What's wrong with our country, and how're you gonna fix it? by Cuda

Debates are ok, but people shouting rhetoric back and forth is kind of pointless.

What is wrong with our country (I assume you mean the United States)? It is the same thing that is wrong with every other nation, human nature. If people were good enough to create and operate a just and righteous government they wouldn't need one in the first place. For this reason, most governments start out with a system to balance the power and abuses that are inherent to its nature. Within mere minutes of signing and with the ink on the constitution still wet, individuals and groups begin plotting to exploit loopholes and accumulate power within the framework established.

What can be done? Personally, I think it all amounts to

. Then again I am a depressed and jaded man

.

Arawaen

Um, I'm lost. Uh, I'm Angry. And I'm Armed.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 8:42 AM

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

Quote:
Originally posted by Arawaen:
Debates are ok, but people shouting rhetoric back and forth is kind of pointless.

What is wrong with our country (I assume you mean the United States)? It is the same thing that is wrong with every other nation, human nature. If people were good enough to create and operate a just and righteous government they wouldn't need one in the first place. For this reason, most governments start out with a system to balance the power and abuses that are inherent to its nature. Within mere minutes of signing and with the ink on the constitution still wet, individuals and groups begin plotting to exploit loopholes and accumulate power within the framework established.

What can be done? Personally, I think it all amounts to . Then again I am a depressed and jaded man .

I agree w/ you on the point Arawaen that human nature is the main problem w/ our government. Politicians can not seem to understand the concept "by the people, and for the people". Too often, greed, paranoia, and ambition lead our elected officials to forget why they are in office, and they are too preoccupied w/ agendas of their own to fulfill their hollow campaign promises.

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 8:43 AM

I vaguely recall Perot's family, or daughter, was threatened, and in light of the threat, Perot withdrew. I know he did get massive support from voters disgusted with the status quo.

How to fix the country? The biggest thing, as I see it, is to get more people to recognize the true state of the corruption. Once people realize that yes, our government is, and has been, lying to us, then perhaps some serious action may be undertaken. But even on these boards I've read the comments of those who totally believe that our government is truthful, and that no "conspiracies" exist. With so many folks' heads in the sand, it's tough to have meaningful discussions that anything is, in fact, wrong. If you don't believe something's busted, there's no need to fix it. Hence my call for getting people to turn off the TV news and start reading worldwide news reports on the Internet. This is something I've done for well over ten years now (at first with ancient Compuserve, in case anyone wonders), and my knowledge is vastly different from anyone who gets his "facts" from Dan Blather.

.......Ruxton

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 8:45 AM

LODRIL

I think it's the increasing number of non-germane subjects on fan message boards. :)

As to how to fix it. Hrm. Haven't solved that one yet.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 9:19 AM

CARTAGIA

You're pretty close on the way the President is elected in the US. Our system runs so that the candidate that wins a State's election wins all of that State's electoral votes (predetermined based upon that state's population). So, if Florida has 10 electoral votes assigned to it, and more people in Florida vote for Bob than any other candidate, then Bob wins all 10 electoral votes. He doesn't even have to have a majority of the votes in that state, just more than any other candidate.

That isn't to say that you can have NO voice in the government unless you win a whole state. Much governing is done on the local level and you can only get elected to Congress as a Representative (one House of our Legislative Branch), with a local campaign. A candidate runs in a district (there are several districts in a State) and is sent to the Federal Legislature from that district. However, unless you are a part of a National Party, you are unlikely to be able to get the support from other Representatives to get anything done, and would then be unlikely to win re-election.

I can see why Parlimentary Democracy is so attractive in many ways. It gives a much broader range of choices as opposed to only two (perhaps three in rare occasions).

To me, however, the drawback is that it fosters what I would call "one-issue thinking" in the electorate. Let me make up an example based on a likely party if the US were to adopt Parlimentary Democracy.

If I am Pro-Lifer, I will vote the Pro-Life Party. Apart from strong ideas about abortion, the Pro-Life Party likely has no idea what to do in other areas, such as economics or national defense, if it should win. Likely, it will not win a majority and will have to ally with other parties whom hopefully fill in the gaps that Pro-Life has in its platform. These alliances take place after the vote has taken place. So, it is feasible for me, a Pro-Lifer, to have contributed to a government that is I may have strong moral objections to (for instance, the All-FOX-Reality-Show Party), if my Party Leaders feel that they need such a party to create a government.

I suppose Sweden is a good example of a smoothly running Parlimentary government. However, Italy also has a Parlimentary government, and when I was living there in 1989, the government had changed so often (lack-of-confidence votes, usually) that there had been more elections than years since WWII.

In the US Federal System, you only have (usually) two parties, but because of this, you generally have a good idea of what the party's platform is going to be if they are elected, BEFORE the votes are cast. It is possible (some would argue probable) that our candidates will misrepresent themselves, but then we should hold them accountable for that in the next election. If we fail to do that, then the fault lies with us.

Simon: I've never shot anyone before.

Book: I was there, son. I'm fair sure you haven't shot anyone yet.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 9:34 AM

FREMDFIRMA

The fix is simple.

Drag all the lawyers out into the streets and shoot them.

You don't kill a weed by snipping it's leaves, you tear it out by the root.

It's not simpler than that.

-frem

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 9:41 AM

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

Quote:
Originally posted by Ruxton:
How to fix the country? The biggest thing, as I see it, is to get more people to recognize the true state of the corruption. Once people realize that yes, our government is, and has been, lying to us, then perhaps some serious action may be undertaken. But even on these boards I've read the comments of those who totally believe that our government is truthful, and that no "conspiracies" exist. With so many folks' heads in the sand, it's tough to have meaningful discussions that anything is, in fact, wrong. If you don't believe something's busted, there's no need to fix it. Hence my call for getting people to turn off the TV news and start reading worldwide news reports on the Internet. This is something I've done for well over ten years now (at first with ancient Compuserve, in case anyone wonders), and my knowledge is vastly different from anyone who gets his "facts" from Dan Blather.

.......Ruxton

I agree that too many people are too wrapped up in their own lives, or in denial about the state of our country and government. There is corruption, misappropriation of funds, abuse of power, secret agendas, you name it and it is going on in Washington DC, and in state governments.

What to do about it? People need to educate themselves. They need to turn off the reality shows and start reading news on the net, and watch international news channels so they can get unfiltered news to get the whole story. They need to get involved in their community and local government. People need to above all else, vote. We need to put politicians and government on notice. We need to let them know that they work for us and that we will not sit idly by and let them do as they please. They are answerable to the people.

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 10:04 AM

I recall an article in the paper yesterday morning where a state congressman had proposed allowing teenagers a limited vote. That is, 16- and 17-year olds could receive a half-vote, and 14- and 15-year olds could receive a quarter vote. If that proposal were to be backed up with actual educational content about participating in society (before said kids developed the all-too-common view that their opinions don't really matter and can't really change anything), a renaissance of involved individuals could arise from the apathetic population.

The thing that irritated me was the comment I saw further down in the article, from a 16- or 17-year-old. She rambled on to the effect that she didn't want the responsibility because she had her own life to live, social life, too much to do already with regards to school, blah blah blah. These are excuses that any adult could still have -- but she seemed to be trotting them out as reasons why she shouldn't be bothered, or something to that effect.

What this country needs is an energized voting populace, one that's less involved in living vicariously through bad shows and worse writing and more involved in the events which go on in the world around them. More curious and willing to investigate things that are going on, to investigate issues and make an informed decision.

*sigh* Apathy sucks.

"Sir, I would like to gingerly point out that it is difficult for someone to be gently reassuring when they're holding three and a half feet of sharpened steel."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 10:51 AM

MERLINDREA

I have lived in Belgium for one year and learned that they have a mandatory vote. If you are a belgian citizen over 18 and you do not vote, they can actually send you in prison for that (although in reality its a monetary penalty, I believe).

At first, I found this shocking (I am from Eastern Germany, where we had to vote and were told what to vote as well), but on second thought, I think this is a really good idea.

I mean, in a democratic country you have so much rights, so much freedom you can enjoy, but you actually don't have many duties. Shouldn't it be the duty of everyone to speak out and say who they want to govern them? Because without a duty to vote, extreme parties will always be overrepresented, because they usually can energize their members. And if you really don't know whom to vote for, you can always make your vote so that it does not count.

On a lighter note: somebody of my friends once proposed to only have the effects of a decision done to people who voted for the party making the decision (e.g. tax cuts/increases etc). Could be an interesting model

Merl

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 12:08 PM

SCIFIDO

Wow, there are interesting opinions here. I am thrilled to see an exchange of ideas without the flaming that usually crops up.

I believe that part of the problem in the United States is the fact that Free Market Ideals often conflict with democratic ones. The money in our system ensures that big business support political parties that will favor big business goals. It is in Big Business's goals to keep us buying no matter the personal cost. The stock market has to increase. And corporate wealth is tied to the markets. Our 401Ks are controlled by a select few, and the SEC does very little to slow the rampant profiteering, even when an Enron takes the money out of their investor's pockets. In my humble opinion, the Money train is what we need derail before a third party will work.

Oh, and removing most of the lawyers is also a good idea.

Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 12:18 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

I just want freedom, dammit. Is that too much to ask for ?

You can't take the sky from me!

They don't like it when you shoot at 'em.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 12:39 PM

CROWLEY

Let's see, some of my views about the US of A in general:

One thing that's pretty nasty is that USA is at the moment quite obviously the most powerful single nation in the whole world. And these days it seems like the basic thesis of their foreign politics is that the rest of the world should only exist to conform to their needs. And this tendency seems to be escalating rather rapidly.

Another unfortunate thing is that it appears that as a nation, the United States seems to be saturated with fear, or the potential thereof. This leads to huge overreactions when something unfortunate happens. Shortly after September 11th when USA had declared war on Afghanistan I read some downright sad testimonies about the kind of social pressure was applied to people who simply voiced their opinions that going to war wasn't the best option. Another example would be the zero-tolerance policies that were adopted in schools after school shootouts.

Now, there is one other thing that I think is a huge problem in politics pretty much all over the world, including USA and Finland, where I live in. That is that corporations these days have way too much power in politics, overshadowing the influence of voters. Much of this is probably due to the mobility of the economics these days. If a bunch of large corporations don't like for example the tax policies of the country they work in, nothing really stops them from relocating to some low-cost third world country.

I'm fully willing to debate these views and prepared to change them is someone gives valid counterarguments.

People are crazy and times are strange
I'm locked in tight, I'm out of range
I used to care, but things have changed
-Bob Dylan

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 1:25 PM

KALATHENA

What is wrong with the US?

It is fueled entirely by the concept that a short term increase is superior to long-term sustainance.

What will I do to fix it? Try to instill in the young children I teach that sustainable living is a superior way to live.

--Kala

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 2:47 PM

Agreed. If the U.S. population thought more about long-term planning as a whole, and was willing to discipline themselves to stick to that planning rather than glomping onto the short term satisfaction, things would undoubtedly be different.

"Sir, I would like to gingerly point out that it is difficult for someone to be gently reassuring when they're holding three and a half feet of sharpened steel."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 2:59 PM

GINOBIFFARONI

What is wrong with the U.S. ?

Being from Canada, I am not well versed with your domestic agenda so I will use a foriegn policy example.

Haiti

At first glance it appears your government is trying to assist with the best intentions,

Then Aristide comes out with the claim that the US government were involved in overthrowing a democraticly elected government...

While unproven, with past examples like Chile... perhaps not far fetched.

Then I read further and find that by cancelling promised aid, embargoing their exports, and calling in loans much of the crisis which led to this civil war spun out of US policys.

Then I come across a Blog which quoted news sources which claimed the US state department actually funded the opposition to Aristide to the tune of 75 million dollars... sometime you do not allow in reguards to your own government.

So if true this is a crisis made in the USA, and now the good guys are riding in to save the day??

I am really starting to have concerns what the real agenda is ?

" Thats not fair !!!!
I didn't even have a soul when I did that!"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 4:49 PM

Well so far 2 things have been mentioned that I found very interesting. Those would be 'Human Nature' and 'Long Term Planning'.

I am not at all a fan of welfare, or any kind of handouts. I know that it is not always the case, and there are those that legitimately want to work hard to get ahead, but I feel that it is human nature that if you are satisfied with your current state of living and you don't have to work hard to maintain that state, then you will never strive to do better. I feel that welfare simply enables many of its recipients to go through life without having to put forth any effort to make a life for themselves. Shouldn't people be held accountable for their own situations, regardless of wether they made good or bad choices?

Ok, well, it has been said many people are this way because they have a low level of education. We have a public school system (not to spectacular in some areas) that anybody can participate in, right? Well if a person decides they do not want to educate themselves, isn't it their own fault? We have scholarships for high performers, do we not? As I see it, anyone, anywhere in the country could get an Ivy League education if they wanted it badly enough. (yes, harder in some areas) I think people should take a little more responsibility for educating themselves.

I think we need to have some sort of policy of 'Tough Love' where people are allowed to fail so that they can see what they must do to succeed. This may require some sort of interim welfare to help those during their 'time of failure', but only for a limited time to help them get back on their feet.

Ok, well, this is where long term planning comes into play. Wouldn't it be better to dedicate more resources to the school system? The way I see it, free education is like the ultimate form of welfare. Education allows people to realize what is possible, and enables them to do whatever they want.

Obviously this isn't something that could be changed in a few short years. Even if the schools became instantly spectacular, it'd probably take at least a decade to see the results.

I await your criticism...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 5:05 PM

SERGEANTX

The most fundamental thing wrong with this country politically is plurality voting. The two party system has a stranglehold on government and there isn't a dimes worth of difference between them. When we finally say goodbye to the notion of voting for the 'other' of two evils we might see some real change for the better.

There are some realistic alternatives out there. Its not a hotly charged sexed up issue, but its probably the very best thing we could do to insure a more sane future for our country. Check out Approval Voting here:

" http://www.approvalvoting.org/"

or check out some other ideas here:

http://www.electionmethods.org

SergeantX

"..and here's to all the dreamers, may our open hearts find rest." -- Nanci Griffith

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 5:26 PM

HARDWARE

What's wrong with the US? Fear of losing a good thing. The US supports roughly %10 of the world's population but consumes over %60 of the world's resources. We have a very, very high standard of living and we are terribly afraid of losing it. To this end the people in power are manipulating the social, political and economic environment to ensure that more money remains in the hands of the wealthy. It's a classic "Screw you. I got mine, you get yours."

NAFTA was supposed to weld a giant economic block out of Canada, the US and Mexico to compete with the European Union. Truth is the EU was cobbled together to compete on near even terms with the US. NAFTA allowed the upper echelon of management to send a whole host of manufacturing and service jobs to Mexico and Canada with nary a hint of it in the papers. They are our economic partners, it is okay for them to have these jobs. The cheaper US products are produced and services rendered the bigger the bottom line for the upper echelon.

Hell, even when the company fails the management is rewarded. Enron employees got screwed, lost all of their retirement savings and the executives, while they are pariahs and probably won't work in major corporations again, have not had to tighten their belts a single notch.

Okay, follow along her kids. If we import most of our products and we don't actually manufacture anything to export to balance that trade debt, then what happens to the US economy? If you said it flies down the shitter faster than your last trip to Taco Bell you get a big fat star.

As for what am I going to do about it? Nothing. I'm just going to quietly build and stock my bunker in the old, geologically stable mountains of the northeast. And when the Yellowstone supervolcano blows, close the doors and windows so I don't have to watch %99 of the US population go the way of the dinosaurs.

The more I get to know people the more I like my dogs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 6:13 PM

Quote:
If we import most of our products and we don't actually manufacture anything to export to balance that trade debt, then what happens to the US economy?

Just because something is made outside of U.S. borders, doesn't mean the profit isn't going to the U.S. American products made in foreign countries are still American products.

I know this raises all sorts of employment issues but if American workers aren't willing to work for the same types of labor rates as foreigners, then maybe they should think of coming up with some alternatives on their own. Like I said in my earlier post, maybe they should have worked harder on their educations so they could have employment traits for something other than a production line.

I think people need to ease up on the corporation bashing. I know there are some bad ones out there, but greed is what makes companies succeed. If a company can't turn a profit on product, then the company has no reason to produce a product. It may appear to some that companies are taking advantage of foreign workers, but if the conditions are so terrible and the compensation so poor, just like in the U.S. they wouldn't be able to retain employees.

A huge demand is placed on the efficiency of consumer goods, from cars to appliances. But companies are basically machines also, if they are not allowed to run efficiently, that simply means that there are wasted resources within the system. Jobs may go to foreigners, but that should allow the remaining Americans to pursue other means of employment. Hell, they could start their own companies, which then hire employees, produce goods, generate tax revenue, yada, yada...

A lot of 'corporation bashers' seem to be tax lovers. They need to remember that company profits turn into, amongst other things, company taxes.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 6:37 PM

KOBAYASHI

First let me apologize for my slight rant in the other thread. I didn't see this thead. Heads are much cooler in here.

Whats wrong with our county? Plenty. Is it the right-wing? Sometimes. The left-wing? Sometimes. Liberals, Democrats, Birkenstock-wearing tree-huggers, Republicans, gun-toting bible-thumping zealots? Sometimes.

The point is, (and most people that follow politics don't understand this) its not ANYONES fault ALL OF THE TIME.

If you listen to the media (which DOES indeed have a liberal slant), you would get the impression that all conservatives are right-wing kooks.

If you listen to Rush Limbaugh (which everybody knows is leaning hard to the right), you would believe that all liberals are out to turn the USA into a Socialist system.

Neither one is right. Neither one is completely wrong.

I believe that the biggest hurdle that we as a nation need to get over is the divisionism power politics. Not enough of us educate ourselves with the facts. We listen to the crap that the politicans tell us. We listen to the spin that Dan Rather puts on it. Then we listen to Rush spin back.

When did we become such a band of followers? This country is founded on the pricipals of freedom, yet we let others fill our minds with their opinions. We are free to think for ourselves, but we are also lazy. We are also disinterested (unless we're trying to impress someone with our knowledge of politics).

I consider myself a conservative. I don't vote straight Republican. The Republican party doesn't do any better that the Democratic party in most cases. I belive that Government is TOO BIG. It has become something that the founding fathers never intended. They set up the country to be based in INDIVIDUAL freedoms. Now the government has its fingers in every part of life.

I don't WANT universal heathcare. I don't WANT free prescription drugs. I don't WANT Social Security. I would much rather have the government take less money from my paycheck. We should be able to provide for ourselves, not have to rely on the government. Bush drive me crazy for this point. He signed the Universal Heathcare Bill. A true conservative would never have signed such a bill. Its a total Democratic-party-social-plan program.

I'm all for big-business. I can't imagine how hard it would be to create and manage a wildly successful company, but I hope to do so someday. When I do, I don't want to be penalized for being good at what I do. Same with taxes. Why is it that just because your rich you should pay higher taxes? Where is the freedom in that system?

...whew... need to take a breath.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 7:13 PM

CARTAGIA

As far as 'fixing' the country, I think some people on this thread are on the right track. I don't think the problem lies so much with the government, but with us, the electorate.

There is little responsibility taken for our own actions, these days. Whether we are talking about personal responsibility for our actions (do we really need to sue if I stick my tongue on a hair curler because it doesn't have a warning sticker on it?) or social responsibility.

I live in Florida. Last Presidential election, I received sample ballots a week ahead of time showing me exactly what the ballot was going to look like. When I went to the polls there were about 5 people sitting around with nothing to do but answer questions. And still people couldn't be BOTHERED to fucking figure out how to cast the vote they wanted, and then HAD THE UNMITIGATED GALL TO COMPLAIN that their vote was miscounted.

The sad fact of the matter, is that instead of sympathizing with these individuals who came forward saying that they were robbed of their vote because they mispunched their ballot, we should have ridiculed them mercilessly.

I think that is the flaw in the idea that someone put forward to follow the Belgian practice of mandatory voting. Personally, if someone doesn't want to vote, I don't think making it mandatory is the solution. If anything it will make the problem worse, as people will vote because they have to. We can't MAKE them research the candidates. They will likely wind up deciding on who's got better hair or some other stupid ass reason.

People need to take more responsibility. It is not something the government can force on people. The only thing that the government can do is make sure that people have to live with the consequences when they DON'T. That hasn't been happening for quite some time.

Simon: I've never shot anyone before.

Book: I was there, son. I'm fair sure you haven't shot anyone yet.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 8:00 PM

TEEHUNT

Well, if I had to pick a few things that really bother me about the US these days, I'd make this list:

1. Crazy folk: someone hit on this earlier. Americans as a whole love to overreact to issues. It's part of the culture, and it'd be nice if there were more venues (like the News Hour for example) where events went through rational discourse rather than 15 seconds of information. But I guess that doesn't keep people's attention.

2. Unbelievable bureaucratic systems, of which the case in point is health care. The health care system in the US is beyond repair, simply because there is too much gorramn money in it. (14% of GDP from what I remember.) We've got so many little streams of income going into the health care system, we've completely removed any demand pressure on it. Ergo, health care prices skyrocket because they can. So, health care costs will get to the point where anyone making less than 40K/year is probably going to see their health care plans get cut by 2010. From what I saw, less than half of all money rolling into health care systems comes through insurance companies, so my fix would actually be to cut all government programs. It might sound crazy, but if you suddenly drain the system of half it's income, prices will fall. I'd rather have "the market" deal with it. I want my government paying attention to regulation (i.e., making sure medical practices are safe) rather than management.

I'd be curious to see if we could come up with a "universal subscription"-style ploy with health care. I'm referring to the phone charges seen across the country to give low-income families cheap phone access. The general idea is to charge everyone "who has" for a specific service in order to provide money for those who "have not". Ergo, there would be a "universal health care charge" on everything which would subsidize people under a certain income level. No medicare systems, just a lightweight, easy to manage, funnel across an income barrier. I think we'd get more universal coverage that way.

Of course, adopting such a system would be kind of nasty to get right. But I'm still a believer that a free market (where each customer has a true effect on demand) will be much more effective than a goverment-managed solution. When the government gets too involved, you simply get a situation where the rich are the only ones who affect the system, because they're the ones who can afford lobbyists. In a more purely market-based system, the supply entities (usually the rich folks) have to answer to the demand folks, because hey, that's where the money's at.

Maybe I've been listening to too many damn economists.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 8:59 PM

AURAPTOR,
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

Along those lines, I have a friend who was in the National Guard for several years, about ten years ago. Yet when I asked him recently to get involved in serious contemplation of nationally important events, his response was that his personal life and problems took precedence over any thoughts of what might be going on within our government. He didn't seem to realize government corruption could affect him or his family. He felt his time was better spent solving his personal problems and enjoying life, rather than worrying about something he could not control. While his viewpoint may be selfish or even scary, it's in many ways entirely valid, and highly prevalent throughout the U.S., in my experience.
-----------------
Another recent problem is that credible reports indicate electronic voting is wide open to tampering, which can make it seem like voting would be a waste of time in those areas.

I apologize for giving problems without solutions, but I've thought about many of these things (discussed on this forum string) for many years and have not come up with viable solutions. Civil war? Mebbe, but for that to happen, enough folks have to have MAJOR concerns about what's going on, such as being personally hurt, before taking action.
----------------
CUDA, better schools would surely help. It would seem the school system has been purposefully "dumbed down" in accord with someone's long-term agenda. I am constantly apalled by so many who have the hardest time trying to get their thoughts clearly presented on the 'Net. The lack of schooling is not only rampant, it's shameless. Writers don't care about their ignorance, and show it by making up words such as "alot," or misspelling others, such as "low and behold." (The only thing that can low and behold is an observant cow.) How can we expect those who don't care how foolish they look in print to get interested in the malfunction of big government? Unless it whops them upside the head, some fine day.
---------------
HARDWARE, you made excellent observations. Perot was right about that big sucking sound. One of my big concerns is, I ain't that far from Yellowstone....
-----------------
The biggest single problem I've noticed with this country is the massive lies by the gov't to the people. If you look into things -- almost anything -- seriously and deeply you'll get a pretty good picture of the truth. But after you do that, when you compare what you know with what you've been told, the stories are never the same.

........Ruxton

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 11, 2004 2:30 AM

TJ63

I come here to get away from all the political debates on the OB. Can't you do this over there? There's bucket-loads of political threads to go at.

Gorram politics and politicians

TJ

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 11, 2004 3:18 AM

CANTTAKESKY

I am very impressed with the quality and civility of the discussion on this board. I am so proud that browncoats have such intelligence and common sense. I don't see this on other political debate boards.

I am especially taken by the willingness to accept responsibility for what is wrong with this country. Instead of scapegoating the rich, the poor, the immoral, or the government, we are saying the real problem is our own apathy, oversimplification, and lack of education. I don't hear this sort of self-examination very often.

Thank you for this thread.

Can't Take My Gorram Sky

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 11, 2004 4:04 AM

STEVE580

Many people seem to mention improvements need in our education system. And it's true; our public schools are pretty terrible. A few younger friends of mine who are seniors in high school *ran out of classes*. They've already taken all of the advanced courses the school offers; so this year, they were forced to take classes like art, and gym.

Some day, I'll change the education system, if no one else does. Less math. No one needs to know how to graph an inequality; it just isn't pertinent information in everyday life. More history; I think this should be an every-year course, like English is. Social studies, then, can focus on geography, and government; to subjects sorely missed. English should focus more on reading than writting; perhaps two seperate classes are needed. And the writting they teach needs to be changed. English clas prepares you to be an English teacher; nothing more. It doesn't teach you to write business reports, or office memos, or scientific reports, or magazine articles, or novels. Not my English class, anyways. But boy, did we spend a lot fo time on poems. Damn useful stuff, that is. 'Bout as helpful as that ole' inequality graph.

I think if the schools taught things that were useful in people's lives, and made things like advanced math optional, students would be more willing to learn. I loved history in high school (and still do), but no one cared to tell me about it. One year. I got one year of world history, plus a year of American history. That seem right to you? Three-hundred years in one course, then six-thousand in the next.

Well, that's my education rant. I guess as a teacher-to-be I'm just particularly interested in that field.

Any Brittish chaps here? From what I here, over there, your education system is comperable to ours; maybe worse. But you have a very well-developed private education sector; and it's assumed anyone with an interest in education will send their kids there. Is this in any way accurate? Because perhaps a system like that would work here. Who knows; if there was competition to educate, then perhaps education would be improved.

And that's all. Except for this - I think one of the biggest things we an do to reduce the size of governments is stop thae damned foolish 'War on Drugs'. I'm gonna fix that, too. I've emailed both my senators several times, and heard back from one; I'll change their minds, believe you me

And THAT's all.
-Steve

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 11, 2004 4:04 AM

SCIFIDO

To Cuda and others:

I completely understand the ideal that folks should pull themselves up by their bootstraps but sometimes social assistance is necessary. I am in my mid 30s, I have a Masters Degree in Businss and I worked for 8 years for good companies.

In the last year and a half, I have lost about 60% of my eyesight due to an illness. My doctors indicate that it is unrecoverable and likely to lead to more loss over time. Well based on that My company offered insurance assistance, but eventually I lost my job.

Now I have to start over and my medical needs without insurance are prohibitive. My rant against Big Biz is that some of my meds which have not changed much over the last twenty years (no research, little marketing) have gone up in price more than 1000%. That is profiteering.

Anyway, I guess like everyone, my viewpoints are tempered by my reality. I just wish that most folks could discuss things with the civility that this forum has maintained.

And now back to you....

OK, So what's the speed of dark?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 11, 2004 6:53 AM

I am really finding this thread facinating, thank you for all the great comments so far. I think this might be a good point to focus in on another subject.

How about healthcare?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 11, 2004 7:06 AM

HARDWARE

Well, since all of these political discussions seem to center around fixing what is wrong with your country, why not have people describe their perfect society?

After all, there's no sense arguing about how to get someplace you can't describe adequately. And if people's description of their personal social paradise doesn't agree, then why argue over how to turn this one to that when the desired object of perfection isn't the same? Unless of course it is just plain pig-headedness and you want to be the one to "own" "this" society.

Perhaps this might require a new thread.

The more I get to know people the more I like my dogs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 11, 2004 8:31 AM

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

Glad to see the sharing of opinions on politics and problems w/ the country has not sparked the usual heated debate.

Everyone seems to have some very well thought out responses on the issues.

Personally I would like to see a bit more involvement by people in the political theatre. I think that voting, educating ourselves, and knowing the issues that effect each and everyone of us. I also feel that there is a bit of fear/paranoia in matters regarding the government. People feel questioning the government or their actions could lead to "Big Brother" causing trouble for you or your family.

"The tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson.

I do not think that this statement need only apply to actual bloodshed, but rather the effort and striving to insure that liberty and freedom are enjoyed by all citizens, without fear of a federal government that would infringe on those rights.

I think all of us can better our community, and by proxy, our country, if we are more involved in the community, and less self involved. Educating ourselves on issues, and what our government is doing, and how it effects the citizens of this country, not just ourselves.

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 11, 2004 8:57 AM

Steve580 wrote:

Quote:
Some day, I'll change the education system, if no one else does. Less math. No one needs to know how to graph an inequality; it just isn't pertinent information in everyday life. More history; I think this should be an every-year course, like English is. Social studies, then, can focus on geography, and government; two subjects sorely missed. English should focus more on reading than writing; perhaps two seperate classes are needed. And the writting they teach needs to be changed. English clas prepares you to be an English teacher; nothing more. It doesn't teach you to write business reports, or office memos, or scientific reports, or magazine articles, or novels. Not my English class, anyways. But boy, did we spend a lot fo time on poems. Damn useful stuff, that is. 'Bout as helpful as that ole' inequality graph.

Some math, though, is extremely helpful. I agree that stuff like calculus truly isn't useful unless one is likely to pursue a math-intensive career like engineering or astrophysics, but the basics of trigonometry and algebra should be learned by everyone. I know I've used them quite a bit since high school, though calculus has (thankfully) faded to just a memory.

I still think that writing (and legible handwriting!) should be emphasized -- possibly more than it is now. Having worked in secretarial positions, I can comment with authority that bad grammar, spelling, and handwriting are an absolute plague upon adults both young and old. It isn't quite as bad as the infuriating netspeak that chokes the Internet ("w0w!!1 u r 1337!!!"

), but it is nonetheless a pain in the ass.

History's great... as long as you can get competent, interesting teachers to relate the knowledge. I have my best and worst memories in history class -- both exceptionally boring, and greatly involving. Different teachers, of course.

Geography and government are two things I'd also like to see taught more. I was fortunate in that regard because my parents travelled extensively while I was young, and so my knowledge of the world's geography far exceeds that of many of my peers.

Science remains important, though I'm still mystified as to the relevance of cutting open a frog in class.

Electives are important, though... art, music, possibly literature (to split that off from English seems excessive, though). Business-world stuff -- like computer use and use of the more widespread programs (MS Office?), typing with more than two fingers, common office appliances such as fax machines and the like ("This is a copier. This is how you reload a copier machine when it runs out of paper..." "Oooooh...") would undoubtedly be useful.

One of the things, though, that I'd like to see a focus on would be critical thinking classes. That is, educating people in actually thinking rather than blindly accepting things told to them. My first experience with this was actually in college, in a class called "Darwin and Darwinism", and learning to actually think critically really woke me up to the world.

Then again, many high schools don't seem to consider allowing students to think and act for themselves a priority, instead forcing them into "societally-accepted" niches.

"Sir, I would like to gingerly point out that it is difficult for someone to be gently reassuring when they're holding three and a half feet of sharpened steel."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 11, 2004 9:07 AM

To add to that -- I think that students should be class-required to read newspapers and keep up with current events. While I was in college, one of the things a class of mine did was get us an inexpensive subscription to the New York Times. Reading that kept me up to date on things that were happening in the U.S. and around the world. Where I went to college, the surrounding area was relatively rural and the outside world didn't often intrude upon it... so when the class ended and I no longer read said paper on a regular basis, I quickly lost touch with what was going on.

Keeping students interested and curious about current events will decrease their apathy. And that's got to be a good thing.

"Sir, I would like to gingerly point out that it is difficult for someone to be gently reassuring when they're holding three and a half feet of sharpened steel."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 11, 2004 10:17 AM

CROWLEY

I would like to point out that there days many of the bigger companies pay 0% corporate taxes. Why? Because they're free to move to another country at a whim, and many poorer countries would gladly welcome the employment they bring and the income tax they could obtain from those employees, even if it would mean that they would have to accept not taxing the company itself. In addition to that the capital is safely stowed away in tax paradises like Cayman Islands.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 11, 2004 10:25 AM

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

Quote:
Originally posted by Crowley:
I would like to point out that there days many of the bigger companies pay 0% corporate taxes. Why? Because they're free to move to another country at a whim, and many poorer countries would gladly welcome the employment they bring and the income tax they could obtain from those employees, even if it would mean that they would have to accept not taxing the company itself. In addition to that the capital is safely stowed away in tax paradises like Cayman Islands.

Add to that the fact that many cities will do anything to entice large companies into their areas to generate jobs and the revenue new families will generate in taxes. These companies can make ludicrous demands from state governments in order to set up shop.

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, March 11, 2004 8:50 PM

The purpose of education is to teach us to think, not to learn by rote.

One comes to truly enjoy thinking (and especially to enjoy silence). On a long trip many years ago I had no radio in my car. When I arrived, my host asked me how I could stand not having music on that long drive. I tried to explain to her that I spent my time thinking about things, and the trip was actually too short for me to think through all the items I had on my thought-agenda. She could not understand this at all. But I did the same thing on a LONG drive to Alaska a while back. No radio. For what it's worth, I find it impossible to write creatively with any music in the room.

I think the well-rounded high-school education of, say, 40-50 years ago was supposed to help us deal with whatever we might do with our lives. College would be more focused, of course, but we were supposed to have a clear idea of what we might want to do for a career by the time we entered college. And that would have had to come from our high school experiences. We were taught higher math, and some had an affinity for it. They would be led to fields that would need such things, like engineering or science. If the high-school student liked English better, he/she would be led toward teaching or similar fields of employment. So the thought, back then, was that it was necessary to experience many fields to help the student sort his early life out. From what I've read here and elsewhere, it seems the students are not taught to think at all. Can that really be so? Are we raising a generation of robots?

Personally, I liked high-school math, but had the devil of a time with it in college. I can still get a feeling for the area under some kinds of graph (integration), so I did get something out of the math. The concepts are pretty rusty now, but I was able to derive a simple formula I needed one day recently -- to my utter amazement, I might add.

I agree with several posters here that more history is needed, though I too had one of the most boring of history teachers in high school. The most successful woman I know was a history major in college. One of the more interesting fields, given as an optional class in the 1960s, was Industrial Arts. High-school students learned to work on cars, etc., and some went on to become mechanics. We also had the option of taking typing, which was one of the most useful skills I ever learned.

It occurs to me that we who participate on forums such as this string are the forerunners of a better society. By defining the problems, we have taken the first step toward solving them.

Another thing I remember was that at the family dinner table we used to discuss world events. Not much, but at least the whole family was there, no TV, no distractions, and we communicated. That seems to be a lost art.

.......Ruxton

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 12, 2004 4:47 AM

Quote:
I agree with several posters here that more history is needed, though I too had one of the most boring of history teachers in high school.

My biggest beef with history is that it is relegated to propaganda tool. I can't say this hasn't always been the case, it is written by the victors as it were, and revised as is necessary I guess.

We had one really good world history teacher in high school. She had a heart attack and so we had a substitute for close to 2 months. When the main teacher came back she taught the same section again, which was discussing America's open door policy to China. There was nothing in common between the two approaches. The substitute had presented America as totally altruistic and the main teacher had America as totally self-serving.

I also got to take some history at a Catholic seminary and it was striking how contrary it was to what I learned in high school. High school had the common peasants suffering under medieval life and being freed with the coming of the Renaissance, while the Catholic version indicated that most commoners at the end of the middle ages were freemen working low-rent farms and with the Reformation the land they were renting was seized by the wealthy and the were evicted and forced to move to the cities and work for others.

Can't say which is the correct version, but I have become very skeptical of anything claiming historical precendent.

Arawaen

Um, I'm lost. Uh, I'm Angry. And I'm Armed.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 12, 2004 5:58 AM

SCIFIDO

On the education discussion:

I too believe that major reform is necessary. I can't recall learning very much in high school except how to avoid getting rediculed or worse. But subject wise, there was little pay-off for studying hard since it drew the attention of the bullys.

Recently 60 Minutes ran a story indicating that there is an increasing divide between boys and girls with regard to higher education. Basically due to the Alpha Male syndrome many boys are learning from their pears that a focus on learning is too feminine. Enrollment in college for young men is dropping as a result. They said this was a wide spread phenomena with trends showing that this could become a national crises in the next twenty years. Currently, the mix in AP classes was like 70% female and rising.

This is an interesting and frightening dynamic I thought this group might like to dicuss.

As to my feelings on highschool and college, I wish that someone had offered opportunities to learn more about 'real world finance'. It is a crying shame that many Americans do not understand credit, basic accounting, mortgages, and their retirement savings. I didn't learn most of that until my twenties. Every kid coming out of highschool should understand money in a free market economy like ours. Their are way too many ways to lose everything.

Just some more food for thought.

Back to you...

Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 12, 2004 6:09 AM

Quote:
As to my feelings on highschool and college, I wish that someone had offered opportunities to learn more about 'real world finance'. It is a crying shame that many Americans do not understand credit, basic accounting, mortgages, and their retirement savings. I didn't learn most of that until my twenties. Every kid coming out of highschool should understand money in a free market economy like ours. Their are way too many ways to lose everything.

If they had, I would never have been willing to sign for my student loan...

Wow, I would be a lot better off.

You are so right on this. I've had to learn from mistakes which while a valid form of learning, is not preferable to learning from other people's mistakes and hence not having to make your own.

Arawaen

Um, I'm lost. Uh, I'm Angry. And I'm Armed.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 12, 2004 6:58 AM

MAUGWAI

Quote:
Originally posted by Steve580:
English should focus more on reading than writting; perhaps two seperate classes are needed. And the writting they teach needs to be changed. English clas prepares you to be an English teacher; nothing more. It doesn't teach you to write business reports, or office memos, or scientific reports, or magazine articles, or novels. Not my English class, anyways. But boy, did we spend a lot fo time on poems. Damn useful stuff, that is. 'Bout as helpful as that ole' inequality graph.

Good. Keep that ciritcism. I am an English teacher, and I don't teach my students to be English teachers. But I do teach them to think. In high school, your reading should be more critical. Those poems taught you more than you know. By learning to analyze poetry, you learned to analiyze political speeches and episodes of Firefly.

I totally agree with the idea of taking history all four years. Way more useful than the inequality graph. But it has to be more than videos and worksheets. Half of our history department is coaches who know very little about history. They show videos and give out worksheets and make kids read the book and answer the questions at the end of the chapter. It's kind of appalling.

So I guess that's one of the things that's wrong with this country. Some of the older teachers teach the way they were taught without noticing that times have changed. So kids learn what their grandparents learned, which fits only the world in which their grandparents lived. So when they get out of high school, they don't know how to care about the world around them. Oh, if only I had a dime for every time I was in the middle of a rant about the travesties of sex slaves in Thailand when some kid interrupted me to ask what time we get out of class.

By the way, we in the US may be ignorant and self-centered, but most of us do not sell our daughters into slavery, and we do give a lot of humanitarian aid to the rest of the world.

"Dear diary, today I was pompous and my sister was crazy."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 12, 2004 7:10 AM

Quote:
Well, since all of these political discussions seem to center around fixing what is wrong with your country, why not have people describe their perfect society?

The BORG! No, wait... Resistance is futile!

Honestly though, I think it is not about getting a perfect society, but an ideal to strive for and the need to constantly strive towards that ideal.

I am reminded of this saying:

"We have remarked that one reason for being a progressive is that things naturally tend to grow better. But the only real reason being a progressive is that things naturally tend to grow worse. The corruption in things is not only the best argument for being progressive; it is the only argument against being a conservative. The conservative theory would really be quite sweeping and unanswerable if it were not for this one fact. But all convservatism is based upon the idea that if you leave things alone, you leave them as they are. But you do not. If you leave a thing alone you leave it to a torrent of change. If you leave a white post alone you will soon have a black post. If you particularly want it to be white yo umust always be painting it again; that is, you must always be having a revolution. Briefly, if you want an old white post you must have a new white post. But that which is true even of inanimate things is in a quite special and terrible sense true of all human things. An almost unnatural vigilance is really required of the citizen because of the horrible rapidity with which human institutions grow old."
-- G.K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy

I keep deleting everything I say after this point, so maybe I will just let G.K. speak for me.

Arawaen

Um, I'm lost. Uh, I'm Angry. And I'm Armed.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 12, 2004 9:25 AM

JEDIJOE7

A lot. But there's a lot right too. Or at least until lawyers get involved. First to all the non-US citizens. FYI: the American citizen is as much a victim of their own goverenment as the rest of the world is. Yes, we have a republic playing at democracy. But the big corporations and special interst groups with the right amount of money can override the wishes of the majority by enfluencing members of Congress. It's a game that is played by a free enterprise society. Most citizens realize this on some level and that's why you traditionally see such a low voter turn out compared to other countries. Additionally most politicians are wealthy or planning to be so they all have their own personal agenda. As someone said, it's all simple human nature. How do we fix the stuff that's wrong? First, eliminate the Electoral College. Second, get the citizens to realize that a united population CAN effect change. Get people to be as attentive to the people running the US as they are to darn ball games flooding TV. Third: teach people to think about what they are told and question the source. God gave you a brain, now use it! The media in league with politicians, big business, their own agendas, political correctness are tainting the information presented to the citizenry. It is a propaganda war basically. And it is all designed to keep the powers that be in control and the average Joe in his place. People disgusted with the system and distracted by daily problems and a sunami of sports are not paying attention and the politicians and megacorporations are doing pretty much whatever they please and getting away with it. I work in government and see what is going on. The public is not using it's potential to force accountability and responsible behavior upon its own government. Government does not serve the people, it currently serves itself. Come on guys, pay attention and make your representatives BE your representatives and not the lobbiests'. This is by no means a complete solution, but its a good start.

Signature, what's that? Do I put my X here?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 12, 2004 9:48 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

What's wrong with our country?

One thing is that there are too many people who think they know exactly what's wrong with our country, and think that they should be able to tell me exactly what I must do to fix it.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 12, 2004 2:34 PM

DYAIRVATREE

Gee CUDA quote me and then cut me out with your edit. See how you are and my quote was there for a day too then you decided you didn't like it for shame.

You said you put it their to get people started and now I'm disappointed in you.

Why is Ruxton talking about Ross Perot exactly?

It must have been my later posts.

Oh well this is what I get for talking about Skull and Bones I guess. A charming orginization out of Yale that graduates 15 members a year two of whom are running for president.

Well whatever I don't know about the rest of you but I'm voting Bonesmen!

Or maybe it was my talking about how Pat Buchanan won the right to speak at the 2000 presidential debates by law by getting 5% of the vote. And then had it taken away by the Bi-Partisan commission who when the next election came around said he now needed 15% of the vote. Once again making sure no third parties could ever win.

Posting a Democracy Now link was to leftist maybe?

Whatever!

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 12, 2004 3:25 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dyairvatree:
Gee CUDA quote me and then cut me out with your edit. See how you are and my quote was there for a day too then you decided you didn't like it for shame.

You said you put it their to get people started and now I'm disappointed in you.

And now many comments like Cowards and Ruxton make less sense how sad.

Well sorry, I wasn't exactly trying to offend you. I just put it there to get things started, and then things got started. I was only trying to draw the debates from threads that began with subjects other than politics.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, March 12, 2004 3:59 PM

DYAIRVATREE

Quote:
...For God sakes let this thread die.

That was what you posted after my last post on the same thread you once quoted. For someone not trying to offend me your not doing a very good job.

Oh and the last post you quoted I was ironically in the proccess of altering while you posted it. I had no idea you post back so quick but it's not like you can really fault me for that I guess.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 13, 2004 1:22 AM

DYAIRVATREE

By the Cuda I was a little annoyed but I ain't really mad or anything.This is a really cool political thread I'm enjoying reading it.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 13, 2004 12:28 PM