Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: What Would A New Constitution Say? Or People's Bill of Rights, http://www.initiativesamendment.org/

Posted 1 year ago on March 7, 2013, 11:54 p.m. EST by gsw (2728)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

People's Democracy Solution: http://www.initiativesamendment.org/

“Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government...”. http://www.initiativesamendment.org/

  • “Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government.”

“Leave no authority existing not responsible to the people.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/05/fbi-occupy-wall-street_n_2410783.html       - “The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive.”

“All authority belongs to the people”

“The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.”  Thomas Jefferson quotes (American 3rd US President (1801-09). Author of the Declaration of Independence. 1762-1826) http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/03/03/the-rich-get-richer-obama-style-crony-capitalism.html

“I have no fear that the result of our experiment will be that men may be trusted to govern themselves without a master.”  Thomas Jefferson quotes (American 3rd US President (1801-09). Author of the Declaration of Independence. 1762-1826)

“If once the people become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress and Assemblies, Judges and Governors, shall all become wolves. It seems to be the law of our general nature, in spite of individual exceptions.” Thomas Jefferson

https://appam.confex.com/data/extendedabstract/appam/2012/Paper_2134_extendedabstract_151_0.pdf

We were advised by founders to not neglect our duties to question government

http://thinkexist.com/quotation/a_bill_of_rights_is_what_the_people_are_entitled/167157.html

So lets say we decide we would like to make a new constitution, now. What would it say?

State constitutions often say people have power. We should exercise it.

  • Sec. 2.  Sovereignty of the people. All political power is vested in and derived from the people; all government of right originates from the people, is founded upon their will only, and is instituted solely for the good of the whole. http://www.ncleg.net/Legislation/constitution/article1.html

Sec. 12.  Right of assembly and petition. The people have a right to assemble together to consult for their common good, to instruct their representatives, and to apply to the General Assembly for redress of grievances; but secret political societies are dangerous to the liberties of a free people and shall not be tolerated.

EDIT. Lets get together to visit state capitals and petition for grievance redress. Hop on the Ows busP GRIEVANCE LIST

We are debt peons, to a large extent http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/breaking_the_chains_of_debt_peonage_20130203/ http://www.nationofchange.org/big-bank-immunity-when-do-we-crack-down-wall-street-1363098432

http://www.thestreet.com/story/11844439/1/what-will-debt-jubilee-look-like.html

http://www.american.edu/spa/ccps/upload/Final-Draft-of-Thurber-s-What-s-Wrong-with-Congress-What-Should-be-Done-About-It-3.pdf

SOLUTION: . . 2nd PEOPLE'S BILL OF RIGHTS. . .

http://democracy.mkolar.org/DDlinks.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demoex

  • 13 4 day work http://shorterworkweek.blogspot.com/

  • 14 Medicare for all to opt in. http://www.pnhp.org/publications/proposal-of-the-physicians-working-group-for-single-payer-national-health-insurance

  • 15 college paid for through national service work projects, Or national education coop credits for all eligible citizen ( equal to difference between your wages, living wages, and other coop credits)

  • 16 a people's national bank with access to 0 interest credit. http://www.justmeans.com/A-Real-People-s-Bank-Occupy-Wall-Street-s-Call-for-a-Public-Banking-Option/50253.html

  • 17 the trillion dollar platinum coin 18 would be great.

  • 18 ban on drones and other mindless terminaters.

  • 19 war on drugs ends. It's a health issue. Go li Washington state, make it into a regulated coop, linked with access to mental health care. MJ legal.

  • 20.....25 percent debt repudiation jubilee as of 3-7-13, retroactive to 2008 collapse, this would be returned to all eligible by ileagle bank participants.

  • 21 Flexible living wage for all workers: (through citizens members all members of public coops in community ownership of 51 percent of all corporation operating in usa, or nationalized public coops where all citizens have a voice, ownership, and dividend credits to assure the reach a living wage and meet human needs through: oil and minerals, utilities, food, housing, education coops, whose proceeds and credits help ensure living wage and basic needs credits as human rights) see 22 and 23 below for further details on how funded.

For example ...Say we decide $75,000 is a living wage. ( or some relative equivalent if we have universal Medicare, and universal coop food, housing and energy credits to bring one close to this level, assuming the people decided cooperative of the major resources, owned by all, is a good idea and is best for whole country, the general welfare). Students would not earn full living wage in housing, but might earn more credits toward education, so it would balance out. This would be to state schools, most likely, but not exclusively). Also the $75,000 figure might be for a forty year old. A more modest living wage, say $40,000 for a twenty five year old, $25,000 for below 25 years. This to be paid for with 80 percent income tax on earnings over a 400,000 a year, and from credits we all earn as members, citizens of government coops in food, energy, housing, agriculture, education, etc. Slackers, and the are some, would be towards lower end of living wage scale, more of a maintain acne wage. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Bill_of_Rights

Would be nice if we had some legal legislative bills attached on this the states could vote on. Maybe call it second bill of People's Rights

INITIATVE DEMOCRACY CAN IT WORK: PROS CONS http://occupywallst.org/forum/initiative-democracy-pros-cons-can-it-work-in-time/

250 Comments

250 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

Lets get together to visit state capitals and petition for grievance redress. Hop on the Ows bus http://www.initiativesamendment.org/problem.htm

GRIEVANCE LIST Petition http://www.cusdi.org/petition.htm

1 wealth plundered by elites

2 climate ruined by big oil

3 treasury robbed by banksters junta (return money with 50 percent interest directly to citizens with less than median income on a sliding scale)

4 happiness ruined by perpetual state of war and hostilities

5 congress ignoring will of the people

6 gerrymandering

7 George Bush and company of tyrants sold us down the river, dems went along for the ride...we want a full release of records on this corruption.

8 bloated government not focused on priorities

9 government has neglected the people, from whom power derives, and targeted it with force in disbanding the creative communities of Ows to practice their beliefs

10 citizens united still stands.

11 end duopoly

12 direct democracy

13 4 day work week

14 Universal Medicare

-15 year of college for year of service to country. Eg building, teaching, nursing, etc. or concurrent

16 a people's national bank with access to 0 interest credit.

17 the trillion dollar platinum coin 18 would be great.

18 ban on drones and other mindless terminaters.

Feel free to expand the list...99 would be a good number

Feel free to expand the list...99 would be a good number

Who wants to take a list to their state congress?

Would be nice if we had some legal legislative bills attached on this the states could vote on. Maybe call it second bill of People's Rights

It's Right Here! http://www.initiativesamendment.org/amendment.htm

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

gsw, I agree fully with your intention here, but after giving the matter a lot of thought I concluded that any attempt to change the Constitution would be very dangerous.

If the establishment can prevent people from going to say, the Republican National Convention, through a show of raw force, then what is to prevent them from simply locking people out of a new Constituational Convention?

I believe such a convention could and would be hijacked by the forces curretly in control.

This is still a very new movement. If the people of America really want change, a much safer mechanism is simply the voting booth. The society we have will finally be determined by the will of the people. When one thinks about it, the battle really is for the will of the majority, and at the moment we are winning that battle - We Are Winning!

In some sense then this battle is in and for the mind and conscience of the individual. If we can win that battle and still perservere, then there will be no need for something as risky as a new convention.

That is how I have come to see it, anyway.

Thanks for the above very clear vision regarding what we need to accomplish. I am with that vision 100%.

[-] 5 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

Get direct democracy without article V convention, but through state legislative bodies, initiatives.

http://www.cusdi.org/amendment.htm

Amendment

[-] 3 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago
  1. Right to Propose Initiatives
  2. A Gateway System to Qualify Initiatives
  3. Right to Vote on Qualified Candidate Initiatives

http://www.cusdi.org/solution.htm

Okay. GSW, looks like a fair analysis and some new ideas I haven't seen. I like that it compares or addresses the idea of Referendums and then moves off into State/Community Initiatives by either Direct or indirect Democracy with Boule.

  1. Signature Petition System
  2. Internet Voting System
  3. A Boule or Assembly of Randomly Selected Citizens

Interesting, GSW.

[-] 3 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

As We try for initiative powers in our local arenas, we will be educating the public, who already know change is needed, but don't know how to make the system realize change.

It will awaken the people to awareness of the depth of the problem, and importantly a plan to deal with it maturely, within systems and traditions.

http://www.iandrinstitute.org/statewide_i%26r.htm

http://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/initiatives/faq.aspx

The process is lengthy for initiative. If your state doesn't have this freedom, how wiould it be acquired in your state. Probably have to petition for it and get the power in your state constitution, a delicate procedure, look to the state histories of those who have initiative powers, how they were formalized on the books.

http://www.iandrinstitute.org/New%20IRI%20Website%20Info/Drop%20Down%20Boxes/Quick%20Facts/History%20of%20I&R.pdf

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

Let me bump your post, hope more read it. I have to get back to you. I'm having some problem right now. Thanks for the hard work. Looks like you have posted something important and new for us all to take a look at this week.

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Lightning strikes.

[-] 4 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

boule, legislative council of ancient Greece consisting first of an aristocratic advisory body and later of a representative senate noun. (Concise Encyclopedia)

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/boule

Deliberative council in the city-states of ancient Greece. It existed in almost all constitutional city-states, especially from the late 6th century BC. In Athens the boule was created as an aristocratic body by Solon in 594 BC; later, under Cleisthenes, 500 members were elected to represent the 10 tribes (50 each). A certain number, in rough proportion to size, were allotted to each deme. Complementing the work of the ecclesia and areopagus, the boule controlled finances, managed the fleet and cavalry, evaluated officials, received foreign ambassadors, and advised the strategus. The boule model largely influenced the organization of councils of other cities in the Hellenic period.

Solon (biographical name mentioned above)

(born c. 630—died c. 560 BC) Athenian statesman, reformer, and poet, known as one of the Seven Wise Men of Greece. He was of noble descent but of moderate means. Though he held the office of archon c. 594, he did not gain full power as a reformer and legislator until some 20 years later. He ended aristocratic rule and permitted participation by all citizens who had achieved a measure of wealth, eliminating any bloodline requirement. He replaced Draco's code with more humane laws, freed citizens enslaved for debt and redeemed their land, encouraged professions, and reformed coinage and weights and measures. Despite complaints from all sides, the people abided by the changes. He apparently left Athens for 10 years on a series of travels; on his return, he warned Athens about his relative Peisistratus, who would become tyrant.

strategus

In ancient Greece, a general, often functioning as a magistrate with wide powers. Cleisthenes introduced an annual board of 10 strategi in Athens to be commanders of the army; one or more, all equal, were responsible for each operation. In the 5th century BC they gained political influence, in part because they were elected and could be reelected, thus were able to entrench themselves in office. In the Hellenistic Age they were the supreme magistrates in most federations and leagues. In Egypt (3rd century BC–4th century AD) they were civil governors.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/concise/solon
http://www.merriam-webster.com/concise/strategus

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Yes, I have always been attrackted to the Greek ideal of direct democracy, but I have been a fool. Until I read gsw's post yesterday, I just never saw any Viable Path to get there, and I was becoming increasingly frustrated with this movements growing irrelevence.

I now see a way, but I wish to God I had seen that earlier. The momentum of a movement is hard to rekindle once it's been lost.

The people are the backbone of such movements, they need the fire of Oct. 2011, and disillusionment is a powerful narcotic.

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

Perhaps there are serious Wastes of Taxpayer Money or still more Financial Scandals to Expose and Broadcast.

I found over $150 Billion in Education Programs created after the 2009 Recession in the Federal Budget ... this money is going to either the Banks or is a hidden stimulus to prop up the US Economy.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

I'm sure there are many scandals yet to be exposed, in fact I'm positive of it. There has been no oversite of any kind for years. Perhaps with Elizabeth Warren et all will start to change that.

In the meantime where shall this movement go to rebuild its momentum? That, I think, is the question.

[-] 4 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

Follow your heart.... You have been living correctly from what I can see.

There are a lot of Dirty Tricks that OWS has avoided by being a leaderless movement without a defined platform. The greatest Success has to be the education of a generation. We saw protests in the 1990s, but now it seems an entire generation has learned about Financial Corruption.

Corruption to me seems the Key.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Very good comment. I've read a lot here today, and looking it over again, nothing better than this. "A new generation has Learned about financial corruption. Corruption seems to be the key."

Thanks:)

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

Thanx. Been having a computer issue. Let's see if this works this time.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

True - especially about being leaderless. I think that will show itself to have been brilliant.

[-] 3 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

Agree, people that dont spt democracy are a corruption that will target activist and people that speak publically.

I keep the CIA in mind how they work on Regime change and are willing to break the law. Corruption breeds in a certain environment.

The environment of "We are in charge" seems to breed empires and cults of personality. People with Money, Power, or Position feel power and have to decide if they are going to support democracy and constitutional rights, Individual rights, ... safety regulations, financial regulations, consumer protections, ... and on and on.

We all have to choose. Will we support democracy and equal and individual rights ... or will we chose to be part of the power structure and network with cronys that will do anything to further their careers.

And we all do choose even if we are not thinking about it.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Yes.

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

I'm sorry, I just have a minute here.

All I have to say is Now You're Talking!

Now this seems an idea really worth debating!

Attempting this at the state level, piecemeal, would make it a lot more difficult for the 1% to railroad the process, I think. It's certainly a worthy idea.

I wish I could engage that debate right now, but I can't.

Thanks - this is a really good issue.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

I'll look into it, GK.

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Chills go down my spine.

I think this is it.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

I didn't see anything that would warrant further inspection.

Just gotta keep the meddlers out of the final vote count, as per usual.

It does appear to be just what the American people, and #ows in particular, need to be leaning towards.

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

I think, Builder, that gsw has struck pay dirt. This movement will live again. This is it. We can all physically reach our state legislatures and demand direct democracy, and if even one liberal state, say Mass., institutes direct democracy and demonstrates that it can work, we have won.

I have agonized over this question. In a world with nuclear weapons stable government is paramount, but when our government gave away 14 trillion dollars (I really wish someone would clearly tabulate the damage of the Bush Administration) then the argument for representative democracy breaks down. Further, we now have the technology to implement direct democracy, something unavailable in the past.

The state by state plan circumvents, hopefully, interference from vested interest - that is by prolonging the process and subjecting it to public scrutiny The argument for representative democracy, that it somehow prevents egregious miscarriages of public policy, has been destroyed by our current government's bankrupting of the world economy. This seems like it, the possibility for the democratic ideal. I finally see this as a real possibility!!!

What say you?

[-] 4 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

I say yes. Grab it and Run with it.

I've felt like a busted old gramaphone wound up by a circus monkey, spouting on about Iceland and how direct democracy is the only way out of this mess.

We need a method of dismissing the duplicitous mugs that are pretending to represent the people, and presenting the wishes of the masses in a format that can't be glossed over with corporate cash.

The time for change is now.

[-] 4 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Thank God you said that!

The world is lonely. I have been accused of being a Democratic plant, and I don't know what else.

You said it, Method, Method, Method!

That is what I've been grappling with here for ages.

As I said, in a world of nuclear weapons stable government is paramount.

I just never saw a possible Method before of meeting all these terrible contradictions - the necessity of furthering democracy, without risking political instability in a nation with enough nuclear power that in the wrong hands it could destroy the world.

I think this is it, and so, instead of giving up now my Friend . . .

Once more unto the breach . . . like tigers.

[-] 3 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

Fools might rush in, where brave men fear to tread, but in times like these, GypsyKing, pioneers push forward, and show others the path.

Only the brave shall survive the onslaught. The meek can inherit the earth, but they can't make it their own.

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

This, finally, is the formula to reignite this movement!

And . . . thank God you are here, and others who still believe in the goals of The Enlightenment!

If this isn't the answer for our movement's next step then I'd like to know what is?

I think we finally, finally, figured it out! And so . . .

Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more; Or close the wall up with our English dead. In peace there's nothing so becomes a man As modest stillness and humility; But when the blast of war blows in our ears, Then imitate the action of the tiger. . . .

[-] 4 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

-King Henry V -Shakespeare

I had to look it up. You know I heard that Sir Francis Bacon might really have Written most of Shakespeare and responsible for the rest of Shakespeare's writing through a team he put together for "His Own Elightenment Scheme" which soon is said to have reached America through groups like the Masons.

We ceratinly need humans to start Valuing Intelligence & Education, Jobs & Economic Stability, Social Programs & Economic Stability, and Democracy & Economic Security.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

We certainly do.

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 1 year ago

I have a theory that politics tends to simplify the message to one idea about a person or ideology. It is on a par with Name Calling. And we can see it here in this forum... it is oversimplification.

So I am trying to tie several ideas together when I say something.

Is there a Strong Economy either based on GDP or Stock Market Gains ... without growth of "Real Good Jobs with Good Benefits"? And could America the Country be growing and Successful, if we need 30 Million Good Jobs with Good Benefit?

Can our Politicians either the Democrats or the Republicans be considered good Leaders if the Federal Budget has been out of control for all Major Budget Lines (which all increased by 100% from 2002-212) .... and Can they be Good Leaders if we have had World War and Military Expansion since 2001 ... and could they be Good Leaders if we have no Domestic Policy to either Invest for Jobs, Ensure that banks invest in Small Business Expansion, or Even Measure the Total Number of People that Want to Work Full TIme for Good Wages and Benefits?????

[-] 1 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

looks like a clear process, but a lot of signatures of registered voters in Washington state: 8 percent to put on ballot for citizens to pass, or 4 percent to send to legislature to fine tune and implement.

that percent is of those who voted in last election, for governor, if I'm not mistaken.

http://www.sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/Initiative%20and%20Referenda%20Manual.pdf

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Wow, yeah 8% is a lot. There may be enough disaffection with the current process to accomplishe that. Or I hope other states might not have such a tough process.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

I'm sharing the link wherever I go on the world wide web.

It's our resource, our meeting place, and our war zone.

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Thank you Builder, we now have a true battle cry.

[-] 1 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

Glad to see a way forward with hope and a map, something people may agree on, and see as doable.

http://www.cusdi.org/amendment.htm

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

The hope has been dimly eternal.

The map, not always so.

The way forward, often just a glimmer of light required.

The doable, now streets ahead and clearly struck.

[-] -2 points by penguento (362) 1 year ago

My, my. I don't recall anyone around here having been so fired up in quite some time. I'll be really interested in seeing how you guys tackle this. It'd get very interesting indeed if you could swing even a single state; and if you picked a small one that's not too far into the pockets of special interests, like Vermont, you might have a shot. Do keep us posted on your progress.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Yes, you've done a great job of pouring the narcotic of hopelessness in people's ears.

Let's see if they can wake again, shall we?

[-] 1 points by penguento (362) 1 year ago

I'm serious. If I were you, I'd be thinking of moving to Vermont, and convincing everybody I knew to do the same. It's small enough and contrarian enough that you might have a shot of stacking the deck in your favor, which is what you'd need. And if you did it, and proved you could make it work, you could maybe change the whole conversation nationally. But to do all that ya' gotta pick a battle you can win and then you have to go out and win it. That professional wrestler that got himself elected governor had the same opportunity, but he fucked it up by being incompetent.

My chief complaint with folks around here is that they're all talk, no action. Be different. Prove me wrong.

[-] 1 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

Debate site here....argue more, solve issues less here in USA, a bunch of sophist armchair philosophers: gun rights, stinkle abuses, phony issues and worthless threads.

A good Idea for refocusing a drifting movement arises, and we have so much animosity, we are just like congress itself, divided old bickering shrews.

Here's a plan to regain liberty, dignity, democracy.

http://www.cusdi.org/state_legislator_package.pdf

Read it in your spare time, send it to your representatives. It has a link for that.

http://www.initiativesamendment.org/addresses.htm

Start initiative petition in state, register and run for office.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

Thanks. I'll bookmark it for later.

[-] 1 points by LeoYo (5909) 1 year ago

Wow, where have I heard this idea before?

"5.The right of a politically free and democratic people to engage in Initiative, Referendum, and Recall, to have all of their votes counted, and to be without the undemocratic imposition of an electoral college, shall be guaranteed at all levels of government. "

"Prior to a national ratification, the Free Democracy Amendments, collectively referred to as the FreeDA Liberty Bill, can be enacted at the state level in the 24 ballot initiative states..." http://occupywallst.org/forum/free-democracy-amendment/

Question; if 24 states did support Amendment X by adopting it for their own states through ballot initiative, what would compel at least half of the remaining 26 state legislatures and two-thirds of both Congress and the Senate to support ratification of the amendment? I didn't find where CUSDI discusses a remedy for overcoming that obstacle.

[-] 1 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

Good questions. Try this page...

http://www.cusdi.org/state-support.htm

[-] 1 points by LeoYo (5909) 1 year ago

Thank you, that was most helpful. From what I read, with the exception of 16 states that can pass amendments directly through initiatives, it still boils down to faith in corporate bought elected representatives at both the state and ultimately still the federal level to do the people's bidding in ratifying the amendment. As is stated near the bottom,

"The People must trust their state legislators and their legislatures, in whom the Founding Fathers constitutionally entrusted the power and responsibility to prevent this disaster, to act decisively and courageously."

To this, I can only be reminded of words from Thomas Jefferson.

"Our rulers will become corrupt, our people careless. A single zealot may commence persecutor, and better men be his victims. It can never be too often repeated, that the time for fixing every essential right on a legal basis is while our rulers are honest, and ourselves united. From the conclusion of this war we shall be going downhill. It will not then be necessary to resort every moment to the people for support. They will be forgotten, therefore, and their rights disregarded. They will forget themselves, but in the sole faculty of making money, and will never think of uniting to effect a due respect for their rights. The shackles, therefore, which shall not be knocked off at the conclusion of this war, will remain on us long, will be made heavier and heavier, till our rights shall revive or expire in a convulsion."

Thomas Jefferson (Notes on the State of Virginia) 1781

.

"If, then, control of the people over the organs of their government be the measure of their republicanism, and I confess I know no other measure, it must be agreed that our governments have much less of republicanism than ought to have been expected; in other words, that the people have less regular control over their agents, than their rights and their interests require."

Thomas Jefferson in a letter to John Taylor dated May 28, 1816.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/none-are-more-hopelessly-enslaved-than-those-who-f/

[-] 2 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

"In some sense then this battle is in and for the mind and conscience of the individual. If we can win that battle and still perservere, then there will be no need for something as risky as a new convention."

They will make up own minds, but only if we keep going forward and strive for a goal, and convincing individuals in states through local state initiatives and petitions, will make them more apt to make a choice, or even get a little more informed of the issues,

Lots of people want concrete measurable, legislative propoasals that can be examined, so they know what they are signing on to.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Oh yes, I think this work at the state level is essential! Agreed completely! It is only the idea of progressing to a Constitutional Convention that gives me the heebeegeebees.

Man, I find that thought really Sacry!

[-] 2 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

I don't disagree. Just wanted to explore some creative ideas. To get some thoughts and ideas flowing, brainstorming, As i'mstuck in a habitual rut of tradition.

If it was an amendments list, like the 1st bill of rights, that could be voted on by 2/3 of states legislative bodies, then it would be grassroots, allowed by state constitutions.

I do not think we can go directly at us congress with this. We have to go through our local states. State by State, get 2nd Bill of Rights for People passed.

Like civil rights was fought locally, state by state.

Yea. A whole constitutional convention would be overreach, and things could end up worse. I've heard that said. We would be outspent.

Welcome back to Ows GK. We need your Candide clarity of thought and speech, tonight.

It is an onerous process

...Amendments may be proposed by either: two-thirds of both houses of the United States Congress; or by a national convention assembled at the request of the legislatures of at least two-thirds of the states. To become part of the Constitution, amendments must then be ratified either by approval of: the legislatures of three-fourths of the states; or state ratifying conventions held in three-fourths of the states. Congress has discretion as to which method of ratification should be used. Any amendment so ratified becomes a valid part of the Constitution, provided that no state "shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the senate," without its consent.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Thanks for the kind words gsw.

I think we need now to get behind a candidate of the caliber of Elizabeth Warren for 2016, and we need to absolutely get out the vote for such Real choices as her in 2014.

The question it seems to me is, have the American people really learned something from the debacle of the Bush Administration, and have they drawn any deeper moral conclusions from that debacle?

This is where the battle really lies, because if they haven't then I don't think any other method can work any better than the voting booth.

Any way you look at it there are still way too many Americans, such as all the wildly confused liberatarians with their double standard and their delluded good intentions, on this site . . . not to mention the flat-out Neo-Con backers of the 1%, who can still team up with big money to defeat us.

We must become the warriors of conscience. We must re-forge the conscience of the American People. If all we as a people believe in is the individual, the ego and will of the individual, and ultimately therefore in ourselves, then we will be meat for the sharks.

Only when a substancial plurality of us reject the established dog-eat-dog, indiviudualist "ethic" that has replaced the true enlightened values of this nation can we begin to transform the world. It seems up to us to do that.

I always did like a challenge . . . ha, ha, ha.

This truth seems at first disempowering because it takes real thought and commitment to see how it leads us to action, but the truth is really the opposite, it is empowerment because it means that all we must all do is each of us take Action, in some Productive direction, to continue to turn the zeitgeist.

It also means that right now We Are Winning. So we just need to keep on keeping on. . .

Just some thoughts.

[-] 4 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

Well said. We need all voices. Yours is persuasive, combined with your moniker you are like a tall tree in a lightning storm here, so to say.

Maybe try a non-assuming name in the next evolution....Just joking. They'd call you a sock like all the rest.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Keep up your great work here. I always read your comments when I see them!

[-] 1 points by satohirona (-20) 1 year ago

This is still a very new movement. If the people of America really want change, a much safer mechanism is simply the voting booth.

Are you part of Occupy or not? The whole reason we are having this protest is because voting does not work. Having a vote once in awhile is not democratic, hence the idea of anarchy, general assemblies, or more bluntly, that people can govern themselves without representatives.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

My view on that is this: The world is in a hell of a mess. On this I think most of us will agree. The Occupy movement did the right thing in occupying public space to make the point, to show viscerally, how our freedoms have been abridged.

That effort was put down by blunt force.

Therefore it seems we must figure out How we accomplish our goals. It isn't enough any longer to simply dream about them, we must do it.

Given that direct action has been met by main force, how do we proceed in a manner that will have results, and do so before it's too late?

I will simply leave that question out there. I would like to hear people's opinion.

My thing is simply that I want to know Realistically how we are going to go about doing this.

It is here that I think lies the central question now for this movement, and our opponents are making endless hay with our inability to form a cohesive strategy.

[-] -1 points by satohirona (-20) 1 year ago

We didn't use direct action for very long. We should have kept pushing. You don't topple a republic in a few months.

We also have to offer a well planned alternative. We looked like kindergarteners in the general assemblies. We need to formulate a system of direct democracy that actually works; one for live meetings, and one for the Internet. If we can't show a system that we've used ourselves and which worked, there's no way people will buy in to our ideas. The proof is in the pudding.

Finally, it's possible that we'll have to wait for people to be in absolute dire straits. Americans are still a little too comfortable for a revolution. We need to get our act together with general assemblies, community projects, edemocracy, etc... so that when people are completely desperate we can step in with a solution that works.

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

I think that is good thinking. I also think that Occupy is the hub of, or part of, a larger coalition of incresingly influencial left-wing groups with a common agenda, but differing strategies. I have never seen any problem with that fact, because it puts maximum pressure on the .001%. I have never seen these things as mutually exclusive approaches, although I realize that some people do.

I don't believe we should exclude Any approach, other than violence, to achieve the essential goals of this movement. In fact I believe that doing so amounts to a misunderstanding of the powerful nature of the forces we are up against, as well as a misunderstanding of the necessary dynamic of successful social movements.

We need to be inclusive, flexible in our thiking, and relentless to succeed.

That has been my belief at any rate.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

I would also like to make the distiction between bringing down the corruption of a republic, and toppling a republic. I, for one, am concerned with bringing down the corruption of the republic, not with toppling it.

I am by no means convinced that toppling it would usher in a better system. If history is a judge, then that outcome would appear unlikely.

These are of course just my views, and I think we need to include as many views as possible, as long as people are in line with basic objectives, first and formost in separating monitary interest from democratic government.

If Occupy is intent on excluding people who hold views like mine then I will respect that intent.

[-] 0 points by nandoatake (-18) 1 year ago

and I think we need to include as many views as possible, as long as people are in line with basic objectives

Political revolution, the toppling down of the republic to replace it with anarchy, is one of the basic objectives of Occupy. It's the underlying objective, the main one.

I fully support that objective because the system is broken beyond repair. Supporting Occupy, but not supporting that objective, is akin to supporting communism without supporting the idea that material goods should be distributed in equal manner. It makes little sense. A rabbi doesn't go to church, he goes to a synagogue. When supporting a group it's important to retain our integrity. We should only support what we truly believe in.

[Removed]

[Deleted]

[Removed]

[Deleted]

[-] 0 points by nandoatake (-18) 1 year ago

Let's not dismiss the power of education. Philosophy is interesting and anarchy is not such a high-minded concept. It's quite simple actually. The problem is the US government has been creating anti-communist propaganda since the beginning of times. We must reverse this, or else nothing will ever improve.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Nah

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Hello GK. Are we winning? How do you measure "winning"? From what little I know of life, you risk nothing, you win nothing.

Perhaps you'd care to comment: http://occupywallst.org/forum/keep-searching-for-ways-to-screw-the-corrupt-syste/

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

I recall towards the beginning of this movement I backed the idea of debt repudiation, as being the only power actually in the hands of the people great enough to force real concessions from the 1% establishment, and you rejected it as being too risky.

Now you are willing to risk everything on a Constitutional Convention.

What are the differences here?

In debt repudiation the establishment is put at risk. In a Constitutional Convention the rights and freedoms of the people are put at risk.

So, it seems that your advocation of risk is somewhat unfounded.

[-] -2 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Actually, I think you might be right about that, debt repudiation. I think many things will be necessary. But the simple fact is, our rights and freedoms are already at risk. Great risk. As you well (or should) know.

Nor am I interested in "concessions"...

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Very well, my disgreement with you, aside from your original opposition to debt repudiation, has always been simply over a Constitutional Convention.

[-] -3 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

We've agreed to disagree in the past... But from my perspective, you too easily give away our one and most powerful Constitutional tool. Have you read the OP in the link above? Care to comment substantively about it? As gentlemen?

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Thank you for that invitation. I have given my opinion. I simply do not think the people of this nation, under the present condition of clear and present danger to our existing freedoms, under the seige of concentrated wealth against our institutions, and given the inadequacy of our current state of representation in government, can safely risk such a convention.

We need to restore our representation in government and go further to retake control of that government. The means of doing so, as far as I can see them, I have described above.

Thank you, DSamms.

[-] -2 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

That saddens me. You resign yourself to "concessions" literally. Perhaps they'll be generous. Good luck.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

I don't think you need to be saddened. The battle here is that of restoring the moral outlook and will of a people, and through doing so reversing the fate of the world.

Nothing less will do it. If it can be accomplished then nothing can stand in the way of reform, if it cannot then there is no contingency that can ultimately save us.

We are the problem and the solution, and I believe that hope is now on the ascendency.

I don't look for concessions, I look for the revolutionary transformation of the human spirit:)

[-] -2 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

It saddens me nonetheless because you advocate and stand for nothing... Pretty and meaningless phrases.

GK: "I simply do not think the people of this nation, under the present condition of clear and present danger to our existing freedoms, under the seige of concentrated wealth against our institutions, and given the inadequacy of our current state of representation in government, can safely risk such a convention."

If not, then what? When? How? Who?

There'll be time for a "revolutionary transformation of the human spirit" after we get these twin-party political monkees, and their masters, off our backs.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Okay, now you talk in circles, and in no way address my point about the saftey, or indeed the almost certain negative outcome of such a convention. Also, I'm sure the 1% would love to convince us that only such a rash step as this can change anything, when things are already changing.

You are very selective concerning when you want to appear rational and when you want to appear radical, and also when you do and don't want to address substance. I find that rather suspect.

You have been a one-note-Johnny on this topic for I know not how long, and never countered the thrust of the agrument against it that I have seen . . . never.

I have said what I have to say here.

[-] -2 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Same arguments the Tea Party hacks use. Better prose tho...

It's a frightening thought isn't it -- rational and radical? Who'd a thunk it... Thank you for the compliment.

The thrust of the argument is that you don't know what you're talking about. Thus cannot argue substantively on the merits.

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

I didn't say rational and radical at the same time, but rather implied the oscilation between the two. and . . .

I'm sorry, was there something of more substance regarding this issue than its likely outcome?

I must have missed something. Perhaps you could enlighten me . . . or someone else . . . I've had enough of this sillyness for now.

[-] -2 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

But you so easily "assume" a negative outcome, as if a foregone conclusion. Please tell us o' great sage, where comes thou wisdom?

[-] -1 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Hi GypsyKing,

"...after giving the matter a lot of thought I concluded that any attempt to change the Constitution would be very dangerous.

"If the establishment can prevent people from going to say, the Republican National Convention, through a show of raw force, then what is to prevent them from simply locking people out of a new Constitutional Convention?

"I believe such a convention could and would be hijacked by the forces currently in control.

"If the people of America really want change, a much safer mechanism is simply the voting booth. The society we have will finally be determined by the will of the people. When one thinks about it, the battle really is for the will of the majority..."

Welcome to the club GK... If direct democracy is your thing, go for it. Good luck... Nice to see you thinking again.

But you're only partially right that "any attempt to change the Constitution would be dangerous." And the "forces currently in control" will certainly try to hijack it. Just like they will direct democracy. The plot calls for both to be corrupted. So, now that we know this, how do we neutralize their attack?

I understand, all too clearly, your preoccupation with nuclear weapons. Ever touched one? But after Shrub (and Cheney)... how high is that bar? And now a guy I can only describe as the executioner in chief? (Winning in a non-race, over his arch-nemesis Golden Globalization Boy!) These hacks simply carry elite water...

But with a truly democratic yes or no decision in the election... Let's argue, for a moment, that we actually motivate fifty to sixty million people to withdraw their consent. No matter what else happens -- you now have a de facto political party capable of challenging Rs and Ds on a legitimate populist footing. Immediately. A little bit of well-organized political chaos might go a long way.

And if the USG attempts to suppress or openly oppose our vote, will that be seen as "of the people, by the people, and for the people"? Or will it stiffen our will? And de-legitimize themselves in the process... Their legitimacy, or lack thereof, is paramount. Attack it! They cannot defend a principled attack.

How would you vote GyspyKing?

As an American citizen, make a yes or no decision based on what you think, and what you want to happen next. The question is:

Either support the twin-party political status quo and thus consent to all their bad acts you claim to hate and detest...

or

Reject their hate and war and poverty by voting to withdraw your consent to be governed under the Constitution in the next general election.

Ultimately we agree GK, people really ought decide in the voting booth.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

There has been progress in the voting booth. Elizabeth Warren for example. We need to keep pushing that, I think. But this movement always was about direct action, and I think the state by state push for direct representation allows for that to be a meaningful tactic again. And even if we got just one state at the beginning it would be a check to the failure of representitive democracy in recent times.

It would be a standard to hold it up against.

So, I think that state by state process is the best option on the table.

Oh, and not every state has a police force like NY. I wouldn't want anyone to go up against That again.

And no, I haven't touched a nulear weapon lately. Lifelong radicals aren't given that opportunity, even if they wanted it.

[-] -3 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

I wasn't always a radical. Life is funny sometimes. Ironically so...

My best advice is, if Elizabeth Warren, or Dennis K, or EvolutionNow is running in your district, vote for them. But, if it's simply a choice between a lesser of two evils, vote to withdraw your consent. You do have a choice. And hope. Maybe a lot of us feel, and think, this way.

[-] 2 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 1 year ago

DS... I personally am not that Happy with much of what Obama is doing... however I know enough to know that I don't know the whole picture... and I supported him because he is a 1000 times smarter and better than the opposing idiot... so... until we get a new system in place ... we MUST make the best of what we got... throwing votes away does not make a stand... no one listens to that... they simply will think you were too lazy to vote..

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Thank you for that succinct reply. He also seems to back a lot of other ideas that are either dysfuctional or dangerous.

I have now seen enough to know who's side he's on, and it ain't the 99%.

[-] -3 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Political partisanship? My my, GK, your Democratic slip is showing... Not to mention your blood-stained hands. Back wounds are painful.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Are you the only one left here who doesn't know you are here to disrupt this movement?

Just wondering.

And now goodbye until you can find some new sham "idea."

[-] -2 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Didn't you just change your tune GK? Reminds me of the old days.

[-] 2 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

lets try to stay focused for one thread. stop with the personal histories

[-] -2 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Yes, of course. One must observe decorum to cover odious smells.

[-] 3 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

well valid criticism is fine, and sometimes I see your point of view, it depends on the issue and the presentation of the argument. I am not seeing the continuity in your thinking today, and you usually have valid points.

it does help to not be insulting

[-] 0 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

I'm tired, and if I've offended, my sincere apologies.

[-] -2 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

You're wrong. And Obama, personally, is not the problem. The problem is systemic corruption. It's our fault. We have to fix it. No one else can.

But, like I post above: Vote your conscience.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/keep-searching-for-ways-to-screw-the-corrupt-syste/

[-] 2 points by BradB (2693) from Washington, DC 1 year ago

oh... so argumentative... ;) DS... we ALL agree ...we need a new system in place ....

until we implement it .... ??? what do we do ???.... voting does help some ... there are great people out there ... Sanders, Warren etc... good one's ... and ....better than the other ones... and very bad ones..

[-] -2 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

When, in your congressional district, Sanders, Warren, or Dennis K or their clone, is running, by all means vote for them. But if your choice is the lesser of two evils, vote to withdraw your consent. Otherwise you consent to this farce, and perpetuate it. Vote your conscience.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

I really do think a Lot of us feel and think this way. The question is Method. I really don't oppose a no vote, if you really have no choice in a race, why would I? But I don't think a no vote in and of itself is a solution.

[-] 0 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

I agree. That's why what I advocate is a bit more complex, and Constitutional, than that.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Please DSamms, tell us in plain words what exactly it is you advocate.

[-] -1 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

How would you vote GyspyKing?

As an American citizen, make a yes or no decision based on what you think, and what you want to happen next. The question is:

Either support the twin-party political status quo and thus consent to all their bad acts you claim to hate and detest...

or

Reject their hate and war and poverty by voting to withdraw your consent to be governed under the Constitution in the next general election.

Vote your conscience.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/keep-searching-for-ways-to-screw-the-corrupt-syste/

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

That, sir, is not a plan.

You have said nothing, using a lot of words.

[-] -2 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Poor choice GK... But then your judgment, not to mention your motives, has always been a bit suspect.

[-] 1 points by LeoYo (5909) 1 year ago

I thought you might find this to be of some interest due to it pertaining to your neck of the woods.


Radioactive Sludge Leaking at Hanford

Tuesday, 12 March 2013 09:30 By John LaForge, Consortium News | Report

http://truth-out.org/news/item/15064-radioactive-sludge-leaking-at-hanford-threatens-to-contaminate-regions-water-supply

Contract employees working on the demolition of a plutonium vault complex at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Washington State in 2011. (Photo credit: Energy Department)The U.S. rush to build a giant arsenal of nuclear weapons during the Cold War created an environmental disaster at Hanford in Washington State along the Columbia River. Clean-up costs are staggering and radioactive sludge threatens to contaminate the region’s water supply, writes nuclear watchdog John LaForge.

Federal and state officials said in February six giant underground tanks holding an explosive and toxic brew of highly radioactive liquid wastes are leaking at the 570-square-mile Hanford Reservation, on the Columbia River in South Central Washington State.

Hanford is perhaps the dirtiest reactor site in the world with 1,000 inactive dumps, 100 to 200 square miles of contaminated ground water, and 50,000 drums of plutonium wastes in temporary storage. For 40 years, Hanford’s eight production reactors made plutonium for H-bombs, and in the process its contractors dumped plutonium, cesium, technetium, tritium, strontium and other isotopes into the air, soil, ground water and, astonishingly, even directly into the Columbia River — the drinking water source for downstream cities.

Hanford has 54 million gallons of the high-level liquids and sludge in 177 aged and decrepit tanks. In the 1980s, the Department of Energy (DOE) disclosed that up to 69 of the million-gallon tanks were leaking. February’s disclosure makes 75.

In 1998, the DOE said it expected all the tanks to leak eventually. Twenty years ago Newsweek declared that all “177 unlabeled tanks leak radioactive glop.” Several million gallons have since been removed for processing.

DOE spokeswoman Lindsey Geisler said late last month there was no immediate health risk from the newly discovered leaks. This reassurance is suspect since the DOE said for decades that tank wastes would take 10,000 years to reach the ground water. It got there in less than 40.

A similar but contemporary PR twist came Feb. 22, when Washington Gov. Jay Inslee said that the state would impose a “zero-tolerance” policy on radioactive waste leaking into the soil. Looking back at Hanford’s record, a “zero-containment” policy is more likely.

Radioactive Iceberg

This season’s leaks, which reportedly amount to 300 gallons per year, seem barely newsworthy in view of the colossal dumping that’s been done at Hanford. In the heyday of plutonium production, the Seattle Times has reported, “The DOE estimates that as many as 750,000 curies of radioactive iodine, xenon, cesium, strontium, plutonium and uranium may have been put into the Columbia River each year in the 1950s.”

A week earlier the paper reported said, “Many of the releases involved dumping of cooling water into the Columbia River.” Tim Connor of Hanford Watch in Spokane told the paper that daily releases of 430 curies noted in one 1946 report were, “the equivalent of a Three Mile Island accident every hour.”

DOE officials admitted in 1991 that managers dumped 440 billion gallons of radioactive liquids directly into the soil — using ditches, cribs, trenches and injection wells — and that hazardous waste had “fouled the Columbia River.” A 1965 report from Hanford among 19,000 pages of documents declassified in 1986 says “a total of 6 million curies” of radioactive material were dumped directly into the Columbia. In 2000, the DOE estimated that the tanks held 190 million curies of radioactivity.

Leaving aside the billions of gallons of nuclear poisons poured directly into it, the New York Times reported in Oct. 1997 that, “If leaks from the tanks reach the Columbia River through ground water, radioactive material would eventually be incorporated into the food chain and could expose people to radiation for centuries.”

And even with all these millions of curies thrown into the soil, a ground water manager at Hanford said in 2000 that the “worst” tank wastes, including technetium-99 and cobalt-60, are “probably still 20 years away” from the Columbia.

Twenty-five years since its reactors were shut down (they stopped making plutonium in 1987) leaking plutonium tank wastes are not the only way that Cold War cancers are still being dispensed from Hanford.

Wildfires burned 300 acres of the reservation in summer 2000, when Energy Secretary Bill Richardson rushed to say July 1, “There does not appear to be any contamination whatsoever.” Wrong again. By Aug. 3, plutonium was found to have been lofted to 10 far-flung areas, including five Eastern Washington city neighborhoods. Even then, Jerry Leitch, an EPA official at the time, told the Seattle Post that the amount of plutonium was below what’s considered a threat to health.Really? A single atomic particle of plutonium if inhaled can cause lung cancer.

The estimated cost of cleanup — the most expensive anti-pollution effort in history — has steadily increased. In 1989, DOE guessed it would take $57 billion and 50 years. By 1997 its estimate was over $200 billion.

Explosive Risks

The DOE has long worried that its waste tanks, at Hanford and at Savannah River, South Carolina, could explode due to the buildup of hydrogen gas or organic vapors. Indeed, a 1965 explosion at Hanford ruptured one tank that subsequently leaked 800,000 gallons of cooling water into the soil. Again on May 14, 1997, a tank holding plutonium processing chemicals blew up, sending its heavy steel lid and a plume of toxic gas through the roof.

Arjun Makhijani has said that an analysis by the DOE in 1978 put that chance of hydrogen explosions Savannah River’s tanks at 1-in-10,000. Chances of an explosion of organic vapors were ten times higher, or 1-in-1,000. Considering the number of tanks, the chance of one of them having an explosion was one-in-50 each year.

In 1986, researcher Michael Blain at Boise State University showed that women in Eastern Washington and Northern Idaho had elevated rates of thyroid and breast cancer and said there was a high probability that “the excess cancers are attributable to the release of radioactive iodine.”

Cancers, miscarriages and other health problems suffered by people in the area have been blamed on the deliberate spewing of 5,500 curies of iodine-131 to the atmosphere in a Dec. 3, 1949, experiment called “green run,” and on the offhand dispersal of 340,000 curies in 1945 alone.

In 1974, Dr. Samuel Milham in Washington’s state health department published his finding that men who had worked at Hanford had a 25 percent higher proportion of cancer deaths than for similarly aged men in other work.

And in 1977, the journal Health Physics published Alice Stewart, Thomas Mancuso and George Kneal’s finding of a 6 or 7 percent increased cancer effect in Hanford workers. About this increase Dr. Stewart said, “It wasn’t much of an effect but the shock was that there was any effect at all since the cancers were occurring at radiation exposure levels well below the official limit of five rads per year. It meant that the current standards for nuclear safety might be as much as 20 times too high.”

In 1990, a DOE analysis of radiation exposures downwind from Hanford found that infants and children were heavily contaminated because of drinking contaminated milk. The Hanford Environmental Dose Reconstruction Project found that 13,500 people may have received doses over 33 rads of iodine-131 and that infants and children closest to Hanford could have consumed between 650 and 3,000 rads. Even a single rad can cause thyroid cancer and other illnesses.

Not to put too fine a point on it: Hanford’s latest six leaks are the tip of its iceberg of radiation which is spreading to the Columbia River and beyond a plague of cancer and disease that will never come to an end.

This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license.

[-] 1 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

Radioactive groundwater in my homeland and Beatiful Columbia River where I fished salmon, steelhead in youth, stone throw from family home. Argh!!!! Rips my heart.

Thanks for sharing this, it was a 15 second spot on the news locally.

[-] 1 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

shits leaking,

Not happy.

Govnt says not be concerned. Ha ha

Isn't breast cancer increasing too in younger people?

we need to take care of ourselves, because government is not paying attention to our human needs:

good healthy food, clean water = L I F E

Initiative Democracy is a way for people to take action and make government work for people, by giving the people a say

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (22310) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

All cancers - But - not to worry - we have more cancer charities.

[-] 1 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES

Citizens for U.S. Direct Initiatives, joined by Citizens who independently communicate their support, hereby respectfully petition the U.S. Government for a redress of grievances:

Our government no longer represents the People.

Congressional candidates cannot get elected in today's information age unless they get major financing from wealthy special interests groups. Instead special interests now excessively influence many of our elected representatives and assure their continual reelection.

Our democracy is rapidly transforming into a surrogate plutocracy—a government in which the supreme power is lodged in the hands of wealthy special interests that arrange the continual reelection of representatives who govern as their surrogates.

This significantly harms the People in many and varied ways.

We ask that the Government redress these grievances, permit the People to regain control of their government, and promote the general Welfare.

This redress of grievances must put the voters’ interests ahead of congresspersons and special interests groups. Therefore the voters must control the solution. To achieve these objectives, we respectfully submit this Citizens' Initiatives Constitutional Amendment, ask that the Congress adopt it, and subsequently present it to the several states for ratification.

http://www.initiativesamendment.org/petition.htm

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (22310) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

GR8 comment - put it out on other social media too.

Still instead of the several states - I would say to the 50 states.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22310) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Back space - our government no longer represents the people. Backspace two or three times - you may not have to backspace the other two lines. But if so two backspaces a piece ( per line ) should be good to get the text into format.

To the 50 states for ratification.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

I like that sense of humor!

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (22310) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

If we could only get them to link-up to demand that recognized/identified causes of cancer be removed - well then - huge step forward towards ending cancer.

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

Apparently there's a lot of controversy right now in regards to how much the medical industry really wants to find a cure.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (22310) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Certain aspects of the medical community ( for profit based ) I can understand not wanting to remove causes or find a universal cure. They have tons of money being pumped in for continued research and treatment.

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

Yeah, especially treatment. There's little money to be made from a healthy population. "Treat, don't cure."

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (22310) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

And - there it is - Again - always - profits over people

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

Amazing how all roads seem to lead there, isn't it?

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (22310) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

The parasites are not very inventive - as for new games - just how they represent them - still - The Public should know better by now.

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

It seems like the public is slowly . . . slowly starting to wake up. I've seen some good signs recently.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (22310) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Many actually over this last year - I have hope for ALL of us - but this time around - there can be no leaving the process to take care of it's self.

[-] 3 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

Truth. Gotta stay for the long haul.

[-] 1 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

Thanks ows for analysis and consideration of this issue

Initiative Democracy http://www.cusdi.org/generic_state_bill.htm

....as looking state level will help us potentially side step some of the prospective fed level problems ...

  • also will looking "poll level" will help us potentially side step some of the prospective state level problems ...

  • if we initially step back... and simply initiate "direct democracy polling" first... no one will oppose ...

  • as these "direct democracy polls" begin to reach consensus levels ... say 60-70% on given legislation ...

  • it will become very hard for any representative to vote against their constituents stand ...

  • and the "direct democracy polling" will become norm with No opposition or fight... we simply need to do it...

Right BradB. We have people all over country, in each state, who, if they choose to, can work towards this, and work and planning it will take, but now we have a legal means, a legitimate way, and a place to refer people to a solution forward from mess with citizen involvement, and ultimately Initative Democracy, a possible new name for this movement or approach, it captures it's essence, and can give power back to people, more broadly than money out of politics, which can also help us in getting to this....

This will take many leaders, thanks ows

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 1 year ago

Yes. I have the cusdi.org website bookmarked and have been checking it out.

[-] 2 points by LeoYo (5909) 1 year ago

Amendment for a Democratic Congress

1. The Democratic Congress shall constitute all United States Citizens of the United States Electorate.

2. Barring conviction for either treason or for voting fraud, the right of all mentally coherent adult citizens to fully participate in the Democratic Congress shall be guaranteed, the violation of which shall be punishable with equivalence to an act of treason.

3. The Democratic Congress shall convene in groups of approximately 100 voters called a Kentum in the months of January, April, July, and October on the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd, Sundays of those months for deliberation on matters pertaining to the Local, State, and National governments, respectively.

4. The Library of the Democratic Congress shall exist at every level of government and shall include the duties of receiving bills proposed by the Kentums, the grouping of any similar bills into amendments of the same bill, and the dissemination of the bills in the order received to the Democratic Congress.

5. No more than three bills per level of government shall be disseminated to the Democratic Congress.

6. In the 24th week after a bill’s dissemination, the bill and any amendments to have arisen shall undergo Judicial Review.

In the 26th week after a bill’s dissemination, the bill and any of its amendments to have passed Judicial Review shall be presented to the Democratic Congress for final deliberation.

In the 52nd week after a bill’s dissemination, the Democratic Congress shall vote on the bill and its amendments.

7. Anyone to vote on a bill must vote on all amendments of the bill or completely abstain from voting on the bill.

8. Any amendments of a bill to receive greater than 50% of the votes, barring any conflict with any other amendments with a greater number of votes, shall become law. Any approved amendment in conflict with an amendment of a greater number of votes shall not become law.

9. Amendments to the Constitution of the United States shall be approved by a two-thirds majority of the Democratic Congress.

10. The Democratic Congress shall have the power to revoke any Executive Order at the corresponding level of government.

11. The Head of the Executive Branch at any level of government shall have no power of veto over the Democratic Congress at the corresponding level.

12. At every level of government, the Heads of the Executive Branch and the Chief Legal Officers shall be elected to four-year terms on the 4th Sunday of October for no more than three terms.

13. Candidates elected to office shall take office on the 4th Sunday of January.

14. Candidates for Public Office shall be non-partisan.

15. The provision of Patriot Dollars to the Democratic Congress for the sole funding of political campaigns shall be enacted to keep political campaigns free from the undemocratic influences of monied interests that shall be prohibited from funding any political advertisements outside of political campaigns.

16. The Office of the Attorney General of the United States shall be under the jurisdiction of the Democratic Congress and shall head the management of Congressional Oversight.

17. The decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States shall be unanimous, determined by a court of twelve Justices selected by the Democratic Congress, each Justice serving a maximum of twelve years.

18. Each State of the United States shall have a state bank collectively forming the Union Reserve Bank of the United States with a state appointed bank official from each State to compose the Union Board of Governors exercising all the responsibilities of the Open Market Committee and a Chairman of the Union Board of Governors under the jurisdiction of the Democratic Congress.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/amendment-for-a-democratic-congress/

[-] 2 points by LeoYo (5909) 1 year ago

Corporate-Approved State Bills Kick Low-Wage Workers While They're Down

Wednesday, 13 March 2013 12:23 By Michelle Chen, In These Times | Report

http://truth-out.org/news/item/15105-corporate-approved-state-bills-kick-low-wage-workers-while-theyre-down

President Obama called for a modest raise in the federal minimum wage to $9 in his State of the Union Address, and several Democratic legislators have upped his bid with a proposed increase to $10.10.

But an insidious effort to lower the wage floor is already underway much closer to the ground—in the state legislatures where right-wing lobbyists have been greasing the skids for years for an onslaught of anti-worker policies.

An extensive analysis recently published by labor advocacy organization the National Employment Law Project tracks more than 100 bills introduced in 31 states since January 2011 that “aim to repeal or weaken core wage standards at the state or local level." Each bears the fingerprint of notorious super-lobbying organization the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), which acts as a forum for “private sector leaders” to advise public officials. Most of the anti-worker bills were proposed by lawmakers directly linked to ALEC and include language that echoes that of "model legislation" developed by ALEC. Among the proposals are measures to undercut minimum wages for teenage workers, restrict overtime pay and repeal or ban local laws to improve working conditions.

ALEC has been called out by activists for pushing legislation that advances a classic right-wing agenda, from school privatization to rolling back healthcare reform. But the “wage suppression” tactics are a particularly callous attempt by ALEC-affiliated legislators to feed corporate profits by starving workers.

The wage-suppression laws are the latest strike in a war of attrition waged by ALEC and “private sector leaders” (as the organization calls them) against labor and workplace rights, aimed at forcing low-wage workers into even deeper economic insecurity.

While efforts to pass pro-worker policies in Washington have met with resistance, ALEC-sponsored bills seek to outlaw protections for workers at the state and local level, such as living wage ordinances and paid leave mandates. In several states, including Arizona, Connecticut, Maryland and Michigan, lawmakers have introduced ALEC-associated legislation to preempt prevailing wage laws, which ensure workers receive relatively fair wages in government-contracted work, including the public infrastructure projects that fuel local construction sectors.

NELP points out that only a minority of these bills have actually been enacted, but the sheer volume of anti-worker legislative proposals is nonetheless alarming at a time when the labor movement, which has traditionally struggled to beat back pro-corporate legislation, is weaker than ever.

The ALEC-inspired bills to weaken state minimum wage laws strike directly at state’s efforts to lift workers above the absurdly low federal minimum of $7.25 an hour. Some states have set base wages significantly higher than the federal minimum—like Vermont's minimum hourly wage of $8.60, adjusted automatically to keep pace with the cost of living.

Losing the state minimum wage could leave some workers completely unprotected, because they are excluded from the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Home health aides, for example, have long been exempted from federal minimum-wage rules, despite strong grassroots campaigns to include them, but are covered by minimum wage law in some states, including New York and Massachussetts. Their incredibly low wages—typically less than $10 an hour across the industry—could be bumped down further if state wage floors are ripped from under them.

Overtime pay is another labor issue on which states have filled gaps in federal law. While the FLSA guarantees time-and-a-half overtime pay for many sectors, some low-wage workers, including certain federally-exempted domestic service jobs, are entitled to that wage boost only under state law. Legislators in some states—including the “right to work” battlegrounds of Ohio and Michigan, where unions are under siege—have tried to allow certain employers to get around overtime by instead paying workers “comp time,” or time off equal to one regular hour of work, even if they work more than 40 hours a week. One ALEC-affiliated bill proposed in 2011 in Nevada explicitly sought to exclude home care workers from overtime laws.

Noting that conservatives will hold majority control of most state houses this year, NELP analyst Jack Temple says, “Since legislation to raise the federal minimum wage usually depends on momentum from the states, bills like these that weaken or repeal wage standards at the state level serve to undercut the momentum needed to pass national legislation in Congress.”

The measures to prevent local officials from raising the bar for workers betrays ALEC’s underlying agenda. Though the organization purports to champion the “rights” of local authorities to act independently of “big government,” NELP reports, it’s really more about emancipating big business from regulation:

Despite ALEC’s putative support for limited government and local sovereignty, living wage preemption proposals would establish state-wide mandates that severely restrict the freedom that city governments have to set standards for businesses that receive public support.

According to Temple, with so many wage-suppression bills clogging state legislatures, even if many do not pass:

The significance of these bills for advocates at the state level concerns the sheer amount of energy and time that must be spent fighting back bills like these, which drains the time and resources that could otherwise be dedicated to improving wage standards rather than just protecting the laws already on the books.

A bill creeping through the Florida legislature seems poised to undercut emerging efforts to improve workers’ lives. HB 655 would ban towns and cities from taking local initiatives to raise wages and give workers paid leave time, thus blocking key policies that could improve the lives of workers surviving on the state’s threadbare minimum wage of $7.79 (about a third of what a single parent of two would need to earn a decent living). On the heels of a recent campaign, led by local labor groups, to establish paid sick days in Miami-Dade County, the bill would effectively block local officials from granting workers the basic protection of not having to lose wages for calling in sick.

Florida is just one battleground in a nationwide movement to improve protections and wage standards for the working poor, as labor advocates push for raises in state and federal minimum wages in tandem with the White House's proposal. But NELP's report reveals how groups like ALEC have already gotten a head start in our state legislatures.

Without strong unions or even an adequate social safety net, minimum wage laws are the last line of defense between low-wage workers and abject poverty. So it makes sense that ALEC is now driving to pull the floor from under them; they might as well kick them when they’re down.

Originally published at InTheseTimes.com

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Great Thread gsw!

Thanks.

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

A "new" constitution can be created by an "Article V Convention"
You can read all about it on the alec / koch brothers web site

http://www.alec.org/publications/article-v-handbook/

1
How many of your list does alec / koch support?
2
Can you imagine any other alternative to abort the power of the 1%?
3
How are delegates chosen?
4
How do the "people" influence the delegates in the convention?
5
Is there ANYTHING the convention could NOT pass?
6
OWS's primary issue is money in politics - how will you you stop 1% / koch money from bribing delegates ?


Do you have the courage to SPECIFICALLY answer these questions?

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (22310) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

People support koch/alec/heritage/cato and you will be supporting your lives being reduced to NOTHING !!!

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Right on point. But you usually are.

I want to say though that gsw was also right on in bringing this issue up again. It has needed some serious clarification.

What say you?

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22310) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Agree - people need to examine what was meant to be and was put down in how our country was supposed to be run ( legally run ) - then look at the facts of what is actually happening - and get involved to return the country to the people and principals that it was founded on.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

Direct Democracy Initiatives are the People's only permanent and definite method to assure that government, Congress in particular, operates and knows that it must operate for the People's benefit and not for the benefit of Congress, Congresspersons, or their friends. All alternatives to Initiatives as the People's ultimate control of their government are temporary patches and, as the People are painfully aware, ultimately fall far short or fail completely. Congress is outstandingly good at finding and creating loopholes and end-runs around legislation that attempts to constrain its excesses. Therefore, one-time fixes can never be sufficient—the repair process must be permanent and ongoing to be effective. This plan proposes the incorruptible “Athenian” initiatives system NOT the easily corruptible “Oregon” initiatives system used today in 24 states and many cities. In October 2011, the LA Times commented on the "Oregon" system: "These days, signatures for initiatives are gathered and ballot measures are put to voters by powerful public employee labor unions trying to tighten their grip on Sacramento, by private businesses trying to shape the market and state regulations to their advantage, by billionaires who sometimes seem to push policy measures as a kind of hobby, by would-be politicians who try out their campaign chops on pet measures and, occasionally, by grass-roots groups trying to shape law the way they believe it should be." Later sections of this website explain Athenian initiatives in detail, clarify how they avoid Oregon initiative defects, and show why they are far more effective and trustworthy. Nevertheless, grass-roots State Initiatives are an important tool of the People to propose this constitutional amendment in the 24 states with initiatives—a high proportion of the 38 states needed to ratify a Constitutional Amendment. Gaining enough support in the balance of 14 needed out of the 26 remaining states without initiatives will require a final great hard-ball push from the People by state electoral vote, fund-raising, campaigning, referendum, protest, etc as necessary.

http://www.cusdi.org/index.html

[-] 1 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

I'm sure kochs won't like 16 to 23 above.

  • first we would need amendment all americans are delegates to convention. See 24 above.

I believe all americans should be delegates via electronic modern communication, approval of people's list of rights, as prior passed by citizens of states. This is to correct wealth inequality for America. Not cater to wealthy. Power rests with the people.

3 of 4 state legislatures have to approve ammendments.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

A new amendment -
to create a completely NEW way to create a new constitution would FIRST require 2/3 of the house + 2/3 of the senate followed by 3/4 of state legislators [ there are other - more difficult ways that have never been used ]


My option is not to tear up virtually everything -
but to get to the source of the problem -
1% capitalism owns our 99% democracy HJR29 is already in congress and is the first step to this solution


Bill HJR 29 Constitutional Amendment XXVIII Introduced in Congress
by Rep. Rick Nolan (D-MN) & Rep. Mark Pocan (D-WI)


Section 1. Artificial Entities Such as Corporations Do Not Have Constitutional Rights
The rights protected by the Constitution of the United States are the rights of natural persons only. Artificial entities established by the laws of any State, the United States, or any foreign state shall have no rights under this Constitution and are subject to regulation by the People, through Federal, State, or local law. The privileges of artificial entities shall be determined by the People, through Federal, State, or local law, and shall not be construed to be inherent or inalienable.

Section 2. Money is Not Free Speech
Federal, State, and local government shall regulate, limit, or prohibit contributions and expenditures, including a candidate's own contributions and expenditures, to ensure that all citizens, regardless of their economic status, have access to the political process, and that no person gains, as a result of their money, substantially more access or ability to influence in any way the election of any candidate for public office or any ballot measure. Federal, State, and local government shall require that any permissible contributions and expenditures be publicly disclosed. The judiciary shall not construe the spending of money to influence elections to be speech under the First Amendment.

This responds to hundreds of local & state resolutions and Move To Amend for a “We the People” Amendment - The movement for constitutional reforms that would end “corporate rule”. The Amendment clearly and unequivocally states that: Rights recognized under the Constitution belong to human beings only, and not to government-created artificial legal entities; and that Political campaign spending is not a form of speech protected under the First Amendment. Government belongs to the people & must not be for sale to the corporations and the wealthy and the 1% special interests. The Move To Amend coalition of nearly 260,000 people and hundreds of organizations has helped to pass nearly 500 resolutions in municipalities and local governments across the country calling on the state and federal governments to adopt this amendment. This bill is specifically different from the other proposals that have come forward in response to Citizens United because it also specifically addresses corporate personhhod. In every single community where Americans have had the opportunity to call for a Constitutional amendment to outlaw corporate personhood, they have voted to end “CP”. The Citizens United decision is not the cause, it is a symptom. We must remove big money and special interests from the legal and political process entirely with this amendment.

If you want to understand Citizens United & Corporate Personhood & the Amendment Process Please visit our OWS Amendment site: http://corporationsarenotpeople.webuda.com 70+ videos & 40+ documents on this issue from Sanders, Chomsky, Maher, Hedges, Lessig, Warren, Grayson, Hartmann, Hightower, etc

►►Support this bill◄◄
Write & email your congresspeople house:
http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/
senate:
http://www.senate.gov/reference/common/faq/How_to_contact_senators.htm

Rep Rick Nolan 202 225 6211

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

I think if we look at the outcome of citizen efforts to directly involve themselves in the political process over recent years we can form a conclusion regarding the outcome of an Article V Convention:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zgr3DiqWYCI

[-] -2 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

And your specific point? Otherwise you simply associate yourself with the twinkle-team, whom merely re-cycle Eagle Forum (Phyllis Schlafly) anti-Article V nostrums. Hanging out with the propagandists? Again?

You argue no avenue ought be foreclosed, yet clearly you do believe that our most powerful Constitutional means should not be exercised. Which is it?

GK: "I don't believe we should exclude Any approach, other than violence..."

At this point, considering the nationwide police attack on Occupy; the NDAA indefinite detainment provisions; planned drone usage in the US; the president's claim he can legally order any American killed anywhere, anytime; DHS purchases of CQB automatic weapons; stockpiling over one billion and a half rounds of ammunition; purchasing over 2700 MRAPs and bulletproof roadside checkpoints, it's difficult to disagree with your clause below...

GK: "...under the present condition of clear and present danger to our existing freedoms, under the seige of concentrated wealth against our institutions, and given the inadequacy of our current state of representation in government..."

You hit the nail on the head. Problem is, you bookend it with this:

GK: "I simply do not think the people of this nation, ..., can safely risk such a convention."

So just what is it, exactly, you'd have us do GK? Vote for more politicians? But, only the "right" ones of course... How very reasonable. Just another lesser of two evils?

All I think we ought do is ask everyone to vote on it. You know, walk in the polls on election day. And ask themselves if they consent to what we write above? Or Not!

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Your refference to the best posters on this site as "the twinkle team" says everything about where your alliegences really lie. And by the way, learn to make coherent arguments, rather than simply taking the words of others out of context and trying to spin them. That tactic also says everything about your intellectual bankrupsy.

There isn't anything more to say to you.

[-] -1 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Don't run off in a huff, hon...

[Removed]

[-] 4 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

nandoatake (2) joined, wow, today.

Surprize.

[-] -3 points by nandoatake (-18) 1 year ago

What does it matter when I joined? I'm just here expressing ideas. Do you have something against new users? Is attacking them part of your responsibilities as one of the forums self-appointed prosecutors?

Do you have any arguments that justifies that a person would have so little integrity that they would support Occupy but not support its intended goal, i.e. a revolution?

Do rabbis go to church, or do they go to the synagogue? Why do anti-anarchist Obama supporters even think of supporting Occupy? Note, I'm happy about it since it's their integrity problem, not mine. The more people we have supporting the toppling of the republic the better our chances of succeeding.

[-] 1 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

National Initiative Democracy would widen the revolution.

Also -- Not anti-anarchist, not pro-republican

Yes practical intelligible doable

Yes real democracy, yes democratic workplace

This could be a step in revolution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution

Right of revolution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_revolution

In political philosophy, the right of revolution (or right of rebellion) is the right or duty, variously stated throughout history, of the people of a nation to overthrow a government that acts against their common interests. Belief in this right extends back to ancient China, and it has been used throughout history to justify various rebellions, including the American Revolution and the French Revolution...

.... As the American Declaration of Independence in 1776 expressed it, natural law taught that the people were “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights” and could alter or abolish government “destructive” of those rights

[-] -3 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Good handoff boys...

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Yeah, you guys got a nice tandum tag-teem thing going here, don't you?

Clever ploy, trying to disguise it that way.

Who goes on shift now?

[-] -2 points by nandoatake (-18) 1 year ago

Stop hiding behind logical fallacies like all the other Twinkle Teamers. Use arguments. Back up your claims. Why should an anti-anarchist who believes in the republic support Occupy? Isn't integrity important to you. You stated above that you don't believe in a revolution, so why are you here?

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Hey Tr@shy, knew you'd show up.

How's it hanging?

[-] -1 points by nandoatake (-18) 1 year ago

Sigh... Guess you can't back up your illogical position. Another day of logical fallacies by the Twinkle Team as per usual. Well, thanks for your help in toppling the republic. Let's keep the anarchist revolution going.

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Another day of logical fallacies hell - another day of multiple personalities more like!

There's three of you here now, in some weird permutaion!!!

I begged you to get therapy!!!

[-] -1 points by nandoatake (-18) 1 year ago

The others aren't me.

I guess some have arguments, and some don't. It would have been nice to hear you defend your position, but I understand not everyone here is able to debate against a position contrary to their own. Have fun going around the forum twinkling like minded individuals.

[+] -4 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Gotta love it when ya get a nibble... GypsyKing

Come on GK, what bright political and Constitutional ideas do you have? Wait for the first drone strike?

Got any idea what's going on in the world? Know anything about currency? Petrodollars? Who's buying gold? Why?

Are you a real person? Party shill? Patriotic fool? Propagandist?

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

No, you would know more about currency, petrodollars, who's buying gold -like any member of the 1%.

[+] -4 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Come on down in the mud, GypsyKing, the slime is sublime... You could try arguing on the merits. A real person could... A wage slave cannot.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

"The slime is sublime."

Thank you for that very revelatory remark.

[+] -4 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Good handoff GK...

[-] 0 points by ProblemSolver (79) 1 year ago

The question is .. what do we do ?

Even with a complete change of representation .. lets say we choose a handful of trolls from this website to run the country .. ! how frightening is that .. ? There is a BIG problem we face .. one without a cure .. and honestly even with a Convention held ... which is possibly the one chance of making significant changes .. what will those changes be .. and in whose hands will they be in ..? I don't see an answer to this .. Sure the one percent are corrupt .. but with the experience on this website .. the lower portion of society is equally if not worst nasty .. in so many ways .. I wouldn't want to make the trade at this point .. The coruption and greed is horrible beyond all belief .. but still better than letting ***and her band of cohorts .. running the outcome of my life. So if the whole world goes up in flame / if we completely destroy the planet with environmental disaster .. I say we had our chance .. and the human race has proven without a doubt ..completely unworthy.. present company exception of course..

[-] -2 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

That's a very good question. I think it's up to each of us to decide for ourselves, and vote on it.

It's late and I'm really tired, I was up last night with GK. So I'd like to answer, if I may, with two links. The first, a broad overview imperfectly argued:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/keep-searching-for-ways-to-screw-the-corrupt-syste/

The second, third party information on Article V:

http://www.foa5c.org/

BTW, I don't think we have to worry about anyone from this forum being elected a delegate... But I've been wrong before.

[-] 1 points by ProblemSolver (79) 1 year ago

Thanks..

[-] 1 points by ProblemSolver (79) 1 year ago

But doesn't this condradict your belief in "money in politics?"

Let me explain..

You believe the government is badly influenced by the wealthy.. If this were true .. why would the government not have called an ARTICLE 5 Convention by now ..? You clearly feel a Convention would certainly favor the already powerful elite.. hell they would be given the keys to the whithouse .. with an article V

[-] 3 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

We need to demand congress give us power ... All power comes from the people...direct democracy national initiative powers-- votes of all citizens.

Then...look towards these and the list.

1 government representative workers receive minimum wage and are bureacrats, without power except to carry out will of the people, determined by national poll of citizens (vote).

2 Direct Democracy Now: They implement will of people via direct democracy.

3 majority of citizens can impeach federal representatives, automatic if they dont implement citizens direct democracy initiatives.

No PACS money for election, but public financing and equal access on public and private media.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (22310) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

We don't need to demand power/recognition from congress - we need to exercise OUR power OVER congress and vote assholes OUT!!!

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

This is truth. And if we want lasting change we must do the work of introspection, to see that we do not 30 years from now just become mirror images of our opponents, through the seduction of the lower forces of power, and money, and vanity, and all the other substitutes for what our deepest being really longs for.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22310) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Introspection = understand self

Extrospection (?) = understand the world around us ( what is going on near and far )

Empathy = understand another-s experience as if it was your experience.

Understand:

  • that except for looks and location - we are all very much the same.

  • that quality of life does not mean having more then everyone else is a better life - but that having those you love and love you and time to spend with each other "IS" living well.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Well, some things have come up in my life at the moment, and unfortunately I won't be able to post here again for awhile.

Thanks once again for all you've done here DKA. You message has been right on!

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22310) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Thank you for your time and participation - Be Well. {:-]) Thx 4 the compliments as well.

[-] -2 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Gawd I love when you speak the "truth" GypsyKing... Introspect on the fact that you haven't done a damn thing, and advocate doing nothing else... Unfortunately, events overtake us... and yet you are oblivious. Please, more pearls of wisdom...

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

No, it is you who haven't done a damned thing. You've never stepped out for one day in the real world, without the edifice of the society you want to destroy backing you, and you're foolish enough to think that if you bring the walls of civilization down it is your ilk that will come out on top!

You are a blessed idiot.

You go down to Juarez, where kids play in urine soaked streets, and you spend just one week living in the world you want to create, and when you are through, you tell me if people like you will come out on top!

You know nothing. You are a fool, you don't even know what is in your own best interests, You are a sheltered babe, without even the vauguest understanding of the hell you want to wreak.

Change your fucking diapers.

[-] -3 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

See GypsyKing, that's where you're wrong. I don't want to bring it all down. I merely hope we can avert a bloodbath as well as tyranny. Maybe do some real good.

I do understand all too well what might happen -- as well as what is happening right now. I've seen the third-world. I know exactly what we've done there and how. It's blowing back -- all our spooks are coming home to roost. You could call it karmic justice... unfortunately.

So what are we gonna do, before they disappear us?

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Do you think I can ignore the substance of this whole conversation we've had, and now believe you are as you now present yourself?

Wow, one of us is a blessed idiot, and I don't believe it's me.

[-] -3 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

The problem is GK, you haven't brought any substance to the conversation. Problem is, you don't know anything about what I think, because you're too busy rattling your own cage.

See, the difference between us is that I trust the democratic process we have, however imperfect, if we, the people, use it consciously and deliberately to end elite dominance. But that means growing up, making hard choices, compromising... You know, all those things for which democracy is noted. Problem is, we don't have a plethora of choices, Constitutionally speaking, and time is not on our side...

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Go on, finish getting drunk. I'm now really through with you.

[-] -3 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Whatsa matter GypsyKing, employer got your tongue?

[-] 1 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

It's problematic. Incumbents win like 93 percent of time.

Anyway, after the winner has put up with all the crap to get elected, the system will grind him up.

Then he is free to vote how he wishes. There's no guarantee he'll vote as he implied.

There's no guarantee he would implement People' Policies.

Direct democracy would be cleaner, if we could get it.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/direct-democracy-amendment-now-if-its-good-enough-/#comment-936628

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22310) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Direct democracy still needs representatives - difference being though - that the representatives can only support what has been decided by those that selected them as a rep. To do else would be to quit their job ( essentially ).

[-] 1 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

Right --- they should receive the national minimum wage.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (22310) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

A minimum "living" wage - tied to inflation - same as anyone - that is if we had a national minimum "living wage" - and if it were tied to inflation.

[-] 3 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

Here's my thoughts

21 Flexible living wage for all workers: (through citizens members all members of public coops in community ownership of 51 percent of all corporation operating in usa, or nationalized public coops where all citizens have a voice, ownership, and dividend credits to assure the reach a living wage and meet human needs through: oil and minerals, utilities, food, housing, education coops, whose proceeds and credits help ensure living wage and basic needs credits as human rights) see 22 and 23 below for further details on how funded.

For example ...Say we decide $75,000 is a living wage. ( or some relative equivalent if we have universal Medicare, and universal coop food, housing and energy credits to bring one close to this level, assuming the people decided cooperative of the major resources, owned by all, is a good idea and is best for whole country, the general welfare). Students would not earn full living wage in housing, but might earn more credits toward education, so it would balance out. This would be to state schools, most likely, but not exclusively). Also the $75,000 figure might be for a forty year old. A more modest living wage, say $40,000 for a twenty five year old, $25,000 for below 25 years. This to be paid for with 80 percent income tax on earnings over a 400,000 a year, and from credits we all earn as members, citizens of government coops in food, energy, housing, agriculture, education, etc. Slackers, and the are some, would be towards lower end of living wage scale, more of a maintain acne wage.

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (22310) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Good thoughts - I was thinking that Universal Health care ( no more for profit health insurance or care facilities ) would be a step forward. Universal education ( again no more for profit institutions ). Not for profit utilities. Any 40 hour per week job - needs to pay a minimum living wage to pay for housing food clothing transportation utilities and vacations and provide enough for savings to be set aside.

This living wage concept would put more money out into the economy - so business's would have a broader customer base ( more sales ). A healthy full circle.

[-] 2 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

Steps like those truly lift all, which is not direction of last 30 years.

Helping people help selves is good value and role of government, to establish for the social welfare of all (not welfare as in handouts, unless to those truly not able to contribute to society) but means to real hope- health, work, intrinsic value of human life.

I don't see how things like this are not obvious.

People owned Coops seeded by by government or people's banks could be a way to help get real living wage too, which kind of varies at different life stages, hence the flexible living wage idea, which starts at about 25,000 a year for twenty year old, in my book.

In some parts of country that would go farther, but if we all have credits in coops and national resources, to bring all up to minimum living wage, government could and should help in this, in my opinion.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (22310) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

government could and should help in this, in my opinion.

What the hell is government for? If not for the running of a healthy ( for ALL ) society!!!

[-] 1 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

Right.

If one state of citizens could get a list of People's Rights on a state level as a model for other states, and the nation.

WA state has a citizens initiative, with enough signatures, initiatives get on the ballot state ballot, such as legalize MJ. Our state has 9.00 minimum wage now. Come visit WA.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (22310) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

The Constitution ( as it exists ) is our template for state and federal actions - IN support of The People - when also including the repeal of person-hood to corpoRATions..

[-] -1 points by nandoatake (-18) 1 year ago

No, we have to demolish the congress and the whole republic with it. If we have power to exercise, then it should be by ourselves, and for ourselves. Viva anarchy!

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (22310) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Anarchy is not the absence of structure - it is more that it is equality of all within a structure. Structure - Not - Chaos.

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

The movement FOR an Article V Convention is FUNDED by the koch brothers.
Can you answer my 6 questions?
I know the answers - do you?
or are you afraid to give honest answers?

[-] -1 points by ProblemSolver (79) 1 year ago

Whats preventing an Article V from occcuring ? are not all politicians "bought off" .. ? Do the Elite want an Article V?

[-] 3 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

If the koch brothers are the elite - yes they want a convention
A "new" constitution can be created by an "Article V Convention" You can read all about it on the alec / koch brothers web site

http://www.alec.org/publications/article-v-handbook/

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (22310) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Yep - support Move to Amend and like campaigns PEOPLE - the amendment to happen is spelled out.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (22310) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Providing your own intro?

This one is a master of distraction and disinformation not to mention legend in his own mind: Probably.

[-] -1 points by ProblemSolver (79) 1 year ago

..Explain something.. Do you want an Article V? Are the elite trying to avoid an article V ..

I read the front page on the post you linked.. It looks as thought ALEC wants to stop the Government from freely spending and increasing the debt.. The Elite would not want this .. ? The Elite likes when the Government spends ..Billions .. So I am lost on where you stand on all this .. what is your fight ? .. You are against an Article V convention ? You seem to be against ALEC? ..What EXACTLY do you want ?

[-] 5 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

The elites - koch - alec & grover want to shrink govt any way they can - and have a balanced budget amendment and they believe t hey can continue their acquisition of America by buying a new constitution.
It could incluse zero cap gains tax & zero inheritance tax & privatization of all schools.


I want to sever the connection between capitalism & democracy.


Bill HJR 29 Constitutional Amendment XXVIII Introduced in Congress
by Rep. Rick Nolan (D-MN) & Rep. Mark Pocan (D-WI)


Section 1. Artificial Entities Such as Corporations Do Not Have Constitutional Rights
The rights protected by the Constitution of the United States are the rights of natural persons only. Artificial entities established by the laws of any State, the United States, or any foreign state shall have no rights under this Constitution and are subject to regulation by the People, through Federal, State, or local law. The privileges of artificial entities shall be determined by the People, through Federal, State, or local law, and shall not be construed to be inherent or inalienable.

Section 2. Money is Not Free Speech
Federal, State, and local government shall regulate, limit, or prohibit contributions and expenditures, including a candidate's own contributions and expenditures, to ensure that all citizens, regardless of their economic status, have access to the political process, and that no person gains, as a result of their money, substantially more access or ability to influence in any way the election of any candidate for public office or any ballot measure. Federal, State, and local government shall require that any permissible contributions and expenditures be publicly disclosed. The judiciary shall not construe the spending of money to influence elections to be speech under the First Amendment.

This responds to hundreds of local & state resolutions and Move To Amend for a “We the People” Amendment - The movement for constitutional reforms that would end “corporate rule”. The Amendment clearly and unequivocally states that: Rights recognized under the Constitution belong to human beings only, and not to government-created artificial legal entities; and that Political campaign spending is not a form of speech protected under the First Amendment. Government belongs to the people & must not be for sale to the corporations and the wealthy and the 1% special interests. The Move To Amend coalition of nearly 260,000 people and hundreds of organizations has helped to pass nearly 500 resolutions in municipalities and local governments across the country calling on the state and federal governments to adopt this amendment. This bill is specifically different from the other proposals that have come forward in response to Citizens United because it also specifically addresses corporate personhhod. In every single community where Americans have had the opportunity to call for a Constitutional amendment to outlaw corporate personhood, they have voted to end “CP”. The Citizens United decision is not the cause, it is a symptom. We must remove big money and special interests from the legal and political process entirely with this amendment.

If you want to understand Citizens United & Corporate Personhood & the Amendment Process Please visit our OWS Amendment site: http://corporationsarenotpeople.webuda.com 70+ videos & 40+ documents on this issue from Sanders, Chomsky, Maher, Hedges, Lessig, Warren, Grayson, Hartmann, Hightower, etc

►►Support this bill◄◄
Write & email your congresspeople house:
http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/
senate:
http://www.senate.gov/reference/common/faq/How_to_contact_senators.htm

Rep Rick Nolan 202 225 6211

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

They aren't elites.

They are criminal entities who have bought a free ride.

They are going to prison one day. Keep that in mind.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 1 year ago

Yes, I believe they do. We have to be smarter than that.

[-] -1 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

GK, and the boys, can't acknowledge this contradiction, much less answer it... It's an inconvenient truth so to speak...

[-] -1 points by ProblemSolver (79) 1 year ago

I have to hand it to the Founders, Article V gives us a chance to start with a clean slate .. practically above the law.. I would be afraid to step into that ring without FULL back up.

[-] -2 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

The only way to go there is with full public backup. I say we need to vote on it. But no matter how well prepared we are, it will be a dogfight. No doubt about that... This is a frightening place, and circumstance, to find ourselves.

You might find the following comment interesting:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/what-would-a-new-constitution-say/#comment-941540

[-] 2 points by ProblemSolver (79) 1 year ago

WE need our Governments to become involved in Commerce.

Non-profit Commerce. Funded by our tax dollars.

To end the monopoly of Corporations whom have bled the wealth of the people to poverty.

[-] 2 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

Yes great. Included above in the list. Very good.

That could deny the uber rich more of our money....sound like giant coop we are all members and it is connected to government, which is us.

If we, the citizens, own our resources - minerals, oil, and don't give them away, but use the proceeds to help establish government coops where all Americans have coownership, rights to credits from proceeds. Coops in agriculture and groceries, education, transportation, and production, to help proved living wage for all.see 21 above.

I still like the minimum living wage idea for government workers. That would boost minimum to a living wage, and not make government workers superior in wages than a janitor. Also a 4 day maximum work week.

[-] 1 points by ProblemSolver (79) 1 year ago

I like the idea of Equal-Pay.

We the people are certainly capable of efficiently running the companies we work for.

Let's make it Constituional.

If Corporations are people.. well than Government is people too ..

If Corporations can operate businesses , well than Governments can operate businesses too !

We the Government- We the People.

[-] 1 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

That would help end hierarchy, and is now in my list above, as I interpret your idea.

How about a youth wage of half " living wage" unless they have a kid, for people under 18, or married, such as for dependent worker, or apprentice wage till 20 years old.

[-] 1 points by ProblemSolver (79) 1 year ago

No.

A six year old going to school will receive the same pay as a full grown adult.

The student will probably only be in school six hours per day? .. where as the adult .. may work 10 - 12 hours per day.. so in the end the adult will have earned nearly twice the student... Adults are bigger , stronger, and perhaps have more expenses ..

[-] 1 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

Good reasoning. They might then earn a proportion or percent of the living wage according to hours worked.

Also, i do believe bonuses for time on job, experience, and performance and duties, would not be out of line.

Say we decide $75,000 is a living wage. ( or some relative equivalent if we have universal Medicare, and universal coop food, housing and energy credits to bring one close to this level, assuming the people decided cooperative of the major resources, owned by all, is a good idea and is best for whole country, the general welfare).

Students would not earn full living wage in housing, but might earn more credits toward education, so it would balance out. This would be to state schools, most likely, but not exclusively).

Also the $75,000 figure might be for a forty year old. A more modest living wage, say $40,000 for a twenty five year old, $25,000 for below 25 years.

This to be paid for with 80 percent income tax on earnings over a 400,000 a year, and from credits we all earn as members, citizens of government coops in food, energy, housing, agriculture, education, etc.

Slackers, and the are some, would be towards lower end of living wage scale, more of a maintain acne wage.

[-] 2 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

Constitution would say all branches of government are to implement the will of the people, and receive The national minimum wage for their services.

Might be one way to raise wages.

[-] 1 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

"we haven't been represented"

http://www.nationalmemo.com/poll-even-republicans-support-government-spending-to-create-jobs/

77 percent of Americans want Government to give more to jobs creation,

majority support from both parties.

[-] 1 points by LeoYo (5909) 1 year ago

1. No formula business outlet shall exceed the size of the largest local business outlet of the same category.

2. The number of business outlets for any formula business shall be limited to 1 outlet per every 50,000 inhabitants of the local municipal population.

3. All municipal businesses shall have local bank accounts in which their profits shall be retained within the municipality and not be exported to anyplace outside of the municipality.

4. All offshore exports to the municipality shall derive from foreign retail companies owned by natural born citizens of those countries.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/free-democracy-amendment/

[-] 1 points by LeoYo (5909) 1 year ago

1. Barring violation to the rights of others, the right of a free people to be secure in their individual decisions of personal safety, ingestion, expression, activity, association, and property, shall not be violated without due process of law.

2. The freedom from direct taxation being necessary for the right of a free people to be sovereign in the ownership of their labor and of their property, the imposition of direct taxes shall be prohibited at all levels of government, allowing for only indirect taxation and voluntary withholding as a tax payer’s voluntary means of funding selected social welfare services.

3. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall exist within the United States or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

4. Barring conviction for either treason or for voting fraud, the right of all mentally coherent adult citizens to vote at all levels of government shall be guaranteed, the violation of which shall be punishable with equivalence to an act of treason.

5. The right of a politically free and democratic people to engage in Initiative, Referendum, and Recall, to have all of their votes counted, and to be without the undemocratic imposition of an electoral college, shall be guaranteed at all levels of government.

6. The provision of Patriot Dollars to voters for the sole funding of political campaigns at all levels of government shall be enacted to keep political campaigns free from the undemocratic influences of monied interests that shall be prohibited from funding any political advertisements outside of political campaigns.

7. The offering or acceptance of any item or service of value including but not limited to the offering or acceptance of future employment involving a public official or candidate for public office of any branch or level of government shall be prohibited and punishable with equivalence to an act of treason.

8. All communication to take place between a lobbyist and a public official shall be public and open to the press, the violation of which shall be punishable with equivalence to an act of treason.

9. The separation of corporation and state being necessary for the independence of a democratic government in serving the needs of the people, no public service shall be under the management of a private sector entity and each State of the United States shall have a state bank collectively forming the Union Reserve Bank of the United States with a state appointed bank official from each State to compose the Union Board of Governors exercising all the responsibilities of the Open Market Committee.

10. Any private business acquiring a national market share large enough to be a detriment to the national economy upon the business' failure shall undergo divestment into smaller units assessed to be economically secure for fallibility in the national economy.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/free-democracy-amendment/

[-] 1 points by LeoYo (5909) 1 year ago

In whatever state you're in, try to involve the PIRGs (such as WashPIRG in Washington State). They are already organized for gathering information and disseminating it to people.

[-] 1 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

that's good info. Thanks

http://www.washpirg.org/

[-] 1 points by LeoYo (5909) 1 year ago

And since faith in representatives at all levels of government has already failed the masses, I see no alternative other than the utilization of affidavits to be applied to aspiring candidates. Whether people realize it or not, that is an application of direct democracy already within the power of the people. Permanent direct democracy can be attained with certainty if people are willing to utilize a temporary form of direct democracy to achieve that end.

[-] 1 points by redandbluestripedpill (333) 1 year ago

ART5 w/preparatory amendment has the authority for the people to be "the masters of the congress and the court" (Lincoln) for the purpose of "altering or abolishing".

[-] 2 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

Direct Democracy Initiative Amendment Site

http://www.cusdi.org/index.html

This goup is working on this.

[-] 1 points by redandbluestripedpill (333) 1 year ago

Excellent! They are on the right track. They need a Boule to review the logical need for preparatory amendment.

[-] 0 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

I'd like to talk sometime. I've read some of your posts and think we have some common interests. But it's very late and I'm beat and have to get up early. Some other time?

[-] 1 points by redandbluestripedpill (333) 1 year ago

Yes. I appreciate your knowledge of politics and legal process and so far few understand the implication of constitutional intent and preparation for ART5.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

are day to day lives are determined by the money we have

[-] 1 points by HCabret (-327) 1 year ago

See The Common Law Republic.

[-] 1 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

Looks like great ideas for a classic city-state republic.

[-] 1 points by HCabret (-327) 1 year ago

similar.......yes, did you read it?

[-] 2 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

Twice

Pro... Mostly direct democracy in Collegium

? the meeting space may need to be large for a country, for Collegium.

Also on laws-enforcement- trials....that part became muddled for me.

[-] 1 points by HCabret (-327) 1 year ago

There wouldnt be a single nationwide collegium. There would likely be hundreds of thousands, if not millions of collegiums in the US alone.

What part about the trials confused you?

I would like to see OWS adopt some of my ideas if possible.

[-] 0 points by redandbluestripedpill (333) 1 year ago

Nice fantasy, accurate issues etc., but no legal process.

[-] 2 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

State by state in state legislative bodies, up to national level, by state initiative.

We have citizens initiatives here in Washington State.

.......Initiative and referendum rights are written into the state constitutions of several U.S. states, particularly those in the west. And a number of jurisdictions within states that lack statewide plebiscite rights have various forms of initiative, referendum, and recall. The federal government of the United States of America has not formalized any of these rights.

Good criticism. It may be all a dream, legally. Without dream and vision, there is no progress except random chance.

[-] 1 points by redandbluestripedpill (333) 1 year ago

Your info is good. A number of states, perhaps near 1/2, have initiative process or something like it.

And you echo how the fed has not accepted any referendum capacity.

Consider: What you propose embodies quite a bit of the same political action in the same places as ART5 would, if done properly.

[-] 0 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 1 year ago

“Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government.”

Most of the people are misinformed or completely uninformed. They can be trusted to vote for one of two parties. That's about it.

[-] -1 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

If you don't mind my asking, have you considered how to change that?

[-] 2 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 1 year ago

Sure! Great question. Number one. Teach people how to think for themselves. How to question any fact or idea and spot what isn't true and replace it with what is.

Our schools, our media, our churches, and our governments fill our heads with facts and figures, ideas and desires, but if we don't have the ability to question their accuracy or honesty, we are nothing more than mindless robots, totally at the mercy of our programmers. It must be made clear to everyone that they've been brainwashed for decades, it's time to think for ourselves, to stand up and say "for what possible reason" instead of blindly obeying and being led like sheep.

What are we taught from birth? That we are consumers, or voters, or taxpayers, or part of some other group, while the simple fact is we are none of these, we are human beings, whose purpose is not to serve the few masters who are the beneficiaries of this groupthink mentality, but to serve ourselves.

On Facebook we can challenge our friends and family with facts and ideas that they would never hear on the MSM or might refuse to hear from anyone else. Forums such as this throw our opinions and beliefs into the furnace of debate (usually) and burn away all that is not true (hopefully).

On the street, at work, in super market lines, on T shirts, even more people can be reached and their minds opened to the fact that they are a thousand times more powerful than they've been taught, if they only begin to reason instead of accept, and act instead of submit.

[-] 1 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Great answer.

"Teach people how to think for themselves. How to question any fact or idea and spot what isn't true and replace it with what is." Have you considered how to implement this from a practical point of view? For example, the necessary social conditions... (what you propose is subversive).

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 1 year ago

The logical place to teach people how to think for themselves would be in public school, second in importance to reading. Instead of memorization, they would learn how to form independent ideas, find the flaws in a persuasive argument, or how to determine what is right or wrong using common sense.

It would be fought tooth and nail by those who would most likely lose their influence because of it, governments, political parties, religious groups, the military, corporate giants, mostly any organization that depends on deception and mind control to influence and manipulate large groups of individuals.

Human society as a whole hates the nail that dares to stick it's head out of the plank. What we need is to have so many nail heads sticking out of that plank, that even the flush headed nails will rise up and realize that it was just to keep the elite from stubbing their toes as they walked on top of us.

[-] -1 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

I agree. Do you think we can we do something now, something "educational", via the electoral process? Maybe something viral?

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 1 year ago

If we could get all of the groups that are pursuing disparate agendas and instead focus their resources toward the common goal of waking up the American people from their MSM induced trance, it would benefit them all in the long run. If the people are asleep, how can positive change ever be achieved?

[-] -1 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

I agree. Do you recall what I advocate? This is why...

[-] 0 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 1 year ago

What do you advocate?

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 1 year ago

Here's a more powerful way to withdraw our consent to be governed that doesn't require us to wait four years till the next election. Our Federal taxes can be withheld as a means to show our displeasure and contempt for the present system of endless war, endless corruption, and endless domination by the wealthy. Withdrawing our dollars from their treasuries withdraws our consent to be governed in a way that can't be miscounted, blocked by any court, or bought off. Money is the source of their power, not votes. If we want to kill the beast, stop feeding it.

[-] 0 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Congressional elections occur every two years. There is a general election next year.

And I agree that "[M]oney is the source of their power, not votes." Votes are the source of our power.

Moreover, you raise an interesting point. "Withdrawing our dollars from their treasuries withdraws our consent to be governed in a way that can't be miscounted, blocked by any court, or bought off." I do not disagree.

However, don't forget the battleground... "If we could get all of the groups that are pursuing disparate agendas and instead focus their resources toward the common goal of waking up the American people from their MSM induced trance, it would benefit them all in the long run. If the people are asleep, how can positive change ever be achieved?"

Effective tax resistance and protest will require exactly the same widespread public participation... A massive number of citizens must participate, or else those brave few will face the full weight and wrath of the tax man. Privately. Individually. Alone.

In the voting booth we are asserting our rights, not asking government's permission.

"Teach people how to think for themselves. How to question any fact or idea and spot what isn't true and replace it with what is."

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 1 year ago

Nearly every voter who enters a voting booth has the invisible hand of the wealthy political contributors directing their choice. 98.5% of the voters voted for just two parties in the last Presidential election. It's a clear example of just how thoroughly our thoughts are controlled, and for just $2 billion.

"Votes are the source of our power". In reality, whoever influences the casting of the vote is the one who possesses the power.

The most visible person I know of who's currently refusing to pay federal income tax is Cindy Sheehan, the war protester whose son was killed in Iraq in 2004. For the past 5 years or more she refused to pay Federal income tax in protest of the war and was summoned to court in 2011. She fought back and the IRS has relented.

http://sniggle.net/Experiment/index5.php?entry=28Feb13

More ways to resist paying taxes here:

http://nwtrcc.org/how_to_resist.php

[-] 0 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

""Votes are the source of our power". In reality, whoever influences the casting of the vote is the one who possesses the power."

That's why I consider a stark choice and viral campaign. They cannot defend a principled attack, based on the Constitution and in voting booth. That threatens their legitimacy. Anything they do to oppose such a vote discredits them. And that's the point.

How would you vote?

As an American citizen, make a yes or no decision based on what you think, and what you want to happen next. The question is:

Either support the twin-party political status quo and thus consent to all their bad acts you claim to hate and detest...

or

Reject their hate and war and poverty by voting to withdraw your consent to be governed under the Constitution in the next general election.

Perhaps the one thing on which we can all agree is that people really ought decide in the voting booth.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 1 year ago

What do you mean by a stark choice?

[-] -1 points by vaprosvyeh (-400) 1 year ago

And what of the Federal taxes withheld from paychecks by employers? Companies are not going to violate the law and risk those penalties. If you refuse to turn in a W-4, your employer will withhold taxes from your paycheck at the highest rate possible.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 1 year ago
[-] 0 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Answering here...

"What do you mean by a stark choice?"

How would you vote?

As an American citizen, make a yes or no decision based on what you think, and what you want to happen next. The question is:

Either support the twin-party political status quo and thus consent to all their bad acts you claim to hate and detest...

or

Reject their hate and war and poverty by voting to withdraw your consent to be governed under the Constitution in the next general election.

That fully qualifies as a stark choice, don't you think?

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 1 year ago

If the stark choice you're really aiming for is an Article V convention, then no thanks. There are better choices available, completely out of the slimy manipulative hands of the current power structure.

[-] 1 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

Personally, I am happy the guy in the bully pullpit isnt Mit, up there being an social idito, selling out country to his rich friends.

So despite my vote for a non-corporate Rocky, Mine was a throw away, protest vote.

I don't support duopoly, but to withdraw consent to be governed from the who messed up system? Yes, but I want to find a way out of the mess and muck.

anarchy's not happening soon. maybe later

[-] 0 points by Builder (4202) 1 year ago

"Reason, instead of accept; act, instead of submit."

If we can just overcome apathy, then we're on our way.

As I said in a post just a minute ago, when people start to realize that their vote actually means something again, more people will become interested in the political process.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 1 year ago

The "mothers milk of politics" is now 180 proof. Why bother to vote when neither candidate is sober and the voters who do vote think the smell of whiskey on the candidates breath is fine cologne.

[-] 0 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Replying here...

jrhirsch:

If the stark choice you're really aiming for is an Article V convention, then no thanks. There are better choices available, completely out of the slimy manipulative hands of the current power structure.

DSamms:

Please describe these "better choices"... I'm open to hearing as many points of view as possible.

I cannot tell if Mitt would be better or worse than Obama. The significant policies would not change. That's what matters. Control of policy. And you didn't throw your vote away. It was counted. I voted for Jill. But there were no "good" choices in my congressional races.

A Georgetown U. professor called this the coin theory -- that the parties should be as alike as two sides of the same coin, so the people could throw the rascals out in any election, with the other party, without effecting or changing policy. That control of policy and political stability are the two most prized elite possessions.

Yes, "withdraw consent to be governed from those who messed up the system." Call an Article V convention. Publicly debate amendment proposals in the run-up to the election. Make twin party candidates compete with Constitutional philosophy and ideas. The cream will rise to the top -- proposals and proposers and debaters.

Ignite public imagination. Frame the issues, ask the question and let people educate themselves. Trust democracy. That's what everyone wants, isn't it? Direct democracy? A choice? This is it. Make it viral.

After the election, if we we prevail, we elect local delegates, our candidates -- debaters and proposers, in existing congressional districts, same as any general election, to the convention. They debate and propose amendments in public convention. Any amendments they propose must be ratified by popular vote in 3/4s of the states. Constitutional democracy in action. It's not perfect, but its possible. And its Constitutional, not anarchy.

Ask yourself this question:

As an American citizen, make a yes or no decision based on what you think, and what you want to happen next. The question is:

Either I support the twin-party political status quo and thus consent to all their bad acts I claim to hate and detest...

or

I Reject their hate and war and poverty by voting to withdraw my consent to be governed under the Constitution in the next general election.

Perhaps the one thing we can all agree on is that we, the people ought decide this in the voting booth.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Good idea gsw.

Rather than new, care if I consider amending our current one?

[-] 2 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

We should start touring to all the state capitals to drum up support, by bus or car pools this summer.

  • The media and regular citizens would be awakened.

You are right, DSamms.

  • Amending is easier than abolishing. We have right to amend, so they say.
[-] 0 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

"We have right to amend, so they say."

I would like to help make that happen...

[-] 1 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

If we start planning now, get people together in cars to show up at capitals, maybe camp out on the commons, spreading our list of grievances.

are the reps working in summers?

We could make 4 state circuits, or plan to be at certain capitals on certain days, to have numbers.

We should also gather signatures of real humans, not online petition, as we go.

[-] 0 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

From the interoccupy website:

http://interoccupy.net/calendar/

Saturday, March 9th

3:00pm — ARTICLEV.ORG, CONVENTION TO PROPOSE AMENDMENTS

Sign up for the call if you wish. They are considering something exactly along those lines.

[-] 1 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

Great. Does the link work on your end?

I've been having issues with google and pages loading.

[-] 0 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

No, I tried it before posting. Well, imagine that...

[-] 0 points by satohirona (-20) 1 year ago

The new constitution:

  1. Religion is strictly forbidden
  2. Representatives are strictly forbidden
  3. Hurting other people in any way shape or form is forbidden
  4. Cooperation is mandatory
  5. Full implementation of anarchy throughout the land
[-] 3 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

Interesting

1 Why forbid religion. Might make it more appealing?

2 representatives must implement will of people, and only receive minimum wage, or be fired.

3 good one

4 cooperation in what?

5 anarchy of work and government... Maybe want to call it democracy of work and government, but that semantics.

Thank you for participating.

[-] 0 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

Answering here...

gsw:

"Personally, I am happy the guy in the bully pullpit isnt Mit, up there being an social idito, selling out country to his rich friends.

"So despite my vote for a non-corporate Rocky, Mine was a throw away, protest vote.

"I don't support duopoly, but to withdraw consent to be governed from the who messed up system? Yes, but I want to find a way out of the mess and muck.

"anarchy's not happening soon. maybe later"

DSamms:

I cannot tell if Mitt would be better or worse than Obama. The significant policies would not change. That's what matters. Control of policy. And you didn't throw your vote away. It was counted. I voted for Jill. But there were no "good" choices in my congressional races.

A Georgetown U. professor called this the coin theory -- that the parties should be as alike as two sides of the same coin, so the people could throw the rascals out in any election, with the other party, without effecting or changing policy. That control of policy and political stability are the two most prized elite possessions.

Yes, "withdraw consent to be governed from the who messed up system." Call an Article V convention. Publicly debate amendment proposals in the run up to the election. The cream will rise to the top -- proposals and proposers and debaters. Ignite public imagination. Frame the issues, ask the question and let them educate themselves. Trust democracy. That's what everyone wants, isn't it? Direct democracy? A choice? This is it. Make it viral.

After the election, if we we prevail, we elect local delegates, our candidates -- debaters and proposers, in existing congressional districts, same as any general election, to the convention. They debate and propose amendments in public convention. Any amendments they propose must be ratified by popular vote in 3/4s of the states. Constitutional democracy in action. It's not perfect, but its possible. And its Constitutional, not anarchy.

Ask yourself the question:

As an American citizen, make a yes or no decision based on what you think, and what you want to happen next. The question is:

Either I support the twin-party political status quo and thus consent to all their bad acts I claim to hate and detest...

or

I Reject their hate and war and poverty by voting to withdraw my consent to be governed under the Constitution in the next general election.

Perhaps the one thing on which we can all agree is that people really ought decide this in the voting booth.

BTW, you doubt there is financial tsunami rushing silently toward us, below the MSM radar...?

[Deleted]

[-] 0 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

War all over the globe is the wrong way. Obama's foreign policy people were recycled from Bush.

I agree.

[-] 0 points by HCabret (-327) 1 year ago

Sounds like Soviet Russia to me.

Would freedom also be strictly forbidden? What about dissent? or creativity? or innovation? or change?

would thinking be strictly forbidden?

[-] -2 points by DSamms (-294) 1 year ago

I take exception to number three:

"Hurting other people in any way shape or form is forbidden."

If we're destined to torture and kill god, we'll need to keep in practice...

[-] -3 points by satohirona (-20) 1 year ago

True indeed. We must add a new rule.

  • Torturing God then killing him is our primary goal as a responsible society.
[-] -1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

What replaces the political duopoly exactly?

Here is a suggestion for the list, much better than just a one time trillion dollar coin - How money comes into the system is very important. Instead of the primary source being bank lending, it should enter the system through the creation of real wealth like infrastructure, job creation, education, health care, etc. This also takes power away from banks having such a large control over the economy. I suggest Kucinich's HR 2990. A fantastic read if you've never read it - http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/hr2990

One of the causes of inflation is when you create new money without new wealth.

This is an excellent post GSW. I look forward to discussing it further.

An important quote to remember from MLK - going off memory here - "The problem with communism is that it forgets about the individual. And the problem with capitalism is that it forgets about community."

How do we get started?

[-] 2 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

Glad you like some of the ideas, usually we think similarly in outlook on parties...like I'm tired of them they're a corrupting influence, way to keep us divided. If going to have them, there should be three or four parties, so people have some sort of real choice. They're all paid corporatists by the time they win.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (22310) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

CorpoRATism = worse than aids!

[-] 0 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

I don't think there should be a political party. If they want to work together, fine. But when there is a party system, it becomes like nationalism in a country at war with another. Without political parties It would also add more people to the ballots as they would not be competing for a spot in a party, but instead running for the seat.

Party systems are divisive. We need an open forum for people to work together. Not teams in which they can play against each other.

This also reduces the chances of people feeling stuck between the lesser of 2 evils. For a system with the lesser of 2 evils, evil always prevails.

[-] -3 points by brady (-5) 1 year ago

Yes a new Constitution should get rid of the 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 5th amendments. We should also get rid of Posse Comitatus. So Federal troops can be used to conduct warrant less searches.

[-] 1 points by gsw (2728) 1 year ago

consumers rights to know what can hurt them in products, foods: clear labels on products, food

http://www.naturalnews.com/037249_GMO_study_cancer_tumors_organ_damage.html