Language:
switch to room list switch to menu My folders
Go to page: First ... 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 ... Last
[#] Mon Sep 09 2013 07:42:54 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


No, I really mean it when I said voting reform.

Regardless of whether or not the people allowed to vote are land-owners or tax-payers in a weighted system, our current system mathematically leads to two parties and gerrymandering, and consequently fails to best represent the will of the people.

In fact, given the weird strategies our current system encourages, there is a chance it fails to even represent the general will of the people.

The last four presidential elections should be evidence enough of this.

[#] Mon Sep 09 2013 09:33:27 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Are you suggesting a system that leads to something other than winner-take-all, or a system other than one-voter-one-vote?

[#] Mon Sep 09 2013 12:30:12 EDT from vince-q @ Cascade Lodge BBS

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


I have long thought (mostly to myself) that it might be a Good Thing if the US were to convert our legislative/executive system to something more akin to the British parliamentary form.

Here's the rough idea:

1. keep the existing President, convert the Presidency to a 12 year term, powers mostly ceremonial. Eliminate the Vice Presidency entirely - will not be needed.

2. House of Representatives to be modelled after the British House of Commons - majority party elects a Prime Minister - Prime Minister to hold the powers currently associated with POTUS (see item #1 for changes in that office). Election of House members to follow on a vote of No Confidence in the prime minister, as in Britain.

3. Senate - remains as is; roughly equivalent to British House of Lords, mostly ceremonial, but will retain the "Advise and Consent" role in the existing powers of the Senate specifically in re treaties and appointments, with the exception of the Prime Minister's Cabinet, which will NOT be subject to Senate confirmation.

Like I said - rough and off the top of my head - but it might be an improvement of the crap we currently have. And hopefully move the power in our federal government back to the people.

[#] Mon Sep 09 2013 15:49:07 EDT from zooer @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOOTKA0aGI0

[#] Mon Sep 09 2013 17:48:35 EDT from Sig @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

One of the major problems with any significant reform to our Constitution is that it would require a series of amendments or a new Constitutional convention. If the latter happens, all bets are off as to what could happen. But given the state of
public awareness of political issues, I can't see anything good possibly coming from monkeying about with the fundamental structure.

[#] Mon Sep 09 2013 17:59:26 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

That's the problem. If the Constitution gets replaced, it's going to get replaced with something FAR WORSE, not better. It's the 21st century and patriots are a dying breed; the commies almost outnumber us and between cheating and media bias they can outvote us (which is why America finally lost the Cold War on November 4, 2008). [2~


[#] Mon Sep 09 2013 21:08:59 EDT from zooer @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Nah, we lost the war when Reagan said "Tear down this wall.", it lead people to believe communism was dead, a
false sense of security.

[#] Wed Sep 11 2013 07:45:08 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


9/11/2012 ... We Will Never Forget


[#] Wed Sep 11 2013 11:06:06 EDT from vince-q @ Cascade Lodge BBS

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I know many of you are not overly fond of Facebook. I know I'm not fond of Facebook in the least.

But here is something truly worthy of your attention, respect and admiration:

https://www.facebook.com/2MillionBikersDC?hc_location=stream



[#] Wed Sep 11 2013 11:08:47 EDT from vince-q @ Cascade Lodge BBS

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]



[#] Thu Sep 12 2013 08:13:43 EDT from zooer @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Only took 12 years

[#] Thu Sep 12 2013 12:49:39 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

There really ought to be a giant American flag on the top of that thing.

Or -- even better -- a giant foot with its bottom facing Mecca. (I was orignally going to say "middle finger" but let's go with something that's insulting to muslims rather than something that's insulting to humans.)

[#] Thu Sep 12 2013 12:57:08 EDT from vince-q @ Cascade Lodge BBS

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

 

Thu Sep 12 2013 05:13:43 PDT from zooer @ Uncensored
Only took 12 years

What else do you expect in a city run by the likes of Bloomberg - probably preoccupied doing important things like trying to regulate the maximum size of a Slurpee instead of aiding in the speedy completion of a project which should have, at most, taken 4 years, not nine.



[#] Fri Sep 13 2013 07:43:03 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Too much time was spent worrying about how to "honor the victims." The best thing we could have done to "honor the victims" would have been to haul the original plans back out and immediately start putting the original towers back up, ten stories higher. And then nuke Mecca, of course. The message should have been "this is what happens when you f**k with America." Instead, the terrorists won.

[#] Fri Sep 13 2013 12:42:44 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Quote of the day:

"And if you ask them what ought to be done about the fact that shari'a law approves marriages of girls down to ten years old - well, everything bad that Muslims do is George Bush's fault. Because racism. So there."

-- Eric S. Raymond

[#] Wed Sep 18 2013 17:24:31 EDT from LoanShark @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

** WHAT ARE THEY DISTRACTING US FROM? **

something to do with penises.

[#] Wed Sep 18 2013 19:07:29 EDT from vince-q @ Cascade Lodge BBS

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Sep 18 2013 2:24pm from LoanShark @uncnsrd (Uncensored) in Politics & Propaganda>

** WHAT ARE THEY DISTRACTING US FROM? **

something to do with penises.



If it involves democraps you can ***count*** on that!

[#] Wed Sep 18 2013 19:51:32 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


Bah. Even the government cannot distract me from penises.

Although a penis could easily distract me from the government. That isn't really difficult, though. Could be hard, but not difficult.

[#] Wed Sep 18 2013 21:29:18 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

something to do with penises.



If it involves democraps you can ***count*** on that!

There is an old adage about how it would be appropriate to change the symbol of the democratic party from a donkey to a condom because it stands for inflation, protects a bunch of pricks, and gives you a false sense of security while you're being screwed.

Go to page: First ... 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 ... Last