America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

i'm not interested in changing anyone's mind -- unless it was dead from the get go and i can give it a jump start. :) likewise, i enjoy it when someone can flip the "on" switch in my brain in areas previously darkened.

where politics is concerned, it seems like a sporting event. it's pretty much all been done in, say, baseball. there are the strikes, the hits, the catches. there are the rules that have always been the rules. occasionally one will be modified, but it's still basically just plain baseball.

the only thing "different" is the heights and depths the players can reach or fall to, as individuals or as a team. the players change, but they are confined to the same rules, the same equipment, etc.

so i don't expect much to change in politics. i don't even expect much from the players in that game. baseball can still thrill me; politics... eh, not so much.

what i DO enjoy about politics, though, is the way it stirs people up. it gets the juices flowing, the gumption jumpin', etc. sure, it's often just the same old armchair pitchers, so to speak, making the same coulda woulda shoulda commentary -- whatever makes their team look stellar and the other look like crap.

but every now and then a new thought will come along -- not a couldawouldashoulda, but a veritable, bonafide "what if" or "why." it might blow away in the wind like a tangy mustard burp, but every now and again one will fall like a seed, and in time something will grow from it.

the fact that this nation was built upon a "what if" and a "why" gives me hope that other ideas can take root and grow up into something great as well.

until then, there's still baseball. :)

Cavallo, I like your baseball analogy. I would've liked it more had the Cubs not lost last night.

I guess that my comments are really intended to stir the kettle of bees and possibly inspire true political discussion. I'm really probably just wanking off.

MACS I would start with the following:

Real campaign finance reform.

Ban all PACs, Unions, etc… from collectively participating in the political process.

Amend Article II, section 1 of the U.S. Constitution (e.g. Electoral College) and go with a popular vote to elect the president.

…I can’t think of anything else right now, and I actually need to get back to work. But before I go…

And just as an extra for the other problems of our country…

2 years of mandatory military service for everyone (no exceptions) starting upon high school graduation or drop-out. This would definitely be prior to entrance in to college, civilian work, NBA, etc, etc, etc…

Flat tax rate of 20% for every person in the US. No deductions. If you don’t pay you would be thrown out of the country.

Tort reform (primarily limiting damage claims)

dbguru I'm only looking for more true discussion and less BS. I personally feel that both sides of the political exiles have good points in their platforms. I also believe that both parties feel that they are doing what is best for the country. I don't like posts that just put garbage out there and call it truth. I really don’t like posts that tell people that they are idiots for not agreeing with their points of view. Most of the time different points of view are just that, different (not wrong).

I know I know I know... 2 comments with questions

You should read all the posts in which name is hurled in my direction just for taking a stand. Personally I believe people resort to namecalling when they have lost the debate and have run out of logic and facts to base there opinions on. However we do have some who resort to namecalling right out of the gate... What would you call them?

What is BS and what is valuable commentary is a personal judgement. Unfortunately there are no objective standards for BS. In my estimation, I've seen a lot of stuff which I think is BS that others support wholeheartedly..... and vice versa. No BS is a noble objective but whose judgement of what is BS do we adopt??

include an abolishment of what is basically a two party system.

I say bring back the Monarchy (but only if I'm king). It's good to be the King!!

Robby, what a drag!! Hope you feel better.

Robby... i've been taking up your slack buddy. I've smoked at least 2 a day for the past couple weeks. We are in that "do very little" stage just before deployment, making sure folks have plenty of time to spend with loved ones before the absence... problem is, one of my loved ones is at school, and the other at work... so I smoke all day and work out and watch TV.

Today, I am on the ship... watching TV and surfing the net. All my pre-deployment stuff is done (I have been done for almost a month because i've done so many, I prepare well in advance).

This was a blatant threadjack. Sorry buckwheat. To make it up to you, I leave you with this: If common sense were really common... more people would have it. That is a favorite quote of mine that fits the thread.

"But look what is happening here. I listen to a lot of national right wing radio to understand both sides of the debate. On these right wing shows I hear the jocks pleading with their listeners to be outspoken in spreading their views. So you see evidence of that on this board. A neo-con Bush supporter is far more likely to post their opinions than the liberal minded Cbiders here."

Does anybody think there may be more conservatives that smoke cigars than liberals that smoke cigars? After all, wasn't it liberals that went after the tabacco companies to reimburse the states for "cost associated with smoking?" Isn't it liberals that are trying to ban smoking in public places? Isn't it liberals that want to tax internet sales?

I may be wrong, but when I pull up next to an SUV and look over and see a BOTL smoking a stogie, I assume he's a conservative and give him a friendly wave. Now if I thought he could be a liberal, I'd have to give him the finger. ;)

There are more concervatives that herf than libs. I speak for at least 2 or 3 dozen silent BOTL who cheer me on, I know that's true. But it's human nature. Some people are more prone to conflict and debate, and some are less prone to it. That's fine, there's nothing wrong with it. It takes all kinds, even LIBERALS! lol!

BUSH SUCKS!!!!

says so on this web site: www.IhateBush.com

and

KERRY SUCKS!!!!!

says so on this site: www.IhateKerry.com

Since I am new to the board I thought this may be a good place to make an entrance.

Responding to MAC

Start over. Take all the career politicians out. Put in everyday people. Limit to 2 terms max. It has some flaws but can it be any worse than it is now?

Some random thoughts inspired by what I've read on this thread:

DB: I suppose I'm what you'ld term a "neo-con" but I would wholeheartedly support a lifting of the embargo against Cuba. the fall of teh soviet Union should prove that you can kill Marxism with kindness and heavy exposure to the benefits of a free-market economy!

DB: YOU were the first person to bring up any particular political belief, why do I find that incongruous to your claim that the "neocons" use every opportunity to parrot the "right wing jocks" talking points. Hmmmmmmm! (he who smelt it dealt it?)

MACS (and others): Okay, there's a few problems with the system as it sets, and I honestly dont know if it CAN be fixed. My points are as follows:
1) It costs MILLIONS to win an elected office. We have made it that way, not wanting to vote for somebody we've never heard of, so they buy up TV and radio time to keep their accomplishments(?) and names in front of us. The presidency only pays something like $250,000 a year, and tens, or hundreds of millions of dollars are spent trying to win that office. This can only mean one of two things. Either the candidate is a complete idiot who ins incapable of simple mathematics (all the Bush haters are jumping on that one already!), or he's a crook who is planning to peddle his influence to whoever will make sure he has a comfortable retirement. (I can hear the Kerry haters all saying "yep, that's the other choice"), or maybe there's a third possibility, that the sucker is just a whack job who just wants power for it's own sake, and THOSE are the ones who really scare me, but I honestly don't think we have one of those trying to get in this time.

Overall, I think that none of us really thinks we're going to change one anothers minds, I think, (at least I do) that if a person of the opposing viewpoint makes a post, and a response is not made, then anyone out there reading will think that that persons opinion is the "uncontested truth". so I think most of the debate, both the eloquent and the profane are aimed more at the undecided than at the person rebutted.

CW... Your comments are Fair and Balanced. Hey You are really right on with the last paragraph.

On the "Smelt it Dealt it" comment. Next time you smell an ISOM cigar let me know.

I agree shammill that 20% is probably too much. I was just proposing the flat tax rate; the number I pulled from my ***. I guess that my beef with the EC is that it really doesn't accomplish what it was put in place to protect against. I think that the states with low populations are always going to have a diminished voice in the federal government (being from KY I should know). I think that with the removal of the EC at least there wouldn't be this argument that we are not a true representative government or that the election was bogus. I know that I'm greatly simplifying the debate on the EC. It is only because I'm not really qualified nor do I posses the knowledge to argue the point. Thanks for the comments.