AMERICA'S CHALLENGE (or DILEMMA)

The government will be in trouble not matter who gets elected.

This is an interesting discussion--thanks. I have been trying to keep up with all of the candidates on both sides and I have not been able to come up with a good choice. I am someone impressed me before election time comes around.

I am sickened by it all, left or right! All they care about is getting re-elected, not about the actual state of affairs. Record unemployment, inflation, poor housing market, etc.

My daddy always told me that "money is the root of all evil"... I think the best candidates are still out there somewhere but the big money has drowned out their voices. What a pity!

There is no secret or magic solution. Democracy requires citizens to be informed, to educate themselves. Unfortunately, people don't want to be bothered. Most would rather watch something banal like "reality TV" than actually learn about the issues that will affect their lives.

People also have to stop expecting politicians to do something that they will automatically feel in their lives. When we say they don't do anything we are usually unable to define what they could do that would satisfy us.

If we don't know ourselves what we think should be done, if we are not up to speed on the details of the issues, then the politicians can't possibly meet the vague expectations that we have of them.

Not defending them, they do a lot of wrong stuff, but how would we know if we had a good one. Your life would not get better overnight.

The answer does not lie in our government, but in our spirituality. Unless or until the groupmind gets the BIG Picture, the governement will do as they please because they believe they are the big picture, and we will be slaves to their system because we don't believe we are the Big picture..

Heh... the basic problem is that nobody really trusts that representatives will represent us anymore.

Can we find an answer to the need for political parties?

The American are like so many countries that were in the hands of fanatics, and they are power hungry. There is far too much money being spent on campaigns.
As long as the peoplecan be some what satified nothing will change; until it is too late.

Blessings

Americans need to speak and let their voice be heard. They need to take an active stance in their government and what the elected officals are doing or not doing.

Blessings

Dennis Kucinich.

Larry, I tend to agree with you. I think the Citizens have allowed this to go too far.



Kylee, thank you for stopping by and commenting. I was hoping to stir some interest from all sides of the voting issues. I call these issues "Non-Partisan" because they affect all candidates regardless of party.

Lost Soul, thanks for your input. I am not familiar with Dennis K. I am afraid some of the really good candidates are going to slip through the cracks.


Personally, I would like to see West Virginia's Govenor jump in on this race. (I think he is Democrat, but what matters is that he seems to have morals and values.) He attended the Sago Mine tragedy from day one. In fact, he was at one of the Super Bowls (?) in Florida when the cave in happened. He left immediately to be with the families of the trapped miners.

Shannon, I am sick and also afraid. The coming months are going to be very important. I hope America wakes up and realizes that there is more at stake here than a job for someone who is handsome or attractive.


Carole, the love of money has caused corruption throughout the history of the world. I doubt that will change anytime soon. I would like to see James Stewarts' old movie, "Mr. Smith Goes To Washington", played on all the channels on T.V. I know that not everyone will watch it, but perhaps the lesson it contains would reach the "thinking" population.

June, people do not vote on who would make the best choices, but rather if they are anti-something. IF they are against the same things that the voter is, then the voter likes this person. Many spend little time actually researching the candidates, their records, their histories, or actually their plans.

We as a society have taken a back seat with realistic views in fear of political correctness, and bully tactics by certain groups. This is sad. We can also see a lack of realism when it comes to what we should be looking at, which is what is best for the country, and not for just our own selves, or the political party we are affiliated with. We have become a country of stagnation, and acceptance of mediocrity.

When our main goal is to get something for nothing, and to take money away from those who have money, then we can see that we are truly in a downward spiral, with no escape from that very slippery slope. We can see the results in all parts of America, from School killings, to blaming the government for hurricanes, and for actually believing that the government has created 9-11 and planted evidence and lied about IRAQ and AFGHANISTAN. We can argue the opinions, but facts do speak extremely loud.

I applaud your article, but now we as a society need to do more than see the problems, but do something to make a vital change before it is all lost. Scruples has been lost, now when all signs of morals and ethics are gone, what is there truly left that would distinguish us from lower animals, or from caveman?

Rory, I understand your point. However, I honestly believe that most Americans are able to see and hear how much trouble this country is in. The main issues seem to be Immigrants and Iraq. There are other issues that need to be tended to. One is China. Why do we keep importing goods that are deadly to adults, children and animals? The politicians tend to cover the important issues up with such senseless issues like the Ice Age/Heat Age.



We pour money into overseas health care but we can't take care of our own cititzens. They put "Dr. Death" in prison for helping the hopelessly ill leave this world with dignity, yet they sit back and let a woman starve to death in front of T.V. cameras. Prescription costs are out of sight for those on Medicare, but the government can only talk about cutting down on Medicare.



Personally, I think America has been sucked into the "Black Hole" and there is no light to be seen.

Rosa, we allow ourselves to be influenced by the media. It matters not whether the station is right wing or left wing, they are all passing out the Kool Aid...and the sad part is that a lot of American are swallowing it.



Austin, best remark I have read all day! We send them to Washington, but they represent themselves, not their constituents!

June you had written this to Rory
We pour money into overseas health care but we can't take care of our own cititzens. They put "Dr. Death" in prison for helping the hopelessly ill leave this world with dignity, yet they sit back and let a woman starve to death in front of T.V. cameras. Prescription costs are out of sight for those on Medicare, but the government can only talk about cutting down on Medicare.

As you know, I am very ill, and the future does not look bright in liver transplants, but I also do not believe that the answer is always government to give handouts. With that said, I would hope we could re-evaluate our money we give to other countries and find a way to give more money to Americans with more money for food[via food stamps] and more, actually complete medical pay for the disabled and elderly [Medicare/Medicaid], but not for the healthy and capable.

We should not be, nor can we afford to be, the all paying government for those who are unwilling to work, while taxing others with huge burdens. Maybe if we quit paying for those who are here illegally, we may be able to pay for the health costs of those who are citizens?

We need to go back to manufacturing in this country, but that means we, as a society need to stop expecting 40.00 plus per hour to make a shirt that can only be sold for $25.00. We need to stop having such greed.

I hope my comments have helped open up more dialogue. I think you have some excellent points.

Dan! Perfect response. Thank you. It would be nice to see people run on their own performance records, their own feelings and beliefs, and the answers they think that would provide a solution for a lot of America's problems.


Personally, I think we should have a President from each Party! One would handle domestic affairs, the other would handle foreign affairs. A big change would be to see the Politicians censure issues like the British Parliment does. The British may not have all the answers but they do seem to meet and agree/disagree together.
Parliment seems to have it together a lot better than Congress or the Senate at this stage in the Political game.

Wiaca, so true! We need to go back to the "grass roots" type of politics. There should be a ceiling on Campaign Funds, and these funds should be monitored closely. I suppose we have left those days behind along with the people's wants and needs.

June, I read in your comments, well comments of others in your thread that political figures put foot in mouth. Well, I respect a person who speaks what he thinks, and not what is politically correct, or will be a positive spin on the next day's news stations.

We expect our political leaders to be perfect, and cannot understand how one could ever change your mind. Then how dare we as the normal folk ever change our opinion on the color of our outfit, the food we eat, or anything else. Is there really a difference? I know I went way out there, but I think we need to accept realism over talking points, action over promises and reality over wishes.

Keith, I understand where you are coming from. As you probably noticed, the front runners are those with the most money and popularity. They draw so much attention to themselves that the late runners do not have a chance to catch up or make themselves known. It is possible to lose an excellent future President because he got left behind on the turn. Once again, we can blame the Media. They want to be the first to announce who may be throwing their hats into the ring, therefore, the candidates with less fame and money are ignored. (I think the debates show this with candidates on both sides. These "unknowns" did not receive an invitation to the debates among their own parties! There is something wrong with this picture.

Olga, someone who is familiar with this person, Dennis K., needs to write an article and publish it to the political groups as well as the general interest groups. I am not familiar with the name, party or qualifications of this person.


Thanks for your comment.

Randy, you have some good points. I need to point out that citizens will not even get motivated until they understand what the media and the politicians are pulling off behind our backs. My hope is that this will open eyes for those who are not into politics or the happenings in Congress or the Senate.


Randy, I am not asking the governemt for a "hand out". People on Medicare or Disability have spent their lives working and paying into the Medicare Fund. For years, we were led to believe that although Medicare would not provide the lifestyle that a paycheck offers, it would cushion the hardness of America's Golden Years. Now, they are talking about cutting back on Medicare and doing away with the Children's health programs.



People on limited incomes who have prescription bills that run into a thousand or more a month, have to decide whether to buy groceries or their medication. That is just not right.



I do not believe we should support illegals, but we can't allow the children to suffer because of lack of care. Tightening the nation's belt and funneling money back into the citizens is the way it should work. I remember, in the Bible, Jesus chastising the Pharisees for giving big fancy offerings to the temple while their widowed mothers went hungry. He was quite angry to see this happen. What would He say today about our government's current state of affairs?


Charity begins at home.


The Candidates running for office seem to skirt this issue.



"Soylent Green" seems to fit this generation quite well. There is always the possiblity that there is someone out there who can spur up the old American Spirit and enthusiasm. I just hope this person steps forward soon.

Randy, thank you for commenting. You always seem to bring up other issues that need to be considered, and that is great. The more aware the population becomes, the more hope there is to resolving the problems.

June: My, what you have provoked. I have suspected for years that the reason why most Americans don't vote at all is this awareness that the system is failing us. It was the best that could be devised several hundred years ago and a wonderful advance. The problem is that the sheep still go to the poles. What we need is a "no-party system" as proposed by the Baha'i Faith and in practice for over a hundred years world wide. About three thousand years ago Plato observed that partisan politics (a party system with any number of parties) is a "no win" situation because it amounts to a "rule by cliques." The people only imagine that they are in control. The golden rule is appropriate here... "them with the gold, rule." My way of protesting is to simply not vote. I cannot participate in a sham that pretends to be the will of the people when it is a vehicle for power seekers to have their cake and eat it too. We need an evolutionary (not revolutionary) change from a party system to a no-party system where, 1) there are no candidates and no one is allowed to campaign for or against themselves or anyone else, 2) Lobbying is not permitted in any form, 3) Every voting citizen is an automatic candidate (the entire population for president, for instance). 4) the winner is determined by the largest number of votes received (by plurality and not majority). The elected person has no constituency to satisfy except the entire citizenry since he/she did not promise anything, didn't "run on any issue" and didn't ask to be elected. Sounds impossible and too ideal? Yes. But it actually works and is working (in the Baha'i Faith) in spite of fears that it is idealistically unworkable. What happens in reality is this: there are people who stand out in any crowd because of their values and thinking skills, etc. They become well known for those values and not for what they "campaign for". In addition, the electorate will automatically shy away from anyone who is an obvious power seeker with the attitude of "me, me, me." (to wit: the Dewey, Truman election in which the big city slicker with the apparent overwhelming support lost to the farm boy from Missouri who "didn't have a snow ball's chance in Hell" of winning.

Dan, June and Donald: You are all on the right track when you challenge the need for political parties. More can be achieved through co-operation than through confrontation. Political parties are one of the greatest obstacles to true democracy.

Donald thank you for a very interesting observation. I'm not sure how the "no party" system could function in a nation as big as ours. It sounds like we would revert to the status of "clans" instead of united. I would think the better way would be to end the bickering, hatred and "Big Dog" concept we are now subjected to and get back to basics.


I hate the primaries because you have to register as either a Dem or Rep, those are the only two choices. The candidates you like may be on both sides of the ticket, but in the primaries you have to vote straight ticket, (which is definitely not democracy.)

Thomas, thank you for stopping by and leaving your comment. I agree that the current system needs an overhaul.

Congratulations! Your article has received ten or more votes and has a rating of 8.0 or higher, and has been removed from Rating Resurrectionists in accordance with our group's policy!

June: I realize how difficult it is to accept the rather "far out" idea that a no party system can work, no matter how large the population. I wouldn't have believed it either from just a first look. However, I have seen it work amazingly well; howbeit, for a much smaller population count. This is handled nicely, though, by breaking it down to electing delegates who in turn do the actual electioning. Yet in the last analysis, it can't be any worse than what we have now. It isn't working. And I have never voted in a primary because I can see myself being affiliated with any political party. It is too demeaning to me from whichever way one looks at it.
A bunch of egotistic power grabbers wanting me to endorse something they have already concocted. And Austin Cushing: what is "Rating Resurrectionists"? Is your comment positive or negative. Forgive me for being so ignorant about the niceties of the "gather" system.

Donald, Austin is talking about a Group he owns. That is the name of his group,
Rating Resurrectionists. When an article receives more than 10 comments, and a certain rating, they pull your article to make room for someone else. (This ia a good thing...lol).



I understand the shunning of primaries, but one particular primary had some candidates that were friends of the family. One was running for Sheriff. I didn't realize he was on an opposite ticket than the one I registered under, so they had to give me a new ballot and re-register me under the other party. Some of the other candidates were, of course, on the opposite ballot. This showed me how stupid our primaries really are. We are allowed to vote "split tickets" in the General Election, but not in the primary. Makes no sense!

Thanks for the information on the group Austin founded. However, I'm not sure that pulling an article that generates a lot of interest is a "good thing." As to primaries, I agree. But with so many people crossing party lines to vote for personalities and "good looks" (sad, itsn't it?) I think they are basically a sham to make people think they really have a say in who runs. After all, the candidates on the primary were all preselected by their peer politicos.

wow both of Kuicinch's supporters are here on gather!

Seriously, there are some decent people out there. What it takes is for voters to look at the positions and balance their priorities versus that of a lot of other people. No candidate can appeal 100% to all. In trying to do so, anyone compromises themselves. Look at what the government is supposed to do versus what it does today, if it returned to traditional limits-people would do more for themselves as the Founding Fathers intended.

The information is out there, the one I support only gets 80% of my approval. I've never had one get 100%.

check out the candidates web sites and there are usually opposition blogs to cross check on. Do not simply take their or others words for the truth, research.

Rory.
I'm not sure any candidate has ever done anything the affected me much personally, but then I don't expect them to, so I vote for the candidate who I feel will better the lives of the most number of people and the nation and will try to do the least amount of harm in the process.


Charles,

I've never had a candidate get 100 percent approval from me either including my current choice. The answer is Hillary.

June,

It is past-time for open primaries where everyone can vote for the candidate of their choice regardless of whether or not you and that candidate belong to the same party.

Thank you Donald. I always appreciate your comments.


Charles, I agree the primaries should be open to both sides of the ticket. The problem is picking who to vote for. No matter who the candidate is, he is still going to stick to his party's basic guidelines. The Democrats have already started voting for issues that will raise the taxes. The minimum wage raise sounds good, however, the aftermath is tragic. Everything goes up excepth the fixed incomes.


On the other hand, the Republicans have seemed to really cause confusion and doubt in the voter's mind. I favor the Democrats wishes for health care, but I fear our protection from Terrorists will be compromised. So far, the candidates on both sides have not proven their worthiness to be President. (In my opinion.)



Carol, thanks for stopping by and leaving your comment. I, too, have never found a candidate that meets my criteria 100%. I shouldn't say never because I voted for Bill Clinton on his first run and felt he filled the requirements I had set as a voter. I still feel he was good president even though he had personal issues. He did pull a boo-boo by letting Osama slip away, but hindsight vs. foresight in that incident. I just don't feel Hillary has the "balls" to handle the mess our government has become. An example of that is Nancy Spilosi. She was full of promises when she took over the House. Somehow she has let the reins slip and cannot even control order. Now, Cindy Shehan (sp?) wants to take Nancy's place.

Is it hard to get the rest of the world to submit to one world government when the USA is out there shining like a beacon of hope?, yes it is. We have to fall, global trade agreements, Nafta, now this American Highway, etc., the more we globalize, the more our workers compete head to head with the third world worker, our wages have to go down, and our country goes down to meet the third world in status, etc., This is not an accident, this is planned policy, has been for years. We have been the global marketplace, with more consumers than any other market, and as such, we could dictate how things went, but we put government in the hands of those that have delivered us, like sheep, to be sheared. Now we are on the brink, and everyone is wondering how we got here. It's simple, really. Corporations don't care what we live like, as long as they make money. Fleeing our high wages, and leaving us to twist in the wind just makes us malleable to their whims. When we got sold on global trade agreements, we sold our soul to the devil. Tri-lateral commission, Illuminati, Bilderbergers, all names for the same thing, the rich and elite, ruling we the serfs of the world. Rudy is their next Republican candidate, although the Republicans have been on board for a long time, and Clinton, their favored Democratic one. What the thing is, is that it doesn't matter anymore, they already have the press, and the political process, and we just dance for their amusement. I work for another candidate, possibly as bad as the rest, but as the media tries to trivialize and smear him, It convinces me he may be sincere, or another illusion. What difference does it make, though, If he wins, and he's sincere, they'll Kennedy his butt. If not, you know he's a part of it all. I don't know the answers, but I know we aren't asking the right questions yet.

June,

Hillary was First Lady when her health-care initiative was presented and had no political clout beyond what Bill allowed and was capable of doing and his options there were limited. He was considered a Washington outsider at the time and had a Republican Congress to deal with on top of that. On top of that the insurance. HMOs and pharmaceutical companies pulled out all the stops in their PR campaign designed to scare the public.

I think Hillary has the figurative gonads and unlike Bill I don't think she will have to worry about accusations that her spouse wears the pants in the family because such accusations would hold no sway with the millions who wish Bill could have run for a third term.

Hillary is her own woman and she has shown that by not kowtowing to either the left or the right. Given our political atmosphere it takes guts to stand up to both those loud mouth groups and risk incurring their wrath as she has done. She has not let them intimidate her and if we our looking for a way out of the mess that Bush as created, neither should we.

I've made this a featured article in Differing Views - thanks for provoking so many interesting thoughts.

On a mission, can't talk now, Trying to give fifty points (at least) to all my connections for Christmas, or whatever:

Ten unsolicited points from the world's worst connection. Merry whatever you celebrate!

June -

Those in power want it this way. The more confused and apathetic we get, the better to them. A much smaller voting block is much easier to control. They want us overwhelmed and apathetic; we overlook much of what's going on because we don't have the time and energy to keep-up. JMHO of course.