reframe a constant television presence into proof of "corporate obligation" or "sell out" or some other negative idea that is easy for people to relate to.

we really can't compete with corporate spending; we have to neutralize the value of it. i don't pretend to have all the answers, but i do think this is an important strategic focus and well worth pursuing. topple "them" with their own momentum. help them make themselves a visible target for american's frustration.

to our favor...

We need people, when they see an ad repeatedly to think and say,
"Wow, someone is sure spending a lot of money to get this guy elected. What are they buying? How important could my feelings be to him/her. i'm not voting for anyone already bought and paid for."

We need to permeate the air with suspicion and distrust for heavily funded candidates. we can't out fund raise or out spend them; we need to use our heads by making their momentum work against them. i think that is the strategy for one of the martial arts, using the other person's momentum against them.

we need to make the visible effects of huge funding work against the candidate.

to an interesting question of pragmatic moves and values driven decisions. further complicating these elements of potential contradiction are the wildly different perspectives from which a situation is viewed by by each person. viewed from this perspective, it is easy to see why conflict is so easy to generate and peace so hard to secure. so here is a new puzzle:

We need to find ways to articulate shared concerns among progressives and other disenchanted voters of both parties in a way that crafts an alliance. much is done to emphasize the differences among progressives and many other voters who are not well represented by major political parties. More needs to be done to articulate the shared concerns and experiences that separate both groups from the corporate politicians in both parties. Reframing our objectives in ways that address our shared concerns could provide an alliance strong enough to win a voice. it could be a fun brain storm.

shared concerns among progressives and other disenchanted voters of both parties in a way that crafts an alliance. much is done to emphasize the differences between progressives and many other voters who are not well represented by major political parties, but nothing noting the shared concerns and experiences that separates both groups from the corporate politicians in both parties. Reframing our objectives in ways that address our shared concerns could provide an alliance strong enough to win a voice. it could be a fun brain storm.

allows domination by the few. All on the water that day had an investment in the long term survival of the prey species and the sustaining ecology of the ocean, yet they were led to conflict due to perceived short term differences. A pervasive culture of competition and win/lose values fails to focus attention on elements of cooperation and long term survival. instead our attention is always focused on short term competition and gains to those most willing to impose force and bodily injury on others. truly, we reap what we sow. the gulf oil spew is an elegant metaphor for how our process serves us.

of poverty are essentially put into place at a persons point of birth and we are not willing to recognize and mitigate this difference. Consider that at a person's point of birth, they have physical and cognitive attributes. They are born into environments that affect how they are nurtured and nourished. Their economic status is determined. Opportunity is sharply limited for people who are born with an unfortunate combination of birth point elements. Opportunity is sharply increased for people with a fortunate combination of birth point elements. There is increasing research showing that genetics, nutrition and nurturing significantly effect how we merge into the people we become.

Poverty is rarely volitional. By overstating the idea that anyone can succeed if they try and ignoring the role of point of birth issues in limiting a person's opportunities, we distort reality and create a cruel disdain for people who weren't born into the high opportunity group.

I say this after spending 20 + years working as a social worker with people in poverty. Our words of equal opportunity obscure how unequal people's access to success really is.

I believe it was written by Lynn Caine. She describes her experience and confusion living with her husband who had terminal cancer.


even when we think we have walked a mile in someone's moccasins, remember..... it was us who were doing the walking.

the standard is unable to do the tasks of any job due to objectively documented limits in your ability to perform physical tasks, communication tasks, tasks requiring manual dexterity, analytical or accounting skills for example. People are seen as unable to perform the tasks of the job when their objectively documented problems interfere with work tasks they might reasonably be able to do based on education and past work history or their potential to retrain to work compatible with their "transferable skills". high school graduates are expected to be able to do "sedentary work" by virtue of their education.

key works are "objective medical evidence" and "tasks of a job". this does not weigh someone's ability to get a job nor the availability of the work in your area. If you are a high school graduate and under age 50 you are considered able to do sedentary work. sedentary is the lightest type of work in so far as physical tasks are concerned. Other aspects of work performance can be measured with memory, intelligence testing, neuropsychological testing, range of motion and dexterity measurements to name some of the objective evidence used to document disability.

If you describe your symptoms i might be able to help you. i have worked as an ssdi and ssi facilitator for 18 years.

to pad the pockets of the health insurance industry and the fortunate.

people who can afford to pay for health care and insurance are rewarded for their affluence and comfort by receiving tax credits that take away dollars for medical care and bare survival needs for the elderly and disabled.

edited for clarity

And this is why....

I am looking for a president who has a track record of winning at what he does. I want someone who knows how to clarify a situation so people can see what is at stake. This is what John Edwards did, over and over and over in his career representing people's interests agains corporations. He was always able to show the jury how his clients were injured and why their cause should prevail. He didn't deceive, he showed bright lights on what happened so all could see and understand right from wrong. Isn't that what we so desperately need right now... someone with integrity and a track record for representing regular folk; someone who wins by convincing, with evidence and facts that his perspective is congruent with reality. Once we see a common perspective, we can begin to move toward cooperation and effective problem solving. But the shared clarity of vision is what opens the door for community building and peacemaking. John is the man with proven experience in setting up a shared clear vision among real people. It's how he won in court, every time.

In comparison with Obama....
I'm not saying there is anything especially wrong with Obama, but standing next to John Edwards he is a neophyte in the world of changing minds, understanding people, and being able to lead a nation. Obama is a smart young man. John Edwards is a "life seasoned", brilliant, imminently successful, HUMAN BEING in his prime.

I live in western washington and have since early 70's. In the late 70's I worked in real estate development and land use planning; i served on the planning commission for the community in which i lived. At that time there were concerns about development along the I-5 corridor in Lewis County due to the increased flooding caused by creating impervious surface (non-permeable surface ie. roofs, roads, parking lots,) in an area that relies on natural drainage to handle rainfall and slow run off into the river. Needless to say, the clamor from outraged landowners claiming their right to develop and profit on their real estate purchase joined with the banks eager to loan money, developers hot to do their community building, businesses wanting to expand with the magic words of bringing "economic development" won over common sense and paying attention to the mundane realities of hydrology, geology, and basic land use concepts.

Now, we have wailing and hand wringing about the losses. It isn't that I am insensitive to people's suffering and the loss of livestock and pets, especially the losses of farmers whose farms were devastated by the increased flooding.

Why is this relevant???? Because on a global scale we are in possession of scientific findings that suggest the need to make changes in how we live and use our resources. And again common sense and scientific information is being drowned out by paid nay saying shills, representatives of the magical thinking trades; representatives of industries who continue to bank on things staying the same; and people who don't like disrupting their comfortable lives.

sadly, a deeply cynical part of me suspects that this information was removed because the die off from global warming and oil peak needs to be controlled so it affects the most vulnerable. we have predatory leadership in the world spawned by corporate governance; predators prey on the vulnerable.

Ignorance of global warning by leaders is not driving the pretense of denial; this is a strategy to manage the die off and keep it focused on the most vulnerable. It wasn't the wealthy who died and lost everything in Katrina. It won't be the wealthy whose home won't be replaced in California; and it was the wealthy who knew enough to have their own fire departments on site, you will find that the bushes and cheneys are well situated to ride out water, oil, food shortages. They own land on huge aquifirs; they have well stocked undergrround bunkers; they will always have the cash to buy what they need. They know the truth and are making their own plans.

george bush isn't stupid; he is sly like a fox; he has always been able to manipulate people with success; the key to his success is that he has no limits to what he will do to acheive his ends; blackmail has always struck me as his style, with some dramatic lessons of punishment thrown in to get everyone's attention. He is narcissitic, cruel, petulant, sociopathic, but not stupid. there are many ways to be smart; interest in intellectual pursuits isn't everyone's schtick. george is a showman, a player, a front man; it's what he does.

Blocking info re: global warming and at the same time reducing the resources to meet expectable need is damage management.

I am not demeaning your efforts in any way, nor the value of your contribution. I am trying to say that in a culture that values cooperation and integrity more than competition and ruthlessness, ways to find value for your efforts and abilities flourish. One of the problems for people seeking work today is that many respectable, adequately paying, physical labor jobs have either been off shored or fazed out through technology. Those who where successful in mills, on logging sites, as farmers, as textile workers, as automakers, as fisherman... there are many ways people used to work with their at birth advantages that have been disappearing; at the same time the heirarchy of skills needed for success in US today demand technological and abstract skills that not all have. more people can be productively involved when their is reward for a broad array of skills and abilities. negatively judging those squeezed out of productivity by the changes in our world only makes sense if you assume everyone starts equally, which of course we don't.

It's a bit ironic that we speak of equal opportunity for all, but to really be serious about this we must first address the very real disparity in peoples starting points in order to creat opportunity that could be called equal. or as my boss says, there is nothing so unfair as to treat everyone the same.

for a time lasting far longer than at our current level of dominance in the world, we survived and grew into dominance because we were intelligent, knew to band together and cooperate for survival, and agressive.

To successfully adapt to our current dominant species position many great minds have urged us to reduce our reliance on competition and agression in favor of cooperation that supports the survival of all. We don't need to be a fearful, naked prey species any more, nor do we need to continue to act like one.

Our attitude of competition sets in motion the values that label people of unfortunate birth as "fuck ups" while those of fortunate birth as successful. Those of fortunate birth win accolades and honors reinforcing their sense of preimminence. To put this idea into a visual: Imagine two men shooting a basket: one is 10 feet tall, the other is 4'8". Will the 10 footer make more baskets? it's likely. will the 4'8" guy make baskets? sure, some, but not as many as the 10 footer no matter how he tries. does the 10 footer deserve any particular accolade for making more baskets??? no,

I believe that by recognizing that non volitional elements effect all of our lives for good or ill we can become respectful of the lives of all; if we can have the humility to be grateful for our unearned gifts we can cease to judge those not as fortunately born.

these were elements of your success that allowed your effort to pay off; elements of your personality that created your determination.... these can be traced to your genetic being when you were born; its a good thing to have these advantages. This is not about diminishing the value of your effort, but to recognize that people without the benefit of good health, neurologically determined learning abilities that are consistent with current environment, functional chemical and electrical balance in brain and body would not be able to achieve as you have, despite their effort.

That you coninue to have to work 60 hours a week (unless you love your work and would choose to do it without pay) to support your life may speak to the impact of the very unfortunate elements of your birth as you described them. Your effort, coupled with educated, supportive parents may have put you in a very different position.

There is a strongly projected illusion that anyone with persistence can make it to the top of whatever hill they wish to climb. Thus, those who don't charge ahead up the hill are obvious by their presence lower on the hill. Paint those lower on the hill as lazy, un motivated, un fit, etc; pretend all could be at the top with effort. And forget that most of those on the higher levels of the hills were born there.

I have spent many years working as a social worker helping people get income and medical if they become disabled (meaning not able to work). Most of my clients have spent lives working harder than most of us can imagine. That their effort yields the chaos of poverty is the result of elements that were present for them at the moment of their birth. Birth is a very uneven starting point in this world off ours. I;ve always thought a civilized culture would create values that balanced and reflected this reality.