Politics Political Articles

When our founding fathers established the great United States, it was an experiment of sorts. Combining political philosophies on democracy and republics spanning across centuries, they pieced together a system that has lasted far longer than any other political experiment in history. One of the more interesting impacts this experiment has had is the development and entrenchment of a two party system that influences American politics each and every day. This two party format is not a structured extension of our central government, but is nevertheless an integral part of the political process.

In American politics today, the government is run, by and large, by Republicans and Democrats. The Republican’s platform is based upon conservative principles. They traditionally are pro-life, anti-gun control, anti-big government, anti-spending, and in favor of low taxes. The Democrat’s platform is based upon more liberal or progressive principles. They are usually described as pro-choice, pro-gun control, pro-social programs, and in favor of a strong central government. These ideals and principles, however, have shifted along the spectrum of political ideology decade after decade. While it is typically a safe assumption to associate these ideas with their respective parties, in American politics, there are even subcategories within the two party system, like Blue Dog Democrats or Neo-conservatives.

When considering American Politics, it is interesting to note that, despite their being no laws regarding representation of parties and quotas, the two party system has endured. While the parties have changed names as the years have gone on, the ideals and split of ideals has largely remained the same. Though some third parties have emerged, such as the Green Party and Libertarian party, and though these parties have at times severely influenced elections, they have yet to gain enough substantive ground to be able to truly influence American politics on a daily basis. Perhaps the most significant influence that a third party candidate has had in American politics occurred during the 2000 Presidential election, where Ralph Nader’s pull in Florida arguably pulled votes away from Al Gore, allowing George Bush to win the state and the election overall. However, as far as holding enough sway in Congress to influence legislation goes, we are a long ways away from seeing that happen.

Many people question why third parties are unable to make a significant contribution to American politics. One reason that is usually supported comes in the idea of funding. Republicans and Democrats alike have powerful and wealthy allies. These individuals and companies have the ability to rally large amounts of people, and therefore resources. There is a pervasive belief that because the Republicans and Democrats have been around for so long, supporting or voting for a third party, no matter how good their platform might be, is a waste of your effort. Until this belief is diminished, the de facto two party system will continue to be the bizarre operating system of American politics.

The author has been writing articles online for 4 years now. Come visit his latest site The Cash Code review that reviews The Cash Code by Michael Jones.

As a great lover of history, I often look back on the American Constitution with amazement and awe. It showed such foresight in its conception and was written with such beauty and eloquence. It was an absolute stroke of genius.

When I think back on what our forefathers were confronted with in terms of trying to establish a set of laws by which our new country would be governed, I can’t imagine being charged with that kind of responsibility or handling it as well as they did. It has served as the supreme law of the country for more than 220 years, and has not become outdated.

The Bill of Rights showed more than any other part of the American Constitution the brilliance of the men who wrote it, because they allowed for the possibility that they had not gotten everything right, and that circumstances might change, making some of the laws inappropriate.

As a journalist, the most important of these to me is the First Amendment right to freedom of speech and expression. I am not sure if most people realize just exactly how important this amendment is, but the fact of the matter is that Americans would not know about scandals, breeches of security and political corruption if it was not for this amendment.

We as Americans would not be able to protest or speak out against issues if we disagree with them if was not for our First Amendment rights. The United States of America is what it is today because of our First Amendment rights.

Then there is the freedom of religion that is part of our First Amendment rights. That is one thing I hear people of all faiths say when they talk about the greatness of America, is that they can worship as they choose, without having to worry about being persecuted.

The Eighth Amendment, which prevents cruel and unusual punishment for crimes, is another amendment to the American Constitution that showed tremendous forethought. When you think about the torturing of criminals that goes on in some countries even today, it really makes you appreciate what our founders understood 220 years ago; even though a person may be a criminal, they are still human, and deserve a certain degree of protection in a civilized country.

I know that this concept is not uniquely American, as the idea was borrowed from the English Bill of Rights, but it was still recognized as important enough to keep in our own constitution.

The American Constitution is such an important document in our country’s history not only because it sets out the laws by which the United States is governed, but also because it has endured for more than 200 years.

The author has been writing online for 4 years. Come visit his latest site www.TurboTrafficSystemBonus.com that reviews Turbo Traffic System free traffic formula.

The United States is now solidly part of the western world, having been colonized from the sixteenth century to the twentieth, when the Apache’s, not willing to extend immigrant amnesty to the western invaders, were finally released from their prisoner of war camp and allowed to return to their ancestral homes, as close as they could get to it. Conquest, not some divine law, put the land of the United States, North America, into the hands of those who now claim it as their own. Manifest destiny drove the European invaders from one end of the continent to the other, immigrants all, none applying for amnesty to the natives who wanted them out, not when killing the natives was the easier path. To the New World they came, as if the Divinity had created this continent only on their arrival, bestowing right of claim on them for the civility of their ways. But if law is to be universal, then Americans can’t escape the fact that this land was taken without the cover of law, that they and their progeny are essentially illegal immigrants and, some natives would say, should be asking for immigrant amnesty themselves. Fortunately for these invaders, amnesty is no longer necessary: those who were rightful, de facto owners of the land are mostly dead or were herded into concentration camps we euphemistically call reservations.

Today, as it was in the colonizing days of the Americas, a new set of immigrants have invaded the land, coming, not with sabers, horses, rifles and cannons, but with bodies hardened for back-breaking work, not so much looking for Eldorado’s land of gold, but for the chance to live the life of a modern, civilized man. These immigrants came in full view, in full knowledge of the U.S. government -immigrant amnesty by silent consent – to fill jobs that U.S. citizens, fully equipped with high school diplomas and corporate office, warehouse, factory and plant experience, no longer wanted. Many of these immigrants came under the laws of immigration to this country, and never was there one available immigration position left unfilled for these blue collar legals, yet the demand for such workers not only remained, but grew to such a proportion, that a nod and a wink replaced the tedious immigration procedure, especially when the crops were in danger of destruction and U.S. agriculture stood to lose great profits throughout the world.

There was no call for exportation of these immigrants then, no counter call for amnesty, for jobs were aplenty for all, no, not until the U.S. leadership let the prominence of America fall in international economics, when jobs became scare, that calls resounded throughout to deport these illegal immigrants, to deny immigrant amnesty, thereby making those once unattractive jobs available for the children of those illegal immigrants who came on wooden ships centuries before with no invitation in hand.

Let us be fair. Perhaps we should allow the Native American Indians, what’s left of them, to determine who should and who should not receive immigrant amnesty. It was theirs first.

The author has been writing online for 4 years. Come visit his latest site www.HardCashHijack.org that reviews Hard Cash Hijack by Mike Auton and Chris X.

At best, it cost the United States about $40,000 a year to imprison one inmate in a state or federal prison. Latest statistics show that at least two percent of the total population is in some phase of the justice system, with approximately a half a million of them ending up in prison for periods of anywhere from 6 months to natural life. Prison inmates are essentially warehoused during that period of time, perhaps performing some prison job in a prison industry that profits very little, its primary products going to the prisoners themselves.

The cost of imprisoning a human is indeed staggering when we consider facilities, personnel, and technological costs to maintain prisons and prisoners, but this is just the tip of the total costs the society bares. Many prisoners leave behind families who had come to depend on the prisoner as the primary income earner for wife and children. Families losing the bread winner to prison will normally have to go on public assistance of some sort, food stamps, welfare, state sponsored insurance and the like. While many of these inmates were no contribution to society or to their families, still a fair percentage of them held jobs and supported their family and paid their taxes. All this is lost when prison inmates leave their homes for the small cells that will become their home for years to come, and society loses potential assets also, taxes that would have been paid, work that would have contributed to the economic or social fabric, to the building of a strong American.

Nor does the children of these prison inmates fare better with fathers and mothers incarcerate. As well as having to live with the stigma of having a parent in prison, the child loses that fraternity with society that is all important in establishing the trust that will be necessary for the fullest development of the child. Children of prisoners will most likely follow in the parents footsteps, feeling themselves somehow determined by genes or fate to become as their parent became. Although not true, they will believe they are destined to suffer the sins of their parents.

Society does have a responsibility to secure itself against lawbreakers, and in many cases, such as with violent offenders, only incarceration can give us that security. Murders, rapist, child molesters, these cannot be permitted the freedom to wander the land, at least not until society is perfectly assured that the causes of the behavior are no longer motivating the inmate.

Most prison inmates, however, are not imprisoned for violent crimes. A large portion of them are drug offenders. A healthy debate still exists that maintains these offenders should not be incarcerated, but rather they should be treated as diseased individuals. The legalization of drugs has been proposed as a way of reducing the prison population and its fiscal and social costs. No civilization has permitted the sale of poison to its population, and most of these drugs are just that, poison. We should certainly restrain such sellers and even give them an appropriate retributive punishment in the name of justice.

While drug sellers should indeed be incarcerated, it is doubtful that turning illegal drug users into prison inmates is the best, most reasonable course for a society bursting at the seams with prison inmates convicted of drug use. Surely, a society based on the perfectibility of man, on the hope of the power of science and social justice, surely such a society as ours can find an alternative to prison for these people who are essential sick. So say many groups today who are promoting medical rather than judicial treatment of illegal drug users. Given its toll on our society, perhaps we should all give a closer and more compassionate look at prison inmates who are being punished for being the victims of those who have sold them a slavery even prison cannot abolish. Perhaps psychology and the social sciences can finally prove its worth by coming up with a better method of bringing these people back to health. Are you ready to release the sick from shackles and chains, to the hope of man? Isn’t that what the Enlightenment promised us? Does the light still shine?

Come visit the author’s latest website www.ViralSubmitterProReviews.org that discusses the new software Viral Submitter Pro by Adeel Chowdhry, Bobby Walker, and Jeff Schwerdt.