The GOP’s 10 Most Extreme Attacks on Women | | AlterNet

As I read this article what I found was a deliberate and conscious effort of conservatives and radical conservatives to violate the concepts of the Constitution and the basic principles of liberty.  Who gives any one the right to determine the fate or rights of women in this country other then women. The last time I checked they are US citizens.

I am tired of hearing the sanctimonious right tell the American people they fight for the American people and the Constitution. The Republicans and the Democrats who support any laws that interfere with a woman’s health are in direct violation of the Constitution.

The wave of idiocy on abortion and health has gone so far that we as a nation will be looking at a regression of healthcare and basic liberties.   Do we really want to return to the days when abortion and family planning was not discussed,  when death was common, and women were considered incapable of making decisions for themselves.

The laws and proposed laws at all governmental levels are draconian and are the vision of a few individuals who will impose their will on the majority.  Could this issue be only one of many on the Radical Rights agenda?

The GOP’s 10 Most Extreme Attacks on Women | | AlterNet.

Advertisements

Americans Elect wins third-party spot on California ballot – latimes.com

Seal of the United States Federal Election Com...

Image via Wikipedia

The article  from the LA Times is interesting in that it refers to Americans Elect as a third-party and that it is privately run.  Americans Elect is in fact a nominating process which received initial start-up funding from Peter Ackerman.  It should be noted that the initial money was a loan which is to be paid back and all other funding is in the form of contributions from individuals. Funds are not accepted from the candidates, special interests, lobbyists, corporations, PACs, or political parties.

Do some voters and commentators have concerns about Americans Elect?  In retrospect  I suppose they do. Let me try to put some light on who we are?

First of all, we are not a party, we are a nominating process that is nonpartisan using a secure online convention,we do not have an agenda, a candidate, nor do we advocate for a position. The process is tied to the voters directly, they put together the issues that the candidates submit their positions on the issues.

Second, the candidate(s) will go through a balloting process by the voters /delegates which will narrow down the potential candidates in April / May. The candidates must declare their intent to run and choose a running mate from another party.  There is no censor or board of censors who determines the worthiness of a candidate. The candidates however do have to file with the Federal Election Commission  and full disclosure laws and submit qualifications to a Certification Committee.

It is important to remember that as the election season moves forward there will be accusations, challenges, and questions from the media and public. Americans Elect is about the voter and the issues that concern him or her.  As the momentum grows and Americans Elect is added to the ballot lines across the country,( are currently on 12 states ballot lines) perhaps the political editors will address Americans Elect as a Nominating Process and not as a third-party.  The advisors to President Obama have acknowledged the influence of Americans Elect and have begun to try to discredit the efforts of Americans Elect. Both parties are concerned because the right candidate could syphon votes or damage the electability of their candidate.

AmericansElect.Org has the information the voter needs to know about the organization and how to participate.  I encourage both the concerned voter and the skeptic to really check it out.

Americans Elect wins third-party spot on California ballot – latimes.com.

Americans Elect the New Nominating Process

Flag of the United States

Image via Wikipedia

Americans Elect the New Nominating Process; Not a New Party

Vincent P. Lacey, Delegate Americans Elect 2012

Americans Elect is a brand new process that allows all registered voters the opportunity to participate in the political process. It is a nominating process not a new party. It began  securing spots on the ballots of the 50 states in 2010.

Why now?  Every voter deserves an equal vote in the nominating process. Does your residence determine how much your primary vote counts? Do you or your state have a less than meaningful vote? Are an independent with no say in the primary system? Are you one of the millions who is angry, and disillusioned with the current two-party system? Then perhaps this is your opportunity to make sure that your voice counts.

Another significant element to this coming election is the use of technology. Americans Elect is going to have in place a cost effective process to reach out to millions of voters, a secure online convention, and the ability to verify every voter and accurately count every vote.

Americans Elect does not support or oppose any candidate or draft  movement,  it is simply providing the infrastructure for a better way of participation. It will be the first direct online nominating convention giving the voters the power to decide the issues, choose the candidates and nominate a third ticket.

The nominating process is unique in that it is open to all registered voters in America. The registered voters may sign up with Americans Elect and become voting delegates regardless of party affiliation. The intent of Americans Elect is to allow the American people a choice that goes beyond the two-party system.  The candidate running for president may formally file on the website. A question that is asked is “Could a candidate from a major party candidate also file to be included on the website?” Yes they could.  Another option open to the Delegates is the power to draft any constitutionally qualified person.

Another important part of the nominating process issues is the open forum.  At the open forum the delegates can discuss their issues and opinions with other delegates.  At this moment many topics are being entered and discussed by individual delegates for possible inclusion in the platform questions each candidate will answer. A Platform Committee will put together the Delegates inputs and compare them with the  American publics issues and their priorities before codifying the platform of questions.

Americans Elect is a Nominating Process for all of America. It allows for direct participation in all aspects of the election process from becoming a delegate, selecting topics for the Platform Committee and finally having a candidate that represents the American people.

The opportunity to learn about Americans Elect can be found at www.americanselect.org

When is Ideology Foolish?

Ideology Icon

Image via Wikipedia

Ideological parties are archaic in today’s thinking. When a party basis’ its beliefs on set of principles than is it really relative to our historical situation of 2011.  The Republican Party is just one example of a party stuck in neutral. But so, is the Democratic party, for all their rhetoric they cannot see Progressive gains without tying them to the old liberal ideas of the past.

Ideology is foolish when it does not allow for change, compromise, social and economic advancement or for dynamic fluctuations in the psyche of the general public.  Occupy Wall Street (OWS) is a dynamic change in thinking, reacting, and in communicating ideas and beliefs.  The OWS movement was not anticipated, but it has galvanized a broad spectrum of Americans.  If the movement carries forward and continues to grow it could help shape a very unique and interesting election. The media cannot clearly define the Occupy Wall Street  movement because it does not lend itself well to soundbites.

The Tea Party faction has similar complaints that OWS has about politics.  The Conservatives of the Republican Right are not very keen on turning on big business, their political allies, or their interest groups which ply them with money.  It takes leadership, foresight, fortitude, and an understanding of being Progressive without destroying the country.  Currently, there is no one in the GOP capable of doing or acting in this manner.  Ideology and pledges can be damaging, and unforgiving if there is a time when the breaking of either is necessary, such as no taxes.

It remains to be seen if Ideology will carry the day for the Republicans.  If anything they had best move cautiously because the average American is slowly awakening.  Politics, banks, financial entities are in the crossfire, not because they are anti-American but truly exercising their right to free speech.

The Democrats who believe they are above the fray are foolish to think so. They are just as guilty, that guilt comes from arrogance.  The displacing of leadership, dereliction of duty, and the Liberal Ideology has become old.  The idea that government can do all things is no longer possible.  The Ideology of the Democrats must change from a Liberal to a Progressive perspective.  These two ideas are not the same.  Progressive is progress.  The current leaders of the Democratic Party are from a generation of liberal activity and belief that is no longer viable.

There are many problems that this nation must resolve and to solve them it will take courage, not ideology, cronyism, corruption, political favors, or money.   The ideology of yesterday must change. The new ideology must be one that addresses America’s strengths not weaknesses. It must break the “Financial-Political Complex.”.

When is ideology foolish? When the viability and the sustainability of it is not worth destroying a country over “principle”.

The new ideology must become a futuristic.  It must be multi-faceted, and it must be clearly a part of  who we are,  as a people through our Declaration of Independence and our US Constitution.

Why must the American People Suffer the Election Process?

apathy

The suffering of the American people during the election process; Is it really necessary? In 2000, 52% of the eligible voters voted,about  49%  for George Bush, 49% for Al Gore.  The election in 2008 wasn’t much better in total turnout.  We are losing both the current voter, but also our potential voters because of the process we believe is the only one that works.. We Can and We Must do better.

It has become a series of non-informative non debates about who the GOP wants in the White House. The political season is far too long, acrimonious, childish, and destructive to the voting process.  I do not believe the American people need to subject themselves to the antics of the candidates to determine who is the best for the job.

We need a process that is narrow, clearly defined by issues, and effective.  The debates are more about personal attacks, accusations, falsehoods, misrepresentation of facts, and being a politician for politics sake.  The elected officials of today have an agenda that in many cases does not fit the electorate.  Perhaps the voter needs to be more assertive in demanding better representation and reliable and factual information from the fourth estate.

An idea that comes to mind is something like the following;

1. The entire election process should be held in the same year as the election. This would include all primaries and caucuses.  The election for office between the major parties would be between September 1 and election day in November.

2. No campaigning prior to January 1st of the election year.

3. Full disclosure of all financial records, all campaign funds, and any non- financial, gifts, contributions, other politically related monies. All funds spent from the candidates personal accounts must be recorded. Political Action Committees and other political organizations would be free to contribute to their candidate, but only after the 1st of the year of the election year.

4. Businesses, corporations, companies financial institutions, unions, and other business / political organizations will not be allowed to fund an election as if they are an individual voter.   Individuals within such organizations can contribute to a candidate’s campaign so long as it is representative of the individual voters. Business are not people.

The last three  elements listed below should be the ones that put the pressure on the candidate.

5. The media must be investigative and thorough when investigating all candidates.  It is the responsibility of the press to inform the electorate.

6 The electorate must keep themselves informed about all issues.

7. Currently no debates.  They are forums in crisis. Let us make the forums worthwhile, challenging,  and clearly defining for both the candidate and the voter  The moderators must have specific questions and demand short specific answers without the crossfire dialogue.  The candidate must answer the question.  The candidates must know what the ground rules are and they should be public. If the candidate cannot work within this framework than they can be excused from the forum.   The moderator must inform the public why the candidate is a no-show.

Caricatures: GOP Presidential Debate Participants

Image by DonkeyHotey via Flickr

Political Parties versus Fiscal Responsibility: Standard and Poor’s Reacts First

The holders of the United States national debt...

Image via Wikipedia

Standard and Poor’s Global Credit Portal essentially lowered the United States Rating from AAA to AA1/2 due to three major factors that are negative.  One, Political Risks, second, Rising Debt, and Third the Negative Outlook.  All of these factors were not considered nor addressed when the budget and debt ceiling debate was being haggled.

Standard and Poor’s Overview

  • The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government’s medium-term debt dynamics.
  • More broadly, the downgrade reflects our view that the effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges to a degree more than we envisioned when we assigned a negative outlook to the rating on April 18, 2011.
  • Since then, we have changed our view of the difficulties in bridging the gulf between the political parties over fiscal policy, which makes us pessimistic about the capacity of Congress and the Administration to be able to leverage their agreement this week into a broader fiscal consolidation plan that stabilizes the government’s debt dynamics any time soon.
  •  The outlook on the long-term rating is negative. We could lower the long-term rating to ‘AA’ within the next two years if we see that less reduction in spending than agreed to, higher interest rates, or new fiscal pressures during the period result in a higher general government debt trajectory than we currently assume in our base case.

It appears that Congress and the President received a bitter pill on August the 5th.  It was and continues to be of their own making. The Director’s Blog, provides the Congressional Budgets Office outlook for 2011 long term. About 70% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) will be the federal deficit. The CBO has grim and bad news for Congress and the President. The current system of tax and spend is unsustainable. Our outlays with continued deficits will severely hamper the government’s ability to pay its debts.

The Democrats want to maintain social services, Republicans do not want taxes, you cannot have both. The budget deal and raising of the debt ceiling was cowardly and dangerous and all parties to include the president knew it.

The proposed scenario from the CBO is raise taxes substantially as a percentage of GDP and decrease spending significantly from projected levels.  It is necessary to make the corrections now so that the future is more robust and sustainable.

It is my hope that a light of wisdom comes on somewhere, but at the moment it is still the blind leading the blind.  Senator Reid, did say, that the S&P action showed that  Democrats preferred policy approach was the right one. He was speaking of balancing cuts with taxes.  I am a skeptic only because the devil is in the details.

Representative Boehner, commented that Democrats needed to stop tinkering around the edges. Rep. Boehner also says that the S&P noted that reforming and preserving our entitlement programs is the key to our fiscal sustainability. Rep. Boehner, neglected to put this in proper context because it also dealt with raising taxes.  His entire comment does not properly address what the S&P suggested.

I shall not point fingers into anyones eyes..Politics is the second oldest profession, it is about me, ideology, and reading and speaking with forked tongue.  Standards and Poor’s got everyones attention. The presidential wannabes are spouting off about solutions and not having the foggiest idea what they would have done.

Let us hope that they seriously look at the budget and carve and not cleave.  Raise taxes on corporations and businesses so that the individual American does not have to carry the burden.