Bipartisan Flush of the Government 2008

About: vote out incumbents for democracy

The cited website has a good BlogRoll with a list of who's up for election in the House & Senate.  To make a difference the Flush has to be bipartisan - otherwise the party out of power will think it's a mandate to do their own mischief & corruption. Remember that absolute power corrupts absolutely! I'm not sure that the cited website is unbiassed.

Tags

  1. flushgov.net
  2. politics
  3. bipartisan flush
  4. voidnow.org
  5. reference
  6. question-hair
  7. questionaire

Comments


David Remer says
Thanks for the citation for VOID (Vote Out Incumbents for Democracy). The Board of Directors is made up of a Republican, a former Republican turned independent and a former Democrat turned independent. The volunteers run the entire political spectrum and the supporters as well.

The site is unbiased if being opposed to reelecting politicians who shore up government corruption, bribed votes, abuse of power of office, and choking the democratic process, is considered unbiased. The writers for editorials all have their own biases running from conservative to liberal, but, their views are their own. VOID has only one agenda, voting out irresponsible government and voting in challengers until they get the message: The People Come First, not power, not money, and not wealthy donors and special interests.

Again, thank you for the publicity for our site.

Mark de LA says
We'll see if VOID really stays bipartisan or anti-partisan.  The definition in wikipedia seems to favor the Democrat Party since the party currently in power is Republican.  A ground swell of "anything but Bush" will produce the same kind of government we have today with just a different cast of characters. We need some fresh faces & new ideas.  We need something PRO instead of CON. I agree with Peggy Noonan  - maybe it is about time for a third party. HATE & ANTI moves the mob, but it doesn't motivate me. I want to move towards something good. To move toward a better future is more precise! 


Mark de LA says
Actually, switching parties will bring back the SAME cast of characters with nobody solving the real problems that a government can do & staying out of the things that government has no business doing! 


Mark de LA says
(Co-posted with 4029)

Actually, if you don't like government wasting time you might consider seriously the
flushgov.net proposal. The challenge with that, though IMHO are five things:
  • How do you make sure that those who come in are people of quality?
  • Like a cease-fire in a war, how do you make sure that one side of the current polarity doesn't take advantage of the situation and retain their cronies?  This is particularly true of the party out of power.
  • How do you remove the incentives to corruption entirely from the governing process ?
  • How do get to know about people who do not have good name recognition yet?
  • How about a questionaire or a test for various levels of office holders?


Mark de LA says
What are your views on the role of journalism & media in providing channels for transparency of government?

Mark de LA says
What do you think about the rules of the Senate & the House of Representatives & the process of governmental business in the several legislatures.

Mark de LA says
What do you think about the rules of the Judiciary & the process of criminal & civil justice ? Include the Supreme court in this mix.

Mark de LA says
M 2006-07-30 06:13:30 3643
Right now I will just throw out the questions for the questionaire as comments on this node & then collect them later somewhere else:
  • What is your philosophy of government (or governing) ? - note this is an open ended question requiring only a paragraph or two at most.
  • What is your philosophy of taxation?
  • What is your philosophy on the defense of the USA?
  • What is your philosophy on public education?
  • What is your philosophy on the public health?
  • What is your philosophy on managing taxpayer funds & other governmental resources?



Mark de LA says
This item is interesting. Apparaently it is a questionaire for all governmental elected officials by zipcode.  Notice I have been unable to find a official response yet. Maybe that is an indication of what politicians will do with the flushgov.org questionaire .  It is provided by Project Vote Smart & is called the NPAT.  I found it via the blogroll on uri http://voidnow.org/.


Mark de LA says
M 2006-07-30 07:21:48 3643
This item is interesting. Apparaently it is a questionaire for all governmental elected officials by zipcode.  Notice I have been unable to find a official response yet. Maybe that is an indication of what politicians will do with the flushgov.org questionaire .  It is provided by Project Vote Smart & is called the NPAT.  I found it via the blogroll on uri http://voidnow.org/.
Apparently Seth has a rep (Adam Smith) in his 9th district that answered the NPAT questionaire.

Mark de LA says
Are these issues from the NPAT questionaire from Project Vote Smart the most interesting to you?

-Abortion Issues        -Gun Issues
-Budgetary, Spending and Tax Issues        -Health Issues
-Campaign Finance and Governmental Reform Issues   -Immigration Issues
-Crime Issues   -International Aid, International Policy and Trade
-Drug Issues        -National Security Issues
-Education        -Social Security Issues
-Employment and Affirmative Action Issues      -Technology and Communication Issues
-Environmental and Energy Issues        -Welfare and Poverty Issues
-Legislative Priorities



Mark de LA says
These are the overall sections of the questionaire:
Abortion Issues
Budgetary, Spending, and Tax Issues, Part 1: Budget Priorities
Budgetary, Spending, and Tax Issues, Part 2: Defense Spending
Budgetary, Spending, and Tax Issues, Part 3: Taxes (A)
Budgetary, Spending, and Taxes, Part 3: Taxes (B)
Campaign Finance and Government Reform Issues
Crime Issues
Drug Issues
Education Issues
Employment and Affirmative Action Issues
Environment and Energy Issues
Gun Issues
Health Issues
Immigration Issues
International Aid, International Policy, and Trade Issues, Part 1: International Aid
International Aid, International Policy, and Trade Issues, Part 2: International Policy
International Aid, International Policy, and Trade Issues, Part 3: International Trade
National Security Issues
Social Security Issues
Technology and Communication Issues
Welfare and Poverty Issues
Legislative Priorities

Note the International Policy sections (3of them)(part2?) which deal specifically on things like the Middle East!
  
While the Middle East is most interesting at this time the results of elections last for 4 or 6 years.   Basing a questionaire on just the issues misses the questions of character, ability to think, ability to negotiate, ability to be non-partisan when it matters, the ability to communicate to the people, media & other branches of government; the ability to select good people to work with &, the ability to lead .


Seth says
M 2006-08-05 06:41:43 3643
Are these issues from the NPAT questionaire from Project Vote Smart the most interesting to you?
No.

How about adding:
  • Middle East policy issues
  • The war in Iraq issues
  • Stem Cell research issues
  • GITMO issues
  • ...

Mark de LA says
Also add to the above the ability to manage a budget & spend selectively & prioritize!


Mark de LA says
Except for the political class I think most people want to ignore government. I would like to know that those in government who represent me can be trusted to do the right things. Issues are less important to me than the things I mentioned before like character, leadership & guiding principles.  How does one tease these out in a questionaire without something tedious like the current crop of psychological tests which try to screen against lying? I don't think that most people running for office would take such a test anyway. About the only way I know that can defeat the lack of responses, like many who have been given the NPAT is for bloggers & media to show up at campaign events and ask the questions at press conferences.  I don't know whether there would develop a critical mass of such activity, but it would be interesting if the so-called new media would get going on the idea! 


Mark de LA says
What does anyone think of developing a set of questions that could be asked at press conferences ? Would they be more interesting than the usual gotchas & slander & insulting questions asked routinely these days?


Seth says
M 2006-08-06 09:22:45 3643
What does anyone think of developing a set of questions that could be asked at press conferences ? Would they be more interesting than the usual gotchas & slander & insulting questions asked routinely these days?
It is impossible to write these kind of questions sans any assumptions.  Questions must always assume some paradigm ... a careful reading of Kuhn and others should convince any skeptic here.  This was recently noted by William Gibson here.  This is why i strongly favor the technique of writing two different questions and letting the politician answer whichever question they choose as in this example. The gotcha is that they must answer one question from each set.  But avoiding answering the hard questions is something that we really don't want to let politicians get away with. 

Btw for a example of asking the hard questions see Exhibit #1 on this page: "Four short clips of things Americans never see on TV Exhibit #1 - Journalists who ask questions - I".  I doubt that your site will be very popular if it comes off as strong as this.  But if it is always asking milk sop questions where the politician can avoid answering, then it will be almost worthless.

Seth says
M 2006-08-06 09:20:39 3643
I would like to know that those in government who represent me can be trusted to do the right things. Issues are less important to me than the things I mentioned before like character, leadership & guiding principles.  How does one tease these out in a questionaire without something tedious like the current crop of psychological tests which try to screen against lying? 
Teasing out a politician's character is not something that can be done in a objective manner.    A politician represents me if they will vot the same way i would vote on any given issue.  For me issues are king.

Mark de LA says
seth 2006-08-06 10:17:35 3643
M 2006-08-06 09:20:39 3643
I would like to know that those in government who represent me can be trusted to do the right things. Issues are less important to me than the things I mentioned before like character, leadership & guiding principles.  How does one tease these out in a questionaire without something tedious like the current crop of psychological tests which try to screen against lying? 
Teasing out a politician's character is not something that can be done in a objective manner.    A politician represents me if they will vot the same way i would vote on any given issue.  For me issues are king.
The problem with issues as king is that a new issue can surface long after the election is gone. Like immigration wasn't a biggie in 2000 & 2004.  Neither was 9-11 nor Iraq (in 2000).  I want someone who has a spine & leadership qualities & character who can handle that.  We are not like Israel or the U.K. so we can't change the government immediately when we don't agree with what they are doing.

Mark de LA says
seth 2006-08-06 10:08:20 3643
M 2006-08-06 09:22:45 3643
What does anyone think of developing a set of questions that could be asked at press conferences ? Would they be more interesting than the usual gotchas & slander & insulting questions asked routinely these days?
It is impossible to write these kind of questions sans any assumptions.  Questions must always assume some paradigm ... a careful reading of Kuhn and others should convince any skeptic here.  This was recently noted by William Gibson here.  This is why i strongly favor the technique of writing two different questions and letting the politician answer whichever question they choose as in this example. The gotcha is that they must answer one question from each set.  But avoiding answering the hard questions is something that we really don't want to let politicians get away with. 

Btw for a example of asking the hard questions see Exhibit #1 on this page: "Four short clips of things Americans never see on TV Exhibit #1 - Journalists who ask questions - I".  I doubt that your site will be very popular if it comes off as strong as this.  But if it is always asking milk sop questions where the politician can avoid answering, then it will be almost worthless.
I have noticed that some people bandy the words paradigm & paradigm shift around when they  have no fucking idea what's going on. I like the word context better. On the other hand what we have here is war & terrorism which need no redefining & is understood by anyone with half a brain. Your simple 2 question set is interesting, but carried much further than a few questions & including overlap to trap liars is tedious & self defeating. The gotcha's I was referring to are those questions asked by the media like this in some form: "Have you quit fucking chickens yet ?".  The only thing I got out of the your four short clips was there are an awful lot of bleeding-hearts for the terrorists & very few for the jews - yet the terrorists intentionally kill anyone, hide behind women & children, provoke wars, & consistently lie to the media for propaganda purposes. One never knows what they want except the complete destruction of Israel & when that is done the United States as well.

Seth says
We have issues inside a platform (or political belief profile).  If you agree with a politicians issues and their platform, then chances are you will also agree with some new issue that arises.  I'm not saying that character is not important.  Perhaps you are looking at three components.  But if you eliminate issues and the belief profile there is not enough there that will assist one in deciding.  How are you going to be able to establish something like "can be trusted to do the right thing" ?

Mark de LA says
seth 2006-08-06 11:26:11 3643
We have issues inside a platform (or political belief profile).  If you agree with a politicians issues and their platform, then chances are you will also agree with some new issue that arises.  I'm not saying that character is not important.  Perhaps you are looking at three components.  But if you eliminate issues and the belief profile there is not enough there that will assist one in deciding.  How are you going to be able to establish something like "can be trusted to do the right thing" ?
Except for Newt's Contract with America, it's been a long time since any party has been held to account for their platform or what was in it.  I will guess that 95% of the public does not know what is in either platform for either party for the 2004 election without googling for it. One thing that may be interesting is to use NLP cues & voice stress analysis on the candidates answering questions. Then hone the follow-up questions & analyze the results.  I made this an open question because it does not matter what a candidate answers on a question-hair if he lies or doesn't have any allegiance to the truth (or believes that truth is relative) - think Clinton.

Seth says
M 2006-08-06 11:19:53 3643
I have noticed that some people bandy the words paradigm & paradigm shift around when they  have no fucking idea what's going on. I like the word context better. On the other hand what we have here is war & terrorism which need no redefining & is understood by anyone with half a brain.
Does not matter what you call it, the famous logician Ouine refered to it as "indeterminacy of translation" ... it is a well known phenomena of language.  A Palestenian does not understand the term "terriorism" the same way that an Isralie, or that Bush understands the term.  You do not understand the term the same way that i understand the term.  To wave that away with a stroke of your pen indicates to me that we will probably not be able to collaborate on building a political tool. 

Mark de LA says
seth 2006-08-06 11:41:17 3643
M 2006-08-06 11:19:53 3643
I have noticed that some people bandy the words paradigm & paradigm shift around when they  have no fucking idea what's going on. I like the word context better. On the other hand what we have here is war & terrorism which need no redefining & is understood by anyone with half a brain.
Does not matter what you call it, the famous logician Ouine refered to it as "indeterminacy of translation" ... it is a well known phenomena of language.  A Palestenian does not understand the term "terriorism" the same way that an Isralie, or that Bush understands the term.  You do not understand the term the same way that i understand the term.  To wave that away with a stroke of your pen indicates to me that we will probably not be able to collaborate on building a political tool. 
No amount of intellectualism is going to solve the problems we face as a world!
  -M.R.

Mark de LA says
  -M.R.
No amount of intellectualism is going to solve the problems we face as a world!
Hmmmm. . . I wonder if I should issue a fatwa on this statement.

Seth says
M 2006-08-06 11:50:57 3643
  -M.R.
No amount of intellectualism is going to solve the problems we face as a world!
Hmmmm. . . I wonder if I should issue a fatwa on this statement.
Your statement is certainly true
But as a response to my concern, it is a distraction .

Mark de LA says
Your concern is intellectualism.  Everyone understands war. War's purpose is to kill people & break things. 


Doonesbury says
lol "Have you quit fucking chickens yet ?"

Mark de LA says
Well I was not trying to invent a tool, I think that is a continuation of your previous wallaby. I am trying to answer the questions about what to elect if we flush the government of incumbents. Without records that incumbents have we need a real clue as to what we are jumping into.  Now a cynic would say get rid of them all - who cares what replaces them.  I would like to do better than that. The NPAT questions are good if nothing else shows up. A good leader with character, intelligence & heart trumps all policy wonks who try to please the crowd they are speaking to. 


Mark de LA says
Doonesbury 2006-08-06 12:44:08 3643
lol "Have you quit fucking chickens yet ?"


Seth says
M 2006-08-06 12:07:35 3643
Your concern is intellectualism.  Everyone understands war. War's purpose is to kill people & break things. 
Apparently you do not understand my concern ... notwistanding that it comes to you from intellectual sources.  But, M, you are proposing creating a tool that uses language.  And what is more, you are proposing creating a tool, that attempts to eliminate as much bias as possible ... (or did i get that wrong).  Well if you take that seriously you must needs come upon the problem that i bring up here.  I can across it when i was attempting my project in platforms.  The best solution i found was to have some kind of way where people and politicians can first choose their paridigm (or platform or set of terms or context or whatever) before they start talking about issues.  I came to this conclusion not by starting with this intellectual understanding but by trying to do it without calling first on that context. 

Mark de LA says
M 2006-08-11 09:54:26 3643
M 2006-08-11 09:52:33 3643
Maybe someone is getting the hint.  Unfortunately it looks like the same jerks who are out of power will get in power
We need people who have not been there before.
Some say this is more anti-Bush than anti-incumbent.

David R. Remer says
Folks, the Vote Out Incumbents strategy is the only one that will result in better government. And like most effective solutions, it is not a one shot and all is fixed. It is a voting strategy that must grow over a number of election cycles. But, think about this.

What do 9.5 politicians desire most? Reelection, right? What if solving America's border problem, ending deficit spending, saving Soc. Sec. in an affordable and sustainable manner, and reforming the health care system such that its inflation stays as low as our total inflation rate, were all made the criteria of voters? In other words, if voters vote for results, not empty promises, and keep voting them out until solutions appear to be working, don't you think Congress' politicians would put these issues at the forefront of their efforts, and let the priority of special interests, lobbyists, and wealth campaign donors slide back to 2nd or 3rd place?

Think about it. What other solution could possibly be as effective a motivator for the U.S. Congress to solve more problems than it creates?

Mark de LA says
David, what I have been trying to develop is finding better candidates & politicians to represent the people. My ideas have evolved from issues to the quality of the people we send to office.  Issues will change over time. The people we put in office have to be the kind with integrity, agility & leadership to make it all happen. Just voting the current crop of bad people out is no guarantee that the new crop will be any better - furthermore we have to then wait for the next election or impeach.   Issues & concerns often die sooner than the incumbents leave the offices they hold.  I like your NPAT as a good start for a questionnaire on the issues. I want another one that determines character.


Mark de LA says
The Democrats hope this is a trend:
url http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/25/greenfield.incumbents/index.html or see this link.


Mark de LA says
Here is something that looks like it is in the right direction ==>  Some citizen control of out of control judges.


Mark de LA says
Here is some issues oriented information from the internet technology perspective. I like in particular the Kerry I voted for it after I voted against it stuff: (or visa-versa)
source: ... (CNET Article)
Sen. John Kerry, the 2004 Democratic presidential candidate, voted in the pro-tech direction in only 2 of 13 votes. That put in him second-to-last place in the Senate, with a score of just 15 percent. "The methodology behind this scorecard is cuckoo for cocoa puffs," Kerry spokesman David Wade said. "He's been a leader on Net neutrality, helped write the first Internet tax moratorium, and built a coalition of tech leaders and mayors to fight for broadband deployment." But the Massachusetts Democrat has frequently taken a pro-Internet tax stance. Kerry voted in 1998 to require a supermajority in both the House and the Senate to renew the Internet tax moratorium; and he voted in 2001 against making the moratorium permanent. He also opposed killing an amendment that would encourage online taxation. (Kerry skipped the fourth tax vote, which was held during the 2004 presidential campaign.)
...



David R. Remer says
M., most candidates newly elected do desire to represent the best interests of America when elected. It is the incumbent infrastructure that denies them committee assignments, and threatens to withhold party support and special interest money at reelection time that corrupts freshman politicians.

That is why the corrupt incumbent infrastructure must be changed, and the only way to do that is to force enough out, lower the reelection rate for incumbents from 90% to 50%, and then, and only then, will the infrastructure change, putting the people's expectations for positive results ahead of the agendas of special interests, lobbyists, and wealthy campaign donors.

WE have to make reelection contingent upon solving more national problems than our Congress creates. The anti-incumbent movement is the only way that is going to happen. <a href="http://voidnow.org">Vote Out Incumbents Democracy</a>

- says
David html doesn't work here. We use "wiki references" so that your reference is coded simply by Vote Out Incumbents Democracy using the link button on a selected phrase. 

Anyway to me the idea is more complex than just removing one group of bozos & subsituting another. We need better qualifying methods & better people. Power corrupts etc. In a way, I suppose I would rather have a corrupt politician that in important matters thinks the way I do on the issues than just somebody that's different. How about elevating the election process to fine art.

See Also

  1. Thought Zen & the Art of the Right-Wrong Game with 586 viewings related by tag "politics".
  2. Thought Inquiry: The nature of an individual to a group. with 279 viewings related by tag "politics".
  3. Thought Politics is the Art of making the possible happen ... with 204 viewings related by tag "politics".
  4. Thought Copy of - An agreement to avoid an unthinkable war with 138 viewings related by tag "politics".
  5. Thought #MyVote2016 with 97 viewings related by tag "politics".
  6. Thought P r e s e n t a t i o n ! with 67 viewings related by tag "reference".
  7. Thought about: thought 23251 - comment 74736 with 62 viewings related by tag "politics".
  8. Thought An agreement to avoid an unthinkable war with 59 viewings related by tag "politics".
  9. Thought Zen Gorilla offers his Point-of-View with 42 viewings related by tag "politics".
  10. Thought This One Wonders with 35 viewings related by tag "flushgov.net".
  11. Thought What informs hearing truth? with 30 viewings related by tag "politics".
  12. Thought Politics = RWG with 23 viewings related by tag "politics".
  13. Thought Ancient Wisdoms in Politics & Ethics with 15 viewings related by tag "politics".
  14. Thought Group on Politics with 12 viewings related by tag "politics".
  15. Thought 9 years left & counting .... with 8 viewings related by tag "politics".
  16. Thought The Dunning-Kreuger Effect with 8 viewings related by tag "politics".
  17. Thought Questions - Always Questions with 5 viewings related by tag "politics".
  18. Thought Democracy as Spinach with 5 viewings related by tag "politics".
  19. Thought Al Franken plus a pile of shit still is Al Franken with 5 viewings related by tag "reference".
  20. Thought Flushgov.net - Part II - RESPECT My Vote with 4 viewings related by tag "flushgov.net".
  21. Thought Vote Smart - Update with 4 viewings related by tag "flushgov.net".
  22. Thought Comparison: Left-Wing, Right-Wing By Issue with 3 viewings related by tag "politics".
  23. Thought Obama versus the Wright with 3 viewings related by tag "politics".
  24. Thought FAIR ? with 3 viewings related by tag "politics".
  25. Thought Project 6 - The Politics of the Golden Rule & beyond with 3 viewings related by tag "politics".
  26. Thought Otherness & Culture with 3 viewings related by tag "politics".
  27. Thought Political Campaigns, Straw men, and Hyocracy with 3 viewings related by tag "politics".
  28. Thought Serious Proposition Node with 3 viewings related by tag "politics".
  29. Thought 222 years 1 month 6 days ago with 3 viewings related by tag "flushgov.net".
  30. Thought It's Hard to get Americans to Riot over a Cartoon with 3 viewings related by tag "politics".
  31. Thought about: Tempting Faith with 2 viewings related by tag "politics".
  32. Thought Internet Politics - internet primary anyone - 3rd Street with 2 viewings related by tag "flushgov.net".
  33. Thought The message is on the cover! with 2 viewings related by tag "politics".
  34. Thought The Big Stories and views that don't make major network news ... with 2 viewings related by tag "politics".
  35. Thought about: the great theft: wrestling islam from the extremists with 2 viewings related by tag "reference".
  36. Thought Dragon Bones with 2 viewings related by tag "reference".
  37. Thought Politicizing a Disease - Ebola Czar with 2 viewings related by tag "politics".
  38. Thought Ship of Fools with 1 viewings related by tag "politics".
  39. Thought A Great Sleeve Job with 1 viewings related by tag "politics".
  40. Thought The Voice of Leadership with 1 viewings related by tag "politics".
  41. Thought about: Video: 50 year study says conservatives 'followers' with 1 viewings related by tag "politics".
  42. Thought Of Ego Trips & the Last Refuge - (Adolfz Result) with 1 viewings related by tag "politics".
  43. Thought Understanding Politics with 1 viewings related by tag "politics".
  44. Thought Tar & Feathers for Congress with 1 viewings related by tag "politics".
  45. Thought Polls VS Polls VS Polls with 1 viewings related by tag "politics".
  46. Thought William, shame on you ! with 1 viewings related by tag "politics".
  47. Thought Why I am Losing Heart on this Project with 1 viewings related by tag "politics".
  48. Thought Shout out newsletter 2016-05-02 with 1 viewings related by tag "politics".
  49. Thought War On Christmas with 1 viewings related by tag "politics".
  50. Thought the profound languor of the comfortable with 1 viewings related by tag "politics".