Another great Olbermann commentary

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Then what should the average voter do? Not vote? You don't think that the Republicans being in power for say, 30 years would be any different than if Repub/Dem's swapped leadership every 4-8 years? No difference at all because they're all slimy politicians?

No heck of course you should change them up. They represent different regions and it's only fair that the pork barreling get spread around. But expecting them to be non-politicians --- Is anybody really that stupid?

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

No heck of course you should change them up. They represent different regions and it's only fair that the pork barreling get spread around. But expecting them to be non-politicians --- Is anybody really that stupid?

Sooo... you'd vote Democrat this time around to share the pork-barrelling evenly?

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

No heck of course you should change them up. They represent different regions and it's only fair that the pork barreling get spread around. But expecting them to be non-politicians --- Is anybody really that stupid?

Hoping for or expecting a politician to value the lives of hundreds of millions of people more than the short-term fortunes of a political party is not stupid, it's common sense.

You don't think there is a single politician on the planet who actually wants to do something good?

How did you get so hopelessly bitter about the whole thing? If I felt the same way as you I'd move to a shack in the woods and never speak to another human being.

[Crazy Flamer]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

LOL no wonder American politics is so polarized. Fart listen to the stupidity of Canadians harping about it. Republicans because they cater to certain sectors of the populace will be saints. Democrats are better because they are willing to change. HO, HO, HO.

The one that really made me laugh was somebody getting on some guy cause he was just doing this to stay in power. Man talk about stupid or naive. There isn't a politician on the planet whose primary purpose i sn't to try and stay in power.

Classifying one party or one president as anything other than a politician is stupid. You can't prove it because it's impossible. Any unbiased look at it by those with no axe to grind confirms the facts.

Politicians are BS. Party and country makes no difference. Want lies or hypocrisy or any other thing to back up that statement. I could type for the rest of my life and NEVER be done.

It's a horsemanure argument. Changing parties will change ZERO. They will immediately begin the process of feeding at the trough and trying to stay in power.

So you think all politicians are out there just to get as much as they can for themselves, hold onto power as long as they can??? If that were the case, none of us would be here now, we all would have been blown up decades ago.

To think that no politician ever wants to do anything good is not only cynical, it goes against common sense. Are there corrupt politicians? Of course!!! There always will be. But that doesn't mean they all are.

And do they want to stay in power? Sure, they get to keep their jobs. But most politicians stay in power by keeping the people they represent happy. They give people what they want. Rarely do they lie, cheat and fearmonger to scare the general populus into keeping them into power. That use of fear to justify the blatant disregard for Constitutional rights borders on fascism.

[Agamemnon]

I also think that the system is really more corrupt than the politicians. The political system works a certain way that actually encourages corruption (ie, vote in favour of a bill simply to get more tax dollars spent in your riding rather than voting for the good of the country).

The very fact that politicians represent specific regions of people seems to encourage 'corrupt' activities by them to improve the lot of their specific constituents rather than all Canadians/Americans.

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Hoping for or expecting a politician to value the lives of hundreds of millions of people more than the short-term fortunes of a political party is not stupid, it's common sense.

You don't think there is a single politician on the planet who actually wants to do something good?

How did you get so hopelessly bitter about the whole thing? If I felt the same way as you I'd move to a shack in the woods and never speak to another human being.

Really that would be just as dumb. I would think that you would rather easily find that at least half the population could care less about politics and don't bother to vote. No need to be bitter about it either -- I've just been around long enough to observe how they operate.

Value the lives of hundreds of millions of people -- pray tell what are you talking about. Fairly obvious with millions of them without even healthcare etc. that they don't give a crap as long as they get their votes.

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Sooo... you'd vote Democrat this time around to share the pork-barrelling evenly?

Nah how about Ralph Nader. Is he running again. Give the third party a shot LOL. Wouldn't make any difference anyway and might be good for entertainment.

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Crazy Flamer

So you think all politicians are out there just to get as much as they can for themselves, hold onto power as long as they can??? If that were the case, none of us would be here now, we all would have been blown up decades ago.

To think that no politician ever wants to do anything good is not only cynical, it goes against common sense. Are there corrupt politicians? Of course!!! There always will be. But that doesn't mean they all are.

And do they want to stay in power? Sure, they get to keep their jobs. But most politicians stay in power by keeping the people they represent happy. They give people what they want. Rarely do they lie, cheat and fearmonger to scare the general populus into keeping them into power. That use of fear to justify the blatant disregard for Constitutional rights borders on fascism.

Rarely do they lie. Fart now that is hilarious and no I ain't giving you no list of their lies. My fingers would be bleeding by the time I just finished the lies of the local ones nevermind going farther afield. They do whatever and whenever, either party and any party. Don't be naive!!!

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

Really that would be just as dumb. I would think that you would rather easily find that at least half the population could care less about politics and don't bother to vote. No need to be bitter about it either -- I've just been around long enough to observe how they operate.

Yeah, you aren't bitter at all. Congratulations to half the population that are either too lazy or too stupid to care about decisions made about their own lives. "Everyone of them is a crook and they are all the same" is a pretty pathetic cop-out.

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

Value the lives of hundreds of millions of people -- pray tell what are you talking about. Fairly obvious with millions of them without even healthcare etc. that they don't give a crap as long as they get their votes.

Huh? I think it's pretty obvious what I'm talking about.

All Canadians have health-care. Does that make our politicians better?

[jonesy]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Save your keystrokes. HOZ is an idiot and his reading comprehension skills are at the 1st grade level.

You appear to be a very intolerant person.

Why can't you reply without the vicious attacks?

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Yeah, you aren't bitter at all. Congratulations to half the population that are either too lazy or too stupid to care about decisions made about their own lives. "Everyone of them is a crook and they are all the same" is a pretty pathetic cop-out.




Huh? I think it's pretty obvious what I'm talking about.

All Canadians have health-care. Does that make our politicians

better?

I was referring to Americans without healthcare. Your view of those who don't vote(stupid and lazy) is as naive as your view of politicians. Neither has anything to do with reality.

[Crazy Flamer]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

Rarely do they lie. Fart now that is hilarious and no I ain't giving you no list of their lies. My fingers would be bleeding by the time I just finished the lies of the local ones nevermind going farther afield. They do whatever and whenever, either party and any party. Don't be naive!!!

I didn't say they didn't lie. I said they don't lie, cheat and fearmonger to this extent. Read the whole quote if you want to refute me.

And don't be so cynical!

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

I was referring to Americans without healthcare. Your view of those who don't vote(stupid and lazy) is as naive as your view of politicians. Neither has anything to do with reality.

Okay, I'll make it nice and easy.

Say you are a soldier in the Canadian army, and you don't want to go to Afghanistan. One party says "we will pull out of Afghanistan" and the other party says "we will stay in Afghanistan" and you have a choice to pick one or the other. You wouldn't even bother voting because they are all the same?

Or a single mother with very little money. One party says "more money for daycare" and the other says "no money for daycare". She shouldn't vote for either, because they are all the same?

What if you are gay and you want to get hitched to your boyfriend. One party says "no gay marriage" and the other says "gay marriage for all". You would tell him to not bother voting?

Make sense? If any of those people don't vote, they are either stupid or lazy. Probably both.

I realize you were talking about Americans without healthcare. Canadians have healthcare though. Does that make our politicians better? If millions of Americans not having healthcare proves that they don't care about the people, all Canadians having healthcare must prove that they care more.

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Okay, I'll make it nice and easy.

Say you are a soldier in the Canadian army, and you don't want to go to Afghanistan. One party says "we will pull out of Afghanistan" and the other party says "we will stay in Afghanistan" and you have a choice to pick one or the other. You wouldn't even bother voting because they are all the same?

Or a single mother with very little money. One party says "more money for daycare" and the other says "no money for daycare". She shouldn't vote for either, because they are all the same?

What if you are gay and you want to get hitched to your boyfriend. One party says "no gay marriage" and the other says "gay marriage for all". You would tell him to not bother voting?

Make sense? If any of those people don't vote, they are either stupid or lazy. Probably both.

I realize you were talking about Americans without healthcare. Canadians have healthcare though. Does that make our politicians better? If millions of Americans not having healthcare proves that they don't care about the people, all Canadians having healthcare must prove that they care more.

Nah all it proves for healthcare is we got it before the cost went through the roof. Wonder if it would get in now if it was something new. Oh and your other points where you again call half the population if not more stupid and lazy which is yeah STUPID are pointless as well. Let's see --We will(for example) kill that stinkin GST when we get in -- yep sure ya will. Ahhh we believe this about that --- followed by the cries of the populace -- ahhh we now believe that we still believe it but we will let it be a non party vote if it comes up in legislation.

Duck and jive and tailor it to get enough votes. Go ahead vote whoever in and watch them not do what they said they would. Meanwhile watch them fill their pockets with YOUR money and waste it on all kinds of ridiculous rubbish.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

Nah all it proves for healthcare is we got it before the cost went through the roof. Wonder if it would get in now if it was something new. Oh and your other points where you again call half the population if not more stupid and lazy which is yeah STUPID are pointless as well. Let's see --We will(for example) kill that stinkin GST when we get in -- yep sure ya will. Ahhh we believe this about that --- followed by the cries of the populace -- ahhh we now believe that we still believe it but we will let it be a non party vote if it comes up in legislation.

Duck and jive and tailor it to get enough votes. Go ahead vote whoever in and watch them not do what they said they would. Meanwhile watch them fill their pockets with YOUR money and waste it on all kinds of ridiculous rubbish.

You dodged it all. What would those people be if not lazy or stupid? They passed up a direct opportunity to influence a decision that would greatly affect their lives. Isn't that stupid and/or lazy?

And if I'm calling half the population stupid or lazy, you are calling the other half stupid and naïve. Isn't that equally STUPID?

Here's another scenario:

Joe Blow sees an election coming up. One party says "we want to put a big estate tax on rich people" and the other party says "we don't want any estate taxes". Now Joe Blow knows his Aunt Mae has millions socked away, and she only has a few years left, and Joe is the first in line for that dough. If that estate tax comes in, he loses millions.

Should Joe Blow vote in that election? Yes or no.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

You dodged it all. What would those people be if not lazy or stupid? They passed up a direct opportunity to influence a decision that would greatly affect their lives. Isn't that stupid and/or lazy?

And if I'm calling half the population stupid or lazy, you are calling the other half stupid and naïve. Isn't that equally STUPID?

Here's another scenario:

Joe Blow sees an election coming up. One party says "we want to put a big estate tax on rich people" and the other party says "we don't want any estate taxes". Now Joe Blow knows his Aunt Mae has millions socked away, and she only has a few years left, and Joe is the first in line for that dough. If that estate tax comes in, he loses millions.

Should Joe Blow vote in that election? Yes or no.

You're assuming there is a substantial difference between the parties, which is a pretty big assumption.

I'm shocked that I agree with Johnny here, but I do.

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

You dodged it all. What would those people be if not lazy or stupid? They passed up a direct opportunity to influence a decision that would greatly affect their lives. Isn't that stupid and/or lazy?

And if I'm calling half the population stupid or lazy, you are calling the other half stupid and naïve. Isn't that equally STUPID?

Here's another scenario:

Joe Blow sees an election coming up. One party says "we want to put a big estate tax on rich people" and the other party says "we don't want any estate taxes". Now Joe Blow knows his Aunt Mae has millions socked away, and she only has a few years left, and Joe is the first in line for that dough. If that estate tax comes in, he loses millions.

Should Joe Blow vote in that election? Yes or no.

Joe votes alright. The party gets in and says we have decided that our estate tax policy needs to be reviewed. We have setup a commission. We expect the report in 18 months and then we will review our options. Meanwhile Aunt Mae croaks. Tough freakin luck Joe --but you could have changed the world. Cough, cough yep sure!!!

Ahh lets see. You vote for a party. They go in and pork barrel, waste money like it's going out of style, involved in numerous scandals and don't do what they said they would.

You vote for them again. How should I describe you?

You vote for the other party and they repeat the other party's performance.

You voted again. How should I describe you?

Joe can work for a living and not worry about milking his relatives, the boyfriends can live together(they don't need a piece of paper), soldiers shouldn't have joined up if they were going to worry about where they go.

Don't count on government. In fact a better "vote" would be to reduce their role in our lives to the bare minimum and beyond. I'd reduce them to business managers. Any divisive issues would all be free votes and they would have to canvass the electorate and vote as instructed. Also those issues could only be changed if there was a massive plurality that said that is should go forward.

Cut them down to bare bones -- vote on their managerial talent. They vote how the majority says or they are tossed(no vote --instant recall).

Then they might have the respect of the population who in the HUGE vast majority think they are full of crap!!!!!

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

You're assuming there is a substantial difference between the parties, which is a pretty big assumption.

I'm shocked that I agree with Johnny here, but I do.

It's not all that big of an assumption. In the scenario I provided, I could see the NDP trying to impose a large estate tax, and the Conservatives being against it.

I know it's nice and easy to say "they are all the same", but clearly they have some ideological differences.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

It's not all that big of an assumption. In the scenario I provided, I could see the NDP trying to impose a large estate tax, and the Conservatives being against it.

I know it's nice and easy to say "they are all the same", but clearly they have some ideological differences.

Well, I guess I misnderstood, i thought you were talking about the american system.

Sure, there are fundamental ideological differences between the parties, but they are all out for self-preservation, which is why no one is seriously looking at electoral reform or STV, even though it's in the best interest of the country.

Same can be said for other things like marijuana legalization. The majority of canadians are for it, the vast majority are for decriminalization, but no one is picking up on it because it would mean political suicide from the police and corrections unions as well as the RCMP and trucker unions. It's in the best interest of the country, it's the will of the people, but it won't happen.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

Joe votes alright. The party gets in and says we have decided that our estate tax policy needs to be reviewed. We have setup a commission. We expect the report in 18 months and then we will review our options. Meanwhile Aunt Mae croaks. Tough freakin luck Joe --but you could have changed the world. Cough, cough yep sure!!!

Well you changed the whole premise to fit your argument, so your answer isn't valid.

You don't really believe that nothing has ever changed, do you? That's what you keep saying, but isn't it pretty clear that laws have in fact changed? Laws that affect our lives? How can you deny that?

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

Ahh lets see. You vote for a party. They go in and pork barrel, waste money like it's going out of style, involved in numerous scandals and don't do what they said they would.

You vote for them again. How should I describe you?

You vote for the other party and they repeat the other party's performance.

You voted again. How should I describe you?

And you've completely ignored a process that directly affects your life -- a process that dictates how much money is taken out of your pocket, tells you how fast you can drive, where you can live and what your kids learn in school. How should I describe you?

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

Joe can work for a living and not worry about milking his relatives, the boyfriends can live together(they don't need a piece of paper), soldiers shouldn't have joined up if they were going to worry about where they go.

Those are completely unrelated discussions.

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

Don't count on government. In fact a better "vote" would be to reduce their role in our lives to the bare minimum and beyond. I'd reduce them to business managers. Any divisive issues would all be free votes and they would have to canvass the electorate and vote as instructed. Also those issues could only be changed if there was a massive plurality that said that is should go forward.

Cut them down to bare bones -- vote on their managerial talent. They vote how the majority says or they are tossed(no vote --instant recall).

Then they might have the respect of the population who in the HUGE vast majority think they are full of crap!!!!!

Fine, you think there should be a better system. If a political party came along and proposed such a system (there are parties that want to reduce government, btw) would you vote for them?