After numerous years of pretending to be the nation's crack bulldog/watchdog/hardball-playin' journalistic purist; our hard-hitting analyst of all flawed transgressors has completely tinkled his tingling leg.  He is now the CONFESSED advocate and INSURER of presidential success.

Mathews, do you have any self-respect, or is this all a calculated pitch to crawl up to a staff position in Obama's administration?  I'm afraid you would embarrass the man, and you would definitely cast profound doubt on his administration's judgment. Myself, I will never allow your name to enter a conversation in my company without peels of laughter and ridicule of your infamous impressions of preteen girls backstage at a Jonas brother's concert. 

It is one thing to be biased, it is another to be fully in the tank, but it is yet altogether another level to be on your knees in a puddle of your own self excited puppy pee.  You are no longer simply an embarrassment to journalism, you have become an embarrassment to masculinity.

Moron mothership, time to beam the little boy up.

Obama is not only admittedly interested in redistribution of wealth from one sector of the US to another, but he is also committed to redistribution of wealth from the United States to other countries.

This isn't theoretical, it has already happened.  One of the very few pieces of legislation that they freshman senator is responsible for, is the "Global Poverty Act" (S.2433)" (proposed & sponsored by Barack Obama and rushed through congress by a suspicious VOICE ONLY vote by none other than Joe Biden). The legislation moves to make levels of U.S. foreign aid spending subservient to the dictates of the United Nations, and would push the U.S. to spend 0.7 percent of GNP on foreign aid.

The bill cites the U.N.’s Millennium Development Goal (established by the UN in 2000) as underlying framework, which calls for “the eradication of poverty” by “redistribution (of) wealth and land”. It has among its provisions: a "currency transfer tax," ; a "tax on the rental value of land and natural resources"; "royalty on worldwide fossil energy projection -- oil, natural gas, coal"; "fees for the commercial use of the oceans and fees for airplane use of the skies", fees for use of the electromagnetic spectrum", "fees on foreign exchange transactions", and a "tax on the carbon content of fuels". These would be UN taxes on US buisness and individuals. Add to the taxation tiers of local, state, federal taxes under which you suffer our new UN taxes!

Obama states: “I fully support the Millennium Development Goals.”..."As President, I will make the MDGs [Millennium Development Goals], America’s goals." http://www.unausa.org/site/pp.asp?c=fvKRI8MPJpF&b=3879851

Now charity is close to the heart of most Americans, but why subjugate ourselves to an external governing body to dictate how, when, where, and why we will be charitable?  Will there be oversight and stipulation to prevent the money from ending up in the war chests of despotic leaders and warlords?  Will there be sufficient oversight to prevent the majority of the money from being quietly absorbed by the bureaucracy administering it?  While it is Charity based in language, in fact it is nothing less than mandatory international redistribution of wealth, AT BEST.

Charity by definition is a voluntary act.  For it to actually be Charity, it should be established as a fund to which there are encouragements and incentives for participation (as in clarity, transparency, and monetary efficiency of operations).  Not only is the UN based action established by the bill prone and magnetic to mismanagement and theft, it simply un-American.  The United States voluntarily gives profound and significant aid across the globe every year, but now this act suggests a persistent US OBLIGATION to redistribute US wealth to a foreign agency; who will then decide for us where there are entities deserving our surrendered capital.  Is there any doubt that this global "poverty" fund will find itself routinely participating in political influence? (it is handled by the UN, after all).  Without accountability, this third party globally elite agency can and undoubtedly will practice some level of embezzlement, influence peddling, political meddling, and admitted redistribution of wealth.  The US does not under any circumstance need to OBLIGE itself to suffer law which commits us to hand over our wealth to another non domestic agency with no return of any kind, nor insurance of delivery of this wealth to the intended parties.  What is the point?

Will our money go to help poor Georgians, or poor Russians?  Do we get to say?  Do we get to even know?  Do we get to care why one would be chosen over the other?  No, we would not.

There are other aspects of the bill which are even MORE troubling, though digressions.  Language in the bill flirts dangerously close to committing United States citizens to obey foreign bodies (UN) regarding gun possession. The bill meddles in language suggesting establishment of powers for UN committees over nations for the banning of"small arms and light weapons"  Ideally, this aspect of the laws would be intended to disarm violent insurgents and lawless rebel factions (as if there was any possibility it would work in any way, shape, or form).  But, backed by anti-American sentiment, perhaps it would be molded to demand the US legislation comply with international mandates of prohibition of private arms?  Is anyone able to promise this is not one possible direction of our signed subjugation?

It is bad enough that socialist tenants of redistribution can pervert the framework of American entrepreneurial lifestyle, but Obama has unequivocally proven he is also willing and interested in collecting our wealth and sending it to the UN.  Obama has made his stance clear.  This is practically his ONLY large legislative act in a short Washington career.  If poverty is at the heart of his concerns, why didn't he start in Illinois, and specifically Chicago, at the least, instead of aggressively seeking to redistribute US wealth oversees.  After all, the people of Chicago and Illinois are the ones who gave him his job.  Where do his commitments lay?

Fine.  Let's stop the fighting.  There's just little point in persisting to seek a sunny morning where we discover we actually all agree.

We are always migrating to polarity of everything.  Us against them, our team versus your team, yin versus yang, good versus bad, the black hats versus the white hats, and the Republicans versus the Democrats.

We can't persist with this.  It works well with our sporting events, and we get great cathartic release from these; but it is crippling us in the realm of national affairs.  "A house divided against itself cannot stand" was the great lesson learned from the Civil War.  And yet we are annihilating ourselves in internal polarization, while the rest of the world delights in our self-mutilating behavior.

Therefore, it is time to stop the bickering and Institute the facility for the Two Americas.

Let there be two sub-cells to the USA. Let there now be two sub capitals: Reagantown, and Clintonville.

Let there be two "wards": clearly the West Coast and New England will belong to one ward, and the majority of that in between, and Alaska belonging to the other ward.  Some of those deeply blue states in the middle are going to be more sticky, but we shouldn't let that get in the way of moving forward.

Washington will be gutted.  Washington will function as a skeletal overview only; a stripped-down shell of minimalism. Primarily, it will function as a tourist center; a museum of artifacts and delightful history.  Beneath this essentials-only core, the two camps will be able to exist in a far more self-guided and self-determined fashion.  We shall end up with two distinct experiments with real results to make the cases we've heard made hypothetically so many many times.

Why not do this? What is there to be afraid of, a decline in the world?  Domestic and international turmoil?  Financial peculiarities and instabilities? Hmm, why do those sound familiar?

Do I have this all figured out?  Hell no.  But are we poised to resolve our deep internal divided?  Hell no, as well.

But it is a unique time in front of us.  We have a deep and pronounced divide in our nation; and yet, it's carved out very neatly!  The issues separating us are distinct and grouped neatly to a convenient left and right.  We are not going to resolve feelings on abortion.  We're not going to resolve positions on gun ownership, on entitlements and welfare, on socialization of healthcare and banking.

California may have tons of oil off its coast, but no one will make them go for it!  If Nancy Pelosi doesn't want it, we won't make her get it.  But her ability to thwart Texas and Florida and the lower East Coast will be eliminated.  Other regions can begin to enjoy the resources of their land!

So we'll need a new flag. Maybe one gets horizontal stripes. Or maybe Obama can come up with a new symbol.

Our two sub capitals can become experiments in efficiency or bloat; entitlements or self dependence. And a terminal partisan stand-off can cease to rattle in our ears day and night, while nothing of any merit EVER gets accomplished.

The flood is here.  It is an apocalypse of chaotic lifestyles, financial mazes, and governmental insanity or incompetence; if not sinister and nefarious behavior. At a time when the masses seem bent on voting for freebies, socialization of concerns, and ephemeral promises of entitlements to prosperity -- and politicians seem to defy common sense and the will of their constituents -- one must make a bold ark of  redemption to survive.

THIS is an Ark.

This is the official conceptual inauguration of a new political party! THE CLEAN PARTY! There is no budget yet, no war chest, no history; but there is a CLARITY of purpose, that is FUNDAMENTALLY universal in mass appeal.

Reid, Pelosi, Dean, Dodd, Frank - WOW! The Dems suck, big time! Obama is an interesting and dynamic enough fellow, but he's FAR left on almost any major issue. His scant resume (Illinois) is hardly a happy land of low taxes, urban shininess and racial harmony. Please. And never mind all that "black theology" garbage.

But McCain seems to have become weak-kneed, even if he was ever desirable. He's against the bailout, so he votes for it. He's FOR the citizens, but ignores their voice on illegal immigration, anwar drilling, and bailouts. Its embarrassing.

But almost anything is going to be better than the last 8 suffering years under Bush. But who were we SUPPOSED to like? Kerry!? Gore?! Useless. So what are you supposed to do when you see your country going down the toilet spiritually, financially, and legislatively?

I hereby pledge allegiance to the CLEAN party...

Our unfit, unhealthy nation has had a heart attack -- that is how the gurus have described it as they argued for bailouts of financial resuscitation. OK, so the nation's doctors are warning us of our heart condition, our high cholesterol, etc. We must quit the "smoking" and binge drinking...and get clean.

THE CLEAN PARTY PLATFORM:
Clean government:
Clean media
Transparency
Clean out of corruption
Cleaning the tax code
Orientation toward clean energy
Orientation toward clean lifestyles
Clean streets
Clean living
Clean policy (clean out spending and especially clean out waste)
Clean police and justice
Clean commerce interactions
Clean banking
Clean international behavior
Clean air, Clean water.

The clean party will seek clean solutions to hopeless morass we always confront.

The first chore, create two divisions of separation:

1.  "Clean policy" (that which the public and citizenry will have no debate over)
corruption, graft, perversion, theft and crime, constitutional reverence, the maintaining of the branches of power, the tax code reform. While there are perverse minority viewpoints that will contest ANYTHING, the vast majority will find CON CENSUS on MANY issues! IF the party deadlock is transcended!

2.  "Difficult policy" (that which is unresolvable and thorny)
Terminally unresolvable issues will be given special treatments (Welfare, education, guns, gay marriage, illegal immigration, gambling, abortion)

The clean solution to difficult policy will not be RESOLVED in some campaign promise; states will have to react to the will of the people.  There will be pockets of sin, and pockets of salvation.  Difficult morality will have to migrate toward a backyard affair.  It is the cleanest solution we could ever hope to achieve. As for Social Security, entitlements, etc., these will require special handling and will be promptly addressed in such a way, with emphasis on  PUBLIC FORUMS, and public votes directly on the issues. 

The next significant challenge is simple and essential: define the role of government.  It may be beautiful, it may be grotesque, but it should at the least be cleanly defined.  We should not have to debate about what role our government presently has.  For better or for worse, we MUST START with the definition of U.S. government; where it stands and what it is SUPPOSED to be.

This Ark may not save my life, but it is my publicly advertised space of safety.  I am on record and in the public view as occupying this avocation, and no matter what happens I will be able to enjoy commitment to the definitions of this young fresh environment.  It is clean here, and I live politically in this space.

No matter what stupidity surrounds me, I will be free to say "don't blame me". I will be free from accusation, and free from associations of failure, and free from guilt. In devotion to this new party, I shall be a free man.  I shall be free in my conscious and in my relationship to my fellow citizens. While REAL freedoms are sinking beneath the crashing waves of the flood (freedom in your home, freedom to leave your home, freedom to get a job, freedom to create a job, freedom to vote in a clean and honest election) -- I will be free to pursue ideals of escape.

I will suffer these literal truths beside you, but my spiritual, poetic, and philosophic world will be free and clean. I will live proud and brave, knowing I have refrained from the easy and expected (demanded?) path of perpetually electing parties which have long since sold their soul to the devil, sold policy to the highest bidder, sold the public interests to the special dollar interests, sold the People's welfare to their party's welfare, and sold commonsense to the pursuit of personal gain.

 

I am the captain of a pirate bank

I am the captain -- of a scurvy lot;  I run me a rogue credit card bank.  

We enjoy pillaging your wallet within a place enjoying the most wondrous absence of prosecution.  The liberty we enjoy whilst pirating you is a grand thing.  Our port of call... aye, is Delaware.

As the captain, I just wanted to publicly thank me mates in this great rogue state of Delaware, for allowin' our pirate ways to be welcome -- aye -- even LEGAL in their port.  Without ye, we could not be.

Aye, we've even been 'lowed to construct a legal contract for our piracy.  Delaware is grand!  For truly, it is not a contract all -- but a license by our grand state, to be a pirate.  We are enjoying the legalized ability to rob ye poor slobs.  We have written many new darlin' sea-shanties celebratin' the beloved 30% interest rate the "law" permits us to crush you with. We particularly love the ability to construct a legal-bindin' CONTRACT that gives us the right to change ANY terms at ANY time for ANY reason we want!! That be OUR kind o' contract! I probably don't need to tell ye, it's a lovely arrangement for us.

So, I'd just like, again, to thank me allies -- and those runnin' the lawless states which make my life possible.

A toast of ale!  To the great pirate state... of Delaware.  

And three cheers for their pirate-toleratin' governors and senators!

Senators... like Joe Biden.

Three Pirate cheers!

• There is only ONE way we can improve our predicament, and it must necessarily cost a massive sum of taxpayer commitment?
• The massive figure ($700 billion) has been determined somewhat arbitrarily and in a somewhat, well... capricious manner?
• This must be IMMEDIATELY enacted, rammed down our throats if necessary, force-fed to us, expedited; anything but the most HASTY behavior is inadequate and...dangerous?
• One man is responsible for generating the core thrust of this "solution"? Our government and nation is ready to anoint ONE individual as expert enough to determine nationally "imperative" spending of hundreds and hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars? We should just run with the essence of his proposal?
• It is okay if this is the same man who has been our "adviser" as we slid effortlessly toward this crisis? So, we are guided in our solutions by the expert who let us into this mess? Our reinforcement camp of champions of salvation are the admitted economic experts Obama, McCain, and Bush?
• The will of the public and citizens (no matter how wildly unanimous in voice) is not the bottom line, not the point, or even irrelevant?
• If Wall Street corrects downward to a level that is perhaps more correlated to the numerous real and critical national issues, our planet will die? We must prop-up Wall Street -- to whatever happy level the traders and brokers tell us they desire? This alone can save mankind?
• When Enron collapsed and shocked the nation to its core with a $60 billion-dollar market value loss, the public and Washington screamed bloody murder; investigations commenced and people went to jail, and nothing less would have staved off public uprising...When a foreign radicalized entity bombed our buildings and capital with planeloads of our own citizens, Washington even conducted a massive INTERNAL investigation to find limits of OUR OWN responsibility... Now that there is a devastating succession of internally planted time bombs wiping out our financial backbone; we hear no calls for jail, no mandate for probes, no leadership for delivery of truth in culpability? Not even a single firing or resignation yet?
• With Barney Frank chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, and Charlie Rangel at chairman seat of the Ways and Means Committee, we are now modeling our leadership committees on the U.N. "irony" patterns (permitting Syria to chair Commission on Human Rights, and Libya on Security Council) ?
• Instead of calls for responsibility, we are seeing PRAISE laid at the feet of the very people who should be assessed for culpability (Barney Frank for example). We are asked to follow these people into deeper governmental meddling to the tune of $700 billion? We are asked to authorize them to determine what the nation should do?

Poor, poor Barak.  He was all excited to go on the largest shopping spree of his life, the likes of which even his $300-earring-friendly wife has never experienced or dreamed. (Well, she probably dreamed it at least).

He was completely ready, and wearing "comfortable shoes"; prepared for a marathon spending spree of cash and credit all over the national mall and the nation's governmental superstores.  He was prepared to even INVENT some stores, for enhanced shopping ability.  In short, he was ready to spend, and spend, and spend.  Nationalized institutions, carbon friendly reward programs, an ambitious 10 year national energy about-face, free health-care for all, free housing for the lazy, free unfettered imigration and welfare for every man woman and pet, free lunches, free backrubs for minorities with sore shoulders...Why, just put the word free before any statement not ending with "for the rich"; he probably considered it.

While we place SOOOOOOOOO much emphasis on our presidents and presidential elections, and attribute all our ills and glory to this individual in this office; this is but the executive branch of a three branch (or FOUR branch) structure.

 

Now, the Supreme Court (judicial branch) is appointed -- so we don't get much direct input into that powerhouse... that leaves us with our legislative branch, Congress (arguably the most important and critical branch). Unfortunately, Congress is rather perceived as a huge mass of nearly nameless faces and suffering general uselessness or full loss of integrity. That's why it's a lot easier to get mad at that one President guy. But is it mature, or functional, or even dangerous to persist with this consolidation of blame and hope in one individual? The position of president becomes the personification of leadership and utmost power. But it's just not accurate.

 

The problem with trying to care about Congress though, is that we ONLY get to vote for representatives of our individual states. This reality leaves us ill-equipped as individuals to personally assert ANY meaningful influence on the operational mass of the governing body. What are we to do?

 

ONE REFORM SUGGESTION: We the People -- We the Nation, get the pleasure and luxury of the opportunity to now elect six posts of importance within these institutions (to which currently we are not permitted influence); the majority/minority leaders and speakers of both houses. This would give us a chance to get all excited and worked up about seven critical government executive positions, instead of just the one we get now. And why should the people get zero say in this? I mean, Nancy Pelosi? Does she represent this nation? Isn't the bulk of the nation repulsed by this hypocritical shrew? Isn't the abysmal sales of her book a quantifiable testament to this point? So why should We the People suffer her in her rather prominent and rather important position? Let the people vote for these elevated positions! -- Also known as; "no taxation without representation".

 

And speaking of taxation, there's NO WAY the nation in general would elect Charlie Rangel to the leadership position in matters such as our taxes! We should get a say on this man's stature within Congress. Sure, his state can elect him in as their embarrassment, but the NATION should get to decide if he is to become a BIGWIG within the congress! At THAT point it is no longer about the state that elected him., it is about the nation.

 

I would be comfortable suffering these losers, if there was a natural and national majority that actually played a role in their enjoyment of their elevated positions. But instead, they feel to me like some sort of U.S. nobility; that simply inherits, or is anointed into their posts (and consequently enjoying great influence and power for reasons beyond the understanding or control of the citizens).

 

Hell, we'll skip the minority leaders; we'll just vote for the powerful majority leaders. And maybe later continue on from there!

 

FOUR positions of U.S. Royalty are returned to the people as elected representives!

Something very subtle and wonderful has taken place.  And it has come as a surprise.

It is amazing how much most of us are conditioned by a rewards system.  There are few who continue to do labor which bears no fruit, right?  On the other hand, many will repeat disgusting, illegal, or risky behavior, if it actually worked for them on a previous occasion.  No complex thought here.

But in our contemporary culture, there has been so much inversion of ideals of reward for good behavior.  Of course crime can pay;  people can make more money selling ecstasy or crystal meth than selling BMWs, much less selling shoes.  How much money did that prostitute who ruined the career of Elliot Spitzer make in the end?  Quite a lot, and quite quickly.

There is an epidemic of similar inversions.  This is an era of rewards for bad behavior; do something ugly, stupid, grotesque, or immoral - get a TV show, Playboy spread, or book deal. On the other hand, play by the rules and they apparently smell weakness; and arrive quickly to present a whole new volume of ADDITIONAL rules, till eventually you feel you are being crushed under their weight. But don't expect help; few have noticed you exist -- not in this Jerry Springer circus environment. 

I can all but guarantee those hooligan  twits vandalizing St. Paul during the RNC will get laid, by lady friends as wack as they are.  And they'll turn to using that angle again; because it worked. Bad behavior can reap gorgeous rewards; and well-meaning, law-respecting lifestyles can leave one with staggering bills; and a demanding taxman looking for yet more of your money to build bridges to no where.

And we're arrived at politics and politicians.  How many politicians in our lifetime have used ugly means to achieve their personal goals?  The public can be regularly snowballed (look at John Edwards homepage for some ironic rhetoric and moral posturing). Typical political "rewards" would equate to votes.  Votes are typically garnered through an ugly and familiar playbook, composed of strong financial backing, savvy strategic marketing, a ruthless dismantling of your opponents, tapping into fears, saying just what folks want to hear, or making lovely promises of a free lunch. Circular logic, smoke and mirrors, lies and denials, smears and propaganda, outright deceit -- it all works regularly. And it is reasonable to conclude that if politicians employed nefarious tactics once, (or even watched another peer make it work), they will employ what they've learned again in the pursuit of their desires.  How much cynicism is born of the contempt we ultimately feel for these politicians?

Enough bad sentiment; this is a good story.  John McCain is an admittedly imperfect Republican and a man whose long career has found him on the wrong side of his share of issues.  But he is a man who is true to himself, and at this unique point in time, he did something bold which few predicted: he handed a magnificent reward to the relatively unknown Governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin.

Sarah Palin is not here so rewarded because she looks right, smiles right, smells right,  talks right, or even because she is a woman (although all of these are certainly potential assets).  Sarah Palin is here rewarded because she has taken a stance in her administrative career.  It is a stance that makes the cynical voter pause and gaze up from the slouched downcast moping which has been his habit.  "Could this be?  Does she treat her constituency right?"  Now Al Capone treated his constituency right; but to be performing well on the immediate level, while paying respect to a larger picture, a national level of concern at the same time -- this suggests exceptional integrity.

Alternately, Senator Obama has inspired great hope; but the lessons are different. Obama is a man who has received reward for less than exceptional behavior.  In analysis of Obama's career you find a personal political history of strategic behavior; dicey allegiances and alliances.  I doubt he had a choice;  Chicago is a cesspool.  But surely he didn't vote "present" in the Senate 130 times because he's stupid, or incapable of choice;  it is a strategy, at our expense.  "Don't get yourself on the record on that issue, my friend. *wink*..." Maybe I'm wrong.

I argue Obama is not actually getting rewarded for his actions of merit; he is rising beautifully and gracefully, but it is as a result of CONCEPTS of merit.  Even if his concepts are flawless, the "reward lesson" for all of us is, "say the right thing.  Say it well".

But what matters is not these names or personalities, rather the behavioral model being played out. Sarah Palin just received an excellent award for some irregular political behavior that we the people desperately need. Even if you don't like her politics, the manner of her behavior in office can end up benefiting every single one of us. Why, even if our impressions of her unselfish and fiscally responsible acts AREN'T TRUE, she still would be receiving an enormous lesson on what she SHOULD consider successful behavior. Indeed, all politicians on the present scene might reassess their strategies; as this woman is proving a pattern too rarely witnessed in modern government.

She is being rewarded handsomely for being strong, defiant, and principled.  Not clever, or flawlessly strategic, or well-financed by influential friends and backers. It is her unusual bravery and politically risky behavior which brought her soaring wildly into the national spotlight.   This frames the future for a toning down of public cynicism.  She is poised to teach herself, her peers, and us, that the United States is ready to show appreciation, and indeed reward, for good behavior, that we so badly need and so rarely see. She and the nation has been handed the blueprint of a system of extraordinary benefit for extraordinary action.  This blueprint could be used to rehab our capital. Even if she doesn't win office, the case has been made for a functional new paradigm.

Surely the lesson will fade, as surely as it will return again.  But for this moment in time, the recipe is strongly enforced; trickery or deceit is less successful than responsible excellence.

 

I, like most, would love to see more activity and interaction on my blog.  OK, I'm going to use the silence to my advantage; to help make my points...

I lived in Illinois before Barak Obama received the gift of an effectively unopposed Senatorial campaign.  (Anyone who counts the carpetbagging Alan Keyes as competition is being silly).  I continued to live in Illinois after B.O. packed his Gucci luggage to head to Washington DC.

I cannot point to any positive change I experienced and enjoyed thanks to B.O. being my Representative.  Nothing but NOTHING got any better upon his arrival, that I could distinguish.  I did feel there were some things that got worse.  That's what really irks me with the recitations of glorious splendidness regarding this sublime and delicious (etc, etc) candidate.

OK fine, did I MISS SOMETHING!?  You tell me!

If B.O. did something splendid for Illinois as its elected representative, PLEASE LIST IT HERE; I would love to know what I failed to experience or perceive.

=====================BELOW IS A LIST=====================

=========of BARAK OBAMA'S EXCELLENT ACCOMPLISHMENTS ==========

=================FOR THE PEOPLE OF ILLINOIS=================

============AS THEIR ILLINOIS SENATE REPRESENTATIVE=============

=========as submitted by any and all who have a contribution==========

 

(list sponsered by the future King of the U.S. --  Details: http://KINGoftheUNITEDSTATES.net)