Christian Democrats in the United States

Domestic Issues - Democracy

We think that, in addition to Republican, Executive and Judicial institutions, good government should provide states and the nation as a whole the facilities with which to participate in legislation, directly and/or in a cameral house chosen by lottery. The American people do believe we are sufficiently edumacated to direct our own affairs.

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]

Friday, August 8, 2008 6:45 PM

2008 election - senatorial control of government

Though Ike scratched out "Congressional" as part of the "Military-Industrial Complex" in his harrowing warning, there is still a hope in the nobility of the institution of the Senate that turns the people who serve there into more than machines. This election promises hope and change for America whether Obama or McCain wins, because they are both Senators and the honorable pursuit of compromise toward common welfare makes them both better men.

Bush's comments toward China about the freedom of its people on the eve of the Beijing Olympics honor a set of liberty, for the freedom to be wrong, for the freedom to live independently. But he has never understood and at times seems to have resented the Senate for its willful obedience to the flawed and changing desires of the people, nor that people have the freedom to be right in ways that make him, his cadre, his politics and his mindset seem insane. The desires of the people change because when we have more information, we change our minds. Think of how grand America will be when the government empowers its people with the truth!

Bush's fight to the death over Congressional subpoenas of White House aides is only the latest example of his stubborn misunderstanding (and mis-underestimating) of what America's government is supposed to be about. And today all people can talk about is how Obama's appeal to regular people and his connection to them as a "celebrity" is somehow a drawback, and how Edwards' affair is going to ruin his career, and how McCain is a bitter old man ready to kick the bucket.

But what truly gives me hope is, the candidates are both Senators, both have the experience of how to compromise, and both have experience including people across the aisle and in the grandstands.

One concern is what the goals are for each individual to move from Capitol Hill to the White House. Will the President's goal be to subjugate the Representatives, who then have no choice but to subjugate the People, or to walk with the People, and thereby lead the Representatives?

A greater concern for the continued liberty and livelihood of our fair country is, regardless of who wins, will one be shot or the other keel over and be succeeded by a twisted servant of the death machine? We must steadfastly refuse to bargain on the risk either way, because it is equally great (or when viewed with love, equally small) with both candidates. I have faith in the American people! We can set aside our hatred and violence.

So, where do you think the collective negativity is coming from? It's almost as if the notion that the President is not a king or a dictator is under attack. Will we go the way of the lie, the way of failed states, the path of those we conquered that we risked treading upon ourselves after World War Two? Or, are we going to make freedom work? The choice is up to you.

> detail, links and comments >>

Wednesday, June 4, 2008 12:28 PM

offensive spam and immortality

A new turn in the acres of offensive spam delivered to our Inboxes every day: by taking penis enlargement drugs, you'll be a "Patriot" or a "Hero." Subjects appealing to sense of our patriotism encourage us that if we only had a bigger schlong or a 24-hour erection, we'd achieve that ideal of loyalty to our country.

I'm actually encouraged by this, because it is on its face so stupid that the people who might have fallen for it and sent their credit card number before may actually think, hey, that's stupid, patriotism is just a little more complex than that. So maybe people will finally wake up and get it?

On the other hand, maybe they won't. After all, spammers would not send this crap if they did not get some people on the hook, if they weren't making money. There are probably even some people out there selling the drugs and not just trying to steal your card. So maybe our nation is populated by complete idiots who think that patriotism is measured by the size of one's nads and how many people can be killed with some device or another. Are you one of them? Is that what we're destined to become?

Of the apparent certainty of death in the world as we perceive it, at least that means that the old people running the country will die off and people with more smarts for this kind of bogosity will take over. Sorry folks, but if you can't figure out when someone's trying to scam you on the Internet by now, maybe you should reconsider your assumptions.

And of course on the other hand, we perceive only a world of four dimensions while a world of ten or eleven dimensions filled with a continuous harmony of energy is more likely the case, so maybe death isn't all that certain, either.

While you go about your daily lives today, picking up your kids, writing your emails, buying your groceries, h4xgn ur c0D3, take a second out to think about that.

The mountains of mundane drivel thrown at us every day by those deceived into believing the supremacy of money are only one of the last attempts of evil to ensare our minds, the death throes of a dying age of money-mongers and bomb-lobbers. And when you stop and think about it, this attempt is so pathetic that evil seems desperate, like a desperate con artist shaking at the knees because his time is up and his lender is coming back here to collect. So it's a heartening sign in a way, because it's so stupid.

Real patriotism is one's own natural expression of one's love for all of existence and a will to take risks to protect all of it for those future generations who will understand more than we do.

> detail, links and comments >>

Tuesday, January 8, 2008 9:44 PM

democratic budget control

Just as the federal government must trust the states to develop reasonable and compatible laws, all government must trust the people to do the same. So budgetary use of all the budget, if subject to public review of files accessible by the internet, constructed and approved thereby, and to some legislative or executive veto that would revert vetoed line items to debt repayment, would be reasonably funded by the people. The people would get involved because they had to, the reason usually anyway, even if believed otherwise. A fail-safe printed checksum system can be developed to enable review of the budgets of covert government departments, with procedures to maintain anonymous chains of evidence, trust, archival, legislative and executive review. Better systems of review and opportunity for involvement by the people result in a nation at one with itself. That is good for the whole world.

> detail, links and comments >>

Wednesday, July 11, 2007 10:03 PM

private property and commonwealth responsibility

It seems to me that most American citizens who seek the dream of a secure home with a spacious yard do so out of fear, locking themselves in a castle, shutting out all the bad parts of life. It also seems, from wandering the streets lonely at night, and from my social experience with people, that many would rather lock themselves away in the prison of fascism, giving all responsibility for public safety to the police and taking none, locked in the chains of fear in front of their televisions.

I leave my windows open at night. I heard a distant yell. If it were something other than kids playing, would any of the neighbors near the yell do something about it?

Would they notice? Would you?

> detail, links and comments >>

Friday, May 4, 2007 3:13 PM

constitutional voting

The U.S. constitution does not seem to delegate authority to any other source of law to control the manner in which the President and Vice President are elected, on distinct and separate lists, so it would seem that every election has been illegal since the party electorate slate system was perpetrated on the American people as a means to control popular opinion and consolidate the executive. Curious. Can anyone explain how the authority to regulate the executive election drifted into statute, or correct me if there is something in the constitution that un-does that requirement?

> detail, links and comments >>

Tuesday, May 1, 2007 6:40 PM

Democracy

We think that, in addition to Republican, Executive and Judicial institutions, good government should provide states and the nation as a whole the facilities with which to participate in legislation, directly and/or in a cameral house chosen by lottery. The American people do believe we are sufficiently edumacated to direct our own affairs.

> detail, links and comments >>


Archives May 2007 / July 2007 / January 2008 / June 2008 / August 2008 /