Doesn't anyone realize how dangerous it is for America to have the 3 branches of government controlled by one political party?
A better question would be: Why are all three branches of government as well as thirty state houses are controlled by a party to which only 26% of American voters are registered?Two books that deal with this question are Dark Money by Jane Mayer and Democracy in Chains by Nancy MacLean.Several decades ago a small clique of billionaires began to organize a vast network to promote their libertarian policies. This network included the Cato Institute, George Mason University in Virginia, The Heritage Foundation, FreedomWorks, Fox News and dozens, perhaps hundreds of lesser known organizations.The aim of this effort was to reduce government, lower taxes, abolish any regulations on capitalist enterprise and abolish social programs that redistributed tax money to the poor and middle class. They aimed to privatize education, prisons, and anything else that could be privatized.The Koch brother’s clique poured vast amounts of money into elections. If two Republican were running they would support the more right wing candidate. It became a Darwinian situation in the GOP-survival of the rightest. They succeeded in getting a whole slew of Tea Party Republicans elected in 2010.The Supreme Court’s Citizen’s United decision has essentially legalized bribery. A legislator who depends on the donations of billionaires for election will not vote on issues contrary to the wishes of the donors. No legislation can be passed that does not meet the approval of the billionaire oligarchs.Other factors that tilt the playing field in favor of the minority party are the Electoral College which weighs votes in some states more than in others, gerrymandering, voter suppression and vote tampering.It is possible that, in the coming election, the majority party will take over Congress, but this will not result in any progressive legislation, but merely prolonged gridlock. Our problems cannot be solved under the present political system. To solve them we would have to make profound changes in our electoral system, especially getting corporate money out of politics.
Which is more dangerous the far right or the far left?
Assume that there is a simple 2D spectrum. Than the answer is a very simple: both.Just take the two most prominent examples:Right: Nazi-Germany. A very conservative, work ethic driven, "we for the Führer/nation/people" regime.Left: Stalins UDSSR. A very conservative, work ethic driven, "we for Comrade Stalin/nation/people" regime.Continue to observe their common traits:Very strict rule set which may turn against you at any time.You may work as hard as you want, if there's someone in the political party of the nations leader which has more influence than you, you're probably already gone.Gulags and KZs (concentration camps) to kill people.No legal allowed opposition. Illegal opposition ended in Gulags or KZs.A very inhuman attitude against people and life in general.Very aggressive foreign politics.Focused on military spending. Don't forget. Almost the whole 20th century in Europe is the history of right-winged and left-winged dictations battling each other. There was Italy, Spain, Germany, Hungary, Austria, etc. etc. each either communist or facist.
Do Americans realize just how screwed America is?
America was headed off a cliff after the Bush administration, and it did't matter who took the presidency after him. I could litterally rattle of several reasons why America will be lucky if it even exists as a country by the end of this decade: 1) The War that never ends. China owns the U.S., lock stock & barrel, it could crash the American economy instantly if it wanted to, and it's vice grip on your balls is not stopping because you keep on borrowing more money. 2) Education & Healthcare: Both systems are f____ed up, America has the most uneducated population for a developed country in the world. It is ranked 30th in overall education, and most of the highly educated Americans are immigrants, or the children of immigrants from other countries 3) Baby boomers: Taking into account America's largely uneducated population, and realizing that this is the information age and brains make countries go, America is headed down the drain and the baby boomers retire, their physcial jobs are replaced with more intellectual ones, and the Americans who are in the work force do not have the expertise. Better start importing a lot of Asian doctors & engineers 4) Social issues: Americans are so stupid that even in the midst of 2 wars, a healthcare crises & a crappy economy, they are still fighting over issues of religion, sexual orientation, race, etc. So not only are the current problems not being solved, they are being exacerbated by a population that prioritizes non-issues over real ones
Is the Teaparty a Conservative Movement or a Libertatrian Movement?
It's a republican movement. If it had remained a libertarian movement it would be a handful of fourty year old guys eating pizza in their moms' basements discussing revolution, and most people would have never heard about it and most who did wouldn't care.
Does Obama winning mean that Hannity and Rush are losing their grop on america?
I have listened to both of them for the last two days.They are not even going to give Barack Obama a chance to get in office and give him a chance to prove that he can or cannot do good things for this country.Instead they try to poison their listeners minds against him and his policies before he has had a chance to implement them.While it is true that they are losing their relevance,they both still have a huge audience of brainwashed listeners,and I believe that they are an actual DANGER to America with their hate speech.I don't think that a return of the fairness doctrine forcing stations that put them on the air to also give equal time and quality to opposing views over the publicly owned airwaves would be a violation of free speech.
Should Black Lives Matter change its slogan to "Black lives matter as much as everyone else's"? Or “Black lives matter too” — to put an end to the "All lives matter" backlash?
I saw a report (TV) some time back about how the Tea Party was targeted by the IRS.If the people within the Tea Party Movement decided to call out the IRS, as they did, they had every right to.If the Tea Party Movement decided to popularise their frustration with a popular slogan, like, i dunno, “Tea Party Taxes Matter”, no-one would begrudge them. Of course, a counter-arguement could be made, that all taxpayers matter. But, that would be petty. It does not allow Tea Party folks to highlight a valid concern.If any Tea Party people wanted to say/shout/scream/write/sing about their predicament, that would be fine with me; they have earned it.Highlighting the problem is a statement of grievance, not accepting victimisation.Raising or highlighting that issue does not mean every IRS official, manager or senior person was in on the campaign. Highlighting this as an issue allowed the accountable officers to check themselves and put in place measures to correct the situation.Note, this was one organ of the state targeting a specific group, for a year or so. Imagine if that organ of the state had guns and targeted you your whole life.Back to Black Lives matter. Black people have felt for a long time that some organs of the state have targeted them their entire lives. You may not agree with that characterisation, but try being black for a week; Some freedoms you take for granted, will require an explanation to a relevant authority.Allow people (minorities) with valid concerns to draw attention to their challenges.Maybe am just an optimist. Thanks for the question. Your life matters, of course. But, allow me to say/shout/scream/write/sing ‘Black Lives Matter’!!! As a black man, I have earned the right to.
Does the Constitution still matter?
http://patriotpost.us/alexander/2011/06/... In celebration of the 235th anniversary of the signing of our Declaration of Independence, Time Magazine, the "journal of record" for the Leftist Illiterati (or as they prefer to be known, "the intelligentsia"), published a cover story featuring their errant interpretation of our Constitution. On an image of the shredding of that venerable old document Time posited this question: "Does it still matter?"