Now can we please have some sensible politicians?

[Nirvana Starseed]

We need people who are not illogical. I HATE NONLOGIC processes. Some of the things that should be agreed apon ATLEAST. For the good of all. I support the principle of free speech. All people must be allowed to express their political and spiritual views however impulsive without legal restrictions. Do you think most parties would support that? I commit myself to sending goodwill and the spirit of friendship to all involved in the political process especially those with differing political views. (basically committing ourselves to being nice to each other, very difficult one) Even though the majority may not always support my views I realize that the majority view, when properly informed, rarely will lead us on a dangerous path. I therefore seek to honor the will of the people. When I disagree with the will of the people I will not seek to forcefully control them or change them but will use peaceful means to inform and educate them. (One thing you notice in today's society is that the common man on the street seems to be a lot smarter than the average politician) There are a number of issues that cause division, heated debate and anger. Examples are abortion, gun control, social programs, drug legalization, military activities and others. Most cannot be resolved in the near future through the conversion of the one side to the other. I support the following unifying approach: To support the principle of fairness on controversial issues both sides must be heard even though the other side may be repulsive to me, for free speech and thought is the most important principle and the prime directive of unification and ultimate peace. I therefore commit to the principle of fair play realizing that both sides deserve to be heard and have their representatives in positions of power according to the will of the people. I believe in integrity and honesty and will seek to be truthful no matter what the opponents do. I seek not to distort or lie for the benefit of my party or for personal gain. This is going to be tough for the politicians, isn't it? I accept that we must be fiscally responsible and will do all in my power to create a balanced budget, except in times of national crisis. I will only support social programs that can be funded or continued without increasing the burden on the taxpayer. I agree that the people are taxed enough and seek to keep the budget within the range of current tax revenues and to not raise the percentage of taxes on anyone. Approximately 50% of our money goes to taxes and most people feel that's enough. Almost every legislator will say we're taxed enough. I agree to put the security of my country and the world above the views or actions of my own political party. If others of my party sabotage national security or undermine a just effort toward the elimination of threats I will be just as critical of them as the opposing party. I accept the fact that there is great waste and inefficiency in government spending and commit myself to eliminate waste and increase efficiency wherever and whenever possible. I accept and support the idea that we can save ourselves much grief by learning from the mistakes of history so we do not repeat them. It is therefore of extreme importance that the youth be accurately taught, without censorship, national and world history in a way that is of interest and will be absorbed by them. I will oppose all those who revise history in distorted fashion for political gain.

[Gargen]

i think there is a song that sums up what Nirvana is saying and it goes a little like this Oh I am an anti-christ And I am an anti-christian Don’t know what I want But I know how to get it I wanna destroy your passion boy ’cause i, I wanna be, anarchy In this fuckin’ city Anarchy for the usa It’s coming sometime, maybe You ... your parents are dreaming their shopping schemes ’cause I wanna be, anarchy Well it’s the only way to be (solo) Ha ha ha ha ha ha There are many ways to get what you want I use the best, well I use the rest Well I use the enemy I use anarchy ’cause i, I wanna be, anarchy Fuck the rat race man Is this the pmrc Or is this the dea Or is this the cia I thought it was the u.s.a. Not just another country Some other fuckin’ country And i, wanna be, anarchy Oh I wanna fuckin’ hear it man And i, wanna be, anarchy Let’s say it again boys And i, wanna be, anarchy Fuckin’ destroy and yes this isnt the sex pistols version it really isnt as good as the motley crue cover (no offense to the late Sid Vicious)

[Rakkantekimusouka]

/me rips Gargen a new one

[Howie]

You have my vote NirvanaStarseed! I believe that one major issue with our political process is that if you give an inch, then they take a foot. This is any side that you are on. So in response to that, each party will fight any of the other parties ideas regardless of the fact that they may believe in most of what is presented. It is unfortunate it has to be this way. But it is difficult to remain neutral. Take the second ammendant for example. I am a big gun advocate. But I have seen some measures that have been brought up and have a very good agenda behind them. Any resonable person could see that. However the agenda for the people against guns are to get thier foot in the door. As a result, the NRA an other gun advocates have to fight every issue that comes to the floor. This applies to many issues. That just being one example. Originally posted by NirvanaStarseed I accept and support the idea that we can save ourselves much * grief by learning from the mistakes of history so we do not repeat * them. It is therefore of extreme importance that the youth be * accurately taught, without censorship, national and world history in * a way that is of interest and will be absorbed by them. I will * oppose all those who revise history in distorted fashion for * political gain. This brings up a very difficult issue, for me at least. I feel very strongly about our constitutuon. And how our founding fathers did so well at drafting a resolution that could stand for so many years. But there are some things that they could not have forseen. But I am still at odds about changing the constitution.

[Rakkantekimusouka]

THANK YOU, Howetz!

[Nirvana Starseed]

Thanks Howe each party will fight any of the other parties ideas regardless of the fact that they may believe in most of what is presented. It is difficult to remain neutral. [/b] Exackly...... I feel very strongly about our constitutuon. And how our founding fathers did so well at drafting a resolution that could stand for so many years.[/b] I agree.... The problem is corruption will always creep in. One of the terms needs to be the use of correction according to what works. When you set a course for guidance you can't let it run without correcting it over time. Other people are going to come along and they are not the same people who made it. That makes a difference. The adjustments are needed by those who have sufficient understanding of the original intentions to keep them intact and to improve and add to it.

[Alric]

The problem is that people often forget that they might be wrong. How often do you see two sides argueing and one of them stops and says "You know what? I never thought about that before, maybe I should give this a second thought". Not that often. By the way, have you thought of running for public office yourself? Thats one way to get someone who agrees with you.

[Nirvana Starseed]

Hey Alric people should do that. hehe

[Belisarius]

"The will of the people" is a romantic term, but what it really means is what the majority wants to achieve through political means(force, threats, and violence) at the expense of the minority. Often times this voting minority is a coalition of people who seek the advancement of their own agenda and support others' agendas as well because the party pushing their agenda is pushing the other agendas as well. Politics isn't a pretty buisness, it's very nature involves threats, coercion, and violence with the aim of controlling other people. Corruption and violence within the political system is inevitable, reduced only by a ridiculous appeal to loyalty to the state, and to the people. There's nothing noble about politicians who are just gangsters writ large. The 'protection' they offer, especially in powerful nations like the US, is just as useful as that offered by gangs. To maintian the appearance of legitimacy gangs lack, the state resorts to lies, deception, pandering, and half-truths to fool a gullible public into believing they desire to be scincere servants of the people. I would rather have fewer politicians, not "sensible" ones.

[Nirvana Starseed]

Belisarius I would rather have fewer politicians, not \"sensible\" ones[/b] I would rather have politicians who know what they are doing. To solve the problem properly you need to increase the quality rather than cut down on the quantity. Some other agreements we would do well to consider....... I agree that extremism has been and is the cause of many problems in the world and seek to not impose extreme views on thepeople. If I happen to have extreme views, which I believe to be of value, I will seek to persuade by education rather than by force of law. It is also a problem when political opponents are called extremists when over a third of the public support them. Such accusations are extremism in disguise. I seek to not be extreme myself in distorting the image of opponents by calling them extremists when such is not true. For instance, it is not extremism to be simply for or against abortion as there are many on both sides of the equation. I support the elimination of poverty but realize there are two approaches to this. The first is to give a helping handout and the second is to provide circumstances so the person may help himself. Extremists on this issue have warred against each other and have been the cause of much division. I reject extremism on both sides and seek to recognize the value of both sides. There are times of helplessness when people need direct assistance and times when they need encouraged to stand on their own feet. I do not support handouts to those who are capable of helping themselves and refuse to do so. I support the separation of church and state, but reject extremism on both sides. I reject the extreme of specific religious influence dictating public policy even though all religions have the freedom to express their views. I also reject the other extreme that any mention of God, religious values, or the public display of religious symbols is to not be tolerated. I support equal rights for all races, both sexes and members of all religions and ideologies. I recognize that the large majority both sides of the political spectrum seek what is best for all races and minorities (even though the opposition has a different approach) and refuse to manufacture accusations for political gain. I recognize that the large majority both sides of the political spectrum seek what is best for the environment but again both sides have a different approach. Two extremes causing division are: The first seeks to conserve the environment even if there is strong economic and job loss. The second is seeking profits at the expense of the environment. The truth is the two are interdependent. A strong economy can provide funds to help the environment and a healthy environment provides for a good long-term good economy. I seek therefore to work with both sides of this issue and will seek cooperation rather than assigning blame. I seek to aid the environment without harming the economic structure. I recognize we are a nation of laws and will not support the subversion of law for political gain. I will condemn such subversion of those who share my views as well as those who do not. I will only support the establishment of necessary law as well as the elimination of bad, as well as useless laws that clutter the system. In the end, I support the example of John Kennedy who, whilecampaigning, found good things to say about his opposition and instead of tearing down he said "we can do better." I support the idea of converting by good works and ideas rather than tearing down the opposition. What do you guys think? Overall would the basic person agree with them? Politics is as metaphysical as anything else. People shy away from it but when you think of it, politics is such a powerful influence in our lives. The political problems need to be solved.