Lol, democracy.

Look at the people around you... do you REALLY want them to take part in important decisions?

It just doesn't work, man. America may not be really democratic, but it's the best system that there is.

>>37
I assume you're talking about discount school lunch programs, because every school I've been to, you pay for the meals yourself, unless you can't afford em. Since the government requires you by law to go to school until a certain age, that would be a little cruel to just take away the only meal they may get in the day.

And WHY is that the only meal they might get in the day? Why exactly do some kids starve in this country? Is it because some parents were irresponsible by having kids that they couldn't afford? ... Or is it alllllll just either the president's fault or socieeeeetyyyy's fault?
DON'T HAVE KIDS IF YOU CAN'T AFFORD TO FEED THEM. Get a damn job, move out of the sticks if you're going to have kids and want em to be fed, unless you live on a farm. It's called being responsible.

Oh wait, maybe they had money, had kids, then went broke! Who's fault is that? Nobody's it would seem, right? Just the fault of nature or whatever, right? Don't think they could have done anything to actually prepare for a disaster, had some sort of back-up plan or funds? What a concept! It's still irresponsible to have a kid until you know without a doubt they'll be secure until they can fend for themselves. And before you all come up with some kind of irrational rhetoric in response, just ask yourself, is he right or not? I already know I'm being insensitive.

>>39
You make it sound like we're right down there with Africa...

>>41
The solution isn't to let the kid starve. Just force the parents into slave labour and send the kids into an orphanage, stupid liberal.

>>42
Your sarcasm is pathetic. It's simple, if you can't afford to feed a kid, then don't have one.

Yes, John, we know -- everything is simple in that little head of yours.

>>43
New and improved idea.
Let poor people with good, attractive genes breed as much as they want, then allow them to DONATE TO 4CHAN all the females and feminine males.
Ugly niggers are allowed two kids, who will be 'appraised' regularly. Should there arise evidence said negress is unable to provide a steady source of nutrition during any checkup, she is given $2000 and her child taken for slave labour. If we can't stop outsourcing in white collar jobs, we'll sure as fuck stop it with blue-collar.
Anyone who tries to cheat the system and goes over the limit gets a 9mm abortion.

>>44
Well, I'm sorry that the issues seem so complicated to you that you don't have any concrete convictions on them. Everything's just an uncertain maelstrom with no real ideas of right and wrong to you, isn't it?

>>43
PRO LIFE!  PRO LIFE!!11!!

p.s. I lub Jesus

>>46
Ideas aren't "real."

Life is messy and not black and white, even if your precious ideas are.

Right and wrong depend on the situation.

>>46
|real ideas of right and wrong

Moral certainty is for idiots. If you want to be an idiot, far be it for me to dissuade you. I don't care if you hold ideas that I think are "wrong." Unlike you, I don't care about ideological purity.

People like >>49 cause the decline of the west. You're a fucking pussy who doesn't take a stance on anything or fight for ideals whereas the enemy is fucking determined to kill us all. Guess who wins.

Says who, >>50?

If someone wants to kill you, I don't think there's much debate about killing them to defend youself.

Except that life is rarely that simple. It's people like you that get us into these situations where killing may be necessary. If there were fewer extremist nutcases like you, there'd be less death.

Go shove your stance up your ass, along with the rest of the self-righteous fundamentalists made of the same fabric as you.

whatevs

>>50 is trolling

>>48, >>49
... What in the hell do you people live for, anyway? You seem completely against the idea of ideas, and you decide to live in a self-negating fog of uncertainty...
What a sad view to live with...

>>53 ooh burn

>>53
You live for your ideas, or rather, Ayn Rand's ideas, which you swish around in your head and recycle over and over.

>>53
Ideas are fine, but they're just ideas; you shouldn't cling to them like they're The Truth. Life is messy and not at all black and white. Your ideologically perfect ideas won't do the job; it's like trying to use a pocket knife to mow the lawn.

>>55
So anyone that adopts any kind of philosophy is a little myrmidon, is that what you're implying in essence?
Or rather, why are you so much against Ayn Rand in particular? Her ideas make you feel like a bum, and so you resent it, is that it?

>>56
"Life is messy and not at all black and white"
Guess what, man... That's where the concrete ideas come in to fix shit up-- when life gets messy. Or to use your analogy, that's when you bring out the lawnmower.

Her ideas make you feel like a bum, and so you resent it, is that it?

I dunno about >>55, but I consider the ideals a lot of Objectivist nutballs enspouse dangerous. It's not that there's anything wrong with them per se, but they're combined and distorted into something very sickly. As mentioned earlier, the objectivist philosophy only works in an oversimplified caricature of the real world. I have yet to see any viable society remotely adhering to something similar to objectivism. It's not like the ideas are that new, but it's never happened in reality. Why?

And yes, I'm a productive member of society, thanks.

That's where the concrete ideas come in to fix shit up

Right, just like Christian and Islamic fundamentalists. You have all the answers, and they aren't amenable to a messy reality. Yep, objectivism is a nice religion.

To all those people saying the US system, democratic or not, is working blah blah

One word Reply:
Bushes

>>1
True! A leader is one who knows whats the best for the people, we need a leader because the people does not know whats best for them selves.

Just vote Bush out and America will be a better place for us all.

>>59
Because in a democratic system, only leaders you agree with will be elected to office.

>>58
wins

>>1
it doesn't work cos of people like you -
america is no where near to even call it a "good" system. it's a system, yes, but it's also full of shit.

good systems are found in scandanavian countries.