Updated: Mar 14, 2020
Though there will be other aspects and the format of the rally could evolve, the following represents the core of a Really? Rally, including the history behind the idea, the mission of the Really? Rally and a description:
Really? Rally Enlighten, Evoke, Entertain Motivation Behind the Really? Rally Growing tired of both of the major political parties strangle hold over America's future, I started looking into why our country had come face to face with the biggest economic disaster since the Great Depression, and although I do not have all of the answers and believe that no one truly could, I do feel that the American public has been misled by those who claim to know how to fix the economy, the environment and our society in general. For this reason, I came up with the Really? Rally. These Rallies are intended to occur all across the country and hopefully provide a platform for all who wish to speak to have a voice. They are intended to provide the public with an alternative to the major news outlets that are currently owned by no more than six large corporations which have definite agendas that might not be in line with the policies that benefit the majority of the Public. The goal of the Really? Rally is to provide an open and HONEST discussion of the issues that face the nation and a forum for those who wish to lead the nation. While I do have a personal opinion, as I am certain most people do, as related to their own political ideology, the function of these rallies is to eliminate any bias through a randomization of the audience in attendance at any particular rally. As an example of the types of misleading information that Really? Rallies could refute, I offer the following: "There are many leaders in Washington who say that we have to provide tax breaks and other incentives to supposed "Job Creators" so they can in turn create the jobs that they seem not to have created over the past twelve years of the Bush Era Tax cuts. While there are those who oppose this economic policy, they don't seem to be able to provide a persuasive argument against the idea of "Job Creators". Whether or not "Job Creators" should be compensated is not an argument that America should be burdened with any longer, but there seems to be no real response to it coming from anyone in Washington D.C.. I believe that there is however an argument which could dispel the claim that these mythical "Job Creators" need tax breaks up front; an argument that I present it here: Why should the public pay for tax breaks that go to these "Job Creators" up front? Why don't we only pay subsidies for those jobs that have actually been created instead? In this way, if only 20% of those who are considered "Job Creators" actually create jobs, the country saves 80% of the money that would have gone into the coffers of those "Job Creators" who don't create jobs. Under this plan, those who actually create jobs are rewarded, while those who don't are prevented from wasting taxpayer dollars. And if the number of jobs created is higher than 20%, say 50%, it still represents jobs that actually helped America out of this recession as well as the 50% savings that would have gone to jobs promised, but never delivered." To learn more about the Really Rally, keep reading or contact Chris at: email@example.com
A Really? Rally is a forum for people of any ethnicity, political affiliation, cultural background, national ancestry, race or any other classification that can be thought of to bring forward their ideas and beliefs as they pertain to the advancement of this nation as a whole. The intent of these rallies is to help people truly understand the issues that are presented by their elected officials without the spin or rhetoric that too many politicians use as subterfuge for their agenda(s). The format of a Really? Rally will be as follows:
1. There will be categories as suggested by individuals, groups, organizations and corporations or government agencies where participants can put forth their ideas for societal changes, legislation, non-profits or anything that has an impact on a particular group of people, neighborhood, county, city, state or the nation in general.
2. The participant(s) must be able to present their views or positions in a clear and concise manner, as provided by the following procedures:
a. Opening - There will be a two (2) minute introduction provided in which the presenter will introduce themselves, offer any contact information and give short description of what they will be presenting. There will be NO voting by any of the groups pertaining to maintaining or losing the floor at this time.
b. Presentation - There will be a ten (10) or fifteen (15) minute period in which the presenter will describe their position or bill or idea for a non-profit. At this time, the presenter will be judged by the crowd and if they do not present themselves in a manner that is easily understood, they could lose the "floor". More on how a presenter can maintain or lose the floor is provided below.
c. Questions - This time will be allocated to providing information about any organization, group or agency the presenter is promoting. This is when information about upcoming events or meetings, etc. can be given out by the presenter. There will be NO voting by any of the groups pertaining to maintaining or losing the floor at this time. The "Closing" is the prize for presenting in a clear and concise manner.
3. Maintaining the "Floor":
a. A presenter must be able to hold the interest of those in attendance. This does not mean that the material presented must be interesting (government is not always interesting), it simply means that the presenter must get his or her ideas across in a manner in which the audience understands what is at stake. This requirement is due to the fact that it seems far too many people have no understanding of how certain laws will affect or impact them and those for whom they care.
b. The audience will have the responsibility of helping a presenter lose or maintain the "Floor". Maintaining or losing the floor will be done in one of two ways: Groups (discussed below) will have the sole power to vote off or keep a presenter. This will be done by holding up red octagonal shaped signs or by holding up a green, round signs. The red and green signs will offset one another, but when the red signs outnumber the green signs by a certain number or percentage (TBD) a warning light (yellow) will be triggered behind the speaker to give those groups who want the current speaker to continue, time to raise their green sign(s) to offset the red signs, thus saving the presenter. There will be a second warning light (orange) and if no green signs are raised, the presenter (speaker) will here a sound indicating that they have lost the floor.
c. A presenter must only maintain the floor for as long as it takes to deliver their message or until their 10 - 15 minutes expires. They can choose to forego any remaining time left on their 10 or 15 minute clock, but it cannot be added to their two minute closing.
4. Groups - All groups will be randomly selected (means of selection to be determined) and no individual can join a group. This random means of selecting group members to ensure that no one group has any particular bias for or against an issue or candidate. This random group must then elect one person (foreman) to representative to represent them. This representative will be the only person to hold the red and green signs and the only member of the group who can decide to raise one or the other, based on a consensus of the group, or at least the majority of the group. Members of a group cannot change membership throughout the entire rally.
* - TBD - To Be Decided
In an effort to attract people who would normally not show any interest in politics, there will be forms of entertainment, including music by local and national acts, rides to keep the children occupied and food and drinks for all. Other forms of entertainment will be considered.
As for the music, it will be scheduled at the end of the political portion of the rally, which will vary in length, depending on the number of presenters. There will be no set time for any act and the national acts will be mixed in with the local bands to insure that people will show up and spend a sufficient amount of time at the rally.
Really? Rally Mission Statement
In order to provide people with a reliable, easily understood and concise resource of political news, the Really Rally was created. In an attempt to offset the rhetoric and double speak that has dominated the American Democracy in the 21 century, the Really Rally seeks to not only inform the public about the affects that various legislation and political decisions have for the majority of citizens, but also entertain. Though politics and entertainment may not seem a natural fit, the two can no longer be considered exclusive, given the sources that so many turn to for news.
The Really Rally must expose those ideas that are born of hypocrisy as well as those which are too convoluted to be easily understood by the people, groups or agencies they impact. It is the greatest wish of the founder(s) of the Really Rally that people become engaged in politics at least to the extent that they have a greater understanding of what their elected officials proposals mean to their future as well as the future of their children and grandchildren.
Another goal of the Really Rally is to hopefully set the United States on a path beneficial to as many of its citizens as possible. It is the firm belief of the founder(s) of the Really Rally that those who seek office today should, not only be able to see the problems that face this country, but also have the ability to provide solutions in a manner that translates to the public readily.
Ultimately, the goal is to give people a clear choice between the ideas put forward by opposing elected officials, as well as a clear choice as to who would be best suited to present those ideas that best serve the public interest.
Really? Rally History
For the past few years, I have tried to understand why the government of the United States of America has felt as if it were not looking out for the people, at least not the majority of the people. Recently, there have been those individuals, entities, organizations that have sought to explain and /or fight against what most people perceive as drift from governance by, for and of the people. The problem is that, while these groups and individuals have sought to put control back in the hands of the people, corporations, wealthy individuals, and groups like A.L.E.C. (American Legislative Exchange Commission), have worked against the interests of the people, the country and the world in order to further their own selfish desires.
As I delved into the factors that shaped today's America and its government, I discovered things that terrified me. These weren't concepts, ideas or beliefs that would have an impact on my life alone. The things that I learned in my own personal research were things that would have been considered conspiracy theories in the past, but were now simply conspiracies. From the fact that the 80% of the nation's beef and 60% of both the pork and poultry are processed by as few as four corporations to the more subtle, yet insidious proliferation of money in our political system, to laws that promote voter suppression (the list goes on), our Democracy has been hijacked.
Not an exaggeration, our government, has in fact, been overtaken by those with the funds to manipulate, control and dominate those who have sworn an oath to see to the betterment of this country. America's greatest threat does not come from some outside entity as the fear mongers would have the ignorant believe. The greatest threat to this country has much less to do with the threat of some foreign government or terrorist group, than it does with the attacks that so many in this nation face economically.
America was built on the belief that together we stand, divided we fall and there are some out there who seek to divide the people. They seem to believe that every individual should be left to their own devices, which might make more sense if the system was not so imbalanced as it is today. We have leaders and individuals who decree those Americans in need of assistance should be considered no more than parasites by the rest of the nation's people. The problem with this logic are too numerous to mention, but following are a sampling of reasons for everyone to consider:
First, the majority of people do not share this opinion. Consensus is quite the contrary and most people realize that there are those times in one's life that require a helping hand.
Secondly, those leaders who live by philosophies such as or similar to "Objectivism", where the leaders own interests supersede those of the group should not be considered leaders. A more apt title for such an individual would be "Dictator" and America was not founded on a system of dictatorship. It is and will never be the American way to, willingly and knowingly elect a candidate such as this to any office that oversaw the lives of any group, large or small.
There is no need to name any individuals currently in power who do not seem to put this Nation's best interest at heart, because the messages and/or legislation that they continually push all seem to assist a small segment of our society. The ideas that these individuals put forward claim that if the wealthy are further enriched, they will prove to be the philanthropists we hoped they would have been over the past thirty years. To the enrichment of the coffers of the few, ideas like trickle down (supply side economics) are offered and claims made that suggest that, if 'WE' the masses give rich people more money (in the form of tax breaks or subsidies) these same rich people will in turn give us some of our money back, but only after we have done some work for them. Does this sound fair? If it does, please donate as money as you can to the Really Rally Foundation, so the Foundation can give you some of your money back after you've done some work for the Foundation. Then there are the laws that help corporations avoid cleaning up after themselves. Unlike the individual, too many corporations that spew pollution into the atmosphere are not made to clean up their garbage. Imagine if every person in America was allowed to throw their garbage into the street without paying for some service to come and pick it up. This is what Americans are expected to accept from companies that spit toxic chemicals into our atmosphere and this is what certain politicians fight against.
As for things such as tax breaks, there are politicians who sponsor bills that further enrich the few by taking that money from the rest of us. The benefit of such behavior is expressed in campaign donations or private sector jobs after said politician(s) has completed their "public service" and turned their back(s) on the people they are elected to represent. It's easy to determine who benefits from these types of backroom deals, especially nowadays, because those individuals who advance themselves in this manner no longer even try to hide these facts. Why is that? Could these immoral leaders be so jaded to the electorate, that they feel no need to hide these conflicts of interests.
In short, very little is does in secret these days, because those who seek to undermine the power of the people believe that the American spirit is broken. They believe that the citizens of this great nation have succumbed to complacency and have lost all common sense pertaining to electing leaders. They believe that Americans no longer care about what happens to them, their neighbors, their friends, those in need, those who seek a better life and any other group that doesn't include the wealthy or powerful. This belief couldn't be further from the truth and this is where these enemies of civil society have made the gravest mistake. They have underestimated the will of the people, which is as indomitable as it ever was throughout history. The problem today is that the messages proffered by all sides have become too convoluted to be deciphered correctly by the layperson. People simply do not have the time to disseminate what they are being told by most of the media that people consider fair and balanced sources of information.