Now that it's over...

[belgareth]

The election is over and barring a really big surprise from any possible audits we’re stuck with

the leadership we have for the next four years. I think it would be in everybody’s best interest to drop the ‘us and

them’ attitude and consider what is in the best interests of this country as a whole. We have four years to work on

improving on the mistakes of the last few elections. We, as a nation and as a people, can do better. We’ve allowed

the system to run out of control for far too long. Divisiveness is exactly what both major parties want because

while divided by acrimony we don’t pay attention to what is really happening within the government; we are too busy

arguing with each other.



So, I ask each of you, where should

this country be going? How should we get there? What are realistic priorities that will best serve the people? I

don’t care about party, the people aren’t a party affiliation, they are moms and dad and brothers and sisters who

have lives and aspirations for themselves and their children. How do we best help each of them to fulfill their

dreams while preserving the planet for our children?

[DrSmellThis]

Bel, I admire your intentions

here! I'd like to see this focus on common ground happen. Would that we could ignore "party" when addressing

government and system corruption at this moment! You'd hope Republicans would scream that the ends don't justify

the means. I'd love for Republicans to be equally concerned to address this scandal, for example. But why should

they be? They won. Far from extending an olive branch, Bush and Cheney are just saying they have a mandate and

intend to ram home their right-wing agenda. So far his "gap-bridging" includes lame statements about reaching out to

anyone who already "shares" his "goals;" and about being "happy to explain why" he is doing everything exactly the

way he wants to. Otherwise any dissention, even within the Republican party by its own moderates, is already

starting to be treated more harshly than ever before.

There are certain things that are not "over" yet, and

shouldn't be, such as the voting irregularities controversy. After all, no matter how non-partisan we intend to be,

sometimes in history one party or another assumes prominence in corruption, and this is apparently one of them,

IMHO. It is unfortunate that partisan considerations are essential to the issues themselves at present. You can't

separate them. That could change if Republicans relax their "power concerns" after their coup -- and their

obliteration of democratic checks and balances, sure to continue in the courts -- and start thinking of the American

people. I'm struggling to be more optimistic here.

[a.k.a.]

I see America facing three great

junctures:

Firstly, we have crossed beyond the point where the earth can continue to sustain our rate

of consumption. This is a global problem. But, since we consume 40% of the world’s resources, we need to shoulder

at least 40% of the responsibility.
We need to reduce carbon emissions immediately (bike, walk, bus, car pool).

We need to invest in (clean) alternative energy sources wherever possible. But this will in no way solve the problem

on its own. A strict conservation policy is bound to be unpopular, but the longer we put it off the more stringent

it will have to be when finally implement it.
We need to wean ourselves off of large pesticide dependent,

corporate farms and filthy, disease infested meat factories. Invest more in local agriculture and free range meat

production.
Mostly we need to curb waste, reduce transportation needs and cut down on consumption.



Secondly, we are approaching the point where we will no longer be able to run our industries (or our cities) off of

cheap fossil fuel.
We need to start building wind farms and invest in research towards cheaper solar cells.


But most importantly, we’ve got to restructure the way our goods are produced and our cities are organized. We need

to evolve towards more durable, more reusable goods (planned obsolescence might be good for profits, but it’s a

horrendous waste of energy) and a more localized (less transportation intensive) way of life.

Finally,

like all great civilizations before us, we have reached the point where the stretch of our empire threatens the

security of our Republic.
We need to scale back our military and economic presence in the world. We don’t need

to arm Columbia. And we don’t need to dominate Middle Eastern oil markets.
We need to bring our Education and

Healthcare systems up to par. And we need to focus our expertise, technology, and labor power on resolving the first

two issues I mentioned.


This is the vision.

Realistic priorities include:


Pulling out of Iraq. Making military sales to Columbia, Turkey, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria and Pakistan

contingent upon adherence to international human rights standards.
Joining the International Criminal Court and

the Kyoto Protocol. Getting back on board with antiballistic missile treaties.
Renegotiating the General

Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (so that international trade respects a degree of labor and environmental standards).

Using our leverage in the International Monetary Fund to write off debts (or at least interest payments) for

countries that abide by environmental and human rights standards.
Instituting a minimum wage that brings

working families above the poverty level. Developing a single payer, national healthcare plan.



Reduce corporate welfare. And especially do away with military spending that has no strategic function (eg. the

F22). Increase social welfare, and especially Aid to Families with Dependent Children.
Stop subsidizing

cash crops for export. Tax breaks for organic agriculture.
Reinstituting regulations which limit the amount of

speculation that banks and insurance companies can engage in.
Reduce sales taxes. Increase taxes on

interest income. Tax wealth heald overseas.
But mostly just tell the people the truth.

[koolking1]

I was just thinking that

some of you may not understand how military aid to countries such as Columbia, Turkey, Israel, etc. but very

possibly excluding Saudia Arabia work. The basic is that we "grant" these countries large amounts of aid. They

don't actually "see" the money but are required to spend it on specific weapon systems made by USA defense

contractors (I was going to say manufacturers but that may well be not as correct as it used to be). Instead of

saying that we gave Columbia x amount of dollars in aid we should just say we gave them 150,000 M16s and the ammo to

go with them. (I like that last line of your wish list Mr AKA!!!).

My wish list would have:

Paper

Trail in the voting booth.