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
Who, may I ask will pay for them. Have you not heard that we as a nation are quite indebted?
RofC, if a gay man wants to marry his lover, does the government allow this? Is this prohibition by the gov't discrimination?
If a gay man wants to serve in the military, is this allowed? Is this discrimination?
Is that like the 35 hour French work week? Do you understand what a disaster their economy is? We would do well to avoid their policies.
I think that if someone wishes to work 30/40/50/etc hours a week it is their personal choice to do so (as it is now), but to force everyone else to pay them more for less work is ludicrous, not to mention restricting others whose families are best served by working more hours-you are just forcing those people into involuntary poverty.
AmericanInfidel, from your comments about health care and work you sound like someone who has significant wealth and has had few interactions of substance with people on the margins of society.
For you to say that it's up to the individual how many hours they work is so ignorant of the real world it's almost comedic.
Do you really think that someone making $45,000/year can decide to make only $40,500 because s/he wants every other Friday off?
"AmericanInfidel, private sector bureaucrats ration care in private health insurance."
To a point, but in a private system you still have an incentive to decide if a runny nose is worth going to the doctor for. In a Gov't system, there is no incentive not to go, thus, the need for rationing in said system is more severe, as their systems are often clogged with such minor healthcare issues. In a private system, people are forced to self-ration through costs. Meaning that sniffles are taken care of with chicken soup and those with real needs have a better chance to get prompt attention.
Granted, there are always exceptions, but overall a universal system is not much better (and is often worse) than what we have now.
Also, remember that if one set of bureaucrats dissatisfies the patient, they can seek alternatives in a private system; not so in a universal one.
Let's talk about motives. Why do we want to see something change in 2024? Do we have to wait that long?
I want to start from first principles because only thru common commitment to a common vision of our future together can we build an Agenda that will produce concrete, specific results.
We must learn to seek compromise on those results or at least learn to accept such compromise.
My motive is simple: I want us to come together and do something of which we all can approve, in which we all can take pride.
Speech devoted to truth should be straightforward and plain
So here is something said by one I admire greatly in history - a very wise man IMHO.
Think on this and let it form the basis of discourse here:
"All things are woven together and the common bond is sacred, and scarcely one thing is foreign to another, for they have been arranged together in their places and together make the same ordered Universe.
"For there is one Universe out of all, one God through all, one substance and one law, one common Reason of all intelligent creatures and one Truth.
"Frequently consider the connection of all things in the universe.
"We should not say ‘I am an Athenian’ or ‘I am a Roman’ but ‘I am a citizen of the Universe."
(Marcus Aurelius, Meditations)
What a pleasant surprise! I've been chatting up the Biden-McCain ticket concept for the past 12 months, and when i heard on MSNBC there was an actual web site for the concept of a dem-rep ticket! well, hallelujah! The party of the "rational middle". Maybe a new party or just a way to bring the existing parties back to some sanity. But hey, forget the Hillary-McCain concept, although Hillary wants to be perceived (and maybe is) in the middle, that's not how a large portion of the public sees her. Yes, I know, a victim of the republican attack machine, but why bog down your plenary ticket with all that baggage. Think Biden - one of the most articulate and thoughtful politicans around, and teamed up with McCain, a likewise thoughtful man, would be quite a choice for voters.
Keep up the good work.
I want to vote for someone who will give us a 10-year crash program to achieve energy independence.
As Tom Friedman has pointed out, the technology is already available - in Brazil, where they produce approx. one million cars and trucks yearly, manufacturers now offering flex-fuel vehicles that run on any combination of gasoline and/or ethanol - in their case, from sugar cane. Marry that up with hybrid technology available in the US and you have gone a long way.
I just saw a headline in the NY Times that sales of US auto-makers fell sharply in May - I wonder why?
Fossil fuels are what runs the economic engine in this country and the fact we are running out should be of fundamental importantance. We all need to be educated on the options and conservation should be the first thing we need to be taught. We use more fuel per person then any other country. A large percentage of our oil usage goes to transportation and this is where we should focus our attentions. I live in Orange County and commute to Los Angeles ever day, a 70 mile round trip. I sometimes take mass transit to work and it really sucks, for all practical purposes it does not exist. In a city as big as LA it is a disgraceful that we don’t have a better mass transit system and it is equally disgraceful that we don’t have bullet trains up and down the coasts and across the nation. My president’s platform would completely stop all money for all new road expansion he would then reallocate the dollars to mass transit projects.
My area’s transportation board is living in a dream world they want to build a 7 billion dollar tunnel under the Santa Ana Mountains, a toll road through a state park, double decker freeways and more traffic lanes that will only plug up a year or two after they are built. We cannot force people to take mass transit but if there is an alternative to clogged freeways, it is cheap, reliable and convenient they will change there ways. The president must honestly explain to the public what is at stake if we continue on the same path that we are now on. If necessary most Americans would also support a tax on gasoline if it were to be used exclusively on a mass transit project.
Q:RofC, if a gay man wants to marry his lover, does the government allow this? Is this prohibition by the gov't discrimination?
A: No, because marriage has always been defined by society (since time's beginnings). As of today, the CURRENT definition is that marriage is between a man and a woman. If society decides someday it wants to change that definition, then society must FIRST vote to change that definition. I am fine with redefining marriage if a majority of voters agree. Until that definition has changed, Government is simply enforcing laws as defined by society's current norms - not discrimination. Civil Unions, on the otherhand, can and should be enacted by government to allow certain legal rights and benefits.
Q: If a gay man wants to serve in the military, is this allowed? Is this discrimination?
A: Yes, it is allowed - so therefore there's no discrimination here. Remember our most recent Democratic President enacted this, but that's something I "don't" need to "tell" you, so "don't ask." :)
"AmericanInfidel, from your comments about health care and work you sound like someone who has significant wealth and has had few interactions of substance with people on the margins of society."
Actually no, I am lower middle-class.
"For you to say that it's up to the individual how many hours they work is so ignorant of the real world it's almost comedic.
Do you really think that someone making $45,000/year can decide to make only $40,500 because s/he wants every other Friday off?"
No, I don't, I'm pointing out the reality that to restrict everyone to a set number of hours is to doom them to a set income with no way to improve their life through hard work. Some people need to work double-shifts and somewhere out there I bet I could easily find someone that can afford to only work part-time. All I'm saying is that it's stupid to force one to live like the other.
So Carl, are we going to debate the issues or are you going to break this down to typical ad hominem mud-slinging? I thought you came here to get away from that.
We need to come to a common understanding of what we mean when we say the word "Reality."
Is there an absolute foundation for working out the Truth?
Or is something only more or less true depending on how many people at any point in time agree on how to use that word?
Another way to consider this might be to ask how do you know a chair is, in fact, a chair? Is it because there is an "objective reality" to the chair, it is a chair because it has the "essence" of a chair? Or is it a chair because we all know how to use the word?
Agreeing on this might allow us to avoid many of the problems of Physics, Philosophy, Metaphysics and Theology.
At the very least, we might wind up talking to one another rather than past one another.
Are we really going to go there? Someone posted earlier that it might be best to leave the really divisive social issues off the table and punt it back to states rights. Thats about as close as anyone is likely to come to compromise.
In 2024 McCain said the United States should work to destabilize "rogue regimes".
McCain pretty much described the foreign policy Bush implemented.
Biden is a first-class weasel. You want someone to be slippery and talk clever about an issue, Biden is your man. You want courage to do something principled you've got a better chance with the average guy in the street.
Jim, we are not running out of fossil fuels, the fact is we have more known oil that ever before, but prices are high because demand is simply outpacing supply.
Taxes on gasoline are already making prices high, levying more taxes won't solve the problem.
Info on gas taxes:
http://www.gaspricewatch.com/usgastaxes.asp
Article on gas price breakdown:
http://www.logictimes.com/gastax.htm
Which is what apparently the Dalai Lama said to the hot dog vendor and achieved Nirvana on the spot.
Do we agree that the world we experience (our senses, which are a representation of the mind) are incomplete and deceptive?
Do we agree that when we see things as being separate and discrete (like the human body), this is an illusion (naive real)?
Do we accept that, in reality, matter (and thus humans) are structures of the universe, thus we are all subtly interconnected not only to the world around us, but to all other matter in the universe?
Can this explain the foundations of the ecology of life on Earth, and why the preservation of Nature and our existing ecosystems may be critical for our future survival?
What can we advocate regarding this idea?
"Don't ask; don't tell" clearly discriminates against gay servicemembers.
RofC, the government isn't responsible for stamping out prejudice, but Troy has a legit beef with gays in the military. The policy is clearly discriminatory.
The fact that Clinton implemented the discriminatory pollicy doesn't make it any less discriminatory.
RofC, you say society can vote to change the definition of marriage to include gay marriage.
That begs a question: should "rights" ever be put up for popular vote? Should the Constitution restrict certain people from enjoying specific rights that are granted to others?
Would you be satisfied with a Civil Union as the extent to which you can protect and express your relationship?
Should the Constitution have been amended to ensure racial equality? Or should Congress have just stayed out of the business of white people lynching black people, denying them jobs, housing, food?
Gay men do not enjoy free speech if they are forbidden to declare their sexual orientation...when that's just about all male soldiers do socially.
No one was happy with Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Mr. RofC
"Let us all flood into Unity08 and use it to bring Chritianity back into the US Government. The Republicans have left us out in the cold and done nothing about gay marriage, banning abortions, or bringing the Ten Commandments back into the Courtroom. Now, Unity08 offers us a chance to unite and purge the government of non-believers"
The above message, whether a hoax or not, is as terrifying as a rifle attack on innocent humans. For those of us who do not subscribe to religiuos mythology, this is exactly what unity08 must avoid at all costs. We need intelligent discussions not sermons dictated by moronic religious nutcakes to make this work. All religions should be barred from discussion because of their divisivness. For a substantial number of us all religions are irrelevant because of their long history of wrapping scoundrels in a cloak of legitimacy while robbing innocent believers of their dignity as well as their money
This message board is already out of control. If Unity 08 wants unity, you better get people on the common sense path. That should be the name of a new party, "The Common Sense Party".
If Unity 08 is going to work and really make a change in Washington
we MUST send home the old guard who created this mess that we have
now. We desparately need new and independant thinking. The congress and the same cast of characters has failed us for decades, their failed leadership and corruption can no longer be tolerated.
This seedy neanderthal is still trying to figure out your last one :)
CapeJay -- I couldn't have said it better myself.
People should look above religious differences to get to the Great Truth which covers them all. In fact, all religions (when stripped of their dogma) boil-down to a very simple creed:
Love God, Love One Another
When any group of people say they have ALL the answers... RUN!
We may not be running out of oil but there is considerable evidence that oil production has peaked in Saudi Arabia, and some evidence of peaking in Iraq and Venezuela as well. Worth reading "Twilight of Oil" for well-informed analysis of Saudi situation.
A simple but effective way to break up the Lobbyist effort over the common good is to allow the congress and senate to stay in Washington D.C. for only two months
at the first half of the year and six weeks during the second half of the year. All other activity can be done over secure internet lines.
This way the congress and senate will be anchored at home to face their constinuents as our forefathers would wish it.
The founding fathers had no concept of technology thus did not account for the propoganda control it would create. Even now with the internet we scream for voice like this. And like the FX American Candidate it will be swallowed whole by the two headed beast. So remember, only you can take America back by not legitimizing the two headed beast, change your political affiliation to Independent, at least make them earn your support! Like they have....for more info visit www.appyp.com/fix_main.html
I will take the time to respond to ONE of your inquiries:
Q: Should the Constitution have been amended to ensure racial equality? Or should Congress have just stayed out of the business of white people lynching black people, denying them jobs, housing, food?
A: Race is clearly defined. Sexual preference is not.
Please, I simply believe there is too much gray area to make concrete laws for this issue. Read my prior posts, I believe in equal rights for all and that the Constituion as it is already provides this...
Good luck with your battle for equality in your own eyes. You are already equal to me in my eyes.
I found this initial post concerning the attempt to bring "Christianity" back to the government offensive.
1) The original design of our government was deveoped to reduce as much as possible the influence of religion.
2) This is a blatant attempt to deny those of us that are not Christians our rights as citizens.
This also suggests a weakness in the foundation of this movement: the fissures that have opened up in this country are almost too great to be healed.
From Washington on through Lincoln there has been a continuing error made. There should never have been an attempt to reconcile the northern colonies and the southern into one country. There has been friction since the Reveloution when most of the southern colonies remained loyal to the crown of England. The southern states should have been allowed to go their own way in 1861.
In seven decades I have only voted for a Republican once -- and was sorry afterwards for that. I am not about to start now, no even as part of a "split" ticket. I have voted for third party nominees and would again but never one that would add anything to the Republican power base.
I hate to seem like a naysayer, but how in the world would this work? Any independent ticket has to play within the system or fail at every turn. We all understand what is wrong with the current electoral and political system, but how would it be reversed? I wonder if a Unity '08 ticket would do nothing more than split the vote a bit (like Nader or Perot) and ensure that the system continues. There have been some comments made about what would happen in the unlikely even of a bi-partisan or non-partisan white house occupancy and how they would deal with congress. In essence, they wouldn't be able to do anything because they'd be blocked repeatedly, without end. Until real election and campaign reform is implemented, all a third party ticket would do is make a wild battle cry and be forgotten in a month after the election. I love the idea and would like to see it come to fruition, but I remain skeptical.
A new party should agree on the principle of equality as broadly as possible and move on. Gay Rights? Yes, as fully as possible. Gender Eqaulity, as fully as possible. Women's Rights, as fully as possible. The right to worship, as fully as possible. The right to disagree, as fully as possible.
What we really need is a party that is not ashamed of those ideas and which does not break down in the face of opposition to them....those issues distract us from the truth of what is wrong in America.
We have a tax policy that is simply out of control. We have a Rightist Party that wants government to die and is squeezing it to death with tax cuts...as if government needs no money to operate or as if society has no need for any government.
We have a military that eats more money than we can print.
We exist as a nation today only thanks to the willingness of China to continue loaning us money.
We have a debt to other nations that exceeds our GDP for the next 5 years.
We have 50 percent of our nation unable to see a doctor or be hospitalized.
We have deep corporate corruption in this country that dictates legislation and public policy.
We have an unsustainable dependence on oil and other 'natural' resources.
We blew it after 9-11, attacking the wrong nation and depleting our good will in a run up to war...we have massive diplomatic obstacles as a result.
We have lost our moral compass on the world stage and lost the admiration of the world's people.
We do not have an immigration problem that eclipses all the other problems we face.
We have lost our priorities and become addicted to being governed by the politics of distraction. Rest assured that if a story is too toxic for the current administration they will distract the nation with something nuclear or terroristically related...xenophobia now rules us.
We have loads of problems as a nation. Loads....but as a gay man I am not interested in your party if you decided that in the mix of all this my needs should be discarded.
Include me and my sisters and fellow victims of systemic and cultural prejudice and I will help and follow.
Become a party of evangelists interested only in your narrow, very narrow understanding of Jesus and your caveman politics and I will only want to see you fail.
I worked with Perot and left him before he left nation. His problem was all appeal and no programs or answers other then jobs or debt! NOW the issue is the MOST citizens simply do not know much if anything about impact or ops or the basics of Nat/Private debt, trade-free trade-tariffs and even less of trade balances. MOST do not care or understand about how dollars flow, or whom owns us (bonds-etc) and futher could care less! There is much more, but these are just a few. as unity mentions, the serious ones. But it is like telling someone settin on a ticking A-Bomb how the physics work..and they do no have clue so they run next door. The same is ALL to true of the aveage citizens.. lets face it you will end up talking to blank stare unless you find some way to educate the nation on what needs fixing and why.. and you MUST tell them WHY it impacts them or the other side(s) spin will win.. as it has so far. USA is really quite dumbed down on real issues..know more about celebs and sports stats then money, war, trade , debt etc.. as proven by their silence over last few years.. ANSWER IS ?????? as most will nod off. as past few years.
I am glad to know that you are not a homophobe but that does not prevent me from being discriminated against.
Race was once clearly defined: Africans were once considered 3/4 human.
That changed only after people fought for the change.
Gay marital rights will become a reality only if people fight to make it so. And since there are those who are fighting to prevent it from ever being so, there is a principled stand here that needs to be considered.
Where would a new party stand?
McCain-Feingold!
What a mess
McCain-Feingold! --Dean
Take the first letters of each of their names and you'll get what most people will call that ticket!
"M*th** F***ers!" Haha, I couldn't resist.
Aside from "unity" and an aversion to party politics, Unity08 does not have a platform.
-What is Unity08's position on gun control?
-Where does Unity08 stand on the abortion debate?
-How would Unity08 get the budget under control?
-What is Unity08's exit strategy for Iraq?
If you don't stand for something, no one is going to stand with you.
If you don't stand for something, no one is going to stand with you. -- Eric Mattison
Yea, but the great thing is no one can stand against you either!
Americans may not be ready for my Futurist Policies now to stop crime and fix the Iraq problem... but at this pace you will all be saying "I knew he was right - I could feel it in my guts"... until then I'm gonna hunker down cuz I have a bad feeling about the current course! For all of you who have lost children to child abductions, been convicted of crimes you did not commit, and those terrified of our police state visit www.appyp.com/fix_main.html for answers.
Hmm .. Ya know, Perots stupid pie charts... as dumb as those were they served more of an educational purpose than all of the studies and reports I have seen since. People looked at those charts and knew what he was saying. Education starts with the basics.
So simple... we create laptops that only act as modems to dial into local school networks where all software and files are stored. These $20 computers with no hard drive space are only for schools and have tracking and video systems to monitor a childs education. A software package that identifies a childs learning strengths and takes advantage, teaching the child in half the time. Requiring all children to spend 2-3 hours a day in a community activities, sports, or outdoor activities. The computer does the routine education and the teacher then can focus on individual attention. As the system grows smarter the teacher can teach more and more students. For more information visit www.appyp.com/fix_main.html
As a lawyer you might assume I have a basic aversion to "tort reform", but then that is the problem with our current political system, we are always assumed to fall into this or that interest group.
Reform the tort laws to promote health care, and end the use of courts as lottery machines. Some states have required administrative hearings to address malpractice issues or other forms of mandatory alternative dispute resolution. These methods protect the rights of the victim, while sifting out the non-meritorious legal claims. Another method is to simply limit by statute the types of claims that can be raised and end the use of courts an a grounds for experimentation with novel theories of liability. Again, it comes down to doing what is EFFICIENT rather than what is funded by an interest group.
Buteo
I think ballots should include another option: None of the above. Then instead of voting for the lesser of two evils as I'm usually forced to do -- if None of the above receive the majority -- voters could demand a more acceptable candidate.
I view the Unity08 experiment as a means of reviving a sense that government works best when it serves the interests of the community as a whole. Currently it works as a system for redistribution of resources to the highest bidder. Regardless of which party is in power, the interest groups that put them there expect pay back. Dems want large government programs and full employment for social workers and Repubs want corporate welfare.
We need to find not just a collection of policies but a new core philosophy of governing. If we simply clobber each other with who is "right" and who is "wrong" on this or that issue, we have accomplished nothing.
What is the core Philosophy of a new Unity government?
buteo
What would be better than a "none of the above" option would be the ability for voters to rank their preferences, rather than simply choosing one candidate.
Forcing voters to mark only one candidate distorts their choices. The reason that people keep voting for the people that they do is because the established parties are the only ones who seem to have a reasonable chance of being elected. Voters have to cluster around a couple of main choices or risk "throwing their vote away."
If people could rank their preferences, then someone who really wanted Nader could still get Gore rather than Bush. Or someone who really wanted Perot could get Bush (I) over Clinton.
I don't really think is what we should be focusing on, but since it keeps coming up.... What's wrong with everyone (gay or straight) being part of a civil union according to the government, and leaving the word marriage to chuches?
Why is health insurance still tied to employment? I believe this relationship dates back to WW II when health care insurance was in its infancy and employers offered it to attract workers. Today, there is little or no reason for employers to provide such a benefit. Whatever health insurance a person has should be fully portable and not tied to employment. If commercial insurance is the right answer, then it should be available and affordable to all or almost all. If this is impossible, who other than government can make it possible? Let's not use the old words, "socialized medicine", to frighten people away from the topic.
Which ones of the 6 ideas put forward are you referring?
One raises substantial monies by profits from the new infrastructure.
Some are constitutional amendments which are not revenue intensive in any way.
Some are substantial cost savings (defending a border as long as the Panama canal instead of the Canadian and Mexican borders combined). It would be reasonable to assume that the cost now is a function of the border length so 51 miles/10,000 miles (you have to include the Alaskan border with Canada) or .5% of the present costs of 1.4 BILLION or a savings of $1.393 Billion dollars. Also the same idea cuts the INS budget by more then half (6.3 Billion to 3 Billion). Total Savings almost 5 Billion Dollars!!
Some are capital intensive, long term bonds are traditionally how we do such things without affecting the national debt.
And finally the prizes- well as you can see they are funded by the Border patrol and INS savings with many dollars left for other ideas.
If we are to have Unity, lets keep religion out of it! This administration and most politicians like to keep people divided! Remember the 1st rule of war -- divide and conquer. Lets meet on middle ground. There is plenty of room. Every time someone comes to the middle ground it grows and makes room for more. Those that insist on the far right or the far left will loose. The only rights I'm interested is EVERYBODYS RIGHTS! When one starts to campaign for any one group they loose another. If you are willing to deny ANYONE their rights, then you are willing to deny me my rights and you have no right to do this!
Agenda 1
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.
Agends 2
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.