Mitt Romney YouTube clip

The following is a proposed YouTube clip on what Mitt Romney’s swearing-in ceremony might involve. I wrote this fanciful piece to encourage America’s citizens to reflect on what a Romney presidency might come to mean.

Scene:

A room opening on to a balcony from which Mitt Romney will soon be sworn in as President of the United States. The muffled sounds of a large crowd gathered outside can be heard behind the balcony’s closed doors. Romney is pacing back and forth talking to his Chief of Staff, who is off camera but speaks with a Darth Vader voice. There is a portable radio in the room carrying a live broadcast, which we can hear as the scene opens.

From the radio, we hear this dialogue:

First Reporter: “Who would have ever thought we’d see a Mormon in the White House?”

Second Reporter: “Who would have ever foreseen Barack Obama’s untimely death?”

First Reporter: “That certainly threw the Democrats for a loop, didn’t it?”

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

At that point, we hear a sharp click as Romney turns off the radio, saying, “You know, I would have rather beaten Obama than…”

Chief of Staff: “I know, but the Lord does work in mysterious ways, doesn’t He?”

Romney (slowly): “Yes – He – does.”

Chief: “Do you want to practice one more time? Your public is waiting.”

Romney: “Are you sure we should be doing it this way? I mean, you know, people might take this rather badly.”

Chief: “People might as well get used to the New World Order. And me swearing you in – especially this way – is a pretty good place to start.”

Romney: “I’m still not sure.”

Chief: “It doesn’t matter if you’re sure. Orders are orders.”

Romney: “End of story, right?”

Chief: “Actually, this is only the beginning. Have a little faith.”

Romney: “Very well. Let’s run through this one more time.”

[Romney picks up a book and hands it to his Chief, still unseen off-camera except for a black gloved hand which takes the book.]

Chief: “Place your left hand here, raise your right hand, and repeat after me: I”

Romney: “I, Willard Mitt Romney”

Chief: “do solemnly swear”

Romney: “do solemnly swear”

Chief: “that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States”

Romney: “that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States”

Chief: “and will to the best of my ability”

Romney: “and will to the best of my ability”

Chief: “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”

Romney: “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. [pause] I do so solemnly swear upon this, The Book of Mormon, the most correct book of scripture known to man.”

As soon as Romney starts saying “this, The Book of Mormon,” he takes that book from his Chief’s hand and holds it high over his head so his imaginary audience can see its title. The camera zooms in on the Book, as we hear radio voices saying:

“What just happened?”

“The balls of this guy!”

“Impeach the sonofabitch!”

“This is an outrage.”

“The Southern Baptist Convention is going to have a shit fit.”

“Who’s the Svengali who just swore in our President?”

“By what right does Mitt Romney add his own propaganda to the oath of office?”

Reflections on this clip

As for that last question: That tradition started with George Washington who added “So help me God” to the oath, even though that wasn’t in Constitution. And every President thereafter also added, “So help me God.” So why shouldn’t Mr. Romney feel free to add his bit?

I have been criticized for dragging Mitt Romney’s (and Jon Huntsman’s) religion into consideration. The Constitution says, “…no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” By dwelling on their Mormon faith, I seem to be submitting these candidates to a “religious test,” which bothers some people. “A candidate’s religion is personal and should not be questioned,” or so they’d claim. To which I would ask, “Would you feel the same way if that religion called for human sacrifice? Wouldn’t you expect a bit of clarification?”

As for the constitutional prohibition against a “religious test,” that simply means no authority can insist on such a test. That is, for example, no Secretary of State could deny ballot access for this reason. However, We-the-People have a right to know as much as possible about what makes our president tick. So We can insist on such a test. It’s true that candidates can ignore religious questions, but they do so at their own peril. In fact, they seem to welcome the opportunity to share their faith and how it might shape their decision-making processes.

But what about bad taste?

It might be considered bad taste to suggest that Obama might not live through his first term. I defend that as merely a shocking, attention-grabbing device. The deck is so badly stacked against independent candidates like myself, we need all the help we can get to make an impact.

As for that Svengali/Darth Vader character and hints of a New World Order, we truly don’t know from whom a Mormon president would take his marching orders. Anyone who doubts this should remember how surprised we were when Barack Obama “chose” Rahm Emanuel as his chief of staff, and “chose” only Wall Street types to be his economic advisors. I very much want people to be aware of Svengalis lurking in the background.

As for me? You can easily judge from my platform that I don’t have any marching orders. I also don’t have any problem explaining exactly what kind of a Buddhist I am. Nor would I have any problem with those who might lampoon my faith. Actually, I would welcome that as a challenge.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party

“I am forced to push the envelope, for the mail must go through.”

Contact me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com

Presidential Candidate’s Yahoo Postings – Part IV

The following are comments I’d posted to articles on Yahoo! News since April 10. Or at least, that I’d tried to post. Even though Yahoo rarely censors my posts any more, they’re trying a new tactic – allowing only a dozen or so posts to remain on-line while deleting the rest. This is recent, though I have no idea if only I and a select few are being singled out. I’m astounded that Yahoo bothers with such pettiness.

[NOTE: These mini-essays are not in any particular order.]

ONE:

“France's defense minister acknowledged that without full American participation in the combat operation, the West probably can't stop Gadhafi's attacks on besieged rebel cities.”

This is absolutely amazing. France has 10 times the population of Libya, which as only 6.4 million people. How is it that France – by itself – can’t beat Gadhafi? And, please note, the minister said “full American participation” is needed. Just what kind of supermen are fighting for Gadhafi?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“How ironic – one Colonel (that’s all Gadhafi is) is able to hold off all the generals of NATO? A stunning accomplishment indeed.”

TWO:

"...troops loyal to Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi are hard to identify from the air."

That's strange. I remember reading, years ago, that we had a spy satellite 125 miles aloft with such superior optics it could spot a quarter held up by a man standing on the White House lawn...and it could spot whether the view was of "heads" or "tails." The real reason why it's so "hard to identify" Gadhafi's troops from the air: The longer this "war" is artificially prolonged, the higher will go the price at the pump. That's the game plan.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"I'm seeing prices over $4.25 per gallon in my locale...why?"

THREE:

“A failure [by Congress] to raise the [U.S.] debt limit would mean the government would … default on the national debt.”

So what? You heard me, so what? I’m not being contrary here, but I think we’re overlooking a golden opportunity. The same people who piss and moan that we should bail out the big banks or “the world” economy will implode are also saying we should continue to raise the debt limit. Again, why?

Of course there will be consequences, but it could well lead to restructuring our debt. And what’s wrong with that? Like people who get into deep debt doo-doo, nations can also submit to bankruptcy proceedings. Nothing undignified in that. It’s just an honest confirmation of reality – we are bankrupt. We have to deal with it, and better sooner than later.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Maybe we could have a sale of assets to help balance the budget. How much to you think we could get for a couple of our nukes?”

FOUR:

The answer? Declare bankruptcy. We are bankrupt, so why avoid the inevitable? DON'T raise the debt ceiling...and let the chips fall where they may. And, no, this will not herald the end of Western Civilization. Since the US is so big, we are in a great position to declare bankruptcy and restructure our debt. By continuing to borrow, we'll only dig ourselves in deeper. So deep, we'll only have one option: Go to war and start stealing stuff from other nations and put the hurt on our creditors. If we don't bite the bullet now, we'll "have to" start shooting bullets later.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“No, I’m not kidding.”

FIVE:

So “strongman” Laurent Gbagbo ended up getting busted, with a little help from a former colonial superpower. This guy was so awful, he won 46% of the vote. And yet he refused to relinquish power, even though “the world” said he should. And, as in Libya, concern was expressed for civilian casualties. And yet no African nation saw fit to intervene – as in Libya, the United Arab League didn’t see fit to intervene. Is this, then, to be the wave of the future? Former colonial powers sticking their noses where they don’t belong because “the world” opposes dictators and locals can’t seem to settle their own affairs without the fatherly intervention of the Mighty White Man?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Watch out for more of the same – as the song goes, ‘This is only the beginning.’”

SIX:

The only "spending plan" I want to hear from Obama is how he'll save the economy $1B by not running for reelection. That $1B is the amount projected that he'll raise by promising "More of the same" to those who'd bought into "Change you can believe in." Obama, do us a favor...don't run...and urge those who would have donated that $1B to fuel your ego to spend more wisely than that.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"Let's bring out the applause-meter to Obama's first reelection campaign rally and see if those decibels exceed the thunder that greeted his first rallies - back when people thought he would really be All That And A Bag of Chips."

SEVEN:

Maybe Mitt's exploratory committee (or, even better, Mitt himself) can explain why he didn't make this comment back on Nov. 6, 2007 during a major speech, after being introduced by Bush the First: "When I place my hand on the Book of Mormon and take the oath of office, that oath becomes my highest promise to God." Instead of "Book of Mormon," Mitt said "Bible."

Now that's odd, considering two things: 1) Mormons consider the Book of Mormon to be superior to the Bible which, they claim, has "errors," and 2) Mitt is the descendant of a Mormon apostle. Why would Mitt swear upon something he sees as "inferior?" If I get sworn in as the first president who happens to be a Buddhist, my hand will be upon the Lotus Sutra.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"Mitt, I'll bet you never dreamed I'd bring this up."

EIGHT:

@ Darthlaurie…Actually, you are wrong about that. According to the Wikipedia article on the Book of Mormon (complete with verifying citation): "Church members officially regard the Book of Mormon as the 'most correct' book of scripture..."

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"My unique claim is that the Mormons are the connecting link between Christianity and Buddhism...check out something called the King Follett discourse."

NINE:

If Mitt Romney gets the GOP nod, it will probably be for one very bad reason: It’s his turn. The GOP has a nasty habit of bowing to pecking order. However, not to despair. I’ll have as much fun ripping Romney now as I had last election.

For instance, he wrote back in ’07, “A person should not be elected because of his faith nor should he be rejected because of his faith.” My answer: “Wouldn’t that depend on the faith? Suppose a candidate believes that human sacrifice is appropriate…” Well, you get the idea…and Mitt should have.

Romney also wrote, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God…” My answer: “I’m sure Mitt Romney meant to say, ‘I believe that Jesus Christ is the son of a God...,” since Mormons believe that more than one God exists.”

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“All I ever ask of my opponents is that they write something or say something in public. Then the rest becomes painfully easy.”

TEN:

"...integrating the Taliban into the political system in a new Afghanistan..."

Sure, go ahead and "integrate" all you want. As long as Karzai can rig elections, no problem with integration.

(sigh) Has it really come to this? Turkey - once the proud center of the Islamic world - is now reduced to stooging for "Western" interests? And they think this will help get them admitted to the European Union?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"I keep telling the Turks, your destiny is not with the EU; your destiny is far greater than that. You know what to do."

ELEVEN:

‘… “So read, the [Arizona] statute is a singular entry into the foreign policy of the United States by a single state," [a judge] wrote….’

Uh, huh…and what about Article I, Section 8 (US Constitution) that says, “Congress shall have the power to…repel invasions?” [I dare say, Congress’s refusal to repel any invasion should be considered an act of treason.] Arizona is being invaded and yet Congress refuses to do its constitutional duty to repel that invasion.

Put another way, if Hawaii fought back against an invading Chinese navy, would that be “a singular entry into the foreign policy of the United States”…especially if the US refused to do its job in protecting Hawaii?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“I get it: If it’s called ‘illegal immigration,’ Congress gets to sit on its hands; if it’s called ‘invasion,’ then Congress has to act. Ladies and gentlemen, let’s call this what it is – an invasion.”

TWELVE:

I think it’s pretty obvious why Gadhafi’s people let her go. They were confident she would trip herself up when recounting her story to whomever would listen.

She says she was sodomized with a Kalashnikov rifle. Hmm…okay…I guess they removed the sight near the tip of the barrel before they sodomized her. If that protruding piece of metal hadn’t been removed, she’d be in need of surgery to correct the mess. This assumes, of course, that the sight was removable and that her attackers were thoughtful enough to remove it.

She says, “My neck turned blue from being strangled.” She presumably knows this because there happened to be a mirror nearby when she was strangled. Or else her neck remained blue long enough afterward for her to get to a mirror or have someone tell her this. Did anyone in the hotel happen to notice this?

She says her attackers drank alcohol, which is a huge no-no for a devout Muslim. Maybe she’s lying, trying to make her “attackers” out to be non-believers? There’s an awful lot about her story that just doesn’t ring true. However, we must keep in mind: “Truth is stranger in fiction.” But also keep in mind: “Sometimes people will lie for what they (or their coaches) believe is a higher cause.”

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Whether her story is completely true or not, however, doesn’t detract from the immense courage it took to enter that hotel and make her accusations.”

THIRTEEN:

"At Quantico, such a guarantee is only reserved for attorney-client communications," he said.

Oh, stop...does anyone really believe attorney-client communications aren't bugged? Come on, as long as these guys can recite the mantra "national security demands it," they can bug anything they want - with or without a judge's rubberstamped approval.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"It's too bad most people don't realize how little freedom we really have. Prepare now...for the day the black suits come knocking at YOUR door."

FOURTEEN:

Oh, stop...the "men" behind the Donald Trump movement = the "man" behind the Donald Trump movement = Donald Trump, founder of the "Wig" party...

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"Donald just wants another toy to play with - the fate of the entire country should he be elected."

FIFTEEN:

Trump's gamesmanship reminds of the waning days of the Roman Empire. The game was over, the barbarians were at the gates, and the wealthy sought to buy the emperor's crown for themselves. Oh well, I hope "the Donald" can at least keep us entertained until the final curtain.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"The irony of a Trump vs. a Searle candidacy? On one hand, you have someone who everybody "knows" but who can't think outside the box (he got rich by expertly maneuvering within the box). On the other hand, you have someone nobody knows who knows exactly what to do outside the box."

SIXTEEN:

“…fearing that if al-Shabab seizes the country [Somalia], the failed state could be used as a training ground for attacks on the West.”

Do you want to know what we’re succeeding in doing by “spending hundreds of millions of dollars?” We are giving al-Shabab valuable training and combat experience. And, believe me, we will come to rue the day they use that directly – against us. I can’t believe there are still fools out there who think we have anything to fear from people hiding out in caves, plotting and scheming against us. Or “training” in the jungle to help bring down Western Civ.

We are doing al-Shabab a huge favor by spending our money to train their forces in real live combat.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“All we’re doing is giving them a chance to develop true grit and hate us even more than they already do.”

SEVENTEEN:

“…a megawatt-level electron laser that could be used to defend Naval ships against supersonic and ballistic missiles…

” Hmm ...very interesting… Even more interesting? Could Iran use such a device to blast an oil tanker trudging its way through the Strait of Hormuz? Or could China use one to sink one of our aircraft carriers? You know, I hate to break this to the navy but the days of the unchallenged behemoth floating fortress are quickly drawing to a close. Kind of ironic that a weapon tested by our own navy might help close this curtain.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“I know, I know … someway, somehow lobbyists will find a way to continue funding worthless war machines. Just chalk it up to the deficit.”

EIGHTEEN:

Who knows? If convicted and sentenced, maybe this atheist [Avigdor Lieberman, Israel’s Minister of Foreign Affairs] will find God in prison. It happens.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"It'll be interesting to see how hard this blowhard blows behind bars."

NINETEEN:

“Mr. Geithner never suggested that there be any lack of diligence or any slowdown.”

The very fact that Geithner felt it necessary to meet with Cuomo in the first place constitutes "suggestion" in and of itself. What Geithner failed to realize at the time is that a hard charging prosecutor was exactly what was (and still is) needed. Geithner is nothing but a dishonest POS who (check this out) would be fifth in the line of succession should anything happen to Obama. That's almost as disgusting as thinking of John Boner as second in that line, right behind Joe Biden-his-time.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"Where, oh where, do we find these people?"

TWENTY:

Qatari crown prince Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani, said "The main aim of our meeting is to help the Libyan people decide their own fate...

That's rich...I love it when crown princes talk about people deciding their own fate. You can stop snickering now, Your Majesty...we get the joke.

Heads up: Some of those weapons funneled to the rebels will "find" their way to al-Qaeda's willing hands. Just thought I'd mention it.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"I'll bet Obammer never dreamed Libya would turn out to be so complicated. Fact is, the complications have only just begun."

TWENTY-ONE:

President Barack Obama says the nation's effort to curb ballooning deficits "can't exempt anyone."

Well, Obammer can say that if he wants to. But by the time he signs the final version of deficit control into law, the usual suspects will find much to their delight - their exemptions will be preserved. There's a Pink Elephant in the middle of the room nobody's talking about - the culpability of the Two Party System itself. Unless we vote ALL of the Dem/Pubs out of office, real change you can believe in just-ain't-gonna-happen.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"Time for a New American Revolution: Declare your independence by voting for independents."

TWENTY-TWO:

This whole issue of standing is improperly used when judges can’t pull any other tricks out of their (er) hats. For instance, if I tried to bring suit to stop school children from reciting the Pledge of Allegiance, my suit would be denied due to lack of standing (I don’t have a child being “forced” to recite the Pledge).

However, my standing would be as a citizen who is being injured as the long-term result of a whole generation being dumbed-down by pledging allegiance to a piece of CLOTH. It does say, “I pledge allegiance to the flag…” and that’s what the flag is … a piece of cloth. Treating it any other way smacks of idolatry – condemned by all of the Abrahamic faiths, though they seem to have a weakness for our flag (that’s called hypocrisy by the way).

"Hurt feelings differ from legal injury," the appeals court said. It’s not a matter of “hurt feelings,” it’s a matter of the US President trying to define what is proper behavior for all Americans, which is exclusionary to say the least. Obama proclaimed: “…in times of great challenge and uncertainty, Americans have turned to prayer.” He pretends to speak of all Americans. I, for one, when the times get tough don’t go whining to God.

The appeals court (quoted in another article) also said, "A feeling of alienation cannot suffice as injury.” If one is “alienated” (or discriminated against), then we’re not just talking about “feelings.” We’re talking about the outcome of public policy.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“As in many other respects, Obammer is being way less than honest here.”

TWENTY-THREE:

"...[Obammer's] vote as a senator in 2006 against raising the debt cap was a mistake motivated by politics." Oh, I get it...and now that he's president, he's above politics. Riigghhhtt...

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"The New American Revolution: Declare your independence by voting for independents."

TWENTY-FOUR:

"The law requires that Americans elect someone President next year..." No it doesn't. We have the right to vote, not the obligation. There is nothing here that "the law requires." [God, I hate sloppy writing.] To revamp an old slogan, "What if they held an election, and nobody showed up?"

Oh...don't worry about Mitt Romney. I'll blow him out of the water with merciless questions about Mormonism. There are questions he'll not be able to answer.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"Careful here, folks. He's not just another Mormon, he's related to an Apostle...and not the kind that followed Jesus."

TWENTY-FIVE:

"The destruction there was huge. I was there and saw for myself," he said...

If "he" says so. Frankly, I'd like to see some pictures. Why are the Western powers not showing us what's going on? Surely their surveillance is top-notch, so why won't they let us have a detailed look?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"Truth is always the first casualty of war."

TWENTY-SIX:

"It is unthinkable that someone who has tried to massacre his own people can play a part in their future government."

Gadhafi didn't "try" to massacre his own people, though his early rhetoric seemed to portend that possibility. I hate it when high-sounding foreign interventionists exaggerate their claims. The article said..."where hundreds of civilians are reported to have died in a six-week siege." Any loss of human life is regrettable, but I would hardly call 100's within six weeks a "massacre." Under different circumstances, we would call that "collateral damage" (say, in Afghanistan).

Now Rwanda...that was a massacre...and where was the US? Where was the EU? Where was the African Union?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"Let's start the New American Revolution ... here at home...Declare your independence by voting for independents."

TWENTY-SEVEN:

@ Andrew T: “the point,” you say? “The point” was really an attempt by the US to try to be on the winning side. We thought Gadhafi would fold or that his troops would flee upon hearing threats from on high (that is, from the EU and the US). Guess what? We guessed wrong. As far as “another Rwandan incident” is concerned, anybody could have intervened in that country as soon as it became obvious that a massacre was, indeed, underway. And that had become obvious very early on. But in Libya, we chose to read more into Gadhafi’s rhetoric (and jump on that) than we’ve read into our own. We didn’t give Gadhafi the benefit of the doubt (“Is he just saber rattling or what?”).We were just itching to smack Gadhafi, and the potential for “massacre” had nothing to do with it.

@ Spice: A lot of “strongmen” dictators we currently support have been killing their people for over 40 years. They still behead convicts in Saudi Arabia, which “disappears” those who oppose the royals. Are you suggesting we jump in and smack those guys down? Where does it stop? Where do we draw a line and say to the regional players (local nations), “What are YOU going to do about this? Because we’re not going to.” It doesn’t have to always be us.

As for Pam Am 103, since I’m 59 years old, I do remember that incident. I also remember how badly the 9/11 attacks on US soil were investigated, and still don’t believe the official version of what went down. Let’s have a real investigation of that one, shall we?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“My basic issue was with the quote that said he “tried to massacre his own people,” claiming he did not even try. That was my main point. Sorry you chose to overlook it. Truth is the first casualty of war.”

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party

“Obama is the perfect example of the cynical politician – He rode into office on a wave of populism and yet positions himself to rake in a billion dollars to get re-elected. On the other hand, I refuse to accept a penny in donations. Go figure.”

Contact me at : bpa_cinc@yahoo.com

The Long Arm of the Law

The Long Arm of the Law:

My personal definition of the "Long Arm of the Law:"

"No matter how strongly voters feel about the burning issues of the day, the ‘law' (that is, the political establishment) is proficient at using its power and influence (its ‘long arm') to hold We-the-People and the reforms we seek at bay."

In Congress

The Long Arm of the Law is firmly established in Congress. Committee chairs can keep legislation from leaving their committees and moving on for consideration by the full house. It's true that such techniques can be countered, but not easily.

In the Senate, we have the practice (called a “hold”) of individual senators being able to block consideration of legislation. That's right: One single senator can object to the whole Senate considering a bill, and make his objection stick (at least for "a while"). Not to mention the venerable, majority-thwarting, unconstitutional device of the filibuster.

The Long Arm not only reaches out and grabs you (which is the usual meaning of this term) but it also serves to hold things back. The reaching-out-and-grabbing takes the form of concentration camps, which are entirely constitutional by the way (as with Japanese-Americans during WWII). The holding-things-back occurs when reform legislation gets “lost” in committee.

My Vision for a Streamlined Congress

I'm a New Age Abolitionist, in that I advocate abolishing all Congressional committees. Since all Americans are supposed to be equal in the eyes of the law, I suggest that all Congressmen should be equal to each other. Forget the Seniority System, since it makes some Congressmen more powerful than others. Why should such an undemocratic state of affairs be allowed to continue?

How a Congress without committees would work: Let's say I'm a Senator, under my proposed system, who wants to pass a new bill into law. It's called Bill XYZ and I (or my staff) wrote it. Since the Senate will have a "Senators only" LAN, I will simply input my bill. Each bill will have an attachment, allowing my fellow senators to cast tentative, non-binding votes on Bill XYZ. This will allow me and my peers to gauge likelihood of passage into law.

A few weeks pass and another senator inputs a competing version of Bill XYZ that she wrote, calling it Bill XYZ.1. This also has an attachment allowing for tentative votes. Bill XYZ.1 is clearly marked to indicate how it differs from the original. In a manner of speaking, this gives each Senator a form of line-item veto or, more accurately, allows for a bill to evolve to a universally-acceptable final draft.

Suppose the vote tally on my version (XYZ) shows that I have the majority necessary for passage. Then I alert my peers that this is so, via "Senators only" e-mail, and that I'm about to formally submit XYZ to a vote. This is all done on-line and this final vote is locked-in electronically. If it passes, it goes on to the House.

Bottom line: No committees to get lost in. No filibuster to get tripped up by. No parliamentary procedural tricks to prevent my colleagues from voting (as Bush II liked to say) "straight up or down."

The Way Things are at Present

One reason for committees is to allow party leadership time to twist arms and make necessary threats. Also, leadership has a chance to "inform" legislators as to which bills are desirable for passage without burdening the lawmaker with having to actually read the text. [Heaven forbid! What are we paying them for?]

However, committees get in the way by creating artificial barriers. Congressmen are notoriously territorial and protective of their committee’s turf, so they tend to “defer” to each other’s “expertise.” But why should there be turfs at all? Again, each Congressman is supposed to be equal to each of his peers, since each was elected by voters who are equal to each other. So why not allow each to be (in effect) a virtual president? The Chief Executive isn’t limited as to what he may or may not address (that’s called “leadership”), and he has ample staff to bring him up to speed. Why impose any (committee) limits on our lawmakers?

Proper Representation

Each Congressman should be expected to intelligently vote on all bills that cross his desk. If he wishes to allow trusted experts or lobbyists to inform his decision-making, fine. That would be his choice. To assist the New Congress in wading through the pros and cons of various bills, I advocate providing lawmakers with an adequate level of research staff and access to outside expertise.

This might end up costing more than our current system, but I maintain: We can't afford not to.

The Hindrance of the Presidency

Sooner or later, we’re going to catch on to the idea that we don’t even really need a President, except to push the button (if necessary) in the event of nuclear war.

Think about this for a moment. How much trouble have we gotten into thinking of one person as being the (well, for lack of a better word) personification of an entire country? It’s not possible, it’s not necessary, and in fact it’s counterproductive and downright polarizing. Look at how divisive that office is: A fierce struggle occurs every four years to re-personify the United States in the person of a newly popular (for the moment, anyway) figure.

If the US insists on having a President at all, I am in favor of Congress voting for one of their own by a simple majority of both houses. In the absence of a simple majority, the interim President would be the Speaker of the House.

The only historic reason for having a Chief Executive was to thwart democracy. We-the-People were never to be trusted. But I maintain: Those days are gone (and if not quite yet gone – let’s show them the door, shall we?). The idea that one man can be (not just can run, but can be) an entire branch of government is ludicrous. One man can thwart the representatives of We-the-People. Why should that be? And why aren’t more people asking that question?

If the President, as thwarter of the popular will, ceased to exist, that would make the Congress the focal point of our lawmaking activity. As it should be. But for that to work, our Congressmen shouldn’t be hamstrung by our archaic and constrictive committee system. Each should stand coequal with his peers and be fully staffed to do the job we expect them to do.

Steven Searle for U.S. President in 2012Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party

I am the only candidate with a contract: "You wouldn't sell your house without a contract; why give your vote away?"

Contact me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com

Updates from my Yahoo! posts – Part 3

The following are comments I’d posted to articles on Yahoo! News since March 18. Or at least, that I’d tried to post. I’m happy to report, though, that most of these 33 weren’t censored. As usual, when I open with a quote, that comes directly from the article I posted to. NOTE: These mini-essays are not in any particular order.

ONE:

“…no one told [NATO] the rebels used tanks.”

This is a bald-faced lie. I absolutely refuse to believe NATO didn’t know the rebels had tanks. With our CIA on the ground, and communication established with the rebel leadership, to have been unaware is inconceivable.

But suppose NATO really didn’t know. Shouldn’t they have reasonably assumed the rebels would use anything they could get their hands on? And, more to the point, why bomb the tanks in the first place? Were they in a position to be a direct threat to civilians? Were they firing their guns – at what? At fleeing Gadhafi troops? Someone, somewhere isn’t doing a leader’s greatest job – thinking.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Of course, it’s entirely possible NATO knew these were rebel tanks and bombed them anyway – just to send al-Qaida a msg.”

TWO:

What’s Obama’s slogan going to be this time around? Oh wait, I’ve got it:  “No matter how much I’ve disappointed you and raped your values (and will continue to do so), surely you wouldn’t consider voting for my Republican opponent.”

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“That’s not quite as snappy as ‘Change you can believe in,’ but it might be good enough to win the day.”

THREE:

Is it just me or do all the photos of rebels look like they’re posing? Even their uniforms look spotless … and hair well groomed … dang … I should look so good.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Unlike Newt Gingrich and (maybe) the rebels, I’m not posing.”

FOUR:

“The CIA’s infamous secret network of “black site” interrogation centers is gone.”  Bull…

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

Don’t kid yourselves – the CIA represents a far greater threat to American freedoms than al-Qaeda ever did.”

FIVE:

“She has the fire in the belly, Mark McKinnon writes.”

Sometimes people who have “fire in the belly” end up self-immolating.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Obama would love to run against Bachmann…and I would love, as an Independent, to run against both of them. She is a dumb a$$ and he is just plain dishonest.”

SIX:

"Certainly if you're in the (Iraqi) military you understand [what] your capabilities and your gaps are..."

Certainly? You've got to be kidding...unless by that you mean, "If you're in the (Iraqi) military you understand that one of your fellow soldiers would be more than happy to put a bullet in your back, if he happens to be in a sleeper cell and you're just a grunt trying to keep his country together." But that's the point: There never was a "country" to keep together in the first place. There was (and still is) Shia, Sunni, and Kurd.

Back when I started campaigning for the US Presidency in 2006, I had forecast (correctly, as it turns out) that the "real" war in Iraq starts (that is, the jockeying for power; the non-headline grabbing, subtle part) after the US either draws down significantly or leaves entirely. Translation? I had forecast that we would be in Iraq for decades. Tell me now, was that the Change You Can Believe In you thought you'd be getting when you cast your vote for that Bush clone?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"I hate to say it, but my patience for the 'light at the end of the tunnel crowd' is wearing very thin indeed."

SEVEN:

“The exception is social conservatives, whose base largely supports abortion restrictions.”

Aren’t these the same social cons who are so supportive of our troops? Seems they have no problem with a govt shutdown that threatens soldiers’ pay. Oh, well…I guess consistency in life is a rare thing.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“I’m sure glad the social cons don’t call themselves Compassionate Conservatives any more – that was an unbelievable label from the beginning.”

EIGHT:

"Before departing the Capitol, Boehner urged the House to pass legislation to cut $12 billion, fund the Pentagon through the end of the year..."

Whoa...wait a minute...why does the Pentagon get a free pass? Why didn't Boehner urge the House to also cut $12 billion from the Pentagon's budget? Surely they could suck it up. Didn't Obama claim that our intervention in Libya could be "absorbed" by that budget? Why doesn't he just whip up an extra supply of that "absorbent" - gee, I'd like to have some of that myself.

And if that $12 billion turns out to be so important, all Obama will have to do is wave his magic wand in a few months, and have his Pentagon ask for a supplementary appropriation. ["Hey, the rubes buy that S.A. line of bull all the time...support the troops you know...rah, rah for our side." And, yes, that's how the powerful talk about us behind closed doors.]

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"I hate to tell you this, all you John Q. Publics out there, but you're being played like a fine, old classical violin."

NINE:

“Syria’s security organs will move quickly and ruthlessly to suppress even the germs of revolt within the military.”

Hmm…that’s more easily said than done, for how does a full grown man stop something as small (and deadly) as a “germ.” Surely the Sunni soldiers know they’d have to be stealthy and sabotogical in their opposition. The Alawites will find, much to their sorrow, that it’s hard to fight against your own troops who decide to engage in guerrilla war against their commanders. Assad and his commanders will end up learning a hard lesson: It’s untenable to have the vast majority of your rank-and-file troops (who have access to weapons) holding grudges against you.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“All militaries, the world over, fear dissension within their own ranks…about as much as they fear external enemies.”

TEN:

“Libyans … want a civilian democracy …,” said Abdel-Hafidh Ghoga, vice chairman of the opposition’s National Provisional Council.

And this vice chairman was elected to be vice chairman by … whom?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“So many players and not enough background info.”

ELEVEN:

“…the president is only “ready to discuss the peaceful handover of power according to the constitution.”…”

I don’t know anything about Yemen’s constitution, but surely there is nothing unconstitutional about resigning.  Saleh, in spite of what you think this is not about you … what part of “Saleh must resign” don’t you understand?  There’s really nothing to discuss … just go and be done with it.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“If I were one of Saleh’s spokesmen, I’d be a little nervous right now about something called retribution.”

TWELVE:

Unemployment drops? The GOP must be trembling … or is it “shakin’ and quakin’?”  I can see it now:  An emergency call from the GOP Central Committee went out to all their presidential hopefuls:  “Quick … go to your nearest party-approved prayer circle and ask the Lord to put a stop to these dastardly employment gains.”

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Think I’m kidding?”

THIRTEEN:

“We are sending them all one very clear message, which is that Gadhafi must go,” he told reporters.

Uh, huh … and suppose Gadhafi says “the Queen of England must go … you guys are supposed to be a democracy, right?”  I’m sure the British govt would say something like, “Jolly good show … you’re right … the Queen and all the royals must go … what were we thinking all these years?”

Riigghtt … Besides, Gadhafi’s winning, so why should he go?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Those in power never like to give it up, even in a democracy.”

FOURTEEN:

"...He denounced it as a "disrespectful and abhorrent act" and called on the U.S. and the United Nations to bring to justice..." [Refers to riot in Afghanistan where UN workers were killed and weapons stolen.]

No, the truly "abhorrent act" was the taking of life, not to mention (by taking weapons) stealing. As for the US bringing a book [Quran] burner to justice, maybe the pyromaniac who did this could be charged with hate speech and inciting to riot. I hope this "man of God" is enjoying his 15 minutes of fame. Too bad he couldn't have contributed to world peace, instead of being such a shameless fame-seeker.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"Of course, if the US and its henchmen (I mean, coalition of willing mercenaries) weren't in Afghanistan in the first place, perhaps this riot might never have happened."

FIFTEEN:

“The White House said the strongman’s inner circle was clearly crumbling with the loss of Foreign Minister Moussa Koussa…”

The White House is engaging in wishful thinking, trying to spin this into good news since the battlefield news isn’t so good. Also, this particular minister might well turn out to be a Trojan horse. But it would be unwise to read into his “defection” any great loss to Gadhafi, for the only inner circle he needs are his sons. And the only “great loss” would be a loss of heart among this troops…and so far, that ain’t happening.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“If the US ‘foreign minister’ (Hillary) quit, would that mean the US inner circle is crumbling?”

SIXTEEN:

“U.S. officials have acknowledged that the CIA has sent small teams of operatives into Libya…”

Hey, wait a minute. Didn’t Obama say we wouldn’t put any “boots on the ground” in Libya? Oh, my bad … maybe the CIA teams aren’t wearing boots … maybe they’re wearing sneakers (how appropriate).

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Isn’t it about time we had a President who was (really!) a man of his word? Always? Under all circumstances? Or would the shock kill us?”

SEVENTEEN:

Interesting how this article (and others) says absolutely nothing about how sub-Saharan Africa is emotionally dealing with Western aggression against Gadhafi. This is no small point since many of the troops loyal to Gadhafi are Black. Also, there are idealists within those nations who share Gadhafi's dream of a United States of Africa. Huh! Imagine that: A new USA to lead the world (the old USA becoming more morally compromised with each passing day), one that refuses to let its carcass be picked clean by Western (and Eastern - hello, China!) powers.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"I'll be the first presidential candidate to say it: I will back a United States of Africa freed forever from foreign exploitation."

EIGHTEEN:

Libertarian,

What you say about the bank holiday is true. However, that would work against the (I'll say it) establishment, for a bank holiday would basically shut the entire system down. And that surely couldn't be profitable or ensure confidence. Besides, the action I envision would be gradual, and spread by word of mouth. So it would be hard for the establishment to know when to kick in such a draconian measure.

By the way, how do you tell independent-minded Americans (who are sick of too much government in the first place) that they can't choose to ignore the top 7 banks? Isn't "choice" supposed to be the cornerstone of a free market?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"It won't take people long to realize that my suggestion (to turn our backs on the top 7) is the only real option they have left, since all other means of effectively redressing their grievances have been shut down."

NINETEEN:

@TC

Your question is a fair one. I am totally in favor of cutting off all forms of military aid to all nations - even to our NATO clients. Humanitarian aid can be considered on a case-by-case basis, though I oppose designing any type of aid package to further the imperial interests of the US. By the way, no need (as you did) to put the word "Zionists" in quote-marks, for those are the folks running the show over there. To put a finer point on the matter, though, my greatest fear is of the atheists who are in charge in Israel. Whatever it is they think they're practicing, it isn't Judaism (and, yes, I know a fair bit about Judaism). More likely, it's an exercise in arrogance and tribalism.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"Don't you think it's time we shed the ancient burden of tribal identity? Gets in the way of our humanity, don't you think?"

TWENTY:

"...the mission's goal of protecting civilians from being snared in attacks by Gaddafi's troops. He said it could take days or weeks, but certainly not months, to crush Gaddafi's military."

"to crush Gaddafi's military?" I thought the "mission's goal [is] protecting civilians."

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"I actually bothered to read the UN resolution (the whole thing) and it doesn't say anything about picking sides in a civil war."

TWENTYONE:

U.S. Secretary Robert Gates called the rocket attacks "repugnant" and defended the Israeli attacks in the Gaza Strip as legitimate self-defense.

“legitimate self-defense?” Oh, I get it. Random rocketing by Palestinian terrorists is properly answered by indiscriminate bombing by Zionist terrorists. Tell me, why does Gates think it’s necessary to defend Israel, as if he’s their spokesman? Oh, wait…the answer’s obvious: Since he won’t be our Defense Secretary forever, he’s angling for a gig as a mouthpiece for Israel post-Obama.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“What’s the matter, Robert? Couldn’t you manage to line up a stateside gig?”

TWENTYTWO:

@ V, the Zionist:

You couldn’t possibly mean “we would bulldoze the whole area,” since that would kill everybody in that area. I don’t think the USA would do that, and we wouldn’t annex the land either (violation of international law). Actually, sounds to me like you’re a Jewish Israeli citizen of the hawk persuasion. Just because you used the word “we” (trying to imply you’re an American) doesn’t fool anybody.

And that last bit about “no questions asked,” is lame – if, for instance, we started getting random rocket attacks from Mexico, we would ask questions of the Mexican government. [NOTE: We would consider bombing first in more or less hot pursuit, if we had good intel and delaying might enable the perps to escape.] That’s how civilized people behave, as opposed to “no questions asked” Zionists.

@ Jphaliasjph:

Ah, you’re talking about guilt by association, yes? Sorry, I don’t buy into your thesis that every Palestinian knows about (much less “lets”) Hamas lob those rockets. If my brother would come over to your house and start shooting, I would hope you would shoot back – at my brother. If you kill him, fine. If he runs away, I hope you would then call the police and not turn into the mass murderer you claim you’d be.

@ GC:

There are sure a lot of simple minds on Yahoo today, including yours. If someone would start shooting at me, I wouldn’t automatically fire back, depending on the circumstances. I’m not a knee-jerker – too many of those running around (and, gasp, they’ve got guns). Besides, you and the others are missing a huge point of my post: Why does Gates think he’s got to speak for Israel?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“People, if you can’t post intelligently, then give it up…you only embarrass yourselves.”

TWENTYTHREE:

The Christians just don’t get it. Actually, none of the Abrahamists get it. But don’t get me wrong, there’s a hell alright. Actually, a lot of different hells – both hot and cold. But no one is doomed to spend all eternity there.

I asked a Christian friend, “Do you mean to tell me that we get only one life to get it right, or else we burn for eternity? Then why don't we just kill our newborn babies so they don't have a chance to sin?” That doesn’t sound like the message of a loving God, but rather the hate-speech of earthly, power hungry, patriarchs looking to frighten their flocks.

I’m with the Buddhist view: We’re reincarnated (seemingly) endlessly, that is – until we reach enlightenment. Then we don’t have to come back since we’re truly at one (totally integrated) with the Void. But all Buddhas do come back – to lead others to Buddhahood.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“If you want an example of the legitimacy of the Abrahamist faiths, just consider how well the Sons of Abraham living in Israel/Palestine are getting along.”

TWENTYFOUR:

"Gadhafi's air force strikes back - hits an air base deep in the heart of France" - now that would be a headline. However, could the French really complain? Especially if there were only minimal civilian casualties. This is war, you know.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"What goes around, comes around....arghhh...INCOMING!!!"

TWENTYFIVE:

"We began a military action at the same time that we don't have a clear diplomatic policy…” – Sen. Jim Webb.

Let’s be very clear about this:

As for Senator Webb: As long as the US president is solely in charge of our diplomacy, the only place where we have to have a “clear diplomatic policy” is in Obama’s head. And, according to the rules of the game, Obama doesn’t have to explain squat to anybody – including Senator Webb – and Webb knows this.

We engaged in acts of war against a sovereign nation without provocation, without any threat to the United States, without any threat to any of Libya's neighbors, and without a congressional declaration of war. Not all of our air strikes were to “protect civilians” or to enforce a cease fire, so we didn’t even bother to follow the UN mandate.

And worst? We took it upon ourselves to do what others (notably the Arab League) should have done. As for the League, it’s jolly good to hear the mighty Qutarian Air Force will be joining the fray – this weekend. Where are the Saudis, who have a far greater military?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Obama should be impeached for this.”

TWENTYSIX:

@Sea Turt1e, I have to disagree. We "entered" by sticking our nose where it doesn't belong, so therefore we'll need an exit strategy. Some milicrat might split hairs by claiming, "Since ground forces never went in, we didn't enter in such a manner as would require an entrance strategy." Lawyer logic like that is what is destroying this country. And perhaps to you, "a few cruise missiles and bombs," are "nothing." Not so, though, to the guy on the receiving end. Who has friends and sympathizers, who have other friends and sympathizers. So, to those of us who think of our actions as being "nothing," don't be too surprised if a suicide bomber strikes a bit too close to YOUR neighborhood. Just saying....

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"This is 'nothing?' I'll tell you what 'nothing' is – minding our own business."

TWENTYSEVEN:

"If rebel fighters were to then try to attack regime-held cities and march on Tripoli to oust Gadhafi, it is unclear what the U.S. and European stance would be."

Unclear? How so? The UN ordered a cease-fire. So if the rebels went on the attack, wouldn't that violate the cease-fire?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"Ah, war is never so simple as it looks during the planning stages."

TWENTYEIGHT:

- - - "American leadership is essential," [Obama] said… - - - “No, it isn’t,” Steven Searle, Your Next President, replies.

 - - - historian Robert Dallek says, "A President cannot sit on his hands and be seen as passive in the face of ruthless action by a foreign dictator." - - -

These are not the words of an historian; they are the words of a propagandist (at best) or a provocateur (at worst). And he’s being selective at that. I’m sure Dallek wasn’t urging we go in with six-guns blazing during the Tiananmen Square massacre. Or when the Yemeni president’s snipers killed 46 civilians.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“We can ill-afford to let people like Dallek get away with spouting such nonsense. It’s bad enough that Obama doesn’t know what he’s doing and is accepting some very bad advice.”

TWENTYNINE:

It's about time to start asking a very important question: Who are the rebel leaders? And, more importantly, what do they stand for? Since the prestige of the Western "democracies" is now on the line, "we" can't very well let Gadhafi come out on top, now can we? So, back to the original question: Who are these rebels, one of whom could well end up becoming the next strongman?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"I'm still amazed at how quickly the rebellion spread, and sustained its momentum. Makes me think they're not quite as random and uncoordinated as the media makes out."

THIRTY:

(sigh) Why do prez candidates find it obligatory to make a pilgrimage to the "Holy Land" to kiss the (uh) ring of the latest Zionist chief? I've made my position quite clear: If elected, I will void US diplomatic relations with Israel and refuse to sign any bill into law that continues our dole of taxpayer dollars to that welfare state.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"Actually, in my view, the entire world is the Holy Land. We've gotten into way too much trouble thinking otherwise."

THIRTYONE:

William, things aren’t quite as 1, 2, 3 as you’re portraying.

1) “Cut salaries and benefits for congress.” You’re right - this wouldn’t dent our deficit. But our leaders should set an example – and that is priceless. You would have scored a direct hit, though, if you had urged people to address the real problem: The Two-Party system. As long as the Dem/Pubs have a monopolistic lock on power, we’ll never get to the root of what ails America. Only with independents (including the President) in office can we start leveling the playing field, and stop playing favorites.

2) “Cut defense spending, the wars are costing us a fortune.” William, you blew it when you wrote, “wars are actually good use of the money that we’ve already decided to use for defense.” It’s that “already decided” bit that’s disingenuous. We did not “already decide” to keep increasing warmongering spending (as opposed to defense spending). When we get into a war, then the warmongers claim we can do it on the cheap, the light’s at the end of the tunnel, but (meanwhile) they’ll keep asking for more “supplemental appropriations.” Defense spending is heavy enough; it’s our warmongering spending that throws a monkey wrench into things.

2a. “Just bring the troops home and we’ll worry about the U.S. and everybody else can deal with their own problems.” Actually, your item 2a glosses over a few things. First of all, we should have the option of putting it on the table – that we’ll bring the troops home and close all our bases unless the “host” countries pony up to help pay for this protection we’re providing As for “if we abandon them, they will abandon us,” I don’t see how pulling our troops back redefines the marketplace. We/they have things we/they want to buy/sell. That won’t change.

3) As for “the rich supply the means of production”…does that entitle them to unfettered free-market capitalism without regulation, as well as bailouts when they blow it? With independent lawmakers in office, we will have a better chance of creating a level playing field that will encourage competition, which is something the rich aren’t all that keen on doing. Oh, by the way, one of the “means of production” is the time and effort of the workers, for without them, nothing gets produced. So I would definitely consider a worker a “means of production.”

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“As for ‘give me opportunity,’ why should anybody give YOU squat? However, I can agree with: Give everybody a level playing field.”

 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party

“Yes, yes…I’m fully aware that anything I (or anybody) posts on Yahoo! gets funneled to the CIA – complete with our real names and not just our Yahoo! handles. Keep in mind: After the Iron Curtain fell, the CIA automatically assumed that disgruntled US citizens were to become its main focus.”