- This topic has 1,260 replies, 39 voices, and was last updated 15 years ago by
ucodegen.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 11, 2009 at 10:54 PM #468318October 11, 2009 at 11:21 PM #467513
urbanrealtor
Participant[quote=Arraya]Yeah, Afghanistan such a worthy cause… See, the funny thing about ME democracies is they always elect people that “we” don’t like. So we re-democratize them in the name of freedom.[/quote]
Yeah like the Palestinian elections.
That would be the inherent problem with democracy.
Another would be their instability if done wrong (eg: France, Chile, Mexico, Russia, Thailand).
October 11, 2009 at 11:21 PM #467695Participant[quote=Arraya]Yeah, Afghanistan such a worthy cause… See, the funny thing about ME democracies is they always elect people that “we” don’t like. So we re-democratize them in the name of freedom.[/quote]
Yeah like the Palestinian elections.
That would be the inherent problem with democracy.
Another would be their instability if done wrong (eg: France, Chile, Mexico, Russia, Thailand).
October 11, 2009 at 11:21 PM #468049Participant[quote=Arraya]Yeah, Afghanistan such a worthy cause… See, the funny thing about ME democracies is they always elect people that “we” don’t like. So we re-democratize them in the name of freedom.[/quote]
Yeah like the Palestinian elections.
That would be the inherent problem with democracy.
Another would be their instability if done wrong (eg: France, Chile, Mexico, Russia, Thailand).
October 11, 2009 at 11:21 PM #468122Participant[quote=Arraya]Yeah, Afghanistan such a worthy cause… See, the funny thing about ME democracies is they always elect people that “we” don’t like. So we re-democratize them in the name of freedom.[/quote]
Yeah like the Palestinian elections.
That would be the inherent problem with democracy.
Another would be their instability if done wrong (eg: France, Chile, Mexico, Russia, Thailand).
October 11, 2009 at 11:21 PM #468333Participant[quote=Arraya]Yeah, Afghanistan such a worthy cause… See, the funny thing about ME democracies is they always elect people that “we” don’t like. So we re-democratize them in the name of freedom.[/quote]
Yeah like the Palestinian elections.
That would be the inherent problem with democracy.
Another would be their instability if done wrong (eg: France, Chile, Mexico, Russia, Thailand).
October 12, 2009 at 7:04 AM #467551Arraya
Participant[quote=urbanrealtor][quote=Arraya]Yeah, Afghanistan such a worthy cause… See, the funny thing about ME democracies is they always elect people that “we” don’t like. So we re-democratize them in the name of freedom.[/quote]
Yeah like the Palestinian elections.
.[/quote]Yeah, that was a real big surprise. Put people in a cage and consistently steal land by coming to their door, kicking them out and bull dozing there homes all while claiming divine right. Then act surprised that their elected officials are not to friendly to the land thieves. Who would’ve thunk it.
October 12, 2009 at 7:04 AM #467735Participant[quote=urbanrealtor][quote=Arraya]Yeah, Afghanistan such a worthy cause… See, the funny thing about ME democracies is they always elect people that “we” don’t like. So we re-democratize them in the name of freedom.[/quote]
Yeah like the Palestinian elections.
.[/quote]Yeah, that was a real big surprise. Put people in a cage and consistently steal land by coming to their door, kicking them out and bull dozing there homes all while claiming divine right. Then act surprised that their elected officials are not to friendly to the land thieves. Who would’ve thunk it.
October 12, 2009 at 7:04 AM #468089Participant[quote=urbanrealtor][quote=Arraya]Yeah, Afghanistan such a worthy cause… See, the funny thing about ME democracies is they always elect people that “we” don’t like. So we re-democratize them in the name of freedom.[/quote]
Yeah like the Palestinian elections.
.[/quote]Yeah, that was a real big surprise. Put people in a cage and consistently steal land by coming to their door, kicking them out and bull dozing there homes all while claiming divine right. Then act surprised that their elected officials are not to friendly to the land thieves. Who would’ve thunk it.
October 12, 2009 at 7:04 AM #468162Participant[quote=urbanrealtor][quote=Arraya]Yeah, Afghanistan such a worthy cause… See, the funny thing about ME democracies is they always elect people that “we” don’t like. So we re-democratize them in the name of freedom.[/quote]
Yeah like the Palestinian elections.
.[/quote]Yeah, that was a real big surprise. Put people in a cage and consistently steal land by coming to their door, kicking them out and bull dozing there homes all while claiming divine right. Then act surprised that their elected officials are not to friendly to the land thieves. Who would’ve thunk it.
October 12, 2009 at 7:04 AM #468373Participant[quote=urbanrealtor][quote=Arraya]Yeah, Afghanistan such a worthy cause… See, the funny thing about ME democracies is they always elect people that “we” don’t like. So we re-democratize them in the name of freedom.[/quote]
Yeah like the Palestinian elections.
.[/quote]Yeah, that was a real big surprise. Put people in a cage and consistently steal land by coming to their door, kicking them out and bull dozing there homes all while claiming divine right. Then act surprised that their elected officials are not to friendly to the land thieves. Who would’ve thunk it.
October 12, 2009 at 12:29 PM #467641ucodegen
Participantucodegen, compare to the non-votes by Mc Cain during the same period.
I’ll let you do the counts…
I did check McCains record before I did that post, and I also checked Hillary Clinton etc. I don’t agree with any of them skipping out on their constituents to further their careers.
That said, when taken as a totality of their congressional record, Obama’s has very high percentage of non-voting/chasing career to the expense of his constituents.
I’ll prune McCains record, since he still is a senator, to 2008.
McCain:
Resumed participation at the same time as Obama.
McCains block of ‘non-voting’ started around 7/9/07
Obama’s block of ‘non-voting’ started around 2/17/07
–Obama bailed on voting early, Hillary’s non-voting started around 9/6/07 – which is actually better than McCain – though it looks like she may have continued ‘non-voting’ after the primary.
McCains record goes back to 1/12/91
Obamas record goes back to 1/6/051.5 years of non-voting in 15 years of service for McCain.
1.75 years of non-voting in 4 years of service for Obama.It is quite possible for them to know when a vote is going to go to the floor.. and this is the electronic age. It is possible for them to get a copy of the bills that are going to vote without even being in congress. No excuse for either.
October 12, 2009 at 12:29 PM #467823Participantucodegen, compare to the non-votes by Mc Cain during the same period.
I’ll let you do the counts…
I did check McCains record before I did that post, and I also checked Hillary Clinton etc. I don’t agree with any of them skipping out on their constituents to further their careers.
That said, when taken as a totality of their congressional record, Obama’s has very high percentage of non-voting/chasing career to the expense of his constituents.
I’ll prune McCains record, since he still is a senator, to 2008.
McCain:
Resumed participation at the same time as Obama.
McCains block of ‘non-voting’ started around 7/9/07
Obama’s block of ‘non-voting’ started around 2/17/07
–Obama bailed on voting early, Hillary’s non-voting started around 9/6/07 – which is actually better than McCain – though it looks like she may have continued ‘non-voting’ after the primary.
McCains record goes back to 1/12/91
Obamas record goes back to 1/6/051.5 years of non-voting in 15 years of service for McCain.
1.75 years of non-voting in 4 years of service for Obama.It is quite possible for them to know when a vote is going to go to the floor.. and this is the electronic age. It is possible for them to get a copy of the bills that are going to vote without even being in congress. No excuse for either.
October 12, 2009 at 12:29 PM #468179Participantucodegen, compare to the non-votes by Mc Cain during the same period.
I’ll let you do the counts…
I did check McCains record before I did that post, and I also checked Hillary Clinton etc. I don’t agree with any of them skipping out on their constituents to further their careers.
That said, when taken as a totality of their congressional record, Obama’s has very high percentage of non-voting/chasing career to the expense of his constituents.
I’ll prune McCains record, since he still is a senator, to 2008.
McCain:
Resumed participation at the same time as Obama.
McCains block of ‘non-voting’ started around 7/9/07
Obama’s block of ‘non-voting’ started around 2/17/07
–Obama bailed on voting early, Hillary’s non-voting started around 9/6/07 – which is actually better than McCain – though it looks like she may have continued ‘non-voting’ after the primary.
McCains record goes back to 1/12/91
Obamas record goes back to 1/6/051.5 years of non-voting in 15 years of service for McCain.
1.75 years of non-voting in 4 years of service for Obama.It is quite possible for them to know when a vote is going to go to the floor.. and this is the electronic age. It is possible for them to get a copy of the bills that are going to vote without even being in congress. No excuse for either.
October 12, 2009 at 12:29 PM #468250Participantucodegen, compare to the non-votes by Mc Cain during the same period.
I’ll let you do the counts…
I did check McCains record before I did that post, and I also checked Hillary Clinton etc. I don’t agree with any of them skipping out on their constituents to further their careers.
That said, when taken as a totality of their congressional record, Obama’s has very high percentage of non-voting/chasing career to the expense of his constituents.
I’ll prune McCains record, since he still is a senator, to 2008.
McCain:
Resumed participation at the same time as Obama.
McCains block of ‘non-voting’ started around 7/9/07
Obama’s block of ‘non-voting’ started around 2/17/07
–Obama bailed on voting early, Hillary’s non-voting started around 9/6/07 – which is actually better than McCain – though it looks like she may have continued ‘non-voting’ after the primary.
McCains record goes back to 1/12/91
Obamas record goes back to 1/6/051.5 years of non-voting in 15 years of service for McCain.
1.75 years of non-voting in 4 years of service for Obama.It is quite possible for them to know when a vote is going to go to the floor.. and this is the electronic age. It is possible for them to get a copy of the bills that are going to vote without even being in congress. No excuse for either.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.