Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Sign the California Clean Money Campaign Petition

Posted 10 years ago on April 1, 2013, 10:20 p.m. EST by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Californians are not the only Americans angry that special interest money has taken over the electoral process. Americans in every state in the nation are also crying out for reform to restore democracy by giving ordinary voters an equal voice.

Their voices are beginning to be heard — and the early results are inspiring. Arizona, Maine, Vermont, Massachusetts , New Mexico, and North Carolina have all passed versions of Clean Money reform.

More info here:


Sign petition here:


Or here:




Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by redandbluestripedpill (333) 10 years ago

Signed. This is how we begin to let officials know we are not allowing the $ to hijack our democracy in silence.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 10 years ago

Cool. Pass it around!

[-] 2 points by redandbluestripedpill (333) 10 years ago

Actions like this state petition are similar to what would be happening with ART5, so this is good practice aimed at getting some dirty money out of politics. Of course preparatory amendment for ART5 needs to include campaign finance reform, but the initiative process needs cleaning up too.

[-] 2 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 10 years ago

If there were enough people awakened and educated enough to demand an Article V convention, we wouldn't need an Article V convention.

[-] 2 points by redandbluestripedpill (333) 10 years ago

If free speech was not abridged for 60 years of mass media, we would have had one already because people would educate one another.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 10 years ago

Explain how free speech has been abridged for the past 60 years.

[-] -1 points by redandbluestripedpill (333) 10 years ago

The purpose of free speech must be known first. Logically free speech serves the societal purpose of enabling people to share information needed for survival.

That is an absolute, meaning that information which has reasonable support on a local level, must be empowered to go national.

To completely answer your question would be a very long list, assuredly incomplete. Instead I've defined parameters and ask you make a mental list, just to be satisfied, of all the different national communications mediums that groups of citizens in agreement cannot use to share their info.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 10 years ago

Give us a current example of free speech being abridged.

[-] 1 points by redandbluestripedpill (333) 10 years ago

Facts of the cognitive infiltration are not available to the public.

Forum censorship stops vital info.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 10 years ago

If the facts of cognitive infiltration aren't available, how do you know it exists?

[-] 1 points by redandbluestripedpill (333) 10 years ago

I've seen tests and exposures of it right here on this forum since it started. That's when I caught on, and leaned/realized that cass sunstein, obama advisor recommended cognitive infiltration of social activist groups.
You have to; imagine what the infiltration's might look like, why they might be there, actually have info that the infiltration wants to diffuse then try to introduce it to groups discussing the issue or related issues.

Then you can see the cognitive infiltration when people who appear to support a cause are suddenly VERY conditional about their support. If you figure out a logical way to meet a goal they know about it and that its a waste of time. They have lots of groups to refer to to, supposed authorities. None accountable in any way.

Using that, I've gone out and tested it for myself. It's true. It's success is based in the fact that you, the public do not know what you do not know. Therefore you do not know what to search for to see its not there or being suppressed.

I've seen facts showing the same about most other major forums.

There is no free speech on dot com.

I've seen links showing where youtube blocked using response videos to major environmental problems because the response video had info which is to be kept out of all public news and not benefit from user promo actions at major sites.

You don't know what that info "to be kept out" is do you?

The internet as we know it is a MASSIVE 1st amendment violation.

Trying to evaluate free speech without stating what the perceived intent of it as a right is, will not work.

The intent of free speech is that info needed for survival be shared. This is vital and erring on the short side is EXTINCTION in our case.

[-] 3 points by Renneye (3874) 10 years ago

Beautiful post!! Very well said.

[-] 1 points by redandbluestripedpill (333) 10 years ago

Yea, you would recognize that because you've seen enough of it here using edgy socialist(ic) terms, presented as "strategy"; then it turns out from the most active in discussion that maybe the demands don't mean so much if seeing them met means people have to do this, or that.

Instead of working for whatever strategy/cause they espoused, suddenly dismembering well founded strategy becomes a group task.

Suddenly the method by which a demand is met, rather than the demand, is what is important.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 10 years ago

The most serious problem the internet has isn't the lack of information, but an enormous glut of erroneous and dishonest information.

[-] 1 points by redandbluestripedpill (333) 10 years ago

I hate to point this out, because what you say is absolutely correct, but this is in addition or a caveat; when you do not know what info is missing, one may think there is no lack of info.