Describe your ideal President and Representative

[NorthSideSox72]

Describe the following...

 

1. Your ideal Presidential candidate

2. Your ideal Congressional Representative

 

And do so WITHOUT using...

 

--Any specific person, by name or indirectly!!!

--Any political party

Edited October 24, 2006 by NorthSideSox72

[southsider2k5]

Does "me" count as a name?

[Jenksismyhero]

1. Someone with the balls of our current president but the brains of our first or 16th president (does that count as not using names? )

 

2. Anyone with half a soul who cares about their consitutuents needs but refuses to grant their wants. Also someone who is willing to rally the rest of Congress to reclaim their rightful position as the most important branch of the government instead of letting popularity contests ruin us all.

 

for both: people that actually get stuff done. They manage to create lacy peterson legislation in a matter of days and it takes months and months (if not years) to fix the more pressing needs of the country.

[NorthSideSox72]

1. Someone with the balls of our current president but the brains of our first or 16th president (does that count as not using names? )

Yes, it does. NO REFERENCE TO SPECIFIC PEOPLE!!!!! That was what I was going for.

 

But still, I like your other answers.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

-Conservative

 

-Belives in low taxes and government spending.

 

-Wants to abolish/privatize government social programs.

 

-Wants to actually follow the 10th Amendment and return powers not specifically delegated to the Federal Government to the states.

 

-Believes in a strong national defense. Peace through strength.

 

-Believes in sweeping tort reform. Rein in greedy lawyers and their frivolus lawsuits by implementing a "loser pays" system as well as strict caps on damages.

 

-Anti-abortion save for cases of rape/incest or to save the life of the mother.

 

-Believes in punishing criminals as opposed to coddling them.

 

-Believes in a secure border/punishing those who hire illegals/border fence/punishing the Mexican government for encouraging drug smuggling/illegal immigration.

 

-Wants to embark on a crash program to develop new primary source of energy to replace petroleum as both a national security issue as well as an environmental one.

 

-Someone who brings an end to affirmative action and passes legislation to completely eliminate race as a factor in hiring/university admissions and any other forms of preference. Make this a merit based society.

[LowerCaseRepublican]

Quickly...

 

-Rein in "Defense" spending

 

-Rein in CIA/black ops that destabilize governments

 

-End support for human rights abusing dictatorial countries

 

-End the embargo against Cuba and let a true free market take over

 

-Says 'f*** the flag burning amendment'

 

-Revamps NCLB to include higher level mastry questions on exams rather than rote memorization and assists teachers to not be pressured to 'teach to the test' so they can use a wider variety of means to make topics interesting

 

-Ends capital punishment

 

-Ends torture tactics being used by the US government

 

-Issues apology for innocents killed and "disappeared" throughout the last 70 years during the fight with 'Communism' around the world

 

-Has a national holiday on the day Kissinger kicks the bucket

 

-f*** "community standards". Free speech should apply to all situations anywhere in the US as long as it is not screaming 'fire' in the crowded theater.

 

-Increase parental responsibility with TV shows, video games, music, etc. I do not need the PMRC, Safe Games Illinois and Joe Lieberman telling me what I can and cannot see, listen to and play. Let parents make their own decisions.

 

-Promotes legitimate safe sex discussion and ends the farce of "abstinence only" education because it'll lead to a cut in the abortion rate

 

-Free contraceptive distribution areas in cities to help anybody who wants them

[FlaSoxxJim]

Quickly...

 

-Rein in "Defense" spending

 

-Rein in CIA/black ops that destabilize governments

 

-End support for human rights abusing dictatorial countries

 

-End the embargo against Cuba and let a true free market take over

 

-Says 'f*** the flag burning amendment'

 

-Revamps NCLB to include higher level mastry questions on exams rather than rote memorization and assists teachers to not be pressured to 'teach to the test' so they can use a wider variety of means to make topics interesting

 

-Ends capital punishment

 

-Ends torture tactics being used by the US government

 

-Issues apology for innocents killed and "disappeared" throughout the last 70 years during the fight with 'Communism' around the world

 

-Has a national holiday on the day Kissinger kicks the bucket

 

-f*** "community standards". Free speech should apply to all situations anywhere in the US as long as it is not screaming 'fire' in the crowded theater.

 

-Increase parental responsibility with TV shows, video games, music, etc. I do not need the PMRC, Safe Games Illinois and Joe Lieberman telling me what I can and cannot see, listen to and play. Let parents make their own decisions.

 

-Promotes legitimate safe sex discussion and ends the farce of "abstinence only" education because it'll lead to a cut in the abortion rate

 

-Free contraceptive distribution areas in cities to help anybody who wants them

 

Except for the fact that your President apparently doesn't care dick about the environment, that would be a good start on my President as well. Maybe not the Kissinger Death Party either, unless it makes for a sweet 3-day weekend.

 

My Prez would also be a health care reformer that took another look at some health care compromises that did (*gasp*) nationalize/socialize basic services and benefits.

 

And he would pursue legitimate debate on the merits of the Fair Tax, including the exploration of strategies to ensure that it is not effectively a regressive tax program.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

And he would pursue legitimate debate on the merits of the Fair Tax, including the exploration of strategies to ensure that it is not effectively a regressive tax program.

 

 

What is your idea of a "Fair Tax". I've heard that label used for both a flat tax and the most steep of "progressive" tax curves.

[CrimsonWeltall]

"THE" Fair Tax (the fairly new, popular idea) is a large national sales tax that replaces the federal income tax.

[FlaSoxxJim]

"THE" Fair Tax (the fairly new, popular idea) is a large national sales tax that replaces the federal income tax.

 

Correct. In a straight form, a national sales tax would be regressive since it places disproportionate burden on low income individuals. So, whether it's waving or slide-scaling the rates on essentials like food, clothing, rent, etc., or wether it's tax credits to the poor to cover a portion of those needs, some additional measures need to be added toa national sales tax to address that issue.

[NorthSideSox72]

OK, here we go...

 

--Interprets all 10 amendments of the Bill of Rights broadly, erring on the side of the people (not just 1 and 4 like the Dems, or 2, 5 and 10 like the GOP).

 

--Sees getting off oil and other fossil fuels as a high priority, national security issue on multiple fronts (military, economic, environmental).

 

--Expects the government to be run like a business (see my previous posts on how to accomplish this).

 

--Understands the dangers of allowing religion (ANY religion) to dictate policy.

 

--Believes that the federal government does not belong in the business of marriage, or any other personal relationships, whatsoever.

 

--Supports a balanced budget amendment (with a declared war exception).

 

--Supports a Truth in Legislation Act and/or a Line Item Veto power.

 

--Pro-choice and pro-child.

 

--Wants to remove monetary influence from any part of the equation for election of politicians.

 

--Believes in a strong national defense, but also subscribes to the "walk softly and carry a big stick" theory (as opposed to the "walk loudly and hit people" theory).

 

--Pushes for much greater funding and prioritization of non-traditional military strategy (this includes overseas operatives, increasing the flow of both SigInt and HumInt, alternate technologies, psychological tactics, etc.).

 

--Stop all financial support of any nation or government that doesn't treat its citizens with at least some nominal level of basic respect.

 

--Wants secure borders, but also easier policies for LEGAL immigrants and NO WALL.

 

--Sees and understands the realities of our current environmental problems and their consequences, and promotes things like sustainable agriculture and energy policy, protection of open space and water sources, and much tougher standards for emissions at all levels.

 

--Reverses the course of the current, tort-happy legal system in some fashion.

 

--Favors privatization of social security to promote solvency, and eventually, getting the government out of that business entirely.

 

--Favors open trade and moving the country forward in global business, as opposed to being protectionist.

 

--Sees the war on terror as needing attention on THREE fronts: tracking and the big fish, securing our own country, AND addressing the root causes of terror in the Middle East (this is the part being ignored currently).

 

--Sees big business not as a great evil, but instead, as one of the country's greatest assets and tools for growth.

 

--Understands that "going it alone" in foreign policy should be a last resort.

 

--Looks to get rid of the IRS almost entirely, favoring simplified tax codes and a near-zero reporting need for most taxpayers.

 

--MORE FEDERAL MONEY TO: Environmental concerns as above, non-traditional national defense, science funding for national security needs like energy policy

 

--LESS FEDERAL MONEY TO: Waste (see business point above), social security, entitlements generally, pork (truth in legislation and/or line item veto), exploration of fossil fuel sources, IRS and other self-serving agencies

 

That's all for now. Maybe more later.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

OK, here we go...

 

--Interprets all 10 amendments of the Bill of Rights broadly, erring on the side of the people (not just 1 and 4 like the Dems, or 2, 5 and 10 like the GOP).

 

--Sees getting off oil and other fossil fuels as a high priority, national security issue on multiple fronts (military, economic, environmental).

 

--Expects the government to be run like a business (see my previous posts on how to accomplish this).

 

--Understands the dangers of allowing religion (ANY religion) to dictate policy.

 

--Believes that the federal government does not belong in the business of marriage, or any other personal relationships, whatsoever.

 

--Supports a balanced budget amendment (with a declared war exception).

 

--Supports a Truth in Legislation Act and/or a Line Item Veto power.

 

--Pro-choice and pro-child.

 

--Wants to remove monetary influence from any part of the equation for election of politicians.

 

--Believes in a strong national defense, but also subscribes to the "walk softly and carry a big stick" theory (as opposed to the "walk loudly and hit people" theory).

 

--Pushes for much greater funding and prioritization of non-traditional military strategy (this includes overseas operatives, increasing the flow of both SigInt and HumInt, alternate technologies, psychological tactics, etc.).

 

--Stop all financial support of any nation or government that doesn't treat its citizens with at least some nominal level of basic respect.

 

--Wants secure borders, but also easier policies for LEGAL immigrants and NO WALL.

 

--Sees and understands the realities of our current environmental problems and their consequences, and promotes things like sustainable agriculture and energy policy, protection of open space and water sources, and much tougher standards for emissions at all levels.

 

--Reverses the course of the current, tort-happy legal system in some fashion.

 

--Favors privatization of social security to promote solvency, and eventually, getting the government out of that business entirely.

 

--Favors open trade and moving the country forward in global business, as opposed to being protectionist.

 

--Sees the war on terror as needing attention on THREE fronts: tracking and the big fish, securing our own country, AND addressing the root causes of terror in the Middle East (this is the part being ignored currently).

 

--Sees big business not as a great evil, but instead, as one of the country's greatest assets and tools for growth.

 

--Understands that "going it alone" in foreign policy should be a last resort.

 

--Looks to get rid of the IRS almost entirely, favoring simplified tax codes and a near-zero reporting need for most taxpayers.

 

--MORE FEDERAL MONEY TO: Environmental concerns as above, non-traditional national defense, science funding for national security needs like energy policy

 

--LESS FEDERAL MONEY TO: Waste (see business point above), social security, entitlements generally, pork (truth in legislation and/or line item veto), exploration of fossil fuel sources, IRS and other self-serving agencies

 

That's all for now. Maybe more later.

 

 

I agree with much of your platform, but the SS issue stands out above all.

 

The current system purports to be a "saftey net" but in reality it hinders lower income people who can't save their own money from ever accumulating wealth. This has the effect of keeping poor people down across multiple generations and keeping them dependent on the government.

 

Allowing people to invest a portion of their SS money ( in other words, allow them to invest their portion of FICA while still sending the employer match to the SS system ) would allow even the working poor to build real wealth instead of depending on a meager government check in their old age. The current system consigns the low-wage people to a lifetime of poverty and dependence on government.

[mr_genius]

- end lobbying/bribing

 

- more money towards technology advancement, less on blowing up camels in the desert.

 

- end racial prejudice in public university admissions

 

- technology infrastructure enhancements

 

- protection of free speech and religious exrpession

 

- don't apologize for ending communism (communism killed more people than even the nazi's could ever dream of)

 

- curtail drug war

 

- strictly enforce laws against hiring illegal workers

 

- fix our education system, not throw more money into a failed system.

 

- enhance military defense and intelligence capabilities

 

- enviromental protection

 

- drastically reduce dependence on foreign energy

 

- stop race baiting and class warfare

 

- lower middle class taxes

 

- balance budget

 

- make mr_genius vp

 

- improve foreign relations

 

- change foreign policy away from being "world police"

 

- continue tough fight on terrorism (and no, invading countries like Iraq doesn't mean "tough fight on terror")

Edited October 25, 2006 by mr_genius

[Texsox]

Nuke,

Mexico is forced, by US policies, to spend more of their GNP on fighting drug smuggling into the US, than the US. Because the US has a drug use problem, Mexico is racked in violence. The heavier drugs are produced in South American and smuggled through Mexico. The solutions involve South America and the US not the middlemen.

 

Jenks,

Rightful place as most important branch? Look up the definition of balance. You may remember a phrase called checks and balances, there isn't a more important branch. That is a cornerstone of our government.

 

I am looking for a candidate with the charisma of Reagan, style counts as our chief cheerleader. A positive attitude will do more to fight the terrorist threats than trying to lure them all into a war in the middle east.

 

I am looking for a candidate that understands balancing the budget, that we can't continue to spend trillions more than we take in. Buying votes is easy, and we've become accustomed to "helping the economy". One that understands some programs are investments. Education, childcare for the poor, health care, all are cost effective when they lead to better paying jobs, and it's easier to keep someone healthy then pay for disease.

 

Someone with the courage to spend our tax dollars are what we need, not what is politically popular, like a symbolic fence.

 

Someone that will see we need immigrant labor, and put together a meaningful immigration reform bill that allows businesses to hire the people they need and will not require a generation of our kids to become yardmen. Immigrants have always filled these jobs in every society, nature always provides the most efficient solutions.

 

As far as Congress and the Senate, I have two different views. In the Senate, I look for visionaries and statesmen. People with high ideals that can offer long term solutions. Character over political views. The Senate should be the arena for great debate.

 

In the congress I look for a worker, someone that will roll up their sleeve and get things done for today.

[Jenksismyhero]

Jenks,

Rightful place as most important branch? Look up the definition of balance. You may remember a phrase called checks and balances, there isn't a more important branch. That is a cornerstone of our government.

 

Check out the Federalist Papers and biographies of most of the 'founding fathers.' Most agreed Congress should be the strongest branch of the government. Strongest doesn't mean unchecked.

 

Our current government has two flaws:

 

A) The President has become too powerful. He's the spokesman for our country who is supposed to enforce what Congress legislates. Today, he initiates most legislation and uses his popularity to mold Congress to vote on it.

 

sub a) Because of the new President standard the distinction between Federal and State power is practically non-existent. Katrina is a good example of this. Why was Bush blamed for not acting when the ONLY Federal response came from FEMA. Argue all you want about whether Bush nominated the right guy to lead that agency, but most people thought Bush should have 'done more.' It's not the federal governments job to fix every problem in the country! (So I guess back to the subject of the thread my President will understand his role as leader of all national problems, not state and local problems......but that'll never happen again.)

 

B) Congress is the red-headed stepchild of government. Both the Senate and House are worthless. They fear what will happen if they actually do good. There priorities are job security and networking, not the people. The entire system should go back to the way it was in the beginning when a seat in Congress was more of an annoyance than anything else. The meeting hall was hot, the pay was low, and the reward was doing a good job and not having 15,000 state projects named after you (crazy Byrd).

 

 

The Federal Government is entirely too powerful and intrusive into our lives. Whether it be gay marriage, stem cell research, gun control, religion etc etc, these issues should be decided by communities, not crooks from DC. My President and Reps would understand their limited role.

 

Pseudo Republican-Libertarians unite!

[Texsox]

Check out the Federalist Papers and biographies of most of the 'founding fathers.' Most agreed Congress should be the strongest branch of the government. Strongest doesn't mean unchecked.

 

Why don't we check out the Constitution instead?

[Jenksismyhero]

Why don't we check out the Constitution instead?

 

 

Do it! And report back with who has more express powers. Also note that the Supreme Courts role is barely mentioned (and what is mentioned is not the Courts role today).

[Soxy]

Support a balanced budget amendment.

 

Strong on science: support stem cell research, increase funding to our national science foundations (NIH, NSF, NIMH), research and advocate the use of alternative energy sources (wind turbines, solar power)

 

Strong on education: Repeal No Child Left Behind, increase funding for education (particularly math, science, and foreign language)

 

National Health care (or some way to fix the current uninsured crisis in this country)

 

Pro-choice and pro-sex education (like LCR I think that education is the best way to bring down the need for abortion)

 

Supports environmental causes (clean air/water, Kyoto, no ANWAR drilling, tougher emmissions standards, just a beginning of a list here)

 

Against a "protection of marriage amendment" and the flag burning amendment

 

And I really like NSS72's quoting Roosevelt (I think) of "walk softly and carry a big stick." But I guess I'd add, walk softly with others while carrying that big stick.

[Texsox]

Do it! And report back with who has more express powers. Also note that the Supreme Courts role is barely mentioned (and what is mentioned is not the Courts role today).

 

I thought you said important? Having more powers doesn't make you more important.

[NorthSideSox72]

sub a) Because of the new President standard the distinction between Federal and State power is practically non-existent. Katrina is a good example of this. Why was Bush blamed for not acting when the ONLY Federal response came from FEMA. Argue all you want about whether Bush nominated the right guy to lead that agency, but most people thought Bush should have 'done more.' It's not the federal governments job to fix every problem in the country! (So I guess back to the subject of the thread my President will understand his role as leader of all national problems, not state and local problems......but that'll never happen again.)

 

This is sort of in conflict with your point that the executive is there to administer the policies of Congress. Congress created and funds FEMA, and the executive is supposed to manage it. Therefore, by your logic, the President (Chief Executive) was highly responsible for the debacle of a federal response to Katrina.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Nuke,

Mexico is forced, by US policies, to spend more of their GNP on fighting drug smuggling into the US, than the US. Because the US has a drug use problem, Mexico is racked in violence. The heavier drugs are produced in South American and smuggled through Mexico. The solutions involve South America and the US not the middlemen.

 

 

Tex. The Mexican government is one of the most corrupt governmental entities in the world ( even more so than Chicago ). They allow narco-traffic through their borders with little more than a casual wave because everybody involved with stopping it is in the pocket of the drug cartels. They have crime problems because the government isin't interested in helping people get out of poverty, just exporting it to the U.S.

& most of their police are either on the take or incompetent ( probably both ).

 

As for South America, what solutions do you propose? A lot of the S.A. drug traffic has shifted from Columbia, where the government is still interested in helping, to narco-states like Bolivia and Venezuela where governments are decidedly unfriendly.

[Jenksismyhero]

I thought you said important? Having more powers doesn't make you more important.

 

 

Important, strong, powerful...all the same in the context I'm talking about. Congress was meant to be the chief policy maker, creating legislation for the country. Today it seems that Congress waits on the President to give it agendas to work with when it should be the other way around.

Edited October 25, 2006 by Jenksismybitch

[southsider2k5]

I would contend that orginally the states were supposed to contain the majority of the power, not the Congress, President, or Judiciary. Out of the 3 federal branches historically there is no doubt in my mind they wanted the Congress to be the most powerful branch, but with definate limits. Remember in a historical context they were trying to avoid a King-type leader who had a ton of power, as the states were pretty cognisant of the King of England exerting his power over them for something like 200 years at that point. The executive branch was definately supposed to be the weakest of the 3 groups.

[NorthSideSox72]

I would contend that orginally the states were supposed to contain the majority of the power, not the Congress, President, or Judiciary.

 

The 10th Amendment:

 

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

 

This to me says quite clearly that the Constitution is an affirmative document in explicitly providing powers to the federal government. Meaning, EVERYTHING not SPECIFICALLY given to the federal government, was meant to be reserved for the States, or the people (via lower levels of government in some cases). The 10th is by far the most abused and forgotten entry of the Bill of Rights.

[Jenksismyhero]

This is sort of in conflict with your point that the executive is there to administer the policies of Congress. Congress created and funds FEMA, and the executive is supposed to manage it. Therefore, by your logic, the President (Chief Executive) was highly responsible for the debacle of a federal response to Katrina.

 

 

He was responsible in part yes. Should he, as the apparent sole representative of the federal government, have done more? No. Bush got the bulk of the blame when both the local and state governments also failed their constituents. The federal government should be there to assist the state and local resources, not replace them which is what most people want them to do.

Edited October 25, 2006 by Jenksismybitch