is a draft imminent?

[tim929]

Low aptitude recruits are best

suited to REMF (Rear Echelon Mother F#*$ers,for you civilians) type positions.Under fire,I would hate to the think

that the guy with the M-16 and a bunch of frag grenades behind me has a tough time remembering left from right.Low

aptitude recruits also tend to be the anti scocial,dropped out of highschool to persue drugs,abused by thier step

father types.You dont need someone with anger management issues running around with an M-240 machinegun and an

attitude problem in an environment where the folks around you are often hostile but still non-combatants.

A

friend of mine just got back from Iraq and there have been a few issues with guys having a hard time not wanting to

mow down a bunch of people who pissed them off.Granted,if you piss off a guy with a gun your taking your

chances...but still...as Americans,we are supposed to be "better than that."

[koolking1]

for Tim's

post!!!!

[Biohazard]

I beg to

differ. While in Vietnam I witnessed many many folks who had zero desire to be there doing much better things than

the jail house dropout types. Often the folks who did not want to be there had some amount of education and did

things like teach English at night on their own time thereby helping enormously with our relations with the

Vietnamese people.

Fair enough. But your generation vs. my generation. Do the memories of

Vietnam make my generation overall more resistant to mandatory service, thereby reducing their effectiveness as

soldiers? Possibly.

Either way, draftees or category IV soldiers, it's not ideal.

[tim929]

Memories of Viet Nam have had an

enormous impact on how this current generation views warfare in general.Thier parents were raised durring the war

and those men and women raised thier children to be...no offense intended...whimps.Mothers and fathers actively

discourage thier children from entering the selctive service program as a direct result of the lies and

misinformation and controversy surrounding the Viet Nam debacle.Parents protest the presence of Army recruiters in

the public high schools for fear that thier little sons and daughters may be shipped off to fight in yet another

meaningless war.

This is the generation of pacifists and pussies,raised by hand-wringing liberal women with an

agenda.Now dont get me wrong...Viet Nam was a disgrace...the current confligration...same thing...pure stupidity.But

the fault for that lies not with the millitary or the politicians or even President Bush.The blame for ALL of or

governments problems,from the war to scocial security to welfare to health care to the price of eggs and cheese lays

squarely on the shoulders of the voters and ONLY the voters!It is the civic duty of every red blooded American to

not only vote,but to be INTIMATELY INVOLVED in the public process at every level of government.Local,county,state

and federal policies are OUR resposability.It is the responsability of everyone to make sure that if a congressman

farts,we know what he ate that gave him gas! If a congressman is in the process of helping to make a decision,its

our responsability to make sure that nobody is hiding a bunch of pork in the deal to pay off his friends with.And

when these people get caught doing something wrong,its our responsability to make sure they are tarred and feathered

for thier offenses instead of re-elected.

The American people have spent so much time watching reruns of

Sinefeld and Friends and so little time paying attention to what might actualy be important that or elected

officials can quite literaly get away with murder and we do nothing about it.Our education system cranks out people

who are perfectly suited to thier place as burger flippers for a large national corperate chain.Our colleges crank

out perfectly moulded mid-level managers well suited to quoting company policy and not asking too many questions.And

as long as we have reruns and pizza delivery,everything is fine.

The nice,well meaning folks who gather in the

town square with the nice little home made signs with cute little slogans painted on them have NO IDEA that the

people in the whitehouse couldnt care less about them.More over,the nice folks at these cute little rallies arent

even being heard by the people in the party that they belong to.They are routeenly held up as an example by the

media and the politicians but the agenda the politicians end up making policies that not only dont accomplish the

intended goal,but also provide massive amounts of pork for things that thier supporters will never know about

because they are to distracted in the noise and confusion.

[belgareth]

All very true. Thanks Tim.

I've been saying the same things for a long time. Until we crawl out of our holes, stand up and make it clear the

the status quo is unacceptable, it is going to continue to get worse. Every one of us has an obligation to be a part

of the system and make our voices heard. That doesn't mean we all have to agree on any issue, only that we are

watching and holding those representing us responsible fopr representing us, not themselves or their corporate

clients.

[DrSmellThis]

That's all true. One person

can make a difference. If I can wax optimistic, it's probably heading more toward involvement, as people are

becoming aware of the consequences of not doing so, along with the internet's influence. Hopefully we will see

greater accountability as the public mind becomes more aware of everything our leadership does.

[Biohazard]

But, does it not require a

significant amount of intelligence and dedication to understand politics? I mean, half the country doesn't even

know how to use a computer. Those of us who make it on the net follow the news, do our own research, discuss these

issues almost on a daily basis with peers, and therefore we can make informed decisions. Many such "well-read"

people completely agree with the Iraq war, others don't. I seem to detect some inferences here that if more

citizens paid attention to politics that we wouldn't be in Iraq now and/or many of our domestic problems would be

solved with a perfect solution. I don't follow.

My folks are just regular blue-collared people who work

40-50 hour weeks. They have almost no concept of politics and don't have the time to learn it. That's the

practical reality of it. I think it's unrealistic to expect EVERYONE to understand the system as much as each one

of us does.

[belgareth]

I didn't mean to infer that we

wouldn't be in Iraq if more people followed politics. My statement was intended at face value, that we would be in

better shape politically if a greater percentage participated in the system. Personally, I think more people are not

involved out of a feeling of being disenfranchised and plain apathy than not having the time. Not only that, I think

the feeling of apathy is encouraged to some degree. My opinion is that we would still be in Iraq regardless of the

percentage of the population that participates.

You probably didn't mean it that way but your remarks sounded

elitist, that the majority are not capable of understanding politics and should not be allowed to participate. I

think that is part of the problem in the capitol today, a belief that the people aren't smart enough to figure out

what is going on. Maybe they aren't but that doesn't entitled us to determine that or take the right to make those

decisions away from them. They work in this economy, they pay taxes into the system and their children are sent to

die in other countries, certainly they have the right to a say in the matter regardless of whether their

comprehension is the same as ours. Keep in mind that in some countries voluntary participation exceeds 90% of the

eligible voters. In other countries participation is mandatory. It seems to work for them and I'd bet that the bell

curve applies to their intelligence levels about the same as it does ours.

All that said, I have another thought

on the matter. In almost every country in the world and likely in all time periods, some portion of the population

has believed that they had the best possible form of government. Many of the Iraqi people believed that about their

country before we invaded and many of the people in China believe that about their own country as well. What

independent measure do we have that really proves we have the best country or form of government? I'm not saying we

do or don't, I'm asking how we know this to be a fact and how that gives us the right too impose our forms of

government and political beliefs on others who may or may not feel it is the right form of government for them.

[tim929]

Originaly posted by

Biohazard



But, does it not require a significant amount of intelligence and dedication to understand

politics? I mean, half the country doesn't even know how to use a computer. Those of us who make it on the net

follow the news, do our own research, discuss these issues almost on a daily basis with peers, and therefore we can

make informed decisions. Many such "well-read" people completely agree with the Iraq war, others don't. I seem to

detect some inferences here that if more citizens paid attention to politics that we wouldn't be in Iraq now and/or

many of our domestic problems would be solved with a perfect solution. I don't follow.

My folks are just

regular blue-collared people who work 40-50 hour weeks. They have almost no concept of politics and don't have the

time to learn it. That's the practical reality of it. I think it's unrealistic to expect EVERYONE to understand

the system as much as each one of us does.

You said a mouthful when you said that your folks work

forty to fifty hours per week.Part of the process of desolving the American family has been and ever shrinking

standard of living created by lower and lower wages requiring more and more hours of work to stay ahead of the

game.One of the side bennefits of that for our masters is that if people are working themselves into the ground.They

havent got the time to spend learning about what is going on on Mount Olympus.By the time the average working stiff

gets home,he or she has just enough energy to park the kids in front of the TV,scarf down a microwave meal and veg

out to the latest reality TV show or sit-com.The intelectual numbing of America is not only destructive to our way

of life,it is...in my rather carefuly considered and researched oppinion,INTENTIONAL!


In Rome,the emperors

had a policy that was called "bread and circuses."Keep the people fed well enough that they dont complain and

entertained well enoguh that they are distracted,and senators can go on about thier marry way of

lying,cheating,stealing,manipulating and generaly undermining everything for thier own personal gain without getting

any real opposition from the dweebs they rule over.

In Nazi Germany,Joseph Goebbles (yes,I spelled it right...I

checked ) figured out the ultimate version of that technique and the Nazi government implimented it with

brutal efficency.The Nazi's dumped HUGE amounts of money into the German equivelent to Hollywood and Adolph Hitlers

own personal contingent of SS Grenadiers would often star as extras in movies,stage plays and musicals.One

particularly good German vocalist had problems because she was a very tall and stocky woman and her extras on stage

always ended up lokking like little girls around her.Enter the SS Grenadiers...these men appeared in her stage show

IN DRAG(!!) because they made her look smaller and the propoganda machine wanted her to be successful and be able to

put on a good show.Fifty of Germanys toughest and best trained soldiers in dresses and wigs.

We now have an

industry that rakes in many hundreds of billions of dollars every year for providing the invaluable service of

keeping everybody from using thier brains for anything other than a door stop.They even know this in the highest

echelons of Hollywood and they laugh all the way to the bank.Oh...lest we forget...the music industry is,in my

estimation just a part of Hollywood and not its own seperate entity...they work very closely together on many

projects.I know people who can quote...line by line every episode of Sinfeld or Friends,and know exactly who is

going to get voted off the island and so forth,who dont even have a clue who they voted for for CONGRESS FOR GOD'S

SAKE !!!! (Sorry...my meds need to be adjusted.)

The Europeans laugh at us when they hear how many hours we work

and how little vacation time we get each year and how few of us take the time to bother to vote.The average European

knows beyond a shadow of doubt that the average American is a complete idiot regarding anything beyond sit-coms and

Hollywood divorces.And,while they laugh...they also resent the hell out of us because our stupidity comes with a

price that the rest of the world has to pay.All this will eventualy come back to bite us in the ass,and it wont be

pretty.

As long as Im railing against all this neat stuff...have I taken the time to mention our

wonderful consumer goods industry?The people who use the mind numbing qualities of television to convince us that we

need to buy lots more of the latest electronic crap and shiny things that we dont realy have a legitimate use for so

that they can rake in hundreds of billions more of our hard earned money?And that way we can all spend that much

more time at work,sacraficing our children and our health for the bennefit of the captains of industry and the folks

whos policies ruin life for so many other people around the world.My friend who just got back from Iraq spent some

time in Kuwait and one of the locals that he befriended there told him this...

"We dont hate Americans.Americans

are realy nice people.We hate the fact that you bring with you things that threaten our way of life and our

families.Like Britney Spears and pornography."

Okay...the meds have finaly kicked in...I feel much

better....

[Biohazard]

You said a

mouthful when you said that your folks work forty to fifty hours per week.Part of the process of desolving the

American family has been and ever shrinking standard of living created by lower and lower wages requiring more and

more hours of work to stay ahead of the game.One of the side bennefits of that for our masters is that if people are

working themselves into the ground.They havent got the time to spend learning about what is going on on Mount

Olympus.By the time the average working stiff gets home,he or she has just enough energy to park the kids in front

of the TV,scarf down a microwave meal and veg out to the latest reality TV show or sit-com.The intelectual numbing

of America is not only destructive to our way of life,it is...in my rather carefuly considered and researched

oppinion,INTENTIONAL!

Kind of reeks of entitlement here, no offense. Everyone is

entitled to a comfy job with flexible hours? Please. My folks don't have an education, which is why they have the

careers they have. They admit it, and have taught me to do better. They don't feel cheated by the system, they

own a house valued at $650,000 minimum, have full health benefits, and actually have quite a bit of discretionary

money to the point they're always offering me money. You can live fairly well in America even on relatively low

wages, my folks raised me on it.

Now, the downside is that many people don't have time to pay attention to

politics due to the way our economy works. But personally, I think it's unrealistic to expect every single person

to be actively engaged in our society anyway. Pragmatism vs. idealism.

[Biohazard]

I didn't mean

to infer that we wouldn't be in Iraq if more people followed politics. My statement was intended at face value,

that we would be in better shape politically if a greater percentage participated in the system. Personally, I think

more people are not involved out of a feeling of being disenfranchised and plain apathy than not having the time.

Not only that, I think the feeling of apathy is encouraged to some degree. My opinion is that we would still be in

Iraq regardless of the percentage of the population that participates.

You probably didn't mean it that way

but your remarks sounded elitist, that the majority are not capable of understanding politics and should not be

allowed to participate. I think that is part of the problem in the capitol today, a belief that the people aren't

smart enough to figure out what is going on. Maybe they aren't but that doesn't entitled us to determine that or

take the right to make those decisions away from them. They work in this economy, they pay taxes into the system and

their children are sent to die in other countries, certainly they have the right to a say in the matter regardless

of whether their comprehension is the same as ours. Keep in mind that in some countries voluntary participation

exceeds 90% of the eligible voters. In other countries participation is mandatory. It seems to work for them and

I'd bet that the bell curve applies to their intelligence levels about the same as it does ours.

No one is suggesting taking away voting rights.

I know it sounds elitist, even before you

mentioned it. But honestly, having someone show up to the polls without really researching anything wouldn't

impact our politics or society significantly. All you will have are extra people who are flipping a coin before

deciding how to vote. That's all I'm saying. The only tangible impact would be if they really learned about the

system enough to know what actions are necessary to affect it. That takes serious effort.

Personally, I

would like to see more people pay attention to the goings on of the world. But realistically, that's a lot to

expect of people on a large scale.

[Netghost56]

You can live

fairly well in America even on relatively low wages, my folks raised me on it.

That's a wild statement.

It's hard to believe that you're living well when your neighbor is trashtalking the fact that he owns three cars

and you own one.

On top of the obvious, greed turns people against each other. Either burn yourself out on long

hours/low pay, or do as Dick and Jane do. THAT's the American way.

[belgareth]

No one is

suggesting taking away voting rights.

I know it sounds elitist, even before you mentioned it. But honestly,

having someone show up to the polls without really researching anything wouldn't impact our politics or society

significantly. All you will have are extra people who are flipping a coin before deciding how to vote. That's all

I'm saying. The only tangible impact would be if they really learned about the system enough to know what actions

are necessary to affect it. That takes serious effort.

Personally, I would like to see more people pay attention

to the goings on of the world. But realistically, that's a lot to expect of people on a large scale.

It

works in other coutries. Why not here? I admit it would take a huge change in outlook but wouldn't it be worth

it?

[Biohazard]

That's a

wild statement. It's hard to believe that you're living well when your neighbor is trashtalking the fact that he

owns three cars and you own one.

On top of the obvious, greed turns people against each other. Either burn

yourself out on long hours/low pay, or do as Dick and Jane do. THAT's the American way.

Why

are you equating "living well" with how many luxury items one owns? Living well means not struggling to obtain

basic necessities. This can be done even on low wages, I personally can attest to that. I should have cleared that

up, sorry.

[Biohazard]

It works in

other coutries. Why not here? I admit it would take a huge change in outlook but wouldn't it be worth

it?

Face value, I agree we'd be better off. But in terms of tangible effects? I don't see it

happening.

[Netghost56]

I call that "getting by". For

three generations my family has been getting by, but now because of me we're sliding.

"living well" to me is the

same as "well off". That means you can afford luxuries.

[tim929]

I am not talking about an

entitlement so much as simply a reversion back to common sense.I cant believe I am going to write this again but

here goes...

In 1938 Congress passed the Federal minimum wage act.They determined that .25 cents per

hour over a forty hour work week was the MINIMUM REASONABLE LIVING WAGE.That would keep clothes on your back,food on

your table,pay your baisic living expenses such as power and so forth and provide you with a baisic roof to keep it

all under.Adjusted for cost of living and inflation over the last 67 years,would put the Federal Minimum Wage at

nearly $16.00 an hour.Its interesting that "prevailing wage" is calculated in exactly that fasion.Companies that

perform contract work for the government are required by law to pay "prevailing wages."The hard numbers fluctuate up

and down slightly,but in point of fact,federal jobs and contract jobs typicly start in that neck of the woods.



The usual method of calculating wages has been a very simple formula for years.Unskilled labor starts at...minimum

wage.Semi-skilled labor typicaly gets minimum wage plus 50% and works its way up to skilled labor,which begins

around minimum wage x 2 and goes up from there...to max out around 4x minimum wage.The government contractors get

around paying more that double by putting people on salery and calling it good.But with a minimum wage that isnt

even half of what it should be,whats a family to do?

The big seperation began in the mid 1960's.All at once it

was being discovered that there were alot of very expensive Government programs that were going to need

funding.There was a nice little war going on in South East Asia and a whole pile of expensive toys being purchased

to ward off the Soviet menace.The war on poverty began in earnest.And that is a war that we are now,ultimatly

loosing because jobs dont pay living wages anymore.All of these neat things cost alot of money.And there are only

two people in the United States who pay taxes.Consumers pay it in higher prices and emloyees pay it in lower

wages.After that its just a question of who writes the actual check.

Couple all this with consumerism and a

general malaise regarding political involvement and, voila...you have what amounts to slavery.Dont be fooled by what

looks like a decent standard of living.The people you see day to day with a decent standard of living are working

far more for less than thier parents or grandparents did.What makes the whole thing so insidious is the fact that

these changes have been so gradual that nobody has realy noticed it.But Labor Department statistics from our own

government bear out the truth,and have been tracking the decline since I graduated high school in the mid 80's.



As for politics being too "complicated" for the average "Joe Sixpack"...rubbish! Politics realy arent any more

than ninety percent smoke,mirrors and slight of hand and ten percent substance.I used to think that it was all too

complex.But the reality is that much the same way lawyers unnecessarily complicate simple things to confuse the

layman,lawmakers spin things into a frenzy and use parlor tricks to throw the hounds off the scent.Politicians

are,after all is said and done...just elected lawyers.They arent called "lawmakers" for no apperant reason.

The

only people that cant follow politics are the folks that either have no real interest and just dont care,or people

who have been fooled by the smoke screen into thinking that things are "too complex." I have had the dubious honor

of meeting and shaking hands with two state lawmakers and a congressman in my life.These men are,for all intents and

purposes,about as smart as the average used car salesman.I used to sell used cars so I can dis them all I want

These guys arent something special that only years of intense training can produce.They arent doctors or surgeons or

rocket making dudes,they are just realy charismatic salesmen.They are realy good at bullshitting people into buying

thier line of crap.

There is no entitlement involved in what I have said...I only want to see a return to common

sense wages and working/living standards so that families can actualy start acting like families again instead of

strangers that share a house.Once that is accomplished things will settle down quite a bit and people can start

focusing on the realy important things in life.

By the way...if you find yourself strapped for time and cant

seem to get everything in your life done...try turning off the television...it worked for me. I have more time than

I know what to do with.

Okay...my doctors are here and they say I have had enough excitement for one day.Time

for me to lay down now...

[belgareth]

Face value, I

agree we'd be better off. But in terms of tangible effects? I don't see it happening.

Of course it won't

happen if nobody tries. Nobody knows what might happen were people to become more involved. Tangible effect?

Impossible to guess.

But that wasn't the question. Other countries manage a huge participation, why wouldn't

it work here?

[Biohazard]

Of course it

won't happen if nobody tries. Nobody knows what might happen were people to become more involved. Tangible effect?

Impossible to guess.

But that wasn't the question. Other countries manage a huge participation, why

wouldn't it work here?

Probably because of our entertainment culture. It's good and bad, but much

more the former than latter, IMO. I like how rich American culture is, from movies to sports to electronic

technology. The cynic may see it as an "empty culture," because most American citizens are pre-occupied with short

term happiness above most things. That's just a product of how much our society has to offer in the social arena,

and I see little wrong with it. Give these other countries everything our culture offers, and you'll probably see

less people paying attention to politics as well.

To get involved in politics where you're not just

showing up to the poll and thinking "eenie, meenie, mynie, mo... this is how I'll vote," takes some effort. It

takes a bit of time and research to arrive at a decision that you can intelligently defend. It's this type of

involvement that will make a significant change in our country, not the type of involvement where you decide at the

last minute in the polling booth how you'll vote -- I think a surprisingly large percentage of voters actually do

this.

If you want to change all this, you have to make a fundamental change to our culture as you said.

You also have to ask, how practical is this goal?

[Biohazard]

I call that

"getting by". For three generations my family has been getting by, but now because of me we're

sliding.

"living well" to me is the same as "well off". That means you can afford

luxuries.

Has your family felt "exploited" because they don't own a Mercedes like their employers

do? Or are they like my folks, who realize that people deserve what they get, and that even a modest living in

America is way, way better than living in a mud hut half way around the world? Put things in perspective, and you

can be happy and comfortable while living modestly.

[Biohazard]

As for politics

being too "complicated" for the average "Joe Sixpack"...rubbish! Politics realy arent any more than ninety percent

smoke,mirrors and slight of hand and ten percent substance.I used to think that it was all too complex.But the

reality is that much the same way lawyers unnecessarily complicate simple things to confuse the layman,lawmakers

spin things into a frenzy and use parlor tricks to throw the hounds off the scent.Politicians are,after all is said

and done...just elected lawyers.They arent called "lawmakers" for no apperant reason.

The only people that

cant follow politics are the folks that either have no real interest and just dont care,or people who have been

fooled by the smoke screen into thinking that things are "too complex." I have had the dubious honor of meeting and

shaking hands with two state lawmakers and a congressman in my life.These men are,for all intents and purposes,about

as smart as the average used car salesman.I used to sell used cars so I can dis them all I want These guys arent

something special that only years of intense training can produce.They arent doctors or surgeons or rocket making

dudes,they are just realy charismatic salesmen.They are realy good at bullshitting people into buying thier line of

crap.

Lotta rambling in your post, so I'll just respond to what I think is most relevant to my

recent posts.

You just contradicted yourself. You say politics isn't complex, yet each citizen must

wade through all the "smoke an mirrors" to get to the facts. When you buy a used car, you have to do some legwork

to find out the true history of that car. Seeing through politicians and not just simply regurgitating their

cliches and campaign slogans requires independent research.

I have an old college buddy who failed out.

When I asked him for specific reasons why he was voting for Kerry last year, he told me nothing but catch phrases.

"Bush is a screw-up." "Democrats are the party of the average Joe Lunch Bucket." "Iraq is vietnam." etc etc.

Nothing specific about how Kerry's plans would benefit the country or him personally -- because he's never taken

the time to learn about how the system works. You see, anyone can have an opinion. Not everyone has an opinion

that is well thought out. An opinion without a rational defense is kind of worthless.

[belgareth]

Probably

because of our entertainment culture. It's good and bad, but much more the former than latter, IMO. I like how rich

American culture is, from movies to sports to electronic technology. The cynic may see it as an "empty culture,"

because most American citizens are pre-occupied with short term happiness above most things. That's just a product

of how much our society has to offer in the social arena, and I see little wrong with it. Give these other countries

everything our culture offers, and you'll probably see less people paying attention to politics as well.

To

get involved in politics where you're not just showing up to the poll and thinking "eenie, meenie, mynie, mo...

this is how I'll vote," takes some effort. It takes a bit of time and research to arrive at a decision that you can

intelligently defend. It's this type of involvement that will make a significant change in our country, not the

type of involvement where you decide at the last minute in the polling booth how you'll vote -- I think a

surprisingly large percentage of voters actually do this.

If you want to change all this, you have to make a

fundamental change to our culture as you said. You also have to ask, how practical is this goal?

Japan has

an entertanment culture at least equal to our own yet regularly has a 90% or better showing at the polls. The same

applies to Australia. Obviously that is not the reason for the low showing at the polls in this country.

To get

involved by your standards or by the majority's ability? Under law and within reason, voter pamphlets are written

to be understood by a person with a basic high school education. While arguably not as complete an understanding of

issues as I would like to see, it is sufficient to the purpose of allowing a person to make moderately informed

decisions. The point of voting is not whether or not you can defend your decision, intelligently or otherwise.

Ballots would not be secret if that were the case. The point is your right under the consitution to participate and

voice your opinion as you see fit. That is, IMHO, both a right and an obligation under our representative

government.

Under the constitution we have a representative government, that's the way our government is

legally structured. Practicality arguments are irrelevent even if true which I do not concede since other nations

seem able to accomplish it under similar conditions. I also do not claim that it is the best or preferred form of

government, only the naked fact that it is the legal structure we have to work within. We have few choices here if

we are to claim to be part of that structure. We can either support it or change it. If we claim to support it then

say that the system is too complicated for the average person to participate we are making a mockery of the basic

concept of representative government and hypocrites of ourselves. If your intent is to change it, as seems to be

implied by your argument then I'd like to know what form of government is best and how you intend to justify it.

I'm certanly not convinced that what we call our government is the best and so am willing to listen to any rational

suggestion.

[tim929]

You just contradicted

yourself. You say politics isn't complex, yet each citizen must wade through all the "smoke an mirrors" to get to

the facts.

Wading through the smoke and mirrors is a product of people not being terribly interested in

hearing anything more than the slogans spewed out by politicians.The Romans had...funny thing...forums! Much like

this one.These forums could be found in almost every town with a population.The forum was a gathering place for

locals and travelers alike to gather and discuss relavent issues and through the sharing of information and view

points develope a better understanding of the world of politics in Rome.The lamps burned constantly in the forums.It

was the only place to hear news of the world outside the city gates.It was one of the several venues for scocial

interaction among peers.It was a place of learning,not only for the elders of the community but for anyone who chose

to participate.And almost anyones voice could be heard.

Building a forum in towns was considered to be of the

utmost importance by local governors because it gave people a place to discuss important issues publicly and the

oppinions that were developed within the forum would eventualy find thier way to the govenors palace for his

consideration.Not building a forum in a town or city was a great way to end up with extremely costly riots on your

hands.The forums were powerful enough that govenors ignored these oppinions at thier own grave risk,and many times

they had a very profound impact uppon the political climate of the province.
People who could be seen at the forum

ranged from every possible walk of life and aged from barely old enough to talk to barely young enough to be

alive.Doctors and carpenters and farmers and bakers and stone masons and politicians and teachers and

lawyers...everyone was welcome.In many provinces there were special days every month where even slaves were allowed

to voice thier various grievences and concerns publicly.Involvement was not leagaly mandatory,but non-participation

was scocialy devistating.

As the senate and the emperors ignored the rumblings comming from the provincial

forums,the condition of Rome declined.As arrogance seperated politicians from the people,Rome suffered.But the fact

that there was a venue that was available to almost everyone where they could be heard and...just as importantly

where they could hear,left a huge mark on what government did and how the people viewed it.In this country,the

internet is the closest thing we have to those forums.Various political groups of every bent and persuation can make

thier oppinions known.Unfortunately,this lacks the personal touch that is realy necessary to not only have a serious

impact on real world politics,but to teach people new to politics the ropes so that they too can be informed and

involved.

For the smoke and mirrors of politics,you only realy have to wade through them once...after that,the

rest is easy.But where does one go to learn to do that?There is no communal forum.Nobody attends town hall meetings

anymore.No one attends city counsel meetings...and the council chambers are REQUIRED BY LAW to have a certain amount

of seating available for the public.But...ya know...The Apprentice is on tonight...and want to see what Donnald is

going to say to that smart ass kid...And Im tired after a long days work...



.

[Biohazard]

Japan has an

entertanment culture at least equal to our own yet regularly has a 90% or better showing at the polls. The same

applies to Australia. Obviously that is not the reason for the low showing at the polls in this country.

To

get involved by your standards or by the majority's ability? Under law and within reason, voter pamphlets are

written to be understood by a person with a basic high school education. While arguably not as complete an

understanding of issues as I would like to see, it is sufficient to the purpose of allowing a person to make

moderately informed decisions. The point of voting is not whether or not you can defend your decision, intelligently

or otherwise. Ballots would not be secret if that were the case. The point is your right under the consitution to

participate and voice your opinion as you see fit. That is, IMHO, both a right and an obligation under our

representative government.

Under the constitution we have a representative government, that's the way our

government is legally structured. Practicality arguments are irrelevent even if true which I do not concede since

other nations seem able to accomplish it under similar conditions. I also do not claim that it is the best or

preferred form of government, only the naked fact that it is the legal structure we have to work within. We have few

choices here if we are to claim to be part of that structure. We can either support it or change it. If we claim to

support it then say that the system is too complicated for the average person to participate we are making a mockery

of the basic concept of representative government and hypocrites of ourselves. If your intent is to change it, as

seems to be implied by your argument then I'd like to know what form of government is best and how you intend to

justify it. I'm certanly not convinced that what we call our government is the best and so am willing to listen to

any rational suggestion.

Those numbers from Japan and Aus are astounding. But from our earlier

discussions about citizens' obligations to our country, you rattled off a list of things you inferred would happen

if more people were involved in the political process. Correct me if I'm wrong. Things like ending all foreign

wars, holding politicians accountable for their secret misdeeds, among other things. I agree with you that more

voter participation is generally a good thing. I just don't see how simply having more [generally undecided]

people show up to polls in and of itself does anything more than simply uphold the status quo. 50% vote one way,

the other 50% goes the other way. Net effect? Nothing.

[Biohazard]

Wading through

the smoke and mirrors is a product of people not being terribly interested in hearing anything more than the slogans

spewed out by politicians.The Romans had...funny thing...forums! Much like this one.These forums could be found in

almost every town with a population.The forum was a gathering place for locals and travelers alike to gather and

discuss relavent issues and through the sharing of information and view points develope a better understanding of

the world of politics in Rome.The lamps burned constantly in the forums.It was the only place to hear news of the

world outside the city gates.It was one of the several venues for scocial interaction among peers.It was a place of

learning,not only for the elders of the community but for anyone who chose to participate.And almost anyones voice

could be heard.

Building a forum in towns was considered to be of the utmost importance by local governors

because it gave people a place to discuss important issues publicly and the oppinions that were developed within the

forum would eventualy find thier way to the govenors palace for his consideration.Not building a forum in a town or

city was a great way to end up with extremely costly riots on your hands.The forums were powerful enough that

govenors ignored these oppinions at thier own grave risk,and many times they had a very profound impact uppon the

political climate of the province.
People who could be seen at the forum ranged from every possible walk of life

and aged from barely old enough to talk to barely young enough to be alive.Doctors and carpenters and farmers and

bakers and stone masons and politicians and teachers and lawyers...everyone was welcome.In many provinces there were

special days every month where even slaves were allowed to voice thier various grievences and concerns

publicly.Involvement was not leagaly mandatory,but non-participation was scocialy devistating.

As the senate

and the emperors ignored the rumblings comming from the provincial forums,the condition of Rome declined.As

arrogance seperated politicians from the people,Rome suffered.But the fact that there was a venue that was available

to almost everyone where they could be heard and...just as importantly where they could hear,left a huge mark on

what government did and how the people viewed it.In this country,the internet is the closest thing we have to those

forums.Various political groups of every bent and persuation can make thier oppinions known.Unfortunately,this lacks

the personal touch that is realy necessary to not only have a serious impact on real world politics,but to teach

people new to politics the ropes so that they too can be informed and involved.

For the smoke and mirrors of

politics,you only realy have to wade through them once...after that,the rest is easy.But where does one go to learn

to do that?There is no communal forum.Nobody attends town hall meetings anymore.No one attends city counsel

meetings...and the council chambers are REQUIRED BY LAW to have a certain amount of seating available for the

public.But...ya know...The Apprentice is on tonight...and want to see what Donnald is going to say to that smart ass

kid...And Im tired after a long days work...



.

I have no idea what you just said!

But I'll say this. If you want to change the status quo, it takes more than just showing up to the poll booth

and randomly punching up your ballot.

[tim929]

Your absolutly right! it does

take more than simply showing up and punching a ballot. We are blessed in this day and age with a wealth of

information comming at us from a variety of sources.We are also blessed with a variety of different organizations

who seek to pour over all that data and find the hidden truth.And many of them do an excelent job.Our news media

used to be a good watch dog over politics,but comercialism has kinda ruined that over the last three decades.But

watchdog groups do still exist and they are a very effective way of staying informed on various issues.Most produce

monthly news letters,free of all the hype and noise created by the politicians,and these news letters can help

people to make informed decisions regarding almost any issue.

But first comes the process of learning what

America is all about.The concept of its system of government,system of laws,cultural and moral leanings and so

forth.In other words...what exactly does it take to be an ACTUAL citizen as opposed to just having been born

here?Alot of people have been born in the United States.But does that realy make them citizens?In high schools they

used to have classes called civics.Im sure we all had a class that went by that name.But in bygone years,those

civics classes were intended to teach young men and women about the price of being an American.They were taught

about the constitution and its meanings,taught about our system of goverment,the responsibilities of the citizen and

so forth.In my civics class,our teacher was a died in the wool dungeon master who expected nothing less than

perfection from his students in regards to the study of civics.And without his magic "OK" you didnt graduate high

school...PERIOD.

He regarded...and rightly so,civics to be the single most important class in the history of the

world.It was his class that was designed to prepair young people to handle thier dutys and responsabilities as

citizens and voters.The emphasis in todays public school system however has shifted considerably,and the

requirements of the typical civics class have had to be dumbed down to a point where students in most schools have a

tough time remembering the difference between the executive branch of government and the judicial branch.The

constitution is...and should always be held up as the second most sacred document in the world by American

citizens.Second only to whatever religious documents you subscribe to.

Training a citizen is hard work,and in

many ways our education system falls tragicly short of producing effective citizens.I suspect that this shortfall

isnt as much a matter of people getting dumber,as it is the powers that be not wanting too many people knowing what

they can do to make a diference.

Im gonna go eat cheetoes and watch South Park now....

[belgareth]

Those numbers

from Japan and Aus are astounding. But from our earlier discussions about citizens' obligations to our country, you

rattled off a list of things you inferred would happen if more people were involved in the political process.

Correct me if I'm wrong. Things like ending all foreign wars, holding politicians accountable for their secret

misdeeds, among other things. I agree with you that more voter participation is generally a good thing. I just

don't see how simply having more [generally undecided] people show up to polls in and of itself does anything more

than simply uphold the status quo. 50% vote one way, the other 50% goes the other way. Net effect?

Nothing.

Actually the vote usually goes about 40/40/20 with the 20% being independents, small parties and

such. Those voting in the 40/40 groups usually vote right along party lines. Over the years both major parties have

lost huge portions of their membership through disenchantment with party policies. As a result of that and other

factors, the non-voting majority tends to be closer to 25/25/50 with a large percentage of the 25'ers likely to

vote their mind rather than any party line. Of the 50%'ers, most are completely disgusted with the way the

government operates but feel they cannot do anything about it so don't bother. The error is obvious. That

'inbalance' is one of the reasons that both major parties try so hard to register new voters to their party. They

hope that by getting them signed up themselves they will have some influence in how they vote.

What would

actually happen if participation went up to 90% is anybody's guess, you have your opinion and I have mine. But

right now many in politics seem to feel they can rest on their laurals because nobody's watching them very closely.

Consider the potential of 40 percent or more of the voting population unalianged to any particular party. It

doesn't take much imagination to see that there would be numerous changes within our country. Exactly what they

would be is anybody's guess but at the least I think it would result in greater accountability.

Additionally, I

think Tim has it right that participation is discouraged, that the government would really prefer our opinions be

suppressed.

[Biohazard]

Your absolutly

right! it does take more than simply showing up and punching a ballot. We are blessed in this day and age with a

wealth of information comming at us from a variety of sources.We are also blessed with a variety of different

organizations who seek to pour over all that data and find the hidden truth.And many of them do an excelent job.Our

news media used to be a good watch dog over politics,but comercialism has kinda ruined that over the last three

decades.But watchdog groups do still exist and they are a very effective way of staying informed on various

issues.Most produce monthly news letters,free of all the hype and noise created by the politicians,and these news

letters can help people to make informed decisions regarding almost any issue.

But first comes the process

of learning what America is all about.The concept of its system of government,system of laws,cultural and moral

leanings and so forth.In other words...what exactly does it take to be an ACTUAL citizen as opposed to just having

been born here?Alot of people have been born in the United States.But does that realy make them citizens?In high

schools they used to have classes called civics.Im sure we all had a class that went by that name.But in bygone

years,those civics classes were intended to teach young men and women about the price of being an American.They were

taught about the constitution and its meanings,taught about our system of goverment,the responsibilities of the

citizen and so forth.In my civics class,our teacher was a died in the wool dungeon master who expected nothing less

than perfection from his students in regards to the study of civics.And without his magic "OK" you didnt graduate

high school...PERIOD.

He regarded...and rightly so,civics to be the single most important class in the

history of the world.It was his class that was designed to prepair young people to handle thier dutys and

responsabilities as citizens and voters.The emphasis in todays public school system however has shifted

considerably,and the requirements of the typical civics class have had to be dumbed down to a point where students

in most schools have a tough time remembering the difference between the executive branch of government and the

judicial branch.The constitution is...and should always be held up as the second most sacred document in the world

by American citizens.Second only to whatever religious documents you subscribe to.

Training a citizen is

hard work,and in many ways our education system falls tragicly short of producing effective citizens.I suspect that

this shortfall isnt as much a matter of people getting dumber,as it is the powers that be not wanting too many

people knowing what they can do to make a diference.

Im gonna go eat cheetoes and watch South Park

now....

Glad you finally agree with me that it takes some serious dedication to learn about the

system in order to make a difference in one's country. Are you going back on your claim now that everything is

"simple" to understand?

[Biohazard]

Actually the

vote usually goes about 40/40/20 with the 20% being independents, small parties and such. Those voting in the 40/40

groups usually vote right along party lines. Over the years both major parties have lost huge portions of their

membership through disenchantment with party policies. As a result of that and other factors, the non-voting

majority tends to be closer to 25/25/50 with a large percentage of the 25'ers likely to vote their mind rather than

any party line. Of the 50%'ers, most are completely disgusted with the way the government operates but feel they

cannot do anything about it so don't bother. The error is obvious. That 'inbalance' is one of the reasons that

both major parties try so hard to register new voters to their party. They hope that by getting them signed up

themselves they will have some influence in how they vote.

What would actually happen if participation went

up to 90% is anybody's guess, you have your opinion and I have mine. But right now many in politics seem to feel

they can rest on their laurals because nobody's watching them very closely. Consider the potential of 40 percent or

more of the voting population unalianged to any particular party. It doesn't take much imagination to see that

there would be numerous changes within our country. Exactly what they would be is anybody's guess but at the least

I think it would result in greater accountability.

Additionally, I think Tim has it right that participation

is discouraged, that the government would really prefer our opinions be suppressed.

Okay, so you're

talking about the classical "swing" group. I classify this group as moderates who's votes can be bought, more or

less, with catch phrases, punch lines, and commercial bombardment. They have no strong identity. You buy that

group, you win, basically. They go one of two ways for the most part, right or left depending on the weather.



I felt that you and Tim were trivializing how difficult it is to impose real change. It's not as simple as

just getting 90% of the people to take 1 hour out of their day every election cycle (say every 2 years) to punch a

card. Would that automatically mean that foreign wars would stop, that government would shrink, that politicians

would suddenly become transparent, that somehow utopia is otherwise achieved? Unfortunately, I think more voters

just means more voters, that's it. It might make us feel better about our "representative" government, but I

don't go on feelings.

It takes organization to effect change. Let's look at the NRA, as an example.

I don't know if this is still true, but Fortune mag ranked the NRA as the #1 most powerful lobbying group in

Washington a few years ago. We're talking a group of 4 million citizens, or little more than 1% of the population,

who have had a big hand in re-shaping congress over the past decade. Why? Because they're active, they understand

the mathematics of the political system and the nuances of law, they have sharp lawyers, and they know how to

communicate effectively. This takes skill and intelligence to put it all together into a winning package.

Basically, you need a plan. Just speaking idealistically like "go rock the vote" a la MTV ain't gonna cut it.

Sorry.

The smart man invests his time and energy into things that are likely going to net a return. Not

things he hopes and prays will net a return.

[belgareth]

No, I don't think in the sense

you mean swing group that is what I am talking about. Most swing voters are not bought but are buying a bill of

goods themselves. In point they are buying the person rather than anything else. The average swing voter is trying

to do what they believe is right. I think you are over-simplifying those dynamics.

I figured that's what you

thought but you misunderstand the issues if you see it that way. The dynamics are a lot more complicated. You are

assuming there's an agenda other than creating involvement which is a goal in itself. Agreed about organizations

like the NRA, who lose battles often enough. I am not trying to shape policy, only trying to get the engine working.

Shaping policy is for the voters to do of their own free will. With as many different motives as are out there and

the general level of disgust with both political parties existing in the non-voting majority, change would occur if

you could get them involved. What change in particular is anybody's guess.

How a smart man invests is entirely

dependent on what his end goals are, nothing more. Your view of a return and mine are entirely different. By

definition, we have a representative government. That means participation by the people being represented. If you

want to change the type of gevernment we have I'm all ears as to where you'd like to take it. But until then, the

goal is to have the people, all the people voicing their opinions.