A Good Ideal for America

[Hellkite]

Editor's note: Lt. Gen. Russel Honoré commanded the military response to Hurricane Katrina. He retired from the U.S. Army in 2008 after 37 years, sits on the board of the Stevenson Disaster Management Institute and is an adjunct professor at Emory and Vanderbilt universities. He is the author of "Survival: How a Culture of Preparedness Can Save America and You from Disasters."

Like most veterans, the men and women who have worn our nation's uniform to defend this country, I am furious with and disappointed in the state of indecision that plagued Washington these past few weeks. Whether or not to raise the debt ceiling so our country can continue to pay our bills and maintain our global credit rating didn't seem like such a difficult decision.

As a retired, disabled soldier who spent 37 years in the Army, I can only see this debacle -- the weeks of haggling to get to an eleventh-hour deal -- as the definition of "mission failure." At this point, even the last-minute deal that is on its way to President Obama's desk will not repair the damage our elected leadership's amateur-hour, worthless grandstanding has caused.

And it's not just our image as a world leader that has been harmed. It's our nation itself.

Our nation won the Revolutionary War because we shared a common purpose: freedom. General Washington's ragtag army, 20% of whom were slaves, were poorly armed and trained, freezing and hungry, yet they defeated the most powerful military in the world. Those men and their families were willing to sacrifice, to risk their lives and everything they had, to achieve our nation's freedom. Now the country that generations of Americans have worked and fought for, that 1.3 million soldiers, marines, airmen, and sailors died fighting for, is at risk.

Why? Because our national elected leaders don't share a common purpose. They have failed to live up to their oaths of office, to protect and defend the Constitution and the United States of America. Instead they strike partisan poses they hope will be remembered during their next campaigns.

This isn't leadership, it's playacting. And we should all be disgusted.

The very notion that our federal government may not be able to pay its global debt is embarrassing, but it is shameful that our government has been willing to play games with the livelihoods of our active-duty soldiers, our veterans, and our most vulnerable citizens.

Our nation's government must remember its purpose: to keep this nation free. Many disabled veterans, the ones who are praying the check comes in the mail after all, can't work as result of injuries sustained on duty. They were willing to die to keep America free, and they sacrifice to this day. How many of the grandstanding clowns in Washington took a bullet in the name of freedom? Are they willing to sacrifice as much as the average National Guardsman does?

It's time to get draconian. But not with the helpless elderly who need their Social Security payments, not with the powerless Army private supporting a family. I mean it's time to load our elected officials on troop planes and send them to Camp Shelby, Mississippi. Put them in tents with no air conditioning, have Army drill sergeants teach them teamwork and physical sacrifice. When they recognize their responsibility to the people of America, they can return to D.C., their upscale restaurants, and military plane trips, as though they were royalty.

And if they can't? Better that they should fail to learn what an 18-year-old Army private understands than continue to fail America.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Russel L. Honore.

And he so right I could not have said it any better myself

 

[Majestic]

I've been following this on the news as much as I can. I heard that soldiers in the Middle East may not get paid. Very harsh, why can't all the politicians who have huge salaries give up theirs, it's not like they are risking their lives. Typical politicians, I honestly they should get paid a hell of a lot less, something more in line with what a business manager or exec gets, that how I think Aussie politicians should get paid.

 

[CrazyFrog1903]

Would this be possible???? I like this idea...

 

[Starfox1701]

And he so right I could not have said it any better myself

here here

I've been following this on the news as much as I can. I heard that soldiers in the Middle East may not get paid. Very harsh, why can't all the politicians who have huge salaries give up theirs, it's not like they are risking their lives. Typical politicians, I honestly they should get paid a hell of a lot less, something more in line with what a business manager or exec gets, that how I think Aussie politicians should get paid.

it wouldn't be enough but it is an idea

Would this be possible???? I like this idea...

Just hade a better idea send them to Parris Island SC and let the gattors and Marines have them

 

[thunderfoot]

Why would you infect my home with politicians? What ever I did to make you mad, please tell me and I'll enure I never do it again. Camp Shelby is about an hour's drive north of where I live. May I make a suggestion which would actually allow some use out of these otherwise worthless individuals? Load them on troop planes, yes. Put them in camps with no AC, yes. But place the camp about fifteen minutes away from Afghanistan's border with Pakistan, the so called epicenter of terrorism. Make it public and then send them out on patrol every day. This would probably save the life of some soldier on patrol, a fobbit back at the base camp, or another equally useful person.

Kidding aside, the politicos in DC, and elsewhere, are running amuck because their boss is not supervising them properly. "We the people" need to remind them very firmly just who they really work for. And if you do not vote when you are eligible to do so, you are not participating, If you do not vote, you are not entitled to have an opinion. On this or any other subject. Because you did not vote. Therefore, you are part of the problem and not part of the solution. It is not about whether your candidate wins or loses. It is about expressing your choice of who should run the country, or catch dogs, for that matter.

 

[CABAL]

Thunder's right, as always. We need to do a better job of electing people that actually care and not those who just want money and power. Unfortunately, it's the people that already have money and power that can really launch a campaign, making it much harder for those other people to get elected. Perhaps if every candidate was given a specific amount of money from the government to campaign with and couldn't receive donations or otherwise increase their funds that would mitigate the problem. Of course, there's no way that would get past Congress.

 

[Majestic]

And if you do not vote when you are eligible to do so, you are not participating, If you do not vote, you are not entitled to have an opinion. On this or any other subject. Because you did not vote. Therefore, you are part of the problem and not part of the solution. It is not about whether your candidate wins or loses. It is about expressing your choice of who should run the country, or catch dogs, for that matter.

That is exactly what I believe, it's actually illegal in Australia to not vote, you can get fined and all that in Australia if you don't vote.

I feel the same, if you don't vote you give up your rights to complain about the government and what they do or don't do. It's about choosing the party who you think will do the best job (or in many cases today the party that will do the least damaging job to the community).

Here in Australia I vote for Labour as they have the best interests of Australia, Liberal only care about making money and getting rid of Australia's debt by making Australians go without. Like the new Carbon tax, Liberal has all the scare campaigns going on through the media about loosing jobs, yet it's only going to improve the community, encourage businesses to go to energy efficient power sources like solar and wind and be less reliant on coal and such and the plain fact is no jobs will be lost as the government will even be helping business to start with so they can afford to still have all their current employees employed.

Unfortunately in the last state election for New South Wales the majority of the New South Wales population were very short sighted and voted for Liberal and now they are complaining because Liberal are selling historic building and former police stations and hospitals to make more money, which these buildings could be reopened into anything from their former uses to new public places including schools.

I say use your head people, Liberal in this country will say everything you want to hear when they aren't in power, but once they are in they won't honour their promises, like they have done in the past. Do your research. At least Labour does do what it says it will do like the Carbon Tax, which they promised to the Green's party in the last nation election if the Green's would back them. Bring back Kevin Rudd as the Labour parties leader and PM, he was the best we had. He stuck to his guns no matter what everyone else thought, he always put the people first and always did what he thought was right regardless of the fact he often placed himself in the firing line for media, big greedy companies and the opposition.

Internationally I say vote and make sure you vote for the right reasons and for the party who will do the best for your country. Many have fought and died over the years against all sorts of opposition so you can vote and have your say, the least one can do is honour them by participating in the dream that many gave their lives to create.

Sorry for the rant everyone.

 

[Syf]

My fellow Americans: I have an Idea... We the people, should march on D.C. like our Grandfathers and Grandmothers did... Millions of registered voters, we should all band together and demand that things change for the better...

Here's just the beginning of my list of what we need...

1.) Let no man nor woman whom has not served this country by means of honorable military service (Standard minimum service of a National Guardsman at the very least) be allowed to hold a federal office of Senator nor President. We shall allow a non-serviceman to hold a position of Representative on the condition that they been put through some sort Public service training and performed in such fields, be it Firefighter, Medical expertise, or even served as a Kitchen hand that fed the homeless, etc (4 years experience required), prior to pursuing any political offices.

2.) Let No man or woman hold a public office if they have financial holdings/assets that qualify them as "Upper Class" or "Elite" (meaning, if they don't understand what life is like at the "bottom" up-to the "Middle class", then what the heck are they doing blowing the billions of dollars that Politicians currently waste). This does not mean one can not be successful, or practice "business", etc. However, if one of them wish to qualify, they must have donated their fortunes to charities and such, and have lived as a Middle class (or less) for no less than 5 years. Proper tax filings should be able to show proof of expenses as well as all other financial data.

3.) All Political posts, upon retiring (or losing their seat/post in an election) shall, at the time which they retire from "working", like so many Americans, Shall receive and live by the "Standard" retirement package of "Social Security", "Disability", and Medicare. They must adhere to all regulations and requirements that all others are held to (such as all assets exceeding what is allowed most be repossessed, disposed of, etc) prior to them receiving Federal aid. This means, when they retire from office and the working world, whatever the "Average" American must live on, so should they. That means the medical care and all, same as if they were a retirement age McDonald's worker. If they are a Disabled Veteran (Military service), then they shall receive/ live on the same package that all other Disabled Veterans get, Including the trips to the VA for medical treatment. No more $200K(plus) retirement packages for those that served as a politician (etc). They only get what all other American retirees get.

And this is just the tip of my "Iceberg" of Political change I want to see.

Reviewing Why I listed those 3 today...

1.) This is rather simple... It falls in line with prior posts. Let them not endanger Troops for the sake of policing a foreign country that we have no real interest in. At the very least, if they served as either a military person or a public servant, that would be a lot more in touch with why, what, and how is really happening. Then they wouldn't send troops to be slaughtered (pointing at known problems with proper equipment, or lack of, to do the tasks given to the troops). A Unit of grunts can't be expected to hold a "key" bridge with only a single gun with a single bullet. If we don't need troops on the ground... well there are better options... Intercontinental Ballistic weapons come to mind for ridding the world of groups like the Taliban. No need for our troops nor those of our allies troops being put in harm's way. If it was indeed oil they wanted, glass is easy enough to drill thru. Not that I encourage the use of WMDs, but seeing what all of our troops have dealt with, one can imagine a better way of fighting terrorism. lol, Instead of "Save a horse..." We can sing "Save a grunt, send a predator!"

2.) If they are rich... why bother with "running the country"... er, or is that "Ruining the country... The Majority of Americans are "Middle class or lower", and therefore, it should be people of this status that become those directing our country. Don't tell me just because a person don't have a huge fortune that they are not fit to lead the country or pass laws. Most Educated people are not very rich. Most educators are poor. It's these class of people that have heart. They are not the ones out to shovel America's assets into their pockets. When these people start to get older and wiser, they should be put into a position of leadership, not discarded because they are a financial burden because they have to go to the doctors more often than a younger person. Educators, Firefighters, Policemen (and women), retired Generals (or even SPCs), or even that guy that is about ready to retire from the IT department of a company like IBM after 25 years of "Saving lives"... or at least saving everyone's collective "Assets" by fixing the network problem before real problems started... These are the people we need leading our country... Not Bill Gates, Donald Trump, nor any one of those other already "well off" greedy nut-jobs. America is not some Corporation, we are a nation. As long as they can balance a check-book, keep the family on schedule like a finely tuned clock, and do it all on a budget, then they are already 10 times better that those baboons in office right now. A "poor" person is most likely an ace at operating on a budget. A rich person only knows how to blow more money on a vacation trip to Paris than the average American earns in a year. Rich people waste money... Simple enough... the proof is in the cesspool of the messy "pudding" we currently have witnessed with this B.S. debate over our National Debt.

3.) The last one goes like this... They are telling us that anyone under 40 yrs old currently will not get Social Security. They want to raise the retirement age to 70 yrs old. My mother is about to retire... And when she does, she musty have less than $2,000 in total assets, or else she will not qualify for Social Security. She has worked her butt off for the last 47 years... and this is what she has to look forward to. Here's something most Americans don't know... If you are on a "Check", such *** Social Security, you can not get a new car... Not even win one in a raffle or other contest. A local couple won a new Car here about 5 months ago. They were an older couple, getting a "Check" each month. When they got told they won the car, they went to get it, only to receive notice that as long as they have that car, at least until it's value depreciates down below $2,000, they are then and now disqualified for their Social Security and their Medicare. They are old, and both have major health problems. Winning a new car basically has cost them their lives because now they can not afford their medicines. Yes, they Sold the car... Got $20,000 for it. They can not re-signup for Social Security nor Medicare until their assets drop below $2,000... And to make matters even better (sarcastically saying), When they do spend that $20,000 and drop below $2,000, they will have to re-qualify for Social Security and Medicare, which takes an average of 6 months to be approved... So, once they drop their small "Fortune" under $2,000, then that has to last 6 months until they get a "Check" again and get their medical supplies. I think those Baboons in office should get the same package as these kind folks got when they retire from office. Yes, the Man in that couple served this country. Didn't qualify as a disabled Veteran, regardless, he did serve this country.


As for voting: I make it a point to vote on every election poll I can. I agree 100% with TF's sentiments.

Maj: It's okay. Rant all you want.

 

[Hellkite]

Why would you infect my home with politicians? What ever I did to make you mad, please tell me and I'll enure I never do it again...

Nothing it was Lt. Gen. Russel Honoré that picked your area Thunder


But back to the point.

Terran Federation (Starship Troopers) to me is starting to look viable or at lest need something along the lines of.

My reasoning is

"Nothing freely given has value.."

People do not value the right's they have. They do not grasp the cost that was paid in live and blood a thousands of times over. And to a even lesser degree so our "" Leaders"" Don't understand this but add insult to injury by paying lip service with hollow words

I going to stop before I go off on a rant

 

[Majestic]

I totally agree with you Syf, and Hellkite you're right on the money, so many people don't value what they are given, it's a said fact of the generations that currently exist on this planet and it's just getting worse. I am sometimes embarrassed to say I am 27 and not 77.

 

[EAS_Intrepid]

When I read Syf's suggestions Starship Troopers came to my mind as well.

And I have to say, that it does have a certain appeal. We need people with common sense and pragmatism in leadership positions.

Now this thread is called "A Good Ideal for America" and I live half a world away, but i think that some of that what Syf posted could also apply here.

Our current Secretary for Economic Affairs is a medical doctor. He was the Secretary of Public Health before and started a major, pretty devastating, health care and health insurance reform that only benefitted major medical companies. Halfway through this reform he quit the job to move to his current positions. Because he did not care. If he at least cared, he'd have said "Sorry, Chancellor Merkel, can't leave now to do the Lobbying stuff for the rest of the big corporations, I have a health care reform to do." Nope, he eagerly took the new job *and* became head of the liberal party.

Nearly the same with our ex-Defence Secretary Mr. Guttenberg. Okay, he was rightly kicked out because he basically stole 75% of his political doctor exam from other authors few years back and lied about it.
He was to oversee the transition of the German Army into an all-volunteer force. Now the current Defence Secretary found out, that all his predecessor was doing, was boasting about how much of a good job he doing.
He wasn't. Our military can't even fill in all personel slots and its medical branch is going downhill since there are not enough volunteers. There might be a shortage of combat medics abroad if they continue like that.
By the way, the guy was drafted in the 80s into a Ranger regiment.

These are just two examples of a group of people who have no clue whatsoever about what they are doing. And common people re-elect them :x


Politicians have to feel a certain responsibility for what they do. Our current Secretary for Finances was *heavily* involved in an affair about party contributions in the 1990s. He is now managing the finances of one of the largest economies of Europe. Lord knows how much money these people put aside.

Noone ever learns in this country. We did not learn from WW I and we did not learn from WW II. We elect and reelect the same people over and over.

It is already in our hands to start some change. And Obama, for example, I thinkg, wanted to have that change but the opposition and the "legacy" of Mr. Bush made it way to hard to really achieve something.

E.g: I cannot understand why rich people do not want to contribute to the overall social standards. It is in their best interests.
Hell, even Lockheed-Martin cares about the community around the cities where they have their plants and surely no-one around Denver will buy their own ICBM. Mercedes Benz however, does not do a **** thing about the community though people who have some money do tend to buy German quality products. And (at least German built) Mercers are top noth quality.
"GIMME THAT IT's MINE!" It's horrifying.


There's a new program for volunteer work here in the FRG, because we do not have the dual system of military draft and civy work anymore.
For a certain amount of time you work in a hospital or elder home or whatever. Even work abroad is sponsored! 330 Euros per month, which is ok money.
But they lack volunteers as much as the army does....


That's why I have a simple proposal: Every able citizen from the age of 18 on is to serve a certain amount of time in a civilian public and social branch, including hospitals, garbage disposal, work with disabled people, poor people, sick people. Everything.
However: No company or no public office may use these people to cut regular jobs or salaries.

The service is compulsory, not optional.

This is a bit undermining Syf's suggestions, which is not intentional. I just took his model and changed it a bit to fit German needs.

Other than that: I understand you need an international banking system, I somewhat understand you need a stock exchange. But the excess that it produces has to stop. It is not fair that a guy crunching numbers behind a desk and trying to trick people out of their money is earning more than a teacher or a nurse.

We need a new class of people to lead our nations.

In the end: I'd be all in for a revolution.

These guys have to realize, we ordinary people are not getting poorer and poorer because we do not work hard. "Lord" knows I work hard. And we are wondering, where does all our money go? If you spend it to help the people that are currenty starving in Somalia... okay, fine. Need an extra 10 bucks? Or do you fill the tank of your really big and representative car with it? Be
glad it is armoured.

"I'm a fair guy, but this frakking heat is making me absolutely crazy."

My rant. Otherwise I am all for public, democratic discourse.

 

[CrazyFrog1903]

Intrepid, Obama did want change....He wanted Democrates to be in power instead of Republicans. That is the only change he wanted. The first part of his current term showed that. They closed the Republicans out of talks dealing with laws to be passed. The Dem's had enough people in both houses of Congress and the White house to pass any law or "reform" they saw fit. While "Mr. Bush" may not have been one of the best presidents in history. We will never know what his presidency could have been like in a time of peace. 9/11 happened in his first year. Thus, "Mr. Clinton's" policies were still in place to allow the attacks. Bush had to deal with being at war almost his entire 2 terms. Obama is just riding the tails of plans that Bush put in place to close out the 2 different wars. In all honesty though, how long has it been since the world has seen a true leader who actually cares about the people of their country??

I do agree the leaders of today should get sent over to the Afghan/Pakistan border and get to see what it is like. I should know. I was there for a year. I worked less than a mile from the border and lived less that 3 miles from the border. The only reason I would disagree with sending them is the countless troops over there that would lose their lives protecting them over there since they would be clueless on what to do. I would not want to place my brothers/sisters-in-arms in anymore danger just to prove a point.

Oh, and Intrepid, I am not picking on you for what you said in any way. The only people we have to be upset with is all of our leaders whom only care about power instead of what their jobs really should be...

 

[Majestic]

In all honesty though, how long has it been since the world has seen a true leader who actually cares about the people of their country??

Kevin Rudd, our former PM who was stabbed in the back by his party, best friend (now the Deputy PM) and Julia Gillard our current PM. The only reason she got re-elected is because of Tony Abbot, the opposition leader would destroy Australia if he took the position of PM.

Even in his current position, he was hands on making sure to help out the people in his area during the Queensland floods. He is the one PM I would go and see in person if he was in my area and personally say thank you for his work he has done for this country. He is the one man that really deserves to run this country and I would love and get excited if he was to rise to that position again.

 

[CrazyFrog1903]

Kevin Rudd, our former PM who was stabbed in the back by his party, best friend (now the Deputy PM) and Julia Gillard our current PM. The only reason she got re-elected is because of Tony Abbot, the opposition leader would destroy Australia if he took the position of PM.

Even in his current position, he was hands on making sure to help out the people in his area during the Queensland floods. He is the one PM I would go and see in person if he was in my area and personally say thank you for his work he has done for this country. He is the one man that really deserves to run this country and I would love and get excited if he was to rise to that position again.

Then sounds to me like He is one whom deserves all of our respect...

 

[Terra_Inc]

That's why I have a simple proposal: Every able citizen from the age of 18 on is to serve a certain amount of time in a civilian public and social branch, including hospitals, garbage disposal, work with disabled people, poor people, sick people. Everything.
However: No company or no public office may use these people to cut regular jobs or salaries.

The service is compulsory, not optional.

So, we should essentially make the new BuFDi (Federal Volunteer Service) mandatory? That's maybe not a bad idea...

 

[Hellkite]

... "Mr. Bush" may not have been one of the best presidents in history. We will never know what his presidency could have been like in a time of peace. 9/11 happened in his first year...

Frog my friend we do know just look at headlines months before 9/11 Frog

January 2001. Upon entering office, Bush suspends implementation of most of former President Clinton's late-term executive orders regarding the environment, including the "roadless rule" protecting 60 million acres of national forest, new standards for arsenic in drinking water, and a phased-in ban of snowmobiles in Yellowstone National Park. To ease California's electricity crunch, the U.S. EPA lifts air-pollution standards for California power plants. Gale Norton, dubbed "James Watt in a skirt" by one enviro for her libertarian views, is approved by the Senate as Interior secretary, and former Sen. Spencer Abraham (R-Mich.), who tried to abolish the Energy Department while in Congress, is approved as Energy secretary.

February 2001. Norton announces that the administration will seek to "adjust the boundaries" of Clinton-designated national monuments. Bush, readying his budget, plans to cut Interior Department funding for environmental policy enforcement by 7 percent. The Republican-controlled Senate introduces a bill that would allow drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, a proposal that becomes the cornerstone of Bush's energy policy.



March 2001. Bush reverses a campaign pledge by announcing that he will not order mandatory reductions of carbon dioxide emissions from the nation's electrical plants. He also withdraws from the Kyoto Protocol on global warming. The U.S. EPA delays new rules regulating hard-rock mining and cancels the implementation of the arsenic rule, inciting a national controversy. The president nominates mining industry lobbyist J. Steven Griles for Interior deputy secretary. Mike Dombeck, the most pro-conservation head of the U.S. Forest Service in decades, announces his retirement.

April 2001. Breaking another campaign pledge, Bush abandons plans to invest $100 million per year in rainforest conservation. Bennett Raley, who once testified that the Endangered Species Act should be repealed, is nominated as Bush's assistant secretary for water and science. The Interior Department seeks to limit citizen-initiated lawsuits involving the Endangered Species Act. Vice President **** Cheney, heading up Bush's secret energy task force, meets with Enron executives for advice.

May 2001. The Bush administration places a freeze on new proposals for expanding the national park system. The president nominates James Connaughton, notorious for his legal defense of General Electric in Superfund fights with the EPA, to be the chair of his Council on Environmental Quality, and Congress approves Linda Fisher, former head of Monsanto's government affairs office, as second-in-command at the EPA. A federal judge warns the administration that it could be held in contempt of court if it fails to remove cattle from parts of California's Mojave Desert in order to protect the endangered desert tortoise. Bush releases his energy plan, devised in secret by a task force headed by Cheney. The administration announces it will uphold but modify the roadless rule.



June 2001. The chickens come home to roost: Vermont Sen. Jim Jeffords, citing Bush's hostile environmental policies, leaves the Republican Party to become an Independent, handing control of the Senate to the Democrats. Norton announces she will block plans to reintroduce the grizzly bear in Idaho, killing a landmark compromise between local environmentalists and industry that would have allowed reintroduction. During the president's first summit with the European Union, protesters on the continent deride Bush for his global warming policies. Former timber lobbyiest Mark Rey is nominated for Agriculture undersecretary for natural resources and environment.

July 2001. The administration announces it will open 1.5 million acres of the Gulf of Mexico to oil drilling -- although not near Florida Gov. Jeb Bush's shorelines. William G. Myers, a former lobbyist for the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, is confirmed as the Interior Department's new solicitor, and regulation-phobic John Graham of Harvard's Center for Risk Anaylsis is confirmed as the influential administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. Environmentalists sue the EPA for failing to meet deadlines for controlling hazardous air pollution in cities. More than 185 nations back the Kyoto Protocol at climate talks in Bonn, Germany. The U.S. is conspicuously absent.

August 2001. The Justice Department indicates that it will seek to overturn a federal court order blocking oil and gas exploration off the California coast. The General Accounting Office sends a letter to Bush demanding the release of documents relating to the deliberations of the Cheney-led Energy Task Force. Citing executive privilege, Bush refuses to reveal with whom Cheney met.

These were the main head lines form the months before 9/11 judge him on them it was peacetime then.


But back to topic

Thing is that I realty see no true US leadership since the assassination of JFK

What I would like to see is a raise of a New Franklin D. Roosevelt "archetype"

 

[Adm_Z]

I just have to say that I am staying out of this one. There are some good reasons, but mostly because I agree with you guys in principle, but have some major disagreements as well(as I said, not in principle) and I am not interested in starting an argument among friends.

As an example(and I"m not just singling you out hellkite my friend)

Thing is that I realty see no true US leadership since the assassination of JFK

What I would like to see is a raise of a New Franklin D. Roosevelt "archetype"

This^^

I don't want to start arguments.:zipped

 

[Syf]

All of this has merit. Hellkites ideas, EAS's, CF's... even mine (I think).

I am sitting here, making this post, and have this strange idea in my head that it's not just America that has these problems...Duh! But really, We are all the same. We are the lower class, the middle class, the poor, the service men and women. I am willing to bet not a single member here on MSFC is part of the upper or Elite classes.

It's a simple world to understand... It is the Rich in charge. Why, because they pay people. They make jobs, and the average person jumps on it. Yes Sir, Yes Ma'am!... There is no shame in making money and offering jobs to others. But, there is shame if all one cares about is money. I think we all know that.

First, let me state, for the record, I am not nor ever have been a military man. I have not served my country... Least, not in the ditches in a combat zone. I do however, serve a public duty. I currently deliver meals to the sick and elderly. To those that can not go out to get their food. It's is a paid job, but the pay is token at best. I make just enough to cover the cost of fuel. However, I would do it for free if I didn't have to fund the fuel bill too. Sorry, I'm not rich. So, While I did not serve my country with my life (I did apply for the job, but was refused), I do think of myself as serving my country in some form.

Side story here: On one of my meal deliveries, I got to one of my elderly lady's house. I knocked and knocked. Finally, I heard a faint "come in". I go inside to deliver her meals to her, start to head to where she has me put them "as usual", when she said just leave them on the kitchen counter because her fridge isn't working. I then realized she was exaggerating... It wasn't just her Fridge not working, but rather, her electricity was off. I inquire as to what happened. Come to find out (note, this was 2 weeks ago. The temps here have been 105 degrees Fahrenheit or hotter since May) Her power failed the evening before I had arrived. I arrived at her house a little after 9:00am. She is a very sick and elderly woman. She depends on a continuous oxygen feed to breath. She's in her 70's, Has so many things wrong with her (cancer as well). Anyways, the electricity failed around 8:00pm the day before. She had only a cordless (electric type) phone. Her Lifeline system is electric based, as is her Oxygen machine... All this failed when her power went out. When I arrived at her front door 13 hours later, it was already 98 degrees outside. It felt more like 110 degrees inside her house. Anyways, I went into "Rescue mode", as she was living on her reserve oxygen tanks. Which, based on how much she had used during the power outage (13 hours thus far), she only had *maybe* 2 or 2 1/2 (+/-) hours left before her oxygen tanks ran out (the tanks I refer to are the kind used to travel to the Doctor's appointments and such)... Her care taker was expect to arrive much later in the day (that evening was the scheduled time, I think around 4-5 pm... sorry, I have trouble remembering details right now). I got contact information from her and contacted her caretaker and the local city utility people. I made sure she had electricity and oxygen within the hour... I believe to this day that had I not been there when I had, she would have died because someone didn't pay attention... But us civil servants do! (and she's alive this day, playing with her grandchildren)

Why the long side story, I do agree with the concept of "Starship troopers style government"... to some extent. However, service (and becoming a true citizen) is not just picking up a gun... I feel I do similar things to what our troops do for people wherever they go... And I mean all of us here that do similar jobs, excluding jumping into a "real" combat zone. Regardless if your an American(USA, CAN, MEX...), German, Australian, Norwegian, English, Scott, etc, your countrymen all do the same thing. We each may do it "In the name of our country", but really, we do it "For the sake of all mankind". Be it fighting terrorists (the true enemy of the world these days which knows no borders), Dictators, Rogue regimes, Disease, starvation, or Death itself... We are all troops of some sort. We fight the good fight. We fight for what is right, for freedom. We save lives, one way or another. We all choose to stand in the way tyranny, oppression, and death. And let's not point out that there are crazy people that would harm civil servants... Terrorists don't attack soldiers or military targets all the time... Let's remember that civilians get sacrificed... Flown into towers, blasted to bits on subways , etc... And there will always be public servants there, willing to pay the ultimate price, to search and rescue, to save lives, to do what's right, even at the peril of their own. Let's not forget the firemen, policemen, the medics, etc. They earn the "citizen" title too.

The Policeman that chases down a murder...
the fireman that runs into a burning building...
the Medic that tries to restart the heart of an accident victim on the highway while cars fly past...
The Social Service person that takes the hand of a scared child after watch her home washed away by a flood...

I am least likely to be equal to a soldier in any aspect..The only thing I do is instead of a carrying a gun, I carry boxes of food. I hand deliver hundreds of boxes of food each month.

Anyways, regardless the country, we all have a problem... We fight off hunger, pain, suffering, death, or enemies... really bad people... but we don't do nothing about tyrants that we vote for that only treat us like sand beneath their feet.

Sorry, I am out of time, so I will leave it at this for now. Off to work I go.

 

[Hellkite]

I just have to say that I am staying out of this one. There are some good reasons, but mostly because I agree with you guys in principle, but have some major disagreements as well(as I said, not in principle) and I am not interested in starting an argument among friends.

As an example(and I"m not just singling you out Hellkite my friend)

I understand your intent

We all entitled to our opinions my friend. Voltaire said it best

"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." Voltaire

"Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear. " George Orwell

This statements lay at my core of the truths of my being. You can not offended me by speaking your mind friend. But I well reserve the right to disagree
-----------------------

Syf I concur one should not have to pick up a weapon to a Citizens

At 18 every "Civilian" should have the right to enroll for a minimal 2-year term of "Federal Service/Civil service ". In theory a completed term of terms service ensures a "Citizen" is willing to put the needs of the community before their own personal well-being.

But "Civilians" should neither discriminated against, nor deprived of legal rights other than that of the ballot or hold public office.

 

[CABAL]

Going back a bit,

1.) Let no man nor woman whom has not served this country by means of honorable military service (Standard minimum service of a National Guardsman at the very least) be allowed to hold a federal office of Senator nor President. We shall allow a non-serviceman to hold a position of Representative on the condition that they been put through some sort Public service training and performed in such fields, be it Firefighter, Medical expertise, or even served as a Kitchen hand that fed the homeless, etc (4 years experience required), prior to pursuing any political offices.

I have to disagree with the military service part of this. The reason being that not everybody is physically fit for military service. I might fail to meet standards simply because of how obscenely bad my eye sight is. To give you an idea here, without my glasses, stuff doesn't come into focus until it's about seven inches (17.5 cm) from my face.

 

[Hellkite]

the is the reason I stated


At 18 every "Civilian" should have the right to enroll for a minimal 2-year term of "Federal Service/Civil service ". In theory a completed term of terms service ensures a "Citizen" is willing to put the needs of the community before their own personal well-being.

But "Civilians" should neither discriminated against, nor deprived of legal rights other than that of the ballot or hold public office.



Federal Service = military service

Civil service= "all labor jobs non political offices in the executive, judicial, and legislative branches of the Government , examples EMT,Cop, Firemen teachers, civil maintenance workers and Social / health workers includes Doctors

 

[Adm_Z]

I understand which part of the system you guys are talking about now. I feel dumb.

I think that it is a neat idea, however it is against our current constitution and in order to enact that kind of plan, I think that more would be changed than was intended.

Having to earn the right to vote is indeed a good plan, however I think that making that person earn that right by governmental service is not great. I can't come up with much a better idea though. Maybe a counsel of outstanding citizens, morally and ethically, could be elected specifically for the purpose of deciding weather a citizen has done enough "community service" or simply service, to have earned the right to vote. This would be after the age of 18, after proof of understanding of the constitution and our governments history, and if they still come short, then the option of government service would be presented.


But there is a good idea too. What if we simply made all citizens, prove their knowledge of our government and history, just as we make immigrants do? I think that might help a lot. Just make sure that those who don't pass have to retake the test until they pass or give up the right to vote.


Ok, so Im not doing a good job of staying out of this...

 

[thunderfoot]

The idea Robert Heinlein was espousing in Starship Troopers was that citizenship is a privilege, not a right. And further that citizenship should be earned, not given automatically. Same idea the Romans used. There were many within the Empire who grew to great power and glory. Who had great wealth and success in all their endeavors. But the very highest honor anyone in the Empire could be given was to Be named a Roman. Not a bad idea at all actually.

CABAL, worry not about the eyesight thing. One of the ideas being discussed is here is service to others. This is an idea which has been gone from the USA for a long time. Service to others does not exclusively mean military service. Look at what EAS does. He is an EMT. This is service. What about things such as volunteering to assist with children at the library? Or participating in a Special Olympics event? Or becoming a research assistant at Lawrence Livermore Laboratories? The idea behind service is to place the needs and wants of your fellow citizens as more important than your own.

 

[Majestic]

Then sounds to me like He is one whom deserves all of our respect...

He does, in fact not to be bias, but if there was to be a world leader he would be the best candidate I have seen from any country this far. He just has such a big heart, even though he has just gone through his second heart surgery.

Syf I concur one should not have to pick up a weapon to a Citizens

At 18 every "Civilian" should have the right to enroll for a minimal 2-year term of "Federal Service/Civil service ". In theory a completed term of terms service ensures a "Citizen" is willing to put the needs of the community before their own personal well-being.

But "Civilians" should neither discriminated against, nor deprived of legal rights other than that of the ballot or hold public office.

I agree 100% with this, the added benefit of this means everyone would have a job, a job for life if they wish and then we would not have homeless, unemployed and the countries wouldn't have such a large drain on their system by those who simply do not wish to work and just take money from the government.

Kat and I both don't work, for two reasons, jobs that we are eligible for and can physically do are simply not readily available and secondly we both have certain medical issues that at least for the moment prevent us from working. Something we both wish to overcome in the next 12 months or so with any luck.

However there are some people we know that simply kind every single excuse in the book to keep from having to work or even doing work for the community, which I have done and rather enjoyed. I worked at two primary school's helping to fix, improve and maintain the grounds and facilities for the young kids. It's a job I would like to do again in the future and while not a high paying job, it would be enough to help improve our standard of living and also help the local community.

 

[dinosaurJR]

the is the reason I stated


At 18 every "Civilian" should have the right to enroll for a minimal 2-year term of "Federal Service/Civil service ". In theory a completed term of terms service ensures a "Citizen" is willing to put the needs of the community before their own personal well-being.

But "Civilians" should neither discriminated against, nor deprived of legal rights other than that of the ballot or hold public office.



Federal Service = military service

Civil service= "all labor jobs non political offices in the executive, judicial, and legislative branches of the Government , examples EMT,Cop, Firemen teachers, civil maintenance workers and Social / health workers includes Doctors

Have you read Starship Troopers by Robert A. Heinlein? This what you posted seems awfully close to the same ideal - Only if you are willing to serve the state are you granted the right to vote.

I actually think it is a great idea - it would completely remove the problem of voter apathy - you are not born with the right to vote like some spoiled child - you earn it.

 

[EAS_Intrepid]

[@ Hellkite]
Have you read Starship Troopers by Robert A. Heinlein?

You bet he did Good book. Would not agree to everything Heinlein wrote, but it is worth considering and thinking about.

But "Civilians" should neither discriminated against, nor deprived of legal rights other than that of the ballot or hold public office.

Would have to agree on the part of "holding public office" but not on "the right of the ballot." I do think people should be allowed to vote freely and without any requirements. But I also think, that public office has to be tied to a social or federal service.

So, we should essentially make the new BuFDi (Federal Volunteer Service) mandatory?

Absolutely.

Thus, "Mr. Clinton's" policies were still in place to allow the attacks. Bush had to deal with being at war almost his entire 2 terms.

I have to disagree with you here. You should read "Against all Enemies" by Richard A. Clarke. He was one of the center-figures is combating terrorism for a good part of his life.
According to Clarke, Mr. Clinton was the first president to really fight terrorism against the US and the western world. He was barred from effectively hunting down the first al-Qaida cells by internal disagreements in his party and with the Republicans. While he stupidly had an affair with Lewinsky, he was trying to get the chiefs of staff and the CIA to do missile strikes against camps in Afghanistan and elsewhere.
Actually, he put a lot of the legal framework to fight terrorists in place. THe Bush administration did not really care about that until short before September 11.

But yes, leadership during wartime is hard and might possibly not raise your level of public acceptance.

Oh, and Intrepid, I am not picking on you for what you said in any way. The only people we have to be upset with is all of our leaders whom only care about power instead of what their jobs really should be...

We're just having a friendly discussion. Disagreements are okay. It's part of decision making and democratic process.
No worries, mate, as our Australian friends say.
Or as HK put it nicely: We all are entitled to our opinion.

I probably can't be as objective about Obama's work, since I can only get my info through the usual mass media. But even here the media reports, that he does not really get a lot of stuff done.

 

[dinosaurJR]

Sorry EAS, I disagree with your second point - people now have the right to vote from birth and (especially in the USA) voter apathy is a major issue; people who have this right - the most important right in a democracy - and they dont use it. That is abuse of your rights as far as I am concerned...

Heinlein had the right idea, make people work for that right, it is a very important task that many are too lazy to do, so make them earn it.

Yes, Heinlein was a little extreme and I dont think being a soldier is the only way to earn the vote, but some sort of civil / national service should be mandatory. Firefighting, Medical, Civil (penpushers), Teaching, Care profession, etc... something that benefits society for a minimum term. Then you have shown that you are willing to take part in (and work for) society and so therefore you have the right to say who rules and how - like a boss...

 

[EAS_Intrepid]

Maj said, that in Australia people are fined for not showing up at the ballot. I think that is a good idea. It was discussed here some time ago as well, but unfortunately it hadn't been implemented.
Of course that would mean preparing a list of citizens who did not show up on the ballot or who did not vote through the means of voting per post office. (You can also send a letter to the local administration office with your vote. I, for one, always go to the voting office. It's a somewhat special day for me and I usually have inforadio turned on the whole day then )

Because on the case of not-voting we two are on the same page. However I also think that you should be allowed to discard your vote, if you want to protest against the political system like that. Sometimes my wish is, that as many people as possible simply don't vote for any of the parties, especially in Federal Elections.

That would probably be a huge legislative problem for the parliament and would show the major distrust that most people have in gov'tal affairs.

 

[CABAL]

The problem I see with forcing people to vote is that the people that are apathetic are still apathetic; they're just filling in boxes at random because they don't care and I'm not sure that's better than not voting at all.

 

[Adm_Z]

Its a good way to make people vote for sure, but it isn't a good way to make sure they make an educated decision, which in my opinion is the real problem. Not that people don't vote, but that they vote about things and for people they don't truly understand. I think that many of our problems would be solved if voters in this country actually knew who they were voting for and understood the ideals those people stood for.