Quote:

---

German Kahuna said:
You Americans and your ideas of a democracy are cute, really. Maybe it used to be a people's country back in the old Abe Lincoln days, but now? Gimme a break. And then you bitched about a one party socialist dictatorship. Hey, at least in the US they make you THINK that you have a two party choice (LOL!) instead of saying "sign here, stupid peasant, or we will shoot you in the back of your neck".
The truth is, whoever wins gets bought out by big business "You want another term in office? Well, here's the suitcase with the cash and you know who to do a favor". Republicans and Democrats, what's the really big difference? I mean really. The big corps are running your country and you have absolutely no say, face it. Bush and Obama, for the average American it's all the same. Your country is run by Haliburton, Phizer, etc.
It's getting worse and worse over here as well. The American disease is catching on. Industry lobby groups are getting more powerful by the minute. This planet sucks as long as the human race is a part of it.

---

This man speaks the truth and it deserves quoting. Before mushrooms I was super partisan, I still consider myself left leaning but fuck the democrats and republicans I've always known my vote didn't matter much, but now I'm considering if it matters at all. Whoever gets elected usually caves in to lobbyists (which I think should be illegal) There are exceptions to what he's talking about, I think we've had a few good administrations (I'm still in college so I haven't personally experienced them, mind you) but for the most part... i'm not so sure anymore. I can only speak of bush and obama...

Obama so far has not lived up to many of his campaign promises obviously. I sure as shit don't see any "change" yet, except for the little change in my pocket these days, maybe thats what he meant.. I hope to god he wasn't blowin smoke because I worry about the direction this country is headed and has been heading for quite some time.

I'd take obama over bush any day of the week. Say what you will about obama because I have my complaints too, but IMO he is a pragmatist which I like. Bush delegated, and what he did do he did with idealistic reasoning IMO

I'm also worried about sarah palin as president... What have we become as a nation when sarah palin is a viable candidate? She's a walking punchline. Don't get me wrong, I'd hit it..but I think thats solely where her appeal lies

correct me if I'm wrong I'm just spoutin shit off just to get it off my chest.

Quote:

---

fapjack said:
Your post makes you sound like a selfish asshole.

---

Quote:

---

LloydChristmas said:

4.  Come to our senses on the War on Drugs.  Personally, prescription drugs do more damage than illegal ones, and pot is no more a threat than alcohol, but we%u2019re spending billions locking people up for what is not even a crime in other countries, not that we need to be like them, but we can be more sensible.  I don't do drugs, and I support this to a large degree.

---

Quote:

---

TM2443 said:

I'm also worried about sarah palin as president... What have we become as a nation when sarah palin is a viable candidate? She's a walking punchline. Don't get me wrong, I'd hit it..but I think thats solely where her appeal lies

correct me if I'm wrong I'm just spoutin shit off just to get it off my chest.

---

Quote:

---

StaleShrooms said:

Quote:

---

LloydChristmas said:

4.  Come to our senses on the War on Drugs.  Personally, prescription drugs do more damage than illegal ones, and pot is no more a threat than alcohol, but we%u2019re spending billions locking people up for what is not even a crime in other countries, not that we need to be like them, but we can be more sensible.  I don't do drugs, and I support this to a large degree.

---

but your status thing says you're tripping? lol

i liked a lot of those libertarian points. I wasnt gunna vote in the next election because it doesnt matter. but it cant hurt to atleast cast my vote for a libertarian candidate. even if they cant win. i'll have to look into it more.

Quote:

---

TM2443 said:

I'm also worried about sarah palin as president... What have we become as a nation when sarah palin is a viable candidate? She's a walking punchline. Don't get me wrong, I'd hit it..but I think thats solely where her appeal lies

correct me if I'm wrong I'm just spoutin shit off just to get it off my chest.

---

i dont think Sarah Palin has any chance of getting a nomination even if she decides to run. the christian conservatives are dumb, but not THAT dumb. It'd be like the conservative equivalant of nominating Barney Frank.

I mean, I really like Barney Frank but he has no chance of being president.

---

Tripping isn't a drug its a plant!!!

Quote:

---

Happy2fly said:

Quote:

---

TM2443 said:

Quote:

---

Samurai Drifter said:
As if Democrat and Republican are the only choices. I'm a Libertarian.

---

But you have to vote democrat or republican, third party candidates hardly ever stand a chance.

---

Third party candidates don't stand a chance because people think they have to vote democrat or republican.

Quote:

---

TM2443 said:

Quote:

---

Samurai Drifter said:
If everyone just keeps only voting democrat/republican then of course this system's never going to change.

---

I agree with you

---

---

Quote:

---

jewunit said:
I voted for all three because you can't figure out how to make a simple poll.

---

I'm neither.
Don't box me in!

Quote:

---

jewunit said:
I voted for all three because you can't figure out how to make a simple poll.

---

Quote:

---

StaleShrooms said:

i dont think Sarah Palin has any chance of getting a nomination even if she decides to run. the christian conservatives are dumb, but not THAT dumb.

---

Quote:

---

Classical liberalism is a political ideology that developed in the nineteenth century in Western Europe, and the Americas. It was committed to the ideal of limited government and liberty of individuals including freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and free markets. It drew on the economics of Adam Smith, a psychological understanding of individual liberty, natural law and utilitarianism, and a belief in progress. Classical liberals established political parties that were called "liberal", although in the United States classical liberalism came to dominate both existing major political parties.[1]

Although classical liberalism built on ideas that had already developed by the end of the eighteenth century, it advocated a specific kind of society, government and public policy required as a result of the Industrial Revolution and urbanization.[2] Notable individuals who have contributed to classical liberalism include Jean-Baptiste Say, Thomas Malthus, and David Ricardo.[3] There was a revival of interest in classical liberalism in the twentieth century led by Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman.[4]

The term classical liberalism was applied in retrospect to distinguish earlier nineteenth-century liberalism from the newer social liberalism.[5] The phrase classical liberalism is also sometimes used to refer to all forms of liberalism before the twentieth century, and some conservatives and libertarians use the term classical liberalism to describe their belief in the primacy of economic freedom and minimal government. It is not always clear which meaning is intended.[6][7][8]

---

Quote:

---

Social liberalism is the belief that liberalism should include social justice. It differs from classical liberalism in that it recognizes a legitimate role for the state  in addressing economic and social issues such as unemployment, health care, and education while simultaneously expanding civil rights. Under social liberalism, the good of the community is viewed as harmonious with the freedom of the individual.[1] Social liberal policies have been widely adopted in much of the capitalist world, particularly following the Second World War.[2] Social liberal ideas and parties tend to be considered centrist or centre-left.[3][4][5][6][7]

A reaction against social liberalism in the late twentieth century, often called neoliberalism, led to monetarist economic policies and a reduction in government provision of services. However, this reaction did not result in a return to classical liberalism, as governments continued to provide social services and retained control over economic policy.[8]

The term "social liberalism" is often used interchangeably with "modern liberalism".[9] The Liberal International is the main international organisation of liberal parties, which include, among other liberal variants, social liberal parties. It affirms the following principles: human rights, free and fair elections and multiparty democracy, social justice, tolerance, social market economy, free trade, environmental sustainability and a strong sense of international solidarity.[10]

---

Quote:

---

Learyfan said:
We don't like either party. 

---

Quote:

---

Shins said:
Is it possible to be a democratic republican?

a democratic republic is what the USA is supposed to be.

just saying.


Democratic = mob rule

Republic = protection from mob rule

combine them together to make the U.S.A.


The question is in what proportion.

---

Quote:

---

fapjack said:
Your post makes you sound like a selfish asshole.

---