Category Archives: General

It’s Official: I’m doing it again in 2020!

So three Fridays ago, on 19 April 2019, I filed with the FEC to be running again for the Office of the President of These United States of America.  That being said, I fully support Mayor Pete Buttigieg, so I volunteered for his campaign.  They have not yet responded, as I sure they have a deluge of people who are as interested and capable as I am.

When I first ran for POTUS in 2008, I would have been the youngest, but now Mayor Pete has that mantle.  Let’s please elect him and get this country back!

Also, please keep in mind that I wrote a Voting Rights Bill Of Right back in 2016, which some candidates are now picking to adopt. Please look at it again!

Thank you and Luvvins!

Michael

Comments Off on It’s Official: I’m doing it again in 2020!

Filed under General

It’s almost Election Time!


Click here if you live in Tucson!
Hi Everybody,

It’s getting close to election time and many of you in Ward Six have your early voting ballots already!

There are a few debates among the Ward Six candidates which you can watch and at least one more coming up which everyone can attend.

Arizona Public Media aired a debate between myself and Mike Cease on 4 August 2017 and you can watch that on the AZPM website.

Also, the Green Party had a similar and slightly longer debate at its General Meeting on the first of August.  We are getting that online shortly, so check back.

The next debate, which everyone can attend, will be held on Monday 14 August 2017 at 6:30PM in the Ward Six offices near Country Club and Speedway, and it will feature all four candidates.

In the meantime, we are still looking to get our Clean Elections Funding, so please contribute today!!!

Thank you for all that you do!

Michael

Comments Off on It’s almost Election Time!

Filed under General

Hey, Everybody! I’m running for Tucson City Council!

It’s Official.

My name, Michael Oatman, will be on the 29 August 2017 Green Party primary ballot (provided my nomination petition signatures are turned in during May). Since I’m running unopposed in the Green Party, that will advance me into the 7 November 2017 General Election for Tucson City Council Ward VI, or six, or 6 if you prefer.

I’m running against Steve Kozachik, who used to be a Republican, and another Republican. But Ward 6 is filled with Progressive Democrats and Greens.

I think the choice is simple: “Ward Six, Vote Green! Vote Oatman in 2017!”

Click above to read more and help out! Contribute! Get Signatures!

You can also read my Endorsement Application form sent to Bernie’s campaign spinoff, Our Revolution.

Oh, and if anyone wanted a picture of me, just watch my TV show, Illegal Knowledge.

Here is my Press Release:

~ ~ ~

Hello, please circulate widely, thank you!

Contact: Michael Oatman
Michael Oatman For Tucson Ward 6
Tel: (520) 302-5465 (Tucson Offices)
Fax: (206) 202-2194
Email: wardsix@MichaelOatman.info
Website: http://MichaelOatman.info/

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

TUCSON, AZ (UFNPSI) — 19 April 2017

Michael Oatman is announcing that he is currently an official candidate for Ward Six of the Tucson City Council in 2017.

He will be representing the Green Party of Pima County in the 29 August 2017 Primary Election and in the 7 November 2017 General Election.

He will be attempting to unseat the current City Council member, Steve Kozachik, a former Republican-turned-Democrat.

Oatman has been registered nearly always with the Green Party or as an independent voter for over a decade. He has participated in the 2008 Arizona Presidential Preference Election as a Democrat and again in 2012 and 2016 under the Green Party. He placed third in 2012 Arizona Green Party voting, and won outright in Apache County. In 2012, he also placed tied for first with fellow Green Party candidate Richard Grayson in voting amongst candidates who participated in the Tucson Weekly’s Project White House contest.

Says Oatman, “The people in Ward Six are rather progressive,and want a new direction for the City Council. I feel that I can represent them in Council far more to their interests than either of the two Republicans currently running. Oh yeah, that’s right, Steve’s a Democrat”.

Oatman, a Tucsonan since 1999, is a local television show host, businessman and entrepreneur, and lives in Ward Six, just south of Columbus and Glenn in central Tucson.

This is his first run for a seat on the Tucson City Council.

# # #

Please see his website for further information: http://MichaelOatman.info/

Michael Oatman is currently accepting invitations for interviews from all news and media outlets. Please contact Mr. Oatman using any of the contact methods provided in the header of this release. Thank You for Your Interest!

With Love,
We Can All Take The Power Back!

Vote Green! Vote Oatman!

Thank You,
Michael Oatman.

~ ~ ~

wardsix@MichaelOatman.info
(520) 302-5465

Comments Off on Hey, Everybody! I’m running for Tucson City Council!

Filed under Bernie Sanders, City Council, Election, Energy & Jobs, General, Green Party, Local Government, Press Releases, Tucson, Tucson Weekly

Hey, Bernie! It is NOW time to run!

Senator Sanders, please hear this:

The media is telling everyone that “Head for the Red Right Arrow on the Hills” Clinton has a delegate count which is, and I would like to emphasize this, **HALFWAY** to a point at which HDRC has, and again, to emphasize, **HALF ** the delegates, of the total in which any Dem needs to win the Nom.

I’m hopeful that everyone reading knows how to multiply fractions and/or percentages.

For, if you are halfway to “getting half” (i.e.: “halfway”), you could represent the wins of HDRC as “one half of one half”, which by multiplication (0.5 x 0.5 = 0.25, or 1/2 x 1/2 = 1/4) gives you 25% of all delegates. This obviously means that there are still 75% of delegates out for grabs. Not Superdelegates, but just the ones where you win them when people vote.

For everyone reading this, you should probably look at my Voting Rights Bill Of Rights, because that should happen immediately. Also, VOTE!!!!!

Oh, wait, yeah…….. FUCKING VOTE!!!!! I mean, you may get a ticket for indecency if you do that in the booth; I would recommend a nearby hotel; keep passing the currency. BUT VOTE!

The turnout in Nevada was 11.5K in 2016 as opposed to 105K in 2008. Bernie won 3/4 of those counties, but Hillary won Clark and Nye. Hillary got the majority of the delegates.

I believe that very many people want Bernie Sanders to be POTUS, but if we cannot get our collective asses out of our Google Cardboard 3-D what-the-fucks, then, we will, and will deserve to be, bound by the fruits of our collective inaction. And I really hope that will not end up being my least favorite DJ, TRUMP (please see http://CLUBTRUMP.COM/)!

In short, Bernie can win the remaining 75% of the delegates, and I say IF AND ONLY IF, we finally and all of us please do SHOW UP TO VOTE!

Come On!!! Really!!?!!

Luvvins and I Voted Early on 26 February 2016 For Bernie!
Michael

Comments Off on Hey, Bernie! It is NOW time to run!

Filed under General

Hey, Thanks Everyone! I’ll See You Again In 2020!!

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

TUCSON, AZ (UFNPSI) — 31 December 2015

Michael Oatman is announcing that his current 2016 Presidential Run is now suspended.

He will be seeking the office again in 2020.

His interim plans are to seek the office of Tucson Ward 6 City Council Member, unseating Steve Kozachik.

Please see this website for further information. Meanwhile, please consider voting for Bernie Sanders.

The 260 or so Arizona Presidential Preference Election Nomination Ballot Signatures have been appropriately disposed. Please Watch The Video to find out how. This video has been compressed to fit in the hosting service used. For the original MP4 @ 1080p 720×640, please send inquiries to FEC@MichaelOatman.info.

With Love,
We Can All Take The Power Back!

Vote Green!
Vote Oatman!

Happy New Year,
Michael.

~ ~ ~

Comments Off on Hey, Thanks Everyone! I’ll See You Again In 2020!!

Filed under Arizona Legislature, Bernie Sanders, Corporate, Corporate Corruption, Election, Election Results, Endorsment, Energy, Energy & Jobs, General, Green Party, Local Government, National Election, Press Releases, Reform, Tucson Weekly

The Voting Rights Bill of Rights of 2016

Following several United States Supreme Court rulings regarding limits on monies in elections, it has become clear that we the People in the United States would be served better should some particularly sweeping election law reforms be instituted.  To that end, I have developed a dozen election law reforms that could be enacted by legislatures in the States and in the US Congress, and by Amendments to the Federal and States’ Constitutions, which I now present to you here.

Any Citizen Can Vote (No One Convicted of Voting Fraud May Vote)
Currently US citizens who are convicted of a felony may have their voting rights removed as a condition of their sentence. The only reason any US citizen should be prohibited from voting is if they are convicted of a crime involving multiple or fraudulent voting, or tampering or otherwise interfering with a local, State or Federal election, and that prohibition should last for the duration of that person’s sentence, including parole or probation, should also extend to prohibit that person from working, serving or observing in a polling place or election tabulation center, and should prohibit that person from assisting another US citizen in filling out a voter registration form.  All US citizens who are currently being denied their voting rights for non-election-related crimes should have their voting rights immediately reinstated.  All US citizens should be eligible to vote for all respective local, municipal, regional, territorial, State, and Federal offices, and every US citizen should be eligible to vote for US President.  No voting prohibitions should be made for US citizens either born or residing in the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, US Virgin Islands, or any other territory or protectorate or otherwise, which is administered and/or under the jurisdiction of the Federal United States or any State.

Automatic Voter Registration
Any US citizen who is 18 years of age or older should be automatically enrolled to vote, with “No Party Preference” selected for party affiliation unless otherwise selected by that citizen.  Any US citizen who is 17 years of age or older, at any time, may fill out a form to “opt out” and therefore become disenrolled to vote and from any party affiliation.  Automatic forms use the last known address of the voter to decide which precinct and district in which the voter is enrolled, and any enrolled voter may visit or request by mail from their local elections agency a voter registration form to update their information. Local election agencies should make voter registration forms freely and widely available, including at motor vehicle departments, post offices, libraries, universities, courts, and any other public agencies as is possible.  Allow for same-day registration and registration updates at all polling places, particularly when a voter has moved or has no current address, with the voter registration form serving as an affidavit of veracity of the voter.

Extend Voting Period (And Allow Voting by Mail)
Polling places should be open for at least one week, for at least 12 hours per day, if not more, up to one month, ending on Election Day.  Voters should be encouraged by all elections agencies to vote by US Postal Service mail, as many States currently allow.  Local elections agencies’ offices should serve as regional polling places for voters who cannot locate their precinct polling place(s).

Use Ranked Choice Voting (Require Majorities)
To help prevent “spoiler” candidates like Ross Perot and Ralph Nader from unduly influencing elections, institute ranked choice voting, where the voter selects a “first choice” candidate, a “second choice” candidate, a “third choice” candidate, and so on throughout the list or ending where the voter decides, should the voter decide not to rank all candidates on the ballot for each office up for election.  This will work for both single-seat and multiple-seat offices, where a voter, if they wish, may select up to the number of seats in the office per each ranked choice, out of those who are running for each office, in the case of multiple-seat offices, but may not multiply select any one candidate to receive multiple different rankings, nor may multiply select more than one candidate to receive the same place number ranking (or in the case of multiple-seat offices, not more than the number of seats available for that office per the same place number ranking).  Should a mismarked ballot occur, and the voter’s intention cannot be understood, that individual voter’s vote will not count only for the election(s) to the office where the mismarking(s) occurred.  In the event no one (or multiple, in the case of multiple-seat offices) candidate receives a majority of the vote, require an instant runoff of the top two (or two times the number of seats available, in the case of multiple-seat offices) candidates within three weeks of either Primary or General Election Day, with the exception of States’ Presidential Elections, whose electors by State result to the respective parties’ National Conventions will be apportioned directly according to the votes tallied, and should not be “winner take all”.  In the case of multiple-seat offices, any candidate who receives a majority of the possible vote shall be elected, even if other candidates require an instant runoff, and the number of candidates to be included in the instant runoff will be two times the difference between the number of candidates who received a majority for that office and the number of seats for that office.

No Electronic Voting Machines (Allow Open Source, Contractor-free, Publicly Owned Counting Machines)
Require all voters to mark paper ballots, with indelible ink, preferably in scan-tron form, to allow for easy machine counting, and to allow for hand-recounting where necessary.  All counting machines should be publicly owned by the elections agencies and should never be outsourced to third-party contractors.  All software controlling all counting machines should be standardized and should use open-source software, with the software code publicly available on the elections agencies’ websites, or in print if requested.  All ballot forms should come with easily understandable instructions on how to mark the ballot form in order to vote so that the voters’ intentions are correctly understood.

Use Election Monitoring (Use United Nations If No Better, More Neutral Party Is Present)
Allow all parties’ representatives, all interested media, and any other interested US citizens to freely and publicly monitor all elections results counting procedures.  In the event of recounts or in any cases where requested, allow additional neutral parties, where available, to perform elections counting monitoring, and if no neutral parties are available, allow for elections counting monitoring to be performed by the United Nations representatives.  Under no circumstances should elections counting be performed behind locked doors and out of view of any interested public of any sort, and doing so should constitute a felony, where all persons involved should be tried and sentenced to a permanent removal of voting rights, at minimum.

End The Electoral College
It will require a US Constitutional Amendment to replace the Electoral College with a direct system of elections for US President for the US General Election, using ranked choice voting, with an instant runoff three weeks later between the top two candidates if no majority is reached.  This will require the introduction of such an Amendment by US Congress and passage of this Amendment by at least 34 States.  This current method of electing a President Of The United States is outdated, unique, not useful, and is often in contravention to the wishes of majority of the voters.  The current use of parties’ electors in nominating a US Presidential ticket in those respective parties’ National Conventions following States’ US Presidential Elections may be preserved, although in an apportioned basis only (this would end “winner take all” US Presidential Primaries, and would also serve to assist in shortening the election cycle).

No Gerrymandering
US House and State Assemblies’ districts should be redrawn by independent non- or multi-partisan redistricting commissions from each State to follow first County or Municipal boundaries where possible, and otherwise be as square as possible while retaining equal numbers of eligible voters per district, following every US decadal census.  Ideally, one single straight longitudinal or latitudinal line should be used to square off one district when numbers of eligible voters within a municipality are uneven between districts.  It will be the responsibility of the redistricting commissions to first ensure an equal number of eligible voters per district, to within 0.01% of the eligible voters in the district (or 200 eligible voters, whichever is greater), and second to maintain properly drawn boundaries of every district.  It is conceivable that this method of redistricting could be done using a computer algorithm, where the purpose of the redistricting commission would then be to check the work of the computer algorithm.  Redistricting commissions should not take the party affiliations of eligible voters into consideration when redrawing districts, and should not attempt to force the creation of “competitive districts”, nor should redistricting commissions try to force the opposite “uncompetitive districts”.

No Paid Lobbyists (Individuals Lobbying for Personal Causes Is Fine)
There is a multi-billion dollar per year industry thriving on K Street in DC which gets paid to lobby US Congresspeople for votes in exchange for election campaign contributions.  None of this should exist.  Any person lobbying their representative member(s) of the US Congress or their State Legislature, may not be paid to do so by any entity whatsoever, and should be lobbying for (or against) an issue or multiple issues which affect that person individually and directly.  Any registered voter wishing to lobby their member(s) of the US Congress or their State Legislature should receive a reasonable amount of unpaid time off from their employment for this purpose.  This will free up members of Congress and State Legislatures to meet with those people whom they are representing, and otherwise to do the work they were sent to Washington DC to do. No person should lobby a member of Congress who is not either their elected US House representative from the district in which the person is registered to vote, or one or both of their elected US Senators.  No person should lobby a member of a State Legislature who is not either their elected State House representative from the State and district in which the person is registered to vote, or one or more of their elected State Senators of the State in which the person is registered to vote.

Reduce The Campaign Cycle To Six Months Or Less
No other nation has a National Campaign Cycle which lasts at least two, and up to four, years, and all of this for one four-year term of office.  The problem exists even more so for those US House members wishing to retain their seats; they spend the majority of their time seeking election campaign contributions for the next election cycle upon the minute after taking their oath of office.  As a result, we are beset with a distracted legislature and first-term executive office holders.  We should prohibit any straw polls, primary and States’ elections, debates and electioneering otherwise from occurring prior to at most six and preferably four months from the General Election, with all States’ and Primary Elections occurring two to three months prior to the General Election, and with parties’ National Conventions occurring immediately after the Primary Election.  This will free up our elected representatives to do the work they were sent to Washington DC to do.

Equal Money For All Seeking Each Office (No Outside Money In Elections)
Require that no personal, corporate or PAC monies be spent for elections of individual candidates for any office, local, State or Federal, and require that no candidate shall accept any money or gifts as donations from any entity or person whatsoever, regardless of the appearance of a quid pro quo nature of the money or gift.  Personal, corporate and / or PAC monies may be spent on initiatives or other ballot measures where no individual is seeking to be elected to any public office.  All persons wishing to hold public office would be required to gather a certain number of signatures from a portion of eligible voters in the region or district to which that person is seeking to hold public office, and while that person may pay others to collect signatures on that person’s behalf, no fees should be charged otherwise to the person seeking office for the privilege to do so.  An Elections Fund should be established by each region or district, State and Federally as well, which pays equally to every person who is seeking public office monies to cover expenses only relating to that person’s campaign for public office.  Encourage taxpayers to contribute, as tax-exempt, to the Elections Fund on all annual tax forms, as the only method of incomes for the Election Fund should be such donations.  Prohibit television and radio stations from charging for campaign advertisements and establish some limit as to the amount of time any one such station may devote, equally to all candidates running for each particular public office, for such campaign advertisements; the cost to the station incurred by the airing of such advertisements may be deducted as a tax write-off for the business which operates that station.  The internet should not be subject to content, timing or money regulations which are imposed upon television and radio delivery methods.  Allow free US Postal Service mailing of elections materials by candidates.  During a Primary Election, for each party represented by a candidate running for a public office may elect one candidate for the General Election, who will then be the only candidate eligible to receive monies from the Elections Fund.  All Primary Election candidates who have met the signature requirement will receive Elections Fund monies in equal proportions up to the time of the Primary Election.  This may require a US Constitutional Amendment to achieve, so as not to conflict with the First Amendment, although legislation may suffice, where the restriction is based on harm reduction, akin to the prohibition of falsely yelling “fire” in a crowded theatre.

Place All Parties In General Debates (and Have Equal / Proportional Primary Party Debates)
Should there be a number of candidates seeking any singular public office which is greater than the number of seats for that particular public office, at least one debate should occur between all candidates, regardless of party affiliation, seeking that office prior to the General Election and following the Primary Election.  Should there be a number of candidates within a political party seeking any singular public office which is greater than the number of seats for that particular public office, at least one debate should occur between all candidates within that party seeking that office prior to the Primary Election.  Should more than one political party need to conduct at least one debate prior to the primary election, all other political parties which also need to conduct at least one similarly timed debate should have an equal number of debates for each party.  All debates for any particular office should be aired on an appropriate television station (or radio station where no television station is available) whose coverage extends to a geographical extent which matches or exceeds the geographical area over which the office presides.  There should be no cost to the candidates or to the political parties for the privilege of conducting and airing such debates; the cost to the station incurred by the airing of such debates may be deducted as a tax write-off for the business which operates that station.  Should no television or radio station elect or be available to broadcast any required debate, an internet-based broadcast of the debate shall suffice, on a website owned by the local or regional elections agency (or the Federal Government in the case of Federal elections).

With all non-citizen interests removed from elections in the United States, it is my hope that the public good will be best served, that the public apathy regarding elections which has been so obvious lately will disappear, and those candidates with the best ideas on how to serve the public good will prevail and be elected to the offices which they seek to hold.

“I invite you to help us all, while we all join to change the world.”

Thank you,

Michael Oatman For President of
These United States of America!
Email: 2016@MichaelOatman.info
Website: http://MichaelOatman.info/

With Love, We Can Take the Power Back!

Comments Off on The Voting Rights Bill of Rights of 2016

Filed under Corporate Corruption, Debates, Election, General, Local Government, National Election, Reform, Tax Code

An Open Letter To Mayor And Council Of The City Of Tucson, as delivered in chambers on 19 May 2015

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

TUCSON, ARIZONA, 21 May 2015 (UFNPSI).

An Open Letter To Mayor And Council Of The City Of Tucson,
as delivered in chambers on 19 May 2015.

Mayor, Council, thank you. My name is Michael Oatman, and I live in Tucson.

I am here to talk to you about dinosaurs … and while you might think I am refering to Access Tucson, … no. To which I refer *is* the Mayor and Council.

You are trying to privatize Tucson 12 and Access Tucson, through the RFP process, when so many of us in the community bear the conviction that our community media should remain fully funded through the City of Tucson.

Now, I thought privatization was a Republican thing ….

The amount you set, $300,000, when the current budget for both is somewhere between $550,000 and $650,000, is clearly not enough for both Tucson 12 and Access, and it is setting a very low bar. These both cannot be funded this way without draconian cuts, or, charging for programming time, or advertising, or all of these.

What’s worse is that you are still keeping millions of dollars in franchise fees which are earmarked to fund both these channels.

Now if you do not have enough pie to go around, please expand the pie and invest in projects, like providing Gigabit Ethernet, which is massively revenue positive, using the Copenhagen or Chattanooga models, as very many US cities are now doing.

Why do we deal with uncertainty? We all know what Access and Tucson 12 are like now. Why risk throwing that all away? Who knows what we will get with private enterprise handling these? It would be that much better to keep them as they are.

Or, is it actually your goal for the RFP process to fail, so that you can sell the property for another giant student housing complex?

Now, if you continue to pursue the RFP process instead of using City Funding … *you* will be DINOs … that is, Democrats In Name Only. Yes, you too will go the way of the dinosaurs, and *your* asteroid will be *your* loss in *your* next election.

Thank you.

~ ~ ~

Michael Oatman
Host / Producer,
Illegal Knowledge TV
(520) 302-5465
mac@IllegalKnowledge.com
IllegalKnowledge.com

Comments Off on An Open Letter To Mayor And Council Of The City Of Tucson, as delivered in chambers on 19 May 2015

Filed under City Council, Corporate Corruption, Election, Election Results, Energy & Jobs, General, Green Party, Jobs, Local Government, Press Releases, Reform, still?

Okay, spoilers, it’s official.  Of Course I’m Running Again!

Hello Everyone!

After a long and perhaps undeserved respite, I will become a presence on this WP site yet again.

Shall you ask why?  There is nothing like a race-baited government-induced crisis to bring folks like me out of the woodwork, I suppose.  Obviously, I am referencing the obamACAre hating bigots of the far right, who seem to be making their own Golden Dawn-ish party faction of the Federalists, er Whigs, er Republicans.  And they say that Democratic-Republicans who were then spoken of as the Democrats are not the Grand Old Party.  I am registered as an Independent and I think I’ll be running under The Truth Party; we’ll see.  Let’s just get Single Payer and get it over with!

I don’t subscribe to the theory that with only crisis do you resolve to have action; we must be proactive in the future.  We need to stop monoculture, Monsanto, and we can sequester carbon by properly tilling the soil.  We need to bring back the Bison, the Wolves and the Bees.  These actions all will perpetuate the survival of humans, which is in prescient danger.

They set the bar intentionally higher this time in 2016 so as to prohibit people in general from exercising their civic duties by running for President, so I’ll need some statewide organizational help if we are to pull this off.  By “they”, I mean the states’ legislatures which now require both money and petition signatures to qualify for the ballot.

You may reach me at president [at] MichaelOatman [dot] (info|net) for now, until I get a really nice site up.  That would be either .info or .net after my name.  I’m still working on recovering my .com.  Damn cybersquatters.

So I wrote this on my TV show and business websites, http://IllegalKnowledge.com/ and http://HeyComputerMan.biz/ so please read:

The place in this world bears no more space for those ideologues of bigotry nor hatred.  The ancient thought that a betterment of one family or race or strain is somehow purity, that is now obviously not only quaint, but incorrect and patently obtuse and averse from reality.  The old lines are no longer to be sanely held.  We shall not now and ought not to ever more be alone.  I do not want to be this, only in, that only I am this; it is necessary this entire world needs to share that this immutable truth must be known, because, we all of everyone, we do collectively hold the highest and so care about our future, even when it is not our own.

And if that is not a blatant espousal of communism, then I don’t know what is.

That’s all for now, please take the poll, and please stay tuned!

Michael

Comments Off on Okay, spoilers, it’s official.  Of Course I’m Running Again!

Filed under General

Romney Shares Something With Reagan After All: No Memory When Convenient

Sources: Washington Post, LA Times, Don’t take my word for it.

Well, talk about using a Bully Pulpit.

Not so fast though, it appears that Mitt Romney is actually a bully, and the worst kind at that, as if there were any other kinds.

As it turns out, Mittens might have been better named Scissors, since The Post recently revealed that:

Romney returned from a three-week spring break in 1965 to resume his studies as a high school senior at the prestigious Cranbrook School. Back on the handsome campus, studded with Tudor brick buildings and manicured fields, he spotted something he thought did not belong at a school where the boys wore ties and carried briefcases. John Lauber, a soft-spoken new student one year behind Romney, was perpetually teased for his nonconformity and presumed homosexuality. Now he was walking around the all-boys school with bleached-blond hair that draped over one eye, and Romney wasn’t having it.
“He can’t look like that. That’s wrong. Just look at him!” an incensed Romney told Matthew Friedemann, his close friend in the Stevens Hall dorm, according to Friedemann’s recollection. Mitt, the teenage son of Michigan Gov. George Romney, kept complaining about Lauber’s look, Friedemann recalled.
A few days later, Friedemann entered Stevens Hall off the school’s collegiate quad to find Romney marching out of his own room ahead of a prep school posse shouting about their plan to cut Lauber’s hair. Friedemann followed them to a nearby room where they came upon Lauber, tackled him and pinned him to the ground. As Lauber, his eyes filling with tears, screamed for help, Romney repeatedly clipped his hair with a pair of scissors.

The LA Times goes on to report that:

After Romney’s campaign spokesperson initially denied the story, Romney went on Fox Radio to say he did not remember the incident but that he was sorry about it anyway. “I’m a very different person than I was in high school, of course, but I’m glad I learned as much as I did during those high school years,” he said in the radio interview.

So I’m now thinking, “isn’t it rather convenient to forget about these things?”  Reagan did, about authorizing the Iran-Contra affair, which is somewhat now paralleled by the infamous “Operation Fast and Furious” into which Obama seems to be needing a new recollection.

I do not forget things like this, and nor do I forget my own.

The one bully I had in high school, after he intentionally “spilled” pudding on my shirt, I, right there and then, decided to left-swoop back hand Alex MacKenzie into the side of the head, which sent him reeling backward onto the pavement, knocked out for a few.  It was the worst thing I have done to someone, but after he woke up, he suddenly decided to become my best friend the next day in school.

I think we just can do the same forgeting to Romney by simply not voting for him.

Ever.

It makes you wonder whether, between the crass class callousness combined with the elite aloof, whether someone like Romney is to ever be fit for the job.  If history is to be of any use, you would expect to be ripped off unless you are already rich and then bullied if you dare to be unlike “them”.

I wonder where Alex is….

Comments Off on Romney Shares Something With Reagan After All: No Memory When Convenient

Filed under Bullying, Classism, Corporate, Corporate Corruption, Election, General, Homophobia, Reagan, really, Romney, still?

I Am Tied For First in PWH Voting!  Thank You To Everyone Who Voted!

I am rather pleased to report that after all the votes have been tallied, I placed tied for third place with 6.87% of the vote total in the Arizona Green Party results in the 2012 Presidential Preference Election.  First I would like to say thank you incredibly much to the people who voted for me this year, I would like to congratulate all the voters who made this election one of the most participated with a 45% turnout, and I will guarantee that I will be running again for US President as well as for other offices in the future.

I would also like to congratulate Jill Stein, the winner of the Green Party Election with 68.9% of the total vote, and her runner up, Kent Mesplay with 8.68% of the total Arizona Greens voting for him.  I would also like to congratulate all the Project White House (PWH) candidates who participated in this year’s election.

Among the PWH candidates, who were Richard Grayson, Gary Swing, and myself, it was Richard and I who tied for first place with 35.8% each of the PWH vote.  Gary Swing finished closely behind in third with 28.3% of the PWH vote and fifth overall with 5.42% of the total vote.  Jill Stein, Kent Mesplay and Gerard Davis (who received 3.25% of the total vote, thereby finishing last amongst the Arizona Greens) all chose not to participate in Project White House in 2012.

The PWH Greens kicked butt compared to their PWH Republican counterparts when it came to capturing the largest portion of the electorate, beating the Republican percentage by 18.4%, although not so much if you only count raw numbers of votes since there are far fewer Greens in Arizona.

There were 106 people in Arizona who voted for any of the Project White House Green Party candidates (19.1% of total Green votes), and (a huge!) 3,444 Arizonans who voted for PWH Republican Party candidates (well, not that huge, since those 3,444 people make up less than 1%, only 0.68%, of the total votes cast by Republicans).  Of those few thousand some Republicans, Sarah Gonzales was the clear winner at 44.7% of the PWH vote, and placed sixth in the total Republican vote (after Romney, Santorum yuck, Gingrich, Ron Paul, and Rick Perry) with 0.30% of the total.  I wholeheartedly offer my congrats to Sarah for her outstanding performance and participation in the debates.

Of the PWH Republicans, second place went to Cesar Cisneros with 12.2% of the PWH vote (placing ninth in total), third went to Mark Callahan with 10.4% of PWH voters, and in fourth, fifth and sixth places were “Dick” Perry, Don Benjamin and Kip Dean respectively, with 9.1%, 6.5% and 5.7% of all PWH votes.  The remaining five PWH Republican candidates were Ron Zack (4.4%), Matt Welch (2.5%), Jim Terr (1.7%), Charles Skelley (1.7%) and lastly Simon Bollander (1.5%).  The five lowest placing PWH Republicans totaled 11.8% of the PWH vote, and places 2 through 6 totaled 43.9% of the PWH vote for the Republicans.

Of all the votes which I received, Pima County voters accounted for only 21.1%, with the majority of my votes coming from voters in Maricopa County with 52.6% of the total.  I also received votes from voters in Yavapai (10.5%), Coconino (5.3%), Pinal (2.6%), Navajo (2.6%), Mohave (2.6%) and Apache (2.6%) Counties.  Thank you again to everyone in those counties who voted for me.  Actually, Jill Stein won the county-by-county in every county except Apache County, where I received the sole Green Party vote cast from the Lukachukai precinct, thereby actually winning the only county in Arizona which Jill Stein did not win.  Now, do I get delegates for that?

I would also like to thank the single Green Party voter in Oatman, Mohave County, Arizona who noticed the name similarity (the town was named after a branch of my family which moved out west about 180 years before I did) and voted for and carried your precinct for me.  It’s nice to have support from a town which shares your name.

I compiled a map which you can see here which contains the county-by-county results for the Green Party and how I placed (or, see the map of only the PWH candidate placements).  As it turns out, I either placed or tied for either first or second place in six of the 15 counties in Arizona, there were six others in which I made the top three, I tied for fourth twice, and I never placed last.  Aside from Jill Stein, who outplaced me (and everyone) in 14 of the 15 counties, of the four other Green candidates running, I was outplaced by no one in six counties, by Grayson in five counties, by Mesplay in four, and by Swing and Davis in just two.  So all in all I’d say I did pretty well.  Thank you all again for your support!

I’ll keep writing here; I will keep this blog active, so check back often, and please remember to comment if you would like!

Thank You for Voting Green, and Thank You for Voting Oatman!!!

2 Comments

Filed under Debates, Election Results, General, Green Party, Tucson Weekly

Announcing First Arizona Presidential Preference Election Debate in 2012 (press release)

Hello, please circulate widely, thank you!

Contact: Michael Oatman
Oatman for President 2012
Tel: (202) 642-4785 (D.C. Offices)
Tel: (520) 302-5465 (Tucson Offices)
Fax: (206) 202-2194
Email: 2012@MichaelOatman.net
Website: http://2012.MichaelOatman.net/

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Announcing First Arizona Presidential Preference Election Debate in 2012

Description:  The first Arizona Presidential Preference Election debate of 2012 will be held on 18 February 2012 at 8:00 PM.

TUCSON, AZ, 15 February 2012 — All candidates whose names appear on either the Green Party or Republican Arizona Presidential Preference Election ballots have been invited to participate in the first debate of the 2012 election season.  The debate will be held at Access Tucson, 124 East Broadway Blvd. in Tucson, Arizona, at 8:00 pm on 18 February 2012.  All media outlets are welcomed to cover the debate immediately prior to and following the event.

The presidential debate will be produced by the television show entitled “Illegal Knowledge” and will be hosted by Tucson Weekly contributor and San Diego City Beat newspaper columnist Dave Maass.  It is being coordinated by Illegal Knowledge producer and candidate Michael Oatman and Tucson Weekly writer Jim Nintzel.  There will not be a specific topic to be debated, but will cover all areas of the social and political spheres.

There will also be a second debate to be held at Access Tucson on the following day, on the 19th.  This next debate will be produced by the Tucson Weekly in conjunction with Access Tucson and feature the winners from the debate on the 18th.  More details of the second debate will be given on the night of the 18th at the first debate.

A third debate has been scheduled to be held in Mesa, Arizona on the following Thursday 23 February 2012.

Green Party candidate Michael Oatman quipped, “We did this in 2008 and it worked really well, so I’m definitely looking forward to the debate this year”.

# # #

Michael Oatman is currently accepting invitations for interviews from all news and media outlets.  Please contact Mr. Oatman using any of the contact methods provided in the header of this release.  Thank You for Your Interest!

Vote Green!  Vote Oatman!

Michael Oatman For President of
These United States of America!
Email: 2012@MichaelOatman.net
Website: http://2012.MichaelOatman.net/

With Love, We Can Take the Power Back!

Comments Off on Announcing First Arizona Presidential Preference Election Debate in 2012 (press release)

Filed under Debates, General, Green Party, Press Releases, Tucson Weekly

Truth, Transparency & Trust: We Need It, And In the FDA

Genetic Hybridization has been a long standing pillar of those who use farming, herding and ranching to supply their means to make a living.  Unfortunately, it is no longer the “mom and pop” farms which manufacture the bulk of this nation’s produce.

Since the development of global agribusiness, which has been steadily encroaching upon the local output of the total production base of livestock, fruits and vegetables since the 1980s, the one agency which has been slated to regulate the quality of these consumer items, the Federal Drug Administration (as well as the USDA), has been rendered wholly toothless as a result of the incessant putsch for deregulation, perpetrated by those who stand to gain the most in the business.

Now, and particularly within the last 10 years, GMO foods (GMO is Genetically Modified Organisms) have penetrated our supermarkets, and GMOs are present in pretty much all non-organic preprocessed foods.

We are now exposed to more GMOs in our foods and produce than ever before, with little to no oversight of what actually comprises them.  We know that right now, most corn (corn and canola oil), alfalfa, soybeans (soy, soy lectin), sugar beets (sugar other than pure cane sugar), papayas, cotton (cotton seed oil), yellow squash, and some kinds of non-organic Golden Rice are either wholly or partially composed of GMOs (see the list).  All meat products produced in the US, since they are all fed 100% GMO feed stocks, are essentially 100% GM meats.  I think it’s time to go vegan.  Organic Vegan, that is.

We also know that somewhere in the neighborhood of 93% of Americans support the labeling of GM products.  Europe (the EU) already requires labeling of GM foods, and since the mid 2000s, the EU has banned most types of GMOs from being grown or produced within its boundaries.

So why does this matter?  Let’s go back into history a little bit.

In 1901, Monsanto was founded.  It started off making an artificial sweetener called Saccharin, which it marketed to Coca-Cola.  In the 1920s, Monsanto started producing vanillin, salicylic acid, aspirin, and basic industrial chemicals like sulfuric acid and rubber processing chemicals.

Odd that a company which makes food additives would also be making sulfuric acid (which will eat through your skin) and rubber processing chemicals (which can kill you), isn’t it?

Since the 1940s, Monsanto become a leading manufacturer of plastics, including polystyrene, synthetic fibers, the herbicides 2,4,5-T, DDT, Agent Orange, the artificial sweetener aspartame (NutraSweet), bovine somatotropin (bovine growth hormone or BST), PCBs, LEDs, 2,4-D, BT-Toxin, and most profitably, Round-Up and Round-Up resistant GM seeds.

Obviously, DDT (an “insecticide”) and Agent Orange (a “defoliant”) are no longer being produced, but 2,4-D is a very close cousin to Agent Orange, and what the BT-Toxin does to insects makes DDT look humane.  BT-Toxin is a GM toxin which alters the DNA of insects so that their internal organs turn to gel and explode.  Somebody at Monsanto really has it in for bugs, huh?  They put this stuff in Round-Up, and the GM seeds which are constructed to be Round-Up resistant have this same GM BT-Toxin in them.  It has been shown that when GM plants grown with these BT-Toxin-infused genes are consumed by some animals, the bacteria in those animals’ stomachs get their DNA altered so that they become miniature BT-Toxin factories.  Yes, that’s pretty gross, right?

So it is conceivable that if you eat enough, say, GM corn chips, your stomach bacteria will start producing BT-Toxin, causing your stomach to explode, just like the insects.  This will cause a very painful, and very certain death.  Maybe somebody at Monsanto really has it in for everyone who eats their GM seeds, actually.  Just as an aside, there were several Monsanto scientists who, having learned from their research the effects of BT-Toxin in the feeds which were then fed to cows, stopped buying non-organic beef and milk altogether, and one even went so far as to buy his own milk cow.

Now, it should be noted that they did have some help, from the inside.

From Wikipedia:

  • Justice Clarence Thomas worked as an attorney for Monsanto in the 1970s.  Justice Thomas wrote the majority opinion in the 2001 Supreme Court decision J. E. M. Ag Supply, Inc. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc. which found that “newly developed plant breeds are patentable under the general utility patent laws of the United States.”  This case benefited all companies which profit from genetically modified crops, of which Monsanto is the largest.
  • Michael R. Taylor was an assistant to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) commissioner before he left to work for a law firm on gaining FDA approval of Monsanto’s artificial growth hormone in the 1980s.  Taylor then became deputy commissioner of the FDA from 1991 to 1994.  After he went back to Monsanto to become Vice President for Public Policy, Taylor was later re-appointed to the FDA in August 2009 by President Barack Obama.
  • Dr. Michael A. Friedman was a deputy commissioner of the FDA before he was hired as a senior vice president of Monsanto.
  • Linda J. Fisher was an assistant administrator at the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) before she was a vice president at Monsanto from 1995 to 2000.  In 2001, Fisher became the deputy administrator of the EPA.
  • Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was chairman and chief executive officer of G. D. Searle & Co., which Monsanto purchased in 1985.  Rumsfeld personally made at least $12 million USD from the transaction.

One would wonder why the Republicans wanted to get rid of the EPA under Dubya, when their corporate cronies were actually running it, at least from afar, and mostly from the inside.

Not only this, but Michael Taylor is currently heading the FDA and has been appointed Food Czar by none other than Obama.  With Taylor leading the FDA, giving the FDA more money will not help unless all vestiges of Monsanto are removed from government.  Taylor will undoubtedly just continue to green light all Monsanto foods, without regard to the health and safety of the people who are eating the food.

And as for the poor who live on USDA subsidies?  Well, just talk about shoving it down their throats….

To achieve the Truth, Transparency & Trust which are required of the FDA, Taylor must go, along with Obama, and we must replace the void with real leadership who have actual respect, and not this apparent disdain, for We The People.

But all is not yet lost.

There is also a California Initiative to require labeling of all GM foods.  The theory is that food producers would rather not admit to the US public that they have GMOs in the foods they make, and rather than label them, the food producers would rather remove the GM ingredients from all their foods than admit they were there in the first place, and Monsanto will simply go out of business or something.

Now you would think that passing this initiative would be a no-brainer, but lobbying and false advertising by Monsanto have defeated a similar initiative in Oregon not but a few years ago.  Monsanto has and will claim that the companies who produce the food will have to charge, look out, way more money to print new labels, and therefore the food will become, oh, so much more expensive.  Pity then for the poor consumer, no, no.

The opposite is actually true. Not to mention that food producers change their labels all the time with no increase in consumer cost, the labels will not change (since the food producers will not want those labels on their foods), and the food producers will actually save money by not having to pay Monsanto extra money to put their GM foods in the food producers’ products in the first place.  Labeling is a win-win for everyone but Monsanto.  That must be why they at Monsanto really have it in for us.

Then there is SB 510, the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act.  This act will require little oversight by the FDA of GMOs, will encourage GMOs to be added to foods, will require organic farmers to submit to a litany of overburdensome regulations regarding the supposed “safety” of their foods which have been perfectly safe for millennia, and will actually outright prohibit anyone from growing their own food in their own garden.  If you grow food, you go to jail.

No, unfortunately, I am absolutely serious.  I wish I was kidding.

So obviously, SB 510 needs to be stopped in its tracks, and we need to get its sponsors and supporters out of office.  Immediately.  You really have to wonder if this is yet another Bilderberg ploy to cull more of the population.  Getting death into our foods would easily enable them to take out all but one of fourteen.

In the meantime, please protect yourself by making sure that you never buy GMO foods.  Please check out:

for more information, and remember, as always:

With Knowledge and Love, We Can All Take The Power Back!

Vote Green!!!  Vote Oatman!!!

Comments Off on Truth, Transparency & Trust: We Need It, And In the FDA

Filed under Corporate, Corporate Corruption, Education, Environment, Foods, General, Government Intrusion, Poverty, Reform

Happy Birthday, Arizona!

Just a quick Happy Birthday wish for Arizona:

I have noticed that Coal, Copper, Cotton, Cattle and Citrus has now become Copper (still!), Call Centers, Climate, Crazy Legislators and Corruption.

I sincerely hope your next 100 years will be better than your first.

With Love,
Michael

Comments Off on Happy Birthday, Arizona!

Filed under General

On HSBC, Federal Reserve, CIA, Drugs, Leaders and Future Wars

It is truly about time someone put this all together.  Fortunately, I stand on the shoulders of giants.  Mr. Corsi is one.

Sources:  Jerome R. Corsi (in 3 articles: 1, 2, 3) and Coast To Coast AM interview with Corsi

I had a dream the other day, well, night, that I was attempting to extract snakes from the proverbial grass.  This imagery may have been brought on by the many recent news reports of an abundance of pythons within the everglades, or perhaps you could think of the serpent in E.DIN.

Someone was standing a few yards away from me (and was helping me get at these snakes) and would pull the head of their snake from their side, but then mine would retreat simultaneously from my grasp on the head end which I was handling, and conversely, when I would pull, their snake would retreat.

Somehow, a machete materialized in my hand and I began to hack away at the grass and weeds in which the snake was hiding, as did my compatriot.  Eventually we managed to hack away at the grass to a large enough extent that we could spot other snakes hiding in the weeds as well.

As we continued to pull and hack away, it became apparent that both of the ends of our snakes were somehow tied together, so that we were actually pulling on the same two headed snake.  As we cleared more brush it became even more apparent that all of the snakes which were present in the weeds were actually part of the same animal.

Then the ground shook, the brushy area in front of us bulged upward, and out of the soil arose a stone granite Medusa-head, atop of which all the snakes were joined.  I was taken aback, but that was where the dream ended as I woke up.  I mulled it over, and went back to sleep to a different, slightly less weird dream.

The next night, Jerome Corsi was on Coast.

For any of you who still have not heard (of) Coast to Coast AM (formerly with Art Bell, now with George Noory), I strongly suggest that you wiki it or just go visit the website.  In the first two hours of the show, Corsi was on, and he spoke of receiving about a thousand pages of documents from a HSBC Banking employee turned whistleblower named John Cruz.

As Corsi told it, Cruz started out life being poor, his mother having died and his father having left the family.  Living with his grandparents, he got through school and then worked his way up through positions in various banks until he got a break working to expand the client base and clients’ services for HSBC in 2008.  He was finally paid rather well at HSBC.

Cruz worked at the NYC branch of HSBC and was given business client account information for which he was to use to contact clients and attempt to have those clients purchase more services from HSBC.  He was basically a mid-level marketing guy with access to business accounts.

In the course of performing these duties, Cruz discovered that about 90% of the accounts he received were either fraudulent or suspicious.  That is, when he would attempt to contact any of these clients, say, at their businesses, he would find the business did not exist (think barren weeded warehouses), or that there would be no obvious activity happening (no office furniture, no workers, you get the picture).  When he contacted individuals, those people were unaware that their names were being used in conjunction with a business, and those people were either past HSBC customers or victims of identity fraud through credit cards.

Since numerous laws including the PATRIOT ACT required Cruz to notify at least one of his superiors of these many breaches in practice and law, if not other regulatory agencies as well, he went ahead and did so, lest he be seen as the one breaking the law.  After all, he liked his job at that point.

Well, this is what got Cruz fired not but two years after landing the job, for “poor performance”.  One wonders how one could perform well with only 10% of a client base with which to work.

When he brought these cases up to management, he was told that there was no problem and that he was imagining it, and when he went to HSBC security, they told Cruz they were “prevented by executive senior management of the bank from doing anything about accounts like this”.

Cruz noted that these accounts were being used to transfer via telephone (never with checks) large sums of money — in the hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars — to and from accounts which were not on record with the bank.  This, Cruz guessed, would total something easily into the billions or even low trillions of dollars of money laundering.  Cruz further guessed, probably correctly, that HSBC senior management knew of and was participating in and likely profiting from the scheme.  “From what I saw, I came to suspect HSBC had become the Mexican drug cartels’ bank of choice,” he said.

So at this point, I’m thinking, “maybe I should check out my local HSBC Bank branch to see whether there is an account worth millions in my name.”  I’m thinking we all should check on this, just to be certain, and withdraw all funds if there is.

Cruz started wearing a wire, on his own, and copied about a thousand pages of documentation of the suspected laundering activity.  After recording conversations with management, he took his case to Jeremy Scileppi, bureau chief of the Suffolk County District Attorney’s office on Long Island.

“Scileppi was no more interested in hearing what I had to say than was the HSBC senior bank management,” Cruz said.  “I got stonewalled.  That’s when I decided to write a book.”

Titled “World Banking World Fraud: Using Your Identity,” Cruz’s book was published on 7 October 2011.  Cruz then took his book and documents to Corsi, who talked about them on the Coast show on 6 February 2012.

That’s where it all gets interesting.

Corsi used to be in banking, before becoming an investigative journalist, and Corsi loves whistleblowers.

Corsi, on Coast, mentioned that there would be no way that such millions would be able to be transferred with such regularity to or from any bank, much less the London-based HSBC, without attracting the attention of the US-based Federal Reserve Banking System.

Now the Federal Reserve is not a government agency, but is a collection of private banks organized in a system with tight, and basically illegal, control over the United States currency supply.  So I agreed with Corsi; the Fed must have known about this, and if so, then they were obviously just as well involved in the money laundering and illegal profiteering.  After all, no sane person would let that many billions or trillions slide without at least taking a cut, unless they were being blackmailed or something.

So now to recap; we have the drug cartels laundering the drug money from the drug users in the United States through HSBC (and perhaps other institutions like PayPal and AmEx — see Corsi’s third article), while HSBC and the Fed take a cut and let the process go unhindered.  How many snakes is that?

So how does Corsi or Cruz for that matter know it was drug money?  Well, maybe it’s not, but who else makes that much money in that short of a period of time (I know, Big Pharma and Big Oil) and still needs to launder it through ficticious accounts?  (Right, drug cartels.)

And all the HSBC high level executives know about this?  Undoubtedly.  Will it be investigated?  Well, hopefully; let’s find out.  This should be one of the biggest news stories of 2012.  But will it be?  Again….

Now, you may ask, does Fed Chair Ben Bernanke know about this?  Quite possibly.  Do the individual twelve Fed Bank Chiefs know?  Almost certainly.  Does US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner know?  Maybe.  How about Dubya or Obama?  Hmmmm….  I wonder.

But I know who absolutely has to know, since it is their job to know these things, and that is the CIA.  And if the CIA knows, you can bet the FBI is out of the loop.  Corsi agrees with me using other logic.

Corsi figures that at least $2T (that’s two trillion dollars) annually goes to the US black market in drug use.  That might seem high, considering spreading that total out over the US population of 400M people gives you $5000 spent annually per person.  But then I thought about all those Wall Street Bankster and Hollywood Insider parties Featuring Charlie Sheen, and Corsi might be about right.  I’m going to leave Corsi in the dust for the rest of this article, though.

The CIA has a number of “Black Ops” (programs or operations which are to be kept secret from the public, like the Bin Laden raid) that need to be funded every year.  The problem with funding black ops is that by publicly funding them, even by just stating the actual total of the funding, you make the black ops a little less black.  So what does the CIA do to counter this problem?  They “earn” the money needed to fund their black ops.  Blackly.

We’re not talking about bake sales here.

The LA Times did an article about ten years back detailing how the crack cocaine epidemic was started in LA because the drug was created by the CIA (just add baking soda?) to fund a CIA black op in Nicaragua, giving arms and other support (like mining Contra ports) to the Sandinista government to keep the fight going between the US-publicly-backed Contras and the Sandinistas, so that more US taxpayer money could be thrown at the Nicaraguan civil war.  War costs more if you do it longer.  This is also good for banks.  The CIA also helped to intensify the US War on Drugs using this same operation (thereby providing even more money for various LEOs).  This is a great dual example of the use of the Hegelian Dialectic.  You can wiki any and all of this.

At any rate, the CIA was actively involved in selling drugs.  It still is (why are we in Afghanistan?  Opium!).  It has found that line of business quite profitable historically and quite useful when it comes to funding their black ops, and keeping that funding black.

And those are just two examples.  The CIA created the Mujahadeen (precursors of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda), and therefore the “war on terrorism”.  The CIA was deeply involved in the coup d’etat which in 1953 overthrew the popularly elected Prime Minister of Iran Mohammad Mosaddegh so that they could install the Shah into absolute power, which immediately benefited Big Oil, setting the stage for the 1979 Iranian revolution which brought the Ayatollah and his Shiite successors to power, to now threaten Israel with nukes.  The CIA even created an asset (a person who will carry out tasks for the CIA when asked), internally known as Tim O’Brien, although most of us knew him as Osama Bin Laden (the CIA trained him in Egypt).

So you see, as it turns out, the CIA has quite a good track record (or bad, depending on who you ask) of getting the “correct” leaders in power using drugs and drug money directly, or indirectly through funding their operations.  In this case, correct means that those leaders will willfully do your bidding, or, in this case, the bidding of the CIA and the Bilderberg Group.

If you do not know what the Bilderberg Group is and who composes it, I again very strongly suggest that you read up on that, right nowI’ll save your place, just close the new tab or window after you’re done.  Go ahead, I’ll wait.

Okay, you’re back.  So now I take it that you have figured out that the Bilderbergers are an insanely wealthy group of oligarchs intent on world domination and a return to feudalism and serfdom for the rest of us who are not to be simply killed off, while they pursue life extension technologies and get to fly to other planets on our cool black triangular shaped AGV craft, right?  What, didn’t you read the part about the Georgia Guidestones?  Okay, I’ll wait; read the ten inscriptions, please.

All right then, let’s recap again.  Let’s see if I can get this right.

So the Bilderbergers who want to control everything, and who do control politicians of all parties in most countries, along with the CIA, and by extension most militias, wars, conflicts, and whatnot, do so all for the benefit of the banks, the owners of which mostly comprise the members in the Bilderberg Group.  The CIA uses the drug money which is laundered through these same banks (which create economic crises to make those already rich even richer) to accomplish the goals of the Bilderbergers, of which Ben Bernanke is a member, and all of whom directly benefit in both power and money from these processes.  I’ll bet anyone ten grand (even Romney) that there are about 3,600 snakes on that Medusa head.

So now we are all talking about a war between Israel and Iran.  I heard the other day that someone in the US government suggested that it was actually Iran that flew the airplanes into the WTC towers.  I guess Iran must have flown that invisible plane into 7 WTC.  No, silly, it was Pakistan’s ISI (their CIA) and Israel’s Mossad (their CIA) who organized the whole thing.  Aside from the fact that at least 13 of the 19 supposed terrorists turned up alive since 9/11 (yes, true, again, look it up), most of those suspected terrorists were from Saudi Arabia, and the others from Pakistan, with one from Afghanistan.  That, of course, is why we had to invade Afghanistan, and then Iraq.  What now, Iran?

Franklin Delano Roosevelt made sure that our aircraft carriers were not in Pearl Harbor and that the radar was down for repair on the morning of 7 December 1941 because his New Deal policies were not pulling the US out of depression, and he figured that a full-scale war with Germany, Italy and Japan could recreate the manufacturing base required to reinvigorate the US economy.  It turned out that he was right about the economy, but it did not prevent him from committing Treason that day.

The trouble making that 2012 analogy is that war between Iran and Israel would undoubtedly involve Russia and then China, and barring a new wave of isolationism within the US, it would involve our nation as well, and would very likely go nuclear, since Israel has built up quite a stockpile of nukes over the last 26 years since Mordechai Vannanu started reporting on it.

If we legalized drugs, regulated and taxed them, we would have plenty of money to give to Iran to stop them from developing nukes, not to mention for jobs, education, green energy development, ending poverty, social security and really whatever, but where would the CIA get all the black money for their black ops?  Into what new nefarious ventures might they delve, hurting everyone in the process?  Not that I’m arguing against legalization, because I’m not, but perhaps the CIA and all the Banksters are just too expensive to keep around.  I will need a body double before I travel to Dealey Plaza.

If the CIA wants to do something which is actually useful, it should get the Iranian Green Revolution which started in February 2010 into power, since most Iranians, by a landslide, do not want war with Israel.  No one who I know here wants war with Iran.  But then again, no one I know is a Bilderberger.  They want a situation where every 13 out of 14 people living now will be dead.  You’ve got to ask yourself one question: “Do I feel lucky?”  Well do ya, punk?

We cannot begin another Great Game, this time with Persia as the prize.

The problem is that we are making a repeat performance of the events leading up to the illegal invasion of Iraq in late 2002 and 2003, and while I suspect that Iran is actually enriching uranium and to a lesser degree plutonium to produce weapons-grade materiel, I think it would be wisest in this case to offer to lift all sanctions and restore diplomatic relations with Iran only if they would turn over all nuclear production to Russia and/or the IAEA, so that it could be used only for peaceful power generation.  In fact, I think it would be even more wise to convince Iran to drop the nuclear program altogether and pursue wind, wave, solar and tidal energies exclusively, just like we should do, and just like Germany is doing already.

The nightmare would be the prescribed culling of the population to 500 million via a nuclear WWIII, but that would be letting the snakes win, and I still have a machete.

I actually do quite often have prognosticative dreams which turn out to be metaphorical, and occasionally literal.  More often, they have happier endings, but there is no reason this one cannot have an ending where the figurative Medusa head is obliterated.

That kind of stuff/people absolutely hate(s) it when you shine the Light of Truth on it/them.

With the Light of Truth and Love, We All Will Take The Power Back!

Vote Green!!!  Vote Oatman!!!

Comments Off on On HSBC, Federal Reserve, CIA, Drugs, Leaders and Future Wars

Filed under Banking, Corporate Corruption, Education, Energy, General, Government Intrusion, International, Iran Crisis, Jobs, Legalization, Poverty, Reform

PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE QUESTIONNAIRE

From Project White House.

Saturday 14 January 2012

Jim Nintzel
Senior Writer
Tucson Weekly

Thank you Jim!  Here are my responses.

Name: Michael Oatman

Contact/Email:2012@MichaelOatman.co.cc

Website: 2012.MichaelOatman.co.cc

Social media —
Facebook: facebook.MichaelOatman.co.cc
Twitter: @MichaelOatman

Occupation: Webmaster
Website: HeyComputerMan.co.cc

Birth Town: Lancaster, Pennsylvania
Residing in: Tucson, Arizona

Pets: Fish

Favorite food: Baked Ziti, or pizza, both of which I make.

99% or 1%?

  • There will always be a 99% and a 1%.  The issue is the difference of incomes and standards of living between the two.  Eventually, the differences will become less, but it is only now a question of whether that difference reduction is accomplished via social, economic and political reforms or via revolution.
  • I prefer reforms, but I will always assist in the revolution, should reforms fail.

How many houses do you own? None, I rent.

General Questions

Who is your first choice for a running mate? Cynthia Ann McKinney

Make us a campaign promise: “I Do Solemnly Swear To Read The Tucson Weekly, Weekly!”

Spaceships appear above every major US city: How would you handle it?

  • 1) Find out whether they are ours and whether this is an exercise or a coup d’etat.  If it is an exercise, deny it.
  • 2) If they are ours (and not an exercise), quash the coup and hang the treasonous bastards.  If they are not ours, well, fucking negotiate.
  • 3) If they (not ours) refuse to negotiate, and it is understood what they want, and that is our annihilation, then nuke them.  Cooperate to our mutual benefit otherwise.  Let’s get on board!

Name two people you would bring together in a beer summit.

  • Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman, just to test them.
  • Other than those two, neither of whom would likely have a beer, an effective beer summit might include myself and the leaders of Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Brazil, EU people, Palestine, and Israel.  One can only imagine the tremendous range of topics to be hammered out.  We would need absinthe, not beer, for this one.

Priority Evaluation

Please order the following threats in terms of biggest priority to least priority (1-6):

First of all, I’d like to explain my numbering scheme.  I have these listed in order 1-6, and also in percent importance priority, 0%-100%.  The latter percent is where the issue falls in relative importance overall.  I will use this percent importance scale in further posts.

Order  Pct. Importance  Issue
-----  ---------------  -------
1.     92%              Climate Change
2.     90%              Iran
3.     85%              Unemployment
4.     60%              Food recalls
5.     25%              Harakat al-Shabaab al-Mujahideen
6.     0.00002%         Piranhas

FYI, I would place the possibility of Asian Carp invading the Great Lakes at number 4.5 with a percent of 30%.  Additionally, I would give 100% to overall political reform of elections involving the federal government.

Issues (stated):

Abortion – Safe, Legal, and Rare.  Birth control should be freely and widely available so that abortion effectively exists only to protect the life and well-being of the mother.

Guns – For the Second Amendment, and for the argument that a background check (instantaneous) does not impinge on it.  I also support free public gun training, particularly for those who wish to carry concealed.

Death penalty – Only for the offense of Treason.

Marijuana – For decriminalization, for removal from Schedule I, and for treatment like and taxation beyond Alcohol and Tobacco.

Israel or Palestine or is it complicated? I support a One-State solution, where everyone’s votes are equal under a united government.

Justin Bieber – I’m for kids with talent.  This excludes Bieber.  I’m morally against mommies trying to relive their youth by entering their daughters into beauty pageants, but there should be no law.

Waterboarding – For the Geneva Conventions for all nations.

Gays in the military – Are we seriously still talking about this?  It has been resolved correctly, finally.

Bigger threat to the institution of marriage: Sinead O’Connor;  Las Vegas?

Obamacare – I support (and have since 2007) a single payer, possibly multi-tiered system.  Please see the website for details.

Boehner’s tears – As fake as his tan.  Where In The World Is Jon Boehner?

Border fence – For a reasonable guest worker program, some version of the Dream Act, drug legalization (except meth and heroin), the cessation of state funding for Israel and Pakistan (our businesses can still sell them weapons), and the removal of our bases from Mecca and Medina.  The fence was historically used simply to mark the national boundary.  Oh, and no Canadian fences.  If we remove the reasons for which people want to come here illegally and/or attack us, we need no fences.

English as the U.S. official language – Je parle Francais aussi.

Amnesty for undocumented immigrants – Yes for the kids; Guest Worker for the adults.

Koch brothers – BANG, ZOOM!  Straight to the moon!

Net Neutrality – 1000% FOR!  100% against SOPA/PIPA!  100% FOR COPPA!  Let corporations make their own limited internet, parallel to the real one.  Let’s see which one people want to use.

Increased defense spending – As if we really have the money to spend — but if we just print it, could we at least print 3 times that much for education, please?

Should text message abbreviations be taught in schools? AFAIK ABVS RNT GRMR.  If you could understand that, then maybe we *should* teach people how to communicate with you, or perhaps better vice versa.

Childhood vaccinations – I’m against mercury in particular and any other toxins in vaccines.  Yes, mercury is still in there.  You should really read the packaging ingredients on everything.  The underlying principle of vaccination is fine, medically speaking.

Disclosure

Please list all:
love-children: none
sexual harassment allegations: none
illegal immigrant house help: no house, no help; I rent
criminal convictions: public record
draft dodges: none
bribery scandals: none
other ethics challenges: I’m NOT for bestiality, incest, rape, the Bohemian Grove, Sharia Law, Vulture Capitalism, or closed minds.

  • God Is Everything And Everything Else.  God does not require religion, but the opposite is not true.

Please remember to register with the GREEN PARTY on or before Monday 30 January 2012!

Please Vote for Michael Oatman on Tuesday 28 February 2012!!!

Thank You ALL For Your Amazing Support!

Comments Off on PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE QUESTIONNAIRE

Filed under Corporate, Education, Energy, Environment, General, Government Intrusion, International, Jobs, Reform, Tucson Weekly

What is Necessary For National Defense, And For Exactly Whose Defense

On 31 December 2011, President Obama silently signed an act into law.

This act was named the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA.

There was much furor over this act becoming law, for a number of reasons, which I will write about here, and about the implications of those governing sections of this act.

Let me first state that the NDAA for 2012, unlike other Defense Spending Acts passed in years prior, which were used to simply supply the military of the United States with the funds needed to operate, the current NDAA has been written to be much more far-reaching, to include executive branch limitations on where and how to combat terrorism, conditions on Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, and detentions of individuals from within the United States, and the fundings for these entities and practices.

The original version which passed the House of Representatives was written to bind the executive branch from moving Guantanamo by removing all funding for doing so. The detainees there would be left there indefinitely. The Senate version was no better.

Now, President Obama did not like having his executive powers limited (see Title XII) and he threatened a veto of the bill, but the reconciled version, struck in committee, did allow more powers to the executive regarding these things.

Obama was then agreeable to passing the act one the powers of the executive were not so restrained.

Regardless, it was written (see Sec. 1021 and Sec. 1022) that individuals can be held indefinitely (or until the “War On Terrorism” has ended, which according to Senator John McCain, will be “never”).

Now, we suppose that all of this has nothing to do with you and me, correct?

That assumption is very unfortunately dead wrong.

Both versions, and the committee version which was passed by Obama, which is the actual law, allow for indefinite detentions or military tribunals of ANYONE.

Let me make that perfectly clear. ANYONE. Any individual.

This includes United States Citizens, living in the United States, since this country is a front of the War On Terrorism.

The remedy is indefinite detention.

This a completely arbitrary and includes classes of individuals which, according to the law, are now described as “any person who has committed a belligerent act” (see Sec. 1021(b)2).

So, if I am walking down the street, say quickly, and pushing through a crowd, am I being “belligerent”?

If I write this, am I being “belligerent”?

If I am, I can now be held indefinitely, without trial or Habeas Corpus, in a military prison or even in Guantanamo Bay.

This is certainly NOT what the Founding Fathers intended.

Furthermore, the law allows for the executive branch to assert a power to identify any particular individual and hold them indefinitely (see Sec. 1022(a)4).

You can be kidnapped by the military off the streets and be held and never heard from again. No trial. No jury. No Habeas Corpus.

If you are lucky, you might get a military trial. You might even get a regular trial.

It is not up to you. You might get deported to face trial in your home country, or maybe not (see Sec. 1022(a)3). This is the way the NDAA has been written. Please read it.

Do that here http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr1540enr/pdf/BILLS-112hr1540enr.pdf or here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Authorization_Act_for_Fiscal_Year_2012

Thank you.

Now, I would like to restate that Obama only had a problem that the powers of the executive branch were limited, and one those powers were given, Obama figured the NDAA was a good thing that he wished to sign in secret on 31 December 2011.

No ceremony, no 15 pens given out, no press.

I have an idea on how to define “belligerency”.

I think that it was a clear act of belligerency against the United States that any act, such as the NDAA, has been passed, and I do hold as “belligerents” those who had any part in passing the NDAA for 2012.

If they make their bed, they must lie in it.

Yes, the fact of the passage of the 2012 NDAA is, in itself, an act of belligerency against the United States, and any individual who took part in its passage and enactment into law should be subject to its terms.

This would include the 93 Senators, the 322 members of the House Of Representatives and President Obama.

Their punishment for this act of belligerency shall be indefinite detention within the confines of the US base in Cuba, named Guantanamo Bay, D-4.

Once they are gone, We The People should set about to be repealing this indescribable repugnancy of an act which should never have seen the light of day.

There are simply too many of us, even for the FEMA camps.

More importantly, this is construed as an act for “National Defense”.

The question really is “whose defense, from whom and against whom exactly?”. I think that this act smacks of being an enactment of defense of the US Government from its own people.

We The People should not allow this, and if necessary, take up arms to resist the obvious coming of the Federal Police State, enacted under our noses, by “law”, in our own nation.

Let us now join together and take the ownership back for ourselves from those who falsely govern out of fear.

With Love, We Will Be Our Own Sovereigns!

Comments Off on What is Necessary For National Defense, And For Exactly Whose Defense

Filed under General, Government Intrusion

Michael Oatman for President in 2012!

Hello Everyone,

Please allow me to introduce myself; my name is Michael Oatman and I am seeking nomination as a candidate for the office of President of these United States of America from the Green Party, seeing as how the Democratic Party has chosen not to participate this year.

I am submitting my Candidate Nomination Paper via the Tucson Weekly for the Arizona Presidential Preference Election to be held on the 28th day of February 2012.

Now, I would like to tell you a little about my platform. Actually, unlike just about every candidate who is currently running for president, I would like to describe fully (to a practical extent) the platform upon which I will be running for the office of President of these United States of America. For more complete information, you may view my website, currently at http://MichaelOatman.wordpress.com/ where you may also participate by asking questions and leaving comments.

We all have heard the push-button issues about which the current candidates have made their televised sound bites: the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; universal health care; reduced deficit, and particularly debt; middle class job sector improvement; a federal executive trashing the Bill of Rights and the Constitution; the border and migration issues; the failing housing market and economy; and many more. Then, there are the usual suspects like gun control, abortion and gay marriage. In a moment, I will address all of these issues. What is truly amazing and mostly depressing is that I have not changed the above wording in this paragraph since four years ago.

However, I think it is important for all of us to step back and look at the whole of things, “the big picture” so to speak. These issues, while debating and discussing them is extremely important when finding a solution, they have tended to do more harm to the peoples of this country, at least in their attitudes toward one another. We can see that we are becoming increasingly intolerant to what we consider “the other side”, when usually there are many shades of grey.

I think that the Peoples of the several States of these united States of America ought to truly and finally set aside their differences and do come together in order to be completely themselves. It would be a marvelous day when we can all say that we fully know who we are, and who each other are, and have understanding and show respect for this; this which is not exactly the current state of affairs.

With that said, I would like to say a little about myself. I consider myself to be, first and foremost, a logician. My profession is a computer scientist, or an “IT Guy”. The way I approach problem solving is with the goal of *actually solving the problem* rather than giving lip service to some group or a sound bite or two to the media. When the latter is done by politicians, the goal is not to necessarily *do* anything about the issue, but rather simply to quell the populace, or a particular group; to spin the media so that the issue becomes a “non-issue” is the immediate goal of this rationale. I employ no such rationale.

Having hosted and produced a television show entitled “Illegal Knowledge” on the local public access stations, Access Tucson (http://access.tucson.org/), whose tagline is “Everything we should have known, but were never supposed to find out”, and the issues in this season, season two, have ranged from the Question of the Middle East, to 9/11 Revisited, to Media and Corporatism, to A Discussion of Non-Valuation, and even featured an Election Special with Proposition 200 author John Kromko as guest, I am keenly aware of the subtleties of the global events happening today, and I will not hesitate to bring that knowledge to my Administration.

Let us now go onward and discuss various specific issues relating to topics of today. I am and will be always open to input from the People of this Nation, and I currently will make my email address available for this purpose; it is oatman [at] geocities [dot] com and all who wish may write to me there, or to Post Office Box 304, in Tucson, Arizona, 85702, for those of you who prefer snail mail (parcels will not be accepted). If anyone emails me with generally important issues, they will also be answered on my blog at WordPress (http://MichaelOatman.wordpress.com/). I will first state that I am generally, although not without exception, socially left-leaning and fiscally conservative.

In the arenas of jobs, the debt, our banking system and government intrusion, I would like to side fully with the bulk of the People who are disaffected as a result of this as well as the past two administrations’ policies. We must support the People who support this Nation, and we can do that by providing green jobs for every person capable of working, tax heavily corporations who wish to outsource jobs overseas (if not prevent it outright), reduce defecits and debt by completely reforming the banking system and the Federal Reserve, and keep the government from otherwise meddling in People’s affairs. More on exactly how to accomplish this will appear on my blog in the near future.

In issues of federal and executive importance, I strongly believe in the efficacy of our Constitution and give myself as a strict constructionist if not an originalist; that is I will use the executive to interpret the Constitution in its original meaning, with emphasis given to the Articles and Amendments themselves. This means I will roll back all domestic spying, NDAA, limitations on internet use (I’m against SOPA/PIPA and for Net Neutrality), and the myriad of other executive abuses perpetrated by the Bush administration as well (and it seems as much or more) by the Obama administration, I will work to end the deficit *AND* debt, partially by bringing to and end by political means the war Afghanistan (and wherever else by the end of Obama’s term), all while maintaining good relations with nations which are needed for us to prevent any terrorist acts.

I will write much more on these and many issues later, but for now I will ask all of you this: where would you like to see this Nation be in five years? Please visit http://MichaelOatman.wordpress.com/ and share your thoughts with myself and others today!

I look forward to representing We the People of these United States of America in the next general election in 2012.

This is now the time to register (Green Party) to vote and, most certainly, to vote for me, Michael Oatman, on election day, Tuesday 28 November 2012, and I thank you well in advance for your vote that day.

Sincerely,

Michael Oatman

Comments Off on Michael Oatman for President in 2012!

Filed under General

A new Facebook page for the Truth Party

Here’s a post to the Facebook group called the Truth Party. The idea is that there should become a new political party in the US, called the Truth Party, since both the Democrat and Republican parties have made themselves out of line with the common goals of the People of this nation, and therfore should be made irrelevant.

The Facebook page for the Truth Party is at http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=38182145308.

Here’s the post:

Hello,

I came across this group while looking for a new political party, which had its ideals based in Truth and not in lies, rhetoric and mass public manipulation, as do the Democrat and the Republican political parties. I myself do not think that the policies of the Libertarian political party are pragmatic enough, and the limited scope of both the Green and Communist political parties do not provide them with the capacity to ever draw large numbers of voters “into their tent”. I had thiought that a new political party which is capable of representing the wide range of popular policies which benefit the People of the United States of America has been sorely needed since the 1980s, obviously so during the 1990s, and painfully so since the election of Barack Obama and the plurality of Democrats in both the House and Senate, any and all historical significance aside.

Therefore, I thought that a new political party had been needed to accurately represent the will of the majority of Americans. I thought a really good name for this party would be the Truth Party. Republicans have become (over the space of time since president Eisenhower) ever increasingly shown to be outright liars, starting with Nixon and crew in 1960 and worse yet when elected following the assassination of Bobby Kennedy in 1968. The entire basis of (G.H.W. Bush and) Reagan’s “trickle down” economic policies have been shown time and again to be an outright fabrication produced only for the benefit of the already rich, and George W. Bush has been widely viewed as the worst president in the history of the nation for nearly every single action he performed while in office. Democrats have fared no better since president Carter, insofar as that president Clinton seemed intent on rejecting unions and workers rights and standards for the benefit of Global Fascists and their corporate shills on the same level as Reagan. President Obama, who was elected just as Clinton was, on a tidal wave of popular “hope” regarding “the economy, stupid”, has so far failed as horribly as Clinton in terms of providing a better standard for the workers of this country, the majority of the populace, at 70-80% of the total workforce. Obama has done noting for the workers, while simultaneously giving trillions to the already rich banks and bankers in the form of bonuses. He may publicly speak against it, but he has done absolutely nothing to prevent it (the “Pay Czar” has no teeth), and has encouraged it by giving the banks the money in the first place, rather than, say, spending less money by simply bailing out every underwater mortgage in the country. Obama obviously believes (or at least acts), like Reagan, that “trickle down” policies work, where it is painfully obviously to the majority of americans that he is completely incorrect and out of touch.

Both the Democrat and Republican parties are entirely Fascist, being completely beholden to global businesses and their lobbyists to have the ability to get elected or even cast a vote. The People of these United States of America deserve the opposite of this, and the Truth Party should be beholden only to the People. In fact, despite their acted public quarrels, the Democrats and Republicans have almost everything in common on issues of monetary and economic policies, favoring global capitalism as a means of resource extraction to benefit the already rich, foreign policy often to the same end, and policies on outsourcing the military and prison functions to private contractors owned by the already rich. The Truth Party will oppose all of these policies, so as to benefit all of the People of these United States of America.

The false dichotomy between the brands of Republican and Democrat provides the People of this nation with the illusion of a choice while presenting a singlar choice of complete Fascism (which is rule by the corporate structure) on a global scale, and our Fascist Supreme Court today has underscored this when they did not even bat an eye while they unanimously equated corporations with people (the ruling itself was 5-4 on the question of campaign financing, but no one on the bench questioned that corporations were people, which they are quite obviously not). The Truth Party must seek to remove the personhood from corporate law, and revert corporations to limited chartered activities for the good of the People of these United States of America.

The Truth Party need not have a position on so-called “wedge” issues, like abortion rights, gay marriage, flat taxes and the like, but rather should concern itself with corporate personhood, monetary, economic and foreign policies, workers’ rights and standards, and the betterment of the overall lives and livelihoods of we the People of these Unioted States of America. The Truth Party should not be confused with the 9/11 Truth movement, although there may be many shared ideals, and should never be comingled with the “Birthers” and other crazies. The Truth Party should demonstrate itself to be the salvation of the 95% or so of the People who are not already rich, and should therefore wrest control of goverment from the Fascists currently in charge.

I propose that we use this dormant Facebook group to organize and publicize these efforts to return control of the nation back to the People of these United States of America. Please post a reply to this topic if you agree and then spread the word, so that work can begin!

Thank You!

Michael Oatman

4 Comments

Filed under General

On “Change”, Understanding, and Personal And Corporate Responsibility

Hello, my name is Michael Oatman and I am running for President of these United States of America.

People in this campaign are using the word “change” so much anymore that is becoming nothing more than a buzzword.

But speaking about change without understanding the true nature of the problems facing this nation is really nothing more than giving simple lip service.

Similarly, talking about these problems without addressing the root cause is much the same, like pulling up a weed but neglecting to take up the roots.

The root causes of which I am talking stem from the policies of several organizations in this country — and abroad — and the members of those organizations are often in government and are leaders of big business, and often their allegiances cross party lines, because of a dialectical policy, which is the nature of these organizations.

I will name some of the organizations of which I speak, and some names may be familiar to you: the Council on Foreign Relations, the Project for the New American Century, the Bildeburg Group, the Trilateral Commission, the Heritage Foundation.

These organizations’ primary objective is to attempt to control and direct the future of this nation and the world.

Their goal is to eventually form a one world government, a New World Order, over which they will have a direct control, or they may have an indirect control, but if so only through the same manipulative practices.

The manifestation of that goal in this nation is seen in what Greg Palast so adeptly calls “The Bush Cycle”, where we see leaders from business becoming lobbyists or even presidents and vice presidents, or secretaries of defense, and then when their term is done — or their lies are discovered and they are forced to resign — they retreat back into the business sector.

Now, at first blush, that seems fine, to augment a distinguished career in the business world with one in public service, but this is not the sum of it.

What happens is that these people will bring their industry’s concerns to their roles as head of some oversight agency or another, but that agency which they are heading seems always to be the one which provides oversight to the industry of which they had just been a part. As such, industry always gets its way.

Then when they retreat back into the shadows of the world of big business they are rewarded handsomely for providing taxpayer-funded windfalls to that industry.

Now, why this mechanism happens to be the vehicle for control in this nation is because of the nature of corporations in the United States.

The laws in this nation are largely written by corporations, for corporations, and at the expense of the public and the resources of the public, with the blessing of the judiciary.

There is legally no liability of a corporation to the public at large, but only a responsibility to the stockholders to maintain the highest return possible to those investors.

Corporations are neither required to recognize any externalities which may figure into their computations on how to maximize their profits, nor are they required to work for the public good.

In fact, corporations are essentially required to do neither of these things in order to keep the profits up for shareholders.

What a quandry.

Some people consider this to be a “Culture of Greed” which started in the 1980s under president Ronald Reagan, but it goes much further back.

Please see the Timeline of Personhood Rights and Powers for detailed information on this subject.

Corporations used to be chartered for a specific, time-defined purpose, for a particular common good which was spelled out in their charter, and would dissove after that.

Nowadays, corporations are global in scale, timeless in scope, and We the People seem to be getting more powerless against their collective will, all with the help of the judiciary, but mostly the Supreme Court.

This is why we see that this so-called “Culture of Greed” has manifestations in all areas of corporate malfeasence, namely: the mortgage and housing crises, global outsourcinng and national job level migration to the service sector, the health care crisis, the worsening quality fo good and particularly toys, environmental destruction and climate change — or if you prefer — Global Warming, the skyrocketing prices of oil and gas, and the total lack of development of alternative energies in this nation to name only a few.

Furthermore, this influx of corporate leaders into the highest echelons of government has produced: all of the wars and secrecy surrounding those wars, spying on the people of these United States of America, massive constitutional subversion and an extreme rise in power of the executive branch of the federal government, the absence of any meaningful campaign finance reform or restrictions on lobbyists, and massive, massive foreign policy errors which have the potential to set our nation back for years before those errors are healed.

When I am elected, I will call on all of us to teach and or require that corporations begin and continue to act responsibly toward the people of this nation and toward the resources of the people of this nation.

We can do this if we are determined and we act as if we are even more determined.

Let us all vote for Michael Oatman on election day 2008 and let us all Take The Power Back!

Thank You,
Michael Oatman

————–

Michael Oatman For President of
these united States of America!
Blog: http://blog.MichaelOatman.com/
Website: http://2008.MichaelOatman.com/
MySpace: http://ms.MichaelOatman.com/
Take The Power Back!

Comments Off on On “Change”, Understanding, and Personal And Corporate Responsibility

Filed under General

Center for Arizona Policy Survey Answers

Michael Oatman
Candidate for the Presidency of
these United States of America
PO Box 304
Tucson, Arizona. 85702-0304.
(360) 656-0498

Cathi Herrod, Esq.,
Jennifer Clark
The Center for Arizona Policy
7227 North 16th Street
Suite 250
Phoenix, AZ 85020

11 January 2008

Dear Cathy and Jennifer,

I received your 2008 Survey Questions given to the 2008 Presidential Candidates (which was postmarked on 01/08/2008, by the way). After reading through the questionnaire, I felt that it was necessary to qualify and/or expand on some of my answers to your survey questions, given the leading phrasings of most of the questions.

Therefore, I am submitting my full text answers to all of your survey questions, since I believe they are deserving of answers more descriptive than a simple scale of “support” to “oppose”. I will also be posting my answers on my own website (http://2008.MichaelOatman.com/) so that there is no confusion as to exactly how these questions were answered by myself. When you “inform citizens of [my] positions on key issues”, I would consider it to be deceptive to those citizens if you do not include the full text of my responses which are given in this letter (and fax).

My answers are as follows to the survey questions, as numbered in your survey:

1. School Choice.
Parents should be able to earmark money from their taxes owed to the federal government to enhance the quality of their local public schools (in their district). If parents wish to home school, or send their children to a private school, that would be their independent choice. I would support a tax write-off for parents buying books and other school supplies when their children do not attend a public school. I believe it is beyond the scope of the responsibilities of the federal government to support private and particularly parochial/religious schools beyond the bounds of the current level of support.

2. Stem Cell Research.
With the advent of stem cell development using blastomeres (see NY Times, 23 August 2006, Science Section) it is no longer necessary to use embryonic cells to develop stem cells. Therefore, since using the embryonic method destroys the embryo, which I *DO NOT SUPPORT* doing, and the blastomere method does not destroy the embryo, I do support using *ONLY* the blastomere method of stem cell harvesting.

3. Marriage.
I am a strict constitutionalist and would not support adding an amendment to the constitution which involves an area in which the federal government has no business involving itself. Exactly how marriage is defined is up to the church, and not to the state.

4. Abortion.
In the words of Donna Edna Shalala, a person whom I do admire, “abortion should be safe, legal and rare”. I do not believe it is necessary to perform abortions at all (except in the cases of incest or rape, and in cases where it may severely adversely affect the health of the mother), particularly with proper and freely available family planning methods. Once these resources are in place and available for all women of child bearing age to receive, I would like to see an end to the procedure of abortion (above noted excepted), but moreover, I would like to see the federal government place much more of a priority on pre- and post-natal care, including allowed leaves of absence for pregnancy.

5. Abstinence Education.
Abstinence-Only programs have been shown time and again not to work, and in fact, to tend to have the opposite effect on teens’ behavior patterns. I would support any program which has a proven track record of preventing teenage pregnancies, particularly until marriage, and I would have those programs receive federal funds, provided they are not entwined in a religious program (I would also provide federal funds if the religious nature could be ambiguated from the pregnancy prevention nature).

6. Taxes.
I would support replacing the national tax code, as it is voluntary unless you are a federal employee. I do not think that taxing the poor does anyone any good, and therefore I would not support a flat or national sales tax (unless the flat tax was 0% below US$200K/year + COLA and something like 40% above the same). I believe there are better ways for the federal government to raise the money it needs, including spending less.

7. Gay Rights.
All citizens of these United States of America should share and enjoy the same rights. Period. No exceptions. No discrimination should exist, lest there be legal charges brought against any offending party.

8. Border Security.
Building walls on our borders (don’t forget Canada) is impractical (not to mention physically passable) at best and an environmental catastrophe waiting to happen at worst. I would support placing sensors along all of our borders, much like is done on Nellis Air Force Range’s S4 and S5 regions, but only in the short term. In order to secure our nation, we must improve upon our foreign policy, and particularly become an active participant in the economic development of the nation of Mexico and other Central American nations, so as to prevent the need for the mass migration which is presently and has been occurring. Without the millions of immigrants passing across our borders who only want jobs and a brighter future, it will make spotting those who wish to do us any harm much simpler. Then again, pulling our bases out of Mecca and Medina will also accomplish much in the way of reducing the number of people in the world who wish to do us harm.

9. Immigration.
Tax law reform, economic reform and foreign policy reform (see answer #8) also have to happen before true border security can be accomplished. If so many people per annum wish to become peoples of these United States of America, we ought to recognize this and eliminate the 18-or-so-year waiting list by allowing all of the current and the would-be entrants a legal path to citizenship.

10. Iraq War.
We need to first restore the world’s confidence in this nation in terms of its efforts to fulfill in good faith the policy objectives of all nations. This will take a great deal of legwork, no thanks to the current resident and his band of neoconservative hate-mongering iconoclasts. This will be basically top priority in my administration, since we should have brought the troops home about four years ago, after being in Afghanistan, and never in Iraq to begin. As soon as a diplomatic solution can be reached (read: we will need to force a solution by March 2009 should none be reached sooner), we should remove 100% of our current military forces. Note that I spoke not of our private military (Blackwater, etc.), which may stay at the sole behest of the Iraqi government, and without federal support.

11. Judicial System.
I’m not quite sure why this question is included; federal judges do not use other countries’ current laws to interpret our laws. If you are referring to the Magna Carta, etc., that is already part of the laws of the United States. If you are referring to treaties, there are a few which, for brevity, I do not entirely support (Geneva Conventions is not one of them), but those too are laws of the United States. I support the United States law of the Posse Comitatus Act.

12. Gun Laws.
Of course I support requiring a waiting period for gun purchases, even at gun shows. This question is the only one which I would actually circle “SS” on the form which you have provided, with no caveats. To allow anyone to possibly immediately purchase a gun for use in the heat of anger is a recipe for disaster, and does not impinge upon the Second Amendment. Further restrictions on the use of guns (except requiring that a civilian who carries a gun must be over the age of 21 or be in the immediate presence of a parent/relative/guardian over the age of 21, and either way must have passed a federal gun safety test prior to carrying the gun), are where I would have to give the issue more consideration.

13. Health Care.
This nation should have a single payer system, but it may be possible to incorporate a two tier option into that system. Whichever entity, public or private, produces the most benefit to the users of health care should be the entity which is selected as the single payer. Right now this is looking like the federal government, but with the proper corporation reforms in place, HMOs might not exist solely to make money for their stockholders, and may be able to actually serve the needs of their heals care clients. This is really the crux of the issue, some would say “corporate greed” but it is actually the way corporations are defined within the laws of these United States of America. I would consider it a top priority to reform those laws regarding the behavior of corporations with regard to having the profits of the shareholders being the single motivating factor where all externalities and harm to the people of this nation be damned. This would actually solve quite a few problems, most of which you have not mentioned in your questionnaire, like the mortgage crisis and housing industry, environmental destruction, global outsourcing and job level migration, poor product quality, skyrocketing oil and gas prices, and the lack of development of alternative energies to name just a few.

14. Environment.
With Bali and subsequent conferences on Global Warming / Climate Change (which *IS* a reality) obsoleting the Kyoto protocols, it is, as they say, too little and too late to sign on to Kyoto. We must, and I repeat *MUST*, as a nation, curb our insatiable appetite for carbon emitting energies and immediately develop carbon-neutral and better yet, carbon-negative methods of energy production. So far I support only solar, wind, hydrogen fuel cell (*ONLY* when one uses solar powered electrolysis to produce point-of-consumption hydrogen), and wave action energy technologies as viable and carbon-neutral. Short of actual carbon sequestration, I have not found any carbon-neutral technologies which I would endorse. We as a nation of industry must pledge our support to developing more carbon-negative technologies in the immediate future and we must mandate the cessation of use of all carbon-positive technologies by the end of my first three years in office.

Thank you for your interest in printing my responses.
I hope your publication goes well.

Sincerely,

Michael Oatman

————–

Michael Oatman For President of
these united States of America!
Blog: http://blog.MichaelOatman.com/
Website: http://2008.MichaelOatman.com/
MySpace: http://ms.MichaelOatman.com/

1 Comment

Filed under General

Jobs, Energy and Environment

19 December 2007

Hello Everyone,

Today, I’d like to address an issue which I believe should be first and foremost in addressing: the economy of this nation.

Furthermore, I’d like to talk about one of those things which economists talk about almost in taboo terms, externalities. These are things which most industry planners as well as economists largely ignore, for the simple fact that it becomes someone else’s problem. For example, to most in industry, THE ENTIRE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT is an externality. Pollution is as well to these types. To them, externalities are anything whose actual cost is unknown and which does not immediately affect the bottom line for the enterprise.

Of course, I’m writing about Global Warming, air and water pollution, and food chain contaimination, primarily and amongst a myriad of other problems brought on by this tunnel vision.

But what I’m really about to write is how I believe we can satisfy our economic needs without slowly killing our collective selves, and while simultaneously dramatically improving the middle class job sector. This is how we can end our energy dependence, save our environment and produce lots of jobs (and not even in the service sector!).

It is indisputable that we need to end our reliance on *ANY* foreign oil, be it from Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Iran or Venezuela. The cost of a barrel of oil being roughly $100 whereas seven years ago it was barely $25 (and our resulting gas and heating oil price jumps) is not only a result of the current administration’s global policies and attempts at empire, but also as a result of rapidly growing demand, particularly in China and India. We do not need to be competing for this resource any longer.

This nation is already becoming a global supplier of wind energy, and it has long been in the forefront of producing solar energy. We now need to do more. Much more.

We can, and if you elect me on Tuesday, the 4th of November 2008, we will convert at least 80 percent of our overall national energy reliance to solar, wind, and other renewable and non-polluting energies. These are all systems which have no or little of those pesky things called externalities.

If this requires converting our entire fleet of personal and corporate commuter cars and trucks, then so be it. If this requires shutting down coal burning plants and converting them to atmospheric carbon scrubbers, then so be it. If this requires this nation to sign on to an international treaty whose sole effect is to reduce the amount of carbon produced into the atmosphere from all nations globally, then so be it.

Making these changes will go a good deal of the way toward balancing our carbon output with what this planet can handle naturally, effectively reducing our “carbon footprint” to zero. Making these same changes will also produce thousands if not hundreds of thousands of jobs, or more; and not just regular service industry jobs, which are the type which are cited by the current administration when it refers to “posted national job gains”, but well paying, unionized, secure positions in an ever-growing new vital industry.

And we won’t be addicted to foreign oil.

Now, the other problem is that corporations which operate in this nation and who employ skilled and semi skilled labor have been, since the advent of GATT and particularly NAFTA, outscourcing their operations to overseas branches of that corporation or to similar industries, located most recently in China, India and Indonesia (to name only a few). Corporations which wish to continue to do business as being based in this nation, or at least ones which do not wish to be taxed heavily, under my administration when you vote in this November election, will not be permitted to perform these, or any other, types of outsourcing of skilled or semi skilled labor.

When I named TR — Theodore Roosevelt — as my most respected president in the history of this nation, I was refering in part to his own handling of corporations which have run amok with power over and abuses toward the national labor force. It is most worthy of note that TR did *NOT* simply hit all the corporations with a “big stick” but used anti-monoply laws fairly and judiciously to alleviate the problems caused by the worst offenders and as a result, bring others into line.

It will take something akin to his deft manouvering just over one hundred years ago to bring about similar change in this country and beyond, for labor and jobs, for our energy for our future, and for our planet for all of us.

Thank You Everyone,
Michael Oatman

oatman@geocities.com
http://blog.MichaelOatman.com/
http://MySpace.MichaelOatman.com/

2 Comments

Filed under Energy, Energy & Jobs, Environment, General

Lets get on TV – Illegal Knowledge’s Presidential Preference Election Special is this Saturday @9PM on Access Tucson

Hi Everybody,

Would anyone like to be on Access Tucson
this Saturday 19 January for an episode
titled "The Presidential Preference Election
Special"?

I will be interviewing candidates, and
stating my own positions, on my TV show,
Illegal Knowledge.

The show runs from 9PM to 9:50PM this coming
Saturday. If you are interested in appearing,
please reply to this email (preferably) or
just show up at the Access Tucson Studio
(124 East Broadway in downtown Tucson --
just Southeast of 6th and B'way) around 8PM.

Regardless, please arrive no later than
8:30PM so everything can be coordinated
properly. Sorry for the short notice.

The show Illegal Knowledge is a live call-in
talk show, hosted by myself, Michael Oatman.

We will discuss our positions and take calls
from the audience.

NOTE TO JIM NINTZEL: Jim, if you would like
to come also, you could have the position of
moderator/host.

Thanks in advance for your interest,
Michael Oatman

Michael Oatman For President of
these united States of America!
Blog: http://blog.MichaelOatman.com/
Website: http://2008.MichaelOatman.com/
MySpace: http://ms.MichaelOatman.com/
Take The Power Back!

Comments Off on Lets get on TV – Illegal Knowledge’s Presidential Preference Election Special is this Saturday @9PM on Access Tucson

Filed under General

Michael Oatman for President! We Can Take the Power Back!

Hello Everyone,

Please allow me to introduce myself; my name is Michael Oatman and I am seeking nomination as a candidate for the office of President of the United States of America from the Democratic Party.

I am submitting my Candidate Nomination Paper via the Tucson Weekly for the Arizona Presidential Preference Election to be held on the 5th day of February 2008.

Before I begin to write about my platform, I would like to tell you how I came to be running for President. It was in the early Reagan years when I was in grade school, learning civics, that I did the math and figured that I would be just old enough to be able to run for president, then far off in 2008. I have since considered it to be a civic duty, an avocation if you will, and have spoken of the possibility on rather many occasions to a great number of people throughout the years. My friends would sit around and debate (hypothetically) who would get which cabinet position.

So when I turned 35 last March 10th and started talking about getting 250 people together who could each find one thousand individuals who were willing to donate $1000 to my campaign, no one was much surprised. But when the Tucson Weekly put forth their 22 November 2007 issue with the “Project White House” cover story, I said immediately “okay, I said I was running, so now I’m definitely doing it if they’re just going to throw it in my face”. And with that, here it is. A nice story, but let’s get to the meat of things.

Now, I would like to tell you a little about my platform. Actually, unlike just about every candidate who is currently running for president, I would like to describe fully (to a practical extent) the platform upon which I will be running for the office of President of the United States of America.

We all have heard the push-button issues about which the current candidates have made their televised sound bites: the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; universal health care; reduced deficit, and particularly debt; middle class job sector improvement; a federal executive trashing the Bill of Rights and the Constitution; the border and migration issues; the failing housing market and economy; and many more. Then, there are the usual suspects like gun control, abortion and gay marriage. In a moment, I will address all of these issues.

However, I think it is important for all of us to step back and look at the whole of things, “the big picture” so to speak. These issues, while debating and discussing them is extremely important when finding a solution, they have tended to do more harm to the peoples of this country, at least in their attitudes toward one another.

While it may not be as bad as in 2004, mostly because nearly everyone wants to end the war in Iraq very soon, when we talk about immigration, about recruiting in schools or in general, or about when and where are the most appropriate times to protest, we can see that we are becoming increasingly intolerant to what we consider “the other side”, when usually there are always shades of grey.

I think that the Peoples of the several States of these united States of America ought to truly and finally set aside their differences and do come together in order to be completely themselves. It would be a marvelous day when we can all say that we fully know who we are, and who each other are, and have understanding and show respect for this; this which is not exactly the current state of affairs.

With that said, I would like to say a little about myself. I consider myself to be, first and foremost, a logician. My profession is a computer scientist, or an “IT Guy”. The way I approach problem solving is with the goal of *actually solving the problem* rather than giving lip service to some group or a sound bite or two to the media. When the latter is done by politicians, the goal is not to necessarily *do* anything about the issue, but rather simply to quell the populace, or a particular group; to spin the media so that the issue becomes a “non-issue” is the immediate goal of this rationale. I employ no such rationale.

I would also like to mention that I currently host and produce a television show entitled “Illegal Knowledge” (http://IllegalKnowledge.com/) on the local public access stations, Access Tucson (http://access.tucson.org/). The show’s tagline is “Everything we should have known, but were never supposed to find out”, and the issues in this season, season two, have ranged from the Question of the Middle East, to 9/11 Revisited, to Media and Corporatism, to A Discussion of Non-Valuation, and even featured an Election Special with Proposition 200 author John Kromko as guest. I am keenly aware of the subtleties of the global events happening today, and I will not hesitate to bring that knowledge to my Administration.

Let us now go onward and discuss various specific issues relating to topics of today. I am and will be always open to input from the People of this Nation, and I currently will make my email address available for this purpose; it is oatman@geocities.com and all who wish may write to me there, or to Post Office Box 304, in Tucson, Arizona, 85702, for those of you who prefer snail mail (parcels will not be accepted). If anyone emails me with generally important issues, they will also be answered on my blog at Yahoo 360 (http://360.yahoo.com/illegalknowledge). I will first state that I am generally, although not without exception, socially left-leaning and fiscally conservative.

In the arenas of health care, jobs and housing, I would like to side fully with the bulk of the People who are disaffected as a result of this administration’s policies. We must support the People who support this Nation, and we can do that by providing full and free health care, tax heavily corporations who wish to outsource jobs overseas (if not prevent it outright), and work with home builders to create a glut of affordable and decent housing, while keeping interest rates low. More on exactly how to accomplish this will appear on my blog in the near future.

In issues of federal and executive importance, I strongly believe in the efficacy of our Constitution and give myself as a strict constructionist if not an originalist; that is I will use the executive to interpret the Constitution in its original meaning, with emphasis given to the Articles and Amendments themselves. This means I will roll back all domestic spying and the myriad of other executive abuses perpetrated by the current administration, I will work to end the deficit *AND* debt, partially by bringing to and end by political means the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (and wherever else by the end of Bush’s term).

I will write much more on these and many issues later, but for now I will ask all of you this: where would you like to see this Nation be in five years?

I look forward to representing We the People of these United States of America in the next general election in 2008. This is now the time to register to vote and, most certainly, to vote for me, Michael Oatman, on election day, Tuesday 4 November 2008, and I thank you well in advance for your vote that day.

Sincerely,
Michael Oatman

oatman@geocities.com
http://blog.MichaelOatman.com/
http://MySpace.MichaelOatman.com/

Contact Info:

  • My email address is oatman@geocities.com
  • My mailing address is:
    PO Box 304
    Tucson, Arizona. 85702-0304

Please send email if you would like me to answer a particular issue very quickly. I apologize for the informality, but I can type rather quickly being a computer guy by profession, and therefore I can answer much more mail this way.

Please send regular mail if you need to mail in a campaign donation or any other type of contribution to my campaign. Sending anything but flat parcels or regular envelopes is *VERY* highly discouraged by the post office and myself.

Thank You Everyone,
Michael Oatman

oatman@geocities.com
http://blog.MichaelOatman.com/
http://MySpace.MichaelOatman.com/

Comments Off on Michael Oatman for President! We Can Take the Power Back!

Filed under General