Thursday, August 28, 2008

Interview with 2008 Presidential Candidate Orion Karl Daley

Original post location and date:
July 16, 2007

John-Michael Talboo (JMT)-Q:

So Orion, you are running as a Balanced Party candidate. How did the conception of the Balanced Party come about, and why do you think it's a good alternative for voters?

Orion Karl Daley-A:

In November 2004, 21% of the voter population put the current poor leadership into office, and another 20+% voted for the Democrats who ran with their tail between their legs when the results were left uncontested. 60% of the voter population let others make the decision for them, as already feeling left out in the cold.

I was fed up with the poor leadership already and the lack of the sense of responsibility that they demonstrate for our nation as a people. My immediate concerns were the health, safety and welfare of my family which cannot be assured unless it is for our nation.

Spending the next few years, plans were drafted for the New Deal. This now provides a compelling alternative for Election 2008. It is to reform government and the economy, so we as individuals, communities, and as a nation are empowered with a strategic future.

I believe that 80% of the voter population can be inspired to vote for the New Deal regardless of their personal differences and political followings. They can find a solid common ground in the Balanced Party.


Yes, it really does seem many Americans are fed up with the two party system. There seems to be more political theatre that goes on as opposed to actual solutions. I'm going to touch on a few of the big issues today with you Orion. First one on most voters’ minds is of course Iraq.

Do you believe we should have ever engaged in this war to begin with? Secondly, how do you propose we put an end to this mess we have gotten ourselves into?

Orion Karl Daley-A:

To answer the first part of your question JM I would say that the justification that Saddam was in bed with al Qaeda even if this was true, I would have rather invested our resources in Afghanistan and complete the job as much as possible there. We owed it to the American People to capture bin Laden, and not let him slip off the radar when he sneaked out of Tora Bora. Saddam also had no interest in al Qaeda, as in being a dictator would not need that type of distraction in Iraq.

The notion of Weapons of Mass Destruction was also dismissed by the UN security council, as remembering vividly the weapons inspector’s statements, and that Iraq was providing full cooperation with the inspections. Also we have to consider that today we all can enjoy Google Earth. The military I would hazard a guess should have been watching Iraq in the same manner for years if it had such a concern. The photos from the Cuban Missile crisis demonstrated WMD, and not Iraq. We also left Iraq very little wiggle room with respect to the no fly zone as well.

About being a threat to the region, and / or invading the US, as Rumsfeld had boasted, that it would only take about 6 days to topple Saddam's regime. So the question is posed - what threat?

About Freeing the Iraqi people from the tyranny of Saddam, I want to put some conditions about this answer. Let’s assume that before considering this, that we had not burnt our bridges with the World Court, and the UN Security Council. Let’s also assume, unrelated to bin Laden, that we were genuinely concerned about the Iraqi people like we should have been with Darfur. I would send in a special opts team, and take Saddam to the World Court. I would have them leave a message behind to have fair elections, or they will be visiting the World Court as well.

For the above purposes, an invasion in Iraq was not warranted. But let’s consider why it could be. During the Gas shortage in the 70's, we almost invaded Saudi Arabia in order to get to the Aramco reserves. In theory from an arrogant point of view, we could practice Manifest Destiny in Iraq, put in our own puppet government, (like that had before Saddam), and then some how secure America's stake in middle east oil. The fallacies with this are that where ever we have put a puppet government in place, they have fallen. Cuba, Iran, and Vietnam are some immediate examples.

It was obvious to me, 'John Q Public' that we had no good reason for invading Iraq in 2003. Further, I did not like the way the head of the Democratic lead Senate rolled over one day from an absolute staunch opposing position to the invasion. Many had seemed to take the position in Congress, that they would give a vote of Confidence to Bush, although having no basis for it.

It was also predictable that in invading Iraq, and imposing a puppet government as a political solution that there would be civil war and where our brave soldiers would be caught in the middle of urban house to house fighting. Offering 12 million voters very little choice in Iraq is not a true election.

What invading Iraq did serve is bin Laden's interest in bleeding and weakening our military reserves while building a perception of dislike for American's from Muslims, re-allocating our National Guard that should be protecting our borders and ports instead, a lot of serious military and munitions contracting.

What it has cost is as we know over 3,500 American lives, and a magnitude (10 times) more in severely wounded Americans, and a weakening of our economy from borrowing and incurring extensive foreign debt for financing our practice of imminent domain through manifest destiny. It has also cost well over 650,000 Iraqi lives, and I would hazard a guess that for every one killed that there are 10 wounded, and cost our friendship with our allies in Europe. It will additionally cost much healing time for the Iraqi vets, even if they are able to come home in one piece.

This act of invasion itself deserves due process of discovery once the Bush Administration is no longer in office.

As far as how I believe we should get ourselves out of Iraq it is apparent that as of today, most American's would just like to end the Iraq war, and bring our people home with no further delay. For a politician running for the Presidency, it is more than easy to just promise the immediate withdrawal, and pass the mess off to the UN that we had made there.

I believe that the Repubs have a point that in some so called phased withdrawal would make remaining US forces easier targets, and the Democrats have a point that there should be a time line for withdrawal. The Repubs have a point if and only if the Shiites and Sunnis are no longer shooting at us. The Dems could have a valid position that is, if and only if we have a real plan for Iraq, as opposed to just leaving them in the state they are in as a civil war when the time us up.

So as far as the Dems are concerned, they appear to be doing nothing more than just going through the political motions, where Bush can veto them. This is unacceptable in my opinion of how the American Government is to serve the people cost effectively.

Further, regardless of the Bush administration being responsible for the Iraq mess, we as Americans are just as responsible. A president that takes office in 2008 cannot just say, "I didn't do that, it’s not my fault, so we are just exiting Iraq". It is also easy to give fuzzy promises as an Election 2008 candidate, but later say that "there were mitigating circumstances where the time is just not right yet".

Many Americans gave their lives, or at a minimum their future health. Their families have also made significant sacrifices. They deserve their pride and dignity as Americans. There is no real healing than can take place without one's dignity in tact. That also goes for our allies and enemies as well.

We deserve our strategic pride as Americans, where we have not in good conscious gone out and destroyed lives in other parts of the world. Other wise, what makes us better than any other global tyrants? Being compromised financially to Foreign lenders such as China, also puts us in a weak position if they decide to address such a global tyrant. We loose any capital in foreign policy proportionally to how much of a tyrant we are. Domestically, our economy will grind to a halt.

But what is most important that as Americans, we have been raised with a conscious of what makes Americans very special. We want to pride ourselves as being the kindest nation. To be Americans we are also accustomed to a very most powerful and undauntable pride. And this is for good reason. Americans no matter what race, creed, color, religion, or followings and beliefs, are over all, decent, fair and moral minded people.

For us to do what is right in Iraq, in May 2004 I sent the following summary proposal for Senator, Biden, Dyrben, and others in the Senate and House.

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: How to Fix Iraq
Date: Wed, 05 May 2004 08:17:13 -0400
From: Orion Karl Daley Organization: The Trading Systems Network, Inc.

I'm missing why the obvious has not been addressed - please explain why we have had limited vision in terms of Iraq -

Example - To Fix Iraq

1- Split the land for three separate nations

2- Offer each a way to the UN - with Nonaggression rules

3- Allow each to join OPEC - with nonaggression rules

4- Provide Banking infrastructure in Saudi Arabia for the 3 nations

5- Provide irrigation services to instill both agricultural and oil Economies

6- Have the UN provide security against any one , or two nations against the other

-Orion Karl Daley

I would not want to confuse Biden's partitioning plan with the above which looks similar to Step 1. As far as Biden's new partitioning plan, I give no credit as he did not read the email thoroughly. They are to be sovereign nations, or the result is a civil war where we have passed responsibility of the real political solution off to the Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds to deal with. Hence, civil war continues.

The above is what I saw most fair then and is known as a plan 'Peace with Dignity, Iraq Exit Strategy' on the net, at,, and in the book, The New Deal. As sovereign nations, the Sunnis do not have to entertain Saudi dynamics, the Shiites would not need the same with Iran, and Kurds, who already have their own active government can easily embrace Sovereignty.

Just bringing this to the table at the UN to become involved brings the world into a peace with dignity effort, where the US can also mend friendships. For Iraq, the Sunnis and Shiites would no longer have a need for a civil war. During the planning a real cease fire can occur.

Our troops can safely downsize, as no longer being a substituted target of threat for both the Sunnis and Shiites. In Sovereignty, al Qaeda would also no longer serve any purpose and therefore this tension is also downsized. Al-Qaida would be out of a job, and jobs would become available in all three sovereign nations of Iraq.

As we can come home with unquestionable pride in doing the right thing, these nations would want to entertain American oil interests. We demonstrated their best interest in mind at the sacrifice of American lives.


Well Orion I have to say you have covered all you bases and have an honest plan. You seem very genuine in your motives. We never fully agree with a candidate’s views or plans. However, politics is a dirty business so candidates like yourself really deserve consideration and support. You seem to truly have the American and Iraqi people and their best interests in mind.

Now an element to all of this that most candidates won’t touch with a ten foot pole is possible government complicity in the attacks of 9/11. The current conflicts our country is involved in are a direct result of that painful day. So if there is any merit to this at all it is a trumping issue in my mind. What are your thoughts about the 9/11 truth movement and would you support a new truly independent 9/11 commission.

Orion Karl Daley-A:

What was once like trees in our front yard, is now the pit down the street. We were part of 9/11, but not those who had suffered.

I have much documented at and in the New Deal of my commitment for further due process and discovery on 9/11 where ever the path leads. It is not to be a back burner item, and without true recognition, we can not move forward as a nation.

I support any current effort for this process to gain momentum now. I believe also that one of the petition organizations should reach to the others about this, and aggregate all signatures. As a critical mass this can be brought to Congress for its sincere recognition before Election 2008. This effort should also not be lead by any Election 2008 Presidential Candidate either.


Fair enough... While we are the subject of Government misdeeds, here is a three fold question for you. Do you believe further compensation is warranted for the past use of Agent Orange in Vietnam? Also, do you believe a commission should be set up to get to the bottom of Gulf War illness. Finally, why do you think our veterans are treated so poorly?

Orion Karl Daley-A:

I believe what I shared in regards to your recent article that covered these subjects’ best sums up my thoughts...

Our nation will have a long road to its healing after Iraq. And if we cannot consider the older vets, then in our moral fortitude, where should we really start? Where ever we start should bring dignity to all vets and their families.

Congress was high about making moves over Walter Reed, and Bush even apologized for not being aware of the conditions. But consider not being aware of all who have served and have been forgotten. This has to be put smack in the face of Bush and the Congress and in the public's voice is the means to do so.

At, and in the New Deal I propose a comprehensive plan called 'Leave No Vet Behind'.

Our government must be transparent and accountable in what it does in the name of the people as a nation. Our vets and families in my opinion are first in line for this regard by the government.

Why this is not the case currently, can only be due to the disregard of the people by the current leadership in the executive and congressional branches of government.


Yes, disregard is the culprit Orion I agree. Complete lack of conscience and empathy, it is just astounding to me. The treatment of our veterans brings to mind the treatment of our citizens in general. The debate about the current state of affairs in our health care system has had a fire lit under it recently by Michael Moore, do you like any of his ideas? How do you propose improving the system?

Orion Karl Daley-A:

The other day I shared a message with some friends at This was:

It was blistering the other day in NYC when I arrived at a much needed water fountain where a man was doing some laundry. He said, please let me clean the soap off the fountain for you'. I thanked him.

Regardless if he is homeless, and I am not, we both have as much right to the same water fountain. To put this in perspective, unfortunate circumstances can trickle down on any one of us.

The Health of our Nation is reflected in our people, and I believe is a right deserved by all.

100% full quality health care for all does not have to be at tax payer’s burden, or through private enterprise health insurance policies.

It can be financed through fully tax exempt 'Health Care Bonds'. This allows it to be robust enough to meet the needs of national disasters, and other unexpected events while at a minimum provide full health care coverage to all.

In Detail...

I believe the government can lead health care innovations in order to benefit the people, and the private sector will follow in order to take advantage of the resulting business opportunities. When the private sector leads, the focus on business profits causes diminishing quality of service. My concern is that health care costs will continue to rise while private health care offers less and less benefit to the public.

I propose the 'People's Health Care Plan.' This consists of a Federal universal health care program that leaves opportunity for the private sector to compete with fair additional offerings. Additionally, 'For the Good' community service based health care should be created for preventative health care.

1- The Federal Care program would afford fixed health care infrastructure costs; make services available when needed by all U.S. Citizens, and cover health treatments and remedies adequately up to 100% with quality service.

This is to include but not be limited to chronic care, emergencies, restorative health, post operative recovery treatments, and generic prescription programs. There are no deductibles and no loss of coverage when in between jobs, when economically disadvantaged or when in retirement.

The Federal Health Care Plan is to be funded by moving Medicare/Medicaid into a people's health care general fund. and by replacing normal employer/employee health care insurance plans with a monthly contribution to the people's health care general fund that is about half of what is normally paid. He believes that this alone as not being profit based can address basic quality coverage.

Additionally the Federal Care program is to be galvanized by funding from fully tax exempt health care bonds. OKD believes that the tax exempt bonds will become actively traded in the financial markets. They will also allow the public to make tax exempt investments.

In addition to having a robust health care fund, he believes that this also provides coverage of natural disasters like hurricane Katrina, for first responders when in a state of emergency, the public if when under a terrorist attack and epidemics which at this point are not being competently embraced by the government.

2- 'For the Good' community based offerings are to address the economically disadvantaged with a focus on preventative health care. Health practitioners may receive tax benefits based on community service quotas and level of service.

3- The Private Sector is welcome to operate honestly by offering competitive alternatives, add-ons for such things as elective surgery and post operative care, and additional services that they feel could interest consumers.


Sign me up! Illegal immigration is another hot topic these days Orion and being a Balanced Party candidate I'm sure you a have a middle ground we all can stand on? How can we solve this problem while taking all into consideration?
Orion Karl Daley-A:
There are a lot of misgivings about our current awareness, and what we are doing about immigration. It has actually been an issue for some time, but no focus has really been put on it, except recently.

The public has been thrown a bone of patronizing sense of empowerment. For the people, this in the new form of racism. 'They are not like you, they are also Illegal'.

I believe that it has been used as a distraction by the Executive Branch, so as not to focus on the other 'nuts and bolts' that have been coming loose with our nation. This also serves Election 2008 Candidates for what kind of red/blue divides they wish to create. And, for Senate Lobbyists, in the name of people like Bill Gates, it is used for the purpose of opening up our local labor markets to a further flood of cheap guest worker labor.

Some due diligence about this has been addressed at and in the New Deal. This is in addition to 5 revisions of the 1986 Immigration Act, in order to give the issue the time and focus that it is worth as workable laws.

In all the 'Hearsay', we should have a few points of reference. This in order to filter the noise in the media, and actually account for why neither side of the Senate in the recent Immigration Bill did not serve the issue genuinely.

The IRS knows of 12.5+ million unregistered immigrants. This is because they are registered with the IRS, which does not share information. But let’s hazard a guess that the average annual wage in the USA for unregistered immigrants is $20,000 or $200,000.000 for 10 million immigrants. The Average income tax per year to the nation is $50,000,000 per year. The immigrant by definition is what makes up the backbone of this country. Like the colonials, they are those who are not looking back, but see their future as US Citizens.

Guest workers that are flooded in this country ship about $800,000,000 per year out of our country. It goes back to their homes in foreign lands. This is money that is not circulating in our communities. Our economy simply cannot afford this.

For resolve the following is proposed:

2- The Laws: Consider what are 'Fines' and what is 'Amnesty' when it comes to the existing residing unregistered Immigrants.

As the Economy is the primary factor for the level of immigration, in volume, that can be allowed, and in compliance with the noted proposed criterion (a - e) below, The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 so shall be proposed for revision by Congress. This is to allow the United States to have fare and just law for immigration subject to the level of economic burden that can be supported by our nation.

a- For those who are paying taxes, should be able to register with out fear of reprisal. They are contributors to our economy, and therefore our country. For those who are not paying taxes, are in fact taxing our economy. In both cases we have to know, who is willing to swear an allegiance to our country, and who is not.

b- Those not willing swear an allegiance to our country, and are employed, must leave until our economy can support their presence. In other words, when Americans are no longer out of work, can we afford to have foreigners here that want to ship money out of our country; and not before. That is regardless if they pay taxes or not. The jobs can be for Americans at realistic and fare market rates, that are not suddenly below earlier market rates, who can also pay the taxes, and not have to them need to collect unemployment.

For example, an IT Specialist previous to 9/11 could earn upwards of $90-100 dollars per hour. The same job description is now filled at $40-$50 per hour.

c- For those who are employed, and willing to swear an allegiance, allow them to do so. They want to be Americans, and this is what our country was built on.
d- For those who are not employed, and willing to swear an allegiance, they are to register with the Government for employment ; If below the age of 60, and able bodied, they are allowed 60 days of residence, and if not gainfully employed by then, must be sent to the country of origin, where they can await notification of employment. If they are not able bodied, and/or over 60, I think we really have to search who we are, if to want to send them away.

e- For those not willing to register, and employed or not employed demonstrate no intent to work with the constraints that we must have for immigration. This includes Iraqi Refugees, or anyone who is not natively born in this country. They cannot be permitted to live here. In our current economy, We can only allow those who are, or intended to be Americans the right to live here under our laws as a Civil Society.

As noted in A-2 above, each offense requires that one is processed for a period of time where they are photo graphed and finger printed. There is no fun in this when one's intent is come into our country. When sent back, if one gets too many points, say starting at 10, then you will be locked up instead for a period of 60 days and then sent back.

Further as noted, this is not intended to conflict with Amendment 13 of the Constitution on involuntary servitude or to imply some form of slavery. Although not also intended to be a paid vacation to a country club, those retained for a period of time are to be treated in a humane manner as all visitors to the United States.

3- No Open Borders We cannot just have open borders, and that is not recommended here either.

Our Borders must be secure, and in our current times, this is where the National Guard should be deployed. We can build walls, but this becomes a permanent fixture that walls us in as much as walls others out. The current administration has done this over and over again. This is not in our history, and it is not the American Way.

Noted earlier, in our current economy we also cannot afford the spirit of Emma Lazarus that is written on the tablet of the Statue of Liberty, but we must strive to be able to do this again once more, some day. For if not, then what do we stand for. What does Liberty stand for, if we are to ignore the history of the American Way?


Last question Orion. If you were sat down at a table with the USA constitution and the USA Patriot Act lying before you with a lighter and you HAD to burn one, which one goes up in a cloud of ash and fire?

Orion Karl Daley-A:

The Patriot Act has no place in a Civil Society. The US Constitution is written in plane English. Although its context is somewhat different as of yesterday, where the word privacy did not exist during its authoring, its principles can sustain time, where the Patriot Act has no future.

It surprises me how many in the Senate and the House , as well as the Executive Branch have not read the Constitution, as much as thinking that a Patriot Act could take its place. The Constitution, although coming before the Patriot Act, obsoletes the Patriot Act.

The real question comes to the surface - who in our elected leadership is capable of drafting such a work like the Constitution?


In other words... The Patriot act burns folks! Thanks for doing this interview with me Orion. If you believe Mr. Daley deserves to be on the 2008 Ballot in your town, please sign his petition by clicking here!