Sunday, August 28, 2011

US President’s weekly Yahoo News updates

Once per week, I consolidate comments I’d posted to recent articles appearing on Yahoo News. I share my views, written as if I actually were the US President. [I’m working on that.] The following were posted between Aug. 22 and today, though appear below in no particular order. As is my usual custom, if I open with a quoted item, that’s from the article itself.

I hope you enjoy all 14 of these mini-essays/comments.


ONE:

“British warplanes struck a large bunker Friday in Moammar Gaddafi’s hometown of Sirte”…

NEWS FLASH: In a daring raid in broad daylight by a single low-flying plane from Gaddafi’s air force, Westminster Abbey was leveled by a huge bomb blast earlier today. Radio Free Libya issued only this terse statement within minutes after the attack: “One good turn deserves another.”

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Naw, didn’t happen. There will be retribution but it won’t be this obvious or this soon.”


TWO:

"Little by little the US is becoming Mexico."

Some Mexicans embrace the concept of Reconquista, meaning to take back what the US took from Mexico. They figure, one good turn deserves another.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"When I asked my Mexican-American father-in-law about Reconquista ("Is it true?"), he just smiled."



THREE:
[“Congress may be able to approve the sale of F-16 fighter jets to Taiwan even if President Barack Obama should object, a Republican senator said Tuesday.” By slipping it into a general defense appropriation bill.]

“Obama still would have the right of veto, but exercising it would mean scuttling approval for a wide array of defense programs.” Maybe it’s about time to scuttle a wide array of these programs, which are not really as defensive as they are world dominators.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Vote for me and I’ll veto all military appropriations that exceed half of those currently in effect.”


FOUR:

“Both Cameron and Sarkozy will now brandish their cojones, claiming to have had ‘a good war.’”

Fine. I suppose you have to have something to show the peasants as the economy sinks deeper into the toilet. BTW, those so-called “good wars” don’t come cheap. And it remains to be seen how much more will have to be paid after the rebels win. Assuming they really do win.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“I say, jolly good show and all that rot.”


FIVE:
"You can be God fearing and patriotic?" No you can't, for to be "patriotic" is actually a form of discrimination - saying, you love part of God's creation more than other parts. And your "God bless the USA" further reinforces this point. It should be "God bless all of us."

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"I never had much use for the term 'God fearing,' since 'God worshipping' or 'God loving' seems a better salute to the Almighty."


SIX:
Pro-Gaddafi forces have suffered the wrath of US and NATO bombings for months, making me wonder how much actual fighting the rebels did. You have to wonder why they continue to fight on; maybe they know something about the rebels that we don’t.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“The saddest part of this undeclared war against Gaddafi? Voters in the Coalition of the Duped won’t care about their leaders fighting without their consent – as long as ‘we’ win and it didn’t cost ‘too’ much.”


SEVEN:
"S&P will continue to produce ratings that are comparable, forward looking and transparent.” How about ratings that are accurate? Ratings that are based on some type of scientific methodology? Naw…
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“I still say the entire ratings system is nothing but a scam.”


EIGHT:
“The picture The Daily Mail paints of the rebel plan contrasts sharply with the reports we used to receive of a disorganized opposition.”

Oh, make no mistake about this: This opposition had been very well organized for years. The question now: What price did we pay, and will we yet pay, for our involvement?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Be careful what you ask for.”



NINE:
An example ALL of us should emulate. I’d like to go to a social gathering someday and not hear people talk about how much they earn (usually disguised as, “This is what I do for a living.”). I’d like to hear, “This is how much I gave last year and I deeply regret it wasn’t more” or “This is how little I live on, giving most of it away…and still I feel not sufficiently shorn of greed.” Only by means of compassion and almsgiving can any land be transformed into a Buddha-Land.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Imagine a land where the main goal in life, shared by everybody, was to attain enlightenment.”


TEN:

@ Van K

The Con Con wasn’t organized to “throw out the Articles.” According to Wikipedia, “Although the states' representatives…[to the Con Con] were only authorized to amend the Articles, the representatives held secret, closed-door sessions and wrote a new constitution.” So our Constitution was created under rather dishonest circumstances, wouldn’t you say? Certainly a far cry from your claim that “we organized a [Con Con] to throw out the Articles.”

Next, my preferred model (glad you brought it up) is to replace the current Constitution with one based on Cross-Sectional Representation, a concept I developed in the 70s. Essentially, this replaces all Congressional Districts with Cross-Sections, with constituents randomly assigned from a national list of eligible voters – there no longer being a Senate or a popularly-elected President. This is a cornerstone of my own campaign for the presidency. If you’re concerned about our growth for the next 13 decades, you should be very keen on replacing our current Law of the Land with one based on CSR.

As for “sorry,” no need to apologize, though I hasten to add, “nostalgic bubble” is not where I’m coming from. My complaint is that whatever powers the Founders intended the states to keep, as enshrined in the Constitution, have been systematically destroyed by an overreaching national government. I don’t champion what you call a “sovereign states model;” rather, I believe the states were intended to keep a significant degree of sovereignty in the name of checks-and-balances (as also were We-the-People). But somehow, the feds ended up taking way too much.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“If we’re supposed to be one nation, then why wasn’t our name changed? Last time I checked, it’s still called the United STATES.”


ELEVEN:
“The pledge … states that, if elected, Perry will send a Constitutional amendment…to the states for ratification…” This is misleading since the Pledge actually states, “…if elected President, I will: One, support sending a federal constitutional amendment…to the states for ratification.”

So, what’s the difference? The President cannot, as the article indicates, send any amendment to the states – that’s up to Congress or an Article V Convention should one be called by Congress. However, the President can “support sending [an]…amendment…to the states.”

Perry can support whatever he wishes. However, I wish he wouldn’t support this provision (also in the Pledge): “[to] establish a presidential commission…to investigate and document reports of Americans who have been harassed or threatened for exercising key civil rights to organize, to speak, to donate or to vote for marriage and to propose new protections, if needed.” If citizens have been “harassed or threatened” for any reason, there are already laws on the books to protect them. We don’t need to “establish a presidential commission.” That is, we don’t need to unless Perry wants to spend hard-earned taxpayer dollars to needlessly duplicate existing institutions.

But I guess Perry isn’t as interested in saving money as in pleasing the ever-voracious base.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Actually, why didn’t Perry [or Bachmann, Santorum, Romney (who should know better), or Pawlenty (RIP)] show a little independence by signing a pro-marriage pledge in his own words instead of mindlessly signing a version promoted by some pressure group.”


TWELVE:

@ Stephen

There was a time when the "melting pot" description fit. But we're so polarized now, there are thousands of mini-communities that don't think of themselves as Americans first and which don't care to "melt into" any larger community (if indeed there is such a thing).

If you think about it, that was the intent of the Founding Fathers. This was never supposed to be ONE country. Someone pointed out to me that the word “democracy” doesn’t appear in our Constitution even once. So he concluded that our form of govt was (instead) a “constitutional republic.”
I returned the favor by pointing out to him, “You mean, ‘it’s a union of constitutional republics (more than one).”

There was never supposed to be “one nation [under God]” as in the Pledge of Allegiance. It was supposed to be a United Nations of sorts. But the Elite didn’t like that, so they did everything they could, after the Civil War, to destroy the sovereignty of the individual states.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Anyone who uses the term ‘melting pot’ these days is showing their age. Oh, I’m 60 by the way.”


THIRTEEN:
[This is based on a story about a mom who wanted to “Bullyproof” her 12-year-old son, who had been bullied in school for years.]

“The bully's friends told Martin to get up, but … ‘I chose not to.’

Of course, this story could have taken another turn. For instance, “The bully’s friends told Martin to get up. And when he didn’t, one of them took a flying leap and kicked him in the head and broke his neck. Martin’s heartbroken mom then took a shotgun and blew his instructor away before turning the weapon on herself.” Sounds pretty horrible, doesn’t it? But sometimes real life turns out that way.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Deep down inside, a lot of Americans suffer from the residual effects of ‘bully problems’ they had as kids, which is probably why we’re so much into the Pre-emptive Strike strategy.”


FOURTEEN:
One problem I have with Ron Paul is, ironically, the very thing I could praise him most highly for: His better-than-average devotion to the Constitution. Because of that devotion, he cannot see the need (not to amend but) to completely replace our current Constitution. Unfortunately, there are people out there who really believe we could not (even if we wanted to) replace the Law of the Land. [NEWS FLASH: Yes, we have that unalienable right.]
Our Founding Fathers could have been more honest – and trusting of future generations – if they had included words to this effect in their Constitution: “At least once every 25 years, at least half of the states must re-ratify this Constitution; failure to do so, resulting in a new Constitutional Convention [which could rewrite the whole thing].”
Frankly, our current archaic document is dragging us down. Witness legislative gridlock and the anti-democratic Senate filibuster rule. I favor a model that weans us away from the corruption inherent in geographically-based Congressional Districts. These CD’s should be replaced by Cross-Sections each electing a Congressman from a constituency drawn at random from a list of all eligible voters in the country. No more Senate. One chamber – a House, with each Rep serving a cross-section of the nation’s voters.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“What this really boils down to is one question: When are we going to really consider ourselves to be ONE nation, instead of a collection of fiefs forever at war with, or in destructive competition with, or working at cross-purposes with other such fiefs?”

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *  * * * * * * *
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party
“Yes, you’ve probably noticed by now that I respond to individuals in my posts. I invite all questions, especially via email sent to bpa_cinc@yahoo.com . Since the response to my presidential bid has been so (er) underwhelming, it’s not like I’m too busy for a bit of one-on-one.”

No comments:

Post a Comment