Republicans move to delay climate bill progress

Pinjas · 11-18-09, 12:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Jones

"Democracy has failed"? LOL

Democracy has just begun.

Democracy is the latest and greatest way of life on the planet.

You are reading into words too deeply in this occasion. But I suspect you don't know what the word democracy, or republic for that matter, means.

Democracy is a process of voting on a subject where all members votes are counted equally. The democratic voting system for politicians is a system that, today, gives great benefit to the political incumbent. 98% of the time the incumbent gets re-elected, if on that note alone the notion of democracy cannot be declared, currently, as a failure than perhaps it is time to realize just how apathetic you or those around you really are.

Tom Jones · 11-18-09, 12:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinjas

You are reading into words too deeply in this occasion. But I suspect you don't know what the word democracy, or republic for that matter, means.

Democracy is a process of voting on a subject where all members votes are counted equally. The democratic voting system for politicians is a system that, today, gives great benefit to the political incumbent. 98% of the time the incumbent gets re-elected, if on that note alone the notion of democracy cannot be declared, currently, as a failure than perhaps it is time to realize just how apathetic you or those around you really are.

LOL - it is obvious you have no real experience with democracy.

Sure, encumbents get re-elected more often than not - that's because people know what they are getting and choose to not take a chance on someone they don't really know about - unless the encumbent has screwed up, the public at large will most likely vote them back in office - this is the public's choice, and this is part of the democratic system - the operative word being choice.

People in a democracy have a choice - vote or don't vote - re-elect the encumbent or oust his/her ass and put someone new in.

It works well, despite your thinking that "democracy has failed".

Democracy has not failed.

Like I said, "Democracy has just begun. Democracy is the latest and greatest way of life on the planet."

Pinjas · 11-18-09, 01:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Jones

LOL - it is obvious you have no real experience with democracy.

Sure, encumbents get re-elected more often than not - that's because people know what they are getting and choose to not take a chance on someone they don't really know about - unless the encumbent has screwed up, the public at large will most likely vote them back in office - this is the public's choice, and this is part of the democratic system - the operative word being choice.

People in a democracy have a choice - vote or don't vote - re-elect the encumbent or oust his/her ass and put someone new in.

It works well, despite your thinking that "democracy has failed".

Democracy has not failed.

Like I said, "Democracy has just begun. Democracy is the latest and greatest way of life on the planet."

The democracy you believe in was the very thing we fought against in past wars. A political incumbent does not get re-elected because he is doing a good job to any degree. He gets re-elected because of a term called 'franking' and that those who are funding their campaigns know full well that the incumbent is going to, most likely, get re-elected.

Many people are extremely dull and apathetic, they base their vote on reasons that have nothing to do with reason or logic. Until tyranny comes knocking down your door to kill you, you will likely remain blind to it. A substance they put in peoples water to instill a level of apathy is called fluoride, fluoride is the active ingredient in a lot of drugs they use to level someones mood, such as prozac. High fat diets also cause great levels of apathy and stupidity, and in case you weren't aware, the US has a tremendous number of obese individuals.

It wouldn't take much to realize that the system is rotten to the core, but you'd have to be certain that your mind wasn't being tampered with by one of the -many- sources of brain washing. The media, foods, the water, general educational system and so on.

The guy with the most money or the biggest campaign bill will almost always win the election, that guy is always going to be the incumbent because lobbyists or people who bribe politicians to get things they want know this.

Instead of pointing fingers I will give you a small piece of the puzzle for a needed solution. Term limits. That's it, two words, term limits. In other words, no more professional politicians. A man may be elected for any seat of our government, and after a longer 4-8 years he/she may never run again. No more incumbents, no more corruption, no more committees and two sided battles in our own political system.

Tom Jones · 11-18-09, 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinjas

The democracy you believe in was the very thing we fought against in past wars. A political incumbent does not get re-elected because he is doing a good job to any degree. He gets re-elected because of a term called 'franking' and that those who are funding their campaigns know full well that the incumbent is going to, most likely, get re-elected.

Many people are extremely dull and apathetic, they base their vote on reasons that have nothing to do with reason or logic. Until tyranny comes knocking down your door to kill you, you will likely remain blind to it. A substance they put in peoples water to instill a level of apathy is called fluoride, fluoride is the active ingredient in a lot of drugs they use to level someones mood, such as prozac. High fat diets also cause great levels of apathy and stupidity, and in case you weren't aware, the US has a tremendous number of obese individuals.

It wouldn't take much to realize that the system is rotten to the core, but you'd have to be certain that your mind wasn't being tampered with by one of the -many- sources of brain washing. The media, foods, the water, general educational system and so on.

The guy with the most money or the biggest campaign bill will almost always win the election, that guy is always going to be the incumbent because lobbyists or people who bribe politicians to get things they want know this.

Instead of pointing fingers I will give you a small piece of the puzzle for a needed solution. Term limits. That's it, two words, term limits. In other words, no more professional politicians. A man may be elected for any seat of our government, and after a longer 4-8 years he/she may never run again. No more incumbents, no more corruption, no more committees and two sided battles in our own political system.

It is evident that you harbor hate in your heart - it will rot you to your core.

America is a very young nation - and it is America's love and pride of freedom that will keep America alive and strong for many, many, many years to come.

You speak of rich politicians - sure, we have rich politicians - we also have poor ones, and lots in between - it's a free country - we are not about to try to prevent someone who is rich from running for office just because you may whatever - that would be wrong - besides, there's nothing wrong with having someone who has experience with success helping to manage government affairs.

Term limits have their ups and downs - sure they may unseat someone who should be unseated, but they also may unseat some seriously needed experience who shouldn't be unseated - we leave it up to the voters, the American people, to unseat a politician if they feel it is necessary - we even recall politicians when we feel it is necessary.

And talk about being brainwashed - LOL - your thinking up stuff like flouride is put in water to cause apathy in Americans shows that you are brainwashed to hate America for anything your twisted mind can stretch to think of.

Flouride has been used and proven to be safe for over 60 years in America - it is not put into water to brainwash people, or cause apathy - it is put into water to help prevent tooth decay - and studies show that it has that effecct by 30%.

Flouride exists naturally in water - some communities have enough naturally that none has to be added, and some communities add some - only 60% of communities add flouride - and many communities don't get community water; they are on individual wells.

Besides, many people do not drink tap water - they drink bottled water, which is available and sold everywhere in America so your flouride for apathy program only exists in your mind.

You are the one who is brainwashed and twisted.

You have hate for America not for what we are doing wrong, but for what we do right.

We know that you hate us for making it possible for women to have a decent life instead of being subservient - you hate us for freedom of speech - you hate us for freedom of religion - it's obvious that you hate everything about the good parts of America.

That's OK - Americans will continue to love and enjoy our wonderful way of life, and if you choose to let your hate eat your heart's core..... - we believe in freedom - it's your choice.

Aunt Spiker · 11-18-09, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinjas

To focus on a matter of this destructive two party team that exists isn't productive either.

The two-party system is sided and unfair, I agree with this. . .I feel the guidelines that lead to this come from things such as the regulations that the Commission on Presidential Debates follows ... as well as the incessant drone of "3rd party votes don't count" or the "what a waste of a vote" around election time.

Quote:

The notion that our species has the knowledge and understanding of the workings of our planet and it's weather patterns is clearly not true. We don't even have 100 years of solid global scientific weather recordings, we cannot accurately predict the weather tomorrow 100% of the time, what makes anyone think that we know what's going on at all?

Fact, actually, is that man has been maintaining a variety of weather-related records since the dawn of man.

This knowledge might not be "modern" post the Industrial Revolution - but it's still significant and quite impressive.
However, why do we need several centuries of compiled "scientific information" as you're refering to it to be the legs under the table? It's obvious that weather patterns fluctuate decade-to-decades and century-to-century.

Quote:

The media wants you to believe there is a big problem and that the government needs you to fix it for you. The government couldn't solve this type of problem, nor most it is faced with. The government is not an army of scientists, most of them are nothing more than professional liars who sit where they do every day because democracy has failed.

I believe the word you're looking for is bureaucrats. . .which are a product of our government-by-proxy standards. Quite of few of which are experts in their fields and some have rather nitty gritty jobs - not desk jobs - which center around a hands-on understanding of their field.

But that's beside your point...

Quote:

Our species has, at best, minor hints or clues as to what has occured on our planet over the past few billion years. Anyone who makes claims of -knowing- about a danger of something to do with our weather in the far off and distant future is likely the same group of people who will tell you that only cops should have guns. They want to control you and eventually kill you. Look into fluoride and aspertame if you need proof.

Well - at least the government isn't advocating for us to kill ourselves before 2012 gets here.
What's wrong with trying to protect the environment a little?

Some alternatives are skewed, however, and in this regard I agree with you, their interjection is folly - like them pushing the CFL bulb eventhough it's toxic to everyone and the environment - and they've yet to find a solution to this rather unsafe and damaging product.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinjas

The democracy you believe in was the very thing we fought against in past wars. A political incumbent does not get re-elected because he is doing a good job to any degree. He gets re-elected because of a term called 'franking' and that those who are funding their campaigns know full well that the incumbent is going to, most likely, get re-elected.

While franking *might* help the incumbent get reelected it's not the only tool to use so pinning incumbent success all on the franking priveledge is kind of silly.

Quote:

Many people are extremely dull and apathetic, they base their vote on reasons that have nothing to do with reason or logic. Until tyranny comes knocking down your door to kill you, you will likely remain blind to it. A substance they put in peoples water to instill a level of apathy is called fluoride, fluoride is the active ingredient in a lot of drugs they use to level someones mood, such as prozac. High fat diets also cause great levels of apathy and stupidity, and in case you weren't aware, the US has a tremendous number of obese individuals.

The founding fathers agreed, which is why we're a representative democracy with an electoral college, etc - and not a direct democracy where the tally of our individual votes are counted in direct vote of the president/etc.

The founding fathers were also very religious, almost all of them. . .what's that about their decisions having nothing to do with reason and logic?
Kettle meet pot.

If your logic rang true then the places with a predominately fit and healthy populous would be current republicans, only, and all in opposition of Obama - and the supporters of our current government, the democrats, would all be in favor of him.
See - it just doesn't work that way, sorry.

Obviously there's far more ot our country that Fat Joes and Sloppy Susans.

Quote:

It wouldn't take much to realize that the system is rotten to the core, but you'd have to be certain that your mind wasn't being tampered with by one of the -many- sources of brain washing. The media, foods, the water, general educational system and so on.

So what's your prefered alternative? The British style democracy with a Parliament...if so - which party would you vote for and how would you feel if they elected a doucher for Prime Minister and you had no say or recourse? How would you deal with the government and parliament being on eachother's side, ALL the time, and never having any opposition rise up and force things to balance out?

Quote:

The guy with the most money or the biggest campaign bill will almost always win the election, that guy is always going to be the incumbent because lobbyists or people who bribe politicians to get things they want know this.

I partially agree, unfortunately money means your voice is heard more than the opponents if you apply it to advertising. But consider it the other way around - that if someone's more popular and has a greater number of supporters, and they each donate $5.00 - then their popularity is a cause, not a result, of their finances.

However - your logic means that if the incumbent is running against a rich candidate then the richer of the two would trump . . .or do you think franking trumps riches?

Quote:

Instead of pointing fingers I will give you a small piece of the puzzle for a needed solution. Term limits. That's it, two words, term limits. In other words, no more professional politicians. A man may be elected for any seat of our government, and after a longer 4-8 years he/she may never run again. No more incumbents, no more corruption, no more committees and two sided battles in our own political system.

No more professional politicians?

I don't think you're aware of how big the government is - it employs over 2 million people directly and far more than that number are employed indirectly (via tertiary agencies ... government by proxy businesses)

I agree with the sided-issues of government, though. I also feel it's filled with too much party-clinging individuals.

However, it's better than it use to be - they hire on merit and accountability rather than patronage and spoils. Baby steps, but the government itself is becoming more diverse - employing a huge range of people and culture types, now. The only ones we really hear or think about are the big ones on the Hill: Executive, Legislative and Judical Branches ... however, they're just a small percentage and each of them has their own staff - and it's that staff which assists, advises, informs and guides the leaders and heads - rather than it being the other way around. I'd hardly consider any of the supporting staff to be professional politicians.

Pinjas · 11-20-09, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker

The two-party system is sided and unfair, I agree with this. . .I feel the guidelines that lead to this come from things such as the regulations that the Commission on Presidential Debates follows ... as well as the incessant drone of "3rd party votes don't count" or the "what a waste of a vote" around election time.

Fact, actually, is that man has been maintaining a variety of weather-related records since the dawn of man.

This knowledge might not be "modern" post the Industrial Revolution - but it's still significant and quite impressive.
However, why do we need several centuries of compiled "scientific information" as you're refering to it to be the legs under the table? It's obvious that weather patterns fluctuate decade-to-decades and century-to-century.

I believe the word you're looking for is bureaucrats. . .which are a product of our government-by-proxy standards. Quite of few of which are experts in their fields and some have rather nitty gritty jobs - not desk jobs - which center around a hands-on understanding of their field.

But that's beside your point...

Well - at least the government isn't advocating for us to kill ourselves before 2012 gets here.
What's wrong with trying to protect the environment a little?

Some alternatives are skewed, however, and in this regard I agree with you, their interjection is folly - like them pushing the CFL bulb eventhough it's toxic to everyone and the environment - and they've yet to find a solution to this rather unsafe and damaging product.

While franking *might* help the incumbent get reelected it's not the only tool to use so pinning incumbent success all on the franking priveledge is kind of silly.

The founding fathers agreed, which is why we're a representative democracy with an electoral college, etc - and not a direct democracy where the tally of our individual votes are counted in direct vote of the president/etc.

The founding fathers were also very religious, almost all of them. . .what's that about their decisions having nothing to do with reason and logic?
Kettle meet pot.

If your logic rang true then the places with a predominately fit and healthy populous would be current republicans, only, and all in opposition of Obama - and the supporters of our current government, the democrats, would all be in favor of him.
See - it just doesn't work that way, sorry.

Obviously there's far more ot our country that Fat Joes and Sloppy Susans.

So what's your prefered alternative? The British style democracy with a Parliament...if so - which party would you vote for and how would you feel if they elected a doucher for Prime Minister and you had no say or recourse? How would you deal with the government and parliament being on eachother's side, ALL the time, and never having any opposition rise up and force things to balance out?

I partially agree, unfortunately money means your voice is heard more than the opponents if you apply it to advertising. But consider it the other way around - that if someone's more popular and has a greater number of supporters, and they each donate $5.00 - then their popularity is a cause, not a result, of their finances.

However - your logic means that if the incumbent is running against a rich candidate then the richer of the two would trump . . .or do you think franking trumps riches?

No more professional politicians?

I don't think you're aware of how big the government is - it employs over 2 million people directly and far more than that number are employed indirectly (via tertiary agencies ... government by proxy businesses)

I agree with the sided-issues of government, though. I also feel it's filled with too much party-clinging individuals.

However, it's better than it use to be - they hire on merit and accountability rather than patronage and spoils. Baby steps, but the government itself is becoming more diverse - employing a huge range of people and culture types, now. The only ones we really hear or think about are the big ones on the Hill: Executive, Legislative and Judical Branches ... however, they're just a small percentage and each of them has their own staff - and it's that staff which assists, advises, informs and guides the leaders and heads - rather than it being the other way around. I'd hardly consider any of the supporting staff to be professional politicians.

I believe a lot of the points you read were misinterpreted. I am very familiar with the size of the government, and I feel very strongly that it is essential that it's size be reduced by a very large percentage before they reduce us by a very large percentage.

To an extent we may be able to remotely speculate that there have been variations about weather that has been very minor in general. But over all, we are completely blind. We could be changing things just as easily as the world could be flopping over. We just don't know, if you weren't sure if what you smelled was chocolate cake fresh from the oven or smoke, would you spray for fire no matter what?

A great deal of wisdom can be extracted from this phrase, "Those who would sacrifice security for freedom deserve neither".

My opinion is that the government will create events and lies to instill fear in the already dumbed down, drugged up, dull and apathetic masses to rob them of the little sense that they have left. Before you know it, they are going to be -forcing- you to to get these shots to 'protect' you, if you resist they will put you in prison to 'protect' you because you no longer have a choice weather or not you want to live with some man made virus or not.

I am loyal to the constitution, I believe in it's ways. What made our once great country great was that our government was limited in it's size and ability and that we, as people, were allowed to keep the fruit of our labors. Today these ideas are lost and gone, the insane taxation, inflation, and outright corruption is clear and obvious. The only thing that shocks me today is how calm and flat people are about these ideas. I have seen children explode in ecstasy over receiving cell phones or other stupid garbage that they didn't need. I have watched adults roar in universal pleasure when an sports team won a game. But when a horrible even occurs, terrible realizations are found and action must be took, all is quiet and dull. You have to wonder why our streets are so quiet, the reasons are many of course. A lot of people (not enough) are saying 'wake up' with a fire and intensity that might match the sports enthusiasts. But it's difficult to compete with the mind consuming effects of all of the man made substances, media and propaganda and fear.

Right now, they want you and I, and everyone here to squabble and argue with hate against each other on matters that have no validity to what is important and urgent in our lives. They don't want you to think about police tazering, killing and imprisoning people, they don't want you to think about why were raping the middle east, they don't want you to pretend the twin towers are trees and thus meaning it would be possible to bring them down in a straight direction via one method and no other. They want you to wait in your home until they are good and ready to take everything they want from you, your freedom. They killed JFK, they killed those at pearl harbor, they killed those in iraq, they killed those in wtc 1 and 2, they killed those all over the US when they put toxic substances in your water (chlorine and fluoride), and you and I are next on their list, all you've got to do is nothing.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode