As I mentioned in my last blog, I got a questionaire/survey thing from a group called the "National Republican Senatorial Committee" earlier today in the mail (which is kind of ironic since I'm registered as a Democrat). I did a blog with my thoughts and reactions about the letter itself and that, what I feel is an arrogant and dismissive statement towards anyone who doesn't decide to send this political action group money. If you don't send them money, you're automatically a supporter of Harry Reid and the Democatic party policies in their eyes and they have no use for you. Well, screw 'em because I don't like PAC's or arrogant politicians who think they know what's better for us than we do ourselves. They're ass-clowns, pure and simple.
But the survey thingy did have some good questions. So I've decided to play political pundit for a while and do my best to answer each and every one of their questions. In the survey, they just want people who fill out the questionaire to be good sheep and just say yes to everything. Well, that's not how I roll. I don't play "loyal flock of sheep" to anyone, unless it's Juventud Guerrera dressed as a shepard. Or the neighbor boy? He so damn sexy! Damn, I'd like to f.... never mind. So where was I?
They had questions so I decided to provide some answers. Just consider this a bit of foreshadowing about any potential political future for me in politics? Will I ever run for a political office? Who knows? But my thoughts and opinions are here for all to know and see... just in case. Let's do this!
DEMOGRAPHIC / POLITICAL PROFILE
Gender? Male
Age? (40 - 48)
As a representative of Scotland County, How would you describe yourself politically? Moderate Conservative with liberal social tendencies...
How do you typically receive your news about politics, government and campaigns? Newspapers, Fox News, MSNBC and the internet.
In general, how long have you identified yourself as a Republican? I am registered as a Democrat and have been since I first registered to vote in 1984, although I actually tend to vote more for Republicans than Democrats.
Did you vote in the 2010 election? Absolutely - I haven't missed an election since I turned 18..
Do you intend to vote in the 2012 election? Definitely - we need a lot of changes in our Government and if a person doesn't vote, they have no right to complain or bitch about what we get in Washington.
Do you believe that electing a new Republican Senate Majority is important to getting America back on track? I don't really think that it matters which party is in control when there is a leader in the White House who actually believes in uniting and compromise rather than making everything about politics like our current leader does. When we had Clinton as President and Newt Gingrich / Bob Dole in control of Congress, things got accomplished and our country had some great moments because no one had absolute control and they all realized that they had to work together rather than fight if they wanted to get anythng done. If one party has control of everything (White House and Congress), usually it's all about whatever their agenda happens to be and the country be damned. I'd rather see the Democrats control the Senate (but replace Harry Reid) and the Republicans control the House and a President who can work with both houses (Newt has a record of being able to do so. I also think that Romney and Huntsman, (to a lesser degree) would be able to do so. But Obama has already proven that he has no desire to be a leader and would rather just campaign and play political games so he's got to go. I just hope his replacement is able to step in and step up and actually lead.
ECONOMIC ISSUES QUESTIONS
Do you believe spending cuts - NOT tax hikes - are the best way to deal with the national debt, which has sky-rocketed to a record high $15 trillion under the Democrats? I think it needs to be a combination of both. Over 40% of the people in our country don't pay any income tax at all and that needs to be changed. In my own opinion, the best way to rectify this is to go to either a "Flat Tax" or a national sales tax and totally eliminate our current method of collecting taxes. It's not fair and punishes success the way things currently are. So modify and fix our tax system and it's help. And cut spending as much as possible. That's common sense. If you're running tight on money in your home and can't pay your bills, you tighten the belt, do without on some things and bust your butt to get the bills paid. You do what you have to do to eliminate expenses and increase income until things balance out. It works for real people so why not the government?
Do you think that President Obama's 2nd "stimulus" bill will fail to help the economy? Spending money we don't have is not an option. It's the responsibilities of our leaders to think outside the box and come up with other alternatives while also finding ways to decrease spending and get our debt under control. If they can't do it, then they don't need to be in power and should get out of the way to allow others who can come up with productive ideas and solutions to step up and handle things.
Are you against the "card check" bill that would force more workers into unions? Unions, at one time, were a good thing and did a great deal for the American people and our economy. But like most good things, over time, they've become corrupt with power and now, it's become more about spreading their agendas and controlling the power than actually helping the people they're supposed to represent. The Unions have become so used to getting their ways and demanding more and more, companies are going broke and can't meet the demands and they end up going out of business or end up requiring bailouts and the people the Union claimed to be protecting end up out of jobs. If a company prefers to hire non-union labor so that they can turn a profit, build their business and stay in business, then they should be allowed and encouraged to do so. The Unions would rather see companies go out of business and the workers pink-slipped rather than give up the power trips and both the employees and employers are better off without them.
Are you in favor of making all the "Bush tax cuts" of 2001 and 2003 permanent? Yes!
Are you concerned that President Obama is not serious when he talks about how we need to rein in the out-of-control spending? President Obama is like a crack-head who's found a wallet on the street full of cash or credit cards. He spends and spends and spends. It's his chosen solution to everything and anything - throw money that we don't have at every problem and damn the consequences. Our government has grown more under the three years of Obama than in the entire eight years of his predecessor, George Bush. And the national debt, which grew by four trillion dollars under 8 years of Bush (and Obama called "unpatriotic" as a candidiate for President in 2008) has grown by six trillion more dollars in just three years under Obama's watchful eyes. Serious about cutting spendng? Not even close.
Do you support the moratorium on pork-barrel "earmarks" that Republican's are pushing? Earmarks (little pet projects inserted into larger bills) by both parties, need to be cut out and eliminated. If it's important enough to a Senator or Congressman to push a bill or project, introduce it in an individual bill and be passed or fail on it's own merit rather that trying to sneak it through.
Do you support a Balanced Budget Amendment to the U.S. Constitution? Yes! President Clinton and Newt Gingrich proved that it could be done, but the politicians since then (of both parties) love to spend money we don't have far too often to tighten their belts and act realistically. Maybe if it was part of the Constitution and the politicians were held accountable, they would get off their rumps and get something done.
Did you disapprove of all the bank bailouts and government ownership of private companies? I'm kind of mixed on this topic. There is a thing called "too big to fail" and no company should ever be allowed to get that big that it requires the government to step in and take control. Private companies (like Ford, General Motors, etc) should be left alone to either succeed or else go into bankruptcy if they can't compete. The government should not have stepped in with those companies because there were other alternatives still available. As for the banks, they've been allowed to get too large and we couldn't afford to let them go under because of all the people that would have been affected. So bailing them out was a necessary evil and had to be done to protect our already fragile economy, but I wish that other options had been explored first.
Generally, is there too much government involvement in our free enterprise system? Very true. Government should be limited and stay out of our lives and our businesses as much as possible. The best government is a smaller government with as little power as possible.
DOMESTIC ISSUES QUESTIONS
Do you support Republican efforts to repeal the government health care takeover (Obamacare) that was shoved into law? ObamaCare was (is) a flawed plan that was voted on in the middle of the night on Christmas Eve of 2009 with no debate and before anyone even had a chance to actually read the bill and all it's provisions. Nancy Pelosi, the then-Speaker of the House, even stated that they had to "pass the bill before they read it" and the loyal sheep, the Democrats who then controlled both houses of Congress passed it through and it was signed into law (even though nobody had read it and knew what they were passing). Several provisions are being contested as unconstitutional and it's been shown in numerous studies that if and when this goes into effect, it will only add to the costs of health care and lower the level of care being administered by medical personal. It's basically treating a headache by cutting off the head. ObamaCare needs to repealed and other options need to be pursued.
Should Senate Republicans continue working to defund ObamaCare and strip away the most damaging provisions until we have a new Republican Majority that will vote for a full repeal of that law? Yes - it's a flawed law and will do far more harm than help. Whatever it takes, it needs to be eliminated in it's entirety. 'Nuff said!
Should we pass free market health care reforms to reduce costs and expanded access? It would bring down prices and the costs of health care by ensuring competition between the companies and also allow more options for consumers looking for health insurance and health care providers as well. Reform is something that definitely needs to be implemented and worked upon by our Congressional leaders and the President, whoever it may be.
Are you in favor of the ban on partial-birth abortion that became law in 2003? I don't think that the government should be involved in any kind of decision about this particular issue. Anything concerning an abortion should be a decision reached between a woman, her partner, their doctor and their God. It's that simple. I don't like abortions and would personally prefer to see other alternatives chosen, but I refuse to judge anyone for what they decide to or not to do in this situation.
Should we pass a permanent ban on federal taxpayer funding of abortions? I will not and refuse to condemn anyone for their decision on this issue. I'm a guy and I will never have to deal with this issue personally so how can I judge others on what they do or don't do? But, that being said, if a woman does choose to have an abortion, they should pay for it themselves. Government money should not be used... ever!
Do you support federal protections for marriage as a union between one man and one woman? Not at all. Marriage and the recognition of a marriage is and has always been a state issue and the federal government has no right or business sticking it's nose in what has always been a state matter. And DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) is unconstitutional and wrong anyhow. If two people choose to make a committment of marriage to each other, it shouldn't matter if it's a man and woman, two men or two women - it should be legal and allowed. Why are a man and woman allowed to have special rights when they commit to each other, but if I commit to another man and want to spend the rest of my life to him, we're not allowed. They're not any better or worse than we are so why are they allowed to be married and we're not? The states are slowly coming around and realizing that same-sex marriage is not going to destroy the institution of marriage, but help it survive this new century where many consider it unnecessary and a relic of days gone by. My sisters got married to the men they loved - why am I not allowed to do the same? Oh yeah, back to the quesiton. The feds need to stay away from this topic and mind their own business.
Do you believe in school choice measures as the best way to improve education? Not really. The best way to improve education is to allow the teachers to quit being social workers and be teachers instead with absolute control over their classrooms and the students with major emphasis placed on the basics of reading, writing and math. Let the teachers do their jobs and quit trying to over-regulate them or make them politically correct. I know of several people who are high school graduates who can't write in cursive or do basic math because they were pushed through by teachers and a system that's afraid to offend anyone and control the classrooms and would rather push classes in "Social Media" than the simple basics that people actually need to get by and survive.
Do you consider yourself a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms? I support the rights promised us by our Constitution. Guns don't kill people. Ass-clowns kill people. 'Nuff said!
Do you prefer judges who strictly interpret the law, as opposed to using the courts to push their personal social agenda? It would depend upon the law and the situation in each case. Criminal laws are pretty straight forward and should be treated as such by the Judges, but then we have laws that are obscure, outdated or irrelevant and need to be changed or modified to fit the world as it is today instead of when the law was written. So I guess my answer would be I like to see judges who use common sense and precedence when dealing with laws, but are open-minded enough to recognize when the laws are prejudicial or obselete and are in need of either modification or to be eliminated altogether.
NATIONAL SECURITY / FOREIGN POLICY ISSUE QUESTIONS
Should we do more to secure our border with Mexico? Very true. While I have nothing at all against Mexicans (remind me to tell you one day about this Mexican guy I met when I lived down in Wilmington many years ago - he was illegal but damn, he was a sexy ass, awesome dude!) - harrumph! As I was saying, we do need to try and control the border and who gets into our country. A fence would help, as would establishing National Guard troops to help patrol the border. Something does need to be done.
Do you believe Bush-era measures like the USA PATRIOT ACT have helped keep us safe? While there are some aspects of the Patriot Act that I do agree with and feel have been productive in helping to keep our country safe, there are some aspects, such as being able to detain people without charges or legal counsel, that disturb me. It was a good idea that has been taken way too far and has ended up trampling all over quite a few of our constitutional rights.
Should we reserve the right to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities by force? Yes, but it would be better to work covertly or else alongside of Israel in a matter like this.
Do you believe America must remain a steadfast ally of Israel? Yes
Do you support the National Republican Senatorial Committee's mission of electing a new GOP Senate so we can permanently repeal the entire Obama agenda? Nope. Not the entire Obama agenda. I like the repeal of that moronic "Don't Ask - Don't Tell" policy for the military, which was extremely wrong and bigoted as hell. And if I'm sure that if I look hard enough, I'll find a few other things that I like. Just get rid of Obama next November and repeal the ObamaCare stuff and the rest of the stuff can be decided on a case by case basis.
SPECIAL QUESTION
Overall, which Political Party is best able to handle each of the following national issues? (Democrats / Republicans / No Opinion)
Abortion: No Opinion - Politics should not be involved with this topic - it's a matter between a person, their partner, their doctor and God.
Budget/Spending: Republicans
Creating Jobs: Republicans
Economy: Republicans
Education: No Opinion - This is an issue that should be dealt with at the state and local level and the Federal Government should MYOB!
Health Care: No Opinion - Both parties on the Federal level are pretty useless when it comes to dealing with health care. Nationalized health care is not the answer though. This is an issue that should be dealt with at state level.
Immigration: Republicans
Judges: Democrats
National Defense: Republicans
Protecting Traditional Values: Democrats because when it comes to changing with the times, Republicans seem to have a stick up their ass!
Second Amendment: Republicans
Social Security: Republicans
Taxes: Republicans
War On Terrorism: Republicans
So there you go. I've answered all the questions on the surveys and far more fully than any real politician or pundit actually would. And somehow, based on my answers and opinions, I have a strong feeling that neither the Democratic party or the Republicans would be all that happy to take me into the fold. Ooops! Oh well, maybe the Libertarians then. Can't help it though. I am what I am and think what I think and what you see is what you get, take it or leave it, love it or hate it - I've gotta be me!
And with that, I'm out of here for now. Have a great day and I'll see you on the flip side.
Ubuntu!
No comments:
Post a Comment