Why Isn’t “Nation-Building” an American Domestic Policy, Rather Than Only a Foreign One?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/23/us/politics/the-selling-of-a-politician-and-the-ads-almost-broadcast.html?_r=1http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/23/us/politics/the-selling-of-a-politician-and-the-ads-almost-broadcast.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120323

The lesson is perhaps that populism doesn’t always make good politics, however tempting it is to the thought-leaders. Of course, to some the real issue is why after 200+ years of the increasing power of populism — call it democracy — we still elect our Presidents through an arcane, unbalanced, non-democratic system that makes political advertising calculations, and vote counts, so corrupted — the obsolete and dangerous Electoral College!

Is this country more likely to have a 21st century version of a French revolution, than ever really reform our government? Isn’t it amazing that “nation-building” is still an American foreign policy, and not a domestic one?

Cheers, nonetheless…

Advertisements

Gerrymandering?

In Michigan, Romney beat Santonum in the Republican primary by more than 30,000 votes, yet the delegates assigned to each was 15/15 — that’s gerrymandering.

In the Presidential campaign of 2000, Bush lost to Gore by more than 500,000 votes nationally – the population of Milwaukee. Yet Bush won in the antiquated Electoral College. That’s gerrymandering.

Why do we have gerrymandering? Politicians.

How do we restore one person/one vote democracy? Demand better of our politicians, NOW, before it’s too late.