Socialist Debates More Active

Apr 2009
1,943
5
Disunited Queendom
#1
Have you ever sat in front of your TV, watching the Presidential Dabates going "well, this is s***". Yes? Well, here's why:

The Republican and Democratic parties teamed up (two sides of the same coin, as ever) and constructed the Commission of Presidential Debates.

This commission's job is to control the debates and make sure things don't get too hot for the candidates.

Big surprise, it's managed by Dem. and Rep. party-members themselves from both parties and is funded by corporations.

This commission is a puppet organisation serving the Democans and Republicrats. It makes sure nothing "bad" happens to either candidate and keeps minor parties out of the arena.

The CPD director said in 2002 "I think it's obvious that independent candidates mess things up". - This is a poor excuse for actively excluding minor parties and makes their anti-democratic agenda (by which i mean against democracy rather than against the party) fully visible.

Reps of both politicians sign a contract that puts into ink the agreement that it shall be nothing but an utterly uninteresting facade.

The 1996 contract included this phrase:

No follow-up questions by the moderator will be permitted, and no-cross-questions by the candidates or cross-conversation between the candidates will be allowed under these rules.

This contract phrasing was taken from a copy leaked by the non-profit group "Open Debates", which wants to put the debates under the control of a citizens' commission.

Until this happens, we can expect future Presidential Debates to have all the excitement of watching paint dry.
 
Jul 2009
5,741
441
Opa Locka
#3
This is why I think all political parties and all corporate funding must be outlawed. Politicians must run on their own merits.
 
Mar 2009
2,751
6
Undisclosed
#6
Well no. If they ran on there own dime, only the rich would win. If they ran on there own dime and non-special interests donations on the other hand...
See I am getting old and have trouble understanding some things. Like why someone making 2 million a year (no certain person or party) want to quit that job to run for office at say two hundred thousand a year? In my tired old brain it seems there must be something they are not telling us.:confused:
 
Apr 2009
1,943
5
Disunited Queendom
#7
See I am getting old and have trouble understanding some things. Like why someone making 2 million a year (no certain person or party) want to quit that job to run for office at say two hundred thousand a year? In my tired old brain it seems there must be something they are not telling us.:confused:
Well, there's always expenses...

Also, i'm sure they'll remain a significant shareholder in their hypothetical multi-million dollar company and then enter politics. They could use their position to (take your pick):

*work to get more tax exemptions for businesses
*cheat the treasury and add to their company's coffers
*invest treasury money and play the stocks
*buy more shares in the company they board with treasury money
*work to deregulate businesses
*work to attain a favourable bail-out deal for their company
*refuse bail-out deals to competitors in the same market
*blackmail potential competitors
*other possibilities i haven't considered
 
Jul 2009
5,741
441
Opa Locka
#9
See I am getting old and have trouble understanding some things. Like why someone making 2 million a year (no certain person or party) want to quit that job to run for office at say two hundred thousand a year? In my tired old brain it seems there must be something they are not telling us.:confused:
There is 1 thing even a capitalist values more then money... POWER.
 
Jul 2009
5,741
441
Opa Locka
#11
In society today, money IS power. It is no longer a means, but an end.
To an extent but a homeless person that gets elected president, assuming they have a strong will, will still hold more power then the BoD of Exxon-Mobil. Granted a member of the BoD of Exxon-Mobil has a greater chance of being elected because of there wealth but my point still stands.
 
Apr 2009
1,943
5
Disunited Queendom
#12
To an extent but a homeless person that gets elected president, assuming they have a strong will, will still hold more power then the BoD of Exxon-Mobil. Granted a member of the BoD of Exxon-Mobil has a greater chance of being elected because of there wealth but my point still stands.
Presuming the homeless person can afford the $500 deposit. But i see your point, yes.
 
Apr 2009
1,943
5
Disunited Queendom
#14
I think most people would trust a sober, intelligent homeless person over the Chair(wo)men of the D/RNC. ;)
If they are conservatives, they might engage in blaming the poor for their own position and labelling them irresponsible. In which case, while they wouldn't trust a corporate executive in a considerable number of millenia, they would see him/her more competent in terms of fiscal management, however misplaced that confidence would be.
 
Mar 2009
2,187
2
#16
Not really. I think I heard somewhere it was 8. But I don't care if he has 28. He proved himself to me before he ever thought of being president.
I was just thinking how much more impressed I am with McCain after the election than while he was campaigning. He is acting much more stronger, with great dignity (as always) but with tons of respect.
 
Apr 2009
1,943
5
Disunited Queendom
#17
I was just thinking how much more impressed I am with McCain after the election than while he was campaigning. He is acting much more stronger, with great dignity (as always) but with tons of respect.
Thanks for the propaganda, much appreciated.
 
Mar 2009
2,187
2
#18
Thanks for the propaganda, much appreciated.
Not sure what you mean. I was saying something good about McCain. Not sure that he will ever stand again, possibly he is too old for that, and also not sure whether I would have wanted him for the President either. I'm hoping that there are younger people as it requires someone with lots of good health and energy.
 
Mar 2009
2,751
6
Undisclosed
#19
Not sure what you mean. I was saying something good about McCain. Not sure that he will ever stand again, possibly he is too old for that, and also not sure whether I would have wanted him for the President either. I'm hoping that there are younger people as it requires someone with lots of good health and energy.
I have always wondered how the other guys in the election would hold up as POWs. I would think the guy in office now would fold like a cheap drugstore lawn chair.:confused:
 
Jan 2009
181
0
Philadelphia
#20
I have always wondered how the other guys in the election would hold up as POWs. I would think the guy in office now would fold like a cheap drugstore lawn chair.:confused:
Just as John McCain did, he seriously violated the Military Code of Conduct by trading "Military information" and making numerous public statements that appeared favorable to the Communist effort in exchange for special treatment. In one of his confessions "I am a black criminal and I have performed the deads of air pirate. I almost died and the Vietnamese people saved my life, thanks to the doctors." war hero my (*) (*) (*). As a Junior Senator, he was involved in the savings and loan scandal ( Known as the Keating Five). Had numerious affairs while he was married to his first wife. What a man of integrity.