Report, edit, etc...Posted by TheDaddy0420 on 2006-02-11 at 19:17:14
Its actually by the people, for the poeple. Thats it.
You all should think of what you can do for your country, not what it can do for you.
If you rely on the government (any government) to do something for you, you will be disappointed.
You all should think of what you can do for your country, not what it can do for you.
If you rely on the government (any government) to do something for you, you will be disappointed.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Azu on 2006-02-11 at 19:19:32
I don't rely on it to do anything. But I expect it not to do lots of BAD things.. -.-
Report, edit, etc...Posted by TheDaddy0420 on 2006-02-12 at 16:55:58
Such as?
Last time I heard, freeing people was a good thing.
Last time I heard, freeing people was a good thing.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Demaris on 2006-02-12 at 16:59:00
But would you be liberating, or unleashing?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Detestable_Evil on 2006-02-12 at 17:05:24
Umm... which revolution? If it existed.
Or what are each party's plans?
It would be kinda silly if you got rid of a corrupt government and helped build another one just as corrupt, just so the process can start all over again.
So it would for me depend on their future actions.
Or do you mean, for either buissness rights compared to worker rights?
Or what are each party's plans?
It would be kinda silly if you got rid of a corrupt government and helped build another one just as corrupt, just so the process can start all over again.
So it would for me depend on their future actions.
Or do you mean, for either buissness rights compared to worker rights?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by TheDaddy0420 on 2006-02-12 at 18:00:51
QUOTE(Demaris @ Feb 12 2006, 01:59 PM)
But would you be liberating, or unleashing?
[right][snapback]425602[/snapback][/right]
Would you please make sense?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Shapechanger on 2006-02-12 at 18:03:04
I think he means liberating the people from an oppresive state, or throwing a whole nation into a horrible state of chaos and destruction.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Demaris on 2006-02-12 at 18:07:54
Liberating from oppression or unleashing a group of crazy people from the bonds of law and society.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by SkuLL on 2006-02-12 at 18:23:02
I'd take sides with the side which has the reasons.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Demaris on 2006-02-12 at 18:29:15
What if both sides have legitimate reasons?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Infested-Jerk on 2006-02-12 at 18:37:41
Let's face it everyone, bush isn't the only reason the government sucks.
It's one reason but not the only one.
The ammerican government is corrupt because those in it are.
So the sollution is to get rid of the corrupt one sooner
I'll post later and actually be on topic.
It's one reason but not the only one.
The ammerican government is corrupt because those in it are.
So the sollution is to get rid of the corrupt one sooner
I'll post later and actually be on topic.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by l)ark_13 on 2006-02-12 at 20:49:11
Like I said, I would board up my house and kill anyone who comes inside.
Then, when I think the revolution is coming to an end, I join the side that looks like it is winning. It is a coward's way... or a rat's way... call it w/e you want but it works
Then, when I think the revolution is coming to an end, I join the side that looks like it is winning. It is a coward's way... or a rat's way... call it w/e you want but it works
Report, edit, etc...Posted by olaboy- on 2006-02-12 at 20:53:36
I'd revolt if the goverment was horrendous to its people and didn't give them rights.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by TheDaddy0420 on 2006-02-12 at 21:35:32
Some one give me specific examples of people in our government being corrupt. Which includes senators and not just the President/Vice President.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Demaris on 2006-02-12 at 21:43:47
Jack Abramoff.
Looks like you just got pwnt.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Arbitrary on 2006-02-12 at 21:51:41
Shall we begin with the whole Abramoff debacle?
Nay, that's been done...let's try this:
There are three branches of government at the federal level, and in each state; local government varies widely. Now, these branches have a system of checks and balances in place to control each others' actions. Have you seen them doing this much lately? There's a Republican/conservative monopoly on the federal government, with a clearly inept president in office, a Republican majority in both the House and Senate that essentially bypasses any reason for the legislature to exist in the first place, and now a majority conservative/insane Supreme Court.
Having a bunch of people with similar idealogies in power, while at least half of the nation's population (that's roughly 150,000,000 people) have varying levels of disagreement with their policies, defeats the point of having a representative democracy. I'd also like to mention that the NRA was in large part responsible for Bush winning the 2000 election.
If that wasn't a particularly good example, here's another: FEMA.
For however many decades, FEMA has been a playground for backwash political appointees. As known by most people by now, the most recent director, Michael Brown, had experience in an equestrian club. This agency has the role of management of national crises, and they put a hobbyist in charge of it. This isn't a strictly Republican issue, but I'd say that's a rather large blunder. Look how pissed the general black populace is because of the Katrinia thing.
Nay, that's been done...let's try this:
There are three branches of government at the federal level, and in each state; local government varies widely. Now, these branches have a system of checks and balances in place to control each others' actions. Have you seen them doing this much lately? There's a Republican/conservative monopoly on the federal government, with a clearly inept president in office, a Republican majority in both the House and Senate that essentially bypasses any reason for the legislature to exist in the first place, and now a majority conservative/insane Supreme Court.
Having a bunch of people with similar idealogies in power, while at least half of the nation's population (that's roughly 150,000,000 people) have varying levels of disagreement with their policies, defeats the point of having a representative democracy. I'd also like to mention that the NRA was in large part responsible for Bush winning the 2000 election.
If that wasn't a particularly good example, here's another: FEMA.
For however many decades, FEMA has been a playground for backwash political appointees. As known by most people by now, the most recent director, Michael Brown, had experience in an equestrian club. This agency has the role of management of national crises, and they put a hobbyist in charge of it. This isn't a strictly Republican issue, but I'd say that's a rather large blunder. Look how pissed the general black populace is because of the Katrinia thing.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by olaboy- on 2006-02-12 at 21:52:41
I wouldn't revolt solely on Jack Abramoff, plus he is being punished. It would have to be someone opressing the majority.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Azu on 2006-02-12 at 23:39:59
QUOTE(olaboy- @ Feb 12 2006, 06:53 PM)
I'd revolt if the goverment was horrendous to its people and didn't give them rights.
[right][snapback]425804[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]425804[/snapback][/right]
So you'd revolt against the current U.S. government in otherwords. So would I lol
Report, edit, etc...Posted by TheDaddy0420 on 2006-02-12 at 23:46:58
QUOTE(Azu @ Feb 12 2006, 08:39 PM)
So you'd revolt against the current U.S. government in otherwords. So would I lol
[right][snapback]425958[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]425958[/snapback][/right]
Inncorrect, radical bais stance.
ADDITION:
QUOTE(Arbitrary @ Feb 12 2006, 06:51 PM)
Shall we begin with the whole Abramoff debacle?
Nay, that's been done...let's try this:
There are three branches of government at the federal level, and in each state; local government varies widely. Now, these branches have a system of checks and balances in place to control each others' actions. Have you seen them doing this much lately? There's a Republican/conservative monopoly on the federal government, with a clearly inept president in office, a Republican majority in both the House and Senate that essentially bypasses any reason for the legislature to exist in the first place, and now a majority conservative/insane Supreme Court.
Having a bunch of people with similar idealogies in power, while at least half of the nation's population (that's roughly 150,000,000 people) have varying levels of disagreement with their policies, defeats the point of having a representative democracy. I'd also like to mention that the NRA was in large part responsible for Bush winning the 2000 election.
If that wasn't a particularly good example, here's another: FEMA.
For however many decades, FEMA has been a playground for backwash political appointees. As known by most people by now, the most recent director, Michael Brown, had experience in an equestrian club. This agency has the role of management of national crises, and they put a hobbyist in charge of it. This isn't a strictly Republican issue, but I'd say that's a rather large blunder. Look how pissed the general black populace is because of the Katrinia thing.
[right][snapback]425895[/snapback][/right]
Nay, that's been done...let's try this:
There are three branches of government at the federal level, and in each state; local government varies widely. Now, these branches have a system of checks and balances in place to control each others' actions. Have you seen them doing this much lately? There's a Republican/conservative monopoly on the federal government, with a clearly inept president in office, a Republican majority in both the House and Senate that essentially bypasses any reason for the legislature to exist in the first place, and now a majority conservative/insane Supreme Court.
Having a bunch of people with similar idealogies in power, while at least half of the nation's population (that's roughly 150,000,000 people) have varying levels of disagreement with their policies, defeats the point of having a representative democracy. I'd also like to mention that the NRA was in large part responsible for Bush winning the 2000 election.
If that wasn't a particularly good example, here's another: FEMA.
For however many decades, FEMA has been a playground for backwash political appointees. As known by most people by now, the most recent director, Michael Brown, had experience in an equestrian club. This agency has the role of management of national crises, and they put a hobbyist in charge of it. This isn't a strictly Republican issue, but I'd say that's a rather large blunder. Look how pissed the general black populace is because of the Katrinia thing.
[right][snapback]425895[/snapback][/right]
So how is that corrupt? Just becuase a theres a dominant party in office that you disaggree with does not cause it to be corrupt.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Arbitrary on 2006-02-12 at 23:47:31
QUOTE
Inncorrect, radical bais stance.
I'm gonna have to agree this time, you're just making unsubstantiated claims that the U.S. is like a dictatorship, Azu.
It isn't one yet, you know?
Edit: Above post was edited while I was posting..
QUOTE
So how is that corrupt? Just becuase a theres a dominant party in office that you disaggree with does not cause it to be corrupt.
I said nothing of my personal stance. I said that because they run all three branches of the government, the system that's set in place for each branch to control the others has become largely defunct. The president routinely gets billions of dollars in "emergency funds" that the Republican-majority Congress practically gives away..
Report, edit, etc...Posted by TheDaddy0420 on 2006-02-12 at 23:53:11
Then thats good, we have a working government that doesn't bicker too much with its self and gives its money away. Sounds pretty self-less to me.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Azu on 2006-02-12 at 23:54:35
QUOTE(TheDaddy0420 @ Feb 12 2006, 09:46 PM)
Inncorrect,[right][snapback]425960[/snapback][/right]
Wrong. Your post is incorrect.
ADDITION:
QUOTE(Arbitrary @ Feb 12 2006, 09:47 PM)
you're just making unsubstantiated claims that the U.S. is like a dictatorship, Azu.
It isn't one yet, you know?
[right][snapback]425964[/snapback][/right]
It isn't one yet, you know?
[right][snapback]425964[/snapback][/right]
It is just as bad as one. And soon it will BE one. At this rate. -.-
Thanks for agreeing with me for once, arbitrary.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Arbitrary on 2006-02-12 at 23:56:45
Haha, yes, working government...
A working government that managed to run up an $8,000,000,000,000+ deficit, incite an armed insurrection, trip over its own feet with a hurricane..
The latest $18,000,000,000 from Congress will be going to Iraq, as far as I know. Wonder how it's distributed.
A working government that managed to run up an $8,000,000,000,000+ deficit, incite an armed insurrection, trip over its own feet with a hurricane..
The latest $18,000,000,000 from Congress will be going to Iraq, as far as I know. Wonder how it's distributed.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by TheDaddy0420 on 2006-02-12 at 23:58:27
QUOTE(Azu @ Feb 12 2006, 08:54 PM)
Wrong. Your post is incorrect.
ADDITION:
It is just as bad as one. And soon it will BE one. At this rate. -.-
[right][snapback]425970[/snapback][/right]
ADDITION:
It is just as bad as one. And soon it will BE one. At this rate. -.-
[right][snapback]425970[/snapback][/right]
How? Outragous claims. No bases. May I add that During Theodore Roosevelt's President terms he took control of more nations then our current government and also lost more Service men then now
Of course that government was dictatorship too.
ADDITION:
QUOTE(Arbitrary @ Feb 12 2006, 08:56 PM)
Haha, yes, working government...
A working government that managed to run up an $8,000,000,000,000+ deficit, incite an armed insurrection, trip over its own feet with a hurricane..
The latest $18,000,000,000 from Congress will be going to Iraq, as far as I know. Wonder how it's distributed.
[right][snapback]425974[/snapback][/right]
A working government that managed to run up an $8,000,000,000,000+ deficit, incite an armed insurrection, trip over its own feet with a hurricane..
The latest $18,000,000,000 from Congress will be going to Iraq, as far as I know. Wonder how it's distributed.
[right][snapback]425974[/snapback][/right]
Hey, we are good for the money
And it could be worse, Azu could have been our President o.O
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Azu on 2006-02-13 at 00:02:23
QUOTE(TheDaddy0420 @ Feb 12 2006, 09:58 PM)
Outragous claims
[right][snapback]425975[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]425975[/snapback][/right]
Outrageous spelling errors.
And if I was president I would have done everything in my power to prevent the war in Iraq and has the bad guy assassinated instead. I'm not sure exactly how that would make the national deficit worse.