Republicrats -- Have You Learned NOTHING?

"The republicans are a party...of bad ideas....and the democrats...well the democrats are a party of no ideas. You see, the way it works is, a republican stands up in congress and says 'HEY! I'VE GOT A REALLY BAD IDEA!!' and then, the democrat stands up and says 'AND I CAN MAKE IT CRAPIER!!' * "
--Lewis Black

Have the majority of the people in this country not yet learned that the republicans and democrats are nothing more than two different teams playing for the same company?

I mean, sure, each team wants to win the game, but after the timer runs out the winning team doesn't really matter because the power/glory goes to the same backer.



You would think, after the dems "took over" last year and NOTHING changed, that people would have figured out that it's all just a scam.

But no, you still have people arguing over who the "right" side is.

What's funny is, all of these people have yet to realize that the simple fact that we are only allowed two sides means that there IS no right side.

You tell me how exactly this is a free and democratic republic when our candidates are chosen for us. You tell me how we have a real choice when 3rd party candidates can't even get on the ballot in most cases.

How can a government be of the people, by the people and for the people when the GOVERNMENT dictates just what people we can "vote" in?


Just a few of the parties with numbers and representation in this country are:

Libertarians
Nazis
Fascists
Socialists
Communists (almost hand in hand with the above)
Greens
Constitutionalists
Centrists
Firsts
Heritage
Reform
Labor
Pacifist
Worker

Yet, when it comes time to vote in '08, you will see Republican and Democrat.

Now you tell me, in a fair and open election should you have the right to see and vote for ANY party candidate you like when it comes election time?

As most of you know, Ron Paul is a Libertarian. Yet, he is having to run as a republican candidate to stand a CHANCE of getting on the ballot in '08.

You tell me; Is that a "fair" practice?

Does every member of this country fit into the "R" or "D" category? I THINK NOT!

The two party system in this country is a JOKE. And guess what? It's a joke that most of us have fallen for.

Sure, we are free to vote for the candidate of our choice come 2008, that is, as long as the candidate of your choice is one of the two on the ballot.


In my honest opinion, even the concept of a two party system in this country is a lie. I personally feel that the Republicans and Democrats should be merged together and renamed the Corporate Party of Amerika. At least that would be closer to the truth.


Now, don't get me wrong. I would never want to see a Nazi or Socialist in the White House. Yet, shouldn't the American tax payer that DOES want them there have the RIGHT to vote for their candidate when the time comes?

I think so.



Having said that, let me ask you. Which is the worse of the two?

A fascist candidate that RUNS as a fascist? Or a fascist candidate that runs as a Republican or Democrat?



Jasn

Well if all falls on the vote and so I guess we can blame each other. Personally I do not see it as bad as you do. I see many who want to do well but are restrained by their party lines and the threat to not be too different.

I just want to say good post. You verbalized what many of us are thinking. It is a sad joke and what makes it worse is the fact that there is nothing that can be done about it. Sure, there are some idealists out there that think they have the power to influence change, but sadly I don't think it is true.

We have been on this path for a long time now, growing more and more corrupt as time passes. Many idealists have come and gone and we have continued to blaze down our current path unfazed. There may be a moment of change here, or a glimmer of hope there, but in the end those are just a flash in the pan and we will continue down our path of corruption and greed.

Nothing will change until the big reset button gets pushed and society collapses and has to start over. But even then, it is just like starting the clock over again, the alarm will still go off, the end will be the same. Corruption and greed will always rule the day.

BTW: I am not sure if you coined the phrase "republicrats" or if you got it from somewhere else, but this is the first time I have seen it and I think it is great.

[edit on 21-10-2007 by Karlhungis]

reply to post by Xtrozero


Agreed.

But what does it say for our future (past and present?) when someone who wants to do some good is restrained by "party lines"?

Thanks for the input

Jasn

Originally posted by SimiusDei
reply to post by Xtrozero

 

Agreed.

But what does it say for our future (past and present?) when someone who wants to do some good is restrained by "party lines"?

Thanks for the input

Jasn

Honestly looking in the past, the government was much more corrupt then for they could easily get away with it, and it was also just considered a norm. Today, everyone lives in a glass house and that will reduce the corruption, but also highlight it anytime it pops up.

I do find it is crazy that our government just cannot get it right. As example; the vast majority of Americans want illegal immigration fixed, but they also understand the need for immigrate workers. This need as most see it is also greatly reduced by the burden that is placed on our schools, social programs, hospitals etc. for we cannot ask anyone if they have the right documents. The other dangerous part is agencies cannot talk with each other, and so dangerous illegals keep getting released for crimes that an average American would do hard time for, and this is totally ludicrous. I think a hand full of us could come up with a fix in a day that just about everyone in America would jump up and down for, but our representatives can’t.

I think the biggest problem, and it is very insidious, is careerism in politics. People do not do the right thing because it is the right thing to do, they do whatever keeps their political career going as long as they can. It is not some kind of NWO or other conspiracy, it is simply that these politicians spend a lifetime in a long term filibuster that never goes anywhere.


[edit on 22-10-2007 by Xtrozero]

reply to post by Xtrozero


Well said.

And thus, I salute you. Great post.


Jasn

too much pride in this country over things people shouldn't be proud about. One of those things happens to be political affiliation. Most of what you say is true, these guys are just different sides of the same coin, and yet they have the public convinced that real change can occur simply by flipping the coin to the other side every 4 years.

A problem is that a lot of people on both sides of the coin are apologists for their side of the coin, and take offense when you say bad things about that side, even if those things you say are true. They're too proud of their belief's, they won't even fathom that the side they support can be wrong.

We won't get change because these people who define themselves by a group or an ideology rather than their own individual merits refuse to question the group/ideology that they belong to. And this is everywhere, not just in politics. Criticize America, and Americans get upset, because America can never be wrong, can it? Criticize the greed of the rich white rulers of the world, and poor white people will take offense, because you said white, and they're white. Even though those white people are just as poor as the minority who's criticizing the elite, they take offense. I guess that's the speaker's fault as well, because he's trying to fit evil into a niche group, when evil is spread about all across the board. There are black people who would do the same as the elite are doing, while there are white people who would reject the greed. No one group has a trademark on evil, yet nearly every group think the group that opposes them ideology does in fact own that trademark and are the main source of evil in this world.

It doesn't make sense to me. I'm satisfied with who I am as a person, I accept by shortcomings just as easily as I accept my strengths. I don't align myself with any group, even those I've been born into. I think that's where we need to advance as a people. Everyone needs to be satisfied with who they are as individuals, and not look to groups, or to material objects to cover-up their own insecurities. You need to start respecting yourself before you can start respecting others.

Originally posted by Kingdrakethe3rd

It doesn't make sense to me. I'm satisfied with who I am as a person, I accept by shortcomings just as easily as I accept my strengths. I don't align myself with any group, even those I've been born into. I think that's where we need to advance as a people. Everyone needs to be satisfied with who they are as individuals, and not look to groups, or to material objects to cover-up their own insecurities. You need to start respecting yourself before you can start respecting others.

I think we need a new third party called the True Moderate. Eight years under Clinton or eight years under Bush we see neither really got anything done as what they said they would do, and as opposite parties you would think at least one would have.

The Democratic Party kicked Lieberman out and supported another candidate to try and win his senate seat just because some (and I mean some) of his views lean towards republican ideology. This was a presidential hopeful for them, but they are so set in their ways just as the Republicans are that to not follow the part line means you are a traitor.
I would much rather just see where a candidate stands than as to what party they belong, but most of America just treats them like sports team that they follow no matter what. I bet that if the two parties could totally flip ideologies people would still vote for the same party as they always have.

When I look at myself there really is no one party that fits what I want the government to be though I tend to lean Republican. Looking at the debate the other night every one of them is basically a clone, so in the end it doesn’t matter which one I pick. Bush today is about as Republican as Hillary is so does it really matter?

To be clear... there are a number of "other" presidential candidates who do appear on the ballot representing various parties. One problem... NO ONE has EVER heard of any of them, except from some select fringe media.

I do have to say that your post was most execellent! The "Establishment" has certainly rigged the game. Imagine, if you will, that you are the CEO of a HUGE multi-national corporation and politics will directly impact how you do business and, more importantly, how it will affect the bottom line. Now imagine that you have found a sympathetic ear to your concerns on BOTH sides of the aisle, so to speak. Because money and politics are prominent bed-fellows, you can simply pour money into the coffers of the two politicans who "support" your cause. As a result, no matter who wins, you win!

Now, let's complicate the issue. You are still the CEO of the previously mentioned corporation AND you are linked with some of the most elite business people and politicos (Think CFR, Bilderberger, Tri-laterals etc...) who share many of the same concerns that you have. You collectively agree, behind closed doors and out of public sight of course, to throw your support behind the two politicians who can create a truly "Friendly" environment to your causes. You assure the media that you will continue to drop HUGE advertising dollars (Because this is how they make their money) on their networks if they will help to "Promote" the appropriate candidates by selectively censoring the news to show those candiates in the most positive light while neglecting the alternatives (think Ron Paul).

So, you see, the HAVES get to rig the game with money. We NEED to eliminate ALL forms of private campaign funding. The whole notion that contributing to a campaign constitutes free speech is BS! Talk about dis-enfranchisement! Large corporations and their wealthy executives can "buy" candidates while common folk (like you and me) struggle to pay our monthly grocery bills - that dis-enfranchises the average American. Instead, each candidate should start with the exact same tax-payer funded "war chest" of $5,000,000. Any media with an FCC licenses should be required to give equal time to each and every candidate - to include debates, stories etc... and should also require a minimum amount of coverage to ensure that all of the facts are presented equally, without bias.

Imagine how different our political landscape would look if the average American had access to ALL of the information on ALL of the candidates - equally instead of being indoctrinated by the mass media!? Think about it...