Democrats & Liberals Archives

Government Reform Needed

From the Washington Post:

“The poll numbers paint a portrait of national frustration with the direction and leadership of the country, which, if not reversed in coming months, is likely to color the environment for next year’s midterm elections, putting incumbents in both parties on the defensive.

Dissatisfaction is not limited to the president. Fewer than four in 10 Americans -- 37 percent -- approve of the way the Republican-controlled Congress is doing its job, the lowest rating for lawmakers in nearly eight years.

The survey also provided bad news for Democratic leaders, who are judged as offering Bush only tepid opposition. Slightly more than half of those surveyed expressed dissatisfaction with congressional Democrats for not opposing Bush more aggressively."

We, as American voters have a choice to make. We can continue to support a weak and ineffective Democratic party and a Republican party that is not in touch with the American people and reality, or demand changes in our government that can put the power back in the hands of the people.
Do we want closed door budget meetings where pork barrel spending and corporate American influence are the priority? Or do we want a transparent government, that through sweeping government reform, makes budget decisions based on their constituencies needs?
How many times, in the last year alone, have we read or written about a public official involved in corruption? There is no accountability in government. Our system is now influenced by large corporations and special interest groups. The citizens have allowed our own interests to become secondary and our government was happy to oblige.
We should not be influenced by party, but vote our concience. We need leaders, not the people who are in office due to wealthy influencial connections. They are there, not to serve the citizens of there towm, city, state or country, but to participate in a power and money grab that our Democratic government has devolved into.

Posted by Andre M. Hernandez at September 9, 2005 11:33 AM
Comments
Comment #79311

We should not be influenced by party, but vote our concience. We need leaders, not the people who are in office due to wealthy influencial connections. They are there, not to serve the citizens of there towm, city, state or country, but to participate in a power and money grab that our Democratic government has devolved into.

Well said! This is the first blue side article in a while that I’ve agreed with. Good Job, Andre.

The parties are loosing popularity. Hopefully, some moderate independents will win in the next few elections.

Posted by: TheTraveler at September 9, 2005 12:38 PM
Comment #79315
We should not be influenced by party, but vote our concience. We need leaders, not the people who are in office due to wealthy influencial connections. They are there, not to serve the citizens of there towm, city, state or country, but to participate in a power and money grab that our Democratic government has devolved into.
We need a representative government.

Not a government of the corporation, by the corporation for the corporation.

Like Jefferson said:
“I think the best remedy is exactly that provided by all our constitutions, to leave to the citizens the free election and separation of the aristoi from the pseudo-aristoi, of the wheat from the chaff. In general they will elect the real good and wise. In some instances, wealth may corrupt, and birth blind them; but not in sufficient degree to endanger the society.”

Posted by: john trevisani at September 9, 2005 12:54 PM
Comment #79319

The climate could be right for an independent movement. An impressive smart, fair, pragmatic white knight. Some of us thought at one time Ross Perot might fit that bill, but no. Surely the country has a few hidden away - some may even contribute on this blog.
But we need a new way of funding and conducting elections. Deception is too easy, honesty doesn’t pay. I suggest using a well scripted reality TV show as the best way to elect the best candidate.

Posted by: Ms Schwamp at September 9, 2005 1:06 PM
Comment #79326

Amen, Andre. Of the people, by the people, for the people. Whichever party can make the American people their mantra and their mission will win in ‘08, as more people than ever feel that government has abandoned them.

Posted by: Mister Magoo at September 9, 2005 1:21 PM
Comment #79335

The time is ripe for a Third political party to make a move. Deomcratic and Republican Leadership in America has shown that they lack the courage to do what is known to be Unalienable Right Regardless. Like Linclon in the 1850’s, an American needs to step forward who is willing to take on “The Monster” we call Society.

Not having the experience and expertice to create such a political party on my own, I will say that the first political canidate who is willing to pick up the cuase of America’s Founding Fathers would take down both political parties without a problem.

America and Humanity’s Nations over the next several years will require large sums of money to not only defeat Terrorism, but send all those who believe that it is ok to exploit their fellow man running. A sum of $41 Trillion dollars should make a good down payment so that our Societal Tools such as Commerce can grow enough to provide Every Citizen on Earth with their wants and needs as prescribed by The Law of a Nation just being a Nation.

The Hat Trick found by America’s Founding Fathers is to have their Citizens invest in “We the People” so that we can govern & regulate our Society in such a manner that it adds to the environment. $5.00/wk or less than a Dollar a Day invested by or in the name of Every Human (6.4 Billion) over a 25 year time in for a lack of a better word U.S. Federal Reserve “Special Treasure Note” would not only give our governments the Treasury to build an Energy-Free Environmently Positive Economy through the proper channels that already exist, but allow each Human to aquire about $6,500.00 plus interest worth of Wealth.

Not only would this cuase Great Hope for many of Citizens in America and Humanity’s Civilization, but given the fact that many of these citizens live on less than $2.00/day most would become Economically Viable and Financailly Independent as long as their Leaders would control “The Greed” of The Rapitalists of The World.

The Know Something Party could take on any Political Party by basing their Ideolgy on “We the Consumers.” For as a Consumer, you do not want others to tell you what to consume; however, you know what is unalienable Right Regardless by Self-Nature. And for those Nations & Rapitalists that do not want to conform to Reason and Logic, let them go the way of the Neanderthal Man of long ago.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at September 9, 2005 1:41 PM
Comment #79349

Here’s my idea…

1) All politicians can only get their campaign funds from the people (citizens) or their party.
2) All persons (citizens) are only allowed to give $50 a year to ANY political organization or party or politician in any proportion.
3) All politicians cannot become lobbyists who represent companies and their associations to government officials for at least 10 years after leaving public office.

I’d like to think we are all equal, yet we all do not get the same kind of attention of our leaders. They’re too busy getting their political donations from the political donor class (corporations and the wealthy). I wonder if the Rep’s see it this way? Anyway, what if the leaders were more reliant on their constituents for their funding. They would have to spend more time answering to us, then to their biggest contributors. I would also like to think that someone would not buy a vote by offering cushy jobs to politicians, thus my third rule. I’m one rule shy on my wish list, it’s a little off topic, but “4) No gerrymandering”. Ahhhhh, that’s better.


“Somehow it seemed as though the farm had grown richer without making the animals themselves any richer—except, of course, for the pigs and the dogs”

Posted by: Patrick Howse at September 9, 2005 2:11 PM
Comment #79353

Fantastic article Andre, I could not agree more.

Though my politics have always been directly between Libertarian and Republican, for quite a while now I have always thrown out those Libertarian/independant cantidates that I thought had no chance. Thinking that my vote was wasted on them. Leaving me voting with the common “lesser of 2 evils” approach. Of course with my personal views that leaves me voting Republican.

That has completely changed in the last year or so.

It’s not that I suddenly don’t believe in most of the ideals as the voting republicans in the US have, it’s that I feel less and less like the folks in power in that party still share those ideals with us. They talk the talk but they really are not walking the walk. The reason behind this is simple. Staying in power… Getting votes. And as Andre pointed out, this is not just a Republican problem.

Both the Republican and Democrat parties are appearing more and more interested in only one thing. Beating the other one in elections. Both will do and say anything to make that happen. And the habitual (career) politicians in those parties are not just towing the party line… They have their own agenda. Mostly involving keeping their positions as long as they can. They too will do and say anything to anyone if they believe that it will help them keep them in office for another term.

I’ve personally had enough… Government reform needs to happen. I’ll be using my next votes to assist it. Voting out all incumbants would be a great step. Even better would be to rally behind an independant or moderate party cantidate(such as Libertarian). Take control back over our government by letting them know that they WILL be voted out if they do not start walking it like they talk it!

Posted by: BradM at September 9, 2005 2:22 PM
Comment #79355

You are all dreaming. Even as we speak, the Rove Spin Machine is working on the lies regarding Katrina. By the time the Election comes up, Hurricane Katrina will be perceived as a Liberal Plot to weaken America for Al Queda!!!

Third Parties will NEVER RISE!!!!!!!!

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Aldous at September 9, 2005 2:27 PM
Comment #79359

Aldous, Third Parties will NEVER RISE

If that was the case in America, we would still have the Political Parties of The Federalist and Whigs. Guess I blew that argument out of the water Ha?

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at September 9, 2005 2:35 PM
Comment #79361

I don’t want to eliminate Corporate influence in our government, I just was to make it small enough so that I could drag it into the bathroom and drown it.

(Man, that is a really sick reference hidden in that mis-quote…)

Posted by: tony at September 9, 2005 2:50 PM
Comment #79365

tony,
The Hat Trick is not to make Corporation influence smaller in our government. It is to confront it so that “I the Consumer” can have it all. Every single American and Human on Earth!

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at September 9, 2005 3:03 PM
Comment #79368

I agree with your sentiments, but disagree that we should form a third party. Remember, Republicans are UNITED; they will all vote for the Republican candidate. This means our side is fractured. The result will be more Republicanism.

Remember Ralph Nader? He’s the reason Bush is president.

Posted by: Paul Siegel at September 9, 2005 3:10 PM
Comment #79373

SEVERAL MODEST PROPOSALS

OK, we all seem to agree that “something” has gotta be done. How’s These???

1)Eliminate the Electoral College. It was designed for a time when it often took weeks for news to travel from New England to Florida, Americans didn’t move around much, and the population was pretty heterogenious. Each state was like a separate country, with their own currencies, etc. It’s outdated and flawed in the sense that a candidate can lose the popular vote and still end up in the White House, effectively negating many thousands of votes and contravening the will of the people…this is NOT democratic!

2) Redesign the election process so that money will have little to do with it. We now have “mass media”. Let’s say, anybody who can collect 50,000 (100,000, whatever) signatures can run. We give the guy an hour of primetime TV to state his platform. Then he shuts up. The media can quote him, argle-bargle, re-state, whatever, but that 1 hour (or whatever) is his campaign. Period. No hundreds of millions of bucks spent on blabla smear campaigns, advertising, no influences from big corporations contributing the big bucks. The guys shut up and the public decides.

3) We institute a system sort of like they have in parliamentarian countries…a vote of NO CONFIDENCE can be called by congress, or by public ballot, and if the guy loses, he’s OUT and we run new elections. Why should we be stuck with a bunch of obvious crooks/liars for 3 more years when an idiot child can see the damage they are doing to the nation.

Whaddaya think? I have heard lots of bitching lately, but very few real suggestions as to what should be DONE…

Posted by: capnmike at September 9, 2005 3:19 PM
Comment #79375

Paul,
I don’t care if it is Democrats, Republicans, or whoever that starts looking out for the inherent best interest of “We the Consumers,” but as the Equal Peer of All Enities of Society someone does.

Capmike,
I don’t care about changing the Electoral College, but in the 21st Century it is redicules that two names on a piece of paper can not be counted properly by those in charge of the task. Maybe we need to give the job of counting “The Votes” to the Children in the second grade. At least they can get their elections right.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at September 9, 2005 3:28 PM
Comment #79381

Henry, with all respect, you SHOULD care about the electoral college…if it wasn’t for that archaic relic, Al Gore would be in the White House. And, it’s a lot harder to rig the voting machines EVERYWHERE than in just a few “key states”.

Posted by: capnmike at September 9, 2005 3:36 PM
Comment #79382

Woop…I meant John Kerry …sorry (Senior Moment there, guys!)

Posted by: capnmike at September 9, 2005 3:38 PM
Comment #79385
with all respect, you SHOULD care about the electoral college…if it wasn’t for that archaic relic, Al Gore would be in the White House.

Even with all of the stuff going on that I don’t agree with in this administration I still shudder at that thought! Al Gore is just plain creepy to me. :)

Posted by: BradM at September 9, 2005 3:40 PM
Comment #79392

How to get a third party into office
First we need to change the election laws. We need elections that are not just Side A vs Side B with a few C to round it out. And if you vote for C then you have “thrown away your vote”. To get rid of this we need a vote where you vote for more than one canidate. Say you want Canidate C, and Canidate B sucks, but Canidate C will get the more votes. You normaly would vote either for A and throw you vote away, or C to make sure B dosn’t win. With the multi vote system you could vote for both A and C. A as you first choice C as your second. If niether B nor C get 50% of the vote than the votes for A would void and both C and B would get A’s second votes, till someone got 50%. I don’t know if anyone got that. But if it works people will vote for third and maybe even forth parties and still vote Rep or Dem. Than, when americans see that the other parties get actual votes, they will vote for them. Eventually there might even be third and fourth party wins. That’s what I say.

Posted by: Matt at September 9, 2005 3:53 PM
Comment #79396

Oh and get rid of campaign donations, give ALL canidates equal amounts from the Government, and equal air time. That is it.

Posted by: matt at September 9, 2005 3:58 PM
Comment #79417

Capnmike,

I agree that there are things that need changing although I am not so sure about the reality on your thoughts.

1)Eliminate the Electoral College. - Since the Electoral College would take a constitutional amendment to change I do not think it would happen. Too many of the smaller states would not agree to this since they would see it as a drop in their power. I wonder if a better way would be to make the electoral votes proportional in all states instead of all votes going to the winner. There are a few states that do this so it is something that could be changed at the state level and would then not be a “winner take all” contest at the state level.

2) Redesign the election process so that money will have little to do with it. - I agree that money is a big problem but this will just not happen. To be elected you have to have name recognition and the only way to get that is through media sources. And how do you control the campaigns of Swiftboaters, Moveon.org, etc which exist solely for a political purpose?

3) We institute a system sort of like they have in parliamentarian countries…a vote of NO CONFIDENCE can be called by congress, or by public ballot, and if the guy loses, he’s OUT and we run new elections. - Personally I like this idea although isn’t that what the impeachment process is for?

Mike P

Posted by: Mike P at September 9, 2005 5:02 PM
Comment #79423

Matt,

There is something called Instant Runoff Voting, this would do what you’d like, just more efficiently. And I’m all for it.

I think it would be hard to stop all political donations (freedom of expression), that’s why I’d cap it to $50 a year, per person (citizen). (No corporate money).

All,

Plus, if we can’t get rid of the Electoral College, how about we just get our States to split their electoral votes along the lines of their popular vote. To be fair though, all the States will have to join a compact, when the last state joins; a date is picked for all the States to start using the new “popular” electoral voting. That will get rid of that blasted “winner take all” approach, still preserve “small State’s” voting rights, and would better reflect each State’s demographic.

Posted by: Patrick Howse at September 9, 2005 5:05 PM
Comment #79425

Forget Nationwide elections. There are far too many people in the political and judicial process anyway.

Here’s the deal….

Get together a group, I don’t know somewhere between 7 and 11 or 21 and 29 or some predetermined number like that and have them appoint all the political positions. It will be just like the Nobel Prizes.

The appointees will decide who and how many people they need to help them. Their selection however will be from a list prepared by the Committee, no substitutes.

Same thing for State and Federal positions.

Posted by: steve smith at September 9, 2005 5:07 PM
Comment #79443

Good article Andre. It would be great if we had real meaningful choices at election time. The last presidential election, for most of us who are not fanatical left or right, was a choice between the lesser of two evils. Unfortunately, the time in our country when people ran for office to serve the constituents has long gone the way of the fifty-cent haircut. Yeah I know; I?m showing my age. Today?s politicians are supported by special interests, whether corporate or other, and they serve those interests.

Corporate funding, PAC?s, and other special interest efforts have diluted the power of the ballot. Multiple parties would be a great idea if they really provided an independent choice. However, without election reform that returns the power to the proletariat, those other parties will come under the influence of the same special interests in order to get elected. Without that support, they will never win.

IMHO reform of this nature will never be driven from the federal level. Voter complacency, and apathy have all contributed to letting the genie out of the bottle. The ?me first? attitude of many, which drives the special interest influence, is still alive and well. Changing the latter will require putting the genie of apathy and complacency back in the bottle. Reform will have to come from the involvement and action of independents and centrists from the two major parties who have finally realized, we are headed down the road of self-destruction.

The polarization of the American people into camps willing to fight rather than compromise, and work jointly to resolve issues has to be ended by centrists reaching out to both sides, offering a difference. People in the center have to offer candidates who hold to the value of serving their constituents as well as the overall good of the country. Slowly over time, perhaps a moderate consensus will put the genie back into the bottle, restore sanity in government, and return power to the people.

From my point of view, whether you are from the extreme right or the extreme left, you do not have all the answers. Somewhere between the two poles, lies the answer. And when we find it, it will not likely be nearer one pole than the other.

Posted by: Dave at September 9, 2005 5:48 PM
Comment #79447

Bravo Andre, this is a great article.

I’m one of those who “expressed dissatisfaction with congressional Democrats for not opposing Bush more aggressively”. In fact, my dissatisfaction was so great after the last election, I left the Dem’s after voting for them my entire adult life and felt forced to join the Green Party.
Personally, I’d love nothing more than to see the Dem’s return to their liberal base and start supporting America’s average earners and the poor once again. If they did, I’d be extremely happy to return — and work as hard for them as I used to every election cycle.

Henry:
“If that was the case in America, we would still have the Political Parties of The Federalist and Whigs. Guess I blew that argument out of the water Ha?”

Nice one, Henry.

Paul Siegel:
“Remember, Republicans are UNITED; they will all vote for the Republican candidate.”

I don’t agree, Paul. I believe a wide split has been opening in the Republican Party due to BushCo. I think there is a lot of dissatisfaction coming from the old-school conservative types toward the Neocon’s out of control spending, ineffective leadership, and chickenhawk warmongering.

Capnmike — I like all of your ideas. The most important one you listed is doing away with the Electoral Collage. Many people will fight to keep it simply because it’s been with our government since it’s inception, but at this point with the two party system so firmly entrenched, it really is the only way any third party will ever stand a chance to win a major election.

Posted by: Adrienne at September 9, 2005 5:53 PM
Comment #79450

Andre M. Hernandez,
Thank you for writing an article that addresses the most important issue facing our nation: Irresponsible and Unaccountable Government

I think you understand the gravity of the situation.
The situation is more dire than many believe.
The potential economic meltdown (growing more probable every day) will widen the gap between the vastly wealthy and the poor. The middle-income population could shrink drastically.

Nothing can ever be resolved without first resolving the core problem with government. We’ve tried a lot of things, and they’re not working. Politicians won’t tackle tough problems for fear of risking re-election. That system is bass-ackwards. The system, beyond a shadow of a doubt, is broken. We can waste time the many problems which grow worse in number and severity, or work on the core problem that makes those many problems grow worse in number and severity.

THE CORE PROBLEM: irresponsible government because the system is broken (almost all succumb to the system, which is corrupt and government is for sale);

THE SOLUTION: remove irresponsible government by fixing the broken system (most anyone elected will succumb to the system);

HOW ? make it impossible for those that abuse vast wealth and power to buy and influence elected officials to know which candidate to support and finance (usually incumbents) by getting more names (more choices) on ballots, and only voting for non-incumbents (preferrably non-main-party candidates); repeatedly vote out incumbents until government adequately addresses the 10 top most important problems facing the nation; this will eliminate the need for term limits, encourage politicians to work on problems instead of avoiding problems;

What sorts of things do you think should be on the top-ten list of most important problems facing the nation?

Third parties should now make every effort to get on the ballots for all seats of government, and voters should start voting for non-incumbents. And, if these new elected officials don’t work out, the voters will simply continue to vote out the incumbents. This may even make some politicians police their our ranks. Imagine politicians telling one of their peers to straighten up and fly right for fear the entire bunch will be voted out for failing to be responsible. The measure of responsibility will be whether government adequately addresses the nations top ten worse pressing problems.

This solution is simple, easy to understand, easy to communicate to others, doesn’t really need a party, doesn’t need a lot of money, and doesn’t need anything else but the one thing we still have (at this moment): our vote

And, if it doesn’t work? What harm was done? We’ll simply still be close to the egde of the cliff on both sides of our current path.
Here’s a list to start from:
home.comcast.net/~d.a.n/PressingProblemsFacingTheUS_NoBackLinks.htm

Third parties should unite to spread this message to all voters across America. This may be the last peaceful way balance power (not simply shift it) between government and the people.

And, government continues to be irresponsible and unaccountable, voters can continue to vote them out every election, or continue to let the two main parties take turns being irresponsible and unaccountable. Voting for incumbents and main-party bigots will not resolve anything, since they won’t tackle tough issues for fear of risking re-election. We’re all responsible for this situation, but the government won’t reform itself, and the voters are the only ones that may resolve this problem. The system is broken. We should start treating government as one entity, and stop looking at politicians individually. That’s how we inadvertently continue to empower politicians to continue to be irresponsible and unaccountable. But, if the voters start voting out the entire bunch, both Democrats and Republicans will no longer be able to take turns using and abusing the people.

If anyone has a better idea, please share it with us. I’d truly be interested in hearing it. But, please don’t tell me we simply need to vote better, and need to do more research to know who to vote for. That doesn’t work. Incumbents are hard to unseat. Politicians are bought and paid for. Government shouldn’t be for sale. 90% of all elections are won by the candidate with the most money. 5% of the most wealthy in this nation have 59% of all wealth. The remaining 95% of the population do not have nealy as loud a voice, since they only have 41% of all wealth.

Also, for starters…get congress to pass a law that limits bills to ONE purpose, so that unrelated items can’t be sneaked into big bills. This one simple thing will increase transparency tremendously, and we’ll then know why a politician voted for or against a bill ( a bill with only ONE purpose ).

What ever we do, we’d better do it soon, because economic disaster is looming, and government continues to grow to nightmare proportions, spend irresponsibly, and mismanage just about everything for fear of risking re-election by recommending or making tough decisions that will be needed to resolve the many problems.

Posted by: d.a.n at September 9, 2005 6:00 PM
Comment #79464

How about we skip all the flashy campaign extravaganza (we have too many unpaid bills to be throwing a party) and simply start a grass roots write in campaign…

My dream team:
Colin Powell Pres,
Barak Obama VP

and would that i could appoint
Ralph Nader Budget Secretary.

Powell has made clear to us and the world he is not pleased with the status quo. Obama so far seems moderate and hasn’t been in too long to be completely corrupted. Ralph, well, for all these decades he’s never deserted the consumer.

One fell swoop. Announce to corporations, partoes and the world… we’re not dead yet.

Posted by: jo at September 9, 2005 7:32 PM
Comment #79474

There will always be parties. Simple fact is, people will congregate into different factions, based on worldview, cultural background and personal idiosyncrasies.

But does that means that these strange attractors of political opinion have to rule everything? Politics is a product of the need for people to plan together. Folks, from the beginning of time, had to learn how to deal with each other and compromise.

But politics is about what we imagine to be right, and because of that, it’s always in danger of becoming merely a reflection of what we think to be right, unfazed by a reality that is almost completely contradictory.

Overwhelming events bring reality back home, sometimes in a truly lethal way. We become more unified because it’s less easy to withdraw into a shell of self-made thought, and it’s readily apparent what people really feel, or really should. But this has been a hard and bitter political period in our nation’s history.

I do think, though, that Bush’s pool of unconditional supporters has been diminished significantly, and people are beginning to see that such unconditional support is not keeping the American people safe or this country secure, regardless of what party you belong to.

America will prosper better when folks start opening their eyes and recognizing this nations’s needs before their party’s desires. If Bush wants to polish up his legacy in these last few years, he can get to work actually governing the country he was elected to lead, and doing things right. Otherwise he will be an object lesson to leaders of either party who eternally try to escape responsibility and shift blame.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at September 9, 2005 8:25 PM
Comment #79480

Stephen,
Your right, Human Nature drives people to seek out those Humans that have like ideas and lifestyles. The biggest problem the Democrats and Republicans have and has had is seperating themselve from their political party’s ideology once they get elected.

An Elected Official holding Public Office is not there to push his/her party’s agenda, but is to work within the framework of our government to debate the issues from the Point of View of what is Unalienable Right Regardless of Race, Color, or Creed and is in the Inherent Best Interest of All Citizens, not just those that gave them money.

Therefore, if a third political party wants to take advantage of the current divide in America, their canidates are going to have to explain to their supporters that once elected they will have to represent both sides of any argument; however, their standard will be to only vote and pass Laws that when read by the Average Layman is known to be Unalienable Right Regardless. For example, why do almost all citizens never complain about spending their money on pay roll taxes? Because we know that they go toward paying for the social insurance programs that we, a family member, or friend uses or may need one day.

Makes you think when you here the Party that holds the Whitehouse or the majority in Congress talk about their party’s agenda instead of what is in the inherent best interest of America and our Citizens doesn’t it?

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at September 9, 2005 8:52 PM
Comment #79537

Andre, I might lend my vote to a Democrat in 2006 based on the person and their policy proposals, but, no way I would give a Democrat a vote because they were Democrat. It is my opinion that if Democrats regain control of the Senate for example, it will be two years of payback toward Republicans before they got around to reinstating the checks and balances and rules which once gave the minority party a say in legislation. And they would serve the American people little better than Republicans in power now.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 10, 2005 12:59 AM
Comment #79567

I wish I had a nickle for every time I heard a republican DENY he was a republican or DENY he voted the party line. I could afford the price of a tankful of gas. Those very same republicans who deny their party will never, NOT ONCE, cross the ideological line. Pick any subject and he will spout the party talking points, all the while claiming he has an open mind. I see a number of such posts above and laugh because when they get in the voting booth, and pull the curtain, no one knows they were lying.

Third parties aren’t going to reform government. Oh they may change the agenda for a while as Nader did when he sucked in just enough votes to deny Al Gore the presidency. But the song remains the same. The only way to reform government is to take away their incentive to sell their souls by taking away the money from those who would corrupt them.

Posted by: Thom at September 10, 2005 7:01 AM
Comment #79599

I used to be Republican. Not any more.
But, I’m not voting for a Democrat either.
From now on, I’m voting non-incumbent/non-main-party.
That’s because it’s now all too obvious that the two main parties are part of the core problem.
They just take turns being irresponsible and unaccountable, and why things continue to get worse.

Also, as David Remer pointed out…when Democrats regain the majority (which is highly likely in 2008), they’ll spend a few years punishing the Republicans (just like the Republicans punised the Democrats last go around).

There’s really no difference between Democrats and Republicans. See the many similarities: home.comcast.net/~d.a.n/MainPartySimilarities_NoBackLinks.htm

And where’s the outrage about the two main parties blocking access for 3rd party and independent candidates to ballots and debate ?
All the more reason to not vote for main-party candidates.

People are so afraid their vote will be wasted on any 3rd party or independent, but the fact is, their vote is not only wasted on main party candidates (and incumbents mostly), but empowers the main-party bigots to continue to be irresponsible and unaccountable. Main party candidates know most voters believe their only two choices are: a Democrat or Republican; and they’re capitalizing on it (to benefit themselves; not the people).

The Democrats and Republicans love it, and simply take turns being irresponsible and unaccountable.

The nation has no leadership. It’s overrun with corruption and greed in this era of fiscal and moral bankruptcy.

Posted by: d.a.n at September 10, 2005 11:48 AM
Comment #79603

Thorn,
Don’t think a Third Political Party can’t take out one of the two top dogs. History has proven that statement wrong. The secret to spearheading a movement is to find the “Common Ground” held by our citizens in Today’s Society and exploit the known weakness of the other two political parties long standing Ideology while staying in the Framework established by The Founding Fathers of America.

The hardest problem with this fact is to be able to explain it in a 30 second time frame so that you show the Stupidity of the other two parties Realm of Thinking. All of Americans say that we believe in Freedom for every Human on Earth, but the Democrat and Republican Party both follow paths that keep at least 10% of our population bound to the chains of Society.

Want to bet a Presidential Canidate that is willing to run on a slogan “Elect Me and I’ll make every Working American a Millionaire, establish a clean/free energy system for Our Nation, and work to move our economy toward producing a environmental positive Economy & Society” won’t raise a few eyebrows?

No, a third party can take out a political party based on Ideology without changing a single Law of the Land. And as an added bonus to All Americans, they can lower taxes and more profits to our corporations and stockholders as well as prove the The Founding Fathers of America solved The Riddle of a Righteous Nation all at the same time.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at September 10, 2005 12:00 PM
Comment #79616
That’s because it’s now all too obvious that the two main parties are part of the core problem.
They just take turns being irresponsible and unaccountable, and why things continue to get worse.

Well said!

Posted by: jo at September 10, 2005 1:32 PM
Comment #79833

I’ll take the U.S. political process seriously when there are the same amount of canidates on the ballot as in the Miss America Pagent. Ok, all jokes aside, the post by d.a.n above sums it up. That the two main parties are the core problem. They take turns being irresponsible and unaccountable. Well said.
As a registered independant I have voted on particular issues not party in the past. This past presidential election was decided on the lessor of two evils. People could say I picked the wrong one but how would we know that? I always thought my vote would be wasted by selecting a third party. I think the time is right to finally make that vote. It’s time for some serious changes. I want my country back.

Posted by: Lisa at September 12, 2005 9:00 AM
Comment #79834

The above comments are precisely why I suggested a Vote of No Confidence procedure. Sure, we have impeachment, but that is sort of a criminal trial thing, long, drawn-out, (expensive) and not very effective. And plain incompetence, callousness, lack of leadership, cronyism, etc., are not necessarily impeachable offenses. Dont you think whoever is in office, regardless of party, would be inclined to behave much differently if he knew his ass could be tossed out quickly and efficiently? Having more parties isn’t necessarily any solution…look at Italy! They have loads of parties and their government is about as screwed-up as they get.

Posted by: capnmike at September 12, 2005 9:09 AM
Post a comment