Let Everyone Vote

[Grizzle]

Kal,

Rebellion isn't imminent, but it still remains a possibility, whether it's a violent one or not depends on the people.

As for the 1950s, it wasn't much different than today, it's just that people kept things more to themselves and the population was generally less educated and perhaps a bit more naive.

Technology has made the world smaller with it's rapid dissemination of information, combine that with the desire to reduce political stance to a few talking points and you end up with what we have today. Too many people only getting half the story by limiting their exposure along party lines.

Nomad,

Another nice post. You are fortunate to have an external perspective on these matters and you always speak your mind well.

For the past few elections we have had a third party, but due to the inherent problems with the current two party system, it's very difficult for any third party to gain much ground. So many people when faced with too many choices will always fall back on their political affiliation as the easiest way to make a decision.

This is a good discussion, keep it up, for now I have some work to do

[Guest]

A genuine Democracy is a wish for suicide.

This is a REPUBLIC, NOT a Democracy Nomad, and has never claimed, NOR should have EVER wanted to be a Democracy.

Democracies are inherantly self destructive, they self destruct within 200 years, always have, always will.

A representative Republic, which is what the US actually is, was supposed to take the strength of the Roman system, and add Democracy to it, to strengthen it.

It is IMPOSSIBLE for every citizen of a Democracy to be an expert on every issue, that is why we elect representatives to do that for us, we elect them to represent us, we elect them, so that they will be able to become experts on the issues and make those laws etc.

The entire system has been subverted.

The Senate was supposed to be elected by the State legislatures, in order to protect the states from the federal government, and not step on the states rights, with the Senators now elected by popular vote, the states protections have now been removed.

The electoral college is the ONLY way to keep the larger states from pouncing and FORCING the smaller states to have no voice in the elections.

There are a number of ways to fix this mess, but moving to a Democracy is worse then the disease.

Making the Senators once again elected by the various state governments, and somehow destroying the 2 party system would go a LONG way towards fixing it. Also, putting term limits on EVERY public office, and actually impeaching judges that legislate from the bench.

Those would fix a myriad of problems with the system we have now.

But turning it into a true Democracy?

Give me a break...

What is a democracy? 2 wolves and a sheep sitting down and voting on what's for lunch.

Ben Franklin was right, we have a Republic, if we can keep it. Which we have failed to do, miserably....

[street228]

quote:

---

A genuine Democracy is a wish for suicide.

This is a REPUBLIC, NOT a Democracy Nomad, and has never claimed, NOR should have EVER wanted to be a Democracy.

---

Utter rediculousness!!

The ONLY reason, a true democracy was not established at the time of the succession, was

due to three very specific points.

1) at the time, few americans were educated enough to understand the workings of government.

..I for one, am an educated American, who is fed up with, and sick of being referred to as ignorant by a group of radical idiots, bred from the lower educational standards of the late 70's and early 80's generation.

2)lack transportation, and slow information distribution, deemed it necessary for a representative form of government to be implimented, at the time

Now MOOT points, in the established base. Now there is an ABSOLUTE necessity for change in this area, for further progression toward the INTENDED purpose, of establishing a GOVERNMENT: FOR THE PEOPLE AND BY THE PEOPLE: described within the constitution. This PROVES, a true democracy was the original INTENT, but not practical within the time period, in which it was established.

3) A true democracy, had NEVER been concieved, nor implimented PRIOR to the established constitution. And those which had been tried throughout history, were not Availiable for comparrison, by the founding fathers.

They simply had NOTHING to base a government structure on, other than that which they were familiar.

All three of these points, AND the points you have stated(which I quoted) Make any and ALL or your radical misconceptions complete RUBBISH.

I fear, more education within these matters would only serve to add to your confusion. Not that there is no hope, for those willing to learn...but first, one must be willing to observe things in an objective perspective. This is something, I do not feel your physiological brain, is capable of doing; however, in this I could be mistaken

[Darkling]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kalshion:

I hate to say this, but I agree with Lost here

There is NO way a criminal should be given the right to Vote

If they commit a crime, then there right's should be REVOKED. That INCLUD'S there citizenship and if they get back out into the public they should WORK to get that all back

We have criminal's now-a-days that get sent to jail, then get out and commit a crime, go back get out, commit another crime

We can thank our justice system for those. And Lawyers

My take

If a lawyers bails a guy out, and he commit's another crime. Then not only should THAT lawyer be prosecuted, but so should the judge as well for ALLOWING the guy to go free after looking at all the evidence

---

While I feel that this is true of Thugs, Violent Criminals and Con Artists, the truth of the matter is that these days you can have your rights revoked for something like Driving on a suspended license.

A few years back, my brother got his drivers license suspended because he was laid off and wasn't able to pay his child support for about 3 months. Finally he got a job, started paying, but it was too late, they had suspended his drivers license, and in Florida, there isn't exactly a reasonable public transportation system so pretty much if you can't drive you can't work.

So he's driving to get to work to pay off the arrears, he asks the judge to help him out with a temporary license so he can go to work, they told him he has to wait a mandatory 3 months! In the end he got busted, went to jail for a month and it took him 5 years to get his rights returned to him and about the same amount of time to get the whole mess staightned out. A problem that started because he was laid off due to a company closing!?!

The problem with the current system is that it is all too easy to become a criminal.

Maybe if the judicial system spent more time in prosecuting the "REAL" criminals, and putting them behind bars we wouldn't have the revolving door of justice that we have today.

[Darkling]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Grizzle:

Thanks Nomad, for saving me the trouble of pointing that out.

One could define a criminal as anyone breaking the law, but the law breaks crimes down into further categories such as felonies and misdemeanors.

Generally speaking a person is stripped of their right to vote if they are a convicted felon (murder, theft, drug trafficking etc...), since felonies are considered the worst of crimes.

DUI is not a felony, but it is a "crime".

---

In the state of Florida, a DUI OR Driving with a suspended license can be procecuted as a felony and if it's a 3rd offense (or combination of), let's say 1 DUI and 2 DWSL, MUST be prosecuted as a Felony and there is NO time limit, they could be 10 years apart.

[street228]

quote:

---

these days you can have your rights revoked for something like Driving on a suspended license

---

or less. I know a man who lost his right to vote, his drivers license..and faced 20 years in the state pen, just for taking his dying wife to the hospital, in a car that was unregistered an uninsured. His primary insured/registered car had broken down during this emergency, so he used an old running car, he had stored in the garage.

(2001- I am sure, this VICTIM says "thank you bush for your communist mentality, and your promotion of ZERO tolorance dogma!!")

quote:

---

The problem with the current system is that it is all too easy to become a criminal.

---

I HEAR YOU!!

yeah, I know. Just say NO to reckless killing and invasions of another country...and your deemed a supporter of terrorisim!!!

with the twisted mentality, of the followers of BUSH, It wouldnt surprise me if THAT would be enough to be a CRIMINAL..by 2008

quote:

---

DUI is not a felony, but it is a "crime".

---

In MOST STATES, DUI , is IN FACT, a felony conviction.

In the state of SOUTH CAROLINA, driving a car with lapse of INSURANCE, is a FELONY CONVICTION, as of January 2001.

more and more misdemeanor offences have become reclassified as FELONY.

Hell, President clinton smoked POT. NOW mere possesion of 1 seed, would be a felony in 23 states. where as up to an OUNCE of weed was a misdemeaner offense,in 43 states prior to 1993.

not to argue...but every state is different, and radical changes have come into effect, since the first BUSH administration...in a whole range of areas, where peopl ARE loosing their rights to vote.

[Darkling]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jaguar:

The federal government has 2 main constitutional duties, the defense of the country, and foreign affairs. That's it.

It was NEVER authorized by the constitution to play Robin Hood with ANYONE, including corporations, or the poor, or the old, or anyone.

---

Actually it has 3 main constitutional duties, add to that interstate crimes, hence the FBI.

Personally I think that the government should mandate that the states each pay a certain amount per person for the defense of this country to the Federal Government (let's say around 1600.00 per person, that would generate the 400 Billion we spend on defense now) and from there the states could figure out the best way to raise the revenue, be it by higher Sales, Income, Property, whatever, it's up to the states. The Feds would get rid of the IRS and had over Social Security to individuals in some sort of Trust Fund. The states would then be in charge of all the social service programs along with the ways to raise the money to pay for them. In addition, the states should push as much as they can to the local governments, the cities and county's. This way the politician's in charge of the spending would be our next door neighbors, people right down the street. It's a proven fact that the closer the politicians are to the constituents, the more thrifty they are with thier money.

Case in Point: Education

Most states spend around 15 to 20% of Education budgets on administrative overhead, while around 45% of Federal expenditures get eaten up by administrative overhead - Almost Half! And that is only ONE example.

[Matchoo]

I got pulled over twice last month for having my registration expired for 2 months. I have some parts for my emergency brake on back order and I can't get the safety check done until the brakes are fixed. I explained it to the officers and both times they understood and just gave me a warning.

I guess this breaks your 'cummunist mentality, and your promotion of ZERO tolerance dogma!!" theory.

[Guest]

quote:

---

Originally posted by street:

quote:

---

A genuine Democracy is a wish for suicide.

This is a REPUBLIC, NOT a Democracy Nomad, and has never claimed, NOR should have EVER wanted to be a Democracy.

---

Utter rediculousness!!

The ONLY reason, a true democracy was not established at the time of the succession, was

due to three very specific points.

1) at the time, few americans were educated enough to understand the workings of government.

..I for one, am an educated American, who is fed up with, and sick of being referred to as ignorant by a group of radical idiots, bred from the lower educational standards of the late 70's and early 80's generation.

2)lack transportation, and slow information distribution, deemed it necessary for a representative form of government to be implimented, at the time

Now MOOT points, in the established base. Now there is an ABSOLUTE necessity for change in this area, for further progression toward the INTENDED purpose, of establishing a GOVERNMENT: FOR THE PEOPLE AND BY THE PEOPLE: described within the constitution. This PROVES, a true democracy was the original INTENT, but not practical within the time period, in which it was established.

3) A true democracy, had NEVER been concieved, nor implimented PRIOR to the established constitution. And those which had been tried throughout history, were not Availiable for comparrison, by the founding fathers.

They simply had NOTHING to base a government structure on, other than that which they were familiar.

All three of these points, AND the points you have stated(which I quoted) Make any and ALL or your radical misconceptions complete RUBBISH.

I fear, more education within these matters would only serve to add to your confusion. Not that there is no hope, for those willing to learn...but first, one must be willing to observe things in an objective perspective. This is something, I do not feel your physiological brain, is capable of doing; however, in this I could be mistaken

---

Oh please Street, have you NOT studied ancient history?

Obviously NOT.

Democracy, TRUE deomcracy has been tried NUMEROUS times, and ALWAYS has failed!!

Democracy was NEVER the intent of the founding fathers.... Please come to grips with that, because it is the TRUTH!!!

The founding fathers KNEW the inherent dangers of a democracy, and wanted to blunt it with a version that had NEVER been tried.

They formed a REPUBLIC, if ANYONE had stated to the founding fathers that they had created a democracy, they would have been stunned, because they did their best to KEEP from doing that.

You need to study up, because your ignorance is just astounding, and your arrogance in saying that I am ignorant, is AMAZING and absolutely LAUGHABLE!!!

I have probably forgotten more about the federalist and the antifederalists and the founding fathers then you have ever known.

It was NOT because of the people being uneducated, it was NOT because of long distance communications was slow.

It was because a DEMOCRACY has NEVER worked, and they were not going to make the same mistake.

They knew HISTORY, and were NOT going to be doomed to repeat it.

You obviously do NOT know history, because you wouldn't have said the stupid things that you said above.

Democracy as a form of government has been thought about, used and experimented with for THOUSANDS of years Street. It is NOT a new concept.

It has been and ALWAYS will be a failure.

[Darkling]

quote:

---

Originally posted by street:

not to argue...but every state is different, and radical changes have come into effect, since the first BUSH administration...in a whole range of areas, where peopl ARE loosing their rights to vote.

Actually, Governor Bush inherited the current system here that was put in place by the Democrats, he's actually made it harder for police to stop someone for an expired tag, by combining the month and year tags into one and they're all the same color. Before that's all police seemed to do around here was look for people with expired tags. Bush wants them to concentrate on REAL criminals, not the easy targets to meet quota, who was usually some down on his luck smuck that was trying just to get by. No the current system has been put in place by years of people not interested in justice, but poeple like Janet Reno, who made it the hallmark of her campaign to go after "Deadbeat Dads", what's funny is that in these Kangaroo courts, guys like me have split custody, I pay for their home, car, schooling medical bills and everything else. I pick up my kids every Friday and drop them off to school on Monday (effectivly equally splitting our time), but you know what I STILL have to pay over $1000.00 a month in child support. And when it was first ordered .. get this ... I was only making $500.00 a week!

If it wasn't for the fact that I had just finished college and shortly thereafter started a business that has done tremendously well for me. I would be one of those criminals in Jail right now, because how the hell was I supposed to take my kids on the weekends, pay for their Medical, Clothes, School Supplies and everything else, PLUS pay their mom half my pay?

If you think that's bad, well my brother has it Worse! To top it all off, both our wives left us, it wasn't us who left them, we just made bad choices on who to marry.

[Darkling]

quote:

---

Originally posted by street:

The ONLY reason, a true democracy was not established at the time of the succession, was

due to three very specific points.

1) at the time, few americans were educated enough to understand the workings of government.

Actually you are wrong.

The reason that a "True" democracy was not put into place is because the founding fathers didn't really believe in one. They wanted even the smallest state (like Rhode Island) to be able to make a difference in the Republic, but how would that be possible in a "True" democracy? Also, they wanted the Senators to have almost an Aristocratic Flair to them and to an extent be sheilded from the "Passions" of the day, which is why Senators used to be appointed, not voted in. However even after that change they still kept the Senators 6 year tenior, so they would not be affected too much by voter "passions". No, the current system was put in place so as not to allow any one state (like California) to become "too" powerfull and make all of our country's decisions for us. It was a very carefully crafted system that has worked out EXTREMELY well over the years. In just 200 years the U.S. has become, by far the most powerfull country in the world, we have in only 200 years acheived what it took the Romans 2000 years to acheive and it wasn't due to the Romans lack of education, Roads, or anything else for that matter, we simply have the best system of government in the world.

[Darkling]

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the worldÔÇÖs greatest civilizations has been 200 years.

Great nations rise and fall. The people go from bondage to spiritual truth, to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back again to bondage."

Quote is of unknown origin but attributed to:

ALEXANDER FRASER TYTLER, LORD WOODHOUSELEE. Unverified

[Guest]

Thank you Darkling, maybe Street can be taught, but I seriously doubt it.

With those ideas, I have no idea where he's coming from, because his entire historical view is completely preverted.

And because Street is gonna come back with a bunch of garbage aobut how he is right and how we are wrong.

Here are just a few quotes from some of the founding fathers.

"We are now forming a Republican form of government. Real Liberty is not found in the extremes of democracy, but in moderate governments. If we incline too much to democracy, we shall soon shoot into a monarchy, or some other form of dictatorship."

--Alexander Hamilton

"...democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths."

--James Madison, Federalist No. 10 (arguing in favor of a constitutional republic)

"Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide."

-- John Adams, 1814

The Founding fathers KNEW the dangers of a democracy, and did their best to make sure that we didn't get one.

[street228]

heard it all befoe dark, and Mathoo, consider yourself lucky on your warnings, you obviously live in a more relaxed state. But dont imagine for a second, the strictness will never touch your isolated part of the country.

The ZERO tolorance mentality is far reaching and has encompassed many states, where the population thought they were free of its domain. There are literally hundreds of thousands of americans, who have lost their voting status to bogus insignificant offences, reclassified as felony crimes.

and poor jag, still lost in his arrogant illusion of self importance, may as well play with himself, as I am not playing anymore

[Guest]

Oh poor Street, pounced on his ignorance and he runs, but first has to toss off about arrogance and self importance.

I know a bit about our form of government Street, and I will take on all comers.

Especially you, because your socalled education is SORELY lacking on it.

[street228]

Jag, your utter stupidity is amazing. You dont know me, nor do you have an inkling, as to what i refer. I refuse to argue, and your preconcieved notions that you have exclusive understanding to the ideals presented.

Your argument is total BULL, but based on the established school of thought which Dark has accurately referred.

My discussions DO NOT include you, and your self promoted idea of kowledge. I know this bothers you to some radical degree. As there has not been one post, i have made since attending this forum, you have not shown your utter stupidity, in your attempt to trash.

so give it up and go back to playing with your little yellow duck. Oh...and Tell your daddy I said hi, but am really disappointed in the development of his childs education....

On second thought, dont, Ill tell him myself!!!

And Dark, I understand the whole school of thought you are presenting;however, it is NOT the only one, and there is evidence for several interpretations, as to the whole of the argument, I do concede

[Darkling]

quote:

---

Originally posted by street:

heard it all befoe dark, and Mathoo, consider yourself lucky on your warnings, you obviously live in a more relaxed state. But dont imagine for a second, the strictness will never touch your isolated part of the country.

The ZERO tolorance mentality is far reaching and has encompassed many states, where the population thought they were free of its domain. There are literally hundreds of thousands of americans, who have lost their voting status to bogus insignificant offences, reclassified as felony crimes.

and poor jag, still lost in his arrogant illusion of self importance, may as well play with himself, as I am not playing anymore

---

I'm not arguing with you in that regard, the states have gone WAY too far in many respects, I still won't drive through Luisianna for fear of getting stopped for DWHIANCSHMBADD (Driving While Hispanic In A Nice Car, So He Must Be A Drug Dealer) the laws there actually let the officer confiscate ANY cash you may have in your pocket, keep a certain percentage for themselves, give a percentage to the Judge, the Prosecutor, the Captain, everyone gets a cut of it. I didn't even believe it myself, until I saw a special on 20/20 about it. I usaully carry a few hundred in cash since you never know what might happen, and this state actually let's them take it from you and keep part of it.. That's an invitation to make shit up.

[Guest]

quote:

---

Originally posted by street:

Jag, your utter stupidity is amazing. You dont know me, nor do you have an inkling, as to what i refer. I refuse to argue, and your preconcieved notions that you have exclusive understanding to the ideals presented.

Your argument is total BULL, but based on the established school of thought which Dark has accurately referred.

My discussions DO NOT include you, and your self promoted idea of kowledge. I know this bothers you to some radical degree. As there has not been one post, i have made since attending this forum, you have not shown your utter stupidity, in your attempt to trash.

so give it up and go back to playing with your little yellow duck. Oh...and Tell your daddy I said hi, but am really disappointed in the development of his childs education....

On second thought, dont, Ill tell him myself!!!

And Dark, I understand the whole school of thought you are presenting;however, it is NOT the only one, and there is evidence for several interpretations, as to the whole of the argument, I do concede

---

My argument is based on the writings of Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Benjamin Franklin etc.

So, you are basically saying that our founding fathers were ignorant and had no clue what they were doing.

Poor Street, I slammed you on your ignorance, and you can't handle it.

Geez, and I thought some others on here were bad.

quote:

---

3) A true democracy, had NEVER been concieved, nor implimented PRIOR to the established constitution. And those which had been tried throughout history, were not Availiable for comparrison, by the founding fathers.

They simply had NOTHING to base a government structure on, other than that which they were familiar.

---

ROFLMAO!! Now That's a keeper!!!

[street228]

quote:

---

And Dark, I understand the whole school of thought you are presenting;however, it is NOT the only one, and there is evidence for several interpretations, as to the whole of the argument, I do concede

---

And Dark, do not misunderstand me. I am aware, of where we disagreee and do not, but I cannot seem to get a word in edgewise here, without the JAG attack confusing the whole of any discussion, I have ever tried to have in this forum. It makes it very difficult to discuss ANY issue rationally.

I KNOW this is the reason, so many avoid this part of the forum with a passion. I too thought to do that, but I refuse to be run of by a ________ _________"(use your imagination to fill in the blanks)

[Guest]

YOu're the one that opened your mouth Street, and popped off about something that you are OBVIOUSLY ignorant in, and now are trying to move onto something else that might make you seem more intelligent.

BTW, I have a quote for you, you knew that most if not all of the founding fathers had liberal educations, they studied Plato, and Aristotle and others.

If liberty and equality, as is thought by some are chiefly to be found in democracy, they will be best attained when all persons alike share in the government to the utmost.

Aristotle, Politics

Greek critic, philosopher, physicist, & zoologist (384 BC - 322 BC)

Democracy was discussed for THOUSANDS of years, the Founders had plenty of examples of Democratic experiments through the ages.

If you think that my confidence in this subject is somehow arrogance, then that's fine with me.

Your ignorance is what astounds me, I actually thought you knew at least a LITTLE bit about our country and it's history and how our form of government was created. I was obviously wrong.

[Darkling]

quote:

---

Originally posted by street:

I KNOW this is the reason, so many avoid this part of the forum with a passion. I too thought to do that, but I refuse to be run of by a ________ _________"(use your imagination to fill in the blanks)

I know, his intentions are good, but sometimes he gets a little too, shall we say, Impassioned? I got into a "Discussion" with Jag before on Evolution, it's about the only REAL area where me and Jag totally disagree and let's just say that it wasn't pretty.

[Grizzle]

Lots of good stuff here many good points being made, but so far no one has posted anything that is absolute. There's room enough here for everyone's idea's and opinions.

[Guest]

Unless their historical facts are completely wrong Grizzle.

The founding fathers had PLENTY of examples of Democracies, and I told Street that, and now he is running, screaming behind him how arrogant and ignorant I am.

All he has to say is Oops, I messed up, I was wrong, but he won't do that. It is impossible for Street to be wrong, even when it is patently obvious to those that actually know a little bit of history, OK, maybe more then a little bit.

And Darkling, yeah, I remember that little debate, and nol, it was NOT pretty, but we found common ground and are freindly.

I have tried a few times to find common ground with Street, but he always pops off with some arrogant, ignorant, snide remark.

As a matter of fact, I agree with Street 100% on his zero tolerance for zero tolerance, then again, I dislike the war on drugs as well, and other such nonsense that bites into our freedoms.

It's the war on terror that I agree on, and he disagrees on, so of course he has decided that ANYTHING I say, he HAS to disagree with.

[street228]

stop trying to speak for me jag, and mind your own business. ABSOLUTLY NOTHING i say, is even remotely connected to your resolution, as to what I mean; Thus, you have no clue as to how I contrive my ultimate dicisions, and what makes my points valid.

Your arguments are nothing but offensive attacks on anyone with opposing opinion, and Ill not discuss ANY points you make. so kiss off

[Guest]

ROFLMAO!!

You're wrong, so you run.....

Run AWAY, RUN AWAY!!!

ROFLMAO!!!