The Left has Exterminated their Platform

originally posted by: Terpene
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

I guess i was just wondering why you make it about party lines when the issue is much broader. it's actually a global issue that jokes about how easily the donkeys and the elephants chase that dangling carrot.

You know what's also effed up in a bipartisan system. That critique of one side, even if justified, is sort of championing the other.

I agree, what's been done to Trump is not fair.Well i mean I don't think he's totally innocent. I think it's common practice above a certain net worth to fix the books. So yeah, it's unfair because he's singled out. And quite honestly he doesn't strike me as a criminal mastermind, not even aspiring.
The swamp is so filled with filthy slimy things that have a hue of rot emanating from them, the realization that our legal system can take them down, that's what i hope might come from this.
I'd like to see the same ruler applied to everyone, and we could possibly talk about the actual corruption. But you know that can't happen.
I've always found the medias obsession to paint him as the bad guy much more disgusting than his off putting personality.

But then again it's 24 and US elections are coming up, pretty sure that's one of the few times internet sleuths can actually make some cash, so i shouldn't worry too much about the divisive rhetoric... Even if it might be wise not to use it considering the tensions.
It only takes a drop to burst a full barrel...

I do have a question that nobody seems capable of answering. What books did he cook? What entries did he change/delete/alter? You made the claim as many have, yet nobody can point to what "it" is. Let's see if you have the hidden knowledge, or perhaps you are just another who parrots what the newz tells you.

a reply to: Terpene

“Insanity is repeating the same mistakes and expecting different results.”

Yes, I am well aware of the colloquial saying, I guess my more direct question was, who you are attributing this (alleged) statement to? Okay, I'll spare you the suspense and drama here...it was kind of a trick question. As far as modern historians are able to determine, this phrase, often wrongly attributed to Albert Einstein, seems to be a manufactured phrase which didn't appear until the early 1980's ('83 seems to be the most common thought). In other words, it's not an "old saying" as people often refer to it, nor does it appear to be a 'saying' at all, but rather just some thing various people conjured up over time which sort of coalesced into the phrase people quote today.

Regarding a 'constitutional revolution' (and I'm not trying to be pedantic with your words here, just trying to be clear and helpful), that sort of implies a revolution 'against' the Constitution which isn't what would happen. The argument here is not 'against' the Constitution, but rather in 'favor' of the Constitution, or 'in line' with the Constitution. Now, just the word 'revolution' implies conflict (potentially armed conflict), and I don't think we're at that stage at the moment. The Constitution does not automatically presume a conflict in resolving Constitutional matters, quite the opposite. The Constitution lays out all manner of remedies for violation of its articles peacefully, and it is my opinion these remedies have not yet been exhausted. However, people have to have the "balls" to actually use the tools they have available to them, and right now we do not have politicians in Washington DC with the testicular fortitude to do just that. THIS, in my opinion, is one of the very first problems which needs to be solved. In less polite terminology..."kick these swamp-water, thieving, cowardly and corrupt politicians who refuse to obey the Constitution dead square in the nutsack and throw them out of Washington DC and don't ever let them come back (under penalty of treason)!"
(How's that for being direct???)

If this means sacking the president of the United States in the process (regardless of who he is, or what color his arm band is), then so be it. It's called 'kicking ass, and taking names' (hopefully without physical violence)! And, I am DEAD Serious! No half-stepping; the time for political double-talk and BS lip-service and rhetoric is OVER! Failure to do this will lead to the systematic dismantling of the Constitution of the United States to the point of irrelevancy.

What happens beyond that, or if "The People" fail to demand this, is all just speculation. Could some sort of conflict evolve out of those eventualities? I suppose it's possible, but this would be a very last resort after all else had failed.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Yeah I googled the saying and kind of saw that coming, sorry for not taking the bait...

I guess the question is how could it come to this when the constitution is perfect as is. Is it just human nature?
maybe put AI in charge... I mean in some sort or another you need to adapt, either the constitution or those in carge.

There are two problems the corrupted government and the divided people.
if you could just agree on the first maybe the second would solve itself...

But that won't happen if every critique, makes sure to pin it on the political opposition...
Because if you make it about the parties you make it about the people that vote. Not the politicians that abuse their power.

The rhetoric some choose is either knee-jerk ignorance or deliberate divisivness.

I like you're approach but not without proof and you know that's all behind a big wall of national security...

if you want to clean it, you would have to unravel so much crap i doubt the government in it's form would survive... The whole damn structure would come down, i mean scratch national security, scratch global dominance. It'll be an unpleasantly sobering process for a young pubescent nation.

I've said it before and i agree with you on many fronts. The us citizens are one of the few that have a legal fighting chance against their corrupt government officials. The less fighting they do the more probable their success. It really is the last time we get a chance to actually make some real change, but if it then turns out to be just the same we'll loose everything. Because the path we're on has been decided long before me and even you.

And thanks for not being pedantic about my choice of words...

a reply to: network dude

I'm no lawyer, sorry... I guess I'm just amused by the naivety...

a reply to: Naftalin

You know what I always keep forgetting... There are people that know what I am forgetting and what not...

a reply to: network dude

There is a standard practice with propaganda and that is to dumb down the argument to make it easily undertood and digestible for the common man who doesn't have the time to research.

What has happened here is the propaganmda is making the case about the bookkeeping entry.
Did Trump know that legal expenses were being entered for his payment to a porn star!
Yes, or no?
The question becomes simple.
The truth is a yes or a no answer is totally irrelevant.

That is not what he was indicted for.

The actual case Bragg had to prove is far more complex and ridiculous on it's face - but the media and those predisposed to believe - or rejoice - in anything bad that happens to Trump simply don't care about anything but the result and they will use the simplicity of 'bookkeeping entries' to justify to themselves and those around them that all is fair.

TBH, I have more respect for those that just say - 'I hate Trump, I am glad he got stitched up by a corrupt prosecutor and judge'. I have little time for those ignorant to what actually took place who try to justify it.

originally posted by: Terpene
a reply to: network dude

I'm no lawyer, sorry... I guess I'm just amused by the naivety...

who's, yours? that's kind of sad, not funny.

a reply to: Terpene

Well, it seems you didn't take it into consideration in your post. We say it like that here, it's a way of speaking. But you can't know that, I should have paid more attention.

But it was a very polite statement. Because it saves face and gives you the opportunity to agree that you knew it, but didn't think about it at that moment.

I could have gone into the conversation with the prejudice that you were simply too stupid to know that... But you can't please everyone.

a reply to: Naftalin

I guess switzerland isn't a democracy either... I mean one is the form of government and the other is the process in which that government is elected...

USA, DE, and CH, at It's core all have a democratic process to elect their government. We now have the tools for true direct democracy but we fail to implement it at every corner and there is a reason for that. The biggest opponent of true change is the political status quo...

But no matter the form, the voting citizens in democratic countries have no voice, they quite literally give it away to some representatives...

So yeah if we don't even want to be a democratic country our voice really means absolutely nothing...

a reply to: Terpene
It's not about what you or I want when we talk about the fact that neither Germany nor the USA is a democracy.

Because they are not, no matter how often the politicians say "we have to protect democracy". Something that is new here is something I've been hearing constantly for two years. Let's stick to the facts: USA = Republic; DE = Republic.

So what is a democracy and what is a republic?
A democracy is a form of government in which state power comes from the people. A republic, on the other hand, is a form of government in which the head of government is legitimized by the people. Just because this head of government is democratically elected does not make the country a democracy. It is intellectually dishonest to talk about protecting democracy in a republic.

Because it exploits confusion like yours.

originally posted by: Naftalin
a reply to: Terpene
It's not about what you or I want when we talk about the fact that neither Germany nor the USA is a democracy.

Because they are not, no matter how often the politicians say "we have to protect democracy". Something that is new here is something I've been hearing constantly for two years. Let's stick to the facts: USA = Republic; DE = Republic.

So what is a democracy and what is a republic?
A democracy is a form of government in which state power comes from the people. A republic, on the other hand, is a form of government in which the head of government is legitimized by the people. Just because this head of government is democratically elected does not make the country a democracy. It is intellectually dishonest to talk about protecting democracy in a republic.

Because it exploits confusion like yours.

Aye.
Worth pointing out that a true direct Democracy is probably the most dangerous form of societal administration there is. It almost guarantees oppression and the loss of voice in the politicall and societal process - notably for any minority group.
The US Republic was constructed with this in mind - to avoid it, with many insights coming from the fall of Rome - a system of mixed direct democracy and representative democracy.

Where the USA got it wrong (even though i believe the founding fathers of the USA created the best system ever created) - IMHO - is they made it too hard to hold representative officials accountable. This is why i think an easier process for recalls and the introduction of term limits should be core to improving the system - as well as a massive overhaul on campaign finance. The playing field should be levelled in that last point to ensure a poor man has an equal chance as a rich man of getting elected.

I agree that the use of the word 'democracy' has become a weapon in politics and is simply not understood to mean anything other than 'good'.
When you hear a politician say 'we need to protect our democracy' or 'our democracy is at risk' what they are really saying is 'I am winning the game and you all need to protect me so i can further prosper'.

a reply to: UKTruth

They could lock up everyone above a certain net worth if they wanted.
yes the loopholes are incredibly complex and ridiculously hard to proof. But are they actually legal to exploit?

To assume Trump wasn't using these loopholes is far more simplistic than to assume a witch hunt. And just by observing mainstream media that's what's happening, doesn't mean he's innocent though.

Honestly I'm surprised it took them that long and I'm confident nothing will come of it. Because you know how corrupt the justice system is...

a reply to: UKTruth

Considering how easily people can be manipulated, I completely agree with you when you say that direct democracy is dangerous.

If there had been direct democracy in the USA or Germany during the COVID period, it would have been a dark chapter in the history of our countries because of all the mindless drones. Some people were already treated like animals back then and the people were crying out for more.

I can't comment on your electoral system, I don't know enough about it to have a reasonable opinion here. You are right when you say that it would be better if politicians could be held accountable. But this seems to be a global issue. Something that we all know, they know that we know, and yet nothing is happening in a direction that would change that.

# just falls to the bottom and the people - we - are at the bottom.



Your reason for the edit (must be filled out):
I saw your edit, but I already responded to it without you mentioning it, so I won't change anything

originally posted by: Terpene
a reply to: UKTruth

They could lock up everyone above a certain net worth if they wanted.
yes the loopholes are incredibly complex and ridiculously hard to proof. But are they actually legal to exploit?

To assume Trump wasn't using these loopholes is far more simplistic than to assume a witch hunt. And just by observing mainstream media that's what's happening, doesn't mean he's innocent though.

Honestly I'm surprised it took them that long and I'm confident nothing will come of it. Because you know how corrupt the justice system is...

That it has taken a clearly corrupt system so long to get Trump and when they did it was on something so shockingly weak and bogus actually speaks very well of Trump.
I am quite confident that it would not take so long - anywhere near as long - to land most politicians in jail if they were subject to their entire lives being investigated by dedeicated people solely out to get them AND with a strnaglehold on enough positions of power to see it through.

That said - Trump is clearly a self interested man, spinning yarns to get votes and take power. His motoivations are pretty clear and I do need the sick bag when I hear people tell me he's in it for them and America. BS. He's a narcissist that needs his gigantic ego fed and it never seems to be fed enough. That is whay it is so easy to blind side him and get close to him, then stab him in the back.

None of his pretty major short comings come close, however, to justifying the irrecovarable corruption of the current regime that has all but destroyed America.
I genuinely see no way back from a march into a hellish society from this point.

1) Current regime wins in November and they will be emboldened further - god help half the country in that scenario. It will be time then to keep your head down and tow the line.

2) Trump wins - the other half of the country goes nuts as Trump goes on a very vindictive revenge tour that shreds everything - whilst his supporters cheer it on as they get the pound[s] of flesh they are thirsting for having felt so oppressed and attacked for so long.

I don't think there is a middle ground left - it's been scorched now.

a reply to: Naftalin

I see only one talking about saving democracy and being confused by what I said...

Sounds like semantics to me... Was it a republic that enabled Hitler? Hey and it even was a democratic thing... I guess we've been just lucky that germany didn't go full on covid bonkers... Because obviously it has nothing to do with democracy or republic....
It was very relaxed here in Switzerland, compared to every other country in Europe... And it just so happens to be very close to direct democracy...

I'd not fly that republic flag... But you do you...

So yeah...

a reply to: UKTruth

That it has taken a clearly corrupt system so long to get Trump and when they did it was on something so shockingly weak and bogus actually speaks very well of Trump.

Lol, true that. I guess it's because they have little practice with going after one of them, they're just experts at protecting them...

a reply to: Terpene

Ah, here comes the Hitler argument, bundled with your comment that I'm the confused one here.

I also brought up COVID in connection with how dangerous direct democracy can be in a crisis like this. That wasn't a conversation between us either, but a response to UKTruth. So I see that as a cheap dig on your part. I've already seen through your style.

It's great that direct democracy works in your country, good for you! Now you can use your direct democracy to solve the suicide problem, which is sometimes twice as high as in your neighboring countries.

I'd not fly that republic flag... But you do you...

Yes, indeed. Because I'm German, living in Germany, which is a republic. How many times do you have to have that explained to you before you're able to understand it? The same goes for the USA. Republic. Not so difficult to understand for most people.

a reply to: Terpene

A little dig: After Hitler, people also looked around: How can we prevent this so that it never happens again? And then they chose a republic as a form of government. Not a democracy. Reasons I mentioned to UKTruth.

Which was absolutely right from a historical perspective. After all, it was Democrats who were pro-slavery. And recently, too, they have clearly shown their ugly racist face more and more.

The majority of people are simply stupid and easily influenced. This includes those who think they are very smart but aren't.

a reply to: Naftalin

Oh that's sweet...

First you imply i forgot something, just to bolster your argument you feel like if considered would change what i said... Not to mentioned that it was a debate over several posts you seem to interject with no context...
then you imply I'm confused about democracy and when the mirror comes up you play the victim...

Your republics representatives are voted by a democratic process... Right?
I mean it could be diffrent, it's not a prerequisite for a republic... A republic is a Middle age idea to get rid of blood rule... No need to mentally stay there too.

Patridiots for the world

a reply to: Naftalin

It was a republic when hitler rose to power and the best idea is a republic to avoid it happening again that's comedy gold...

I didnt know germany was such a funny crowd...