Via OccupyPhoenix

[madscience.livejournal.com]

Comments

[i.livejournal.com]

Now that's a great rationalization for not participating in the process and abdicating yourself of any responsibility for the outcome.

[mckavian.livejournal.com]

And your assumption of this shows that you are good at jumping to conclusions. Then again, I suppose my previous statement could be viewed with a knee jerk - and wrong - reaction. But, you have already made your opinion, haven't you?

[bikinisquad3000.livejournal.com]

So how would you proceed on the premise that it doesn't matter who, we always get screwed? Best way to nip assumptions in the bud is to provide no room for them.

[mckavian.livejournal.com]

My thoughts are that it does not matter whom is in charge, they are politicians. They are in it for themselves - with the occasional person who is in it to actually help us all. Not all politicians are bad.

To paraphrase Mark Twain: 99% of all politicians give the rest a bad name.

[bikinisquad3000.livejournal.com]

Yep, that's been established. i (as in the user named "i") assumed that you use that as a rationalization for not participating in the political process and absolving yourself of responsiblity for not doing so. You chided i for jumping to conclusions about people who have this opinion of politics and politicians. I'm asking what the correct version of i's assumption is—what that opinion leads you to believe is the best course of action for yourself, politically.

[mckavian.livejournal.com]

First and foremost, let me thank you for asking intelligent questions rather than assuming.

Second, as to what was mentioned before, there are a lot of trolls out. Being that tone is hard to convey in text, I am trying to answer you with the respect you deserve, not trolling. If it comes across otherwise, i apologise.

To answer your question of am I doing to change/correct the situation? (Not your exact words, but that is how I read what you said) first off, I vote. Local, state and national levels. I vote for who I feel is best for the job. I am conservative on some things and liberal on others. I do not vote party lines. I am also pagan, ex-military, pro-gun but also pro reasonable regulation.

I am not above signing petitions for things/causes I believe in.

I will also stump for politicians I believe in.

That being said, I also believe that that there are too many morally reprehensible people in power. A few years ago there was a web page that cited which congressman/woman has been through bankruptcy, had DUIs, been charged with what felonies, and a host of other things. I no longer have the link, so I am not going to try and cite facts I do not have. My point is that is you are going to try to lead your people, they should be held to a high standard...and too many far short.

To make a long point slightly longer, the whole point of my first comment was that with the corruption of either party, we all suffer for it.

[deborahkla.livejournal.com]

The poster was merely pointing out that such a rationalization is often used for non-participation in the process. Troglodyte is notorious for using such a rationalisation here.

The poster does not appear to be accusing you of making such a rationalization--the knee-jerk reaction is yours and yours alone.

[mckavian.livejournal.com]

I read the accusation as implied. Much as they read, wrongly, into my statement.

[deborahkla.livejournal.com]

I read the accusation as implied.

There's no indication whatsoever of an implied accusation.

Much as they read, wrongly, into my statement.

And there's nothing to imply that the poster was reading anything into your statement--which couldn't be more wrong, BTW--he/she was merely stating that many people like yourself who wrongly identify both parties as exactly the same do so as an excuse not to become involved in the political process, or even to vote. As I mentioned, Troglodyte frequently moans and whines here about how the parties are the same and that's why he/she doesn't vote.

It's easy to construe your statement as an excuse, because aside from accepting donations from PACs the policies of each party are markedly different--and that's why the Republicans lost the last election. Anti-immigrant, anti-gay rights, anti-abortion, anti-women's rights, refusing to tax the rich and laying the entire tax burden on the middle and lower classes--all stances in direct opposition to what every public opinion poll reflects. That's why more than a few Republicans abandoned their party in the last election.

So to continue to claim that both parties are the same is ridiculous. That's a fallacy, because they most definitely are not. The public obviously recognized this and managed to defeat the Republicans despite all their machinations to manipulate and limit the vote to people of color and the poor--two factions they know they will never win.

Oh, and that's another significant difference between the parties--and one that clearly lays waste to the argument that both parties are equally corrupt. The Democrats haven't done anything in the last four presidential elections to hinder a person's right to vote--they've come a long way since the Dixiecrats of the fifties and sixties. Indeed, it's worthwhile to point out that those very Dixiecrats all defected to the Republican party beginning with the election of Ronald Reagan. Surprise, surprise.