I've lurked here for quite a while. I like this site. Damn it's a good one. I've never felt compelled to post anything until now.
Now, I didn't want my first post to be on a political subject, but oh well. I would really like to know what if any effect a group of people voting for one person would have on the election.
If 33% voted for 1, 33% voted for 2, 33% voted for 3, and 1% voted for 4. Numbers 1, 2, 3, and 4 represent the political parties. What would be the deciding factor?
The Electoral College, that's what. Of the three with an even number of votes, the one who is most popular with the members of said "college" will win. Period.
Our opinions don't seem matter to the Presidents we "choose" to elect. I'm only guessing here, but I'd say that out of the 100 richest people in the world 80 of them are U.S citizens. Those are the people that supply campaigns for the presidency with the money to do it. Providing that if elected, a few minor policy changes benefiting the supporters will be made. Where alse could the incentive to contribute come from?
The same goes for most politicians at all levels. Where do you think the members of the Electoral College get the cash for their political campaigns? Once they are in office they seem to do only what is required of them by law and what the financial supporters want. The rest of the time they are playing golf and living very well at our expense. It is our country, everyones.
So when do our votes really matter in a Presidential election?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congress
Even when the economy is down, unemployment is up, and the budget deficit is greater than anticipated Congress votes themselves a pay raise. Then proceeds to give themselves they're own little "retirement package" with our tax dollars. All this after making our Social Security a part of general funds leaving it open to plunder by congress itself. Real good mathemeticians they are, right!
Where's the accountability and who's doing the accounting?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On current government leadership.
Since we've all decided to play follow the leader and be sheep in the herd. I'll comment on the current government. I don't like it, plain and simple. It doesn't matter who's running it. It's just too big for it's britches. Since I have to live with it I make sure to keep up with it as much as I'm allowed too. Yet another thing I don't like, but I digress.
It's strange how politics work. People seem to blame Bush for the Enron debacle, yet, it occurred during the Clinton administration and fell apart under Bush.
Bush is blamed for the economy, yet, it was going head over heels at the end of the Clinton administration after ridiculous growth in the stock market which was fueled by speculation rather than earnings growth. When the Feds stepped in to stop the explosive growth in the market, it jacked interest rates way up and killed the small real growth that was actually going on across the broader sector and created a wave of layoffs that somehow became Bush's fault.
After years of saber rattling and tossing a few missles at Osama, we manage to piss him off and we get 9/11. Bush reacts by starting to cut some of the terrorist roots. Suddenly he is a war monger? The entire world knows that Iraq was a source of funding for terrorists.Especially those that attempted to harm the U.S. because Saddam perceived us as enemies. We all know that he had weapons programs and David Kay just reported they were ongoing. Bush clearly, was given the same info as his predecessors and he chose to act upon it rather than to make empty threats.
His opponents cry about how our allies don't love us anymore. Anyone that has spent much time overseas will most likely tell you that our successes since the second world war are greatly resented and our "friends" often have done everything they could possibly do to undermine our positions and give tacit support to those that would wish to cause us harm.
It is not coincidence that Chirac considered Saddam a friend and no coincidence that France did so much business with Iraq as did Germany and Russia. Hmmm, two of those have been our enemy throughout much of the prior century and the other has resented us tremendously as it owes its current existence to us.
Playing the political game nicely and allowing them to walk all over us makes us chumps, not smart guys. We have been one of the protectors of freedom of this world for the last 90 years, I think we have the right to protect ourselves when we feel the need instead of rushing to the aid of those that could not/cannot.
I don't particularly like Bush, but, compared to those whining weenies that would give our soul away to be liked by the frick'n French and Kofi Anan, I would vote for him about 20 million times if the local ballot box would hold them.
When someone such as Kerry campaigns for a 50 cent per gallon increase in tax on gasoline, and, then turns around and tells people he would reduce the price of gasoline, it neither makes him liberal or conservative even though he would appear to have espoused both sides. Hell, He even voted for both sides when it came time to make a decision concerning Iraq.
It simply makes him a friggin' idiot with no beliefs other than what he feels serves him best politically.
I voted for the guy that I thought would do the best job for the country as a whole. It's been awhile since the democrats have chosen someone that I thought had the balls to do that. I don't think Bush even farts without daddy's approval though, maybe Sr.'s the only reason we aren't overrun with terrorists. Who really knows.
Words in the United Nations are great, but there are far too many that want a piece of our Rock and I prefer to give them a little lead and maybe a daisy cutter or two rather than rolling over and giving them what our forefathers have spent three hundred years building and preserving.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On to our "allies"
Has anyone ever heard of "The Marshall Plan"?
The Marshall Plan
Yep, we refinanced the reconstruction of Europe so that the new governments would have a chance to survive and prosper and so that we would not have the choice of feeding the populations or fighting another war at a later date because the hungry turned to someone that promised them a piece of the pie.
Where are the sumbitches now when we need 'em?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Where are the jobs?
One thing is certain. Our population is growing rapidly but the industrial base that used to provide so many jobs is shrinking rapidly.
Some of the shrinkage is due to non-competitiveness and closure of plants. Remember Mr.Clinton's N.A.F.T.A., thanks a lot asshole. Other loss is due to technology which has reduced the need for manpower or the influx of immigrants. Legal or not we do not need anymore people here. The employment opporutunities we have are few and far between as it is. We don't want more competition for the few jobs we have.
The northeast is a prime example of technology reducing the need for manpower. Steel mills used to provide a lot of jobs...a man could work there his entire career and live comfortably even though the work was hard. I don't think that is too common now.
I'd bet a dollar that every person reading this knows someone who's lost a job/career directly or not because of cheap labor becoming available south of the border. Thank again Clinton, you asshole.
The world has gone from the Agrarian stage, to the Industrial Revolution, to the Technology State. Major changes, but, the one thing that has not changed is the ever growing world population that demands to be fed. Yet, the population grows and the job base declines....this is not just a U.S. problem. It is just more evident here at this point in time.
The point I'm trying to make is, All the gripes about the government are pointless. Until we do something to make the necessary changes for our benefit, this will not change.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here are some final thoughts.
Americans complacency and false security is the reason that those two airplanes were not caught before the danage was done. They wanted a fight, they picked a fight, now they've got a fight.
You can be a pacifist all you want and you can negotiate peace at all costs...but that will not stop a wolf from coming around and ripping your throat apart.
In nature, stupidity is a capital crime. The sentence is carried out immediately, judgment is absolutely impartial, and there is no appeal. Humans therefore aren't natural. We try to fix the stupid.
Larry
. 
