Jump to content
3000AD Forums
Sign in to follow this  
street228

Citizen In Search of a Leader

Recommended Posts

America needs a leader that is balanced, thoughtful, integrative, supportive of dissent and debate, and above all, educated enough to craft a national strategy for security and prosperity that will stand the test of time. I want a leader who is at least as committed to the future of my children as to the passing security and prosperity of the moment. Individuals obsessing on being elected or re-elected need not apply.

In my view as a citizen, there are four areas where the right individual, as a team builder rather than a personal icon, could help America restore its balance. These four areas are: 1) electoral reform, 2) intelligence reform, 3) global issues & national security reform, and 4) governance reform inclusive of corporate ethics and accountability. I would sum up the objective of all four reform initiatives with the phrase: ÔÇ£Creating a Smart Nation, Of, By, and For the People.ÔÇØ

I take it as a given that no election that limits itself to Republican and Democratic candidates, and their die-hard voters, will achieve the outcome I seek. We must engage the vast majority of Americans who are Independent, Green, Reform, Libertarian, or dropped out, and we must help the people take back the power while creating a new form of participatory democracy that cannot be hijacked by elitist power brokers who manipulate government to serve their own ends.

Common Sense Guide to Big Issues

Electoral ReformÔÇöRestoring the People as Owners of Democracy

We own this country, but unless we manage it directly, we will lose it to bureaucratic ÔÇ£squatters.ÔÇØ.

Electoral reform has not been articulated in a broad enough manner. Ralph Nader has correctly identified many of its elements, but is not willing to build the non-partisan coalition to make it happen. This is what I want as soon as possible, beginning with a candidate and team committed to these objectives:

Change law to do voting on week-ends (with Sundays for Orthodox Jews);

Restore League of Women Voters as the presidential debate manager, and open the debates to third, fourth, and fifth parties.

Announce non-partisan Cabinet in advance of election and in time to enable the League of Women voters to change the voter evaluation paradigm by interspersing Cabinet candidate debates with Presidential and Vice Presidential debates.

Implement the ÔÇ£instant run-offÔÇØ concept, where the first choice counts toward future Federal funding for minority or losing parties, but the second choice, if first choice does not win, counts toward the election of a winner elected by a majority.

End physical gerrymandering, and move instead toward virtual representation in which citizens can self-identify as belonging to a specific party, and then vote for Governors, Congress, and other key positions as a member of that virtual community within each stateÔÇöthis will achieve true representation; and

End corporate and association contributions to political candidatesÔÇösimply make them illegal, while doubling salaries of elected officials over ten years, coincident with a push for major increases in salaries for those engaged in homeland nation-buildingÔÇöteachers, cops, firemen, and public health professionals.

Intelligence ReformÔÇöGlobal Understanding, State & Local Security

ÔÇ£Nothing in the existing or planned Federal budget makes America any safer!

Our government has gotten out of touch with global realities, at the same time that we have failed to develop new forms of state & local security. Below are some general intelligence reforms I want to see championed by a candidate and team of substance:

Restructuring of the Presidential staff to create four Director-Generals for Policy, Strategy, Intelligence, and Research. America has no serious strategy for its future, intelligence is not impacting on policy or strategy, and government research (as well as taxation policies) are retarding rather than advancing the private sectorÔÇÖs ability to be innovative.

Creation of a consolidated National Foreign Intelligence Program that gives the Director-General for Intelligence control over the three technical intelligence agencies now within the defense department, while earmarking 50% of the program in peace, 85% in war, for defense.

Elevation of the National Intelligence Council to the Office of the President, where it can do a better job of harnessing the distributed intelligence of the entire Nation, while also working more closely with the Cabinet departments.

Establishment of the Global Knowledge Foundation, a $1.5 billion a year ÔÇ£.orgÔÇØ dedicated to helping all elements of the government as well as the private sector gain better access to open sources of information in all languages of the worldÔÇö80% of what we need for 5% of the cost of secrets. Includes creation of a ÔÇ£virtual national intelligence communityÔÇØ of leading experts on everything who do not want top secret clearances, and a Digital Marshall Plan for Third WorldÔÇöthe sooner they are ÔÇ£wiredÔÇØ the sooner we can more ably understand them.

General redirection of the major intelligence agencies, to include conversion of the NRO into the National Collection Agency, CIA into the National Analysis Agency, and NSA into the National Processing Agency, while creating a new Clandestine Service Agency that is truly clandestine, and a Homeland Security Intelligence Program that enables Governors and Mayors to establish professional intelligence and counterintelligence programs under their sovereignty rather than as federal initiatives.

Global Issues & National Security ReformÔÇöRevitalizing Soft Power

ÔÇ£The world is on fire, but we can put this fire out while also preventing future fires!

America leans toward isolationist and what I call ÔÇ£false neutralÔÇØ positions. In a world at war with itself there are no neutral positionsÔÇöonly victims, if not today, then tomorrow. We need a candidate and team that can help America to properly interpret 9-11 as the early warning of global chaos, and terrorism as the least of our problems. There are 102 conflicts between different nation-states today, and 175 violent internal political conflicts within individual nation-states. At the same time there are 32 complex emergenciesÔÇöfailed statesÔÇötoday; 66 countries with millions of displaced persons and refugees; 33 countries suffering famine and starvation; and 59 countries and rising with plagues and epidemics. There are 18 genocide campaigns going on, today; child soldiers are killing and being killed in 41 countries; corruption is common in 80 countries, and censorship in 62 countries. Water scarcity looms large.

Against this real world complexity, America spends almost its entire national security budget of $500B a year on a ÔÇ£heavy metalÔÇØ military that is useless 90% of the time, meaning that we underfund special operations and low intensity conflict forces, underfund diplomacy, overt intelligence, and economic assistance, underfund education at home and abroad, ignore public health, and ignore public safety around the world, allowing warlords and crime kingpins a free run. This has to stop but it will not stop unless America finds a leader of gravitas who is truly representative of both our values, and the power of our budget if spent wisely. This new national security strategy could be called ÔÇ£1+iiiÔÇØ and could, within the $500 billion a year now being spent (greater than what the next 20 nations, including Russia and China, spend together), redirect funds as follows:

Big War. Fence at $250 billion a year, fully 50% of the national security budget. Designed to be able to take on the Russians and the Chinese simultaneously, inclusive of strategic nuclear forces, a 12 division-wing-carrier battle group team, and reserve-reinforcement bridges to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization forces or Asian allies.

Small War. Increase from $20 billion to $75 billion a year, 15% of the national security budget. Empowers U.S. Special Operations Command as a global operational force, but introduces constabulary-gendarme forces that can impose order within failed states while providing police, medical, and other critical public services needed in the transition back to local control and security. Creates a new ÔÇ£ground truthÔÇØ foreign area observer force.

Peace Force. Increase from $20 billion to $100 billion a year, 20% of the national security budget. Dramatically restores the competency and global presence of the Department of State; reinstates the independence of the U.S. Information Agency, doubling the latter to manage global educational program. Increases Peace Corps and the Agency for International Development, with a special emphasis on public health as well as water and food security.

Home Force. Increase from $38 billion (was $16 billion) to $75 billion a year, 15% of the national security budget. This investment helps state & local authorities, under their own sovereignty rather than as part of a federalized system, devise effective measures for detecting and responding to all threats including terrorism, crime, disease, and natural disasters.

Governance ReformÔÇöCoalition Approach, State Power, More Ethics

ÔÇ£America canÔÇÖt be governed by one man and his buddiesÔÇöit takes a coalition team.

The world, and America, have gotten too complex to rely on a single President being elected, and then leaving the rest of the team up to his preferences. America needs to see a candidate for President that has both the courage and the ÔÇ£big tentÔÇØ philosophy of non-partisan teamwork to pre-select and offer for inspection as part of their two-year campaign, a complete Cabinet. The process of devising a Coalition Cabinet should start now. A leader of a multi-party team, with a landslide popular and electoral vote behind them, should be able to carry out this comprehensive reform agenda that puts the power back in the people, and common sense back into a down-sized government.

Emphasizing the need to use federal funding to empower state & local governments with respect to intelligence & counterintelligence could also set the stage for proposing new national initiatives for elementary and secondary education as well as public health across America. Thomas Jefferson said ÔÇ£A NationÔÇÖs best defense is an educated citizenry.ÔÇØ The people of this Nation are its seed corn, and we must tend these fields. Every American should receive the same high-quality education, regardless of the prevailing real estate values that now fund vastly disparate levels of education. At the same time, some form of universal health insurance is needed, not only to cover the uninsured, but also to liberate AmericaÔÇÖs workers from their dependence on corporate health plans that constrain job mobility and innovation. Finally, we must dramatically re-invigorate our preventive medicine and public health programs to lower the costs to the taxpayer and our families of diseaseÔÇöincluding animal-borne and terrorist-spawned epidemicsÔÇöthat could have been prevented in the first place.

At the same time, we need a candidate who is very strong on ethicsÔÇöAmerica suffers when their leadership is perceived by both the people and the international public as being ÔÇ£in the pockets ofÔÇØ big oil or big pharmaceutical companies, or other special interests. The right candidate, with a proven mind of their own, can make the economic case for ethics. A Nobel Prize was awarded for a demonstration that trust lowers the cost of doing business. Ethics is pro-business and pro-consumer at the same time.

Finally, we need a candidate and a team that can change the paradigm of the PresidencyÔÇöour new President should plan to spend more time on ÔÇ£Seventh GenerationÔÇØ challenges that bear directly on the future of the entire world as well as the future security and prosperity of America seven generations out, and less time on top-level day to day Executive matters. The new Vice President should spend two thirds of their time actually managing the government, and one third training to be President in the future.

All this puts power back in the hands of the people, while tackling the tough issues head on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Did you write that, or did you get it from a website.

If you wrote it, good job, but if not, please supply a link.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I am going to assume that you wrote this Street, and I will take it one piece at a time, and comment on each point. I am going to be as neutral and fair as I possibly can be, so please, can we try to keep it civil?

quote:

We own this country, but unless we manage it directly, we will lose it to bureaucratic ÔÇ£squatters.ÔÇØ.

Electoral reform has not been articulated in a broad enough manner. Ralph Nader has correctly identified many of its elements, but is not willing to build the non-partisan coalition to make it happen. This is what I want as soon as possible, beginning with a candidate and team committed to these objectives:

We' will go over these one at a time, the problem that I see with the above, is that the elections at this point work for the status quo, Republican and Democrat, therefore, there won't be any changed unless one of the parties implodes and disapears. I don't see much hope in that occurring, but then again, the Democrats seem intent on imploding this year. So, you never know.

quote:

Change law to do voting on week-ends (with Sundays for Orthodox Jews);

Sounds good to me, but you will get some Christians that will disagree, such as mormons etc, that have Sundays as a holy day and not Saturday.

I still think it sounds like a good idea, but you might still upset some other religious groups.

quote:

Restore League of Women Voters as the presidential debate manager, and open the debates to third, fourth, and fifth parties.

Announce non-partisan Cabinet in advance of election and in time to enable the League of Women voters to change the voter evaluation paradigm by interspersing Cabinet candidate debates with Presidential and Vice Presidential debates.

I agree with this wholeheartedly and 100%, especially seeing the debate tonight, it SUCKED, it was more like a press conference then a debate, and it was just plain BORING!!!

quote:

Implement the ÔÇ£instant run-offÔÇØ concept, where the first choice counts toward future Federal funding for minority or losing parties, but the second choice, if first choice does not win, counts toward the election of a winner elected by a majority.

End physical gerrymandering, and move instead toward virtual representation in which citizens can self-identify as belonging to a specific party, and then vote for Governors, Congress, and other key positions as a member of that virtual community within each stateÔÇöthis will achieve true representation; and

The first I need a further explanation on, get a little more specific if you would.

The second sounds great, but I believe it really opens things up for voter fraud, then again, EVERY system we have come up with is ripe for voter fraud.

Again, we have the problem of status quo.

quote:

End corporate and association contributions to political candidatesÔÇösimply make them illegal, while doubling salaries of elected officials over ten years, coincident with a push for major increases in salaries for those engaged in homeland nation-buildingÔÇöteachers, cops, firemen, and public health professionals.

This sounds real good, but the fact is that people should have the opportunity to pool their money together for candidates, not sure if you would make that illegal as well, and I believe that corporate entities should be able to make their voices heard, because they are taxed as well. I believe though, that that financial support should be limited.

Lord knows the McCain Feingold bill was a total disaster, any change would be good from what we have now.

quote:

ÔÇ£Nothing in the existing or planned Federal budget makes America any safer!

Our government has gotten out of touch with global realities, at the same time that we have failed to develop new forms of state & local security. Below are some general intelligence reforms I want to see championed by a candidate and team of substance:

I disgree with this entire premise, because I believe that there are things in the federal budget that address our security. But we will go over your points one at a time anyway.

quote:

Restructuring of the Presidential staff to create four Director-Generals for Policy, Strategy, Intelligence, and Research. America has no serious strategy for its future, intelligence is not impacting on policy or strategy, and government research (as well as taxation policies) are retarding rather than advancing the private sectorÔÇÖs ability to be innovative.

Creation of a consolidated National Foreign Intelligence Program that gives the Director-General for Intelligence control over the three technical intelligence agencies now within the defense department, while earmarking 50% of the program in peace, 85% in war, for defense.

Elevation of the National Intelligence Council to the Office of the President, where it can do a better job of harnessing the distributed intelligence of the entire Nation, while also working more closely with the Cabinet departments.

Establishment of the Global Knowledge Foundation, a $1.5 billion a year ÔÇ£.orgÔÇØ dedicated to helping all elements of the government as well as the private sector gain better access to open sources of information in all languages of the worldÔÇö80% of what we need for 5% of the cost of secrets. Includes creation of a ÔÇ£virtual national intelligence communityÔÇØ of leading experts on everything who do not want top secret clearances, and a Digital Marshall Plan for Third WorldÔÇöthe sooner they are ÔÇ£wiredÔÇØ the sooner we can more ably understand them.

General redirection of the major intelligence agencies, to include conversion of the NRO into the National Collection Agency, CIA into the National Analysis Agency, and NSA into the National Processing Agency, while creating a new Clandestine Service Agency that is truly clandestine, and a Homeland Security Intelligence Program that enables Governors and Mayors to establish professional intelligence and counterintelligence programs under their sovereignty rather than as federal initiatives.

I am not sure if this would streamline it, or create another beauracratic mess. This one I will have to look at a little closer before I comment on it. If you would care to get a little more specific, I would be glad to read it.

It's late, and I am now getting more and more NOT in a political mood tonight, and your post is pretty long, so I will try and comment on the rest of it tomorrow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i will wait on you to finish your dissection, before I continue...I realize, much of this is probably over your head, and will attempt to break it down for you after your through

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Well, that's enough of that.

I thought that we could keep it civil, but I guess not.

Was trying to be neutral and ask the right questions and you had to come back and be an ass.

What else should I expect from you?

I was actually interested in hearing further what you had to say, but if you are going to an arrogant ass, you can kiss off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL yeah, I can be an arrogant ass, that is definately one of my capabilities.. as is one of yours, as well. See? we do have something in common , after all!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

BTW, most of your thoughts are COMPLETELY politically impossible, and will never happen.

They are great dreams, but the fact is, NONE of them are realistic.

Remember, this is the REAL world, not some dreamland.

Then again, you do seem to be in Dreamland a LOT lately, that Hate Bush thing has really got you going, and I am beginning to think it is taking you where you really don't want to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was merely what the title of the thread stated: nothing more, nothing less.

Why you must try to prove your expertise, in things you obviously do not understand, I guess we will never know

And as far as hating bush goes, just another one of your misinterpretations of reality.

Irresponsible men in power, are a threat to the WHOLE nation's welfare, not mine alone.

use some gray matter, and consider that one thought...if that is possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Irresponsible men in power, yeah, Kerry in power scares me to death, absolutely.

I was not trying to prove my expertise, I was being realistic and trying to ask you questions, which you decided were somehow below you, and tried to burn me on.

I was trying to keep it simple for you so that you could answer in simple and easy to understand terms, but you again, decided that that would be below you.

There are teenagers on this board, high school graduates, and newbies to politics that really have no idea what you are talking about.

Perhaps, just perhaps, if you came down a little bit, you would be better understood, but that is probably below you as well, so never mind.

I was trying to draw you out, so that you would be more easily understood by the rest of us here, but you decided again, that that would be below you.

Your decision to be an arrogant twit, I was actually trying to start a conversation, a CIVIL conversation, which you decided should be turned into a pissing match.

Quit feeling so threatened, I told you RIGHT up front, that I was going to keep it civil, and I certainly tried, but you obviously cannot contain your anger towards me enough to carry on even a fake atmosphere of civility.

Oh well.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Kerry in power scares me to death, absolutely.

Fear, is what your all about. I think the whole world KNOWS that is the BUSH strategy.

does not surprise me, you are neck deep in it. You should be. Kerry's got one hell of a chance!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

quote:

Originally posted by street:

quote:

Kerry in power scares me to death, absolutely.

Fear, is what your all about. I think the whole world KNOWS that is the BUSH strategy.

does not surprise me, you are neck deep in it. You should be. Kerry's got one hell of a chance!!


You mean snowballs chance!!! ROFLMAO!!

Please see my edited post above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by street:

quote:

Kerry in power scares me to death, absolutely.

Fear, is what your all about. I think the whole world KNOWS that is the BUSH strategy.

does not surprise me, you are neck deep in it. You should be. Kerry's got one hell of a chance!!


Yea... one hell of a chance to destroy the US and bring us back down to where we where when we where attacked...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nomad

War will NEVER be won without the loss of blood

We've lost only a 1000 troops

The enemy has lost A LOT, rumors speculate that they've lost well over 9 perhaps 11 time's more than us

In my opinion, it's worth it

Soldier's follow orders Nomad. Granted there are time's when those orders shouldn't be followed, but no soldier is questioning the orders given to them to kill the terrorists

You are right, we where attacked

Just like how we where attacked in World War 2, Pearl Harbor, how many where lost? A LOT

We went in, we got involved in that war. We lost more soldiers in those battle's than we did at Pearl Harbor

BUT!

It was worth it

Germany surrendered, Hitler commited suicide, Japan surrendered

In total nomad, we lost a lot more soldiers in World War 2 than we had at Pearl Harbor, which is what got us into the war

The terrorist attack on the World Trade Center, we lost about 1500+ citizen's there. We then go to war against Afganistan

So, in reality, when you go to war it's only natural that you'll lose lives a war will NEVER be won just sitting on you're hands doing jack shit

I thought you would know that Nomad, obviously I misunderstood you, I figured you to be smarter than this. I seriously hope I just misunderstood you're post... and that you DO realize that war will be won without blood shed

Edit: Nomad, read Lost's post.. expically the new's max.. it's rather interesting and provide's some good information

There's a connection alright, tracking saddam's money and such prove's just that

quote:

Originally posted by street:


It's no laughing matter Street, but that's something you clearly have no capacity of understanding.. Nomad on the other hand, does understand it.. that's why I enjoy debating with him

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nomad, we have 90% of our military, currantly occupied with iraq, and afghanistan....this has put a strangle hold on our ability to deal with other world threats..which are more prevelant, and well routed.

The United States can only handle ONE more "hands on" military operation, of any sizable scale.

It would, in fact, be a fatal mistake for this country to take any further agressive steps toward any other country in the world.

I know, many within this forum, do not agree with any position I assume; however, I have great concerns in the arrogance of our present day, foreign policy.

Within this whole issue, is the present misunderstanding of the whole American populace, that we are not fighting a single war, but two distinct wars.

This is the core, of the illusion, presented by our currant president, which need be clearly revealed to the American population.

This is also, the core, of Bush's psychological instability. As he has demonstrated, he cannot adequately distinquish between the two very different "threats" presented.

This is a common psychological failure, for one who cannot handle stress. And this is something, which cannot be foreseen, until events surrounding the individual cause it to surface.

I firmly believe: "This country, and consequently the world, is in a tremendously unstable position of security, with such an individual, in control of of such an arsonel of power"

quote:

It's no laughing matter Street, but that's something you clearly have no capacity of understanding.

Kalshion: Dont bother , My responses toward you and Jaq, will not be, as you expect. For very good reason. your immature flames, are redundant and offensive, and I have'nt the patience, nomad is willing to display. So, as is common among the locals here, " Dont start, there wont be none"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

This is ONE war Street, this is something that you can't seem to come to grips with.

The stability of the president is not what I am worried about, it's your stability that worries me.

The war on Iraq is indeed a MAJOR part of the war on terror, just as afghanistan was.

The ties to Al Quaeda and other groups to Saddam existed and there is no way to argue that. It's a PROVEN fact.

Iraq is a part of the war on Terror, and 90% of our military is NOT in Iraq, NOR involved in Iraq, we have other responsibilities in other corners of the world that we need the full timers for, which is why we are INCREASING our full time VOLUNTEER forces, and using the reservists and Guardsman to pick up the slack in Iraq.

90%

As I said, your stability is what worries me.

Also, just FYI, we have increased the size of full timers by 40,000 this year, and are increasing it even more next year.

All services are MEETING or surpassing ALL their recruitment requirements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LIS: Your 'proof' is bogus.

That newsmax article is similar to most right-wing propaganda, claiming a Al Qaeda-Iraqi link, jumping to conclusions.

So one member of the Iraqi army was a member of Al Qaeda. Timothy McVeigh was a Bradley gunner, does this mean the U.S. bombed the Alfred P. Murrah building (AKA Oklahoma City bombing)? Lee Harvey Oswald was a Marine sharpshooter, does this mean that the American government ordered the assassination of Kennedy? Of course it doesnt. The affiliations of one person does NOT mean the entire group has the same affiliations.

Freerepublic is me-tooing, conservative propaganda, and parroting whatever republican talking point happens to be the most prevalent.

So there was another person affiliated with Al Qaeda, who was also in the Iraqi government. It's entirely reasonable to say that some people in Iraq were involved with Al Qaeda. But by no means does it prove that there was a concerted effort at the higher levels of the government to help Al Qaeda, like you're claiming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

This is ONE war Street, this is something that you can't seem to come to grips with.

The stability of the president is not what I am worried about, it's your stability that worries me.


personally jag, your wasting your breath, addressing me, in any way, shape or form

Your immature flames are evidence of your instability...so whatever you say kid.

quote:

That newsmax article is similar to most right-wing propaganda, claiming a Al Qaeda-Iraqi link, jumping to conclusions.


EXACTLY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by street:

quote:

This is ONE war Street, this is something that you can't seem to come to grips with.

The stability of the president is not what I am worried about, it's your stability that worries me.


personally jag, your wasting your breath, addressing me, in any way, shape or form

Your immature flames are evidence of your instability...so whatever you say kid.


Hmmm

You must be an immature kid to, seeing how you keep attacking the messenger, refusing to cooporate and answering the question's put before you

You insulted Jag in another thread.. so quite frankly YOU shouldn't talk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact you replied and used that word is proof enough, thank you Street. You just proved my point

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×