Why do we put up with lying crooked thieving idiotic politicians?

[Tingkai]

Living in Hong Kong, I have to put up with an idiot of a leader. I don't have a vote here. But then I think even if I did have a vote it wouldn't make a difference.

In Canada we elected a Liberal Prime Minister who claims Canada won't support the American invasion of Iraq and then allows Canadian troops to take part in the invasion. He's got half a dozen scandals surrounding him. The last time we elected a Conservative PM, we ended up with a lying crook.

In the US, they've got Bush, who wasn't really elected and is corrupt with all the deals he's handing out to his friends. The Republicans claim to be in favour of small government but they're spending money left right and centre while creating laws to tell people what to think, say and do. Clinton was no better. Christ, he was a Republican in Democratic clothing with all most of his policies and he let his rich friends get away with crimes just like Bush Sr.

In Britain, they've got Blair lies about being a leftist when he's a conservative.

Why the hell do we do this to ourselves. Why can't we elect honest politicians? Why can't the American conservatives elect a politician who will cut government rather than spending $15 billion on weapons that the military doesn't really want? Why can's the liberal Canadians and labour Brits elect a liberal/labour government that is actually liberal/labour?

What gives?

[TheStinger]

Well you sort of have a point althought I think Blair is of the left just not as left as the lentil munchers would like

[Seeker]

My old politics prof thought it was lack of Proportional Representation.

Look at Ireland and New Zealand, they seem to be doing all right....

(but please don't look at Italy....Berlusconism...)

[Arrian]

I think it has to do with the type of person who becomes a politician and runs for high office.

The people who desire power are the last people to whom it should be granted. But what's the alternative? Leadership by lottery, and compulsion if the "winner" doesn't want to lead? That can't work.

-Arrian

[TheStinger]

Irelands politicians are as corrupt as evryone elses. Alot of them are implicated in the scandals invlovong the covering up of priests having sex with children.

And Sinn Fein are linked to the IRA who are turning into the mafia

[Clear Skies]

In Britain lying politicians are generally automatic, because the British people want better public services and lower taxes...incompatible aims make for 'truth-bending' politicians.
And politics attracts that sort of person. So many compromises, backstabs, points scored, etc. are essential to get to the top - and it's not the cream that floats to the top, it's the scum.

And TheStinger...Blair's not on the left.

[TheStinger]

No Blair is of the left he is not a socialist though.

[Arrian]

because the British people want better public services and lower taxes

Everyone wants that. So the pols promise everyone everything and then cannot possibly keep their promises once elected.

Blair strikes me as akin to a Southern Democrat in the US. Conservative on certain issues, religious (for a Brit), but leading a party that is generally on the left.

-Arrian

[TheStinger]

Blair has increased spending, redistrubuted wealth, regulated evrything, renationlised railtrack, raised taxes,
embarked on grand projects. of course he's of the left

[Clear Skies]

He renationalised Railtrack because he had no choice, rasied stealth taxes rather than direct taxes (which are more progressive) and could hardly NOT redistribute wealth after Thatcher, who basically reversed everything done through the 80s.

On the other side, he's ****-tough on law and order, and has followed Tory policies and spending plans for ages.

He's only left when a) he's forced to be or b) it suits him.

[TheStinger]

Being tough on law order does not make you right wing.
Sometimes it does but not always.

[Clear Skies]

Fine, pick one point and argue that...
And when you're tough on it by taking away the right to trial by jury, increasing sentencing and generally ignoring the rehabilitational effects of teh justice system, then yeah, that's pretty right wing.

[*End Is Forever*]

He's only left when a) he's forced to be or b) it suits him.

Actually if you re-read your post it sounds like you're arguing he had no choice but to move rightwards (which is true, no chance in hell of a proper set of social democrats getting into power these days...)

[TheStinger]

Originally posted by Clear Skies
Fine, pick one point and argue that...
And when you're tough on it by taking away the right to trial by jury, increasing sentencing and generally ignoring the rehabilitational effects of teh justice system, then yeah, that's pretty right wing.

Ill pick teh reat aprt latter I got a go soo.

tony Balir is not as left wing as previous Labour leaders that does not mean he is right wing. He does not believe in the right wing philosiphy of indviduals palying a major role and the sate only intervening when absolutley neccessary.

[Clear Skies]

No-one forced him to follow Tory spending plans.
And I'm saying that since he shifted to the right in order to gain ground in upper-middle class England whilst ignoring his grass roots support; the left-wing things he does happen only when he's forced to do them. Blair's a Thatcherite in disguise and without the elocution lessons.