1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Lott is Back, Yes He's Back, Lott is Back, Tell a Friend

Discussion in 'Issues Around the World' started by ethics, Jan 5, 2003.

  1. ethics

    ethics Pomp-Dumpster Staff Member

    It seems the Republican Party, despite forcing Trent Lott out of the Majority Leader's seat, still wants him around in a leadership position and he has been offered the <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7277-2003Jan3.html">chairmanship of the Senate Rules Committee.</a> Looks like the Southern Strategy is alive and well! :)
     
  2. jamming

    jamming Banned

    I was told that they were just doing it to upset one Robert Harris of NYC. ;)
     
  3. midranger4

    midranger4 Banned

    Ethics,

    Although the comment Lott made was likely insensitive I did not find it blatantly racist or discriminatory in any way for that matter. It was taken out of context and twisted into something Lott surely did not intend when he spoke the words. I tire of seeing the feeding frenzies the media and opposing political parties engages in when a sound byte it blown so far out of proportion.

    I also find it convenient that *other* high profile politicians do not receive similar chastising for far more inflammatory statements.

    Surely you don't suggest that the Repulican party should allow Lott to just *fade to black* do you ;)
     
  4. ethics

    ethics Pomp-Dumpster Staff Member

    Honestly?
    To me, any and every politician today is suspect. If it's not racism, it's corporate funding, if it's not that, it's something else.

    When we rid of the way people get elected, mainly, the campaign funding, that's probably when I will view them more of representatives for the people and not corporations and this is across all political spectrums.
     
  5. midranger4

    midranger4 Banned

    I am in total agreement Ethics.

    Nobody is perfect or beyond reproach.

    The propaganda machines both political parties employ just make me that much more jaded I guess.

    If Jesus Christ himself were to hold political office he would be torn to shreds as well if his opponents were motivated to do so.
     
  6. ShinyTop

    ShinyTop I know what is right or wrong!

    I thought I summed it up well here.
     
  7. jamming

    jamming Banned

    Link's broke Shiny.
     
  8. Robert Harris

    Robert Harris Passed Away Aug. 19, 2006

    Why should it upset me to see the Republican Party behaving like itself? I would be surprised if it did not. If they had not treatred him nicely they might have lost some of the gains they have made in the South, where support for Strom's views still exists and has shifted lots of votes to the Party.
     
  9. ShinyTop

    ShinyTop I know what is right or wrong!

    Sorry about the broken link. Even did the forward to self thingy Ethics suggested.
    Here it is again:

    TIME OUT!

    Check my signature. The person who gets the most money and pisses off the fewest voters is gonna win. A candidate who is middle of the road, let's take a look at gun ownership and come up with a civilized compromise won't get votes from either well funded camp. Choose your issue and you will find the funds are all located on one end of the spectrum or the other. If you want to get elected you must have money and the money is collected at the extremists ends of each issue.

    Change the way we allow funding. Do not let corporations contribute in any shape, fashion, or form to campaigns. Free speech my ass. Corporations are made up of shareholders and employees. Let every one of them contribute individually what they want. That's free speech. Limit the amount a person can contribute so the voice of Bill Gates is not worth 100,000 times my voice. That's free speech. That's returning the country to the voters.

    We are run by corporations and organizations that are good at collecting money. And nobody ever collected money by saying I agree very strongly with both of you. Fix campaign contributions, make corporations stick to business and let government be run by the people. Until we do we will not have any change over what we have now. One thousand $10 contributors will not be heard as loud as one $10,000 contributor. If for no other reason than they are not speaking as one.
     
  10. Omar

    Omar Registered User

    What I constantly do not absorb and I have a feeling that it's more than just not being non-American, is that America prides itself on democracy.

    Well, while you have the option of a choice to vote for anyone you want, the leaders took away that power by giving you the choices only they want you to have.

    Isn't that a circumvent of your politics?
     
  11. Biker

    Biker Administrator Staff Member

    It isn't so much the leaders have given us the choice, but rather he with the most cash wins. And "cash" speaks louder than the voters.
     
  12. Omar

    Omar Registered User

    Ok, but who decided on the above decision? The voters or the leaders?
     
  13. jamming

    jamming Banned

    The voter's shaped by the leaders choices, but the voters do rebel: the Democratic Leaders didn't want Clinton at first, the Republican Leaders didn't want Reagan either.
     
  14. Omar

    Omar Registered User

    I don't see how the above logic is pertinent to my question, Jim, no offense.
     
  15. jamming

    jamming Banned

    None taken, the Leaders don't decide, but they try to limit the choices by only funding the choices they want. So the voters can only choose from a handful of screened choices. Reagan and Clinton were outsiders from the leadership who were able to go around this hurdle that the Party Leaders placed in the way and secure the nomination for their own Political Parties. It still comes down to the voter's voting, but there are some roadblocks in the way. Is that better?
     
  16. Omar

    Omar Registered User

    Yes. Apparently you agree with my outrage?
     
  17. jamming

    jamming Banned

    I think there are problems in the system, but the word outrage is a little strong for my feelings, more like upset.
     
  18. Omar

    Omar Registered User

    It's not my country, so I don't think outrage applies to me. But if it were, I'd definitely be outraged.
     
  19. ShinyTop

    ShinyTop I know what is right or wrong!

    I don't think we have as little to say as Omar does. But I am outraged. When the corporations and the rich are buying elections I am outraged. And the bad part is that our lawmakers are the only ones making the laws about campaign contributions. If anything brings the American experiment down it will be this issue. If this is not changed we will have admit that we are no longer a government of the people.
     
  20. Coot

    Coot Passed Away January 7, 2010

    Well, I guess the only thing that remains to be seen is if the Democratic Party offers up Byrd's name for President Pro Tem of the Senate ;)
     

Share This Page