|
Current Issue - Click Here |
APRIL 21, 2004
"We frequently receive inquiries concerning such issues as gay marriage, the War in Iraq (and other places, sad to note), women's "right to choose" (abortion), gun control, the War on Terrorism (Homeland Security and the Patriot Act), legalization of some drugs, (particularly marijuana), etc.
Also, we occasionally receive an inquiry from the many, often opposing, "Special Interest Groups" that appear on the political palette we fondly think of as "American Democracy".
You will not find any Party Platform/Position statements regarding such issues on these pages.
Some time ago, when the Reform Party was in its infancy, Ross Perot pointed out to us that such "social issues" are divisive; that is to say, on any one such issue, in any randomly selected group of American voters, it is very likely that a poll taken on that issue will show equally divided results. The overall effect is, while none of these "social issues" is ever resolved to the mutual satisfaction of a majority, all the other issues that corrupt the political processes of this country go unresolved, too! Fiscal responsibility, taxation, deficit spending, campaign financing, ballot access, health care, illegal immigration, international trade, jobs and the economy, conservation and the environment, and a sensible foreign policy that does not foment hatred of America by the rest of the world, are all issues that eventually affect every one of us, at one point in our individual lives.
The longer these issues remain unresolved, as long as "social issues" keep the nation divided--- much to the delight of the corporation-controlled Republican/Democratic duopoly --- the longer this nation will remain on that rough road to Empire --- and eventual Fall.
As a consequence of this official Party philosophy, we are most often labeled by our peers/antagonists as a 'centrist' Party, since we seem to eschew the more radical elements of other third/alternative Parties, as far as Platform issues are concerned.
Personally --- and I mean that I am not now representing the Party philosophy, but rather presenting my own for your consideration --- I feel that, by avoiding these "social issues", we are also providing a potential political home for all those "radical elements" who are willing to sit at the table with their 'social' opponents and hammer out a consensus on the Paltform Issues of the American Reform Party without attempting to force their own personal, private convictions on the rest of the Party.
If we are ever successful in this effort, our philosophy will then be "populist" thereby, and more representative of the Democratic Republic we profess ourselves to be:
A government " ...of the People, by the People, and FOR the People... "
~~~~~~~David J. Repko, former National Chair, author of "The Repko-bate".
September 2, 2003.
It's 1 AM, and I am sitting here in front of my pc listening to my Joni James songs --- yes, that's how old I am --- I have democratically 'stolen in concert', along with the rest of the Internet's millions of surfers.
It's amazing, the range of songs she sang, from "Cold, Cold Heart" by Hank Williams, to "People Will Say We're in Love" by Rogers and Hammerstein, to Johnny Mercer's "Stardust", to "Panis Angelicus" [bread of the angels] by whomever.
To the best of my knowledge, Joni is still living (in Chicago, I believe) --- and not realizing a dime from any of those free-booting surfers. Ah, the wonders of technology!
But what does Joni James and/or Napster have to do with politics, the ARP, the price of gasoline, or that awesome celestial view of our neighbor, Mars, last night?
In a roundabout way, the way I most usually write, it has a lot to do with all that jazz. I gazed at Mars till I started seeing two of them, then came in and fired up my pc --- and Joni.
I thought about Mars being named after the Roman god of war, which led my thoughts to all the wars I've lived through, and the different kinds of music we listened to at the time. Before World War II was the Big Band Era; Tommy and Jimmy Dorsey, Benny Goodman, Paul Whiteman, and Glenn Miller. When that terrible War was at its height, as thousands of men from a hundred different countries were battering each other to bloody pulps, there were but two kinds of music being played, even in those countries that had murder as one of their official --- but secret --- government policies.
Patriotic music and love songs!
Oh, there were some silly songs, "Mairzy Doats", and "Seventy Mental Reasons", by Spike Jones, who created his own niche in comedy tunes, which this country (and the rest of the Free World) desperately needed to keep their spirits up in such awful times.
But it was the love songs that saw us through an era of hate for our enemies, and it was love songs that helped to heal all that hate for the vanquished peoples we once swore to wipe from the face of the earth.
For the most part, the architects of those wartime atrocities were brought before the Bar of Justice, and in many cases, answered with their lives. And new love songs continued to be written and played, while all the patriotic war tunes faded into memories.
This lasted for almost 20 years --- even during a less-than-world-war that wasn't called a 'war' at all; it was called a "police action", in a far-off country called Korea.
Yet still the love songs rolled on. -------------- Until Viet Nam.
Then, a strange phenomenon slowly occurred. Love songs lingered, but they were gradually being squeezed into the background by new kinds of music, "rock and roll" and "new country". Romantic love songs were being replaced by "peace, flower power and freedom" songs. "Make love, not war." became the message; new words and phrase like, 'psychedelic' and 'heavy metal' were invented.
I remember an incident that occurred between me and a guy I considered to be a close friend, although he was 15 years my junior, and I hiss boss at work. We were sitting in a bar in Gehanna, Ohio, drinking beer and listening to the juke box ( yeah, they still had juke boxes, but no I don't drink alcohol any more ... sigh ). The box went quiet, so I walked over, dropped in a quarter (three songs for 25 cents back then) and punched up one of my favorites, the Carpenters "Super Star". As I went back to the bar and sat down, one of my songs began to play --- and my friend became livid with rage!
"How dare you play such stupid, juvenile, garbage? "Baby, baby, baby, baby oh baby...! Don't you realize there are thousands of people being killed, tortured and maimed in an unjust war, while we sit here listening to idiotic, meaningless words being sung by a couple rich kids that will never understand what is happening in the real world today?"
I was stunned!
I said, and not too calmly, either, "Eric, I know what is happening over there, as do millions of Americans --- including Richard and Karen Carpenter. But fercrissakes, man, however 'bubble gum' the songs are that they are singing, they're friggin' love songs! Is the world supposed to put love in a closet until this war is over, or mumbled quietly about in the back seat of a car, or whispered about in some rent-by-the-hour motel room, then to wake up the next day embarrassed by it all because we are at war? Or pretend it was just another 'incidental' physical act of human existence, like eating and shitting?"
He calmed down, but I could tell he was not convinced.
Since that time, I have listened to the new music young people listen to most of the time. There are songs about drugs (for and against), sex (for and against --- in all of its several manifestations), God and Satan (still about evenly matched), all of the Ten Commandments, and how to break them while avoiding 'aftermaths', war and killing (although not necessarily in relation to each other), and there are many songs about hate (a la Jerry Springer) of all kinds. Hate for: parents, siblings, neighbors, 'foreigners', the government, the cops, the crooks the schools, the teachers, even 'best friend' classmates! Kids are humming songs about stealing guns instead of stealing kisses.
On Valentine's Day, some kids now exchange technicolor condoms! But not books of romantic poetry.
Will we ever start taking hand-holding strolls with our sweethearts again?
Will love songs ever come back? Will we ever want them back?
Will we ever again hope for, and believe in, the possibility of a loving world at peace ?
-David Repko - "The Old Repko-bate"
Vice Chair, National Committee
I am so satisfied with the 'dialogue' approach to writing this column that I will do it again today:
August 18, 2003
At 03:15 PM 8/13/2003 +0000, Dave Trotter wrote:
Hello everyone, My name is David Trotter and I am the new chairman
of the American Reform Party of Utah.
Hi, David, welcome aboard. (catchy name, "David" --- been told it means
'Beloved of God". I suspect it means "thank God somebody does!)
-DJR
I wanted to introduce myself and start to get knowing the people involved
with the ARP.
-DT
Let's start with the foreknowledge that there are now three "David's". Two of them post here regularly. My name is "David" (signet "DJR"), not "Dave" , who is Dave Ketcham (signet-"davek") and PLEASE, not "Jerry"; my middle name is John - "Jerry" never did live here --- it's a long, boring story.
In addition to being the incumbent National Vice Chair, I scribble the
"Repko-bate" column (on the backs of used envelopes, naturally) and send
them to Roy Downing, who puts them on the Party Web site. [Mostly because
I always spell his name correctly.)
-DJR
A little about myself, I was a member of the Democratic Party for over
12 years (not in Utah but in Florida). I had always been a moderate to
conservative democrat on domestic issues. Recently, the local democratic
party and I had a disagreement on issues like Affirmative Action, Gay rights
and immigration.
-DT
My position on those issues are as follows; ALL government actions should
be 'affirmative', the ONLY immigration allowable should be LEGAL immigration,
and before anyone plans on kissing me goodnight, they'd better acknowledge
that I would be a very expensive date.
-DJR
After debating these issues, the local dems gave me the vibes that they
no longer wanted me in the democratic party. I gladly left. In February of
2003, I became a Republican. I agreed with a number of things the republicans
said and felt comfortable with them at first. But when I realized that the
republicans didn't realize that there is a problem with health care in this
country, I decided to leave.
-DT
Somebody should have told you the 'problems' in this country ARE the
Republicans and the Democrats.
-DJR
I was stuck, I didn't know what to do. Though I had been well established
in the Democratic Party, I did not want to return. There was also no way
in hell I could go back to the republicans since health care was my most
important issue.
-DT
Which gives me an idea! Perhaps we ought to act to grow the Party by
recruiting the homeless! God knows, eventually there will be the Republicrats,
working for the federal government --- and the homeless. Which means eventually
the rest of us will outnumber them.
-DJR
So I decided to "surf the web" and look and see if there were any 3rd
parties that I agreed with. One of the first ones I looked at was the ARP.
I looked at their platform, and turned my attention to the health care plank.
I saw "single payer health care" and thought "great, but lets see how they
are on immigration." I read the immigration plank, and at that point I was
sold, I knew I was a American Reformer! It took a lot for me to leave the
two party system. For somebody that is going to make a career in political
management, it is hard to leave a well established party. But I felt so strongly
about the ARP after looking at their platform that I am willing to work hard.
I think that with this platform we can really make an impact in recruiting
members, candidates and actually win some elections. Lets work together to
make this work!!
-David
Trotter ARP of Utah
David, we are very pleased with your enthusiasm. I hope you are with us
for a very long time. Welcome!
-David John Repko
Vice Chair, National Committee
"The Old Repko-bate
August 7, 2003
I was recently contacted by a member of a group seeking the repeal of the 17th Amendment. I responded, thus initiating what might prove to be another on-going exchange in my personal e-mail correspondence.Since this issue is also one of the Planks in our ARP Platform, I thought it appropriate to post it here, unedited and complete, as my next edition of the "Repko-bate" series.
I welcome constructive comments.
-DJR
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
At 08:32 AM 8/6/2003 -0700, Stephen Abbott wrote:
Mr. Repko:
Thanks for your response. While I understand your reasons for not joining due to your position, I would welcome you as a member if you changed your mind.
Thank you.
As far as an official coalition goes, people from any political party are welcome to join this, and the future OFF-line group, including the ARP. In fact, even though a vast majority of people in the Yahoo! Group (and on the Internet) are conservative or libertarian, the concept of an appointed Senate has wide appeal to all political persusions.
I have informed our National Chair of my correspondence with your group, wondering if we might want to insert a cross link to your URL. I will keep you informed. For the same reasons you mention, I would hesitate to ally the concept or the group to any one party, which I'm sure you understand. Perfectly.
While I have no problem with your words and exchanges with Mr. O'Neil being posted - and actually enjoy those exchanges - it would be appropriate to include a "disclaimer" that they were first posted elsewhere (Some groups don't allow this, actually, since it can be VERY confusing for a thread to come seemingly out of nowhere.)
Understood and agreed; this is precisely why, when posting to OUR newsgroups (we have several, depending on the nature of the post itself) I am especially careful to attribute every paragraph, including any/all participants in the thread. I HATE the misunderstandings that arise otherwise. btw, if you wish to post a disclaimer, that is okay with me.
As for the re-postings themselves, in the interest in brevity, they should also probably not be extremely long.
The long stuff, if a general interest and relevant to the mission of ARP, I put onto our Web pages under the "Repko-bate" column I infrequently write.
(Surprise! This very exchange of dialog, unedited and complete, might very well be my next column!)
Again, thanks for your response and for your support of this concept. Take care,
Stephen
p.s. Is it "Jerry", "David" or "John" Repko? I've seen three names now.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My name is David John Repko, I prefer "David", and Jerry is my nephew, for whom I once worked; at that time, he was paying the bill, so I used "Jerry" on the ISP contract. When I moved (concurrently leaving his employ), for continuity I kept the same ISP --- hence, the "Jerry" appellation.
As to my 'support' of this concept, the repeal of the 17th Amendment, I am of the political mind that, while it is a plank in our Party Platform, and is filled with 'interesting' possibilities, there are several other "bigger fish to fry", such as campaign finance reform, ballot/debate access, and fiscal responsibility. I am of the opinion that the US Constitution originally provided for the state election/appointment of US Senators for the sake of expediency. While the original framers of the US Constitution gave lip-service to the Ultimate Temporal Sovereigns, "We, the People ...", those whom they actually had in mind were future generations of well-informed citizens of a well-established United States of America. I do not believe they wanted to risk the ratification of their new Constitution, forged by the novo 'elite' of the infant nation, by placing it into the hands of the great, unwashed, uneducated riff-raff who fought and died winning that nation for them.
Pity.
Else why did Thomas Jefferson (a champion of republican democracy) make the observation:
"I know no safe depositary of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power." --Thomas Jefferson to William C. Jarvis, 1820. ME 15:278
Why else would he say such a thing, other than as an answer to those loud voices that were chafing for a strong central, federal government, with the states having "rights", specified and unspecified, while the individual citizen Constitutionally had 'only' the Bill of Rights, as specified. Since then, how slowly and inexorably have even those "Rights" been abridged, abused and most recently, 'suspended' in the name of "Homeland Security"?
Any other 'sovereign' rights of the citizen, now or later, could be Constitutionally regulated or denied completely by the states themselves. As they have been. (Where is our national "right to redress", as ordained in the First Amendment? Where is our 'unabridged' right to " ...keep and bear arms"?)
No, Stephen, I am definitely in favor of repeal of the 17th Amendment, but I am not particularly excited about anything that does not immediately and effectively inspire the common citizens out of their apathy and into involvement in the political process ---such as demonstrating against the 17th Amendment! {:>)
David
July 9, 2003
To My Reader[s]
--- hoping there is more than one out there. {:>)
I am so satisfied with the 'dialogue' approach to writing this column that I will do it again today:
This exchange recently took place between myself and Hank Roth, another subscriber to our Party listserver/reflector/newsgroup, "IssuesOfTheARP@yahoogroups.com". Again, I encourage the reform-minded reader activist to subscribe to this reflector, if for no other reason than to follow the rest of the dialogs of these 'threads' as they 'unravel'.
AMERICA'S Puffed Up Self-image
George Bush has masterfully used 9/11 to go public with what has always been a belligerent American foreign policy.~Hank Roth
Oh, I don't think so, unless you refer to everything that has happened to the United States since World War Two as "always". Before World War One, we, the People of the united States did not even have a "standing Army", a Constitutional 'no-no'. We bought most of the continental territorial expansions with cash --- except for our egregious treatment of the Indians, who weren't even intrinsically cognizant of the concept of land 'ownership'. To them, if they were using it, it was theirs, as was the trees and the streams; when they 'nomadded' on, it then 'belonged' to the next tribe that moved in. War, particularly war of empire, was onerous to all Americans. And then came the atomic bomb and "Cold War". America grew up, and will never again be the idealistic world 'teenager' it once was.
[Besides, you give George Bush much more credit for "masterful using" than
he deserves.]
-DJR
---------------------------
Now what we do is out in the open. And by the high level of public
support for this aggressive militantcy several things seem apparent. First
of all, most Americans cannot project their feelings outward; they see themselves
as the center of the universe and all the suffering we cause is not much
of a concern for as long as we as Americans benefit.
-HR
---------------------------
Again, unfair, and untrue.
We KNOW exactly what we do, at least to the degree our elected/appointed leaders allow us to know. And we know how to 'project' our feelings outward. [Where were YOU on 9/11?]
The way we do it, as a Nation United, just doesn't suit Hank Roth.
Unfortunate. But among ourselves, we discuss, fight, decide, then do what we decide.
[Seems that's the way we were organized at the start.]
-DJR
---------------------------
America is the rogue nation
-HR
---------------------------
???? Hardly. The fact is, we are this planet's ONLY surviving 'superpower'. We didn't plan it, many of us are not happy with it, and many more see it as more curse than blessing.
But that is hardly justification for labeling the United States as "rogue".
["Top Dog" I can go along with.]
-DJR
---------------------------
and humanitarianism is the least of our considerations.
-HR
---------------------------
Whom is this "our' of which you speak? If it hadn't been for our NATIONAL humanitarianism, the entire United States would be surrounded by a Great Wall on our southern AND northern boundaries, not as the Berlin Wall, to keep our people locked IN, but to keep the riff-raff, the drug dealers, the criminals, terrorists and 'political refugees' OUT.
Instead, we have this great, big, ugly green Lady standing in the harbor of our great, WOUNDED City, holding a Light for those "tired, poor, huddled masses yearning to breathe free". Yes, we STILL specialize in 'recycling' "wretched refuse"!
If this were NOT so, how come there are always so many of them?
[Yes, I am aware that there are thousands of us who would love to see such
a Great Wall built. They're not in charge, though, now, are they?]
-DJR
---------------------------
Of course they're mistaken about who benefits because the ruling elite
benefits the most - but the vast majority of Americans will be doing the
sacrificing by fighting their wars which is necessary to continue to project
our global dominance.
-HR
---------------------------
Another one of our 'peculiarities' I am not particularly ashamed of.
-DJR
---------------------------
Americans also do not really get too upset over their lack of freedoms
because unless they are personally affected it isn't happening to them (they
think), and many American believe that only the outlaws have anything to
worry about and don't deserve all this freedom anyway. They do not realize
that "their" freedom is also "our" freedom. America is on the verge, now
that it knows what the American foreign and domestic policy is and isn't
the way it was before - vaguely aware of previous government wrong doing,
but were separated enough from it in their own personal lives, not to be
worried or too exercised over those abuses of power.
-HR
---------------------------
Not all of us, obviously. We few, on this and other similar list servers,
groups, etc., also serve, even when all it seems we do is stand and wait.
-DJR
---------------------------
The war on Afghanistan and then on Iraq was covered around the clock
and Americans were given a view that was skewed by mostly journalists who
saw the entire war through the eyes of the military to which they were assigned.
Now they can add "war journalist" to their resumes. They should also put
in there, "agents of the George Bush administration."
-HR
---------------------------
HR, that's exactly what our soldiers are, "agents of the George Bush
administration." That is what they are supposed to be! And I am very happy
it is not the other way around!
-DJR
---------------------------
The sanctions which was responsible for far more death and suffering
than George Bush could pin on Saddam Hussein and was barely ever covered
in the media. It wasn't the kind of news most Americans care about. Americans
don't want to know how much suffering and damage they inflict on others.
They're only interested in winning -- because after ll, it was just a video
game for most of them. The chicken hawks were the loudest cheer leaders,
including all the non-vets in the Bush regime.
-HR
---------------------------
Ah, ahem. Pardon me, but these awful sanctions, weren't they put in place by the UN?
And, Americans not wanting to know? Are you serious? MILLIONS of Americans watched nightly, to the infliction of suffering and death upon the people of Iraq by the American military. But, try not to forget that the greatest number of those 'suffering' Iraqis WERE SHOOTING BACK --- AND SOME OF THEM STILL ARE!
[By the way, are you suggesting that Americans involved in armed conflict
should seek to LOSE? That WINNING is a shameful thing to do?]
-DJR
---------------------------
Saddam never used WMD in any of the Gulf Wars with the U.S.
-HR
---------------------------
Does this make him "Mr. Nice Guy", that he 'only' uses them on those who can't fight back? If he had, it is very possible Baghdad would be a big parking lot today.
[Which thought I am sure occurred to him.]
-DJR
---------------------------
"The Gulf War and the sanctions likely killed over 1 million people
and led to a large-scale breakdown of Iraqi society. It was even easier to
forget the fact that Iraq had not used any `weapons of mass destruction'
(a term that is applied equally to the very real thermonuclear bombs of the
united States and to the hypothesized Iraqi mustard-filled artillery shells)
-- and that, therefore, the claims that Iraq posed some threat to the United
States that had to be `pre-empted' were absurd.
-HR
---------------------------
The threat never was claimed to be directed at the United States. 6000 miles
of ocean and land jinxed that idea. It is the entire Middle East that was
threatened --- and that was/is a good enough threat to world peace and stability
to suit me.
-DJR
---------------------------
If, after all, Saddam Hussein's regime was either unable or unwilling to use the dreaded WMD to save his own rule--the ultimate threat--what would be the circumstances in which he would use them? What possible threat to the world's superpower is posed by a country unable to fly a single plane against an occupying force?"
[Rahul Mahajan, "Full Spectrum Dominace: U.S. Power in Iraq and Beyond"
2003]
-HR
---------------------------
WMDs would never have 'saved' Saddam Hussein's rule. Or any other dictator's
rule, now, it seems. I have a feeling that the lack of our military use of
WMD's since Hiroshima and Nagasaki are almost an unspoken guarantee to every
human being on this planet that those who would go there in the future would
certainly be committing national suicide, and perhaps even of the entire
human species.
-DJR
---------------------------
SANCTIONS were always ILLEGAL
"The Geneva Convention is absolutely clear. In a 1979 protocol relating to the "protection of victims of international armed conflicts," Article 54, it states: "It is prohibited to attack, destroy, remove, or render useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population, such as foodstuffs, crops, livestock, drinking water installations and supplies, and irrigation works, for the specific purpose of denying them for their sustenance value to the civilian population or to the adverse Party, whatever the motive, whether in order to starve out civilians, to cause them to move away, or for any other motive." [Thomas J Nagy, "The secret behind the sanctions" - (09-01-2001) - The Progressive - Vol 65, Num 9]
"But that is precisely what the U.S. government did, with malice
aforethought. It "destroyed, removed, or rendered useless" Iraq's "drinking
water installations and supplies."
-HR
---------------------------
Pardon me, HR, but I'd like to have documentation on this. It must include
where, when, how, why, and furnish specific proof. [Sometimes the devil is
in the details.]
-DJR
---------------------------
The sanctions, imposed for a decade largely at the insistence of the
United States, constitute a violation of the Geneva Convention. They amount
to a systematic effort to, in the DIAs own words, "fully degrade" Iraq's
water sources." [ibid]
-HR
---------------------------
"... largely at the insistence of the United States ..." ???? At this "insistence"???? I think you are playing a little loosely with the facts, HR. The UN has told the US "NO"! in the past, about a lot of things. [Most recently, the invasion of Iraq!] NOW, you tell us that the sanctions were ALL our fault --- no other nations had a hand in it!
WHOM, are you trying to kid?
-DJR
---------------------------
As Cynthia McKinney, U.S. Congresswoman from Georgia said during a hearing in the House of Representatives:
"Attacking the Iraqi public drinking water supply flagrantly targets
civilians and is a violation of the Geneva Convention and of the fundamental
laws of civilized nations."
-HR
---------------------------
Again, I must insist upon detailed documentation. Unsubstantiated quotes,
taken out of context, is one of the oldest propaganda tricks in the world
of international politics!
-DJR
---------------------------
And when Clinton was president, Representative Tony Hall of Ohio wrote to Secretary of State Madeleine Albright:
"The prime killer of children under five years of age-diarrheal
diseases-has reached epidemic proportions, and they now strike four times
more often than they did in 1990.... Holds on contracts for the water and
sanitation sector are a prime reason for the increases in sickness and death.
Of the eighteen contracts, all but one hold was placed by the U.S. government.
The contracts are for purification chemicals, chlorinators, chemical dosing
pumps, water tankers, and other equipment. ... I urge you to weigh your decision
against the disease and death that are the unavoidable result of not having
safe drinking water and minimum levels of sanitation."
-HR
---------------------------
Again, I must insist upon the details of the documentation. The word "Iraq"
is not used once in the above quote!
[And please define the nature of the "holds" mentioned." Did they refuse
to pay their water bill?]
-DJR
---------------------------
How often or even when did you read or hear those journalists tell
the American public about the widespread devastation from U.S. imposed sanctions
on Iraq?
-HR
---------------------------
Not at all, HR. Which doesn't surprise me, since the only sanctions imposed
upon Iraq that I know the US was involved in came from the UN.
-DJR
---------------------------
What you did hear was the same lie repeated over and over again about
how Saddam was causing so much suffering to the Iraqi public. It was his
fault. Sure, it was! That is why at least 5,000 Iraqi children died every
month because of the sanctions, imposed on Iraq by Republicans and Democrats
alike.
~Hank Roth
---------------------------
My goodness! Have the Republicans and Democrats taken over the UN?
Now I KNOW we are in deep doo-doo!!!!
~David John Repko
June 26, 2003
"Well-Said"
a dialogue with a virtual Llewellyn Rockwell
Subject: [IssuesOfTheARP] Well Said
At 06:38 PM 6/14/2003 -0600, Steven Woodcock wrote:
"In the absence of the capitalist economy and all its underlying institutions, the world's population would, over time, shrink to a fraction of its current size, with whatever was left of the human race systematically reduced to subsistence, eating only what can be hunted or gathered. Even the institution that is the source of the word civilization itself -- the city -- depends on trade and commerce, and cannot exist without them. And this is only to mention the economic benefits of capitalism. It is also an expression of freedom. It is not so much a social system but the natural result of a society wherein individual rights are respected, where businesses, families, and every form of association are permitted to flourish in the absence of coercion, theft, war, and aggression. Capitalism protects the weak from the strong, granting choice and opportunity to masses who once had no choice but to live in a state of dependency on the politically connected and their enforcers. Must we compare the record of capitalism with that of the state, which, looking at the sweep of this past century alone, killed hundreds of millions of people in its wars, famines, camps, and deliberate starvation campaigns? And the record of central planning of the type now being urged on American enterprise is perfectly abysmal. Let the state attempt to eradicate anything -- unemployment, poverty, drugs, business cycles, illiteracy, crime, terrorism -- and it ends up creating more of it than would have been the case if it had done nothing at all. ... In every society, there is greed, fraud, and theft. But let these vices rear their heads in a socialist society-- though the norm is a continual and brutal struggle for power -- and the fact goes unnoticed or is attributed to the remnants of capitalist thinking. Let these vices appear in a largely free economy, and the cry goes out: take away the freedom to trade and put the state in charge! ... The hatred of markets must be countered by defenses of freedom in every generation. Our lives depend on it." --Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
=============================
From: Steven Woodcock
In the High, Snowy Mountains of Colorado
"Well said"????
Well --- yes.
Well written, well-thought, well expressed. After all, we are talking about a piece written by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr., no less! So I read it several times, wondering why I found myself irritated by it.What is there about it that kept me from reading it over, then comfortably putting it aside? Then, after several days simmering, I realized why.
It's a bunch of simplistic crap.
See my comments/observations below. -DJR
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"In the absence of the capitalist economy and all its underlying institutions, the world's population would, over time, shrink to a fraction of its current size, with whatever was left of the human race systematically reduced to subsistence, eating only what can be hunted or gathered. -LR
Even if this were so, the alleged 'initial' effect, the shrinking of the world's population would seem to me to be a good thing --- although not via famine, pestilence and death, as Mr. Rockwell opines. The "capitalist economy" concept came into being as a corollary to the prior birth of the concept of 'money', the use of symbols for wealth as a means of convenience in the defining/handling/storing/exchanging of that wealth objectively.
Capitalism is the way civilized men go about exercising their intellect and free will in expressing their dedication to greed and self-interest --- peacefully, under due process of law.
Without money, capitalism would, of necessity, disappear, and the world would revert, not to barbarism, nor "hunting and gathering", as proposed, but to barter. Commerce would be greatly impeded but it would not disappear. On the contrary, I see a future where cash money will become severely limited in its application/usage, because, while it 'greases the wheels' of a capitalistic economy, it is fast outliving its usefulness in that respect --- except for criminal activities.
Now, Plastic rules.
Therefore, as the symbols of wealth change/disappear, so will the concept of capital, and so will the concept of a "capitalistic economy". Only the all-owning, all-owned, all-powerful "Corporation" will remain. Its watchword will not be "interest on investment", the original goal of capitalism; it will now be "profit as much as the traffic will bear".
And it cannot --- WILL not --- tolerate any crimes but its own. Wars will
be rarely fought, and will not annihilate. They're too expensive. Rather,
future combat will take place, is already taking place, in boardrooms and
on stock exchange floors.
-DJR
---------------------------
Even the institution that is the source of the word civilization itself
-- the city --depends on trade and commerce, and cannot exist without them.
-LR
---------------------------
Ah, but trade and commerce can, will, and in some ways already does, get
along quite well without cities. Matter of fact, more and more, cities are
becoming wealth-consumers, via taxes, rather than wealth-producers. Cities
are slowly becoming more liabilities than assets, and that trend will continue.
The Internet will see to that.
-DJR
---------------------------
And this is only to mention the economic benefits of capitalism. It is
also an expression of freedom. It is not so much a social system but the
natural result of a society wherein individual rights are respected, where
businesses, families, and every form of association are permitted to flourish
in the absence of coercion, theft, war, and aggression.
-LR
---------------------------
Capitalism is no more "an expression of freedom" than the plantations of Dixie were. The only 'freedom' there was that enjoyed by the landed gentry, the plantation owner --- in particular, the white man.
The Civil War, as is true of all wars, was an excellent example of the greedy, willful child in all of us. Although morally necessary, for human beings as property is a reprehensible institution, the American Civil War was economically UN-necessary. The "Industrial Revolution" was already a steam-driven juggernaut grooming us to be the new "wage-slave". It was only a matter of thirty or forty years off, and then tractor-owning Southern gentry would have started to forcibly eject 'human property' from their fields---as the banks did to the tenant farmers in the Oklahoma Dust Bowl in the '30's!
The "capitalistic economy" no longer had use for human 'property', with
its high, ever-increasing 'maintenance costs' we now call "national health".
Had it not been for the peculiarly successful rise of the labor unions, the
"capitalistic economy" of Mr. Rockwell would have become one long, continuous
execution of "coercion, theft, war, and aggression" on the common people.
-DJR
---------------------------
Capitalism protects the weak from the strong, granting choice and opportunity
to masses who once had no choice but to live in a state of dependency on
the politically connected and their enforcers.
-LR
---------------------------
What audacity! The only ones who have that kind of freedom --- and protection
from the "masses" --- are those who are "politically connected" to the wealthy
capitalists, and their "enforcers", the United States Congress!
-DJR
---------------------------
Must we compare the record of capitalism with that of the state, which,
looking at the sweep of this past century alone, killed hundreds of millions
of people in its wars, famines, camps, and deliberate starvation campaigns?
And the record of central planning of the type now being urged on American
enterprise is perfectly abysmal. Let the state attempt to eradicate anything
-- unemployment, poverty, drugs, business cycles, illiteracy, crime, terrorism
-- and it ends up creating more of it than would have been the case if it
had done nothing at all. ...
-LR
---------------------------
While Mr. Rockwell does indeed paint an accurate picture, he is confusing "the state" with the government, which it is NOT! The "State" is a monolithic entity, ponderous and awesome to behold in its symbolically swathed robes of Power and Majesty. It is also 99% illusion!
The government, on the other hand, is what those who are being governed
permit it to be --- at least in this nation, at this point in time. If "the
state" is to blame for all those social failures Mr. Rockwell lists above
--- and I tend to agree, with some qualifying exceptions, then WE, the People,
are to blame, for permitting such poor government to occur, AND TO CONTINUE!
But please, Mr. Rockwell, be a little more precise with your terminologies.
-DJR
---------------------------
In every society, there is greed, fraud, and theft. But let these vices
rear their heads in a socialist society-- though the norm is a continual
and brutal struggle for power --and the fact goes unnoticed or is attributed
to the remnants of capitalist thinking.
-LR
---------------------------
"... the remnants of capitalist thinking."! Perchance, sir, by this phrase do you mean, Worldcom? Or Enron? Or Imclone? Or junk bonds'? Or "insider trading"? Or Whitewater? Or Teapot Dome? Or Standard Oil? Or "The Great Depression"?
The "State" did all these things? Why in hell, sir, do you think the Socialist
States of America was born?
-DJR
---------------------------
Let these vices appear in a largely free economy, and the cry goes out:
take away the freedom to trade and put the state in charge!
-LR
---------------------------
There IS no "largely free economy" anywhere in the world, only nations that regulate their commerce in varying degrees, which degrees are wholly dependent upon the authors of those regulations, the representatives of the people or the representatives of the corporations. It is only within the past five or ten years that the American people have slowly become aware of which representatives are presently making their laws.... The hatred of markets must be countered by defenses of freedom in every generation. Our lives depend on it." --Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
There is no such thing as a "... hatred of markets ...". It is a nonsense phrase created here to incite an anti-socialistic passion. No army ever took to the field to defend a "free" market. Many armies have done so to enforce/protect a captive market. What we need now is an army to protect and defend a fair market, not fair to the army, not fair to the "capitalistic economy", but fair to WE, the People!
~David John Repko
June 10, 2003
“A-a-a-CHOO!”
“Welfare Bless You!”
A few days ago on the ARP “Issues” discussion reflector, there arose --- I like that,
‘arose’, like an ascension of some holy problem or situation to a level which we can all then profoundly perceive and, somehow, resolve --- a proposal that we, the American Reform Party, devise a Plank addition to our Platform at the next Party Convention.
The proposal ‘thread’ was entitled: “Universal Health Care” but, after a few exchanges on the reflector, it metamorphosed into “Income Fairness”; it seems that the very first consideration of the Plank was “how much will this new bureaucracy cost us?”
Pity.
At first, various historical fiscal misadventures raised their troubled heads (Medicare, Medicaid, employer benefits costs, HMOs), it then devolved into minimum wage and overtime considerations and, dare we mention it, INCOME TAX!
Fortunately, before that pseudo-thread plunged into the “bogus budget” swamp of “Flat Tax vs National Sales Tax”, someone came forth and introduced “Hobbes vs. Locke” and “Marx vs Lenin” --- and suddenly, everybody stopped talking!
So, now it’s my turn ...
I want to go back to that “Income Fairness” thingie for just a moment. Actually, just the “Fairness” part. It seems to me that one of the first ‘inventions’ of Man --- probably Cain, because Daddy Adam knew better by then --- was the concept of “fair”. The loser (Cain) offered a second-rate sacrifice to the Lord, but the Lord chose the winning (Abel’s) offering instead. (No fool, HE!)
Cain cried, “Hey, Abel was programmed to be a cattle man, I was trained to be a field hand; it’s not my fault steak tastes better than lumpy oatmeal, they’re both good for the bod, aren’t they? God’s not FAIR!”
So Cain killed Abel.
And the Hollywood Westerns have been wreaking vengeance on the sod-busters ever since! (I often wonder why they didn’t do a sequel: “Shane Comes Back and Discovers Oil!”)
I digress.
The next statement we hear from God is, “Hey, brother-keeper, Mom and Dad lost “fairness” when they lost all the rest of the good stuff called “Eden”. Who said Life was Fair?” Then God kicked CAIN out of the county!
Now, let’s flash forward to 1787 C. E. (or A. D., for we politically incorrect believers)
or thereabouts. A bunch of funny-dressed guys are gathered around a big table discussing this new ‘Constitution’ for the infant United States that they are going to ‘ratify’ --- if the hometown folks can be persuaded, that is.
“Guys, they’re going to ask us, ‘What the heck is a ‘Constitution’, and why do we want it? What is it gonna do for us?”
“Why, it’s a kind of contract we are going to make, a promise of sorts, to our children and grandchildren, etc., etc,. etc. A promise that this here Constitution is made BY us, FOR them, FOREVER! Or as long as we and they can make it so.
It will promise to make our country more grand than it already is; we will be able to defend it, make it peaceful, and, doggone it, make life JUST and FAIR for ALL the general WELFARE!”
That's us.
Now we are at a crossroads. We have the systems in place, all we need is the resolve.
We must NOT ask, “How much is this going to cost?” We must ask, “How much will it cost us if we don’t?” We don’t need to watch the poor get sick and die because nobody cares. We need to see that the elderly enjoy their twilight years in relative peace and health, as worry-free as we once did, when a family took care of its own --- because everybody cared! (Even the cheapskates.)
We need to get the main characters to the bargaining table.
WE, the People, need to bring our physicians to our town halls --- not in the back row, but up front, where everybody can see, hear, and question them, “If you, a doctor, could sit down and write a complete process, cradle to the grave, of the basic care YOUR patients ought to have, to lead a full, productive life, regardless of cost, what would you write?”
THEN, we get together with the pharmaceutical houses and medical supplies/equipment manufacturers, summon THEIR minions to that town hall, and tell them, “Here is the plan the physician gave us for the common medical welfare of their patients. Never mind what THEY are going to get out of it; they are going to get to continue to practice their first love --- medicine.
Now, you take that plan and write down what you will charge WE, the People --- and everybody else in the world where you do business. OR WE WILL NO LONGER ALLOW YOU TO DO BUSINESS IN THIS COMMON WEALTH.
Then we need to march the tort lawyers down to that same town hall and say, “WE, the PEOPLE, have allowed you, licensed you, to determine, in courts of law, that we receive justice and FAIRNESS in those courts. We mean ALL the people, not just those who pay you money.
Now, write down a plan that does this thing, and TELL US WHAT IT WILL COST!
By the way, “contingency fee’ is not an acceptable answer!
And, yes, your license to practice law DEPENDS on it.
Then, add up those town hall figures, ask the PEOPLE for ideas to cut those costs WHEREVER THEY FEEL THEY MUST, to avoid bankrupting the nation.
Then, compare those costs with all the other governments of the world that practice ‘universal’ health care and say, “Help us with your experiences.”
Then go do it.
Because we ARE our brothers’ keepers; because we must!
~David Repko
June 1, 2003
A series of postings were made on the “Issuesof the ARP” newsgroup reflector [subscription to this reflector is free and open to the public---see subscription instructions elsewhere on these pages] under the Subject Title of “Education Issue”. The aim of the series was to lay the groundwork for an additional plank to the Party Platform. If the effort is successful, it will be one of the issues discussed and voted on at the next Party Convention [date/place/times to be announced sometime soon --- I hope].
Meanwhile, after reading these postings, and comparing them with my own experiences, then and now, it seems to me the basic fault lies with the entire philosophy of education in America. It has changed, from things that used to work, to things that were hoped would work, but did not. And nobody ever thought to change them back!
For instance, there used to be a ‘little red schoolhouse’, a large one-or-two room building with one or two teachers (the second one being a ‘teacher in training’, often the oldest girl (and, for a very good reason, also the largest --- those farm boys were grown big!).
I underline ‘girl’ because everyone ‘knew’ that somehow or other, girls were smarter than boys --- up until the age boys found out why there were girls in the first place.
Then, the boys got smart. They found out that the world was run by MEN, not boys. Men that were strong, and smart, and tough, and HONEST, and HARD WORKING, and DEPENDABLE. And whatever lessons the schoolmarm had difficulty in teaching, well, mother and father [shudder] were always willing to remedy at home.
Especially lessons about family, and neighbors, and friends and grange, and horses and school boards [more shudders] and taxes and respect for the law --- with perhaps a little private resentment reserved for the dog-catcher.
Kids walked to school because it was safe to do so, and, while every boy may have been trained to be a marksman with a .22 rifle by his father before the age of 12, he knew it was a method for putting food on the table and getting rid of four-legged varmints, not an acceptable method for dealing with bullies and teachers at school.
Now, some kids spend almost as much time riding in school buses as they do in classrooms. When my oldest daughter was approaching school age, there were some idiot parents that wanted to bus suburban kids to center city schools and vice versa. This way they were sure all our kids would grow up loving each other! I stood up at the public meeting and asked how long the round trip would take. The reply made me observe --- quite loudly --- that the one vocation most of the kids would be trained for would be bus drivers!
One would think that, with all the money being spent by school boards on stuff that did not actually teach anything --- like air-conditioned auditoriums for 1500 students, and SCHOOL BUSES, that somebody would get the idea to DE-centralize the schools (exceptions being sports events and physical training), have a FOUR day week and a THREE-day weekend, so that parents who work a four day week [or now ‘commute’ to work via the Internet].
AND SAVE GASOLINE, LOWER AIR POLLUTION, NOT TO MENTION MAKING THE BUSES LAST LONGER! (School busses are not cheap!)
Matter of fact, wherever and whenever possible, bring the schools back to the neighborhoods --- let the kids walk to and from school --- allowing parents who worry about their special, precious little darlings, to drive them back and forth themselves, if they insist.
Matter of fact, if some parents can demonstrate their home-schooling talents, with test results, instead of giving them school vouchers of $2000 each to send their children 20 miles from home, PAY them with a tax credit of twenty-FIVE hundred dollars for teaching their kids at home. Lessons like the dignity of honest work and a sense of personal responsibility. It will give both parents and kids a chance to get to know each other --- instead of day care providers.
If there are certain parents that demonstrably EXCEL at home schooling, LET THEM TEACH OTHER FOLKS' KIDS, AS WELL! That’s another 2500 bucks income! Hey, it could skyrocket into a ‘career’ of ‘babysitting’ at a professional level. Just like some few we already mis-label “teachers”.
And for GOD’S SAKE, LET’S STOP FUNDING EDUCATION WITH REAL ESTATE TAXES MIS-LABELLED ‘SCHOOL’ TAXES!
1. Simplify! (Think ‘neighborhood’).
2. Innovate! (Think ‘out-of-the-box’)
3. Get rid of the dinosaurs on the school boards and faculties.
~David J. Repko
March 6, 2003
"MAY THE BESTCANDIDATEWIN.ORG"
It grieves me to inform you, dear readers, that my last column title, "TheBestMan.org", is already taken --- but not yet in use! Perhaps some speculator hopes to sell it at a profit. {:>(
I feel certain that eventually one of my readers will come forth with a Web site name that will 'click'. Meanwhile, we need to move forward.
THE QUESTIONNAIRE
I have already described how we must contact, and persuade, as many political entities ---"third Parties" --- and those who aspire to such 'lofty' heights/depths, depending on one's point of view --- to cooperate with this concept by taking the time to contribute questions that our hypothetical candidate will be expected to answer. The purpose of this step is twofold: First, we need to insure that the proposed questionnaire will engage the widest spectrum of political ideologies practical, so as to avoid the inevitable criticisms of "Unfair!" as much as possible. Second, by so doing, we can facilitate the spread of the project to as wide an audience as possible.
After a Web site [domain URL] has been secured, an "Under Construction" notice will be posted:
"On this site will be constructed a web site for ANY candidate of ANY Party (or NO Party) for ANY Public Office ANYwhere in the United States of America. Candidates will receive a MAINTAINED Web Page, for the length of their campaign, FREE OF CHARGE! It will be of sufficient size to tastefully represent the candidate with a photo and a resume/bio, furnished by the candidate. (If you need help in polishing up your resume with good grammar, punctuation, etc., that will also be supplied FREE OF CHARGE!) If the Candidate is a member of a 'third' Party, and that Party has a Party logo, said logo will be placed upon the Candidate's Web Page ONLY, provided said Party will give written permission for such use of that logo prior to its use.
The Candidate will be required to assume full legal responsibility for said logos legitimate use.
(NOTE: Text/graphics of questionable Netiquette taste MAY be prohibited.)
There will be an EXTENSIVE QUESTIONNAIRE to express the candidate's opinions and convictions of conscience. This QUESTIONNAIRE must be completely filled out {"No
comment" will be accepted as a legitimate answer to any question} and submitted before the Candidate's Web page is posted. After the Candidate's Web Page is posted, the Candidate will be free to make additions/deletions to the resume/bio, BUT THE COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE WILL NO LONGER BE AVAILABLE FOR CANDIDATE EDITING. [A pre-posting 'galley proof' will be supplied for candidate approval.]
If any reader wishes to 'vigorously' object to the content of any Candidate's Web pages --- well, that's what e-mail is for.
Ditto for campaign contribution requests.
Candidates may make note of later additions, corrections, emendations, and/or amendments under a section, "Remarks:"at the bottom of the candidate's resume/bio. Candidate access to this area of his her Web Pages will be password-protected.
The Candidate will be responsible for the content of his/her personal web pages ONLY.
Further, the Candidate may order the removal of his/her personal Web pages at any time (24 hours prior notice will be required).
If the Candidate orders such removal, that Candidate will not be allowed to post any material of any nature whatsoever, thereafter.
At the end of the candidate's campaign, his/her personal Web Pages will be removed, and ARCHIVED!
NOTICE: All materials on this Web site will be copyrighted, and become the property of the Web Site owner, at the end of any campaign. Candidates will be required to acknowledge a waiver of copyrights BEFORE posting of his/her Web Pages.
[Successful Candidates often 'forget' campaign promises --- but THIS Web site will still have the 'skinny' on file.] End of "Construction" notice
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Once this "construction" notice has been placed, the following letter will be e-mailed/snail-mailed to as many "Third Parties" --- and wanabees ---that can be located online.
[An apology to those folks not yet 'online': Your absence on the Information Highway is noticed, and regretted. Your world is about to leave you behind.]
"Dear fellow American Citizens:
"Third Party" and independent candidates, including totally disgruntled "Republicrats" have ballot access 'cards' stacked against them. There is NO centralized, consolidated,
NON-PARTISAN public forum for the nation's independent voters/contributors to go to "research the resumes" of all such candidates without costly or time-consuming letter-writing, phone calls, Google searches, etc., --- except for the "Republicrats".
There are a lot of stalwart citizens out there that would be willing to run for public office at ALL levels of government, but they
have neither the money nor the 'connections' that the rascal Republicrats have at their disposal. What follows is a proposal to remedy that "omission":
[here will be inserted the "Under Construction" notice, above]
You may see this Notice online at ____________________(URL) BUT, in order for this project to see some good results,
WE NEED YOUR QUESTIONS!
Yes, that's right. We need every patriotic political activist to examine this project, then compose and submit a list of questions that will answer for you, "Is THIS candidate worthy of MY vote?"
After we get as many questions as possible, from as many civic-minded groups and individuals as possible, and after the questions are edited to eliminate duplication, WE INTEND USING THE
CANDIDATES' ANSWERS TO THESE QUESTIONS TO IDENTIFY THOSE CANDIDATES' EACH ONE OF US DEEMS
WORTHY OF OUR INDIVIDUAL SUPPORT!
And we mean every candidate, not just those running for President!
We shall set up a state by state Candidate locator! No matter if you live in Springfield, Ohio, Springfield, Pennsylvania or Springfield, Illinois, we will have the Candidates on our Web Pages!
But YOU must help us locate them, and YOU must help us identify them with the questions YOU ask!
Please note that, while we are willing to list Party affiliation and logo to Candidates you approve, and the Candidate requests, NO QUESTIONS on the questionnaire will be identified as to source.
YOU can ask the questions, but nobody, including the Candidate, must know where that question came from.
Which means, "Do you believe that the use of marijuana should be legalized under the same/similar control as alcoholic beverages?" would be an acceptable question.
Such questions as "Are you a member of the _______ Party?" would NOT be an acceptable question.
Examples of typical question formats would be:
[Here, I intend to insert some of those questions appearing on the ARP Candidate questionnaire, elsewhere on these Party Webpages.]
I thank you in advance for your assistance. If you have any personal questions to put to me, send me an e-mail, please.
End of letter to "Third Parties, et al"
March 2, 2003
Besides being a subscriber to the various ARP reflectors, I also subscribe to several other politically motivated similar reflectors, notably “United We Stand, America” [uwsa@uwsa.com], Independent [Ind@yahoogroups.com], intra-Party Caucus, 2004 [caucus04@yahoogroups.com], and CoalitionCentral [CoalitionCentral@yahoogroups.com], a group that calls itself a “Launchpad for Third Party Alliance”. They all have a common theme, the amalgamation of ALL reform-thinking voters.
In spite of that common theme, they ALL suffer from the same defects that proscribe their common goal, the much-needed political and governmental reform of the United States of America. The major defect is, of course, the system itself, which is implanted into American citizens almost from birth, at home and in the schools (public and private), and that is “WE know best”, “WE” being, of course, whatever group is doing the talking at the time.
We, as the children of the world, are imprinted with all the biases, prejudices and outright lies that our heritage has to offer, along with all the goodness and truths we are taught under the same system.
The end result is, whatever makes YOU feel smug and self-righteous in your beliefs/faiths/convictions/opinions, makes ME “mad as hell”! Consequently, even though our thin veneer of ‘civilization’ compels us to resist the almost universal urge to bash each others’ heads in, the best society can hope for is a grudging tolerance for one another, in order to achieve some small measure of social progress toward a better tomorrow --- which we also, universally, hope and work for.
Most of us, anyhow.
The problem is, because of this seemingly innate hostility and mutual mistrust, how can we, the above described conglomerate of dis-united dissidents, ever hope to reform this firmly entrenched duopoly we tend to call “Republicrats”? The answer, or rather, my proposal, is not a simple one; after all, it has been a complex and, until recently, overwhelming problem.
Not anymore.
The answer is the Information Superhighway.
That’s right, this new “good old boy” circuit, the Internet! Everybody uses it, everybody is welcome, and most importantly, it’s FREE --- or almost so. As with all good things, there is a ‘down’ side. Somebody has to set a Web site up, and maintain it in good working order and ABOVE ALL, refrain from ‘editorial creativity’.
Here’s how it will work --- and how it will spread, hopefully, like wildfire:
Set up a domain --- separate from all commercialization ---no ads, no ‘sponsors’ like Yahoo! that will attach ‘strings’ tied to that “Establishment” none of us can ever attach a responsible label. To.
[What the heck is so horrible about an ‘exposed’ preposition, anyhow? --- DJR]
We will need a name. [I would like to suggest “AdHoc.org” --- unfortunately, it’s already taken by some group in the Netherlands, and I can’t read Dutch.] Its name ought to reflect that it is a political ‘clearing house’ for CANDIDATES. [“TheBestMan.org”???]
It must NOT be a showcase for any one particular Party, BUT, there IS a showcase for political parties already on the Internet --- I forget what it’s called --- and that site MUST be cross-linked for reasons which I will explain in a minute.
It must offer a FREE Web-Page, INCLUDING FREE, PROFESSIONAL-LOOKING GRAPHICS, FOR ANY AND ALL CANDIDATES FOR ANY OFFICE THE CHOOSE TO SEEK. It will include a heading listing Office being sought, geographical/district/location with a click-on map link, Party affiliation (highlighted with the Party cross-link mentioned above, IF APPLICABLE. (otherwise “unaffiliated”). The CONTENT, of course, must be as the candidate wishes, either self-written or “cleaned up” by a volunteer with an excellent background in such ‘pedestrian’ matters. It can be self-edited by the candidate {password protected} for ease of removal and/or additions, such as later endorsements. This approach will give folks that ought to be running for office the impetus, the self-confidence, to put their position before the public, “at no cost”, so they won’t have to sell their soul to the duopoly devil to reach their prospective constituencies.
HOWEVER, the Robert Heinlein TANSTAAFL philosophy must be preserved. “THERE AIN’T NO SUCH THING AS A FREE LUNCH!”
Each candidate that applies for the “free” Website (some of them that already have a professionally designed-maintained may also wish to appear --- they will gladly be accepted under these guidelines) must “pay” for that Web site by filling out a Candidate Questionnaire Form, and that they will be aware the answers to that questionnaire will also appear as a part of their ‘free’ Web page.
[NOTE: For a ‘template’ example of what I mean by a “Candidate Questionnaire”, look elsewhere on this ARP Website. ]
What kind of questions? Well, that again is going to be a major project requiring the skills and dedication of all the myriad political Parties, PACs and civic/special interest groups, or at least all those willing to cooperate. EACH group will submit a candidate questionnaire they would themselves ask of a prospective candidate seeking THEIR endorsement. ALL such groups that participate will receive acknowledgment of their contribution at a prominent location on the Web site.
[For some reason I cannot divine, I suspect THE DUOPOLY will ‘decline’ to participate. However, I think they should be allowed, if they choose. {:>) ]
When the respective questionnaires are submitted, a group of volunteers from these organizations will review the questions, UNIDENTIFIED AS TO SOURCE, and AT RANDOM, eliminating duplication of con-tent or in-tent. Clarification will be a primary consideration of each question. Only those questions surviving the procedure by 100% consensus as to elimination of duplicates will be included in the final questionnaire.
Questions that are obviously offensive to “good taste/social etiquette” will not be accepted. Volunteers of participating groups can peremptorily challenge/reject questions they deem ‘offensive’ --- at risk of having retaliatory challenge/rejection of their questions as ‘offensive’.
I think that open minds and cool heads will prevail under such circumstances.
Candidates submitting questionnaires may submit a “No comment” response to any question, but they MUST respond in some fashion that acknowledges the existence of the question itself. Candidate editorial access to Questionnaire responses will be denied once they are posted on the Candidate Web page. This fact will be printed on the top of the questionnaire AND on the Web page itself. [No ‘waffling’.] However, the Candidate will be free to editorially post a retraction on his/her Web Page --- with the politically necessary ‘explanation’ (spin) included.
At the end of the Candidate questionnaire/Web page, have a running tally of those who check off ‘Approval’ [NO DISAPPROVAL CHECK OFFS ALLOWED!!!! If you don’t like the dude/message, move on, brother. E-mail your criticisms to the Candidate privately.]
Other cross-link ideas and Web site features might likely occur to me --- or others --- later, but this is the basic idea of my proposal. Let us try to take the choice, from the lowest candidate of the smallest geopolitical area, to the highest Office of the Presidency of the United States, OUT OF THE HANDS OF THE DUOPOLY, and start helping OUR “Best Man” win!
It won’t be easy, fighting “the machine”, but it is “the machine” that is the blind, bloated, careening, powerful-yet-soulless, AIMLESS enemy of We, the People of the United States.
David J. Repko {:>)
February 21, 2003
It is probably the dirtiest word ever invented, no matter what language. IS there a language that doesn’t have it? I don’t think so. But there ought to be!
At this moment in human history, our country is poised to make war on the nation of Iraq. The “dirty” word appears on almost every page of every newspaper and magazine in the entire world. Each of us, regardless of gender or background, holds an opinion on the matter, and many of us give voice to that opinion. Often that opinion is voiced in anger; always, with conviction. Sometimes it is motivated by politics, sometimes morality, often by fear. There has never been such division of the people of this country, with the possible exception of our war in Vietnam, the only war this country ever lost --- mostly because our armed forces were ordered not to win “for political reasons”! (Somehow, the folks “in charge” seemed to forget that the whole mess started because of “political reasons”, namely, “to save the world from Communism.” The Communists ‘won’ anyhow --- and have been trying desperately to live with ‘victory’ ever since.)
Emotionally, this “marching, as to war” is tearing our nation apart. While various interested groups (and a few interesting individuals) engage in protests and demonstrations over the rightness or wrongness of this war, many of us look to our traditional institutions for guidance, or encouragement, or hope. Religious groups, unions, youth groups, civic organizations, even environmental and animal rights [?] groups are choosing/have chosen sides. Our two major Parties have, however, risen/lowered themselves (depending on one’s point of view) to meet the occasion by engaging in political rhetoric, uniting no one, alienating everyone. Our American Reform Party, so far, has declined this ‘opportunity’ to take a stand.
And I am glad of it.
Don’t misunderstand; I, too, have my anger, my reasons, my convictions, and it takes all my resolution to refrain from venting my spleen. [God, what a disgusting expression! What is a ‘spleen’ and, most importantly, what does it ‘vent’? Never mind, I really don’t want to know!] But I am not going to do so here, and for two reasons: First of all, it is unfair to the reader --- how can one effectively rebut a columnist’s Internet opinion? Second, I have no such reluctance on the ARP “Issues” reflector, where *anyone* who subscribes can give me a piece of their mind --- assuming they can afford the loss.
[Subscribing to the ARP “Issues” reflector is open to the public. Instructions on subscribing are here]
The reason I refrain from speaking out my opinion on what has thus far proven to be a ‘sitzkeieg’, or ‘phony war’, and am glad the ARP has not, is simply the still-relevant fact that this ‘War with Iraq’ IS so divisive!
Party Principle is quite clear on the matter of exclusion of “divisive social issues”, lest those who are most ardent in their support of any such issue succeed in stifling the opposition --- who will then pick up their marbles and go back to the Republicrats, our real foe.
So, much as I enjoy engaging in e-mail ‘warfare’ on the ARP subscription reflectors, I am afraid I must come out in favor of “peace at any price” on the Webfront’
Note: I have a proposal to make here, in the next day or so. Don’t wander off too far. Meanwhile, have a nice whatever.
David J. Repko {:>)
June 15, 2002
I am very impressed by this young man's passionate concern for his government and its future. I am also impressed by his nascent writing skills. In that respect, I believe this letter ought to appear on the national website pages AND the North Carolina State ARP page, and I encourage Roy to poll the membership for their opinion in the matter.
This young person represents the future, not only of organizations like the ARP, but of the world he is about to inherit from us. The people of America needs to hear him.
David Repko
--------------------
Hello
As many of you know I am Jon Matthews an active 16 year old member of the ARP. I work at a diner known as Denny's and I am always having interesting souls come across my path. Today I had a North Carolina Senator come in and I got to talking to him. I was telling him about the ARP and its causes what it wanted to promote. He was very attentive and was 100% with everything I told him. When I reached down to grab my wallet to give him an ARP business card (provided by Mr. Downing) he placed his hand on the table and told me that there wasn't any need to give it to him. I inquired as to why and he said "It's a simply impossible cause.". These words shocked me. Although this man agreed with everything I said and the fact that Democrats and Republicans were both corrupted and that it was time that those parties either reformed or died he still said that. He is a highly respected man and could win as an ARP member with mere simplicity. Then he told me that he will always remain a republican because Noone wanted a third party in America.
We must face reality. It is true that third parties are generally small and don't hold any incredible power but we have faced a new future. Many third parties have attained an array of local possitions and are multiplying. However this man said it was a Simply Impossible Cause. The duopoly has drownded the voice of even those in power. I think it's time that we all took a stand. I am going to include this on my campaign site and if anyone here besides me thinks that the ARP and the other third parties aren't an Impossible Cause then reply to this letter with simply your name and please pass it along. My goal is over 1000 names and I will mail a copy of this to this Senator and other senators across America. If we can go past 1000 then I'll go for it. Please help me in my small cause. If you want to get signatures in your neighborhood or anything then please print this and pass it around and mail it back to me at the address below.
Thank you. For Printable Version - Please Click Here
Jon Matthews: 549 Arbor Hill Rd Apt 6B Kernersville, NC 27284
1.__________________________________________
2.__________________________________________
3.__________________________________________
4.__________________________________________
5.__________________________________________
6.__________________________________________
7.__________________________________________
May 30, 2002.
Did Roosevelt Really Know The Japs Were Going to Attack Pearl Harbor?
(I think maybe Marilyn Monroe did, and decided to tell all, just to embarrass the Democratic Party, thus punishing JFK/RFK for dumping her. And we all know what happened to her, don't we?)
All this lather being churned up by those Congresscritter Whips:
DID Bush/CIA/FBI/ATF/IRS/NSA/NRA/AFL-CIO/ADF and the Security Branch of the Salvation Army really have prior knowledge of the 9/11 attack on the WTC?
If anyone did, does any rational American think the public would ever find out? Am I the only one to have seen "All The King's Men"? This "inquiry" is not about terrorism. This is about politics.
If there was any real investigation into the possibility of genuine, prior HARD knowledge, nobody would be paying much attention to what all those acronym groups, above, had to say, nor would anybody (including those above-mentioned acronym groups) be paying attention to the Germans, the French, the British and the Israeli "intelligence" services. BEFORE revealing any substantially factual data about anything to anybody, they would FIRST spend most of their efforts covering their OWN collective butts.
And, on that premise alone, any statements they make would be suspect. No, the questions that I would personally like to ask would be, rather than who died in the attack, who did NOT die? And, under ordinary circumstances, OUGHT to have died?
Not the janitors and waitresses and homeless/bums/panhandlers/, not the accountants and lawyers and import/export clerks, not the tourists or cabdrivers or (quite probably) some unfortunate hooker/s. Not the secretaries and mail clerks, nor the heroes of the aftermath.
WHO WASN'T THERE THAT DAY, THAT ORDINARILY SHOULD HAVE BEEN THERE, WHERE WERE THEY, AND WHY?
Find out how many CEOs or other high-ranking corporate types --- or federal government security personnel --- were "fortunately" elsewhere on that day, and then look for patterns. Like "Deep Throat" told the Washington Press reporters --- "... follow the money."
Pardon me for changing the subject, but I'm a Pennsylvania guy, and I was wondering, has anyone seen Tom Ridge lately? We're having our gubernatorial election next week, and we've been offered a choice of Ed Rendell, the former mayor of Philadelphia, and Bob Casey, the former PA state bean-counter. Both are "professional politicians" [read that, 'Party hacks'.]
Could it possibly be that Tom Ridge, a VERY popular governor here in PA, would have been a little TOO much for George Dubya to handle in 2004, so the Republicans sold Gov. Ridge a bridge and some Florida real estate, just to get him off center stage?
I think I'll go to the polls next week, and vote for Tom Ridge as a write-in.
I mean, y'never know, maybe by 2004 we independents and reformers could talk HIM into running?
David Repko
Limerick, Pennsylvania
Sept. 13, 2001
Current Issue
- Click Here
.
Out of the depths have I cried unto Thee, O Lord;
O Lord, hear my voice." ---Psalm 129
David Repko
Sept. 1, 2001 Current Issue - Click Here
It has finally been resolved; the dates for the next Convention, to be held in Schaumburg, Illinois, are the weekend of October 19-21, 2001. After much hemming and hawing, it seems that this will be the weekend when the fewest number of key people will be unavoidably absent. Sadly, the show must go on, for the present Party Constitution demands that a new slate of National Committee Officers must be elected, even if it means some of those seeking election/re-election will be unable to attend.
At present, the bare-bones agenda includes the above-mentioned Election, the adoption of much-revised Party Constitution/By-Laws, and the various Annual Reports from the Party Secretary, Treasurer, etc. It is anticipated to be a working Convention, with debates and workshops taking up much of the time. At present, a Guest Speaker has not yet been chosen. (I tentatively suggested that we might be able to invite the Mayor of Schaumburg, thus avoiding the expense of an airline ticket and room accommodations, but later withdrew the suggestion, since it is most likely that hizz/heroner is probably a Republicrat.) Another drawback to selecting a Guest Speaker, at least for some ARP members, is a non-existent requirement that said speaker must be in 100% agreement with the ARP Platform, which would even disqualify me, since I do not agree with all the planks in the Platform. (I posit, to those ARP members who agree with the "100%" opinion, that only by pre-programming a Cray mainframe computer with voice recognition/simulation capability, could we come up with such a "sanitized" Guest Speaker. Unfortunately, the Party Treasury is a little short of the quarter-million dollar pricetag for that piece of hardware.)
There is one item for the agenda that has been forthcoming from several quarters within and without the Party, and that is a definition --- a re-consideration, if you will --- of what the American Reform Party is, and what it perhaps ought to be.
Some think that, because of its size and dilution throughout the 50 states (not to overlook the District of Columbia), the lack of an impressive/effective Treasury, and a dearth of local/state party-building efforts, the American Reform Party ought to rename itself to 'Committee' status. As such, it would somehow be better able to further the planks of the Party Platform. The essence of that "re-consideration" is contained within the following exact quote:
"The ARP, as a whole, should change direction from party-building to
political action committee, and support a variety of legislative initiatives, political candidates from any and all parties if they match up with our platform, etc. etc."
My response to the above statement is this: One of the main goals of the reform movement is to curtail the degree of influence of groups such as PACs (political action committees) over the national legislative process through campaign finance reform. To posit that the best way to accomplish this original, founding goal is to become a PAC, is like saying that the best way to deter crime is to become a criminal! To me, this would be selling out!
I will say for the record, here and now, that when Ted Muga resigned as National Chair, I accepted the nomination to succeed him, pro tem, with the understanding that the original goals of the reform movement would remain intact. I did not, and WILL not, revise that understanding.
I did not agree to become the pro tem chief pallbearer at the funeral of the last remaining bastion of grassroots, democratic political and governmental reform in this nation.
David Repko
August 12, 2001 Current Issue - Click Here
by David Repko
If the day should come, when those to whom we have entrusted command over us, decide to suspend the Constitution in order to exercise that command more efficiently, that will be the day when I will no longer be obligated to obey that command.
The American Reform Party is growing by leaps and bounds. Since last year, there have been dozens of applications for membership received at the National level. However, this has happened before, particularly before a Presidential/Vice Presidential Election, or before a National Convention. After the "smoke" clears, we find the numbers again slowly dwindling. There is no single issue, no one area of disagreement where we can point a finger and say, "This must be fixed", before we can continue to work effectively for reform. No, the problem remains, how do we continue to grow and function as a National Party, and is that function merely to come forth with a Party Nomination for the two highest public Offices in the Land?
The first part of the question is, how do we continue to grow and function as a National Party?
It is simple. "All politics is local". Towns must be "chartered", counties and parishes must meet together to fulfill that particular county/state's Election Board requirements. And ALL those requirements vary so widely from county to county and state to state, it often seems to the newcomer that the mountain of red tape is insurmountable.
Well, it has been designed in such a manner, and very carefully, by those very folks we are destined to meet one day, either at the poles or, as some would have is believe, upon the barricades of revolution.
Yet, IS that truly the way to "grow" a Party such as ours?
We have begun to make us of the Internet as the truly greatest tool for the dissemination of information/news, that is finally putting the "mainstream media in its place. Now, we must use that same Internet to bring each other closer together, as a Party.
Lately, I have begun compiling a roster of membership applicants BY STATE. I am about to direct the Webmaster, Roy Downing, to post those names/addresses of these membership applicants TO THE STATE LINK OF THEIR HOME STATE, in hopes that they will summon up the intestinal fortitude to meet together with the object of founding a state organization that will comply with their state's requirements, and create a viable state affiliate to the National ARP.
This is a very important step, and one, unfortunately, the we as a national organization can do very little to help.
We have no money, nor do we have an expert in each state who can tell you what the next steps must be.
[There are organizations that HAVE such information/expertise, such as Richard Wingers "Ballot Access News" at http://www.ballot-access.org ]
Fortunately, there are TWO avenues of organization where we can help: I have already mentioned that we are going to start posting the names and
addresses (as well as E-addresses) on the state website link, of those members already in your state..
PLEASE NOTE: BEFORE THIS IS DONE, YOU WILL BE NOTIFIED AND ASKED FOR PERMISSION.
MEANWHILE, I SHALL ASK OUR WEBMASTER TO ADD THIS QUERY TO THE APPLICATION FORM, SO THAT FUTURE PROSPECTS DO NOT HAVE TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT THEIR IDENTITY.
SECOND, We already have in operation a process to evaluate/endorse
third party/independent candidates wishing our endorsement. This will bring the name of the America Reform Party forward to that local 'public' who are most concerned about the election of their "favorite son", and who we hope will continue to smile favorably upon us, win or lose.
If there are any questions, or points you wish to have clarified, please e-mail me direct.
David Repko
Chair, pro tem
The National Committee
The American Reform Party
Collegeville PA
July 15, 2001 Current Issue - Click Here
Dear Readers,
I was the third National Committee member from Pennsylvania before I got this job. The first guy quit, so I was appointed to replace him. My partner, the other National Committee member is Bettyjean Kling of Shippensburg, somewhere in the wilds of the western end of Pennsylvania. She also happens to be Roy Downing's daughter, and a person I consider a friend.
She wrote me a long e-mail letter tonight, and, after you've read it, you will understand why I chose to make it my next Repko-bate column:
| Hi David,
I once told you that I wished I could write. You told me to try and even offered to read it. Your only comment was that it should make you feel something. This morning I wrote something. Its a poem to my son for his birthday this Sunday. It's hokey and certainly not a literary giant but it should make a reader feel something. I think have captured the essence of my son's life in these few lines and I hope it comes through. I would love nothing more than to share this poem with the world as a tribute to my son. If you know of anywhere that I can submit it where it can be shared let me know. Thanks for taking the time to read it. Mikie's Mom, BJ
|
~ David Repko
National Chair, pro tem
I have been remiss in keeping this column to a weekly schedule. I will try to make up for it by including a short story I wrote for the 4th of July issue of my hometown paper a few years back.
Meanwhile, I would like to request a little enthusiasm from our membership for the upcoming Convention. It will be held in Schaumburg, Illinois, the birthplace of the American Reform Party, dates and times not yet finalized, but tentatively, middle or late September. Since this will be primarily a 'working' Convention, there will only be one speaker. I cannot reveal a name at this time, suffice to say it will be a person of some renown.
In order to spark some of that enthusiasm I requested, I would like those members who are on line, but not presently subscribed to the ARP-Issues reflector, to do so, for I think it is time to sketch out a Convention Agenda.
To get the ball rolling, here are the items I would personally like to see accomplished:
I am sure there are other suggestions out there, and I want to here them from you, the 'owners' of this Party.
[Note: For those who are online, and know someone who is not, PLEASE pass them a hard copy of this announcement. I want to have as much member feedback as possible as to what the final agenda ought to be.
Thanks. Hope you like my little story.
We stared at the old man making his way across the crowded intersection. He wore rumpled, mismatched clothes and had an old knit cap pulled down almost to his ears, in spite of the hot July sun beating down on the spectators. His coat was what we called an Ike jacket years ago. It was decorated with all sorts of military badges and patches. I say spectators, for that is what we were. We were waiting for the start of the annual Fourth of July parade. Later, there would be a community picnic, and that evening there would be fireworks in the city park.
The old man was pushing a rusty old shopping cart filled with what most people would consider junk. His face was obviously not on good terms with a razor, and the stubble on his chin was white. This was no over-the hill hippie from the Vietnam era, I thought. Too old for that.
As he passed by, some of the people shrank back to avoid physical contact, or turned their heads. Some little rogues held their noses and made rude noises, but he ignored them. With face straight ahead and back ramrod straight, he claimed a place on the sidewalk for his own and waited for the parade to begin. A police car drove by slowly, and I could see the occupants eyeing the old man with obvious circumspection, but they continued on down the street without stopping.
Presently, I heard martial music approaching from the direction of the high school stadium, where the parade marshals had organized the marchers. Soon the mayor's bright red convertible came around the corner, accompanied by the sheriff's posse on horseback. Behind them came the flag bearers and the color guard, members of the local VFW post. Finally, the high school band, complete with majorettes and baton-twirlers, led the rest of the marchers past the reviewing stand where the mayor and his entourage of local notables had disembarked.
I noticed that the old man had become nervous and fidgety as the Stars and Stripes drew closer to where he stood. Moments later, as the flags were about to pass, he buttoned up his jacket and began to rummage through the shopping cart. Presently, he uncovered a beat up looking round box, opened it, doffed his dirty knit cap and took from the box an old-fashioned officer's garrison cap, in mint condition, complete with glittering gold spread eagle. This he carefully placed on his head, making sure that the brim was the regulation two inches from his nose. Just then the flags passed him and, as they did so, he came to attention and saluted!
Patriot is not a dirty word.
There has been some confusion/dissension on the recent decision --- and subsequent announcement by the National Executive Committee, --- to establish a $20/member annual 'fee'. One objection is that most states have made 'dues', 'fees', 'contributions', 'donations' (whatever you want to call them) illegal as a requirement for 'membership' to a political party.
This is true.
What is NOT being mentioned (by those who ought to know better) is that there is no such thing as a national political party in the United States, as far as *I*am aware. All 'political parties' exist at the state level (hence, the phrase "all politics is local"). That being the case, the NATIONAL organization of a 'political party' is a FORMAL AFFILIATION OF STATE PARTIES, and 'exists', *formally*, only while a Convention of Delegates of these affiliated state parties is in session. BETWEEN CONVENTIONS, that body of affiliated delegates has authorized and empowered, through the Party Constitution, intermediate bodies of organization, composed of members of the several affiliated states, TO ACT AS THEIR AGENTS, for the sole purpose of maintaining the structure and goals of the articles of affiliation (usually referred to as the 'Platform', or 'Statement of Principles', or 'Mission Statement'), and to act as custodians of the various properties, real and/or intangible, that facilitate the continuation of the affiliation on a day-to-day basis. ONLY THOSE MEMBERS OF THE NATIONAL ORGANIZATION (Convention Delegates, National and National Executive Committee Members and National Officers, members of Standing and Special Committees) are being asked to contribute $20 each, TO THE NATIONAL ORGANIZATION ITSELF (in other words, pool their donations to themselves). There are two reasons why this motion was made, seconded and passed by the National Executive Committee, and well within the definition of "delegated authority" under the present Party Constitution.
First, in between Elections, contributions to the national organization from friends, members and well-wishers, are few and far between. Also at this time, it is worth stressing the fact that we will not knowingly accept 'soft money' contributions from any source! Unlike the Congress of the United States, we are not for sale to the highest bidder!
But there ARE expenses in maintaining, and *growing* a societal organization, such as a political party. One such expense is the *hoped-for* National Convention, required by the ARP Constitution, to elect National Officers, in odd-numbered years. [Yes, my 'pro tem' position comes up for grabs, so ALL of you get a chance to 'do me in' --- 'virtually speaking'. {:>)] We also wish to re-instate the newsletter, which reaches many non-members, often, individuals who have either money, or 'clout' or both --- but whom we do not necessarily expect to become members, let alone *activist* members. This newsletter incurs printing and mailing expenses.
We also have some impressive phone bills.
And the Web site is NOT 'free' --- The PARTY just doesn't pay for it.
None of this money is earmarked for any non-Party personal use by anybody in the Party. There are no salaries/wages being paid to anyone; on the contrary, many of us in the national organization spend hundreds of dollars, and unpaid hours, on errands of necessity, for the national organization to continue to function.
This is not right; this is not fair.
Yet, even WE, who are spending our own time and money, are sending in our 20 bucks, too. So I don't think it's venal or unfeeling of us to have decided that the practice of 'free' national membership is now discontinued.
[After all, how else can those of us who live in an as-yet-un-organized geographical area be expected to feel themselves as part of the whole, without something so simple as a membership card --- "paid-in-full"?]
Besides, we are not cruel, crass, heartless folks --- like the IRS or the county assistance workers. Just tell us, privately, that you truly cannot afford the twenty dollars; you will still get your membership card.
FINALLY, please be reassured that SENDING US $20.00 is not breaking the law! If your own state Secretary of State disapproves, send her [ {:>)] to us. We can probably find pro bono lawyers quite willing to 'instruct' said person as to the legal definitions of 'fee/contribution/donation/dues' to 'national' political committees.
That said, I am asking Roy Downing to place this open letter on the Website, under my "Repko-bate" column, for this week.
In reform,
Dave
"... if your number is selected..."
At present, I am ungainfully, unprofessionally employed in playing about 27 Internet sweepstakes. For a while, after I was 'downsized' out of my job at age 60, I was similarly employed in what is euphemistically known as "freelance writing". Well, maybe not exactly "ungainfully". I did sell a few 'shorties' to various magazines and local newspapers. {end para}
[Go to www.geocities.com/SouthBeach/Strand/5536 click on "Story Corner". Some of them no longer belong to me, but Yahoo! won't give me access anymore because I won't sign their dumb release form, so I can't delete. Or add. Or edit. Oh, well ...]{end para}
So-o-o-o-o, I keep poking Lady Luck in the ribs, and looking out the front window for the Prize Patrol van. If she does happen to bring my ship in one day, I'll probably be out at the airport. {end para}
So one day, I got this brilliant idea --- I attempted to enter the American Reform Party in the "Name" field of the sweepstakes entry form. (Hey, you never know, man ...) To my dismay, I couldn't find one sweepstakes that would accept an entry from a political Party! Which means, I gotta do it the old fashioned way. Beg. {end para}
But I'm going to try to do this with a bit of class.
The Party needs money. But more important, we need folks who know how to go about getting money on a regular basis. And, since we obviously don't have any money, we can't pay anyone to get it for us --- on a regular basis. So I am asking for volunteers, members now, or hopefully one day, to contact me at my phone number, ubiquitous throughout the Website. [I like that word, 'ubiquitous'. The first time I saw it, it was in an ad for telephone booths ...] In lieu of cash I am prepared to lavish the impressive title of Chair, National Ways and Means Committee, American Reform Party. Pro tem, of course. {end para}
And I am still hopeful that I will soon get at least one volunteer from each state to seek out, and help us evaluate local candidates for public office who would like to have the ARP endorsement on their campaign literature. {end para} If you are interested enough in seeking out this site, you must have already realized that it's going to take folks like us to help save this country for folks like us. Please call. Please write. Please help us help each other while we still can.
May 14, 2001 Current Issue - Click Here
When the species finally got past feudalism, modern man reached for religion, got Cardinals and lost some freedom. Later, we tried aristocracy, got the nobility, and lost some freedom. Later still, we tried monarchy, got a king (or a queen), and lost some freedom. Then some of us tried an old chestnut from the days of the Romans and the Greeks, the Republic --- but with a twist of democracy added, for flavor.
For a while, we got a bureaucracy, and lost a very little freedom, but we also got rid of the worst of all possible governments, a ruling class. There were a few millions, here and there who tried slightly different approaches. There were the Fascists, who got Hitler, and the Communists, who got Stalin; but they were more 'hero' cults than forms of government, and lasted no longer than their heroes. Irrelevant, as far as this discussion of "forms of government" is concerned.
So, until it was some seventy-five years of age, our democratic [representative] form of republicanism survived one Revolution and a few smaller 'invasion'-type wars. For a while, it looked like we had a good thing going; little loss of personal freedom, relatively speaking, and no idle, wasteful elite ruling class to suck the fruits of our labor and the creativity of our individuality and give back nothing in return but injustices.
Then, something went wrong.
The very fiber of our government, representative democracy started to unravel. Special interest groups, rather than becoming part of the national fabric, began to add a snarl here, a snag there, until the basic pattern became so distorted that the owners of the loom, "We, the People," began to forget what the original 'weave', a protest for freedom and a revolt against tyranny, was all about. They began to believe more in the power of politics than they did in the purpose of politics, namely, our own self-government. Instead, the more ambitious of us began to promote the idea that partisan politics was/is a better idea than patriotism and statesmanship.
Today, that concept has become so deeply ingrained into our national political activities that many of us have discovered that "We, the People, ..." no longer have representatives who represent US, but who represent their new masters, the Corporations. It has become so apparent, that a new term for partisan politics has been coined to describe this phenomenon, "Republicratism"!
This term, used contemptuously, manifests its claim to authenticity in every election, but most emphatically in every national election. It does so in the overwhelming numbers of eligible voters that don't show up on election day! The FACT is, more people in this country DO NOT Vote, than do. And a large percentage of those that DO vote, are registered [where registration by Party is possible] as "independent". That means (and I spell it out deliberately), they do not believe in partisan politics, because they correctly believe that, although there are many factions, and many divisive issues, there is only one political party with any real power in the United States today, and that is the Republicratic Party, otherwise known as "the Corporation".
Further proof of this is the FACT that, all together, ALL the third (or minor) party votes did not change ONE vote in the Electoral College, last election. The combined weight of the fictional two major parties, the Republicrats, have been so successful in eliminating the competition through punitive ballot access laws and complex political party regulations, that no serious group of voters, acting alone, can undercut the national political scene by way of traditional methods.
Third parties, following traditional political methods, are a waste of time. And money. Even all the current talk of coalitions and mergers is a tempest in a teapot, using traditional methods. Hero worship movements, like Perot's Reform Party, can only go as far as their heroes can take them, and when the heroes fade away, so do the hero worshippers.
So, if partisan politics doesn't work, if coalitions/mergers don't work, if candidate hero worship doesn't work, if even the money of millionaires won't work, is there ANYTHING that might?
Well, I have a possibility that might.
Lately, even before I became National Chair, PRO TEM, I read a lot of negativistic talk about the futility of it all; where was the ARP going, was it really going anywhere, was it even possible for it to go anywhere, and how? Would it not be better to just have one big blowout, one last hurrah, and go on our separate ways? I don't think so. That's how the country has gotten into the situation it is now in. (I feel pretty sure that I was, if not the last resort, at least the second to last, to be the National Chair. I'm glad I was asked.)
So, since traditional partisan politics has been proven to be a dead end, which way can we turn? Well, it takes TWO things to get the brass ring in politics, and that's MONEY and VOTES. We can forget coalitions, mergers and conventional 'party-building'. The American people are not interested in 'telephone booth' and 'living room' political parties; if they were, third parties would already have thousands and millions of members. But there are SOME folks out there who would like to hear from us, and that is the candidates. Not THE candidates, they already have the corporate money and the Republicratic nominations/endorsements. What WE need to be looking for are the little-to-medium guys, those candidates who are running against otherwise UN-opposed Republicrats, or against such an unpopular choice between two devil Republicrats, that they have a chance to do the major party 'duopoly' some real damage in their home town, home county, or home state legislature. Maybe, someday, a handful of US Representatives and a US Senator or two. And we don't have the money!
We need votes, fellow ARP-ers, and we need INDEPENDENT and THIRD PARTY candidates to spend those votes on. Maybe we can't offer a lot of big bucks, but we can offer people to put up signs, staff candidate booths at fairs and festivals, solicit petitions, etc.; but MOST OF ALL, we need to have candidates to endorse! Yes, that's what I said, we need candidates! Hundreds, maybe even thousands of candidates, who will put our name on their campaign literature!"Endorsed by the American Reform Party!"
It doesn't make any difference that we are small --- we are a Party! And, even if they do not win any particular election, their friends will remember our name. (Maybe even a few will join!) If they do win, we are bound to get a little of the credit --- and credit has a way of growing, in politics.
However, I don't want to give the wrong impression; we DO have a Party Platform, with basic issues we wish to promote --- starting with a return to self-government. To that end, there is posted elsewhere in one of the archives of this Website, a Statement of that Platform, and a prospective candidate questionnaire based on that Statement. I would like all of you readers, and ARP members, to canvass your political scene, local, county, parish, state, and Congressional District for potential candidates who can agree with AT LEAST 80 percent of that questionnaire. Further, I want all ARP members to give careful consideration to volunteering on what may end up being the largest Special Committee in the American Reform Party, the Electoral Strategy Special Committee. It is this committee's job to seek out prospective candidates whom we think might qualify for our Party endorsement, and who would appreciate having such endorsement. To that end, these volunteers will be asked to approach candidates, search out their political records (if they have any), be part of the national ARP staff of the ESSC in custom-tailoring the basic questionnaire for all levels of government in your geographical area, and asking those candidates to respond to that questionnaire, directly to the national ARP, for consideration of endorsement. THEN, if we do so endorse them, contact and /or help with any volunteer work for their campaign that you feel is within your means.
REMEMBER, we are seeking to build our Party, so we cannot offer our endorsement to major party mavericks unless they cease to be Republi-Crats. We are in a war, a non-shooting war, but a war nevertheless, and the enemy are the "corporate business-as-usual" Republicrat sell-outs now running this country for the New Elitists, the Corporate royalty, the wannbe Rulers of the World of Tomorrow --- with our children as their slaves and playthings.
~ David Repko
National Chair, pro tem
May 7, 2001 - The First Issue of The Repko-Bate Current Issue - Click Here
I've never been part of the furniture before. I've been a president, an editor, a general manager and a Group Commander (in the Civil Air Patrol), but I've never had anyone address me as "Mr. Chair."
It gets worse. Being that I am just filling in the remainder of the term of Ted Muga, our former Chair, I am "Chair, pro tem." "Pro tem". A Latin phrase meaning, "Keep a sharp eye on this guy; he might not be around very long." So, not only am I part of the furniture, but there's a good chance I may be destined for a yard sale! Well, que sera, sera, whatever will be, will be. Meanwhile, since I will be around for a little while, at least, let's get to know each other.
I am 66 years old, live in Collegeville, a small town in southeastern Pennsylvania, near Valley Forge, and have been happily divorced for more years than I was married. I spent two years attending what is now Carnegie-Mellon Institute, in Pittsburgh, PA, where I eventually fell in love, got married and had four children --- although not necessarily in that order. I am divorced, my children are all grown and gone, leaving me with nothing much to do but go to work every day (I am/was an industrial paint and coatings chemist, now retired) and think up different ways to get into mischief --- like, political activism, an avocation perhaps better suited to younger men and women.
When I first decided to single-handedly reform my country and my government, I figured it would be a good idea to get to know a few like-minded people, so I joined the Pennsylvania Patriot Party in 1995. Within six months I was soliciting petition signatures for Ross Perot, and was no longer a Patriot.
If that sentence doesn't seem to follow, you haven't been around this neighborhood very long.
In 1996, I went to my first political Convention in Valley Forge, at the Sheraton Hotel and Convention Center. Where I should have been, at the time, was at the Parkview Hotel, about a mile down the road, where another 'revolution' was brewing. I had been informed that a bunch of malcontents and troublemakers were having their own little mini-convention. This group, along with the volunteers of the "United We Stand, America", were those to whom Russ Verney was referring when he made his now notorious observation, "It's like trying to herd cats." Later, these "cats" came to call themselves the "National Steering Committee of the Reform Party" at first, then finally, the American Reform Party.
For two years after the split, I pronounced a plague upon both their houses, and confined my activism to lurking and sniping from the safety of "non-involvement". I had started writing a book, "The History of the Perot Reform Movement", hoping to stem the inevitable tide of growing factions within the movement and the Reform Party itself. I gave up the idea when I realized I was not going to be able to finish the book in time to prevent the coming debacle. I 'officially' joined the American Reform Party at the last Convention in Washington, DC.
~ David Repko
National Chair, pro tem
The Repro-Bate is a series of weekly columns from David Repko
The Repro-Bate is a series of columns from David Repko, former ARP Vice-Chairman
If we are ever successful in this effort, our philosophy will then be "populist" thereby, and more representative of the Democratic Republic we profess ourselves to be a government,
"OF the People, BY the People, and FOR the People."
~David J. Repko, former National Chair, author of The Repko-Bate
What's
New? |
Repko-Bate Series
| State
Links |
Platform
|
Constitution
| Press
Releases
ARP Issues |
ARP Candidates
|
Archives
|
Convention
|
Membership
|
Contributions
|
Contact
Us
©1998-2006:
American Reform Party
Website Designed, Updated,
Maintained & Hosted by ON
IT Industries
