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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (172632)	10/16/2005 4:59:53 PM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Let me see if I can use your statements and come up with something resembling a logical solution which works. The vote was based on a mistake, or even worse, fraud. When people vote based on their belief in a mistake, do you just stay the course of the mistake- or do you recalculate? I'm not exactly sure what you're talking about here. Perhaps you're talking about the original vote to go to war, linked with the WMD issue. If that's the case, why did the President and his party win re-election when a large part of the election was based on his foreign policy decision to go to war? It's simply not credible to suggest the American people were duped, lied to etc, but then re-reelected the same person after those lies were discovered. Makes more sense the American people heard the arguments and still agreed to continue the course. Or, they understood the difficult challenges faced by intelligence agencies and gave them the benefit of the doubt in regard to mistakes being made. In Mr. Bush's universe you make a mistake, pretend you didn't make it, or that it was someone else's fault, and ignore the fact that you made it. Now what does that have to do with democracy. Your presumption in this statement is the President "made a mistake". Perhaps you think he did, and perhaps a bunch of people at moveon.org think he did, but it's obvious a majority of the American people didn't think he did on election day because, they re-elected him to office. The best method I know for a democracy is to do the same thing I do- own up to mistakes that have been made, take the real evidence available (not the wishful thinking of a biased ideologically blinded administration), and move on using the ideas of people who actually know something, versus the ideas of people (like Rove) who only know their own ideological preferences, and who seem to be unable to grasp the fundamentals of the real world. You are so silly to say democracy doesn't work for me. Don't you feel silly saying things like that in post after post? Your posts just look so foolish with things like that thrown in. Do you think you are capable of writing a post without something made up in it? No wonder you like Bush. This section looks like some kind of rambling nonsense posted because you're going through cognitive dissonance while not being able to clearly answer the question. I've yet to see a practical alternative presented which supports your position. It appears you think our democracy is a failure and want to change it. However, instead of presenting practical solutions you're reaching for some kind of minority opinion based acquiescence approach. A lot of people probably feel that way when they are in the minority on Election Day. However, foreign policy decisions based on minority feelings are not compatible with sound governmental positions, especially on the very important point of war.