Originally posted by ahinton
View Post
-
Yes, a good question, but may I refer the honourable gentleman to the relevant song by Randy Newman.
-
I suppose that you may if so you wish, but you would surely have first to find an honourable gentleman to whom to do so?!Originally posted by Lateralthinking1 View PostYes, a good question, but may I refer the honourable gentleman to the relevant song by Randy Newman.Comment
-
-
Regarding Republicans and Democrats, they have changed their politics and areas of strength somewhat since the formation of both parties
In Lincolns time, Republicans were the progressive, anti-slavery northern Party, The Democrats were mostly the conservative proslavery Party with a southern stronghold (though they were very much devided)
The strongholds stayed with them till the Time between Roosevelt and Kennedy, when the Democrats changed into the "liberal/progressive" party, while Republicans lost quite a lot of that. I don't think the deep South shifted to the right; They were always on the right/conservative side. Possibly the far right got more prominent a problem, though that would probably show more in their Congress votes than their Presidential decissions.Comment
-
No, siree, I'm quite sure that there isn't!...Originally posted by Lateralthinking1 View PostThere's no easy answer to that one!
Comment
-
You lot are on another planet, and whilst other media organisations might be outside your comfort zone this piece is accurate with regard to funding...
Comment
-
I've witnessed many US Presidential elections. I've never seen anything like the 2012 farce. Whilst folks buy into the 'land of the free' and 'ain't capitalism great' stuff, do you actually realise what's going on?!
It's like the western world is in some kind of hypnosis/denial.
I've never seen anything like it.Comment
-
Mmmm, comfort zone ... well, on the other hand, I think the state-funded Russia Today wouldn't be my first choice for a report on what was going on in the US ...Originally posted by Budapest View PostIt isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.Comment
-
So what is your first choice..?Comment
-
I'd have to research that. I just meant that I would feel that RT might have an agenda of its own.Originally posted by Budapest View PostIt isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.Comment
-
Not just the western world, Budapest. Most of the rest of the world too. Most people who deal at any sort of reasonably high level with any sort of international trade, especially via or with the USI, know exactly what the score is, but mentioning it except in closed circles is all but impossible, and the major US media - of all complexions - won't, for obvious reasons.Originally posted by Budapest View Post
You mention denial; maybe it is something along those lines; but I think also some people just can't, and therefore won't try to, imagine what would replace the current system. And don't forget that there are also many good things in American society; there are some valuable freedoms, albeit as we know they are only allowed as long as it suits those at the top. Which, whilever they are making money and retaining their power, it will do.Comment
-
An interesting clip, Budapest, for which thanks. I understand your comments. It wouldn't necessarily be right, though, to see this thread as a glowing endorsement of the US electoral system. The wide range of comments doesn't suggest it. Even without the serious matters you raise, there are aspects of the process that have always been bemusing from a British perspective. Since the thread began, it has been focussed on events that are undoubtedly real. They have happened, are happening, and will happen very shortly. There is certainly an argument for fury or frustration. At the same time, much could be said of many aspects of life.Originally posted by Budapest View Post
While the economic circumstances now are unprecedented in modern times, many of the criticisms today have existed for decades. I vividly recall in the early 1980s being acutely aware of the wealth required to be a Presidential candidate and widespread concerns about the power of lobby groups. At various times, there have also been complaints about there being little policy difference between the candidates. While the political and economic framework might be such that policy difference can never be considerable, it is still true that Obama and Romney differ on fundamental matters, eg approaches to security and climate change.
Yes, there are financial interests behind any policy, even when it differs. Major players in the green economy are far more influential on Obama than the supporters of Jill Stein. Without question, Romney would put industry first. It's also true that many problems are caused by character failings in leaders. I feel that it could be wrong to see the outcome as hardly mattering. It might have impacts on all our lives. And we can look at the process from many perspectives. One can be broadly supportive of it while being highly critical of its limitations. There can be outright opposition while feeling it would be unreal just to go out golfing.
The topic has been treated seriously here but there has also been humour. For some, that might seem inappropriate but, as with any system, there is much that is bizarre. To my mind, that makes it all the more fascinating. Without noting that there is a humourous side, however infuriating, many would go crazy. So, as with any fact of life, that mixture of seriousness and humour is arguably the best approach. Occupy deserves respect. To think that small numbers of votes could affect the outcome in such a big country is still "awesome". There are many countries in which people do not even have the benefit of being in that position.Last edited by Guest; 04-11-12, 03:20.Comment
-
French Frank, Russia Today (aka RT) is of course biased. The figures they give about campaiign funding in the USA are correct (this can be easily verfied by a quick Google).
My prediction: the US dollar will collapse in March 2013 and there will be total mayhem in the western world.This is one reason why I can't take the Obama/Romney stuff seriously. At this moment in history we need real leaders. There are none.Comment
-
"My prediction: the US dollar will collapse in March 2013 and there will be total mayhem in the western world."
How nice to find some blunt realism. Some of my colleagues would agree with you: I think it will be at least six months later. I also think that GB will weather the storm better than most.Comment
-
Not USA today of course, but artists like Johnny Heartfield have been 'voicing' public knowledge and disquiet about the link between corrupting wealth and corrupted politics for far longer
Comment
Comment