Hillary
Moderator:Metacrock
-
Reed_Rothchild
- Posts:6
- Joined:Wed Feb 06, 2008 4:19 pm
Mike Huckabee is a batshit insane fundamentalist who would have us self-fulfilling end times prophecy within 6 months of being sworn in.
-
KR Wordgazer
- Posts:1410
- Joined:Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:07 pm
Re: Hillary
And yet you want a monarchy, Zarove?ZAROVE wrote:Im for smaller Govement and federalism, not a centralised state and central economy.
Reed, I wouldn't vote for Huckabee, but I wouldn't put it quite that strongly.
Maybe I should vote for Metacrock's yellow dog, too. Hmmm.
Wag more.
Bark less.
Bark less.
Re: Hillary
I odn't think Huckabees that bad...
That said, Kristen, as forign as Monarhcy is to an Ameircna mind, and as much as it may seem to the contrary, the fact is that Monarchies are less expensive than elected PResidencies,and often can hosue smaller Govenrments.
If the Govenment was limited to a King and his Privy Counsil, for example, then you'd have one or two peopl for every 50 or 60 now had.
I'd of course faovur a larger Parlement, but not one as sprawlin as the Modenr UK one, with its iendless beurocracies and powr vested in the Neo-Republican abourites.
That said, Federalism works because of the size ans scope of the Unitd States. The US can have a King, or Queen, and yet still maintian sevral states as seperat einteties.
Each with a govenment of their own.
Its how the Emprie worked,a nd what Id suggest as a THird Way for the idea betwen preservign the United Kigndom as is, or Lettign Scotland be independant. If they follwoed the American State system, Scotland woudl be independan tiwhtin its own baordrs, and their woudl be a Federal Govenrment to reuglate defence and trade from without. THis can later extend otthe rest of the COmmonwealth.
That said, Kristen, as forign as Monarhcy is to an Ameircna mind, and as much as it may seem to the contrary, the fact is that Monarchies are less expensive than elected PResidencies,and often can hosue smaller Govenrments.
If the Govenment was limited to a King and his Privy Counsil, for example, then you'd have one or two peopl for every 50 or 60 now had.
I'd of course faovur a larger Parlement, but not one as sprawlin as the Modenr UK one, with its iendless beurocracies and powr vested in the Neo-Republican abourites.
That said, Federalism works because of the size ans scope of the Unitd States. The US can have a King, or Queen, and yet still maintian sevral states as seperat einteties.
Each with a govenment of their own.
Its how the Emprie worked,a nd what Id suggest as a THird Way for the idea betwen preservign the United Kigndom as is, or Lettign Scotland be independant. If they follwoed the American State system, Scotland woudl be independan tiwhtin its own baordrs, and their woudl be a Federal Govenrment to reuglate defence and trade from without. THis can later extend otthe rest of the COmmonwealth.
Re: Hillary
In regard to Monarchy, by the way, the last Feudal State, the ISland of Sark, is beign forced to become a Democracy thanks to the European Human Richs COmmission. They votedon it, and at 56% in favu of the Shift, it may seem the peopel want Democracy, but the reality is that they simply don't want ot be annexed by Guensey. ( Which woudl happen if they di dnto reform their Govenrment alogn European lines, and which still may.)
As a Feudal State, you'd think fo the poor oppressed serfs under vcruel and oprpessive Lords, beign made to do gindign wrk and longign for freedom, but they whre quiet happy with the Feudal Arrangements until interlopers who don't eveb live on the ISland bough tone of the Tenements, beocomign Lords. ( I'd have made sure that wa simposisble by sayign you had to be aresedent to be a Tennemnt.)
The Barclays.
THis evil, oppressive form of Govenrment had no Income tax, little Crime, and short Govenment.
I honeslty think the love afair with "Democracy" and htinkign of it as the only valid form fo Govnement, and ht eonly one in wich peopel can be free, is nonsence, and the cost alone isn't justified either.
Give me a Storng, central Monarchy, with Lords and perhaps Elected Representitives, and let eahc local commnity have its own set of Lords and Reps, as did Sark. Eahc can be a small feudal area, runnign tiself in a Decentralised fashion answerable only to a higher corut, not to a lengthy Beurocracy.
As a Feudal State, you'd think fo the poor oppressed serfs under vcruel and oprpessive Lords, beign made to do gindign wrk and longign for freedom, but they whre quiet happy with the Feudal Arrangements until interlopers who don't eveb live on the ISland bough tone of the Tenements, beocomign Lords. ( I'd have made sure that wa simposisble by sayign you had to be aresedent to be a Tennemnt.)
The Barclays.
THis evil, oppressive form of Govenrment had no Income tax, little Crime, and short Govenment.
I honeslty think the love afair with "Democracy" and htinkign of it as the only valid form fo Govnement, and ht eonly one in wich peopel can be free, is nonsence, and the cost alone isn't justified either.
Give me a Storng, central Monarchy, with Lords and perhaps Elected Representitives, and let eahc local commnity have its own set of Lords and Reps, as did Sark. Eahc can be a small feudal area, runnign tiself in a Decentralised fashion answerable only to a higher corut, not to a lengthy Beurocracy.
Re: Hillary
As or the United States eleciton, it looks like Obama and McCain will take the lead. THus it seems, as of this post, that they are the Frontrunners.
May God have mrcy on our souls.
May God have mrcy on our souls.