Would you support a truly "Independent Party" , the only party with Integrity!

olaru12
reply to post by grandmakdw

 

This idea is so radical I can see that both lefties and righties are having trouble with the concept of individual freedom within the framework of a "party" which is necessary to participate in our current government the way it stands.

I'm a Libertarian; we are the true and only party of individual freedom; why reinvent the wheel....and my question is...

How do you keep big corporate money from influencing candidates? How do you convince those incorruptible souls to enter politics.

Systems theory breaks down in an unstable environment aka flux.

jesus-messiah.com...

Libertarianism is terrific, however, the meme of the libertarian is (unjustly) that of pot smoking hippies, wrong I know, but that paradigm is fixed in the minds of the people.

Unfortunately, you can't be certain people aren't corruptible, you can just set it up so failure is assured as much as possible when corruption happens.

Actually systems theory can thrive in an unstable environment. The parts keep banging into each other and changing each other until a resolution (stability) is reached. The more the flux, the more the movement, for good or bad, but with great flux, comes a great push back. Maybe what we need.

reply to post by olaru12


What if every single person was required to serve in government as part of there right to exist here?

Not unlike serving as a juror..

You'll have a mix of people sure and not always in agreement but more often then not they will find a consensus. Ergo, no money involved. Could it be manipulated, indeed, but as can everything. But it places the power in the hands of the many instead of the few.

Of course it couldn't be this simple but perhaps a step in the right direction.

Rosinitiate
reply to post by olaru12

 

What if every single person was required to serve in government as part of there right to exist here?

Not unlike serving as a juror..

You'll have a mix of people sure and not always in agreement but more often then not they will find a consensus. Ergo, no money involved. Could it be manipulated, indeed, but as can everything. But it places the power in the hands of the many instead of the few.

Of course it couldn't be this simple but perhaps a step in the right direction.

Idealistic and the current establishment would not allow it.

Great idea, not implementable at this time without a revolution or throwing out every elected official from the POTUS to the county clerk.

Forming a "nonpartisan" party is at least within the "rules" of the current government and stands a chance of succeeding until people are in office who are more interested in serving than getting power and money.

grandmakdw

Forming a "nonpartisan" party is at least within the "rules" of the current government and stands a chance of succeeding until people are in office who are more interested in serving than getting power and money.

I hear what you are saying but lets be real here. regardless if it's in the rules, you have a better chance of seeing God then seeing the current establishment allow any challenge to their authority.

#, you question a practice or an action of the government and can find yourself suicided......

Rosinitiate

grandmakdw

Forming a "nonpartisan" party is at least within the "rules" of the current government and stands a chance of succeeding until people are in office who are more interested in serving than getting power and money.

I hear what you are saying but lets be real here. regardless if it's in the rules, you have a better chance of seeing God then seeing the current establishment allow any challenge to their authority.

#, you question a practice or an action of the government and can find yourself suicided......

Doing nothing risks complete totalitarianism for our children and grandchildren who will say

Why didn't you try? I rather try and be "suicided" than not try at all.

Martyrs make the most powerful agents of change.

reply to post by grandmakdw


Indeed, good sir/ma'am.

grandmakdw

MrSpad

grandmakdw

calstorm
I like the premiss, but they are a few kinks that would need to be worked out.
Campaign contributions for one. If they are getting more money from a wealthy person or corporation, what is to stop them from voting for laws that favor the wealthy individual or corporation over the needs of the general public?

Also if they are kicked out of the party if the go against their outline, then that prevents compromise which as current events show can be a necessity.

You misunderstand, compromise is ok as long as the elected representative can make a logical argument that the compromise upholds their promises/platform more than it goes against their promise/platform.

This is what every politician does now. I do not see how this party would be any different than any other.

The difference is accountability. No current representative is forced to look at what they promised before they were elected and then have to defend the compromise they make as being consistent with their original promises.

Right now a representative is free to outright lie about what they promised when running for office and no one hold them accountable. That is what has the average american so frustrated with the current system. Currently a representative can lie about what they promised and there are no consequences, and no attempt is even made to hold them accountable as to why they did the polar opposite of what they promised their bosses (the people)

The people who vote for them can hold them accountable and re-elect or not them if they choose. They should be judge of how a person has performed not somebody from a political party.

grandmakdw




Martyrs make the most powerful agents of change.

If there was ever an American martyr it would be John F. Kennedy.

How'd that work out?

reply to post by olaru12


JFK was not a martyr for a cause. We still don't know to this day really who did and why. So that doesn't count as a martyr.


Martin Luther King Jr.

Joan of Arc

The Christians thrown to the lions in Rome to try and stop the fledgling religion.


Those were real martyrs.

Do I see myself as those martyrs? Not exactly.

But if the government chose to kill me for my political beliefs and my open discussion of my beliefs when I have absolutely no violent or subversive bent, just wanting to change things with the power of the vote:

well then I guess I'd have to be an anonymous christian thrown the lions in an attempt to stop a fledgling movement.

grandmakdw
reply to post by Spookybelle

 

The Tea Party has been so maligned by the media that it doesn't stand much of a chance of succeeding. The Tea Party has been unfairly maligned and so badly misused, on purpose, by Dems and some Reps and the major networks who have brothers, sisters, spouses of top executives literally on Obama's staff, that the uninformed average American has a distorted picture of the true objectives of the Tea Party.

What an absolute fallacy!

The only media outlet that is painting a false portrait of the Tea Party is Fox News. It is they who are pretending that the Tea Party is something other than what it really is. Most people, as well as most media outlets, see the Tea Party for what it really is and have been reporting it as such. That's precisely why the TP enjoys an approval rating somewhere in the low 20%s.

Truth be told, the modern day Tea Party is nothing other than the latest incarnation of the Ku Klux Klan. The KKK was never eliminated, only driven underground and every once in a while, they attempt to revitalize their insane ideology disguised as something new. This time around, it's called the Tea Party.

What did Sinclair Lewis say? I think it went something like this; "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross." Sounds kinda Tea Partyish, doesn't it?

In my book, the Tea Party is a lower life form than pond scum and the fact that the mainstream GOP hasn't totally rejected their insane ideology, makes them no better.

By the way, don't be so naive as to buy into the new Libertarian brand either because it's nothing more than a different label for the same mentality. It's intended to attract those who's ideology is consistent but are too embarrassed to be called tea baggers. Kinda like mainstream Republicans who now call themselves Independents because they're embarrassed by their party's actions.

reply to post by Flatfish

By the way, don't be so naive as to buy into the new Libertarian brand either because it's nothing more than a different label for the same mentality. It's intended to attract those who's ideology is consistent but are too embarrassed to be called tea baggers. Kinda like mainstream Republicans who now call themselves Independents because they're embarrassed by their party's actions.

Come on Fish and tell us how you really feel...

I don't think you have been to Libertarian get together. They can get down right kinky. Much better than the Tea Party whine festivals. I doubt if deep down any third party member really thinks they can make an impact on the Corporate oligarchy currently in place. Dreams are only 3 pence a pound but heart aches are a nickle.

grandmakdw
All candidates must sign an integrity pledge ...

I got that far and had to stop to comment. Every candidate promises things. And they all lie and/or break their promises. Signing a 'pledge' would be no different than making campaign promises. The signature on a campaign promise really means nothing.

Nice idea. But .....

Candidates should go through a rigorous psychological assessment so as to weed-out those who are sociopaths; our current enemy of the people, IMOHO.

Government isn't the main problem, it is psychopaths holding high executive positions. To be independent means you put your own money up for your own cause, because you actually possess conviction to do right by your fellow man. Nobody with any real integrity puts much stock in economics as a viable means of trade.

reply to post by grandmakdw


I have been calling for this for a long time. But I am just one voice with no money. It is unfortunate but our politics today are all about money. The supreme court made sure this won't change by making law, which isn't their job, and making it so it will take a change in the constitution to reform campaign refinance.

Our whole country gone bonkers. Because of the court money will continue to own politics.

If we want change we must:

A. Third party, yes we must have an independent party that the only stated purpose is to make the other two compromise and work together. The only way this works is this party has no agenda and takes enough seats to force them to work together. The only way we get this party is we need a benefactor to fund the startup and maintained by small membership fees. You have to pay to play folks, to be successful we must raise money and have a pac.

B. Term limits: no more career politicians. Two terms is more than enough to serve the people. This alone will change allot. This along with campaign refinance will only happen with changes to our Constitution. Supreme Court made sure of that.

C. Electorate : the founders did not intend for it to be this way. They never dreamed there would be so many states and such manipulation to control elections. This too will take constitutional change. The president should be elected by the popular vote. This too will take power and emphasis away from the parties.

Without changes in the money of politics and the term limits nothing will change. This is not going to be easy folks and it will take money.

The Bot

reply to post by dlbott


Thank you for your well thought out post. I agree wholeheartedly.

It would take money, or a grass roots effort that spreads like wildfire.

I'm trying to get the meme out there. Feel free to pass it on and add your ideas.

I've sent this email to a rabid forwarder to see if the meme takes hold and starts a paradigm shift.

(subject line) Have you Heard of the Independent Party

(body of email) Thought you might be interested. Here is a description. Fascinating.

All candidates sign an integrity pledge that commits them to only voting the way they have stated in their individually publicly published platforms, which must be consistent with the American Constitution and Bill of Rights. (Because they must swear to uphold and defend the Constitution when elected and integrity is the cornerstone of the Party)

They are respectful of people with differing values, goals and policy positions that are well thought out and are consistent with the American Constitution, and Bill of Rights.

The Independent party does not have a cohesive platform other than honesty in making pre-election promises and following through on their promises as best they are able.

Candidates can differ in their values, goals and promises, and be truly Independent and let the voters decide who they wish to choose. A Los Angeles member may have entirely different values, goals, and promises from a member in Alabama, however each must pledge to do all they can to uphold their personally stated values, goals and promises.

The only requirement for the Independent party is that candidates must have clearly stated goals, platforms, and values and must publish them publicly when running for office.

Once elected, members must adhere as strongly as possible to pre-election promises and statements or be removed from party support for the first offense and kicked out of the party for the second offense. A defense for an offense is allowed if the elected official feels that a certain bill upholds their promises to constituents more than it harms their constituents based on their published platform.

There are standards to uphold. Not social standards, the party enforces the member’s own stated standards which are clearly laid out for the voter. The standards set by the candidate are the measure, the stick by which integrity is measured. Compromise in legislation is permissible as long as the elected representative can make a logical argument that the compromise upholds their promises/platform more than it goes against their promise/platform.

The party members are in no way be obligated to vote on a party line, since there is none, they are to vote the way they were elected by the people to vote as expressed in their public platform statement.

The Independent Party, holds as its primary value that elected officials are SERVANTS to the people and are to serve the people who elected them into office by doing their utmost to only vote the way stated in their public platforms.

reply to post by dlbott



Tell you what: I promise if I win the lottery or something like it: I'll start the fund personally, that is my pledge.

However, living on a pension like I am limits me to speaking out and doing my best to change minds and hearts to help restore our once great country which has fallen and crumbled into something that no where near resembles the America that we used to be so proud of.

As for you thinking "I am just one voice." Look, you are no longer one voice. One voice, one person with grit and determination can make huge changes in the world. So spread the meme as far and wide as you can. Use my words and add yours and send it out to rabid forwarders and to talking heads you think my listen. Now there is you and me, and soon............ who knows.