Quote:
Originally posted by
js250
I applaud the efforts of these sites in their attempt to get the word out, however this will affect the basic public. What would probably get more attention would be to shut down sites and pages that affect congress, legislatures, the decision
...
more
I applaud the efforts of these sites in their attempt to get the word out, however this will affect the basic public. What would probably get more attention would be to shut down sites and pages that affect congress, legislatures, the decision makers. The general public has a tendency not to get listened to, but if there were sites and programs that decision makers used regularly and depended upon--that would get their attention!!
We do have to start somewhere, maybe other sites will follow their lead and hopefully they are the ones that are used by legislatures, senate and other leaders. (Craigslist is really going to suck, I have stuff for sale on there, but oh well--it is a good cause!!)
less
i disagree with a few things. first, going after sites congress uses might seem reactionary at best and threatening at worst, it would be bad PR and hurt the cause. I agree that most of the current sites won't help get the point across, but I think that's because the bill's basically dead already. It's likely that the big guns, shutting down google and facebook, are being saved in case the bill comes back.
A for the general public, the reason why the public is ignored is because they DON'T DO ANYTHING!!! On the one hand, I understand this, most people don't care about politics and want to be left alone. On the other hand, a person cannot refuse/forget/choose not to vote, not contact elected officials, not be involved in local politics, not focus on national issues, or even blog about issues and then complain that the government ignores their interests.
What of the converse? a group of motivated people research an issue, get signatures, put it on the ballot, launch a statewide campaign and it's defeated because people who don't know anything about it vote "no." Or that same group lobbies a legislature, creates a logically impeccable argument, has thousands of motivated supporters, but their bill fails because polls show the public isn't in favor of the bill. the public isn't enthusiastically for or against the bill, but they are against it, however mildly. Do the uninformed, unenthusiastic deserve a louder voice because of their numbers, or do the motivated minority, with the sound argument deserve to get their policy?
Sorry if this sounds preachy, but too often I hear that the public is ignored, but that's easy because the public doesn't do anything. too often they expect their voices to be heard despite never trying to ensure anyone listens. voting, protesting, running for office, contributing to politicians, organizing friends and neighbors in support of a policy or even just going to the local PTA meeting (if you're a P or T, otherwise it's creepy). it's hard work, doesn't always create change and can be thankless, but it's more effective than watching dancing with the stars and complaining about the government.
