If you’re not yet convinced that the American Party is needed, you will be after reading the following NYT column by former Budget Director David A. Stockman: http://goo.gl/743IV

Posted in Economy | 4 Comments


Many Republican and Democratic politicians count on the electorate to forget their half-truths and broken promises soon after each election. Once elected, there’s no good way to hold them accountable and at the start of the next election cycle the spin machine is simply re-started. We’re reminded of the famous line from the film “The Hunt for Red October”, in which National Security Advisor Jeffrey Pelt (played by Richard Jordan) says, “I’m a politician which means I’m a cheat and a liar, and when I’m not kissing babies I’m stealing their lollipops…” Yes, yes, we know, there are in fact some politicians who genuinely mean what they say. The collective record in recent decades, however, is a poor one of failed leadership, broken promises, missed opportunities and poor governance. This blog post, however, is about the sleazy nature of the 2012 Presidential campaign, not about Obama policies or the record of Congress.

Why are we writing about this now, after the 2012 Presidential election? We’re writing now because it is crystal clear that millions of voters were deceived and misled by the Obama Democratic Party campaign. In this election’s aftermath, the results are already being spun into propaganda that the 2012 Obama victory defines some type of new Democratic Party coalition that will propel Democrats to victory in future elections. These Democratic Party pundits would have you believe that large majorities of Latinos, Asians, African-Americans, youth, union members and single women are going to mindlessly and thoughtlessly go into the voting booths of the future and push the “Democratic” button because they did so in this election. To which we say: RUBBISH.

Let’s think for a minute what this latest Democratic propaganda really says. It says that the votes of Latinos, African-Americans, youth and single women will now be taken for granted. That really would not be unusual for the Democratic Party because it already takes the votes of union members and entire Democratic-leaning states like California, New York and New Jersey for granted. Why bother planning to protect New York Harbor or San Francisco Bay from flooding when the schmucks are going to vote for you anyway?

The simple truth is that Mr. Obama was re-elected for three reasons. First, there remains a hangover from the George W. Bush years. All Americans remember the tremendous human and financial cost of the Iraq war and Mr. Bush’s policy of threat pre-emption at any cost. The country is tired of foreign wars, and Romney’s somewhat strident campaign rhetoric undoubtably cost him votes.

Secondly, majorities of Latinos, African-Americans, young voters and single women voted for Obama at least in part because they were deliberately deceived by the Democratic Party and Obama campaign. This is what can happen when you have a sitting President flying around the country on Air Force One for 18 months in campaign/fundraising mode rather than devoting his time and energy to the job for which he was hired. The lesson of the 2012 Presidential election is that if you tell enough people what they want to hear, mix in vague phrases like “hope and change”, “forward” and “we’re all in this together”, deceive millions more, spend 80% of the campaign’s duration slandering your opponent and appeasing certain voter blocs, you can win. That is all the 2012 Presidential campaign means.

Third, the Obama campaign mounted a major voter registration effort and had an effective grassroots “get out the vote” campaign. Is it honorable to deceive, mislead, slander and lie for one’s personal gain? Of course not. Whether such conduct is seen in our personal lives, business affairs or political campaigns, it is universally recognized as dishonorable. Mr. Obama won re-election, but without honor. Duty, honor and country will always matter in America. This may be one of the reasons why 500 former Generals and Admirals spent their own funds to endorse Romney in a full-page ad the day before the election. Their ad can be seen here.

Our next post will provide specific examples of the deception and slander that made Mr. Obama’s re-election possible.

Posted in The Necessity of a Third Party | 4 Comments


Campaign 2012 is insulting to every one of us. With 88 days to go the Obama and Romney campaigns, having gone negative early, have set a new, all-time low for campaign integrity, transparency, clarity, divisiveness and policy articulation. What makes this so damaging is that there has never been a more urgent need for the opposite: positive campaigning that offers real solutions to America’s many serious problems.

As the national debt increases at the rate of $5 billion per day, poverty reaches levels not seen since the 1950s, foreign policy issues multiply, the country becomes even more polarized and unemployment plateaus at 18%, we can’t help but be reminded when we listen to Governor Romney and President Obama of the cover boy of Mad Magazine, Alfred E. Neuman. Alfred was usually shown with the caption “What, Me Worry?”, indicating a total lack of intellectual interest in what was happening.

We’re not alone in commenting on the offensive and sleazy nature of this campaign. David Rothkopf of the FP group, publishers of Foreign Policy magazine, writes in an CNN.com column on August 8, 2012:

“Apparently, the candidates and their advisers think that is what will work with us. They think we don’t see the big problems, care about them or understand them. They think that throwing mud and unsubstantiated claims and getting bogged down in distractions will tip the scales in their favor. So the sad punch line to all this pettiness is that in a campaign laden with name calling, the biggest insult of all is the one that is being directed at the American people. Amid all the dirt and the shallowness, this is the one that should produce the greatest outrage. But of all of them, it’s also the only one that could produce any good at all. It could get us to act and demand more and to reject negative campaigns. Take it personally. Every time you hear a politician sling mud at an opponent rather than addressing a real issue, recognize that you’re the one being dissed. Then do us all a favor and vote your anger.”

One problem, Mr. Rothkopf. The Republican and Democratic parties are the only two choices on the supermarket shelf. There won’t be real change until the emergence of the American Party.

Posted in Organizational Update | 5 Comments


Actually, it’s long overdue. U.S. law does not require that candidates for President undergo psychological testing. U.S. Presidents undergo only an annual physical examination that apparently does not include a psychological evaluation. Have you ever heard a President’s doctors pronounce him mentally sound?

This is the most powerful job in the world, with immense responsibilities, tasks, stresses and demands 24 hours per day, 7 days a week. A single episode of weakness could have damaging consequences for the country. Given the responsibilities of the office, aren’t psychological exams even more important than physical exams? At the time a Presidential candidacy is announced, and before a single donation is made, shouldn’t we have the knowledge that the candidate is mentally sound, with a psychological profile evidencing the traits that would allow him or her to be successful in that office? Wouldn’t a baseline psychological exam be helpful in any determination that may need to be made under Section 4 of the 25th Amendment in the event that there is a question of incapacitation?

Beyond evidencing sound mind, shouldn’t American citizens have access to a candidate psychological profile that tells us how the candidate is likely to behave in office? After all, candidates have no problem with asking us for donations!

So, why haven’t we mandated psychological examinations for Presidential candidates and the President? Could it be that the Republican and Democratic parties don’t want their Presidential candidates to be tested with their psychological profiles made public? Yes, we think that is precisely what’s going on. We resolve that any American Party candidates for President will undergo both physical and psychological testing at the time their candidacy is announced, with the results made public. Taking this one step further, we believe that all Presidential candidates should make all of their educational, testing and work-related records public.

The following list contains traits known to be present in a certain type of personality. Do any of these sound familiar?

– Subtly misrepresents facts and expediently and opportunistically shifts positions, views, opinions, and “ideals” (e.g., about campaign finance, re-districting). These flip-flops do not cause overt distress and are ego-syntonic (he/she feels justified in acting this way). Alternatively, refuses to commit to a standpoint and, in the process, evidences a lack of empathy.

– Ignores data that conflict with his/her fantasy world, or with his/her inflated and grandiose self-image.

– Feels that he/she is above the law.

– Talks about himself in the 3rd person singular or uses the regal “we” and craves to be the exclusive center of attention, even adulation

– Has a messianic-cosmic vision of self and his/her life and “mission”.

– Sets ever more complex rules in a convoluted world of grandiose fantasies with its own language (jargon).

– Displays false modesty and unctuous “folksiness” but is unable to sustain these behaviors (the persona, or mask) for long. It slips and the true self is revealed: haughty, aloof, distant, and disdainful of simple folk and their lives.

– Sublimates aggression and holds grudges.

– Behaves as an eternal adolescent (e.g., his choice of language, youthful image he projects, demands indulgence and feels entitled to special treatment, even though his objective accomplishments do not justify it).

Posted in The Necessity of a Third Party | 3 Comments

AMERICA is HALFWAY to ORWELL’S 1984 – THANKS TO OUR TWO-PARTY SYSTEM (and that’s NOT a good thing)

The American Party® believes that American citizens should be managing Government, including the Congress and Federal bureaucracies, rather than the other way around.

This week’s events reminded of George Orwell’s novel Nineteen Eighty-Four published in 1949. Its worth a look if you skipped it – the CliffsNotes version or Wikipedia summary will do nicely. It’s a novel about life in a future society known as Oceania, which is dominated by constant public mind control and government surveillance using technology. Oceania’s totalitarian government compels compliance with a single political ideology known as IngSoc, or English Socialism. The purpose of IngSoc is political control of its citizens, all of whom are under the control of an omnipresent dictator known as “Big Brother”. Individual thinking and reasoning are held to be thoughtcrimes, punishable by the Thought Police. Thoughtcriminals are sent to the Ministry of Love, which is ironically named as it inflicts brainwashing, misery, torture and fear to control the will of the population. Here’s a graphic of Oceania that looks very much like America today:

The Proles are representative of the lower and middle classes. The only difference is that Proles make up about 95% of the population in today’s America. The Outer Party (4%) represents the rich, households worth $1M or more. The Inner Party (1%) represents the political class and the super-rich such as billionaires, Wall Street traders/executives, software millionaires and some professional athletes.

Several events of this past week reminded us of the continuing trend towards Oceania, IngSoc and Big Brother.

The first was the finding that the National Security Agency (NSA) is building the country’s biggest communications spy center in Bluffdale, Utah. Its purpose? The NSA claims that it is being built to help protect against cyberwar and cyber-hacking. But it is also capable of collecting, deciphering and analyzing all of our cellphone, e-mail, Google searches, blog posts and phone calls. In the words of former NSA cryptoanalyst and official James Binney, “We are that far (holding thumb and forefinger close together) from a turnkey totalitarian state.” How can we be sure that our communications will remain private when the Utah center goes active in 2013? Given the need to prevent domestic terrorism, we think it likely that eventually the Utah center will actively monitor our personal communications with or without a court order.

The second was an interview given by Nobel Laureate economist Dr. Joseph Stiglitz, who tells us in a June 8 interview which can be seen here that “the American Dream is a myth”, and that “America is No Longer the Land of Opportunity.” Stiglitz is one of the world’s best known economists. This is notable as Americans for the first time are being publicly told that realizing their dreams of achievement and upward mobility are no longer possible.

The third was the disclosure of a April 23, 2012 memorandum by the Secretary of the Air Force which discusses the use of military drones over America to “balance…obtaining intelligence information…and protecting individual rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.” There is nothing to prevent the Government from using drones to watch us, listen to us, and record information. This is discussed more fully in former judge Andrew Napolitano’s column seen here and a report in the Christian Science Monitor seen here.

The fourth was President Obama’s press conference on Friday, June 8, the latest in a long string of Presidential (Republican and Democrat) Big Brother-style pressers in which we are told what to believe. In this event, we were told that the economy’s problems are the result of the European debt crisis and the fact that States and cities have had to lay off government workers. Our point is that Presidential press conferences and addresses to the nation used to be reserved for important policy statements. It meant something when the President asked for TV time. Now they mean much less because most are intended to spin the news for political gain.

Finally, on June 9 we had the news that kindergartners at PS 90 at Coney Island, New York won’t be able to sing Lee Greenwood’s song “Proud to be an American” at their June 20 moving up ceremony because the Principal says that “we don’t want to offend other cultures.” This despite the fact that the song has overwhelming support from the kids and parents at PS 90, many of whom are immigrants. This is just another example of out-of-control political correctness, a precursor of an Orwellian society in which a Ministry of Truth rewrites history, changes the facts and enforces thought control to fit Party doctrine, which is that multiculturalism is the only acceptable social model – the “melting pot” model which molded generations of immigrants together to make America great is no longer acceptable.

Everyone can add 2 and 2 from these events and see where this is going. We are heading for IngSoc, Big Brother, the Thought Police and the Ministries of Truth and Love. Today we are being told that the economy is bad and its someone else’s fault. Now we’re starting to be told by noted economists that nothing can be done about it – that Americans are powerless to change their lot in life. You can vote, but you’re really impotent to change anything. Want to contest that? Well, the Government has aerial and electronic surveillance capabilities.

A Feb. 18, 2010 Rasmussen poll found that only 21% of voters believe that the Federal Government enjoys the consent of the governed as seen here. And they are right. The Republican and Democratic parties are equally responsible for the growth of Big Brother.

But all is not lost. Americans are perceptive enough to know what’s happening even without a Paul Revere-style, alarm-ringing mainstream media. 38% of Americans now call themselves Independents rather than Republicans or Democrats. We know we’re being shafted by power-hungry, incompetent politicians.

The American Party is still idealistic, we still believe America’s problems can be solved and we still believe America’s best days are ahead of it. Let’s regain our idealism, challenge the status quo and begin to make plans to manage Government rather than Government managing us. This will only happen with the emergence of a third party – the American Party®.

Posted in The Necessity of a Third Party | 7 Comments


We recommend the following columns for those interested in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars:

Top Ten Lessons of the Iraq War by Steven M. Walt in Foreign Policy, March 20, 2012

A Festival of Lies by Thomas Friedman in New York Times, March 24, 2012

Posted in National Security | 231 Comments


The media seems incapable, or unwilling, to provide real insight for citizens into the Administration’s policies in Iran, Afghanistan and Iraq. We don’t have a staff of foreign policy experts – yet – but we’re willing to offer what we believe to be some honest insights into U.S. policy because we think citizens should begin to understand the difference between the two current political parties and what the American Party may seek to do.

In our last post we lamented the fact that the Bush Administration did not obtain a permanent security alliance with Iraq such as we have with South Korea. Nor did it get concessions on Iraqi oil which could have eventually repaid some of the $1.9 trillion spent. The Bush Administration should have worked with the U.N. from the earliest days of the Coalition Provisional Government to make this happen.

In Afghanistan we are in the 11th year of what was originally expected to be a 20 year campaign. The monthly cost exceeds $6 billion, and we have over 17,000 U.S. KIA or wounded. This is now the longest war in U.S. history, and it is far from clear that the Afghan National Army will be able to prevent terrorism and the Taliban from returning once international forces pull out for good in 2014. If not, our sacrifices will have been largely wasted. This war was initiated on October 7, 2001 by the Bush Administration in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.

Progress towards an Israeli-Palestinian agreement is non-existent. As we see it, President Obama has been adeptly boxed in by Israel. PM Netanyahu said this week that Israel will, at its sole discretion, retain the option to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities and may not inform the U.S. before it does so. President Obama’s response: “I have Israel’s back”. This sounds like an open-ended commitment in which the U.S. may have to finish whatever Israel starts while taking casualties in the process. If so, we could also say goodbye to any hope of an Israeli-Palestinian two-state solution in the foreseeable future. It is not the American way and is indicative of a not-very-savvy Administration. The notion that Israel, a nation of only 8 million people, should feel that it has no option but to initiate an illegal, unsanctioned war with Iran is absurd. The very fact that it is being discussed indicates weak U.S. policy. Ultimately U.S. national security is at stake here along with the national security of many other countries. If Iran builds the bomb we all understand that it won’t be too long before a few ICBMs are aimed at the Great Satan, to use Iran’s term for the U.S. Then we will have to live under constant threats from the ayatollahs.

There are no good options. The fanatical regime in Iran has said time and time again that it will not yield to the world community. Iranian government advisor Ahmad Bakhshayesh recently said, “The U.S. has no other option than to compromise on our stances and accept our nuclear program.”

This is a problem for the big “5+1” countries to handle, not Israel. We think the U.S. should lead by immediately starting to work within the U.N. to form a consensus that Iran’s nuclear facilities must be taken out unless Iran complies fully with the IAEA, now and in the future. The U.N. could set a deadline date in 2012 for full Iranian compliance with the IAEA. That should be the policy – work within a U.N. framework and make sure Israel stays on the sidelines. We should permanently end the possibility of an Iranian threat and avoid any further proliferation of nuclear weapons. The 21st century must be spent reducing worldwide stockpiles of nuclear weapons, not adding to them.

Posted in National Security | 4 Comments


During the January 24, 2012 State of the Union address Barack Obama said: “Last month, I went to Andrews Air Force Base and welcomed home some of our last troops to serve in Iraq. Together, we offered a final, proud salute to the colors under which more than a million of our fellow citizens fought — and several thousand gave their lives.”

That was the end of Mr. Obama’s reference to Iraq. Why didn’t we hear what should have come next – what the U.S. accomplished through its enormous sacrifice of blood and money during both the Bush and Obama administrations?

4,800 American servicepeople died and nearly 32,000 were wounded in Iraq, many grievously. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the long-term price tag for the Iraq war is $1.9 trillion. It would be reasonable to expect concrete, tangible and permanent results to recoup our losses in Iraq. Moreover, we believe that President Obama had a duty to those who served and the American public to tell us what concrete results were achieved through our sacrifices in Iraq.

Because President Obama left out this information, here are the results based solely on information that is publicly available: very little. Yes, we toppled Saddam Hussein, installed a democracy and fruitlessly searched the country for weapons of mass destruction. But we disengaged from Iraq without concluding so much as a permanent security or defense cooperation agreement. On November 17, 2008 the U.S. and Iraq signed a “Strategic Framework Agreement” that provides for ongoing cultural, economic and limited security cooperation. This isn’t a permanent security or friendship agreement. Either country can withdraw from the SFA with one year’s notice.

You may be wondering if the U.S. even attempted to negotiate an agreement on Iraqi oil concessions, as Iraq has the largest proven oil reserves in the world. All indications are that it did not, as almost all oil production contracts to date have been awarded to non-U.S. firms. The fact that oil service and drilling companies like Halliburton may gain new contracts will return only a few dollars, if any, to the U.S. Treasury.

We’re not suggesting that American forces fought and sacrificed for nothing. But, at a minimum, we should not have disengaged from Iraq without a long-term security agreement and some agreements on preferential treatment for U.S. companies. Was it reasonable to expect that of the $1.8 trillion spent, much of this sum would eventually be recouped? We think it was, but that money isn’t coming back now.

Donald Trump is correct when he says that U.S. Government officials are often very poor negotiators, and this is one of many such examples. The Iraq War started, of course, during the Bush Administration and the Bush Administration shares responsibility for this outcome.


Irbil, Iraq (CNN) — Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi has lashed out at Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, predicting that Iraq could soon return to widespread sectarian violence that could require the return of U.S. forces. “What sort of Iraq we are talking about?” he asked. “How the Americans will feel proud? How the American administration is going to justify to the taxpayer the billion of dollars that has been spent and at the end of the day the American saying, ‘Sorry, we have no leverage even to put things in order in Iraq’?…..The future of Iraq is grim.”

Posted in Foreign Policy | 3 Comments


This week saw the passing of Steve Jobs and Al Davis. Steve Jobs, a native of San Francisco, returned to Apple Computer, a company he co-founded, in 1997 and made it the most valuable technology company in the world by creating products that changed how we listen to music, communicate, consume and create. He is listed on 338 U.S. patents or patent applications. Steve was driven by the desire to create well-engineered, innovative and stylish consumer products.

Al Davis, born in Brockton, MA., was the AFL’s Coach of the Year in 1963. In 1972 while Oakland Raiders’ managing general partner Wayne Valley was attending the Summer Olympics in Munich, Davis drafted a revised partnership agreement that made him the new managing general partner, with near-absolute control over team operations. With Davis as GM, the Raiders won 12 division titles and 3 Super Bowls. Al Davis will always be remembered for his slogans “Just Win, Baby”® and “Commitment To Excellence”®.

Both Steve and Al succeeded because they dared to be different, weren’t satisfied with the status quo, continually innovated and were not afraid to fight for their organizations and personal beliefs. These are truly American qualities that remind us of the founding fathers and great Americans like President Theodore Roosevelt. All of these Americans had one thing in common: they were great achievers. The lesson for us is that we will succeed only by becoming an achievement society, which is the original thesis and position of the American Party®.

Posted in Organizational Update | 4 Comments


Economist Jeffrey Sachs on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” on Friday, August 19, 2011:

“We’re almost three years into this administration, and there’s never been a plan. And that’s what everybody feels. And the president didn’t lead. He waited. The quintessential image, sadly, of an administration that I supported and hoped for much better, is the president waiting by the phone to hear what Congress calls to tell him. It doesn’t work in this country that way. It’s not a matter that it’s August. It’s a matter that it’s August 2011. So we’ve been drifting for a very long time. And we’ve been drifting down. And we had a short-term plan that failed. A short-term stimulus that was supposed to get the economy back on track, but it failed. And now we have nothing behind it. And we have no agreements, and we have no leadership. And, frankly, I do think it’s pretty odd the president’s on vacation right now. Normally I wouldn’t care about such things, but the world markets are in deep crisis. It’s no joke. This isn’t just an up-and-down little blip. This is a very serious situation.” View this link to see the interview.

Posted in Economy | 32 Comments