Won't vote for Obama? Then it's time to enlist. - Page 2

saltwn · #11 (**permalink**) 05-26-2008, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mikeyy

I will admit to using Media Matters as a source for material. But really the real headlines are enough material for me to make my points. I lean left but I can't stand the people that the right thinks we listen to. In fact I think most of us are in the middle. And the talking heads represent the extreme.

KOS opinion is as important to some as Rush Limbaugh's is to others.

“Daily Kos” Will Keynote Idaho Democrats’ Biggest Event | Boise | New West Network

It's a mad mad mad mad world out there!

Michael1 · #12 (**permalink**) 05-26-2008, 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saltwn

KOS opinion is as important to some as Rush Limbaugh's is to others.

“Daily Kos” Will Keynote Idaho Democrats’ Biggest Event | Boise | New West Network

It's a mad mad mad mad world out there!

Oh cool. So you'll forgive me for tuning into Rush 10 years ago and I'll pretend you no longer surf KOS or JUANCOLE or MOVEON. Maybe you can start to pretend I don't subscribe to opinionjournal or look at sites like National Review or the Weekly Standard.

Let's just all be HONEST for once.

People tend to invite information (that is, visit web sites) they're inclined to be agreeable toward.

I get that Dems 'no longer' want to be associated with Kos or Juan Cole or moveon to the same degree that Republicans don't want to be associated with Rush or Sean Hannity or ... whatever the name was of that right wing think tank.

I DO think, however, that KOS is still increasing in 'market share' whereas Rush peaked long ago.

What does that tell you Mikeyy and Saltwn?

The only thing it tells me is that over the top rhetoric is now more on the internet than it is on talk radio. Eventually, there will be an internet right-winger to oppose the left wing blogger-haters. For now, the left owns the internet.

I'm not entirely convinced that garners a Presidential election success, however I'm not entirely convinced the Dems want their candidate to win.

saltwn · #13 (**permalink**) 05-26-2008, 11:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael1

Oh cool. So you'll forgive me for tuning into Rush 10 years ago and I'll pretend you no longer surf KOS or JUANCOLE or MOVEON. Maybe you can start to pretend I don't subscribe to opinionjournal or look at sites like National Review or the Weekly Standard.

I do look at the New Yorker, and the news feeds. But I stumbled across KOS and Rush and both are weirdos in my book. But I'm not a Dem or a Rep.

Let's just all be HONEST for once.

People tend to invite information (that is, visit web sites) they're inclined to be agreeable toward. This is true.

I get that Dems 'no longer' want to be associated with Kos or Juan Cole or moveon to the same degree that Republicans don't want to be associated with Rush or Sean Hannity or ... whatever the name was of that right wing think tank.
Do you get that those people never did speak for a lot of people who are tired of the meanness?
I DO think, however, that KOS is still increasing in 'market share' whereas Rush peaked long ago.

What does that tell you Mikeyy and Saltwn?

The only thing it tells me is that over the top rhetoric is now more on the internet than it is on talk radio. Eventually, there will be an internet right-winger to oppose the left wing blogger-haters. For now, the left owns the internet.

I'm not entirely convinced that garners a Presidential election success, however I'm not entirely convinced the Dems want their candidate to win.

I'm not entirely sure with this election there are any hard line Dems or Reps left. Just people who want to make the right choice. I still haven't decided, still leaning toward McCain. That could change.

Adept1 · #14 (**permalink**) 05-26-2008, 11:56 PM

Well the opposite editorial opinion would be that if you want Obummer to win then you should go ahead and give away all your freedoms and rights, become a 95% taxpayer, allow the government make all of your life and health decisions for you, destroy all private and publicly owned business, go on ahead to "reeducation camp" if you disagree with anything he(or his wife) says, and oh yes SUBMIT to all terrorist demands.

This comparison of what an Obama supporter should do is just as asinine as what the KOS idiot said.
I am only comforted by the thought that our system is full of checks and balances and provides many opportunities for corrections. I am extremely discomforted by the LACK of intelligence, knowledge, and ability to interpret clearly what realities are of so many of the people that are allowed to vote.

saltwn · #15 (**permalink**) 05-27-2008, 12:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adept1

Well the opposite editorial opinion would be that if you want Obummer.....

Obummer...

I know it's mean. Maybe I'm easily impressed, but I thought that was so funny.

Spencer Collins · #16 (**permalink**) 05-27-2008, 12:15 AM

The great Electoral College will protect us from "mob" rule....

saltwn · #17 (**permalink**) 05-27-2008, 12:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spencer Collins

The great Electoral College will protect us from "mob" rule....

I too think the EC was a good addition to our democracy to balance things out. I just don't look forward to the day when steamy brained muck wadds is all they can find to staff the electoral college. Or when they can be bought off. I hope I'm pushing up daisies when that happens.

Spencer Collins · #18 (**permalink**) 05-27-2008, 12:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saltwn

I too think the EC was a good addition to our democracy to balance things out. I just don't look forward to the day when steamy brained muck wadds is all they can find to staff the electoral college. Or when they can be bought off. I hope I'm pushing up daisies when that happens.

In it's day,the EC was a good idea and may still have some merit.I have a bit of a problem with the "Faithless Elector" issue.The EC could use some updating..

saltwn · #19 (**permalink**) 05-27-2008, 01:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spencer Collins

In it's day,the EC was a good idea and may still have some merit.I have a bit of a problem with the "Faithless Elector" issue.The EC could use some updating..

I gotta ask you, how would you change it to a better fit for today. ?

Spencer Collins · #20 (**permalink**) 05-27-2008, 02:38 AM

The SC ruled in favor of empowering a states political parties to "require" formal pledges from Presidential Electors (Ray v Blair, 343 US 214) However,21 states still do not require their members to vote for their party's candidate! I believe it should be mandatory and "all" states "parties" electors should be "required" to make formal pledges to vote for the candidate of their respective parties.The reason for this should be obvious.Faithless Electors have far too much individual power and can work "outside" of their designated party.The possibility of corruption arises.While a single elector may not change the outcome of an election it remains "possible",there certainly is room for improvment here.The EC already has a good deal of power without including the faithless elector issue.The Faithless Elector is free to vote against not only the will of the people but also against the will of their own party! They become far too powerful and that smacks of tyranny not democracy.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: http://www.politicalwrinkles.com/opinions-editorials/3312-wont-vote-obama-then-its-time-enlist.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date
Political Wrinkles	This thread	Refback	05-25-2008 06:31 PM

The Following User Says Thank You to Adept1 For This Useful Post:
saltwn

The Following User Says Thank You to saltwn For This Useful Post:
Adept1