Home of Today's Common Sense

This coming election cycles, both 2006 and 2008 portend to be the best opportunity for a third political party such as Libertarians to take a place of prominence on the political scene.
The Republican Party seems to be leaving “the folks” who made them, by becoming more socialist in their actions while still spouting noises of lower taxes and less government.
In the case of the Democrats, it appears that they have run out of ideas and are merely reacting to what the Republicans do and say. They try to be more socialist than the Republicans and attack everything in sight, hoping that by dragging others down it will somehow make them better.
I have read a number of articles that assert that there really isn’t anywhere for the “formerly silent majority” or the “conservatives” to go except a third party, the largest being the “Libertarian Party”.
I expect that I am not alone in my disaffection with the “two party system” as it now exists, and I also suspect, I am not alone in that sense of hope for the future, I experience when I hear and read the thoughts of others outside the conventional political groups.
Most of the best that formerly resided in, the Democrats progressive thoughts of an unobtrusive government that had the daily social interests of the working man in mind, and the Republicans goals of small government, low taxes that engender freedoms to create a better economy for everyone, are now looking for a new party to embrace them.

I predict that during the next months one or more potential “third” parties will publicly attempt to focus specifically on the issues confronting our real concerns.
I believe that when any public voice suggests policy and resolutions that this new party agrees with, they will compliment and support that voice regardless of origin. Then they will become associated with real sensible solutions to real problems not just distant ideals as many see on the scene today. They will let the two major parties attack the messenger and lose the message.
Most importantly, I believe that the new player should also translate the ideals into clear and simply stated issues and solutions. In illustration, I offer the following as a suggested issue and direction:
The first step would be to agree on a focus and solution to the real contentious issues of war. In my opinion, it is not that it is good or bad or that it should only be used only in the most dire circumstances, for the defense of our national and personal existence. I believe that most will concede that as abhorrent as war is, there may be an occasion that it is necessary.
The primary issue seems to be the question of “what constitutes an attack on our existence, how the information relating to this attack reaches the Congress, to what extent that information can be believed and then how individual Congresspersons address their responsibilities.” Then the issue becomes, how that war should be conducted!
In my experience, while in the military during the Vietnam era and observations of conflict since, there are many questions as to whether the information about the risk to the national security was complete and accurately presented to Congress. Then there was the issue that whether those politicians on both sides gave it proper consideration or just did the most expedient and the least politically risky thing. There is even evidence that war declarations further in the past may have begun on less than sterling information.
I suggest that rather than attack war as a concept, that the initiation of war should be made as individually accountable to each Congressman as possible.
At some risk I would like to offer the way of thinking about war that has evolved in me over time.
The current “War Powers Act”, passed by a Democrat Congress over President Nixon’s veto, effectively permits the President to “have a war” so long as Congress doesn’t object.
To reduce the chances of war and insure accountability, I would suggest a new “War Powers Act” that would require that the President spell out the reasons for the military action in a written declaration of war, describing who we are fighting and how we will know it is over.
After suitable debate, each Congressman should then vote either yes or no, (no abstentions) and express the will of the Nation.
Additionally, I would suggest that no less than a commitment of all our resources to the winning of the war should be included in the “Declaration” as well as an initiation of Martial Law until the troops have returned.
Lastly, along with this declaration should be an acknowledgement that all the Congressional Leaders and Administration would be subject to prosecution for War Crimes or dereliction should they be found not be diligent in the declaration or prosecution of the War. Certainly, there would be sufficient personal or political risks to ensure that war would be contemplated in only the direst of circumstances.
For the most part, I submit that any public issues with regard to the prosecution of the war be withheld until all military activity has ended and our troops have returned home.
With that said and most important to me personally, a focus is crucial that will give our young neighbors, who are in the field of battle, the best chance at winning and surviving.
During several tours in Vietnam from 1963 -1969, I witnessed my comrades dying for nothing because the public abandoned them in the field. I also saw horrors of many “folks” just like us and evidence of many thousands more who helped us in the effort, tortured and extinguished because we gave up and abandoned them also. Is it any wonder that our resolve is frequently tested?
I have addressed the safety of our troops with a declaration of Martial Law until they have returned home, not unlike the position that Presidents Roosevelt and Truman took in World War II.
Perhaps the idea I have advanced may seem incomplete, it does appear that such policies reduce the opportunities for misadventures in military conflict and serves to protect our troops while they are defending our way of life.
In the above illustration, I have tried to apply focus on the processes of war that seem to be most important.
When we see the definition of key issues and solutions in terms that can be easily identified with; then advocating them as “Talking Points” whenever the opportunity presents itself, surely we will see the new player making inroads with that part of the political landscape that has been supporting the least awful candidate.