Carole
11-05-2008, 08:20 AM
Would now be the best time to send Reps a strong message (by registering Independent en masse in these few days following the election) that they have allowed neo-cons to destroy the party? (Dems think they are validated so no message possible there at this time.)
For me the Republican party is dead. It was infliltrated and destroyed from within by neo cons. We do NOT have the precious commodity of time to slowly rebuild it because our Republic is near death and hanging on by a thread.
I am planning to become an Independent because it is the closest entity we have that resembles a viable third party and from which both Reps and Dems find themselves having to "earn" their votes. This ever-larger and growing group of Americans has seemingly at least found a way to gain some influence. This is why I wish now to become Independent or independent.
However, it still fails to act truly independently by voting for third parties. That is the present problem with Independents.
I frankly believe NO party would be better than one, two, three, or ten parties, but realize that people want to identify with something collectivist.
The poster below had some very good points.
http://independentga912.newsvine.com/_news/2008/10/25/2038721-the-two-party-system-has-outlived-its-purpose
Poster Independent GA said:
The Two Party System Has Outlived Its Purpose
News Type: Opinion — Sat Oct 25, 2008 9:58 AM EDT
"A growing amount of Americans are becoming disenchanted with the current setup of our political system as well as the election process. For decades, voters have been forced to vote for the lesser of two evils, while third party candidates have been excluded from the process by the media and the two political parties. Americans are desperate for change, which is why Sen. Obama's campaign has gain much traction. Americans are tired of the status quot (sic)and Sen. Obama represents the change the American people are yearning for. However, most Americans still feel as if they are choosing between the lesser of two evils. I don't think Sen. Obama or Sen. McCain are evil, but they are a product of a system where corruption is as prevalent as the sun, moon and stars.
"The Democratic and Republican parties have failed the American people, in more ways than one. Instead of getting things done, they have systematically divided the American public by focusing on differences, rather than focusing on the things that bring us together. Devices like, class warfare, gender, race, fear, social issues and even patriotism are often used to manipulate votes. The notion that one party is patriotic and the other isn't is both insane and UN-American. These devices are used to keep us divided, which keeps us from holding these politicians accountable. It's this type of political infighting and divisive politics that allowed 9/11/01 to happen. If politicians were working together to keep our country strong and safe, instead of fighting and behaving like preschoolers, maybe, just maybe, 9/11 could have been thwarted.
"A house divided can never stand, and if we truly want to see the change that we are looking for, it starts with us, the people. Obama often says, "Change doesn't start from top to bottom, but it starts from the bottom up." That's true. And until we realize that we are the bottom and we demand change, change can never and will never happen. How long will we continue to fall for the "banana in the tailpipe"? How long will we continue to allow the fringes in both parties to hi-jack public policy? We need a viable third party. Even if it's only to serve as as a referee. Both parties have some good ideas, but they are too blind to see it. Our politics are broken and our nation is in peril. It's not because of the American people, it's because of the Two Party System- And we deserve better."
~~~~~
The Founding Fathers had no political parties or factions. It wasn't that they didn't know about political parties, but that they were unwelcome. Observing the factions of Europe, our Founders didn't like what they saw - political intrigue, conspiracy, and hostile divisions. They were afraid that such a system would rip apart the Union. They hoped that in free elections it would be natural for the best men to rise to the top and be elected to office. That is why before the rise of political parties (which made necessary the Twelfth Amendment), the man with the most votes was president and the man with the second most was vice-president.
Why must we work within a two-party system rather than voting for the best individuals? We have been propagandized into accepting there are only two viable parties because it is much easier for the enemies of a free America to exercise control within a two-party system than to deal with individuals. And our country is a nation of individuals not ever intended to be a collectivist socialist society that we now have.
"The two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can 'throw the rascals out' at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shift in policy." Quote by Georgetown Professor, Carroll Quigley from his book "Tragedy and Hope" referring to the secret network that started the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), America's true ruling establishment (For more on the CFR see "Thirst For Justice"
"Professor Carroll Quigley was not some "right wing radical" who was trying to make the establishment look bad. A mentor of former president Bill Clinton, Quigley was in the know about how America was being intentionally transformed from a God-fearing free country to atheistic socialism by wealthy individuals working together behind the scenes of government. These individuals figured that if they could give the people two candidates with the same socialist goals but still call one a "Democrat" and one a "Republican", they could give the people the illusion of choice while keeping the country headed in the same direction no matter who was elected to office. We can see that the American people have fallen hook, line and sinker for this tactic, because at this moment we have a Republican president who has been able to push more social programs than many Democrats would have even dared, but he still receives the support of most "conservatives".
http://www.newswithviews.com/Ohara/debbie29.htm
Comments appreciated. :)
For me the Republican party is dead. It was infliltrated and destroyed from within by neo cons. We do NOT have the precious commodity of time to slowly rebuild it because our Republic is near death and hanging on by a thread.
I am planning to become an Independent because it is the closest entity we have that resembles a viable third party and from which both Reps and Dems find themselves having to "earn" their votes. This ever-larger and growing group of Americans has seemingly at least found a way to gain some influence. This is why I wish now to become Independent or independent.
However, it still fails to act truly independently by voting for third parties. That is the present problem with Independents.
I frankly believe NO party would be better than one, two, three, or ten parties, but realize that people want to identify with something collectivist.
The poster below had some very good points.
http://independentga912.newsvine.com/_news/2008/10/25/2038721-the-two-party-system-has-outlived-its-purpose
Poster Independent GA said:
The Two Party System Has Outlived Its Purpose
News Type: Opinion — Sat Oct 25, 2008 9:58 AM EDT
"A growing amount of Americans are becoming disenchanted with the current setup of our political system as well as the election process. For decades, voters have been forced to vote for the lesser of two evils, while third party candidates have been excluded from the process by the media and the two political parties. Americans are desperate for change, which is why Sen. Obama's campaign has gain much traction. Americans are tired of the status quot (sic)and Sen. Obama represents the change the American people are yearning for. However, most Americans still feel as if they are choosing between the lesser of two evils. I don't think Sen. Obama or Sen. McCain are evil, but they are a product of a system where corruption is as prevalent as the sun, moon and stars.
"The Democratic and Republican parties have failed the American people, in more ways than one. Instead of getting things done, they have systematically divided the American public by focusing on differences, rather than focusing on the things that bring us together. Devices like, class warfare, gender, race, fear, social issues and even patriotism are often used to manipulate votes. The notion that one party is patriotic and the other isn't is both insane and UN-American. These devices are used to keep us divided, which keeps us from holding these politicians accountable. It's this type of political infighting and divisive politics that allowed 9/11/01 to happen. If politicians were working together to keep our country strong and safe, instead of fighting and behaving like preschoolers, maybe, just maybe, 9/11 could have been thwarted.
"A house divided can never stand, and if we truly want to see the change that we are looking for, it starts with us, the people. Obama often says, "Change doesn't start from top to bottom, but it starts from the bottom up." That's true. And until we realize that we are the bottom and we demand change, change can never and will never happen. How long will we continue to fall for the "banana in the tailpipe"? How long will we continue to allow the fringes in both parties to hi-jack public policy? We need a viable third party. Even if it's only to serve as as a referee. Both parties have some good ideas, but they are too blind to see it. Our politics are broken and our nation is in peril. It's not because of the American people, it's because of the Two Party System- And we deserve better."
~~~~~
The Founding Fathers had no political parties or factions. It wasn't that they didn't know about political parties, but that they were unwelcome. Observing the factions of Europe, our Founders didn't like what they saw - political intrigue, conspiracy, and hostile divisions. They were afraid that such a system would rip apart the Union. They hoped that in free elections it would be natural for the best men to rise to the top and be elected to office. That is why before the rise of political parties (which made necessary the Twelfth Amendment), the man with the most votes was president and the man with the second most was vice-president.
Why must we work within a two-party system rather than voting for the best individuals? We have been propagandized into accepting there are only two viable parties because it is much easier for the enemies of a free America to exercise control within a two-party system than to deal with individuals. And our country is a nation of individuals not ever intended to be a collectivist socialist society that we now have.
"The two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can 'throw the rascals out' at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shift in policy." Quote by Georgetown Professor, Carroll Quigley from his book "Tragedy and Hope" referring to the secret network that started the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), America's true ruling establishment (For more on the CFR see "Thirst For Justice"
"Professor Carroll Quigley was not some "right wing radical" who was trying to make the establishment look bad. A mentor of former president Bill Clinton, Quigley was in the know about how America was being intentionally transformed from a God-fearing free country to atheistic socialism by wealthy individuals working together behind the scenes of government. These individuals figured that if they could give the people two candidates with the same socialist goals but still call one a "Democrat" and one a "Republican", they could give the people the illusion of choice while keeping the country headed in the same direction no matter who was elected to office. We can see that the American people have fallen hook, line and sinker for this tactic, because at this moment we have a Republican president who has been able to push more social programs than many Democrats would have even dared, but he still receives the support of most "conservatives".
http://www.newswithviews.com/Ohara/debbie29.htm
Comments appreciated. :)