Why do we need a president?

[mykil]

AS time persists to move forward, it is apparent that we as real people might be better off without a President. Every so-called leader we have had in the last like forever has been nothing but a bourdon on the American people. So why do we continue with the whole “lets get a better one in there” scenario? I think this is along the lines of dating and the constant of getting the wrong mate. Lets give up already and take control. WE need a president like we need another hole in the head. WE can live without one, and a lot better is my guess. I myself have never voted. I find it degrading to participate in such a disastrous event in general with the outcome to be nothing more than a failed outcome to begin with. Why must we do this and continue on with this sort of behavior?

[shellebelle]

Ya know hun I love your spelling cause I tend to automatically cahnge in my mind now burden is what you meant I know but I saw BOURBON! And ya knwo if these presidents were pouring Bourbon on us we might be doing better!


AS time persists to move forward, it is apparent that we as real people might be better off without a President. Every so-called leader we have had in the last like forever has been nothing but a bourdon on the American people. So why do we continue with the whole “lets get a better one in there” scenario? I think this is along the lines of dating and the constant of getting the wrong mate. Lets give up already and take control. WE need a president like we need another hole in the head. WE can live without one, and a lot better is my guess. I myself have never voted. I find it degrading to participate in such a disastrous event in general with the outcome to be nothing more than a failed outcome to begin with. Why must we do this and continue on with this sort of behavior?

[Valley Oak]

LOL!

Edward



Ya know hun I love your spelling cause I tend to automatically cahnge in my mind now burden is what you meant I know but I saw BOURBON! And ya knwo if these presidents were pouring Bourbon on us we might be doing better!

[Tars]

"Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few." - George Bernard Shaw (1856 - 1950)

"It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried." - Sir Winston Churchill (1874 - 1965)

OK, actually we're a representative Republic, but we elect those people, 'cause everything else is worse. Heh...we haven't even come up with a credibly accurate digital voting machine...how would major decisions be made in your scenario?

[Dark Shadows]

Because white men like their chiefs to wear suits.

[MsTerry]

I think you are on to something and I'd like to nominate you to be the first president of the Party to abolish the presidency!


AS time persists to move forward, it is apparent that we as real people might be better off without a President. Every so-called leader we have had in the last like forever has been nothing but a bourdon on the American people. So why do we continue with the whole “lets get a better one in there” scenario? I think this is along the lines of dating and the constant of getting the wrong mate. Lets give up already and take control. WE need a president like we need another hole in the head. WE can live without one, and a lot better is my guess. I myself have never voted. I find it degrading to participate in such a disastrous event in general with the outcome to be nothing more than a failed outcome to begin with. Why must we do this and continue on with this sort of behavior?

[theindependenteye]

>Because white men like their chiefs to wear suits.

And men of other colors like them to wear quill-bonnets or horned headdresses or crowns. And it seems that pea-hens like the cocks to spread their tail feathers. I don't think any race or sex is exempt from outsize decoration. Kind of a shame, in fact, that Presidents aren't required to walk on stilts and wear red noses.

To me the danger is that we're desperate for a father figure or an evil genie who happens to be on our side. When I was a kid and we did choose-up-sides for the football game, we always wanted to get the big savage kid on our side in order to make the contest as manifestly unfair as possible.

The Presidency is pretty well designed in the Constitution, it seems to me. Evolution, for better or worse, responds to circumstance and need, and human need is deeply psychological. Arguably, some of Lincoln's deeds during the Civil War were as Constitutionally suspect as any of Bush's, but was that because he was simply power-mad?

Cheers—
Conrad

[Valley Oak]

Applause!

(Now what are we going to replace it with?)

Edward


I think you are on to something and I'd like to nominate you to be the first president of the Party to abolish the presidency!

[mykil]

Really now, it seems simple enough. Yet you gotta know it will take more than a pry bar to get them to loosen their grim. We have tried this for a while, like a couple hundred years, and obviously it hasn’t worked. Every president feels the need to prove himself by going to war, fucking up the economy or both.
Clinton was just as bad, he just happened to slide in on a landslide with the dotcom industry. If he were a real president he would have found a way to save about two thirds of all that money and invest it in our futures. Thus we would still be living off the revenues. But no he blew the whole wad and left right when the bubble burst to leave the blame on the next sucker…
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
WE haven’t really come a long wayz since we have invaded this little space in the world way back in history and wrote the little pieces of paper that they take for granted over and over again. Molding them to meet their needs when they get to the big space in time to make everyone around them rich beyond their wildest dreams. You think that voting for the least off ALL Evils is going to be a better thing and this is where you are all going wrong. DON’T VOTE!!! MAKE CHANGE
<o:p></o:p>
All I’m saying is we don’t need a leader; we tried that and failed miserably! We can do this with another office that takes a majority of another hundred or so. Safer. To the point and it will take allot more corruption to get to every one!:2cents:

[alanora]

???????????


Really now, it seems simple enough. Yet you gotta know it will take more than a pry bar to get them to loosen their grim. We have tried this for a while, like a couple hundred years, and obviously it hasn’t worked. Every president feels the need to prove himself by going to war, fucking up the economy or both.
Clinton was just as bad, he just happened to slide in on a landslide with the dotcom industry. If he were a real president he would have found a way to save about two thirds of all that money and invest it in our futures. Thus we would still be living off the revenues. But no he blew the whole wad and left right when the bubble burst to leave the blame on the next sucker…
<o:p></o:p>
WE haven’t really come a long wayz since we have invaded this little space in the world way back in history and wrote the little pieces of paper that they take for granted over and over again. Molding them to meet their needs when they get to the big space in time to make everyone around them rich beyond their wildest dreams. You think that voting for the least off ALL Evils is going to be a better thing and this is where you are all going wrong. DON’T VOTE!!! MAKE CHANGE
<o:p></o:p>
All I’m saying is we don’t need a leader; we tried that and failed miserably! We can do this with another office that takes a majority of another hundred or so. Safer. To the point and it will take allot more corruption to get to every one!:2cents:

[theindependenteye]

>>Clinton ... If he were a real president he would have found a way to save about two thirds of all that money and invest it in our futures.

Dear Mykil—
Don't you think that had something to do with the 535 congressmen who actually have to agree on a budget? Sounds as if what you really want is what you're arguing against: a stud with the absolute power to go in there and kick ass and get that stuff done — in other words, an enlightened despot.

>>You think that voting for the least off ALL Evils is going to be a better thing and this is where you are all going wrong.

For myself, I would much rather have the lesser of two evils. I'd rather lose a finger than an arm. I agree that having to vote "yes" on losing a finger is kinda tacky, but I'd still do it if I had to.

>>DON'T VOTE!!! MAKE CHANGE

Meaning what? Levitate the Pentagon? Throw bombs? Pray? I'm all for engaging in political action, trying to bend the system, reforming election procedures, expressing ideas, changing the cat pan, all that. Not voting isn't as stupid as voting for our current sociopath; it's only half as stupid.

>>All I‚m saying is we don‚t need a leader; we tried that and failed miserably! We can do this with another office that takes a majority of another hundred or so. Safer. To the point and it will take a lot more corruption to get to every one!

The parliamentary system, with the prime minister chosen by the prevailing party but often required, to keep a majority, to make deals with other minority parties, may be closer to what you have in mind. Does that work better? I dunno. I've worked in ensemble-oriented theatre for 38 years, seeing groups try many different structures to give their members maximum personal empowerment while still getting the business done, and also seen a very effective Quaker congregation operate by consensus. But those structures are hard enough, given our cultural conditioning, when it's only 5 to 20 people. I'd love to have someone invent a way to operate a wildly diverse nation of 300 million without a great deal of power at the top, but it's beyond my own imagination.

Cheers—
Conrad

[mykil]

I envy the fool that thinks his or her vote will make a difference in our society in this day and age in the presidential race. I wish I were this naive!
It must be nice to be this delusional! Do you really think Edwards or Hilary will pull troops from Kuwait and Iraq? Do you already know that they will find a way to rape our economy to line their own pockets no matter who is in the front row? In my opinion the only way to make change come about is to get everyone to just not vote. Show the real spirit of the cause. If no one voted it would have to change. Show them how important it is for you to just not even say none of the above!

["Mad" Miles]

Mykil et al,

As usual this subject, or some variation thereof, has been discussed before on this board. While not directly related to the question of whethor or not we should have a President, or should vote, it is pertinent (https://www.waccobb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9495).

As for the question of government itself, I've long been sympathetic to the Anarchist position that, "a society without formal authority, based on cooperation and love." is the best way to go. But I don't call myself an Anar because it is one thing to think it the best option, another to think and believe it to be a doable thing.

Given the limits of human cooperation and love, I choose to be the most radical democrat (system not party) I can be. That means voting, in spite of the futility and the feeling of having soiled myself by participating in a corrupt process.

Life isn't simple, it takes all kinds and varied approaches to.... making it work? making it through? pretending? all of the above?

"Mad" Miles

:burngrnbounce:

[Valley Oak]

A poet is born!

Edward



Mykil et al,

As usual this subject, or some variation thereof, has been discussed before on this board. While not directly related to the question of whethor or not we should have a President, or should vote, it is pertinent (https://www.waccobb.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9495).

As for the question of government itself, I've long been sympathetic to the Anarchist position that, "a society without formal authority, based on cooperation and love." is the best way to go. But I don't call myself an Anar because it is one thing to think it the best option, another to think and believe it to be a doable thing.

Given the limits of human cooperation and love, I choose to be the most radical democrat (system not party) I can be. That means voting, in spite of the futility and the feeling of having soiled myself by participating in a corrupt process.

Life isn't simple, it takes all kinds and varied approaches to.... making it work? making it through? pretending? all of the above?

"Mad" Miles

:burngrnbounce:

[santarosie]

I'll vote for Burboun. It will give us the warm fuzzy feeling we want from a president, will make us feel good about ourselves again, and everyone else around the world will look better too!

:vote1:

Bourbon for president!

[mahakali overdrive]

It seems to me that true Democracy is pretty close to that notion. Unfortunately the U.S. is a representative Democracy.

My own political impulses always move me toward small anarcho-tribal based ideations in the best of all possible worlds.

Emma Goldman was so smart.

We can follow reform on the path to revolution, and so I vote, even as I don't entirely believe in Government.

Knowledge is power!