Our brains are prewired to liberal or conservative?

[CheezeFlixz]

No argument here! Amen!!!

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87yq372R4Ts

[RCMerchant]

Revolution...? Dam straight! 
But that in itself poses a problem...who to follow? Some phoney bulls**t artist with the gift of gab?
If Jesus Christ ran for office-he'd be laffed out of town as a radical !

[CheezeFlixz]

Revolution...? Dam straight! 
But that in itself poses a problem...who to follow? Some phoney bulls**t artist with the gift of gab?
If Jesus Christ ran for office-he'd be laffed out of town as a radical !

I like a straight talker, someone that will say we're going to build a wall and they don't care if it p**ses off every illegal from here to the pacos. A leader that won't play politics with bad politicians and call them bad politicians and expose them for what there are. Have the backbone to tell this wacko judges that think they can make law as they go along to reel it in or pay the price. We need Uncle Ron back, no one could handle Ron he did what he wanted to do and the world feared him and more often than not Ron was right ... he psyched out the Soviets with his make believe star wars, brilliant develop a weapon that can't be made and the other side folds. 

Oh I'm going stop or my blood pressure going to go up and I'd have issues with that here lately.

I just listened to the Presidents speech and the Dem response and while Bush has his faults the Dem's have him beat in spades. I'm so sick of the term "failed policies" ... EXCUSE ME CONGRESS! Did you not vote for an pass a bill allowing all you whine about? AAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!

Where's my F%*&kin' Maker's Mark at?!!

[RCMerchant]

 [youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmtcVECZBCU

I'd love to change the world....but I don't know what to do.

[Allhallowsday]

I like a straight talker, someone that will say we're going to build a wall and they don't care if it p**ses off every illegal from here to the pacos. A leader that won't play politics with bad politicians and call them bad politicians and expose them for what there are. Have the backbone to tell this wacko judges that think they can make law as they go along to reel it in or pay the price. We need Uncle Ron back, no one could handle Ron he did what he wanted to do and the world feared him and more often than not Ron was right ... he psyched out the Soviets with his make believe star wars, brilliant develop a weapon that can't be made and the other side folds.  Oh I'm going stop or my blood pressure going to go up and I'd have issues with that here lately.

Well, Ronald Reagan is not one of my favorites for a laundry list of reasons; I agree with half of what you said, but don't kid yourself, Ronnie was the master of partisan politics.  I almost gave you karma for that "straight talker" remark, but then you had to get into "the great communicator..."   
I liked that "Revolution" video, too!     Watch your blood pressure!   

The manner in which votes are awarded, as I understand it, is a state's prerogative, and there are at least a couple which award the electoral college votes proportionally, instead of as a single discrete chunk.

Exactly. 

I fully understand the argument against the electoral college, however with that said you would have an imbalance in the system. ... so while the electoral college isn't the best it's better than the popular vote.

The purpose of the electoral college is to ensure that the wrong candidate does not get elected (like a hugely popular demagogue, or worse, a despot...)  The problem as cited by others is that it is elitist and always has been.  Of course, with laws regarding the voting requirements of the members of the college differing state by state, the original purpose is obscured.   

PS: I don't consider myself either libral or conservative...I don't know what I am.  I just don't trust politics....it's all sales pitch.

Here, here!  But, I can't give you no more karma tonight either, but I so agree.  But then again, everything in the mainstream is a sales pitch one way or another...

[CheezeFlixz]

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTCQSk2l8bc

Well, Ronald Reagan is not one of my favorites for a laundry list of reasons; I agree with half of what you said, but don't kid yourself, Ronnie was the master of partisan politics.  I almost gave you karma for that "straight talker" remark, but then you had to get into "the great communicator..."   Lookingup
I liked that "Revolution" video, too!   Smile  Watch your blood pressure!   TeddyR

Ah come on ... Ron was cool. Sure he was partisan but who isn't? We're all partisan to some degree on some issues.

[RCMerchant]

I have heard good arguments from Karl Marx,Ronald Reagan, Thomas Jefferson, and every other person in creation...the peoblem is...everybody on Earth will never agree with one another...it will never be  Utopia.....and we can never  NEVER fix anything by killing one another. Do I know what to do? No. Let me know when you find someone who can.... Jesus Christ couldn't do it...if he couldn't-good man as he was-no one can.

[nshumate]

The purpose of the electoral college is to ensure that the wrong candidate does not get elected (like a hugely popular demagogue, or worse, a despot...)  The problem as cited by others is that it is elitist and always has been.  Of course, with laws regarding the voting requirements of the members of the college differing state by state, the original purpose is obscured.   

Actually, the electoral college is a relic of the days when the President was seen as presiding over the union of the individual states, not the country as a whole -- i.e., when we referred to the "United States" in the plural instead of thinking of it as a singular nation.  It makes sense in the same context of U.S. Senators originally being appointed by state legislatures instead of elected by popular vote; way back when, the people determined the state government, and the states determined the federal government (with popularly-elected Representatives as a counterbalance).

[Allhallowsday]

The purpose of the electoral college is to ensure that the wrong candidate does not get elected (like a hugely popular demagogue, or worse, a despot...)  The problem as cited by others is that it is elitist and always has been.  Of course, with laws regarding the voting requirements of the members of the college differing state by state, the original purpose is obscured.

Actually, the electoral college is a relic of the days when the President was seen as presiding over the union of the individual states, not the country as a whole -- i.e., when we referred to the "United States" in the plural instead of thinking of it as a singular nation.  It makes sense in the same context of U.S. Senators originally being appointed by state legislatures instead of elected by popular vote; way back when, the people determined the state government, and the states determined the federal government (with popularly-elected Representatives as a counterbalance).

So... how does that disagree with or correct what I wrote?  "Actually" blah blah blah... I am well aware that the electoral college was created by our so-called "founding fathers," and of course the electoral college is all about states' rights.  I reiterate: it's purpose is to prevent the election of the "wrong" candidate, and it remains elitist.  I have not indicated that I disagree with its function, even though the "W" was originally elected because of it. 

Ah come on ... Ron was cool. Sure he was partisan but who isn't? We're all partisan to some degree on some issues.

One thing Ronald Reagan was not is cool. 
"The revolution will not be televised...the revolution will not be brought to you by Bullwinkle..." 
Okay, okay, I'll give you karma, but we definitely do not agree about that operator.  

[CheezeFlixz]

Where's Alice Cooper's song "I'm the Coolest" on youtube when you need it ...

Guess I could just put up the mp3 and a pic of Ron LOL....

You know I'm the coolest
That's ever come around
You'll notice things get hotter
whenever I'm in town
I mean I gotta be the coolest
who else could it be?
Everybody knows who's really cool
Ron

[Allhallowsday]

Thanks Cheezeflix for the payback.  Yes, that remark is sarcastic.  Why, oh, why am I so influenced by COOL music? 

[RCMerchant]

I don't believe in genetic predispositions.
I say it's all in our zodiacs, offset by what music is popular at certain points in our lives, with just a dash of karma at daily intervals to bring it alive.

Like the man says...we are emotional creatures...in the long run-THAT is what drives us....politics be damened!

[nshumate]

The purpose of the electoral college is to ensure that the wrong candidate does not get elected (like a hugely popular demagogue, or worse, a despot...)  The problem as cited by others is that it is elitist and always has been.  Of course, with laws regarding the voting requirements of the members of the college differing state by state, the original purpose is obscured.

Actually, the electoral college is a relic of the days when the President was seen as presiding over the union of the individual states, not the country as a whole -- i.e., when we referred to the "United States" in the plural instead of thinking of it as a singular nation.  It makes sense in the same context of U.S. Senators originally being appointed by state legislatures instead of elected by popular vote; way back when, the people determined the state government, and the states determined the federal government (with popularly-elected Representatives as a counterbalance).

So... how does that disagree with or correct what I wrote?  "Actually" blah blah blah... I am well aware that the electoral college was created by our so-called "founding fathers," and of course the electoral college is all about states' rights.  I reiterate: it's purpose is to prevent the election of the "wrong" candidate, and it remains elitist.  I have not indicated that I disagree with its function, even though the "W" was originally elected because of it. 

How does that disagree with what you wrote?  Well, it gives some actual historical context, instead of simply declaring that it was intended to prevent the rise of a demagogue (in some fashion that goes unexplained) and that it is "elitist" (again, in some sense that goes unexplained).

[Derf]

So are there no libertarian nutjobbers here (besides me, to some extent)? I'm personally all for getting back to what the founding fathers had in mind with a union of states rather than a single entity with artificial state boundaries (as nshumate pointed out). Take the centralized power out of politics except for national defense and international diplomacy. I've been reading The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History by Thomas E. Woods, Jr., and, while it is sketchy, it gives some perspective to many events we've been taught only one side to. Some of it I already knew, but not all of it (I was never particularly interested in history, though that has changed in the last several years). So, since I've read part of a sketchy book, I guess I'm an expert now  .

Anyway, I have long believed that the Federal Government has become too powerful; it is past time to start repealing laws that should never have been passed in the first place. I am morally conservative, but I know better than to think that it is possible to force morality on people through legislation. Laws concerning personal behavior (outside of behavior which affects others) are usually worthless and unenforceable. Morality comes from within, not through force, so the government should get out of that game. State governments should be able to handle the day-to-day affairs of their citizens with only minimal involvement from the Feds. I am all for pushing innovation through a market economy (i.e., throw it out there and let the market decide if a given product is worthwhile). The way things are now, there are so many federal rules about products, most of which were passed because of special interest lobbyists, that innovation is stifled and we are stuck with whatever Wal-Mart thinks we should have.

The U.S. is not far from becoming a socialist country. We still have more freedom than the Soviet Union did, but as long as Congress and the Executive Branch measure their success by how many laws they pass rather than by wise governance, we continue the slow, steady march to totalitarianism.

I guess I'll stop my ramblings now. I'm just tired of governments that continually inject themselves deeper and deeper into citizens' everday lives.

[Allhallowsday]

How does that disagree with what you wrote?  Well, it gives some actual historical context, instead of simply declaring that it was intended to prevent the rise of a demagogue (in some fashion that goes unexplained) and that it is "elitist" (again, in some sense that goes unexplained).

Nathan, you have good taste in music, so I like you, and I came perilously close last night to getting into a political debate in this thread (something I "religiously" avoid  )  I'm sorry my comments were "simple."  However, I remain unsure whether or not you agree. 

I may not have "explained" what I wrote, but I still believe it.  The purpose of the electoral college (particularly in the context of a poor 18th century backwater calling itself the United States of America where a majority could neither read nor write) was and is to safeguard the elite.  In colonial America, that would have been your gentleman farmer, the educated professional, and the businessman.  My thoughts are hardly a new idea.