But both parties voted for it with Gusto. Only one Senator opposed the original Patriot Act--Russ Feingold. It was a very bipartisan bill and law (unfortunately).
Apparently, it upsets you that the best-educated states and the worst-educated states vote as they do, but you can's dispute the numbers.
True. It disturbs me that anyone could be so dumb as to vote for Obama no matter what their education level. [video=youtube;TG7gYNE-WWs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG7gYNE-WWs[/video]
No. That's not what you implied before. Before you implied there was a problem with voters and our democratic system relies on voters to choose their leaders. The government doesn't choose the leaders, the people do. Our government is in a constant state of revolution. Every 2-4- and 6 years there is a controlled revolution. This is the brilliance of our democratic system. When Obama was up for election and reelection the people chose by a great majority him as the better choice. You said there is some fault in this choice. I'm wondering why? The people spoke it is what it is. You just happened to have been on the losing side this time but would you rather always win? That would be tyranny. Take the loss, learn from it and move on, buddy. Don't blame the system or the voters. Look inward for the answer.
The corruption and greed has permeated the media and academia and many other private and government institution while the public remains ignorant, apathetic or misinformed. I blame the government, the media and damn the voters for their stupidity.
Blaming the government is redundant to blaming the voters, which you do. So, again, I ask you, because you seem to not have faith in the ability of the people to choose their leadership, do you believe our system of government is now defunct because Obama was elected twice? I see this often among the right wing types. They blame the "government" for all that is wrong in our country but in fact it is the people that elect the government through our democratic process. So, by blaming the government you are essentially blaming the American people or the American democratic process. So which is it because the government is a combination of the will of the people and Constitutionally mandated elections.
That may be because you entertain an unrealistic estimation of your own acumen that is not shared by most who are well-educated. Of course, you can shriek "Stupid!" at better-educated Americans whenever their electoral preferences and yours do not coincide, but don't expect them to be amenable to your plaint.
There is a faction that is alienated from America and the democratic process. There is no shortage of opportunistic media entertainers who pander to them as they revert to their ideological fantasyland from which they fling dung at the reality they bemoan. It would be nice if they all absconded to Kansas and stopped their whining, but they seem to prefer whining.
lol. It's Verbal Vomit. Thankfully, I only see it when it's quoted. Hillary will drop out. She'll suffer some imaginary accident or illness to save face. If she doesn't drop out, she'll be soundly defeated, like 2008. Probably by O'Malley.
Hillary Clinton was not "soundly defeated" in 2008. In fact, she won the popular vote and lost the delegate vote by less than 2%. It was an extremely close primary.
Indeed. it is a fantasy-land, kool-aid mentality that keeps Republicans in office in a great many states, especially in the South and Midwest. It is sad that the states with the highest poverty rates are mostly Republican controlled. Kansas is a great example. In many Jayhawks school districts they will have to cut the school year short because there isn't enough revenue to fund a full year. I suppose it is a good thing that you can spend your government aid money on guns there because there will undoubtedly be more misguided and under-educated youth than ever. The ironic thing is they will need to spend more on government welfare because an uneducated population is more likely to be dependent on assistance programs. What a mess they got themselves into. Once a state starts cutting education there is nowhere to go but down.
Kansas is the showcase of the realization of TP airy-fairy ideology, and as a pragmatist, I have cordially enjoined them to engage in discussion regarding the empirical results of the imposition of their agenda: here and here. They scurry away like cockroaches exposed to sudden illumination.
I should be edified that your knee-jerk reaction to my insightful commentary approximates your respect for the US Constitution and democratic institutions, but your peevish alienation from the nation distorts your perception. I am confident that, in America, political centrists will continue to self-govern and seek substantive progress whilst extremists both left and right will bray their radical agendas from their fringes in vain. The best-educated states will continue to cast their electoral votes for the Democratic presidential candidate, and the worst-educated states, overwhelmingly, for the Republican. Democrats hold advantages in party identification among blacks, Asians, Hispanics, well-educated adults and Millennials. Republicans have leads among whites particularly white men, those with less education and evangelical Protestants as well as members of the Silent Generation. That empirical reality leads directly to the candid, self-critical admission:
I don't agree with your analysis. A close race in which someone finishes second doesn't imply soundly defeated. Romney and McCain were soundly defeated, Clinton barely lost to Obama.
In what sense do you mean the Constitution has been usurped? You tried to argue that the will of the people is no longer the best way to elect our leaders because Obama was elected twice. Thus, our democratic form of government is somehow defunct. For a guy who claims himself Patriotic, you don't seem to like the American for of government. What are you patriotic to?
I love my country, not my government and those who are corrupt; not to those that usurp the Constitution.
I'm not here to defend Clinton, but I wish all the people speculating about how damaged she is would look at actual data. We've had weeks of right-wing noise about her, all claiming to have uncovered the scandal that will sink her. She's damaged goods, sinking fast, better get out while she can. But the polling averages show a collective shrug: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_presidential_race.html Clinton leads all likely GOP challengers by at least 7.5 points (Rubio) and by as much as 13.3 (Carson). Why would Clinton drop out when she has a commanding lead in the polling?
Another contradiction. You claim to love your country but not your government. Your government is a direct reflection of your country. Haven't you ever heard "you get the government you vote for"? It doesn't make any sense to try to separate the government from the country in a democratic republic. I could understand if you lived in a country like Iran where there is an un-elected supreme leader but this is America - our leaders are directly elected by the people. You're trying to make America out to be something it is not.
Don't get too excited. Her name recognition will skew these initial polls. When people actually turn their attention to the business of decision making, it will be after Hillary has been through both the primary grinder, at which point her harsh personality will have had enough play to disillusion many, and her opponents will have thoroughly tenderized her. After that, there will be what the GOP nominee will have done to her, combined with the public being able to hash through the GOP offerings and select one they like the best. Evidence of what I'm saying can be found in the answer to the following question: do you really believes that if Hillary wins (and I know you think she'll win) that she'll win by anywhere near the margins you're clucking about in that meaningless poll?
