The Venezuelan Socialist Diet
United we stand. Divided we fall. Ringside seats for all. Just watch. History repeats.
So we rally behind people who say they are going to do that, take it back, because they know that’s how we feel, but they don’t take it back. They take the vote and run to Washington and do what they really want to do because elections are posturing and their reality is something that happens in between.
One of the problems is that the skills that are needed to win elections has very little correlation with the skills needed to perform the job of the elected position.
If the election process were set up so that the populace would actually evaluate and make decisions based the qualifications of the candidates – that is, the candidate’s ability to actually perform the requirements of the job – it would be a start.
It’s been a popularity contest since Kennedy / Nixon.
Bwag last edited by
@Kcmatt7 under current Venezuelan rule, investment only would lead to war when they basically mis-appropriate the money to continue to prop up the socialist administration if we wanted to recoup any of it.
The alternative theory is that the Venezuelan dictator decided to rebel against the currency-backed world economy and paid the price, as some past dictators tried to do, & shortly thereafter met their hastened fates. Chavez supposedly visited the US, and within 3 mos was dead of a rare form of aggressive cancer. Now Putin has expressed interest in offerring an economy based on something other…& thus put himself in severe peril.
JayHawkFanToo last edited by JayHawkFanToo
Where do you get your information, CNN? Chavez was diagnosed with Cancer in June 2011 and died in March 2013 after getting treatment in Cuba. Perhaps, if he would have seeked treatment in the US, like all the tinhorm dictators do, he would have lived longer, all he had to do is come here illegally and the American taxpayers would have ended up paying the bill.
@JhwkSqdn These people are starving from an evil form of government that has starved millions of people to death over the past century.
Not picking on you. Yet a groomed and professional politician versus a multi billionaire? I’m taking the billionaire. Many of groomed and professional politicians have led many of young Americans to war and Death. Don’t need to be a groomed and professional politician to do that. Just have to look at the popular polls.
Look I get it everybody loves that person that can give a great speech. Yet what does a good speech do if nothing changes? All I see is the politicians getting richer and the promises they make going unfulfilled. Look at Bernie he promises a fair and socialist type government. Yet the dude owns 3 houses and is a millionaire. Now how is that possible from a person that has never worked a non government job in his life? Where did that money come from? Yet somehow he cares?
Look at the Great Obama? He railed against the rich and wall street. Now look what he’s doing. Giving speeches at $400,000 a pop to the same people he railed against. Don’t see him down in the inner city giving speeches of hope. Do ya? Yet somehow he cares?
Nah keep those groomed and professional politicians/lawyers. Give me a billionaire that actually knows what a budget is. Hey you don’t like Trump then give me those libs Bill Gates or Warren Buffet. Hell I’ll vote them. Just don’t give me anymore groomed and professional politicians. I’ve heard enough good speeches. I want some substance.
@DoubleDD I’m not advocating for any particular party or candidate. I’m advocating for a system of electing leaders that have competencies that translate to the role for which they are elected. The skills and capabilities that win elections have nothing to do with whether the person can perform the job.
A typical hiring process for a chief executive would evaluate candidates based on their demonstrated competency in basic executive functions and would look at relevant aspects of their history to determine which candidate was best fit for the responsibilities of the role.
^ This is not a description of our current process for selecting the Chief Executive of the United States.
The national election process /hiring process does the following:
- Parties and primaries that operate like 2 powerful hiring agencies that focus on putting forth only one candidate each
- The candidates represent dramatically different philosophies and spend most time on fringe interests that have little to do with the majority of the job they will be doing.
- The candidates don’t make a case for why they are best; they smear the other candidate. Discussion about topics germane to the job are overshadowed by provocative statements, innuendo and scandalous accusations.
I don’t think any rational voter would advocate that the best and most qualified candidate for chief executive of the United States is one who has filed for bankruptcy multiple times and demonstrated pattern of managing enterprises into dissolution.
But Trump wasn’t elected for his executive acumen. His (in)abilities and (in)competencies were rendered irrelevant by the current process of evaluating and selecting candidates.
I’m not comparing Trump to Obama or Clinton or any other particular person. Rather, I’m saying we should hold a presidential candidate up to the standard demanded by the job.
Is this really the best person we could find to fill this position? I don’t think even Melania would answer yes to that question.
Maybe he’s the better of the two choices we were given (or maybe not depending on your view), but let’s not delude ourselves into believing that he’s the best person (e.g. person with the best qualifications) we could hire for the job.
Our hiring process is broken. And the stakes are pretty high with this job.
Politics are always a tricky business. However the reality is. The Best people for the job never get elected, and they never will.
Crazy as it seems and flies in the face of democracy. As along as average Americans get to vote the best person will never be elected. Americans want to be inspired by a future president. They want to be connected to that said person. American voters can be very fickle.
Take Bush Jr. for example. After 9/11 happened he had full support to go into Iraq and start a war. That changed when Americans became weary of the war. Democrats sensing blood in the water changed their position over night. All at seizing power in the next election. This is politics and it won’t change because of the things I mentioned earlier.
I do like Trump, just like I would like a Bill Gates or Warren Buffet. We have been electing groomed politicians/lawyers for decades. It’s not working. If at the bare minimum he shakes things up I’m happy. You might say that Trump isn’t fit and I might say he’s just what we need? So who is wrong and who is right?
I didn’t care much for Obama not because he was black or a Dem. I just felt he lacked real experience and didn’t care much for his anti American views. Yet some felt he was exactly what this country needed and even felt he could do no wrong. So who is right or wrong?
And this is kind of my rebuttal which I think you’re right. Is that if your not one of the chosen by the party, can’t give a great speech, don’t have charisma, and the media doesn’t like you. That person has no chance of winning even though they maybe perfect for the Job.
Tell you the truth I would vote for Oprah at this point, as long as it’s not a chosen, silver tongued, groomed politician. Hate or love Trump he got elected because the American people want change. Bottom line.
LIke I said earlier I agree with your points can’t argue them. However to become president you have to be elected, and as long as there are elections. The games will be played.
Your response sounds rather fatalistic at the end – that the system is what it is and we might as well just accept it.
I see no reason for resignation. The country was founded on ideals and higher standards and I think it’s very American to examine what isn’t working and strive to make tomorrow better than today.
The current dysfunction in the electoral system is bipartisan, so I would hope it would be less political and more philosophical.
I appreciate the appeal of Trump as a change agent. But I am concerned he is more like a stick of dynamite rather than a shovel in a sandbox. Both are going to move the sand, but with one, it’s a bit more predictable where the sand will land.
As for the similarities between Trump, Bill Gates and Warren Buffet, I see very few… Although it is clear that they are all 1- percenters, which is not a quality that should be considered as an advantage (or disadvantage) for presidential candidates.
If there were a list of qualities that should be considered for presidential candidates, I’m pretty sure Bill Gates and Warren Buffet would come out well ahead of Trump. So might Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Tim Cook and dozens of other corporate leaders.
But great candidates don’t have be corporate leaders. They could be leaders from other fields.
What should matter is the individual’s ability to perform the job.
And that seems to be the thing that gets the least focus when we elect.
DoubleDD last edited by DoubleDD
Elon Musk? Really. This dude lives off tax payers. OH he’s smart he learned how to tap into the tax payer piggy bank. Just like Al Gore he’s so far invested in green energy. It’s no wander he’s the speaking head for Global warming.
Not trying be rude but I bet you’re pissed that Trump backed out of the Paris Accord? Yet why not tell the average American how many jobs they are going to lose? Tell them how much their taxes will go up to pay for the Paris Accord? Tell them how China and India can keep polluting under the Paris Accord? Tell them how China and India are going to receive US tax payer money while they continue to pollute? Tell them how if every country abides by the Paris Agreement the world temperature would only go down by 2 tenths of a degree? (so the experts say) Tell them how Obama never took this agreement to the House and Senate? Sorry I’m assuming your position.
It’s politics. It only matters what side of the aisle your on.
Sorry if I’m being rude. I don’t mean to be. Just I find this talk only comes around when there is a so called Rep president. Nobody was talking like this when Obama was president. Yet he ruined so many American families abilities to make money. Like I said you don’t see Obama down in the hood preaching hope. Nah he’s demanding $400,000 for each speech.
Why not elect the Rich? They already have all the money they need, and have shown they can rise to the top. They have nothing to gain financially. Yet they might want to take their skills and do something great. To many groomed politicians come into power with little money and leave rich. How does that happen? Their making deals to pad their pockets that’s how.
Nah hate Trump if you must and if you want. I’m down with the boy.
If you want change as you speak. Then you have to rock the boat. Like him or not Trump is rocking the boat.
Until we have term limits, nobody will be doing what is best for the country. We will continue to have short-sided, small-minded ideas that cost us twice as much money because all we do is repeal and replace every law either side puts in. The pettiness will only increase. As will the waste of tax payer dollars. We need to restructure the government to take away power from individuals. We may not have a tyrant, but we have gotten to a point where we are too top heavy as far as power goes. We allow 546 men and women to make decisions that effect 326 million people. And we pay them handsomely to do so. So they have no incentive to leave. Just an incentive to do whatever they can to stay in office. Its atrocious.
What we need is a truly unselfish leader to rise to the top and introduce term-limits and give states more power to instill laws that matter to each state. We should never decide another social issue at the federal level again. Let states vote and live how they like. Keep the military strong and keep states in check. That’s all we need the feds to do.
.0001% of the population makes decisions for 100% of the population. It just isn’t right.
I have no problem with 0.0001% of the people making the decisions for the rest of us provided it is not the same group of people. We need to go back to the concept if the citizen legislator as envisioned by the founding fathers where individuals would take a few years off their regular jobs to serve the country and then go back to their original jobs. We do this as follows:
Term limits - 1 6-year term for senators and 3 2-year continuous terms for congressmen. Once an individual has completed his/her terms he/she cannot ever run again.
Congressmen are subject to all the same laws as the rest of the people. No exemptions.
Congressmen contribute to social security just like the rest of the people. No congressional retirement plan.
Congressmen are covered by the same insurance plans as the rest of the people. No congressional health plan…you would see how quickly the current program is fixed.
There you go, problem fixed…and then I woke up…
bskeet last edited by bskeet
So, my original assertion is that the system and process for electing representatives has been perverted to the point that it is a key contributor to dysfunction in our governing system.
I think you believe I have some agenda or political beef.
Since we seem to be on the topic…I will assert that it is possible to be a proponent for change and for fiscal conservatism, and not be a fan of Trump.
I will give you my opinion of Donald Trump – the human being, and the man who is in the most important position on the planet and represents me, as a citizen of this country and as the supposed leader of the free world:
Trump is autocratic, impetuous, infantile, petty, supercilious and narcissistic. His comments are reckless and often inaccurate. He is the antithesis of a leader.
He is a bad man even without considering his qualifications based on his life experience (which includes a broad spectrum of evidence from business management that leads to bankruptcies to imperiously walking into the dressing rooms of Miss Teen USA contestants as they are changing). His bravado and entitlement will inevitably lead to some decision that will either shame or harm this country.
Somehow, the system allowed a flawed individual into the most important position on the planet. It is the same system that allowed Nixon and Clinton into the same position and probably a few others who were also ill-fit for the role.
I do not believe this is about politics. I’m not talking about the Paris accord or any other titillating topic that the White House or Media want to occupy us with. Please don’t paint a political agenda around me.
If you believe the US electoral process is functioning swimmingly, please enlighten me with some evidence. My argument is that it is FUBAR.
See that is the point. Everybody thinks the system is flawed when the election doesn’t go their way. That is the nature of it. As for Trump it was no different with Obama. Some actually believed the guy could walk on water while others thought he could do nothing right. It is politics.
For the sake of the conversation and the point you were making. How are you going to change the election process? Who gets to decide if this person or that person is worthy to run for president? To be honest that kind of talk scares me. I have no illusions that our election process has flaws. Yet it does give a voice to the people. Also the electoral college helps those people in fly over country have a voice. Take that away and California and New York get to decide who the president is every election. I’m not interested in that. Been to both places. Nice to visit have no desire to live there.
Hey you can hate Trump as much as you want, just don’t be surprised that some think he’s exactly what this country needs. You see what you view as presidential another might see just another politician. This is the problem I have with your views on the election process. Our country is $20 trillion dollars in debt, and a big chunk of this was done under Obama. However Obama is considered the most presidential president we’ve ever had. Just because someone can be presidential doesn’t mean they’ll be a good president.
bskeet last edited by bskeet
This wasn’t about a single election… But I’m not sure I can convince you of that despite my attempts to reference events during the last 60 years.
(BTW, the Senate was designed to give people in smaller, less populated states better representation. The electoral college was actually designed to ensure that a qualified candidate was elected due to the fear that a tyrant could manipulate public opinion and come to power. The smallest states get an advantageous representation of electoral votes to population, but this is based on the number of votes in congress which are given 2 for senators and 1 for representatives. And the fact that most states have decided to use a ‘winner-takes-all’ approach to casting electoral votes is an advantage the most populated states. The Electoral College has one job and that is to take the power out of the hands of the populace. It is a feckless vestige of the founding fathers’ original plan.)
Either way no matter it’s intentions it does give the American people in less populated areas a chance to hear their voices. Take it a way and Hillary is your president. Even though all she really won was New York and California.
No I hear what your posting. Just don’t see how you can make it work. I just don’t like a select few deciding who is presidential and who isn’t. I mean we have already have been getting that from the two party system we already have.
That’s why I like Trump so much. He pisses everybody off. Yet he does make sense. Take the Paris Accord back lash. Any other two bit Dem or Rep would just sign off. Yet the reality any body with a half a brain and cares for the US would wouldn’t purge the Americans into such a one sided deal.
@JayHawkFanToo I agree with that. But that doesn’t solve the problem of the entire country being split on major social issues. Which, is a major cause of political tension we see right now.
I’m just saying that if you gave states more power, everyone would get more of a say in how they get to live their lives.
I 100% agree with term limits though.
The federal government had gotten into too many areas that should be the domain of states. Most federal agencies cand be eliminated and the jobs moved to individual states where they belong.
The primary responsibility of the federal governments is in the Constitution’s Preamble which says the federal government was established (and the Constitution was adopted) to “form a more perfect union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquillity, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.”
The job of the federal government as originally envisioned included foreign relations, national defense and security, individual liberty and order and justice to allow a civil society without anarchy; everything else is secondary.
@DoubleDD Great post. I felt it very unusual that a US president (Obama) would actually have “anti-American” views, as you put it. Or maybe a better term would be anti-American-ism. As a nation, we seem to now like to go counter-grain, until we are way, way off course, and have gotten away from our founding ideals. What is the value in getting away from the very ideals that made America, and that defined Americans for generations? Were not perfect, by any means. But deconstructing is an entirely different notion than fine-tuning away our flaws.
I dont understand why Obama kept wanting to convey a tone of being an apologist for American ideals? What made him think he could speak for us like that?
It took the founding fathers’ building blocks about 170yrs to create a superpower, but all of a sudden some kook like Bernie thinks we need to change it all, making no distinction between good or bad, but of course highlighting only the things that need improving. A multimillionaire with 3 houses who suddenly cares about us, eventhough his “ideals” led him to honeymoon in the USSR back in the cold war era. So which part of him is the facade, and which is real?? Even Hilary said you simply cannot promise free-college and free everything. But of course the minions fell for it.
Wasnt there another generation that was all self-happy, peddling self-love, open love, communal love, drugs, peace, flowers, antiwar…? I’m not sure if their contribution to American grit is net-negative or net-positive. I do like the breaking down barriers and brotherhood aspects, if anything, but thats about it.
Keep putting out “alternative” and “countergrain” cultural ideas (to the basic ‘American’ founding ideals), and see how far you can dilute down the fabric of the country. That’s the peril of putting a thousand “change this too” ideas out there. Stated another way: the founding fathers started a whole nation with their ideas, and I’d hindsight “judge” that they were onto something…since it grew and prospered beyond any of their expectations. Other nations have NOT propered like this, oh, but lets wholesale change it, not fine tune its problems. Lets move the entire 3rd world to the US and Western Europe, since our hearts bleed soooo bad for all those sufferring people everywhere. Erase all the borders, right?
How would all the “change” proponents and progressives do if we let them start their own country? Umm, I’m betting on the founding fathers’ concepts, only because they are proven. And they seem to have beaten all the socialists, bolsheviks, monarchies, communists, fundamentalist states, and fascists that we’ve seen over the last few centuries.
Dare anyone to come up with anything better…“change”? Be very careful what you wish for. Dont know what you got til its gone.
The “decline” of America, by the way, refers to the people currently alive in it (who are responsible for its direction), NOT referring to its founding ideals. How could it.
Trump? Hope he can make good and simply give us all a better deal. Fix some things, actually. And give our enemies the rawest deal possible. I think he can.
Dems? Current far-Left types simply need to stop being butthurt. Hilary cant throw in the towel. What and awful campaign. Go ahead and attack Trumps extended family, and see if those attempts make such Dems “look” better. Trying to take the low road to get to a higher place? Ha, what logic. And I had little issue with old school Dems of a generation or two ago, like JFK or even Carter.
Republicans? Trump is different than them, so some of them find it hard to venture out of their box. Well, the American public spoke. And note to the Dems: You cannot get any more electoral votes from winning CA even if you got 99% of all Calif votes, duh. What a pointless fact that Hilary won the popular vote–of course, but Calif and NY dont speak for every other state now, DO THEY? Find someone in the DemParty strategy committee who decided to have Hilary not set foot even in some key states. Was that a public “snub” by her, before votes got cast? Wow, talk about accidentally falling on yer own sword…what a lesson. And they spent 4x the $ the Repubs did. And they had all major media, except for 1 network. But lets find some way to blame the Russians. Because Russian Red Army barricades kept Hilary’s motorcade out of those key states all thru the campaign, ya…And the Red AirForce kept her plane from landing in those states, ya…
Like all totalitarian dictatorships, when money runs out violence is used to keep the people down. A real tragedy what is happening there.
@JayHawkFanToo This ought to be condemned worldwide, yet you barely hear a peep. The blockade against the truth about socialism continues.
approxinfinity last edited by
Venezuela, toilet paper, Bernie Sanders?
mayjay last edited by
@JayHawkFanToo So, you obviously think the Truth hurts? backatcha!
approxinfinity last edited by
Bizarre choices of articles.
@JayHawkFanToo So, you obviously think the Truth hurts? backatcha!
In his hay day the truth would drop 25 points on you and hurt you really bad but now that he is retired he is pretty harmless. We are talking about Paul “the truth” Pierce, right?
@KUSTEVE You haven’t updated this in a while… Recently introduced a Crypto Currency backed by an Oil Company that is $45B in debt. This supposedly reduces the worth of the Bolivar by 96%.
I read where inflation is now 1 million percent…unheard of and unprecedented. Also, the government finally and officially admitted that the socialist economic model was a failure, something everybody has known for years.
This is a 4 part series where a former USSR citizen asks people supporting socialism and communism to explain it: it’s pretty funny…
The great lie of socialism is that the workers will suddenly have “power”( meet the new boss- same as the old boss). Read how “powerful” they are, as they line up to buy spoiled, rotten meat:
Step 2: Crash all of the South American economies to create chaos, fear, and massive migration:
And then crash the entire world’s economy…
Nicaragua on the brink of collapse. Ortega has hired criminal gangs to shake people down, especially his opposition. Another socialist paradise on the brink of total anarchy:
Apparently the U.S. talked about supporting a coup against Maudro. Not surprised. Needs to probably happen soon.
Here’s a brilliant idea: when monetary inflation has hit a million percent, raise the minimum wage 60 times higher, and don’t allow businesses to raise prices. Socialist math = 40% of businesses closing down…
mayjay last edited by mayjay
@KUSTEVE I just read that the accused plotters of the drone attack on Maduro mysteriously fell out of an upper level window. Geez, conditions must be really getting bad there if the thugs in the secret police can’t afford helicopters like they used to in Latin America.
Edit: Oops, it was just one guy who threw himself out of the 10th floor bathroom window.