political-parties

With modern technology it is the easiest of tasks for a media, guided by a narrow group of political manipulators, to speak constantly of democracy and freedom while urging regime changes everywhere on earth but at home. A curious condition of a republic based roughly onthe original Roman model is that it cannot allow true political parties to share in government. What then is a true political party: one that is based firmly in the interest of a class be it workers or fox hunters. Officially we have two parties which are in fact wings of a common party of property with two right wings. Corporate wealth finances each. Since the property party controls every aspect of media they have had decades to create a false reality for a citizenry largely uneducated by public schools that teach conformity with an occasional advanced degree in consumerism.

There is more for us to gain through love than hate.

HOW TO CHOOSE A GREAT LEADERChoose a leader who will invest in Building bridges, not walls.Books, not weapons.Morality, not corruption.Intellectualism and wisdom, not ignorance.Stability, not fear and terror.Peace, not chaos.Love, not hate.Convergence, not segregation.Tolerance, not discrimination.Fairness, not hypocrisy.Substance, not superficiality.Character, not immaturity.Transparency, not secrecy.Justice, not lawlessness.Environmental improvement and preservation, not destruction.Truth, not lies.

I never understood what it meant to be a Democrat or Republican. I'm fully American and agree on some issues presented by both - but not all of them. So why do I have to pick a side? Nobody can say they agree with every single issue proposed by any team unless they lack the ability to think for themselves. To me, both parties are the same. A method to distract and divide a nation from using common sense and logic. I would want a leader to represent every fraction of the country as one united SUM. To make the country stronger, not weaker. One thing I know for certain, is to never choose a leader who needs their speeches written for them. If they cannot communicate to the public directly with their own heart, then they are not a true leader.

You don't fight America_You get America__ Democratic and Republican parties to fight each other... and destroy each other. Worst case scenario_the enemy can slip thru the back door while they are fight like third graders. ~~High Commander Mustafa

But nowadays -- Our weakness for the last few years has been the ineffectiveness of the Opposition. This Labour Party has never had the quality of a fighting Opposition. It has just sucked the life out of Radicalism. It has never had the definite idealism of the Whigs and Liberals. 'Give us more employment and slightly higher pay and be sure of our contentment,' says Labour. 'We're loyal. We know our place. But we don't like being unemployed.' What good is that as Opposition? It's about as much opposition as a mewing cat. We mean more than that. I tell you frankly. Our task, I take it, my task, is to reinstate that practical working Opposition which has always been Old England's alternative line of defence... For the good of all of us...

It is only by ignoring fact, science, and reason that one can support current Republican positions.

We owe our loyalty to each other and to our children's children, not to party politics.

Blind party loyalty will be our downfall. We must follow the truth wherever it leads.

The political parties are there to distract us from our systems of government; instead of focusing on the system, we focus on political parties to vote for.Voting is our only encouraged interaction with our systems of government.The choice between political parties fractures our nations yet further, turns our focus on each other, and away from the mechanisms of our systems of government.

There should no be teams to divide a nation. There should be no such thing as "Them' vs. Us' - only 'WE'. The only interests that should be discussed in Washington are those that serve the best interests of the entire country. So why is there a blue team and a red one? What does it really mean to be conservative or liberal? And if you are conservative, does that mean you will blindly agree with every leader and issue brought forth by your team? And does it mean you only serve and support the upper class even if you are low class? How does that work in your favor exactly? I understand why professionals raking in heavy figures a year would hail the Republican slant for tax reasons, but why would a young unemployed kid from Jersey with an interest in acrobatics give a damn?

In 1959, Vice-President Nixon, speaking to members of California__ Commonwealth Club, was asked if he__ like to see the parties undergo an ideological realignment__he sort that has since taken place__nd he replied, __ think it would be a great tragedy . . . if we had our two major political parties divide on what we would call a conservative-liberal line._ He continued, __ think one of the attributes of our political system has been that we have avoided generally violent swings in Administrations from one extreme to the other. And the reason we have avoided that is that in both parties there has been room for a broad spectrum of opinion._ Therefore, __hen your Administrations come to power, they will represent the whole people rather than just one segment of the people.

All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests.

[T]he enduring problem for liberals, as for everyone else, is not whether history will judge them wise or foolish regarding the war on terrorism; it is, rather, the way that the past decade has splintered them away from other Americans. This fracture comes with a steep price: in today's toxic atmosphere, liberals are no less cynical, shortsighted, and parochial than anyone else, and they understand their fellow-Americans just as badly as they themselves are understood. When liberals look at red-state voters, they see either a mob of pious know-nothings or the insensible victims of militarism and class warfare. Yet.... [such people] defy fixed categories, which means that they have to be figured out the hard way--on their own terms.

The dismaying truth is that birtherism is part of a larger pattern of rejection of reality that has taken hold of intimidating segments of one of the two political parties that alternate in power in our governing institutions. It is akin to the view that global warming is a hoax, or that the budget can be balanced through spending cuts alone, or that contraception causes abortion, or that evolution is just another theory, on a par with the theory that the earth is six thousand years old.

There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution.

Republicans are for both the man and the dollar, but in case of conflict the man before the dollar.

If the surprise outcome of the recent UK referendum - on whether to leave or remain in the European Union - teaches us anything, it is that supposedly worthy displays of democracy in action can actually do more harm than good. Witness a nation now more divided; an intergenerational schism in the making; both a governing and opposition party torn to shreds from the inside; infinitely more complex issues raised than satisfactory solutions provided. It begs the question 'Was it really all worth it' ?