So, he's been in office for what? 10 days now, and he's kept (or is working on keeping) 5% of his promises already. That's pretty impressive, considering he is only a single person and he doesn't make decisions exclusively. Anyone know what GW did in his first 10 days?
LMAO! yeah, quite the contrast. but really, we can't keep up this routine of compairing obama to bush all the time.... otherwise we'll succumb to some hero worship, idolizing him, treating him like a god, like a pharoah/furer. because yes, the image presented really is that much more impressive. me frankly i think folks could do with being reminded of the difference*... so that we can all stop this "pissing-away-your-power-to-the-oligarch/despot". presuming the words were genuine, and genuinely meant in the broad sense of "we", then take heed what obama said when he said "we are the ones we've been waiting for". obama isnt the one you've been waiting for.... you are! *the difference: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bY8GzJNuz7I"]YouTube - Fun with Fascism[/ame] -edit- http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter...five-days-of-public-comment-before-signing-b/ the one broken promise so far. just because he's broken it once, dont let him keep on breaking it! this is one of the most important promises made. ever since Clinton passed the "Executive autonomy bill" in his last week in office, america has been SORELY lacking in government accountability. though the executive autonomy bill wasnt the last nail in the [democracy's/freedom's] coffin... ashcroft (and others) made sure they were hammering nails in fast and furious while the executive had it's shroud of autonomy. what did executive autonomy mean? it meant the gov can do what it likes and doesnt have to tell the people. .... pretty wild idea for a democracy huh? so stick on his case! .....& check the propsed bills!
^ its gonna be awesome when something happens to the country and completely takes ALL of his attention away from what he's doing right now then we'll see what happens to the obameter
you really have no idea what your talking about. Despotism is not Fascism, how about you go take a 5 minute seminar of political science and come back to us. A direct democracy is more like fascism than Despotism if you knew anything about the two systems. How about you try your smear campaign somewhere else than here, because we aren't buying what your trying to sell. You come off as a jackass and you sound like a dumbass, that is a volatile combination brother.
wrong. YOU come off as a jackass and sound like a dumbass. there's no need to be uncivil in here. you sound like you think you're higher( no pun intended) than everyone else
I was the car, he was the Bear... Natural Selection works for everything, especially things of politics, sure people are entitled to there opinions(even if they are wrong ones), but I too are entitled to mine. He could have easily responded to me and we could have a civil conversation, but I think he himself saw the error of his ways. He is staying quiet now. Survival of the fittest bro, learn it, it will be your best friend in life.
Does any politician ever keep his/her campaign promises? More specifically, the president? I thought that's what presidential campaigns were...ass-kissing, phony fuckwads throwing us bullshit to munch on in hopes they will win this nationwide popularity contest while knowing all the time they will just appease the people who contribute to their campaign for prom queen...I mean president.
Private tyrannies will always be more corrupt than state run ones, furthermore our constitution is an article of a control over negative Despotism. A limit of power on the leader, in a direct democracy there would be no limits on what you can and cannot do our it would not be direct. That society would fall on a tyranny of the majority, in America for example you would see slave labor rampant still just like when the Greeks had slaves. As long as there was a majority of whites, which there still is, you would not see that change. Some of our greatest and worst leaders are ones who disregard the constitution for better or for worse. The constitution and congress were put in place to make sure America doesn't see a Caesar come into power, who was put into place through democracy. Plato talked of this, "...then democracy comes into being after the poor have conquered their opponents, slaughtering some and banishing some, while to the remainder they give an equal share of freedom and power; and this is the form of government in which the magistrates are commonly elected by lot." "Dictatorship naturally arises out of democracy, and the most aggravated form of tyranny and slavery out of the most extreme liberty. " I would have have a system where educated men are encharge of my countries finances than the majority. Most people in America aren't even economically sound to realise simple economic terms, let alone manige the countries finaces. More proof democracy is a failure...Mrs. Hilton never voted.....even after doing tons of promotions for the VOTE OR DIE! campaign.
You seriously think there would still be slavery? Great Britain and France are examples of Western nations that democratically abolished slavery without violence (aside from preceding slave revolts).
That's why I mention Greece, also to my knowledge those countries did not abolish slavery through democracy. It was signed in by there parliaments to my knowledge. I was talking of direct democracy, not despot-democracy.
Your scenario is certainly more likely under direct democracy, but I seriously doubt slavery would be favored by the majority. Abolitionists were winning the debate centuries ago.
Let alone understand the policies of the jackass for whom they are voting. Let alone, let alone, let alone...