“Republicans” and “Democrats” what a load of crap

[Bob]

How many here are defined by a political party that cares nothing for you or your family? All I see posted lately are tag lines that start “Bush did this or that” – as if conservatives live or die by the guy who has betrayed many of the values that conservatives hold to. Republicans are guilty of this too.

So is there something bigger and more important than party that defines you? Spider, that is your family right? How about family, or fatherhood, or Christian, or American, or a philosophy of decentness? All of these seem much better anchors to weather the storms of shifting values. Look at the values of JFK – he would be considered a conservative if he were reincarnated today, or if that is too much to stomach, how about the values of Lincoln who was more concerned about holding the Union together than abolishing slavery. The truth is he would be considered a religious nut job and bigot by most “modern” standards, even more so for Jefferson or Washington.

So my point is this: parties change with the fickle winds not rooted in the pursuit of truth, but in the pursuit of power and self-preservation -- so when you start labeling yourself as Republican or Democrat you allow some of the baggage that comes with that identification. These two power-driven entities start to influence how you think, to hate the “other guy.” And become sheeple. As if conservatives and liberals were another freaking species to be held with contempt.

When I said that I was no longer a Republican a few years ago, it was liberating. I could vote for who I thought was the best person, (yes I have voted for a few Dems since that time.) Jefferson was very concerned the political parties would eventually rip the country apart. I am beginning to believe that he was right, because combined with the media we are awash in “the spectacle” that does not give a crap about getting at the core of things, and to find common ground. Those that give the “information” are concerned about ratings, money, and agenda. The media (and politicians I might add) love for two yelling heads in opposing boxes to screech and signify nothing, because in the end it means the status quoi – like some freaking opiate that deadens the collective American consciousness. The People get more and more stupid and pissed off "thinking" they have been wronged, as every random act of God is turned into a conspiracy caused by the other party. For political points, weak levies in New Orleans turn into a right-wing bomb-blast, or the twin towers are taken down by our government, not terrorists – all because some blog is regurgitated by those with agendas. Those left of center will be able to cite many examples where the right have some the same things for political gain, and divisiveness. Those that do this will rot in hell. The people of the nation gradually loose the ability to connect, emphasize, and have respect and get at common ground – because the are pathetic, small R's and D's – and not Americans first.

Look at the recent “immigration” debate. The Republicans as well as the Democrats were ignoring the will of the people on this one and wanted to pass it for their own personal gain and screw the people. It was damn hard to stop it as well. The switchboards had to be shut down in DC with the volume of calls to representatives telling them that We The People didn’t want it, but they still fought hard for it. If we are too busy yelling at each other they can keep treating us for granted, and sheeple us into small, controlled definitions.

[Northman]

Im a independent so i try to be as objective as possible when choosing a person for office or whatever politics wise. My family is more important than anything else including country. I know that Spider and a few others feel differently and thats their perogative. As you've stated, no politician gives a **** about the people of this country no matter what their party is. The U.S Goverment has been on the steep Decline for years now but that shouldnt be a shock to anyone at this point.

[jhat01]

The two party system is a stagnant joke. Here's a quote that pretty much sums it up:

“The tendency of the system is to drive to the middle,” she says. “The problem is, the middle isn’t where you find what most people want and believe in, but where you find the most voters.”

[Garcia Bronco]

Read Federalist Paper #10

[Spider]

How many here are defined by a political party that cares nothing for you or your family? All I see posted lately are tag lines that start “Bush did this or that” – as if conservatives live or die by the guy who has betrayed many of the values that conservatives hold to. Republicans are guilty of this too.

So is there something bigger and more important than party that defines you? Spider, that is your family right? How about family, or fatherhood, or Christian, or American, or a philosophy of decentness? All of these seem much better anchors to weather the storms of shifting values. Look at the values of JFK – he would be considered a conservative if he were reincarnated today, or if that is too much to stomach, how about the values of Lincoln who was more concerned about holding the Union together than abolishing slavery. The truth is he would be considered a religious nut job and bigot by most “modern” standards, even more so for Jefferson or Washington.

So my point is this: parties change with the fickle winds not rooted in the pursuit of truth, but in the pursuit of power and self-preservation -- so when you start labeling yourself as Republican or Democrat you allow some of the baggage that comes with that identification. These two power-driven entities start to influence how you think, to hate the “other guy.” And become sheeple. As if conservatives and liberals were another freaking species to be held with contempt.

When I said that I was no longer a Republican a few years ago, it was liberating. I could vote for who I thought was the best person, (yes I have voted for a few Dems since that time.) Jefferson was very concerned the political parties would eventually rip the country apart. I am beginning to believe that he was right, because combined with the media we are awash in “the spectacle” that does not give a crap about getting at the core of things, and to find common ground. Those that give the “information” are concerned about ratings, money, and agenda. The media (and politicians I might add) love for two yelling heads in opposing boxes to screech and signify nothing, because in the end it means the status quoi – like some freaking opiate that deadens the collective American consciousness. The People get more and more stupid and pissed off "thinking" they have been wronged, as every random act of God is turned into a conspiracy caused by the other party. For political points, weak levies in New Orleans turn into a right-wing bomb-blast, or the twin towers are taken down by our government, not terrorists – all because some blog is regurgitated by those with agendas. Those left of center will be able to cite many examples where the right have some the same things for political gain, and divisiveness. Those that do this will rot in hell. The people of the nation gradually loose the ability to connect, emphasize, and have respect and get at common ground – because the are pathetic, small R's and D's – and not Americans first.

Look at the recent “immigration” debate. The Republicans as well as the Democrats were ignoring the will of the people on this one and wanted to pass it for their own personal gain and screw the people. It was damn hard to stop it as well. The switchboards had to be shut down in DC with the volume of calls to representatives telling them that We The People didn’t want it, but they still fought hard for it. If we are too busy yelling at each other they can keep treating us for granted, and sheeple us into small, controlled definitions.

as sad as it is , I identify myself by my Job , I try not to , but I do , Fatherhood and family second , then political party , I am damn proud of my family , and I love them more then anything .....except for my Job ..... I am an American trucker , I am always in a hurry to get home and see my family , but then I have to get some miles .............
perhaps I need therapy ;D

[Bob]

Read Federalist Paper #10

Synopsis?

[Bronco Bob]

The two party system is a stagnant joke. Here's a quote that pretty much sums it up:

“The tendency of the system is to drive to the middle,” she says. “The problem is, the middle isn’t where you find what most people want and believe in, but where you find the most voters.”

So basically she is saying that the majority of people are on the left and right
but they are too lazy to get off their asses and vote for someone so the
middle gets to pick who they want instead because the middle has enough
ambition to vote?

[Bob]

I have heard somehwere that the truth is usually found somewhere between two extremes. I guess I am screwed then.

[Crushaholic]

How many here are defined by a political party that cares nothing for you or your family? All I see posted lately are tag lines that start “Bush did this or that” – as if conservatives live or die by the guy who has betrayed many of the values that conservatives hold to. Republicans are guilty of this too.

So is there something bigger and more important than party that defines you? Spider, that is your family right? How about family, or fatherhood, or Christian, or American, or a philosophy of decentness? All of these seem much better anchors to weather the storms of shifting values. Look at the values of JFK – he would be considered a conservative if he were reincarnated today, or if that is too much to stomach, how about the values of Lincoln who was more concerned about holding the Union together than abolishing slavery. The truth is he would be considered a religious nut job and bigot by most “modern” standards, even more so for Jefferson or Washington.

So my point is this: parties change with the fickle winds not rooted in the pursuit of truth, but in the pursuit of power and self-preservation -- so when you start labeling yourself as Republican or Democrat you allow some of the baggage that comes with that identification. These two power-driven entities start to influence how you think, to hate the “other guy.” And become sheeple. As if conservatives and liberals were another freaking species to be held with contempt.

When I said that I was no longer a Republican a few years ago, it was liberating. I could vote for who I thought was the best person, (yes I have voted for a few Dems since that time.) Jefferson was very concerned the political parties would eventually rip the country apart. I am beginning to believe that he was right, because combined with the media we are awash in “the spectacle” that does not give a crap about getting at the core of things, and to find common ground. Those that give the “information” are concerned about ratings, money, and agenda. The media (and politicians I might add) love for two yelling heads in opposing boxes to screech and signify nothing, because in the end it means the status quoi – like some freaking opiate that deadens the collective American consciousness. The People get more and more stupid and pissed off "thinking" they have been wronged, as every random act of God is turned into a conspiracy caused by the other party. For political points, weak levies in New Orleans turn into a right-wing bomb-blast, or the twin towers are taken down by our government, not terrorists – all because some blog is regurgitated by those with agendas. Those left of center will be able to cite many examples where the right have some the same things for political gain, and divisiveness. Those that do this will rot in hell. The people of the nation gradually loose the ability to connect, emphasize, and have respect and get at common ground – because the are pathetic, small R's and D's – and not Americans first.

Look at the recent “immigration” debate. The Republicans as well as the Democrats were ignoring the will of the people on this one and wanted to pass it for their own personal gain and screw the people. It was damn hard to stop it as well. The switchboards had to be shut down in DC with the volume of calls to representatives telling them that We The People didn’t want it, but they still fought hard for it. If we are too busy yelling at each other they can keep treating us for granted, and sheeple us into small, controlled definitions.

Great post, Bob. People need to wake up to the fact that politicians of both parties are focused on gaining and holding on to power. Once that is realized, maybe some of this bickering simply based on "Republicans vs. Democrats" will stop and we can focus on what's actually good for America...

[Stormontheplains]

Great post Bob! Keep up the good work

[Garcia Bronco]

Synopsis?


Basically this:

It was written by James Madison. He basically says that political parties (a.k.a Factions) are the disease of a democracy/republican government.


"By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.

There are two methods of curing the mischiefs of faction: the one, by removing its causes; the other, by controlling its effects.

There are again two methods of removing the causes of faction: the one, by destroying the liberty which is essential to its existence; the other, by giving to every citizen the same opinions, the same passions, and the same interests."


The first method is actually happening and the second is impossible. Here Madison is basically saying factions destroy the liberty of others. He's also saying the only way to abolish factions is create a utopia or have everyone in the same faction. That's impossible.




http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa10.htm

[BroncoInferno]

A multi-party system would work no better. In fact, they are worse. It becomes extraordinarily difficult to form a consensus on many issues in such systems. See some of the problems in the German parliment from the last couple of years as proof.

[alkemical]

If you only have two choices (for the most part), how sure are 'we' that we aren't being directed to voting for those two guys (illusion of choice).

Karl Marx stated in Das Kapital about the end result of capitalism is communism - it's about a/b choices - nothing more. When you interject that into the market place of ideas, it's no different.

We were duped along time ago into this.

[ant1999e]

Jefferson was very concerned the political parties would eventually rip the country apart. I am beginning to believe that he was right, because combined with the media we are awash in “the spectacle” that does not give a crap about getting at the core of things, and to find common ground. Those that give the “information” are concerned about ratings, money, and agenda.

This is definately happening in the US today and ratings, money, and agenda are breaking down our political system and destroying our country.

[BurgundyNGold]

Read Federalist Paper #10
Damned nice pull, GB. One of the best editorials ever written, IMO.

[c_lazy_r]

What should happen then, Bob (or anyone else)?

The "machine" has become so large that it seems almost impossible to change in small increments. It would appear to me that we just need to unplug it and reboot.

I ask myself a question every 4 years... Are you telling me that these 2 or 3 guys are the best options available to run this country? My answer is always "no".

[Garcia Bronco]

What should happen then, Bob (or anyone else)?

The "machine" has become so large that it seems almost impossible to change in small increments. It would appear to me that we just need to unplug it and reboot.

I ask myself a question every 4 years... Are you telling me that these 2 or 3 guys are the best options available to run this country? My answer is always "no".


Honestly...the first thing I would do is completely decrease all term limits. Then I would eliminate most social programs. Next thing I would do is reform the tax code. then I would make all elected positions in the Senate, House, and WH unpaid positions...or at the very least make the pay an average of the yearly household income.

[Play2win]

What should happen then, Bob (or anyone else)?

The "machine" has become so large that it seems almost impossible to change in small increments. It would appear to me that we just need to unplug it and reboot.

I ask myself a question every 4 years... Are you telling me that these 2 or 3 guys are the best options available to run this country? My answer is always "no".

Maybe we should switch to multi-party system, where each party campaigns a platform, not an individual. There can be as many parties as see fit. The voters vote on the party and their platform, not the individual. This way, the accessibility of other parties to be involved in, if not compete and possibly win, the political process would be much greater. It would be much more open and fair.

I love how some talk about the "open market" and how the "market" should decide, just keep it an open market. This when the whole of our political system is one of the most closed markets ever. Just like the campaigning politician "We need to keep the markets open", then mumbling to himself, "as long as I keep MY markets safe, secure and CLOSED."

[Play2win]

Honestly...the first thing I would do is completely decrease all term limits. Then I would eliminate most social programs. Next thing I would do is reform the tax code. then I would make all elected positions in the Senate, House, and WH unpaid positions...or at the very least make the pay an average of the yearly household income.

Note to all the extreme libertarians (not saying you are one) out there- There is a little thing called the INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION that has happened since the Framers convened and set forth the design of our nation. Entitlement spending is a necessity (to some degree) because of the Industrial Revolution.

[c_lazy_r]

Note to all the extreme libertarians (not saying you are one) out there- There is a little thing called the INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION that has happened since the Framers convened and set forth the design of our nation. Entitlement spending is a necessity (to some degree) because of the Industrial Revolution.

Can you expand on that? I am unsure of what you mean.

[baja]

If you only have two choices (for the most part), how sure are 'we' that we aren't being directed to voting for those two guys (illusion of choice).

Karl Marx stated in Das Kapital about the end result of capitalism is communism - it's about a/b choices - nothing more. When you interject that into the market place of ideas, it's no different.

We were duped along time ago into this.

Were it up to me I would change your tag to read "Everything is true but nothing is real"

[alkemical]

Were it up to me I would change your tag to read "Everything is true but nothing is real"

Explain further if you could. I read many different interpretations into this post Baja, and just would like clarification of intent.

Thanks,

Me.

[baja]

Explain further if you could. I read many different interpretations into this post Baja, and just would like clarification of intent.

Thanks,

Me.

We live in a collective allusion therefore nothing, as we see it, is real.

Within the illusion everything is true in the eyes of the beholder.

IE there is no wrong and no right just illusion.

What is IS.

[baja]

PS There is no me.

[c_lazy_r]

PS There is no me.

:)

[Garcia Bronco]

Note to all the extreme libertarians (not saying you are one) out there- There is a little thing called the INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION that has happened since the Framers convened and set forth the design of our nation. Entitlement spending is a necessity (to some degree) because of the Industrial Revolution.

IMO that's where this country went wrong. SS for example is important, but it's a flawed idea that government has access to it and it's not in the hands of the actual people who are the stake holders in the money. It's a complete "rob Peter to pay Paul" situation and I would like to see it gone or changed.

[Bob]

A multi-party system would work no better. In fact, they are worse. It becomes extraordinarily difficult to form a consensus on many issues in such systems. See some of the problems in the German parliment from the last couple of years as proof.

I am not sure that a multi-party system would be better either, but what does need to happen is for people to start thinking for themselves, and create some distance between themself and their previous party. As people are able to do this, and make it clear that they are doing this, politicians are less able to count on the masses to fall lock-step into place, but are forced to listen the will of the people. The example I keep harping on is the the imigration debate. The parties wanted one thing, the people another, when we stood up, they eventually had to listen. If the Africian-American voter, the Union voter, just voted for the right person, the Dems couldnt ignore them any longer, and maybe would not take those blocks of groups for granted any longer. If Mormons, and Evangelical folks didnt vote in mass for Rebublicans no matter what, than they would be listened to by those that represent them.

It is a small way of taking some power back

[Bob]

IMO that's where this country went wrong. SS for example is important, but it's a flawed idea that government has access to it and it's not in the hands of the actual people who are the stake holders in the money. It's a complete "rob Peter to pay Paul" situation and I would like to see it gone or changed.

When Social Security was setup life expectancy was well below 65, and the number of workers vs. those getting benefits was 1 to 7 (I forgot what the ratio is now) Now with life expectancy way above 65, and the costs of medical care skyrocketing, the system does need to be changed. I am not sure what to, but I do think that once certain benefits are extended it is VERY hard to take them back if they are too expensive.

Another unintended consequence of shifting the responsibility of elder-care from the family and church to the state is that there is less urgency of the individual to have children, and to save $ for the future. An extreme example that socialist ideas destroy motivation was seen in the old Soviet Union. In most European countries they have created a system of support that is not sustainable, and will implode. The ratio of workers to retirees is something like 2 workers for every retiree – that is expected to get worse, so what happens is each worker that is close to retirement wants their entitlements, and damn be the future generations that are expected to pay for the bill. Keep in mind that population rates in Europe right now ate less than 1.4 per couple. You need 2.1 just to break even (which is where the USA is.) If you were a very bright young person in a European county getting taxed at very high rates (and had the capacity to move) to where the tax burden is less, it might be hard to pass up, as who would want to support a system that will not reward you now, and wont be around in the future.

[c_lazy_r]

When Social Security was setup life expectancy was well below 65, and the number of workers vs. those getting benefits was 1 to 7 (I forgot what the ratio is now) Now with life expectancy way above 65, and the costs of medical care skyrocketing, the system does need to be changed. I am not sure what to, but I do think that once certain benefits are extended it is VERY hard to take them back if they are too expensive.

Another unintended consequence of shifting the responsibility of elder-care from the family and church to the state is that there is less urgency of the individual to have children, and to save $ for the future. An extreme example that socialist ideas destroy motivation was seen in the old Soviet Union. In most European countries they have created a system of support that is not sustainable, and will implode. The ratio of workers to retirees is something like 2 workers for every retiree – that is expected to get worse, so what happens is each worker that is close to retirement wants their entitlements, and damn be the future generations that are expected to pay for the bill. Keep in mind that population rates in Europe right now ate less than 1.4 per couple. You need 2.1 just to break even (which is where the USA is.) If you were a very bright young person in a European county getting taxed at very high rates (and had the capacity to move) to where the tax burden is less, it might be hard to pass up, as who would want to support a system that will not reward you now, and wont be around in the future.

I stole this quote from the libertarian website as a possible option to SS.

"The federal government owns assets worth trillions of dollars - assets that it simply doesn't need to perform its Constitutional functions. By selling those assets over time, we can keep the promises that were made to today's retirees, and to those nearing retirement, while freeing the rest of America from a failed Social Security system."

[BurgundyNGold]

Honestly...the first thing I would do is completely decrease all term limits. Then I would eliminate most social programs. Next thing I would do is reform the tax code. then I would make all elected positions in the Senate, House, and WH unpaid positions...or at the very least make the pay an average of the yearly household income.
Somewhere in there you should enact some real campaign finance reform. There is so much $$$ spent to get people into office that candidates are basically sold, bought and in pocket before they are even elected. Also, including some form of equal time clause would be an excellent idea, as currently the Dems and Reps control most of the money and the means of public access which means that they are largely the only ones to get any air time.

[Bob]

I stole this quote from the libertarian website as a possible option to SS.

"The federal government owns assets worth trillions of dollars - assets that it simply doesn't need to perform its Constitutional functions. By selling those assets over time, we can keep the promises that were made to today's retirees, and to those nearing retirement, while freeing the rest of America from a failed Social Security system."

Not sure if i want the US to follow the GM model to success...:pity:

[BurgundyNGold]

Not sure if i want the US to follow the GM model to success...:pity:

Besides, why sell off federal assets to cover federal shortfalls on federal promises when we can simply deflate the US dollar to the point where it is worth less than the Canadian dollar (1.04 : 1, it's getting there folks) and dance around gleefully as the fire sale rages on Wall Street and we leak $400B+ a year to China?

:thumbs:

[c_lazy_r]

Besides, why sell off federal assets to cover federal shortfalls on federal promises when we can simply deflate the US dollar to the point where it is worth less than the Canadian dollar (1.04 : 1, it's getting there folks) and dance around gleefully as the fire sale rages on Wall Street and we leak $400B+ a year to China?

:thumbs:

Maybe so I can stop paying 12% of my income into a retirement account that will probably never be available for me. And that's just the tip of the iceberg...

[BurgundyNGold]

Maybe so I can stop paying 12% of my income into a retirement account that will probably never be available for me. And that's just the tip of the iceberg...
Yeah, I should've probably used the :rolleyes: emoticon instead, lol. The Federal government is a mess and neither party will change it for the simple reasons that a) everyone likes free candy, and b) it isn't politically expedient to suggest (let alone enforce) that we live within our means.

[c_lazy_r]

Yeah, I should've probably used the :rolleyes: emoticon instead, lol. The Federal government is a mess and neither party will change it for the simple reasons that a) everyone likes free candy, and b) it isn't politically expedient to suggest (let alone enforce) that we live within our means.

I missed the sarcasm...my bad.

[alkemical]

We live in a collective allusion therefore nothing, as we see it, is real.

Within the illusion everything is true in the eyes of the beholder.

IE there is no wrong and no right just illusion.

What is IS.

"Is", "is." "is" — the idiocy of the word haunts me. If it were abolished, human thought might begin to make sense. I don't know what anything "is"; I only know how it seems to me at this moment. - Robert anton wilson

[alkemical]

PS There is no me.

I AM ;)

[baja]

"Is", "is." "is" — the idiocy of the word haunts me. If it were abolished, human thought might begin to make sense. I don't know what anything "is"; I only know how it seems to me at this moment. - Robert anton wilson

Is is all there Is unless of course you are one of the few that has woken up.

'Is' is the present moment and that is all there is

[baja]

I AM ;)

Not if there is no IS than you would have been or you might be but not I am.

[Cito Pelon]

How many here are defined by a political party that cares nothing for you or your family? . . . . . . ..

As I've said many times, when it comes to the Federal Government how an individual votes is not real important. The DNC and the RNC pretty much run the Federal Government.

The huge amount of power that the Committe Chairs have, the Speaker of the House has, the Majority and Minority Leaders of the Houses of Congress have mean that if an entity - the DNC and RNC - can control those positions of power, they can run the Federal Government.

And IMO, they do.

[Bob]

As I've said many times, when it comes to the Federal Government how an individual votes is not real important. The DNC and the RNC pretty much run the Federal Government.

The huge amount of power that the Committe Chairs have, the Speaker of the House has, the Majority and Minority Leaders of the Houses of Congress have mean that if an entity - the DNC and RNC - can control those positions of power, they can run the Federal Government.

And IMO, they do.

Maybe, but at least we can vote, and we can still speak out and make a difference if enough folks speak out...unlike the land of Putin.

[alkemical]

Is is all there Is unless of course you are one of the few that has woken up.

'Is' is the present moment and that is all there is


Not if there is no IS than you would have been or you might be but not I am.


Not so - you are relating "Is" to just a time perception, and if that's the case - since the 'present' would be the only occupation in time (Past/future non-existent), there would only be I AM. I AM would be "present". Since it would not be "I WAS" or "I WILLBE", i'm only left with "I AM".

[baja]

i'm only left with "I AM".
__________________

Well that's what I am sayin...

Define 'I'

Define 'me'

BTW the present moment is the only place where time in non existent.

[alkemical]

i'm only left with "I AM".
__________________

Well that's what I am sayin...

Define 'I'

Define 'me'

BTW the present moment is the only place where time in non existent.


Well - sort of not really. Then we start getting into possible dimensions, and where time falls into/out of that. I mean time may only exist in the third dimension - as far as we can tell. It doesn't appear to exist on the 2D world (although since i'm not a 2D object - i am not sure of this).

From a spiritual POV i totally understand your point.

I can define "I" and "me" depending on what mood i'm in Baja. ;) - There's at least one more of "myself" in here as well.

Oh by the way i had a real interesting expeirence camping this past weekend. But basically i saw the eye, everrrrrrywhere.

[baja]

Ever read 'The Four Agreements' ?

[alkemical]

Ever read 'The Four Agreements' ?

No - i'm busy working on my own book. But it's not much different in princple than most other systems. Just probably tuned to people who will respond to it much better. (Maybe nor so for the latin/southern peoples).

I mean the eigth-fold path contains some of the same Ruiz uses in his 4 agreements. I'm not "knocking it" - and honestly Baja - the books you recommend me - i filter and give to my friends. It's not that i don't need to read them (I do, but mostly just to see HOW they wrote it down) - but i find it's much suitable for others).

[baja]

Being in the world and not of the world is the challenge. There are those beings that have mastered that and I benefit by reading/practicing what they offer.

But I hear ya the truth is not complex and those that have discovered it all find it to be the same unchanging truth so of course the different works are saying the same thing, otherwise they would not be reflecting truth.

[baja]

There is always more to unravel

[alkemical]

Being in the world and not of the world is the challenge. There are those beings that have mastered that and I benefit by reading/practicing what they offer.

But I hear ya the truth is not complex and those that have discovered it all find it to be the same unchanging truth so of course the different works are saying the same thing, otherwise they would not be reflecting truth.


I'm working on taking some old...mediations and re-writing them for today. Doing things slightly different but keeping the overall psycholigical principles the same.

Trust me baja - i do look at your reccomendations - just that for the 'power of now' - i was already doing that 'years' ago - so i took the book and gave it to an ex-gf of mine. She loves it and it has made her life great, she got rid of her 'ADD", etc.

I'm just operating on a bit of a different wave is all.

[alkemical]

There is always more to unravel

always. It's why i use people as my mirror.

[baja]

always. It's why i use people as my mirror.

What do you mean by that?

[RocBronc]

Somewhere in there you should enact some real campaign finance reform. There is so much $$$ spent to get people into office that candidates are basically sold, bought and in pocket before they are even elected. Also, including some form of equal time clause would be an excellent idea, as currently the Dems and Reps control most of the money and the means of public access which means that they are largely the only ones to get any air time.

The problem with restricting money is when you do that you restrict people's political speech which is our first amendment right. The problem is not the corruption of money in politics it's that we have corrupt politicians.

My solution is that every penny that is given to a politician should be public knowledge and no more than one "group" away from it's source. (You can only give money to a group that has to give it's money directly to a group so you can't "hide" support of a politician by giving money to group A, who gives it to group B, who gives it to group C who finally gives it to a politician.)

[Garcia Bronco]

The problem with restricting money is when you do that you restrict people's political speech which is our first amendment right. The problem is not the corruption of money in politics it's that we have corrupt politicians.

My solution is that every penny that is given to a politician should be public knowledge and no more than one "group" away from it's source. (You can only give money to a group that has to give it's money directly to a group so you can't "hide" support of a politician by giving money to group A, who gives it to group B, who gives it to group C who finally gives it to a politician.)

I don't think businesses should be able to make contributions as a business.

[Spider]

I don't think businesses should be able to make contributions as a business.

they couldnt , thats why the SCOTUS ruled a business can be treated as a individual , with lofty tax holes ......... we got screwed when that happened , Guys like FDR went to the way side .......

[RocBronc]

I don't think businesses should be able to make contributions as a business.

I tend to agree with you... But by the same reasoning neither should Unions...

[Spider]

I tend to agree with you... But by the same reasoning neither should Unions...

agreed , unions should be considered part of a company ........

[alkemical]

What do you mean by that?

People reflect back to you maybe things you don't identify within yourself, not to mention - more times that not - i like getting the world reflected back to me from someone else's POV. That's why i don't turn down any book, etc - or any good conversation with people (for those that want conversation, not confrontation anyway).

[Cito Pelon]

The problem with restricting money is when you do that you restrict people's political speech which is our first amendment right. The problem is not the corruption of money in politics it's that we have corrupt politicians.

My solution is that every penny that is given to a politician should be public knowledge and no more than one "group" away from it's source. (You can only give money to a group that has to give it's money directly to a group so you can't "hide" support of a politician by giving money to group A, who gives it to group B, who gives it to group C who finally gives it to a politician.)

My solution is allow any amount of money to be gathered, but for every say 10k gathered there has to be some amount of community service. That's a fair balance between the lavish fundraisers, time on the job itself, and time with one's constituents.

[Cito Pelon]

Maybe, but at least we can vote, and we can still speak out and make a difference if enough folks speak out...unlike the land of Putin.

Sure, but we have to wrench some power back from the leadership positions in the US Congress. They make deals on their own, and this is nothing new, but more often the deals they make these days are bereft of constituent input. They have to follow the money, and the money is from the DNC and RNC.