Here Are the Some Questions For the Candidates

It is very annoying to get one of those phony political surveys in an official looking package that claims to be interested in gaining your opinion on a list of self serving questions.  Then, as you reach the point where you are ready to submit your opinion you find that they want a political donation for $50 to $500. Off course it is the donation, not your opinion,  that they really want. It is easy to visualize them ripping the check off your opinion submission and throwing the opinion part into the trash.

We know the characteristics we wish to find in our elected representatives but they never seem to be there in our two party offerings. This year I intend to return the following note to each of the “surveys” I receive:

Thank you for your interest in my views on items which our critical to our county.  I have taken the liberty to provide a listing of a few of my specific issues along with a few explanatory comments.  If you or your office would respond that you plan actions that are in essential agreement with these items I would be very likely to support you with my vote and contribution.

I am looking for a candidate who would:

Push the government to take aggressive actions to revive the economy.

When there are trillions of dollars worth of necessary investment grade infrastructure works to be done and millions of people looking for the work there is no excuse for the government not to arrange the financing.  That the work remains undone is a tremendous failure on the part of the two party system, Congress, and the Administration.  This past failure may preclude my voting for an incumbent.

Not be a believer in some ill thought-out austerity program rather than economic growth.

Knee jerk cost cutting based upon political rather than economic goals is the only kind of deficit reduction this Congress knows.  Having accomplished outrageous damage to our present economic environment Congress is now preparing to destroy the future.  This must not happen.

Maintaining a carefully managed defense that cannot be directly challenged by any totalitarian government but not unwisely used.

We must continue to apply the very hard lesson from our WWII experience where lack of preparedness allowed unthinkable tragedies to occur while the allies were building up the arms required to stop a psychopath dictator.  During the early period of unchallenged German success 15 European countries were occupied and over 50 million people killed as a result of Nazi actions.  In addition millions of the conquered populations were placed in concentration camps and slavery to the German war machine.   “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich” by William L. Shirir is recommended reading that documents the horror of showing any weakness in dealing with an aggressive psychopathic dictator. 

We performed the same preventive service in the defeat of Japan, and the Soviet Union.  We were the only democracy powerful enough to have stopped these identified aggressive and expansionist fascist regimes. However, if the opposition would be fighting on its native soil against an “invader” US the chance for lone term success is small. We must learn to avoid the responsibility of wars of this latter type no matter how noble our intentions.

 Strong on reforming the financial sector

We are letting the financial sector buy into aggressive activities that do not support useful growth.  This is placing hardships on the citizens and wasting our resources.  It must be stopped and the financial sector returned to its appropriate supportive role.

Do nothing that will reduce existing rights of citizens 

Our country is defined most strongly by its respect for personal rights. They must be continually defended as our greatest treasure.  Our 2nd amendment stands out as a strong example of a unique right of the US that is under continual attack. There is no reason to give up any personal rights to our current government.  My expectations are to keep 2^nd amendment rights free of any United Nations interference and a strict policy of protection of all other constitutional citizen rights

 Minimum government involvement in Gay marriage

There is nothing in the Constitution or discussions among the founders that would support having the government define marriage.  If secular, marriage between gays should be treated like a normal contract between adults.  If religious, the church should decide on its’ specific religious components.

Revision of the special privileged practices of Congress

You cannot find a citizen that is not outraged at the special privileges and ego boosting management privileges that Congress has voted itself.  The candidate should strongly support proposed any amendment that precludes special privileges for congress.

Runs a truthful campaign with a career record of honesty

Without truth we can never make wise decisions.  Candidates who falsely direct our actions using untruthful information must not be elected.

As a special note I am sure you realize how our non-performing Congress has become a serious problem to our democracy. I don’t believe that our Founders anticipated that Congress would ever be run by an entrenched two-political party system whose primary interest was in itself rather than the country.  This has been true for over 100 years but the situation has come to the point that is doing severe damage to our democracy. We have elections as the way to correct the situation, but need candidates which are independent thinkers.  I hope you will be one.

Support of UN Small Arms Treaty Will Cost Democrats Plenty of Votes

One of the prevailing strengths of the Republican Party, (but not all Republicans) has been its support for the very popular 2nd Amendment. This is the amendment that protects the right of American citizens to keep and bear arms. Our founders insisted upon it to approve the original constitution. It is uniquely American. Unlike many of the other amendments this is one about which that the public remains adamant. They are not going to surrender the rights it grants to an inept elected government. Pro-control Democrats, however, do not seem to realize to what extent this is true. It may cost the party dearly in the next election.


Background

Governments, dictators, and kings have always feared citizen access to firearms. The US Constitution is unique among nations in that citizen ownership of firearms is protected. However, there is a small and insistent element of the US and global establishment that has continually attempted to weaken this amendment by generally ignoring it. Supreme Court decisions which reinforce the power of the amendment are putting an end to this practice.

As citizen confidence in the elected government has plummeted the right to keep and bear arms has gained soaring strength with the citizens. 2011 was a record year for US firearm sales to civilians. In spite of biased support from the main stream media advocating increased firearm control remains political suicide for politicians in all but a very few states. This is one area where the people are drawing the line against a self serving government. A recent Gallup poll showed that 70% of the population opposes any further attempts by the government at gun control.

Wrong Actions

Unfortunately the destruction of this amendment has become a hardened goal of the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. Years ago a damaging quote from a prominent California Democratic Senator, (Dianne Feinstein), shocked a lot of Americans. She said that she looked forward to the day that only the police and military would have access to firearms. She would bide her time until that was politically possible. She is still a Senator and those statements have not been rescinded by the party..

Unable to elect a Congress that will serve their purpose, a new attempt is being made by the anti-2nd Amendment throng. It is through the forthcoming UN treaty on small arms. Although the draft is not yet officially released it is described by this article in Forbes Magazine. You can see that the elements which have been successfully defeated in the US are prominent in the proposed treaty.

The National Rifle Association has over 4 million members while what is left of the Brady anti firearm organization is almost negligible. In no way do any anti-gun organizations approach the energy or membership of the NRA and the several other organizations supporting protection of the 2nd amendment. They include many citizens who would normally be voting Democratic but now vote Republican. Opposing the 2nd amendment is an obvious losing proposition for the Democrats –but they continue to do so.

The Results

The Constitution wisely requires a two thirds approval vote by the Senate to ratify a treaty. The current Congress is strongly against granting the UN any authority over the 2nd amendment. 45 Republican and 12 Democratic senators have already signed a letter saying that they will not approve of any treaty that infringes upon American gun rights. But strangely, the UN small arms treaty program remains supported by the Obama administration. It is being reported that Clinton has promised to take the treaty before the US Senate.

A Sportsman site has been established and recommended by Guns and Ammo magazine with the goal of leading a balanced discussion and review of Presidential candidates’ position on sportsman issues. It appeared to be an opportunity for the Democrats to start to shed their anti-2nd amendment reputation by distancing themselves from the treaty and showing respect for the 2nd amendment. They would be in a much stronger position by focusing on other critical issues such as jobs and energy.

Their support of the UN small arms treaty proposal eliminates this possibility. The American citizens will not cede any control of the 2nd amendment to the UN. Support of the treaty by the administration will further mark it as anti-2nd amendment. No amount of spin can reverse that. It will work against the positives that the Democratic Party should be pursuing and create additional momentum for the Republicans.

An opportunity missed and now gone.