Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

It is my personal belief that America would be a better country if there were no political parties. I feel that because of political parties, 80% of Americans are trained to think that they must always vote for their own party, even if they don't agree with the candidate.

Most Americans embrace political parties as "the right to choose", but wouldn't we have more "choice" if we just looked at the issues and picked our favorite candidate? Republicans will often say things like, "Be an American and support the war!", "If you don't excercise you're rights you're not an American!", or even, "Freedom of speech is what our country is all about!"

The truth is, our country is not about freedom. Our country is about a bunch of individual states loosely joined by a union. The Bill of Rights, which lists all these freedoms, was just an additional reminder, not the basis of our nation.

George Wahington didn't even want political parties. He knew they would lead to mass anger and disagreement, and all for what? All we get out of political parties is organization and being forced to choose "our own" candidates.

_________________

171st POST ANNIVERSARY!!!

I think most people probably agree with you, but the trouble is that it's human nature to form alliances. It would be nice if we could abolish political parties entirely, but I don't believe it's possible.

_________________

I guess it's like Communism: Works in theory, but when applied to real life, never works out and always becomes the opposite.

_________________
Evidence of the ol' glassies! Nothing up our sleeves, no magic little Alex! A job for two who are now of job age! The police!

Allow me to jump in and say that all applications of communism were half-arsed and poorly coordinated. Especially when applied on such massive scales such as Russia and China. You need to start with Socialism, then gradually move into Communism. I know this statement has nothing to do with the topic, just thought I should clear up some misconceptions

_________________

I know, I know--I spent 3 hours writing that on my report on governments...

_________________
Evidence of the ol' glassies! Nothing up our sleeves, no magic little Alex! A job for two who are now of job age! The police!

I have to agree with that. Parties also generate propaganda as well.

Frankly, I'm discouraged by the way Christians so strongly identify with the GOP. I don't think the GOP represents Christ in all matters (if it did, we wouldn't be at war with Iraq right now). Nor do I think that the Democrats are the godless heathens that they are sometimes portrayed to be. After all, Jimmy Carter, a devout Christian man, was also a Democrat. The GOP does not have a monopoly on Christian values.

_________________

I hate to break it to you, but people generate propaganda. So do administrations. And even if we could somehow, however impossible, banish political parties, people and administrations are two things that will exist as long as life on this planet.

_________________

So Dr. Zauis, can I construe this to be a promotion of Communism? I'm not a fan myself, partly because of the whole "poorly implemented" thing (which I agree with). But everything I've heard about socialist health care makes me somewhat nervous to go in that direction.

_________________

What's wrong with socialist healthcare?

Anyway, I think he was partly making a joke too.

_________________

free healthcare yeah it would jack up the taxes but not having to pay for medical care that is sweet.

_________________

no its worse when i say i'm a democrat to a republican that they instantly assume that i'm a heathen commie pinko. not true. yeah i like the idea of a socialized healthcare system but i am not a communist.

_________________

I'm not fond of the idea of socialized medical care. The problem is that the beaurocracy created by a government control agency will cancel out any real benefit from it. As Strong Canada and other Canadian friends have pointed out to me, most Canadians prefer to come to the US for their health care needs because they trust our system more, even if it is more expensive.

So which is better? Having expensive health care, or having free health care that you can't depend on?

_________________

Really? I don't know anyone who's gone to the US for health care. And most people I know can't even imagine having to pay for health care. Remember that guy with the huge gash in his forehead in Bowling for Columbine? To me, that reflects on our attitude. "What? Pay?"

_________________

ModestlyHotGirl, I think you're a good poster, but if you keep referring to Bowling for Columbine like it's gospel, my respect for you is going to plummet. Michael Moore is an entertainer. He creates a product, and he sells it. Is there truth in his documentaries? Yes. Is there fiction? Yes. Take everything with a grain of salt.

_________________

I agree completely, and I don't mean to preach. I just thought that'd be an example of the Canadian attitude towards health care that most people would've seen and would therefore be able to more fully understand my opinion.

_________________

Oh noes! She referenced a movie, once! Please note that, even though I am not a fan of Michael Moore - despite being a heavy left-wing pinko - the movie does have its merits and has much more truth than fiction. Some things he did twist and turn, but it's much more documentary and not as conspiracy and paranoia laden as, oh say, Farenheit 9/11.

As for the health care issue, it's true that both have their merits, but I would personally a government run healthcare, but I know in my heart and soul that it would end up just the same as congress is full of corporate crooks looking to get rich or die trying, so they'd fine someway to get the system to benefit them. Just my 0.02 cents.

Actually, in lahimatoa's defence, I did mention it in the Concealed weapon thread. Again, though, just to exemplify my opinion.

_________________

Oh, alright, my bad. Either way, I wouldn't exactly call that referring it as the gospel. It's topical and a good source of info, but I don't really want to derail this thread so I'll stop now.

I think I may have misled you and others, Didymus. What I meant was that if you are very sick, it is sometimes easier and quicker to get health care in the US, though more expensive. As for actual doctors' and surgeons' abilities, I think Canadian and American medicine probably come out pretty equal.

_________________

Or perhaps I misunderstood. You're not the only Canadian I've heard from about this. There was a Canadian student at the Seminary last year, and he said pretty much the same thing. But the way he put it was, "You might actually die while waiting for the paperwork to clear." According to him, there are actually certain times of the year when it is impossible to get health care at all because the government can't pay the physicians.

_________________

Hmm. News to me. Or maybe I'm just lucky in that I've never been that sick.

_________________

Yeah but our people are going to canada because it is cheaper for them up there.

_________________

I was under the impression that the majority of these people were going for prescription medications (not physican care).

_________________

Bowling for Columbine was actually pretty much right down the middle the purpose of it was to ask "What is wrong with America?" and it was pretty factual. It's only Ferinheit 9/11(sp) that he goes uber liberal. but the fact that we elected a person that I could beat in a spelling bee is sad.
And yes MHG you are a good poster, keep it up.

_________________

I think you underestimate Mr. Bush, Beyond the Grave. I don't know whether or not he can spell Fahrenheit, but I think he'd come closer than you

I actually agree. I've seen plenty of Michael Moore movies, and Fahrenheit 9/11 was the only one I thought was "uber liberal" as you put it. Bowling for Columbine, Roger and Me, etc. all had a sort of left-wing twist, but none of them were really geared that way. I also thought that Fahrenheit 9/11 was very conspiracy theory-like. He went overboard on this one. I enjoyed it though, but wouldn't regard it as much more than entertainment.

_________________

I hear about how Michael Moore was "way too liberal" with Farenheit 9/11, but what really did he exaggerate? There were little instances of a misleading news headlines and whatnot that conservatives loved to pick on, but, despite a liberal tone, the movie dealt with very factual information.

It's true that George Bush bombed Baghdad while they gave NO threat to us, and that there was never any reason for this war. I saw the terribly done conservative response to Farenheit 9/11, Farenhype 9/11. While this movie gave some leeway into the facts that Bush did everything that he could to help the situation, it barely touches the war issue and is just as close-minded as Moore is accused of being.

We're getting dangerously off-topic, so let's get back to the party reconstruction idea.

_________________

171st POST ANNIVERSARY!!!

That is SO CREEPY. I've been thinking of the exact same thing for the past two months.

Well, not exact. I'm Australian, so I was thinking in terms of Australia. But it was the exact same general gist.

_________________
"They've taken Mr Rimmer! Sir, they've taken Mr Rimmer!"
"Quick, let's get outta here before they bring him back!"

The first part of deforming parties would be to grant new laws that allow third paties and independents to have better chances of getting votes for the election by abandoning the electoral college. This would cause more people to convert to third parties and as independents. Eventually, political parties would become obsolete.

This really has to happen before we're economically overthrown by China.

_________________

171st POST ANNIVERSARY!!!

Take a look at your Pay Statement sometime. How come is it that the vast majority of your tax money goes to the Federal Government, and only like a few pennies goes to the State? This disproportion ought to tell you something right there. The Federal Government was only supposed to be a federation of states, not a big huge money-spending machine it has become. Give the rights and responsibilities back to the States themselves, I say.

_________________