The Problem With Democracy..

If John McCain were black and obama was white, mccain would be our president.

Not that I would care much. That election was a lose/lose situation.

I was renewing my car registration yesterday, and there was a flier on the far wall. I couldn't read the whole thing, but the headline or whatever was "CAN I VOTE?" I thought, "if you have to ask, then, no you can't."

Yeah it's sad, for sure. But it makes me wonder, then, if all of those "good, responsible" actions were only the result of peer pressure, isn't the laziness a better representation of human nature?

He is a Christian when campaigning. If you care to hear my personal opinion/interpretation of what 'religion' obama belongs to, Im going to say humanism. Yes humanism is a religion alright. Humanism, is a religion wherein mankind is become a unified singularity --- a collective God of generational immortality. It is true about his distortion of Christianity preached by his old pastor: They believe in collective salvation. As much as I hate echoing glenn beck because his celebrity "cockblocks" my observational credibility even though I already knew it before he spoke, it is true. It is social liberal humanism teachings.

If obama is that, he shouldnt be lying for the vote. man up and say what you really think. Stop whoring yourself for the vote.

I'm with you on the abortion issue. abortion is incompatible with Christianity and claiming a label for yourself while conducting and thinking like the definition of another label is pretty disgusting.

I say we become a dictatorship with Jaerik as our leader, he seems to have the qualities of a good leader and i think he would be good for this country

If I be honest, I think Hitler had it right.

Yeah, as politically convenient as it would be to call him a muslim, that is an uninformed, dishonest conclusion. He doesnt think/behave consistently with Biblical Christianity nor does he conduct himself in accordance with koranic islam. If he did, he wouldnt have been stuffing his face in front of the cameras outside of that small food business during ramadan.

I wouldn't like it, but I'd understand it.

Heil Hitler

I'm happy with it. I've always been pro dictatorship.

Stupid people shouldn't be allowed to run our country, only the elite who have proven themselves should have that right.

The only thing wrong with what you say is that you assume the elite have 'real merit' and possess both wisdom and righteousness.

There is none fit to rein among people who would not be rejected by the people; or halted before ever reaching a seat of authority by those who already are seated. People love corruption. People deserve to partake of the rewards of corruption.

Hitler would have been more justified if his goal was anthropocide, but his vision was diminished. Though his idea wasn't too far off,if his ideas were applied to mankind as a whole; he greatly erred in that he deceived himself into believing that Jews were inferior to the rest of humanity. Hitler was a failure. Absolute justice is the destruction of mankind. Because no one is willing that the entire species should perish, no one people has leverage over another. There is no room to boast over another kindred or creed to destruction. If you condemn one you condemn them all. Hitler was a fool.

It can be summarized in this:

Mankind possesses no redemptive qualities.
I am the antithesis of humanism.

I dont even know how frank and pelosi keep getting elected. Have you ever met anyone who actually likes them? who actually confessed to voting for them? especially pelosi? I smell Watergate. Nothing else adds up.

the bible also says that parents should stone their children if they are being disrespectful. the death penalty is used in a lot of states... THOU SHALT NOT KILL.

Treat others as you would have them treat you - an eye for an eye

----

The bible itself is just made up hippocritical ***. Dont even try and pretend that you can follow it without breaking some other rule in it that says something completely different.

As it were, there were tons of historic dissertations by many famous "framers of democratic thought", from Aristotle and Plato to Jefferson and Madison and onward, regarding government by the educated.

One such concept is Plato's and Pythagoras' notion of the "city of the educated" (noocracy) which could be the ultimate society...part of the path to Eudamonia. Of course, the Greek city-states were much smaller in scope than most modern nation-states, but the germ of the idea arose from such democratic society.

Thomas Jefferson had many thoughts on the education of citizenry, too many to note...

http://etext.virginia.edu/jefferson/quotations/jeff1350.htm

...but as a good idea of his view he put forth this thought (in regard to the OP):



Of course the nascent US society of the time was much smaller than it is today, let alone given that Jefferson was probably referring to "citizenry" as "white male landholders" in the first place.

But, given a modern more-egalitarian interpretation of his thoughts, it's safe to say he felt that if the population of eligible voters is too thick-headed to make proper civic choices in government and representation, that it is our job as a society to increase the level of education instead of remove the right from common citizens.

Here is a political check list, if you know the right answers to the following issues make mental note:

Gay Marriage
Taxes
Abortion
State Gambling laws
Healthcare
War
Peace
Democrat
Republican
Independent
Stem Cell Reasearch
Imigration

Ok, if you've picked out any answers in that list and said they are right or wrong. You have failed to have any understanding of politics. I bet 99% of people in the US would fail this test.

The nature of politics isn't right or wrong, its winning your argument. Only niave people truly believe the ***that is on TV. Truth is, there are very real and legitimate arguments on all sides for almost every issue. Being right comes down to who supports their case best.

Seriously just sit down and think for a few mins on what you just said. Can you honestly tell me that you believe that you can pick and choose what parts of the bible you choose to believe?

LOL, im not sure that the remaining 68% even vote... not that that excludes the 'right minded' people each of us think should be able to vote... but check this out.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781453.html#axzz0yTG0Udlu

He was born from a muslim father, that made him one until he was baptized... (idk if he was, havnt seen his baptismal garb or the sevice so idk. But idc what religion someone is.. can he do the job? IMO... he is an epic fail... worst than Jimmy Carter, who was a nice guy... just coundnt get it right.

The Founding Fathers of the United States rarely praised and often criticized democracy, which in their time tended to specifically mean direct democracy; James Madison argued, especially in The Federalist No. 10, that what distinguished a democracy from a republic was that the former became weaker as it got larger and suffered more violently from the effects of faction, whereas a republic could get stronger as it got larger and combats faction by its very structure. This country was founded as a republic, as a democracy we are slowly destroying this country. As far as who should be allowed to vote, if your a citizen then it's your right to vote whether your an idiot or not, doesn't make much difference really which vote to make in my opinion, they are all evil, rotton, sobs. The one thing that gave the people the power to keep their government in check has been infringed, the 2nd amendment. As to the Bible remarks above, this book is very large & complex, but with some time, research & common sense it can be understood with ease, it was written by men not God, it has been translated, some books even omitted, but for every rule law or story in the Bible there are another dozen areas to confirm it. Also you don't always take every word literally as it would mean today, also some of the translations in this book from Hebrew to English are very poor, like this one,(On the first "day" God created the Heavens & the Earth) if you took that literally, then yes this book makes no sense & your an idiot. The word day here was a very weak & poor translation. Another translation would be, (On the first "age" God created the heavens & the earth) with a little common sense it becomes more clear. The New Testament did not "overrule" the Old, unless otherwise specifically mentioned, like having many wives or making sacrifices on alters.