Recently, Professor Zhu Chunting wrote a blog post: "USA election is a money game to play?" , which triggered fierce debate. Contemporary Chinese was told, capitalist democracy is money control, government representatives of the interests of the bourgeoisie. Chinese immigrants in American life long already belong to the Democrats, in the debate expressed different views. Finishing writing this article, let us have a different understanding of the new on this important topic, the American democracy, with a new understanding of American election.
    Today, the vast majority of Chinese think western election is controlled by the representative of the interests of the rich money, the inherent mode of thinking, the western democratic system more wary. This view is not out of the practical knowledge of the system, but from the media. A lot of people on the existing social problems, think that it is not on the old revolutionary line, capitalism creates, therefore miss before reform and opening era. They ignore a simple fact, demand of previous reforming and opening is the most basic -- the problem of food and clothing have not been resolved, after the reform and opening up in the population doubled instances were solved, the economic reforms that Chinese changed turn the world upside down change, and the reform of the political field has not conducted, it is because of this the reason to create many problems lead to.

 By quoting the wish Chunting articles, comments in order not to appear messy, divided into two camps, that the election is money manipulation Affirmative Chinese americans.

 Zhu Chunting said in the article: "America four yearly election, it is necessary to say America election of common sense.

The official media always say USA election is a money game. Rich was elected president USA always. Many facts have proved, American president is almost uniform of the middle class, including a lawyer are most, like American thirty-ninth President Carter is a peanut farmer (also called the farmer, is the family farm, labor for family members). Rich was elected president USA not letter, will transform the way to fool.

 Senior Huyou is: America president consortium and the rich agent. That is to say, the rich pay to the consortium or agents to participate in the election, elected president, to serve the interests of the wealthy consortium. Which is to say, money USA election manipulation, and the poor have no money, naturally can not support agents, so America president does not serve the poor.

 We can't say the campaign and the campaign never mind. But the campaign funding sources, is open and transparent, and there is a hard and fast rules. American law prohibits companies, banks, financial, social groups to contributions to candidates; individual donations cannot exceed $23000. 23000 dollars how to manipulate won the election? So, what big business or big spender to candidates donated tens or hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign funds, is a Arabian Nights.

(live in USA Affirmative pointed out: the USA banned companies, banks, financial, social groups to contributions to candidates of the law has abolished in 2011. On individual donations, personal (including husband and wife) to a campaign donation of less than $2500, to all the campaign donation of less than $46200)

 Cite a simple example, American Republic, democratic parties ferry ruling. Republican Representative in the class interests, the interests of middle and lower class democratic representative. America colored (mostly black) is a traditional Democratic ticket bunker, this group, the majority of the poor!

 Give a simple example, if like the official said, money can be manipulated America election. So, the Chinese company or agent to donate billions of beauty, it is a piece of cake (four years before Obama received $600000000 in campaign donations, record). "The people of the Hui, loyalty affairs". Funding America agent campaign American president, the president is in America dear.

 Can do it? Indulge in wishful thinking.

 Thank you USA cloth sheep in the life of USA elections provide valuable information!

 This article reviews the fierce controversy, more wonderful than Bowen, welcome to comment.
   
           The candidate information transparency, you have to conceal, opponents and the media are dug out.
  

                   Hilary Obama and the Democratic candidate Obama won the competition

 

The Obama campaign speech

Voters at polling stations waiting

 

    Presidential candidates Mccain and Palin launched 2008 Republican. The results of the vote, Democrats Obama and Biden combined to win."

 The following is a review of:

 Anti side: in each of the three public consumptions, it can meet the election expenses all USA since its founding. Disadvantages exaggerate, demonizing the democratic election, is not conducive to the pursuit of democracy.

Square:You (referring to Professor Zhu) the absolute error. In 2011 the company law forbids, bank, syndicate, social groups to contributions to candidates are American Supreme Court invalidated. Couples can't be more than $2400 in annual contributions. Which consortia or big spender to candidates donated tens or hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign funds, is a Arabian Nights.     Anti side: even money to rig the election, we are still seeking election, there is no vote buying, choose. The civil rights and to improve the system.     Affirmative: American Guard Law 2011 financial control in elections were American Supreme Court invalidated!     Anti side: according to what you mean, American election, is big business control.

   Affirmative: I come from New Jersey American.

Correct -Accurate information is American Federal Election Commission website
LogOn那个WebsiteOf(US)Fe eral partyElectionCommission
This individual donations can not exceed:
2500 dollars(a candidate)
46200 dollars(all candidates)
78000 dollars(all the parties)
Large consortia donation no limit
   Anti side: we might as well have a look back to Obama's campaign platform: 1, limit the oil giant's profit, the oil giant to increase domestic oil production is conservative, 2, criticized Wall Street securities industry greed, that should be seriously rectification, advocates of big company CEO are cut, strict supervision, raise taxes for 3 the merchant, high-income groups, large companies, to re distribution of social wealth. It sounds big bourgeoisie is not in the shooting itself in the foot? In fact, the so-called big bourgeoisie rigged elections and so on, is the bluff, as you say, on behalf of the lower Party, will never be able to govern?

   President Obama is on many people in small campaign funds American elected president, not by what big business, big capitalists support the election, which is consistent to American democracy are deleted a slap in the face. Obama raised more than 520000000 dollars in campaign funds, is the history of campaign funds raised most of the president several times in the American! It was deeply affected by the financial crisis background can be said a miracle. It is estimated that more than 85% of funds from the Internet, most of which is less than $100 of small donations. And these donated dozens of dollars to thousands of dollars and donate one vote is the same. His fundraising rally in general will not accept cash, voters just leave Email address, his weekly campaign would give voters send attractive.

   On the issue of Taxation, Republicans advocate tax cuts, the Democratic Party of tax. Tax cuts for the rich, the poor tax to increase the welfare.
   The richest man in the world after the financial crisis -- Warren Buffett, for Obama, the old man is willing to pay more, not only their own pay, also called on rich brothers have followed, the main reason is that the rich do not care to pay two money, instead of feeling to the state contributed heart happy oh. But Ba Lao ten years to support the Democratic Party as one day, the Democrats lost the 2000 and 2004 elections. So as the workers do not necessarily support the Democrats, "big capitalists" does not necessarily support the Republican Party; and the so-called big bourgeoisie who supported also completely can't decide the election results. And decide the election final is USA one hundred and thirty million votes. I don't agree with money control USA election!

   Anti side: America Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama created many first: the America first black presidential candidate, at first refused to use public money ($84000000) presidential candidate, Obama will probably become America first "Internet president", his campaign is very good use of the advantages of the Internet, attracting a large number of the "long tail" and grassroots forces. He used these small campaign money advertising, propaganda of the party's political ideas, get the support of the voters, finally won the election.

   Square.On behalf of the super rich Republicans should not by the tens of thousands of poor dumb American elected -Reap as one has sown, cut their own welfare!

   The American: from the Republic, democratic parties take turns in power, need to constantly revised policy, seeking a balance in the struggle to compromise. Offbeat is not money rigged elections, planning to cell, playing into the hands, that democracy, but the 99.999% men did not participate in; known as broadly representative, but 99.999% of people do not know who is the representative; which is the defender of the interests of voters, but refused to the public in the maintenance of voter interest income.

   Affirmative: America election by large conglomerates control is a matter of fact, my congressman asked people to petition to change USA election law.

   The opposition: the election law amend ceaselessly, this is the Democratic progress.

   Affirmative: Consortium control of television and news,For the millions of stupid every day USA poor brainwashing, representative of the super rich Republicans came to powerReap as one has sown, reducing their own welfare!

   Anti side: if what you say, USA TV news to national brainwashing. The National Counter brainwashing, the Internet is free space, the Americans used the Internet, to express their views. In fact, Americans are not keen to talk about politics on the internet. Interested in Internet politics is Chinese, because the official control, speech, do not convey the public opinion. I first heard, hundreds of millions of the poor to American brainwashing media, this is your imagination?

   The opposition: the more a strange, let a person cannot read way, claims that he is the incarnation of absolute truth, belong to the great, glorious, the right owners, therefore must win the permanent love people always put things right once and for all, the ruling as a choice, no choice, but also regularly engage in election, of course is the name, also is the adjustment of relations. Mr Jiang Jingguo said: there is no ruling the world. Want to stay in power forever, will perish! When it comes to money, spend one party really surprising.

   Affirmative: if you look at a CNN USA domestic television,You will learn how to brainwash me. CNN international is in American which can not see! I retired from USA navy,Daily from American government pension.Americans use the internet,But they don't speak the language, so they can't get the second pointsWhy don't you have a look they prosecute Wikileaks founder Julian Paul Asang odd?

   Anti side: even if a large corporate control, at least to a vote this, big business can't control people's thoughts! The candidate dissident views do not choose his voters.

   Anti side: first it,I also USA life for more than 20 years, the 'New Jersey' the river opposite the 'New York'. Political position?Are very attention to all Chinese and American occurs, but without any constraints.Just listen to my understanding, is an independent conscientious reader. My answer to this question is:It can't be!American election may not be the most perfect 'ultimate', but it is existing in the world's fair, the most perfect electoral system. See this blog topic, very admire professor zhu.Conclusion although very understand, but because of pollution (maybe not) too much, think too hard, read this thread will understand.Because the original is not in two words or three can explain, a big advantage American political system is' continuously for leakage, revised continuously, continuously perfect ', many misunderstandings are caused by not understanding, many are already solved,The more it is' tunic 'official media attempted to mislead, appear wrong version is almost dominated the domestic public opinion, including the bottom of the people living in the America culture level is not high (not agree there are so-called "hundreds of millions of stupid American poor" argument).

I stood up to say a few words, consciously 'courage' is not small, because I am not an expert in this area, although I have tried many times to try various devices to understand a little more drilling.Another point, from outside the Sina thread is originally is a concern, as Professor Zhu fan, my text is sand may be greater, even accidentally hit 'edge ball' is lying in the gun.Can only be said to have a try! For the divided into several small subject.American democratic system is not perfect, but it has been in continuous improvement -- this is the greatness of USA.

(two) first look according to me, the biggest advantage is through 'USA political viewpoints opposites' (opposite party each other' wrong ') to rectification, improve reaches its maximum. Here, why is the 'view of the opposite' rather than 'Party opposite'?
   Obviously, for "a person's political identity and political views" understanding America with entirely different in china.At home, regardless of your glorious party, Democratic Party, or what not, you must stand in the party's position, keep be of one heart and one mind,Otherwise, a lot of trouble. The other side of the ocean,You can declare (and registration) they are Democrats or Republicans to vote, can also be a party in the next election.Not only does not need approval, also need not apologize to criticize.Even if you are a A Party member, you can also agree with B's opinion or proposal, no checks, no criticism of you.Of course, you register as a A party cannot participate in the B Party's inner-party election.Therefore, political identity and political viewpoint of someone may be due to different positions of different topics,Change your party identity easily, change the political view is normal.That is to say, a personal point of view is not by his own party identity and, of course, always with the party views at odds, another party!As you pleased. For example, the billionaire Bloomberg (mayor of New York) has always been the Democrats (who says the Democratic Party is poor!) After the election, the mayor declared himself a Republican, the second election for dissatisfaction from Republican, now announced that he was' no party sentJudges'. New York City Council Gu Yaming (Hongkong old students, city councillor, pharmacists) Republican, but most political views and Meng Zhaowen (democratic election, lawyers, federal congressman) completely consistent.Meng Zhaowen is now the state of New York's current state senator, father is Meng Guangrui, a famous democrat,The first Chinese State Councillor, big timber companies.The Chinese government is currently the highest New York city comptroller Liu Chunyi (New York city third handle),Now running for mayor of New York, he was the Wall Street financial practitioners, father is the banking sector.The father and daughter, Liu, the rich are ah, they are democrats!What is your party is decided completely by oneself, can change at any time;Even if a party,Also can still against the party's position and support the opposition party, or even directly to easily change over.
   Speak your mind, campaign fight fight at outrance (not life, is refers to the seats), how will campaign people ignore lower people vote?

(three) said 'Republican super millionaire, big capitalists',Say 'democratic representative in the middle and lower people' is too simple, too arbitrary, is misleading, because it is inconsistent with the facts, but also mistook USA election into 'class struggle, class struggle', this is the most damning in USA.

   The election, in fact is to elect a 'real can best represent your interests spokesman'! The man can speak for your benefit, for your interest with opposite battle.

   So, who is the real interests on behalf of your people?Is it right? Sky promise, everywhere lip-service fool the voters who will win? Here is a 'people's eyes are sharp' this principle in action.What is done by night appears by day.The 'Day', is the vast majority of the Zheng big eyes looking at the old people!

   The election, the election is not individual behavior, is the party politics. Each elect their own voice to the management of society, no one can be declared his natural elect.As their real interests, must realize the true 'held not to avoid the dear, and can not avoid.'.If one party is always voted out, not only the candidates not elected House of Commons seats, reducing, even the party will gradually atrophy (nobody listens to you, leave the party) and eventually withdrew from the political arena. This can be back in Taiwan the once struggling to rise, once dazzling 'new', James Soong'people first party', can also have a look of the continuous differentiation of Japan 'Party'.

   Before and after the elections, elected their own representatives of real right, to help the various organizations, various media riveting full vigor, on the other camp, dig scandal, Bao Xin mi,Who can find 'for' material is a national hero, is the admiration of the media!Say what 'control of public opinion'? Launch media?Damn, these media funding from the 'audience' (TV, newspaper readers, street advertising billboard off), they don't accept party funding, how are you?!The size of every hue, the diversification of society, and who can control it?!

   Finally, various statistical out, camp is clear, the last for the object is' unstable 'intermediate layer, who ah, homes for the aged grandmother Grandpa, minority family women, unions are strong teachers, police, firefighters, various church, various community groups,And so on, and so on have become focus of worship the ticket.

(four) is really very tired of writing this stuff, too many things worth our learning, as long as you don't embrace the prejudice of words, as long as you don't put your branch secretary had told you these words as the only truth.

   For example, say that attitude and by ballot vote for. Talk about tax and welfare issues now, this is a hot topic America election, as well as friends repeatedly stressed the issue.With its own interests and related each voter. Here, in fact, is the two big problems: the tax,Increase the tax reduction who, whose tax increase; welfare, who benefits, who benefits.
How to handle their own sense of proportion! Prior to this, also can not just look at 'who is better for me', 'who will have to see the idea most reasonable'! The state raised taxes to improve the welfare of people, right? So, the Democratic Party. Then, by whose tax?The poor to pay taxes, but at the end of the year, countries have to return more dollars to them (that is, American 'tax'), no increase in May (below may specify). Only by increasing taxes on the wealthy. However, the development of tax law for so many years, election for so many years, the fact that the tax rate is quite high (USA is more progressive tax, income tax, the higher the ratio). If more taxes on the rich, the rich may not dry, they will put the business out of America, the company moved to Asia, USA can increase the tax? The state received less money, obviously, the existing welfare will be lost.

    Now, America competition is not the opposite of high welfare European, this is American did not want to become the country that the loss of competitiveness. America now the competition is' rich countries with poor people 'of the country on the opposite side, enterprises to move past, corporate profits will greatly increase. So, American home empty. Taiwan is also facing the same problem. Businessmen are profit while the trend, Li. In order to pull, pull, the Republican businessman, also good, is it. Don't forget, how to make the country more rich, how to really make USA tax increase is only one aspect of the problem, the rich a country again, wealth is limited, so how the distribution of wealth is one aspect of the problem. The welfare effect, is generous in giving help to the poor, no matter from where the fair distribution of social motivation. A dream of Red Mansions, brick geometrical thickness, geometric thin tile. Among various social classes too deviation which are not properly.

(five) the election this year, tax cuts are a big problem. Was originally a temporary tax cuts to stimulate the economy Bush president adopting policies (tax less, we are more willing to spend money to buy goods, companies are more willing to expand production, the economy will go up), now expired. Whether to continue execution, want to change? Democrat Obama, put forward to tax cuts, but only by the annual salary of 250000 below the tax people, Republicans are not satisfied, that the country's money is mainly composed of 250000 annual salary above personnel pay (high tax rate), the bottom line is pulled in one million.The difference is in, is 250000 or 1000000. You can say that, the Democrats is for the poor? Perhaps, Republicans for the rich (there are said to be 'super') speaking, this appear wrong comments appeared, cultural level is not high, especially English level is not high, voters are very angry!

(six) I am very ordinary intellectuals (although in domestic big budget 'senior intellectuals'), annual income is not low, converted into RMB about more than seven digits, as my wife and two children, higher income, according to the statement should be regarded as' white-collar', 'it is very good, middle medical insurance, because of retirement, a half into the' tax deferred retirement pension ', so, now the tax less, but still more than a million dollars. The policy of the Democratic Party, I enjoy, Republican policies, I also enjoy. Those who enjoy social insurance benefits, even less so, then, 'speak up for the poor' party, 'for the talk' party,And from where! Don't forget, America tax system through the 'wrong', constantly, constantly improve the already is more reasonable than the 'tunic' tax, more in line with the interests of the people at the bottom!

   I am also a powerful union members in support of Democratic Party, trade union. My friends in the many, many of them are retirees from the mainland,The pension at home 'don't move,' come here American welfare (per person per month purification enjoy social security benefits of $six hundred or seven hundred, and 'food stamps' $two hundred, that is to say, an elderly couple monthly from American government paid nearly $two thousand, although they one's whole life has never been in a class USA,Some even China verbally curse American decades). Now, they usually live America ZF provided 'low income Apartment', a sleeping rooms Erting (equipped with independent kitchen and toilet, you only need to pay $Yibaiersanshi monthly).Medical insurance is not to mention, I this so-called 'middle' retirement will receive far more.For example, the 'old' American blossom everywhere, is running for election time to visit those places, because there are too many hold votes grandma and grandpa.The senior center, providing daily entertainment lectures, learn skills, health guidance, teach dance, swimming, organizing travel, send a car to pick you up at night, send a car to send you, all for free. Supply two meals a day (in Western-style food), free or equivalent free (a dollar a few cents). To the problem, allows only hold 'white' old man entered, what is called 'white', is the government funded health services holder. That is, the social relief Jinling recipients, they may be low income, may be engaged in is' cash ', never pay taxes, may also retired from the mainland, has never worked in America!

Seven.America laws and regulations related to political donations of common sense:    Political economy is a positive words.Must meet the conditions can be called a political contributions.A certain proportion of such as single sponsorship can not be more than the total contributions, additional conditions political donations should be strictly limited or even prohibited: No additional conditions is the political contributions; There are additional conditions,But legitimate called interest groups of political lobbying; There are additional conditions and unreasonable for bribery; Tobacco companies may not donate political contributions; Civil servants and politicians must not take advantage of their positions to obtain political contributions; Civil servants and politicians will not prevent others from obtaining legal political contributions; The law of political donations to public accounts. Eight.In general, USA election law after revision,Problems continue to emerge,The amendment will follow,Many of the terms, definitions, the political contributions of donors, distinguish, individuals and groups to limit the amount of donations, directly or indirectly, and so on are defined strictly by law,Supervision is more serious.Has been revised several times, and strive to improve the,Generally speaking, in accordance with the laws and regulations mainly refers to "Federal Election Campaign Act" and "USA Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act". The main points are as follows: #The so-called political donations, either directly or indirectly for individuals or groups engaged in a campaign or other political activities, to provide free movable, immovable property, not quite payments, debt relief or other economic interests, for example, to provide free use of campaign office or complimentary drinks to a possible vote and so on, are political donations category.But the political contributions of Party membership dues, does not contain the political group membership dues or volunteer service,These otherwise normative constraints. #America think,Political donations is democracy in the normal phenomenon, the daily politics regularly held elections and political parties and candidates need large amounts of funds allocated by the state, can not solve the,With only a political party or candidate itself of assets also difficult to meet, must raise to the community through a variety of ways.However, political donations also provides an opportunity for the operation of the political influence of money to have the economic strength of individuals or interest groups, resulting in unfair "money politics", so the state has the necessary detail to regulate by law. #Shall not accept foreigners, and government to sign the contract relationship between personal, national banks, companies, trade unions, in third the name of the political donations. Nine. #Public expenditure is the most important political contributions related legal political contributions in the content, its purpose is to enable the public to better understand the party behind the support power and party policy, so as to prevent the parties in policy formation in favor of the economic strength of individuals or interest groups.American provisions, a year of more than $200, all payments must apply to the Federal Election Commission report donors name, address, date, amount, the expenditure, amount, date.I.e.,The following can be anonymous donations of $200,More than $200 must be real name. #At the same time the election (primary + official election), direct individual contributions to a presidential candidate or candidates for Congress's (the so-called 'hard money') shall not exceed $2500 (originally $1000 total donations), including other donations of $37500 (may have slight amount of change). #Individual wishing to donate more than $2500,Only to a non-profit organizations or institutions (such as political action committee) indirect contribution (the so-called 'soft' of money),And then the group or institution of television advertising to express political appeal.But each year to a political action committee donations shall not exceed $5000, to the National Committee of a political party (= the Party Central Committee) contributions shall not exceed $25000 (may be slightly altered). #Corporate or Union banned direct investment to help the Congress or the president candidates. #Corporate or union can form a political action committee for political parties or groups development fund (commonly known as "soft money"), the amount is not limited (formerly limited,In 2010, the lifting of restrictions on the Supreme Court).The so-called "soft money" can not be directly used for individual candidates, can only be used for political parties and organizations at all levels to mobilize votes,For example, the political demands of television advertising. Ten. Write down the two America election related Chinese 'story': The story,    1996.Deputy director of the information department (female juniors of high-ranking officials, military) after American Chinese Zhong Yuhan bypass to see Clinton and group photo,Also to the clock Yuhan $one hundred thousand for Clinton's reelection campaign.It was later America much raise a Babel of criticism of the media,It is a foreign military contributions,Two is the political contributions by the false name,Three,Has more than one hundred thousand amount,A large part is the clock Yuhan annexation,Even the Vice Minister of the intelligence department (after being sentenced to death,They finally released on medical parole) also devour one half to pay her tuition.   Story two,    The current New York city comptroller (generally is third New York city handles) campaign for next year's New York mayor,Momentum is very busy.But suddenly his campaign finance (Chinese female executives,Surname Hou) by federal prosecutors investigation and fundraising fraud 'because' (mainly manufacturing 'ghost fund raiser') was officially charged.    Things originated campaign finance committee found in New York city in 2013, Liu Chunyi ran for mayor fundraising at present a total of 2972 people,Have been to 114 of them a refund (due to different electoral rules), fund-raising total of 2020000 3572 yuan, an average of 708 yuan of donations.The mainstream media pointed out, Liu Chunyi had provided donation limit for 800 yuan per person,So many people are 800 yuan donation, but many donors occupation is chef, hotel service, supermarket cashiers, 800 yuan for these people is equivalent to one week or two weeks pay, so the suspicion which is likely to be some "Ghost Head" in donations (in other's name donations).The campaign fundraising and they take Chinese city councilman Gu Yaming and Chen Qianwen compared.The mainstream media, the two Chinese City Council also has a lot of Chinese supporters, but they accept donations are relatively small, single donation amount is relatively small, this is close to the Asian community. Eleven.    Gu Yaming and Chen Qianwen in the 2009 election, the Senate fundraising per capita number much lower.For example, the number of donations to Chen Qianwen's 1732 people, fund-raising total of 170000 4863 yuan, of which nearly 1300 people make donations of less than 100 yuan, the average donation for 101 yuan.She is also one of the lowest per capita contributions to all candidates.Gu Yaming in 2009 to raise 420000 to 1425 yuan, of which 270000 to 5000 yuan from the opened Ankang Ning dispensary, equivalent to their campaign, collected from the society donation of 140000 6425 yuan, donations for the number 329, 445 yuan per capita.    Reading head next is FBI:A detective pretended to donate $sixteen thousand to Liu, a man surnamed pan campaign workers receive him,Said,No problem,You can help him to find 20 people,Financial director of the surname Hou received the 'enthusiastic' donors and the name of the donor 'audit together,There is a $300 cheque bounced, Financial executives don't contact 'donors' and directly find surnamed pan,FBIThe agent will be recorded. Subsequently, pan (Fujian qiaotuan patriotic overseas chinese,Some cooks,Hotel waiter), Hou (Treasurer) both caught.    Although,The case is still walking program,Also temporarily not to Liu Chunyi himself,But Liu's campaign has very hurt.His deputy,First deputy Comptroller to,His spokesman also resign,Even the Democratic Party held a National Congress is also not Liu into the attendee list (previously, he in order to attend the party). So it seems,Liu 'mayor' road danger danger is!    Later, it happened to Meng Zhaowen (New York state senator,Now run for congressman) father Meng Guangrui (who is Chinese first Senator) by FBIProsecutors charged,The reason is a friend because of tax evasion prosecution,Find old Meng to think of a way,Old Meng said,This is the number of joint,I can help you get through the joint,With tens of thousands of dollars,I find the people's procuratorate. Result.The friend was working with FBI,The tens of thousands of dollars in old Meng requirements in a "fruit basket",Just as the old Meng took the basket,FBIAppear. FBIThat old Meng is any person not and procuratorial contact,Also don't know any of the staff,A fraud. Of course.Directly related to political donations not matter and America election. Oh -    Chinese politics is a very long road,Democracy is the ideal,Also is a habit,We are going to learn,No shortcut,Walk slowly!    The opposition: the law is a big problem, America left parties, is to seek a balance point between.

   Affirmative: Criticism of government is America each American citizen civic duty, I often wrote to my own congressional critics America government, I won't vote for republican!Let Bush become president. I belong to the government,I volunteer to help the Democrats to overthrow the ruling Republican party!

   Anti side: democracy is a money game to play, for this kind of deceptive propaganda, choose the one man one vote in the French elections "Qiufu" president is the best answer. In this election, Sakorzy led the right-wing UMP on electoral resources, as president Sakorzy advantage in others; on the international influence in the international arena, Sakorzy summon wind and call for rain, is already All the world knows. world-class "Star", once in the world took the lead in launching the overthrow of the Al-qaddafi dictatorship, war, become Libya people's Liberation; achievements in the entire term well, during the administration is committed to revive France, France to create the world power status, from promoting the European Constitution adopted and implemented by the world financial crisis, to take the initiative, Sakorzy has been "radiant". However, in the face of the world economic downturn, the French voters are more concerned with their own "purse", the Socialist Party candidate Hollande's economic policy is to increase public spending to stimulate economic growth, tax increases, tax increases up to 75% of the income tax on the rich, including increasing the huge heritage tax and other economic difficulties, not pointing to the French billionaire, forcing a large number of France's home to Britain, Switzerland and other countries friendly to the rich "". Hollande is a "one person one vote" to win the election.
   Need some people for slander democracy, that democracy is money politics, elected only capitalists and rich agents. After all, rich people are in the minority, but one person one vote, so that each voter has the same authority, who stands to gain, it is self-evident. In the final analysis, afraid of democratic election is the fear of losing power in their hands, but should not be to deceive the way you are, to comply with the human moral bottom line.

   Affirmative said: USA election may not be the most perfect 'ultimate', but it is existing in the world's fair, the most perfect electoral system. It can't be!
---Hollande is on the "one person one vote" to win the election. Obama is not on the "one person one vote" to win the election.

   Anti side: America electoral system, is essentially a one person one vote.

    PositiveSquare: 1Hollande is on the "one person one vote" to win the election. Obama is not on the "one person one vote" to win the election.
   2In France, voters have several options,In American, voters have only 2 choices.

   Anti side: USA other parties or independent persons can also be run for president.

   Anti side: in China, voters have only one choice, that is no choice.

   Affirmative: we might as well have a look back to Obama's campaign platform: 1, limit the oil giant's profit, the oil giant to increase domestic oil production is conservative, 2, criticized Wall Street securities industry greed, that should be seriously rectification, advocates of big company CEO are cut, strict supervision, raise taxes for 3 the merchant, high-income groups, large companies, to re distribution of social wealth. It sounds big bourgeoisie is not in the shooting itself in the foot?
---Obama is just empty talk,  In fact, he did not do what! There is absolutely no Republican congressmen, let him do so!

   Anti side: you mean, Obama kidding? Indeed, sometimes or often candidates can not deliver some promise, but also made many promises. If purely Huyou, after the party was over.

   Anti side: Chinese characteristic democratic cashed? Affirmative really want to explain what is not clear, but one thing is certain, the democratic system is a system of various existing system's not bad, do you agree?

   Anti side: in fact democracy benefits available popular points that: we discuss how a vat (the distribution of social wealth management of public affairs, porridge), a limited number, uneven distribution do not have enough to eat (resources), which relates to a method of different (choice of social system). At first, they in turn mean congee eat (primitive), but just in that day their porridge to eat point (human selfish nature decides that he will take care of yourself more). Then they began to elect a person (be of noble character and high prestige worthy Politics) points, strong position will result in corruption, everyone began to rack one's brains to please him bribes, the results have the smog. Later the strongman control points power (authoritarian regimes), arranged by him who go to congee porridge, and let more people than some (Privileges), but this is not content with this porridge, steal a deduction of other people's porridge (corruption), other people were deprived of even not eat (unequal society disaster), but he did not let the people starved to death, so he can always get their porridge. People to eat this not much porridge rack sth., only in any possible to bring a little more porridge side rack one's brains, among others, the infighting. This situation difficult to continue, then the composition of congee Committee and the jury (primary democracy), but they often attack each other, each get down, eating his porridge is cold. Finally, we come up with a way to take points, each time by voluntary running a man (campaign) to congee, the process of a person by prompt (supervision), everyone can remind him whether fair (freedom of speech), but he will have to wait until other people out here, then take the rest of the the last bowl (Law), in order to at least not to eat (even competent people are selfish), he as evenly distributed as possible, because the (equal) everyone happy, even if occasionally uneven also can recognize (democracy but also the defects), more it is mutual humility (people with Bao Rongxin). Finally found one of the best points method, then people in harmony, better life. The divider method different to bring people to life and culture is not the same (system, the choice of what kind of what kind of life).

   Anti side: when it comes to lip-service, a Chinese know. Just to name a few, in the constitution of the freedom of speech, to encourage people to speak the truth, three years to achieve the mechanization of agriculture, take the path to common prosperity, anti-corruption, caught... Beyond count lip-service.

   Anti side: if America government doesn't raise taxes, it must borrow more debt until bankruptcy. Otherwise, the only way is to reduce or abolish the social insurance and medical insurance for your. You can vote republican,Let them to abolish the social insurance and medical insurance for your.
   Affirmative: in any case,No one dare to move free health care I veterans and veterans 100% reward gold.

Anti side: free medical 100% security people, dialogue and Chinese not safeguard the population, criticism America guarantee too inhumane, sounds in Chinese people, very ear piercing.

   Anti side: no election, "not money control" system Is it right? Best system? In response, Li Guibao said that such a statement in his confession: "today, the current system is that everyone is walking on the tip, alive is a kind of art. Any person, is the life is Rainbow Night. No matter who you are, whatever you are doing, living in this cold world, you do not feel the slightest even a tiny bit of warm. And this, is that they give us life, and this, is they want us to live. Everyone was wearing a mask and mask, use sign language or language of life."

   Affirmative Chinese: government is not my election. So, I don't care. I only threw America democratic vote!

   Because I did not agree with the blogger on American political views, refused my,You own more than party dictatorship. If you are my president, don't you kill me?

   The blogger reply: don't take things so seriously. Do you think I am so bad, is you. You are attacking USA democracy, is your freedom. But in my blog, I have the right to welcome what people, what people.

   Anti side: This is your freedom, your rights. We don't have any right. You deserve, you can denounce you are not satisfied with the Republicans need not assume any may cause trouble; and we here, even released some let officials not heard of speech on the Internet, also without exception has blocked, there was even a thousand times blocked. Because I am old, Laoyanhunhua codeword is not easy, not banned after rising from the ashes, so I can only write some health text in the blog, although also endless encountered without notification will be delete strange, but it hasn't been brutally. Ha-ha. Thank you, God bless!
   Of these, haven't experienced USA authorities sealed your mouth are unable to understand. So, do not understand the situation, breathing the air of democracy, please think twice before the speech.

   Anti side: like USA election, especially appreciate a televised debate between presidential candidates! Mule is a horse? Pull out for a walk! Voters judge.

   Anti side: America election, was elected to the benefits of the candidates, and not money determinism. Of course, we also can not ignore the impact on the election campaign funds, but not the key.

   Anti side: America democracy is not perfect, but American total adjusting, otherwise people will not so strong.

   Anti side: Friends of fierce controversy is a good thing, rational argument, let us listen to different voices to understand, to think, benefit. A person enjoying such a good treatment was also critical of their own government, which is worth learning, if we do, our rights will not be violated. But his long life in the American, on China understanding may be not very deep, or don't understand the urgency of democratic longing, every day we are compatriots were destroyed, but incapable of action, so, we hope that as soon as possible by the democratic mechanism to stop all this disaster, I wish the teacher also is doing it efforts. We must strive for now is the first with the existing this kind of democratic system USA, even if it is not perfect, then according to the practice of vulnerability to improve.

   Anti side: a country no matter how progress has short board. A party. Both Democrats, Republicans, but after all belongs to the category of the democratic system inside, you can criticize him, attacking him, pointing out his lack of. But the problem is, he has self repairing function of self perfection. And this is all citizens to complete! This is a very important point! A no experience to Chinese conditions of the people, can experience the life here feel.

   The opposition: the comparison of understanding.

   Anti side: how the freedom and order, freedom and justice is to find the balance between? American total progress, problems, in the twists and turns in the dispute, and then seek balance, finally determined by the legal form. The emergence of new problems, the re amendment.

   Anti side: my understanding of some Democrats, is seen from these people be called is a traitor to start, holding the curious I read these people to write, loudly, they are patriotic, because they advocated democracy, freedom and is said to be a traitor? This is obviously biased. Promoting democracy is wrong? In the early 40's Mao Zedong said: our goal is to overthrow the corrupt, the Kuomintang reactionaries, establish American democracy, enable the people to enjoy the happiness of democracy. Now the Internet has become the main channel, spread the truth according to reports, major events reported by the mainstream media, more than 60% came from the internet. To be called a traitor as traitors who is not all bad, it made a free advertisement for these people, expand their visibility.

   Anti side: I think he is right USA political criticism, but exaggerated to USA political money manipulation is groundless statement. I am also concerned about the America on the Supreme Court ruling, how to avoid consortium to donate large sums of money on the impact of politics? American people how to use wisdom to solve this problem, to rub one's eyes and wait. But I think this is not the greatest danger. When actually America laws on political funding is limited, and without any restrictions on campaign people out of their own pockets, but also didn't see the big spender to rely on capital to run for president? The only exceptions should be the governor of New York, is a rich, out of their own pockets, but also do not pay, the pure duty. The real danger is that many Americans don't care about politics, not only America, Europe is more enthusiastic, entertainment, sports, gossip, see names and faces to vote in the elections, it sounds familiar, see the handsome man will vote for him. Or not to vote. The Obama campaign is likely to be the highest rate of all these years of voting, the number of participants over 50%. When people pay no attention to their own interests, but may be indirectly related affairs, have given their future suffering buried a foreshadowing. For example, in front of people be indifferent to the election, then I had to go to the occupation of Wall Street. It is a question almost failing of modern mature democracy. But for us, this problem is far too far, because we haven't got the votes. There is another reason, they want the opposition as they pass and willing to give up their power. So I don't worry USA solve bad election malpractice. I feel, we for America concerns, like hungry dying people, worried about excess nutrition eat into obesity.

   Anti side: all threads are very seriously, to study more deeply touched. In overseas, concerned about the livelihood homeland, the Bo and domestic intellectual comprehension and heroic efforts real far beyond imagination, gratified. In this paper, the theme, the desire for people such as drought hemiao hope the rain, on life among the people in the room full of fragrant orchids for a long time without their fragrance, even attributed to cause 'allergy' source of trouble.

   Affirmative: never say China than USA good. However,If you do not live in the America, could understand how our political campaign? Freedom of speech allows the other voice. Every day,Tens of thousands of e-mails fly to the White House a curse on Obama not to cash. I think,You don't understand what I said. If you don't know and never in USA English life, how can we understand the political darkness? Mr Obama's people of less than 50% If you support the Republican Party, must be a curse on Obama, if you support the Republican Party and Obama at the same time,Must belong to schizophrenia. I never said Chinese than USA good. I only believe in American election is a money game Obama daily email us,Request donation campaign fundsIn 2008 I gave Obama $5, this is what I wouldn't give him.Obama is not our lord,He is our employeesWe have no obligation to praise him,Criticism he is our civic duty!

   The opposition: the freedom of speech allowed to express opposition,Every day,Tens of thousands of people email to the White House a curse on Obama. You know you live in this country, for us is how happiness? You know, the Beijing Public Security Bureau recently warned: attacks on government and state leaders, the warning light, heavy, shall be investigated for legal responsibility. You know China "legal responsibility" mean? So everyone, only wearing a mask to speak, a silent expression. You said American political darkness, but did not say where is dark, giving each person for power system is worse than deprive a person voting system? You said now who supported Obama less than 50% is good, but he was elected by a majority or not? You said USA money the rigging, to show that you, your family, friends and their votes are false, is lip-service? Why did you contribute to the Democratic candidate Obama campaign funds involved in fraud? You know, if we contribute to our idea of the "leaders" what will be the result? It is a "crime", is a subversion, you know? If you don't understand Chinese conditions, the best first learn to understand, learn to respect the feelings. If you think American than China good, then the first support Chinese people in order to achieve the degree of democracy America after, go to the next level.

   Anti side: he is so understanding American political, ridiculous. He lives in USA political darkness, pity. Obama is deprived of his political rights?
   The opposition: the participation enthusiasm, even I have moved. I have a relative, is USA Stanford University doctoral, now a university teacher, father is a high-ranking KMT, war hero. In his 80's students USA and settled. A few days ago, I met him and said, Chinese biggest success is the nationalization of land, China development so fast... USA High-speed Rail haven't built, the governor of California has changed several, High-speed Rail still has not completed, the land is privately owned, is too high,
   This is a American after 30 years of Chinese words. I asked him: do you think the government power is good, can do great things, you have not thought they do bad things can concentrate power? The power of the government over the people wantonly when the body, what do you see? He couldn't answer. I said to him: "so many America Chinese, just out of a Luo Jiahui, many in the USA lived many years, do not know USA value. Suggest that believe money the rigging people read "the president is unreliable", the article is well written.

   Affirmative: I sincerely welcome you to visit USA, if you like, you can seek political asylum to USA. You can't change the China, but you can change yourself. You can't unite our,Expect others to follow your Chinese democratic revolution.

   Anti side: America greatness lies in a multi-party political system, after 230 years of wind and rain change and continuous improvement, stand as firm as a rock.
    The former Soviet Union and Eastern system only barely survived 70 years, people have been summarized the reasons of collapse: blame Gorbachev's said, have America peaceful evolution said, also called "did not adhere to Marxism Leninism", but failed to find the most fundamental reason: people have to this kind of political system cherish an undying, how else to explain: Soviet tanks not on Red Square to shoot the people and to yield a demonstrations of people? In Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union collapsed, derived from this system exists congenital malformations: all kinds of "official", "representative" candidates at the same time as the election host, as "athletes" at the same time as a "referee", this system of anti-corruption, like with his left hand right hand, very funny? So, the whole system of corruption than European countries individual accidental corruption cases of serious over thousands of times.
    Open, fair, fair multi-party competition system is the best political system of human society: the officials and lawmakers in the "cage", making them in front of the majority of voters reverent and respectful, to be very careful not to have no shame, this system can correctly handle the "servant" and "master" (voters) relationship, correctly handle the relationship between "supervisor" and "supervisor", correctly handle the relationship between the "athlete" and "judge". Only in the multi-party system, each party and each candidate really become an athlete, a truly neutral, and does not favor any party neutral mechanism "election committee" to host various election, this is the essence of true democracy.

   Anti side: since USA political darkness, why don't you come back? At least their speech is free? The army is not the party? Power is restricted?

   Anti side: indeed, he China know too little.
   Can be simple to introduce you to a road along the China problems:
Land reform, hard-working rich people disappeared;
Transformation of industry and commerce, outstanding entrepreneurs disappeared;
The anti rightist struggle, the conscience of intellectuals disappeared;
The great leap forward, the deep forest, steppe disappeared; the lives of countless people disappeared;
The cultural revolution, humanity, dignity, conscience, moral disappeared;
The pursuit of GDP,Green mountains and rivers disappeared, resources and the environment has been poisoned.
Privilege to dominate everything;
Lies instead of truth;
The suppression of human rights;
Corrupt officials oppress the people became the overlord of tyrannically abuse one's power;
The use of taxpayer money to build luxury office buildings to tyrannically abuse one's power, open luxury car swagger before others, Bo Tim Tin Mat public funds;
Social corruption, spread false;
Social value orientation for people to look into all right, follow a dead-alive person;
The corrupt official will be transferred as family property, ready to be people's hard-earned money swept away;
People living in hardship, no, can't afford, death can not afford to, difficult to go to school, get married, buy a house difficult job difficult, difficult, difficult, difficult, peasant workers work hard, live hard, eat hard, honest, helpful to difficult, difficult, difficult, pension rights difficult.

   However, in China still exist such a noble man, they love their country, no political ambitions, only wish the motherland is good, people's happiness, social stability and harmony, to see the drawbacks of social existence, they know the essence of democracy, it is the key to solve these problems, not afraid of pressure political environment, to cancel the privilege level, establish an equal and democratic society, they are the interests of the people around, to cry, to awaken the masses to fight for human rights. They struggled to fight for democracy, in which many people can leave the land to live a better life, but they did not choose to escape, more willing to live in their own ancestors lived, everyone have their dignity, Chinese there is hope. As you see I wish the teacher, they are democratic practice. I think you lack of Chinese understanding, communication difficulties. If you also believe that the system is superior to the China America system, this is the consensus of both sides, of course democracy also has shortcomings is the fact that does not dispute, to be perfect, but have not seen better than democratic system of the system is not? Churchill has a famous words: democracy is the least bad system. The democratic system is not perfect, but the world will not find more in line with public opinion than democratic system.

   Anti side: I have read all the comments, I do not agree with a lot of the gentleman, but he from A to Z are rational debate, not to mind taking the trouble to explain. I think, if he when our executive will not seal your mouth. Although he is indeed very difficult, such a good treatment also dissatisfied with the government, but also often wrote to criticize the president and government, his government and the president can accommodate him, can accommodate thousands on thousands of him, that's the great thing about democracy. USA also because of thousands on thousands of such people, there are national, power is endless progress. But we cannot tolerate this chatter without stop, if we are officials, facing the thousands on thousands of such people? Is it right? To shut him up? Our pursuit of democracy is not only requires that we have freedom of speech, but also to defend the people have freedom of speech, including opposition to our voice, if we fail to do, how can the government do? Or do you think the government is that we have, not comparable, but Sina not we have raised, he sand we Is it right? Reasonable? I wish the teacher blog since come, also have right to speak like Sina, making our home, should let us speak one's mind freely, because if the blog has deleted, restricted to others, so what is to oppose the ban design Sina, what is to oppose the new wave limit our comments? Like against his government is his rights, he will be in the government with the previous government than N, he felt dissatisfied, scold his government evil is normal, because he is not in his government and our government to compare, like my family in Hongkong, I heard their criticism of the government of Hongkong. Through this debate, I hope you re thinking, with democracy at the same time there will be against you, scold your voice, we Is it right? Can accept? For every teacher to allow comments and pleased. USA system is not perfect, but can not find better, we only want to have such a system will like you to perfect the supervision of the government.
  "You can't change the Chinese, but you can change yourself" this is wrong. I can't change the Chinese, but we can change China!

   The opposition: the content, you can criticize President Obama, we want to criticize national leaders, can only stay in prison.

   Anti side: relative to the Democratic autarchy, is a man ruled society, power regardless of size, can be in the field of do as one pleases without supervision and restriction. Because of the power obtained from above, the power from the first form of personal attachment parasitic relationship, not responsible to the people, responsible only to the appointed person. Under this system, law is not clear, people must live in accordance with the provisions of the rulers and work, shall not exceed, lack of vitality and creativity of society. Therefore in the life everyone wore masks, everyone is a "slave", two people. Inequality in fact although maintains surface calm, but in the foot to trip, a pressure level, look who's fist, for shortcut at will by flattery, framed trampling each other a climb, superior to subordinate press, scold, deprivation, the inferior to the superior like a beggar, who dignity lost, the supreme ruler as to his power, position, wealth "slave", not only to prevent their subordinates to peek at ambition, but also to prevent them stealing, more worried about the invasion of foreign enemies, the jungle society, everyone is difficult to sleep. Only the establishment of constitutional democracy, equality, equality, talent, from "slaves" to free people, form a harmonious interpersonal relationship, society can get benign development.

   The opposition: the top this sentence: only the establishment of constitutional democracy, equality, equality, talent, from "slaves" to free people, form a harmonious interpersonal relationship, society can get benign development.
   Anti side: since you say they do not want to say, do not want to endless to emphasize your "truth"? You don't know China conditions, also do not know to suffer this piece of land on the suffering of the people, but do not know as environmental pollution, resource depletion, moral decay became worse and worse, the Chinese nation in the face of ruin the state and destroy the race, die without descendants. You really must explain what is also very simple, from the America back, for 5 years, you will not like today so that.

   Blogger: do not make a proper metaphor, he said like a well nourished people, ran to the north, on the hungry chatter without stop preaching overeating harm. Pathetic said he excess nutrients, hypertension, high blood lipid by suffering. And said in a loud voice, diet is very important for health!

   Affirmative: many people (including me) in USA take action against"Sopa"(SOPA), this legislation allowed the court to shut down the entire domain, perhaps only because a domain name on the blog posting something illegal, "should have been punished a few people, but the most innocent people affected."
   For example, if you write that they believe something is wrong, they will kill and not just your wind Sina blog!
"SopA" (StopOnlinePiracyAct), abbreviated as SOPA, is also referred to as the H.R.Act 3261. The bill by the house of Representatives America Texas Republican congressman Ranmer Smith (LamarSmith) proposed in October 26, 2011, the house of Representatives bipartisan 12 member of the house of representatives of a support. If the bill, will expand the American law enforcement departments and the copyright owner in dealing with network selling pirated products and counterfeit goods when the power of the. America house Texas Republican Senator Ranmer Smith is one of the forces of the dark USA citizen and I against tens of thousands ofThe Republican senator is to serve the interests of the consortium, black manipulation of American.
   Affirmative: for the content, you can criticize President Obama, we want to criticize national leaders, can only stay in prison. ---If all the people and scold them, they could not cast any man into prison

   Anti side: begin to understand his idea, after all, is from another context, has the very big difference with the China, by understanding can have a more profound understanding of democracy, is a good thing.

   The opposition: the understanding of democracy than the pursuit of democracy, not understand democracy and to the pursuit of science. Why China to visit the people much more special? The officials told them "mistime one's remarks half sentence". Open to people of all blog is not purely personal space, if your blog all can see, can be in favor of, but are not opposed to the party, it is not very similar to you. This blog will enlarge, can now see China. When you have the power to dominate the blog, you against your voice, when you have to dominate a will or power of a state, you will also stop these local opposition to the sound of your voice. Democracy should not be so. Hope all the pursuit of democracy, the mind in Nerihiro Hiro blog, learn to accept all opposition to his voice, and with broad mind to meet democratic.

   Blogger: freedom of speech, is the bottom line, for example, in Germany, would not promote Nazi views. He cursed USA democracy, I don't agree.

   Anti side: relative to the social democratic, authoritarian society is a human society, although the autocratic society also has the law, but the law is only used as a tool for taming the people, the ruling class has a method outside the law and outside of mercy, are used to provide the services need to maintain power. One of the features of society ruled by man is right above the law, to achieve this is to create a social hierarchy. Through continuous infusion of traditional idea, strengthens the grade, the legalization, conducive to disintegrate of different classes, let the lacking spirit of cooperation, so that we can separately use. Hierarchy makes high level have greater power, from the above letter of delegated authority, so that each class only to serve his master, which formed many small ruler, supreme ruler does not have the actual control of the people. The authority to make high level people enjoy more privileges, also prompted the different level rulers hope to constantly climb. Have the position to dominate the low caste fate ruler get a sense of superiority, and to his power with the heart of the giver be grateful for. Let all the people around the hierarchical competition, keen to chase the vanity fair, is the highest rulers to consolidate a way to design the power. In addition to the lowest level, relative to the chance of people, each grade has its own frame of reference, there is a comfort and satisfaction. Does not meet the nature will make people try various devices to enter a higher grade, to obtain greater benefits, just go, so people resorted to use all one's skill, legal, illegal, appeared the typical phenomenon of society: the law society bush, in climbing over intrigues, infighting, fight at outrance event process emerge in an endless stream, at all levels of competition in the power field desperately rulers, who wants to be a winner, and everyone because it may be the loser and be always on tenterhooks, officialdom always signs of danger appearing everywhere, even in front of the master favor, and afraid of being bitten.

   In the society by the authority to make wealth, officialdom is the field of life and death of a power struggle, official selection becomes a dominator of wealth loot game, it is hidden in the chamber of secrets, trading power for money as a bargaining chip, lineage, contacts can be used as a passport. Because it can bring huge benefits, people scramble for, authority is becoming larger and larger, more and more bloated, also more and more invalid, still occupy a large amount of social resources, has caused the national wealth. As the spoils the uneven, sabotage, attacking each other. They fight sometimes in a settlement, another way which is also eventually be able to access to the interests of the. Officialdom rulers say may be totally different from what he thought, double benefit to them the schizophrenia. Officialdom popular two language system, carrying out don't pay. This system lies in all levels, rulers of the Shang Yang in Yin. Talk insincerely, cruelly oppress and exploit the common people; to take away by force or trickery, life. They like doing business as an official, to maximize revenue. Once the advanced, as long as the past master, their power is a profit-making tool. Therefore each level will happen corruption. Although the supreme rulers to set up a lot of preventive measures to steal the money, but with a color grading system privilege, because in addition to the master and is not affected by the characteristics of the rule of supervision, can not stop the inexhaustible corruption events.
   Another feature of autocratic society is through the possession of social resources, monopoly of grabbing the interests, the most important is the possession of monopoly for the ruler, standing on the commanding heights, the best way to control the people is to control their livelihoods and jobs, after all the people are most afraid of broke out, in this way, the production, the circulation field also naturally became the source of wealth and the rulers, people create wealth are deprived, because control, they do not have the wealth distribution rights, can only let the ruler discretionary use.
   Authoritarian societies, will to power is higher than all. Despotic rulers adopted a high handed manner to rule, thought control is an important means of control. A single ruler, enjoy the right of final interpretation of the ideological field, the spread of ideas promotion right, the law of the jurisdiction, the autocratic society for the suppression of dissent, obviously unreasonable part to rely on the support of lies, results of this rule is caused by: the truth is not in, false Sheng, foolish people. On one hand the to thinking as the main mode of intellectuals, fearing to suppress dare not express an independent opinion of their own, cynicism prevails, to avoid touching the ruler set box, generally adhere to be worldly-wise and play safe, resign oneself to one's fate attitude. Will this take on social responsibility, all are thrown to the rulers, the rulers not knowing, is unable to face, never involved. For those who dare to touch the high-voltage wire not from, the stigma, or will the conviction, "warn others against following a bad example". On the other hand, people have to wear masks to speak, a silent expression; even if the occasional intellectuals published the correct views of their own, but also because of the lack of attention to and adoption and abortion. Because the rulers deprive people's spiritual needs, only know how to enjoy power, indulge in sensual pleasures, and the lack of guidance for intellectuals prospective, the society was in chaos. Left many cross each other, difficult to solve the social problems, hindered the development of society.
   There is a hierarchy, have control of people's living life and production data, a thought control, the supreme ruler can let the people live in the way they want. He gave the people formulate special rules, manage their laws, deprived of their basic rights, has become the central content of the rulers in the social practice, because freedom is the absolute rivals, equality is the privilege of the enemy, must be defeated, never allow people equality, in existence since the. People's inherent creativity is suppressed, buried, people even in the sacred rules of the religious order always work hard, will not suffer from no political murder and economic plunder, hard life and income effect.

   The ruler is most worried about the loss of power, so in order to maintain autocratic rule will spare no effort to strengthen the state machine, consumption exceeds the actual need, the construction of the court, prison, police, army for a large number of social resources, all aspects of social life revolves around the consolidation of the rule, a lot of the people's livelihood resources are idle in the therefore, the lives of the people affected, the rate of accumulation of wealth is delayed, the progress of the society is drag.
   The tyranny of social power, not to promote social progress, but as a means of maintaining the rule. Social management right where the officialdom into vanity fair gain the benefits of society, so their superiors, unspoken rule prevails, public use caused social all together with corruption.
   Therefore, the authoritarian system is a decline in the social system, which destroy human nature, Yoshitomo, make the society depravity, let the society consumes in a futile, the most inefficient. Although it has the guide can use power dominate everything, set temporary advantage, but it does not have the inherent strength of real, bloated, puffiness bulging like a huge hot balloon like autocratic rule, once encountered acupuncture, will come immediately. In the long run, stale, the internal friction of monarchy, substitution will be full of vitality, creativity, quiet and peaceful democracy.

   The opposition: the lack of public supervision, one person one vote will become the law of the jungle, for example, village election, vote buying wind, become the underworld; under a democratic system, candidates or elected as the slight defect million poly, or to lose all standing and reputation, as bad as China mainland officials dare not. Election cannot do without money, but one person one vote democracy and freedom under the manipulation of the election is not money. Under the despotic system election no matter what form can be turned into money manipulation or manipulated elections.

   Affirmative: blogger said I curse American democracy, only accounting for fear of being cursed dictator,Only a dictatorship by the curse down!

   Anti side: you wrong understanding to the teacher's meaning. See, you also can in the democratic system to support the Democratic Party, the system gives you the power of freedom of expression and vote choice. You are dissatisfied Republicans, think it is backed by big business, so the election is the subject of money control, in that the outcome of the election should be the Republican candidate John John McCain defeated Democrat Obama, but on the contrary, you support Obama was elected, not is that money can not control the election, democracy has its superiority.
    Don't throw the baby out together with the dirty water, not because the big financial support from Republicans, unfair will be abolished, America democracy is not? This is what I wish the teacher said.
    But compared with the USA democracy, China still has a long way to go, you chatter without stop to talk about the election of Republican how, like Gorger let a hungry man on his dinner the view, no practical significance. If you can talk to the Sino US comparison system may have more significance, attention will be more people.

   Anti side: America democracy superiority, reflected in the poor, the interests of the rich are both. If the left party, damage the interests of the rich, the rich only choice of overseas investment. The national economy is bound to decline.

   Anti side: you said, China government is not my election. So, I don't care. I only threw America democratic vote!
- excuse me you said America election is money manipulation, is a game of the rich, but you for the democratic vote is being bought? You are rich puppets? Look at this thread you, more and more confused, I do not know what is you want to say?

   Anti side: I wish the teacher you are forbidden to comment on the opposition, that is to defend your right to speak, your point half I was against the idea, I agree I wish the teacher blog view. I understand and appreciate your obligations as citizens, but your feeling to us still don't understand, because we have no opportunity to do such obligations, we must strive for now is to choose their own rights and obligations as citizens, government supervision. I wish the teacher is not concerned about who did you choose as the president, he is praised the election system. You are not the same problems. You voted America Democratic ticket with feet. In addition, we will with the Democratic deepening understanding of changing ourselves, believe we can change the Chinese.

   Anti side: I wish the teacher praise is USA democracy, I estimate the impression that wish to praise he is opposed to the current president. He is against his government and the president, we misunderstood him against is USA democratic system, so there are many disputes. I wish the teacher banned after his comments, each other's comments are some backlash, which is not conducive to a rational discussion. This discussion can bring you some more thoughts on democracy is a good thing, if we do not have enough understanding of democracy, maybe get or "were lost and poor blood, buy fake Republic".
His comments I also do not understand, sometimes you feel puzzled, he said he is with the software translation, wrong place to make some clip, so his statement is not very good. But so many people surrounded him, I wish the teacher and kill him, he also rational explanation, it is desirable.
   My hometown is the hometown of Xinhui, my brother and cousins hall, a total of 27 people, there are 23 people on the outside, there are dozens of people in my classmates, so the Chinese than the average person to understand more, so to understand him. Every time I listen to their criticism China this or that, the heart is not always this taste, although I always criticize our country, people are like that, you can call family, but does not allow others to scold.
   I have a very good students like him, and he in Australia, go out to study abroad after graduation from the University, it is dozens of chain store boss, he is abroad in addition to work, not to the company. His parents are still Chinese, so he came back. I and several classmates with his friends from our country, I suggested that he go back to have a look, but he was not willing to. Once he stolen luggage is in the ShenZhen Railway Station, he phoned me to say your rogue states. He often said that everyone China and China this or that, but with some of my classmates and I contact more, he also come back to do business now.

   My brother is doing business abroad, he said he repeatedly hear local people said: This is Chinese shop, do not buy them. So, he can only ask the local people to sell things to him.
   There are many overseas Chinese in the foreign country has many bad evaluation, there are a lot of people think that foreigners more loving, get along better. In general, don't speak English, they will be better for China, on our people's feelings. My understanding of the outside is derived from them, may not be entirely correct, but clearly we are not originally imagined so popular.
   The argument Affirmative English is better, he was in the army, contact people less, so the faster integration into the local society, faster and can be switched to the USA citizen role. Some he cares about the election, opposition to the government he thinks unreasonable thing, you said that the president, he opposed, he would argue with you over, I think he's understanding of democracy is more deeply than we.
   On the other hand, he is not don't like Chinese, he opened a blog written Chinese, he also likes to Chinese blog blog around, he should be to wish the teacher's blog, not previously contradiction is because before he found no wish teachers praise him against Obama, he voted for you ", but he could not for you to praise him against the people. I don't know if it Is it right? Democracy. So, I also need to know, to think.

    I hope everyone can rational debate, not to oppose an idea into sb against sb.

   Affirmative: you got me all wrong:

1I support Obama and his Democratic Party, the opposition Republican opposition,He supported the republican;
2I believe American election is a money game,He did not believe the election is USA money game to play
3This and Chinese democracy absolutely no contact

   Blogger: as long as the elected president, I praise, of course, the most should be praised is the electoral system itself.

   Anti side: not completely wrong? The first point is I misread, apologize to you. I do not agree with the second point, third point of view, but the understanding you have their own views, you can keep your opinion.

    Square.In America, 35% of people agree with me, 35% people agree with the blogger.By the opposition sb into against sb,Then use the political persecution!
--This is precisely:The difference between USA Chinese politics and political!
- this is precisely:Why in the China no democratic election-Because the loser will be killed
If you are the chairman, even if you want a fair election.
However, once you lost the election, you will be killed. If you still dare to run?

   Anti side: "politicsHasAbsolutelyToPartyWithMoneyTalkIsCheap ", I think there are two layers of meaning: 1, the election must be rich, 2, the election is decided by the money control? Yes to the first point, use campaign funds to promote the party's views, let the voters have a look the party can provide what kind of service for the voters, in order to be able to make choices in the vote. For the second point, many examples have proved that, the chaebol cannot manipulate the election results, otherwise, Democrats Obama will not overcome the chaebol supported Republican Mccain was elected president USA.

   Square.Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (CitizensUnite partyV.Fe eral partyElectionCommission,558U.S.08-205(2010)) is composed of America Supreme Court an important case. In January 21, 2010 the Supreme Court ruled that the bill Bipartisan Campaign Reform, limiting commercial institutions funded federal election candidates (also known as the Mccain - Finn bill Gould, a Republican Senator John McCain and Democratic Senator Lars Feingold in 2002 proposed) violate the terms of the principle of freedom of speech in the constitution. Famous jurist Erwin Chomynski called it "the most important cases in recent years about the first amendment". [1]This case Columbia district court to appeal. In the 2008 ruling, the district court in the Federal Election Commission (FEC) side, as originally planned to play in the 2008 presidential election on the eve of the USA criticised presidential candidate movie "Hilary: the movie" (HillaryTheMovie) in violation of the relevant provisions of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform act. The Supreme Court's ruling that the final stage, a campaign limit various enterprises or organizations related to the terms of profit or nonprofit funded candidates to the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, [2] and the overthrow of the two case before the Supreme Court, Lun Kui court, difference is the 1990 Austen v. Michigan chamber of Commerce (AustinV.MichiganChamberOfCommerce) and the 2002 Mcconnell v. Federal Election Commission (McConnellV.FEC). [3] judgment by funding to play to criticize other candidates campaign advertising is legitimate, but still limited company or organization to direct money candidates supported by. Supporters say it in accordance with the principle of free speech, while opponents argue that this decision will result in a large amount of money involved in the campaign, the democratic political corruption. 

   Square.Background the Citizens United is a conservative 501 (c) 4 nonprofit organizations, originally planned to broadcast propaganda the movie "Hilary in the party irecTV: a movie" advertising, this is a criticism of Senator, presidential candidate Hilllary Clinton documentary. [4] according to the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act 441b provisions enacted in 2002, enterprises or groups in the 30 days before a primary or 60 days before the election to election related assistance, or ruin the candidates say is not allowed. In 2008 January, Columbia district court to 30 days before the primary funding the advertisement for the Citizens United case. The court believed that the only purpose of this movie is the ruin of Hilllary Clinton, and the Citizens United argued that the movie is based on facts and transcend partisan. [5]In August 18, 2008 the Supreme Court received this appeal, [6] and held an oral arguments in March 24, 2009. [4][7][8] the case originally shall make a judgment in the summer of 2009. [9]However, by June 29, 2009, the court decided to let the two sides hold a debate in September 9th. [10] is one of the important reasons causing the court decided again debate perhaps then deputy attorney general Malcolm L Stewart's words, he represented the Federal Election Commission, said the government should also be forbidden power books published, if the book is by the enterprise or the organization and to "support" (ExpressA vocacy party). In the oral debate stage, the Citizens United had asked the question: "to provide legal support in 1990 Austen v. Michigan chamber of Commerce and the 2002 Mcconnell v. Federal Election Commission in 2002 as the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, whether it should reverse the two precedent?" [11]The case is the justice Sotomayor office in 2009 August for the first time since presided over the hearing, is also the chief federal prosecutor, Rena Kagan for the first time in the Supreme Court debate. The participants in the debate and former Bush government attorney general Theodore Olsen, the famous first amendment lawyer Floyd Abrams, and former Clinton administration attorney general Seth Vanksman. [12]

   Square.The nine Supreme Court justices ruled last judgment results for 5:4. The majority opinion by justice Kennedy submitted to the court, think the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act 441b terms for the funding constraints are not legitimate, do not apply to this case campaign film. The court to overturn the 1990 Austen v. Michigan chamber of Commerce case. At the time of the case, Michigan state has laws restricting enterprises or organizations by funding to support or oppose candidates, the final decision of the Supreme Court in support of the Michigan state practice, said the law does not violate the first amendment and the fourth amendment principles, that fund involvement will bring unfair to the election. The court also overturned the 2002 Mcconnell v. Federal Election Commission case, the Supreme Court upheld a bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 203 and 441b clauses limit for enterprises funded. The dissident liberal justice John Paul Stevens said the ruling would not only pose a threat to democracy, but also on the composition of the Supreme Court itself. [13]

   Square.The Citizens United case said after the verdict, "today America Supreme Court decision allowing Citizens United play documentaries and advertising campaign, regardless of whether the Citizens United, or for each to participate in politics of americans,It is a great victory." [14] columnist, conservative commentator Michel Malkin commented that "yes, each big enterprise will benefit to spend more money into the campaign from the judgment. But the sunlight is the best disinfectant, for candidates complete, transparent disclosure will bring electoral revolution." [15] conservative talk show host Rush Linbo said, "today, free it from a coma. Everything comes from the Supreme Court's great, great, great judgment. I couldn't describe how great." [16]Professor Joll Joro Broolyn of the law school had participated in the 1976 Barclays v. Walaiao case debate, on behalf of USA Civil Liberties Union "to comment on the case of the first amendment important day", also said the Supreme Court "to remove the first amendment on the campaign trail grade system". [17] well-known lawyer, had four presidential Ralph Donald criticized decision. [18]The lawyer Kleta Michael wrote in the Washington Post, "the Supreme Court correctly to eliminate such a constitution and runs counter to the system, only to allow media (such as Washington Post) through the enterprise capital freely pass white them for candidates to comment, but does not allow other companies to do so...... The real victims limited enterprises funded by various nonprofit support organization." [19]

    Square.Opponents including President Barak Obama, the Supreme Court decision he commented that "this will give the special interest groups more power, will cover the voices of ordinary Americans", and [20] said this is a great victory for big oil companies, Wall Street banks, insurance companies and other powerful interests. [21] decision also provoke a backlash in Congress, Democratic leaders in Congress calling for legislative action to weaken the impact of this decision. [21] New York Times editorial said, "at the moment, the Business Companies can support or defeated candidates with cash. If a member of Parliament to a special interest group on the opposite side, its lobbyists can now threatened: we will call all resources will pull you down." The [13] editorial thought, the sentence "rejected the legal system established, erosion has stood between Business Companies and electoral politics for over a century, the great wall." [13] was the Reform Party presidential candidate Pat Choate said, "this decision will make the foreign governments and foreign enterprises to participate in the US presidential election is possible." [22]President Obama spoke of "judgment against our democracy" in the subsequent weekly radio address, said "I cannot imagine something more than this for the public interests of the." [23]Some media reaction is more radical, five justices such as online media "today veterans" will support this decision behavior known as "Treason" [24]. While the MSNBC anchor Keith Olbermann even predicted "politicians all over the next ten years will sell their chastity", also the decision and has caused America civil war in 1857 Sangfute case put on a par with Scott v..

   Square.Because you want to talk about is money game "American election" this topic, please understand this USA Supreme Court case law: "Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission" (CitizensUnite partyV.Fe eral partyElectionCommission,558U.S.08-205(2010) if you can't understand English) original, don't be a professor. !

   In 2010 the Supreme Court ruling on the case is established, the shareholders and other groups to enjoy the same rights as individuals and they will enjoy. The court also ruled, the government may not restrict these groups to support or criticism of political candidates expenses scale. See also the super political action committee.
   Square.With strong economic backing, USA candidates from both parties to a 4 year presidential election lively singing competition. Of course, in order to avoid to leave "money politics" impression, American election law for individuals and enterprises can contribute to the candidate's payments are strictly limited. For example, PAC is a private political organizations support the candidate, usually to the enterprise, interest group or individual. Before 2010, the PAC give no more than $5000. But in 2010 "Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission" case, the Supreme Court ruled that PAC from individuals, enterprises, trade unions and trade organizations fundraising "unrestricted", and can use these funds to support or against the federal government candidates.

   Square.[moreDimensionNews] Senate minority leader Mcconnell 17, accused the new nominee Kagan, support the implementation of restrictions on freedom of speech act on the Citizens United in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission case.
Integrated media reported on May 17th, the Senate minority leader Mcconnell (MitchMcConnell) expresses 17 days, in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (CitizensUnite partyV.FEC), the new nominee Kagan (ElenaKagan) limit speech to "upset those who cherish freedom of speech".
   Mcconnell also said, he needs to convince yourself that, Kagan is committed to free speech. Kagan said in a meeting with a senator in the recently, the Supreme Court did not fully comply with the views of Congress in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision.

    Affirmative: in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the Supreme Court ultimately support the United citizens' First Amendment rights, can spend aid candidates campaign ads. Kagan was the first time as a federal attorney general in the supreme court debate, she thought the government should limit related to these activities, the last of her proposal was not adopted. Citizens United is a non-profit organization conservative. Citizens United was in favor of the said after the verdict, the Supreme Court's decision to allow America Citizens United play documentaries and advertising campaign, regardless of whether the Citizens United, or for each to participate in politics of the United States, is a huge victory.
   The dissident liberal justice Stevens (JohnStevens) is that this decision will not only threaten democracy, but also on the composition of the Supreme Court itself. Decision comments President Obama on the case, this will give the special interest groups more power, will cover the voices of ordinary americans.

   Affirmative: this decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission of subversion in the limited funds for decades the company funding the campaign.
   The Supreme Court decision (votes: 5 vs. 4), support funds companies and unions to support candidates will not be restricted, the resolution let America politics be raging like a storm.This decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission of subversion in the limited funds for decades the company funding the campaign.
--American election is a money game to play?
---2016 years ago,No one knows the answer.

   Affirmative: America Federal Supreme Court in January 20, 2010 made a major decision CitizensUnite partyV.Fe eral partyElectionCommission,558U.S.___(2010), with five votes in favor, four votes against (5 - 4), cancel the over sixty-three year long campaign finance law, namely, the lifting of restrictions on funding enterprises and trade unions in the American political campaign. Analysis refers to the decision for the enterprise to the election of pump water green light, will be discontent Obama government enterprises, which in the mid-term congressional elections in November sell advertising against the Democratic Party, or even a timocracy agitation, failure American democracy.
   The Federal Supreme Court this not to limit the enterprise and the trade union political clout to overthrow the law, the Supreme Court itself has done two ruling over all the overthrow (AustinV.MichiganChamberOfCommerce (1990)And part of the overthrow of McConnellV.Fe eral partyElectionCommission (2003)), ruled that the government may not prohibit or restrict the enterprises and trade unions, to support or oppose the presidential and congressional candidates spend political cost, that is they can spend, produced or published advertising campaign, to show their support or opposition to a presidential or congressional candidates.

   Affirmative: Decision motivation: to defend the freedom of speech and political freedom
    Justice was the debate for a long time, finally by five votes to four to make this decision, prominent, deeply divided. Five conservative justices said the verdict, defend the first amendment to the Constitution (FirstAmen party ment) the most basic protection of freedom of speech, as well as the political right to limit political freedom. Judge Kennedy (AnthonyKenne party y) pointed out, the current level of scrutiny too wide. The dissident liberals believe, allowing business and trade union money poured into political market will lead to corruption, democracy, that is a serious mistake to enterprise of speech and put on a par with personal comments.
   In addition to relax the ruling campaign finance restrictions, and cancel the no enterprises and trade unions in the primary election within 30 days or 60 days, buy mentioned political candidates name advertising ban, various political groups will be more wantonly spending, even in the last days of the key stage of the election, putting more financial resources propaganda. The political groups can not directly tell voters, not to vote for a candidate, but not before the polling date a month to buy advertising; but in the new ruling, these restrictions will be cancelled. However, ruling still limit the enterprises and trade unions, direct contributions to candidates.

   Manufacturing: Affirmative award winners and losers
   According to media analysis, and reference to the political barometer, ruling led several joy several sorrow.
The winners are: (1) large enterprises and Trade Unions: be free to spend money to support or oppose the president or Congress candidates; (2) the first amendment to the Constitution guarantees freedom of speech: success; (3) the media, television and radio: is expected to get more relevant ads and campaign, increase income; (4): will the voters get more information.
Losers are: (1) voters: need to endure all campaign, the information must be careful to distinguish authenticity; (2) the parties and candidates: will be difficult to control information, it is difficult to stop myself didn't like advertisements appear; (2) the courtesy and honesty: campaign ads will become more unkind.

    Affirmative: Obama and the Democrats counter
American public opinion generally considered bad, directly in the ruling Democratic Party, and is favorable to the Republican opposition. Make a decision by the Supreme Court, President Obama issued a response to the media high-profile wording Frank: "the Supreme Court ruling, special interest groups to the new tide of China's political throwing money big green." A Democratic congressman pointed out, ruling allowed wealthy enterprises overwhelmed the other people in the political debate in the sound, weaken the ordinary citizens right of free speech.
Democratic leaders in Congress that will take the legislative initiative, method to study the limit Corporate Campaign spending limits, corporate intervention in the election, hoping to reduce the negative influence brought about by the ruling. Another source of Iowa (Iowa) Democratic congressman Boswell has proposed amending the constitution, seeking to make the decision invalid. And a launch "McCain Fiingold act" Senator Finn Gerd has pledged, there will be new legislation to deal with this ruling. He said: "the next few weeks, I will talk to colleagues propose to amend the bill, as far as possible to restore the past legislation spirit of enterprise, limited intervention on the election."

   Affirmative: award may be about parliamentary politics
   America "New York Times" (Republican) quoted the Federal Election Commission, former legal adviser Noble, lobbyists will later use this ruling around parliament decided, he told MPs: "we have one million, can be used to sell advertising for you or against you, which one do you want?" Report refers to, ruling also increased relevant groups spend in candidates and parties on the strength. "New York Times" editorial titled TheCourt 'sBlowToThe party's ruling emocracy, described as "catastrophic" (the isastrous), a blow to American democracy.
   Report is expected, outside groups to confuse voters wave attack ads, because this decision will be free, while the maximum profit that is have a good relationship with the enterprises and relevant organizations of the incumbent. And big business relationship good Republican, welcomed the Supreme Court's ruling. Senate Republican leader Mcconnell has always been opposed to campaign finance law praise about ruling, that is "an important step towards restoring First Amendment rights".
Firstly, this ruling may influence American 24 states the current campaign spending limits. Another comment, ruling far-reaching influence, said the Supreme Court for enterprises and groups spend, support or suppress the candidates to eliminate obstacles, will dramatically change the political rules of the game, will change the American political power layout. For example, its impact is expected in November's midterm congressional elections to get instant results.
   Also Hongkong commented that, Obama borrow big Wall Street play the populist, affirmation and business grudges. The wealthy and powerful Wall Street would not await one's doom. "A declaration of war against the big banks in Obama at the same time, America Supreme Court ruled that the enterprise and the trade union shall have the right in the election no upper limit for making propaganda films, used as a support or attack candidate. Is generally believed that, this year's parliamentary elections in November, will be to get instant results. ("EastWeekly "336th, February 3, 2010)

   Anti side: you said: "because you want is money game to talk about" USA election "this topic, please understand this America Supreme Court case law: {Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission} if you cannot understand English original, don't become a professor!" speech was full of pride, isn't it? You draw on the much quoted after their conclusion is: "USA election is a money game to play? Before 2016,No one knows. Since for a future "may" happened, even you yourself can't tell you what that, American election money control, this is not very funny? How to make a foreigner must know this case law, otherwise it will not become a professor. Don't say I wish professor is not engaged in legal research, is USA professor knows the bill? Otherwise you will not be as a professor, I'm afraid America not many people can become a professor, American professor can allow you to say? Isn't this arrogant? And your judgment itself is not correct.

   You have not answered my repeatedly presented in the previous question: since the money can manipulate the election, why is represented by the chaebol supported Republican Mccain supported by most voters will be lost to Democrat Obama?

   You say the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission to subvert the limit funds for decades the company funding the campaign, that you of the past decades is no opinion, is dissatisfied with this, whether can think you recognize the past decades not by money and control?
    And the Supreme Court 5 than the 4 vote results show that, the case had a fierce debate, but the result is that, the future how to walk to see. Winners and losers act award made and results, bring you said: "according to media analysis (note, is that you describe such, here is the analysis rather than the known results), and with reference to the political barometer, ruling led several joy several sorrow.
    The winners are: (1) large enterprises (a Republican stronghold) and Union (the democratic camp, composition, the number of voters elected Obama is due entirely to the voters to): can be free to spend money to support or oppose the president or Congress candidates (Obama won numerous small campaign contributions, due to the large number of that raise more capital than large enterprises large sums of money to support the Republican Party); (2) the first amendment to the Constitution guarantees freedom of speech: success (everyone is a winner, which is to ensure the most people enjoy democracy, the minority of people's opinions are respected (Republican)); (3) the media, television and radio: is expected to get more with election related advertising, increase income; (4) voters: will be more different information.
    Losers are: (1) voters: need to endure all campaign, the information must be careful to distinguish authenticity (to democracy must pay the cost); (2) the parties and candidates: will be difficult to control information, it is difficult to stop myself don't like advertisement appeared (to show the candidate; politics, must accept all kinds of inspection) (2) courtesy and honesty: campaign ads will become more unkind. (in the campaign prick possible radical rhetoric, a candidate's personal privacy may be exposed in front of the world, but also can soon be unqualified candidates eliminated.)" From the analysis, the loser is not against partisan voters, are equal, to be elected to accept the inspection.

   From below can be seen, in the face of possible effects, democratic system with self repair function, adjustment, it shows the superiority of democracy. "Democratic leaders in Congress that will take the legislative initiative, method to study the limit Corporate Campaign spending limits, corporate intervention in the election, hoping to reduce the negative influence brought about by the ruling. Another source of Iowa (Iowa) Democratic congressman Boswell has proposed amending the constitution, seeking to make the decision invalid. And a launch "McCain Fiingold act" Senator Finn Gerd has pledged, there will be new legislation to deal with this ruling. He said: "the next few weeks, I will talk to colleagues propose to amend the bill, as far as possible to restore the past legislation spirit of enterprise, limited intervention on the election. }"

   I don't read all of your writing, just glanced to think to write wrong, please correct me.
  "Voters: need to stand out campaign, the information must be careful to distinguish authenticity" -- don't know no comparison, identification, also have no choice? Of course, to be time consuming, but qualified leaders elected a leading nation 4 years worth.

   As you indicate that you wish to view the teacher to chatter without stop, no matter whether he will accept or not, "he got to stand out with him" your topic irrelevant information, also "is also difficult to prevent their didn't like" man, but can through the discussion on the essence of democracy to grasp or good.

   Affirmative: since for a future "may" happened, even you yourself can't tell you what that, American election money control, this is not very funny?
1Dissident liberal justice Stevens (JohnStevens) is that this decision will not only threaten democracy, but also on the composition of the Supreme Court itself.
2 Decision comments President Obama on the case, this will give the special interest groups more power, will cover the voices of ordinary americans.
3I believe what they say, if you have doubt, I hope you ask this question

   Affirmative: the Supreme Court declared the civic coalition final judgment immediately after incurred criticism. The ABC and Washington Post do in February 4, 2010 to 8 in the [10] poll shows, 80% of respondents opposed the court, of which 65% strong opposition. Traditionally Republican and alliances, the ruling is likely to make the Republican benefit. Therefore, the Democratic Party of the ruling is particularly concerned about the reaction is particularly strong. Several hours before the Supreme Court decision after the announcement, President Obama issued a statement [11], condemned the Supreme Court "special interest group fund a new round of come in great numbers of the green light". Obama said, "the decision is the major oil companies, Wall Street banksA major victory, the Health Insurance Company and other powerful interests. These consortia every influence in Washington, flooded American public voice. It makes the special interests in Washington and serve them with lobbyists more powerful, weakened to the general public of small donations of influence for election". In a statement, Obama also requests the administrative department immediately work with Congress to respond forcefully to the court.

   Affirmative: I know English if not original, not to become a professor of irrational statement apologized!

   Blogger: shake hands. I should not delete your two comments, not the time to pull the black you. To apologize to you.

   Affirmative: ThankYou!

   Anti side: appreciate the attitude of your differences, for as long as the exchange of full expression, even if temporarily unable to reach consensus is not important. You say since Obama was elected in 2008, 4 years after the possible re-election, case law justice by Obama nomination by a vote of 5:4 through, changes the rules of the game, is conducive to the 2012 Republican returned to power, this explanation is again that money can not control the election, because:
   1, your approval before the 2010 law, election is fair, just the new legislation is likely to change this kind of justice.
   2, "American election is a money game to play? Before 2016,No one knows "is what you said, my answer is:" as for a possible future things, even you yourself can't tell you what that, American election money control, this is not very funny?"
   Your "guilty until proven innocent first (GuiltyUntilProvenInnocent.) the term "seemed to echo my view and not give different answers, also has not happened that it is bound to happen is obviously wrong. But the phrase you, the criminal justice specifically for the principle of presumption of innocence crime in national electoral system is obviously inappropriate.

    Thinking you can see the contradiction in. The meaning of the principle is: without trial to prove guilt determined before, presumption of the innocence of the accused. Prove that the defendant is guilty of the responsibility borne by the prosecution, the defendant assumes the obligation to prove his innocence.   
   (1). If you own or democratic because case law innocent hurt as plaintiff, defendant Republican relatively, so the burden of proof is on you or the Democratic Party, but the Republicans did not put the blame on the Democratic party.
   (2). If the plaintiff is the Republican, democratic, Republicans should the burden of proof, but in your account the Democrats in the positive proof: "Democratic leaders in Congress that will take the legislative initiative, method to study the limit Corporate Campaign spending limits, enterprise stem election, hoping to reduce negative effects brought by the ruling."
    Your statements made herself into a logical paradox.

   3, as you say:"Democracy is not easy, but from the "superiority of democracy is reflected in its self repair, improve, adjust ability, unlike authoritarian system in a single big no modifications may, this point of view from Obama's statement and all the efforts can be. Several hours before the Supreme Court decision after the announcement, President Obama issued a statement, condemned the Supreme Court "special interest group fund a new round of come in great numbers of the green light". Obama said, "the decision is the major oil companies, Wall Street banksA major victory, the Health Insurance Company and other powerful interests". Obama also requested the administration and Congress immediately to court to respond forcefully.
   The Supreme Court declared the civic coalition final judgment immediately after incurred criticism. Opinion polls show that ABC and Washington Post do in February 4, 2010 to 8, 80% of respondents opposed the court, of which 65% strong opposition.  
   To be a party to enjoy the interest is not to be, that is not a democracy.

   Anti side: Multiparty Qia, seeking to balance, the process is actually modified electoral system vulnerability. As long as the democratic system, cannot produce one brick, have the benefit of.

   Anti side: happy for mutual understanding you, your progress will promote our progress. He carefully, the spirit of perseverance is very worthy of our study, many valuable information he provided enables us to know more America system. Netizens comment more we fill the valuable a democratic course. No self-interest, the debate is the process of seeking progress, we can have a more profound understanding of democracy from, but also to recognize the important understanding, tolerance. Everyone's enthusiastic participation, let me see democracy has come to us. See so much of the commentary is time-consuming, but value.

   Hongkong: Affirmative also commented that, Obama borrow big Wall Street play the populist, affirmation and business grudges. The wealthy and powerful Wall Street would not await one's doom. "A declaration of war against the big banks in Obama at the same time, America Supreme Court ruled that the enterprise and the trade union shall have the right in the election no upper limit for making propaganda films, used as a support or attack candidate. Is generally believed that, this year's parliamentary elections in November, will be to get instant results. ("East weekly" 336th, February 3, 2010) -Obama lost the 2010 November mid-term election.

   Union support for Obama,Therefore, the Republicans will remove the union.

   Affirmative: as said, without trial to prove guilt determined before, presumption of the innocence of the accused. Prove that the defendant is guilty of the responsibility borne by the prosecution, the defendant assumes the obligation to prove his innocence.
--This is the people's standard,The government should use the standard America immigration officer standard is equal to assume you want in America illegal stay, until you can prove that is not true

American election is a money game to play? Before 2016,No one knows "is what you said, my answer is:" as for a possible future things, even you yourself can't tell you what that, American election money control, this is not very funny?"
=Also Hongkong commented that, Obama borrow big Wall Street play the populist, affirmation and business grudges. The wealthy and powerful Wall Street would not await one's doom. "A declaration of war against the big banks in Obama at the same time, America Supreme Court ruled that the enterprise and the trade union shall have the right in the election no upper limit for making propaganda films, used as a support or attack candidate. Is generally believed that, this year's parliamentary elections in November, will be to get instant results. ("East weekly" 336th, February 3, 2010) -Obama lost the 2010 November mid-term election."Before 2016,No one knows "is what you said--I cancel this conclusion.  

   Affirmative: I'm tough -The official is not easy in democratic countries,I wrapped the wound, American than professor you must be to 100 times. They each day must deal with other like me so hard. 100 times as many people. It is easy to do in USA than Professor Professor in China,The core of western education is the need to question the theory all the rules,What things not memorize you, more important is not to trust the government,Because all the government may lie.

   Anti side: "union support for Obama,Therefore, the Republicans will remove the union."
-- Union since its legal status, had never been removed, also does not have what strength can disassemble union.
    Without trial to prove guilt determined before, presumption of the innocence of the accused. Prove that the defendant is guilty of the responsibility borne by the prosecution, the defendant assumes the obligation to prove his innocence.
--This is the people's standard,The government should use standard standard = American immigration officerSuppose you want to American illegal stay, until you can prove that is not true
-- you will be different areas of many things get together, confusing concepts, the principle of presumption of innocence, the functions of the national government, immigration officials requirements and responsibilities, illegal stay, seem logical confusion, unintelligible.

   You quoted Hongkong comments"... American Supreme Court ruled that the enterprise and the trade union shall have the right in the election no upper limit for making propaganda films, used as a support or attack candidate...." To explain the election by money manipulation. History is the best teacher, union support for Obama won the big chaebol supported Republican, creating the highest donation record, than any president in history USA. Moreover, entrepreneurs not be a monolithic whole, firm supporters such as Buffett brothers is a democratic. Even if the ten thousand steps back, because the chaebol funds, the Republican Party is always to win the election, to tend to the policy, the majority of the people suffer USA become poor, USA people allow representative without them as well? USA votes of the people Is it right? Has since become a waste paper? If so, USA democratic completely disappeared. It will bring about what kind of results? Big business in profit, people become afflicted at the same time, the domestic purchasing power will decline, the market because the capacity is reduced, atrophy, lead to the entire national economy declined, the USA will continue to decline, is not a world power. Chaebol would be foolish to this step? USA people will allow this situation to occur? You have great significance as the richest man Bill. Gates this kind of person, all want to know to make money but not to contribute to society of people? If you cancel "before 2016,No one knows "the conclusion, also did not change a fact: to prove that is not possible money manipulation of democratic election, only a special case, only has not truly democratic elections.

   Affirmative: I never asked you to agree with me. I don't believe the election not by money manipulation. Otherwise, no one will donate a dollar will. You have no reason to force me to agree with you. Invite you to have a look my originality: America congressman RushHolt's inauguration ceremony

   Affirmative: Republicans have no right to remove the Union
--If you don't know that last year 100000 people protested in Wisconsin Shangjie how to return a responsibility?If those people do not donation and donation of $one million to those who influence the same, who will donate a dollar? This is common sense!

   Square.November 7, 2004.I personally (voluntary and free) to help the American for CongressIn the forum above against the others I have not personally help America for Congress? If they never saw no mp2.5 blue sky, how could I let these people believe that I speak the truth?
   Square.If I have 5 millions, I can use my own money to elect 100% members. If you have no money, how can you do this?The mayor of New York, using his own money to elect mayors. I have no money, I can't compete with him.
However, many rich people's money can not prove legal sources. If they choose,The exposure!Therefore, they need a third campaign.

     Anti side: since you think USA election is a money game, you also for what kind of ticket, how can it represents your vote? Not to dirty money politics do end?!

   Anti side: you vote according to their own will, or according to the wishes of others - for example, someone pays you to vote Democratic? If you are a according to their own wishes, then explain American election is not the money game.
If someone to buy your vote, it may be that American elections are a game of money. If so, you have how many money? How much do you sell your vote?

   The billionaire Perot hadUse their own money to run for president, but lost no money opponent.

   Affirmative: if the attack I can give China bring democracy, I welcome you every day to do so. Curse of others is easy, but, if you are afraid to idealism have shed blood,Is the schizophrenia. I joined the U. S. Army during the war, To defend the American and world democracy and freedom, I today to receive the pension / free medical care is I should be right! 

   Anti side: the USA joined the U. S. Army to defend the freedom and democracy to the old retired Americans, is that the American election is a money game, should commit suicide, because you find a whole lifetime to defend things turned out to be junk. But you also immensely proud to this experience, so you must lie, or participate in the U. S. to defend liberal democracy is lying, or claim to America elections are a game of money is a lie.

   Square.If you give me $200, I vote for you, I write with a pen on my vote your name.Money isn't everything.People can't live without money,Fair enough?Everyone participate in the U. S. to defend freedom and democracy is to make money
   Anti side: This is a very meaningful discussion, Professor Zhu article detonated an important topic of contemporary education, told Chinese, capitalist democracy by money control, government representatives of the interests of the bourgeoisie. Most Chinese holds this view. In America holds this view does not matter, it is a democratic country, in China is different, China democratic cause just started, many people hold this view will interfere with the democratic process, and that democracy is fundamentally different.Disadvantages exaggerate, not conducive to the realization of democracy.

    His view is that some:
    1, the case law to big business, big chaebol supported Republicans in campaign funds provide more convenience, which he describes in detail the origin and development of things, so that people have more understanding of the USA system.Previously published views do not go into details.
   2, Obama's talk and the Republicans in Congress constraints actually still on rich Republicans favor.

   Obama is Affirmative: l and his party elected talker here don't comment, Congress constraints operating mechanism of democracy is normal, and by Republicans elected president will face constraints restrict the Democrats in Congress, democratic system sometimes looks very inefficient, but also can avoid detours social development, steady.
   3, not to increase taxes on the wealthy, government debt will be due to bankruptcy, but added that it will not affect his social welfare.

    American debt be known to all the world, democracy scores are not entirely due to the bankruptcy American striking, under this system, democracy, freedom, equality and power to the people is guaranteed, the person's potential is maximum, the achievements of the status of the number one power in the world for hundreds of years. The dollar as the world's most popular currency, even as the financial crisis the global economic recession, American government by means of quantitative easing monetary policy, to print money, diluting the impact of the crisis, but did not cause serious inflation, the welfare of the people will not be affected, the world into dollars big reservoir America, easily the crisis passed on to other countries, especially as Chinese holds dollar reserves that most countries, Chinese people's hard-earned dollars in this storm suddenly diving.

   4, if the money to support the Republican administration, will be deprived of the power of the trade unions

The democratic system in the party often swap roles, such as last year in Wisconsin Republican control of the government and the parliament as the government budget deficit deprive the government staff union power in order to reduce costs, leading to mass protest. This and the Democrats ruling by raising taxes on the wealthy as two sides of the same coin, the interests of both sides compete eventually makes benefit and win-win, history of a party to the interests of the permanent possession of party does not exist.
   5, the Republican controlled by media Brainwashing

 Even as he said, the Republican controlled media to use "stupid Americans" brainwashing brainwashing, the result is still "stupid Americans chose Democrat Obama" when USA president, the Republicans still win money.
   6, SopA(SOPA), proposed by Republican Ranmer Smith, get the bipartisan 12 member of the house of representatives of a support. If the bill, will expand the American law enforcement departments and the copyright owner in dealing with network selling pirated products and counterfeit goods when the power of the.

    The bill with members of both parties support, similar to the case law, and this topic has no relationship problems are as the same topic. YouKnown as the "Republican Senator Ranmer Smith is one of the American citizens and the forces of the dark I against tens of thousands of.The Republican senator is to serve the interests of the consortium and the rich!". Also can see you referred to in fact and theme have no relationship.)
   7, money plays a decisive role in the election, "if those not donation and donation of $one million to those who influence the same, who will donate a dollar? This is common sense!"
    Say yes, no doubt, more money can better promote their own policy ideas, but the propaganda target voters, voters about what? Of course, not his battle is much, but his policies Is it right? Conforms to the interests of the voters, this is the most basic and most important aspect, voters will not because of the candidate's wardrobe will vote for him. If the election is money determinism, the candidates who raise more than elected well, anyway, the vote is useless, cast white cast, and meet the eye everywhere history instead.

   On the relation between the elected government, the interests of both employers and employees and development, can look at the:
    Democracy is an important content in the election, elected governments agreed to its power comes from the people, the government by free and fair elections, citizens enjoy the freedom of criticism of the government.
    By manipulating the election money seems unlikely to see by the electoral system, so in practice, when money enters the election will be how?
    To answer such a question, to help everyone know the development of human society, economic law determines the superstructure of this point, see the economic law is how to play the role, and thus affect the three party relations and social development. 
    We know that the social demand to increase production, so as to drive the wealth, people demand is infinite, which should come very naturally will increase the wealth of society. The actual situation is not necessarily so, how is this going? Let us start with a simple example about:
    The first case: the discovery of gold in one place, a personal investment to build a mine, employed one hundred workers for his gold, an annual profit of 10000000 miners, 50% among them as workers wages down, each worker's annual income of 50000, they take ten thousand to rent, the remaining forty thousand you can get married, have children, marry and settle down, miners have five million, in addition to tax can reinvest, both sides have enjoyed economic independence, personal freedom, free will promote the growth of wealth. Because the workers have money, want to settle down, so, house demand. So the owner by the hands of the money to build a house, rented or sold to the workers, the workers. The workers to eat and drink, so, to open the hotel, the workers to earn back his money. The restaurant also hire other workers, so that the working wife have jobs, have a family income, the consumption demand is bigger. The elected government taxes and reasonable, not to increase the burden of enterprises to the investment, but also rich road, built sewage and municipal construction, but also effectively protect the people's social welfare. A few years later, in this place 100 families. Children to school, the education demand, so some people to run a school, workers have to date, to consumption, to do something else, then the cinema, shops. So over the past 50 years later, when the local mines were dug up, here has become a diversified city a 100000 people's prosperity.

    The second kind of situation is this: suppose the same discovery of gold, the same people to invest in mining, also hired 100 workers, the same year profit of 10000000, but the 10% of them as wages down, each worker year 10000. The money is only enough to fill the stomach to them, no money to rent a house, no money for the wife, can only live in shacks, such personal dilemma that people everywhere are not free, no drive. Miners to rely on money to support a for his services to the government, the government cut his taxes, no money to build, the local public facilities inadequate. Miners earn a year 9000000, but see eyeful dilapidated appearance and poor, on the local investment again what do not have demand, had to put the money out of the country, because the local is not safe, he built several villas, hire some workers when bodyguards, workers have no future, in addition to the work life, no other requirements. A bad idea to cheat a wife, a beautiful daughter, perhaps also can marry the wife. 50 years later, this place in addition to the mine owners of luxury villas, still no other industry. Wait until finished digging the mine, with the money and leave, workers or exiled, or men to steal, female prostitution, social decay.
    Of the two cases, a good solution to the problem of three party relationships, social development, while the other did not, the social stagnation. When the Democratic controlled by money manipulation violates economic laws, the law must suffer punishment, democracy itself will be destroyed. What kind of people democracy decide what kind of life, so people will have to fight for. Elected governments levy taxes due, not to hurt the entrepreneurship have more investment, so as to bring Everfount wealth. People's income increases, the incentive effects of the principle of economics will play a role, people have higher expectations will be more hard work, enterprise benefit is rising, can social development problems were solved, the original market this invisible hand -- the law of economics of invisible play a role.

    Although the government is to rely on the tax system, can be good or bad results is not the same. Good democratic government not to waste of public money, capital cost transparency, all for the development of public utilities, public welfare is guaranteed, the open market, giving everyone participating in the market activities, not engage in monopoly. Everyone in the market have the opportunity to play to their strengths, and others exchange, this time a lot of wealth created, free to expand rapidly increase in wealth. America is representative of this system. Relationship between the labor government of three party is a chicken and egg, chicken invigorated, eggs can make more than. The most worth mentioning is Henry. Ford, he created the first of the middle class, and the America society first introduced modern society. Henry. Ford allow workers to afford to buy a car, his high wages to the workers, the mode of production lines also create, make the car cost is greatly reduced, and has become the biggest car company, then the money to workers to buy a car, buy a house, can do other consumption taxes, government Road, theater, library, hospitals and other public facilities, so the middle class is born, city development. The rapid growth of the middle class continue to spur economic growth. If the money the elected government, only the rich to help poor people, there is a market? The development of space? Let the big capitalists to digest all this? Democratic People and promised? They promised to representatives in Parliament?

    The democratic government that did not, therefore, development speed is slow, Latin American countries have long into the Middle Income Trap inextricably bogged down in. Like the Mexico billionaire Carlos, by forestall exploit people's income is fast becoming the richest man in the world, government mismanagement, social development level is inferior to the American.
If the election is made of money manipulation to win power, the tax changes, make capital away most of the people after the consumption must shortage, limited market capacity can only drag the whole society. The same even fairly elected government, if higher taxes will take the most entrepreneurs, distributed to the public, it seems to be equal, this is at the cost of sacrificing the efficiency, reduce the labor, investment, reduce the production of goods will be less, finally we obtained are small. So people face tradeoffs will take care of the interests of all parties, the final result is to keep the balance, democracy will guarantee that this process. Today we discuss the fundamental purpose of this topic is that, through the understanding of democracy, to strive for the realization of democracy in the Chinese.

   Square.The Republican candidate Mitt Romney in order to profit
1Deliberately broke he bought the Usa Inc,Mobilizing American work to Chinese;
2After obtaining the huge profits in the China,Saving his money to avoid paying American tax in the Cayman islands.

   The second kind of situation is this: suppose the same discovery of gold, the same people to invest in mining, also hired 100 workers; the same year profit of 10000000, but the 10% of them as wages down, every year $1 million workers...
This year to earn 9000000 profit, who is a good man,Workers are still working. He will be money in the Cayman Islands to avoid in the USA taxes; he would support a for his services to the government, for the government to cut his taxes.If you are not the 1% super rich, you elect him equal to your money to him, 45% Americans had been deceived.

   The opposition: the election money manipulation is not money can manipulate the election, fail to read, the relationship is not reversible. If so, democratic supervision, check and balance mechanism exists in name only, democracy will cease to exist except in name.
     "They asked me to donate money,If you give me the $200,You treat me better than them,Therefore,I vote for you. "This statement is wrong,Candidates for political propaganda at all rather than personal, confuse the two difference will lead to the confusion of understanding, will elect a vulgar.

   The Republican candidate for that Romney in order to profit tax evasion, the democratic system in the process of practice will gradually solve this kind of problem, like American pressure Chinese increase exchange rate, for Mr. Romney his income will be reduced by this method, USA investment return, this is just one. He placed the money in not long life, even to the death the money there is no significance, once they get the USA, large estate tax will play a role, as well as Bill. The money donated to Gates as a philanthropist, win good reputation.

   Anti side: agree with the above statement. The content of the argument with him mutually sent more than 100 note after the debate, argue some views before we have improved. He agreed to vote not entirely by money manipulation, but plays an important role in money. This argument I also agree, leave the money you really can't find a place to spread your political philosophy. The democratic system American even if not perfect, but more advanced than ours for hundreds of years, I still think to have this imperfect system to improve better. He was China growth, further again in USA, education was questioned the citizen education system and the government, he said China obedient education is wrong, he questioned the various defects of their own government, this is not what can be blamed only on power, alert, monitoring, to restrict power. If we are more like his citizens find government theory, we Is it right? Happy? He care about politics, free of charge to help congress election, that he was actively involved in politics, the exercise of civil rights, appreciate his citizenship.

   Before I have many misunderstanding him, election he supported Obama, but some of the practices he objected to Obama, this would explain why he wasn't satisfied with their election only two choices. In our opinion, their system has been very good, but he was not enough good, North Koreans see our system and we see USA system may be the same feelings. It seems to us that their government has been very good, but he thinks must also monitor it, wary of it, for the government to do guilty inference, this is right. Through this debate, I think their understanding of democracy is still superficial, later also to deepen understanding. Above the brilliant exposition brings us into endless thinking, it is of positive significance to the democratic.

   The opposition:Agree with the analysis just above the users do, Affirmative good citizen consciousness is the abuse of public power, know people will suffer harm, therefore actively involved in politics, from he actively involved in this discussion can be seen. UnfortunatelyHe has, it is Chinese lack, have more than 100 people from well written [] because citizens knowledge cannot be published as everyone knows, China does not have this knowledge, not to mention to use in practice, this can not be regrettable. One cannot step into the same river two times, money can play a role in about the election, but it is by chance, uncertainty, and the system of democracy and democratic practice will hinder the money play a decisive role, which is composed of the system of checks and balances mechanism of decision, I wish the teacher is holding this view point, this discussion to deepen the understanding of democracy, both sides reached unanimity. Democratic discussion result, not suppressed can be resolved, the above statement can be seen as end users for this discussion.