Would you ask your neighbor who is a plumber to come over and setup your wireless network in your house? Crap no you wouldn't.....why do most Americans think they know how to fight a war? This includes members of congress....let the military folks take care of that chit.....you hit it right on the nose
2007-01-26 18:23:57
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
Your thesis that we aren't given most the facts means we should throw out the current government because an informed electorate is vital to a democracy. I don't agree with that theory. Our representatives should do what they think is best. We don't rule by polls. If our elected representatives don't execute our will we can vote them out in two years in the house, 4 years in the executive branch, and within 6 years in the senate. There desire for re elcetion may influence current decision making but they should govern based on the concepts and idealogy on which they were elected.
2007-01-26 18:30:07
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I agree. What you speak of is called direct democracy - a system that would work only if the majority of a country's citizens share very similar political ideologies. As you've pointed out, that wouldn't have the slightest chance of working in America.
Consulting 330 million people for their opinions before making a major political decision would render government useless, because of such a massive response time.
We use representative democracy because, well, in most cases, you can't please the majority, let alone please everyone. I still have some beefs with the American system of government. One of my favourite quotes sums it up well:
The principle of democracy: "No idea created by appointed officials can be considered correct or feasible until it has been approved by those who don't understand it"
2007-01-26 18:28:53
·
answer #3
·
answered by jsprplc2006 4
·
3⤊
0⤋
No, that is why this is a republic, not a democracy.
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Leaders, lead they don't follow polls, and change directions with the wind. And for all the bad polls the one the press isn't taking about is his personal ratings which are very high. But until we take a stand against the dems here, we cannot defeat the terrorists over there.
2007-01-26 18:35:53
·
answer #4
·
answered by impalersca 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
A clever ploy- of course, as a democratic republic, the majority does not rule in America. America’s Founding Fathers knew that most people were too stupid and selfish to be allowed a true democracy.
Iraq is not a matter of popularity, however. Bush’s invasion of Iraq was a stupid idea doomed to failure. Not only was that the consensus of every non-partisan Middle East expert in the world – it was the opinion of Bush’s own father.
In his 1998 book, ‘A World transformed’, former president G.H.W. Bush said that removing Hussein from power would result in America becoming trapped in a no-win quagmire, would further destabilize the region and jeopardize America’s long-term interests there, and would cost America its allies, friends, and political standing in the world community.
That might explain why the former President Bush seems to respect Clinton more than he does his own retarded son.
2007-01-26 18:27:44
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
the position become it stated that the adult males were immigrants in that article? besides, certain, we do want extra effective border safe practices, yet enable's no longer ignore that that is the land of the free. Ridiculous regulations on immigration which contain ones depending on race and ethnic history are incorrect morally, in accordance to the structure, and in accordance to the concept u.s. should be a secure haven in the event you want it. One ought to no longer merely be allowed to stroll into our usa no questions requested, yet what I mean is that there should be a stability between what's ideal and what's being unique.
2016-12-03 02:41:02
·
answer #6
·
answered by cheathem 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The President would not waver unless there were mass protests like the ones during the Viet Nam war.
2007-01-26 18:21:32
·
answer #7
·
answered by david m 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Which would you rather choose, to base decisions of defense to the will of the majority or to the will of one person?. Come and think about it.
If you let one person to have the political power to make decisions on his own, then that would be dictatorship and not democracy.
2007-01-27 01:42:17
·
answer #8
·
answered by roadwarrior 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
NO. But if you listen to congress you would think that that is the case. Our country is slipping quickly down the civilization S trap. Countries like Japan had better start making nukes like mad ... the US is no longer willing to confront enemies. With the passing of George Bush we will fade. China knows this ... that's why they tested that space missile without blinking. They know our days are numbered ... all they need to do is build weapons and wait.
2007-01-26 18:23:39
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
I am completely confident in the fact that the President of the US knows more about what is going on here than "Joe" does in his recliner watching CNN.
I understand that people want this to be over but we have to win to leave, not just pull out.
Whatever it takes to win is what we should be demanding from our Congress. Not whatever it takes to lose.
2007-01-26 18:24:14
·
answer #10
·
answered by ? 6
·
3⤊
1⤋