ope:Germany 1932 was an extreme case that can easily be prevented by setting some bar, like 5%, that each party has to achieve to make it into the respective governing body, which is exactly what most democracies have instituted by now. Under these circumstances it is very normal for coalitions of two or possibly three parties to form a stable government, so this doesn't seemt o me to be a reason for a strict two party system.
I think a system of government where the people have only the choice between two parties who don't differ very much except in word, hardly deserves to be called a democracy, which is why I always have to laugh when I hear how America started another war to "preserve and spread democracy".
However, as long as I don't see a system that has significantly out-performed the American one it is hard to suggest improvements.
You guys talk about the States wanting more power back over the federal government. When do you think they lost it?
They used to call it " these" united states, instead of "the" united states. "These" sounds like a collection of indepentant states that operate on a state and federal level. After tyrant Lincoln it was " the" united states as if one entity.
George Washington was asked to serve a third term, but he said that he didn't battle the english just so that HE could become the King of America and have our government like the one they fought to break away against. Then we have shithead FDR.
Look at Lincoln and FDR with the media. Lincoln was jailing reporters, state government ( of Maryland) and others. He had some 10,000 people sent to rot in political prisons, including francsis scott keys son. He suspended the writ of hapeous corpous and people were jailed without fair trials. He was a dictator seeking more power.
FDR wouldn't let the media shoot pictures or have him on tv below his legs. He didn't want to be seen as week. The guy was a commie, and we are still paying for his ponzi scheme called social security.
They used to call it " these" united states, instead of "the" united states. "These" sounds like a collection of indepentant states that operate on a state and federal level. After tyrant Lincoln it was " the" united states as if one entity.
George Washington was asked to serve a third term, but he said that he didn't battle the english just so that HE could become the King of America and have our government like the one they fought to break away against. Then we have shithead FDR.
Look at Lincoln and FDR with the media. Lincoln was jailing reporters, state government ( of Maryland) and others. He had some 10,000 people sent to rot in political prisons, including francsis scott keys son. He suspended the writ of hapeous corpous and people were jailed without fair trials. He was a dictator seeking more power.
FDR wouldn't let the media shoot pictures or have him on tv below his legs. He didn't want to be seen as week. The guy was a commie, and we are still paying for his ponzi scheme called social security.
Actually, Social Security is solvent. It's the rest of the Government that's bankrupt, which is why they keep borrowing from the SS trust fund to help finance our debt.
Lincoln was a dictator and FDR was a commie.....and they wonder why people look on third party zealots as a bunch of nutjobs. :drink:
Right try the Constitution party for a change.. http://baldwin08.com
In the first place, I don't hate President Bush.
In the second place, it's very easy to Monday Morning quarterback 140 years after the fact. We were in a civil war, sir, and the future of the country hung in the balance. Desperate and extraordinary measures were necessary to win the war and preserve the Union. As I recall from high school history class, Lincoln RAN FOR REELECTION in 1864 - hardly the action of a dictator.
In the third place, as a native Marylander, I can assure you that having members of the state Government in jail has been the rule rather than the exception for the past 140 years. Why, one of our illustrious Governors kept accepting cash payoffs in brown paper bags from the boys even after he became Vice President!
just an honest question
do you really think it was necessary for 600000-700000 people to kill each other to "free the slaves" which is what the civil war was supposedly all about?
also i don't think lincoln was deviant and knowingly took on a dictator like role....i believe he thought he was doing what was right for the country at the time
but civil war was a huge power grab in many respects
hell they even ended up used the 14th amendment to give corporations equal rights to citizens...
The Civil War was fought to preserve the Union, not primarily to free the slaves. Had the South prevailed, or had Lincoln allowed them to secede, one can only imagine the bloodbath that would have eventually occurred when the slaves inevitably rebelled. And, although the revisionists and many naifs here and elsewhere may disagree, a world without a United States as the beacon and defender of freedom for the last 140 years would undoubtedly be a world that would be dominated today by either fascism or communism. The consequential death and suffering that would have resulted is unimaginable.
So, yes, the Civil War was a war worth fighting.
Literate and a good political representative are two different things. In Bush's case, he fails in both categories.
Biden seems literate and articulated, but would I vote for him... hell no.
You see, that is the problem, all too often people think the most articulate conversationalist is the best candidate. You have to see who is behind there dream team before you make that assessment. Most politicians don't know their ass from their balls, so they hire "advisors". As we know in Bish's case, Rove and company ran his tenure.
No no, you misread. He's saying the people aren't literate, not Obama. Obama is a joke, socialist scum bag, who is so arrogant he thinks he can micromanage society. Government is Inefficient. And more governemnt...well, is more inefficient. Its a shame the majority of the populous is so fucking ignorant. Too worried about American Idol and Big Brother to give a damn.
