We could start this November, but we probably wont.
2006-07-13 15:14:40
·
answer #1
·
answered by CottonPatch 7
·
4⤊
2⤋
I'm all for it. But, before we reach for our muskets and powder horns, we really ought to consider what we're going to replace these cretins with! We already have a third party - and a fourth, and a fifth - in fact, new parties are formed and old ones fade unlamented into the dustbin of history all the time. Doubt me? Well, we have the Independence Party. Then there's the worker's party. We have a socialist party and there's still a vestige of the old Communist Party stumbling around trying to figure out how to make itsself relevant.
And let''s see - didn't we have some wierd little critter named H. Ross Perot raising heck a few years back? Seems the media were all agog over that oddball, predicting so earthshaking an upset at the polls that particular November that it'd be like the continent of Australia running headlong into the California coast - C*R*U*N*C*H! Um - didn't happen, did it? Nor did - oh, what was his name - Ol' Unsafe At Any Speed - see, you can't remember his name, either. But oh boy, he was *SO* going to upset the status quo.
Before we march on Washington with buckets of tar and bags of feathers with which to enhance the visages of those ensconced weasels and skunks we'd like outa there - we need to figure out what the heck it is that we want, need, stand for. How the heck did that crowd of scumsuckers get in there in the first place? Didn't enough of us vote for them that the actual theft of the last two national elections turned out to be child's play? Wazzup with that? More to the point - we'd have to overcome the very intense resistance of those who still worship George Bush, and those cretins who'd resist our revolution simply because they don't like revolutionaries. Man! Maybe an armed revolution ain't the solution, don't ya suppose? Well, what other forms of revolution are there? I heard something about a "velvet revolution" a few years back - seems that was in the Philippines, but lately, I hear that ordinary Philippinos aren't so happy with how things turned out. N' how about the "orange revolution" - wasn't that in Ukrane, and aren't Ukranians thoroughly disgusted with the results of that one, too?
I wonder: is it really the two majority parties we got to consider, or is it something more profound, more complex, and more challenging? Is it that the American People need a wholesale change of heart? Well, yes, to answer my own query, it is exactly that. So: now that we've hung our muskets back on the pegs over the door, how do we go about changing the country's heart? Now, that'll be a real revolution!
2006-07-07 08:05:18
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I agree with you. We need a party that is going to actually listen to the people and try our ideas and not just make and break promises. Isn't that what our forefathers wanted for us? I think so. I also think that the currnet state of our country is not the "DREAM" that Martin Luther King, Jr. had. He may have been a black civil rights leader but his ideas and the things that happened because of him, benefitted all Americans. I look around and I do love the USA, but this is one messed up country. However, the issues we face could easily be taken care of if everyone would take a step back and not let bipartisan ways come into play and work things out.
2006-07-07 07:59:18
·
answer #3
·
answered by jenna4freedom 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
This is one of the flaws of our system. It wasn't really designed with the idea of political parties, since it was basically the first modern pseudo-democracy. The founders labelled it a "Republican Democracy", thinking that local politicians would pander to local voters, and no real major parties could form.
How wrong they were!
Unfortunately, here we are years later, with a semi-centrist Democratic and uber-right-wing Republican party, both of whom don't really seem to "get it". Nowadays, it's all about who pays the bills, not who goes to the ballot box. With enough money to spread carefully prepared propaganda, and a "winner-takes-all" system, there is little room for honesty.
Fixing the system will be the trick. It will require a four-pronged attack:
1 - Restoring Human Rights to Humans. The reason that both parties are sold out completely to corporations is because of a 1880's Supreme Court decision, which was hijacked by a railroad baron who happened to be the Court's reporter at the time (back then, this was a very prestigious job, and generally given to cronies). Basically, he (without approval from the Justices involved) wrote in the summary that "corporations are persons" and started this whole mess. Since then, corporations have used this case law to claim that they are guaranteed all the rights from the Constitution, such as the right to free speech in the form of bribery. We will likely have to amend the Constitution to fix this. If we do, the money supply for bribes will dry up quickly. That's the first step.
2 - Prohibit funds from non-person entities. Individuals can give up to a maximum, of say, $5000 each, but no fictional entities (corporations, unions, PACs, etc) can give money to campaigns or politicians. No free haircuts, no free trips, etc. With the Constitution amended to where corps, unions, and PACs can't sue to overturn this law, we will finally see much more accountability to the people, since they will have to raise money the old-fashioned way: EARN IT.
3 - Abolish "winner takes all" and switch to proportional representation. With this method, we will likely see minority governments in Congress, which is a good thing. That means that the parties will have to walk across the hallway and COMPROMISE. This generally gets the best laws passed, since everyone gets a say in the agenda.
4 - Expand the size of Congress. I know this isn't a popular notion right now, but hear me out. We don't have enough people in Congress to properly represent everyone, not by a longshot. Look at the Texas gerrymandering to push out Democratic candidates -- this is a prime example of why we need more representatives. I say, stick with two senators but go to a minimum of five representatives per state, with about three times the number of congressmen that we have now. This will make them much more accountable to the people in their (now smaller) districts.
2006-07-07 07:55:35
·
answer #4
·
answered by Brandon F 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
And how do you know that a 3rd party wont be just as corrupt as the other 2? I agree we need more choices, but a revolution is probably not the best answer. We can vote them out, but I dont see any better choices. I've looked into the libertarian party and dont like what I see there (although they are better than the dems).
Give me good choices, not different but more of the same stuff.
2006-07-07 07:46:33
·
answer #5
·
answered by jack f 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Jefferson said we need a revolution every 20 years to keep the government in check...we're about a dozen short!
When schools teach real history, explain the constitution, etc.
correctly...when citizens discover how many illegal things the federal government is doing and how many rights have been stolen from us...and when people figure out they get nothing "free" from the government, and quit voting for the person who steals money from other taxpayers and brings home loads of "pork"...and when a majority has the guts to tell the facts
without lying to get their agenda enacted no matter what....the truth shall set you free...then we will have a revolution...hopefully at the ballot box! In the meantime there is too little truth, the government lies to all of us, and too many citizens lie to themselves!
2006-07-07 08:05:23
·
answer #6
·
answered by cueburn 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
When we actually establish a democracy and give the americans the actual weight in elections instead of the electoral offices. Both party's would have alot harder time paying off 6 million americans than a few senators and maybe we could get these corrupt no good money hungry, preelected, idiots out of the office.
2006-07-07 07:59:08
·
answer #7
·
answered by Tamberli W 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
When it is time to vote remember who has sold out the US and vote accordingly. Our country is well on its way to being completely ruined. The politicians for some strange reason seem to want to turn the US into a third world country. Some extremely high ranking politicians who have brothers with political aspirations to hold the highest office have undermined those aspirations. How long will it take for the American people to forget being sold out?
2006-07-07 07:44:07
·
answer #8
·
answered by papricka w 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
A third party is not the answer. A third party could easily be just as unacceptable as your first two choices. What we need is a way to insure an honest day's work for an honest day's pay. Somehow they must be held accountable for what they do or fail to do. When you have politicians such as the Republican Tom DeLay, it is easy to see just how easy it has been for our elected officials to abuse their offices.
2006-07-07 07:41:26
·
answer #9
·
answered by quikzip7 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Agreed, but it won't happen. As long as people have their creature comforts and can survive with what they have been given there won't be a revolution. Why should they revolt? Sure things aren't great on a national scale, but there is food in their bellies and roofs over their heads. Why should they be the ones to step up and make a difference? I say they, but I really should say we. I would be there if enough people stood up, but I certainly wouldn't be among the first. I'm not that brave.
2006-07-07 07:40:08
·
answer #10
·
answered by traceyquirk@sbcglobal.net 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Thogh I am not American, I must say that I agree with you in the sense that I think the American people has been living in dream, where they expect everyone else to solve the problems for them, but the truth is you are the makers of your country and you must speak up for it, don't let those stupid politicians screw it up and continue to damage the image the world has of your country and your people, because it's just not fair. You have the power to change it. Isn't American democracy "the real democracy"?
2006-07-07 07:55:02
·
answer #11
·
answered by interpreters_are_hot 6
·
0⤊
0⤋