tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-862291898657023344.post3291305532826846433..comments2022-11-10T18:23:51.277-07:00Comments on www.COCaucus.org, "Help us strengthen the voice of the common person.": Week #1-- From John Wren. (Please post your thoughts as a comment below.)John Scott Wrenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07529354102638920309noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-862291898657023344.post-68159756575402890882010-02-21T17:14:00.323-07:002010-02-21T17:14:00.323-07:00Yes, it does take some time.Yes, it does take some time.John Scott Wrenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07529354102638920309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-862291898657023344.post-43946373658656564012010-02-21T16:27:57.873-07:002010-02-21T16:27:57.873-07:00Yes, Thomas J.,John Adams, and Abigail had some br...Yes, Thomas J.,John Adams, and Abigail had some brilliant back and forth dialogue. TJ had a wicked pen, which brings a 'tinge of green' to my skin. I would have sided, and still side with TJ's assessment. But, the operative word in this discussion is "good".<br /> <br />I'm trying to follow the rest of your position's logic. What you seem to be saying is 'subscribe to and read the local newspapers, even if they're 'corporate owned and slanted', or believed to be 'wrong', and find the time to write to them, telling them so.<br /> <br />But you start by saying, people don't have the time "to dig out information". If there is 'no time' to dig for information in the first place, how does one qualify whether or not the newspaper/media source is "wrong"?<br /> <br />Would you agree or disagree that "civic engagement" requires an element of time?Just Anitahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16323623739813649987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-862291898657023344.post-78226403434087569962010-02-21T14:32:25.781-07:002010-02-21T14:32:25.781-07:00Anita,
Back to Thomas Jefferson...
He said that ...Anita,<br /><br />Back to Thomas Jefferson...<br /><br />He said that given a choice of government without newspapers or newspapers without government, he would not hesitate to choose that later.<br /><br />I don't think our type of government works very well without good newspapers.<br /><br />Citizens just don't have the time to dig out the info on every representative and every issue.<br /><br />Seems to me everyone should not only read but also subscribe to their local newspaper. When they are wrong, call them on it with a comment posted online and/or a letter to the editor.John Scott Wrenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07529354102638920309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-862291898657023344.post-67207625726796054072010-02-21T13:47:32.899-07:002010-02-21T13:47:32.899-07:00Maria,
So true. The sad statistics reflect a media...Maria,<br />So true. The sad statistics reflect a media that is not independent, but corporate owned by a few with huge agendas. Mainstream Media outlets are no longer a source of information, as much as, info-tainment with it's own slant and agenda - $$ and ratings. Everything is cyclical. True, we live in a soundbite world, but we don't have to be microsecond girls (or boys), when it comes to validating our positions. <br /><br />The days of cable info-tainment are waning. Frankly, the hype is giving many a headache. It's hard for me to listen to either side, when the percentage of what is verifiable and factual is signifantly low.<br /><br />I tend to be the glass 1/2 full type, and have a lot of faith in the public majority's common sense. Look at the fabulous conversation's we've had on this site, thanks to John's passion and efforts. I'm all in favor of "censorship" with the remote control - power off!<br /><br />There are so many ways to get credible information from the source; getting it second hand is almost, "archaic".Just Anitahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16323623739813649987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-862291898657023344.post-47009018583552222862010-02-17T09:39:56.809-07:002010-02-17T09:39:56.809-07:00I agree with Anita to an extent and with John to a...I agree with Anita to an extent and with John to an extent. <br /><br />The reason for our political system is, just that, not everyone is going to want to participate so we have representatives doing the job for those in the sidelines.<br /><br />The problem is the media. They aren't doing a very good job of keeping the masses informed and what they give us is pure yellow journalism and one sided opinions.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07622423807254356116noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-862291898657023344.post-75995419574429842672010-02-15T18:30:13.300-07:002010-02-15T18:30:13.300-07:00John,
A point well taken if you have a "match...John,<br />A point well taken if you have a "match" and fuel to light the fire, and/or money to pull the "lever". We human citizens understand that both will be a little harder to come by with the SCOTUS ruling handed down from the Supreme Court.<br /><br />Agreed - voter apathy is extreme. But apathy is the symptom, not the disease. We have been trained to look to others to answer our questions, rather than questioning our answers. We read what is in our comfort zone, and we dismiss what goes beyond our scope of reasoning. The question remains, "IS our citizens learning? I'm certain you get my point. <br /><br />We've become a fast food nation in a sound bite world. We're an impatient lot, and we cling to what we know with intensity and resolve, rather than being curious about what we don't know. The parties and pundits are ready with open arms, comforting our woes, helping us to draw more lines in the sand, reminding us we're not the problem - the opposition is the problem. And yes, we bite: hook, line, and sinker.<br /><br />As far as your question about unaffiliated candidates, there aren't many. Statistically, finding qualified candidates, and getting them elected, is equivalent to a snowball's chance in hell. If they do get elected, getting any legislative initiatives to committee is statistically even lower. Neither party acknowledges "independents" because they have gone outside of "party-line" politics. Where's the voter in that process? <br /><br />I've only supported and worked on 1 Independent's campaign. That would be Bernie Sanders in VT - from Mayor to Senate in the 90's. Ask me again after Rep. Kathleen Curry's run, as an unaffiliate this election cycle.Just Anitahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16323623739813649987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-862291898657023344.post-3394730222071436682010-02-15T14:59:40.296-07:002010-02-15T14:59:40.296-07:00Anita,
Political parties are like fire, or a lev...Anita, <br /><br />Political parties are like fire, or a lever. They can be used for good or bad. You talk about "Republican or Democratic parties can do that for us" as if they had a life of their own.<br /><br />The problem as I see it is that too many just sit on the sidelines and jeer. How many unaffiliated candidates have any chance at all of getting elected?John Wrenhttp://www.johnwren.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-862291898657023344.post-4972576875264755022010-02-15T12:37:27.686-07:002010-02-15T12:37:27.686-07:00With regards to the Lincoln and Jefferson comparis...With regards to the Lincoln and Jefferson comparison, I would agree with David's statement only to the extent that both the Democratic and Republican parties have changed their original platforms. However to use Jefferson and Lincoln, as examples of "party leadership" in platform change serves as an injustice to the accomplishments of both men within our history.<br /><br />Both parties are currently too polarized, and neither reflect the visions of their founding platforms, period. Therefore, I would debate that Jefferson and Lincoln are more in line with today's independent convictions than a reflection of changing party platforms. <br /><br />Neither Lincoln or Jefferson feared challenging the "status quo" of their time. The two-party system we have today, relies on opposition to stay entrenched, creating "status quo". Both parties are basically corporations, acting as corporate vehicles for "change" - strength in numbers. Further, the party has become "our voice", and speaks for us. It's a distortion of the Democratic process; choosing a winner take all mentality to force change. Even good change will be opposed, when the minority voice feels suppressed by opposition. <br /><br />The greater lesson to be learned with the Jefferson and Lincoln comparison would be our ability to look beyond loyalist rhetoric, and seek ways to break status quo. Neither the Republican or Democratic parties can do that for us.Just Anitahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16323623739813649987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-862291898657023344.post-8484816779388587632010-02-15T10:32:00.325-07:002010-02-15T10:32:00.325-07:00It's clear to me that our wonderful grassroots...It's clear to me that our wonderful grassroots, neighborhood system, the Colorado Caucuses, gives the common person like me the best chance of getting elected to public office. That's why it is disliked by the rich and powerful. Most public office holders don't like it either, it makes it very easy for a primary opponent to get on the ballot.John Scott Wrenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07529354102638920309noreply@blogger.com