What do you think about this?

[Osborn F Enready]

When a citizen signs in to join the military voluntarily, they go through admissions and upon swearing in, are punishable under the UCMJ. The UCMJ is the law of the land if you are in the military, and you have no "bill of rights" or constituional rights.

Why not propose legislation that would enact a law stating that "All public officials, while serving in office under oath, have no rights under the Constitution, and will be held to new laws under the United States Federal Code of Governmental Justice. This new law would remove all privacy rights of all people serving in public office pertaining to finance, personal and official activity. No officials would be allowed to attend any "private meetings" while in office, and all officials would ultimately be OWNED by the people in the sense that the troops in the military are OWNED by the government. This would be to strengthen and help implement accountability of political office holders, and monitor financial contributions to canidates while serving.

Any ideas, feedback, insults, arguments, DEBATE?

[Suburbanite]

I don't know. My father still works for the city, and he doesn't have any backroom anything. He doesn't have enough power for that stuff. But to invade his privacy? What for?

[white rice]

In California, no public official on the same board can meet with another unless it's planned or stated beforehand. And most meetings if not all are open to the public.

The thing is, you want the law makers to write laws on how they should act. You're missing a step or two here.

[Ross]

Make it a referendum.

[Osborn F Enready]

Truly, I am just throwing out a suggestion to get some feedback on the idea. I have no intent right now to do this, but I think it sounds solid, and would only apply to Federal Officials, which I should have clarified. Say what you think, let me hear some opinion.

[argonak]

Soldiers are in combat situations. Their lives are on the lines. You can't expect them to let John Doe do whatever the heck he feels like just because its "not their business". it IS their business, it effects their mission and effects their lives. They have a right to know if the man next to them is going to suddenly keel over from a heartache, or anything else that might be important to maintaining a state of combat readiness.

[Osborn F Enready]

Reread the initial post argonak, you obviously didn't get the point.

[Young]

Clinton was forced to testify Under Oath, In Public over Lewinsky...Personal matter. Everyone looked the other way when reports of JFK & Monroe were reported. The Murder of over 3000 Americans on 9/11 is not a Personal Matter, Bush & Cheney should testify seperate, in public, and under the influence of a Truth Serum. Osborn is right on this one, Corporations control Our Country, because You & I don't have 185 Million dollars...we can't run for President. The only accountability is Elections & they're obviously rigged. I say We Boycott the Election, We should Campaign to Botcott the Election, or We should really get together & march on the Capitol in the Tens of Millions. Our Forefathers would have Shot these Men for Treason.

Young

[Osborn F Enready]

Young.... AMEN brother!

[argonak]

Reread the initial post argonak, you obviously didn't get the point.

Yes I did. He wants to take away public servant's rights and treat them worse them like slaves.

This new law would remove all privacy rights of all people serving in public office pertaining to finance, personal and official activity.

Sounds to me like this would mostly likely be used to put certain officails constantly on trial for doing their job in the way they see fit, even though they were elected or appointed by the legal process.

This would be to strengthen and help implement accountability of political office holders, and monitor financial contributions to canidates while serving.

No, it would merely make everyone less likely to take the job, since every aspect of your existence would be scrutinized, and you'd be constantly on trial, which would pretty much eliminate any chance of your doing your job.

I say We Boycott the Election, We should Campaign to Botcott the Election, or We should really get together & march on the Capitol in the Tens of Millions

PatrickHenry, this really wouldn't have any effect on the electoral process except to empower the people who DO vote even more.


Monitoring our politicians is a good idea. Treating them inhumanly would merely drive out all the capable people, and we'd be left with the dregs of humanity manning all our command positions. Meanwhile, the REAL power would shift to controloling these poor demented souls. So the Lawyers would be in charge. "Pass my bill or I'll have you in court the rest of your life because you didn't file last week's meetings properly."

[Suburbanite]

Federal Officials? Now that sounds good to me.

Originally posted by argonak, Monitoring our politicians is a good idea. Treating them inhumanly would merely drive out all the capable people, and we'd be left with the dregs of humanity manning all our command positions. Meanwhile, the REAL power would shift to controloling these poor demented souls. So the Lawyers would be in charge. "Pass my bill or I'll have you in court the rest of your life because you didn't file last week's meetings properly."

One could argue that you already have that situation.

[argonak]

One could argue that you already have that situation.

certainly. and the above would only make it worse.

[dotcoma]

Originally posted by Young, Clinton was forced to testify Under Oath, In Public over Lewinsky...

It wasn't because of Lewinsky. It was because he lied under oath. Clinton was/is a VERY BAD dude. Judicial Watch (which is now going after Bush over 9/11, so much for the partisan argument) tried to bring down the Clintons for much more than the "I did not have sex..." BS. That was all they could pin on him. Kind of like Capone. All they had to throw at him was tax evasion. Clinton tried to seduce a married woman and when she refused, he threatened her. And it wasn't the only time it happened. Clinton is a criminal. Yes, his crimes pale in comparison to Bush and Co. But he has enough skeletons in his closet to make it not matter all too much...

[PatrickHenry]

Originally posted by argonak, I say We Boycott the Election, We should Campaign to Botcott the Election, or We should really get together & march on the Capitol in the Tens of Millions PatrickHenry, this really wouldn't have any effect on the electoral process except to empower the people who DO vote even more. Monitoring our politicians is a good idea. Treating them inhumanly would merely drive out all the capable people, and we'd be left with the dregs of humanity manning all our command positions. Meanwhile, the REAL power would shift to controloling these poor demented souls. So the Lawyers would be in charge. "Pass my bill or I'll have you in court the rest of your life because you didn't file last week's meetings properly."

I regret to inform that this is my first post on this thread. The above quote is from my counterpart, Young. I have no intention of boycotting. I choose to exercise all of my "rights" in this ersatz republic. Use 'em or lose 'em. The candidate for my party is worthy of my support.

As for a march on the capitol, it is expensive from Hawaii. And I have done so already. I was a participant in the Stand in the Gap event in 1997, by some accounts the largest gathering of humanity in history on the DC National Mall. It was a day of repentance, forgiveness and racial reconciliation. It was a solemn assembly of men humbling ourselves before God and asking for a return to holiness in the United States. It was a life enhancing experience for me and, I hope, for many of my brothers in Christ. But marches do not depose despots. Public opinion does that. Voting does that.

Despotism in America will never end until the occupant of the Whitehouse voluntarily hands back to the constituted authority all powers usurped for the past 71 years. Any president doing so will be honored in my home with a framed photograph, and should be counted among the heroes of this nation. I propose an additional bust on Mt. Rushmore for any president doing so, that we, as a nation, may honor his memory in generations to come. The alternative is for a resolute Congress to demand an end to the present SoE.

Regarding your proposal Osborn: It makes your point that honorable men in uniform are held to higher standards than public officials. Given the events of recent decades, I have sometimes speculated if we should not also, at the time of the Presidential election, also elect a Special Prosecutor General for the coming four years of corruption and cronyism. Naah.

I believe that the public would hound from office all corrupt officials if the information were freely available. The controlled press and CIA media liars have nearly destroyed our once-proud republic. Sources of truth are presently obscure and must be sought diligently by those wanting truth. We should force the CIA to disclose all their subverted, paid, corrupt journalists, from Dan Rather to Sean Hannity to Alan Colmes to Robert Novak. There are undoubtedly hundreds, if not thousands, generating a propaganda chorus by which even Joseph Goebbels would be awestruck. I have posted evidence on this issue elsewhere on volconvo.

The hour is late; the present situation, dire. Yet, I believe that the Spirit of America is equal to the challenge and, in the moment of supreme crisis, will stand forth to lead our blessed nation back to glory and honor. I hope I live to see that day.

[Osborn F Enready]

Well Pat, even though you disagree, you provided some reasoning why, and I for the most part agree, AGAIN. I appreciate the comments, and opinion, from all of you. That is what I was doing, or trying to do anyway, was plant the seeds of the idea and get a varied response along with some reasoning why. Thanks again.