Re: [independence-1] Platform convention

Like Doug, I, also could not get through the initial screen, to the 12
steps.

I am VERY doubtful, that any plan created by mere mortals is foolproof.

It is difficult to take seriously any claims for ourselves, of much in the
way of superiority over the Establishment, given our recent meek
acquiescence to (and in some cases, rabid defense of)  massive misspending
of taxpayer money. 

Worse, we compound the error by simultaneously acquiescing to massive
borrowing, by which we shift taxes to today's children and grandchildren.

I suggest, that both sides are right, re: trial and error. FDR, for
example, gave the nation two full terms of hope by being an endless font
of program ideas and applying the acid American test: "Does it work?"  

On the other hand, going to war requires wisdom aforethought. "Doing over"
doesn't work quite so well, for the dead, maimed, brutalized and homeless.
 "Suicidal Saudis flying airplanes into buildings, provokes U.S. attack on
Iraq". Who wouldda thunk it?

D.C.


--- Doug Brown <[address removed]> wrote:

> Terry,
> 
> Doing something, even if its wrong, does something.  It tellls everyone
> what not to do.  If you try something, and it fails, and yet your try it
> again, that's insanity.  However, trying something, having it fail,
> going back to the drawing board, and trying something else is progress. 
> You have tested theories/processes and figured out which ones to try
> again and which ones not too.  How can you say this isn't making a
> difference?
> 
> As political parties go, I believe the IP is more accountable then any
> other political party.  However, accountability stems from a transparent
> process that can be documented, investigated, and pulled apart for
> investigation at any time.  Political parties havne't been accountable
> in the past, but we are trying to make the IP transparent.  Have you
> investigated the IP and determined that we are as unaccountable as you
> consider other politcal parties?  Or, are you just lumping us in with
> other parties because we ARE a political party?
> 
> Is the way to fix "our" system, to make eveyone acountable?  Having 5
> million people across the nation, 6% (approx.) of the population really
> going to make that big of a difference?  Understand, I don't disagree
> that something like the AVA isn't a bad idea, and may even help.  But
> holding someone accountable in a flawed system doesn't truly change
> anything but the people acting/working inside that system!  
> 
> As an aside, I did look for your 12 steps, and either I didn't navigate
> correctly or the 12 steps isn't available unless you are a memeber?  How
> can I evaluate these 12 steps?  Can you send them too me?
> 
> Thanks,
> Doug Brown
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Terrance Bushard <[address removed]>
> To: [address removed]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 8:47:52 AM
> Subject: Re: [independence-1] Platform convention
> 
> Peter, 
> 
> 
> You certainly are confused. You say the choice is between giving up on
> the country or doing something. If the "something" you do is the wrong
> thing, what's the difference?
> 
> 
> We have an accountability problem in this country and the IP's, and your
> response, is to have a party! Good grief!
> 
> 
> You have 2 choices. 
> 
> 
> You can either choose to be part of the solution to the accountability
> problem by organizing for that purpose, or you can choose to be part of
> the accountability problem by failing to do so.
> 
> 
> Your actions to date tell me you choose to be part of the accountability
> problem! Hopefully, that is because you have a hearing problem, as in
> you choose not to hear.
> 
> 
> One last time. I have a solution to the accountability problem. It is
> simple, affordable and fool proof. Here it is.
> 
> 
> http://www.americ...
> 
> 
> Respectfully
> 
> 
> Terry Bushard
> [address removed]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Jan 28, 2008, at 9:57 PM, Peter Tharaldson wrote:
> 
> 
> Tim- 
>  
> I am confused. The process we devised in 2005 worked well. We considered
> planks and changes one by one. The member that spoke was speaking
> against any additions to the platform.
>  
> One of the things that changed was to establish a base platform and then
> consider changes...that allows for a greater hearing of any
> changes...and in fact, unlike most platform conventions, we did get
> through every proposed change. About 1/2 of the additions were made, 1/2
> failed. 
>  
> Let's reintroduce your proposals on May 3rd. This time I think
> considering them as divided proposals would work well. I understand that
> they are all related to efficiencies from technology improvement, but
> that is a lot of wording to digest and it would be easier to handle them
> one by one.
>  
> The Platform gets another shot on May 3rd per the call of the
> convention. Try it again...I would be happy to help divide them in a
> stategic manner that would probably sell better.
>  
> Peter
>  
> As for not coming to the convention...it is always worth it. The choice
> is between giving up on the country and the state or doing something. We
> did a lot on Saturday....and maybe that was the problem...but people
> were excited.
>  
>  
>  
> 
> 
> Tim Nelson <[address removed]> wrote:
> I hope I never see a repeat of the behavior of a few of the "movers and
> shakers" at the morning session of the platform convention. If trying to
> prevent the motions for platform changes were not enough, the
> grandstanding to testify against every change by one member really took
> the cake.
> 
> Are you adults? Did you not know that a platform convention just might
> get involved with the platform? 
> 
> I considered leaving before my platform change came up. I felt that I
> didn't belong in that room, or in the party. When my turn came, my heart
> wasn't in it.
> 
> On a personal note, since my political viewpoint is so wrapped around
> the downsizing of the public sector through new technology, and the
> party is not, perhaps it would be for the best if I find myself a seat
> outside the party.
> 
> It has been nice to meet, and talk to many of you, especially Peter,
> Jack Uldrich, Peter Hutchinson, Red and the meetup groups.
> 
> Tim Nelson
> Golden Valley
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone
> on this mailing list ([address removed])
> This message was sent by Tim Nelson ([address removed]) from The
> Twin Cities Independence Party Meetup Group.
> To learn more about Tim Nelson, visit his/her member profile
> To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click here
> 
> Meetup.com Customer Service: [address removed] 
> 632 Broadway New York NY 10012 USA 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try
> it now.
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone
> on this mailing list ([address removed])
> This message was sent by Peter Tharaldson ([address removed]) from The
> Twin Cities Independence Party Meetup Group.
> To learn more about Peter Tharaldson, visit his/her member profile
> To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click here
> 
> Meetup.com Customer Service: [address removed] 
> 632 Broadway New York NY 10012 USA 
> 
> 
> Terry Bushard
> 651-639-9831
> [address removed]
> http://www.americ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone
> on this mailing list ([address removed])
> 
=== message truncated ===

Speak truth to power, analyze responses....and vote.     
  www.fairvote.org;            www.FairVoteMN.org;


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  http://mobile.yah...