Are we truly "united" states?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2007 1:27 AM GMT
    In Vermont, you can be part of a civil union. In Massachusetts, you can be legally married as a same sex couple. In New Hampshire, there is no state income tax, and in Tennessee, the sales tax is 9.5 percent on EVERYTHING.

    We don't realize that moving from one state to another within the U.S. is like moving from one country to another. While every modern society has similar laws and rules about what is acceptable social behavior or not, the little differences between the states can be dramatic.

    George Bush was "elected" to be president in 2000, but it has been since proven that Al Gore got more actual votes than Bush. In the state of Ohio alone, there were 93,000 more votes, than actual registered voters. But it went unquestioned.

    Are we United? If we are then why don't we all agree? Or better yet, why are we not all working towards the same goals?

    The United States of America is a democracy; defined loosely as freedom of speech (especially in political affairs), freedom of the press, majority rule, and the prevention of military dictatorships.

    If we are truly united then why have we not demanded that these basic rights be upheld.

    Isn't it time for a change? If so, how can we ensure that change will occur?

    I am not smart enough to ensure that change, the right kind of change, happens, but I am hoping that someone out there is.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Oct 20, 2007 3:10 AM GMT
    I live in South Florida and have lived in NY and in LA
    and in Boston
    ... I've begun to hate going anywhere else in the US because it's so blatantly ant-gay and stereo-typically "red-statey"
    when I was in Dallas the gay section of town was this little street and tobacco chewin mugwhumps came speedin down the street shouting FAGS! ... of course they didn't hang around because they knew they would have had the S**t kicked out of them
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2007 4:32 AM GMT
    United STATES. Each state has their own feel to it. Diversity is what makes America great, not monotony. The United States is NOT a democracy, it is a republic. A bit different. There is a constant balancing act between Federal and State power just as there is a balance of power between the three branches. Its complex, buts its working out so far right? Its not perfect, but we are getting there and its up to us to steer each facade of government in the right direction through voting.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2007 4:36 AM GMT
    Yes, but we are also granted independent freedoms so while we all pledge to the same flag states also retain the right to form regulations concerning their state.icon_question.gif

    That's w/o even reading anything but the header so sorry if it sounds"ignant" icon_rolleyes.gif

    Paying WAY too much attention in US Government icon_mad.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2007 4:40 AM GMT
    Sorry Owl, but I dont think facade is the word you're looking foricon_wink.gif

    Facade would mean something along the lines of me putting on an inordinately intelligent front when, quite clearly, Im still just some High School Senior.icon_razz.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2007 4:45 AM GMT
    or maybe it was.....oooooo
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2007 4:48 AM GMT
    LOL...I was expecting to get burned so bad I thought I was gonna enjoy it!icon_lol.gif

    Thanks for being a great sport!icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2007 5:22 AM GMT
    We're the united states because Rhode Island was late icon_wink.gif

    We had a loose confederation planned out, but the reps from RI were late, so they got back to writing and made the constitution!


    Were not a democracy, we're a constitutionaly limited republic icon_exclaim.gif

    - We don't make laws or decisions for ourselves, we have people make them for us - republic

    - We have a constitution that limits the power of those people in power - limited


    We can't change things because were to pampered to start a revolution. Ask yourself, would you rather start a revolution and change your life? Or just live, have fun, and try and pretend your voting someone better into office? icon_wink.gif



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2007 9:28 AM GMT
    One reason we haven't changed things is a little word called apathy. People seem to have reached the general consensus that they alone can't make a change, so why bother. They may further extrapolate that getting the majority of people in this country to do the same thing (ie... demand government reform, for example) might be too much like hearding cats... so again, why bother.

    Of course, the truth is that change happens because one person does something, and then another and another... and all those "one persons" add up. The same principal would apply to other things like cleaning up the envrionment, for example. But people tend not to see the big picture... the cumulative effect... instead, they see their immediate world and decide its just too hard.

    I've often thought that we might actually get proper tax reform if every working American citizen simultaneously refused to pay their taxes... I mean, they couldn't arrest everyone, right? But try and get that to happen... icon_rolleyes.gif

    Our best bet is to get everyone we can to go vote... including ourselves... and hopefully the political process isn't too messed up to work this time...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2007 11:22 AM GMT
    icon_lol.gif OOOOOOOOOhhh Revolution/Social Change theory - on a jock BBS - this should be an interesting discussion...

    The forcible, pervasive, and often violent change of a social or political order by a sizable segment of a country's population. Revolution is the most extreme political option of a dissenting group, a course taken generally when more moderate and legal attempts to achieve recognition or reform have failed. Even when fomented by a political minority, revolutions usually reflect a general climate of discontent.

    Revolutions have often replaced one evil with another, as through harsh recriminations, self-serving leadership, or betrayal of the people; these excesses sometimes lead to opposing counterrevolutions.

    A revolution is distinguished from a coup d'etat, which is a sudden seizure of state power by a small faction or element of the government; a coup does not necessarily cause profound, far-reaching change in the social system.

    Distinction should also be made between a revolution and revolt or a rebellion, which may be either a failed attempt at revolution, a violent expression of grievances with limited purpose, or merely a change in allegiance. The term revolution is more broadly applied to any significant historical transformation.

    It is nowhere near time for a change since noone, not even a sizeable minority has any idea of what they want to replace our current system with.

    Even the most wild eyed radicals on the left and right only dream of a coup d'etat to replace the current government with a reformed government.

    The most signifigant revolution in modern times was probably the Russian Revolution - look what happened to the country and all of it's political institutions. (The American Revolution historians would define more as a revolt, or war of independence rather than a revolution).

    The vast majority of Americans are nowhere near ready for that kind of cataclysmic social change.


    R
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2007 3:18 PM GMT

    it may be worth comparing this situation to the european union, a democratic confederation, given the populations are similar and the us and eu are both western regions. each country retains its own legal structure and identity and as in the US; an eu federal directive supercedes any single country's legislation.

    all the nations meet on a regular basis and vote on issues that they need to agree about in order to progress the continent's ambitions as a social group and trade block.

    sections 10 and 11 of the european convention on human rights have protected gay people from interference from the state since 1950.

    these rules in the last 5 years or so has been increasingly been reinterpreted to include gay marriage, and all the nations of the eu have been rewriting their legislation to permit civil unions as quickly as possible before the eu inevitably draws an explicit clarification of this law and sets a deadline. the uk for example, usually a laggard when conforming to pan-continental policies, legalised civil partnerships in december 2005. now virtually all eu countries have either done the same, or are in the process of doing so. this includes super-catholic spain.

    the key point is that it is entirely possible for a large democratic region to retain its diversity, while driving forward social and equality agendas that benefit the common interests of the region and reinforce their social ambitions as a group.

    as in the us, not everyone agrees with the practise of homosexuality or civil unions, however, there is agreement that the only way such a politically and culturally diverse region can progress together is by implementing strictly secular legislation and leaving moral and spiritual decisions to the individual citizen.

    the movement of capital and people is not as smooth as in the us, particularly because there are so many different languages involved. but it's important for any large trade block to make this movement as smooth as possible, including the us. having different partnership legislation in each country can potentially restrain partners who would otherwise move freely from one part of the region to another for economic reasons; this is not logical as it can make the confederation as a whole weaker when one member state goes into an economic decline.

    the situation in the eu is not perfect, but there does seem to be a tendency for these social issues to harmonise across member states more rapidly than in the us, as the eu tends to be much more agressive about wielding its executive power across the continent within its permitted remits

    as a dual us/eu citizen, it's a shame for me that I can travel across europe with a partner without any resistance, but should i want to exercise the us part of my citizenship, i would not be able to take my partner with me. this is surely quite a common problem, particulary where a us citizen might work abroad, find a partner, but not be permitted to return home with them.

    the us in the past has tended to be the world leader in progressive social agendas, but it does seem to me that sometimes the federal government in the us should be a little more aggressive about getting the states to agree on such a major social issue. the us sadly is certainly a few years behind the remainder of the western world on this issue and this does affect how it is viewed internationally, and it's attractiveness as a destination for skilled workers from abroad

  • hotversguy

    Posts: 155

    Oct 20, 2007 4:24 PM GMT
    For every arguement against States' Rights, there is one for it.

    For example, why is it easier to move a firearm from one state to another than it is a bottle of wine (legally, not practically). makes no sense.

    I like to think of states as models from which Federal government can take example. But should not lead. For example, the Federal government should not use Insterstate building/repair funds to coerce legislation (e.g. the drinking age in LA).

    Also some of our cities are like the big city states of old. Sure, California has the 8th largest economy in the world, but the GDP on New York City approaches that of Russia.

    On a tangent, I once heard a great line "New York is the greatest American city. And it belongs to the world."

    I'm really falling into the trap that there is NY, LA and the rest of the country.
  • Salubrious

    Posts: 420

    Oct 20, 2007 4:36 PM GMT
    hotversguyI'm really falling into the trap that there is NY, LA and the rest of the country.

    Well, there's Washington D.C. too. But anything besides those 3 don't really matter.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2007 5:21 PM GMT
    Chicago
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2007 5:26 PM GMT
    0000bq1q


    1. California. Unsurprisingly, California remains intact.
    2. This is the state of Reno, which is easy to spot because it’s just outside the “Tahoe Region”.
    3. The state of Vegas.
    4. All Californians know that their neighbor to the north is Oregon. They know this because Oregon is where Chai was invented.
    5. This is the state of Seattle unless you’re really wealthy, in which case it’s the state of Puget Sound. This is where Starbucks comes from. You’ll note that both Oregon and Seattle span the space between the west coastline and the I-5 corridor.
    6. This is Death Valley. It’s hot here. Except in the winter, when it’s cold.
    7. This is the state of Aspen. From the state of Aspen, you can ski straight into state #9
    8. This state has two names for Californians. If you’re from Northern California, it’s known as “That Bastard of a President’s Ranch”. If you’re from Southern California, it’s called “The Alamo”.
    9. The Midwest. It’s a huge state, as you can see, and for Californians, Midwest inhabitants on both sides of the Mississippi live on a strict diet of iceberg lettuce and Budweiser, which is why they have such big hair.
    10. The blue vertical line is the Mississippi River. Californians don’t actually know where it is, they just know it’s in the middle of the country and that it runs “up and down”.
    11. 11 points to the state of Chicago, which is a convenient home to the city of Chicago. [I can’t begin to tell you how many Californians think Chicago is a state].
    12. This is Florida. It’s home to Disney World (which is just like Disneyland) and a lot of Cubans, like that Ricky Martin.
    13. This is Back East, colloquially known as New England. It contains most of the 50 states because the Pilgrims thought small. That’s why they’re so rude Back East, you know. They don’t have room enough to spread out their yoga mats and become one with the universe.
    14. New York, where the official state animal is the bagel.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2007 5:53 PM GMT
    LOL @ gregsteven's post. Looks like I live in the state of Chicago.

    notarealjockAre we United? If we are then why don't we all agree? Or better yet, why are we not all working towards the same goals?


    We need more public discussion of events. We need to encourage open-minded and objective debate. We need to get our facts straight -- and research them ourselves and not let CNN or Fox News tell us.

    I would love to see a primetime debate show of contemporary issues (a la "Politically Incorrect" but on a major network) that allows enough time for facts to be presented and cases to be argued so that people can make up their own minds instead of being spoonfed what to think. Perhaps then we can pick some issues to work towards and strengthen the interpersonal infrastructure of our country.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 20, 2007 8:30 PM GMT
    well said sir. and you are way smart enough on all fronts.
  • hotversguy

    Posts: 155

    Oct 20, 2007 11:40 PM GMT
    DC is a swamp that's uninhabited two months of the year. And full of crime. And a concession to the South. Nice subway though.
  • hotversguy

    Posts: 155

    Oct 20, 2007 11:42 PM GMT
    greg, you mean that LA and SF are willing to admit they are in the same state?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 21, 2007 1:53 AM GMT
    yeah thats what I was thinking. Norcal and Socal are two different places.
  • hotversguy

    Posts: 155

    Oct 21, 2007 6:17 AM GMT
    i don't know why, but whenever you get a New Yorker on the subject of which is preferrable, SF or LA (after NYC of course) it always gets ugly. I guess it's like picking the maid of honor from your wo best friends. Not that I would know.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 21, 2007 6:59 AM GMT
    owl975yeah thats what I was thinking. Norcal and Socal are two different places.


    I thought it was two different planets... icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 22, 2007 7:39 PM GMT
    I luv the U.S.
    If yall don't like it move the fuck out
    Sick and tired of people complainin and complainin you ain't gotta suffer in some peace of shit third world country.
    if its so bad why don't yall get up and do somethin instead of bitchen
    in the D we don't like bitchen we get stuff done
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 16, 2013 12:29 AM GMT
    Planets as in spheres of molten lava and grass?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 16, 2013 1:11 AM GMT
    GQjock saidI live in South Florida and have lived in NY and in LA
    and in Boston
    ... I've begun to hate going anywhere else in the US because it's so blatantly ant-gay and stereo-typically "red-statey"
    when I was in Dallas the gay section of town was this little street and tobacco chewin mugwhumps came speedin down the street shouting FAGS! ... of course they didn't hang around because they knew they would have had the S**t kicked out of them



    I live in Dallas and I assume you are talking about the Oaklawn area. Dallas is actually more Blue then Red. Dallas County usually votes Democratic. It's the Texas outside of the large cities you have to worry about.

    Oaklawn is one of the wealthier areas of North Dallas.
    I don't doubt that the occasional idiot drives through spouting slurs. But I've been to Oaklawn many times and never experienced anything like that.