Elect Barack Obama
Impeach Bush & Cheney!
"Google" your Voter Registration
Register to Vote
Vote Early-Absentee-Nov4
Visit the Democratic Party
User loginNavigation![]() "The 35 Articles of Impeachment and the Case for Prosecuting George W. Bush" is available for $12; a free downloadable PDF is also available. |
Poll: What Changes Should Democrats Make in the First 100 Days?On Election Day, the American people voted overwhelmingly for change. Vote for up to 20 changes here: http://www.democrats.com/change
|
What's HotStop Bush from Pardoning Himself and Cheney PaulsonWatch: No Bailouts for Bush's Cronies
Replace Bush Democrats
Escrow to Keep Obama Progressive Local: connect with Democrats.com members in your State, County, and Congressional District Are you really registered to vote? "Google" your voter registration to find out Ten Reasons to Impeach Bush & CheneyNo Pardons for Bush-CheneyOut of Iraq PetitionForumsPollShould Congress Give Paulson $700 Billion Blank Check? Yes 1% No 99% Total votes: 260 Protest and Organize! |
20's not ENOUGH!
I voted for 44, then 36, then thirty.... can't get rid of ten MORE! If we're going to have the ultimate fantasy policy wishlist, then let's go for it....
CP ;>0
Intention is mighty powerful.
The nation was stolen from the people long ago. Those who stole it use murder and drugs and fear as their control. Few can stand up to this. They worked me over, big time, twice. I retreated. That's when they quit. So new blood, and push the agenda again, TO RESTORE WHAT WAS TAKEN. That is what this is all about. The ORIGINAL DREAM, stolen by ego types, who hate G*D, but swear in His name, and hate women, but chase them around, and fear everything, but swagger to work -- in short LOW LIFE dressed to kill, run the shop. We would like our nation to be what it was and would be. But they would like us to roll over and drop dead. It is a war of the stupid against life.
More than 20, I agree
I went through the list 5 times trying to scale it down to 20. Why stop at 20? Although I can see priortizing, I found I agreed with every single goal (some strongly while others much less so.)
List Impeach Bush
First on the list, indeed the first 100, 200, 300 listings, before anything else should be IMPEACH BUSH. The democrats did not impeach reagan so the march toward the right continued with 41 and 43 ... this destruction of our country, our bill of rights, our constitution, the magna carta must be stopped with the ultimate weapon of the impeachment of bush.
tell me about it
I've got 61 and that was cutting out a lot I didn't want to cut out. How I'm going to get it down to 20 is beyond me.
Linda
When elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers.
--African Proverb
Urgent Need to amend Social Security Rules to accomodate aged im
I came to US at age 66 after retirement as all our children have settled here. Although I have contributed 30 quarters, working for last 7 years and now being 73 years old I find it difficult to continue to work due to ill health and not getting any suitable job.
I am forced to take a big risk of our lives as we are not yet covered by any medi care which require a minimum 40 contributions with 10 years of work. I lived in UK at younger age where Medicare is free and so in Canada and some European countries wonder as to why the same is different here. You know that about 45 millions Americans cannot afford to take medical insurance because of very high cost and this is very unfair to them. Some of us have some savings made during working life but above the maximum limit of $6000 required to be eligible for any State Medical coverage and/or SSI benefit.
I want to suggest that the Social Security rules should be changed for the aged Americans to get Social Security benefits and Medi care where one could not complete 40 contributions working for 10 years by accepting a lump sum amount equivalent to the present value of the deficit in the minimum amount of contributions required by law. This change will be fair to all and reduce the number of uninsured Americans without any loss to the Social Security Organization.
I sincerely hope that you will consider this proposal and convince other members in the relevant committee for necessary amendments of the SSI rules. Thanks,
Great Ideas But..
I must say that those are some really great goals to have if the Democrats take back one or both houses of Congress. Though I find it hard to believe that some of these would pass even with a Democratic majority. As CactusPat said this is more of a fantasy wishlist. I don't believe that all Democrats in Congress would support some of these ideas such as "Prohibit soft money from wealthy and corporations". I believe that most Congressmen are concerned about themselves and getting reelected so they are fine taking soft money. One other problem I see with some of the ideas is that the public won't go along with some of the ideas. If Democrats take back control, I don't think we should alienate the public in the first year.
I am sorry but I cannot finish my thoughts right now because I have to get to class but I will finish what I have to say later today.
Democrats will have a REAL mandate
for change. we must remember that Bush claimed a "mandate" after stealing the 2004 election by a hair. an overwhelming majority of Americans want the same things: getting out of Iraq, getting corruption out of politics, single-payer health care, restoring the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, etc.
now is not the time to be cynical - this is the greatest opportunity in our lifetimes for broad systemic change!
I guess I am a little
I guess I am a little cynical about the way our country is headed. I am 18 years old so I have only had CLinton and Bush as President. I wasn't paying attention to politics when Clinton was in power because I was a child. The only President who I have actually payed attention to is Bush. And after 6 years of him being in power it has made me a little cynical about politics. I am going to college in a rural portion of Ohio. Im originally from Michigan so its unusual being in an area where supporting Democrats is a minority. I have plenty of anti-Bush t-shirts and I wear them with pride. But I have been stopped by people in stores asking me if I loved terrorism since I don't support the president. It amazes me that people will associate you with supporting terrorism only because you choose to oppose the President. I find it funny that in a country with free speech people can't speak their mind without becoming the enemy.
Also the lack of any fight from Democrats has added to me being cynical and pessimistic. I know there are candidates who are fighting for real change. I see it in those few candidates and also here on this website. I want those candidates to win so they can help promote change. But the Democratic leadership has not done much to impress me. They either stand idle or side with Bush. I want to see democrats who fight back and will take on an obiviously corrupt and criminal administration. I truly hope that change will happen because of the upcoming election and in 08. I want to see our country take back what we used to stand for. I am tired of the fear mongering, hateful country that we live in today. I did my part, I voted absentee this election. I know that I can only help create change so I did. I am going to be honest, I will not be surprised if the Republicans steal this election. It will sicken me if that occurs but I will not be shocked. After seeing what they have done in the passed, stealing an election would be a tiny footenote for them. I am praying that something good will come from the election and that if Democrats take back control, they will pass useful legislature. I hope most of the ideas listed become law. I would love to see most of those ideas passed but I have my doubts. I guess I am cynical but until I see real change I will be this way. I would love to stop being cynical and be able to trust my government to obey the law and protect its citizens. I hope the upcoming elections can be a stepping stone to ending my cynical attitude.
My daughter's first opportunity to vote
was in 2000. I understand where you're coming from. She's so cynical I'm going to have to beg her to go to the polls. It's kinda hard to do when we both know that the software may/may not count our votes accurately.
Welcome to the site and keep your fingers crossed! Maybe if they've rigged the software again something will go wrong and they'll get caught red handed!
Conservative. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from a Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others.
~Ambrose Bierce, 1842-1914, American Author, Editor, Journalist.
You are evolved
Wow, it's hard to believe you are just 18 when I read all that. You are more evolved that many of those older than you. I have hope that more young people like you will have the same wisdom and intelligence because this whole Repukican thing wouldn't have had a chance in hell if not for the ignorance of so many in the US.
I think your cynicism is just you being realistic. I agree with everything you said.
Thanks for the kind words.
Thanks for the kind words. I know many people my age who are tired of the direction our country is headed. For most of the people I have talked to this will be the first election that they can vote. Everyone I know is planning on going out and voting because they want to do something to help the country. I am hopeful that the trend of young people not voting will change and more and more will begin to vote. There is work being done to get the young people out to vote. I know that Punk Voter(www.punkvoter.com) has done a lot of work to register young people to vote and has passed out information about candidates and elections in general, all in the effort of getting more people to the polls. Also bands like Anti-Flag, NOFX, and Against Me! all help promote activist groups and encourage people to help out and get involved in politics. At their shows there is usually a table set up for information about politics, ways to get involved, activist groups promoting their cause. I believe that the youth of America is eager for change and hopefully they will all come out on election day to voice their disapproval what is going on.
Halleluja!
It's posts like your's, Punk Rocker, that gladden my heart and help cling to a hope of better days to come! Thanks for posting such a thoughtful--and articulate!--message.
As you no doubt know by now, a week after your post, the numbers of young people who voted increased considerably this past Tuesday. I only hope that they all were even half as clear thinking as you obviously are.
Thanks, again, for making my day.
--------------------------------------------------------
"While there is a lower class, I am in it. While there is a criminal element, I am of it. While there is a soul in prison, I am not free." - Eugene Debs
Wait a minute...Wait a minute
>>>>
now is not the time to be cynical - this is the greatest opportunity in our lifetimes for broad systemic change!
>>>>
I don't expect "broad systemic change" from a Congress full of institutional Democrats. They tend to be more a part of the Problem than a part of the Solution.
Pardon my "cynicism" [I prefer to call it "realism"], but it wasn't that long ago that we had a Democratic majority in BOTH houses of Congress AND a Democrat in the White House. Not much "systemic change" came out of THAT opportunity. Instead, the Dems in power (i.e., the Clintonista/DLC faction) just decided to act more like Republicans, since that seemed the easiest route to their re-election.
I have to assume that your lifetime spans more than 14 years; so let's not get carried away by visions of Utopia dancing in our little heads. We've seen this movie (or a similar one) before. Our "saviors" in Washington lag WAY behind the progressive visions of people at the grassroots.
The Democrats' timidity and their mis-reading of what the Public supports make them sorely lacking as agents of great change. Just look at how ignominiously most of them have behaved during the last six years...and even before, when they actually sat in the driver's seat.
There are perhaps 70 or 80 truly heroic Democratic members of Congress (no more than a handful of those sit in the Senate). Anytime the McDermotts, McGoverns, Woolseys, Conyers, Feingolds or others stood up in principled opposition to Mr. Bush's machinations, they found themselves virtually alone (except for their 70-80 progressive comrades). Hillary never stood with them...Lieberman never did...Kerry never did. Most of the so-called "leadership" knuckled under to the Republican thugs.
I'd love to see all the "systemic changes" you are touting; but I sure don't expect the entrenched institutional Democrats to lead any more than a token charge. That's why my HIGHEST priority is genuine reform of the voting system--Instant Run-Off Voting, Proportional Representation, Fusion Candidacies, fairer Ballot Access. These won't come from those who are part of the system.
That is why many members of
That is why many members of Democrats.com are advocating the ouster of all DLC DINOs through the election process. We had to start somewhere, and Tuesday's election proved that Middle Americans are tired of the aristocratic corporate direction these clowns have taken.
The DLC "centrist" Democrats are no better than the neocons currently in power. The very hard job of taking our Party back from these neoliberal posers has just begun.
Won't you consider joining us in this fight as a Democrat, instead of just offering advice from an outsider, Green, perspective?
Gee, I'm also a member of
Gee, I'm also a member of the 'public' and I've been alienated since 2000!
I'm sorry I know that Bush
I'm sorry I know that Bush has done many things that has alienated the portions of the public. All I was trying to say was that Democrats should be above that and not follow in the same footsteps as Republicans.
if the democrats alienate
if the democrats alienate the public. They will be handing back power to the GOP in 2008.
Remember
Harold Ford Jr- Running Pro Life, Anti-Gay Marriage, Pro Gun Laws.
Jim Webb- "ditto"
Tester in Montana-"Ditto again"
Sound more to the right than Liebermann, who I think is a great American and a true tranditional Democrat. Learn from him and the Dems will control the Senate, House, and the White House in 2008. If not, lose all 3 again....
Did Ford vote for Bush's insane war?
If so, don't lie. He's not pro life.
Conservative. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from a Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others.
~Ambrose Bierce, 1842-1914, American Author, Editor, Journalist.
He is running as a Pro-Life
He is running as a Pro-Life Democrat in the Senate Race now! If he changes from this one position, he will be defeated in 2012. That was the biggest issue for Gore in his home state. That is why he didn't carry the state. I live in the South, and no democrats get elected at the state level of politics saying they are Pro-Chioce outside of Florida. Only in certain congressional districts like Memphis, Atlanta, etc.. Never at State Level. If anyone says anything different don't live here, and pleas state one Senator that runs as a pro choice canaidate. Even Landrieu out of Lousiana runs as Pro-Life, Pryor out of Arkansas- Runs as Pro-Life.
Webb is running as a Pro Life Democrat in Virginia.
I believe in Democrats
I believe in Democrats believe in different things. I am a Independent that is Socially Conserative at times, but don't want the Government telling me, or us what we can do in are private life. But a Democrat win, will not be as great as people think. These are the Democrats that will shift the balance, and they will vote for self preservation, not what people living on the West Coast or Northeast think, unless(Gore, Clinton Example) who changed when he wanted to be president in 1992.
You just see this time and time again. It never changes, this is why I choose the person, not the party.
You refuse to answer a single question don't you?
Yes we get what you are saying, but do you understand what we are saying when we note that those who protest the most also get the most abortions? THAT should cause some pause.
The "South" is the Welfare capitol of the USA. The "South" is the Divorce capitol of the USA. GAY Mass. is the Marriage Capitol as they have the fewest divorces. The "South" is the Abortion Capitol of the USA.
So it gets a little tiring paying for your lazy asses (I'm using conservative logic here as I happen to believe in one for all and all for one) and having to hear how immoral we are up North. How we can "win" if we only do a, b, and c.
Well I'll never screw over America:
-Religion is NOT by majority rule.
-Abortion was legal when this Nation was founded and long after. A cell is not a human. It does NOT say so in the bible (just look).
-The troops deserve an immediate 50% increase in pay via an Estate Tax which levels the playing field by removing old money going to dullards.
-etc.
I do get it. What I am
I do get it. What I am stating, these people who are running and doing quite well, has taken many of the GOP agenda off the table.
1. Religion is not by majority rule, but is very important in peoples lives.
- I believe abortion is a choice between a doctor and a woman.
- Troops do deserve a pay raise, maybe not 50% but at least 20-35%. I have served in the US Navy for 16 years, and it is hard to provide for a family on what we get.
What I am saying these new Southern Dems, and some Midwest Dems, have taken the playbook form the GOP, and is cramming it down, you know where!!!!!!!!! It works, and the Democratic Party needs to take advantage and learn. Or we are going to have another Right-Winger in Office. I don't want that to happen. I want a smart man or woman that can provide security for the country, and govern from more of the middle, not give in to 10-20% of the population, like the GOP does, and the Democratic Leaders do at times.
Thanks Chief.I'm going
Thanks Chief.
I'm going horse from pounding on brick walls so I hope you'll forgive my bull in a china shop maneuvers.
Jim
P.S. You might be interested in this: http://www.democrats.com/node/7018
In fact forget everything just answer me this one question:
Conservatives stopped collecting taxes on the Leisure class as we did 6 years ago. This has led to massive new debt.
WHO PAYS FOR THAT?
------------------------------------------------
-As a Liberal I say the leisure class should.
-Conservatives have repeatedly said they will not raise taxes on the leisure class so I assume they mean they will call in that debt via the Middle Class/Poor.
------------------------------------------------
Three points:
1) 90% of all professions make a 4 inch stack or less of hundred dollar bills per year. Some in the top 1% make a stack 30 miles high. The majority have not gotten a raise in decades. This is due to men no longer standing up for themselves and allowing upper tier professions (the ones who are skilled at manipulating people rather than tools) to gain ground on them. UPPER TIERS have gotten raises.
2) Upper tier professions use the voting booth to ensure their pay increases. They do this by distributing the wealth that would otherwise pool in monopolies and near monopolies. Anti Monopoly Laws, Time Limited Patent Laws, etc are examples of these. The vast majority of professions have become shy of using that same voting booth because Conservatives keep telling people that it is cheating. I don't follow the logic because what's good for the goose...
3) If you are going to attack spending, don't. First off HALF of your income tax goes to the Military and interest on the debt. That leaves only HALF that you can try to make some inroads on. On that half, what is the point of trying to decrease the debt on my family if you CUT a program which gives my family an increased income to begin with? Yeah, put $300,000 of new debt on my family then "save" me by cutting college loans for my kids???
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Is the above a place where you lean away from the Republican Party and land as an Independent or no?
If he believes in killing babies
by dropping bombs on them/their mothers, he's not pro life. I don't care what he calls himself. There is nothing so disgusting as a politician who claims to be 'pro life' but who voted to allow Bush to wage war all over the US. When babies/pregnant mothers are bombed to death it's not only anti life - it's anti choice.
He calls himself a democrat, too. That doesn't make him one.
Conservative. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from a Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others.
~Ambrose Bierce, 1842-1914, American Author, Editor, Journalist.
Sorry Lootie but Chief has
Sorry Lootie but Chief has left without a response.
Sigh...
I've never met
anyone who can explain to me how someone can claim to be pro life, who believes in elective war.
I dunno why....
Conservative. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from a Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others.
~Ambrose Bierce, 1842-1914, American Author, Editor, Journalist.
How many Senator's voted no
How many Senator's voted no for the War? Democrats or Republicans. I believe you should not attack a people or country unless they attack us first. But the GOP are not the only ones who voted. What made me mad about John Kerry is that he didn't change his mind until Dean took the lead in Polls in early 04 and late 03. That just made me question, was it personal or political. Most likely Political, like any other politian. I believe if the Dems selected someone else, we would of had a different CIC now.
We're talking about Ford
not all the other senators. He cannot call himself pro life if he believes in bombing the shit out of babies and pregnant women, especially if the war is an elective one.
Can't do it. Well, he can but it makes him a liar. Not only is he not pro life, he's also anti choice.
Conservative. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from a Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others.
~Ambrose Bierce, 1842-1914, American Author, Editor, Journalist.
Voting no on war
Some Democratic Senators did vote against going into Iraq, but all mentioned prominently as Presidential candidates stood with Bush for the war. And every single Democratic Senator has since voted to fund the war. Every single Democratic Senator joined the Republicans this year and last to devote over half of the relatively controllable portion of the U.S. budget to current and future wars. A sad, sad story. And only a very small number of House Democrats have voted against the bloated military budget.
Voting no to war
It's hard to remember how many Congress people vote no to war over the history of our country. They always think of themselves as protectors and don't want to seem weak. Many today never served in the armed forces but are "couch warriors".
Weak? Killing and destroying whole countries on a known lie?
John Adams wanted to go to war against France. I think he hated their lifestyle and culture. They didn't like him but adored Franklin and Jefferson. The Congress said, no especially since the French helped us, with great debt and loss of military, ships, etc., win the war against the British Empire.
John Adams passed the Sedition Act (similar to the Patriot Acts) to get his power and agenda regardless of public opinion. Jefferson got angry and won the next election negating it all. Where is our Jefferson today (a liberal) to fight Adams (a conservative)?
John Adams was one of our founders and deserves the credit of risking his life, etc. but he somehow lost his way when power was at his door. He was no Bush though. This country has never seen such abuse of power by a leader.
What do we win with guys like Lieberman in office?
Lieberman is not a traditional Democrat as he is milk toast on Defense, an Aristocrat on Economics, etc.
He along with his Conservative buddies put my family of 5 an additional $300,000 in debt as they put ALL families of 5.
He along with his Conservative buddies waged an anemic war in Afghanistan, alienated nuclear allies, removed geo political dominoes so as to create the need for many more wars, etc.
Now to a point on which we can agree: You like the above. I do not. Democrats are not in this to win an election for the Party Label. We are in it to change the world for the better. I understand we disagree on what that entails, but there is no need to set yourself up on a pedestal to tell us how to win. We are not trying to "win". We are trying to convince folks that, for example, a couple hundred bucks back on your income tax does not offset an additional 300 grand worth of debt placed on your family---to be called in by Conservatives or to be paid for by the leisure class by Liberals.
----------
By the way nobody is Pro Life. (ok there are a few.) 50,000 kids "starve" to death on earth each day but most do nothing. (Hell a 10% reduction in meat eating in the U.S. alone would free up enough grain to feed them. And yes logistics are critical. I am not trying to lay out a slam dunk in anything but the moral arena and with respect to an order of magnitude estimate of whether we could do something major.)
With respect to guns. How about YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR GUN. Its getting a little old having idiots whose kids break into their piece of shit gun cabinet and snipe out a school yard full of kids. My gun does not help when the NRA pinheads continue their advancement of casual gun ownership. Conservatives have had over a half a decade of monopoly power and we have an increase of crime ALL over the Nation.
As to Gays. Yeah great. Two classes of citizenship in America (again). How did that work out for us before? Still, I understand the angst some people feel. My beef is that this is even an issue. Why the hell don't all the anti gay bums do something with their lives? Clearly any minute you spend on this issue you could have better spent building our technology, feeding people, etc. To each his own I guess but...
Professional Wet Finger
politician. That's what Lieberman is. He goes around sticking his wet finger in the air to see which way the wind is blowing and that's the direction he sticks his compromising butt when he bends over.
Conservative. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from a Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others.
~Ambrose Bierce, 1842-1914, American Author, Editor, Journalist.
What do you expect?
Joe is an INDEPENDENT.
-Mental midgets without balls brought us this slide toward endless war (with a fixed and trapped number of troops who we will simply burn through).
-An endless slide toward debt to China, Japan, etc.
-An endless slide toward the rich man's socialism via outsourcing to the lowest bidder.
-Etc.
And some folks suck their thumbs and sit on the fence.
They deserve what they get. Democrats are not begging for votes. If men in this Nation will not stand up and be counted, they are fucked, just as they fuck over others.
Excellent Summary...
of Lieberman, and I loved the Ambrose Bierce quote. I think John McCain also perfectly fits your description.
Vince Lombardi was wrong
>>>>
Democrats are not in this to win an election for the Party Label. We are in it to change the world for the better.... We are not trying to "win". We are trying to convince folks that, for example, a couple hundred bucks back on your income tax does not offset an additional 300 grand worth of debt placed on your family...
...As to Gays. Yeah great. Two classes of citizenship in America (again). How did that work out for us before? ...Why the hell don't all the anti gay bums do something with their lives?
>>>>
Amen, Jim! I've never seen the point of 'winning' at the cost of one's principles. What's the point of winning with a platform that you oppose? Seems to me that too many of the Democratic Party "leaders" have lost sight of the forest for the trees. Politics ain't football.
Battling Satan with Pixie Stix
It doesn't work. We've been doing that since the party bent over for the mythical moderates. We've consistently lost power.
If you want to win you see what the majority is doing. They haven't been at the square dance...
Conservative. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from a Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others.
~Ambrose Bierce, 1842-1914, American Author, Editor, Journalist.
Impeach Bush
If democrats don't impeach bush/cheney they will along with the media rewrite history just as did the Reagan people.
Reagan was a horrible president and should have been impeached instead the media and the republicans have rewritten history.
Now all one hears is that Reagan was a real peach of a fellow.
Peachy, just Peachy
Yep, that Raygun fella was just peachy, well, except for a few things, like Iran-Contra...suppose he was busy catnappin' then (as he was prone to do)...when a few White House folks decided to fund "anti-communist guerillas" with money from arms sales to Iran...Iran, now headed by that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad fella...that guy who says that the Holocaust needs to be proved...smart guy, dumb move...Yep, that's the kind of foreign relations we need, uh-huh. Yep, they can revise history all day and all night on Raygun...but...we sold the arms that somewhere are coming back to terrorize us...Good plan, snooze on...
Very good
You are correct, they would keep their job at all costs, but one might wonder why, since it is so stressful, and death-dealing by nature. The answer is EGO. G*D created us with three aspects, including G*D, and the Son, or Christ, and the EGO, or Satan, This is an ancient teaching on earth. But in D.C., the EGO type took control, and when the Christ aspect surfaces in a Kennedy, or a King, or others, WHACK. Ego does NOT love G*D, but only more power, etc. So one must use skill. And the first skill, is that THERE IS NO PUBLIC. There are individuals, each of whom is different, unique. And each of whom as identical basic needs. So the ART of POLITICIS is to work along these two facts at the same time, with respect for the individual, for each one, and respect for the common needs. What we see in D.C. is a lack of respect for both, but much lip-service. I helped the stupid CLINTON's win their election, the first time, big time. Bad idea. They are totally self-serving, bad tempered, drug using, liars. That is the trouble. One good idea is to CUT THE PAY OF ALL OFFICIALS to something near a middle-manager of a typical small business. That would stop some egos for sure. The original Federal Government had very little power over anything at all. They just kept taking it.
Problem
When the Dems take back the congress ,they will not much of a mandate to pass bills. They will have a slim majority in the House and you need 2/3thirds to overturn veto's. Bush does not care what polls say and will veto any bill he wants.
I just don't see too many changes being made, until 2008.
Slim majority
I listened to GW's comments in his press conference today and I have to say that I did not hear a truly "kinder and gentler" Bush. Yes, he did say that he wants to "work with the Congress", but after 10 years of living under GW (I'm in Texas), I know that this means that George will make proposals and he will expect the Congress and Senate to approve or there will be a bitter round of public name-calling to follow.
I agree that it is not likely that we will see big changes - Pelosi is already saying that impeachment would only make things worse because it would leave Cheney in charge - but at least it seems unlikely that Bush will be able to give away more money to the wealthy with more tax cuts and the permanent termination of the estate tax is at last a dead issue. We might even hope that the congress will at least threaten to withdraw (or diminish) funding for the war in Iraq.
At least we have more reason for hope today than we have had for many years.
Impeach Cheney too
If you search the facts, like FROM THE WILDERNESS web site, run by an ex-cop, you will learn that Mr Cheney is up to his eyeballs in the hard core drug trade.
ROOT and BROWN and HALLIBURTON have a habit of showing up where drugs are grown and produced, kicking the crap out of anybody involved, making deals with the survivors, and taking over the craft. The reason? Alternative Two and Three. What is that? Alternative ONE, which is what the folks of this site, and myself, as well, are about, is HUMAN TRANSFORMATION and HUMAN SELF MANAGEMENT and SELF CORRECTION, making a better world for all.
Alternative TWO is dig big holes in the ground, fill them up with great stuff, and wonderful people, and seal the lid, with yourself inside. This has been going on by the VIPS of D.C. for several decades, ever since it was determined that humans were destroying life on earth, and would not and could not change their bad habits. So to pay for this this game, starting when IKE was the chief, funds were set aside. By the time LBJ was the chief, he did not have a clue. He used some of the funds to build a road on his ranch and a movie theater, but had no idea, reports say, of the real deal. Meanwhile, JFK was going to blow the thing open, so they blew him open. JFK believed that people could and would change themselves. The others did not. That is the difference between a G*D inspired type, and an EGO driven, fear based type.
There is no reason that both BUSH and CHENEY can't be leagally impeached at once, each, and the Speaker of the House become the next President, is there? Find a reason? Drug dealing is not legal -- forget that the CIA, and Military are up to their eyeballs in the trade, it was to pay for the Alternative TWO, and oh yes, Alternative three, fly me to the moon, or Mars. Take me home to another planet. But since we who are left behind would protest, they got into drugs, to pay for it, and keep us stupid. Otherwise we would see all that money. Patents on earth drilling machines were established way back then, when this began, big machines, real powerful, several feet a day. The old tunnel systems were discovered, and expanded. When one site was discovered, recently, reports say, government destroyed it, and built a new site. The beat goes on. The question, as always, is are we a nation of LAWS, or a nation of MEN who rule by power? I vote for law. They hate me. But that's their problem. That's the history, friend. Shameful. Stupid. And documented. Cheers!
Clean Elections
David Donnelly captures what a lot of us are feeling:
I couldn't agree more.
Reform the District of Criminals
PLEASE work fast, since studies years ago showed without a doubt that even when worthy folks got elected, the power of the place to corrupt them, had them all corrupted within six months. Nobody has the balls, guts or courage to stand up against the power of The Game.
The GAME is insane. It is anti life, anti Constitution, anti-G*d, anti-man, anti-Nature, anti-Earth, anti-E.T. yet D.C. is filled with "good people". So it is a tough game. START by insisting on speed, and make the laws that give free access to candidates, who don't need to pay for air time, and block all the perks. Just shut them down. Money and fear rule D.C. Power. And power corrupts. The airwas once were the "people's". I have not been able to get air time for good ideas for 20 years.
The pro military, pro corporation, anti-life crowd took control of D.C. when they destroyed John Kennedy, and Bobby Kennedy, and they took control again, recently, when they created 9/11. Enough is enough. Cheers.
1st 100 Days
Repealing the 17th Amendment to the US Constitution which allows for Senator’s to be elected by popular vote instead of elected by each State’s Legislature would restore the State’s power in the ORIGINAL checks and balances our Founding Fathers gave us. This may not “fix“ everything that is currently wrong with our Federal Government, but it is as good a place to start as any.
Here is a very brief history of the 17th Amendment using the links at the very bottom of this message.
[Paraphrased]
The Seventeenth Amendment restates the first paragraph of Article I, section 3 of the Constitution and provides for the election of senators by replacing the phrase "chosen by the Legislature thereof" with "elected by the people thereof." Also, it allows the governor or executive authority of each state, if authorized by that state's legislature, to appoint a senator in the event of an opening, until an election occurs.
The Seventeenth Amendment is one of the "Progressive Amendments"; they were passed during the Progressive Era, with the support of the political group known as the "Progressives". The other Progressive amendments were: the 16th amendment, which created the income tax; the 18th amendment, which started Prohibition of alcoholic beverages; and the 19th amendment, which gave women the right to vote.
The reason for the passage of the 17th Amendment is because of a procedural problem in the original concept and not because of a need to alter the balance of power. The procedural problem consisted of frequent deadlocks when the state legislatures were trying to select a senator. When deadlocked, a state would go without representation in the Senate.
The 17th amendment, calling for popular election of senators, fixed the procedural problems, but also inappropriately and unintentionally altered the balance of power.
Few people today know that the Founding Fathers never intended for senators to be popularly elected. The Constitution originally provided that senators would be chosen by state legislatures. The purpose was to provide the states — as states — an institutional role in the federal government. In effect, senators were to function as ambassadors from the states, which were expected to retain a large degree of sovereignty even after ratification of the Constitution, thereby ensuring that their rights would be protected in a federal system.
The role of senators as representatives of the states was assured by a procedure, now forgotten, whereby states would “instruct” their senators how to vote on particular issues. Such instructions were not conveyed to members of the House of Representatives because they have always been popularly elected and are not expected to speak for their states, but only for their constituents.
The 17th Amendment should be repealed. This would reinstate the states' linkage to the federal political process and would, thereby, have the effect of elevating the present status of the state legislatures from that of lobbyists, to that of a partner in the federal political process. The state legislatures would then have the ability to decentralize power when appropriate. It would give state legislatures direct influence over the selection of federal judges and the jurisdiction of the federal judiciary and much greater ability to modify the power of the federal judiciary. This structure would allow the flow of power between the states and the federal government to ebb and flow as the needs of our federal republic change.
[End]
The story above is comprised from article in the links below.
http://www.timescommunity.com/site/index.cfm?newsid=17279176&brd=2553&pa...
John MacMullin resolution to repeal the 17th Amendment.
http://www.articlev.com/repeal_the_17th_amendment.htm
Retiring Senator Zell Miller’s comments on repealing the 17th Amendment.
http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_bartlett/bartlett200405120748.asp and
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/e7eed3b8-6398-11db-bc82-0000779e2340.html <---Very interesting reading
YES
This is a brilliant idea. The 17th was a way to make SURE that only a Senator who had PROVED to be of VALUE to people, not to power, got the job. All the officials on his State had seen his works, and knew his character, so a smart ass, power-prone, smooth-talking, fear-crazed, perks-for-me had no chance.
While we study such reform, is it true that there is a MISSING ADMENDMENT, which was erased over 150 years ago, which said that nobody holding official titles from foreign powers, nations or corporations, could also hold office?
IF SO, there is a point in law, is there not, that any law which is not legal, but apparently passed under the color of law, remains illegal?
Taking these two points, the missing Admendment, and the second point, would establish INSTANT REFORM. Why so? The Missing Admendment keeps lawyers from being elected, or holding office. Why is that? They are members of the BAR ASSOCIATION. What is that? It is a special HONORS SOCIETY established in a zone of England, which is inside the City of London, but which is also independent of it, and which is a GROUP that controls ADMIRALITY LAW, as opposed to COMMON LAW.
Our nation was born in COMMON LAW, which is my favorite. But it was taken control of by LAWYERS and MILITARY TYPES (not all are bad!!! (thank G*D)) who insist that they, not us, know better, and they, not us, have the right to tell us, but we, not them, how and what to do. It IS that simple.
So, if we can find an old copy of the Constitution that is not tampered with -- maybe this is just a myth? But if not, then no lawyer held office legally. If so, no law voted on by that lawer was a legal vote. You begin to see the seriousness of this. All those laws, are non-laws. So all the rules and such that they did, are of no legal standing. It is worthy of investigation, even by lawyers now in office who might lose their job, if we could regain our once great nation, and its original vision, resting on such much blood, and suffering, by so many great individuals, who gave everything they had, so we could have these discussions. Cheers.
Vote Republican: the party
Vote Republican: the party of deception, corruption, devastation, torture and oppression.
DEMS AND LIBERALS ARE TRAITORS
They think that no man is above the 'rule of law'.
They think that the Geneva Conventions were, created by wise men, for the good of humanity.
They think that machines should not be rigged to negate their votes.
They think America is at her best when we lead by example.
They think that using Nuclear weapons and WMDs on third world citizens, as a law enforcement tool is wrong.
They think that Human beings are more important than wealth.
They think that more funds should go to aid humanity than killing off humanity.
They think that having enugh nukes to blow up the world ten times over is enough and that we ought to stop the re-instatement of nuclear weapons programs and testing in our own country.
They think that corporations should not be writing laws for congress.
They think there ought to be public controls on public lands, not corporate control of public land.
They think that corporations ought to be held accountable for frauds, the environment, labor laws, work place safety, and product quality and safety.
They think that the richest country in the world should be able to do better than, make over 100 new billionaires and 1 million new poverty entries each year.
They think that investors should expect that CEOs would not be making 400+ times the average worker's wages. Cutting not only the working middle-class, but the public investors.
They believe that our government should not be able to spy on us without warrants, arrest us without charges, hold us in an undisclosed place indefinately, and deny us a lawyer or visits by our family.
They believe they have the right to be honestly informed (not 1.6 billion taxpayer money for false propaganda), so they can give, 'informed consent' to congress to represent them and not multi-nationals or the industrial military complex.
Yes, we are TRAITORS TO THIS REGIME.
WE ARE PATRIOTS TO OUR CONSTITUTION, OUR COUNTRY, AND OUR FELLOW AMERICANS.
_________________
YOU CAN BOMB THE WORLD TO PIECES BUT YOU CANNOT BOMB THE WORLD INTO PEACE...
AUTHOR UNKNOWN BUT VERY WISE
Beautiful, wiseoldgranny
Would love to post this at other forums, and of course will always attribute and credit it to you, wise one!