The response has been big and astounding. Keep it coming. We have just begun to fight to change American politics.
One concern raised by some needs to be addressed head on: Some experienced bloggers expect/want Unity08 to arrive with a specific platform position on every issue.
We repeat what we said in our statement of purpose: We will have an agenda, not a platform. Our agenda is the list of issues that the public feels are crucial that Washington is not addressing – energy independence, quality education, affordable health care, rising national debt and many more.
But we don’t come to this with a platform. We invite you to debate and offer solutions – and ultimately we invite candidates to run for President on the Unity08 banner with their own platform on the crucial issues.
We would stifle the debate if the web site has pre-determined answers. And most American voters know that the crucial issues are very complex, don’t have simple answers, and progress will require debate, discussion and maybe even consensus or compromise.
What’s sad and interesting is that in Washington none of those things are happening on any of the crucial issues. No debate, no discussion, no consensus and no compromise. Washington is polarized and paralyzed.
So to all who expect Unity08 to have all the answers and to be certain of everything, we may disappoint you. To those who relish debate, serious discussion, and finding candidates for leadership ready to discuss crucial issues seriously, we hope to excite you.
Spending a lot of time in Washington is dangerous for your mental health, apparently. But spending a lot of time watching Washington causes you to be very wary of two types: Those who need to read the polls before they know what they think – and those who seem certain of every answer even before the questions are asked.
At Unity08 our forum and our minds are open. Blog on!
Subscribe
Plank 2
A. Create a North American free trade zone and travel zone from Panama to the artic ocean.
1. Standard ID for all people in the region.
2. No birthright citizenship- regadless of place of birth, child receives citizenship of mother only.
3. Joint Naval force (Coast Guard) to suppress smuggling, illegal fishing, and illegal immigration.
4. Joint border patrol force at the Panama canal zone.
How come other countries can provide universal health care, including their fatsos and smokers? Are they richer? More technologically advanced? More compassionate? More clever at providing services?
How about we create a popularly elected board of governors across all three NAFTA countries to make recommendations about how to improve working conditions and the environment across all three countries?
We don't post for anyone unwilling to identify themselves or even use a handle so we can tell them apart from others using the default name- anonymous.
Bad idea we need to streamline the interaction between the inhabitants of North America not start more obstructionist bureaucracies. Keep it simple and make it a subject of treaty.
I suppose if you got rid of elections, government would be more efficient too.
NAFTA, other international trade agreements and internation financial institutions are fundamentally undemocratic. The people governed by their rulings and policies have no practical way to change these institutions.
Vic, it's clear that you are enamored with the ideology of the "free market". But I'm pretty committed to democracy.
If people don't like the government--NAFTA, WTO, IMF, World Bank included--they should be able to vote for a new goverment.
Carl,
I don't want to get into a p*ssing match with you - that's not what Unity's all about. I actually didn't see your question to me - I just saw all the negativity you were posting and felt the need to respond.
However, I believe you to have a wealth of knowledge that can't be ignored... I hope you do understand, though, that there are other viewpoints than yours that just might carry credibility.
So - to answer your question - I believe moderate/right of center ideas have been shut out of Washington politics due to political divisiveness... But such known core principles as fiscal responsibility, low taxes, less government and empowering people to be self-sufficient (rather than enabling them to be lazy) are things that those of us with right-leanings have the "right" idea about.
However, YOU are right in that not much of this has been accomplished in Washington in recent years. This, my friend, is the very reason I support the cause of Unity08!
Plank 3
Make the transport and power distribution infrastructure from Plank 1 a for profit company with 45% ownership (balance publically traded) shared based on contributions to construction by the countries in the alliance and with all profits from these enterprises in each country dedicated to a universal health care fund.
In general, fiscal discipline is the ideology of the Congressional minority. The majority would rather give the money to its interest groups rather than show restraint.
Perot deserves credit for moving the issue up the national priority list.
However, it seems clear that the most egregiously irresponsible behavior in Washington has been perpetrated by the Bush administration and Congressional Republicans.
Paying for large tax cuts by borrowing is stunningly irresponsible. That so many of the Right and GOP went along with it for so long kinda pisses me off, as an American.
Plank 4- Amendment to the US Constitution
Congress shall make no law under which they or any, member of the federal executive or judiciary shall have any rights or freedom from prosecution under any law binding on the citizens in general. Any existing such laws shall be immediately declared null and void, except those expressly delineated in the constitution in the main or under any amendment.
I know its been said before, but I'll say it again to help it get noticed by someone that is in charge around here... The format of this blog is terrible! Please allow the typical thread/reply format. Even OpenSource modules like this one musthave that setting. Also, there's needs to be a way for us to "sign up" and login in order to have nicknames (ex: Right of Center), so I don't have to keep typing it.
I'm lost trying to follow things in here.
Everyone is for the idea of low taxes, but the Republicans have perpetrated a con. (Albeit a con the Democrats have gone along with.)
The total tax burden hasn't gone down under Republican leadership. We have more government than ever.
What the Republicans have accomplished is reducing the federal income tax (which comes mostly from the rich) and shifted the tax burden to property taxes and state taxes which affect the poor and middle class more.
So we need a comprehensive review of tax policy.
If there are ways to make government more efficient great. But what we've gotten from the Right and GOP has been trickery and deferring costs to future taxpayers.
All American's deserve the full and equal protection of the Constitution and the rights that flow from it. Gay men, lesbians, and bi-sexuals are no exception.
Full access to participation in all public services, state sanctioned institutions and organizations (public and private) should be afforded accordingly.
Discrimination on this basis will not be tolerated or codified in anyway.
To win an election with a third party, Unity08 will need to propose a path to a bountiful future for the United States (US). I want to suggest a program that will provide the US (and the world) with energy independence and freedom from the threat of increasing carbon dioxide. If implemented this program will revitalize the US and world economy.
To set the mood it is necessary to reiterate some things you already know but which are often not perceived as interrelated.
Within US borders, we have depleted the supplies of easily recovered oil. Because of the depletion, we now depend on antagonist nations for much of our oil. Authorities project that because fewer new oil fields are being discovered the worldwide production of oil will peak within the next few years. After the peak, the price of oil will increase rapidly as nations compete for the remaining reserves.
China, India and other nations are striving to modernize; they will need sources of energy and chemicals. Their demand for fossil fuels will accelerate the depletion of finite reserves and exacerbate international instability, including wars. Expanding use of fossil fuel will increase both the probability and rate of climate change. Today, expanding use is escalating the cost of all fossil fuels.
In our current energy system, fossil fuel minerals are taken from the ground and burned to carbon dioxide. This is an open loop cycle; the carbon dioxide is vented into the atmosphere where it will remain for thousands of years. Carbon dioxide produced by the combustion of fossil fuels is a threat to the stability of the climate. Initially, most thought that this threat was hundreds of years in the future. Today, most realize that if we take no action, energy dependence and climate change will be a burden for our children and will be a major disaster for our grandchildren. The energy plan described in this document can protect our descendants from the potential for a worldwide depression and Dark Age brought on by our dependence on fading fossil energy sources that produce climate change.
If we wait until fuel depletion and climate changes force our hand, we may lack the energy resources to make a smooth transition to a non-fossil energy system. We will need energy to support the transition process. If we start soon it will greatly enhance our chances for relatively trouble-free success.
Aside from depletion and climate change, there is another compelling reason to curtail the combustion of fossil fuels chemicals. These chemicals should be conserved for higher value uses as feedstock for rubber, plastics, fibers and pharmaceuticals.
We urgently need to engineer a new energy system that will provide stewardship for all life on earth. Renewable energy sources (wind, solar, hydropower, geothermal, biomass, wave and tidal) do not contaminate the atmosphere and are effectively infinite in supply. Unfortunately, they are unreliable in both time and space. We have learned from large hydropower installations that when renewable sources are extensively harvested they cause environmental damage. Renewable energy sources alone lack the capability to provide the robust energy supply needed to support vigorous civilizations.
Uranium based fission energy sources emit no carbon dioxide but produces a nearly immortal radioactive waste that we have not yet learned how to safely transport and store. Uranium fission can also lead to weapons proliferation. Intractable waste and weapons proliferation make fission bad solution for a new energy system.
Sir David King, the chief science advisor for the United Kingdom, recommends that fusion (not uranium fission) is the answer to future energy needs (King, David, ‘Fast Forward to Fusion’ New Scientist, Issue 2442, 10 April 2024). The book “An End To Global Warming” (ISBN 0-08-044-45-2) describes why and how we can convert to an innovative energy supply system. This system combines harvest of renewable energy with utility fusion reactors. The resulting Renewable-Fusion-Hydrogen (RFH) energy system will provide energy independence of all and protect the world from climate change.
Fusion reactors use hydrogen isotopes and/or boron as fuels. Fusion reactors produced positive energy in 1992. This success prompted the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) [http://www.iter.org/] program. ITER will likely use tritium and deuterium as fuels and produces some radioactive waste (far, far less that uranium fission). Since the demonstration of feasibility, little meaningful has happened because of veiled resistance by current energy industries and bureaucratic torpor. First, there were several years of debate about what kind of a team would build the facility. Then further debate about who will fund each part of the project. This was followed by a multi-year bureaucratic battle concerning ITER’s location. The European members of the team want to build ITER in France. The US, Canada and Japan wanted to build it in Canada or Japan. The only product from the dozen years of activity is work for government employees. The entire project has been managed as if it was merely a sand box for training future physics PhDs and not, as Sir David King suggests humanity’s hope for abundant clean energy.
In July 2024, NATURE reported an agreement. ITER will be located at Cadarache, France; finally, after 13 years of procrastination: action. This is good news! In other reports, Raymond L. Orbach of the United States Department Of Energy (DOE) told the United States press that the ITER might lead to a power plant in the year 2024. This is bad news. The agreement that approved the ITER design provides a reactor one-half the size desired by the technical team; this is also bad news. The small size is reputed to save money. Unfortunately, small size magnifies the potential for failure.
In rebuttal to Mr. Orbach’s schedule, see the 1976 report, FUSION POWER BY MAGNETIC CONFINEMENT, ERDA-76/110/1, UC-20, Page 8. (ERDA is the United States Energy Research and Development Administration, a precursor to the current DOE). This 1976 ERDA report states that building a pilot fusion reactor would take 10 to 13 years with a Maximum Effective Effort (using 1976 computers and technology).
To the future of civilization, it matters little who develops the fusion reactors. The supporting governments must light a fire under the ITER team. Demand the program move rapidly ahead. The international ITER team should address the development with the enthusiasm that the US applied to the Manhattan or Apollo programs.
Three actions will facilitate the development of utility fusion reactors within a decade:
One, make it clear that the ITER schedule of 35 years is extraordinarily unsatisfactory. Modify the ITER engineering plans to build a reactor of optimum size for success, not a size that saves money. If the European Union’s (EU) Green constituency is serious, it should be happy to fund a Maximum Effective Effort for ITER.
Two, across the world, encourage the termination the oxymoronic clean coal initiatives and hazardous fission programs. Use the funds recovered to support efficiency improvements and development of renewable and fusion energy sources.
Three, recruit a Pacific Rim group, (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, China, Canada and the United States) to support and fund a Maximum Effective Effort for alternate fusion reactors and/or alternate fuels such as boron 11, in competition with ITER. Japan has an research fusion reactor and China is building a small Tokomak using superconductor magnets. These programs should be accelerated and heavily funded.
Strong support for boron 11 fusion is very important because this fusion reaction has the potential to provide carbon free energy without radioactive waste. For information concerning boron 11 fusion see: [http://fusion.ps.uci.edu/beam/introb.html] The Pacific Rim program will serve as a competitive goad for the ITER effort and both will be driven to success in a timely manner.
The use of renewable energy sources backed up by utility fusion reactors will solve humanity’s need for energy. Most of the energy from these sources will be used to decompose water to produce hydrogen, with oxygen as a by-product. Hydrogen is a good fuel for the simplest cooking fire, the most advanced propulsion system, and for all uses in-between. The hydrogen will be stored and transmitted in continent-spanning pipelines. Most current natural gas pipelines can handle hydrogen. Energy producers will pump hydrogen into the pipeline. Energy users will draw from this pipeline. Hydrogen will serve as the transportation fuel.
The new Renewable Fusion Hydrogen (RFH) energy system will be far more robust than our current fossil fuel system. All energy users will receive hydrogen through underground pipes. Electricity will be generated as needed by fuel cells in the users’ facility or home. RFH will eliminate the ugly, unreliable and dangerous overhead transmission lines that deface the countryside, our cities and continually provoke us with debilitating power outages. These system also kill by electrocution and starting fires.
The economic activities associated with this development will stimulate the world economy for the next 50 years and leave us with a far cleaner world. The oxygen by-product can be used to purify water and destroy solid waste. The development and implementation of the oxygen technology and hardware will also be a stimulus for the economy.
The RFH system will end everyone’s dependence on resources from unstable parts of the world. In the near term, the development program will shake the world economy out of lethargy. Implementation of the RFH system will take a number of years and cost trillions of dollars. Maintenance of the current fossil fuel system over this period will also cost trillions of dollars. Maintaining the current system will magnify its malevolent properties. In the long term, the RFH system will provide energy for eons and stabilize the carbon dioxide content of the atmospheres. Stabilizing carbon dioxide will stop the progression of climate change. RFH energy development promises a large effort that will yield a very large gain.
The advantages of the RFH energy system are:
The nations that perform the development will enjoy an ebullient economy
Energy will be abundant, clean and low cost
The energy system will not supply materials useful for making atomic weapons
Emerging economies can avoid the large-scale exploitation of fossil fuel
Global conflicts over oil supplies will diminish and ultimately end
Fossil fuel chemicals will be conserved for higher value use
Global warming will slow and then stop
Arctic and Antarctic ice will stop melting and sea levels will stabilize
Air pollution from automobiles, diesel trucks and airplanes will be eliminated
Smog, acid rain, and carbon monoxide poisoning will cease to exist
Electricity will be generated by fuel cells on site, not delivered by fragile overhead lines
Electric power lines will no longer deface the countryside or cities
Abundant oxygen will provide a tool to clean-up polluted water, sewage and solid waste
Ozone (easily made from oxygen) will eliminate all toxic chemicals from water supplies
After scanning the literature covering the 60 years of fusion research, it seems likely that to produce low cost energy fusion reactors will need to be large. Large reactors present a challenge of high sites cost (on land) and the NIMBY (NIMBY = Not In My Back Yard) effect. In “An End To Global Warming”, the system described utilizes large reactors built to survive at sea. These floating reactors will be much like aircraft carriers or submarines. Because these floating systems will have a more limited mission than aircraft carriers or submarines the sea based units will likely be simpler and less costly to build. When completed they can be towed to locations throughout the world to supply energy for all.
Current ship building facilities - that are currently struggling to survive - will be the perfect place for construction. The construction of these reactor modules would be a long-term opportunity for high technology industrial activity for all economies. To implement the RFH energy system we need a highly motivated program, similar to the Manhattan or Apollo projects. Such a program would energize the US and world economy. The builders of the RFH energy systems can sell fusion reactors throughout the world without fear of proliferation of nuclear weapons because fusion reactors cannot be used to make bombs.
Unlike the product of the Manhattan or Apollo program, the product of the RFH program will compete with existing industries. The established energy industries will whimper and moan. They will say that RFH cannot compete with fossil fuels. The canal owners in the nineteenth century complained that railroads could not compete with canals on a cost basis, they were wrong. The horse drawn carriage makers said automobiles could not replace the horse, they were wrong. The steam engine manufacturers on the twentieth century stated that diesels-electric engines could not be completive for hauling trains, they were wrong. In the recent past the vacuum tube industry said that solid state electronics could not replace vacuum tube equipment, they were wrong. The older industries were displaced, but the economy as a whole benefited.
The utility reactors can be developed within 10 years. Once utility reactors are coming off the assembly line, complete conversion to an RFH system will take 30 years. The industries that will be affected by new energy sources must apply their expertise in management of fossil fuels to the handling and distribution of the hydrogen and oxygen. If they do this, they will prosper. If they do not adapt they will become history with the canal managers and buggy makers.
Unity08 must strongly oppose the current US administration’s energy policy. This policy appears to be “continue on, as in the past”. For energy, squeeze more out of existing oil fields, build a pipeline to bring natural gas down from Alaska or transport it as a liquid from places such as Azerbaijan. They propose to drill in wild life preserves and increase oil imports from Canada and Mexico. The DOE’s major research programs are “clean coal” (an oxymoron), carbon dioxide sequesterization, (sweeping the problem under the rug) and advanced nuclear fission (more intractable waste and threat from weapons proliferation). It appears the US policy is to push the energy challenges into the future for our descendants to manage, as it has done with debt. The DOE approach is neither “Stewardship of the Earth” or concern for “Intergenerational Equity”.
One DOE effort that vaguely supports a forward-looking approach is the funding of hydrogen fuel cell technology. This is ostensibly good but in fact, the commercial world is already investing in fuel cell development so government participation is not necessary. Where government help is needed is in the task of creating the energy sources and infrastructure to make the hydrogen for use in the fuel cells. The reading of current publications indicate that the national labs think that the hydrogen will be produced from fossil fuels. If this is DOE’s approach then there is no gain; we will still be dependent on fossil fuels and will still be venting carbon dioxide. For hydrogen fuel cells to yield their promise of emission free transportation and hyper-reliable safe, electric energy, the hydrogen must be made from non-fossil sources. Renewable sources backed up by utility fusion reactors are the only means to supply the energy to make the hydrogen for the environmentally benign future.
The notion that developing fusion is expensive, is very exasperating. Currently the world consumes approximately 80 billion barrels of oil per year. At $50.00 per barrel, 4 trillion ($ 4,000,000,000,000.) is spent on oil. A similar, possibly somewhat smaller, amount is spent on coal, nuclear and other forms of energy, for a total expenditure of $6 to $8 trillion for energy. Spending 1/2% of $6 trillion, ($30 billion) to develop the replacement energy source would seem a bargain. This would be an expenditure of $30 billion per year for about ten years. In the US 30 billion is about 8% of the defense budget and energy dependence is a far greater threat to our nation that any outside force that the military can postulate. At this level, a Maximum Effective Effort could easily achieve a facility fusion reactor within a decade. The facility reactors can be sold worldwide and the initial development cost quickly recovered. Saving humanity’s energy dependent civilization and the earth from debilitating climate degradation is worth far more than $30 billion per year.
Please consider adding support for the RFH energy system to your plans for the 2024 election. John Kennedy said “Before this decade is over, we will place men on the moon and bring them safely home”. Unity08 presidential candidate can say, “Before this decade is over, we will provide all nations the opportunity to achieve energy independence and will end the threat from progressive global warming”.
For further details on the RFH energy system, see: [http://www.endtoglobalwarming.com] and read “An End To Global Warming”, available at many Libraries.
Frankly, I'd be embarrassed to implement this discussion site if I had paid staff.
There's a program called Scoop. It's used to manage Daily Kos. Hire a programmer to make this discussion functional.
Problem is Carl, that even those systems that claim to provide "universal" coverage are still forced to ration it.
In Canada, rationing results in 2 year waits for simple knee surgery. In Britain, it results in "Quality of life" judgements that result in eye surgery being performed on one eye only, In Australia it results in toddlers with degenerative tooth decay waiting 12 months for treatment. The result is that people within government-run systems are not much happier witrh their systems than we are with ours. Our system may be bad, but universal, government-provided healthcare has a very bad set of trade-offs that is not worth the expense IMHO.
Now, one book I read proposed a system more like Singapore's, but I'd like to take a harder look at their system.
Troy,
Are you interested in promoting an alternative political party or is gay rights your issue that you are going to promote no matter what?
Troy, do you agree that society is naturally expanding opportunities for gays and lesbians?
How satisfied would you be if the Unity 08 ticket merely pledged to "do no harm"? That is they would implement any anti-gay policy. They wouldn't speak against gay rights or encourage anti-gay bigotry.
The truth is, the idea of fiscal discipline is one that the GOP has betrayed their base on, but one the Dems never held to in the first place.
I will give reasons for discontinuing attempts to reason with Vic, the author of Senecism. They are the same reasons why "discussing" things of importance on the internet can be a complete waste of one's time more generally.
One wishes for a convention of manners - an agreement to at the very least abandon the most obvious and odious formal and informal logical fallacies in making one's arguments.
Vic doesn't engage in conversation. He isn't unique in this, but rather exemplifies a certain type of debating style a lot of folks use online.
By this I mean that Vic deliberately uses several popular but logically fallacious techniques to present his views.
One of these is using a false dichotomy, which is to argue that only two alternatives are possible, and concluding that since one is untenable, the other must be correct. In Vic's case, his argument consists in the implicit claim that the only alternative to what Vic says is something truly horrible and unacceptable -- anything his victim of choice might be saying at any given moment.
Another favorite of the online debating society is the ad hominem attack where one attacks the person making an argument rather than the argument or position the person is supporting. Does it matter whether one is 18 or 58 regarding the facts asserted about American history? After all, one can look it up.
By far the most common logically fallacious technique I encounter in trying to discuss seriously the concepts introduced almost a century ago into American political discourse is that of the straw man.
Vic, and others, attack a misstated, diminished, or absurdly weak version of an opponent’s argument and thus claim victory over his real argument.
Consider Vic's use of the above techniques to rebut what I said and then you find his next ploy: the red herring, distracting the reader or listener with an argument against a related, but essentially different, argument. This is where his "planks" come in. He cannot converse about the subject at hand, so let's talk about something else.
Vic and others make things worse by using the fallacy of the slippery slope on top of the straw man, alleging that accepting the conclusion of an opponent’s argument will invariably lead to an increasing series of dastardly consequences.
The most egregious example in Vic's last post was concluding I must be 18 because I failed to respond to his provocation regarding my person -- something I quite properly judged was irrelevant and immaterial and thus ignored.
This is known as argumentum ad ignorantiam: claiming that the absence of a clear answer to a question implies either an affirmative or negative answer.
Maybe that was the straw man that broke the camel's back after he slid down that slippery slope.
Or, more likely, as in the case of a dangling participle, that is simply something up with which I shall not put.
Did I mention I tried but could not detect in Vic's stuff a sense of humor? Sorry, Vic -- maybe you can take a course?
Plank 5
Congress shall fund and the president shall distribute by measured facts of performance each year a prize of 1 billion dollars for any technology demonstrating the ability to substantially affect local (100 mile radius) or larger climates. Each year the preceding years demonstrated technology control shall be increased in range or effect by 2%. This amount shall be set aside if the 2% goal is not reached and accumulate until such an improvement is demonstrated where apon all set aside monies shall be paid out to the winner.
All American's HAVE the full and equal protection of the Constitution and the rights that flow from it. The End.
I'm a fan of many things Singaporean. I applied to Natl U. of Singapore for a Masters in Public Policy.
But I'd be skeptical of expanding something from a city state like Singapore to a huge diverse country like the USA.
Complaining that Canada and the UK ration care is valid, if you acknowledge that the U.S. system rations care too.
The U.S. health care system leaves 1/5 of the country without health care. It costs an astronomical amount of money. It stops people from starting small businesses.
BTW, did you know that people on Medicaid and Medicare--the gov't run programs--are more satisfied with their health care than Americans with private insurance?
Something to think about...
What should be done about taxation in the United States?
How should the overall tax system be improved?
Yahoo! And end to cronyism and deception .... lol
"All American's HAVE the full and equal protection of the Constitution and the rights that flow from it. The End."
You are obviously a straight, white man who has never experienced prejudice or had to fight for systemic equality.
To be a party a party must address greivances of the present inadequacies of government and social clime.
Right of Center, are gays and lesbians allowed to marry partners of their choice? Serve in the military?
To claim inequality is really equality is somewhat insulting.
Plank 6
Congress shall fund and the president shall distribute by measured facts of performance each year a prize of 1 billion dollars for any technology demonstrating the ability to transport four people safely at speeds of 75 mph or more at the expenditure of 36 kw (1 gallon of gas)in one hour. Each year the preceding years demonstrated technology control shall be increased in range or effect by 2%. This amount shall be set aside if the 2% goal is not reached and accumulate until such an improvement is demonstrated where apon all set aside monies shall be paid out to the winner.
The government has an obligation not to discriminate. It has responsibilites to prevent discrimination.
But prejudice is mostly outside the purview of gov't.
Is this our first official nominee? How do I vote?? Oh wait, the logistics on that are "still to come"... ** Hackers: your cue to salivate now **
I have heard of the terrible mind altering effects which might occur to an individual should they accidentaly consume the kool aid, but from your recent ravings it unfortunatly falls upon me to inform you that it is likely someone has spiked your holiday punch with that noxious liquer.
Hope all is well.
But prejudice is mostly outside the purview of gov't.--Carl Nyberg.
Agreed.
The fundamental problem with modern political discourse is that so many people are half-subscribed to one ideology or another. By day we all go to work, pay our taxes, care for our families, and are bothered by the way government runs. By night we go on about how Conservatives/Liberals/Bush/Congress/Corporations/Socialism/Capitalism/Global Warming/Pseudo-Rights/etc are destroying Our country/the world/the earth. Yet it truly takes time out of our day to look at the cold, hard, facts and both sides of an argument when in fact many feel it is not worth their time to do so. Until everyone decides to take time out to study an issue, we'll just go 'round and 'round 'till the discussion breaks down and we start calling each other names. Then Unity08 will be no better than any other political forum.
Right of Center, you are not the government. So, to the extent that you are behaving in a prejudiced manner, Troy and I have a right to call you out.
Are you willing to acknowledge that gov't does in fact discriminate against gays and lesbians?
Are you interested in promoting an alternative political party or is gay rights your issue that you are going to promote no matter what?
...I am interested in a new party and have lots of reasons aside from Gay Rights...however, I am only interested in a new party if it agrees that my rights and the rights of all minorities are made clear, protected, reaffirmed and strengthend.
Troy, do you agree that society is naturally expanding opportunities for gays and lesbians?
No, I do not agree that Gay Rights have expanded all by it's self: it has not happened without the constant vigilance of people pushing for action on gay rights, expressing the conditions that affect their lives and pointing out the inadequacies of governmental protections...take Gay Marriage...if it fails or passes it is because someone took action.
How satisfied would you be if the Unity 08 ticket merely pledged to "do no harm"? That is they would implement any anti-gay policy. They wouldn't speak against gay rights or encourage anti-gay bigotry.
Do no harm? This is NOT sufficient in the least: declarative statements and proactive steps are required.
Nice try.
Malpractice seems to be an issue suddenly. Is there anyone out there whow really dosn't believe that malpractice occurs? I hope not.
Just think about this. In medical school, just as in any other school, someone finishes at the bottom of the class. A few people cheat to get by. A lot of people decide to be doctors not because they have any special skills, or sense of altruism, but because that's where the money is.
Corporate CEOs are like professional atheletes. There are only a certain number of teams, and a certain number of players per team.
Doctors are just like any amateur atheletes. There are nearly unlimited openings, except doctors get paid a lot more.
Are doctors better people than non-doctors? (You'll have to answer that one.)
The point is that doctors make a lot of money because most people don't want to die, and are willing to do or pay just about anything to avoid it. That's not counting plastic surgeons, of course.
I honestly hope no one suggests that there isn't any other medical system that works.
Vic forgot one thing... planks are used in the construction of PLATFORMS. Unity has already declared it will not have a platform, but rather an AGENDA. So, I'll stop by the store tonight to pick up marshmallows for use in the bonfire fueled by Vic's planks. Anyone care to join me? :)
Just kidding Vic... enjoy your 15 minutes of fame.
Troy, do you think you have a chance of getting the people involved in Unity 08 to agree to your position on gay marriage?
If you know it's not going to happen, what is your purpose of participating in the discussion?
Who needs marshmallows ... just pass the ketchup.
Seneca
Is it possible you might actually comment on the suggested planks in substance?
Or perhaps there is some other act or substantial change you might put forward that has the following properties:
Does not require a change in human behavior.
Not Politically Correct and in fact having no previous history of comment the reader and thoughtful person has to actually consider the matter on its face.
I won't apologize for the planks I've put forward they are meant to be shredded and debated, they are certainly lacking in detail. They are however a start.
Doesn't engage in back-and-forth dialogue.
It's rude.
I realize that all healthcare MUST be rationed, since there is not enough medical skill and infrastructure to satisfy every little ache and pain that everyone has. It's just the reality.
Now the difference between a universal gov't-run system and a private system is where the rationing occurs. In a gov't system a bureaucrat decides what gets looked at and treated and when. Ina private system the patient decides what is the priority and the system attempts to adjust to where the need is-with the incentive of profit.
1/5 of Americans do not have healthcare insurance (which may be true), that is not to say that those Americans do not have access to health care (which is untrue). It is a number often quoted out of context for political purposes.
Think about the fact that Medicare/Medicaid are voluntary systems, universal gov't systems are not. Maybe that's why the satisfaction ratings are high. Of course, if you were to expand those systems to everyone in the US, you may see the dissatisfaction sharply rise as more rationing becomes necessary.
I highly agree with the person's comment last night about implementing a 32 hr. work week, while maintaining the same pay and benefits, so that we have time for our families and for our own mental and physical health and well-being. The 40 hour work week, which I thought was sanctioned by law, has evolved into a 40+ hour work week with diminishing benefits, to expand the profits of corporate America.
In the meantime, the children of this country are being grossly neglected, as a result of absent- parenteeism, as both parents are vanquished into an economic vacuum of dwindling returns. Too many children are no longer being raised by their parents,either physically, mentally, emotionally, or spiritually, but are raising each other, while not possessing the skills for this job.
As a teacher, I have observed many maladies among our children. Too many come to school sickly, ill-fed, ill-clothed, exhausted, with poor hygiene, completely disillusioned, depressed, and with no direction or goals in life. We are beginning to look like a third-world nation. How long do we think we can get away with nationally sanctioned child-neglect without having its consequences visited upon us?
Seneca VS Vic ...
Who shall field the first question?
What? I totally missed where you were "calling me out"... It figures that as soon as I agree with a comment of yours, you go on the offensive.
I believe all people are equal, and should be treated as such, regardless of gender, race or lifestyle preferences. I was simply pointing out that the Constiution already protects us all, and that there's not a need for another Amendment to specify any group of people.... That's why I quoted your specific comment.
I believe the government discriminates against gays and lesbians about as much as it discriminates against minorities for creating a program such as affirmative action because it believes minorities are unable to succeed on their own credentials.
American Infidel--Now the difference between a universal gov't-run system and a private system is where the rationing occurs. In a gov't system a bureaucrat decides what gets looked at and treated and when. Ina private system the patient decides what is the priority and the system attempts to adjust to where the need is-with the incentive of profit.
***
AmericanInfidel, private sector bureaucrats ration care in private health insurance.
OK I'm more then willing to rename my planks- ideas, or discuss your thoughts to build an agenda of ideas.
Make no mistake when we are done, next year and looking around. It is those ideas which have won the blogfest to which we will be seeking candidates to make a commitment.
Can we actually get to the ideas?
This totally botched "grand debut" of a world shaking "sea change" in American politics is beginning to look like just yet another attempt to get 15 seconds of fame by hitting some intermediate top in google page rank by some rank amateurs.
Troy, do you think you have a chance of getting the people involved in Unity 08 to agree to your position on gay marriage?
>>>>The Dems did it and the Repubs do exactly the opposite....neither is sincere in support or opposition...isn't this the problem in American political culture: no one ever does what they say they'll do?????
I doubt Unity08 will acheive anything different from what I am reading...you seem invested in some nutty middle ground.
In order to make change one declares a mission and strives to implement it. ARE YOU INTERESTED IN THAT?
Otherwise just find your choices among the 2 parties.
If you know it's not going to happen, what is your purpose of participating in the discussion?
>>For the same reasons I have stood up for myself all my life and for the same reasons I will continue to; if you actually manage to acheive something I will have added my two cents into what you became.
I was disconcerted when I saw that first on the list of crucial issues is Global terrorism, not the case at all, the real problem is US foreign policy that has resulted in resistance that we call terrorism.
On the list of important issues, you list gun control, abortion and gay marriages. What about jobs, fair wages, benefits and keeping social security? What about affordable housing and safe working conditions?
I also think that protecting our Constitutional rights is extremely important, free speech and protecting whistle blowers instead of exempting them from their right to free speech.
I will continue to monitor your site to see if your ambitions bear sustainable fruit, but at this point I am not completely sold on your solution to putting America back on track.
Troy, do you think you have a chance of getting the people involved in Unity 08 to agree to your position on gay marriage?
>>>>The Dems did it and the Repubs do exactly the opposite....neither is sincere in support or opposition...isn't this the problem in American political culture: no one ever does what they say they'll do?????
I doubt Unity08 will acheive anything different from what I am reading...you seem invested in some nutty middle ground.
In order to make change one declares a mission and strives to implement it. ARE YOU INTERESTED IN THAT?
Otherwise just find your choices among the 2 parties.
If you know it's not going to happen, what is your purpose of participating in the discussion?
>>For the same reasons I have stood up for myself all my life and for the same reasons I will continue to; if you actually manage to acheive something I will have added my two cents into what you became.