[Grovenet] Dependent or Independent? (WAS: A DifferentChristmasPoem)

[Steven]

Maybe the issue is that we allowed for corporations. A figment of the
courts.
These corporations have grown quite large and are paying for these
lobbyists, not wealthy folks.
Then there is the issue of how cheap it is to buy a politician. Clinton 1
sold our national secrets to the Chinese for about $600k. Not much when you
think of what they are worth. For as little as $30k, you can get special
legislation in the state.
But have info like Goldschmidt being a child rapist and you could have what
ever you wanted.

-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com]On
Behalf Of Geri
Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2007 11:01 AM
To: Forest Grove local interests list
Subject: Re: [Grovenet] Dependent or Independent? (WAS: A
DifferentChristmasPoem)


Wouldn't it be fun if there could be more than
two parties (the same old ones elbowing out
the others)?!

Pretty darn sure I'd remain an independent,
but for most elections, I think we'd more likely
as individuals find candidates closer to what
we want.

I think the big lobbyists and corporate interests
need to go ...  There are very few wealthy or
powerful enough individuals -- only a tiny percent
 -- who can ever compete with them, and that
leaves out most of America!  Not to mention it's
"we the people" who are supposed to be
represented, not "we the extreme wealthy folks."


Geri

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ron D'Eau Claire" <ron at cobi.biz>
To: "'Forest Grove local interests list'" <grovenet at rdrop.com>
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 11:41 AM
Subject: [Grovenet] Dependent or Independent? (WAS: A Different
ChristmasPoem)


>I find interesting candidates in both parties. My frustration is with the
> party machines, not necessarily the candidates.
>
> President Bush is simply the latest manifestation of their extremists
> controlling the Republican Party. I have a hard time taking seriously
*any*
> candidate that party puts forward, no matter how personally attractive,
> because I know that he will be controlled by the same party mob.
>
> But I feel that both parties are out of control: they are simply too
> powerful. For many years, anyone who seriously expects to be elected to
the
> Presidency has to join one or the other of the two parties, yet that
person
> is only a figurehead, controlled and directed by a hidden power
structure
> that we did not choose, pursuing goals they do not care to publicize.
>
> The very publicity that convinces the public that the lies you cited are
> truth has disenfranchised the voters as fast as they received their
ballots.
> The power centers do that using the parties as the their 'front',
enticing
> the public with cleverly-crafted emotional appeals the hide the truth.
>
> One of the great fictions of our day is that it takes a rare,
extraordinary
> person to be a successful President. Nonsense! If President Bush hasn't
> proven that wrong, everyone's blind. Indeed, they may well be blind!
>
> This country was founded on the idea that any educated American is
capable
> of handling state or national office, aided by highly-qualified experts
of
> their choosing. It's true that the number of well educated Americans is
> diminishing at an alarming rate, but we still have literally millions of
> well qualified people for the Presidency and every other elected office
in
> our land. The day that's no longer true, we no longer have a republic!
>
> I'm not saying that those who are running for office with either party
> aren't intelligent, educated and qualified to serve. I am saying that
every
> one of those who are running on the national tickets have a huge machine
> attached to them with its own agenda who we will put in power if we
choose
> them. That's exactly what happened when President Bush took office. I
> believe that it's also true with almost every other President in my
> lifetime.
>
> It's time for a revolution, not against the government established by
our
> founding fathers, but against the corrupt, ineffective system by which
we
> choose the candidates who we get to vote on to run the government.
>
> One simple, effective way to revolt is to stop offering our names to the
> political parties to use as they see fit. No matter who we may choose to
> vote for on election day, why allow their party to crow that we are
among
> their dedicated, unquestioning supporters by virtue of being a member?
>
> Why not register as an independent, saying "show me and I'll think about
it"
> when a party puts forth a candidate?
>
> Isn't independence what America is all about?
>
> As an independent, no one will suggest that you should be true to
someone
> else's ideals.
>
> All you have to do is be true to yourself.
>
> Ron D'Eau Claire
> _______________________________________________
> GroveNet mailing list
> GroveNet at rdrop.com
> http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet