Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Of the People, By the People, For the People ...?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Of the People, By the People, For the People ...? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Of the People, By the People, For the People ...? - 9/29/2011 1:58:45 PM   
Edwynn


Posts: 4105
Joined: 10/26/2008
Status: offline


quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY
Wrong thread, methinks.




"Consent of the governed," (or lack of) if I recall. Sorry for the concrete examples there. Back to the 'theory' then.

Vive la révolution and all that.







< Message edited by Edwynn -- 9/29/2011 2:04:21 PM >

(in reply to FirmhandKY)
Profile   Post #: 81
RE: Of the People, By the People, For the People ...? - 9/29/2011 2:04:12 PM   
FirmhandKY


Posts: 8948
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

"Consent of the governed," (or lack of) if I recall. Sorry for the concrete examples there. Back to the 'theory' then.

Vive la révolution and all that.

You need to either start taking, or get off some meds, my friend.  You are making little sense in some of your posts.

Or perhaps I'm just dense.  I'll entertain that possibility.  Would you mind explaining how your "Elizabeth Warren" post relates to the topic?

Thanks.

Firm


_____________________________

Some people are just idiots.

(in reply to Edwynn)
Profile   Post #: 82
RE: Of the People, By the People, For the People ...? - 9/29/2011 2:17:56 PM   
Edwynn


Posts: 4105
Joined: 10/26/2008
Status: offline


First off, the E. Warren comment is opinion, certainly, but based on the fact of her being unquestionably an advocate for the consumer. Which, to break it to some of the audience here, would be in line with what a large portion of "the governed" might consider to be a good thing.  That is, one of the few things that any recent administration has done that could fall into the category of "consent." Certainly a break from having an oil services company's CEO as VP, an agro-chem CEO as Sec. of Defense, a board member of Shell Oil as Sec. of State, a Golman Sachs CEO as Sec. of the Treasury, etc.

As pointed out, not actually any follow-through on the Ms. Warren. Dangerously close to the "consent of the governed" thing, there. Way too close.





< Message edited by Edwynn -- 9/29/2011 2:41:15 PM >

(in reply to FirmhandKY)
Profile   Post #: 83
RE: Of the People, By the People, For the People ...? - 9/29/2011 2:19:59 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

"Consent of the governed," (or lack of) if I recall. Sorry for the concrete examples there. Back to the 'theory' then.

Vive la révolution and all that.

You need to either start taking, or get off some meds, my friend.  You are making little sense in some of your posts.

Or perhaps I'm just dense.  I'll entertain that possibility.  Would you mind explaining how your "Elizabeth Warren" post relates to the topic?

Thanks.

Firm




Firm...

The question did not come up to begin with for the intelligent reader, or was answered sufficiently to those who felt the need to ask, but sources were given for those capable of that pursuit.

I would have thought the answer was obvious.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to FirmhandKY)
Profile   Post #: 84
RE: Of the People, By the People, For the People ...? - 9/29/2011 4:50:26 PM   
Edwynn


Posts: 4105
Joined: 10/26/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

Bush could not get elected in any honest fashion, but there he was anyway. The majority of Americans were avidly against invasion of Iraq, but there we were anyway.


1. Bush was elected IAW the US system.




So, you are saying that a president voted in by the Supreme Court, as against the "consent of the governed" is a normal course of events, then.

Right.

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

2. Can I see your source on Americans "avidly" against the invasion of Iraq, please?




That was 9 years ago, but you demand that someone else who was actually awake at the time now do your homework for you and catch you up with things that you have no interest in hearing to begin with. You were asleep then, quit bitching and carping on others who happened to be awake at the time.


quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

I'm not sure you are prescient.  More likely is that reality has slowly "caught up" with you.

Firm




I never claimed any prescience. Quite the opposite, in fact.

I had let the notion of people "averaging out" to eventually vote in such way as to keep the harm to a minimum hold sway for awhile there, even though I had been taught otherwise earlier in life. After that, I will allow that people such as yourself have "lowered the average" far more than I could have imagined.




< Message edited by Edwynn -- 9/29/2011 4:58:48 PM >

(in reply to FirmhandKY)
Profile   Post #: 85
RE: Of the People, By the People, For the People ...? - 9/29/2011 7:33:05 PM   
FirmhandKY


Posts: 8948
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

"Consent of the governed," (or lack of) if I recall. Sorry for the concrete examples there. Back to the 'theory' then.

Vive la révolution and all that.

You need to either start taking, or get off some meds, my friend.  You are making little sense in some of your posts.

Or perhaps I'm just dense.  I'll entertain that possibility.  Would you mind explaining how your "Elizabeth Warren" post relates to the topic?


Firm...

The question did not come up to begin with for the intelligent reader, or was answered sufficiently to those who felt the need to ask, but sources were given for those capable of that pursuit.

I would have thought the answer was obvious.

Sorry, tazzy, I must be really dense, because I do not know where your quote above comes from, nor how it and Edywin's post about Warren relate to the topic.

Firm


_____________________________

Some people are just idiots.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 86
RE: Of the People, By the People, For the People ...? - 9/29/2011 7:38:06 PM   
FirmhandKY


Posts: 8948
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline
FR:

Here is an example of the type of thinking that will have us end up in a bureaucratic state:

Too Much of a Good Thing
Why we need less democracy.
Peter Orszag
September 14, 2011

To solve the serious problems facing our country, we need to minimize the harm from legislative inertia by relying more on automatic policies and depoliticized commissions for certain policy decisions. In other words, radical as it sounds, we need to counter the gridlock of our political institutions by making them a bit less democratic.

He is arguing for greater bureaucratic institutions to govern the nation.

Firm



_____________________________

Some people are just idiots.

(in reply to FirmhandKY)
Profile   Post #: 87
RE: Of the People, By the People, For the People ...? - 9/29/2011 7:40:49 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn



quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

None of that has anything to do with what I asked you.


It most certainly does, even if beyond an incoherent question as a start. Not giving the answer you wished for, granted. Your usual trade signature of incapacity to understand logical response to your standard inane questions for purpose of instigation and antagonizition notwithstanding.





quote:

It was answered to the intelligent audience to begin with.


Embarrass yourself further if you like.




quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl


quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn



It was answered to the intelligent audience to begin with.


Embarrass yourself further if you like.








Sorry toots, not the least bit embarrassed. You admitted you didnt answer the question.



The question did not come up to begin with for the intelligent reader, or was answered sufficiently to those who felt the need to ask, but sources were given for those capable of that pursuit.

You admitted that you fell short of the mark in any circumstance.




You guess what he is talking about is as good as mine.

Its his intellectual two step that he tries topull when he has been caught with his make believe world.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Edwynn)
Profile   Post #: 88
RE: Of the People, By the People, For the People ...? - 9/29/2011 7:49:06 PM   
FirmhandKY


Posts: 8948
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

1. Bush was elected IAW the US system.


So, you are saying that a president voted in by the Supreme Court, as against the "consent of the governed" is a normal course of events, then.

Right.

You don't seem to understand the US system of Federal elections.  This issue has been fought many times in these forums and elsewhere.

Bringing the discussion back on point, however, the ignorance of great parts of the electorate about how the system was designed, and how it does work is one of the reasons (along with increased ideological stridency) that the legitimacy of the government is in question.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

2. Can I see your source on Americans "avidly" against the invasion of Iraq, please?


That was 9 years ago, but you demand that someone else who was actually awake at the time now do your homework for you and catch you up with things that you have no interest in hearing to begin with. You were asleep then, quit bitching and carping on others who happened to be awake at the time.

You made a claim.  I challenged your claim.

Now you wish to duck the issue.

Ok.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

I'm not sure you are prescient.  More likely is that reality has slowly "caught up" with you.


I never claimed any prescience. Quite the opposite, in fact.


Your post 77:

I might have found the issue that some people only recently woke up to this fact to be 'disturbing' in times past.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

I had let the notion of people "averaging out" to eventually vote in such way as to keep the harm to a minimum hold sway for awhile there, even though I had been taught otherwise earlier in life. After that, I will allow that people such as yourself have "lowered the average" far more than I could have imagined.

Either I am dense as hell, or the clarity of your thoughts are less than razor sharp.

Would you mind explaining your point in this paragraph again, using smaller words, and shorter sentences (a thesis sentence, with clearly delineated supporting sentences, followed by a conclusion sentence might help as well)?

Firm


_____________________________

Some people are just idiots.

(in reply to Edwynn)
Profile   Post #: 89
RE: Of the People, By the People, For the People ...? - 9/29/2011 7:52:03 PM   
FirmhandKY


Posts: 8948
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

You guess what he is talking about is as good as mine.

Its his intellectual two step that he tries topull when he has been caught with his make believe world.

Ahh, apologies taz, I just caught your meaning in the previous post.

Firm


_____________________________

Some people are just idiots.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 90
RE: Of the People, By the People, For the People ...? - 9/29/2011 9:37:49 PM   
imperatrixx


Posts: 903
Joined: 3/29/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

you dont need to veil an insult then tell me to peace out.

your post speaks far more about you than it does about me.

When I am in a crowd of legal/history majors they ears are WIDE open.  Would you like to hang out and see sometime?

I imagine it would disappoint you to hear they are starting in some of the better colleges to teach the stuff I talk about.

I cant imagine what possible good it serves you and others of the same ilk to take that stand.

Having a "working" understanding of the things I talk about set the stage for real change.

How many times over the years have I complained that the judges are completely corrupt?   Maybe if you had listened then it would save these kinds of things form your children having to deal with it.


I think this is the longest you've ever typed without random caps and tinfoil slang. I actually went back to check your avatar name to make sure that you were posting it, no joke.

Seriously I don't even read your posts because I have trouble deciphering what the fuck you are even trying to say and you copypaste walls of text instead of summarizing. So yeah it really seems like you're just in a big circle jerk with the other two conspiratists here. But if you actually want to discuss anything you might want to continue this posting style instead of the random schizoid rantings.

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 91
RE: Of the People, By the People, For the People ...? - 9/29/2011 11:24:49 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: StrangerThan

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Depends on what front that "war" is waged.


Actually Taz, I think the war is being waged now. We have two definitive sides that are ideologically sitting at opposite ends of the political spectrum. People are tagged all the time as being left or right, when in reality, a good many folks sit within a few degrees of center on most issues. These aren't the people who make the most noise though, nor grab the attention, nor push for new legislation. They may get fired up over a given topic, but as a whole, not so much.

The further you venture out along political lines however, the more the whole becomes important rather than a given subject. When you look at court cases that grab the media's attention, what you see often is something driven by the extreme end of one side or another. When you look at elections, there is an undeniable drive from both sides to seed the Supreme Court. When you look at social issues, you see polar opposites establishing stances from which they do not want to either compromise or deviate.

The war is being waged, in the courts and at the ballot box. The issue is, if we have a structural change, a deep one, what it will expose are two sides who cannot stand each other, sides that are held in check somewhat by the structure we currently have, sides that if brought to the table to figure out the next step will have more acrimony for each other than they have either compassion or desire to compromise.

I don't know how we could affect such a change without laying open deep differences, and deep animosities. Personally I think some type of conflict is coming. I don't think we'll divide up into sides and start shooting each other. I do think demonstrations, social unrest, and some violence are on tap if the government does not get it's shit together. Too, the government is a reflection of the people in that we elect who we elect. So many people feel disenfranchised by the whole election cycle anyway, if not for the outside influences, then by the fact they live in a district where their vote doesn't matter anyway.

Dunno.

But as far as figuring it as some future war, I don't think we have to wait. I think it's here now. It's just not being fought with guns and bullets.



I agree with most of what you posted.

I believe many of the people atthe fringes are driven there by fear and misinformation... and we all know who perpetuates the majority of that... and I dont mean a particular side.

What I meant by front is what the subject will be. Look at what slavery did to this country. yes, I know, some will argue that it was about state rights. yes, those states who realized they could lose their property if the visited family in states that no longer allowed slavery.... states that were upset that, once their property was "misplaced" (actually ran away) then the property owner would have little recourse to retrieve that property.

Anyways, this isnt about slavery.. and yes, I agree, a war is brewing. Its going to be nasty, I actually do expect alot of blood shed. Instead of North vs South, it will be people vs government. I dont envision it becoming like Libya... but it will come here none the less.

Its not to the guns and bullet stage yet... but if the recent comments by the NRA have anything to do with it, it soon could be. People are angry, scared and sick and tired of not being heard. Those same groups insist other groups should not be heard.

Keep your hands off my medicare group are the ones advocating for less government.. except when it affects them. Those who support the NRA would have a fit if the government started shooting citizens. Those who preach the bible show little compassion for others. The list of hypocrisy goes on and on.... and its all along the spectrum of political ideology.

Many of us are moderates... just a few leans one way or the other. But most can find a path to meet. Its the fringe who cannot.. and these are the people who are being catered too.

And if that doesnt scare people, the knowledge that "we the people" are being manipulated by fear and anger.... then the wars will surely come... on many fronts.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to StrangerThan)
Profile   Post #: 92
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Of the People, By the People, For the People ...? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.078