Subject:
|
Re: Is Nader really THAT stupid, or just a secret lapdog of GWB?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 27 Feb 2004 17:08:33 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
298 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Neb Okla wrote:
> Too bad they don't have a party just for hypocrites - oh wait! There are
> two!
>
> It's nice to have two parties to choose from. We can oppress homosexuals
> with constitutional amendments, or we can leave it to the states to oppress
> them. It's so nice to live in a free country where you have options like
> that.
Hey, that reminds me of something I occasionally think about. Since
all politicians are corrupt, but they're all we have to work with, what
works best? Two parties that may both marginally represent an insignificant
portion of your interests, or many parties, one of which may marginally
represent your interests a bit more than the others?
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Is Nader Really a Threat to Democracy?
|
| "Don Heyse" <dheyse@hotmail.spam....away.com> wrote in message news:Htr6A9.1wy9@lugnet.com... (...) I think pork-barrel spending leads to corruption, but all hail the community so noble that they refuse to accept it. The lobbiests are at the root (...) (20 years ago, 27-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
12 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
