GalCiv2 Forums
Okay, here's what you do for this game: You have to "ban" the person who posted above you for an outrageous, silly, or funny reason. Got it?
Banned because plenty of things matter. It's just that, for some of us, putting an end to the Cold War hangover that's being sold under the war on terror brand is number one or at least in the top three.
Banned for not wanting to destroy the Republicans and Democrats and start over from scratch, maybe get some guys with common sense and with agendas other than kissing their parties asses and launching their own careers in there. Guys with moral values who actually give a damn about the people and put THEM, not money, not themselves, not their parties, the PEOPLE, first and foremost.
banned for it inevitably becomes that unless you have some way of avoiding 'career politicians'. Sadly, most of those methods people either feel leave us handicapped or think are cruel.
banned for I know tons of ways to end that, but it would require big ass revamps and the people who make the laws surely won't sign off on it.
Banned because ultimately, when you have to appeal to the lowest common denominator... that's exactly what you get.
Banned because career politicians aren't the problem, wild-west campaign spending is the problem.
With a world as complex as ours, adequate government requires people who've been working in it for a long time. I agree that we need constitutional reform, but not term limits for Congress. We need exceptions to the first amendment for campaigning so campaigns can be limited to short periods (like they do in the UK), and we need to overturn (or amend away) the part of Buckley v. Valeo that equates spending to political speech. With no campaign contributions and a short, focused, publicly funded campaign cycle, we would have a far better chance of sorting the wheat from the chaff when it comes to the senior members of Congress.
Banned because I don't have time to get started on bad list UIs. I'm obliged to work with a 'Learning Management System' that shall remain nameless, and the reporting and list functions are abysmal.
banned for functionless functions.
Even if you do not get rid of career politicians, I think limiting their earning potential while in office helps to keep out those looking to make a buck at it. They complain about their income, but compare it to the national average and consider the other perks they get.
Banned because my school let out early so that the teachers could hold ineffectual meetings.
banned for muttering nonsense. It's not the teachers fault is is the government ineffectiveness
banned for I'm sure it's the bureaucracy and many of the illogical ideas that get inserted into it. That's a consistent top-down issue.
Banned for a one-vowel howl.
Banned because you need to cite a source or three for a claim like that. Career politicians who publicly complain about their income are not going to have long careers. That's too big a target for successful campaign ads. Even with our minimally interested, mildly fact-averse electorate.
banned for that's what I'm talking about.
I would not want to entrust the government debt to people that can not figure out how to live on that salary.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
Sins Forums