It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Seperation of the United States.

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 02:16 PM
link   
Does it really matter whether someone is Right Wing or Left Wing?
Does it really matter if you're a Democrat or a Republican? What about Tea Party or Bull Moose?

Are you not an American no matter what your beliefs are? Is this not just labeling someone for their nature? This feels too much like the Civil War. "Are you for the slaves? Are you a [derogatory term] lover?"
What does it matter?

I don't want to hear your words of how you will improve our life, or that you will help out the Healthcare System.
I wanna know your plan. I want to know what you would do should you get there in that place that we "citizens" cannot reach. If any person can be elected as a government official, why don't we see your average joe up there?

I don't see any of your high school drop outs in Congress. I don't see any school teachers or factory workers.
How are we supposed to be represented by people who "know no wrong" and know not how it is to be lesser off.

Would you rather send your mother and father to your highschool to talk with your principle, or would you rather send your best friends mom?




posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 02:22 PM
link   
I agree. I would rather start seeing regular people get up into the realms of politics. Regretfully, you have to have large sums of money to get into the political arena. To even run for a simple local position requires a minimum of $3000 and 5000 signatures to even to get on the ballot. The money is to show that you can fund a portion of your campaign, that can be raised with donations or even personal funds. The signatures are to show your actually interested. These steps are similar on a larger scale, you mainly need more signatures, and you also need millions of dollars just for the advertisement for your campaign.

How can a "regular Joe" even compete with the multi-millionaires, and billionaires who are currently sponsoring and running our government?



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Attrei
 


Seriously.

Our "representatives" say they will take care of us and speak for us. Instead, they increase taxes on everything, spend money we don't have, make wars we don't want, and make laws we don't need.

Either they don't listen to us, or end up having their own little agendas.

So I ask, what do your parties do for us?

A Republican president and Democratic Congress: Nothing gets done.

Democratic president, Republican Congress:Nothing gets done.

And where is the democracy in this? We say we're a Democratic country, but we vote on next to no laws, and when our representatives (namely the Executive Branch) are put before us, they have been hand picked from a group. What choice do we have when we vote?

Sure, you can vote for anyone you want. And sure you see Liberals and other parties.

But how often do they actually get voted in? How does that make any difference?

Why give us options of several from several parties when the parties can choose the best tool for the job and offer him up as their shining gem?



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 02:51 PM
link   
Representitives are not supposed to be the most average person we can find, they are supposed to be the smartest people we can find to represent our issues to the best of their ability

When you get a lawyer, you don't hire your fishing buddy to impress the jury, you get someone whom knows the law flawlessly and how to work the system for the outcome you desire.

We should not now nor ever reward mediocrity. The movie Idiocracy is not a desirable future..but it shows what happens when we stop pushing forward exceptionalism and instead demand for average.

If my mother was a idiot, and my friends mom was brilliant, I would rather she go to the PTA meetings and express my concerns.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


And what has putting our best forward done? Watergate, the Aghanistan war, Bush, Bill Clinton's affair, Health Care Reform, increased taxes.

If these people "know what's best for us" then what's to stop them? Obviously, they already don't listen to us.
They feel no obligation to us. Only those who put them in their position.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xen0m0rpH
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


And what has putting our best forward done? Watergate, the Aghanistan war, Bush, Bill Clinton's affair, Health Care Reform, increased taxes.

If these people "know what's best for us" then what's to stop them? Obviously, they already don't listen to us.
They feel no obligation to us. Only those who put them in their position.


Bush was -not- our best

Nixon was -not- our best

Clinton getting some ass is neither here nor there.

Whats your problem with health care reform? You sad insurance companys cant rape you repeatedly anymore?



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 08:24 PM
link   
What difference does it make, every issue we can come up with will be split 60/40 at its best, and 50.1/49.9 at its worst. No matter who we elect approximately 50% of the people are going to be pissed off. The majority of Americans has no meaning any more, we are too divided.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 08:38 PM
link   
I have more of a problem with the fact that we've never elected a scientist to be president of the united states then the fact that we don't elect your aver joe.


I mean isn't the president suppose to be the smartest guy in the country? I am suppose to believe that George Bush and Obama are smarter the Neil Degrasse Tyson and Michio Kaku? Because I don't belive that at all.


Seriously if we want the president to fix the economy, why don't we just elect an economist to be president?



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reptius
I have more of a problem with the fact that we've never elected a scientist to be president of the united states then the fact that we don't elect your aver joe.


I mean isn't the president suppose to be the smartest guy in the country? I am suppose to believe that George Bush and Obama are smarter the Neil Degrasse Tyson and Michio Kaku? Because I don't belive that at all.


Seriously if we want the president to fix the economy, why don't we just elect an economist to be president?


It won't matter whether he is smart or not.

The president isn't supposed to be the smartest, he's supposed to be the most appreciated and most understanding of the public.

Problem is, we're being forced to believe only those in power and wisdom can become a representative.

Hoover certainly wasn't the sharpest of the bunch. But he did a great job if you ask me. There were certainly some shady investments he made, but still.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


Actually, I felt it was better when no one absolutely had to have insurance. Especially those that could not afford it didn't have to put themself further in debt.

And the Reform didn't help anyone except the companies providing the insurance.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Xen0m0rpH
 


I completly disagree with that. The president should not do what the public wants , he should do what he thinks to be is the best for the public which is why I think we should always elect who belive to be the smartest person in the country to be president.
Carter tried to be president using popular opinion and it turned out horrible.


I mean if the president just followed popular opinon. The tax rate would be
zero and we'd have no police , firemen and are roads would be filled with potholes.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 11:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reptius
I mean if the president just followed popular opinon. The tax rate would be
zero and we'd have no police , firemen and are roads would be filled with potholes.


Bingo. The people are collectively retarded
we want to pay nothing, and have every social service ever pondered. We want to also be completely green, have near personal guards patrolling our street, but at the same time not in our sight, have perfect roads, etc etc etc.

If popular opinion was how leaders ruled, we would still have segregation.











posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 11:55 PM
link   
money and power will entice most people....so the problem is that when you get a non politician into office, they suddenly become a politician......


i think if you take money out of the equation completely, you make the process more fair.....you shouldn't have to have any money at all to run for office.......i think sometimes even homeless people might do more for people than politicians do....so lets elect them then.....lets let them run.....lets let anyone run who has bountiful ideas even if they don't have much money......

take money out of politics and you will bring honesty to our government.....but it won't ever happen.....the lure of money and power is too great for incumbants to change their policies



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join