and gets fired for it. Proof we are all being played against each other?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOaCemmsnNk

the overlords dont like people who think for themselves

Yeah, once you stop reading from the corporate overlord script, they pull the plug. Didn't the same thing happen to Glenn Beck? I seem to remember him spouting off about all the FEMA camps (that he was supposed to debunk, by the way) and next thing you know *poof*. No more Glenn Beck.

oh please, if you believe that you are a moron. The two sides are way different. Sure there are more than two sides to an issue, sure almost every individual is not straight party line in their beliefs,and sure Ron Paul is very different from both parties. That doesn't mean there is any vast conspiracy by Dem and Repub leadership to keep out other thoughts. The two parties represent significantly different opinions on many important issues, and appeal to a large enough majority of the population that to have any power ya gotta go dem or repub.

LMAO I love being called a moron. I have never insulted a soul in here. Can't you make your point with out being insulting or are you just that limited?

So why did Obama, before getting elected, say he was not going to continue the war on marijuana on the states that have basically decriminalized it continue the war in those states. Just one glaring example of the status quo that permeates our government.

If you think they are looking after your best interest why does congress exempt themselves from the laws they pass on us to follow? You know everyone that voted on the healthcare bill also voted to exempt themselves from it? As they have many other laws they have passed.

If we are at each others throats we pay less attention to what they are doing.

As soon as a large enough group starts looking at a possible third party both Dems and Rep jump to demonizing that party. Using scare tactics like your vote wont matter, so you stop even considering it before you have even looked fully at what it has to say.

There's too much money in politics, it dampens even idealists like Obama

"So why did Obama, before getting elected, say he was not going to continue the war on marijuana on the states that have basically decriminalized it continue the war in those states. Just one glaring example of the status quo that permeates our government."

What part of 'the president is not a dictator' are you people still not getting?

He is the top law enforcement officer of the united states and does have the power to stop it. if you don't know that you need to go back to your civics class.

Maybe i am being to harsh I did go to school in the seventies early eighties and learned that in jr high. they dont really teach much to kids nowadays about their government so i apologies if you were never taught that.

I made my point clearly. There are positions I disagree with and positions that I believe a person has to be a moron to believe. Your position is one of the latter...for me to say may be insulting to you, but it helps make clear just how silly I think what you are saying is...

Probably because back then, the Cold War was still going on, and our esteemed education system taught us that the USSR was BAD and the U.S. was GOOD because the U.S. single-handedly won the wars and our government was the be-all, end-all of existence.

Students aren't taught that today because, frankly, it's wrong.

yes that thinking is wrong nuke. I think our education system (as flawed as we all know it is) attempts to teach the "truths" about at least how the government works and some things that they do or have done, although at a young age only so much detail can be given about such a deep topic as politics or legal issues. So, regardless of what we learn in school it is insuffucient information for anyone of us to make the types of assumptions we tend to make about decisions legislators and people like the president have to make. Unless you sought out higher education in the field and have done extensive research on a topic you are either uniformed or misinformed (or both).


Obama could make his top priority fighting somthing as fruitless as marijuana or he could focus his attention on something obviously more important( I could thing of 50 things more important without trying). So idealistically he may still believe that "re-criminalizing" marijuana is important but can/does/should not waste resources on something so trivial at this point.

I dont want to lose your basic idea here that politicians say they are going to do one thing and then do another, that point is very much valid. But when we vote we essentially just want to vote for someone whos idealogies reflect the greater good of America. There is no way to get done everything a person wants to do, but the point of campaigning is to show your stance on many issues and hope that the stance is aligned with the majority of the populations. tbc....

http://www.scholastic.com/...seven-roles-one-president

since most don't click and read links here it is specifically

2. Chief Executive

Roles: The president is "boss" for millions of government workers in the Executive Branch, deciding how the laws of the United States are to be enforced and choosing officials and advisers to help run the Executive Branch.

that one not enough for you here is another

http://www.enotes.com/...e-branch#executive-powers


Enforcement clause

The power to enforce the laws also appears in Article II, Section 3. It says the president "shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed." This means that the president not only has the power to enforce the laws, but has a duty to do so. English monarchs throughout history often chose not to enforce the laws against favored people. Requiring a president to execute the laws "faithfully" is supposed to prevent the president from giving people special treatment under the laws.

In reality, though, presidents and their enforcement agencies get to use their judgment to decide when to enforce a law and when not to. Time and financial limitations prevent the executive branch from prosecuting all violations of the law. Political considerations, such as the power or popularity of an accused criminal, also affect the process. The combination of executive judgment, practical limitations, and political considerations makes it impossible to prevent the executive branch from giving special treatment to particular people.

Ahh, yes, the Constitution.

The oldest, most expensive toilet paper money can buy.

Lmao I have nothing to say that wouldn't be insulting so ill just keep my mouth shut. I will allow you to live in your dream world where we need no protection from our government or no checks and balances of power need to be in place.

check out this video about some information on the federal reserve and our monetary system and find out about the lack of checks in balances regarding our economy. slightly off topic but its a very good video. (it might have some form or bias, i dont know what the motivation of producing this video is besides to just share information with all, so I dont endorse its reliability, but i imagine its pretty legit)

http://mises.org/...g-and-the-Federal-Reserve

I'm with you TY.... And I agree with Judge Napolitano 100%. All of our presidents since FDR really, have been serving special interests way bigger than most people realize. There is no choice between Rep and Dem... they are all the same in the end. Maybe one goes into Washington with the best of intentions... but it sure never seems to come to fruition. What happened to Obama and his campaign pledges? Change we can all believe in. Maybe he did go into Washington hellbent on change.....

But something happened... and now he is one of them, serving his masters like a good puppet. I would be very interested to see if Ron Paul would be different if he makes it in. He's the only one running who even promotes true change in this race. He's been playing the same broken record for 30 years so at least he's consistent.

If you honestly believe that I was saying that we don't need government protection when I talked about the Constitution being toilet paper, then I don't see how I can convince you to do research on how our government has slowly whittled away or otherwise sidestepped our "rights" over the past several decades. Because we have reached the point where we are unable to speak out against our government without the threat of repercussion.

I can totally understand that in the end, both parties are working to the same higher goal, suckling off the same corporate money teat....

But as far as the rules regarding the proles, the parties couldn't be more different. Abortion, Immigration, Marriage Equality, Climate Change, War, Science.... So many differences in what we are allowed to do.

I love the United States of America, but I also have a sneaking regard for European-style Parliamentary Democracy. Plus the UK's "Questions to the Prime Minister" is insanely entertaining.

"You don't need an organized conspiracy when there are like interests at heart..." -George Carlin

I'll paraphrase the rest as he goes on to explain how these politicians all go to the same schools, belong to the same clubs,etc. Many are members of boards of the very corporations that are "blind" donors to various political interests. In fact, many donate money to both sides as a "just in case" policy.

Furthermore, these "significantly different opinions on many important issues" are rarely "important" and are meant to deflect from the real issues. If you honestly think abortion, gay marriage, legal marijuana, immigration and climate change are the throttles of the American plight, then you sir, are the moron (no offense intended). They deflect your attention from the real problems, such as a lop sided tax code, a multi-trillion dollar (still unjustified) war, crappy healthcare, a ponzi schemed social security system (that is about to be privatized), the fact they're trying to print their way out of a recession (hasn't worked, EVER), and so much other crap that you should REALLY be worried about. They keep the real issues quiet so the "right" people can keep going to the bank and you keep showing up to work on Monday.

first, social issues like abortion,gay marriage are actually very important Schilling. Is marijuana even a major issue?

Second, the small list of things you mentioned are far from the only issues that Reps/Dems are on opposite sides of. It's laughable you would even try to claim that.

You go on to mention war, health care and the tax code as three of the major issues they distract us from. Are you paying any attention...like at all? These are the 3 of the 4 biggest issues in the upcoming election (with the "social issues" being the 4th).

Now is there corruption, is the system even close to working well? Of course and hell no. But there is no "conspiracy" take off your tinfoil hats people...I'm done with this thread btw, I'll spend my 10 minutes a day on AT speaking with some of the better informed...

Abortion and gay marriage are NOT important issues. LOL. What one person, or a couple does isn't going to change anything for the better or worse in the grand scheme of things. And while the war, health care and tax code are discussed, they rarely mention the important parts to it, and usually (I'd say 85% of the time) deflect by going into personal attacks on each candidates voting record. You need to pay more attention before you try telling someone who's right in the middle of the arena that they don't know what is going on.

You've completely deflected away from what I said, and missed my main point in that I agreed with you that there is "no conspiracy." Maybe you should spend more than 10 minutes reading from now on.

lets put back the electoral college that the constitution implemented.

A separate body to "interview" candidates and choose a president, and remove the popular vote for president.

(why doesn't the congress choose a president - because the founders looked at parliament choosing a prime minister and decided they wanted separation from the Legislators choosing the President - and created the "electoral college" with the job to select the president. That president not beholding on the legislature to keep the job.)

iolair - ummmmmmm huh? We still have an electoral college. that is why Al Gore lost the 2000 election despite having 543,895 more popular votes that G.W. Bush.

Many of us would like to see the electoral college abolished to get rid of the "winner-takes-all" electoral college seats that disenfranchises large numbers of voters rendering their votes meaningless.

And, BTW, going back to a pure electoral college system would result in even more of a plutocracy than we have now.

I'm an American living overseas. I was a party-line voter, doesn't matter which side. As were many of my American friends who live overseas as well. Every single one of us, independently, has moved towards the logic that Judge Napolitano explains here.

You would be surprised what just 6 months outside the States does for you in changing the way you look at the political system. It essentially gives you a chance to evaluate it from the outside looking in. Getting out of the 24 hour news cycle is a big help as well.

It's quite simple. You either get it, or you don't.

In regards to Dr. Paul, he will NEVER become President. And I don't say that because I think he isn't electable, because he is. I say he will never become President because I fear he would meet the same fate that our late President Kennedy met. Either by the CIA or a Israeli hit squad, and on a much shorter timeline. There is just too much money and power at play to allow a *real* statesman become President.

Napolitano has put out a lot of good stuff in the past. But this 9/11 truther position is completely psychotic. That clip is the stuff of bizarro conspiracy theories, and should be ignored. If Napolitano actually believes it, I feel sorry for him. This firing has nothing to do with politics at all.

It's not a big conspiracy theory and it's not collaboration between the Republicans and the Democrats. It's common sense really. Money and power go hand in hand, and there are enough people across government of any party that have been bought by corporate interests that the real control rests with them and their common interest--to make as much money as possible.

The sad thing is that their short-sightedness will be their undoing. They actually need government to keep competition from becoming destructive. They have a no win situation on their hands. Those who do not soak common people for as much as they can are not competitive and their business folds. Those who do will ultimately be faced with common people in revolt. Unless you want to build a prison for yourself, no amount of money will make you bulletproof.

What if we had a politician who actually tried to do what he said he would?

I would bet he would be the next one assassinated.

lets face it a politician is nothing more then a puppet, and both parties pretty much have the same puppet masters

First, the notion that the President can just do anything (stop war on drugs) is juvenile. Like someone else mentioned, this is just something that politicians say to get out their stance. To think it will really happen is silly. Everything is a delicate balance of left and right moves. For example, Healthcare....Obama got his bill passed and signed into law. Now because he has pissed off the right and right leaning moderates the majority of what he has been doing is trying to get those moderates back. If he doesn't do this than there was no reason to pass the bill to begin with because he won't be reelected and the next person will just overturn it. If he gets those moderates back and is elected again the law will be in full swing and even the next GOP president will likely not be able to overturn it. He can't screw that balance up with taking on something else like war on drugs to drive those moderates away.

Second, everyone complains about the two party system...and oh wouldn't it be great to have more parties..blah blah blah. We have just as many parties as they have in England, we just cut out of the jockeying and pick alliances before we are elected. Just off the top of my head you have Tea Party, Evangelicals, and other right leaning groups under the GOP...they all really CARE about different things. On the Democrats side there are Blue Dog Democrats, Green Party, and other left leaning groups who are all really interested in different things. Each side makes their coalitions before elections and they don't change each election (lib dems and conservatives working together in GB....seems silly to me)

Lastly, Ron Paul is scary, not a statesmen. He is heartless and raised his kids to be the same kind of crazy. If it were up to him people who were even just underinsured would just be SOL. He will never be elected because in the end his values do not match up with either side enough to matter. His movement is less impressive than the tea party movement and will fade faster. He is just a silly old man who has become some kind of fetish for young voters and libertarians.


Also...BONUS!

Disclaimer: All the above views are the opinions of me and do not reflect the views of my alliance. Considering most of them are Europeans or Canadians their opinions don't matter much in this election anyway ;)

Washington can't change Washington. Montgomery, Juneau, Pheonix, Little Rock, Sacramento, Denver, Hartford, Dover, Tallahassee, Atlanta, Honolulu, Boise, Springfield, Indianapolis, Des Moines, Topeka, Frankfort, Baton Rouge, Augusta, Annapolis, Boston, Lansing, Saint Paul, Jackson, Jefferson City, Helena, Lincoln, Carson City, Concord, Trenton, Santa Fe, Albancy, Raleigh, Bismarck, Columbus, Oklahoma City, Salem, Harrisburg, Providence, Columbia, Pierre, Nashville, Austin, Salt Lake City, Montpelier, Richmond, Olympia, Charlston, Madison, and Cheyenne are the only cities that can change Washington.

The people who have the power to change Washington, D.C. serve their constituents much closer to home. They serve in their respective state capitals. Together, Americans can change our nation and our democracy, but we'll have to go to a constitutional convention to do so.


*FYI: the list of cities above is a list of state capitals.

**Waits for be flamed for the above FYI**

PS: Just my opinion. This in no way reflects the way that Omega feels or that Omegans in general feel.