Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
We've now determined that you are a liar, as well.They were used as election targets and Palin never said she want Giffords shot. Sharpton's group did.
I don't need Sarah Palin to tell me that those are gun targets.The two don't go together, because Sarah Palin never called for anyone to die in her words spoken during an interview or speech she has given, and if by chance she did in which I don't know about, then yes a few dots maybe added pertaining to possible flame stoking. No one should call for any harm to come to anyone when politicking or campaigning etc. and I mean what so ever.It's one or the other - are the protestors and Sarah Barracuda both to blame, or are they both not to blame?
They were used as election targets and Palin never said she want Giffords shot. Sharpton's group did.
Some liberals are a little bit wacky I think. Maybe it's because they smoke too much weed or something.
Yep, but in his case I think it was more about not wanting to get arrested again, so he had that sort of stress level going on, and this was just for the cops being there to deal with him once again. I took him as basically like a child that begins to exhibit fear because of what was about to happen to him in the way of punishment (i.e. being arrested in this case), because he knew that he had been caught yet again being a problem in the area. When he began to resist, it was almost as a child resisting a parent attempting to punish him for being bad. I think he had slight mental problems from being on the street hustling for way to long.Did you know that Taser's are lethal, and so are Batons and/or Approved holds and/or some Take downs in rare instances ? It all just depends on the health of the person being dealt with, and how each of these methods work or affect the individual that is being arrested. People have had heart attacks just from the stress alone of being addressed by an officer(s), and some take downs can result in death if not extremely careful with any individual who has a super fast heart rate all of a sudden. Officers don't have time to ask a person is your health good, and so we hope it is because we are fixing to have to arrest you, and if you resist and for some reason die on us, then know that we don't mean any harm to you, so please don't harm yourself in the event of your arrest right ?Taser. Baton. Pepper Spray. Approved holds and takedowns.Must be your convoluted writing style.I never said that he was, so what are you talking about ? I believe if anyone is confused here it is you, and maybe you need a course in reading comprehension, because your not very good at analyzing or interpreting peoples words correctly here at all.
If they used non-lethal force he would still be alive.
Such as? Give us some examples of the non-lethal force you are referring to please.
The fact that there were 5 officers there and one very fat, out of shape citizen.
Absolutely. Almost any method used to take a person down has the potential of causing injury or death. A person could even bump his or her head on the ground! That is why you should not fight with the police but wait until your day in court. That is one reason WHY we have courts, so that you can take up grievances in a civilized manner instead of getting into a street brawl.
Yep, but in his case I think it was more about not wanting to get arrested again, so he had that sort of stress level going on, and this was just for the cops being there to deal with him once again. I took him as basically like a child that begins to exhibit fear because of what was about to happen to him in the way of punishment (i.e. being arrested in this case), because he knew that he had been caught yet again being a problem in the area. When he began to resist, it was almost as a child resisting a parent attempting to punish him for being bad. I think he had slight mental problems from being on the street hustling for way to long.Did you know that Taser's are lethal, and so are Batons and/or Approved holds and/or some Take downs in rare instances ? It all just depends on the health of the person being dealt with, and how each of these methods work or affect the individual that is being arrested. People have had heart attacks just from the stress alone of being addressed by an officer(s), and some take downs can result in death if not extremely careful with any individual who has a super fast heart rate all of a sudden. Officers don't have time to ask a person is your health good, and so we hope it is because we are fixing to have to arrest you, and if you resist and for some reason die on us, then know that we don't mean any harm to you, so please don't harm yourself in the event of your arrest right ?Taser. Baton. Pepper Spray. Approved holds and takedowns.Must be your convoluted writing style.
If they used non-lethal force he would still be alive.
Such as? Give us some examples of the non-lethal force you are referring to please.
The fact that there were 5 officers there and one very fat, out of shape citizen.
Absolutely. Almost any method used to take a person down has the potential of causing injury or death. A person could even bump his or her head on the ground! That is why you should not fight with the police but wait until your day in court. That is one reason WHY we have courts, so that you can take up grievances in a civilized manner instead of getting into a street brawl.
You're inability to prove you're not a liar is noted.We've now determined that you are a liar, as well.They were used as election targets and Palin never said she want Giffords shot. Sharpton's group did.
Oh, go fuck yourself, you pathetic ignorant loser.
True. I should have been there to stop the killer's bullet from hitting Mike Brown.As with 9/11, the one thing we can all say is
that NONE of us did enough to stop the killing because it happened.
Had ANY of us done enough to prevent it, it would not have occurred.
True. I should have been there to stop the killer's bullet from hitting Mike Brown.As with 9/11, the one thing we can all say is
that NONE of us did enough to stop the killing because it happened.
Had ANY of us done enough to prevent it, it would not have occurred.
Dear Synthaholic
What I mean is I wasn't there to talk Michael Brown and his friends into making better decisions
than to go around grabbing property from businesses or whatever they were doing. Now I hear
there may be other video footage of Brown doing criminal or violent things.
That is where more people can make a difference. Even regular folks like me.
I can, however, say things to my coworkers about their social expectations,
and where this mentality comes from that it's "okay" to steal or freeload off others
"who are better off." And not expecting thieves to pay back what they steal "if they can't afford it."
I challenged my coworkers at my job on that mentality that I found shocking!
They didn't believe people imprisoned for theft should be held responsible for paying it back,
because "they weren't going to do that anyway." I couldn't believe it, couldn't accept that answer, and told them it wasn't right to keep expecting taxpayers to pay for the crimes of others. Why should we as working citizens get more taken out of our paycheck, and our insurance rates go up, when the thousands we spend on inmates per year could already pay for health care without having to dish out more money? They never thought of that.
So that still may not be "enough" to prevent crime yet, but if it starts people thinking
about Accountability, and to quit taking things for granted as paid for by taxes,
maybe we'll start to own up and grow up as a society instead of letting this mentality go unchecked.
Why wait for another Michael Brown to get shot after stealing something?
Why keep paying 50K a year for each person in prison, who isn't expected to work to pay the costs of their own crimes, and then have "no money"
to pay for health care for lawabiding citizens and their families working for an honest living?
Why not intervene at the first sign of a troubled attitude,
and help these young men to step up to the plate and quit setting themselves up to fail as victims.
Why keep paying the cost of crime, several times over, and then complain we don't take home enough money from our paychecks to cover costs of living, education, health care and housing when people in prison are getting all that paid for at taxpayer expense. Does this make any sense?
True. I should have been there to stop the killer's bullet from hitting Mike Brown.As with 9/11, the one thing we can all say is
that NONE of us did enough to stop the killing because it happened.
Had ANY of us done enough to prevent it, it would not have occurred.
Dear Synthaholic
What I mean is I wasn't there to talk Michael Brown and his friends into making better decisions
than to go around grabbing property from businesses or whatever they were doing. Now I hear
there may be other video footage of Brown doing criminal or violent things.
That is where more people can make a difference. Even regular folks like me.
I can, however, say things to my coworkers about their social expectations,
and where this mentality comes from that it's "okay" to steal or freeload off others
"who are better off." And not expecting thieves to pay back what they steal "if they can't afford it."
I challenged my coworkers at my job on that mentality that I found shocking!
They didn't believe people imprisoned for theft should be held responsible for paying it back,
because "they weren't going to do that anyway." I couldn't believe it, couldn't accept that answer, and told them it wasn't right to keep expecting taxpayers to pay for the crimes of others. Why should we as working citizens get more taken out of our paycheck, and our insurance rates go up, when the thousands we spend on inmates per year could already pay for health care without having to dish out more money? They never thought of that.
So that still may not be "enough" to prevent crime yet, but if it starts people thinking
about Accountability, and to quit taking things for granted as paid for by taxes,
maybe we'll start to own up and grow up as a society instead of letting this mentality go unchecked.
Why wait for another Michael Brown to get shot after stealing something?
Why keep paying 50K a year for each person in prison, who isn't expected to work to pay the costs of their own crimes, and then have "no money"
to pay for health care for lawabiding citizens and their families working for an honest living?
Why not intervene at the first sign of a troubled attitude,
and help these young men to step up to the plate and quit setting themselves up to fail as victims.
Why keep paying the cost of crime, several times over, and then complain we don't take home enough money from our paychecks to cover costs of living, education, health care and housing when people in prison are getting all that paid for at taxpayer expense. Does this make any sense?
Great post Emily! Makes a TON of sense, but you can probably expect this for an answer
True. I should have been there to stop the killer's bullet from hitting Mike Brown.As with 9/11, the one thing we can all say is
that NONE of us did enough to stop the killing because it happened.
Had ANY of us done enough to prevent it, it would not have occurred.
Dear Synthaholic
What I mean is I wasn't there to talk Michael Brown and his friends into making better decisions
than to go around grabbing property from businesses or whatever they were doing. Now I hear
there may be other video footage of Brown doing criminal or violent things.
That is where more people can make a difference. Even regular folks like me.
I can, however, say things to my coworkers about their social expectations,
and where this mentality comes from that it's "okay" to steal or freeload off others
"who are better off." And not expecting thieves to pay back what they steal "if they can't afford it."
I challenged my coworkers at my job on that mentality that I found shocking!
They didn't believe people imprisoned for theft should be held responsible for paying it back,
because "they weren't going to do that anyway." I couldn't believe it, couldn't accept that answer, and told them it wasn't right to keep expecting taxpayers to pay for the crimes of others. Why should we as working citizens get more taken out of our paycheck, and our insurance rates go up, when the thousands we spend on inmates per year could already pay for health care without having to dish out more money? They never thought of that.
So that still may not be "enough" to prevent crime yet, but if it starts people thinking
about Accountability, and to quit taking things for granted as paid for by taxes,
maybe we'll start to own up and grow up as a society instead of letting this mentality go unchecked.
Why wait for another Michael Brown to get shot after stealing something?
Why keep paying 50K a year for each person in prison, who isn't expected to work to pay the costs of their own crimes, and then have "no money"
to pay for health care for lawabiding citizens and their families working for an honest living?
Why not intervene at the first sign of a troubled attitude,
and help these young men to step up to the plate and quit setting themselves up to fail as victims.
Why keep paying the cost of crime, several times over, and then complain we don't take home enough money from our paychecks to cover costs of living, education, health care and housing when people in prison are getting all that paid for at taxpayer expense. Does this make any sense?
Great post Emily! Makes a TON of sense, but you can probably expect this for an answer
What I ususally get as an answer is
"I hear what you're saying, but 'NO ONE ELSE' is going to change anything."
Ie each person thinks because OTHER people aren't going to respond,
they don't bother asking.
Isn't that sad, like each person on their own would have AGREED and liked to change things,
but keeps waiting to see how OTHER people are going to respond first.
It takes a while for people to get how much power and influence we do have.
That if just 2 or 3 people, maybe 5 get together and start a campaign,
other people might jump up and say why not? that actually makes sense! And get more ppl on board.
Over several months of talking about this, off and on,
one of my coworkers went from not thinking he had any chance or influence on what politicians did.
So why bother asking or complaining, since once you elect people they are just going to 'keep doing the same thing anyway'
to thinking what if he learned enough about how to manage people and business where he could run for office someday.
And one of my friends who ran for President twice to study how accessible and affordable it was
for the average small business person to conduct a common sense campaign,
also reported a similar effect on people. Someone he met on the campaign trail who naysayed the idea of
running for President, since only the very richest people with political influence can get anywhere and the rest
get "labeled" as nutcases (my friend Vern is a well respected business owner and common sense person
so he was very hard to label as a nutcase, and caused people to do a doubletake trying to figure him out).
But then over time, this very person came out and was considering running for President or another public office.
So it seems that person had a change in attitude, that the first step is to push for change, and not to be passive
waiting on other people. We'll only get political bozo's in office if only the same people who lie to get ahead run for office.
At some point the honest working people need to get pushing.
Without getting labeled nutcases or teabaggers etc. and demonized for wanting sensible change and govt reforms
that quit dumping larger burdens and debts on the taxpayers to pay for while govt runs amok. At some point the
people are going to have to stand up and put our feet down and quit allowed politician to run unchecked at our expense.
You're inability to prove you're not a liar is noted.We've now determined that you are a liar, as well.They were used as election targets and Palin never said she want Giffords shot. Sharpton's group did.
Oh, go fuck yourself, you pathetic ignorant loser.
You're way out of your league, kid.
True. I should have been there to stop the killer's bullet from hitting Mike Brown.As with 9/11, the one thing we can all say is
that NONE of us did enough to stop the killing because it happened.
Had ANY of us done enough to prevent it, it would not have occurred.
Dear Synthaholic
What I mean is I wasn't there to talk Michael Brown and his friends into making better decisions
than to go around grabbing property from businesses or whatever they were doing. Now I hear
there may be other video footage of Brown doing criminal or violent things.
That is where more people can make a difference. Even regular folks like me.
I can, however, say things to my coworkers about their social expectations,
and where this mentality comes from that it's "okay" to steal or freeload off others
"who are better off." And not expecting thieves to pay back what they steal "if they can't afford it."
I challenged my coworkers at my job on that mentality that I found shocking!
They didn't believe people imprisoned for theft should be held responsible for paying it back,
because "they weren't going to do that anyway." I couldn't believe it, couldn't accept that answer, and told them it wasn't right to keep expecting taxpayers to pay for the crimes of others. Why should we as working citizens get more taken out of our paycheck, and our insurance rates go up, when the thousands we spend on inmates per year could already pay for health care without having to dish out more money? They never thought of that.
So that still may not be "enough" to prevent crime yet, but if it starts people thinking
about Accountability, and to quit taking things for granted as paid for by taxes,
maybe we'll start to own up and grow up as a society instead of letting this mentality go unchecked.
Why wait for another Michael Brown to get shot after stealing something?
Why keep paying 50K a year for each person in prison, who isn't expected to work to pay the costs of their own crimes, and then have "no money"
to pay for health care for lawabiding citizens and their families working for an honest living?
Why not intervene at the first sign of a troubled attitude,
and help these young men to step up to the plate and quit setting themselves up to fail as victims.
Why keep paying the cost of crime, several times over, and then complain we don't take home enough money from our paychecks to cover costs of living, education, health care and housing when people in prison are getting all that paid for at taxpayer expense. Does this make any sense?
Great post Emily! Makes a TON of sense, but you can probably expect this for an answer
What I ususally get as an answer is
"I hear what you're saying, but 'NO ONE ELSE' is going to change anything."
Ie each person thinks because OTHER people aren't going to respond,
they don't bother asking.
Isn't that sad, like each person on their own would have AGREED and liked to change things,
but keeps waiting to see how OTHER people are going to respond first.
It takes a while for people to get how much power and influence we do have.
That if just 2 or 3 people, maybe 5 get together and start a campaign,
other people might jump up and say why not? that actually makes sense! And get more ppl on board.
Over several months of talking about this, off and on,
one of my coworkers went from not thinking he had any chance or influence on what politicians did.
So why bother asking or complaining, since once you elect people they are just going to 'keep doing the same thing anyway'
to thinking what if he learned enough about how to manage people and business where he could run for office someday.
And one of my friends who ran for President twice to study how accessible and affordable it was
for the average small business person to conduct a common sense campaign,
also reported a similar effect on people. Someone he met on the campaign trail who naysayed the idea of
running for President, since only the very richest people with political influence can get anywhere and the rest
get "labeled" as nutcases (my friend Vern is a well respected business owner and common sense person
so he was very hard to label as a nutcase, and caused people to do a doubletake trying to figure him out).
But then over time, this very person came out and was considering running for President or another public office.
So it seems that person had a change in attitude, that the first step is to push for change, and not to be passive
waiting on other people. We'll only get political bozo's in office if only the same people who lie to get ahead run for office.
At some point the honest working people need to get pushing.
Without getting labeled nutcases or teabaggers etc. and demonized for wanting sensible change and govt reforms
that quit dumping larger burdens and debts on the taxpayers to pay for while govt runs amok. At some point the
people are going to have to stand up and put our feet down and quit allowed politician to run unchecked at our expense.
Unfortunately, I think before any meaningful reforms can happen, we need to level out the playing field so that those lesser known and less wealthy candidates who really do care about America and the American people can have a chance at winning elections to make those changes from within.
True. I should have been there to stop the killer's bullet from hitting Mike Brown.
Dear Synthaholic
What I mean is I wasn't there to talk Michael Brown and his friends into making better decisions
than to go around grabbing property from businesses or whatever they were doing. Now I hear
there may be other video footage of Brown doing criminal or violent things.
That is where more people can make a difference. Even regular folks like me.
I can, however, say things to my coworkers about their social expectations,
and where this mentality comes from that it's "okay" to steal or freeload off others
"who are better off." And not expecting thieves to pay back what they steal "if they can't afford it."
I challenged my coworkers at my job on that mentality that I found shocking!
They didn't believe people imprisoned for theft should be held responsible for paying it back,
because "they weren't going to do that anyway." I couldn't believe it, couldn't accept that answer, and told them it wasn't right to keep expecting taxpayers to pay for the crimes of others. Why should we as working citizens get more taken out of our paycheck, and our insurance rates go up, when the thousands we spend on inmates per year could already pay for health care without having to dish out more money? They never thought of that.
So that still may not be "enough" to prevent crime yet, but if it starts people thinking
about Accountability, and to quit taking things for granted as paid for by taxes,
maybe we'll start to own up and grow up as a society instead of letting this mentality go unchecked.
Why wait for another Michael Brown to get shot after stealing something?
Why keep paying 50K a year for each person in prison, who isn't expected to work to pay the costs of their own crimes, and then have "no money"
to pay for health care for lawabiding citizens and their families working for an honest living?
Why not intervene at the first sign of a troubled attitude,
and help these young men to step up to the plate and quit setting themselves up to fail as victims.
Why keep paying the cost of crime, several times over, and then complain we don't take home enough money from our paychecks to cover costs of living, education, health care and housing when people in prison are getting all that paid for at taxpayer expense. Does this make any sense?
Great post Emily! Makes a TON of sense, but you can probably expect this for an answer
What I ususally get as an answer is
"I hear what you're saying, but 'NO ONE ELSE' is going to change anything."
Ie each person thinks because OTHER people aren't going to respond,
they don't bother asking.
Isn't that sad, like each person on their own would have AGREED and liked to change things,
but keeps waiting to see how OTHER people are going to respond first.
It takes a while for people to get how much power and influence we do have.
That if just 2 or 3 people, maybe 5 get together and start a campaign,
other people might jump up and say why not? that actually makes sense! And get more ppl on board.
Over several months of talking about this, off and on,
one of my coworkers went from not thinking he had any chance or influence on what politicians did.
So why bother asking or complaining, since once you elect people they are just going to 'keep doing the same thing anyway'
to thinking what if he learned enough about how to manage people and business where he could run for office someday.
And one of my friends who ran for President twice to study how accessible and affordable it was
for the average small business person to conduct a common sense campaign,
also reported a similar effect on people. Someone he met on the campaign trail who naysayed the idea of
running for President, since only the very richest people with political influence can get anywhere and the rest
get "labeled" as nutcases (my friend Vern is a well respected business owner and common sense person
so he was very hard to label as a nutcase, and caused people to do a doubletake trying to figure him out).
But then over time, this very person came out and was considering running for President or another public office.
So it seems that person had a change in attitude, that the first step is to push for change, and not to be passive
waiting on other people. We'll only get political bozo's in office if only the same people who lie to get ahead run for office.
At some point the honest working people need to get pushing.
Without getting labeled nutcases or teabaggers etc. and demonized for wanting sensible change and govt reforms
that quit dumping larger burdens and debts on the taxpayers to pay for while govt runs amok. At some point the
people are going to have to stand up and put our feet down and quit allowed politician to run unchecked at our expense.
Unfortunately, I think before any meaningful reforms can happen, we need to level out the playing field so that those lesser known and less wealthy candidates who really do care about America and the American people can have a chance at winning elections to make those changes from within.
Hi ChrisL If you and I are on the same page with that, how many others get it, too?
Just had a similar conversation at dinner with my bf family the other night.
What I suggest was to unite all the leaders and potential candidates for 2016
around teams of Vets to take on govt reform, of the VA, the health care, the post office, etc.
And agree to create jobs for Vets fixing these problems,
and form internships to train govt leaders out of these teams.
So whoever it is, regardless of party, who can team up and win the Presidency,
get behind THOSE people who can work effectively and lead other leaders without the divisive politics and waste.
for Republicans, this is important to make sure the right candidates take the lead,
and sell outs like Jeb Bush don't divide the party and shelve half their voting base at home refusing to come out in support.
so just for party unity alone, they should unite around this type of approach
and make sure nobody sells out for politics.
For Democrats, there also needs to be united efforts to solve problems
and not keep exploiting and projecting blame for political points.
I think the Dems have farther to go to unite on principles, and the Republicans have a better chance of
uniting around Constitutional principles.
The most unifying factor I've seen with Democrats is fear of the opponents, having a common enemy.
But that doesn't solve any problems. So it only goes so far.
We need to organize around solutions, and I find the Veterans are a common focus that gets
respect across the board. If the Republicans take the lead in setting up a unified network
for solving issues of govt reform by creating jobs and training for Vet leadership to be in charge,
I believe the Democrats will follow. And we have a chance to work together on real solutions.
Dear Synthaholic
What I mean is I wasn't there to talk Michael Brown and his friends into making better decisions
than to go around grabbing property from businesses or whatever they were doing. Now I hear
there may be other video footage of Brown doing criminal or violent things.
That is where more people can make a difference. Even regular folks like me.
I can, however, say things to my coworkers about their social expectations,
and where this mentality comes from that it's "okay" to steal or freeload off others
"who are better off." And not expecting thieves to pay back what they steal "if they can't afford it."
I challenged my coworkers at my job on that mentality that I found shocking!
They didn't believe people imprisoned for theft should be held responsible for paying it back,
because "they weren't going to do that anyway." I couldn't believe it, couldn't accept that answer, and told them it wasn't right to keep expecting taxpayers to pay for the crimes of others. Why should we as working citizens get more taken out of our paycheck, and our insurance rates go up, when the thousands we spend on inmates per year could already pay for health care without having to dish out more money? They never thought of that.
So that still may not be "enough" to prevent crime yet, but if it starts people thinking
about Accountability, and to quit taking things for granted as paid for by taxes,
maybe we'll start to own up and grow up as a society instead of letting this mentality go unchecked.
Why wait for another Michael Brown to get shot after stealing something?
Why keep paying 50K a year for each person in prison, who isn't expected to work to pay the costs of their own crimes, and then have "no money"
to pay for health care for lawabiding citizens and their families working for an honest living?
Why not intervene at the first sign of a troubled attitude,
and help these young men to step up to the plate and quit setting themselves up to fail as victims.
Why keep paying the cost of crime, several times over, and then complain we don't take home enough money from our paychecks to cover costs of living, education, health care and housing when people in prison are getting all that paid for at taxpayer expense. Does this make any sense?
Great post Emily! Makes a TON of sense, but you can probably expect this for an answer
What I ususally get as an answer is
"I hear what you're saying, but 'NO ONE ELSE' is going to change anything."
Ie each person thinks because OTHER people aren't going to respond,
they don't bother asking.
Isn't that sad, like each person on their own would have AGREED and liked to change things,
but keeps waiting to see how OTHER people are going to respond first.
It takes a while for people to get how much power and influence we do have.
That if just 2 or 3 people, maybe 5 get together and start a campaign,
other people might jump up and say why not? that actually makes sense! And get more ppl on board.
Over several months of talking about this, off and on,
one of my coworkers went from not thinking he had any chance or influence on what politicians did.
So why bother asking or complaining, since once you elect people they are just going to 'keep doing the same thing anyway'
to thinking what if he learned enough about how to manage people and business where he could run for office someday.
And one of my friends who ran for President twice to study how accessible and affordable it was
for the average small business person to conduct a common sense campaign,
also reported a similar effect on people. Someone he met on the campaign trail who naysayed the idea of
running for President, since only the very richest people with political influence can get anywhere and the rest
get "labeled" as nutcases (my friend Vern is a well respected business owner and common sense person
so he was very hard to label as a nutcase, and caused people to do a doubletake trying to figure him out).
But then over time, this very person came out and was considering running for President or another public office.
So it seems that person had a change in attitude, that the first step is to push for change, and not to be passive
waiting on other people. We'll only get political bozo's in office if only the same people who lie to get ahead run for office.
At some point the honest working people need to get pushing.
Without getting labeled nutcases or teabaggers etc. and demonized for wanting sensible change and govt reforms
that quit dumping larger burdens and debts on the taxpayers to pay for while govt runs amok. At some point the
people are going to have to stand up and put our feet down and quit allowed politician to run unchecked at our expense.
Unfortunately, I think before any meaningful reforms can happen, we need to level out the playing field so that those lesser known and less wealthy candidates who really do care about America and the American people can have a chance at winning elections to make those changes from within.
Hi ChrisL If you and I are on the same page with that, how many others get it, too?
Just had a similar conversation at dinner with my bf family the other night.
What I suggest was to unite all the leaders and potential candidates for 2016
around teams of Vets to take on govt reform, of the VA, the health care, the post office, etc.
And agree to create jobs for Vets fixing these problems,
and form internships to train govt leaders out of these teams.
So whoever it is, regardless of party, who can team up and win the Presidency,
get behind THOSE people who can work effectively and lead other leaders without the divisive politics and waste.
for Republicans, this is important to make sure the right candidates take the lead,
and sell outs like Jeb Bush don't divide the party and shelve half their voting base at home refusing to come out in support.
so just for party unity alone, they should unite around this type of approach
and make sure nobody sells out for politics.
For Democrats, there also needs to be united efforts to solve problems
and not keep exploiting and projecting blame for political points.
I think the Dems have farther to go to unite on principles, and the Republicans have a better chance of
uniting around Constitutional principles.
The most unifying factor I've seen with Democrats is fear of the opponents, having a common enemy.
But that doesn't solve any problems. So it only goes so far.
We need to organize around solutions, and I find the Veterans are a common focus that gets
respect across the board. If the Republicans take the lead in setting up a unified network
for solving issues of govt reform by creating jobs and training for Vet leadership to be in charge,
I believe the Democrats will follow. And we have a chance to work together on real solutions.
I agree with most of your post. I agree that veterans are a rallying point, but I want all people to have the chance. Of course I realize that means some ridiculous or extreme candidates as well (not like there aren't already though), but I would like to see caps on campaign funds (reasonable of course) that would allow everyone to compete. Let's face it, the "average" person could never hope to get any percentage of the vote because most people will not know who he or she is or the platform.
