Observing President Bush’s foreign policy is like watching an immanent train wreck: You can see looming disaster from a mile away but there is not a damn thing you can do about it.
Critical observers knew that the reasons for war on Iraq were all lies and that the resulting invasion would be an unmitigated catastrophe for the U.S. and the Iraqi people.
Similarly, critical observers knew that Bush’s doctrine of military “preemption” coupled with Bush’s short list of countries ripe for “regime change” would accelerate Iran and North Korea’s nuclear weapons programs.
And now, as predicted, we have North Korea announcing “publicly for the first time that it had nuclear weapons” (“Failed tactics leave U.S. policymakers facing ‘rough go’", 10-10.)
How is it that in the span of six years the U.S. has gone from being the “indispensable nation” to being a country that is reviled by its allies and disregarded by its enemies?
The short answer is that our chief executive is totally out of his depths with regard to foreign policy: The man is truly a “Bush league” president.
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
October 10, 2006 - Implement Instant Runoff Voting
Implementing Instant Runoff Voting (IRV), would instantly eliminate the “spoiler effect” that has trapped many voters like Robert A. “Buzz” Kerr who said he “support[s] the views of the Green Party” candidate Kevin Zeese, but is likely to vote for Ben Cardin because he “think[s] it’s real important for the Democrats to take control of Congress” ("Running hard – uphill”, 10-9.)
Under instant runoff voting, voters rank the candidates: a 'one' for their favorite candidate, a 'two' for their second favorite and so on. Votes are then counted for the top-ranked candidate on each ballot. After counting these ballots, if no candidate has a majority of the vote and thus no candidate had won, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and the ballots of that candidate's supporters are counted for their next (second) choice, etc. until a candidate wins with a majority of the vote.
Since IRV eliminates the spoiler effect, saves time and money by eliminating the need for a primary election, ensures that the winner of race has the support of a majority of the voters, and brings more voices and choices into the election, why hasn’t the Democratic Party- controlled legislature in Maryland enacted IRV?
The answer is simple: most Democratic leaders in Maryland are fundamentally anti-democratic. In fact, not much has changed in this regard since the early 1900s, when Baltimore Democratic political boss Arthur P. Gorman denounced the possibility of third-party success as being “more objectionable even than Republican success.”
Under instant runoff voting, voters rank the candidates: a 'one' for their favorite candidate, a 'two' for their second favorite and so on. Votes are then counted for the top-ranked candidate on each ballot. After counting these ballots, if no candidate has a majority of the vote and thus no candidate had won, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and the ballots of that candidate's supporters are counted for their next (second) choice, etc. until a candidate wins with a majority of the vote.
Since IRV eliminates the spoiler effect, saves time and money by eliminating the need for a primary election, ensures that the winner of race has the support of a majority of the voters, and brings more voices and choices into the election, why hasn’t the Democratic Party- controlled legislature in Maryland enacted IRV?
The answer is simple: most Democratic leaders in Maryland are fundamentally anti-democratic. In fact, not much has changed in this regard since the early 1900s, when Baltimore Democratic political boss Arthur P. Gorman denounced the possibility of third-party success as being “more objectionable even than Republican success.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
