Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Support the French! Viva Democracy! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (2397)	8/8/2003 12:42:04 AM
From: 49thMIMOMander	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7834

Try this one cspanrm.fplive.net:554/ramgen/cspan/ndrive/archive/iraq/iraq073103_biden.rm CSPAN sometimes moves recent files to more "archiving" servers. -- Sen. Joseph Biden (D-DE) Speech on Iraq Policy At the Brookings Institution, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Ranking Member Joseph Biden (D-DE) delivers an address on U.S. policy in Iraq. 7/31/2003: WASHINGTON, DC: 1 hr. 15 min. --- CSPAN, searching for Biden c-span.org -- Yes, the two-party system is the "root" to many "strange behaviors" in US government as well as among americans. The basic mechanisms for achiving a two-party system is first the singe-seat-districts, but US additionally (ref UK) other mechanismes like campaign financing, access to ballots and the senate with two repr/state. Also the way the house works, committees, decisions,etc,etc.. That is, very deeply embedded in both the political mechanisms as well as in the "citizens" as well as the "media". A really interesting question is if US could "handle" another (more modern, democratic, responsive, educating for both voters and politicians) system. Ref how UK is now changing their system. The history of the two parties in US is a typical example on how difficult it is for a two-party system to "adapt" smoothly (plus "southern democrates", "blue dogs", "Gingrich republicans", "neocons",etc) That is, both the tyranny of the majority as well of the (small, active) minority. Culturally maybe best explained by the description "adversarial two-party system", lacking mechanisms for "the moderate common sense" (bipartisan in US-talk, but only temporarily when things have gone really bad) Nothing wrong with "old parties" as long as they can adapt. Btw, our center-party can, if one tries, be seen as a "jeffersonial agrarian" party, that is, (historically) small independent family-farmers, not huge landowners, nor lots of "employee", emphasize on education, cooperation, pooling resources, etc. (that is, neither "big capital" nor "landless labor of the big capital") Ilmarinen PS To my understanding the important late 1800s upto the last "southern democrates" has been "pro- or anti-segration" issues forming the present two parties.. That is, a process which has taken some 150 years, but the "segregationists" have now moved over to the republicans thanks to the "religious right" movement and Newt Gingrich. (Btw, what the republicans wanted was taxes of the southern exports to europe as well as cotton for the factories in the north) PPS CSPAN is also a good and systematic source (on purpose) for US history. However, the issue of proportional representation is clearly banned (despite a little attempt during the first months of Clinton, Lani Guyneri(?))

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (2397)	8/8/2003 12:59:53 AM
From: 49thMIMOMander	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7834

Ref US history, CSPAN runs these series "outside of covering congress and administration", courts,thinktanks, universities as well as the commercial media. archived since 1989, their own production booknotes.org booknotes.org in cooperation with, and often copyright problems in terms of archiving (max 2 months) booktv.org booktv.org Some other more focused, independent parts of CSPAN americanwriters.org americanpresidents.org That is, CSPAN is, on purpose and by design and implementation, "the anti-thesis of US commercial media" and because of that, as neutral as can be (and has also been abused, maybe mostly by Newt Gingrich)