Would you vote for....?

[czygvtwkr]

A presidential canidate that wants to abolish all foreign aid and pump that money into energy research, cancer research, and other medical research such as diabetes, HIV, heart disease. etc

That would be their main platform, the canidate would have traits of a conservative except with no association with religion and does not consider abortion a federal government issue.

 

[rraley]

Well I would need more information before I made a conclusion, but if I had to base my vote on the issue of foreign aid and this candidate was campaigning as a proponent of its complete abolition, I would have to vote against him or her. Foreign aid goes long ways in helping less well off nations, and while I support reform in how we pass out foreign aid, I do not believe that ending it would be a prudent course of action at all (foreign aid is what helped us win the Cold War and it is what will be part of the foundation for our victory in the War on Terror, in my opinion).

 

[SamSpade]

I'm kind of with rraley on this one, but probably for different reasons. One, I *never* believe any candidate who claims they'll pump TONS of new dollars into research - they never do that. And foreign aid is always a hot button for some people, but for the most part, it's not a lot of money as a portion of the budget. When someone utters "100 million dollars for" blah-blah-blah, what they don't realize is that Congress spends about that much every few *minutes*. It's chump change, comparitvely speaking.

 

[2ndAmendment]

Against, since the complete platform is unconstitutional. Then again, so is foreign aid.

 

[ylexot]

I'm with rraley on this as well. Foreign aid needs reform, but abolishment would be stupid. Aid helps with foreign relations and is necessary. How about a Constitutional Amendment (would also make 2A happier) to allow foreign aid with stipulations on types of aid (money, food, medicine, weapons, etc.), reviews for aid packages, etc.

I also don't care much for dumping money into medical research. It tends to go towards problems that affect relatively few people (i.e. HIV) instead of problems that affect many (i.e. heart disease). The priorities tend to be skewed all wrong. I'm all for energy research, but like 2A would say, we need an amendment to do research.

I also wouldn't like the "does not consider abortion a federal government issue" stance. That is a complete BS stance. The problem with abortion is that everyone has a different definition of life and when it begins. The anti-abortion group believes that life begins at conception. Therefore, a fetus is a life complete with federally protected rights. So, by saying that abortion is not a federal government issue, you are saying that you are pro-abortion.

 

[Steve]

I also wouldn't like the "does not consider abortion a federal government issue" stance. That is a complete BS stance. The problem with abortion is that everyone has a different definition of life and when it begins. The anti-abortion group believes that life begins at conception. Therefore, a fetus is a life complete with federally protected rights. So, by saying that abortion is not a federal government issue, you are saying that you are pro-abortion.

Actually, in reality no one is a Federal Citizen until after birth, following the issuance of a Social Security Number. The Federal Government was never meant to create Laws that effect the Free Citizens of any State. Its only charter was to mediate disputes between the States and represent the collective States to Foreign Governments. But we have accepted the practice of allowing the U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Senate to rule our lives from Washington. This is the slippery slope we have allowed ourselves to slide down.

 

[ylexot]

Actually, in reality no one is a Federal Citizen until after birth, following the issuance of a Social Security Number. The Federal Government was never meant to create Laws that effect the Free Citizens of any State. Its only charter was to mediate disputes between the States and represent the collective States to Foreign Governments. But we have accepted the practice of allowing the U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Senate to rule our lives from Washington. This is the slippery slope we have allowed ourselves to slide down.

Complete and utter I guess nobody was a US citizen before Social Security existed One of the functions of the federal government is to protect the rights of US citizens...thus the "Bill of Rights".

 

[SamSpade]

I'm all for energy research, but like 2A would say, we need an amendment to do research.

Unless my memory serves me badly, the Energy Department was *CREATED* under Jimmy Carter *specifically* to deal with the problems of energy research, alternative sources of energy and dwindling resources. Thirty years later, what do we have to show for it?

THIS is why I consider "energy research" campaign promises to be BS. Even when they tout "Space Program" of the 60's level of commitment, I don't believe it - because I've seen it before.

C'mon - a *cabinet* level Secretary - what the hell does it do, anyway?

 

[willie]

Unless my memory serves me badly, the Energy Department was *CREATED* under Jimmy Carter *specifically* to deal with the problems of energy research, alternative sources of energy and dwindling resources. Thirty years later, what do we have to show for it?

That was the ONE good idea Carter had. If it were put together correctly, we wouldn't be in half the mess we're in today.

 

[2ndAmendment]

Actually, in reality no one is a Federal Citizen until after birth, following the issuance of a Social Security Number.

That is so much . You do realize that Social Security applications were not distributed before "late November 1936"? (ref http://www.ssa.gov/history/briefhistory3.html ) So by your standard, no one in the United States before the first Social Security Number was issued was a citizen of the United States - Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Franklin, et al, - wow.

The Federal Government was never meant to create Laws that effect the Free Citizens of any State. Its only charter was to mediate disputes between the States and represent the collective States to Foreign Governments. But we have accepted the practice of allowing the U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Senate to rule our lives from Washington. This is the slippery slope we have allowed ourselves to slide down.

On this, we agree.

 

[2ndAmendment]

By the way ...

The First Official SSN

Once the SSN records were received in Baltimore they were grouped in blocks of 1,000 and the master records were created. On December 1, 1936 the first block of 1,000 records were assembled and were ready to start their way through the nine-step process that would result in the creation of a permanent master record and the establishment of an earnings record for the individual. When this first stack was ready, Joe Fay, head of the Division of Accounting Operations in the Candler Building, walked over to the stack, pulled off the top record, and declared it to be the official first Social Security record. (This was the first point in the process where there was enough control to designate an official first card--it would have been impossible to try and identify the first card typed in one of the 1,074 typing centers around the country.) This particular record, (055-09-0001) belonged to John D. Sweeney, Jr., age 23, of New Rochelle, New York. The next day, newspapers around the country announced that Sweeney had been issued the first SSN. It would be more accurate to say that the first Social Security record was established for John David Sweeney, but since master records were invisible to the public and the Social Security card was a very visible token of the program, the newspapers overlooked the nuance.

And so John David Sweeney, Jr. is the closest thing we have to the first person to have received a Social Security card--although his status is more symbolic than actual.

 

[Bruzilla]

No way

 

[czygvtwkr]

How is saying abortion is not a federal issue a cop out? Maybe the canidate doesn't give a damn about it one way or another (I know I could care less) and thinks both sides are a bunch of crazy whiney nut jobs.

Foreign aid, I can't believe people actually think that it helps out. The countries that we need better foreign relations with want us to mind our own buisness, I say we do. I dont see a problem with sending aid workers, teachers, construction workers, food, medicine and even gasoline but money only corrupts the governments that we give it to and they spend their efforts trying to get more instead of trying to solve the problems that we sent the aid for.

I didnt realize we had so many closet liberals in here. LOL

By energy research I ment research, incentives for conservation alternate energies etc etc short term mid term and long term.

Yes most people don't have HIV but there are millions with diabetes cancer and heart disease. I dont think anyone doesnt know someone that was not killed by one of these three.

 

[ylexot]

How is saying abortion is not a federal issue a cop out? Maybe the canidate doesn't give a damn about it one way or another

I think you just answered your own question.

Foreign aid, I can't believe people actually think that it helps out. The countries that we need better foreign relations with want us to mind our own buisness, I say we do. I dont see a problem with sending aid workers, teachers, construction workers, food, medicine and even gasoline but money only corrupts the governments that we give it to and they spend their efforts trying to get more instead of trying to solve the problems that we sent the aid for.

Again, foreign aid good if done right. It not done right now. Simple enough for you?

Yes most people don't have HIV but there are millions with diabetes cancer and heart disease. I dont think anyone doesnt know someone that was not killed by one of these three.

Again, medical research good if done right. It not done right now. It's currently based on the "disease of the month". They should look at the statistics for death rates and try to tackle them proportionately with how much they affect the population.