[QUOTE=ladydoc;418126]LOL Laughing too hard to even write at the moment.....[/QUOTE]
Gee, that's too bad. : )

31% promises kept!!!!!
That is the reason I am totally and completely against Obama and the current congress.
By any measure they have earned a failing grade.

In ANY corporation in America/the world none of them would have made it to 6 months.

So do the right thing and get them out of office in 2012 or sooner if at all possible (no violence intended for those with a distorted magnifying glass on what did he say??).

btk

Originally Posted by billethkid

31% promises kept!!!!!
That is the reason I am totally and completely against Obama and the current congress.
By any measure they have earned a failing grade.

In ANY corporation in America/the world none of them would have made it to 6 months.

So do the right thing and get them out of office in 2012 or sooner if at all possible (no violence intended for those with a distorted magnifying glass on what did he say??).

btk

Good one. LOL Could I use that sometime? "distorted magnifying glass" LOL

Originally Posted by Figmo Bohica

For starters we are not a DEMOCRACY. The United States is a Representatiave Republic. Big difference. Get the facts straight before calling the United States something that it is not.

Now lets start a discussion from this point on.

You are correct, The USA is a representative republic.

I suppose over time, we have begun to refer to ourselves and to our form of government as a "democracy", as meaning a type of government featuring genuinely free elections by the people periodically. But as you point out, calling our government a democracy is incorrect.

What's interesting is to try to understand the differences between a democracy and a representative republic. After you tweaked me on the use of the word, I did a little research.

The chief characteristic and distinguishing feature of a Democracy is: rule by omnipotent majority. In a Democracy, individuals or any group of individuals composing the minority, have no protection against the unlimited power of the majority. It is a case of majority-over-man. The majority’s power is absolute and unlimited; its decisions are unappealable under the legal system established to give effect to this form of government.

Thomas Jefferson opposed the weaknesses of the democratic style of government established by our Constitution, when in 1782 he wrote, "...An elective despotism was not the government we fought for . . ." He also denounced the despotic concentration of power in the legislature, under the Constitution.

Jefferson wrote, "All the powers of government, legislative, executive, judiciary, result from the legislative body. Concentrating these in the same hands is precisely the definition of despotic government. It will be no alleviation that these powers will be exercised by a plurality of hands, as opposed to by a single one. A collection of despots would surely be as oppressive as one."

The framers of our Constitution were aware of the weaknesses of democracy. The Framing Convention’s records prove that by decrying the "excesses of democracy". The Framers, by their recognition of the "excesses of democracy," were merely making clear their sound reasons for preferring a Republic as the proper form of government for the United States. They went on the write, "The tyranny of the legislatures is the most formidable dread, and will be for long years. That of the (President) will come it’s turn, but it will be at a remote period."

They went on to observe that, "There can be no legal system which protects the individual or the minority against unlimited tyranny by the majority.

So, the framers chose a "republic" as the form of government for their new country. The purpose of a Republic is to control the majority strictly, as well as all others among the people, primarily to protect the individual’s God-given, unalienable rights and therefore for the protection of the rights of the minority, of all minorities, and the liberties of people in general.

The framers then argued and eventually wrote and agreed to The Constitution. This system of Constitution-making, for the purpose of establishing constitutionally limited government, is designed to put into practice the principle of the Declaration of Independence: that the people form their governments and grant to them only "just powers," limited powers, in order primarily to secure and keep secure their God-given, unalienable rights. This form of representative republic is designed, above all else, to preclude the existence of any governmental power capable of being misused so as to violate the individual’s rights--to endanger the people’s liberties.

So where are we today? Is the system that the framers put in place working?

I'll direct you to the Twelve Basic American Principles written and used by the framers in creating the Constitution. Here they are...

http://lexrex.com/enlightened/AmericanIdeal/index.html

I know this is a lengthy response, Figmo. But I wopuld ask that those who have chosen to read this far take the time to again re-visit these fundamental principles. After reading them, ask yourself whether our elected representatives are following those principles going on 300 years later. I have concluded that they are not. And for that reason, I'll assert that our (government) is pathetic!

Do you really believe this country hasn't been down this road many times before. The great thing about America is we will never surrender and we will always come back bigger and better. So I am ignoring the naysayers here and focusing on the coming elections and policies being introduced and will voice my opinion and eentually my vote.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

You are correct, The USA is a representative republic.

I suppose over time, we have begun to refer to ourselves and to our form of government as a "democracy", as meaning a type of government featuring genuinely free elections by the people periodically. But as you point out, calling our government a democracy is incorrect.

What's interesting is to try to understand the differences between a democracy and a representative republic. After you tweaked me on the use of the word, I did a little research.

The chief characteristic and distinguishing feature of a Democracy is: rule by omnipotent majority. In a Democracy, individuals or any group of individuals composing the minority, have no protection against the unlimited power of the majority. It is a case of majority-over-man. The majority’s power is absolute and unlimited; its decisions are unappealable under the legal system established to give effect to this form of government.

Thomas Jefferson opposed the weaknesses of the democratic style of government established by our Constitution, when in 1782 he wrote, "...An elective despotism was not the government we fought for . . ." He also denounced the despotic concentration of power in the legislature, under the Constitution.

Jefferson wrote, "All the powers of government, legislative, executive, judiciary, result from the legislative body. Concentrating these in the same hands is precisely the definition of despotic government. It will be no alleviation that these powers will be exercised by a plurality of hands, as opposed to by a single one. A collection of despots would surely be as oppressive as one."

The framers of our Constitution were aware of the weaknesses of democracy. The Framing Convention’s records prove that by decrying the "excesses of democracy". The Framers, by their recognition of the "excesses of democracy," were merely making clear their sound reasons for preferring a Republic as the proper form of government for the United States. They went on the write, "The tyranny of the legislatures is the most formidable dread, and will be for long years. That of the (President) will come it’s turn, but it will be at a remote period."

They went on to observe that, "There can be no legal system which protects the individual or the minority against unlimited tyranny by the majority.

So, the framers chose a "republic" as the form of government for their new country. The purpose of a Republic is to control the majority strictly, as well as all others among the people, primarily to protect the individual’s God-given, unalienable rights and therefore for the protection of the rights of the minority, of all minorities, and the liberties of people in general.

The framers then argued and eventually wrote and agreed to The Constitution. This system of Constitution-making, for the purpose of establishing constitutionally limited government, is designed to put into practice the principle of the Declaration of Independence: that the people form their governments and grant to them only "just powers," limited powers, in order primarily to secure and keep secure their God-given, unalienable rights. This form of representative republic is designed, above all else, to preclude the existence of any governmental power capable of being misused so as to violate the individual’s rights--to endanger the people’s liberties.

So where are we today? Is the system that the framers put in place working?

I'll direct you to the Twelve Basic American Principles written and used by the framers in creating the Constitution. Here they are...

http://lexrex.com/enlightened/AmericanIdeal/index.html

I know this is a lengthy response, Figmo. But I wopuld ask that those who have chosen to read this far take the time to again re-visit these fundamental principles. After reading them, ask yourself whether our elected representatives are following those principles going on 300 years later. I have concluded that they are not. And for that reason, I'll assert that our (government) is pathetic!

Feel free to read this defination Republic vs. Democracy then continue with this discussion. Get educated as to what WE ARE SUPPOSE to be not what our elected criminals tell us that we are. No we are not following what the founding fathers had in mind. We have been lazy and unmindful of those that we have entrusted to do what is right for the country. I hope that we are not to late to save this great nation without blood shed. Maybe our elected officials will wake up and do the right thing and get us back on track once again.

Well said, Rubicon.

Originally Posted by rubicon

Do you really believe this country hasn't been down this road many times before. The great thing about America is we will never surrender and we will always come back bigger and better. So I am ignoring the naysayers here and focusing on the coming elections and policies being introduced and will voice my opinion and eentually my vote.

Very good, but let's just hope that we are not to late. Looks like the Great Give Away State of California is hitting the end of the barrowing line in two weeks according the the Daily Sun. Will the FED bail them out again and again and Oh, Well, with California getting ready to go under what do you think that will do to the rest of the country. I will venture to say, nothing really good.

I think someone once said it does not matter who votes, what matters is who counts the votes. Will we have an honest election? Lets hope so.

Originally Posted by Figmo Bohica

Feel free to read this defination Republic vs. Democracy then continue with this discussion. Get educated as to what WE ARE SUPPOSE to be not what our elected criminals tell us that we are. No we are not following what the founding fathers had in mind. We have been lazy and unmindful of those that we have entrusted to do what is right for the country. I hope that we are not to late to save this great nation without blood shed. Maybe our elected officials will wake up and do the right thing and get us back on track once again.

Figmo, I trust you are addressing this comment to the forum readership in general, because you and I seem to be in agreement on the effectiveness of our elected representatives to actually govern. Our representative republic--you were correct in noting the difference between a "democracy" and what the framers actually had in mind when drafting the Constitution and creating the Congress--seems to have deteriorated into a mob of elected "representatives" so split ideologically and controlled by their political parties and money from special interests that they are incapable of governing at all. One thing that they are absolutely not, and that is "representative".

Like I said in the title of this thread, corrected a bit....our (government) is pathetic!

Again, as I said yesterday....

WE GET THE LEADERS WE DESERVE AND THEY ARE A REFLECTION OF OURSELVES

The below is a sampling from todays news of the audience that these men and women we have elected are playing to....

"“No more talking. They’ve got guns, we’ve got bottles. They’ve got bricks, we’ve got rocks…in a few days you’re going to see what a Molotov cocktail can do to Macy’s.”

"The loss of their camp at Zuccotti Park doesn’t seem to be slowing down the Occupy Wall Street movement as protesters are calling for “a national day of direct action” on Thursday."

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2011/11/...zuccotti-park/

"White Americans give Obama a thumbs down by a 61%-36% margin, with non-white Americans give the president a thumbs up by a more than 2-1 margin."

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...nt-incumbents/

"Authorities are investigating two bullets that hit the White House, one of them apparently cracking a window on the residential level where President Barack Obama and his family live."

http://www.wtop.com/?nid=109&sid=2635318

We and it is WE are all against something and very seldom play the I AM , FOR card.

No doubt these elected officials are doing a bad job but we allow it and if you follow what is happening, we are getting what we deserve and it IS a reflection of US

VK, sorry for the misunderstanding, yes, I was addressing that comment to the general readership of this thread. Seems that our elected officials have use the word Democracy so much that most think that is the form of government that we have. They need to know and understand the difference between a Representative Republic and a Democracy.

Hopefullly with this upcoming election we can move back to the form of government that our Constitution was written for. That states will start taking back their rights and that the Federal Government will be scaled way back and perform the functions that it is granted by the Constitution. Do I think this will happen. Not unless we get the general public educated and headed in the right direction.

It is going to be an interesting election year. One that will determine whether this country survives or is added to the heap of failed countries and governments.

Bucco you are right but it is all the more reason why cooler heads prevail. "The people" need to focus and to express their concerns and make reasonable demands of their representative. OWS antics only create chaos.
Well thought out suggestions emailed to representative are productive. Conversely telling a representative that they are jerks is not.

Also we should not be sidetracked by gossip that is of little consequences to the issues at hand. We are all human beings after all and all of us are fallible
so let's not allow political PR spin to unfairly charge otherwise good people.

My generation was taught to think through issues before deciding subsequent generation were taught to feel (emote) and hence we have too many whiners and naysayers.

I believe in American and in the American people because they have always been willing to fight for their freedoms.

To begin with, most of our elected republicans, both state and federal, have signed Grover's blood oath to not raise taxes, ever. So, there is NO hope of compromise in Congress. It's not going to happen. Democrats are willing to cut entitlements but will not do it unless there are offsetting revenues and an increase in the top marginal rates. We therefore are ungovernable when it comes to spending and taxing.

The only way out of this is a constitutional amendment to change the way we elect our government. We need to do it through public financing and eliminate special interest and corporate spending. You can vote every incumbent out of office and the new people elected will be corrupted before the next election cycle.

So, if you think the fact that the richest 400 people in America control more wealth than the bottom 150 million is OK. Fine. I don't.