|
|
|
Comment |
Sorted by
Date Written |
Brad (Reply to this comment)
by Lark729_89
It's been 3 years since you left epinions. Hope all is going well for you.
MY BEST...
Carol
|
May 16 '12
8:09 pm PDT
|
|
Hi This October $1 per first review... (Reply to this comment)
by gothicdreams
And please check out my first Adult Beverage Review and feel free to comment as I did the best I could possibly do. If you think something else could be added let me know please let me know via comments or email.
link---> "http://www.epinions.com/review/Crown_Royal_Whisky_XR_Extra_Rare_750ml/content_565963689604"
|
Oct 05 '11
2:29 pm PDT
|
|
Nothing Gold Can Stay... (Reply to this comment)
by mongomad1
I joined at a time where the community here was, at least, beyond its peak. Written rules are there, but they go with no enforcement for some and triple for others.
In absence of someone giving firm guidelines, discussions about review policies turn into arguments addressing everything but for the elephant in the living room, the original question at hand.
You are dead on with your political assessment here; we have a two party system with really only one choice in the end. You must vote for someone to pay back those that got 'em there with the least of concerns paid for righting the ship and/or making the decisions best for the country.
It is sad to see you stop writing here, and it is hard to believe we went from seemingly polar opposities to finding so much common ground to stand upon together. Best wishes to you moving forward and I will keep up with your writings as much as I can!
Take care,
James
|
Jul 05 '09
5:57 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Sad to see a political commentator go... (Reply to this comment)
by vicfar
Brad,
it is hard to generalize about multi-party systems. Multiparty systems are present in countries that are extremely poorly governed and informed (Italy takes the cake, I think), and in those which have a reasonably efficient system and healthy political dialogue (Germany).
Germany has two legislative chambers (Bundestag and Bundesrat) which correspond more or less to what the US has. Italy has a bicameral legislative system as well, so the US isn't unique. Yet the Italian system is much less effective. Political structure per se does not make or break.
My comments related to the quality of the political dialogue, which is often due to the fringe parties. In Germany, although SPD and CDU share power and are the only two large parties ( a sign of democracy), other parties have a voice in federal and local legislatures, and the political discussions are broader, more sophisticated (and less grotesque) than in the US.
Non-mainstream views are seldom heard in the US, and many Americans see the Democrat-Republican spectrum as wide enough, which is short-sighted. Both parties are in cahoots with big business, and citizens are not exposed, in mainstream media, to alternative views. In Germany the Greens have a voice. We don't have idiots like Limbaugh or O'Reilly on TV. Americans are exposed to lively but empty shouting matches, and they think this represents freedom of speech and a wide variety of political views. Instead, it represents the pathetic dumbing down of an entire country....we are close to the circus the last Roman Emperors lavished on their decadent, corrupt citizens, so they could stay in power and continue to plunder.
My impression is that democratic institutions in some European countries (like Germany, Holland, probably Scandinavia) are stronger than in the US, whereas in some countries (Italy) they are weaker, so the multiparty system is no panacea.
As to Big Government, which characterizes much of Europe, it should not be seen as a negation of democracy. It is how people here want it. Income redistribution is what makes our societies so pleasant, relatively crime-free, and attractive as places to live. I hope we keep it this way.
Vic
|
Jun 25 '09
2:37 pm PDT
|
|
. (Reply to this comment)
by holy_diver
And so this site looses another critical thinker . . . sorry to see you go.
As for your piece, I couldn't agree more with your views on "healthcare" - not only should life not be a rat race, but it is clear that society can't function as one giant rat race, despite what Ayn Raynd and her jaded followers believe. Unfortunately, I can't say I agree with the kind of "reform" I see brewing in the horizon. Making health insurance mandatory on a federal level, and creating a government program that competes with the private sector!? The government better be able to provide a decent program for dirt-cheap (which it won‘t), or else prices will continue to climb and the rest of us who can’t afford it as it stands will just be facing hefty fees for being too poor to afford said insurance (which of course makes perfect sense, especially given the “liberal” banner it’s being created under - because nothing says “liberal” like forcing people to participate in markets they consider Mafia-like {Sarcasm - That action is actually kind of conservative, which is why I think Obama is, as most Democrats are, a complete and total corporate sell-out, particularly to insurance companies and banks}).
Even in America’s time of “change”, nothing about our country’s busted logic has changed. Continuing to fine those who cannot participate in the markets that benefit our nation’s elite (and we called our economic system “free enterprise”, heh) is the opposite of freedom, especially given that said elites have been clearly acting against the interests and welfare of the rest of America‘s proletariat since Free Trade began, outsourcing jobs, destroying unions, and lowering real wages, at home and abroad, since the 80‘s. But then again, it has been a long time since America stood for legitimate freedom, ever since it decided to stand for the creation of a “global rat race”, in which opportunity and luxury of any kind belongs only to those willing to sprint through the corporate obstacle course of deceit and treachery.
Sorry, I’ll stop the rant. I’ve lost a tremendous amount of faith in America these past two decades, in both the left and right, and I’m struggling now to see how either party can absolve a simple truth - debt-based, interest driven, free-market Capitalism cannot work forever. If only there was a way to stem runaway inflation (oh, wait, there is - get our economic system clean of fossil fuels and the caustic corporate juggernauts that peddle that black-tar, like heroin, to markets said juggernauts have developed a control over. I'd also recommend that our government not spend way more money than they'll ever be able to pay back. I understand the importance of spending money during a recession, but me-thinks Obama has taken this philosophy over the edges of reason. I liked the value of the American dollar where it was at several years ago).
Anyways, good luck for wherever it is you decide to take your future content.
- Diver
|
Jun 20 '09
7:43 am PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Sad to see a political commentator go... (Reply to this comment)
by brad
Hi Vic.
Regarding the multi-party systems in Europe, I'm not sure how effective they are. I would need to study more about how long they've been functioning, at least in modern times. Obviously, before the West became democratized, many European states functioned essentially as dictatorships in the form of monarchies. It would be an interesting study to see exactly how long your hailed multi-party systems have truly been in power and as long as they have, exactly what policies have been enacted and put into place.
As far as the two-party system here in the USA, while it is a two-party system, both parties have traditionally had factions of varying degrees. Even now, at least with the Democrats, we have so-called "blue dogs." "Blue dogs" used to be a term attached to southern Democrats that clung to some of the civil rights issues and more decentralized government that the American southeast has traditionally supported (since they once tried to break away, and really, that sentiment or attitude or culture still permeates to this day). But now blue dogs make up a sizable faction and do caucus together apart from other Democrats. In fact, they are hampering a lot of the more liberal policies that Obama is trying to get passed. If he had all of the Democrats, he wouldn't even need a single Republican. Well, that is, when Al Franken gets there, which should be within weeks.
On the GOP side, things have changed dramatically over the years. Once the party of Honest Abe, it has evolved over time to serve different constituencies and support different issues. And serve to block a lot of proposed change. It is the conservative party and for most of its existence, has served as a check on the far left and progressive initiatives. The GOP's identity even from 1974 when Nixon left up until now is radically different. Nixon had what would not be considered liberal domestic social policies, even supporting a universal, government-run healthcare program at one point. Then of course, began the era of the neocons with Reagan and his disciples and very different domestic policies.
I think what is particularly different and what is a game changer here in the USA is the bicameral legislature. If we had only one house of congress, far more would get done. Even if it were the senate. Your European states don't have similar systems. So things tend to get bogged down because of the bicameral legislature because at times, different parties have controlled the two houses. Complicating matters is our executive branch and vetoes, etc. The manner in which European states govern to me is quite different than how we do things here, and I'm convinced that it is not because of a two-party system. It has far more to do with how our overall system is set up. What do you think?
But again, and I don't think you directly answered the question - or rather it wasn't a question on my part but you didn't dispute it -- what you really have is the left and the right, but with factions that are true political parties. Do you wonder if those parties will form lasting alliances that will bring the sort of gridlock that we experience here? We've had some time -- 200 years -- to sort out this two-party system and we used to have more than two parties, but the factions merged to form the two alliances in the left and right. I wonder if the same fate awaits parliaments and governments in Europe.
You folks in Europe have us on nearly every matter that involves experience. Your ethnic identities, nations, and many of your states have been around for centuries, in some cases over 1,000 years. But then you have not been true democracies -- for the most part -- as long as we have.
Food for thought. I'd love to get your reaction.
Brad
|
Jun 18 '09
8:23 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Sad to see a political commentator go... (Reply to this comment)
by vicfar
Brad,
I agree with what you said, so there is little to argue about. I truly hope that these grassroots movements are effective. There was an awakening in the US in the late 60's, which did lead to some permanent changes. I hope we are on the verge of another political awakening.
The only question I have is: why don't you think there are multi-party systems? Don't you think the broader spectrum we have in Europe serves to catalyze a more intelligent political discussion? The down side is that you need complex coalitions to govern, but that's also more democratic than one party having full monopoly, don't you think?
Cheers
Vic
|
Jun 16 '09
2:59 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Sad to see a political commentator go... (Reply to this comment)
by brad
Vic,
[Applauding...]
Your assessment in a macro sense is accurate. I am in total agreement with your points on foreign policy that the USA is a crumbling empire, at least in the sense that it has nothing to offer except military force (and as you pointed out, as long as it can afford it -- which as you know, will unfortunately be quite a long time).
That said, my concern is not outside of our borders? Should it be? Why? What have our foreign excursions done for us? Russian leaders are on record explaining that the industrial might of post-WWII USA was what defeated the Soviet Union and not military force or the cold war. We "outspent" them, as they have said. Their economic model simply could not compete with the industrial output we had here and the influence it gave us abroad. After all, it's all about money, right? Or gold.
That's what all these wars and coups are about. "Protecting America's interests." "Protecting America's national security." Really? You mean Chile, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Afganistan, and about a dozen other states invaded American soil? No. The geniuses in Langley just thought we ought to preemptively look after things and pull an Israel circa 1967 about two dozen times in twice or thrice the scale.
Stupid.
Vic, what I am concerned about is what is happening on American soil. I really don't give a dam* about our foreign policy, at least to the extent that I know things will not change in that respect. I mean I wish as much as anyone that we would pull all of our troops home and leave everybody else alone. But that's not going to happen. So I need to focus on what I can control.
Domestic politics and public policy here in America can be affected by grassroots movements. The healthcare reform that is being proposed today would not be possible without all of the NGOs and volunteers and organizers who have dedicated so many resources toward bringing this issue front and center. If we get this done, we can compete with the global economy. Otherwise, labor rates are inflated because of fringe benefits.
The environment. If the USA doesn't take the lead in bringing serious environmental policy reform, who is going to carry the torch? We can't ask China to stop building coal-fired plants until we do. Or at least until we get some tough regulations in place. Where did this reform initiative come from? It came from the people. The American people have demanded this change. Special interests have been buying off politicians since the 1970s to stop environmental policy reform but they can't do it anymore because too many voters demand change.
These are just two examples. We have opportunity here to do some things that can really bring change to America and how Americans live. If we can bring in some of the sharing mentality of Europe, some of the workplace benefits, we can change how people here view the rest of the world.
It's sort of like a chain reaction. People here are stuck in a rut. They don't know better. You people in Europe have seen the results of two massive land wars. We have no idea what that's like? Russia lost 20 million people in WWII. We lost 400,000. Germany lost 15 million. How could we possibly have the same perspective? If we did, I don't think we'd be so hawkish on foreign policy.
You raise many issues and I would love to debate all of them, but I agree with most, so not a lot to debate, more to discuss.
In short, I agree with your general assessment. But we can't start turning things around -- here in the USA or around the world -- until we start fixing things on our own soil. Change our domestic policies, change how we live, which hopefully brings a new collective perspective.
There are hard times to come for Americans in terms of how we are able to stave off this financial crisis, what it's going to do to our currency, how that will affect our world standing, the blowback we have yet to receive from the 2000s Middle East excursion, and lots of other things. Yeah, we have problems.
One thing though: every state has a two-party system. It's a spectrum. Any particular person falls somewhere on the spectrum: toward the right or to the left. If you have more than one party, then one of your two parties is simply divided into factions. There is no such thing as a mutli-party system. Eventually, enough smart people will recognize this.
Cheers.
|
Jun 15 '09
6:45 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Re: Sad to see a political commentator go... (Reply to this comment)
by vicfar
Brad,
if by optimistic you mean forecasting the demise of the hated Republicans, you are right. They are buried for a long time. But I have no faith in the American two-party system. Foreign adventures and corporatism are persisting under Obama. I see no major shifts. Unaffordable wars and speculative bubbles have wrecked the productive sector of the economy and produced a massive transfer of wealth from the working sector to an increasingly parasitic, corrupt elite. Obama caters to same elite as Bush did, only with more finesse. His identity politics leave me cold. I couldn't care less what color the new president is or the new Supreme Court nominee. The problems are elsewhere.
Americans, for the large part enterprising and hard-working people, are being failed by a political system where nobody represents their interest. The hollowing out of the economy for a quick economic profit is short sighted. When Americans are more and more impoverished, it will be hard to continue to milk them. That leaves as the only avenue America's continuing wars of plunder. With a huge deficit which will saddle generations to come, the US can no longer afford these wars. When the disasters in Iraq and Afghanistan are finally complete, America may well wake up wiser (yet they did not learn from Vietnam), but most likely broke and overwhelmed by China.
Look at the world: South America is openly defying the US. No CIA coups there...Europe is timidly seeking an alliance with Russia, China is starting collaboration in South America, Africa...and Russia called the US bluff in Georgia and signaled they are not going to swallow American s*hit anymore. Israel is going insane, and the US is doing little to rein it in. It is the picture of an empire in disarray. Yet Obama is staying the course...
Only a grassroots movement can save America. The political arena needs new ideas. Or another revolution...
Vic
|
Jun 15 '09
1:12 pm PDT
|
|
... (Reply to this comment)
by gothicdreams
Take care and good luck!!!
|
Jun 11 '09
11:05 am PDT
|
|
Good Luck! (Reply to this comment)
by gamerjet
I'm going to miss "brad's experience"s
and the yearly "Mac vs PC"! :)
Good Luck,
Gamerjet
|
Jun 09 '09
6:59 pm PDT
|
|
Re: Sad to see a political commentator go... (Reply to this comment)
by brad
Hi Vic.
If I thought posting political commentary here would be an effective means for advancing political discourse, I would not be "retiring." That said, let me address your comments about politics.
I know you're a citizen of the world - so to speak - so I can see where your pessimism stems. American foreign policy in particular has generally not changed for over 100 years, going back to the Spanish-American war. Since then, America has been an expanding empire, spreading its influence to every corner of the globe. So in that sense, I agree that there is little chance we will see a departure from the imperial ambitions of this country. From NSC 68 ("containment") all the way through the cold war and then followed by the hegemonic policy enacted by the neoconservatives, America -- simply put -- has bullied its way into places it simply doesn't belong. That rationale has always been to protect the national security interests of this country, but then as best I can tell (and I am a historian), we have been attacked once in our history post-revolution (including 1812) by a sovereign state (Japan 1942). We were attacked by a rogue group of terrorists in 2001 that belonged to no state and that should have been handled with special forces and not standing armies. I don't agree with the imperial foreign policies we have followed over most of our history, but then we have simply followed human nature of all super powers in the history of the world. We do these things simply because we can, in the end. No matter what people would admit in private.
As for domestic policies, this is the first time since the FDR administration of the early 1930s that the Democrats (liberals) have had a working super majority. We now have 60 senators - (filibuster proof) and firm control of the US House, along with a liberal Democrat in the White House. There will be serious change here on the domestic front, with policies enacted that we've been waiting decades for. Even if you don't live here, if you know our history, you should be optimistic.
In addition, demographics are heavily trending in favor of the liberals, with a "permanent majority" quite possible for -- not permanent but it's the coined term I am using -- a couple of decades. The GOP has lost the black vote, the latino vote, most of Generation X, and most of eligible voting Generation Y. Boomers are finally being marginalized. Most blue states will remain reliably blue for the foreseeable future, with many purple states quite likely to fall into the blue column for a while to come. I don't see a Republican winning the Presidency here in the next 20 years if current demographic trends continue.
The Democrats continue to find opportunities to pick off Senate seats and likely will pick up a couple more (net) in the next cycle. The last bastion of old-school conservatives is in the bible belt of the old South and the Great Plains. But even states like Kentucky, North Carolina, Missouri, Montana, even Texas and Arizona could all produce Democratic Senators in years to come.
If you don't already do so, I encourage you to do some research about the demographics in the USA and how they are affecting politics here. As more and more Democrats get elected, the far-left faction of the party will gain even more power, and that faction is against the imperial foreign policies of the past, is against the corporatism that dominated the neo-con era (Reagan-Bush W.), is strongly pro-labor, and staunchly supports environmental reform.
The Democrats had as many as 68 Senators during the Johnson administration, but a lot of those were "blue dogs" from the old Democratic party that included the South. It was not a working majority. What we have now is truly a working majority and it won't be long, if it hasn't arrived already, that we don't even need to consult with the far-right, which is almost entirely what the GOP consists of. I count two or three moderates in the entire GOP Senate caucus and I wouldn't be surprised if one of those three changes parties before coming up for reelection. The GOP as it exists right now is dead and buried. Only until they abandon the bankrupt policies and tired ideologies of the past will they resurrect. If they do that, it finally means bi-partisanship on legislation, which would be a great thing for public policy here in the USA.
Cheers, Brad.
|
Jun 08 '09
6:04 pm PDT
|
|
Sad to see a political commentator go... (Reply to this comment)
by vicfar
There's few of us left here now. I agree with pretty much you say about epinions and politics. I stay here because of inertia, and there are still a lot of smart people posting here. Unfortunately, the debates are rare...
As for politics, I am more pessimistic than you are. I don't see change in the air. Meaningful change at least. Obama talks well, but his policies do not depart enough from those of the previous administrations: take from the poor and give to my friends, borrow from generations to come, and wage war abroad.
Good luck
Vic
|
Jun 08 '09
3:28 am PDT
|
|
Hey Brad! (Reply to this comment)
by auldbawl1
So nice of you to mention me buddy! Now, can you really "retire" from this place? We both have heard and said our goodbyes and somehow can't stay away. I hope you stick around and write once in awhile. Either way, we are great friends. Let me know what else is up with you. I have 7 months in already with the DoD - things are good for me.
Talk to you soon,
Rick
|
Jun 07 '09
3:34 pm PDT
|
|
Understandable... (Reply to this comment)
by mrkstvns
There's no question that writing on Epinions is far less satisfying than it once was, and that the review quality has generally deteriorated.
Whatever the reason for Epinions' inability to keep its technology functional and its community exciting, it's still a loss whenever a long-time member gets exasperated and leaves.
Good luck whereever life leads you...stop in and shout out every now and again.
Best,
M
|
Jun 07 '09
1:40 pm PDT
|
|
Good-bye Brad (Reply to this comment)
by skbreese
I will be sorry to see you go. Epinions may not quite be what it used to be, but it is still a good outlet for the type of reviews I enjoy writing, and there are still enough familiar faces, that plan to hang in there. Best of luck. Sheila
|
Jun 06 '09
7:25 pm PDT
|
|
|
|
