Who will be our next president?

Okay dude, but what's this Protest Revolution that bereft mentioned?

Chucky,

Sorry...I didn't get the last three letters out. I was referring to the Protestant Revolution or reformation if you choose.

That marked the end of the Catholic church acting as kingmakers by anointing leaders with the divine power of heaven in exchange for their loyalty.

Ah yes, the Protestant Reformation; Martin Luther and all that stuff. We studied that in school, of course. Before the reformation (and indeed after it in some cases), religion had become diseased with money, like so many other things. [Some] Priests saw the opportunity to make a neat profit from religion.

Bereft, I agree the 100 years pull was out of context, but I do believe it has merit. McCain is saying we would stay in Iraq until we achieve "victory" but we're not fighting a government, thus no organized agency or government would ever sign any declaration of surrender for this war. In my book that opens the door to an unending war *shrugs*

Yes I'm pulling a quote given elsewhere to represent my argument, but I believe the remark was a valid one.

That said, because of the current lack of party animals in this country - the jackass and elephant aren't working anymore in my opinion, we are usually voting for the lesser of two evils, or the lesser of two incompetents as you stated. But in my opinion, this is the first election in my lifetime where our very freedom hangs in the balance. If this unending "war on terror" goes on in countries where the leaders al-Qaeda aren't located and have never been, we're going to wind up with more and more enemies in the world.

We're already seen as the stupid kid in the back of the classroom thanks to Bush, I want someone intelligent and without an anger issue to represent us and at least bring the country back to respectability. Since I can't have and never will have a perfect president, I'd at least like someone who can think clearly this time around.

Should also say sorry about the delayed response - was out of town asking "the question" (she said yes!)

Ah, the problem with the Philosopher King is the fact that a human being would decide what philosophies that king would have. That's why in the same conversation about the topic you have both ends of the spectrum mentioned, from Marcus Aurelius to Adolph Hitler.

Every form of government is going to have flaws... usually MASSIVE flaws with big fecking hairy claws (with all due respect to Father Ted for the theft of part of that). Power and money can corrupt even those with the best of intentions. Even if the ruler himself isn't corrupted, some of his advisors most likely are, and some of his teachers, and by that measure, some of his knowledge.

I'd like to see more citizens become Philosopher Citizens, because at least that way we have a core group of well educated and sound minded citizens to oversee our leaders who all too often act like children.

We try to create laws as a group because that way at least most of the population is represented within those laws, the thought being that more eyes on a thing is better than fewer. But when those eyes are limited to one extreme view or another (Repubs or Dems) and not inclusive of other extremes and those in between, the laws aren't very representative.

I'd love to see a Supreme Court with three extreme conservatives, three extreme liberals, and three in the middle. Four or five of the Justices should be women, to represent that half of our population. I'd love to see a President and Vice President of differing parties, with an appropriate balance of power and influence for both. I'd love to see a change in our electoral system where politicians run on the issues and not on personal attacks and insults. I'd like to see more parties (and party animals) represented on our ballots at every level - from local to presidential. And I'd like to see the documents that were created to form this country and those that inspired the formation of this country to be honored.

But this isn't gonna happen in my lifetime.

Oh... Chucky and Asuka - I also agree that too much freedom is bad. In fact I believe anyone who has ever voted for any law believes that in part. Rules are there to keep order, and those rules by their very nature tend to remove some small freedom in keeping order. Whether it's as simple as "don't litter" or as complex as a tax code, it's going to remove some measure of freedom, and I don't know anyone personally who doesn't believe the law against killing another person is a bad one.

seanetal wrote:Bereft, I agree the 100 years pull was out of context, but I do believe it has merit. McCain is saying we would stay in Iraq until we achieve "victory" but we're not fighting a government, thus no organized agency or government would ever sign any declaration of surrender for this war. In my book that opens the door to an unending war *shrugs*

Yes I'm pulling a quote given elsewhere to represent my argument, but I believe the remark was a valid one.

That said, because of the current lack of party animals in this country - the jackass and elephant aren't working anymore in my opinion, we are usually voting for the lesser of two evils, or the lesser of two incompetents as you stated. But in my opinion, this is the first election in my lifetime where our very freedom hangs in the balance. If this unending "war on terror" goes on in countries where the leaders al-Qaeda aren't located and have never been, we're going to wind up with more and more enemies in the world.

We're already seen as the stupid kid in the back of the classroom thanks to Bush, I want someone intelligent and without an anger issue to represent us and at least bring the country back to respectability. Since I can't have and never will have a perfect president, I'd at least like someone who can think clearly this time around.

Should also say sorry about the delayed response - was out of town asking "the question" (she said yes!)

First of all, congratulations and best wishes to you are yours.

As to the political commentary, I think it is amazing that two people of such divergent political philosophies such as you and I can agree on one fundamental issue: Our current political system is not working for the benefit of the people.

I don't know the answer to the dilemma, but I hope that something or someone can change the status quo before the country implodes.

Even though I voted for Bush in the last two elections, he has been a big disappointment to me. We can probably agree to disagree over whether the war against terrorism has been handled correctly, but beyond that Bush's domestic policy has been either disastrous or non-existent.

My greatest hope is that some force will emerge to return our country to a path of safety and prosperity for people like you and my children.

Best,

I agree with you there man, the future generations of this country deserve better stewards than we have been providing lately.

Sean, your attitude on this thread now seems quite different than it was before you asked 'the question' - Could this be because she said 'yes'? You must be looking upon the world in a much different light now. Anyway, I'm quite envious, you must know.

Back to the thread, McCain has been looking arther desperate recently. You can see that's he's trying to be as energetic in his speeches as Obama but he just can't pull it off; and the Palin 'gamble' is dead-and-buried.

Well Chucky, the stress of asking was definitely weighing on me some. I'll try and post some pics once we've had time to go through them so you can see... the falls were spectacular and the perfect place to ask.

Here's a pic of the place someone else took

http://www.spectacularoregon.com/fallsl ... hFalls.jpg