Is anyone really convinced that if the D's win control or the R's retain control it will make much of a difference? Lets face it, the names might change but the game will be the same. Attack and counter attack, More poor, one sided legislation and more pork from a flawed and outdated system. Do you think that either party is interested in anything other than advancing their own agenda and counting coup on the other side. What are the odds of significant change being made on the way business is being done on the national, state and local levels without signinficent change? Unless we, the voters reject the status quo and drag the politicians screaming and kicking into a new way of governing our country, things will never change. Unless Unity08 is a catalyst for change without choosing sides, then we are a fart in the wind. Mark said we need youth in our movement and he is right. They have a idealist outlook on life and we, the ones in our metallic age(silver in our teeth, gold in our teeth, iron in our medicine and lead in our ass) have contributed to and encouraged the system we have now. Fresh input from them tempered with reality checks and guidance from us cannot do much harm and maybe do a lot of good. If we don't change, then we risk raising a bunch of future partisan bickers or worse yet a group of disinterested adults that stay home and bitch about the mess that they inherited from us. We the people, young, old, rich and poor own this country and must dictate to the ones that are supposed to represent us, what they will and will not do in our name. Let's take back our government and reshape it so our children and Grandchildren will have a workable system instead of the bucket of worms we have now. Our forefathers gave blood, sweat and tears to give us a very good start and so far we have royally screwed it up. I don't think they would be very proud of what we have accomplished so far. We must start somewhere and soon.

The following is a summary of Tom Friedman's NYT Op-Ed piece (subscription required) published yesterday:

The Energy Mandate

***

James Carville, the Clinton adviser who coined: “It’s the economy, stupid,” asked the following question on a recent statistical poll for the Democratic party:

“Which of the following would you say should be the two most important national security priorities for the administration and Congress over the next few years?” (emphasis added). He found that energy independence is the No. 1 national security issue.

In Pennsylvania’s gubernatorial race, the incumbant, Ed Rendell and his Republican challenger, Lynn Swann, were initially in a dead heat. Rendell began pulling ahead when – among other things – he began stressing his “PennSecurity Fuels Initiative” – which aims to reduce dependence on foreign oil and grow Pennsylvania’s clean energy market.

Carville, the pollster, argues is that it’s no longer enough to have “energy security” as part of a 12-step plan for American renewal. It needs to become a defining issue of what the Democrats are all about.

***

Friedman concludes the article: (I'm now quoting directly):

So does this mean the public would accept a gasoline or B.T.U. tax? No, said Stan Greenberg – another Democratic pollster. The public wants government to impose much higher auto mileage standards on Detroit and much more stringent energy codes on buildings and appliances. People want a tough regulatory response, à la California.

Hello? Anybody listening?

***
Fess up Tom, did you rip that last sentence from a Unity '08 post? ;-)

Further reading on Unity'08
unity08.com/node/121
Friedman’s Geo-Greens

unity08.com/node/447
The Dark Side of Ethanol

No Donation without Representation!
Vote to put 3 Cyber Members on the Steering Committee

Go from one extreme facist view to the other... sure that is the answer.... - Earn Snyder
Author "$aving the bureaucracy - Killing the beast"
Modern Progressive Independent
www.appyp.com/fix_main.html

Erik, I wouldn't have a problem with your Fairtax idea if there was a point at which those making over, say, $250K fell out of it and had to start paying progressive taxes on all income. Otherwise what you have proposed is a purely regressive system that hurts lower-wage earners more than big earners.

Jack Lohman
www.ThrowTheRascalsOut.org/taxes.htm

Mark, you are 100% correct with your tax proposal. Corporate taxes are regressive, as they simply add their tax cost to their product price and pass it on to the consumer. See my tax page at
http://www.throwtherascalsout.org/taxes.htm

Jack Lohman
http://www.throwtherascalsout.org/index.htm

Erik said:
"YO! MJ777, Mark - Over here! *
TromboneErik on October 10, 2024 - 4:40pm
Due to some kind of weird glitch, I wasn't able to post in the "Issues for Discussion" Forum, "Immediate focus topic," so I landed over here...

I like rich people, I like how they live... I like how I live when I'm with them! Max - Sound of Music

Mark I had a hunch you liked hanging out with those rich folk. ;-) To help with this project, I'll be an impoverished family of 4 living on, say $20K per year. Wait! I already AM! Anybody up for being "Mr & Mrs. Middle Class?"

Mark, if you see a link with a set of "basic assumptions" for these income groups, let me know. Oh boy, I get to do my taxes AGAIN!!"

Erik, Mark is being a little clever. He is pertty sure (and correctly so) that FairTax will be a big break for his hypothetical case and a stick in the eye for your real one. It does try to put a bandaid on the low income end in a pretense of "fairness". My biggest (but not only) concern is the rapid deployment this legislation calls for and the chaos in the disposition of invested capital that will ensue. I want incremental moves toward transaction taxes slow enough to migrate social engineering policy to the expenditure legislation without chaos to either end of the income spectrum. I'd rather take the stairs than leap off the balcony.

I still don't know how the topic as label went off in this direction. We are recycling FairTax.

Bill"for what we are together"

To Clarify, I didn't say that Taxation was a fringe issue, I just said it was divisive - which, in this Forum is a GOOD thing - since controversy generates eyeballs - but in Congress divisiveness just produces gridlock.

Ronald Reagan overhauled the tax code because he was Santa Claus - he reduced everybody's taxes - especially the wealthy. But as soon as you raise anybody's taxes - especially the wealthy... well - it's not the 3rd rail, it's more like lying down in front of the train.

The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 passed with NO Republican votes. Zip. It raised the top two tax rates by 2.3% ($100-200K) and 11.2% ($200K +). Capital gains rates went up about a point. Everybody else’s stayed about the same (the tax credit for the poor improved). That tax bill is widely credited with converting a stream of U.S. Budget Deficits to Surpluses.

Taxes were raised on the top 2% of wage earners and they went ape-sh@#$^t. But they dusted themselves off, scraped together the few billions that they could and bought themselves a new Congress in 1994. How did they do it? They bought TV ads telling middle class Americans that their taxes had been raised, which simply wasn't true. But TV hypnotizes us all, so we (collectively) bought it. Then, in 2024, they bought themselves a president.

That's what I meant by: "Big Money - channelled through lobbyists and other crooks - is warping the democratic process beyond recognition."

Maybe the "fair tax," "flat tax," or whatever is the way to go, but with the wealthy 2% controlling Congress, the socially-engineered beauty you feed in one end will come out looking like a mangled hog-hydra at the other. We've got to wrest at least SOME control from that 2% minority. By definition it's not democracy.

It all boils down to communication: Who gets to talk to the voters and how that is decided. TV has had enormous power in our system going on about 40 years now. It's a money hungry beast and has no interest in ideas - just emotions.

Publicly funded campaigns - from state reps all the way up through Congress - coupled with an internet-television combination (You-Tube?) might just get us out of this mess. I see Unity’08 as being in the eye of that storm and I ain’t givin’ up!

So, Mark – in the interest of generating eyeballs (and I’m always up for new information), knock your self out ;-) Maybe I should do a counter-analysis for a family of 4 in poverty? Anyone else care to do an analysis for a middle class family?…

Cheers, All
Erik

No Donation without Representation!
VOTE to put 3 Cyber Members on the Steering Committee

Erik,

I won't have time to review the so-called fair tax until this weekend. When I do, am going to work up a return on my tax program with the following assumptions.

1) I make $400k/yr in compensation and my wife gets $100k a year from a trust fund. As a stock-holding executive my compensation will be structured in whatever manner is most advantageous - straight comp, dividends, bonuses, etc.
2) I live in a lien-clear $1M mini estate and am very frugal in my maintenance expenditures.
3) My grown children 20 & 22 have attended prestigious universities thanks to their legacy status and my tuition dollars - are meeting the offspring of movers and shakers that will form standing (and profitable) relationships to last their lifetimes.
4) I plow all my earnings into investments (whichever are most tax advantaged - majoritively dividend producing stocks.)
5) I spend a great deal of my time out of country, particularly vacations and entertainment. We buy most of our clothing, household goods, etc. in foreign countries with low labor costs and favorable exchange rates.
6) My current net worth is around $20M and I hope to have it over $100M by the time I retire in 25 years or so. I intend to gift it out to my children and grandchildren as the spirit moves me, and hopefully be able to pass on at least half in bulk upon my and my wife's deaths. I may give a little to charity - haven't really decided yet...

If you have time and resources feel free to run this one yourself - I am very interested in seeing how it plays out next to the current system. While I don't know the details or what the results will be, I do know the folks around here who are pushing this plan. They are without exception highly compensated executives, capitalists and retirees who spend the bulk of their time on country club golf courses and tool about town in foreign luxury cars (an occasional caddy.)

My tax plan is much simpler:
1) tax all income the same with no distinction between estate/gift, dividend, ordinary income.
2) remove the cap on payroll deductions and subject all income from the first dollar to "payroll" witholdings.
3) segregate "payroll" witholdings from general budget revenues and dedicate these revenues only to social insurance programs (SS, Medicare/Medicaid, etc.
3) Exempt the first ??? in income from regular income taxes (use the fairtax prebate numbers? I don't really care)
4) Add a top-tier tax bracket not to exceed 45% for income exceeding $1M (maybe a little higher or lower...)

This is all conceptual - the intent is to broaden the pool of taxpayers supporting the neccessary social spending programs and spreading the burden out for all taxation as equitably as possible.

In my fiscal utopia we would eliminate taxes on business entirely - my detractors say this isn't doable. With Universal Healthcare we would eliminate from employers the burden and unpredictability of health care expenditures. With a bare sustenance national pension (that's not what SS is or should be right now - its insurance against poverty upon death or disability) we would eliminate the neccessity of employer-based pensions which are dying a slow death anyway.)

I want to eliminate the treatment of corporations as individuals in legal and liability matters and to eliminate their ability to influence the political process. In return I am willing to absolve them from any obligation to perform as contributing members to the greater society. That's not what business is about. I think there is an overall value to adjusting the paradigm so that American business is seen by the general public for exactly what it is - a source of wealth for the owners, a source of income for workers and a source of needed goods and services for our society as a whole. To the degree it fails these tests I'm not at all certain why we tolerate it.

The Constitution applies to individual U.S. citizens. The responsibility for funding obligations should rightly fall on U.S. citizens as they individually derive financial benefit from our system.

Something to chew on - gotta get to work.

Mark Greene
Texas Democrat in the Middle

My suggestion: Tax Policy is going to be a divisive issue and we should "back burner" it for now.

I think we CAN agree that:

1) Big Money - channelled through lobbyists and other crooks - is warping the democratic process beyond recognition.

Well, I hate to tell you but tax policy isn't some fringe issue that doesn't affect those issues you think are more important. Our tax code & the manipulation thereof is one of the biggest causes of corruption in DC. Under the Fairtax there would be no special tax breaks for lobbyists like Abramoff and his clients, and so many others to buy! Most of these guys & their deals will never come to light because they are so deeply hidden in tax law (currently over 60,000 pages)that an IRS agent couldn't find it! The Fairtax would raise revenue for Social Security/Medicaid from everyone, including tourists & foreign workers (legal or illegal) instead of from just 135 million workers. The Fairtax protects the poor--the poor pay no tax (up to the poverty level)by the mechanism of a prebate. It's like a refund you get monthly, but before you pay instead of after. The Fairtax protects privacy rights. No more tax on income means the government doesn't need to know if you won the lottery or had a garage sale or your teenager has a babysitting job. Of course it's progressive (the people with the most, pay the most) only spending is taxed. Who do you think spends the most money? Billions are spent by people in illicit trades & now they would be paying taxes, too. Finally, it would keep more jobs in the U.S. by lowering the cost of doing business. American goods would be priced more competitively without all the built-in taxation. We are talking about a plan that can reduce the deficit, save Social Security, improve & simplify the lives of taxpayers (I got a letter from the IRS yesterday about some lost form, blah, blah, blah), put more money in worker's pockets, reduce corruption in government, & reduce the trade gap.

Some fringe issue. I gave some money to Unity08, too, and I hope there will be enough support from people who have a better understanding about the issues than what I've seen so far (not all, but some). If we're just going to be scared that we can't drum up support for this unless we keep the issues dumbed down to fit in nicely between American Idol & Deal or No Deal...well... the "Bush lied, people died" simpletons & the "gay marriage is the biggest threat to national security" crowd already have their own parties. Everything is potentially divisive; does that mean we can't express it and debate it? I thought we wanted out of that mindset.

Protect our children...end Prohibition!

Steve Hiott fed up in SC
How do we go about electing an independent White house? This movement doesn't seem to be going anywhere. What makes anyone believe that the Democrats will be any different if they take power? I see a golden opportunity for an independent to be elected in 08 but it appears that we are wasting this chance. I have been looking at alternative independent parties but they all have pet platforms and some of them I agree with in part but not one that I can find offer a true independent choice, so where do we go? Back to the fox holes and take pot shots at each other in the name of our two major parties? Or does someone have a real idea that will help us to achieve our goal?

I became active as a Democrat because I was so frightened and appalled by what I saw the Republicans becoming. While I will support an independent if (a) they're right on the issues ,(b)they're strong enough to win, and (c)they have a plan in place to be effective in light of the overpowering hold the parties have on our governement, I would much prefer to support the formation of a viable third party in the middle. The Democrats are so attractive now because the Republicans have wandered so amazingly far to starboard, just as the Dems did to port a generation and more back. I would be thrilled to have a chance to be part of a consistent cohesive middle and let the wing-nuts on both sides hang out where their natural inclinations take them.

Mark Greene
Texas Democrat in the Middle

It is sad but the icons are all damned by association... they cannot lead a Independent movement but can be strong validation and pull from both parties (cabinet members)... because they were in it for the money and thats a shame as they are marked... - Earn Snyder
Author "$aving the bureaucracy - Killing the beast"
Modern Progressive Independent
www.appyp.com/fix_main.html

Steve Hiott fed up in SC

I can't fault you on what you said, just want to add a little. Even if all this wasn't true we still would be left with two choices, two platforms that major parties want the politicians and members to subscribe to. Where does it say that I have to take either platform as it stand on issues such as welfare, abortion, defence etc. We both know that each one of us has our own opinions about these and other subjects and the only way we have now is to pick a or b as a whole. I know some of the politicians break rank now and then on something they feel strongly about but most of the time they toe the party line. Yes truly independent is the only way to go. Not like poor ole Joe that is going independent in name only but has said that he will side with the Democrats if elected, what kind of independent is that?

The Democrats have no answers because they are of the same body as the Republicans. They cannot give the people the real solutions because both heads are supported by the same foreign interests. Both parties turned into extremes, two party facism. And being registered as either only legitimizes this facism? Simply register as and vote for Independents this election and chase both parties out of the legislative process! - Earn Snyder
Author "$aving the bureaucracy - Killing the beast"
Modern Progressive Independent
www.appyp.com/fix_main.html

Erik, glad you enjoyed our mid-summer dialogue. Lots of great folks here. Not accomplishing much, but what the hey...

As the most visibly proclaimed Dem in these parts, I will try to very generally proclaim our agenda - not by priority:

1) Sustainability in all aspects - energy, foreign affairs, industry/economy, urban development/transportation, healthcare, etc. The Republicans seem constantly fixated on short-term approaches to long-term challenges and to getting re-elected. Hence no focus on developing long-term sustainable policies across a broad array of critical issues.

2) Fairness/progress - Democrats believe that government exists to address vital challenges that average Americans are powerless to address on their own. National security, domestic crime (white collar as well as criminal), public education, healthcare, the environment, energy, etc. We believe that policy should mostly benefit the broad middle, lend a helping hand to the weakest and allow the powerful to operate as they will so long as their predations don't injure the vast majority of us below them.

3) Limited government - Democrats believe that the government should do a limited number of things very well. Foremost of course is national security, which means adopting sound foreign policy which allies us with other industrialized democracies, seeks to alleviate rather than exacerbate global tensions, develops a sustainable energy policy which frees us from dependence on pollting sources derived from unstable regions of the globe. Additionally, we believe that government should zealously protect our civil liberties and promote fairness and equal treatment of all our citizens in matters both governmental and economic. (Note that I didn't suggest equal outcomes regradless of the price...)Finally, we believe that government, in promoting the general welfare, has a responsibility to assure a clean liveable environment and affordable access to quality health care.

4) Finally, and perhaps most critically, Democrats recognize that government isn't "them," but "us." This is why we want honest, responsible, responsive, open and ethical government at all levels, and why we seek always to increase the education and participation of the broad electorate.

I know this isn't an "agenda" by most definitions, but it is what we're about and why I'm proud to be on this side and not the other...

Mark Greene
Texas Democrat in the Middle

MY turn to be an idiot.

What Tom Harkin meant (it hit me while I was jogging - good for the brain!), was that Bill Clinton's parallel agenda was electing his wife in 2024.

Still... - I'm waiting for the Democrats to come up with something besides "we're NOT Republicans!"

The most pivotal moment in Congress since 1994, and.. what? The Republicans had the "Contract with (some say 'ON') America," the Democrats?...

Again: Yikes.

John, Thanx for starting this thread.

Jack, Mark, and SAXTRich - thanx for making me LoL. The stuff around August 10 is pure gold. Don't y'all (as we don't say in Seattle! ;-) DARE go anywhere!

Maybe the reason we're having a hard time staying "on topic" (what should the Dem's do if they sweep?) in this thread is because... *gulp* uh... they don't really have a plan?

Exhibit A, from yesterday's NYTimes

“There’s no doubt [Clinton] is taking that spot of the bully pulpit for Democrats,” said Senator Tom Harkin, Democrat of Iowa. “We just don’t have anyone like that right now, and Clinton is always there.” Mr. Harkin added wryly, “Now, whether there’s another agenda there or not, I don’t know."

War gone bad, Lobbying scandal (Abramoff), Sex Scandal - the Elephant is on it's back with all four legs up in the air! And the Democrats don't have an agenda?! Yikes.

So, what can we do? - here in Unity'08.

My suggestion: Tax Policy is going to be a divisive issue and we should "back burner" it for now.

I think we CAN agree that:

1) Big Money - channelled through lobbyists and other crooks - is warping the democratic process beyond recognition.

2) Unity'08 - being a creature of the Internet - has the potential to be a catalyst for change - to be the disruptive technology that can pick up where Howard Dean left off and bring the voters back to the negotiating table. (Then we can talk about taxes, and other stuff).

But before we reform the world (or at least the country), we need to reform Unity'08. That starts with getting Cyber Representation on the Steering Committee. Some of us have been sending money but have no idea where it's being used. It's time to throw some tea in the harbor.

So - if you haven't already done so, please follow the "VOTE" link below - to the Squidoo voting site. Then follow the "After you Vote" link back to Unity'08.

Cheers,
Erik

Jump-start Unity’08!
VOTE to put 3 Cyber Members on the Steering Committee

MJ777 on October 8, 2024 - 8:49am

Your assumption is not correct. Many have read and understand what FairTax means as written into proposed legislation. The biggest problem is not progressive / regression interpretations, it is that it is just social engineering in a different bag of intellectual crap that has no idea where it will go actually. But it will perpetuate class warfare through taxation policy.

The policy that separates tax collection (no exemptions.credits, or deferals) from de facto expenditures forces the issue of fairness in social policy out into the legislative 'open' where it belongs. This has been extensive aired on this website.

Bill"for what we are together"

J Lohman and any others who think the fairtax is regressive simply haven't read any details about it. It is the most progressive tax out there. Most people really don't understand tax policy and tax terms used, so it makes it very difficult to educate the average person about the benefits or drawbacks of a particular idea. The fairtax is not partisan, it is supported by people of all parties, from libertarians to the constitution party. Yes, it has gained alot of support from republicans, because they are great at grassroots campaigning and spreading the word on talk radio. I don't know anyone, liberal or conservative that has taken an honest look at this program (it is much more than just your everyday consumption tax) and not gotten really excited about it. I haven't heard any negative responses that were based on the reality of the plan -- only on mistaken assumptions of the plan by people who either have not studied the plan or just don't understand it. I'm not trying to be condescending; I just know that most folks don't have knowledge about this subject.

No plan to take money away from people is going to be perfect, but this comes lightyears closer than our current broken system. If you want to know more, go to fairtax.org & decide for yourself.

I thought you'd really left...

Mark Greene
Texas Democrat in the Middle

"The Plan", a brand new book to present the Democratis Party vision on all the big issues on this site, is highly recommended. It could make the "sweep" possible. It is close to neutral on the US future role in or very near Iraq.

John Gelles

.
I have promised to leave Unity and Fair Tax to go their separate ways. This is not welching on my promise -- it is just to mention my new wiki: http://fair-tax.wikispaces.com

As to Mark Greene and his disappointment that I take the Newt Gingrich Challenge 1 as gospel: the war that our soldiers fight and so moany people ignore has again raised its head out of Britain by Pakistani wannabe killers.

To find excuses for them and comparisons with them is to do what many will but I will not. These are not warriors looking to re-create the Caliphate that we honor for their cause and courage.

These are twisted failures who reject democratic England for the chance to exercise their hate against the West -- including hate for the Jews now in the West who went there over two milennia of time. The Jews went West from the Middle East.

Why the hate of England and America and the desire to procreate their way to power in the heart of Europe? Why do they not assimilate -- and do what the best of their backround do -- study hard and win prizes in science and the arts?

Why follow the examples of the worst of human experience -- the role of would-be conquerors who brought shame and sorrow to their enterprise? I mean, of course, the Germans, Italian fascists, and Japanese.

I expect the bomb scare of the past week will give Karl Rove all we need for a Republican victory in November. If not -- God help us -- the inmates will have taken over the asylum.

Mark I'm sure there are bitter roots that impel you to view these Pakistani kids as objectively as you do. Charles Lindbergh in the late thirties found excuses for the Germans. He was not alone. Half the nation sided with him.

It just may happen that the Democrats will win this November. I will have to eat my words and thoughts if that tragedy occurs.

In all events, I only said that this issue, Gingrich' Challenge 1 -- see http://www.tiea.us/ngc1.htm -- ought to occupy our minds the next two months.

Certainly we will not settle the matter. Only the elections of 2024 and 2024 can come close to that. But what we say here can make a difference -- at least to us.

We are well educated mature Americans. We differ on an issue of life and death, war and peace. Nothing could be more profound. Nothing could better illustrate the truth about democracy and leadership.

The President will either prevail or be defeated. Lincoln was once in the same bind. Grant and Sherman made the difference--at a cost in American lives that shocks us 150 years after the event.

I am sure you will all agree that at the very least we should have sent a senior brigade of my generation to sweep for mines and IED's ahead of the younger troops.

We could have saved the cost to families of funerals and the cost to the brigade members in the pains of old age.

I'm still wanting to go -- TNT around my waist and a cigar between my teeth. Who the hell do these terrorists think they are? Ghengis Kahn or Erwin Rommel? I'll tell you who they are. They are the enemy!

.

John Gelles

Unity-now wiki
My Website
mailto:john.gelles@gmail.com

Human rights and how to pay for them are key to a livable world.

Mark,

1. Texan, I think in one post I e-stood to support a fellow Texan who was being unfairly flamed.

2. SATX = San Antonio, Texas.

3. OK, full disclosure, I am transplant Texan but that is tied to being a Vet. But pretty thorough Texan at this point.

4. vry = very respectfully yours, which is heartfelt though I have to drop it from some replies on occassion where comity and respect are not called for.

5. Hopefuly you have (or have had by the time you read this a kick-ass night on the town).

6. Yes the current state of politics is out of whack and the symptoms are many. Though I will hold that the inherent genius of our republic will be self-correcting though not without effort and being a pain in the meantim. Unity08 might or might not be a part of that.

vry,

RET

So here I am, chowing down on a preventive burrito before heading downtown for a night of revelry, and I find a July 7 post from Rich in fact identifying himself as a Texan. Yay, you - duh me! Where else could you be from to hold such eloquence and passion?!

In response to that post, yes, Texas was better for a few cycles being a two party state with independent seasoning thrown in. Perhaps this cycle or next we'll get back to that.

I would truly love to see some parity, or barring that, one party or the other becoming ascendant based on public zeal for its ideas, rather than the fact that it has its hand on the manipulative levers of the machine at the time. And yes, I know full well how the Democrats abused that power when they held it (before my time...)

What a price working people have paid for our comeuppance, eh?

vry (very respectfully yours?)

BTW- I still hold doors for the ladies, say ma'm and tip my hat, even to young girls. They don't know what to make of it. A little blush and a flash of dimples sure make an old man's nite!...

Mark Greene
Texas Democrat in the Middle

Rich!

I had a Eureka moment in the shower (which seems to be where most of them occur anymore...not sure why)

Could it be that SATX stands for San Antonio, Texas? Or perhaps San Angelo? Am I having these invigorating sparring sessions with a fellow Texas vet? Would explain a lot...

Oh yeah, don't answer the header question...LOL

Mark Greene
Texas Democrat in the Middle

The Muslim holocaust is far greater than the Jewish holocaust. Millions of avoidable deaths. Google Gideon Polya holocaust for the numbers.

US and US-supplied Israeli bombers have put terror into the hearts of so many millions of women and little children. The ones who are still alive.

This seems to be a discussion going nowhere, and I had great hopes for this thread.

The founders of this nation were considered "terrorists" in their time. I am not for a second equating the British-Pakistani would-be-bombers, the suicide bombers in Palestine or Iraq, the Weathermen, the Red Brigade or anyone else with our Founders. I say this only to make a point. Just as (Bismark?) said, "War is just diplomacy carried on by other means(sic)", "terrorism" is war carried on by other means. Many conveniently want to forget that the great state of Israel was established as much as anything by "terrorists" who targeted civilians with assasinations and bombings in their quest for statehood.

I can assure you beyond the shadow of a doubt that if my country is invaded and my family threatened and the government folds or fails to protect me in the face of superior force, I too will be a terrorist. I will hamper and harangue my enemy in any way I can. I will use what little power I have to frighten and shock and demoralize my enemy regardless of what rules of civility others might apply. I will leave a trail of murder and mayhem and bloody entrails as far as the eye can see, if that is what is required to be vistorious. War is not a civilized enterprise and I've always marveled that there ae those who would attempt to apply rules to it to make it seem acceptable.

We will not settle the Iraq question, the Israeli question or any other question of that perverse oil-soaked land on this site. We may or may not have some effect on the quality and focus of the American government, dependent solely on our ability to maintain a rational focus on those things that we can affect and that matter.

Mark Greene
Texas Democrat in the Middle

.
What to focus on -- (in Unity 08 discussion and action) -- between now and Novenber 2024: that is the QUESTION!

From Now Until Nov 06 the Hawks will Call the Doves Soft on Terrorism. Shall we be Hawks, Doves, or something in between ?

The Doves will blame America for Pakastani British assholes -- who would rather fight than switch.

The Pakistani's refuse to switch from terrorists to politicians -- with an agenda to right whatever wrongs may bother them.

The magnificent Canadian documentary "The Corporation", tells it as it is -- as far as a bill of particulars might go -- if we made a list of all that's wrong with laissez-faire as we know it.

As the film says, and I have repeated, business is a cost externalizing machine. It makes a buck selling cars -- but somebody else pays to fix the broken lives of people hurt by cars.

Terrorists are in the business of externalizing all costs -- they pay for their tickets to paradise. But all the costs to prevent terrorism and to repair the immense damage it does are passed on to the hawks and the doves.

As a hawk I pray science can develop a means for excluding all but a very few people from the universe of suspected terrorists. Those who are excluded will then be able to live as we did before terrorism became real and terrible.

Those who remain suspects will be watched by expensive systems. These systems will be reponsible for preventing acts of terrorism and also for removing as many people as possible (as the system improves) from the list of suspects.

Call me an optimist and a war monger. As an optimist I predict we will win. As a war monger I regret to say there are people with no sense and no concience -- there is nothing to do but make war on them.
.

John Gelles

Unity-now wiki
My Website
mailto:john.gelles@gmail.com

Human rights and how to pay for them are key to a livable world.

If we are to concentrate on 2024 my suggestion is that we do everything possible to affect changeover at the state level. Until we start affecting their jobs, until they see that voters have not just a voice, but also control of their jobs, they need only offer lip service. When we start throwing the bums out of office they will start reforming the system. And whether they are R's or D's, if they haven't adequately supported ethics and campaign reform, vote them out!

Jack Lohman
www.ThrowTheRascalsOut.org

.
The Reformers Song: "At first we were ignored. And then after decades we were seen -- only to be laughed at. In due course they came down on us -- and we were in the fight. And then we won." -- Mahatma Ghandi

I heard that last night -- watching one of the many shows I've got backed up on the TIVO.

With Jack joining you, I'm content to give it a rest. The FT has its own tough sledding -- which I can share with them in separate slices of time.

In this space we are supposed to focus on 2024 -- which is now front and center -- thanks to a couple of dozen assholes living in Great Britain and wishing they were dead. They have just set the Deaniacs and Moveon back by about four years.

Funny thing, those young Pakistani's are going to be dead a very long time -- if only they wait til they're my age. What's the rush?

What is it about Western Civilization that unites a band of children, whose parents went to it to escape from poverty, to want to hang it up in such bitter way?

It's hate, no doubt. But more than that. It's pride in the thought that they have caused so much expense and disruption among the Great Satan's peoples -- and they did it without an army, navy or marines.

We are up against a hidden enemy's ghostly soldiers who have no return address.

They are convinced we will never do to them what we did to Germans and Japanese -- burn them up by the millions -- innocents, who on the day the burning ended were suddenly our best friends.

And they are probably right. We are not about to burn down Mecca just because it so hard to fly to London.

We will do the Christian thing -- patiently find the very few who are like AIDS, an invisible enemy with the power that comes to them because they are so hard to find.

It is truly crazy that every American family will be searched for a bottle of poison as they wait three extra hours to fly to visit grandma.

Yet the only alternative will be to inspect everyone alive so we can record their biometrics down to a very fine "t" and allow everyone like you and me to board the plane like we did decades ago.
.

John Gelles

Unity-now wiki
My Website
mailto:john.gelles@gmail.com

Human rights and how to pay for them are key to a livable world.