What Do We Do Now About Our Government?

[Deranged Rhino]

2 hours ago, KRC said:

Taking John Adams' lead, let talk about what we can do to fix the problems in our government. As the OP, I will set the ground rules .

 

Without blaming a political party or any specific politician, how do we fix the systemic issues that have put us in the situation we are in right now? There have been obvious failures on multiple levels that never should have happened. Can it be fixed or are we too far gone? We are still waiting on Barr and Durham to see if any unelected officials will be held accountable. We still have the matter of elected official accountability which is also underway. Other than voting people out of office to handle the elected official problem, how do we address the unelected official part of the problem?

 

What is the over/under on how fast someone will break the rules.

 

 

As long as the people remember they have a voice and a responsibility to hold our elected (and unelected) officials to account, we are not too far gone. The moment the people begin to accept that they are serfs to the political class willingly is the day we're done. And we are right on that razor's edge, with 21st century Stalinsts (who occupy both sides of the aisle) trying their best to push us over the edge. 

 

It's up to us, the people, to make sure that doesn't happen. That starts with voting and being involved, of course, but extends to doing more discerning when it comes to our information consumption -- especially on matters of politics and state.

 

What's the saying, we're always one generation away from losing our freedom? We have to start taking that seriously as a people, and hold the political class to account -- especially when the control systems in the media and establishment class are screaming at us not to. 

[Tiberius]

17 minutes ago, RochesterRob said:

  I know that it pained you greatly to make that statement.  Have a cookie.

You probably believe that. 

[3rdnlng]

59 minutes ago, KRC said:

 

I am a gun guy. I prefer the firing squad.

 

 

 

I completely agree. Freedom is not free of pain. It is better than the alternative.

 

 

 

I agree again. The legislative branch has spent too much time abdicating their responsibilities to the executive and judicial branches. The executive has too quickly overreached because the legislative branch has failed to do their jobs and they want to get their agenda through. Get proper checks and balances in place and do your damn job.

Oh, the irony that we're dealing with. The executive branch has been gaining more power over the last few decades and the legislative branch hasn't put up much of a fight over it. Trump comes along and wants to adhere to the constitution (ie. codify DACA into law) by telling Congress to do their job and they claim he is abusing his power and obstructing Congress on matters that are made up. The eight years of Obama were chock full of pushing Executive Orders, making up mountains of regulations and naming Czars to lead agencies so that they didn't need to pass muster in the Senate. 

[Foxx]

an office of oversight, outside of the government apparatus, would go a long way towards restoring faith in our elite, both elected and appointed. having government operated offices of oversight is simply not ideal due to the obvious conflict of interest that it presents.

Edited December 12, 2019 by Foxx

[row_33]

realize that lefties have given up the class struggle and care only about POWER in any conceivable way in family, church, school, government, riding the subway

 

you can't argue with them because truth and logic mean nothing, they have no concept of history or morals, all they care about is POWER

 

so judge accordingly when trying to reason with them, avoid it at all costs if possible...

 

 

[John Adams]

42 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Oh, the irony that we're dealing with. The executive branch has been gaining more power over the last few decades and the legislative branch hasn't put up much of a fight over it. 

 

Congress's ineffectiveness is mostly due to the unwillingness to work together across the aisle. Biden, McCain, Boehner to pick a few hot button names from this board could do it. The current group lacks the political skill and backbone. Hell, one of the landmark pieces of legislation in the Civil Rights Act was passed because Johnson, a 100% racist SOB, made it happen by twisting a lot of arms, but those arms could still be twisted in that era.

 

Contrast them with:

 

Mitch McConnell, "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." Obama ramming though the ACA with a Congress following the marching orders that  "elections have consequences. Pelosi impeachment. Etc. 

 

It's hard to be effective at pushing back, let alone writing helpful legislation, when you can't work across a party line. That doesn't mean it's going to be clean and kumbaya in Congress--but a two-party Congress won't get it's mojo back unless the parties stop demonizing each other and show America it can still do good work.  

 

8 minutes ago, row_33 said:

realize that lefties have given up the class struggle and care only about POWER in any conceivable way in family, church, school, government, riding the subway

 

you can't argue with them because truth and logic mean nothing, they have no concept of history or morals, all they care about is POWER

 

so judge accordingly when trying to reason with them, avoid it at all costs if possible...

 

 

 

BUZZ! Take it to another thread. That's not the intent here. Plus, go fix your own broken country. 

Edited December 12, 2019 by John Adams

[Nanker]

Could outlawing Political National Committees work?
 

 

Nah, fuggettaboudit.  

2 minutes ago, John Adams said:

 

Congress's ineffectiveness is mostly due to the unwillingness to work together across the aisle. Biden, McCain, Boehner to pick a few hot button names from this board could do it. The current group lacks the political skill and backbone. Hell, one of the landmark pieces of legislation in the Civil Rights Act was passed because Johnson, a 100% racist SOB, made it happen by twisting a lot of arms, but those arms could still be twisted in that era.

 

Contrast them with:

 

Mitch McConnell, "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." Obama ramming though the ACA with a Congress following the marching orders that  "elections have consequences. Pelosi impeachment. Etc. 

 

It's hard to be effective at pushing back, let alone writing helpful legislation, when you can't work across a party line. That doesn't mean it's going to be clean and kumbaya in Congress--but a two-party Congress won't get it's mojo back unless the parties stop demonizing each other and show America it can still do good work.  

 

 

BUZZ! Take it to another thread. That's not the intent here. Plus, go fix your own broken country. 

And to think this all started with a cigar, a BJ, and a blue dress while the Pope was in Cuba visiting with Fidel. 

[Foxx]

3 minutes ago, Nanker said:

Could outlawing Political National Committees work?
 

 

Nah, fuggettaboudit.  

i say we outlaw lobbyists as well.

[John Adams]

2 minutes ago, Nanker said:

Could outlawing Political National Committees work?
 

 

I'd like open primaries, but that's a state issue. I registered D for the first time so I could vote in this primary. Registered R last time to vote in the R primary. But it's ***** annoying to have to switch back and forth like my say as a registered I doesn't matter. 

 

- Get rid of gerrymandering, which could help people live with the "other" instead of segregating voting blocks. 

 

1 minute ago, Foxx said:

i say we outlaw lobbyists as well.

 

I hate a lobbyist too, but there are some reasons for them that make sense. Take some group affected by a health issue. As individuals, it's hard to get heard. Hire a lobbyist and they might get someone's ear. 

 

This is one of those freedom ain't free things to me. I think a better way to skin this cat is to try to get elected officials to sign a pledge not to take meetings or money from lobbyists. 

[3rdnlng]

10 minutes ago, John Adams said:

 

Congress's ineffectiveness is mostly due to the unwillingness to work together across the aisle. Biden, McCain, Boehner to pick a few hot button names from this board could do it. The current group lacks the political skill and backbone. Hell, one of the landmark pieces of legislation in the Civil Rights Act was passed because Johnson, a 100% racist SOB, made it happen by twisting a lot of arms, but those arms could still be twisted in that era.

 

Contrast them with:

 

Mitch McConnell, "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president." Obama ramming though the ACA with a Congress following the marching orders that  "elections have consequences. Pelosi impeachment. Etc. 

 

It's hard to be effective at pushing back, let alone writing helpful legislation, when you can't work across a party line. That doesn't mean it's going to be clean and kumbaya in Congress--but a two-party Congress won't get it's mojo back unless the parties stop demonizing each other and show America it can still do good work.  

 

 

BUZZ! Take it to another thread. That's not the intent here. Plus, go fix your own broken country. 

You only quoted part of a thought.

[Foxx]

16 minutes ago, John Adams said:

... I hate a lobbyist too, but there are some reasons for them that make sense. Take some group affected by a health issue. As individuals, it's hard to get heard. Hire a lobbyist and they might get someone's ear. 

 

This is one of those freedom ain't free things to me. I think a better way to skin this cat is to try to get elected officials to sign a pledge not to take meetings or money from lobbyists. 

nope, sorry but do you honestly think having elected officials to swear not to take money is going to actually happen? i mean, sure they may swear not to but you can't actually believe they won't, at least i hope you wouldn't anyways. this is how we got where we are in the first place.

 

i agree that there are groups and individuals who need to be heard. however... this is why we have a House of Representatives, to, represent. the. people., period. they have gotten so far away from what was intended it's not funny. the whole current system of a lobbyist needs to change. just a thought but, we can start by having forums where the elected Representatives can/have to attend and hear the concerns of groups and individuals... i know, we can call them Town Halls. what a great ***** idea! additionally, they should be required to hear them on a bi-monthly schedule if not monthly.

Edited December 12, 2019 by Foxx

[John Adams]

5 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

You only quoted part of a thought.

 

Because the remainder was the partisan crap KRC was hoping to avoid. If you're going to use examples, try some from both sides. 

3 minutes ago, Foxx said:

nope, sorry but do you honestly think having elected officials to swear not to take money is going to actually happen? i mean, sure they may swear not to but you can't actually believe they won't, at least i hope you wouldn't anyways. this is how we got where we are in the first place.

 

No, but people who get busted breaking pledges like that usually pay the consequences. 

[3rdnlng]

2 minutes ago, John Adams said:

 

Because the remainder was the partisan crap KRC was hoping to avoid. If you're going to use examples, try some from both sides. 

Was I wrong?

[KRC]

Looks like this is devolving to partisan BS. Take that crap to another thread, you degenerates. ?

[Foxx]

2 minutes ago, John Adams said:

... No, but people who get busted breaking pledges like that usually pay the consequences. 

did you read the Panama Papers?

[John Adams]

1 minute ago, 3rdnlng said:

Was I wrong?

 

No, but I beat you to it citing Obama's overreach. That's not the point. Discuss how we all can help solve the problem for America.

 

KRC said maybe.. "Don't point a finger until you realize three are pointing back at you." This is not meant to be a partisan hackery thread. 1 or 2 threads already here for partisan BS. Go find them and roll around. 

[Foxx]

1 minute ago, John Adams said:

 

No, but I beat you to it citing Obama's overreach. That's not the point. Discuss how we all can help solve the problem for America.

 

KRC said maybe.. "Don't point a finger until you realize three are pointing back at you." This is not meant to be a partisan hackery thread. 1 or 2 threads already here for partisan BS. Go find them and roll around. 

it's not your thread to police. 

[John Adams]

Just now, Foxx said:

it's not your thread to police. 

 

Thanks for policing me. 

 

It's our thread, our board, our country, our planet to improve. 

[3rdnlng]

3 minutes ago, John Adams said:

 

No, but I beat you to it citing Obama's overreach. That's not the point. Discuss how we all can help solve the problem for America.

 

KRC said maybe.. "Don't point a finger until you realize three are pointing back at you." This is not meant to be a partisan hackery thread. 1 or 2 threads already here for partisan BS. Go find them and roll around. 

Horseshit. It's funny how anyone who disagrees with you gets labeled a "partisan". 

[RochesterRob]

14 minutes ago, John Adams said:

 

No, but I beat you to it citing Obama's overreach. That's not the point. Discuss how we all can help solve the problem for America.

 

KRC said maybe.. "Don't point a finger until you realize three are pointing back at you." This is not meant to be a partisan hackery thread. 1 or 2 threads already here for partisan BS. Go find them and roll around. 

  But I beat to you that in terms of pointing out examples help clarify points and eliminate unwanted speculation.  You brought fair criticism to yourself based on your numerous prior posts.  Anyways, some of us are discussing the topic without partisanship.  Civics classes all 4 years of high school.  Yay or nay?

[Pilsner]

Bring back the gallows.

[Tiberius]

39 minutes ago, Pilsner said:

Bring back the gallows.

Why? 

[RochesterRob]

1 minute ago, Tiberius said:

Why? 

  Why not?

[Foxx]

24 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

...

as a deterrent.

[DC Tom]

31 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Why? 

 

Because it's easier to spell than "guillotine."

[Nanker]

7 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Because it's easier to spell than "guillotine."

I’ll say it again. The Left (antifa, Occupiers, BlackLivesMatter, SocialCommunists) want to relive the French Revolution. The Right wants to adhere to the principles of the American Revolution. 
 

As such one would think the Leftist would be perfectly comfortable with bringing back the guillotine - especially if it gets used the most at the SuperBowl halftime. 

[John Adams]

34 minutes ago, Nanker said:

I’ll say it again. The Left (antifa, Occupiers, BlackLivesMatter, SocialCommunists) want to relive the French Revolution. The Right wants to adhere to the principles of the American Revolution. 
 

As such one would think the Leftist would be perfectly comfortable with bringing back the guillotine - especially if it gets used the most at the SuperBowl halftime. 

 

^^^

[Gary M]

6 hours ago, dubs said:

get back to federalism. The centralized power, influence and money in the federal government draws these people to DC like moths to a flame. 
 

if control goes back to the states, then at least people can vote with their ballot and their feet. 

 

Not working real well in New York!!!

[GaryPinC]

Great topic!  One of the biggest problems I see underlying any real change is information flow thanks to technology.  You want congress critters to work together?  Fine, but your own party's competition can now easily search these instances and use them against you come election time.  The days of backroom deals seem gone because of it.

Let alone if activists and constituents don't like something about you they can blow up social media for starters.

 

Principled judgement seems lost these days, and I have no idea how we get it back right now.

For me it's a critical part of the solution though.

[row_33]

1 hour ago, GaryPinC said:

Great topic!  One of the biggest problems I see underlying any real change is information flow thanks to technology.  You want congress critters to work together?  Fine, but your own party's competition can now easily search these instances and use them against you come election time.  The days of backroom deals seem gone because of it.

Let alone if activists and constituents don't like something about you they can blow up social media for starters.

 

Principled judgement seems lost these days, and I have no idea how we get it back right now.

For me it's a critical part of the solution though.

 

so 51% of the country wants to work hard and study hard and obey the law and take care of their families

 

and 49% want to ***** in the streets and B word and moan and scream all the time and set up fake impeachment hearings

 

fine with me

 

 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

...suggest we start with making the utterance, "535 here working hard to do the people's business" a Federal crime punishable by death.......ranks right up there with, "I promise....I WILL call you tomorrow".....

Edited December 12, 2019 by OldTimeAFLGuy

[Koko78]

5 hours ago, Nanker said:

I’ll say it again. The Left (antifa, Occupiers, BlackLivesMatter, SocialCommunists) want to relive the French Revolution. The Right wants to adhere to the principles of the American Revolution. 
 

As such one would think the Leftist would be perfectly comfortable with bringing back the guillotine - especially if it gets used the most at the SuperBowl halftime. 

 

I may actually watch that halftime show.

[Pilsner]

8 hours ago, Tiberius said:

Why? 

 

Did a Troll say something?

[Rob's House]

14 hours ago, John Adams said:

4. Stop thinking in good vs evil. It's just dumb. Nothing is so simple. My D and R neighbors are not good or evil. They are people, with people problems. This idea that there's a darkness in the world and a hidden war going on is utter crap. To the extent there are a few underbellies, sure of course. But that's not the norm and it doesn't control the world, especially yours. This thing we do here at PPP of making the other side into a name and meme is unproductive, bad for America, and stupid. Yeah, I just called people calling people stupid, stupid. I get it! I'm an offender too. Color me hypocrite, color me human.  

 

This is the most important piece. Most of the problems we have flow downstream of this.

 

I wish it was as easy as politicians working together, but that's not really the issue. We don't have policy disputes that justify the level of divisiveness we're seeing in our political culture. This is much more primal.

 

The hatred is stoked for the purpose of driving a political wedge, not the other way around.

 

I'd like to be the diplomat who says the problem is on both sides, but it really isn't. The hatred has been steadily flowing from left to right. 

 

I don't really know what people on the right can do to fix the problem, because for the most part the aggression is coming from the left.

 

I'm not saying the right is without fault, we're human too, but there is no symmetry. You can always find some fringe outliers to make a counterpoint, but for the most part the right dumps on left-wing politicians and pundits, and that's about it.

 

The left doesn't confine their attacks to Republican politicians and pundits. They go after their supporters as well. But even the attacks on public political figures is asymmetrical.

 

During the Obama years the aggression from the right consisted of accusing Obama of being a socialist (big stretch there), a Muslim (which was still somewhat fringe), and questioning where he was born. The great slights that stirred outrage were things like Joe Wilson saying "you lie" (he did). 

 

President Trump has been called a racist, fascist, Nazi, rapist, Russian spy, traitor, orange, bad, etc. And not by fringe elements, but by ranking Democrats, high profile pundits, and national talk show hosts across most national news and entertainment outlets.

 

This is all projected onto his supporters. Now we are said to be "complicit" in bringing about all the evil deeds he's committing in the delusions of the left.

 

People are afraid to wear a Trump hat in public for fear of violence. People are afraid to say they like him for fear of losing their jobs or being ostracized.

 

Trump supporters can't peaceably assemble in much of the country without violent attacks from leftist antifa thugs that run in packs with weapons and pepper spray. Antifa is then defended by the mainstream left.

 

Conservative speech is heavily policed. One must walk a very fine line; voicing an opinion that may be deemed offensive can quickly leas to excommunication from the public square. Stating opinions, or even facts, that run counter to PC dogma can cost a professional commentator his livelihood overnight. His fans lose out as well, and the frosty message is clear - your thoughts are wrong and must not be spoken.

 

People are constantly called bigots simply for being conservatives. Denying the oppressed minority/white privilege view of the world is racist. Wanting a secure border to curb illegal immigration puts you in Nazi territory. And it's okay to punch a Nazi.

 

I don't recall any conservatives condoning, much less encouraging, violence against Obama supporters.

 

Liberals have no reason to fear any of this.

 

Blatant and aggressive racism, threats, and lies are seldom if ever cause for de-monetization or banishment when coming from the left. Hell, doxxing kids is okay as long as they're wearing MAGA hats.

 

Conservatives do not systematically dehumanize leftists based on their political opinions (or race).

 

Conservatives do not physically attack liberals for supporting liberal candidates.

 

Conservatives do not typically impute all those things they detest about Democrats onto their supporters.

 

Conservatives don't call for impeachment of a duly elected President under the guise of righteousness because they don't like him. Well, not since Clinton anyway.

 

 

I do agree with your overall point. Most Democrats are not evil people. Most people I know who identity as Democrats are not far-left loons, but reasonable people. Sure, we have different ideas about the role and scope of government, but nothing so drastic as to cause hostility.

 

In fact, even the fringe loons I know are decent people. Most, anyway. They're just easily lead, emotional dupes who need something to believe in to give them a feeling of purpose, and have gone too far down the rabbit hole.

 

The problem is the political left needs that hostility and division, and they do everything in their power to stoke the flames. They couldn't do it without their allies in media and tech.

 

No one with any sense truly believes that their constant demonization makes the world a better place. Not do they believe chastising white people for their so-called privilege, or telling minorities that there's a Nazi behind every door trying to keep them down, does a damn thing to mend race relations or help minorities improve their lot in life. But that's the message we are constantly bombarded with. Why?

 

How do we all come together when our political leaders and media outlets create that dissention by any means necessary?

[John Adams]

"Without blaming a political party"

 

Do you think someone could write this about the other side? Of course they could. 

 

You say you agree with my point, then spend the rest of your time completely undermining that statement. Your post is *the* problem. 

Edited December 13, 2019 by John Adams

[oldmanfan]

You need a few things:

 

1.  There needs to be a viable third party.  The majority of folks in this country are like me.  When it comes to fiscal matters, foreign policy, law and order, I am much more conservative (truly conservative and not what some claim to be conservative today).  When it comes to social policies I tend more towards the liberal side.  Some in the middle may flip flop those, but we can at least talk about these issues and come to some sort of compromise.  We have lost having any moderate voices in either party right now, there is nothing on the horizon suggesting that will change.  So a viable third party, representing the majority of the people, is needed.

 

2.  There needs to be term limits.  Truman was to my mind one of the great Presidents and he would talk about Cincinnatus often, the Roman who came to rescue his country, then went home to his farm once done with his duty.  Elect people who will promise to serve X terms and while in office pass term legislation.

 

3.  This country desperately needs a debate and discussion on exactly what the role of the federal government is under our Constitution.  As one who is naturally conservative on this topic, I believe the federal government does far, far more than it should be doing.  The workings of the federal government need to be pruned way back, which in turn will address the ridiculous deficit.

[row_33]

The People can use the ballot box to effect severe proper change

 

might take another election for liberals to realize what is really going on in their country

 

 

[/dev/null]

14 minutes ago, row_33 said:

The People can use the ballot box to effect severe proper change

 

I wish I could double thumbs up this post.  First for the statement and second for the rare proper usage of effect as a verb

[3rdnlng]

6 hours ago, Rob's House said:

 

This is the most important piece. Most of the problems we have flow downstream of this.

 

I wish it was as easy as politicians working together, but that's not really the issue. We don't have policy disputes that justify the level of divisiveness we're seeing in our political culture. This is much more primal.

 

The hatred is stoked for the purpose of driving a political wedge, not the other way around.

 

I'd like to be the diplomat who says the problem is on both sides, but it really isn't. The hatred has been steadily flowing from left to right. 

 

I don't really know what people on the right can do to fix the problem, because for the most part the aggression is coming from the left.

 

I'm not saying the right is without fault, we're human too, but there is no symmetry. You can always find some fringe outliers to make a counterpoint, but for the most part the right dumps on left-wing politicians and pundits, and that's about it.

 

The left doesn't confine their attacks to Republican politicians and pundits. They go after their supporters as well. But even the attacks on public political figures is asymmetrical.

 

During the Obama years the aggression from the right consisted of accusing Obama of being a socialist (big stretch there), a Muslim (which was still somewhat fringe), and questioning where he was born. The great slights that stirred outrage were things like Joe Wilson saying "you lie" (he did). 

 

President Trump has been called a racist, fascist, Nazi, rapist, Russian spy, traitor, orange, bad, etc. And not by fringe elements, but by ranking Democrats, high profile pundits, and national talk show hosts across most national news and entertainment outlets.

 

This is all projected onto his supporters. Now we are said to be "complicit" in bringing about all the evil deeds he's committing in the delusions of the left.

 

People are afraid to wear a Trump hat in public for fear of violence. People are afraid to say they like him for fear of losing their jobs or being ostracized.

 

Trump supporters can't peaceably assemble in much of the country without violent attacks from leftist antifa thugs that run in packs with weapons and pepper spray. Antifa is then defended by the mainstream left.

 

Conservative speech is heavily policed. One must walk a very fine line; voicing an opinion that may be deemed offensive can quickly leas to excommunication from the public square. Stating opinions, or even facts, that run counter to PC dogma can cost a professional commentator his livelihood overnight. His fans lose out as well, and the frosty message is clear - your thoughts are wrong and must not be spoken.

 

People are constantly called bigots simply for being conservatives. Denying the oppressed minority/white privilege view of the world is racist. Wanting a secure border to curb illegal immigration puts you in Nazi territory. And it's okay to punch a Nazi.

 

I don't recall any conservatives condoning, much less encouraging, violence against Obama supporters.

 

Liberals have no reason to fear any of this.

 

Blatant and aggressive racism, threats, and lies are seldom if ever cause for de-monetization or banishment when coming from the left. Hell, doxxing kids is okay as long as they're wearing MAGA hats.

 

Conservatives do not systematically dehumanize leftists based on their political opinions (or race).

 

Conservatives do not physically attack liberals for supporting liberal candidates.

 

Conservatives do not typically impute all those things they detest about Democrats onto their supporters.

 

Conservatives don't call for impeachment of a duly elected President under the guise of righteousness because they don't like him. Well, not since Clinton anyway.

 

 

I do agree with your overall point. Most Democrats are not evil people. Most people I know who identity as Democrats are not far-left loons, but reasonable people. Sure, we have different ideas about the role and scope of government, but nothing so drastic as to cause hostility.

 

In fact, even the fringe loons I know are decent people. Most, anyway. They're just easily lead, emotional dupes who need something to believe in to give them a feeling of purpose, and have gone too far down the rabbit hole.

 

The problem is the political left needs that hostility and division, and they do everything in their power to stoke the flames. They couldn't do it without their allies in media and tech.

 

No one with any sense truly believes that their constant demonization makes the world a better place. Not do they believe chastising white people for their so-called privilege, or telling minorities that there's a Nazi behind every door trying to keep them down, does a damn thing to mend race relations or help minorities improve their lot in life. But that's the message we are constantly bombarded with. Why?

 

How do we all come together when our political leaders and media outlets create that dissention by any means necessary?

Glad to see you posting more and I appreciate your efforts to bring common sense here. 

3 hours ago, John Adams said:

"Without blaming a political party"

 

Do you think someone could write this about the other side? Of course they could. 

 

You say you agree with my point, then spend the rest of your time completely undermining that statement. Your post is *the* problem. 

Ah, if it wasn't for semantics we'd have to get rid of 3/4 of the lawyers. Can we ban all lawyers under 40 and over 50? 

[3rdnlng]

1 hour ago, oldmanfan said:

You need a few things:

 

1.  There needs to be a viable third party.  The majority of folks in this country are like me.  When it comes to fiscal matters, foreign policy, law and order, I am much more conservative (truly conservative and not what some claim to be conservative today).  When it comes to social policies I tend more towards the liberal side.  Some in the middle may flip flop those, but we can at least talk about these issues and come to some sort of compromise.  We have lost having any moderate voices in either party right now, there is nothing on the horizon suggesting that will change.  So a viable third party, representing the majority of the people, is needed.

 

2.  There needs to be term limits.  Truman was to my mind one of the great Presidents and he would talk about Cincinnatus often, the Roman who came to rescue his country, then went home to his farm once done with his duty.  Elect people who will promise to serve X terms and while in office pass term legislation.

 

3.  This country desperately needs a debate and discussion on exactly what the role of the federal government is under our Constitution.  As one who is naturally conservative on this topic, I believe the federal government does far, far more than it should be doing.  The workings of the federal government need to be pruned way back, which in turn will address the ridiculous deficit.

While I agree with the gist of this I don't agree with the viable third party need. Three relatively strong parties gives us the same situation as a parliamentary government, sometimes spelled as "gridlock". We need to have winners and losers, not people who are somewhat committed to their causes and willing to negotiate their standards away.