4 ms·
To say this: > I agree that the FCC is a federal governmental organisation that should not have precedent over a State's rights. Something which has been abuse
by geekamongus 10y ago
To say this:
> I agree that the FCC is a federal governmental organisation that should not have precedent over a State's rights. Something which has been abused by the courts for the last 50 or so years.
...and then say this:
> Can you remember a time when you voted that you were familiar with all the candidates for both state and city positions? I know I can't. Not even close. I usually just vote a ticket.
...makes me think you don't really care about states' rights.
- Cshelton 10y agoYes, you're right, I basically called out everyone, and then included myself as the problem. Just highlighting the fact that very few people care anymore. It is hard to follow. Keeping track of city, state, and nation wide politics is very difficult. Many times, the local politicians running are very unknown, with no info about them. Then they get into office on city council and there is little transparency into what is going on. Who receives money for what, who gets the contract, etc. And once a city council member is in, as long as there isn't a scandal or huge public outcry in the community, which is also hard to do because back to point A....who can follow politics at every level, the elected member can remain for a long, long time. It's a very hard problem, one thats solution is hard/unknown and may not even involve election "representatives" (do they REALLY represent you for their entire term? A big check from a corporation is hard to turn down and somehow legal in many cases.)