I'm concerned. And Let me start by saying that I feel that the Unity '08 option for a web based voter movement is potentially powerful and absolutely necessary. But what disturbs me EACH TIME I have visited here, is that EVERYWHERE I look on this website it smacks of a Bloomberg promotion or a Sam Waterson soapbox. Seriously folks, if we are truly looking to make this a fair forum (Unity 08 site in general) I don't think that on the main pages that it seems right that speculation on Bloomberg running ie, "if we build it will HE run" seem to dominate the visual range! Yuck, it almost turns me off from this site completely. Why not give equal time to Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich or Ralph Nader, or every candidate (OR NONE) there (or even a neo-con joke like Fred Thompson) but to have the first thing that I see when I log in or for those that discover this site (for the newbies we're trying to attract) it almost smacks of Unity 08' having an agenda that is pre-determined, and THAT DISTURBS ME! AND it is likely to be a turn-off to others as well. I'm posting this here with the hope that the "founding delegates" or powers that be that are pimping Bloomberg will see how this might be taken, and I did not want this to be lost in the bowels of candidate discussion.
Thanks!
- Sign in or Sign up to post comments
- send to friend
- report as spam
Being as I am in Florida, had to think a minute. Bloomberg. Oh yeah. The NYC Mayor. I reckon. Anyway, why don't Unity08... or us, if you like, just build a community and let the candidate question alone until we establish a bond and family of like-minded folks. Along the way, it'd be beneficial, to every now and then have a poll for a candidate where the votes can be tallied and this way the non-possibles can be weeded out. The poll could be like once a week, and should be prominently displayed and noticable.
Dave; in Florida which is kinda quiet, now, (knock on wood)
The candidates you mentioned have been aired extensively on this site....you apparently just see what you want to see and just retain your biases. If you like these folks, campaign FOR them. They will all be available after the major party primaries.
Bill"for what we are together"
bill713.unity08@sbcglobal.net
I am referring to the fact that since I have been a delegate, it appears that the ON OUR RADAR section (most specifically)is very much about Bloomberg. I was not aware that Sam Waterson was now the spokesperson for Unity08, but I retract his name from the original list above, except only to say that since he has worked with Fred Thompson so closely, I would question where his loyalties are. However, you stated that I was biased. I am not. I mentioned several candidates above and did not take a position on who I preferred, except to say I did not like Thompson, but not Bloomberg, and for all you know I could secretly be praying for him to run (which I'm not by the way). The point I am trying to make is that for someone new coming to this site and not jumping through directories to find the actual section on candidates forum to be able to see so much coverage on one candidate, namely the speculation on Bloomberg possibly running, just seems very in your face. No other candidate (or potential one) is that covered on a main section of the site. I see by going through the back pages of "on our radar" that there is some mention of other candidates, but it just seems like "our radar" should be OUR as in everyone that is participating, not just the views of the staff. It just doesn't sit well with me. Sorry of YOU've taken offense but I call it as I see it.
I think you are correct in your assessment, papillon1524. Now I don't know for sure. How can any of us know for sure...that's my point.
First of all, the burden is on Unity08's leadership to create a web-presence that is open, fair, transparent, and above all, beyond reproach; they haven't. Why not?
They have the control of membership communication; we don't. They have control of their web software; we don't. They are in the only position to make all of the decisions; we aren't. They call all the shots; we don't. To now have a delegate suggest a conspiracy is not the fault of the delegate, but the fault of Unity08's leadership.
ex animo
davidfarrar
You said:
"They have the control of membership communication; we don't."
So what are you proposing? You seem to be communicating on the site right now. Do you think all members should have full admin rights to the site to be able to alter it as they see fit? What's is realistic in your mind?
They have control of their web software; we don't.
So are we to assume that not only should complete editorial and content control be turned over to anyone who wants it, but the passwords to the hosting control as well? I'm sure that would go over well; we'd have the "Ron Paul is God" site one day and "The Conspiracy Connection" the next. If I'm being "absurd" here, then please, do tell me what you meant by your assertion above.
Incidentally, Unity08 is running an open source software package called Drupal. They don't have control over this software any more than you do. Why? Because it's GPL'd, meaning you can do whatever you want with it, but the founder site still decides what's in the official release. You can download it and use it just as they have (http://drupal.org/). There you go, now you have "control" over the software too.
They are in the only position to make all of the decisions; we aren't.
That's the principal of leadership. There has to be some of it. It's illusional and delusional to think that mass anarchy will somehow morph into cooperation and solidarity.
By the way, in the spirit to "create a web-presence that is open, fair, transparent, and above all, beyond reproach;" as you say, I am requesting that you post the administrative login and password to your Cyber Party web site and your Unity Party Yahoo group. It would be, after all, a nice token of your commitment to the principles you espouse above.
-GP
Let's do as The Beatles' said: "Come together, right now. Unity." Something like that... ;)
I don't think that Unity08 should need to, have to etc., or would it be practical for having all delegates having some form of admin rights. My point was just to caution those running the site to take a step back and look from the eyes of a new member and I would suggest that it appears on the main area (not the candidate section) that there is a heavy Bloomberg focus which made me wonder if there was a hidden agenda there.
It's a simple agenda really. It's called: "I want to win at all cost".
It doesn't matter if this agenda is right or wrong for the country. The participants assume their ideology is right and, therefore, must win at all costs. For the devotees of this agenda, the ends justifies the means.
This agenda is, of course, a product of the old school of political thought that says what you need above all else is money, lots and lots of money. And in order to win at all cost, that's exactly what had to pay...you had to sell out all your ideals, all your plans for the future, everything was sold to the lobbyists and special interest in order to win.
However, there was one exception, if you were loaded. The thinking goes, if you were loaded you could mount a campaign that would be free of any outside interests and pursue your own course of action.
Of course in this example we must trust in the cult of the personality rather than the ideals of democracy. Because what we are looking at here is the intrgity of the nation being sold on the auction block to the highest bidder. "C'mon over here then and vote for Bloomberg & Nunn. He'll buy you a beer afterwards" -- same prinicple.
However, it doesn't have to be that way. We can still employ the principles of democracy without selling out the nation by creating a viable political 3rd party, designed to take advantage of the Internet from the ground, up. If you would like to join a discussion group to address this issue, please go to The Unity Cyber Party Yahoo Group
ex animo
davidfarrar
The Unity Cyber Party
...is that those who do have those administering powers also have the heavy burden to be open, fair, transparent and beyond reproach with its use. By any measure, Unity08's leadership has not been.
ex animo
davidfarrar
By
...shouldn't you live up to that same heavy burden if we are to consider your NCP as an effort of equal caliber?
-GP
Let's do as The Beatles' said: "Come together, right now. Unity." Something like that... ;)
I JUST and I mean JUST read the Bloomberg section on candidate discussion (because before now I couldn't have cared any less) and it is obvious from the posts there that both Bill and GP are pro Bloomberg. AND there is discussion there about how and I quote here "Bloomy" the overall Unity08 website appears to be. BIG TURNOFF folks! If you want this unity idea to work, the site itself cannot appear to be (or really be) biased in any one direction. So Bill, for calling ME biased, I say right back at cha, look in the mirror before you comment further on this. It's obvious from your email address that you are a part of Unity08.
I didn't start as pro-Bloomberg. I really didn't know much about him, outside of the financial system of his namesake, which we have where I work. Once I looked into his record and stances, however, he did become my number one candidate. I think he's on the right track. He's talented. He started from the bottom. He cares about people over political party. He has real governing experience.
As to the Unity08 movement, I've been onboard with it from the start. I have worked 3rd party campaigns before, and this is the first effort I have seen that actual takes realistic approach to how to win. That is, it's not the blind idealism that usually infects 3rd parties (and ensures that they get less than 1% every election).
Outside of the reasons I stated above, here is why I am "Pro Bloomberg":
So now you have it. That's why I am for Bloomberg. I do think he is a talented leader, but more than that, I accept that his circumstances allow him to beat down all the barriers that relegate every other 3rd party to the lost cause status.
In the end we have to choose between remaining "pure" in principle...and losing elections, or we can step back, see the bigger picture, and compromise a bit in the name of enacting change.
-GP
Let's do as The Beatles' said: "Come together, right now. Unity." Something like that... ;)
I think you nailed it there GP! I still think we need a well thought-out centrist issues/issue-options base to take to the Voter to be credible and to build the needed trust, bond and relationship that money cannot buy. (As Mondale way back when said... ) At some point the public or at least the other 2 pandering political parties will ask THE QUESTION "Where's the Beef". We better have some semblance of a cogent centrist answer when they do or people may flee back to the 2 Party panderers!
DC - 3rd ward - milligansstew08@yahoo.com
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
I'm still very much wanting us to have principles and positions, but right now I'm posting more along the lines of trying to sober the arguments and promote tactical reality. The candidates are going to come with their positions. They'll have to compromise a bit and so will the delegation. And then they will have to compromise with the political circumstances when they get elected. Nobody gets what they want exactly, but as the Stones said, if try we might get what we need...
My hope, for the moment, is to try to promote simple tactical realities and (hopefully) get others on these boards to consider them. There are some huge barriers out there and we need to make the realities they impose part of our calculus and thinking about the Unity candidates. These barriers aren't accidental. They are intentional. They are to ensure Dem/Rep monopoly.
The financial concerns are my largest. We might end up spending all our time trying to raise money, and even then we'll not have enough in time to break into the general public awareness. It's sad but true, so I hope that people start realizing that the candidate with the perfect stances is not the only thing one should consider.
By the time we get to the real contest, our endeavor will be part public will, part candidate push/pull, and part tactical reality. Everyone has to compromise, but it's still a better compromise than what the public makes in the Dem/Rep machinery.
-GP
Let's do as The Beatles' said: "Come together, right now. Unity." Something like that... ;)
I agree that there is a viable strategy here not tried elsewhere. And it couldn't have been tried elsewhere because the outside the center other third parties were not in the unique position to pull votes from both sides, only Unity08 is positioned favorably in that respect.
To make this strategy work, a massive effort needs to take place after we vote at the Presidential Primary in June of 2024. This effort must be very offline oriented. For us to succeed, we need a platform that will not only resonate with disaffected Demos & Repubs, it must also be structured such that those not drawn to our candidates will be drawn by our platform. That will require money and getting platform recognition among the electorate at large. The flip side of this strategy will be based on the appeal of the candidates themselves. A two pronged surge must work hand-in-hand and complement each other so that all the non-internet electorate are familiar with how the two tie together.
Good thoughts, Phil. Perot came close to this strategy in 1992, but didn't win. However, In the 1998 Minnesota Governer's race, a candidate using Unity's approach did win: Jesse Ventura.
Putting aside all the wrestler jokes and whatever you think of him personally, The reality was that his performance in the televised debates was a masterpiece: compliment something about each side and then pull towards the center. Do this for every issue in every argument. He never sounded "too Republican" or "too Democrat", and thus always sounded reasonable. Nobody worried about the spoiler issue because it was clear that people on both sides were moving towards his camp.
It can be done, but it's going to be tough. In terms of right here and right now, those of us on Unity need to start thinking of candidates who aren't on our preferred Dem/Rep side, but ones we consider acceptable. That's they key towards finding that center.
-GP
Let's do as The Beatles' said: "Come together, right now. Unity." Something like that... ;)
Absolutely! Voter Reason is the target for a Centrist. Dems and Repubs will be moving to the center after their primaries to broaden their appeal. A strategy geared to showing the voter how both parties are merely mimicing the Centrist ticket should reasonate with an electorate that wants a reasonable approach to governing as something new and not tried by either Party. If done right it will appear that the two major parties are merely chasing the Centrist ticket. The electorate will see that in this election, at this time in our nation's history, getting back to basics and a new reasonable approach to governing can only be accomplished by the true Centrist.
One of the other really great techniques that Ventura used was that he could go after the bad decisions that each party made based on appealing to its base. In those cases, the defending politician had no choice but to cling to that base. Ventura then stretched them on it and made it obvious how foolish it was for "everyone else" to have to suffer at the hands of bad ideology.
He painted both sides as being highly susceptible to being pawns of bad religion and worse ideals. As the new alternative, he sold his centrist approach as that which simply embraced common sense and reason. In the end he had both candidates stumbling around like Kerry's flip-flop show in 2024. They, the seasoned politicians, looked like fools, and he, the ex-wrestler/actor outsider became the cool, calm voice of reason.
The best part was that they were the ones that sounded like mudslingers and he was the underdog; the small, but brave challenger and champion of reason. He had the advantage of using (literally) centuries of party baggage against them, and they couldn't do it in return because he had no party baggage.
The key, though, was those televised debates. He didn't have the support until then. Once he was up there, he was a peer. He was someone to be taken seriously. The gap between pretender and contender changed after the first debate. From there he just did his thing...and won the election.
TV is key. The Unity08 candidate MUST be in the televised debates. We the people have to beat the 15% barrier. We have to get him/her that far. They will take it the rest of the way.
-GP
Let's do as The Beatles' said: "Come together, right now. Unity." Something like that... ;)
Phil,
Frankly to make this work you need one very major thing, a platform that takes the super majority positions from either party platform and pulls them together into our platform.
How else could any reasonable person choose us over them?
To join the U08 Delegate Council Online Community send an email to
u08delegatecouncil-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Bloomberg was among the early recognized personalitites with policies that transcend party lines. Others are emerging as well. I would prefer Colin Powell if he were available. There is an important senario that says Bloomberg would be better off without Unity 08. Then I will work toward folks like Richardson, Hagel, Biden, etc. But in TX, OH, and NM we can not put someone on an independent ticket that ran in a local primary, which could bar me from any other Unity ticket.
I agree the perception you get depends on where you start and how far you go. The same is true for individuals.
Bill"for what we are together"
bill713.unity08@sbcglobal.net
This message is in responce to GP's post :So as the owner of the NCP...
At present my NCP website simply asks people who want to co-found a true Internet 3rd party to contact me to discuss the issue.
I stand ready to develop NCP party bylaws that will do all that I have stated, and more. Certainly more than a privately owned, IRS political action corporation is willing or able to do.
ex animo
davidfarrar
Looks like Unity08 is pretty able thus far, compared to anyone else. That's pretty much my point, David. It's not perfect. It's not as "noble" as your ideals, but then again idealism is rather easy when it's a party of one, now isn't it?
What if the people that contact you to work with your NCP idea disagree with you and want to hire a lobbyist, someone that knows Washington? What if their bylaw ideals are far different than yours? Would you step aside in the name of democracy and hand the reigns over to them? Or would you override them because you felt that it's YOUR idea, YOUR party? Would you be noble or would you become a dictator?
Most of us here at Unity are accepting of the imperfection you point out. Many of us don't even consider it an issue, any more than a gardener would consider the stink of manure an issue; rather it's just what makes the garden grow.
Perhaps your noble intentions would be better off spent working on your NCP instead of criticizing Unity08? I would have to imagine that if you come up with a better mousetrap, it shouldn't be hard to win people over.
-GP
Let's do as The Beatles' said: "Come together, right now. Unity." Something like that... ;)
I, and every member of NCP will have to abide by the bylaws. This is not rocket science. All political parties are governed by their bylaws. I am not the owner of NCP. That website is just a metaphor. But I stand committed to helping create a truly independent Internet 3rd party. And if its bylaws are written fairly, justly, providing equal access to all, I have no fear of who will be actually running the party.
What I am saying is that now, for the first time in a long time, we do have a practical means to harness the raw power of democracy itself, to turn it into a political force to be reckoned with. That just by its shear weight of numbers, it will inevitably arrive at the right decisions at the right time. Democracy has not been in a position to assert its true strength since the small village council days at this nation's beginning where it shown the brightest. The massive weight of numbers, if organized and run properly will conquer all and once again be the bright light of this nation's destiny.
ex animo
davidfarrar
Ok, I'll just be more blunt. Here's how you come off:
1) Declare intent for new political party
2) Declare that it should be internet-based and utilize the magic of the internet
3) ???
4) "...Conquest and bright light of nation's destiny"
Items 1 and 2 are common sense. There is NOTHING special and unique about what you have said here. Parties are founded every election cycle since 2024 upon this basis. #4 is where you want to get. But there's no #3. You just assert that by some magic that everything just comes together. What you keep missing is that people just don't get along. Software and the web won't change that. The problem has never been a technology one.
Let me reinforce this point: you see the beginning and end points, but have no thought put into how you'll get there. When confronted with practical reality you dodge into the land of the fuzzy and dreamy.
Your intent is noble and I'm sure your heart is in the right place. But do a little research. Look at the Green, Libertarian, Constitution, or Reform parties. Look at how they were founded and what made them gain traction. The reality, as much as you may dislike it, is that these parties were founded by people with influence, or wealth or both. Successful parties are NOT founded because one person wants everyone to get along.
Finally, can you, just for the sake of everyone else here who gets subjected to your ranting, please tell us WHY, if Unity is so terrible you continue to be so active on here. Maybe it's really time for you to go back and work on your NCP and then prove us all wrong. Show us how much better your plan is by executing it instead of detracting from ours.
-GP
Let's do as The Beatles' said: "Come together, right now. Unity." Something like that... ;)
..but I am only to aware of the political reality at the present. Unity08, like the other two major political parties actually fear the democratic power of the Internet.
As an example, Unity08 should have broken their email membership list down into at least the separate states long before now, if not down to county. Assigned special Unity08 email addresses for each delegate and assigned each email address to a specific county or state Unity08 website. Depending on the numbers, because you really never want more than a person can handle, perhaps twenty or thirty, each group should be broken down into their respective precincts, and so forth.
Again, these groups would all be linked through the election of one of their numbers to a higher-order in the party's cyber structure, until you arrive at the National Unity08 Executive Committee...et cetera... I would go into this in further detail, but I really do think I have already posted this before, as well. I will find it, again, and post it.
But the point is, Unity08 hasn't done this because they too are actually afraid of inter-structural communication between members, as is the leadership of both the other political parties. I have been there. I have seen it. Party leadership believes that once they loose control over the communication between party members, they loose control over the whole process, and as does Unity08 leaders.
My evidence to this is Unity08's lack of response to the creation of Delegate Council, even though it was supported by their own Delegate Council Discussion Group. If formed , it would have worked to create many of these structures I am now explaining to you.
The leadership of Unity08 is just as paranoid about the Internet as the leadership of the other two major political parties are consequently, will fail to reap its benefits.
However, do not be disheartened. There are plenty of other Unity08 delegates who believe Untiy08 must become a viable political 3rd party to be effective. Perhapse not in time to effect the outcome of this election cycle, but, rest assure, Eli's Coming.
If you would like to join a discussion group to address this issue, please go to The Unity Cyber Party Yahoo Group
ex animo
davidfarrar
The Unity Cyber Party
ex animo
davidfarrar
...I think you would serve your own interests and credibility better in taking a step back from the conspiracy edge. Lack of evidence is not evidence of conspiracy. Unity's structure and the FEC rules do, to a certain extent tie their hands. Just because the Unity leadership doesn't follow in lock step with what you perceive they should do does NOT mean that they are acting under some nefarious motive.
Would I like to have seen Unity start building local groups as if a third party? Sure. I'm sure I would feel more enthusiastic and involved in the process if that was the case. But I am also willing to concede that these are my biases and that the people running Unity have a better handle on the bigger picture than I do. The founders of Unity, after all, do have real world experience with presidential campaigns.
It's quite possible (sarcasm intended) that they know more about this than we do. Can you consider that possibility?
-GP
Let's do as The Beatles' said: "Come together, right now. Unity." Something like that... ;)
And I question their motives only because of their actions, or lack of action...that's all I, or anyone can do. I don't have a crystal ball. I do know the burden is squarely on Unity08 to perform in a open and transparent manner that would make my criticism, founded, or unfounded, impossible to create or sustain. This they haven't done -- and since we both agree they are experienced, the question becomes; why, haven't they?
Then please stop acting like you do have a crystal ball.
Stop making everything a conspiracy.
Stop speculating 1000 miles beyond what you know.
Stop claiming that the leaders of Unity have singled you out for persecution and censorship.
Stop acting like a dictatorial messiah.
-GP
Let's do as The Beatles' said: "Come together, right now. Unity." Something like that... ;)
As it turned out, was Ventura the best choice for Minnesota? Did striving for the center produce a good state governor?
If Unity08's presidential nominee can't buy his way into the debates, and, as a result, he or she looses the race, would that meant Unity08's choice was wrong? Not in my book it doesn't.
ex animo
davidfarrar
While it is hard to evaluate situations where we didn't get to experience the alternatives, Ventura did in fact do the things he said he would. First and foremost he said he would reduce the yearly license plate tax on vehicles (it was around $300-$400 on average).
He got the first light rail built. That came with much criticism from the Republicans of course. However, once up and running it greatly exceeded projections and with ever increasing gas prices is respected as a good thing. Further expansion of it is underway.
These are things he said he'd do if he got elected. These are things he did when he got elected. In this messy political world I would consider that a good choice; the people voted for him based on what he said he would do...and he did it. Based on your love for "pure", ground-up democracy, David, I would say that you'd have a lot to be proud of in that victory.
Incidentally, I didn't vote for him, so I wasn't a fan. But in retrospect I think he was of the more politically honest experiences we have had here. I will acknowledge that.
-GP
Let's do as The Beatles' said: "Come together, right now. Unity." Something like that... ;)
This message is in response to GP' post at:If you admit you don't have a crystal ball
This is politics. These people are Washington-insiders and lobbyists. They think the American Idol is the perfect model to follow so they can "get the younger people" to join Unity08 and participate.
As far as these people are concerned, Unity08's delegates are political cannon fodder, ready to be sold to the highest bidder. These people have no more intentions of allowing their country-bumpkin-delegates their own choice on who to support for president than the other to major political parties.
Your little flame-out is a perfect example of why Unity08 isn't a serious political effort. Any serious organization would have effectively confronted my criticisms with solid facts and sound arguments each and everytime I made them. They haven't, or can't, and you are frustrated by that. Well, hang in there, GP, as things get closer to election time, you are going to get a whole lot more frustrated.
ex animo
davidfarrar
Once again you're speculating 1000 miles beyond what you know. I'm not questioning the conviction by which you BELIEVE you know everything there is to know about Unity08. I'm simply suggesting you tone down a bit so that people might take you seriously.
I do have to say you made me laugh out loud at your assertion that Unity08 can't be taken seriously because they, essentially, don't take you seriously. That was a good one. Kudos!
The one question you still haven't answered, is if you really don't like Unity08, why do you keep hanging around here?
-GP
Let's do as The Beatles' said: "Come together, right now. Unity." Something like that... ;)
A back full of arrows.
ex animo
davidfarrar
Common sense - the cure for stupid!
The smart pioneers took shelter so they didn't get shot, or stayed out of hostile territory.
Do you really think you're a pioneer? Do you really believe that what you're proposing with the NCP is new? Do you really think that the reason that there isn't a ground-up internet-based party that isn't corrupt with special interest money is because nobody thought of it yet?
The reason there isn't is the same reason that:
We all recognize the horror of wars, but we still have them.
We have the means to end hunger throughout the world, but we don't.
We could vote for one of many third parties out there, but we don't.
It's never EVER been a technology problem. It's always has and always will be a people problem, a cooperation problem. It's hard to get people to cooperate but it's easy to get them to argue and disagree. Look at these message boards. Look at the two of us :P
I am willing to bet that if you asked every single person on Unity08 if they would like to see a political party exist like the one you envision, they would say yes. I would love to see it myself. I too have pondered as to how it might happen in 2024 when I sat there watching the election results come in.
But the problem is you just can't get a million people together that easy. Someone has to lead. Someone has to have credibility as a leader. Someone has to have wealth, power, and influence within the mechanics of the current system to bring something like that to life. Millions of people aren't going to just start handing over money towards good intentions. Millions of people aren't even going to read about good intentions. If you simplify your good intentions into succinct bumpersticker slogans, nobody takes them seriously.
The reality is that with every institution, public or private, a tiny percentage of people will carry the weight. The VAST majority of participants will always just be casual/minimal participants. They don't want to attend regular meetings. They don't want to fill out complex surveys. They don't want to write essays. They don't seek glory. They just want to be part of something that is decent.
The "worst" part is that they won't try something new unless there is already a crowd there. People will readily show up for a party if "everyone's going to be there", but if it's just a few people? Forget it!
That's why the only way that something like the NCP works is that the nucleus of it is from the top down. What that means is that you need to be rich, have some special fame, or have influential associates. Blogs are started from ground up. Political parties just won't be. They require the kind of startup momentum that only the rich and/or powerful can provide.
The Unity leadership does have such things and that is why it is getting somewhere. It's not perfect. I have criticisms of it too, but I would rather take this incremental step towards improving our political landscape than clinging to "perfect" and "pure" nobility...and silent defeat.
What I really hope, David, is that you could just be more constructive. Instead of just trashing everything on here, just give it a chance. It's one thing to criticize, but another to try to assassinate.
-GP
Let's do as The Beatles' said: "Come together, right now. Unity." Something like that... ;)
...but I was responding to the only question you had left in your post: To the contrary To wit: "The one question you still haven't answered, is if you really don't like Unity08, why do you keep hanging around here?"
I am sorry if you didn't understand my reply. I was referring to Unity08 and its self-described "one-of-a-kind, the-first-ever Internet application, as being the pioneer here.
However, to answer your second question:
Q. Do you really believe that what you're proposing with the NCP is new?
A. Yes, I really, really do believe that what I am proposing with the NCP is new. It hasn't been done yet for good practical reasons that have yet to be overcome. But they can, and will be. I have applied for a significant software grant to get it done.
To your third question:
Q. Do you really think that the reason that there isn't a ground-up Internet-based party that isn't corrupt with special interest money is because nobody thought of it yet?
A. No, they have certainly thought of it. All of the major parties have very carefully considered it and have realized its implications and have have turned it down. Ceding power to the people is the last thing party elites want to do, including Unity08's. Party politics is all about controlling power, not dispersing it. That's exactly why Unity08 leadership, for all its bluster, is no different than other party elites.
But Eli's Coming...
ex animo
davidfarrar
Don't you think your NCP would be better served by spending time working on it instead of disparaging what we are doing here? Maybe it's time to "go forth" and bring your vision to reality instead of trashing ours.
-GP
Let's do as The Beatles' said: "Come together, right now. Unity." Something like that... ;)
This message is in response to GP' post: My final question
As I stated before, GP; I am not surprised a group of Washington insiders and lobbyist would use the Internet to achieve their own political aims. I am also not surprised that they too, like other party elites, have no intention of actually empowering the center at their own expense. This is the real reason they too, like the other two major political parties, have no interest in actually forming an Internet 3rd party. The idea would be completely heretical to their own political aims. Lobbyists and special interests, like political parties, are in the business of controlling political power, not giving it away, or dispersing it amongst the people, but that's exactly what NCP intends to do.
And it's true, I might not get there on the mountain top with you, but when it is accomplished, and Eli has come, we will have owed Unity08's owners a sense of gratitude for their awakening of what they like to call..."the Internet masses".
ex animo
davidfarrar
david, i read all the posts back and forth between you and gp. and i must say as just a regular common sense guy, i find your postings full of paranoia. as gp said over and over why not devote all that energy you put into post here on your own thing. continually posting in here is counterproductive to the end means which you want. your postings aren't going to change anything in here in my opinion. you are simply another person who posts. nothing more. perhaps you just like posting your opinions somewhere, i can totally relate to that but one needs to be honest about it. whats wrong with just answering gp by saying i have a message i am trying to get out and thought i couod do it here.. and gp, rightly so, is saying (i think, dont want to put words in gp's mouth)to you that this is not the place for your message. your posts seem counterproductive to both unity 08' and yourself.
just my analysis.
Today, I received an email from Bingham asking me for money. Stating the Ballot access teams were in place in every state, the Nomination Team (already chosen) and made up of a couple of thousand people,was in place. And the selection was going to be a Republican or a Democrat. And he had the gall to ask me to support his group of cronies, who are going to do whatever Mark Cuban tells them to do. After all the categories of Issues they placed on here, what is their agenda and platform? Everyone has blogged their comments on different issues. Do you really have input, just because you took a survey?
This is NOT how you build Unity. Everyone will not agree on everything, life would be to perfect, but to have input, be a part of change and to have your voice heard (and know it has) is what team building is all about. If this forum serves your purpose, thats your choice, but before you send your hard earned money to someone, know what your buying.
I joined Unity08 in hopes of getting the American people to unite for change and to express their will to Congress & the President. Electing a lame duck President will not bring about change, but those elected will serve the purpose of Unity08. Wake up American People!
I too received an email. However, I find no mention of a "Nomination Team" already set up. Are you talking about the internet technology (IT) team assembled to set up the internet online convention? Because as far as I understand, anyone can make a nomination.
Phil
Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one.
Like Phil, mine mentioned the progress:
As our movement heads into late summer, we are beginning some very significant programs:
We are working to attain ballot access in all 50 states.
We are preparing to launch candidate draft petitions.
We are designing and building the online convention hall.
And together, we will continue to shape the American Agenda.
I did not see anything about an already in place "Nomination Team". Can you please post what it is you received as they may be sending different e-mails in batches. Thanks.
I support what Unity08 is trying to do...at its essence, it will awaken the..."Internet masses"... to the Internets potential to re-empower our democracy. If Thomas Jefferson was alive today, he would be busy creating an Internet party, not supporting Unity08.
ex animo
davidfarrar
perhaps jefferson would not support unity but just as likely he would, i mean cmon that is just slightly speculative wouldn't you say? anyway unity right now is what i see as the best hope for change. and of course the beauty of our country is, for now, still free speech. i dont condemn your posts i just think the negativity is kind of a waste of energy. energy you could put to good use on your own website. basically i am curious as to what you hope to achieve with your postings here.
good luck on whatever path you follow.
I concur. Continuous negative posts about Unity08 merely hurt your ability to achieve your vision for your own website.
Phil
Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one.
For some reason, this reminds me of "failed democratic system" the way it is currently. A handful of people making decisions for a few, not even caring about any one else. I thought that the original point was "We gotta take the power back" -RATM. All it is on here is alot of smoke and mirrors (talk). I'm one for action. I visit this site once a month only because nothing ever gets done. We need to get off of our butts and start doing somthing, other than doing a few photo ops without any physical goal in sight. If we really want to make a shake up in the political system, steal a canidate away from their current party now to be "our" candidate. That would get more coverage than anyone could EVER buy.
why do we have to have any of these popular rich men for candidates? do you really think they will do anymore then take the same money bush is? all of these candidates are horrible. a rich man is never going to help the common man. so with these candidates we do nothing more but put another puppet in the house to further the sideshow while our country is literally ripped out from under us.
This man is the ideal presidential candidate this party needs. He went to Harvard and also has a degree in political science. Why not?
Read part 6 and 7 if you don't belive me.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Morello
All you Naysayers - where the hell have you been while others took the bull by the horns and got things moving - WHAT DID YOU EXPECT ?? that 3 Retired Political Activist would invest their life savings and mortgage everything they have - for you ??? THEY CREATED A VEHICLE FOR US TO USE - TO CHANGE THINGS FOR THE BETTER .. they have and are committing their good names to setting a solid stage for us to present "A PEOPLES AGENDA FOR POLITICAL REFORM - That Correctly Addresses The Issues Most Crucial To Our Protection and Survival As A Strong and Free Society" .. and this is what we are doing ..
If you can't glean this from the comments on this webb, the problem is yours not ours, you are seeing only what you want to see - not the reality that exists ..
You are welcome to join us - as long as you can see a HALF FULL GLASS - THAT WE ARE ATTEMPTING TO FILL !!
The choice is yours ..
Peter K. (popo) Evans
Oh, and by the way - if you click on www.america-21stcentury.com YOU CAN GET THE REST OF THE STORY !!