Conservatives vs. Judiciary

[Odin]

libertarians put up with the social conservatives because the social conservatives get the working class Joe to vote Republican.

[Toby Rowe]

Odin,

I'm working class, my mum middle class, politics in the the UK (at least) isn't based upon class anymore, but both are Labour party supporters.

However, my mum must vote for the Liberals (tactical voting) in her ward in order to keep out the Conservatives, as 20,001 votes will beat 20,000 votes.

My area is Labour and always has been; thankgod I support the party that will win the seat (at about midnight tonight), I'd be a very frustratated Tory(Republican) or Liberal otherwise, but our system, encourages this totalitarian type of democracy.

Drawing lines on a map, and then asking people to vote within this boundary isn't going to encourage reluctant voters if the result is always the same.

I want real representation of the people, Proportionial Representation (PR) offers that, both the UK and US systems are out of date and the rest of Europe must laugh at us, if they even take an interest watching our politicians at the hustings.

Toby

[MrFun]

Re: Conservatives vs. Judiciary

Originally posted by Bosh
Hmmm, it seems that traditional conservative blatherings about the evils of an independent judiciary are taking a a turn for the worse:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A38308-2005Apr8.html

I don't know about you, but it gives me a nice warm fuzzy feeling when conversatives quote Stalin with approval....

these statements are real

[Zevico]

Toby,
Is the British electoral system based on preferences, like the Australian one is?

[Ned]

On a national level, our system results in a two-party system and forces a presidential candidate toward the center in order to win elections. For life in me, I cannot understand how this is a bad system and why we should take lectures from people who do not have an independent executive.

[chequita guevara]

For the past 25 years, Ned, it's been forcing the whole system to the right not the center. Today's Democrats are to the right of Richard Nixon.

[Ned]

And Bush is to the left of FDR.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
And Bush is to the left of FDR.

Uh, no.

[Ned]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Uh, no.

Quite, true though.

[chequita guevara]

No, not really. Liberals dont just spend money, they spend on specific areas. Bush's massive deficit spending isn't going to areas like welfare, rebuilding roads, etc. It's going to the military and (mostly) tax cuts for the wealthy. These are traditionally conservative areas. The only places he gets to the left of his party is on Education, which is underfunded, and Medicare, which is also underfunded.

[Ned]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
No, not really. Liberals dont just spend money, they spend on specific areas. Bush's massive deficit spending isn't going to areas like welfare, rebuilding roads, etc. It's going to the military and (mostly) tax cuts for the wealthy. These are traditionally conservative areas. The only places he gets to the left of his party is on Education, which is underfunded, and Medicare, which is also underfunded.

Not true, Che. The spending increase on social programs has been the greatest in American history not only in total dollars, but in percentages of the budget.

[chequita guevara]

Take the Drug program from Medicare and redo that calculation.

[Ned]

Che, facts are facts.

You must know that the conservative right is VERY unhappy with GWB.

[chequita guevara]

Yes, I do know that. But when you take the $600 billion drug presectiption prgram outn of the calculation, Bush no longer seems like this great liberal. Frankly, I don't believe that the program was intended to do anything more than bankrupt Medicare, since it's underfunded.

[Ned]

Well, based on evidence, "compassionate conservatism" appears to be a form of liberalism and is designed to get Bush the Republican nomination by using different words to fool the right wing.