Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » You think America is a Democracy? Think again!!

You think America is a Democracy? Think again!!

2 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

The facts are we were a democracy ... but no more. This, no doubt, will please Herr Markle our resident Nazi, and Pacedog who dwells just to the right of Attila the Hun ...


http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article38235.htm

Guest


Guest

To the "republic" for which it stands.

Going to so called democracy was our first mistake.

United States[edit]

Main article: Republicanism in the United States

A distinct set of definitions for the word republic evolved in the United States. In common parlance, a republic is a state that does not practice direct democracy but rather has a government indirectly controlled by the people. This understanding of the term was originally developed by James Madison, and notably employed in Federalist Paper No. 10. This meaning was widely adopted early in the history of the United States, including in Noah Webster's dictionary of 1828. It was a novel meaning to the term; representative democracy was not an idea mentioned by Machiavelli and did not exist in the classical republics


Guest


Guest

http://i.word.com/idictionary/republic

Main Entry: re·pub·lic

(1) : a government having a chief of state who is not a monarch and who in modern times is usually a president (2) : a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government b (1) : a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law (2) : a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government.



Last edited by PkrBum on 4/14/2014, 7:17 pm; edited 1 time in total

Guest


Guest

PkrBum wrote:http://i.word.com/idictionary/republic

doesn't it look more like what they want is a direct democracy? That's what it looks like to me and I don't think they understand that.

Guest


Guest

They may think/believe that's where we're headed... but the results point directly to national socialism.

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

The substance of this thread isn't a definition fight between the descriptives "republic" and "democracy."

Either way, our government was supposed to represent the people. It doesn't anymore. We're now governed by the wealthy -- which without question makes us an oligarchy.

Do you both think its okay for the very wealthy to govern us?

Markle

Markle

To think, Wordslinger claims to have written a "history" book, it must be located in the "Fiction" section.

We are a Representative REPUBLIC, we have NEVER been a Democracy and rightly so. A Democracy is mob rule. Two wolves and a sheep voting on what is for dinner is also a Democracy.

Guest


Guest

You think America is a Democracy? Think again!! Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQJWOJHe3zqySH4UFUHKbLBOW-7kZ-4cbfhWg5TkC5KMso1Dlwm

It doesn't take a Civics course to figure out the person who started this thread slept through those courses..... and any elementary school indoctrination into the Pledge Of Allegiance.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5heysinF1sw

 Smile 

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

Amazing ... nobody here seems to care that we no longer run our government, which is owned by the ultra rich.

Reality.

Guest


Guest

Stepping in to this but first a question for clarification:  Is your name Words-linger or Word-slinger.  It makes a difference on perception.  Laughing 

"You think America is a democracy? Think again!!"  My reply is, of course, no.

Civics has been mentioned and is an excellent place to begin.

Those of age and registration have the voice in America.  The voice that wins is the voice with the most like minded votes.  It's a pretty close debate/vote/outcome.  When we live that close to a "rub" it's like being in the presence of poison ivy - irritating.  

But, we have not lost our represented Republic and there is, still, representation.  

Now, is that representation skewed by things like love of fame and fortune? Yes.

Are votes cast in the Congress to appease money sources for campaigns? Yes.

Do we see unions and special interest groups vying for the power to persuade elected officials?  Yes.

But are we a Democracy?  Never were.  

Is that splitting hairs over words? No.

Guest


Guest

Obama was elected, and Romney is far richer.

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

colaguy wrote:Obama was elected, and Romney is far richer.

Is it your point that money doesn't impact or dominate national elections?

Wouldn't you agree we would have a more representative government if private funding of elections were made illegal?

What incentive would your congress person have then, to support a bill that would lower the taxes for a company like GE?

I want to see your answer ...

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

SheWrites wrote:Stepping in to this but first a question for clarification:  Is your name Words-linger or Word-slinger.  It makes a difference on perception.  Laughing 

"You think America is a democracy? Think again!!"  My reply is, of course, no.

Civics has been mentioned and is an excellent place to begin.

Those of age and registration have the voice in America.  The voice that wins is the voice with the most like minded votes.  It's a pretty close debate/vote/outcome.  When we live that close to a "rub" it's like being in the presence of poison ivy - irritating.  

But, we have not lost our represented Republic and there is, still, representation.  

Now, is that representation skewed by things like love of fame and fortune? Yes.

Are votes cast in the Congress to appease money sources for campaigns? Yes.

Do we see unions and special interest groups vying for the power to persuade elected officials?  Yes.

But are we a Democracy?  Never were.  

Is that splitting hairs over words? No.

It's Wordslinger.

My complaint isn't against either political party -- it's against campaign financing being taken over by the ultra rich and giant corporations -- neither of which have any incentive whatever to do any thing to help the average American.

Would you agree we would have a much more representative government if all campaign financing was done by the government? The amounts would be set by the office being sought -- Presidential candidates get so much, senators and representatives, etc.

Would you like to see such a system, or do you prefer one dominated by big money?

Guest


Guest

Wordslinger wrote:
colaguy wrote:Obama was elected, and Romney is far richer.

Is it your point that money doesn't impact or dominate national elections?

Wouldn't you agree we would have a more representative government if private funding of elections were made illegal?

What incentive would your congress person have then, to support a bill that would lower the taxes for a company like GE?

I want to see your answer ...

The tax laws are not so voluminous and complex so as to treat people or companies fairly... or ge would pay taxes.

The background point that is always glossed over is why there is any corp tax... it may trim a tiny portion from profit...

in reality it's just another cost passed back to the consumer. But we get the same leftist talkingpoints ignoring reality.

Guest


Guest

Wordslinger wrote:
SheWrites wrote:Stepping in to this but first a question for clarification:  Is your name Words-linger or Word-slinger.  It makes a difference on perception.  Laughing 

"You think America is a democracy? Think again!!"  My reply is, of course, no.

Civics has been mentioned and is an excellent place to begin.

Those of age and registration have the voice in America.  The voice that wins is the voice with the most like minded votes.  It's a pretty close debate/vote/outcome.  When we live that close to a "rub" it's like being in the presence of poison ivy - irritating.  

But, we have not lost our represented Republic and there is, still, representation.  

Now, is that representation skewed by things like love of fame and fortune? Yes.

Are votes cast in the Congress to appease money sources for campaigns? Yes.

Do we see unions and special interest groups vying for the power to persuade elected officials?  Yes.

But are we a Democracy?  Never were.  

Is that splitting hairs over words? No.

It's Wordslinger. (Have you taken that personality inventory yet over in the general discussion area?  clown  )

My complaint isn't against either political party -- it's against campaign financing being taken over by the ultra rich and giant corporations -- neither of which have any incentive whatever to do any thing to help the average American. (Then why not state straight up that you are against ultra rich and giant corporations - could have saved us all a little brain power on the civics lesson.  Suspect )

Would you agree we would have a much more representative government if all campaign financing was done by the government?  The amounts would be set by the office being sought -- Presidential candidates get so much, senators and representatives, etc. (No, I don't think the government needs a hand in the finances. That's the voice of the people, money/contributions of time in support of their candidate.
)

Would you like to see such a system, or do you prefer one dominated by big money? (Your beef is against the "haves" of the corporations. Which will take the argument, should you want it, from civics to economics.

I replied in red.

Markle

Markle

Wordslinger wrote:
SheWrites wrote:Stepping in to this but first a question for clarification:  Is your name Words-linger or Word-slinger.  It makes a difference on perception.  Laughing 

"You think America is a democracy? Think again!!"  My reply is, of course, no.

Civics has been mentioned and is an excellent place to begin.

Those of age and registration have the voice in America.  The voice that wins is the voice with the most like minded votes.  It's a pretty close debate/vote/outcome.  When we live that close to a "rub" it's like being in the presence of poison ivy - irritating.  

But, we have not lost our represented Republic and there is, still, representation.  

Now, is that representation skewed by things like love of fame and fortune? Yes.

Are votes cast in the Congress to appease money sources for campaigns? Yes.

Do we see unions and special interest groups vying for the power to persuade elected officials?  Yes.

But are we a Democracy?  Never were.  

Is that splitting hairs over words? No.

It's Wordslinger.

My complaint isn't against either political party -- it's against campaign financing being taken over by the ultra rich and giant corporations -- neither of which have any incentive whatever to do any thing to help the average American.

Would you agree we would have a much more representative government if all campaign financing was done by the government?  The amounts would be set by the office being sought -- Presidential candidates get so much, senators and representatives, etc.

Would you like to see such a system, or do you prefer one dominated by big money?

Who was it that broke the bank on campaign financing in 2008? The candidate with the closest ties to Communist Party.

In 2008, President Barack Hussein Obama, opted out of accepting matching public funds in order to have no limits or oversight on his campaign contributions. Millions came directly from foreign countries through the Obama Campaign Web Site.

President Obama spent over $750 million in order to buy the Oval Office. SEIU alone stated they spent $60 million. Senator John McCain was limited to $352 Million. In FACT Obama spent more in the 2008 Presidential Campaign than ALL candidates COMBINED in the 2004 presidential election.

So, once again, my Socialist/Communist good friend Wordslinger is desperate and therefore:

You think America is a Democracy? Think again!! Hamlet_quote_t_shirt-p2359314148773-1

Guest


Guest

Wordslinger wrote:
colaguy wrote:Obama was elected, and Romney is far richer.

Is it your point that money doesn't impact or dominate national elections? No.

Wouldn't you agree we would have a more representative government if private funding of elections were made illegal? Yes.

What incentive would your congress person have then, to support a bill that would lower the taxes for a company like GE? I prefer that US corporations not be taxed. The current system passes the taxes to the consumer, and inhibits the US corporations' competitiveness.  

I want to see your answer ...

Markle

Markle

colaguy wrote:Obama was elected, and Romney is far richer.

President Barack Hussein Obama collected and spent more money. So why are the Socialist/Communists whining?

Guest


Guest

This argument probably went over alot better on kos, nation, salon, huffpo, talkingpointsmemo, thinkprogress... etc.

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

Markle wrote:
colaguy wrote:Obama was elected, and Romney is far richer.

President Barack Hussein Obama collected and spent more money.  So why are the Socialist/Communists whining?


I see it's far too complex for you to comprehend the argument that big money shouldn't control campaign funding, regardless of party affiliation.

But what the hell, nobody said you didn't have an over abundance of stupidity.

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

colaguy wrote:
Wordslinger wrote:
colaguy wrote:Obama was elected, and Romney is far richer.

Is it your point that money doesn't impact or dominate national elections? No.

Wouldn't you agree we would have a more representative government if private funding of elections were made illegal? Yes.

What incentive would your congress person have then, to support a bill that would lower the taxes for a company like GE? I prefer that US corporations not be taxed. The current system passes the taxes to the consumer, and inhibits the US corporations' competitiveness.  

I want to see your answer ...

Q: If corporations are allowed to avoid all taxes, would that also apply to small businesses? You do realize that the rest of the taxpayers would have to make up for the difference, don't you? Using your logic, the average citizen gets hit either way, right?

As for American corporations not being competitive, tell that to GE, Mobil/Exxon, Boeing, etc. But, as you know, these corporations have a zillion ways of not paying taxes anyway ...

Guest


Guest

Are you for a consumption tax? That's basically all the corp tax is... just another way to fool the progressive sensibilities.

Markle

Markle

Wordslinger wrote:
Markle wrote:
colaguy wrote:Obama was elected, and Romney is far richer.

President Barack Hussein Obama collected and spent more money.  So why are the Socialist/Communists whining?


I see it's far too complex for you to comprehend the argument that big money shouldn't control campaign funding, regardless of party affiliation.

But what the hell, nobody said you didn't have an over abundance of stupidity.

You think America is a Democracy? Think again!! Socratestoo

Just can't face the fact that it was your guy who broke the bank and has led to billion dollar campaigns can you? You're quite a hoot!

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » You think America is a Democracy? Think again!!

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum