Dobro ne bih rekao da je Kina bolje uređenje od SADa, nije da tamo korupcija ne cvjeta, to što jednom u par godina jednog objese zbog nje ne znači da je ostalih godina nema, dapače po iskustvima određenih privatnika i profesora koji se bave tim područjem Kina je korupcijski raj - prvenstveno jer je čitava vlast koncentrirana u rukama jedne te iste ekipe.

S druge strane stranačka disciplina rješava masu takvih problema kao i proporcionalni izborni sustav, kada imaš ljude vezane za jedno šire područje(najbolje čitavu državu) onda je daleko slabija vjerojatnost da će isti djelovati u korist lokalnih, a nauštrb nacionalnih interesa države.

Glavni problem i razlog zašto je demokratija u Americi sranje je što oligarhija koja finansira političare nema nikakvu odgovornost. Ako naprave neko sranje, počnu da podržavaju novog političara koji će narodu da ponudi hope&change. Čak i da dođe do baš velikog sranja oni će svejedno da ostanu neokrznuti i dalje bogati i dalje će presudno uticati na događaje u zemlji. I još je sasvim legalno da kupuju političare. Nije potreban paravan sa demokratijom, demokratija je preskupa.

Na kraju će doći do onoga što su očevi osnivači predviđali. Ne postoji demokracija koja se nije iscrpila i uništila. Zapravo onaj ideal koji predstavlja je već uništen.

Pod najmanje lošim sustavom mislim da ipak rascjepkanošću interesa se onemogućava da prevlada jedna skupina. Svi se korumpiraju, i svi zadovolje nešto što trebaju.

A dok se odigrava ta politička igra, a neka temeljna prava su zadana, sposoban narod i pojedinci koji ga čine imaju slobodu raditi i stvarati i zapravo izgrađivati zajednicu, društvo i državu.

Demokracija je tu okvir. Amerika je velika jer je narod sposoban, a ta neka uvjerenja su izašla i ukorijenila se iz narodnog duha Anglosasa koji su utjelovili te institucije i vrijednosti.

Taj narod koji je većinom pošten, sposoban, marljiv i organiziran i spoznaja da se možeš pouzdati u drugoga jer će on kao i ti postati vrhunski u svom poslu, a onda će posljedično i svaki dio tog društva funkcionirati jer će svaku potrebu na zadovoljavajući način zadovoljiti neki sposobni pojedinac, zbog toga je Amerika jaka.

Demokracija im je nakon očeva osnivača i ustavotvorne skupštine koja nije izabrana demokratskim putem već su ju činili najveći umovi tadašnje Amerike, proizvodila uglavnom mediokritete i prosječne do ispodprosječne ljude. Druge zemlje su imale puno jaču elitu od Amerike.

Ali Amerika je imala puno jače prosječne ljude. I oni su napravili razliku.

Uglavnom jesu oni impresivni. Ali nisu toliko dominantni koliko su trebali biti kad se uzmu svi kapaciteti.

Mika Antić

White Men Vote Republican Because They’re Suckers

Amanda Marcotte recently wrote that “White men, as a group, vote Republican because they vote their resentments.”

The New York Times article she cited didn’t say or even imply anything about resentment. It did say that straight, working-class white men vote Republican because the Democratic Party has devoted the majority of its resources to appealing to women, gays and the various groups of less-white men who are nostalgically referred to as “minorities.” The Democratic Party has been on the opposite side of issues that working-class white men have cared about for decades, and according to the Times piece, many strategists within the party think it’s a waste of time trying to win them over.

Working-class white men vote Republican because the Democrats have made it clear that they care about representing the interests of everyone but working-class white men. These guys vote Republican because Republicans actually make an effort to tell them what they want to hear.

Basically, white men vote Republican because they’re suckers.

The likes of Marcotte say that working-class white men are motivated by fear and resentment, but the majority of people who vote Democrat are doing it for nobler reasons.

They’re not. Most of them are voting for their own short-term self-interest.

Sure, there is a small class of progressive white men who make a big show of putting everyone else’s interests first. They demonstrate their moral superiority by standing up–mostly online–for whatever “rights” they believe that women or blacks or illegal immigrants or transsexuals or chickens are somehow entitled to.

Everyone else is just voting for stuff they want.

As Gari Day, the white male bus driver featured in the Times article said, “Republicans make you work for your money, and try to let you keep it.”

He probably doesn’t understand how the government can afford to keep giving everyone free stuff forever. He probably does figure that some of that money for the stuff other people want is coming out of his earnings. But he’s not alone in that–I’ve yet to see a successful Democrat turn down a tax break. No one actually wants to paymore taxes.

Aside from voting to keep more of their own money and to keep the guns they bought, a lot of these straight, white, working-class men are not asking for anything. They’re too proud for that.

As old-fashioned voters, they see themselves as part of the government. They’re not just trying to get more stuff from the government and come up with reasons why they deserve it. They’re voting for a society that works the way they think things should work.

And that’s why they’re suckers.

White men are suckers because they haven’t figured out that the America they believe in is already gone, and that they are the only ones who aren’t asking for whatever they can get while the gettin’s still good. They’ll vote reliably Republican as long as the Republicans keep talking about self-reliance and how things should work, and that will free up Republican politicians to do favors for people who actually want stuff.

http://www.amren.com/news/2014/04/white ... e-suckers/

White males fading among House Democrats

House Democrats will make history in the 2012 election, sending to Congress next January the first women and minority-majority party faction in U.S. history.

A new analysis by the Cook Political Report reveals a further progression of white flight from the Democratic Party, which is increasingly represented by women and minorities, while the GOP remains a party dominated by white men.

In 1950, white men constituted 98% of House Democrats—a percentage that fell precipitously to just 53% following the 2010 elections. Based on the makeup of candidates in the current congressional races, Wasserman projects that the 2012 elections will result in a House Democratic Caucus that will be 46%-48% white males when the next Congress starts in January—whether or not Democrats win a majority.

In contrast, white men continue to make up the vast majority of the Republican Party. In 1950, House Republicans were 97% white men, which fell to just 86% in 2012—a figure that Wasserman says will remain largely unchanged in the next Congress.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities ... Fn2jGfBoSq

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/05/us/po ... tions&_r=0

To je uz podatke sa prethodne stranice najbitnije.

Onog trenutka kad bijelci prestanu razmišljati o sebi kao o temeljnom narodu, većini, onima koji održavaju sustav, nose breme na plećima i počnu razmišljati kao jedna od manjina i shvate da su izgubili zemlju i presudan utjecaj, it's game over for Amerika.

Republikancima je ključ nekako privući Azijce, barem 50% Židova i boljestojeće hispance u idućih 10 godina. Inače će demografijom postati nemoguće da republikanci daju predsjednika, a malo kasnije i većinu u senatu i kongresu.

Ove grupe moraju shvatiti da imaju puno više zajedničkih interesa s bijelom srednjom klasom nego afroamerikancima iz ghetta i hispano ilegalcima iz El Pasa.

Not going to happen.

Predsjednika već sad teško da će dobiti. Senat i Kongres je s druge strane teško za dobiti demokratima zbog činjenice da se njihovi glasači zbijaju u velike gradove i tamo dobijaju u izbornim jedinicama 90% dok je ostatak zemlje malo manje uvjerljivo republikanski.

Mislim da Argentina ima zakon o uvozu - firma za svaki dolar koji uveze mora da izveze 1 dolar robe.

Trebalo bi to uvesti na ovom forumu, barem za Hrvate - za svaki post napisan o SADu mora da se napiše jedan o Uskoplju/Prozor Rami/Dobretićima

Podržavam tu plemenitu ideju.

Republicans Extend House Control as Democratic Holdouts Fall


Republicans expanded their majority in the House of Representatives, riding a wave of dissatisfaction with President Obama to victories on Tuesday that will embolden Speaker John A. Boehner as he tries to manage a rebellious Tea Party caucus.

Early Wednesday, it appeared that Republicans were on the verge of winning at least 10 additional seats — gains that would give them their largest majority since the 1940s.

It was a dispiriting outcome for Democrats, who just a few months ago were optimistic that a badly damaged Republican brand would help them prevail in a handful of races.

Some of the political casualties were the last holdouts of an era in which moderate and conservative Democrats could survive in states that were deeply Republican.
Representative Nick J. Rahall II, West Virginia’s last Democrat in the House, lost one of the most expensive races this election cycle. John Barrow of Georgia, the last white Democrat to represent the Deep South, also failed to hang on.

Republicans also picked up seats in blue territory, adding two in New York State.

Mr. Boehner said Tuesday night that the results were “humbling.” He added: “This is not a time for celebration. It’s time for government to start getting results.”
Even with the Republican gains, the overall makeup of the House was expected to change little. It will remain a place that largely reflects the bases of both political parties rather than the increasingly diverse nation it represents.

When the 114th Congress convenes in January, any changes along ideological, racial or gender lines will be only at the margins.

That homogeneity is particularly stark inside the Republican conference. Before Tuesday’s election, 89 percent of House Republicans were white men. The election of a few Republican women lowered that figure only slightly.

Political analysts said Democrats’ hopes of retaking the House faced long odds for at least two more elections — and possibly not until after the 2020 census, when district lines are redrawn.

“We’re talking about a House that’s very well sorted out,” said David Wasserman, a House political analyst at the nonpartisan Cook Political Report. “There’s very little give.”

The stasis is largely a product of the redistricting that Republican-dominated state legislatures pushed through after the party’s victories in 2010. This was the first midterm election to take place under those redrawn lines, which further hem liberals and conservatives into districts that leave little doubt whether the winner will be a Democrat or a Republican.

The widening urban-rural divide contributes to the polarization of the House, with cities increasingly becoming Democratic bulwarks while the much of the rest of the country grows more conservative.

Though both parties have used redistricting to their advantage over the years, its effects have become more pronounced. In the 2010 midterm elections, political forecasters counted about 100 competitive races. There were 39 for this election, according to the Cook Political Report.

Rarer still are so-called split districts, where the congressional representative is from a different political party than the candidate who carried the district in the last presidential election.

In 1995, just before Bill Clinton was elected to a second term, 79 Republicans in the House were from districts that Mr. Clinton carried and 20 Democrats from districts that his predecessor, George Bush, carried.

Today there are only nine Democrats from districts that Mitt Romney won and 17 Republicans from districts that Mr. Obama won.

Republican redistricting eliminated potentially competitive races in swing states like Florida and North Carolina. In Ohio, long considered a bellwether in presidential races and among the most contested states, there was not a single unpredictable race.

It was one of the most expensive campaign seasons on record, though no amount of money was going to change the fact that the balance of power was likely to remain the same. In all, spending will exceed $1.2 billion when the amounts from candidates, party committees and “super PACs” are all added up.

When Mr. Boehner, of Ohio, drops his gavel in January to open the new session of Congress, his job may be no less complicated than it has been in the four years since a band of Tea Party insurgents helped sweep Republicans into power.

He will say goodbye to colleagues who often generated distracting headlines, like Representatives Michele Bachmann of Minnesota and Steve Stockman of Texas, who are leaving at the end of this term.

But he will also lose pragmatic moderates like Representative Spencer Bachus of Alabama, one of 26 House veterans who will not be returning.

It remains to be seen how firm Mr. Boehner’s grip will be over the incoming class. And some Republicans said he faced a singular problem: a larger majority but one that may be no easier to control.

“Normally, a party that’s in control wants to increase their numbers so they can more effectively jam it down the throat of the opposition party,” said Vin Weber, a former Republican congressman from Minnesota. “In this instance, the goal of Boehner and the leadership is to get to the point where they have leverage against their own most conservative members.”

Interpreting their victories in the House as a mandate or a wave — as was the case in 2010 — would be a mistake, many Republicans acknowledged.
“We have to now earn the trust of the American people by proving that we can govern — and govern responsibly,” said Representative Greg Walden of Oregon, who chaired the National Republican Congressional Committee. “That will earn us credibility.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/05/us/po ... tions&_r=1

Hear, hear.

Mada Hrvati toliko dominiraju tamo da nije ni zanimljivo.

Preko bare nema takvog dominatora poput Dragana Čovića pa se nešto i da raspravljati.

Ne izvlači se, imaš 60 sekundi da odgovoriš: koliko poslanika u klub Hrvata u Domu naroda Paralamenta FBiH daje HNŽ?

Vrijeme sad!

Ček da proguglamo

Čekaj majku mu, zablokirao mi pretražnik.

Ma to su tehnikalije, bitno je da lagano širimo svijest o tome što rade Bošnjaci i zašto je treći nužan. S više ili manje uspjeha.

Ma nemoj, a ovde znate koliki procenat muškaraca u Kentakiju voli da ga nosi na lijevu stranu

A pali ste i na trik pitanju, u Domu naroda nisu poslanici već delegati.

I šta je sad bitnije od toga dvoga?

Pa mislim, i to još od čovjeka koji je u trenucima lucidnosti i koliko toliko pametan.

S obzirom da si Amerikanac i da ne živiš u Hrvatskoj gde bi video po jednog crnca u svaka dva meseca, i ja mislim da je glupo postavljati pitanje šta je bitnije.

I ovo što kažeš, moglo bi se u daljoj budućnosti dogoditi da predsjednik bude konstantno Demokrat, a Kongres konstantno republikanski. E to bi bilo interesantno za vidjeti .
Sada to proizvodi dovoljno problema za demokratskog predsjednika, a tek u budućnosti.

Ukratko ovi izbori su ujedno i završnica političke karijere Barracka Obame. Rekao bih da se nalazi u situaciji kao Zoky u RH. Kada siđe s mjesta predsjednika gotova mu je karijera, a povijest će ga upamtiti kao jednog od najlošijih predsjednika SADa u zadnjih 100 godina. Bok uz bok sa Jimmyem Carterom.

Čovjek bi pomislio da su Ameri spremni za jednog novog Regana, ali ne bojte se imigranti će to spriječiti u svojoj beskonačnoj mudrosti, pa možda dobijemo Hilldog za predsjednicu uskoro

Kako završnica karijere, pa šta može da bude posle dva termina predsjednikovanja u SŠA?

Ići će po fakultetima i držati govore za masne cifre, hvaliti se Nobelom... pa nije on Vuk Jeremić da bude predsjednik svijeta...

Ako se ne varam, ni poređenje s Karterom ne stoji, pa Karter je bio miroljubiv a ovaj je ratovao ko Paton...

Odlično da su ovih dana legalizovali vutru i Oregonu. Valjda će uskoro i kod nas. Američka liberalna vrednost za koju sam svim srcem.

Opet nešto na moj račun?

Ili me izazivaš da kažem šta mislim?