Candidate Contracts: A Democratic Renewal

If you can handle my tinny, nasally mid-Western voice, the above video offers a detailed explanation on how candidate contracts take the guesswork out of voting and set a whole, new standard for electoral integrity in our country.  Or you can just read the entire text of the presentation, which follows here:

The candidate contract idea is simple and straightforward.

The candidate contract takes the guesswork out of voting.

It sets a new standard for deciding where a candidate stands on crucial issues, how serious that candidate is about solving problems which are important to us voters, how serious that candidate is about representing his or her constituents.  In fact, it sets down in writing what exactly that candidate will be doing when they arrive in Washington DC, right from Day One.

Every candidate says the right things.  They always say what they think the voters want to hear, the things that will get them elected.  Everyone understands this.

But talk is cheap.  And after they get elected, when these folks arrive in our nation’s capital and get inside that DC bubble, amnesia sets in.

How do I know?

That’s simple.  It’s so obvious anyone can see it.  You just have to look.

Just consider a few of these items.

63% of Americans want a federal minimum wage of $15.00 per hour.
That means more than 6 out of every 10 citizens want the minimum wage hiked to $15 per hour.  Mind you the minimum livable wage in urban areas like New York, San Francisco, Boston is over $22 per hour.  But $15 per hour would be a good start in the right direction. What is it now?  It’s equivalent in today’s dollars to what it was in 1950!  It’s a paltry $7.25 an hour.  It hasn’t increased since July of 2009.  That’s eight years ago!

75% of voters want fair trade agreements protecting jobs, workers, the environment.  75%! That’s a huge majority opposed to the trade bills which now give corporations enormous advantages, are responsible for exporting our jobs, destroying our unions, replacing good permanent employment with low wage temporary jobs.  Is Congress listening?  It doesn’t matter which party is in the Oval Office or even on Capitol Hill.  We still get NAFTA, CAFTA, TTIP, WTO.  Last year our pay-for-play legislators in the deep pockets of the multinational corporations fast-tracked TPP, the worst trade bill in history.  These neoliberal lapdogs won’t quit until we’re all back to being hunter-gatherers!
76% of voters want a cut back on military spending.  So what do we get next year?  Trump proposes an increase of $56 billion in the official defense budget with members of Congress from both parties cheering him on like a bunch of snarling pit bulls.

76% of voters want the U.S. completely out of Afghanistan.  We’ve been fighting that miserable pointless war for 16 years, folks!  They promised to get U.S. troops out of the country by 2014.  Now it’s 2017 and they’re putting more troops back in.  We’re going to be there forever!  For what?  To waste another $600 billion dollars and have more of our best and brightest come back in body bags?
79% of voters want no reductions in Social Security.  70% support expanding it.  79% of voters want no reductions in Medicare.  Here we have two of the most successful programs in our history, loved and supported by the people.  Yet every new session of Congress, there’s talk about cutting benefits, raising eligibility age -- slash slash slash.  Or they talk about “privatizing” it, which is doublespeak for turning it over to Wall Street so they can gamble with the money we’ve put away all our lives.  

It’s truly a crime!

There are many more.  So far I’ve just scratched the surface.

But there’s one last one I’ll mention that truly tells the story, that shows what a sad state of affairs our faltering democracy is in.  Get this: 93% of Americans want GMO labeling.  Mind you, they’re not saying GMOs must be banned.  They’re just saying that the labels for our processed food should say whether the product contains GMO ingredients or not, so that a shopper can make an informed judgment about whether they want to buy it — a mother who wants to be prudent in planning the diet for her kids, a person who may have severe food allergies which requires them to pay attention to the ingredients on a label.  93%!  That crosses all party lines, ideologies, religions, liberal, conservative, all ethnicities, visitors from outer space.  93%!  And Congress won’t pass a bill requiring GMO labeling.  That really says it all, doesn’t it?

Okay, we’ve got a range of different issues on the candidate contract we’ve prepared.  They are the things millions and millions of Americans want done — huge majorities of U.S. citizens.  As different as these items individually are, what do they all have in common?  You've got it!  NONE OF THIS GETS THROUGH OUR DEADBEAT CONGRESS!  Well, I shouldn’t say they’re deadbeat, because they’re not.  They are actually working hard to make sure none of these things gets passed, working hard not for you and I, but for their rich patrons, their deep-pocketed Wall Street donors, their Koch brothers and defense contractors, investment bankers and hedge fund buddies.

Like I said, candidates always say the right things.  Take minimum wage:  “I believe everyone deserves the right to make a decent living. This is the richest nation on earth. Every person deserves a good life.”  Sound familiar?  What’s he going to say? I think some folks should starve to death on slave wages?  Of course not.  But he used a lot of words to say nothing.  The candidate contract makes it a simple but powerful yes or no question: Will you commit in writing to raising the minimum wage to $15 per hour or not?  Yes or no.

So . . . all we’re saying to a candidate is this:  "We love your TV ads, you’ve got a lovely family, your t-shirts and bumper stickers look great!  But running this country is serious business.  So from now on, we want it in writing, in black-and-white, in a legally-binding contract what you will be doing to serve us, the folks who are sending you to your cushy job in Washington DC.  No ambiguity.  No compromise.  No equivocation.  We want it spelled out as an 'employment contract' and we are asking you to sign it.  We’re not forcing you.  It’s your choice.  It’s a straightforward deal here.  You sign the contract, you’ve got our vote.  You don’t sign the contract, we’re looking for a candidate who has the integrity, courage, and responsibility to sign it.  We’ll be voting for that person.  Understand this:  There’s no room for negotiation.  This is final!  That’s the way it works now."

You see, professional politicians have gotten spoiled.  They get so much attention, so much money, so many favors lavished on them once they get in office, they forget the most important single aspect of their job description:  THEY WORK FOR US!  We’re not casting votes for them to talk to lobbyists and rich campaign donors.  We’re casting our votes to have them go to DC and work on behalf of us, the people, the everyday Americans that make up 99% of the population.

Please. Just read the contract.  Everything in it is what at minimum 62% of us regular folks want done.  On many items, it’s even greater.  75%.  78%.  80% and above.  Right now those things aren’t getting done.  Year after year, our elected officials ignore the will of the people, the very citizens who vote them into office.  The candidate contract will make sure they start paying attention.

Here’s the simple truth.  Here’s what’s happening on the ground in real time right now in America.
Voters are tired of slick campaign rhetoric and empty campaign promises.  They’re fed up with a system that’s rigged.

They’re fed up with being left behind, forgotten by their elected officials.

They’re tired of everything getting done for Wall Street, the big banks, the corporations, the wealthy.

They’re fed up with nothing getting done for the PEOPLE — honest, hard-working everyday citizens.
Folks!  We need to DRAW A LINE IN THE SAND!

No negotiation.  No excuses.  No mercy.  No fear.

That’s exactly what the candidate contract does.  It lets us know exactly who’s on our side and who isn’t.

Okay, one last point:  People sometimes ask me, “What kind of candidate would sign such a contract?”

The answer to that is very simple:  A candidate who wants to win the coming election.  The contract spells out what the voters want by huge majorities.  Voters are sick and tired of compromises. They want the job done and want it done right.  Therefore, voters need to stand united and stand strong.  Vote only for candidates who are on their side, who will work for them!  And that being the case, the reason why a candidate should be running full speed with pen in hand to sign the contract is because they want to get elected and be sent to Washington DC to serve those who elected them honestly, faithfully, transparently.

Let me add some beautifully twisted logic to illustrate further why a candidate would want to sign this contract.

We all know there are some good people in politics, decent human beings who truly want to do the right thing.  But politics is often more about power, money, twisting arms, bullying, than about doing what’s good for the people.  So let’s say our candidate — who has signed the contract — arrives in Washington and right off the bat, there’s some lobbyist at his door.  The lobbyist gives his pitch, the typical let’s-see-what-we-can-do-here, the usual I’ll-scratch-your-back-if-you’ll-scratch-my-back blah blah blah.  He’s got some mega transnational corporation paying him big bucks to wax the slide with Congress and get some favorable legislation passed.  Well, here’s the beauty of the contract: Our guy, the one who got elected because he signed on the dotted line with you the voters, can say:  “Hey, I sure appreciate your coming in and talking to me about this.  But here’s the deal.  I’m under contract to my constituents.  I have no room to negotiate, no room to trade or bargain on any of this.  If I go against my constituents on this, I’ll be on the streets without this job, I’ll have to refund all my campaign contributions — and hey, the money is spent, how will I begin to do that? — and I’ll probably get my ass sued for more money than I’ll make in a lifetime.  So even if I wanted to go along with what you’re proposing, I have no choice.  I am legally-bound by contract to answer only to those who voted me into office.  Thanks for stopping by.  Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.”

See how this works?  See why this introduces an unprecedented level of honesty, transparency, integrity, back into voting?  Do you see why at least in terms of good, decent, honest politicians, we’re actually doing THEM a favor with this contract.

Okay, I’ve talked your ear off.  Let me wrap this up.

Yes, the candidate contract is a new innovation.  But it’s a necessary innovation.  Before there were cars, we didn’t need traffic lights.  Before big money and unprecedented concentration of wealth and power into the hands of a ruling elite, we didn’t need an enforceable contract with our elected officials.  Times change and we need to change with it.  Candidate contracts are the answer to the dismal state of our democracy. 

Granted, we have a lot of work to do to repair the mess we’re in.  But good work depends on good dependable workers.  Let’s put some real public servants in office who will serve the public, not just the rich and powerful. Let’s put some representatives in Congress who will represent everyday Americans, not Wall Street banks, corporate CEOs, not the incomprehensibly rich.  Let’s put some integrity back into our elections by electing only those with the integrity to sign on the dotted line, guaranteeing they will work for you in creating an America that works again for everyone.

---

Here is the link to look at the version of the candidate contract for a progressive running for the House of Representatives:  Candidate Contract - An American Renewal.

If you're interested in getting into the real details of an independent campaign using the candidate contract strategy -- and it is an entire electoral strategy, not just a slip of paper with some legalese -- I recommend reading the two books which got me noticed by the progressive activist groups now adopting the candidate contract for future campaigns.

 

"Candidate Contracts: Taking Back Our Democracy" was published in June of 2015 and is available worldwide from all the usual suspects:

Amazon (Kindle)  . . . amzn.to/1QJRiNZ
Amazon (Print) . . . amzn.to/1Cuq0du
Apple (iTunes) . . . apple.co/1BXnPcy
Barnes & Noble . . . bit.ly/1GpTTLq
Kobo (Indigo) . . . bit.ly/1OEI2xj
Smashwords . . . bit.ly/1B4DQCp
Direct from printer . . . bit.ly/1MGjDnN

 

"Fighting for the Democracy We Deserve" was published September 2015 and also is available both in every popular ebook format and as a deluxe paperback:

Amazon (Kindle) . . . amzn.to/1VMf2Ft
Amazon (Print) . . . amzn.to/1L9SdIC
Apple (iTunes) . . . apple.co/1JD1YAg
Barnes & Noble . . . bit.ly/1ZUJUpn
Kobo (Indigo) . . . bit.ly/1IX6rO4
Smashwords . . . bit.ly/22PXWLf
Direct from printer . . . bit.ly/1i7ISFM

[ This originated at the author's personal website . . . http://jdrachel.com ]



Candidate Contracts: A Democratic Renewal

Putting Boots (Birkenstocks) on the Ground: Part V

 

Bernie Sanders talks eagerly about a "revolution".

While this obviously is fantastic campaign rhetoric, his presidential aspirations fall a bit short of a revolution.  Many of his ideas for reforming the political system, revamping our national priorities, and replacing the current agenda with one that serves the greater good of the vast majority of citizens, notably are consistent with revolutionary change.  It is hopeful, heartening, inspiring, truly a breath of fresh air in the stagnant and highly toxic atmosphere of the now dominant neoliberal/neocon regime in Washington DC.

But the simple fact remains:  We're not electing a king.  We're only electing a president.  Reform comes from changing the laws.  Changing the laws comes from changing the law makers.  Either we change their minds or we change them, meaning we replace them with elected public servants who will serve the public instead of their corporate masters.

This entire series of articles is about exactly that . . . the need for such change and how I see that coming about.

It's all about people power.  Not PACs and SuperPACS.  Not big piles of money -- though the enormous sums the wealthy throw into the ring present a formidable obstacle for even the most organized and energetic citizens groups.

Change still comes down to the choice each of us personally makes in the voting booth.  Power resides in our aligning our individual choices, so that collectively -- as in tens of millions of us united in an unstoppable juggernaut of people power -- we get done what needs to get done.

I've already pointed at many crucial issues where there is substantial agreement.

75% of Americans want a federal minimum wage of $12.50 per hour.
63% of Americans want a federal minimum wage of $15.00 per hour.
75% of voters want fair trade agreements protecting jobs, workers, the environment.
76% of voters want a cut back on military spending.
76% of voters want the U.S. completely out of Afghanistan.
79% of voters want no reductions in Social Security, 70% support expanding it.
79% of voters want no reductions in Medicare.
80% of voters oppose the "Citizens United" U.S. Supreme Court decision.
68% of voters think taxes on the wealthy should be increased.
71% of voters support massive infrastructure renewal.
74% of American voters are for ending oil industry subsidies.
93% of voters want GMO labeling on their food.

In Part IV of the series, I recommended collecting signature from people on a combination pledge-petition, which does two things:  1) it ascertains the level of local voter support for specific issues; and 2) invites individuals to take a stand on those issues, i.e. solicits their commitment to only vote for candidates who if elected will represent them and promote the agenda their constituents have united behind.

So we are now confronted with a critical question . . .

How do we know a candidate will do what we want once elected?

My solution is so simple and so obvious, many scoff and dismiss it immediately.

These are the same types of people who, by the way, stood on the beach at Kitty Hawk, scoffing and derisively observing:  "Ha! That contraption will never fly!"

The short answer is . . . we make the candidate sign a legally-binding contract.

While the contracts can address any number of issues, here is an example, specifically for a candidate running for House of Representatives, demanding an increase in the minimum wage to $15.00 per hour.


 
If you're immediate reaction is . . .

"Why, my congressman will never sign something like that!"

. . . all I can do is jump for joy!  It means we're getting somewhere!

I'll explain exactly how this is intended to work in the next installments of Putting Boots (Birkenstocks) on the Ground.  But before we go there, I have to make one critical point.  This really has to sink in and be fully understood in order to appreciate the power of the candidate contract and its potential as a game-changer in our current dysfunctional political environment.  Here it is . . .

While the candidate contract is a legally-binding agreement, properly implementing it is NOT A LEGAL STRATEGY.

IT IS A POLITICAL STRATEGY!

This is not about courts and juries and lawyers.

It is about forcing elected representatives to represent us.

It is using a legal instrument to our POLITICAL ADVANTAGE!

Please repeat this as often as needed for it to sink in . . .

Candidate contracts are legal instruments to force democratically-elected representatives to represent their constituents. They are political levers!

They are POLITICAL SLEDGEHAMMERS!

All will become clear in the next installments.



[ This originated at the author's personal website . . . http://jdrachel.com ]



Putting Boots (Birkenstocks) on the Ground: Part V

Putting Boots (Birkenstocks) on the Ground: Part IV

 

This proceeds from my previous articles outlining my approach to community-based "regime change" activism.  I encourage you to read them to embrace the foundation for what follows.

Part I
Part II
Part III

Using basic social skills, personally engaging others face-to-face, we get people talking and listening about problems we individually and collectively face.  We talk about what ails us.  Most people love to complain.  Misery loves company.  Next . . .

We tactfully and respectfully navigate the discussion to those critical issues which are the direct consequence of government policy and can only be solved by our elected officials.

We find common ground.  This should be easy.  So much has gone wrong over the past several decades, it is almost impossible to find someone who hasn't been negatively impacted by the mess we find ourselves in.  Americans on the whole are hurting.  Individually we are victims of much misguided decision-making.

We continue to talk.  And most importantly . . . to listen.

Maybe this doesn't sound like much of a breakthrough, but if we get this far -- having a comfortable adult conversation about one or more specific things which are contributing to the ongoing dysfunction -- it actually is quite noteworthy, taking into consideration the current environment.  More typically now whenever anything appears to remotely involve politics, we expect to see folks either maniacally shouting or withdrawing into a coma-like state of mute detachment.

Talking and listening thoughtfully and graciously represents dramatic progress! 

So . . . where we heading with this?

Time for a refresher on the Constitution.

Congress makes laws.  The president enforces them.

Granted, this clear division of labor has in recent times been compromised, with abuse of regulatory powers and signing statements by the president, and the wholesale surrender of war making powers by the Congress.  Let's still be clear.  And I offer this both as a warning to the ebullient Bernie Sanders supporters, and to those anxiety-ridden progressives who live in fear of either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump ascending the presidential throne:

Without a supportive Congress, nothing positive -- or for that matter negative -- will get done, especially if the new president is isolated.  It will be animus, gridlock, confrontation, blame-gaming, a show of distrust and open hostility between the executive and legislative branches which will make the past decade look like a friendly game of flag football.  This would certainly be the case with either Trump or Sanders.  Perhaps the most frightening prospect is a Hillary presidency, since her most menacing and treacherous policies, both domestic and international, presently have widespread support by our current corrupt, corporate-owned legislature.

There is no question that a strong, visionary president would be a good thing.

But a responsible, responsive, representative people's Congress is absolutely crucial.

Strong, visionary congressional action is a matter of survival for our nation.

Nothing will change until we change the laws.

Laws won't change until we change the law makers.

This is exactly where our grass-roots, boots-on-the-ground, community-based campaign must be entirely focused.

It is about electing individuals to Congress, both the House of Representatives and Senate, who will be directly accountable to their constituents.  The immediate goal of our efforts is to elect representatives who will pass legislation on a number of issues which are clearly important to voters.  These are things the public wants done . . . but aren't getting done.

This means one of two things.  Either the incumbents running for office come around and do what the voting public demands.  Or they are replaced with fresh candidates who have made a binding commitment to do so.

Back to our "conversation" with our neighbor, cousin, street cleaner, bartender, war vet.

We have been talking and listening.  It is obvious that the person we are talking to feels passionately about one, maybe several of the key issues.  Here's what unfolds next -- for each and every issue -- using Social Security here as an illustration:

 

"I see you feel as strongly as I do about keeping Social Security intact and if anything improving it.  Can I get you to sign this?"

"What is it?"

"It's a petition."

"Oh great!  Another petition.  Those never work."

"We think it will this time.  We're coming up with a way to force our elected officials to do what they say they're going to do."

"Who is we?"

"Well, 'we' is folks just like you and me.  This isn't a political party.  It's just citizens who want to see some important things get done.  Get some serious problems solved."

"How?  Politicians say one thing and do another."

"Exactly.  That's why we need to demand they stop playing games.  People like us have to stand up for ourselves.  The politicians are like children and will get away with whatever they can.  So if you and I don't take a stand, it'll never change.  We have to try.  If enough of us raise enough hell, stick together and refuse to take 'no' for an answer, we just might pull this off."

"How?  How are you going to get these guys with all their money and powerful backers to pay attention?  How can you make them do anything?"

"

First, we're going to get 40,000 people to sign this.  Look what it says.  'I will only vote for a candidate who will protect Social Security and work to increase benefits.'  I'd say that's pretty clear."

"And how will we know they will actually do this?  What's my signing a petition got to do with making my congressman get his butt in gear?"

"It's a place to start.  We will build on it to demand action.  For one thing, you're saying this is very important to you.  If fact, you're saying if he wants your vote, he had better step up to the plate."

"And they'll promise to do it, get elected, then break their promises."

"This time we won't let them."

"Hah!"

Most people are pretty jaded and pessimistic about the possibility of moving the system.  Inaction is the norm, the status quo the accepted state of things.  Resignation is endemic.

Many will want to argue at this point that we're wasting our time.

This is not an argument you can win.  No one knows for sure what will work and what will not.  And frankly, those skeptics have history on their side.  For the average American things are going backwards.  Very little is getting done, unless it benefits the rich.

At the same time, that's not an excuse for not trying.  Not trying guarantees failure.

"If we don't try, then we'll never get anything done.  If you don't want to see Social Security destroyed, then sign this and we'll take it from there.  It can't hurt."

That's all that needs to be said for now.  Here is what the petition pledge looks like:




What does a person have to lose by signing this?

Or signing similar petitions on other issues they feel strongly about?

Some might still be reluctant.  They may want to know why we need signatures on the petition.  If they press the matter, then explain what happens next -- which is what I'll discuss in detail in Parts V and VI of this series.

"Once we know we have enough voters behind this, we'll demand that each candidate signs a legally-binding contract.  That will be the 'absolute commitment' to do what you've asked them to do."

"And if they refuse to sign it?"

"We don't vote for them and we find someone who will.  No contract, no vote."

"They're not going to like this."

"But we will.  And we'll get something done for a change that we want done."

This idea is so simple, yet so powerful.  But there's only one way it can work . . . 

 

People must unite not under party banners, but as a voting bloc around issues that are important to them.  Party labels -- also very much the case with ideological labels -- muddy the waters, get people unfocused on what's truly consequential.  'Democrat', 'Republican', 'liberal', 'conservative', 'libertarian' -- even more so with  'socialist', 'Tea Party', and 'Green Party' -- have now become so emotionally charged, clear thinking becomes difficult, constructive dialogue impossible.

Forget the labels, affiliations, philosophies.  Stick with the issues.  They're staring us right in the face.

I hate sounding like a broken record, but please look again at the issue polls cited in my previous two articles:

75% of Americans want a federal minimum wage of $12.50 per hour.
63% of Americans want a federal minimum wage of $15.00 per hour.
75% of voters want fair trade agreements protecting jobs, workers, the environment.
76% of voters want a cut back on military spending.
76% of voters want the U.S. completely out of Afghanistan.
79% of voters want no reductions in Social Security, 70% support expanding it.
79% of voters want no reductions in Medicare.
80% of voters oppose the "Citizens United" U.S. Supreme Court decision.
68% of voters think taxes on the wealthy should be increased.
71% of voters support massive infrastructure renewal.
74% of American voters are for ending oil industry subsidies.
93% of voters want GMO labeling on their food.

These are huge consensuses.  These are the big issues.  To set the stage for real reform, to get our future elected officials listening, these are the issues which draw a line in the sand.  Either the candidates commit to getting these things done or they simply don't get elected.  Period!

This is how we force candidates to pay attention.

Why will they pay attention?

Their jobs depend on it.



[ This originated at the author's personal website . . . http://jdrachel.com ]


Putting Boots (Birkenstocks) on the Ground: Part IV

We’ll just have to agree to agree.

 

Agree to disagree?

How about if we agree to agree?

Did you know that 72% of American voters want a federal minimum wage of $10.00 or more.

74% of American voters are for ending oil subsidies.

76% of American voters want to cut back on military spending.

79% of American voters want no cuts in Social Security and Medicare.

93% of American voters want labeling of GMOs in their food.

There is vast agreement that the Citizens United decision was bad for America, with 80% 
against it and 65% strongly opposing it.

In a very recent poll, 68% of voters said that taxes on the wealthy should be increased.

I was very surprised, considering the stream of anti-Iran invective issuing from Congress, 
that 61% of Americans think we should do everything we can to cement the recent deal on
monitoring and controlling development of nuclear technology by Iran, as
opposed going to war, as is being promoted by Israel, Saudi Arabia, and
a rabid core of saber-rattling warmongers here in the U.S.

Glancing at the headlines, the constant stream of partisan yelling, social
turmoil, reports of widespread anger, mistrust, alarm and frustration,
you would never know that on many extremely crucial issues, there is
such a broad range of consensus among us normal, sane folks. You know
the people I'm talking about __ real people who have better things to do
than rail at everything and hate everyone in sight.

I'm not a conspiracist. But it sometimes seems as if a certain minority of
self-absorbed miscreants, who don't agree with the majority of decent
people in our country, decided to mangle and manipulate the
conversation. They seem bent on keeping things stirred up, making sure
we don't have a civil, constructive exchange of ideas, try to work out
our differences, then join together to move things in a good, positive
direction.

It's as if they intentionally mislead and misinform us.

By keeping us divided, they control us . . . making it easy to get their own way.

This is nothing new to other countries who view America as the greatest threat to world peace, as a source of chaos, a force not for unity and order but mayhem and disarray.

What we are beginning to recognize within our borders is what the world has for a long time observed outside of them.

They see an America which wantonly uses its military and economic power to muck things up, keep people scrambling, divided, confused, desperate. They watch in horror and fear as we destroy entire nations, killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people, and then claim we're safer now because those countries are in shambles and no longer organized enough to stand up to us, oppose our policies, our exploitation, our callous bullying.

Is this what we want?

Surely we don't really want to live in a nation that is at war with itself
and everyone else. That's not the America we believe in . . . that we
care about . . . that we're proud of . . . the America we hope to hand down to future generations.

We can agree on that, can't we?

I'd say that's a good start.

Let's agree to agree.

Go from there.


[ This originated at the author's personal web site . . . http://jdrachel.com ]

Starts With ‘C’ Rhymes With Dancer

 

I often get very frustrated with politics. So I  do understand why people
prefer to look the other way, though indifference and ignorance
lubricate the self-destructive mechanisms which I believe are taking us
towards either World War III, economic collapse, social Armageddon . . .
or all of the above.

At the same time, there is so much which is confusing, horrifying, nauseating,
just plain stupid and wrong, it's impossible to keep up with all of it.
Most crises seem so far away,  not relevant to the day-to-day business
of just trying to survive and keep our heads above water. ISIS, the
Ukraine, China, Afghanistan, Palestine, all place a distant nineteenth
to paying the mortgage, feeding ourselves, trying to put clothes on our
backs that don't disintegrate in the laundry, keeping the neighbor's dog
from pooping on the lawn.

Regardless of how consequential all of these international disturbances may
ultimately be, the simple truth is they don't hit home until they hit
home. The primary reason Americans are now concerned about Ebola is
their fear that it may spread in America, understandably so, though
chances of infection are pretty remote. But until people started dying
inside our own borders, it was just more bad news piled on bad news from
"somewhere over there" where bad news seems to grow like mold on an old
chunk of cheese in the back of the refrigerator.

Recognizing all of this, I am still very puzzled why people aren't up in 
arms about things which are, without a shred of doubt, a clear and present 
danger to them, right now, right here in our own U S of A. I don't mean unlikely, 
remote threats, like the prospect they will be hit by a drunk driver or be the victim 
of a swarm of killer bees. I refer to very real, very imminent hazards which have 
the potential to kill them, shortening their lives by many years! Who wants to 
die before they have to?

In my travels, people ask me why I left the U.S. in 2006. I have a straightforward reply . . .

The political climate and the food.

Both were toxic. Both were poisonous to my health and happiness.

Since I've already written over a hundred political rants, here let's just talk about food.

The food in America is a death warrant.

Maybe not as poisonous as rat poison but ultimately just as lethal.

 

Some might think I'm being hyperbolic. I don't think so. Americans are being
slowly and methodically undermined by their diet. Meat is chock full of
hormones, antibiotics, toxins, often tainted with fecal matter and 
various parasites, both viral and bacterial pathogens. Vegetables are
often laced with herbicides, insecticides, chemical residues, too often
lacking any nutritional value, due to bad farming, and premature
harvesting to accommodate supply chains that stretch over continents.

As if that weren't bad enough, we fill our faces with so much fat and sugar,
snacks, sweets, and fast food of every shape and color, it's amazing the
sidewalks aren't littered with the carcasses of people who have just
simply keeled over from the sheer glut.

Beyond all of that, which basically is either a matter of choice __ eating junk
food __ or a lack of choice __ the prevalence of unhealthy and
contaminated food staples at the market __ I want to focus on one
specific issue which I see as emblematic.

How many people can say they haven't had cancer directly impact either 
themselves or someone they personally know, perhaps even a close relative 
or friend?

If you said 'no' I would be shocked. According to the American Cancer Society:
"In 2014, there will be an estimated 1,665,540 new cancer cases diagnosed
and 585,720 cancer deaths in the US. Cancer remains the second most common  
cause of death in the US, accounting for nearly 1 of every 4 deaths."

There are certainly many causes for cancer. To whatever degree we can, we try
to avoid exposure to carcinogens or anything which causes or encourages the
growth of tumors.

But what do we do if we are not allowed to know about a potential source of cancer?

Monsanto has been very effective at suppressing any research findings about the
health implications of both its highly lucrative herbicide Roundup and
its expanding range of GMO products.

But reports are beginning to surface. This recent one on Roundup brings into focus
how dangerous this extensively used, putatively harmless chemical killer is.

 

GMOs are the evil stepsister of Roundup. Most GMO crops are genetically
altered to give them resistance to Roundup, so that the weedkiller can
be sprayed on in copious amounts killing the weeds but leaving the
edible plants intact and supposedly healthy.

Given the many reports __ here and here
are merely a couple references __ coming out of research laboratories
from around the world which are suggesting that these genetic
modifications are extremely dangerous, posing all sorts of risks, first
and foremost among them the promotion of grotesque and potentially
cancerous tumor growths, people are requesting that at least the foods
containing GMO products be labeled as such.

This is hardly an inconsequential concern. 88% of the corn grown in the U.S. 
is genetically modified. 93% of our soybeans are GMO. Because these and 
other food plants are the basis for the thousands of processed food products 
commonly included in the typical American diet, now "70 percent of processed
foods in your local supermarket contain genetically modified ingredients."

Mind you, people are not demanding a total ban on GMOs __ though a case 
can be made for one, at least until it is determined with absolute certainty
that these Frankenfoods are safe __ they just want it PUT ON THE LABEL, 
so they can make an informed decision.

 

Polls show that 93% of American voters want GMO labeling.  
93%! This cuts across the entire political spectrum __ Democrats,
Republicans, Libertarians, Tea Party, liberals, conservatives,
anarchists, Free-Tibet-Nuke-The-Gay-Whales Party of Patriotic
Polemicists __ a historic and unprecedented consensus. And we 
can't even get this done!

Our play-for-pay, follow-the-money, corporate lapdog politicians,
from the President, all the way through the entire gutless
reeking-with-corruption ranks of Congress, all beholden to the likes of
Monsanto, refuse to stand up to the scumbags who put profit before
people!

Uh-oh . . . I'm back to ranting about politics.

Sometimes it seems unavoidable, eh?

Anyway, let me wrap this up with a suggestion. While you're munching away
on that corn dog as you drive to your polling place on November 4th, you
might want to ask yourself: 

"Who should I vote for . . . and what the hell am I eating?!"



[ This originated at the author's personal web site . . . http://jdrachel.com ]

Throw the bums out!

 

72% of American voters are for raising taxes on the wealthy.

That equates to 108 million people.

76% of American voters want to cut back on military spending.

That's 114 million people.

72% of American voters want a federal minimum wage of $10.00 or more.

108 million people.

74% of American voters are for ending oil subsidies.

111 million people.

79% of American voters want no cuts in Social Security and Medicare.

Over 118 million people.

93% of American voters want labeling of GMOs in their food.

That's nearly 140 million people!!

But none of this gets done!

The simpleand insulting truth is that a mere 500 or so men defy the will of
millions, that the very people we elect and send to Washington to create
laws that protect our interests, refuse to represent us, ignore our
clearly stated will on these crucial issues and many more.

They ignore "we the people" and do the bidding of "we the rich". Until 
we confront these play-for-pay lapdogs, they will continue to serve a tiny
elite minority of rich and powerful oligarchs and America will continue
its slow but certain decline. You and I will live like beggars and
America will become a Third World country.

We've all been appalled by recent events. We've watched as our government 
was shutdown. We've been horrified by the fight over the debt limit. We've 
seen the systematic destruction of our democratic way of life.

So what can we do? With millions of dollars of fat cat money floating
around, the voice of the regular guy has been drowned out. There has been 
no way to get rid of the crooks and liars. But I believe now there is.

How did that old expression go?

"Throw the bums out!"

We do this using a new, unique and powerful strategy
for taking on the corrupting cancer of money in politics __ an end run
around the iron grip which Wall Street, big banks and corporate
oligarchs now have on our political system. This sledgehammer approach
gives the 500 corporate toadies in Congress, who arrogantly sit inside
the Washington DC bubble and ignore the very people who voted them into
office, a simple straightforward ultimatum: Do your job and start
representing "we the people" or collect your pink slip.

It's a no-nonsense, take-no-prisoners method for cleaning up the corruption
among our elected officials and putting people in office who will do our
bidding. It forces the men and women we choose on election day to start
taking their orders from us, instead of the deep-pocketed puppet
masters who have effectively stolen our government by buying off our
senators, congressmen, even our president, with huge campaign donations.

This is an election year and people are frustrated and angry. Congress 
started the new year at a historically low 13% approval rating.

I say we channel that frustration and anger into a unified and constructive
effort to restore true representative democracy to our country.

It's up tous. But something has to happen immediately. We are fast 
approaching a point of no return, beyond which the specter of a
rigid totalitarian state looms. Either we replace our current legislators 
or they will replace our country with one we don't recognize.

Look around. It's already happening.

So either we rise up now in a bloodless coup at the polls or we rise up 
later in the streets. Revolution in the streets will not be bloodless and I 
suspect it won't end well. The blatant and ruthless dismemberment of OWS 
was a warning.

Time to unite and act decisively.

Hopefully it's not too late.

Sometimes truth comes from an unexpected place and from an
unlikely messenger.

It doesn't matter the source. It's still the truth.


[ This originated at the author's personal web site . . . http://jdrachel.com ]