You are herecontent / See You in DC

See You in DC


So we have come to cash this check -- a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice. We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism.

(MLK, Jr. Aug. 28, 1963, I Have a Dream speech)

What Bush's Katrina shows once again is that my son died for nothing. If you listen to Bush – and fewer and fewer are, thank goodness -- we are in
Iraq in part due to 9/11. All our president has been talking about has been protecting this country since 9/11. That's why people voted for him in the
last election. Katrina shows it's all as sham, a fraud, a disaster as large as Katrina itself.

Hundreds of billions and tens of thousands of innocent lives wasted later what have we achieved? Nothing. Casey died for nothing and Bush says others have to die for those that have died already.

Enough, George! What is disgusting is not, as the first lady says, criticism of you, but rather the crimes you've committed against this country and
our sons and daughters. Stop hiding behind your twisted idea of God and stop destroying this country.

This week I arrive in Washington DC to begin my Vigil at the White House just like I did in Texas. But this time I'll be joined by Katrina victims as
well. In your America we are all victims. The failed bookends of your Presidency are Iraq and Katrina.

It is time for all of us to stand up and be counted: to show the media, Congress, and this inept, corrupt, and criminal administration that we mean business. It is time to get off of our collective behinds to show the people who are running our country into oblivion that we will stand for it no longer. We want our country back and we want our nation's young people back home, safe and sound, on our shores to help protect America. That it is time for a change in our country's "leadership." That we will never go away until our dreams are reality.

We have so-called leaders in our country who are waiting for the correct "politically expedient" time to speak up and out against the occupation of Iraq. It is no sweat for our politicos to wait for the right time, because not one of them has a child in harm's way. I don't care if the politician is a Democrat or a Republican, this is not about politics. Being a strong leader to guide our country out of the quagmire and mistake of Iraq will require people of courage and determination to stand up and say: "I don't care if I win the next election, people are dying in Iraq everyday and families are being decimated." We as the 62% of Americans who want our troops to begin coming home will follow such a leader down the difficult, but oh so rewarding, path of peace with justice.

It is no longer time for the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. It never has been the time for that. Our "now" is so fiercely urgent. Like my daughter, Carly, wrote in the last verse of her A Nation Rocked to Sleep poem:

Have you ever heard the sound of a Nation Being Rocked to Sleep?

Our leaders want to keep us numb so the pain won't be too deep,

But if we the people allow them to continue, another mother will weep,

Have you heard the sound of a Nation Being Rocked to Sleep?

Wake up: See you in DC on the 24th.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Hello, I've been an avid supporter of your movement for quite a long time, as well as a supporter of VFP, and Cindy Sheehan and the Gold Star Families. Please take just a moment to read through what I've written here. Everyone I have discussed this with, whether they be republican or democrat...have said that I have some very valid points here.

I have discussed with friends how much the antiwar movement has changed since the days of Vietnam. The one mistake that the 'hippies' made during that period is their outrageous fashion sense and almost comical appeal. Everyone knew that they were all about free-love, which also included the use of drugs...and overall relaxation and adoration of simplistic beauties. However, the politicians found it easy to paint those people as silly children, playing dress up with colorful clothes and symbols...and quickly caused a large portion of the public to dismiss them as insignificant. The fact that they spoke of love yet condemned and hated the troops, only helped enforce this image. That has changed...now the people who don't support the war look exactly like everyone else. The most intelligent and successful of people are waking up and saying..."hey, hold on a second here..something is very wrong." And the people who support the war and this administrations are the one's who are being labelled as silly and out of touch with reality.

However, I do agree that the democratic party is absolutely no better. This country is in desperate need of change...and I feel that we are not going to find it within either of our political parties. I think that the country is waking up to that and realizing that a strong third party is exactly what this country needs in order to ever change. I was actually told that if a third party were to receive just 5% of the popular vote, from that day forward they would have to receive government campaign funding...and also would then have to be involved in the televised debates before election. They would then be considered a viable party...a party of the people, and representing the people. There are many things your organization is doing to create change and awareness...but the only thing that could ever be done that would create a lasting impact...and make absolutely certain that change will take place in this country...would be to bring about a successful third party. I think that a coalition of your group and perhaps other antiwar groups, and even just groups that see the downward spiral of our government...perhaps with politicians that are turning their backs on their own parties...or politicians that have never fit into either group (for example, Ralph Nader...or i hear that Senator McCain may go independent next year...though think that's just a rumor, or perhaps John Conyers would be our spearhead of the third party) would then polarize this third party...and with the assistance of you and your supporters...for the first time in history a third party would be able to get 5% of the popular vote, and create a permanent third party within our stagnant two party system.

The American revolution was the result of war...but even more strongly it was the result of a coalition of like minded individuals...with similiar unbending purpose and resolve. Their mutual support and unwillingness to bend in the face of their oppressors...is what made them successful, and what burned their permanent change and success into the minds and hearts of all Americans. A revolution can be brought about without war, and without violence...we just need another group who stands diametrically opposed...and who wishes to press their beliefs into the body of our political structure...thereby truly forcing a change in the policies of this country...a change in the policies of a country that goes to war often twice a decade. Whether the war be large or small...we are a country that has been set into a continuous loop of death and destruction throughout the world. A third party, a party that can bring the realization of this to the people...is exactly what this country is in desperate need of. Both political parties are only different by their ideas of how government money should be spent or not spent...and how they should make that money.

I personally feel that there is alot more to being an American than simply the almighty dollar. I feel that you agree..and I pray that you at least take my words into consideration.

I have a metaphor that I used the other day…and have been told it’s rather apt…allow me to reiterate and elaborate. I feel that this country is a plane...and that plane is spiraling downward toward it's own destruction...the pilot (republican) and the copilot (democrat) are both fast asleep...and we all know that it's just a matter of time before either the plane will crash and our way of life will be destroyed...or the people will finally realize that they have to bust down the doors of change...break into the body of our current political process…and grab the throttle to save us all from certain damnation.

In the 1992 presidential election, there was a 3rd party candidate (Perot) who attracted significant attention. Although he didn't win, he drew enough votes to scare the Republicrat junta. After that election, the dem-gop machine wrested control of the presidential debates from the League of Women Voters so they could bar third party candidates.

The corporations that control and manipulate this country (including DEM and GOP parties) also own the vast majority of media and know how to use it to their advantage. Even if everyone who reads this site knows what a scam it is, that's only a small fraction 0.01% of the population.

What's the solution? I wish I knew! It will need to include:

  • Reining in corporate power
  • Breaking up huge conglomorates, especially in the media
  • Getting ALL money out of elections

Everyone vote green and progressive ONLY!!!!!!!!!

And tell all these schmucks on this list, THAT THE NEOCONS WHO VOTED AGAINST HRES 375 ARE BEING WATCHED AND WILL BE FIRED!!!!!!!!!

WE WILL FORCE THEM ALL OUT!!!!!!!!

J.Gresham Barrett,SC. 202-225-5301. fx: 202-225-3216.
Mark Green, WI. 202-225-5665. fx: 202-225-5729.
Jeff Flake, AZ. 202-225-2635l fx, 202-226-4386.
Jeff Fortenberry, NE. 202-225-4806. fx, 202-225-5686.
Darrell Issa, CA. 202-225-3906. fx, 202-225-3303.
Christopher Smith, NJ. 202-225-3765. fx, 202-225-7768.
Joann Davis, VA. 202-225-4261. fx, 202-225-4382.
Jerry Weller, Ill. 202-225-3635. fx, 202-225-3521.
Dana Rohrabacher, CA. 202-225-2415. fx, 202-225-0145.
Dan Burton, IN. 202-225-2276. fx, 202-225-0016.
Elton Gallegly, CA. 202-225-5811. fx, 202-225-1100.
Joe Wilson, SC, 202-225-2452. fx, 202-225-3216.
Michael McCaul, TX. 202-225-2401. fx, 202-225-5547.
Steve Chabot, OH. 202-225-2216. fx, 202-225-3012.
Ted Poe, TX. 202-225-6565. fx, 202-225-5547
Thaddeus McCotter, MI. 202-225-8171. fx, 202-225-2667.
Connie Mac, FL. 202-225-2536. fx, 202-226-0439.
Tom Tancredo, CO. 202-225-7882. fx, 202-226-4623.
Ileana-RoxLehtinen, FL. 202-225-3931. fx, 202-225-5620.
Henry Hide, Chairman, IL. 202-225-4561. fx, 202-225-1166.
Katherine Harris, FL. 202-225-5015. fx, 202-226-0828.
John Boozeman, AR. 202-225-4301. fx, 202-225-5713.

It is time for TRUE accountability, it is time for US to take over once again!!!!!!!

Doug E.

I plum forgot that rat fuck Henry Hyde is from Illinois. Eventually, he will make an appearrence here in Spfld. Im gonna be lookin for that day and try to confront him with a video camera present to record the answer's ill ask him.. And pardon my french everybody...**HUMPHREY**

Your remarks about him are totally appropriate.

The difficulty in establashing a serious third party is the notion i have always heard. For instance, in the last election i was dissatisfied with either candidate and considered a, other than dem or repub. I was told that to vote for any third party candidate was essentially a vote for Bush. I would also argue that there needs to be more voter, or rather citizen imput on who is selected to run in any party. i was, im sorry to say, not satisfied with mr kerry being the democratic selectee for the dem party. Not like i was, with Al Gore. With VP Gores we knew what we were getting because we had had time to observe his conduct in that office and his time in that position surly prepared him for the duty of president. Mr Kerry's wealth, in my oppinion, disqualified him because, he could surly not have any true knowledge about ordinary American's and their needs.

But back to your third party subject. If there is to be a serious attempt at this, i hope carefull consideration would be made as to who will be selected to run for the countries highest office. Also, i would want to know who would be selected to fill the cabnet position's and their qualifications and intentions before the election. And knowledge that a sufficient background check has assured that there will be no suprises down the road. Skeletons in the closet i mean. This has appeared to be a reoccuring problem in both mainstream parties in cabnet selectee's, not to mention selectee's for the highest office having skeletons. These are the reasons people are turned off to regestering and voting. To name but a few. And your correct that there is serious danger of colaspe of this government. People falsely assume that can't occure. Welllll, all that has to happen is U S Currency eliminated as the currency for global trade. Which might occure anyway as a response to this current Administration's conduct around the world..**HUMPHREY**

Nothing short of a second revolution will save the United States of America from tyranny under a system of governance that is no less oppressive and dangerous to individual liberty than was that of King George III of England prior to the U.S. declaration of independence.

The enemy of the people today is not one king, nor one president, nor one political party alone. It is the system itself whereby the power that rightly belongs to all Americans, individually and collectively, has been completely overwhelmed by the power of wealth in the hands of a few. Sometimes referred to as if it were a founding principle, this perversion of "The American Way" is anything but that.

Despite clear evidence that the founders were biased in some measure toward the "landed gentry", it is equally clear that they did not intend an outcome where money and greed alone would determine the country's directions in all matters, both domestic and foreign. Yet that is precisely the status quo under a system of governance where the alleged "representatives of the people" are bought and paid for just like any other commodity under the "free market" (a.k.a. capitalist) economy.

To a very significant degree, all other national ills and threats to true "freedom and democracy" are mere corollaries of that single fact.

Freedom, by the way, means freedom of the people and democracy means "government of the people, by the people, for the people". In that true sense, freedom has nothing to do with "marketeering" practices and democracy has nothing to do with economic theories, neither "free market" nor otherwise. Beware Orwellian twisters of the language who do all in their power to create other meanings and who then use those inappropriate "synonyms" to justify both local imposition and forced exports of their own brands of "freedom and democracy".

Whether one examines America's military-industrial complex with its scandalous operations, "pork barrel" politics and "revolving doors", the concentration of U.S. media ownership, or the unfettered unconstitutional power placed in the hands of an imperial presidency, none could exist without the complicity of a legislature that is purchased by and totally subservient to the interests of a moneyed "elite".

Much of the moneyed power that governs the nation's domestic and foreign agendas today is expressed via "America Incorporated". (I use this title simply as a convenient rubric for the consensus amongst major corporate interests that are headquartered within the U.S.A., but by no means confined to its territory as shown on conventional maps.) This too is a gross distortion of the intent of the country's founders. Many of the principal actors in the American revolution, among them George Washington, wanted to throw off imperial rule precisely because they felt their own freedom was being disrupted by corporate interests such as the British East India Tea Company.

After the revolution, and for a hundred years, the American people bore a deep distrust of the corporation, and corporations were regulated severely. Corporate charters were created by individual states, and those states had the power to revoke that charter if the corporation was deemed to be acting against the public good or had deviated from its charter. During that time, corporations were not allowed to own other corporations, nor were they allowed to participate in the political process.

The corporate power Americans now accept and take for granted actually came about as the result of court decisions that were highly controversial in their own day. Most notable was the 1818 Supreme Court case "Dartmouth College v. Woodward," in which Daniel Webster, advocating for Dartmouth, argued passionately for the power of corporations in regards to property rights.

In domestic affairs, this has resulted in numerous legislative and other measures to limit dissent amongst ordinary citizens and thus to consolidate "elite" power. The so-called PATRIOT Act may be the most notable in recent times, but many others, including changes to bankruptcy laws, also contribute to an atmosphere of helpless "wage slavery" and public subservience to governmental authority rather than vice versa.

Where U.S. foreign adventures are concerned, the results are well documented by those most directly involved, such as U.S. Marine Corps Major General Smedley Darlington Butler. In his published work, Butler points out that war is a racket. "It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. ... It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes."

Dwight David Eisenhower's warning to the American people about the corruption of power has not merely been fulfilled but is now surpassed by a wide margin. Its predominant influences today extend across a vast array of congressional, military, industrial and non-governmental organizations and activities, not excluding elements of organized religions where Mammon has been the obvious victor over the gods of professed faiths.

In this confluence of church-state-military-industrial-media power, deliberately orchestrated by the "elite" class, ordinary citizens of the United States of America face almost insurmountable odds against any return to the ideals envisaged by the country's founders and reflected in Lincoln's immortal words at Gettysburg. The consolidated barriers are now huge and they increase exponentially almost on a daily basis.

Whether Americans retain sufficient revolutionary spirit to overcome tyranny a second time seems doubtful as the "civilized" debates about superficial preferences between the Tweedledum-Tweedledee duopoly within the existing political facade go on ad nauseum. It is abundantly clear, however, that nothing less than another popular rebellion against the system itself will have even a modest chance of success.

I'm not optimistic in the circumstances, but nothing would please me more than to be proven wrong.

An article written by Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman and published today by The Free Press concurs with the conclusion that American democracy itself is badly broken:

[U]nless the public is ready to face the reality that we no longer live in a nation with credible elections, the 2008 balloting is all but over. ... Unless our electoral system gets a total top-to-bottom revamp by an informed public willing to deal with the systematic poisoning of American democracy, there is no reason to bother printing the ballots or plugging in the voting machines in 2008.

"Beware Orwellian twisters of the language who do all in their power to create other meanings and who then use those inappropriate "synonyms"..."

But it is you who "twist" language to establish inappropriate synonyms.

First you succeed in attaching an entire system of fuzzy ambiguous negative connotations to a useful, neutral term; capitalism.

Having now subverted the capacity of your opponents to express their ideas, to which you have no rebuttal, you now proceed to attempt to silence us completely through the use of the "inappropriate synonym": "..."representatives of the people" are bought and paid for just like any other commodity under the "free market" (a.k.a. capitalist) economy."

To begin with, in the free market system, "representatives of the people", by which I assume you mean elected politicians, cannot be "bought" in the sense that you mean it, simply because they have nothing to sell.

A free market means just that, a system of private enterprises that answer to the consumers of the product or service they offer.They either succeed in satifying their clientele, or they go out of business,in a free market system THERE ARE NO OTHER POSSIBILITIES.

Your "representatives of the people" cannot save them from the displeasure of the people, because the ESSENSE of the free market system is the separation of government and economics.

You need to obfuscate the facts, so you can conveniently conflate your twisted, self-servingly and willfully inaccurate version of the "free market" with the status quo; a FASCIST OLIGARCHY.

I must concede you one point, a free market and the fascist oligrachy with which you attempt to confuse it, do share ONE characteristic in common:they do require an ongoing process of accumulation of fungible material assests toward the ends of financing privately owned, profit generating enterprises.But to hang your entire system of "anti-capitalist" nonsense on this one fact is the same quality of logic as pointing out that a dog has four legs and therefore is necessarily a cat.

This, of course you have facilitated for yourself by trashing the term "capitalism"; your purpose being to prevent the expression of the concept it represents, basic newspeak strategy.As alluded to in the preceeding paragraph,capitalism is merely the accumulation of transferable material assets toward the purpose of financing an enterprise who's purpose is to generate profits(the excess funds remaining after obligations are met, in case you have any other obfuscatory plans).

Now that we've reestablished capitalism as a useable objective term,rather than the empty, meaningless shiboleth to which you had reduced it for you ulterior purpose, one thing becomes eminently clear;any system that proports to lift man above mere subsistence, must employ some element of capitalism, even one such as yours, which must rely on obscuring it's true nature and the basics of economics in order for it's adherents to promote it successfully.

Let us return to the matter of common characteristics.We will now compare the aforementioned FACSIST OLIGARCHY with the system I take you by implication,to advocate.As I am working here on an assumption, I'll be brief.Let's just look at this:

Wikipedia

"Fascism was typified by attempts to impose state control over all aspects of life."

"Fascism was, in many respects, an adverse reaction to...the perceived failure of laissez-faire economics"

"Socialism is an ideology with the core belief that a society should exist in which popular collectives control the means of...production"

Big difference.In either case, the individual loses his most fundamental freedom, his right to enjoy the benefits of his own labors, rather than everyone's production being accumulated and redistributed by bureaucrats.Thus reducing the individual to hapless beggar to fill his own needs and a hopeless slave, that the needs of others be filled.
"Freedom, by the way, means freedom of the people". No you sanctimonious fool,freedom is the normal, natural state of affairs, as EXPERIENCED BY THE INDIVIDUAL.It is founded, along with it's essential, inextricable reciprocal,RESPONSIBILITY, on the individual's most fundamental intrinsic quality as relates directly to issues of social structure: AUTONOMY. It is man's fundamental nature that mandates a minimally restrictive social enviornment, that the individual be free to use the one tool nature provided for the species' success: his INDIVIDUAL intellect.He cannot even begin to do this in a social enviornment that systematically deprives him of the fruits of his labors by force and threat of violence.

You're very fond of allusions to the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.Well try this on for size:"...that all men...are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and PROPERTY..." I can't imagine a statement more inimical to the philosophy I take you top espouse.

---The Bikemessenger

"Beware Orwellian twisters of the language who do all in their power to create other meanings and who then use those inappropriate "synonyms"..."

But it is you who "twist" language to establish inappropriate synonyms.

First you succeed in attaching an entire system of fuzzy ambiguous negative connotations to a useful, neutral term; capitalism.

Having now subverted the capacity of your opponents to express their ideas, to which you have no rebuttal, you now proceed to attempt to silence us completely through the use of the "inappropriate synonym": "..."representatives of the people" are bought and paid for just like any other commodity under the "free market" (a.k.a. capitalist) economy."

To begin with, in the free market system, "representatives of the people", by which I assume you mean elected politicians, cannot be "bought" in the sense that you mean it, simply because they have nothing to sell.

A free market means just that, a system of private enterprises that answer to the consumers of the product or service they offer.They either succeed in satifying their clientele, or they go out of business,in a free market system THERE ARE NO OTHER POSSIBILITIES.

Your "representatives of the people" cannot save them from the displeasure of the people, because the ESSENSE of the free market system is the separation of government and economics.

You need to obfuscate the facts, so you can conveniently conflate your twisted, self-servingly and willfully inaccurate version of the "free market" with the status quo; a FASCIST OLIGARCHY.

I must concede you one point, a free market and the fascist oligrachy with which you attempt to confuse it, do share ONE characteristic in common:they do require an ongoing process of accumulation of fungible material assests toward the ends of financing privately owned, profit generating enterprises.But to hang your entire system of "anti-capitalist" nonsense on this one fact is the same quality of logic as pointing out that a dog has four legs and therefore is necessarily a cat.

This, of course you have facilitated for yourself by trashing the term "capitalism"; your purpose being to prevent the expression of the concept it represents, basic newspeak strategy.As alluded to in the preceeding paragraph,capitalism is merely the accumulation of transferable material assets toward the purpose of financing an enterprise who's purpose is to generate profits(the excess funds remaining after obligations are met, in case you have any other obfuscatory plans).

Now that we've reestablished capitalism as a useable objective term,rather than the empty, meaningless shiboleth to which you had reduced it for you ulterior purpose, one thing becomes eminently clear;any system that proports to lift man above mere subsistence, must employ some element of capitalism, even one such as yours, which must rely on obscuring it's true nature and the basics of economics in order for it's adherents to promote it successfully.

Let us return to the matter of common characteristics.We will now compare the aforementioned FACSIST OLIGARCHY with the system I take you by implication,to advocate.As I am working here on an assumption, I'll be brief.Let's just look at this:

Wikipedia

"Fascism was typified by attempts to impose state control over all aspects of life."

"Fascism was, in many respects, an adverse reaction to...the perceived failure of laissez-faire economics"

"Socialism is an ideology with the core belief that a society should exist in which popular collectives control the means of...production"

Big difference.In either case, the individual loses his most fundamental freedom, his right to enjoy the benefits of his own labors, rather than everyone's production being accumulated and redistributed by bureaucrats.Thus reducing the individual to hapless beggar to fill his own needs and a hopeless slave, that the needs of others be filled.
"Freedom, by the way, means freedom of the people". No you sanctimonious fool,freedom is the normal, natural state of affairs, as EXPERIENCED BY THE INDIVIDUAL.It is founded, along with it's essential, inextricable reciprocal,RESPONSIBILITY, on the individual's most fundamental intrinsic quality as relates directly to issues of social structure: AUTONOMY. It is man's fundamental nature that mandates a minimally restrictive social enviornment, that the individual be free to use the one tool nature provided for the species' success: his INDIVIDUAL intellect.He cannot even begin to do this in a social enviornment that systematically deprives him of the fruits of his labors by force and threat of violence.

You're very fond of allusions to the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.Well try this on for size:"...that all men...are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and PROPERTY..." I can't imagine a statement more inimical to the philosophy I take you top espouse.

---The Bikemessenger

But The "Orwellian Twister" Is You

"Beware Orwellian twisters of the language who do all in their power to create other meanings and who then use those inappropriate "synonyms"..."

But it is you who "twist" language to establish inappropriate synonyms.

First you succeed in attaching an entire system of fuzzy ambiguous negative connotations to a useful, neutral term; capitalism.

Having now subverted the capacity of your opponents to express their ideas, to which you have no rebuttal, you now proceed to attempt to silence us completely through the use of the "inappropriate synonym": "..."representatives of the people" are bought and paid for just like any other commodity under the "free market" (a.k.a. capitalist) economy."

To begin with, in the free market system, "representatives of the people", by which I assume you mean elected politicians, cannot be "bought" in the sense that you mean it, simply because they have nothing to sell.

A free market means just that, a system of private enterprises that answer to the consumers of the product or service they offer.They either succeed in satifying their clientele, or they go out of business,in a free market system THERE ARE NO OTHER POSSIBILITIES.

Your "representatives of the people" cannot save them from the displeasure of the people, because the ESSENSE of the free market system is the separation of government and economics.

You need to obfuscate the facts, so you can conveniently conflate your twisted, self-servingly and willfully inaccurate version of the "free market" with the status quo; a FASCIST OLIGARCHY.

I must concede you one point, a free market and the fascist oligrachy with which you attempt to confuse it, do share ONE characteristic in common:they do require an ongoing process of accumulation of fungible material assests toward the ends of financing privately owned, profit generating enterprises.But to hang your entire system of "anti-capitalist" nonsense on this one fact is the same quality of logic as pointing out that a dog has four legs and therefore is necessarily a cat.

This, of course you have facilitated for yourself by trashing the term "capitalism"; your purpose being to prevent the expression of the concept it represents, basic newspeak strategy.As alluded to in the preceeding paragraph,capitalism is merely the accumulation of transferable material assets toward the purpose of financing an enterprise who's purpose is to generate profits(the excess funds remaining after obligations are met, in case you have any other obfuscatory plans).

Now that we've reestablished capitalism as a useable objective term,rather than the empty, meaningless shiboleth to which you had reduced it for you ulterior purpose, one thing becomes eminently clear;any system that proports to lift man above mere subsistence, must employ some element of capitalism, even one such as yours, which must rely on obscuring it's true nature and the basics of economics in order for it's adherents to promote it successfully.

Let us return to the matter of common characteristics.We will now compare the aforementioned FACSIST OLIGARCHY with the system I take you by implication,to advocate.As I am working here on an assumption, I'll be brief.Let's just look at this:

Wikipedia

"Fascism was typified by attempts to impose state control over all aspects of life."

"Fascism was, in many respects, an adverse reaction to...the perceived failure of laissez-faire economics"

"Socialism is an ideology with the core belief that a society should exist in which popular collectives control the means of...production"

Big difference.In either case, the individual loses his most fundamental freedom, his right to enjoy the benefits of his own labors, rather than everyone's production being accumulated and redistributed by bureaucrats.Thus reducing the individual to hapless beggar to fill his own needs and a hopeless slave, that the needs of others be filled.
"Freedom, by the way, means freedom of the people". No you sanctimonious fool,freedom is the normal, natural state of affairs, as EXPERIENCED BY THE INDIVIDUAL.It is founded, along with it's essential, inextricable reciprocal,RESPONSIBILITY, on the individual's most fundamental intrinsic quality as relates directly to issues of social structure: AUTONOMY. It is man's fundamental nature that mandates a minimally restrictive social enviornment, that the individual be free to use the one tool nature provided for the species' success: his INDIVIDUAL intellect.He cannot even begin to do this in a social enviornment that systematically deprives him of the fruits of his labors by force and threat of violence.

You're very fond of allusions to the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.Well try this on for size:"...that all men...are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and PROPERTY..." I can't imagine a statement more inimical to the philosophy I take you top espouse.

---The Bikemessenger

Yes to all you say. This government is corrupt. This government is taking,Your rights, Your freedom as you write. All I ask is that you find your humanity. Government is the people.

Thank you for your comments.

I hope that I am In touch with my humanity, as I attempt to extrapolate what is appropriate to human social structure, I try to both introspect and observe like entities to what I find within,i.e., my fellow human beings.

What I am arguing FOR is the preemption of corruption in government by removal of the incentive.As with all libertarian solutions, they are preemptive, rather than ameliorative.And therefore, must be viewed in the context of the basic nature of the entities directly involved.

The government cannot take your rights.Your rights are, as Jefferson put it,unalienable.They cannot be taken from you, they can only be violated,which is what we experience today.

I do not agree that government is the people, but it does derive it's power from the people.

I only hope that the lessons of the past century or so are learned; that the expansion of governmental authority, regardless of the avowed purpose, can lead to no good.

That like a hurricane in nature, once it attains a certain degree of organization and order of magnitude, it cannot be prevented from acting destructively and with impunity.

That is why the founders imposed strict limitations on the federal government in the Constitution. Limits that preclude a good ninety percent of what the government does.
Congressman Ron Paul ( www.house.gov/paul/ ) presents this argument frequently before congress when opposing a given inappropriate law before the House, such as the authorization for war in Iraq, or the "patriot"act.

These limits are neither outmoded or obsolete.Rather, they are based upon an understanding of the fundamental nature of both government and the human species. And in that sence, are virtually timeless.

---The Bikemessenger

If you think that politicians have "nothing to sell" and that they cannot be bought, you're either hoplessly naive or you simply haven't been paying attention.

And if you think that capitalist enterprise has any form of public good is its goal, you're equally mistaken. The aim of the corporation is singular and straightforward: maximize profit. Buying political influence is one of their primary methods for achieving that end.

Before attempting to lecture others, educate yourself.

Good grief, man. What planet do you live on?

Some of them aren't just bought. Some, like the current vice-president and secretary of state, for example, are wholly owned subsidiaries of wonderful capitalist enterprises like Halliburton and Exxon-Mobil respectively.

As for your idea that capitalist enterprises "answer to the consumers of the product or service they offer", I've seen scant evidence of that alleged corporate undertaking recently. In fact, I'm quite certain that your concept would be a very surprising notion and an enormously unwelcome suggestion for the people to whom shareholder capitalism actually answers.

"Burn, baby, burn!! That's a beautiful thing," -- Enron energy trader celebrating the massive fire that shut down a major transmission line into California.

"Yeah. We never give money back. Look at Halliburton and the military right now. Cheney and Halliburton just say, 'Pay up, Pentagon. Or we'll cut you off and let the troops die.' And blam! Generals crumble at the feet of Halliburton, so as not to jeopardize their chances of working for Halliburton when they retire." -- Enron executive caught on tape.

If that's being answerable to consumers, you must have your own strange Orwellian definition of the process.

Presumably,the same planet as you;unless you can present evidence of communication between intelligent denizens of at least two distinct planets!

You misconstrue what I am suggesting. What you say is correct about the V.P. and Sec. of State.I do not deny that, rather I suggest that the concentration of power that makes that possible must be dispersed.

That merely attempting to replace the "bad" office holders with "good" office holders does not solve the problem, although it may appear to transiently due to the replacement's awareness of the disanchantment that brought his predecessor down.

These matters require examination at a much more abstract, fundamental level than is commonly practiced.At the level where human nature, i.e., those universal characterics intrinsic to each of us that allow us to distinguish our fellows from other existants may be observed.

From this understanding,it should be clear that the structure of human society should be such that the control that any given person has over the behavior and actions of any other given person should be strictly limited.

This, I submit, is the basic concept underlying the principle of limited government as delineated in the Constitution.

I DO NOT state that politicians have "nothing to sell".clearly, they do. Rather, I suggest that they SHOULD have nothing to sell.

I try to pay as much attention as I can.If I am naive, I can only ask you not to give up hope for me, but rather attempt to enlighten me.

No, I don't think that a capitalist enterprise has "public good" as it's goal. The purpose of capitalist enterprise is to turn a profit.You are very observant in pointing out that"Buying political influence is one of their primary methods for achieving that end."This is a point I have made time and again, but not as succinctly as you just have.

I suggest that rather than demonizing capitalist enterprises, which are essential to the production and distribution of goods and services, that in their persuit of profit, they should find themselves in an enviornment that leaves no avenue to profit save the pleasure of those who consume whatever product or service they presumably are in the business of providing.

This precludes functioning at the pleasure of the bureaucrat.

Of course you see scant evidence of this, because again, you misconstrue what I say;you confuse what I propose with what I observe (essentially, the same as what you observe).

The former is, as you suggest, is"a very surprising notion and an enormously unwelcome suggestion for the people to whom shareholder capitalism actually answers."

No one hates the free market more than a successful, established corporation.They much prefer a cozy, mutually beneficial relationship with government regulators to having to constantly fight off ambitious,innovative competitors,and/or adjust to changing demands, the uncomfortable position to which I would move them.

""Burn, baby, burn!! That's a beautiful thing," -- Enron energy trader celebrating the massive fire that shut down a major transmission line into California."

If your only source of income was to keep your transmission line sound, would you celebrate it's burning?

And if that Enron Executive caught on tape did'nt have access to no-bid contracts,which a free market system would strictly forbid, would he display such arrogance?

No, nothing that you describe constitutes being answerable to the consumers;it constitutes being answerable to government. And that's the problem.

A problem not amenable to the superficial "solution" of installing a socialist bureaucracy in the place of the current fascist oligrachy.

A problem that is, in essence, not amenable at all,but is rather so fundamental as to require a preemptive solution; the fundamental restructuring from a centralized,government regulated economy, where capitalist enterprises must please the bureaucrat, to a free market system, where the capitalist enterprise must please the comsumer.

But the central point that I am making is not so much in advocacy of a free market system as to establish it's radical,fundamental distinctness from fascism, a distinctness the author of"Nothing Will Save America But Revolution"attempts to obliterate from discourse.

When I accuse him of Orwellian newspeak, that is no casual hurling of empty epithet,but a precise, pointed accusation of the utmost acuity: His explicit purpose is not to attempt to refute the propositions of free market advocates but to subvert language itself as to render our thoughts unutterable.

But hopefully, whether you agree or disagree with the free market system, you will appreciate that it is something of a fundamentally differnent nature from what we experience in America today.

---Thank you,

The Bikemessenger

P.S. If you would be of kind as to take ten more minutes to view this animation, it expresses free market and libertarian ideals in a simple and compelling fashion that no words of mine ever could: http://www.isil.org/resources/introduction.html

I agree with every thing you say. Bush and the PNAC LIE.!!!!!

We have to get you into politics. This is the thinking that will get people to understand the truth. We need strong leaders to tell the truth. John Conyers has been there, for all of us. I say Conyers in the next election. If we have one!

And,,,,if we don't have one? Or,,,if the next one is subverted like the last two probably were???..8 more years of posting meaningless rhetoric here, on AFTERDOWNONGSTREET.ORG? Where the proclaimtion is repeated daily "wWE MUST TAKE BACK OUR COUNTRY!"**HUMPHREY**

Hideous Henry Hyde and Got no Sensenbrenner head two committees in Congress which effectively block a lot of attempts at accountability or visibility. Sensenbrenner was crucial in the renewal of Patriot Act II. These are the same hacks that ranted endlessly about the rule of law during the Monicagate debacle. Now with Hastert, Delay, Rove, Cheney and others under investigation and/or impending indictments (hopefully) we don’t hear much about the rule of law anymore.
These creeps got their positions for being good puppets.

Newsweek is carrying a story, which states that Bush may try to replace Fitzgerald as chief investigator of Rovegate/Plamegate and other crimes. This is outrageous. Why has it taken two years to finish this investigation? Indictments of the criminal activities of bushcon in combination with the peace movement can give us the sufficient momentum to make some big Congressional changes.

People that say bush cant be forced to resign underestimate the power of the American people. Once we realized Nixon lied about Watergate, he was forced to resign. The White House phone bank nearly melted down from the number of phone calls made. Nixon resigned to avoid impeachment. Revealed, reported truth and American public opinion forced him out of office!!!

People who say there is no hope of getting rid of bush are playing right into the fear, despair, and ignorance which keeps him in power. Cindy showed us that one person can make a difference. How much more can we do as a united group? Three and a half more years of bushco is simply intolerable. A massive movement of committed Americans can force Bush out of office.

What power? I haven't seen much evidence of any people power so far. I think you're dreaming in technicolor. The president ignored the demonstrations (called them "focus groups") before the war. Why would he pay any attention to them now?

Even in the highly unlikely that Bush did resign at some point, he faces nothing more than a comfortable retirement like Nixon did. And do you really think that a Cheney (or Hastert) takeover would change anything. Or that a takeover by any one of the current Democrat "leadership" would change much, for that matter.

Yet again, and this time hopefully it will stick and a true party of the people will emerge.

Doug E.

But Bush&co are guilty of high crimes, the evidence is there; surely, even if they manage to get through the term,they can still be held accountable. Presidential pardons can't cover everything and everyone.

Perhaps,I've been wondering for a while, the broad scope,extreme severity and vast magnitude of their crimes is what makes it difficult to break the log-jam, so to speak.

What I'm getting at is that there is so much wrong to be acknowledged,that the average person,knowing it intuitively, finds it difficult to accept, and therefore evades. They fear the upheavals and potential disruptions; after all, if all guilty parties are brought to justice, will there be anyone left to mind the store in D.C.?

Elsewhere, I facetiously ask about the Chicago city council's position in the Presidential order of succession:
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/2986#comment-22342

---The Bikemessenger

Nothing that will be infallible in court, thats for sure!

Because the GOP is HIDING that evidence and are traitors. And by the way, many in the democrat leadership are just as BAD, so no matter what, it will take a revolution for this all to come down.

Doug E.

Just for comtinueity, is the revolution you speak of the same revolution i have been talking about lately?**HUMPHREY**

With that kind of hopeless negative thinking you are right.
You have no power. None. Keep your weak negativity to yourself.
It leads nowhere. Cynicism is not intelligence. Its just negativity.
Bush thrives on it.

Are all doubts about wishful dreams "cynicism" and "weak negativity"? Is it more intelligent simply to block them out?

In fact, what you replied to was a series of perfectly realistic questions. And your only answer is to tell the doubter to keep all such questions to himself, suggesting that you simply want to avoid anything that conflicts with your own rosy optimism. How intelligent is that?

We are the government. We have to tell the truth to the public. The media is owned by 6 corporations. Tell everyone, tell your friends.People you are power. WE ARE AN ARMY THAT CAN CHANGE THIS BULL SHIT. In the next few days we will see our government in action or in no reaction. The one thing we always have to remember is that we are the government! We are the government. We are the government!

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has."
---Margaret Mead,anthropologist

Of course, the rub is that you can never know in advance if your's will be one of the small groups that succeeds. So you have to follow the dictates of your conscience and try.

---The Bikemessenger

We are not a small group of people! This is a front of democrats and republicans who are pissed off! The republicans are divided and do not agree with the way this president is handling this government!

I just wiped my ass with your constitution and bill of rights, as a civil servant to the public. As you know, the Downing Street Minutes are nothing but Kerry-campaign propaganda by un-named sources.....

Just baseless accusations. You can't get Congress to move based on such frivilous nonsense.

Please america wake up, you can't stop me. Neocons run congress now, and don't you forget about my amazing face.

I am the law now. Don't you dare stand up to me, like they say in my neck of the woods...."What goes around comes around."

If you defy my order, I will throw a tantrum in public and that will make you all shutup. Just remember who writes the law, it is me my friends.

Now then, what are you going to do come the 24th?

Give up like good little civilians? I could pay you all a nice sum of money.....

Henry "Jekyll" Hyde

http://www.heartbone.com/various/RedPillVideos.html#D43

Click on above link and find Karen's interview as it is listed below, then hear the WHOLE TRUTH & NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH about the Office of Special Plans and the LIES to Iraq War:

»»» The Clinton Chronicles
Disc 1
The Clinton Chronicles Part 1 1:18:49
Disc 2
The Clinton Chronicles Part 2 24:15
Kevin Phillips - Bush Crimes 26:36
Col. Karen Kwiatkowski Interview 28:02

COME ON DOWN HERE TO SPRINGFIELD HENRY I GOT SOMETHIN FER YOUR TURNCOAT PUNK ASS BITCH.

HENRY, IF YOU WERE IN A TENT,,AND YOU WOKE UP AND DISCOVERED YOUR ASS WAS ALL GREASY AND SORE,,WOULD YOU TELL ANYBODY?....NO?
You wanna go camping?

I just felt like induldging this morning in a little sick humor.
Forgive me. Sometimes its necessary to induldge in fun.**humpy**

The governor of LA asked for federal state of emergency on the 26 this is fact! This is true. I have gone online and there is blame pointed towards her for not asking for help. She asked before the hurricane. I am pissed at the way she is being scaped goated. Bush was on vacation, Chertoff was off some where talking about B.S and our people were dying. The truth is that this government was iresponsible. That is the word. Or are they just killers?

/ You deside!

Texas is in good hands under my leadership, remember no one will ever figure out the crimes I did.

I'm untouchable....It's me Tom! I'm a great pal to everyone......Give me some more money, I'm the greates thing that ever happened to texas!!!!!

What's this about them requiring a paper ballot in my State? They better not. I own the voting machines. I will never go away.

Face the inevitable, for I am....Tom hear me roar!!!!!

What Congress? I own Hastert and Congress and I am the Federal Government.

Tom Delay

AIN'T NOTHIN IN TEXAS BUT STEERS N QUEERS AN I DON'T SEE NO HORNS ON YOU BOY!**HUMPHREY**

Then we need to start making an equal amount of noise about legitimizng the vote. NOW.

I have nothing but the highest praise for the true patriots in Washington who are fighting the good fight and exposing the Bush fraud. But if the people must wait until next November (which is highly likely) to vote all the bastards out and get the impeachment ball rolling, we must have confidence that our will is accurately reflected in that vote.

As you might recall (he notes with much sarcasm), we have not had a legitmate national election in this country for some time now.

If we allow ourselves to lazily fall back on the "we'll get'em in '06" mantra, then we're setting ourselves up for yet another election scam. With the stakes as high as they are, we just cannot let that happen.

Remember 2000 - When Dubya "won" Florida, and thus the presidency, by 537 votes, because the "Supreme" Court, instead of conducting a genuine quest for the truth, simply said "stop the recounting".

Remember 9/11 - The 56 warnings that were ignored, the 100 meetings that Condi Rice's National Security Council had before they got around to talking about terrorism, the August 6th Presidential Daily Brief (PDB) that Bush asked for then ignored because he had to get started on his vacation. You know, the one that said "Bin Laden determined to attack within the United States".

Remember the pre-war charade - Promises of "only as a last resort", fear mongering images of "Smoking gun in the form of a mushroom cloud", WMD and a nuclear "deal" between Iraq and Niger thet never existed, and on, and on, and on...

Remember May 1st, 2003 - "Mission Accomplished".

Remember 2004 - When in many Florida and Ohio districts on Election Day, Dubya got more "votes" than there were registered voters. And when in Warren County Ohio they took the unprecedented step of locking down the building where the votes were being counted, preventing any public viewing of process, because local officials there said there was a terror threat level of 10 on the building, but nobody from the FBI or Homeland Security had any knowledge of any such threat.

Remember Katrina.

We don't need a national voter ID card. We need voting results and government we can trust. Which is why the demand for legitimate elections must be ringing as loudly and clearly as the demand to end the war.

John Perry
http://www.johnperryonline.com

Hey Johnny,

Now you think the Right stole ANOTHER election in 2004? You people can not accept any defeat can you? It was the Left that cheated like crazy all over this country and now that Jimmy Carter wants ID cards to vote you will come up with some other way cheat. MoveOn.org was an election fraud network paid for by George Soros and Co. This great idea got beat fair and square and you can't swallow that pill, STILL. Pathetic. Did you know that every illegal vote disenfranchises just as many good votes? You people want illegal immigrants to vote, you want people to vote in multiple districts and you want people to be able to vote that are dead. These are YOUR tactics, not mine.

What about all the warnings Clinton had in the 8 YEARS he was in office???? What about ABLE DANGER? What about the fact that Osama was offered to Clinton and he said no thanks??? What about the 4 ATTACKS that took place against the US on HIS WATCH???? What about the fact that he cut defense spending so mush that NORAD wasn't able to locate the final 2 planes fast enough??? 8 months vs 8 years is hard to argue who holds more resposibility you IDIOT!!!! I have read the 9-11 Commission too so I have more about Clinton if you want me to continue????? Why are you not asking him more questions about his failures in office on the terror issue???? Oh yeah, he is a Democrat... You people are such hypocrits...

Kerry got more votes in Wisconsin and Colorado Districts than there were registered voters too. Why don't you bring that up????? Oh yeah, he is a Democrat...

Remember what can happen when the local and state governements drop the ball on their constituents. Not the federal government in N.O. PLEASE remember Katrina...

Remember that JIMMY CARTER thinks it is a good idea to have national ID cards to STOP vote fraud. They'd be FREE so not to disenfranchise ANYONE that is a legal US citizen.

You people never cease to amaze me,

Richie "The Right Wing Kook" Rich

To date,,you and i haven't had any verbal confrontation's..I'de like to initiate a conversation with you. FOR openers, may i ask you the oppinion's you hold, to the following;

1. ON THE PROJECT FOR A NEW AMERICAN CENTURY
2. ON YOUR VIEW'S RELITIVE TO THE EVENTS OF 911 IE. WHO ORCHASTRATED THIS, DO YOU HOLD WITH ANY OF THE OPPINIONS AND EVIDENCE BROUGHT OUT BY THE INDEPENDENT CITIZENS 911 COMMISSION, OR DO YOU HOLD ABSOLUTELY WITH THE OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT 911 COMMISSION?
3. PRIOR TO THE INVASION OF IRAQ, DID YOU SUPPORT THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION'S CLAIMS AND RATIONAL FOR INVADING IRAQ? DO YOU CURRENTLY HOLD THAT THE NOW MODIFIED RATIONAL IS EXCEPTIBLE.
4. DO YOU FEEL THAT THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION AND ENTIRE CABNET REPRESENT TRUE TRADITIONAL REPUBLICAN VALUES OR DOES THIS CURRENT GROUP REPRESENT FRINGE, POSSIBLY FASCIST TYPE VALUES?
5. HAVE YOU EVER SERVED IN THE MILLITARY AND IF SO, WHAT WAS YOUR MOS DESIGNATION?

These are five simple direct question's i ask you in order that i may understand you better. I think these are totally reasonable questions and i hope you'll try to answer truthfully, and from what reflects your beliefs. I will check back here often to see your answers. Any one else who may engadge in discussion with ritchie in other posting's in ads.org, please advise richie of this group of question here. thank you.**HUMPHREY**

I am at work and will respond tonight from home.

See you soon,

Richie "The Right Wing Kook" Rich

RECEIVED AND ACKNOWLEDGED.. ANY QUESTION'S FOR ME YOU MIGHT HAVE?

Sorry it took me so long, I was out making money.

To answer your first question, I have no done much research on that group. Is it the Republican version of ACT or moveon.org? I went on the website, read the statement of principles, and that seems to be what it is so I can understand why people on this site wouldn’t like it.

Your second question is easily answered. From all the verifiable PROOF that is out there, I can only conclude that Osama and Co. orchestrated and carried out the attack. I don’t believe in the conspiracy theories that I have read from this site and others. From the many documentaries I have seen, including F 9-11, and reports I have read I know 9-11 was the biggest terrorist attack in US history. There were people just like this back during the attack on Pearl Harbor that thought it was orchestrated by the U.S. Government. People need to wake up and accept the reality of a situation. But because a Republican is in office, it is their fault. It really is sad people don’t have more to do with their time.

I did support Bush’s reasoning for invading Iraq. Saddam was a goof that gassed his own people and should not be left in power to possibly obtain WMD’s. The other problem was that his son’s were crazier than he was so by killing them we definitely made the surrounding areas safer for the foreseeable future. I do admit that the lack of finding WMD’s in Iraq does not show well for Bush but why is HE to plan for being given bad intelligence? You have to remember that CLINTON presented the SAME information in 1998 to gain approval to use military force in Iraq but did nothing. Why are you not questioning the CIA/FBI? Is it because that it may show huge faults lie in the lap of Clinton and his 8 years in office before Bush? Able Danger? And you wonder why that keeps getting postponed????

I think Bush would have been better received had he come to the public and said, “Listen, we got bad intelligence and I admit that but we have just created the single largest humanitarian effort in world history. Freeing those people from Saddam was a wonderful thing. If you look through the BS in the media, you can actually find countless stories to back that up. Iraq is in a better place. It is the outsiders that are trying to start a civil war, not the people of Iraq. They know what their future holds even if the people on this site don’t.

Do I thing the admin resemble fascists? Are you kidding me? Absolutely not and here is why:

http://www.publiceye.org/eyes/whatfasc.html

Bushco is nothing like this at all. I mean I know Bush is a racist and hates poor people but he is far from a fascist. I love how all the rape and murder in N.O. is turning out to be BS just to try and make Bush look bad…Another backfire for the Left.

To answer your last question, no I have not. I do have friends that have served in Iraq & Afghan recently. Wait, so now you are going to tell me to sign up right!?!?!? That is such a ridiculous thing to say for supporting someone it makes me laugh. If the US is so bad, move to France. That is the same thing. It is childish and holds no water what so ever.

My questions for you:

1) How can Bush possibly be responsible for things that are completely out of his control? We didn’t blame the 14 hurricanes that happened during 1991-2000 on Clinton but now Katrina is Bush’s fault? How????

2) Why are none of the good things that are happening in Iraq being publicized in the mainstream media? There is plenty of it going on.

3) How is 9-11 Bush’s fault when Clinton had 4 attacks on his watch and didn’t virtually NOTHING about it?

4) How is Bush so pro business and pro wealth when the single greatest time of wealth creation in the US happened during the Clinton Admin?

5) How is Bush a racist when he has done more to help the poor than Clinton did? More money spent and lower poverty rates under Bush but Bush hate poor people and blacks? Rice, Gonzales, Powell, Brown???? Bush has more minorities in his Admin than Clinton ever did…How is that possible? Maybe because the left lies to blacks and poor people???

OK, I am done.

Richie “The Right Wing Kook

I think the best thing we can do…is to talk to both Cindy Sheehan, John Conyers, any other senators and politicians that you feel are genuinely good people and interested in the well being of the people…and then also contact all the different activist groups...like VFP, Gold Star...and form a merger of activist groups...form a large coalition of people and organizations that want to see change in this country...and together we will be immense. We will then be able to design a third party exactly how we desire it. It will be a party designed by the people, for the betterment of the people. It has been a long time since the angry masses have established a suitable party to attend to their needs. We can no longer just look at the options that are given to us...perhaps it is time that we create a new option...a better option.

An options that actually gives a shit about our well being. (excuse my language)

Alright...I'm the guy who discussed creating the third party. I'm the guy who posted below talking about it's need...and how we have reached a point of stagnation in our political process.

I'm dead serious about this guys. I've already emailed that suggestion to the goldstar website, and to the nearest chapter to me of VFP.

If anyone else things this is as good an idea, and would really like to toss around some ideas...my email is d_dacey@hotmail.com

I don't usually just give that out on a forum...but I'm incredibly interested in seeing if this can go somewhere.

It would be a good idea, except for one thing,there are already literally dozens of third parties out there, and more forming all the time.

I researched this matter extensively.I've concluded that there are three third partys that are legitimate,have fairly stable organizations and have actually run and elected candidates.

If you study their positions on issues,I'm sure you'll find that amongst the three of them the vast majority would find themselves well represented by one of them:

The Consitution Party;Fundamentalist christian theocratic,anti-statist:

http://www.constitutionparty.com/

The Green Party:An international party more prominent in various other countries.Left-wing statist,enviornmentalist.Frankly, given the ideological position that seems to predominate at this site, I can't understand why you all insist on continuing to grovel to the Democrats instead of supporting those who truly represent your
beliefs.

http://gp.org/

But sadly, the strict self-disiplinarian reasoning and acute scrutiny that would require would'nt allow you to entertain that ideology to begin with.

Indeed,it's hard to come by in my own party:

http://www.lp.org/

Ironically, none of them would be a good fit for war mongering neo-con imperialists, as all three vehemently oppose the war in Iraq in paricular and military aggression in general.

But are'nt there already a couple of partys representing them?

Bushco has no concern for our safety and security, Katrina proved that. No more BS "security" acts.

SECRECY by BUSHCO is our WORST ENEMY> WE THE PEOPLE MUST DEMAND FOIA OF BUSHCO NOW.

CORPORATIONS SHOULD HAVE NO RIGHTS > RIGHTS ONLY BELONG TO WE THE PEOPLE.

Cindy, you are ranting against the wrong person(s). The President is the President because over 50 million people voted for him. That is who you should be upset with, the people who voted for Bush are the ones who want the oil, and want to see innocent Americans die for nothing. Bush is just doing what his VOTERS want him to do. Bush is just doing what his VOTERS put him in office to do.

I wish you would be honest about this. Your fight is not with Bush, it is with the people who put the President where he is today. It is the tens of millions of your fellow Americans who are the killers, the morally corrupt, and have no compassion for poor people. You need to come out an admit that. If you have the guts to.

The President's supporters knew who he was when they voted for him in the last election. They voted for him because they are just like he is. Admit it, you know this is true. So lets not pretend like he is the REAL problem, when you know it is the tens of miilions of American's who voted for him. It is American's who you hate and despise. If only you could admit that to yourself.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Support WarIsACrime



Donate.








Tweet your Congress critters here.


Advertise on this site!




Facebook      Twitter





Our Store:



















Movie Memorabilia.



The log-in box below is only for bloggers. Nobody else will be able to log in because we have not figured out how to stop voluminous spam ruining the site. If you would like us to have the resources to figure that out please donate. If you would like to receive occasional emails please sign up. If you would like to be a blogger here please send your resume.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.