Occupy Wall Street protest

[ZoologyGirl]

I used to consider myself very liberal, and with some issues I'd say I still am. But with other issues I lean more right. And with other issues I lean away from both. That's why I hate labels...democrats tend to agree with nearly everything their party stands for, and republicans tend to agree with nearlyeverything their party stands for....and if they don't conform people shout out "Treason!"..."You're not a real democrat/republican!"...etc... Foolishness. Conforming to a label. I find it impossible to pick any party I may or may not belong to now, but I'd say I'm centrist and/or libertarian with dashes of liberalism and conservative. And I like pizza. Is there a political party for those who like pizza. That sounds like a great party to belong to. Forget the tea party, I'm going to the pizza party!

I have become disenchanted with the political system.

 

[Nanci]

I've always been a single-issue voter. For a long time my issue was pro-choice. That is still important to me, but the older I got, and the less of my money I wanted the government to take away by force to support things I didn't believe in, the more I became a fiscal conservative. Yes, I still support gay marriage, and legalization of marijuana and who knows how many other "liberal" ideas, but we have GOT TO stop spending money.

Here's a little song for our listening enjoyment!

 

[Rich Z]

I used to consider myself very liberal, and with some issues I'd say I still am. But with other issues I lean more right. And with other issues I lean away from both. That's why I hate labels...democrats tend to agree with nearly everything their party stands for, and republicans tend to agree with nearlyeverything their party stands for....and if they don't conform people shout out "Treason!"..."You're not a real democrat/republican!"...etc... Foolishness. Conforming to a label. I find it impossible to pick any party I may or may not belong to now, but I'd say I'm centrist and/or libertarian with dashes of liberalism and conservative. And I like pizza. Is there a political party for those who like pizza. That sounds like a great party to belong to. Forget the tea party, I'm going to the pizza party!

I have become disenchanted with the political system.

Which is a compelling reason why the party system really should be abandoned in favor of ALL representatives being independent. When your representatives vote for what the party wants instead of what their constituents want, then they are really no longer the constituents' representatives. They are the PARTY's representatives casting votes for what the PARTY wants regardless of what YOU want from your representative. We are now, therefore, completely irrelevant to the political process. Until about 6 months before election time, of course.

So someone please tell me what "independent" means exactly, and why we should all be taking a critical look at exactly WHY we would want our representatives to be dependent on anything or anyone except our votes to keep their jobs.

 

[Nova_C]

In the US, do you guys have a separate vote for the president? As in, you vote for your local rep, but there's another vote specifically to select a president?

 

[Nanci]

This is who and what I voted for in the 2010 election:

US Senator, Congress 6, Governor, Attorney Gen., CFO, Comm. of Agriculture, State Senate 14, State Rep. 11, Justice Canady (yes or no), Justice Labarga (yes or no), Justice Perry (yes or no), Justice Polston (yes or no), Judge Clark (yes or no), Judge Hawkes (yes or no), Judge Kahn, Jr. (yes or no), Judge Padovano (yes or no), Judge Rowe, Judge Wetherell, Judge Wolf, County Comm. 2, County Comm. 4, School Board 1, School Board 5, Soil and Water, Amendment 1, Amendment 2, Amendment 4, Amendment 5, Amendment 6, Amendment 8, State Referendum 1, Question 1, Question 2, Question 3,
Question 4, Question 5, Question 6 and Init. Ordinance 1.

So national, state, local levels.

The vote for president is every four years and comes up again in 2012. But it would not be separate, it would be part of the general election.

 

[tsst]

The fact that I'm one of the 'liberals' you blame for all your problems is pretty well known around here, so I'll ignore the rest of your post in the interest of avoiding a flame war.

However, I'll bit on the quoted bit. What benefits does Canada receive from the US military, exactly?

You're jesting correct?

I don't blame conservatives and I don't blame liberals. I blame all politics in general. I am suspect of anyone who is quick to blame solely one party. I am suspect of anyone who believes their party (for lack of a better term) to be blameless.

Well said!

I used to consider myself very liberal, and with some issues I'd say I still am. But with other issues I lean more right. And with other issues I lean away from both. That's why I hate labels...democrats tend to agree with nearly everything their party stands for, and republicans tend to agree with nearlyeverything their party stands for....and if they don't conform people shout out "Treason!"..."You're not a real democrat/republican!"...etc... Foolishness. Conforming to a label. I find it impossible to pick any party I may or may not belong to now, but I'd say I'm centrist and/or libertarian with dashes of liberalism and conservative. And I like pizza. Is there a political party for those who like pizza. That sounds like a great party to belong to. Forget the tea party, I'm going to the pizza party!

I have become disenchanted with the political system.

Well said!

Which is a compelling reason why the party system really should be abandoned in favor of ALL representatives being independent. When your representatives vote for what the party wants instead of what their constituents want, then they are really no longer the constituents' representatives. They are the PARTY's representatives casting votes for what the PARTY wants regardless of what YOU want from your representative. We are now, therefore, completely irrelevant to the political process. Until about 6 months before election time, of course.

So someone please tell me what "independent" means exactly, and why we should all be taking a critical look at exactly WHY we would want our representatives to be dependent on anything or anyone except our votes to keep their jobs.

I like this idea. Abolishment of the party system!

 

[JoannaD]

You're jesting correct?

The Canadian system is very different. The prime minister is based on which party has won the most seats in parliament. Since I believe Nova C is Canadian he is just double checking that that is how it is done. American politics is not taught in Canadian schools.

 

[Nanci]

I'm trying to decide how badly I want to vote in the presidential primary. It means changing my party affiliation from NPA to a major party. Which you can't do on-line, it has to be mailed in with a signature. I think this year I know more about the candidates than I ever have before.

 

[tsst]

The Canadian system is very different. The prime minister is based on which party has won the most seats in parliament. Since I believe Nova C is Canadian he is just double checking that that is how it is done. American politics is not taught in Canadian schools.

Sorry, I should have only quoted the part below.

... What benefits does Canada receive from the US military, exactly?

You're jesting correct?

 

[JoannaD]

Sorry, I should have only quoted the part below.

You're jesting correct?

I am originally Canadian and I am now an American citizen. The Canadian armed forces are not what the American is and will never be. But Canada has a long and proud history of sending forces to where they are needed. They have assisted American armed forces and contributed in Iraq, NATO missions and many others. The American armed forces are mighty and built that way because that is what Americans want and feel is important. They are not doing it for the Canadians and the Canadians have not asked for that. I am not sure what benefits you think the Canadians receive from the American military.

 

[James673]

The vote for president is every four years and comes up again in 2014. But it would not be separate, it would be part of the general election.

The next presidential election is on November 6, 2012.

 

[Nanci]

The next presidential election is on November 6, 2012.

I am so smart! S M RT!!

Thanks...I knew that...

 

[tsst]

Let me start by saying I would be the first to thank any man or woman defending world freedom and safety no matter what nation they are from. The proud history of nor the actions of the Canadian armed forces is not the question.

As far as Canada benefiting... Safety by association?!?! Also throw in money saved by Canadian citizenry on the lesser need for a larger military. A skosh of technology maybe?! Let's not forget ARPANET, the US military funded and developed first gen internet. To name a few.

I never meant to imply Canada asked for anything but to deny they benefit directly from being a northern border neighbor and direct ally of the USA and in kind the US military is a little absurd.

My response being a bit digressive, I yield my soapbox back to the original topic.

 

[JoannaD]

Let me start by saying I would be the first to thank any man or woman defending world freedom and safety no matter what nation they are from. The proud history of nor the actions of the Canadian armed forces is not the question.

As far as Canada benefiting... Safety by association?!?! Also throw in money saved by Canadian citizenry on the lesser need for a larger military. A skosh of technology maybe?! Let's not forget ARPANET, the US military funded and developed first gen internet. To name a few.

I never meant to imply Canada asked for anything but to deny they benefit directly from being a northern border neighbor and direct ally of the USA and in kind the US military is a little absurd.

My response being a bit digressive, I yield my soapbox back to the original topic.

You could also say Canada's proximity and strong association with the US puts it at greater risk of terrorist or other attacks.

I don't deny some of the points you make, I just want to point out it is not black and white. In addition, some countries honestly do not feel the need to have a large military and do not want to have the same financial investment in a big army as does the US. It is a different sensibility that may be hard to understand as an American. (And if any derogatory tone is heard there, none is intended.)

I'll get off my soap box now too!

 

[tsst]

You could also say Canada's proximity and strong association with the US puts it at greater risk of terrorist or other attacks.

I can see the terrorist side of your point and would agree that indirect associative risk is there. I would however contend that other attacks as in direct invasion, declaration of war against Canada, state sponsored terrorism, etc are greatly diminished by being allies.

I don't deny some of the points you make, I just want to point out it is not black and white. In addition, some countries honestly do not feel the need to have a large military and do not want to have the same financial investment in a big army as does the US. It is a different sensibility that may be hard to understand as an American. (And if any derogatory tone is heard there, none is intended.)

I think that lack of feeling the need to have a large military is another side benefit of being allies with the US. Imagine if you will our military were the equivalent of the Kuwait army. Would Canada not need to redefine its defensive philosophy/sensibility and quite probably its investment?

Trust me we don't like our financial investment either but the thought of the alternative is far worse imho. I also think that our investment could be much more efficiently made.

Also I intended nothing derogatory. I apologize if it was interpreted that way. I appreciate your opinion as an American with Canadian background.

 

[12600]

Believe it or not, Canada helped a lot more then Nova_C probably sees from his side. (As far as War on Terrorism.)

Canada is the producer for our 8-wheeled prized horse we named the Stryker. And it did an Amazing job in Iraq (lots of maintenance, but what US Army Vehicle didn't.) I saw 4-6 Canadian Soldiers there the whole 15 months I was there, but never did I have a lack of presence from Canada not being there to support us.

 

[Nova_C]

I think the major sticking point is that Canada is safer with a strong American military, which is something I actually don't agree with. At least, it's not a significant difference.

Ultimately, Canada is unable to defend her own borders in the event of a large invasion. WE have 32 million people and the second largest land area in the world. We simply do not have the capability to defend from invasion.

However, the only nation to ever invade Canada is the US and that will remain so for a very long time. It is not due to the US 'protecting' us, but due to the fact that mounting a full invasion over an ocean to try to occupy a nation like Canada is simply not feasible. The US dropped nuclear weapons rather than try to mount an invasion of Japan. The only way the allies were able to invade Nazi occupied France was because of the British isles as a staging point. The US has never had an invading force threaten your mainland.

People just don't invade over an ocean. Canada is protected by the fact that invading us is a logistical nightmare.

 

[tsst]

I think the major sticking point is that Canada is safer with a strong American military, which is something I actually don't agree with. At least, it's not a significant difference.

Ultimately, Canada is unable to defend her own borders in the event of a large invasion. WE have 32 million people and the second largest land area in the world. We simply do not have the capability to defend from invasion.

However, the only nation to ever invade Canada is the US and that will remain so for a very long time. It is not due to the US 'protecting' us, but due to the fact that mounting a full invasion over an ocean to try to occupy a nation like Canada is simply not feasible. The US dropped nuclear weapons rather than try to mount an invasion of Japan. The only way the allies were able to invade Nazi occupied France was because of the British isles as a staging point. The US has never had an invading force threaten your mainland.

People just don't invade over an ocean. Canada is protected by the fact that invading us is a logistical nightmare.

I guess we will have to disagree. I believe even the US is significantly safer having strong allies. :shrugs:

 

[Nova_C]

I don't actually disagree with that. But it's a matter of what kind of safer. Having strong allies abroad is good for many reasons, including the ability to extend the sphere of influence. This in turn allows a nation to affect decision making in foreign nations is domestically beneficial.

In the case of especially the US and Canada, though, it doesn't really change the fact that no one can directly invade over the ocean. It does change the fact that foreign operations are safer, economic activity abroad is safer, etc.

Probably the one nation that can say they benefit directly from a strong American military is Israel. The rest of America's allies aren't nearly so dependent.

 

[12600]

This day and Age, water means nothing. There are amazing ships, planes... water is not an issue, trust me. Especially when all it takes is an Airborne Agent to be released to start that war. And it take only 1 person/ 1 UAV Drone to do it.