I was surprised in my e-mail today to find a response to the U.S. Senate portion of my Ten Questions. After a couple of days off in the series, I was afraid the interest was gone. But the Democrat who filed at the last minute got his answers in and as promised, he gets them posted on monoblogue.
Question #1:
There are several schools of thought regarding the problem of illegal immigrants, or as some would call them, “undocumented workers.” Some solutions offered range from complete amnesty to sealing the border with a wall to penalizing employers who hire these workers. Currently there are competing House and Senate measures – in particular the House bill has spawned massive protests around the country. While I have listed some of the possible solutions, it’s no exhaustive list. What solutions do you favor for the issue?
No amnesty. English is and remains the official language of the land. Deport all Mexican flag wavers back to Mexico where they belong. Deport all 11 million illegal aliens before they become 30 million. Secure all frontiers: Mexico, Canada, seacoasts. Shoot invaders. Halt ALL immigration for the six-month period of January-July 2007 so that the new Democratic Senate and House of Representatives in Congress Assembled can get us OUT of the mess we’re now in, rather than getting in deeper. Simultaneously, open a national debate about the merits and demerits of halting ALL immigration for good. We’re going to have to do it in the end or risk being infiltrated by foreign elements who will, in fact, take over the United States and end our civilization as we know it. Of that I am absolutely convinced—and history is on my side, too. Europe is experiencing huge problems. The will expel all aliens first, and we will be forced to follow suit. If they don’t, won’t, or can’t learn and speak English, they should ALL go.
Question #2:
Another top-burner concern is the current spike in the price of gasoline. Again, this is a broad issue with many scenarios that can be played out. Possible solutions that have been bandied about in recent days are a temporary suspension of the federal 18.4 cent a gallon tax on gasoline and easing environmental restrictions on gasoline blends (as happened after Hurricane Katrina). Further down the road but possibly affecting prices on the futures market would be the approval of additional oil drilling in ANWR and the Gulf of Mexico. If you were elected, what solutions to this issue would you pursue and why?
The immediate solution is for the Federal government to take over—nationalize/socialize—ALL gas and oil production faciltiies in this nation, and I make no bones about it, either! The REAL solution, however, is to turn completely AWAY from gas, oil, ethanol and all other fossil-based fuels and TOWARD wind, solar, water, and controlled nuclear power to meet our country’s energy needs for the rest of the 21st Century. In the end, we will, indeed, do exactly this: the only remaining question is: How soon? My answer is to START in 2007, and forge ruthlessly ahead.
Question #3:
Recently the news has featured ethics scandals involving GOP donor Jack Abramoff and former House member Duke Cunningham of California as well as Democrat House members William Jefferson of Louisiana and Allan Mollohan of West Virginia. If elected, what steps would you take to help eliminate ethical improprieties among our elected representatives?
The Senate and House should expel all such members who are crooks, and press the judiciary for the full serving of all sentences, with NO parole.
Question #4:
Along that same line, many people have seen the vast sums of money that seemingly are required to run for public office and were under the impression that campaign finance reforms such as those enacted with the McCain-Feingold bill were supposed to relieve this inequity. On the whole, however, the money trail has not ceased even with these laws. How do you favor strengthening these laws to make them more effective, or do you agree with some First Amendment advocates who think these laws should be eliminated?
Since my first of 15 poltical campaigns, I decided to advocate the abolition of ALL PACS: Political Action Committees. In addition, all paid advertising on television and radio should be abolished for the 2008 elections, and the necessary air time seized from the private industry networks who’ve abused the trust given them by We, the People. WE own the airwaves, they don’t, and it’s time to fire them all. Sufficient air time should be provided for all candidates free of charge. That would eliminate ALL fundraising events AND clear out Washington,DC of ALL lobbyists, just as Christ drove out the moneychangers from the temple. When I filed for the current race on July 3rd, I made the decision that I would neither solicit, nor accept. any contributions whatsoever, and have, indeed, returned all such donated funds to date. I am not playing that whore’s game! I will not be had, either by Democratic unions or GOP robber barons, and that’s that!
Question #5:
While the above issues have captured the headlines, our War on Terror (particularly in Iraq) is never far from our minds. It goes without saying that the vast majority of us support our troops; but the question is whether you favor our current approach or something different in terms of sending additional troops, seeking more multinational support, or a complete pullout. Maybe your thoughts are someplace in between these listed or would be considered “out of the box” thinking. What approach would you favor?
The immediate first step is to withdraw ALL our troops from both Iraq and Afghanistan during 2007, WITH all their expensive equipment. The second step is NOT to invade Iran, Syria, and Lebanon on the behalf of the terrorist State of Israel. The third step is to abolish ALL foreign aid to Israel in 2007 and spend ALL that money to rebuild our own country in my proposed Marshall Plan for America and 2nd New Deal for American CITIZENS. The fourth step is to end our foolish and counterproductive 1948 alliance with the State of Israel in 2007, and thus end the war of terror on us. I submit to you that the interests of 295 million non-Jewish American citizens far outweigh those of 6 million Israelis and 5.2 million American Jews. The fifth step is to abolish ALL dual citizenships with other nations as inherently evil AND anti-American. The sixth step is to execute convicted Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard, not release him. The American recognition of the State of Israel in 1948 was the worst diplomatic blunder in all of our history, and should be reversed before they drag us into World War III, which in time is exactly what WILL, indeed, happen. Of that I have no doubt whatsoever. You haven’t asked, but I would bomb all North Korean missile sites tomorrow morning, and would NOT invade Cuba, which the current President is planning to do—along with Syria, Iran, and Lebanon—the week after the Republican Party wins the coming fall Congressional elections. We should also seek a peaceful solution of our current naval differences with China, not go to war with it—also as the President is planning to do before he leaves office on Jan. 20, 2009. Our esteemed President Nixon stopped the on-rushing Sino-Soviet War in 1969 in its tracks, and so can we now!
Question #6:
Related to the above question is the controversy over Iran’s nuclear program. The oil-rich nation claims that this program is for the peaceful use of generating electrical power for its citizens, yet on the other hand its leadership has threatened the nation of Israel with annihilation hinted as being from a nuclear bomb. While the President has the final decision, what course would you advocate he take (a pre-emptive military strike, diplomacy either through the UN or some other way, or leaving them alone as a sovereign nation) and why?
I would favor diplomacy first with Iran to halt nuclear weapons production, but if our otherwise incompetent CIA can PROVE they are forging ahead, then I would opt for a surgical, missile first strike and take them out straightaway. As a former Vietnam veteran soldier and military affairs writer worldwide now, I do not believe a full-scale ground invasion is necessary. We’ve already had two Vietnams; let’s not spawn a third!
Question #7:
Back to domestic issues. One pillar or goal of the Bush administration was to enact Social Security reform in the second term, but it has stalled because of claims there’s no problems with the program and privatization reforms are simply a way to enable Wall Street to profit. Do you think the Social Security program is fine as it is, or what changes would you advocate happening with the program?
I reject all President Bush’s suggestions regarding Social Security enacted by President Roosevelt in 1935 for what they really are: attempts to destroy the entire system. It only works if we’re ALL IN IT, with no one OUT OF IT. The major problem is that politicians of both parties are spending Social Security funds for programs other than Social Security—and I would stop that immediately. Reform CAN be achieved WITH the other 99 members of the US Senate, not AGAINST them. Common sense. listening, and a willing heart CAN prevail.
Question #8:
Some in Congress have raised the question of “pork” or excessive earmarks because our federal budget always runs in deficit and eliminating these earmarks would be a simple way to help balance the budget. But no Congressman or Senator wants to cut their district’s or state’s project. To balance the budget, would you consider sacrificing some of your district or state’s federally-funded projects or would you prefer measures to enhance federal revenues to meet the gap?
Right now, the National Debt is our biggest monetary problem bar none, and for that reason alone the current incumbent President deserves inpeachment, as well as for his Hitlerite way of lying us into the entirely bogus Iraq War, into which he allowed himself to be suckered by Tel Aviv. The basic problem is that we have been in an overheated wartime economy since our last declaration of war on Dec. 8, 1941. We need to switch to a peacetime economy for the rest of this century, and stay there. All of the Bush tax “reforms” need to be thrown out, the minimum wage raised to $ 10 in 2007, and state pork issues examined by all Senators on a case-by-case basis, weighing how the benefit to Maryland is compatible with that of the nation at large. I will not make a blanket decision on matters that haven’t even been put before me on my desk for a decision, but I would proceed as stated above, employing common sense. That’s the best answer I can give you at this time.
Question #9:
Now to the question of trade. When I go to a store, many’s the time that I see a product is made in China – hence we run a large trade deficit with that nation. President Bush has advocated a hemisphere-wide free trade zone that would add Central and South American countries to the umbrella originally created by the NAFTA agreement a decade ago. Given these items, and knowing also that the number of manufacturing jobs in this country remains flat to slightly lower even in this era of steadily expanding employment, where do you stand – do you see free trading eventually shifting our economy to one mostly comprised of service and technology jobs, or do you feel we should take more steps to preserve our core manufacturing positions?
Trade: I was the press secretary for Congresswoman Bentley on Capitol Hill during 1991-92 when the NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) was being negotiated. From that moment to this, I have failed to see how it benefitted the US one whit. We don’t need more Mexicans, and I’d have to see what we’re getting from Canada before I’d move to repeal NAFTA altogether. As for China, we are already WAY out of whack there, with billions owed to the Chinese to pay off our OWN deficits! This strikes me as not only stupid, but also criminal! We lost the battle to maintain a manufacturing base in this country a decade ago. Should we try to reinstate it? I don’t know, but I would like to sit down for a few hours with Mrs. Bentley and just listen to her views on that subject before making a decision. No one knows better than her. Naturally, the Democratic unions would be all for that. We are ALREADY there as far as being a service-and-technology economy dominated and propped up by American bayonets, just as President Eisenhower warned we would become in his last speech from the Oval Office on Jan. 19, 1961. Ending the wartime economy—and switching it to a peacetime economy for the entire 21st Century—is truly THE domestic challenge for this and future generations of Americans. If we don’t do this, I am entirely convinced, as an historian, that we shall either destroy the planet via outright world war in the short term, or strangle ourselves in envirnomental chaos in the slightly longer term. CAN we turn all this around? Yes, we CAN! We were great under FDR and Reagan, and it’s time for greatness again. War is not greatness, but mentally dull stupidity.
Question #10:
This question should present you with the shortest answer. Given that in 2008 either you will be seeking re-election to the House and hoping for some coattails at the top of the ticket, or preparing to work with a new President (for the Senators), if you had a short list of 3 to 5 names you’d like to see seek the job, who would they be? Please note that they do not have to be candidates who are considered to be running for the post at this time.
Who would I like to see President from 3-5 names? Immodestly, I would run myself in 2008 as a favorite son candidate to see enacted the program I’ve outlined above. From the current crop of would-be candidates, let’s dispose of most of them: Sen. Clinton lied about the murder of Vince Foster and helped cover it up; she goes. I would prefer GOP Sen. Libby Dole of North Carolina if have a woman we must. I would fire Secretary of State Rice for the liar that she is, period, over the bogus Iraq War; Sen. Barbara Boxer was right about her on that score. Having read all the books by and about Sen. McCain—and having heard him speak—I am not impressed. As a fellow Vietnam veteran, I have nothing but admiration and sorrow for the many long years he spent as a POW, but if it weren’t for that singular fact, we wouldn’t be having this conversation at all! While I admire former Mayor Giulani for his performance during 9/11, when actor Jimmy Woods portrays you, that’s never good! I would prefer Gov. Scwharzenneger of California, but we’d have to change the Constitution to do that to accomodate a single man, and THAT would be a dangerous precedent. I voted for GOP Sen. Bob Dole in 1996, and Ralph Nader in 2002. I discard our own Gov. Ehrlich as a crypto fascist who has surrounded himself with butt-kissing politcal gangsters of the worst sort, and Mayor O’Malley as simply incompetent. I’m not opposed to naked ambition per se, but I’m not impressed by the former—10 years my junior—or the latter, almost 20; neither are veterans, another minus in my book. If I could not be elected myself, I would want some of the latter people to be running: our very own Republicans, like Congressmen Roscoe Bartlett and Wayne Gilchrist—the fighting Marine from Vietnam!—or Democratic Congressman Dutch Ruppersberger—the trusty lifeguard!—and current Baltimore County Executive Jim Smith. These are men’s men that I would fight alongside, and women’s men who are compassionate, are smart and dedicated, and aren’t IN LOVE WITH THEMSELVES! They are, in fact, the kind of men “to go to the well with” when the Indians attack, so to speak, and it’s nice to know that there are still men left in this world whom I can admire.
******************************
For the record, he signed off:
Thank you for this opportunity to place my views before you and your viewership. One more thing: we are a majority Christian nation, and we should start ACTING like it again. Vote for yourselves in the Democratic Primary of Tuesday, Sept. 12th!
All I have to say is wow. The man certainly is passionate and I admire that in a politician. Being that the first time I read the answers was compiling this post, you have to grant the man has perseverance if this is his fifteenth political run. Agree with him or not, it certainly makes for a good post and he will add to the upcoming “debate” on monoblogue. And thank you, Blaine, for your military service!
