Re: Campaigning is a 'Science', too.
- From: NoEinstein <noeinstein@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2008 15:29:47 -0700 (PDT)
On Apr 1, 4:15 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
When our country was founded, America was a place of hope for those
bold enough to brave the sometimes harsh Atlantic to get here. The
early pioneers wanted fair treatment, and freedom from any oppression
that might limit a person's potential. Democracy seemed to be the
most fair form of government. And a Representative Republic was the
most practical approximation of such ideal.
Over the decades, the self-sufficient agrarian lifestyles of the
majority evolved into our present niche specialty lifestyles. Our
economic system--based on specialization--is varyingly successful. But
too often, our governments try to tweak those places where it feels
there are inequities, and those who 'get' have for too long been at
odds with those who 'give'.
For the first time in our history, 81% of American's are unhappy with
the direction that our country is headed. In recent presidential
elections the percent of those who cheered at the outcome was close to
half of those who voted. 'At least' half of the voters were happy...
But does living in a democracy mean that only half can be happy at one
time in America? No, it doesn't!
Don't blame democracy for our problems! It may come as a shock to
many, but America isn't anywhere close to being a democracy. And she
gets further and further away from such an ideal every day. CNN's Lou
Dobbs is often shown asking this question: "Doesn't America deserve a
government that works?" By all means, yes! But we don't have such a
government(s)... because of the naïve complacency of those niche
specialty citizens and voters. All of you nice Americans haven't been
holding our governments accountable.
Those in governments have become our Elected Dictators--a proverbial
ruling class--that was so disdained by our founding fathers. And we
let it happen right under our own eyes, without a care in the world.
With 81% of Americans unhappy with our country, maybe those same
citizens will listen to some of my insights concerning how to save
America:
"When something is broken, fix it!" Government has been paying lip
service to our pioneer era Constitution. But behind the scenes they
have figured how to circumvent most, if not all, of the democratic
principles so desired by our founding fathers. Largely, this has been
due to treason-worthy Supreme Court interpretations. Again, most of
our too trusting Americans have just gone-with-the-flow, while more
and more of our cherished civil liberties have been taken from us.
And those thefts of our liberties keep happening without any calls of:
"Treason!".
"The media has destroyed democracy!" When the Constitution was
written, the citizens learned of developing issues from low volume
newspapers; bulletins; and via word of mouth. Talking to one's
neighbors across the split-rail fences was wonderful for America. But
today the media--and our specialty lifestyles--lets us 'communicate'
about issues mostly in those forums that the media itself allows to be
aired, and in which Americans are just 'spectators' to the daily
lowering of their own destinies.
"The media has encouraged the very worst among us to... 'represent'
us." Those with huge egos, like Barack Obama... are drawn to political
careers, because the media will print what they say, and allow their
mugs to be put in the public view. Wonderful, patriotic Americans who
would represent us well, but who are more shy in public situations,
never venture into public office, because they don't like being in the
media spotlight.
"The media favors those it knows, and especially those who agree with
their political positions on issues." The buddy-buddy relationships
of the politicians and the media favors... 'career politicians'--who, due
to their governmental isolation, too often, are out-of-tune with those
citizens who elected them. The media has made our career politicians
an elite ruling class. And because the media itself is haughty, it
mistakenly believes that IT, the media, represents America. That's
why the media keeps espousing its own ideals, rather than seeking out
and airing the ideals of the citizens.
"The media follows the advertising dollars in deciding positions."
Hillary Rodham Clinton, to her credit, is a known entity who should be
able to win any 'fair election' based on her best-person-for-the-job
persona. And she should be able to do such without having to purchase
a single advertisement! But the corrupt media is favoring Barack
Obama and his "the presidency-can-be-bought" advertising dollars. And
they are doing so because they feel more important by getting someone
who is undeserving of the job elected. One of my own quotes: "The
lust for power favors evil-doing, because the glory of dictating a
good thing is always shared with its unspoken moral imperative."
In the present race for President, persuasiveness--wrongly--is more
important than having the best positions on the issues. Sadly,
persuasiveness is allowed to negate even our supposed Representative
Republic. Here's how that works: We elect a promising new
representative. But he or she starts out without seniority, and soon
learns who the power bosses in Washington are, and to whom they must
defer. The most persuasive orators are able to sway other
representatives to vote this way or that. But where is it written in
the Constitution that America gets ruled by the best orators... like
Barack Obama has managed to convince people that he is?
This week ex Governor of Minnesota, Jesse Ventura, was a guest on
"Larry King Live". Jesse is someone, with a detachment from... "the
system", to evaluate it without bias. That is... unless being "a
centrist" can be called bias. The following is a letter I wrote to
Jesse in 1999. It hints how profoundly involved I am in rooting out
America's problems and trying to put America back on a sound
foundation based on democracy.
_____
June 4, 1999
Honorable Governor of Minnesota
Jesse Ventura
The State House
St. Paul, Minnesota 55155
Dear Governor Ventura:
To an extent, Minnesota is a microcosm of the USA. What is good
for the USA should be good for Minnesota and vise versa. I am writing
this to you because I've discovered major failings in our systems of
government. All of such can be blamed--in whole or in part--on partisan
politics.
I watched you during your wrestling career only in 'switching
channels'--please don't take offense. But I'd seen you enough so that
your face (and voice) were familiar by the time you started running
for governor. You ran for mayor--not because it was a career political
step--but because you saw a need that you could fill, and those in your
small town sensed a personal benefit from having you for their leader.
For want of a 'better' label, I am a registered democrat who is
ultra-conservative in monetary matters, and moderately moderate on
social issues. I am also a die-hard Civil Libertarian. (I've heard
you talk enough to sense that you greatly value civil liberties as
well.) Lumping all of these things together, one might consider me to
be a moderate, or like you call it, a centrist. I'm BIG on the
American People (with a capital P) and... small on politicians and
self-serving government.
The first thing that really impressed me about you was the fact
that you were a Navy Seal. I've had an innate feeling that Seals are
selected as much for their minds as for their bodies. After all, what
worth is a 'machine' without a good control system! The success or
failure of a mission could well depend on the split-second decision of
the man at the front. In America, somehow, we've gotten away from
that high standard and 'accept' that those who are remote (in
Washington or etc.) can do a better job of running things than... the
man on... the front line.
I was impressed that you are a strong family man. I suspect a
good part of your interest in entering... politics... has to do with
the very real wish that your children have a secure future, and that
your grandchildren, and on and on, will have one as well. I am
impressed that you value a seaside-life-of-leisure more than you value
the 'acclaim' that comes with seeking higher and higher public
offices. But you are not a man to stand by idly when you see a need
you can fill, and there are throngs of... the People... who sense a
personal benefit in having (or considering having) you for their
leader.
By normal 'letter' standards this is already long, but it could
be one of the most important letters you'll ever get. There's a
computer disk enclosed that gives details of why this is important. A
'nutshell' of the disk is the attached letter to The London Times. We
(wrongly) have taken for granted that 'the media' will keep the People
informed so that they can't be duped by big government. The media is
largely a bunch of puppet (on strings) news journalists who must
appease their advertisers, and answer to their don't-make-waves
bosses... The true NEWS isn't being reported. So, this is an
indictment of the media at least equal to the indictment of partisan
politics and big (pseudo-functioning) government.
Following The London Times letter is another letter to you
discussing what I propose doing about these 'problems', and how you
and your family, and their families and on and on should be interested
as well.
Governor, you are one of the men I most admire--based on what I've
learned thus far. I hope we can travel the same paths... for the
benefit of the People!
Very truly yours,
-- NoEinstein --
[Actual name and address was used.]
_____
A large part of this essay concerns our failed media. Just today, I
saw CNN's Wolf Blitzer give his trademark, hiding-behind-a-beard-
without-a-hint-of-emotion, tacit attack on democracy. He made such
attack by having as his guests mainly those who are pro Obama. DNC
Chairman Howard Dean is trying for 'Brownie Points' by claiming to be
working to... 'seat' the FL delegates in Colorado. But 'seating' and
'counting' are two separate things. And without a representation from
Michigan, democracy can't even be claimed as a... plank of the
Democratic Party.
Hilary Clinton, and her would be 'First Gentleman', are knowledgeable
enough about running the Executive Branch that they can do so without
having to go hat-in-hand to anyone in the Democratic Party. In the
other wise, Barack Obama will be totally beholden to those selfish
endorsers of his who keep coming out of the woodwork. Those who
endorse Obama are trying to "buy a job"... that is, unless Obama will
publicly decline to even consider any of his endorsers for a Cabinet
position, or any other, in the Executive Branch.
But Obama has been bought--since he first showed oratory promise as a
teen. The man got pegged as a leader... of blacks. And blacks fed his
ego to believe that his becoming president was his destiny. But the
man whom blacks selected as 'white enough', also is carrying the
wounded psyche of a child who had no loving father figure. As a
result, Obama's loyalties are divided, black and white. He is like a
man without a country, or a ship without a port.
Money, and blind eyes, keep Obama on his failed course to gain the
nomination to become a candidate for President. His "lefty" emotions
just aren't there. He's like a machine that those who are
discontented with the direction this country is headed hope can
perform for them. But an Obama presidency would only sink this
country further and further into corruption.
Suppression of democracy is tantamount to the overthrow of America.
If a spy were caught wanting to destroy the very foundation on which
America was built, such person would be tried for treason. When
Barack Obama, Howard Dean, Tom Daschel, Bob Casey, Bill Richardson,
Wolf Blitzer, Anderson Coo-per, Jack Cafferty, etc., etc, etc., think
that the negating of democracy is "fair play", they should be CURSED
by all Americans--if not tired for treason, or subversion from within.
WITH democracy, America survives; without it, we fail--and from our own
complacency. Babies in wet diapers, and people of similar ilk, may
desire... "Obama, Obama...!" to be their president. But thinking ADULTS
will recognize when corrupt and selfish influences are stampeding a
"Manchurian Candidate" like Barack Obama to be a puppet of those bad
influences. Jesse Venture rightly says that Obama and McCain will get
their "strings pulled" by their parties. This country can't allow
political parties, and a corrupt media, to bring down the Greatest
Nation of All Time.
So arise, thinking ADULTS, in PA, NC, IN and the remaining primary
states as well as in Puerto Rico! Give Barack Obama an appropriate
sendoff for one who is selfish enough to betray democracy, and
mentally ill enough not to show the least hint of emotion that he has
so done.
Respectfully submitted,
-- NoEinstein --
On Mar 29, 2:15 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:> On Mar 28, 12:34 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Very few emerging truths are ever allowed to be covered "as news" in
the media. That's because truths tend to hurt those who are doing the
wrong things, more than the converse. The failed media in this
country is at the very core of America's problems. To correct those
problems will necessitate placing major constraints on allowing ANY
biases in the media to influence ANY decisions of the citizens in how
they will vote in elections or in referenda. So, we in America should
prepare ourselves for living in a world in which "news commentators",
ALL of them, will be an extinct breed.
Recently, I have said that CNN's Wolf Blitzer seems to be showing a
professional detachment in how he administers news stories. This past
Sunday he had James Carville as his guest. As most of you know,
Carville had called Gov. Bill Richardson a... "Judas" for endorsing
Barack Obama. That's because Richardson had served as a cabinet
member during Bill Clinton's administration.
In all fairness, Richardson has every right to switch his loyalty.
But he does NOT have a right to use his own endorsement for anyone
running for office, to persuade others to vote for such person!
Endorsements, more often than not, run counter to democratic
principles. The "buddy-buddy" endorsements by seated officials,
creates these "you owe me one" relationships. Those who manage to get
elected should owe no one anything, other than to do the best job for
all Americans!
James Carville, personality wise, is an ideal person for contrasting
with Barack Obama. Carville shows all of his emotions on his face, or
in his (at times) stammering voice. Those qualities are like windows
to his soul; and he comes across as sincere because of it. Obama, on
the other hand shows NO emotions on his face, nor in his voice. So,
he comes across as someone who can't be analyzed; could be hiding
things; and thus could be untrustworthy.
After Obama made his robot-like address about his relationship with
his pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, he was interviewed about how his
speech may have allayed the Wright issues. I was taken--not by what
Obama said during the interview--but that he said it without a hint of...
quaver in his voice. There was this hugely emotional issue in which
teary eyes, a nervous hand, or Carville-like stammering voice would
have shown Obama to be... human, and perhaps sincere. But Obama has
never shown, to my satisfaction, that he is sincere about anything.
I've seen recent campaign ads of Obama's that are being run in NC. In
those he talks, assertively, about what he will do for the people if
he is elected President. Obama is wearing a white dress shirt with
his sleeves rolled up--the way Screaming Howard Dean had worn his
sleeves.
Obama's speech would have been great for one running to be a US
Senator, but it wasn't appropriate for a person running for
President. Why? Because the issues facing a president are waytoo
broad to be embodied in one person. Though Obama is a smart man, he
'might be' a smart man worthy of being President ONLY if he is wise
enough to delegate the working out of the details to his
subordinates. Because Obama is a detail-oriented specialist, he is
incapable--by his personality-- of delegating authority; he is difficult
to approach and befriend; and his ego is so huge that everyone in
Congress will have their guards up so high, that all of those
"promising" political ads of his will have been just so much hot air.
Sadly, many people will think that because Obama is so strong willed,
that he'll accomplish things "for them" that have never been
accomplished before. But nothing could be further from the truth!
Because Obama has ZERO executive, and ZERO foreign policy experience,
he will be... at the mercy of the Democratic Party to tell him how to
"run" things. 'That' is the reason people like Richardson, Daschel,
and Dean are so "supportive"--they want jobs in the Executive Branch
that will look good in their 'biographies'. And when they betray
democratic ideals for selfish ends, they themselves are being un
American.
With the Pennsylvania primary looming large on the horizon, PA Senator
Bob Casey has endorsed Obama. Those two recently held a pseudo press
conference. In it Obama took just two or three questions, then tried
to SNOW everyone with... how much he knows. He talking waytoolong,
and went into waytoomany boring details. Those same tendencies will
surely doom an Obama presidency.
Sen. Casey was standing beside Obama with this very nervous, almost
stunned look, over how Obama's "press conference" had turned into
monologues. If JFK had held that same press conference, he would have
fielded fifteen our twenty questions, and used no more than three or
four sentences to reply to each. And everyone would have been highly
entertained in the process!
A likely reason that Obama chose to have a pseudo, monologue press
conference is because he didn't wish to 'risk' having a maverick
reporter ask: "Senator Obama, recently, blogs on the Internet are
suggesting that your tacit resistance to having the Fl and MI primary
votes counted, or having those primaries be re held, is tantamount to
your placing more importance on your getting nominated, than you place
on democracy itself. Would you please comment?"
If and when Obama has to answer such a question, his candidacy for
President is over. You voters "still up for grabs" in PA or in NC
should know that Obama can't get to the Democratic National Convention
in August, without answering that very same question. So, to vote for
a real winner (!) Hillary Rodham Clinton is the wisest choice!
Most tellingly, "the question about Obama's favoring getting nominated
over his favoring democracy itself" was never discussed by Wolf
Blitzer. Was he showing bias toward Obama by not discussing that
question? Or was he just following the failed rule-of-thumb in the
media that "news" comes only from A-list politicians or celebrities,
never from any of the John Q. Public out there. I am proud to be John
Q. Public personified!
Immediately, after I began posting regarding Obama's personality being
unsuited for a President of the USA, the readership of my posts shot
way up. Obama knows that I have accused him of having little in
common with anybody. Now, I see him trying to look... American by
bowling gutter balls, or by eating pizza. Yes, he can smile and even
laugh in crowds. But he still can't show any emotion whatsoever while
being interviewed or while making prepared speeches. I could never
trust such a man as my President.
It has been over a week since I accused Obama of "betraying democracy"
for his own selfish ends. Such time period is long enough for him to
have responded this way, if he was so minded: "My fellow Americans: I
have learned--through the recent Internet blogs of a man with the
curious computer name, NoEinstein--that I have slipped up in how I'm
running my campaign for President. The Democratic primaries that were
held in Florida and Michigan... thoughtooearly to comply with the
rules of the DNC, were still democratic processes. I agree with
NoEinstein that the rules of a democracy--like I hope that America
still is--will always trump the rules of any political party. In
short, the 'date restriction' set by the DNC for 'which' primaries can
be held 'when', is probably unconstitutional.
"Therefore, I am recommending to the DNC that the vote in Florida be
taken, as is, with no revote. And I am recommending that the votes in
Michigan be apportioned the same as demographically similar
Pennsylvania, in its upcoming primary. If it should turn out that "as
goes Pennsylvania, so goes the Nation" I will live with such results.
My intent is to abide by sound principles of democracy. Any
candidate, so nominated, will best serve the interests of all
Americans. In that light, I remain a candidate to be your President.
Thank you all."
But the above heart felt speech was never forthcoming from Barack
Obama. His motives are to "serve" the throngs that he imagines still
want him to be President. But the momentum in the "Ballet Bowl" has
shifted. And the desperate calls that Clinton... "give up" are rightly
going unheeded. No speeches given in front of rows of American flags
will legitimize the candidacy of onetooselfish, andtoodetached to
serve anyone but those string-alongs who might get asked to do Obama's
bidding.
It is time that Obama withdraw as a candidate, and time that he
apologize to the American people for not honoring the high ideals of
democracy. America can survive without him.
Respectfully submitted,
-- NoEinstein --
The US Constitution allows the States to decide many issues. The
resulting cross jurisdictions guarantee the right to vote, on the one
hand, while allowing each state to determine the boundaries of its own
districts. Problems arise when any district's boundary decisions have
been based on the resulting demographic makeup of districts--
especially, when the latter starts distorting the macro will of the
people, counter to democratic principles.
Conveniently, the political parties in many states use their already
drawn up district boundaries to allocate delegates to the national
party conventions. That's the reason it is possible for a candidate
to... "win" the delegate count, but loose the total popular vote across
the USA. Those times when the latter happens, democracy gets raped.
In the pioneer days when the Constitution was being written, it was
necessary that we be "a representative republic". That's because
democracy--though it is the shinning ideal--would have been impossible
to administer and to guarantee, if the votes of the people had had to
be collected via horse and buggy. And the distribution of the
information
...
read more >>- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
.
- References:
- Re: Campaigning is a 'Science', too.
- From: NoEinstein
- Re: Campaigning is a 'Science', too.
- Prev by Date: 100% efficiency
- Next by Date: Re: Rigorous definition of Planck's Constant
- Previous by thread: Re: Campaigning is a 'Science', too.
- Next by thread: Re: Campaigning is a 'Science', too.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
