Originally posted by Springer
TERM LIMITS, it's the only way to "clean house". As long as we have career politicians in the Senate and the House we are going to get what
I don't think that the issue is that simple. One of the issues with past governing systems was the fact that the ruling class made no secret that
they were in power and that people should accept what they had/were given.
Enter modern day politics, where the major difference is that the ruling party makes all kinds of show that they are concerned about the public and
what they want. And to an extent, that is true.
But who is in charge?
The lobbyist rule in Washington clearly indicates that money is in charge rather than whom we elect into office. Period. It really doesn't matter
if the most ideological of us is put into office as one voice will get drowned by the money, or those who recognize that without money nothing can get
done. It does require money to save a species, it does cost money to transfer to clean energy, it does cost money to induce change.
And that is the issue. If a particular party isn't in power then they aren't allocating the money and aren't getting their percieved piece of the
We traded one system of class rule for another.
But this particular system is palatable because one lesson was learned and that is smoke and mirrors. It's all in the presentation.
If we wanted to get away from the either/or aspect of partisan ship or class rule then we can discard the ideology and focus on what we do know.
Not everyone understands or places the same priority on the same set of circumstances as everyone else. I think this is an important thing to keep in
mind, especially when people venture to debate people they have never met. I think that people view the world as they percieve and think it should
be, negating the fact that, despite logic, people have a different experience set to draw their opinions and conclusions from. This is relevant when
we consider the type of people we are voting into office and the people whom are doing the voting. And since we can never get to an exact
communication of these motivations, communication usually is best accomplished through general idealism.
And that is how politicians communicate to the public and that is what the public responds to. And to think that this isn't known and intentionally
used by our politicians is naive, in my opinion.
It's all about the money and the amount of time people focus on the issues. And let's not forget that the corporations and interests that pay for
the lobbyists are doing so on behalf of the advertising dollars/efforts expended to maximize the attention (focus/mental attentions) given by the
population to their specific product/project/idea. Which translates into less time spent focusing on the issues.
The issue is actually very complex and not so easy as political reform.