Earlier today, NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg switched his party status from Republican to Unaffiliated. Several periodicals have predicted this as a move towards an independent presidential campaign, although Mayor Bloomberg has not announced his desire to seek the presidency.
Doug Bailey & Jerry Rafshoon, Co-Founders of Unity08, have released statements regarding this move by Mayor Bloomberg.
"The announcement by Michael Bloomberg reinforces what Unity08 has been saying since our inception, that the current political system is broken and does not address the concerns of the majority of the population. Although we had no prior knowledge of Mayor Bloomberg's intentions and we have no idea what it may or may not mean to Unity08, it is obvious that he too understands the need for common ground."
"Michael Bloomberg is the perfect independent leader. And, a very competent one who knows how to work across party lines to get results."
- Jerry Rafshoon, Co-Founder, Unity08
Tags: Unity08, election, president, government, bipartisan, politics, news and politics, bloomberg
I believe that everyone knew this was going to happen sooner or later.
Now what are Mayor Bloomberg's positions on Media Reform and Election Reform?
I've have been advocating for Bloomberg to lead the ticket in the Unity 08 process. For one thing, it is certain that he can get on the ballot in Texas (and Ohio). But mainly, he is tough enough, open minded enough, and effective at keeping people working together until issues are resolved. I care less about the specifics of issues if the person with the final signoff does not pull out the cliches of some special interest as an excuse to overrule the majority interest of the legislators and the public.
If, by the processes of the Unity 08 movement, MB becomes the man to beat, that's good. That may well be the engine the movement needs if MB will stand for it. An engine because, at the very least, Unity 08's nominating process may offer the only vote any of the remaining contenders would have to establish credibility for the final election. If they are cowardly in facing MB, they would be useless in office.
Now, if MB would just give Bill Richardson a call....
Bill"for what we are together"
personalrights@sbcglobal.net
While with the little that I know about Mr. Bloomberg he is a good candidate, we need to get somethings done before we anoint him the king on the centrists. He has done a fine job in New York and that can translate to the federal government, I still believe that the issue that are important to America have to be formed and then see who fits those issues and who can solve them the best.
I with you. I do know that I like his approach to poverty and the environment and the like. I'm not sure where he stands on Government reform, Iraq, health care, although I think he will probably be ok with health care, But I don't think he has much experience in foreign affairs, Bill's right about Richardson.
Betty McLeod
PA 06
Betty327@ptd.net
-
Whomever we choose must be on board and they should sign a pledge to honor our platform. Of course the final platform will have to consider the concerns of candidates.
****
How many of our States & Congressional Districts are represented by ‘08 Delegates.
Under your Profile, in your Signature space it would be hepful if we added our ”unity08name”, with State & District:“your08name"-NY07
ihavehadit-CT02, unity08_ct02@yahoo.com
I with you on choosing a platform. Every attempt I have made to steer the discussion in that direction has failed. In part it is because of the way the soapbox is set up. IMHO there are two many forums that address the same issue and make it impossible to have a comprehensive discussion on any issue. For example, if we make immigration reform part of the platform, then there should only be maybe 5 to 6 subtitles under the title of immigration reform. Not the 30 or more that is present now. It would also be nice if they added a quote key and that way the newest date will always be on top and you will not have dates all over the place.
Betty McLeod
PA 06
Betty327@ptd.net
I agree betty. The web folks need to start moving/classifying the "Issues for Discussion" and "Suggest an Issues" stuff into the Actual Issues listed on the main page. And we need to consolidate the subissues within those issues so we can get a handleon it and maybe list of some suggested reading on each issue and groups to link to for each issue. And we need to ferret on the real "Chaff" inane stuff that really makes the thing unnavigable. There is lot's of that flotsam. Maybe a periodic (monthly cleansing) could be instituted. Would sure help my eye sight and help the whole issue focus thing!
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
Hello all --
A couple of changes in the past few days. First of all, I divided up the categories amongst my team, so we really are doing our best to watch and participate in the conversations. Today, we have been moving the conversations in the "Issue to Discuss" section into the actual issues, too. We'll eventually archive the issues that no longer have ongoing conversation.
Don't forget, there is a "Shoutbox" category to discuss proposed changes. We've posted a new question there: http://unity08.com/node/1422
Maybe Bob will get the message and do something. I've just about given up on focusing the discussion. I personally think Government Reform should be on top. Without this, any gain we might get in the election could be lost very easily. I know there are other issues that are crucial, but this one will insure long term change and help with the partisanship.
Betty McLeod
PA 06
Betty327@ptd.net
Thanks for the input in regard to the forums and discussion! It's about to be used to solve issues.
After the Issues for Discussion (large forum) is transfered/deleted, there will be a set of forum rules posted and topics merged in order to end the redundancy of posts. One option currently being strongly considered is making it clear that redundant topics and off topic conversations will be deleted and people will be refered to the existing discussion.
Let me know if it doesn't sound good, but it should address at least some of the problems.
How can anyone support a party or candidate if we have no idea where they stand on the issues?
I would love to support a major party or a third party that stands near where I do on the issues.
End the war and don't start new ones. Protect the middle class and the constitution.
Those are "center issues" that the bulk of America wants. Let's finally get a party that stands for it.
Bloomberg as President? Let me try to understand the reasoning behind this move...a Multi-Billionaire out-of-touch, Elitist, Republican makes a move to probably "join" the Third Party...in all reality hijacking the Third Party for the Republican cause. Make's sense to me!
Meet the New Boss!...Same as the Old Boss!
I wouldn't put anything past the GOP to win in 2024 including placing one of their own into a third party with the intent of siphoning away the votes of Democrats, It's been done before and works.
All thing considered, I find Bloomberg to be far more "in touch" than the front runners of the dems and reps. He's reasonable. He's pragamatic and as a track record more impressive than the others.
Although, none of us are too excited about politics always being about the expenditure of massive amounts of money, let's face it: that's the way the game is at the present time. Unless we have some posters on here who are themselves billionaires, and willing to give to the cause, we are going to be limited in our impact. Without the mega-millions we're a sideshow, a 10 second mention at the end of a newscast if we're lucky.
I'd further suggest that we consider another handful of realities regarding Bloomberg:
Darkstar: I would do a little more research on Bloomberg. He's hardly a republican. He's closer to the democrat side than anything, regardless of the wealth. He'll most likely be painted as a liberal, and would therefore be well-balanced by someone like Chuck Hagel.
For those interested, here's a link to Mike's stances:
http://www.mikebloomberg.com/en/issues
If the Unity 08 process selected Bloomberg, we would ineffect be providing an endorsement and presumably volunteer campaigning. To the extent that we could be short on ballot positions in some states, we could be just that for anyone we select. We have to cross that threshold as a movement if the movement (or method) is to have a future. If the method works, the idea of Republicans and Democrats could be marginaized for a very long time, and new movements will popup all over building on this methodology.
Bill"for what we are together"
personalrights@sbcglobal.net
It is too early to rally behind anyone, let's hear his positions and see where his loyalties lie. Too much was done for Bloomberg by the existing policies and system he took over from Rudy, what are his initiatives and what are his different programs? He can't take credit for what he was given.
I agree that the wealthy are out of touch for the most part, but let's follow events as they unfold.
Fair is fair. We need to hold him (if he runs) under close scrutiny and thru the grinder just like we do and will all the rest. No holds barred!! He does have some pretty good quals despite his richness at first glance. We will see what we can see though!
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
This was posted late yesterday in another category, but it seems appropriate to re-post it here given Unity08's response to Bloomberg's announcement.
I enjoyed reading Doug Bailey's press release about Bloomberg's switch; when a political operative falls all over himself telling you how he had no prior knowlecge of something like this, and he carefully avoids speculating how it would effect Unity08 - well, let's just say that I am skeptical (and highly amused).
Here is my post from last night:
A while ago I talked about a possible link-up between Unity08 and Michael Bloomberg - and it didn't generate much buzz, even when I linked to an article by Eleanor Clift suggesting the same thing.
At the time I stated my opinion that Clift sourced her story from somewhere - and that she wouldn't have run such a boldly speculative article without solid sourcing; no seasoned D.C. journalist would print such a thing without ironclad attribution.
Forget your distaste for the mainstream media for a moment; in the post-Dan Rather era, a pro journalist like Eleanor Clift cross-checks every source in a story before it ever makes print.
Here is the article:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18355633/site/newsweek/
Suddenly Bloomberg is revoking his republican party membership - and at the same time, Unity08 is installing a new operations team; a team that is skewed heavily toward marketing/re-branding/fundraising expertise.
Doug Bailey "fired" himself, and then Jerry Rafshoon and Bailey hand-picked a management team that has (by their own admission) negligible political experience.
Ask yourself why marketing people would develop a sudden attraction for a virtually moribund political movement with a soft and largely uninspired membership base (and forget the spin about 60,000 delegates - that number has nothing to do with any sort of viable "active" membership; the actual number of committed delegates has to be much lower).
Unity08 tried to brand itself as an idea; advocating a sort of logical positivism for empirical bipartisan political discourse, and it didn't work.
Given the current circumstances, what growth/fundraising tactics are left for a self-stated movement of the disenfranchised center - when that demographic is greeting the current marketing campaign with a studied indifference?
If you can't recruit with the current generalized formula, then you must recruit with some other form of hook.
I'm betting that Bloomberg is the hook.
And ask yourself this: why would a RINO (Rafshoon)and a borderline DINO (Bailey)risk putting time, money, effort, and reputation into founding an organization that could possibly produce a ticket that was an anathema to their personal political views? There isn't much in Bloomberg's political resume to get them riled. And he has the ability to spend a buck or two for the cause. That ability gives him time that the declared candidates don't have.
Think about everything that is happening, and draw your own conclusions.
Jeff C leikec@yahoo.com
Eyes Wide Shut??? Bloomberg was perfectly happy remaining in the Republican Party...until a vacuum had been created by public outrage over Special Interest and the corruption it invariably fosters.
Hopefully, the idea behind a Third Party is to..."Disassociate Itself from this Entrenched Power Structure" that is totally beholding and oblivious to all but Elitist concerns. They will put on a new face and tell you whatever you want to hear... to remain in power. You know how the game works. Don't continue to be fooled by these covert ploy's to marginalize a Third Party. This is exactly the kind of thing they would do.
Right from the beginning, the Unity08 leadership talked about electing a bipartisan presidential ticket. There never was any state-wide organization (with the stated purpose of electing state representatives and US senators).
Right from the beginning, Unity08 talked about forming a coalition of centrist voters; a coalition that had a stated purpose of driving the two major parties back toward each other - and back to centrist politics. Right from the start, this indicated that the Unity ticket would be selected from people within the national political structure; Unity08 is a political organization with a political goal - and the movement was designed to work within the D.C. political network.
Right from the beginning, Unity08 stated that there was no need to leave a current party affiliation to join Unity08. What other third party in history has made that statement?
Unity08 never had any intention of forming a traditional third party - because traditional third parties by nature take positions that are far, far away from the center - and those positions don't win elections.
Unity08 was intended to be a reform coalition of democrats and republicans - and not much else. The premise of the organization from the beginning was to isolate the reactionary elements within the democratic and republican base - forcing both to reform their policies to more closely reflect the moderate bipartisan middle.
Michael Bloomberg is perfect for Unity08; perfect because he can singlehandedly finance the operation, and perfect because his political philosophy matches the idealogy of the founders.
Jeff C leikec@yahoo.com
What's the big hairy deal. We knew Bloomie was going to run sooner or later and that Unity would be a venue for his late money and all. It's been on the blog here for months. I hope there are other Candidates that we can consedered to. We STILL need to do the hard slogging on the issues/platform sonner than later and STILL need to hold Unity to account for their words as we hold Bloomberg and the others to account for their stands on our issues. So what is different?? We need to START reaching out to valid electable candidates and Bloomber IS one for sure. We STILL need to start recruiting others like Powell, Hagel, Kerrey, Bradley, Gore, Danforth, Nunn, Arnie, Clark, Bayh, Kean, etc, etc and start pulling the other parties to the center and if they don't elect one of our own. And hopefully this whole Bloomie tempest will be put in its proper navel-gazing perspective and jump-start that gathering of legit candidates process. No one is anointed and no one will be until we have our say. We need to make damn sure of that...before Bloomie's announcement and after... WHAT is different???
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
We need more candidates to choose from and there are a lot of question to be answered. I want to know where someone stands on the issues, I want to know if they have knowledge of the issues, the pros and cons of a proposed solution that may be offered, the cost as well as the human part. All too often cost alone drives legislation, like the minimum wage. The corporations are the ones who reap the benefits of cost driven legislation, which is why the middle class is declining. Until we have a chance to question those we are considering, we should not make any decisions.
Betty McLeod
PA 06
Betty327@ptd.net
Because I see some PR/Marketing guys being recruited into Unity08, while Doug Bailey and Jerry Rafshoon sit back and put a layer of insulation between them and the membership.
I see an article showing a link between Bloomberg and Unity08, and then I see virtually concurrent announcements from both parties regarding future direction.
Perhaps I should be shopping this script to Oliver Stone, but I have a funny feeling about the entire scenario.
We need to remember that Unity08 was founded by POLITICAL operatives - the type of guys who feel much more comfortable sitting on the back porch deal-making.
If I'm right we will see the signs very quickly. We will certainly have our say - but I expect a subtle but effective P.R./strategy campaign from the new regime specifically tailored to build up Bloomberg to the membership.
Jeff C leikec@yahoo.com
Jeff, I think some are seeing ghosts here where there may be none (a la HC?). I'm glad Unity is finally delegated this stuff to people who can make it happen maybe where the rubber meets the road and get the show on the road finally. It's about time and about 4 months to late on the Marketing/Branding stuff to finally start up with some pros who seem like they have been around the block.
And the almost simultaneous announcements is not surprising given the hair trigger climate in this political land with the modern immediate RSS feeds nowadays tied into the blackberrys and all. I would have been real surprised and worried if Doug/Jerry would have said nothing. Still I agree we need to be vigilant about all. But I am from the "Trust But Verify" School on this. That Bloomberg's non-announcement could cause such a tizzy is mind-boggling tempest in a teapot stuff IMHO.
And political operatives dealmaking - well for sure that is what usually gets things started in this town like it or not. Just as long as the deal-making is done from the centrist orientation and with our centrist imprimatur and not from the pandebear activist special interest fringe ones that the other parties have shamelessly engaged in. That is our job to make sure they do exactly that!
So keep on in here plugging away. We all here have many real dragons to slay inthis venture and must not get sidetracked with ghosts that probably do not exist. Still "Trust But Verify" is always in order!
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
My concern that this whole Unity08 is a easy way to test the waters for Bloomberg. I have read what they have said. I also have read that they had three candidates that they are talking to. That was not on the original information and I now think that the delay in working on issues was to wait until the candidate is on board and then set up a platform for him. While that does not keep me from voting for any candidate, it does leave a bitter taste in my mouth.
Even at the notorious 4/16 meeting and before on the FAQs, Doug said that they have briefed several possible candidates staffs on the rules. I see no problems with that as long as we can get a full slate of good moderate centrist candidates we can scrutinize and pass judgement on. Bloomberg clearly is in that category. I would like to see about 10 others in the first go-around and narrow down to 5 and then select the top two who would be our candidates. All will have to be scrutinized, vetted and pass muster. That will not change with or without Bloomie as far as I can see.
That is why we need sooner than later to get a centrist platform/range of doable centrist options-tradeoffs that we can judge these guys and gals on.
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
Both the Republicans and Democrats will keep us in Iraq.
Will Michael Bloomberg be a centrist and maintain the status quagmire, or will he give America what it wants... a way out?
Another issue; both the Republicans and Democrats are owned by corporate interests. Will Bloomberg be a centrist and maintain the status ownership, or will he give the people a representative voice?
I don't want a stinkin' status quo centrist, I want my government back!
Remember the Law of Direct Opposites that tends to reassert itself in DC every so often when you least expect it - (i.e. Nixon toChina, Southern Whire Demo signing Civil Rights Legislation, Clinton and welfare reform, Reagan negotiating the farm with Gorbie, etc). It may take a person from corporate interest land to read them and their accumulated special interests the Riot Act and actually get something done in that area.
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
That's like voting for Fred Thompson to get us out of Iraq.
He's the only one in the country that's to the right of Dick Cheney.
Does make sense Ed - look at recent history...Hey LBJ was the Viet Nam "peacenik" in 1964; and Nixon a Conservative Cold Warrior Repub was the only one who could get away with the China card gig; and Reagan was the biigest spender/debt creator (before Bush 2 of Course) in US history. Go figure! The list goes on. It might take a Conservative to get us out of Iraq and it might take a liberal (barack) to invade Iran if needed and implement comprehensive entitlements reform. I knowit si a tad quirky but Look at History!!
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
If I want to nuke Iran, then I should vote for Dennis Kucinich.
And if I want to eliminate the tax cuts for the rich, I should vote for Mitt Romney.
Sorry, you don't make any sense at all.
Fred Thompson was our senator and he was well known for doing nothing, check his record. His first statement after being named as a posaible candidate for President was to say he would pardon the convicted criminal Scooter Libby, had he said his first act would be to pardon the two border patrol agents that federal prosicutor Johnny Sutton railroaded into prison and fire Suttion, then I might take his seriously. He is best known by those that served with him for being lazy. Hardly a good candidate.
This article from Politico.com is interesting...
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0607/4581.html
Read the comments attributed to Gerald Rafshoon carefully; apparently we (and when i say "we", I mean Mr. Rafshoon, who is presented as speaking for the organization) have the beginnings of a platform brewing.
Here is one quote that I found interesting:
"Rafshoon said Unity08 is "absolutely not going to support" Giuliani or McCain, because of their support for the Iraq war and President Bush's troop surge."
There is more in the article about whether or not Unity08 is an "anti-war" organization, and Rafshoon goes on to speculate on whether the "centrist" membership of Unity08 would be able to support any candidate supporting George W Bush's Iraq policies (specifically the surge).
There is also confirmation that Unity08 had been networking with several politicians. Here is how it was addressed in the article:
"And Rafshoon told Politico that Unity08 has been holding secret conversations with three candidates interested in running for Unity08's nomination."
Perhaps these are the "briefings" described in the FAQ section of this website, but I tend to believe that more substantial discussions have been organized - and I also believe that Bloomberg was one of those people expressing interest (despite Doug Bailey's wide-eyed, innocent sounding comments in his press release regarding Bloomberg's announcement)in the organization.
Members will also note that Michael Bloomberg related info was plastered all over the Unity08 home page yesterday.
Also, there is a quote from Rafshoon stating that he believes that the Unity08 membership is split almost evenly on the immigration debate. I imagine that this will come as a surprise to some on the forum.
To me, the politico article dovetails neatly with the Eleanor Clift column. Unity08 needs Bloomberg, and Bloomberg can benefit from being aligned with Unity08.
I think Bloomberg would be a great choice for Unity08, and let's face it - he would bring the funding that is needed to mount a true, competitive presidential campaign.
Jeff C leikec@yahoo.com
I hope those comments weren't truly representative of the Unity08 platform. If we have individuals already defining our "platform" then this isn't really an organization representing independent minded people. In my mind, when it comes time to vote for the candidates, all who wish to run should be included and let the delagates decide whether they want an anti-war, pro-surge, pro-choice, pro-life, etc. candidate through the voting process. All one does by pre-defining specific positions is exclude qualified candidates for one issue and create another political party.
All issues will be determined through direct online votes from our delegates. Regardless of who specific people within the administration/founders/employees/volunteers would or would not support as a candidate, or who they would or would not vote for, is totally irrelevent to the goals of Unity08. Jerry Rafshoon and Doug Bailey's votes each count the exact same as my vote, as your vote, and as a radical communist who decides to vote. Everyone, including the founders of Unity08, have their political opinions and histories, but their belief in Unity08 obviously transcends that.
What matters to Unity08, and to this process of selecting candidates and issues, is that everyone who knows about Unity08 signs up, and then invite their friends, so that the votes are truly representative of the American public.
Who is going to be on the "Credentials Committee?"
I mean, is the voting membership going to open-sourced? Are we going to know the total number of eligible voters and who voted and who didn't?
As someone ones said, it's better to trust but verifiy. So while we are all focused on the procedure of the voting, can you run over the verification methods?
ex animo
davidfarrar
Dave,
I'm with you.
When membership participation is not practical, transperancy is a MUST!
I agree dave and trom on that. Those procedures need to be clearly delineated and documented. No problem there! I totally concur on this crucial point.
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
I just wanted to say thanks for the clarification, and to everyone else for your comments. These certainly make me feel better about continuing to push for Unity08. Every once in a while someone wants to claim that we have a platform and it makes me nervous. I want to see it done democratically. Imagine, an entire voting block of Americans deciding for themselves what a platform should be, by voting, rather than letting a "committee" decide their beliefs for them. I just hope when the issues are voted on, people can accept that it's OK to support a candidate that you agree with 80% even if you strongly disagree with 5%.
I do not think it was jefrjohn. As far as I can see everything is on the table right now as we wade into this. That is why we need a start staking out the midleground on these issues and get new type of platform based maybe on a range of doable implementable centrist oriented positions/options (fully costed with tradeoffs delineated) on all mega-issues. We do need to stand for something centrist that is valid doable implementable fully costed options and not laid-in-cement one that panders to the extremes and the activist bases/special interests controlling both big parties. At least that is my hope. As an example, the Iraq Study Group last year laid out some good middle options on Iraq that it seems both Bush and the Demos are achieving some "silent" consensus on.
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
How do we know the cost of what we suggest? To know that you would need a cost analyzes. I don't see us going that far, do you?
AS far as the dems and administration coming to a consensus, I hope it won't be too late. Things seem to be exploding in the middle east and I pray the violence in Iraq does not spill over before they come to some agreement on how to make this thing work. Right now, with this president, I don't hold much hope that will happen. He seems to like defying everyone. His way or no way.
Betty McLeod
PA 06
Betty327@ptd.net
Hey betty...that's what they pay the "big bucks" to those guys and gals in allthose bipartisan Centrist think tanks and universities I listed the other day http://unity08.com/node/1414 - lots of good nonpolitical green eyeshade types out there esp at Concord, GAO, CBO, and CBPP, etc. And input from the Blue Dog Demos and Tuesday repubs and their staffs as well - We need them to chime in on the costs of the various options - will have tobe done sooner or later and I wish the sooner while we can still decide. An informed electorate/delegate is our best weapon and means to achieve wisdom inselecting our platform and candidate and President!
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
Sounds good to me. Think they will help out with our suggestions? Would be nice if the would.
Betty McLeod
PA 06
Betty327@ptd.net
That is why the Unity web folks and the whole Unity organization/delegates need to start reaching out to these bipartisan centrist entities and leveraging their centrist expertise through bloginars, Youtube-inars etc that INFORM the debate beyond our wonderful but limited back-and-forths here in Shoutbox land. And even bringing in a few Governors (border ones esp) who have great/best ideas BTW and some good Blue Dogs Demos and Tuesday Group Repubs in some round robin on-line discussions that actually INFORM and raise the debate level way way beyond the 2 parties present and to-be "Sound-Bite Debate Pandering Heaven" they will foist on the American public in the next 6 months (esp those poor Iowans!). So bring on the Unity Issues Bloginars and Round Robins Unity Web folks. PLEASE!! I think the American Public IS ready for it. I think our Delegates are! I sure am!!
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
If we end up with a platform/agenda that includes any of the wedge issues, I'm gone. I can get that from the two parties we have now.
Betty McLeod
PA 06
Betty327@ptd.net
That is why I think we need to focus hard on the 3 or 4 real key nation-buster mega-issues. The trouble with governnment/politics is that it tries to do (promise)just to much and be all things to all people and it results in wheel spinning and little actually gets done and gets done poorly (and the special interests weasel their ways in under the radar - see Fed Tax Code). It also results in these vast ends-means disconnects and the voter understandably gets frustrated and our grandkids get piled on with more and more debt.
I say we need to get some focus and get consensus and priotitze on the 3 or 4 Big Kahuna issues and hammer away relentlessly on those and be clear and say to the American people - THESE are our priorities, we are SERIOUS, and they MUST be done. You know mine - Comprehensive Entitlement Reforms, Grand Strategy Delineation, and Political Reform. Whatever we decide which, we need some focus on the Biggies and hammer away relentlesssly with cogent effective centrist options to address and resolve for the next 40 to 60 years. No more Can-Kicking!!
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
THE ISSUES/PROBLEMS THE DISEASE CREATES ..
I'll keep saying it until a bell rings in everybody's head :
The Disease Is Political Parallysis Brought On By Partisanship & Pandering To Special Interests PERIOD !!! FIX IT - OR FORGET SOLVING ANY MEGA ISSUES OR EVEN LITTLE ISSUES - In a Timely Fashion !!
You people JUST DON'T GET IT - The System Isn't Broken - IT BECAME REDUNDENT WHEN AMERICA BECAME A SUPER POWER & THE LEADER OF THE WESTERN WORLD !!
What makes me so damn angry is THERE IS A SIMPLE SOLUTION THAT CAN BE PUT IN PLACE FOR THE ELECTIONS OF 2024 - that can Restore Our Strength & Credibilty Throughout The World - and make it possible for us to Prioritize & Start Coping with the Mega Issues in the order of their significance to our continued welfare and security !!
John, I may take some heat for this for all of you - many of you I've grown to like and respect : someone keeps pointing out that Doug hasn't accepted my ideas yet - use your commeon sense Doug was originally part of the Disease, even though he's accepted the errors he made - his mindset and his insticts baulk at new ideas that go against the grain for a Washington insider ..
We live in a whole new era - the old ways just aren't good enough, we have to go beyond the box to find the answers and ways to make them work ..
The Perversion of Our Constitution & Bill Of Rights By Government - created the Disease, it also holds the secret for the cure - we just have to find it and force feed it to our Politicians and the System by which they operate.
I don't know if eben this will make any sense to most of you - you seem so hell bent on looking behind you - instead of looking and planning ahead.
Yes I'm stubborn, yes I'm opinionated - and can be a pain in the butt, I also care deeply about my country and my fellow Americans, and lastly (someone told me once there is no such word - if not there aught to be ) I KNOW I'VE GOT THIS THING PEGGED RIGHT - and it's Y'ALL that are lost in a sea of political and MSM hyperbole !!
I stand ready for whatever you want to throw at me - but know this, like it or not - we are partners - and I'm not giving up on you until I'm forced to leave the building - one way or another.
Doug, that goes for you too ..
popo
ps I'm not even going to chack speling gamma and all that sort of stuff.
As the Brits say TTFN (TaTa For Now)
popo
My opinion is that the War is not really that important of an issue for the 2024 election. The correct path to take will be pretty apparent by then. Taking some position now is simply dumb because things will change so much in the coming year.
I agree GEA! These issues will come and go. What we need to focus one more importantly is how whatever we do in Iraq/Mid East fits into a larger Geo-Strategic Context that is based on what we deem to be in our national interests. That is the debate we need. Can we be informed and learn by what has happened in Iraq? For Sure! We need that lessons of experience and others as well. But these issues whether they be Iraq, Taiwan, North Korea, Iran,etc need to be placed into a larger Geo-Strategic context so that we the electorate can measure the candidates on their world views, how they view our national interests, what America should be about and doing the 21st Century, what America Ought to do, what America CAN do and how they would sych the two up if there are discrepancies. OUGHT implies CAN! THAT is the debate we need to have!! The biggest threat to America in the next 60 years or so is our lack of a decent cogent internally consistent viable Grand Strategy based solidly on our national interests and our on our values as a nation.
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
Does anyone here believe that the government is not corrupt?
My guess is the answer is NO. So I would like to make a suggestion. One that can take place on election day and force reform. No matter Unity does in the election. If we could get a couple of questions on the ballot and the people vote yes for them, then the government would have to comply.
Two to the questions I believe could help would be,
1. Should we make public finance mandatory and thus place spending caps on campaign and stop fund-raising activities?
2. Should we take redistricting out of the hands of legislators and stop the creation of safe seats in both the house and senate?
These two things alone would make future election competitive.
Betty McLeod
PA 06
Betty327@ptd.net