Third Party & Independents Archives

Raucous Debate Expected With Mid-term Elections

Midterm elections are coming up in November. This should be a time for serious debate on the issues at hand. Unless there is an intervening issue the economy will be the focus of any debate.

I can recall a debate between Al Gore and Ross Perot in which Perot said that implementing NAFTA would result in tens of thousands of manufacturing jobs leaving the U.S. Al Gore laughed it off.

Since that debate we’ve witnessed millions of jobs lost to countries where cheap labor is plentiful. We’ve lived through an era in which the greatest transfer of wealth in human history has taken place. So, the upcoming debates should be enlightening as the politicians and candidates relate their visions and plans to move us beyond the great recession.

Some of the questions that would stoke the debate might be; what is the plan for the globalized economy? What benefits should we expect of the NAFTA highway? How will we deal with open borders and the unimpeded flow of workers from around the world? What will be the impact of open borders on our internal security? Would controlling the borders put a stop to the killing of thousands of Mexicans along the border and diminish drug use in this country? What is the plan to put the millions of unemployed back to work? Is there a plan to help U.S. citizens find work in foreign countries? If not the UN or the WTO as the One World government then what is the plan? When One World government becomes available will there still be lesser governments? What part(s) of the Constitution will need modification to comply with One World? Would you need a One World visa to travel between Georgia and Tenn? Or, from Mexico to Costa Rica? Would we still retain Social Security and Medicare or be expected to buy in to One World provisions? Will products be labeled as to their source or perhaps region? Would we be subject to a New World tax? Would New World leaders be appointed or elected? What might the organization chart look like? One currency? What individual rights would we have under One World? What is the projected timeline to put the North American Union in place? To have useful debates should we invite WTO representatives? Well, most papers limit the words in an opinion so I will digress at this point.

I’m sure there are thousands of similar questions people are hoping the debates will address. Then, perhaps there has been no thought given to such questions but we’d like to know that too.

BUT, if there is no debate, no help in understanding the rush to a globalized economy, then there is no reason politicians should expect our vote. To have no debate on this major issue would imply that a GREAT CONSPIRACY is happening right before our eyes. The Emperor has no clothes and all of that - - -

Otherwise, we have the Socialistic-Corpocracy we deserve.

Posted by Roy Ellis at August 10, 2010 9:29 AM
Comment #305522

“How will we deal with open borders and the unimpeded flow of workers from around the world?”

The question, perhaps, should be Why not how IMHO Roy. The unimpeded flow of workers from around the world would indicate that we have lost our sovereignty and our rights guaranteed by the Constitution to become corporate states that are chartered only to make money and not concerned with the trivialities such as rights.

Posted by: j2t2 at August 10, 2010 10:40 AM
Comment #305525

J252, a mistake I make all the time is referring to globalization as something being done instead of something that was done. A guestimate would be that about 90% of globalization is in place. The NAU, NAFTA highway and a little more chinking away at the Constitution is about all I see that remains to be done. The U.S. is the only country that hasn’t totally capitulated as I am aware.

So much has been done in secrecy that the voter has little idea of what has transpired over the last 30 years. And, much of it has been done in the open where many can’t see the forest for the trees. Perhaps congress has debated globalization but if so , it has been done behind closed doors. And, congress has delegated authority to the Executive (Const. violation) making themselves irrelevant while not taking any heat from globalization opposition.

While we don’t yet have One World there are several quasi=gov’t institutions that serve as ‘acting’ New World. The IMF and the WTO come to mind. All secret so we can’t know the full relationship between gov’ts and those org’s. A new one for me is this Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. According to a Wash Post editorial ‘setting capital standards for global banks, and ensuring that they apply roughly equally around the world, falls to the representatives of leading nations who make up the Basel Committee. Seems that to harmonize bank regulations around the world with the recently passed financial reform bill the Basel Committee, hq’d in Switzerland, will rework Basel II regulations for a Basel III set of rules in time for the November meeting of the leaders of the worlds top 20 economies in Seoul.

Seems the Basel’s are a duplicate of the Federal Reserve. An independent organization that, on occasion, has an ear for some federal representative. Maybe this supposed audit of the Fed Rsv will shine some light on the relation between the FED, Basel and the IMF. And perhaps not, as the FED is being given a couple of years to scrub their books before the audit.

But, you are way right on both points j2t2. Government is 99% about corporate profits and .1% about the humanities.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at August 10, 2010 11:49 AM
Comment #305526

Roy as is the case with most conservatives you continue to blame the government while showering accolades upon the “free market”, capitalist, corporations etc.. We need to realize our government has been co-opted by the Banksters and Multinational’s for many years. Elections are corporate sponsored events held for us still naive enough to believe we have a say in the matter.

The IMF has proven to be unworthy, yet because they shout “capitalism” we all bow down and ask no questions. The WTO has decision making power over the local affairs of each and every one of us, how is that Constitutional? Why have the small government conservatives not been vocal on this issue?

We can’t expect the Progressives to do it alone can we?

Posted by: j2t2 at August 10, 2010 12:57 PM
Comment #305528

j2t2, where have you been for the last plus two years? Abolishing corporate personhood, something Beck would never suggest, is the primary mission of the Republic Sentry Party. Our sage thought: nothing of import can be accomplished until corporate personhood is abolished.

The Progressive Alliance website article sounds like it was taken from the Republic Sentry Agenda/Vision USA. That is a great article. Doesn’t mean I approve of the 17th amendment and some other progressive stuff. But, that article is dead spot on.

It would seem the problem of the Progressive’s is that they are part of the Corpocracy by being part of the Democratic Party. IMO, you could remain in the Dem party for another hunert yars and you would never hear a leader of that party suggest abolishing corporate personhood, getting rid of NAFTA and the AFTA’s . Seems to be effective you would want to join the Independents or even the TEA Party folks.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at August 10, 2010 1:31 PM
Comment #305530

“where have you been for the last plus two years? Abolishing corporate personhood, something Beck would never suggest, is the primary mission of the Republic Sentry Party. Our sage thought: nothing of import can be accomplished until corporate personhood is abolished.”

The same place I have been the past 20 years, against the takeover of our government by Corporate America. I am not against corporations, in their rightful place, but I am against corporate control of government. However because I had taken this position long ago I can recognize the enemy and to me Beck is the enemy. I don’t need Beck for the bitty little history lessons he spouts I can do that on my own and I do.

“It would seem the problem of the Progressive’s is that they are part of the Corpocracy by being part of the Democratic Party.

They are part of the dems Roy but they are the part that most consistently fight the corporacy,IMHO.

“IMO, you could remain in the Dem party for another hunert yars and you would never hear a leader of that party suggest abolishing corporate personhood, getting rid of NAFTA and the AFTA’s .”

” Congressman Kucinich remains firmly opposed to CAFTA and to all free trade agreements following the NAFTA model that benefit multinational corporations while harming workers, diminishing environmental protections and limiting access to healthcare for the poor. The Congressman has made efforts to work with legislators across borders to unify opposition to DR-CAFTA.”

“Seems to be effective you would want to join the Independents or even the TEA Party folks.”

There is no viable third party Roy only a bunch of smaller parties that want to have their guy as president. When I can vote for 13 different people for president but only 2 for Representative or Senator then there is no viable third party. The tea baggers are just a bunch of spoiled baby boomers and talk radio conservatives, for the most part, being lead around by conservative movement fascist authoritarians who favor corporacy control of small government. Didn’t we leave that “Divine right” and the aristocracy thing a long time ago?

Roy it is a misconception that I am now or ever have been a registered dem? Since I first registered to vote those many years ago I registered as an independent and have done so the last few decades. In fact I would not even be considered a good progressive, truth be told. But that does not diminish the fact that it has been the progressives that have steadily been fighting against the corporacy that has taken over our government.

Posted by: j2t2 at August 10, 2010 2:51 PM
Comment #305534

Roy, your Republic Sentry Party is the Johnny come lately. Progressives have been fight this battle for more than a hundred years.

Rather than try to discount progressives because they are a part of the Democratic Party, examine the voting records of those in the progressive caucus. The three primary caucuses in the Party are the progressives, the conservatives and the largest one, led by Pelosi, the liberals. In the Senate, Reid leads the liberals with a dozen or so conservatives and the progressives can be counted with the fingers of one hand. The liberals proclaim themselves progressives but, they are being paid to do otherwise.

Mandatory for profit health care is not a part of the progressive agenda. Progressive amendments to the bill were stopped by one or more of the conservative blue dog Democrats with the Obama Administration siding with them rather than the progressives. Obama took both national health care as well as single payer off the table before negotiations took place.

71% disapproval for mandatory for pr0fit means that progressives voted with conservatives on this one.

Why do you think progressives are deeply disappointed in Obama and even more so with the Congress. It is because the corporations now control the election process and they have bought the majority of the Democratic politicians. The corpocracy doesn’t need every politician to control the government.

The progressive legislation of the past was not forced on the people by the government. It was forced on the government by the people. The government had to either relieve the suffering of the poor workers at the hands of the capitalists or go to war against their own people.

According Beck’s position, the government should have joined forces with the hired capitalist thugs to put down the workers and joined with Jim Crow to put down the blacks.

Midterm elections, interesting debate, your joking, right?

The Republicans will bash the left with everything they have, while proclaiming themselves the last bastion of defence for conservative America, condemning racism while implying defence of conservative white America.

The Democrats will continue to blame the Republicans for the shape the country is in while ignoring the role they have played in passing the Republican agenda. They will continue to play the progressives, as in it is us or them and the progressives will continue to believe that they can some how reclaim the Democratic Party rather than reviving the Progressive Party.

I am not saying this because I think the Progressive Party could be a viable political entity in the short term. They will be attacked by the Democrats as well as the Republicans and they won’t have access to large amounts of money, so they will have to wait until the damage is done and then be there for the grandchildren.

Have you noticed that the Right (both R&D) is trying to both scare and alleviate fear in the baby boomers by telling them that they will be protected from the alterations or repeal of the progressive legislation which put most of them in the middle class. Don’t worry, we are not going to harm your position but your children and to a larger degree, your grand children are going to be just as wealthy as the third world workers. This big middle class stuff is bad for business and it must be dealt with. If this is not accomplished, it will mean the end of the U.S.

Only pain can penetrate the fog of ignorance that the people are determined to live in.

The middle class is tired of shouldering the bulk of the tax burden so what are the alternatives? Get rid of the progressive legislation, the military industrial complex spending is sacrosanct, or tax the wealthy. Guess who has all the money for propaganda.

Posted by: jlw at August 10, 2010 4:24 PM
Comment #305535

When the corporations get rid of net neutrality, it will take three days for Nader’s website or the Republican Sentry Parties website to load and 0.3 seconds for the Fox News website or Glen Becks website to load.

Posted by: jlw at August 10, 2010 4:29 PM
Comment #305541

J2t2, if I inferred you were a Dem I apologize. I can understand there are plenty of near center folks in the duopoly and I can understand why. IMO, there is no reason to continue to fight for right within the duopoly. The ant crawlin up the elephant’s leg and all that …
IMO Kucinich ? is not a ‘leader’. I’m talking perhaps a committee chair and Pelosi/Reid leader. I would think the Doctor ? would be against corporate personhood as well.
Anyway, I want absolutely nothing to do with the RepDems. They burned me out during Regan’s term and the beginning of the greatest xfer of wealth in history.
For the most part I agree that the TEA Partiers are Republican-lights. Again, there are lots of near center folks in there but they are just pissing into the wind, IMO.

If you, as an Indie, and the Progressives have been fighting this battle for a hundred years I would suggest a change in tactics, good grief. Why would not all the ‘abolish cp’ers’ not have joined up with, or voted for Nader over those years? By now you might have a strong party built up.
Agree, that the Corpocracy needs only to control leadership positions to keep control. I recall Jesse Helms making some snide remark about a newly elected Rep as being the ‘elevator boy’ or something like that.
Of course I was joking on “Midterm elections, interesting debate”. The onliest debate I … . have some recollection of, is the Al Gore/Perot exchange on L. King in 96. Every admin, beginning with Regan has carried water for globalization and it is, IMO, a colossal failure with no one, no one being held accountable, no debate, no nothing but failure, the great recession, the great debt, the great pile of s..t.
Again, I would think those fighting on the inside would be way better served to be fighting from the outside where they have visibility and not be seen as carrying water for the duopoly.
The middle class is not carrying the tax burden. Only about 50% of people pay any taxes at all. The top 10% pays 80% of the taxes. This situation tends to disenfranchise the middle/poor classes. In other words, ‘jobless recovery’. Half of the middle and none of the poor class are considered ‘productive’ or needed. The well to doer’s can carry half the population ‘for a while’. But, the Social Security, Medicare issue becomes a problem over the long term.

The globalists must have some timeline for globalization to be fully implemented. Surely wages will tumble quickly within a few years. I don’t see how the middle can continue to hold on much longer. But, when you look at the overall pix, future debt and all… the rabbit is, but for his tail, all the way in the cage
Agree jlw, that the duopoly will continue to slug it out in seeking status quo. This latest silly assed gimmick with the Dems returning to pass emp. ins. and paying for it by charging more for temp visas for foreign workers - - - such a sarchastic joke for the so-called ‘greatest deliberating body in the world’. What fanciful BS.

Yeah, I’ve been watching, not understanding, this net neutrality thing. If Google just slows down their search engine thats one thing but does Google control the web backbone to actually be able to slow large chunks of web data flow? Seems like some company that started with a ‘U’ used to control the web backbone.
By the by, I sent a letter to Nader re teaming up with other minor parties to abolish corporate personhood. No response to date.
Otherwise, we have the Corpocracy we deserve.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at August 10, 2010 7:56 PM
Comment #305542

To continue; While Beck takes some stabs at the Rep’s it’s mostly against the Progressive element. I’m big time sure he will never suggest ‘abolish corporate personhood’. However, I do enjoy him calling out the radical elements in the administration. And, I enjoy the educational thrust of his program. But, it’s clear that he is working to co-opt the TEA Party, not that it’s taking much effort, as a means of ‘cleaning’ up after the bad ole Bush days. Perhaps he and Sara will team up for a shot. Nah, Newt wouldn’t like that.

And, I don’t cotton to a lot of stuff the Progressives have done or try to do. Which leads me to believe they are fighting the battle the wrong way. Their agenda is way too long, something for everybody to dislike in there. If they really believe that Corporate Personhood should be abolished they should understand that until that is accomplished there is little sense, use in fighting for any other legislation. They are bound to get something like the HC bill everytime. Take that wasted money and effort and put it where it will be effective.

Circle the wagons around abolishing corporate personhood. One goal that will allow a broad spectrum of voters to support ‘their’ goal, IMO.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at August 10, 2010 8:14 PM
Comment #305657

Roy, I have been checking out the end corporate personhood sites. I found progressives, socialists, anarchists, pagans, witches, third parties (not yours), and people running on third party tickets.

If it starts to catch on, the right wing as in Beck, etc. will have a field day. The Devil wants to end corporate personhood

There were no conservatives and no centrists as in liberals or moderate Republicans.

But, there are two guys in their sixties who are walking across America hoping to solicit by partisan support for a Constitutional Amendment to end corporate personhood.

Posted by: jlw at August 12, 2010 12:45 AM
Comment #305658

Bipartisan, sorry about that.

Posted by: jlw at August 12, 2010 12:47 AM
Comment #305717

jlw, Beck is a hard-core capitalists, IMO. But, he has made no mention of corporate personhood one way or the other. He might suprise us but I think not.
I appreciate the effort of the two guys walking across the country. If I could find a couple of supporters I would be in the little towns around me every Saturday with flags held high for abolishing CP.

I’m starting a book by Ian Fletcher, ‘Free Trade Doesn’t Work’. He relates that suprisingly, a number of bigtime CEO’s, Union Chiefs and the like are throwing in the towel on free trade. Sadly, we’ve got a lot of s..t to shovel for the next 50 years to recover from this grotesque failure.

Worse yet, nobody has been held accountable, not one person. I am pinning my hopes on the voters, hoping they are more educated on the issues and willing to remove the ‘corpocracy’ from government. We desperately need a few elections cycles of anti=incumbency voting, IMO.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at August 12, 2010 8:31 PM
Comment #305737

“But, he has made no mention of corporate personhood one way or the other. He might suprise us but I think not.”

Oh puleeze Roy, It will be a cold day in hell before Beck denounces the corporacy. Face facts Roy, he denounces those that denounce the corporacy. What does it take for you to realize he is the enemy not the solution to the problem?

“Worse yet, nobody has been held accountable, not one person.”

That is because it is not one person that is accountable, Roy, it is the events of the world that we as a country have not dealt with properly that is the problem. We have fallen for many false lines from the chamber of commerce and those that use the COC to lobby for them. When it comes to politicians they all (well most of them) want to do good and then reap the rewards for doing good, but they end up spoiled because of the money they took to get in office. They are human after all.

The middle class is mostly to blame cor not fighting back, while the rich have been engaging in class warfare the last 3 decades, because for years they have allowed themselves to be snookered by the conservative movement voice of talk radio and now Faux news. It is the middle class with the most to lose yet they still vote against themselves. Of course it is also the muddle class, as I like to think of us, that will bear the brunt of the fallout from “free trade” and “globalization”. But then we brought it upon ourselves for being to busy to consider the actions of our leaders not their words.

If you are in the mood I would suggest the author Kevin Phillips for your reading, particularly Wealth and Democracy but most any of his books will be enlightening. Much more educational than anything Beck has done.

Posted by: j2t2 at August 13, 2010 12:53 AM
Comment #305874

Don’t underestimate Beck. If he felt it were necessary to further his goals, he would denounce corporate personhood. It really would not affect the corpocracy if his primary goals of reducing the size of government by eliminating progressive legislation and corporate regulations are achieved.

Link TV: Channel 375 on Direct TV and 9410 on Dish Network.

PLUNDER: How did the financial meltdown happen? Who deliberately took down Bear Sterns? Who laughed at those who tried to warn us? Who is covering it all up? Why did Obama say, mistakes were made.

Sunday Aug.15 at 4:30 PM

Monday Aug,16 at 9:00 AM and 9:30 PM

Thursday Aug, 19 at 4:30 PM

Saturday Aug, 21 at 3:00 PM.

Posted by: jlw at August 15, 2010 4:11 PM
Comment #305885

jlw, will try to catch the TV link. Should the Repub’s ping-pong to power it will be interesting to catch Beck’s response to that.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at August 15, 2010 5:57 PM
Comment #306474

Sure wish Glenn Beck (and some others in the Main Stream Media) would talk more about these 10 abuses, and Congress’ ignoring Article V of the Constitution (despite 400+ applications from all 50 states), and try to see the equally destructive and despicable extremes from BOTH ends of the spectrum, and widespread throughout Congress.

The talking heads that have the most credibility, in my opinion, are the ones that are truly “fair and balanced” (not merely claiming to be “fair and balanced”), more interested in prioritizing and discussing the nation’s most pressing problems (rather than trying only to increase ratings), and truly want to get to some truths that have yet to be even whispered in the Main Stream Media.
How about discussing some of the following in more detail (or at all)?:

  • the massive federal debt ($13.4 Trillion; the largest federal per-capita debt ever);
  • the total per-capita federal debt is 705% larger today than it was in the Great Depression (in 2008 inflation adjusted U.S. Dollars);
  • massive nation-wide debt ($57 Trillion; the largest per-capita nation-wide debt ever);
  • total per-capita nation-wide debt is 400% larger today than it was in year 1956 (in 2008 inflation adjusted U.S. Dollars);
  • Total per-capita Federal debt is 80% larger today than it was in after World War II (in 2008 inflation adjusted U.S. Dollars);
  • increasingly expensive, but poor quality education; and increasingly unaffordable college education;
  • unemployment of 9.5% (or upto 22% by some estimates);
  • massive importation of cheap labor for profits and votes; despicably pitting American citizens and illegal aliens against each other for profits and votes;
  • illegal immigration and massive H1B visas, despite high unemployment in the U.S.;
  • an estimated $70-to-$327 billion in net losses due to illegal immigration;
  • some law firms teaching corporations how NOT to hire American citizens:
  • election fraud; an estimated 3% of votes are by illegal aliens; so the total percentage of voter fraud is estimated to be larger than that 3%;
  • declining median income, and fast rising costs of many things, such as education, healthcare, etc.;
  • incessant inflation of 2% (or higher; currently actually as high as 8% by some estimates); positive inflation for over 50 years; a 1950 U.S. Dollar is now worth 10 cents (or less);
  • the wealthiest 1% who now own over 40% of all wealth today; up a whopping 20% since year 1976; which has never been that bad since the Great Depression;
  • low GDP of 3%, but more likely -1.5% (i.e. actually negative) by some estimates);
  • the declining falling U.S. Dollar (source:;
  • regressive taxation; Warren Buffet paid a total of 17.7% on $46 Million while many people making $60K per year paid 25%-to-31% in total federal taxes;
  • wars (some most likely unnecessary);
  • constitutional violations (e.g. Article V); 6 new cases per day of eminent domain abuse; and perversion of laws to do legalize what used to be illegal;
  • and too many voters who repeatedly reward FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians with 85%-to-90% re-election rates, despite dismally low 11% approval ratings for Congress;

Sure wish Glenn Beck (or some others in the Main Stream Media) would talk about the common-thread behind all of that?
And no, it’s not merely “corpocracy”; there’s something more fundamental behind the “corpocracy” and all of the above.

Sure wish Glenn Beck (or some others in the Main Stream Media) would talk about the common-sense, no-brainer thing voters could all do to toward real reforms.
And no, it’s not merely voting “Democrat” or “Republican”.
It’s doing the common-sense, no-brainer thing that’s right under the voters very own noses, and the thing that the voters should have been doing all along.

Why doesn’t anyone in the Main Stream Media cover the top 10 abuses, and the common-sense, no-brainer solution that could change it?
Perhaps, because they don’t see it?
Perhaps, because they see it and don’t want to speak of those things?
Perhaps, because they are really frauds?

There are some people that pretty much know exactly what is going on, why, and how improvements could be possible (if only the majority of voters would use some common-sense and stop repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians (and their puppeteers, indirectly) with 90% re-election rates.

If the majority of voters mess around too much longer, they may suffer the painful consequences for many decades.
They may even lose the right to vote at all?
If some people think things are bad now, they should understand that things can get much, much worse.

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, repeatedly rewarding the duopoly, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, and corrupt incumbent politicians in Do-Nothing Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 20, 2010 2:45 PM
Comment #306475

As long as the majority of voters don’t mind, this is what they have.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 20, 2010 2:50 PM
Post a comment