- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
Maybe "PC Sucks" should be on the backside.
I suppose "Stop Black On Black Crime" would be too racist for racists to tolerate.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/12/10/col...
Interfere with someones rights that is breaking the law, not some politicians idea of what they think you should do.
I've thought for some time now that Congress (at least the House) should probably not be an elected position. Make it like jury duty - you get a notice in the mail, and think "oh, crap, I have to go be in Congress for two years."
Could the results be any worse than the mess we're in now?
"Cincinnatus was right! So was Washington!"
I do love this idea, and propose it regularly [although probably not widely enough].
Here's a caveat that might address your concern; limit it to a pool of net tax payers. If you're on any welfare program, you won't be called. Moochers would be excluded.
Hell I've been advocating for years that if someone is on a public welfare program for more than, say, six months, they lose the franchise until they are self-sufficient again. No skin in the game, no vote.
I think the bigger problem is in the way people run for office. It seems that the higher up the chain one goes, the more beholden to money one gets. I think I'd try to start with campaign finance reform first by restricting ALL donations for office to come from citizens living within the jurisdiction of the office.
I want the job of President of the U.S. to be so trivial that anyone can hold it - even if he's as dumb as a box of rocks. Mel Brooks' Governor in Blazing Saddles - even HE could be president. You can't tell me that most of the presidents, especially the ones in our lifetimes, are smarter than or are able to know more than the people in the Gulch. The difference is, the people who go after the job want it for all the wrong reasons.
I agree. Benjamin Franklin noted this in the Constitutional Convention debates.
And I think you hit on a very good point: that the Office of the President of the United States has become too complicated. Why? Because running the country is supposed to be the job of CONGRESS, not the President! The President is supposed to be responsible for carrying out the wishes of Congress and leading the military. But our culture has gravitated to insist that now the President must be the Chief Diplomat - the purpose of the State Department, the chief Economist (Treasury), Chief Educator (Dept of Education), etc. We need the President to focus on a few things and do them right rather than bungling EVERYTHING.
We are a constitutional republic because that is the only form of government that (should) guarantee the rights of the minority. It prevents the tyranny of 51%. Unfortunately, our constitutional republic has slipped a few cogs and doesn't run properly any more.
If we were still a constitutional republic, we would already have impeached and convicted the sitting President.
So here it is - Running the country should have nothing to do with government. The "country" is an aggregation of all the individual interactions of free people. Only when these people are able to interact without interference, governmental or otherwise - so long as their actions aren't causing harm to others - then they should be free to conduct them.
What we have today is government dictating who, what, how, and even why and when private actions must be conducted, and now have even supplanted the individual and are conducting individual actions on behalf of the individual - against their wishes (see my post about the gov't re-enrolling people in O'care if they didn't do so themselves, and choosing the level of insurance that will be billed to them).
I also agree with Timelord that we are not merely a representative democracy - that would lead to the tyranny of the majority. It is also why the break-down of the separation of powers as enshrined in the US Constitution is so dangerous. We don't even have the tyranny of the majority, but a simple tyranny of a tyrant.
should be outlawed ... "What difference does it make,
at this point?" she said, smirking beneath her frown. -- j
At least he's not selling NSA spy elves... now THAT's offensive!
If someone says "I can't breathe" and then dies in the hands of cops, they murdered him. Period.
I don't like what the cop says on the t-shirt, but he has the right to say it and people that agree with him have the right to buy it.
Look at it this way: I drove home on Friday with one headlight out. If a CHP had pulled me over and told me that I was violated the law, I would have remonstrated with him. Should I have been choked to death for having argued back in such a case?
I will quite accept, 'fallible' as a concluding argument on the side of the police. I will not accept, "Well done. Cookie."
Jan