Hi John,

On Fri 2037-Mar-27 04:18, JOHN FITZGERALD (1:123/140) wrote to RICHARD WEBB:

JF>   Richard, nice to see someone who both has depth and the patience
JF> (and capacity) to articulate it.  As for the two party system, there
JF> is much  truth in what you've said, but always keep the perspective
JF> that they still tend to balance each other out.  That doesn't mean
JF> there isn't  room for a third party, one that can balance the other
JF> two.

TO some degree they do balance each other, but the lack of
choices that are perceived by the populace as viable means
they don't really have to address some of the real important issues.  I've
grown so tired, for example, of the Roe V.
Wade decision dominating politics when what happens to those young people
once they are actually born into this world
gets short shrift, all because the ideologues can't get past this argument.

JF>   Concerning the corrupt, we can only deal with them one at a time. 
JF> Everyone has their boggy man, real or imagined, but it is good that
JF> we  all have our guards up nonetheless.  We needed people to hold
JF> Bush's feet  to the fire...and we need them for Obama's.  Neither of
JF> them are anywhere  near perfect.   It's just unfortunate that some
JF> can rave about one  person's faults, then turn around and dismisses,
JF> even defends those same  faults in an other.  That is how corruption
JF> is allowed to flourish.   They know all they have to do is appease
JF> their particular ideology, etc,  and some will defend them all the
JF> way to the gates of hell.

Agreed, and get us sidetracked on these other issues.  WHy
do we need to discuss "gay rights" or what constitutes
"marriage" and other nonissue bs and allow it to dominate
political discourse?  BUt, distracting the sheeplee with
such trivial crappola allows the status quo to remain
because they'll never notice.  WHich is why we're doing
millions of dollars in bailouts to irresponsible jerks right now.


Regards,
           Richard
--- timEd 1.10.y2k+