Democratic suicide?

[chcr]

Well, all I have to say is that whoever can keep the economy strong, get us out of Iraq, and heal the budget deficit has my vote - regardless of party affiliation, race, gender, personality, appearance, or sexual orientation. I just want the freaking job done right, period.

You understand that whoever runs will be a politician, right? I think that pretty much blows that idea right out of the water.

 

[Gato_Solo]

Well, all I have to say is that whoever can keep the economy strong, get us out of Iraq, and heal the budget deficit has my vote - regardless of party affiliation, race, gender, personality, appearance, or sexual orientation. I just want the freaking job done right, period.

Anybody who will do the job right will either not be elected because s/he'd piss too many people off, or not be re-elected because s/he'd pissed too many people off. Think about it...how many people would vote for somebody who would raise taxes, and cut out any program not in line with the Constitution? (Welfare, medicare, medicaid, et al...) How many people would vote for somebody who would not create or sustain jobs in their district via pork projects? We always say the the government screws us, but...bottom line...who put those people in charge?

 

[Professur]

As always ... noone in the job is gonna look further than 4 years down the road. That's why your democracy will always be inferior to a good monarchy.

 

[freako104]

Well, all I have to say is that whoever can keep the economy strong, get us out of Iraq, and heal the budget deficit has my vote - regardless of party affiliation, race, gender, personality, appearance, or sexual orientation. I just want the freaking job done right, period.

You and I vote for one and the same. Too bad no politician will fill those shoes

 

[highwayman]

As always ... noone in the job is gonna look further than 4 years down the road. That's why your democracy will always be inferior to a good monarchy.

The only way to do away with an inferior monarchy is through a revolution, it's a fine line between a monarchy and a dictatorship....

 

[Professur]

Exactly ... but it's perfectly acceptable to top a monarch ... since noone put him there in the first place. But you wind up with a king, who's been trained from birth in politics and leadership. A king, for whom money isn't a stimulus. And a leader who knows full well that doing a good job is the only thing keeping his head attached. That's motivation for ya.

 

[freako104]

The only way to do away with an inferior monarchy is through a revolution, it's a fine line between a monarchy and a dictatorship....

Where would the line be? The only difference I could see is whether they usurped power or were born into it

 

[Professur]

Where would the line be? The only difference I could see is whether they usurped power or were born into it

Neg. A dictator is kept in power by fear and military might. A monarch is kept in power by loyalty and love of the population.

 

[Sharky]

I say we vote Democrat in the next election.

Well, it has to be Zell Miller

I would vote for Zell in a heartbeat. He was one of the best governors Georgia ever had.

Zell would be an awesome choice... but true Democrats think of him as a Republican. Besides, Carter made it so that a Georgian wouldn't/couldn't get elected to office for at least a century.

True dat.

You understand that whoever runs will be a politician, right? I think that pretty much blows that idea right out of the water.

Kind of a Catch-22, yeah.

We always say the the government screws us, but...bottom line...who put those people in charge?

Uneducated voters, and the "elite power structure"?

You and I vote for one and the same. Too bad no politician will fill those shoes

One can only dream . . .

Neg. A dictator is kept in power by fear and military might. A monarch is kept in power by loyalty and love of the population.

And respect? Which is something that the American people have lost for our leaders.