OT: any volunteers for votetheincumbentsout.org?

User Forum Topic
Submitted by Coronita on October 4, 2008 - 5:24pm

I don't know how much time I'll have for this.
But if anyone else has spare time and is interested, we can collectively work together to quickly put something together see if we can let's ensure at least some of these Congress incumbents get kicked out this election.

The techie stuff is the easy part..I need good writers to post will we should kick out those who voted for the bailout out.

Domain is registered.

Domain ID:D154395382-LROR
Domain Name:VOTETHEINCUMBENTSOUT.ORG
Created On:04-Oct-2008 18:18:09 UTC
Last Updated On:04-Oct-2008 18:18:11 UTC
Expiration Date:04-Oct-2009 18:18:09 UTC
Sponsoring Registrar:Melbourne IT, Ltd. dba Internet Names Worldwide (R52-LROR)
Status:CLIENT TRANSFER PROHIBITED
Status:TRANSFER PROHIBITED
Status:ADDPERIOD
Registrant ID:D122312040553185
Registrant Name:FLU FLU
Registrant Organization:FLU
Registrant Street1:0000 San Diego
Registrant Street2:
Registrant Street3:
Registrant City:San Diego
Registrant State/Province:ca
Registrant Postal Code:92130
Registrant Country:US
Registrant Phone:+1.8888888888
Registrant Phone Ext.:
Registrant FAX:
Registrant FAX Ext.:
Registrant Email:fluworker@gmail.com
Admin ID:D122312040553182
Admin Name:FLU FLU
Admin Organization:FLU
Admin Street1:0000 San Diego
Admin Street2:
Admin Street3:
Admin City:San Diego
Admin State/Province:ca
Admin Postal Code:92130
Admin Country:US
Admin Phone:+1.8888888888
Admin Phone Ext.:
Admin FAX:
Admin FAX Ext.:
Admin Email:fluworker@gmail.com
Tech ID:D122312040553184
Tech Name:YahooDomains TechContact
Tech Organization:Yahoo! Inc
Tech Street1:701 First Ave.
Tech Street2:
Tech Street3:
Tech City:Sunnyvale
Tech State/Province:CA
Tech Postal Code:94089
Tech Country:US
Tech Phone:+1.6198813096
Tech Phone Ext.:
Tech FAX:
Tech FAX Ext.:
Tech Email:domain.tech@yahoo-inc.com
Name Server:YNS1.YAHOO.COM
Name Server:YNS2.YAHOO.COM
Name Server:
Name Server:
Name Server:
Name Server:
Name Server:
Name Server:
Name Server:
Name Server:
Name Server:
Name Server:
Name Server:

Submitted by kev374 on October 4, 2008 - 5:31pm.

You have my support, let me know how I can help.

Submitted by CA renter on October 4, 2008 - 6:06pm.

Mine, too.

BTW, SD RE Bear also registered a domain name to oust Boxer/Feinstein.

We need to work together to fight the banking/Wall Street lobbyists.

I was thinking it might be time to form a taxpayers' lobby. Nothing nutty-sounding like eliminating all taxes. Just a moderate stance that focuses more on fixing the spending side vs. the taxing side.

Many people wouldn't mind paying more taxes if we could actually get some real return on our investments (excellent infrastructure, health care, national security -- not in foreign countries, etc.)

Ultimately, we could just do something that focused on being the anti-lobby lobbying group; we could even narrow our focus to just RE and the credit markets/Wall Street/banks.

Let me know what you need, too. And once a plan is formulated, we should post it all over the econ/housing blogs.

Submitted by DWCAP on October 4, 2008 - 6:47pm.

I am in. I have never been told that I am an amazing writer or anything, but Ill do some backround research and fact checking. I can write too, but Id need an editor. Post what your ideas are and ill do the best I can.

Submitted by meadandale on October 4, 2008 - 8:22pm.

I have a resellers account. I'd be happy to host the domain if you aren't getting free hosting from yahoo. Not sure I have the time to build the website but I could contribute some time here and there if someone gets the ball rolling.

Submitted by greekfire on October 4, 2008 - 8:34pm.

I'll help post. I recommend working with the Ron Paul people, regardless of whether you are in lock-step with his views. Michael Nystrom, host of dailypaul.com and voterbomb.com, and many Ron Paul supporters are already working for the very same cause. I think we should combine our networks and energy and work together...we'll be so much more successful than if we don't.

http://www.voterbomb.com/

http://www.dailypaul.com/

Submitted by mercedes7 on October 4, 2008 - 9:04pm.

I am in. Just tell me what I can do.

Greekfire, very good point. Do you have a contact at voterbomb or dailypaul?

Submitted by CA renter on October 4, 2008 - 9:09pm.

Some people on FedUpUSA are trying to do this as well.

Here is one of the posts (see petition to recal...):

http://www.tickerforum.org/cgi-ticker/ak...

Here is one of the PROBLEMS with trying to recall a legislator:

Constitutional History.
The United States Constitution does not provide for nor authorize the recall of
United States officials such as United States Senators, Representatives to Congress,
or the President or Vice President of the United States, and thus no United States
Senator or Member of the House of Representatives has ever been recalled in the
history of the United States. As early as 1807, a Senate Committee examining the
question of the Senate’s duty and broad authority to expel a Member, noted that such
duty devolves to the Senate not only because of the express constitutional grant of
authority, but also as a practical matter because the Constitution does not allow for
a “recall” of elected Members of Congress by the people or the State. The
Committee noted specifically that the Constitution had set out numerous provisions,
qualifications and requirements for Members of Congress to prevent conflicts of
interest and to assure a certain degree of fealty to constituents, but did not give a
Member’s constituency the authority to recall such a Member:
The spirit of the Constitution is, perhaps, in no respect more remarkable
than in the solicitude which it has manifested to secure the purity of the
Legislature by that of the elements of its composition .... Yet, in the midst of all
this anxious providence of legislative virtue, it has not authorized the constituent
body to recall in any case its representative.22

http://lugar.senate.gov/services/pdf_crs...

Submitted by CA renter on October 4, 2008 - 9:15pm.

Looks to me like another idea might be to try to get them on criminal charges. Isn't stealing $700 billion (plus all the hundreds of billions already swapped with the Federal Reserve, and what's still to come) a crime?

There is ample evidence showing the regulators and top execs knew exactly what was happening. They were warned repeatedly, but continued to allow the financial raping of the American sheeple.

Though I hate street thugs as much as anyone, they have a point when claiming that white collar criminals do far more damage yet receive far less punishment, if any at all. The current crop of Wall Street criminals are being used as consultants on the current theft, and Wall Street firms -- the very ones who brought us here -- are likely going to help facilitate this wealth transfer from taxpayers to themselves (they will be in charge of the fund, and decide who gets what, and how much will be paid for the trash).

Seriously, time for the pitchforks!

Submitted by Aecetia on October 5, 2008 - 7:44am.

Sounds good to me. And these are old examples.

"Jack L Clark's Nursing Home Construction Company was founded guilty of a gigantic stock fraud that bilked shareholders of $200 million. $10 million of this swindled money allegedly went for Clark's personal use, and prosecutors accused him of hiding another $4 million as well. Clark apologized to the court, pleaded guilty to one count (out of sixty-five), and was sentenced to one year in prison, eligible for parole after four months, with no fine" (from Eitzen, 1986:427).
"C. Arnolt Smith, Chairman of U.S. National Bank, entered a plea of no contest to charges of conspiracy, misapplication of bank funds, filing false statements, and making false entries in his bank books. His case involved one of the largest swindles in American history (some estimates are as high as $250 million). His penalty for this crime was a $30,000 fine, to be paid at the rate of $100 a month over twenty-five years -- with no interest" (Eitzen, 1986:427).

http://www.delmar.edu/socsci/rlong/intro...

I guess this new swindle of the American taxpayers is going to reset the bar!

Submitted by sdduuuude on October 5, 2008 - 11:11am.

I'm more along the techie lines - php/apache/mysql - but I can help.

A simple design idea:

User should be able to put in their zip code, then get a list of incumbants, their vote, and their opponent.

As another part of the movement, you should sell signs that people can put up in their yard that have been localized.

i.e.:
"A, B, and C voted for the bailout. Vote them out"

Submitted by DWCAP on October 5, 2008 - 5:23pm.

So what is the plan? (bump)

Submitted by TheBreeze on October 5, 2008 - 5:41pm.

Great idea, FLU. I actually only want to vote out the incumbents who voted (is that the right term?) for the bailout. The incumbents who voted against the bailout bill should be rewarded in my opinion.

By the way, I think blogs that track government shenanigans are going to be the next big thing. You may have just found your next business idea.

Submitted by greekfire on October 5, 2008 - 7:41pm.

mercedes7 wrote:
Greekfire, very good point. Do you have a contact at voterbomb or dailypaul?

I don't know the host personally, but I would just contact him through his websites and tell him you'd like to work with him.

A couple more websites to check out are:
thirdpartyticket.com
campaignforliberty.com

Just as a warning, these are more Ron-Paul-type websites, but they are for the same causes, namely cleaning up Washington.

Submitted by greekfire on October 5, 2008 - 7:42pm.

Duplicate

Submitted by Coronita on October 5, 2008 - 7:47pm.

TheBreeze wrote:
Great idea, FLU. I actually only want to vote out the incumbents who voted (is that the right term?) for the bailout. The incumbents who voted against the bailout bill should be rewarded in my opinion.

By the way, I think blogs that track government shenanigans are going to be the next big thing. You may have just found your next business idea.

Thanks, but I'm already trying to juggle three, along with a full time job. And for me, it's a good thing that all three I'm happy to say are

1) legitimate
2) are going to generate a hell of lot of net losses for the next 3 years.

Submitted by justme on October 6, 2008 - 12:45pm.

Listen,

this whole "let us vote out the incumbents" campaign is just a ruse to install a republican majority in Congress.

Don't fall for it.

Remember it is the republican "free market" philosophy that got us into all this trouble to begin with.

Submitted by Coronita on October 6, 2008 - 1:02pm.

justme wrote:
Listen,

this whole "let us vote out the incumbents" campaign is just a ruse to install a republican majority in Congress.

Don't fall for it.

Remember it is the republican "free market" philosophy that got us into all this trouble to begin with.

Lol....Conspiracy theory in action...You caught me redhanded.....

Submitted by DWCAP on October 6, 2008 - 1:41pm.

justme wrote:
Listen,

this whole "let us vote out the incumbents" campaign is just a ruse to install a republican majority in Congress.

Don't fall for it.

Remember it is the republican "free market" philosophy that got us into all this trouble to begin with.

Uhhh, last time I checked it was both Democrats and Republicans who voted for this robbery. And uhhh, didnt they vote to enact this "republican free market" philosophy too? So they are not atleast alittle culpable?

Submitted by DWCAP on October 6, 2008 - 11:01pm.

Flu, I know that life gets in the way, but is there anything I can do to help get this site going. If nothing eles, itll give me a place to vent. I dont know what do to though, and it is your idea/site, so well, I guess I just wanna scream in a way they will actually hear.

Submitted by justme on October 6, 2008 - 11:24pm.

Let me try again,

To everyone who is on a tear about “voting against the incumbents”, please stop for a moment and think about what that really means:

1. you will be voting for the Republicans to take over congress.

2. you will be voting against Obama for president if you vote “independent”

Just do the math. Since the Democrats have a majority among the incumbents, you are in effect voting Republican. Is that really what you want to do?

One thing is to vote against the incumbents in a PRIMARY (nominational) election, but it is something different to vote against the incumbents in the GENERAL (real) election.

Submitted by Coronita on October 7, 2008 - 12:06am.

DWCAP wrote:
Flu, I know that life gets in the way, but is there anything I can do to help get this site going. If nothing eles, itll give me a place to vent. I dont know what do to though, and it is your idea/site, so well, I guess I just wanna scream in a way they will actually hear.

I can't make any promises, but I'll see if I can slap some thing together. On the boring side, maybe a petition drive, awareness of the deep sh1t our politicians are signing up, or more importantly. On the not so boring side, a place where we can ridicule this ridiculous mess. Humor goes a long way, and I've always wanted to put up a site full of crass-ness. Afterall, I got hours of entertainment reading fvckedcompany.com.. Unfortunately, someone already took fvckedcountry.com :) Anyway, if you want to help, I need a bunch of zingers that sort of mock the entire situation. Republics, Democrats, alike.

Cheer up buddy....In these really screwed up times. You really need to think with a level head.

Uncertain times, means opportunities, both at the personal level and financial level. And besides, there's more to life than really taxes,money,and some dumbxsses up in washington.

In some sick and twisted way, I'm sort of much happier these days than compared to the dot.com buble rush rush days. Back then I had a completely miserable life, because there was never enough time to get stuff done right, because there was so much competition. You got an idea, you got 5 other people crawling up your ass trying to step over you. But with slowed economy, I've noticed also the sort of competition has subsided. And that's great for folks that like to do things right.

For instance, one of tiny things I'm trying to do is put together an e-retail storefront to sell purely "discretionary spending items". I'm not expecting to be profitable for the next 4-5 years. But you know what? It's great... because no one else would be dumb enough to build a competing site right now...I can take my jolly time putting it together the way I(we) want it, rather than do everything half-ass/timed to market sort of way.
(Oh, yeah, I can lower my taxes a little for the next 3 years too. HAHAHA)...

What's the hurry? Not like we're gonna get another round of stimulas checks :) It's great bonding time with my spouse whom I never agree with on how things should get done...

I've also noticed that people at retail stores are generally a lot more friendly and helpful these days. I guess because they want your business, but also, because I guess with less customers, they're more willing to talk to you.

Customer service, or lack there of use to infuriate me, and I'm not the demanding kind of person. But, lately, people are actually pretty courteous and helpful.

Just the other day, I took my daughter to the toy store to look around, and the store clerk (this cute little college girl) was showing my daughter around, showing her all the latest cool stuff, and spent some time playing with her. That would not have happened last year, or the year before, when there was all that easy heloced money floating around, in which customers were chasing merchants, not the other way around.

When the economy was on fire, people that did their jobs right weren't distinguished from people that do their jobs in a half-ass way. Some people got arrogant and got away with it. You had your half to quarter ass realtor or loan broker, or your 1/8 ass tech worker, or your half ass mechanic that didn't give a sh!t about your problems because there where 24 other bimmers obtained from heloced homes lined up for service ....

Well,that's about to change really really really soon. It's not about being able to be a bitchy customer.. I can expect to get treated well as a customer the same way others expect me to treat them when they are my customer.

I went to a pumpkin patch the other day out of suburbia for the first time. (Yes, I know, I'm not the kind of rustic type of person). But you know what, those folks were some of the nicest people I met. It's sort of nice that in these times, there's a return back to basics where human interaction actually takes place in where you go shopping,entertain,etc.

Submitted by Coronita on October 7, 2008 - 12:10am.

justme wrote:
Let me try again,

To everyone who is on a tear about “voting against the incumbents”, please stop for a moment and think about what that really means:

1. you will be voting for the Republicans to take over congress.

2. you will be voting against Obama for president if you vote “independent”

Just do the math. Since the Democrats have a majority among the incumbents, you are in effect voting Republican. Is that really what you want to do?

One thing is to vote against the incumbents in a PRIMARY (nominational) election, but it is something different to vote against the incumbents in the GENERAL (real) election.

So, if a republican does something wrong, they should be thrown out. But if a democrat does something wrong, we should ignore it? I thought the point of voting out the incumbents that voted for the bill was to toss out the cancer, irrespective of party affiliation.

Submitted by CA renter on October 7, 2008 - 12:09am.

It's sort of nice that in these times, there's going to be a return back to basics.
------------------

Amen to all of what you just said!!!!

Submitted by Coronita on October 7, 2008 - 12:20am.

...and Dear Fed,

Please tell me how I can tap into those low interest business loan that will be subsidized by our taxpayers you're proposing...Because, if I can't beat the system, please let me join it :)

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/081007/fed_credi...

Fed eyes plan to fund short-term business loans
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The government is weighing a bold plan to buy massive amounts of unsecured short-term debts in a dramatic effort to break through a credit clog that is imperiling the economy.

The Federal Reserve is working with the Treasury Department on the plan to buy "commercial paper," a short-term financing mechanism that many companies rely on to finance their day-to-day operations, such as purchasing supplies or making payrolls, according to a person with knowledge of the plan. The person spoke on condition of anonymity because the plan is still being put together.

Submitted by DWCAP on October 7, 2008 - 1:09am.

justme wrote:
Let me try again,

To everyone who is on a tear about “voting against the incumbents”, please stop for a moment and think about what that really means:

1. you will be voting for the Republicans to take over congress.

2. you will be voting against Obama for president if you vote “independent”

Just do the math. Since the Democrats have a majority among the incumbents, you are in effect voting Republican. Is that really what you want to do?

One thing is to vote against the incumbents in a PRIMARY (nominational) election, but it is something different to vote against the incumbents in the GENERAL (real) election.

Right, once again, you shouldnt question who to vote for because everyone knows that Democrats are angelic saviors of the human race and Republicans are devilishly crude robber barons who are only out to inpregnate your teenage daughters and then deny them abortions and force you into perminate servitude working on their Cotton plantations. Especially when they vote the exact same way on the exact same bills as the Democrats did.
Wake up people! You might actually vote for someone who doesnt SUCK!
Why do you think republicans are highlighted in red? Because it is the color of the Devil! DUHHH!

Submitted by justme on October 7, 2008 - 7:11am.

fat_lazy_union_worker wrote:

So, if a republican does something wrong, they should be thrown out. But if a democrat does something wrong, we should ignore it? I thought the point of voting out the incumbents that voted for the bill was to toss out the cancer, irrespective of party affiliation.

I never said that, you are putting words in my mouth.

You may think that "voting out the incumbents who voted for the (bailout) bill" is the point. But then your are turning this into a single-issue election called the "bailout bill", and the Republicans are USING you to their advantage.

Those who want people to vote Republican should just come out and say it. They should stop wrapping themselves in some single-issue flag which effectively means "you must vote republican because more democrats than republicans voted for the bailout bill".

Such people are trying to confuse the issue. The truth is that if it was not for the republican deregulation push of the last 28 years, no bailout would be needed in the first place.

The correct principle is that people should vote for who they believe stands for the best principles of government, and should NOT vote based on some trumped-up single-issue litmus test concocted by an opportunist political strategist.

And by the way, the republicans have done plenty of wrong, and on a much grander scale than any democrat of the last 28 years.

Don't cast your vote based on an impulsive desire to punish someone for voting for something that you despise. I am also against the bailout bill, but no way will that make me vote against a democrat.

Look at the big picture.

Submitted by meadandale on October 7, 2008 - 8:18am.

justme wrote:

Those who want people to vote Republican should just come out and say it. They should stop wrapping themselves in some single-issue flag which effectively means "you must vote republican because more democrats than republicans voted for the bailout bill".

I'm not sure how you can say that voting out the incumbants is a vote for Republicans. I've personally vowed, as a conservative, to vote against any incumbant REGARDLESS OF PARTY AFFILIATION. If my local representative is a Republican and voted for the bailout, I'm voting against them.

The fact that YOUR party (which is obviously Democrat) voted in higher numbers for the bailout than the Republicans is YOUR problem, not mine. It doesn't sound like they have YOUR best interests in mind. I applaud the Republicans that rose up against Bush and this ill conceived bailout and tried to defeat it...twice. Unfortunately, some were weak and capitulated once the Democrats put some pork in the bill that appealed to them. The $700 billion bailout was closer to a trillion once you add up all the pork.

And, you're goddamn right this is a single issue election. These people are criminally negligent for a) allowing this crash to happen due to lack of oversight and b) rewarding the architects of the crash with a cash bailout. In the old days, we'd storm the capital with pitch forks, torches and rope. Now we have just our vote.

Submitted by meadandale on October 7, 2008 - 8:22am.

justme wrote:
The truth is that if it was not for the republican deregulation push of the last 28 years, no bailout would be needed in the first place.

You're living in lala land. For a start, perhaps you need to familiarize yourself with Fannie and Freddie and how Democrats fought AGAINST regulation and oversight.

Submitted by Coronita on October 7, 2008 - 11:05am.

justme wrote:
fat_lazy_union_worker wrote:

So, if a republican does something wrong, they should be thrown out. But if a democrat does something wrong, we should ignore it? I thought the point of voting out the incumbents that voted for the bill was to toss out the cancer, irrespective of party affiliation.

I never said that, you are putting words in my mouth.

You may think that "voting out the incumbents who voted for the (bailout) bill" is the point. But then your are turning this into a single-issue election called the "bailout bill", and the Republicans are USING you to their advantage.

Those who want people to vote Republican should just come out and say it. They should stop wrapping themselves in some single-issue flag which effectively means "you must vote republican because more democrats than republicans voted for the bailout bill".

Such people are trying to confuse the issue. The truth is that if it was not for the republican deregulation push of the last 28 years, no bailout would be needed in the first place.

The correct principle is that people should vote for who they believe stands for the best principles of government, and should NOT vote based on some trumped-up single-issue litmus test concocted by an opportunist political strategist.

And by the way, the republicans have done plenty of wrong, and on a much grander scale than any democrat of the last 28 years.

Don't cast your vote based on an impulsive desire to punish someone for voting for something that you despise. I am also against the bailout bill, but no way will that make me vote against a democrat.

Look at the big picture.

dude, you're really getting worked up about this, it's getting pretty entertaining.

I feel honored you think a few geeks who *might* slap a website together within weeks of the general election are gonna make an iota of difference in swaying people to really effectively vote people out.

Breath in, breath out... Breath in, breath out...Deep breaths, and repeat after me.... I'm smart, I'm attractive, and dog-gonna people like me...

Submitted by University City... on October 7, 2008 - 3:26pm.

I'm in, I'll help, actually have been looking for something like this.
I'm not a professional economist or a teck wiz just so you know, but I am mad enough about this to do something. Perhaps I could edit articles.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.