zauberer44

zauberer44 8 months ago

"So much for Open Government that supports free speech."

Your constitution entitles you to freedom of speech, it does not require others to listen.

zauberer44 8 months ago

hgh,
An intriguing and sober assessment though don't overlook the significance of pent up demand for services in this same time period. You had a country at war with itself which virtually shut off all industry. After years of scarcity and destruction, a desire for production was imminent. A stable currency was instrumental in orchestrating an economic boom, though it was merely the chosen catalyst. I would argue that roughly the same results would have occurred, though perhaps not as drastic or as measurable due to a reliance on barter and private party arbitration rather than currency as a standard medium of contract.

you are certainly right though, often credit and debt serve little productive purpose and actually prevent efficiency when utilized at such a severe disproportion as we have now. Not to say that credit is worthless, but it can be and currently is weaponized to serve the selfish desires of the credit issuers and not the general welfare of the overall community.

Idiosyncrasies of individual economies aside, those states (both tangible and idealistic) which provide incentive to savings and conservation while still restricting interest on debt leveraging realize the benefits of less volatile and more accountable capital markets. In our specific situation, a natural balance can be achieved without cumbersome legislation - though it will require the return of a significant proportion of economic and political power from the suppliers to the demand-driving citizenry.

We all know exactly what needs to be done, and how to do it.

So why havn't we pulled the trigger?

zauberer44 8 months ago

Let me ask all of you - have we had a president (perhaps since Kennedy, if at all...) that wasn't an illegitimate liar, cheat, and crook?

Didn't think so...

I've literally deleted dozens if not hundreds of emails from the lot of you over the past few weeks; all of which fail to raise any new arguments or evidence. Can we agree to disagree and allow the fundamentalists on both sides to plead your cases via a more effective medium?

This discussion is getting nowhere.

zauberer44 9 months ago

obelus, I wish you the most sincere luck in your pursuit; and I encourage your effort to repair a broken national agenda which is exacerbated by the continuance of obviously flawed and failed economic policies. I also urge you to truly consider the ramifications of your accusations as a false pretense can derail your cause. In my opinion we are nowhere near communism nor headed on that road and such accusations can detract from your obviously prudent ascertainment by exposing a flawed understanding of political theory. The consolidation of power is nevertheless frightening but is a far-cry from communism or even socialism which both imply a perceived (if not a real) shared benefit to the populace.

As I've articulated previously, your acceptance of the birth certificate is irrelevant as this argument will go nowhere. You've demonstrated an understanding of this fact by a call to mobilization to clean out our corrupt and decrepit legislative system which is the primary impediment to real social progress. The actor-in-chief who entertains on behalf of the American people and implements policy in accordance with prescribed definition is of little significance because - if such claims are true, they are simply an inconvenient personal realization overshadowed by monumental errors in decision-making. It is the effect of Obama's policy implementation in reference to campaign promises and adherence to dynamic social paradigms and other tangible results which will define the legacy of his presidency - not an unfounded accusation regarding the legitimacy of one's documentation a posteriori.

One can make many attempts to conceal truth but none can deny its reality.

zauberer44 9 months ago

I love to hear you sing this song of duty to the constitution and the republic when it is convenient for your personal interests. Where has this incendiary recursive action been for the past decade, when it was needed most? Why only now have you found your voice for this one particular issue? Is Barack Obama the first president you've seen to side-step the constitution?

If Obama is a God, it is your worshiping of a false idol that has given him that status. Your accusations, jealousy, hatred, and rage are what immortalizes him as a figure larger than life - not the blind testament of his flock. What gave Christ his monumental status? Was it his small band of followers spreading good will one lost soul at a time, or was it the inspiring story of conflict against a fledgling and abusive state that spread his fame? Obama couldn't have achieved this by himself - there are two sides to a coin and your irrelevant opposition willfully gives him his credibility. Accept responsibility for your role. By encouraging this conspiracy - YOU lend to the facade; not his incorrigible supporters. You want him to look, act, and behave like a normal man? Then treat him like one and call out his policies and engage in a civil debate, rather than personally demonizing him.

If you want to waste your breath in pursuit of an unrealistic and unattainable goal, then by all means do it; it is a free country - just realize you give away all of your will to power of your own accord by refusing to stand up for other righteous and effectual arguments grounded in reality. While you're sitting here crying foul about a birth certificate - your nemesis is petitioning the world on your behalf, solidifying his stranglehold on our country, ruining your good name, and destroying what little democracy we have left.

Your distraction undermines your own argument and destroys your ability to inspire meaningful accountability. Do you really think you are going to win based on this argument? Tell me, you guys have been at this for weeks if not months - what even semi-credible news agency has picked this up? What "buzz" is happening on the street? And Why aren't you vehemently criticizing his continuation of GWB's terrible policies, complete disregard for campaign promises, or utter disrespect for the spirit of competitive business? It doesn't make strategic sense. You're right that this administration wants us divided - so if you recognize that, why do you continually pursue the delusion?

The only effective way to organize and inform is to let his actions speak for themselves, and they are. Remember there are many more pieces to this puzzle than this one particular individual and our country is very upset - if disenfranchised. No amount of personal accusations will clear the veil and afford us the opportunity of foresight to take corrective action - We didn't learn our lesson with Bush and it is doubtful that we will learn it now.

This is why these so-called democrats are in power - because you want to blow a bunch of hot air rather than take prudent judicious action. It makes you look good and you get to take the self-righteous moral high road without having to sacrifice anything and after you've seen everyone else's cards. It's easy to pass judgement and criticize when you don't have any skin in the game.

Oh, and one more thing. Don't assume even for a second that just because I think this is an absurd argument which has absolutely no chance of success that I am a liberal or one of your fellow "Kool-aid drinkers."

zauberer44 9 months ago

kichman, why would someone block hostile attempts to view one's personal information?

Post your grades, birth certificate, and other personal information so I can prove you have a right to make these accusations and I'll stand behind your cause. How else can I know you are truly a US citizen with a right to petition our legal system?

Otherwise, we've heard all these arguments before.

Nasty and illogical enough for ya?

zauberer44 9 months ago

Insulting me doesn't make your point any more correct. It just further proves your ignorance.

That's the end of this conversation.

If/when you're ready to have a civil and intelligent debate I'll be waiting.

zauberer44 9 months ago

magikrider909,
From wikipedia,
Occam's Razor is the principle that "entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily." It is apocryphally attributed to 14th-century English logician and Franciscan friar, William of Ockham. The principle states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory.

To quote Isaac Newton: "We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances. Therefore, to the same natural effects we must, so far as possible, assign the same causes."

My simplest answer delineates that markets fluctuate in an open exchange where all information is digested and affects the market in a manner which no single specific statement or policy action can broadly swing prices, specifically one with little or no tangible economic impact in the near future. It is the most basic market economics. The price of oil is going up because the dollar is falling abroad and there is upward pressure on price mobility of the sovereign oil producing nations to cover their budget deficits through a stable pricing mechanism. Furthermore since China and India are increasingly becoming consumers of energy abroad, the American consumer has less and less marginal influence on the price of oil in international markets.

When the bottom fell out because the economy tanked it was because world-wide demand - not just that in the USA - fell dramatically and investment speculations, hedge funds, and computer programs chased the number all the way down as investors tried to short the market. It is only recently climbing from a depressed $40 to around $60 because confidence is returning to the investment class, coupled with those items above and other factors - of which a decision to continue purchasing overseas rather than sourcing oil domestically plays a very small role.

We did and are demanding oil from Iraq, hence the reason a gallon of gasoline is under $3 instead of over $6 as in Europe, where they do not have contractual price obligations with any oil producing countries. This is obviously an oversimplification, as there are many other factors contributing to this disparity; but it nevertheless illustrates the point.

To try and draw a direct correlation to one particular policy event in a complex commodity market is folly. I don't know how many more facts you need - but you can find them in any economics 101 textbook.

We are not the center of the universe.

And I am loyal to principles, not politicians.

zauberer44 9 months ago

"You need to study the 17th and 18th century economies of the American colonies, especially the writings of Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Paine, to understand the enormous value of a fiat currency the amount of which is sensibly controlled."

Precisely my point! These guys truly understood what it meant to manage the money supply by sensible metrics and not blind ideology. The most notable that Ben Franklin championed over and over again was after a phase of pent up demand by the taxpayers. It made the facilitation of policy and printing much easier when the population had taken an active role in it.

I highly recommend reading either of those two men as they are undoubtedly two of the most articulate and well-read scholars and statesmen in Western history.

Another interesting point is, upon analysis; our current so-called "progressive" system is actually extremely regressive - perhaps back to the point of 17th century Europe, where mercantilism was the law of the land and government representative of people was but a glimmer. Compare the banking systems of the Knights Templar or any other large trading interests such as Britain, Spain, or the East India companies (Take particular notice to the layout of the British EIC flag/logo).

The only thing that has changed is the efficiency by which it exercises it's transactions.

zauberer44 9 months ago

If you had half the voracity for pertinent issues and civil discourse as you do for this, we would not be in the midst of the biggest single taxpayer heist in the history of organized government.

zauberer44 9 months ago

No straws, I'll let the record speak for itself.

No one in their right mind thought even for a second that we would be drilling in our wildlife preserves - but that is a discussion for another thread.

speculation was responsible for the rise and the fall. It had nothing to do with physical policy or real-world events. The current rise cannot be tied to offshore drilling, which would only provide a marginal, if any real economic effect some 5-10 years from now. Rather it is a combination of factors, of which any speculation in offshore drilling is minimal at best.

To clarify. If were were not stealing/demanding oil from Iraq, it would be substantially more expensive already and would have been since we invaded in 2003. It's quite obvious. Use Occam's Razor.

zauberer44 9 months ago

You guys still beating this dead horse?

Jimmy, I couldn't agree more. But should I begin by pointing fingers or allow your words and actions to speak for themselves?

To defend one part of the constitution without defending the others is the very action that you decry, yet you openly embrace misconstruing it's intention to support your personal agenda.

OF COURSE, I an all Americans; CONSERVATIVES, Patriots, and Liberals alike would defend our constitution and one's right to legal representation.

The man who murders his wife in cold blood, in front of countless witnesses, is entitled to due process and trial by a jury of his peers.

Is that not the defense of the indefensible?

Let me rephrase that in a manner which cannot be subjected to your myopic and irrational interpretations.

That IS defense of the indefensible.

Your refusal to listen to reason and continued attempts to prove your point through slanderous insults has provided a convenient means to end this irrelevant discussion.

It's time we take Ceadog's advice. Agree to disagree and move on.

zauberer44 9 months ago

"The public credit union model, with some modifications, would best fit a small scale (community) banking model, and could be enlarged to the state, national and other levels. If run by local governments they could even create their own local currencies."

That is a VERY important distinction that I think highlights the true dilemma.

While regulations have failed us, it is not the fundamental concept of private control of banking or even fractional reserve banking that are the culprits here, (In much the same way Communism is not directly responsible for the fall of the soviet union), but rather our specific implementation of it.

The prime source of our poor implementation stems from a motivation of greed. It is our FOR PROFIT banking system that creates the incentives to chase short term profits, personal gains, and to masque objectives in order to defraud investors.

Now as for creating the money supply, that responsibility is provided directly to congress and no one else. Remember the money supply is not a store of value - even at the individual level; but is a medium of standardized measure and contract. Assets and investments create value, cash does not.

We should manage our money supply the same way it has always been managed throughout the history of our country prior to the 20th century. The governing body (in the early days it was states and municipalities) prints money in one block and then release it over time. After some time, the public clamors for more cash to facilitate (not stimulate) markets. The governing body is then contracted directly and proportionately on the behalf of the people to provide a specific amount of new bills and release them into circulation according to agreed upon principles.

There is no institutionalized debt creation, there is no "quantitative easing," there are no market manipulations, there is no compounded interest payments to private industry, there is only simply a hard-line tangible currency that is a true approximation of relative value. Inflation is an irrelevant concept, yet leverage still exists through the fundamental functioning of markets and debt.

Leverage ratios will naturally decrease from 1/10 or even 1/20 to 1/5 or 2/5 as people will genuinely be inclined to perceive cash as an asset. It will effectually turn our always changing standard of contract into a relatively stable, if temporary, store of value - ensuring the incentive to develop new and efficient models exists while mitigating a primary drive to greed. ("my money is always losing face value thru inflation so I must chase more profits to get ahead").

Thoughts anyone? Am I completely off base?

zauberer44 9 months ago

"The data you ask for her should also include links to "donations" made to politicians to see if money is being spent with organizations that provided money to the politicians,"

Definitely a good idea.

prevere, this topic has nothing to do with Religion or State's legal actions; so please do not spam this board.

zauberer44 9 months ago

I'm talking of course about including detailed line-item assessments and per office agency expenditures as this information is available on daily, weekly, monthly, and quarterly bases.

Make it easy to access and easy to read. USASpending is unnecessarily vague and cumbersome to navigate. It provides little to no true insight to financial expenditures, contracts awarded or other information.

zauberer44 9 months ago

"The only difference is that McCain would release and prove it."

Except he didn't. Nor did he validate similar requests for his medical records.

zauberer44 9 months ago

Well it's quite intriguing really when one compares the level of dogmatic faith applied to both traditional religions and those which pursue zealous fanaticism in the name of pragmatism and logic. Science, by all definitions has uniformed followers, theology, dogma, ceremonial dress, a papacy, sacred ground, and even ritual sacrifice.

My point is not to debunk science or religion. Both are intimately ingrained in one-another. Science is the deliberate motion to prove by logic the spiritual observations of our heritage from our ancestors. Plain and simple. Knowledge is knowledge regardless of where it comes from. Religion is a top-down and science is a bottom-up approach if that quantification can suit this cause. They are two sides of the same coin.

Again we are reminded of the balance of the Dao.

you are absolutely right that they should treat all religions equally - though our nation's government should not take any stance in regard to religious pursuit. By legitimizing any religion in the eyes of the state, it gives precedence over those other religions that are not large enough or articulated enough to have a majority presence in representation. It is discriminatory at the most basic level.

zauberer44 9 months ago

"This idea may be a duplicate... If he would comply, it wouldn't be necessary to repeat the request."

How is refusing to operate within the rule (the law of this forum in this instance) not selfish and arrogant?

I fail to realize how your personal request for an item that has already been repeated many times by the community is not in pursuit of your own self interest.

It's irrelevant at this point since your refusal to conform to the framework of this forum, by engaging in a civil and organized discussion; while RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS to discuss ideas which are important to them, only further marginalizes any legitimacy your argument may have carried.

zauberer44 9 months ago

"All their Obamessiah would have to do is provide the valid records proving the rest of us wrong. But since Barry obviously can't produce those documents, VD and friends are left with their only defense ..."

You marginalize yourself.

zauberer44 9 months ago

...We did that.

Or did you think oil is below 80 bucks a barrel just because they like us so much?

zauberer44 9 months ago

"Now if we would ask governments for their oil supplies as reparations for our losses or something of that nature, you'd have a valid point."

Kind of how Rome demanded reparations and tribute from every land it conquered?

Furthermore,

zauberer44 9 months ago

I'm not sure I follow you. Where are you getting your facts and how may I validate them on my own accord?

Evolution is a process by which mutative process makes changes or mistakes in the combination and propagation of biological code. It is a physically observable occurrence via standard laboratory equipment and substantiated daily in biology classes across the world.

It is in no way contradictory to any religious teachings or personal beliefs; nor does it aim to objectify the origin of life itself. Rather it attempts to quantify by deductive reasoning and our bast scientific understanding the process by which each individual differs from one's genetic contributors (parents) beyond the observation of the genetic inputs. Meaning it attempts to approximate the differences you exhibit that come from neither of your genetic contributors - most notably through behavioral or environmental factors; though this certainly not a complete theory or approximation.

Again, if that is a religion, as ascertained by ritual, blind faith, and/or fellowship of ideology; so is all science and for that matter - democracy.

zauberer44 9 months ago

I see your point but I still fail to understand how that is exclusive of other ideas being added rather than simply a vague, if somewhat politically motivated, starting point.

The objective of the thread is to provide insight to operating government.

Questions like, "What policy impediments to innovation in government currently exist?"

or

"How might federal advisory committees, rulemaking or electronic rulemaking be better used to drive greater expertise into decisionmaking?"

my be marginally based in misleading subjective assumption under certain arguments, but do indeed betray an agenda; though I would hardly consider it political, and certainly not divisive.

zauberer44 9 months ago

"...while bashing our Military as the Current administration has continued to do"

Can you substantiate that?

zauberer44 9 months ago

Well considering the statistically significant number of people in this country who support the theory of evolution (Well over 50%); imprisoning all of them would be a logistical and a fiscal nightmare.

I must question your perception of "special rights over the general public or private property". Do you mean to say that your individual right to individual propriety should not be impeded by scientific reason or socially accepted or mandated paradigms?

This is a forum of debate and mutual respect. I appreciate your input but please do not make such broad recommendations or accusations unless they are substantiated with facts.

zauberer44 9 months ago

We arrived at a foreign garrison by one of two methods.

1.) They invited us to come, and provided us everything we need. We asked for the support to do our job. Assuming the job is completed, daily we ask for the right to leave. Or, we found a reason to stay and asked for the right to stay (see #2).

2.) We invited ourselves, and asked for the right to set up a base and conduct operations within their borders.

We can get more specific if you consider issues of repatriation, moving supply lines, air traffic rights, usurping the rights of citizens to their lands, civilian casualties, and many, many, many other issues.

Needless to say, we've never occupied foreign soil and not asked for something up front - unless we came in shooting. In that instance, we made our demands on the back end.

I agree that our military does not get enough recognition for the jobs they do, especially abroad - but consider your request from an alternative perspective. In many countries where we are active, we are an unwelcome occupying force - despite being a very necessary one. Just because they live with it, doesn't mean they have to like it or praise it. That requirement would be a direct insult and goes against the freedom and liberty our soldiers fight for. It would be akin to their recognizing our superiority. Is that the image of America we want to spread? One that is superior to all or one where equality is the rite of the land?

How about we show a little humility instead of arrogance? Even if we don't mean it. :-)

zauberer44 9 months ago

So anyone who disagrees with your opinion of "full truth" is a "liberal"?

That's not a very conservative sentiment.

for the record, I argue against allowing individuals like you to circumvent the constitutional right to due process.

46,365 - 49,462 = Someone so busy, he's moving backwards.

zauberer44 9 months ago

I don't understand. You just made two contradicting statements.

What are you trying to say?

zauberer44 9 months ago

I don't know where you get your facts but we've asked more from every country in which we hold a garrison. Plain old deductive reasoning can show you that.

zauberer44 9 months ago

It is spamming if you don't follow the mandated protocol.

One thread per topic. It doesn't take a college degree.

Furthermore, you seem to have misconstrued the notion of a right to judicial due process and a nonexistent right to have your demands met. Though I certainly will not argue that you absolutely have the right to demand whatever you want, we also have the right to ignore you.

zauberer44 9 months ago

"why haven't you deleted all the duplicate posts on legalizing pot?"

I reported those too. And the dupes calling to ban all the certificate posts.

One Thread Per Idea.

zauberer44 9 months ago

He owes you nothing, yet gives you everything.

Before you accuse me of heralding a messiah or some other misconstrued xenophobic argument, consider, you can't even muster the patriotism necessary to even feign a most basic support for the man your kinsman elected, in good faith.

Your definition of cooperation sounds alot to me like holding someone for ransom.

If he gives into this unsubstantiated harassment and terrorism, what does that teach our collective enemies?

zauberer44 9 months ago

Haha, funny! I figured, but it doesn't always translate well through the web :-)

It's an interesting conundrum that can only be vindicated through an historical perspective. Bottom line is We, as in: The People, do not have ownership or control of any part of our government. That's why I like the 72 hour rule, but really he promised us 5 days for "non-emergency" legislation. Well that is a pretty ambiguous statement. All legislation could be considered "emergency" if argued appropriately.

What we need is a method to express to our representatives our stance on an issue prior to their votes being cast. I write weekly to express my sentiments, but for specific issues I know my reps don't read them for days or weeks after votes have been cast, if at all.

We also need to return vested powers to congress and limit the control of the executive branch - though I am less comfortable with this until we can wrangle control of our representation. At this point, I trust the Obama administration more than I trust Congress to act on my own behalf - and that's not saying much.

I would call to rescind a number of key legislative actions over the past 100 or so years which have taken us on a course tertiary to the one laid out by our founders.

Remember these were simply prudent and honest men (at least in their representation) who wanted nothing more than to be left alone to live their lives as they saw fit.

That's not to say no progress has been made. We have drastically improved the quality of life for individuals and expanded representation (such as through women's suffrage) but it has run away from us in a few key arenas - namely protecting the rights of a corporation over those of the individual.

Let me put it this way - If a company murders someone in cold blood, you can't give it the electric chair. Insurance companies do this admittedly and "legally" ever single day.

zauberer44 9 months ago

"Liberals like zauberer argue against public disclosure"

Obviously you are not above insults. What makes you think I'm a liberal?

"If he could shut us down with a simple document, he would." Is a true testament to your character. Is your opinion here based on what you would do in this situation?

If my goal is to truly work together with you through mutual respect and constructive disagreement, how would putting you down help achieve my goal?

Only through cooperation can we ever hope to achieve anything.

zauberer44 9 months ago

Thank you for proving my point by simply resorting to personal attacks, slander, and the stereotypical - "if you don't like what I have to say... you can GET OUT."

We don't live in Saudi Arabia. If that behavior is exhibited here, and you have witnessed it, then I urge you to pursue police action as it is domestic abuse and women coming from that culture may truly be unaware of their rights.

Otherwise, if you find a method to judiciously police the populace and arbitrate over all crimes committed, righteously, regardless of time or location, than please expound its principles as our system is always open to further improvement.

If you think our tradition is christian then you've missed some very prominent parts of your nation's history - namely the separation of church and state or the first amendment to the constitution. "In God we Trust" was not part of our founding principles nor is it a tradition of ALL Americans.

Furthermore the word God is a euphemism used in the English language to denote any spiritual higher power and in no way applies specifically to a Christian faith. Christians, Muslims, and Jews alike worship the same personified omnipotent deity which uses this moniker in the English Language.

To claim there is nothing wrong with our country is to claim perfection. Do you think we're perfect?

I love my country and what it sands for. No xenophobic opinion is going to convince me otherwise.

zauberer44 9 months ago

Your logic is truly dizzying.

HE. HAS. THE. RIGHT. TO. REFUSE. PUBLIC. DISCLOSURE.

YOU. HAVE. THE. RIGHT. TO. ACTION. THROUGH. LITIGATION.

In either instance, the documents will be reviewed behind closed doors, since this is also an issue of personal privacy as well as legitimacy. You have no rightful claim to personally examine these documents, unless you are a court justice.

If that didn't get through, nothing will; and your opinion becomes further irrelevant.

zauberer44 9 months ago

"It's in the Constitution.
We have the right to know."

You have a right to know, just as he has a right to refuse to release personal and private documents for public scrutiny.

This is my last post repeating myself.

zauberer44 9 months ago

"the amount of embarrassment he could cause the right wing would be enormous. We'd likely never recover."

True, if you objective is to divide the country. However, if you want to unite both and all parties through some common ground and constructive disagreement, then such action would be detrimental to your cause.

"Mr. Obama has plenty of time to cater to whims of the Muslims that hate us"

I don't consider initiating discussion and projecting honorable civility after a decade of ignoring them to be catering to every whim, but that's just my opinion.

"...busy schedule of Bashing the United States of America to put this controversy [sic.] to rest..." I'm not sure I follow. If you are referring to ipods or bowing or the like, I'd have to ask for some real evidence of this accusation or at least an objective, if anecdotal, reference.

Let me just say I don't like being put into this position of personally defending our president because I don't necessarily agree with him, his actions, or his policies. I, however, do believe he has the right to make the vested decisions which are afforded to him both as an individual, and by the support granted to him on all of our behalf.

wheter these accusations are true or not, we must hold true to our democratic foundations and pursue due process.

zauberer44 9 months ago

I think the race to push legislation is more to get the ball rolling in at least some direction before lobby interest can dilute or dismantle any initiatives, but that's just my take on it. Remember, it is much easier to ask for forgiveness than for permission.

If you notice the manner in which ideas are presented to congress, they allow for open interpretation so long as action is taken. What we are seeing for the first time in a long time is a true fight for control over our government.

The only problem is, in the midst of all this chaos, the American people are the ones whose voices are silenced.

Only time and prudent attention on our parts will ensure we may regain control. we must make our government fear our unity.

zauberer44 9 months ago

Name one foreign diplomat who has come to the United States and not observed our "traditions".

It isn't going to happen, because we do not collectively have any traditions. We are an immigrant country composed of all different cultures. That is our culture, to embrace others as our own and look past our cultural differences and find common ground.

zauberer44 9 months ago

It is folly to think that such a rational idea or argument could be achieved through the very channels which oppose it.

If you want your media back, you better stop looking to corporate-sponsors to look out for your interests and not theirs.

MSNBC, Fox, CNN, they are all accountable to advertisers, not viewers.

zauberer44 9 months ago

To stifle the constructive discussion of others by injecting your own opinion countless times into their arguments is suppression of free speech.

I'll be more than happy to embrace your freedom of speech, when you honor mine.

Quit posting duplicates and I'll quit flagging them.

zauberer44 9 months ago

It is a conservative stance to conserve natural resources and to protect the established traditions set forth by our fore-fathers. Those established traditions include a reverence for the environment and a continual dedication to leave our world better than the way we found it. Your argument does not embrace these objectives.

The eco-terrorism movement gives true environmentalism a bad name but it is no more a religion than the "scientific method" you are heralding as counter to their argument.

By that existential argument, football or any other fanatical activity should also be considered a religion.

zauberer44 9 months ago

For the second time today, I'm in agreement with you!

Rushing health care through will help no one except the political interests which support it.

We don't need state sponsored anything. The federal government has proved how inefficiently it can run systems. What we need is for government to take the excuses away from industry. Provide effective and light-weight, simple regulations that provide a competitive atmosphere.

I could see a system where all of the administrative management is handled by the bureaucratic government, or a nonprofit group, since this information is not the property of private companies anyway. That would remove a specific secretarial function form hospital systems and save some money bit it is a pittance.

Another item that has to be addressed is the anti-competitive environment of the insurance industry. Essentially, the majority of problems stem from inflated and ballooning costs due to a poorly organized insurance system. Hospitals and drug companies can charge whatever they want because they are not held accountable to the end customer, they are held accountable only to the business model of the insurance industry, which is essentially defunct.

Private systems and public systems have unique advantages and disadvantages, but neither can be encouraged to allow industry to rob from legitimate payers.

Maybe a system that was partially backed like some types of life insurance, where you pay into a private account in your name. The company pays you a small pittance to keep you above inflation but otherwise earns revenue on the investment or divestment of your monthly payments. It ensures everyone has fair and equal coverage align with their contribution, and any discrepancies or additional needs can be reviewed and extra capital awarded on a case by case basis from the pool of income generated from investment. That keeps the "profits" generated in the company instead of into some executives new yacht.

If industry cant compete in this tight and competitive of a market and be held accountable, it doesn't deserve to exist. But we are not able to make that judgement objectively. We have to allow the system the opportunity to correct itself and enable it to do so before we simply jump on the socialized health care band-wagon.

One part of the argument conveniently left out is that while socialized systems abroad work more effectively at administering care to people; they are essentially doing so free of charge by using American-funded industry innovations. Our private system provides 90% of the research and innovative products to the rest of the world, yet we are unable to provide that service to everyone here at a reasonable cost.

We, the citizens and the consumers are DEMANDING we be provided affordable and adequate services and the effective choice to keep it that way.

zauberer44 9 months ago

Are you holding your breath?

zauberer44 9 months ago

Patient? Spamming the same idea 23 times in 24 hours is hardly what I would call patient.

You undermine your own cause. Are you too blind to see that?

zauberer44 9 months ago

YES.

for the first time in agreement, "I feel we need to give this site and its concept a chance. It remains to be seen if President Obama and the administration do anything about what appears here."

If actions are not taken on our behalf, it is one more item in the arsenal against his transparency claims.

Our entire legal system is built around giving the accused the benefit of the doubt. It has it's faults, (such as in many rape cases) but like it or not - we are innocent until proven guilty.

How do you build a legal case to prove your point? Do you wildly sling accusations and spam websites or do you collect and examine evidence and build substantive arguments around it?

"I suggested (constructive idea X) which was backed by many, but HE did not act on it and only made excuses." Carries a lot more weight with voters than "I forcefully demanded HE give me something I wanted and HE ignored my angry accusations and insults."

zauberer44 9 months ago

Because you have no patience and can't control yourself.

If I were him, I'd make you sweat this a little longer, at least till I was back in front of my desk.

He's a busy guy and has more important things to do than to cater to your every whim. Remember he works for ALL of us, not for each of us.

zauberer44 9 months ago

I agree some sort of filter is definitely necessary. I actually like that you can see who voted which way. Since any personally identifiable information is not included - it is anonymous, but it also gives individuals the opportunity to face their opponents at least in some form.

It also ensures that the accusations of rigging the votes are unfounded.

zauberer44 9 months ago

I'm in complete agreement. I support the rights of those with voices to be heard, but I do not support them taking precedence over all others by forceful means.

Some people simply aren't mature enough to respect their own ideas or those of others, and it distracts from the overall objective of this initiative.

It's come to the point where suspension or some other action must be taken. At this point, I feel the forum has achieved it's objective to the best of its ability.

Once gain, the actions of a few have ruined the environment for everyone.

zauberer44 9 months ago

sreinke, May I ask, once again - what is your objective with this inquisition?

zauberer44 9 months ago

While while what you claim is indeed true, it is not your right to examine the personal documents of another citizen. If these documents have been vetted by congress and the Supreme Court; then that is validation enough for the American people - unless of course you would embrace a law which would openly expose your private federal documents to the American people as well.

We must hold all citizens to the same high standard. President Obama is not above the law of the land, and neither are the rest of us. Why should he be forced to expose his personal information to the public when we are not?

Until we as a society are mature enough to have complete transparency in personal data files and unrestricted free access, without abusing these privileges; you will just have to take the Court's word for it.

thanks for the comments earlier, I appreciate it. I also appreciate your attempt to truly raise this question in a manner which is productive and contributes to the overall discussion.

zauberer44 9 months ago

It's not, however the presentation of your (the plural "your") case betrays your intentions.

I was referring directly to:

"Post his credentialos and I am outta this place"

Which irrefutably exposes a personal agenda. So I asked a legitimate question. Is cloudscape, and others who support this cause here to talk about open government and transparency or are they here to pursue a personal agenda? The answer can be both, but acceptable social standards in this country dictate one substantiate words with actions. JBaker62 meets the standard as he or she has exhibited interest in issues of transparency and accountability beyond an obvious personal interest. You have directly provided constructive ideas for open government in the spirit of this forum, and I thank you for that.

Our records speak for themselves.

If we want this question answered, we'll have to ask it in a manner that exhibits mutual integrity and respect. Encouraging others to spam this forum embraces neither.

zauberer44 9 months ago

Perhaps he should provide his foreskin too?

zauberer44 9 months ago

This is the last time I'm goona say it.

Articulate your argument in a reasonable and objective format - and it will be duly considered. I will stand by your right to be heard, despite disagreeing.

Make unsubstantiated accusations, try to push your way to the front of the line, and insult everyone who doesn't agree with you along the way; and you will be ridiculed.

I'm a conservative, but if that's "leftist propaganda"; well I don't want to be right.

zauberer44 9 months ago

cloudscape, so what your saying is you have no interest in participating in your government but here here only for your personal selfish interests?

I'm trying real hard to support this cause. Despite disagreeing with it, I feel you have a right to have your honest questions answered - but the ignorance and insolence is making it exceedingly difficult.

zauberer44 9 months ago

mail2me, issues which were raised and should have been vindicated during the campaign cycle.

Would you provide all of your personal information to the public at the request of a few citizens, who insult your credibility? I wouldn't. Now if I were asked politely or otherwise by subpoena, that is a different story.

He works for us, he is not owned by us.

I've asked it may times before, and I will ask it again - what do you expect to gain by this inquisition?

zauberer44 9 months ago

Reasonable factual response:

Make your accusations all day, but until you pursue them through your congressional representatives or through court action; be prepared to be stonewalled.

zauberer44 9 months ago

The media asked tough questions huh?

Was one of those questions "where is the proof that Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction"? Was one of those questions, "Where is the proof that Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11"? Was one of those questions, "New Orleans has been underwater for 3 days, the Canadian mounted police are here, where is our national guard?"

If it was, then they certainly asked it quietly.

I'll concede that the media is in love with our current administration, though I do not understand your investment in holding mainstream media accountable to anyone other than those who pay it's bills. It is a futile act to think that CNN, Fox, MSNBC, or any of the others would serve anyone except those who write the paychecks. Last time I checked, that wasn't you or me - at least not directly.

Carpenturr, I guess the discussion is over since we have moved so far from the initial point that all semblance of it is obscured in insult and accusation bearing no consequence of you taking due action on your own behalf.

I truly wish you the best of luck in your pursuit as I would be genuinely interested to see these results, though it is highly unlikely to happen without a champion.

zauberer44 9 months ago

Thank you for proving my point by providing no substantive argument but simply turning my words around.

When you're ready for a civilized conversation, I'm ready and willing. You have obviously thought this through and seem a reasonable person. I'm sure we have more similarities than differences.

I'll start. I agree that private business should be regulated minimally and only in the sense to keep a level playing field for all parties.

However, how can you justify the privatization of necessary social services which allow for private interests to profit from the entire constituency?

furthermore, how can you herald democracy and capitalism while decrying fascism? Is the corporate enterprise not an approximation of a fascist regime where hierarchical structure and centralized commandments dictate the course of action for every individual in its midst? I would agree that our system is different from a totalitarian state if the corporation was truly held accountable to those it's serves or an actionable legislature.

My personal take, is that this is a battle that has been waged for centuries, between the rights of free individuals and the oppresive powers that serve to leverage their will. In a perfect world, our democratic system ideally pursues the balance between private and fascist interests by providing incentive to create new and creative ways to solve tactile problems but still be regulated and held accountable to the distinct needs and desires of the people who make them possible. Ideologically, we will allow a little bit of fascism, to reap its benefits (such as a clear and centralized objective) so long as the negative influences can be checked and balanced.

My point in my last post was precisely that the affairs of government have for all of recent history reflected a general trend toward fascist dominance except in three or four very specific instances in the past four hundred years. Most notably, the French revolution, which didn't amount to much beyond a foundation for American ideology; our revolution where individuals stood up for personal rights; the end of the Civil War, again where individual rights were protected, and lastly, in World War 2, with the same result though more obscured by a veil of collective humanitarianism.

Despite these few instances of hope, the hierarchical model of the invested sovereign has persisted. We have kingly hereditary rite today just as Europe did in the 1600's. We call it something else, representative democracy; but only because we have realized that ideologies and not personalities define one's candidacy to the throne. Regardless, we sill as a society project our will and power onto a sovereign individual; whose receivership of our rights is allegedly for an impermanent and duly short length of time. It is, of course a facade, as the power structure always remained in tact.

Think about it, every free-thinking leader has been assassinated before they could enact a revolution against the established power structure. Further still, no joe-schmo individual could ever become president despite being more qualified than most of our so-called leaders, past and present.

So my question is this, regarding the birth certificate; what is the aim of this request? If you could prove that he is not a naturally born citizen, what makes you think that the ingrained social paradigm will just move aside and allow rightful power to be restored to the people? What makes you think that Joe Biden, the individual who will become your next president if this one is impeached, is not part of the same hereditary culture? By very definition of this culture, one must participate in it to be included in it and to effectively rebel against it.

In my opinion, all that matters is the effect on our own perception of our freedoms and liberties. If these calls go unnoticed and Americans further realize that we simply exist to serve the will of others, will it not be more substantive than proceeding through a dog-and-pony show aimed at (and probably succuessful at) continuing the mass delusion?

So again, I must ask what you aim to achieve by this.

If I have insulted you in any way or seem ungrateful to your opinion I must apologize because that is not my intention, though I have a tendency to be short with half-truths and half-articulated ideologies.

I hope that we may engage in a constructive discourse, though I still believe it would be beneficial for all if this discussion took place at a centralized and specific location - namely the "show us your certificate" post which carries the most votes and comments. Feel free to post our discussion there. I leave you to take the initiative.

zauberer44 9 months ago

Ahh, but you did ask for debate by posting your opinion to a website designed SPECIFICALLY for that purpose. If you didn't want debate, you wouldn't be here.

And again, the tried tactic of personifying your weaknesses onto your opponent in attempt to distract from your own. this is not about me, it never was. It is about your problem with not getting your way. Am I wrong? Present your case.

I find it humorous that these calls for transparency come at such a convenient time. Where was this zealous pursuit in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, or even 2007 when transparency was all but stricken from the dictionary? Where was it in 2008 when your bank took all your money and told you it was your fault?

In fact, where are those calls now?

You don't want transparency or accountability; you want a kangaroo court, and you're not goona get it unless you do something about it. You can scream all you want but no one will listen until you make a rational argument.

your actions, or rather your lack thereof, are much louder than your words. If you have evidence that his birth certificate is forged, then initiate court proceedings. A serious accusation such as this warrants investigation. I guarantee you any rationally articulated concerns will not be dismissed by the supreme court, particularly one with as much radical support as this.

Put your money where your mouth is, and I'll stand by you every step of the way.

zauberer44 9 months ago

Ricardomigrant, is a pot about to meet a kettle.

If the site is so rigged, why are you still here? There re more sympathetic avenues to express your fear and hatred.

The most requested item has NOT been for the birth certificate, except by those who feel they are entitled to more than one vote.

zauberer44 9 months ago

Blondepickle, Your ignorance is eclipsed only by your smug sense of self-satisfaction.

YOU, "should carry yourself humbly not arrogantly."

Heed your own advice.

zauberer44 9 months ago

blondepickle, tell me - what does God have to do with the secular state or interaction in worldly affairs? Ever heard of Freedom of religion or the separation of church and state? As far as I remember, in America, Barack shares this right with everyone else, regardless of where they were born.

So we finally hit the root of all this fear and anger - and I foolishly thought it was founded on a legitimate stately concern for our security and liberty - but it's not. It's founded in a believe of religious and individual superiority over others.

"You need to pray to the God of the Bible that you stay alive long enough to redeem yourself and your sins because when you die you will be judged like all of us."

For your own sake, I hope that you watch your tone and check your language because in certain circles that could be considered a threat.

To turn your own words, you need to behave humbly not arrogantly. How about considering the rights and beliefs of others, or is this the United States of Blondepickle?

zauberer44 9 months ago

jmiller, before you take that insolent tone, you should check your math.

how many of those votes are duplicates? I work in stats and my very educated guess is 90%.

I see not one "show us your birth certificate" item with more than 200-300; while this should still be very significant, all this shows is that those few in favor of this idea are willing to sink to the lowest of levels to get it.

I file this idea under the same category as C1ali5 and V1agra offers. Which is sad, because, like enlarging one's member, it should get at least some legitimate focus.

zauberer44 9 months ago

alujan55, hat are you talking about?

Capitalism and Democracy are by no means mutually inclusive.

In fact, I can make a very stiff argument why capitalism is in direct opposition to a free and equal democratic process.

One not look further than every major so-called left or right-wing economic contract philosophy to see this distinction. Locke, Smith, Hume, Mill, Keynes, hell even Engels and Marx; they all say the exact same thing. In fact, the only one of the bunch to call a spade a spade was Hobbes, but we don't discuss him - because that would admit our dead idols stole their work and that we are truly still part of a fledgling illegitimate, imperialistic, mercantile, and (YES!) hereditary, feudalist state.

Think I'm wrong? Pick up a book or at least hit Wikipedia and come to your own conclusions. Your accusations of "fascist ideology" reflects my ascertainment. It's all a matter of perspective.

zauberer44 9 months ago

I'm beginning to understand what you mean when you say the right is unwilling to compromise...

This is how incendiary radical groups are formed - not because of our staunch stance behind an issue but to combat the ignorant opposition against it.

the funniest part is, they seek to use this as a means to begin impeachment proceedings - showing they have little care for the state of our economy, our other fledgling systems, our reputation abroad, or anything except themselves.

I also find it ironic that since day one the president to win by the greatest popular vote in decades has received more scrutiny by the alleged right-wing (who are truly further left than even the most progressive democrat) in six months than the obviously, probably, and factually corrupt Bush administration did in eight years. There is countless evidence against senior bush executives, yet none will initiate a trial.

In fact, Dick Cheney openly and proudly asserts ignoring the bill or rights, the Geneva convention, and breaking just about any law he came across and it is met with thunderous applause.

America really is two countries. One that aims to positively influence our world for the better and one that cares only for its diluted self-interest.

zauberer44 9 months ago

You didn't, I was giving you the benefit of the doubt but you fully admit spamming this board - by willfully posting an idea which is not dissimilar from others.

What is the point of that, may I ask?

So in accordance with the structure of this forum, I have a duty to flag as duplicate and allow other relevant ideas to be heard, rather than this one idea over and over again.

I'm here in good faith for an open and honest discussion. That is something I have not seen in government in a long time. This is the first opportunity for that to take place yet you obviously have no interest in talking about anything except your own personal concerns, so the point is moot.

Please understand, I find your concern to be legitimate considering the large amount of zealous advocates for it and I will support it being asked fairly - however I will not support it taking forced precedence over all others by divisive and counterproductive tactics. You have to earn it just like everyone else.

zauberer44 9 months ago

So everyone is in conspiracy against you?

If it is rigged, why are you still here making your case in vain instead of pursuing your objective through other, less moderated means?

zauberer44 9 months ago

"We are holding our representatives accountable, which is the point of the tea parties"

while that may be true - it is yet to be seen.

I will reserve judgement until action or inaction has been taken.

zauberer44 9 months ago

I'm not saying it isn't a legitimate or important concern - but merely that there are concerns of greater importance to me, particularly those regarding financial transparency, accountability in congress, and reinstating our constitutionally vested rights under the first ten amendments.

At the end of the day, we may not have the power to demand this disclosure from our president, but we still do not have to go along with it blindly. His actions will speak much louder than any words or documents ever could. They will also speak much louder than the distracting calls of impotent and self-absorbed politicians aiming to destroy the success of others.

I have seen so much dissension in recent months that it truly makes me think our democratic way of life may actually have a fighting chance. With every passing day we come closer to the collective realization that individuals must be responsible for the welfare of all. History will vindicate our ideologies, which are pitted against each other in a delusional battle enacted on the national stage to distract us from truly accomplishing anything. This ruse cannot go on forever and it won't.

It is impossible for the few to unilaterally control the many. The established power structure is waning. Freedom will always find a way because individuals who have tasted liberty know it is worth fighting and dieing for. We will stand up to tyranny.

zauberer44 9 months ago

tayvlhunt, well I can personally guarantee the legitimacy of this question. I see one agenda item with around 200 votes. That is no small number and I will be watching closely to ensure that all traces of this question are not removed.

It is on the second page at the moment. Regardless of the aggregate number, there will have to be so many votes both for and against to get it out of the top 20 or 30 that it will certainly warrant further review.

I encourage you to write your senator and representative if this is of such great importance to you.

zauberer44 9 months ago

So you admit you did not read the previous ideas and comments posted prior to yours? Then it is an honest though inexcusable mistake.

Your voting record, however, indicates that you are fully aware of the multiple instances of this agenda item on the forum, so ignorance is not an excuse.

In all seriousness, why engage in subversive tactics which detract from your objective, instead of supporting the single prominent idea and propelling it to the top in good-faith?

Unless of course you are simply here to sling libel and disrupt the positive discourse of open government. Seems counter-productive in my opinion.

zauberer44 9 months ago

Carpenturr, you are right the qualifications matter - however I cannot justify continuing a debate with one who does not embrace objectified reason.

My ruse was to clarify the absurdity of this call, and the uninformed manner in which it is presented.

If you cannot see my point, than it is a fault of yours as I have over 200 years of legal precedence on my side.

Whether you are in agreement or not is of little consequence as no one can force a sleight of hand in this instance except your congressional representatives or your court system.

So keep doing what you are doing, and your calls will continue to fall on deaf ears. I offer a solution, but one that takes away your excuse to complain vehemently and decry foul-play. What is it you really want?

Before you give me the "We the people..." speech, consider that we have not called to arms in the past 10 months (or Eight years) for the untold atrocities committed against all Americans and in our good name abroad, or those committed openly against the constitution; what makes you think this will be the straw?

zauberer44 9 months ago

Your effort at disguising your agenda is intriguing, however your other ideas show that you prefer to distract from the argument by reposting the same ideas rather than rallying support behind those that already exist.

If you have something new or different to add, then by all means post it - otherwise it is my duty to flag as duplicate.

zauberer44 9 months ago

Vote for topics which already exist instead of posting them again. You will get much more goodwill.

If you can levy support to get that topic to #1, your voice will not be silenced.

I will personally join you if this legitimate concern is completely stricken from these boards - but only on the grounds of your right to free speech.

If, however, you continue to pursue methods of subversion, I cannot in good conscious support you.

Rest easy that your concern has been heard, now you can focus on making it #1.

zauberer44 9 months ago

Though I highly disagree that this "is one of the most substantial issues of our day," I am in complete agreement with cengime.

zauberer44 9 months ago

Instead of posting the same thing over and over, encourage those who are doing this to give their support to one idea and get it voted to the top.

That will go much further toward giving you positive identification as a legitimate question than participating in the spamming of this forum.

Also, this is not really the most appropriate place to address this concern - though if phrased properly it may fall under the umbrella of open government - particularly if personalities are removed and it is presented in an articulate and responsible manner.

Maybe a request to openly provide citizen documentation on everyone in the cabinet, or otherwise sponsoring a bill to release private records to the public in the interest of open and honest electoral practices?

zauberer44 9 months ago

Duly noted and flagged for removal.

I do not aim to silence you, instead I actively encourage your open discourse and continued responsible debate. However in this case ignorance is not an acceptable excuse, so I must ask why you did not read through many of the other ideas to see if yours would provide something original or distinctive from those already posted.

It seems counter productive to one's cause to post the same idea as someone else, rather than giving them your support.

zauberer44 9 months ago

I'm sorry, was that an "I know you are but what am I?"

Furthermore, capitalism is not an ideology or philosophy of social government - Democracy is.

zauberer44 9 months ago

Now to comment on the idea itself.

I propose that the president be required to release his birth certificate on one condition.

All of those who call for the invasion of his personal privacy shall have their own privacy invaded by publicly releasing their names and requiring that each have a copy of the birth certificate tattooed to their foreheads, so that they may forever be identified in public as individuals who are only for themselves and would prefer to engage in the same subversive tactics of their accused.

While this is or was a very legitimate concern where the details of which are somewhat shrouded in half-truths and conspiracy theory, it would be in the best interest of the president to set the record straight.

It is not, however in the best interest of public discourse or the best interest of this unprecedented attempt at the open exchange of ideas to perpetually pester the individuals here and distract from the fundamental task of providing new collaborative ideas to implementing an open government.

You individuals who have tolled through these boards have wasted your own time and mine by refusing to engage in intelligent and responsible debate on the executive implementation of policy and the advocacy of transparency, accountability, and resourceful deliberation in proposed legislative action.

For the last time, it is congress who makes laws, so it is through congress that any arbitration, deliberation, or legislative action will be taken on this topic or any other.

It is neither the role or the responsibility of the US president to vindicate each and every accuser. If you would like to file a formal complaint, do so in writing directly to the office of the White House, pursue legal action through civil or criminal courts, or contact your state representative.

This is neither the appropriate time nor the appropriate place for this discussion.

zauberer44 9 months ago