Slashdot Mirror
Help Bush and Gore Answer Slashdot Questions
1) War on Drugs
by Tim Doran
The War on Drugs has been a consistently neglected topic in discussions surrounding this federal election. My question is, do you believe the War on Drugs has been an unqualified success, and if not, what would you change about it if elected president?
Your answer:
2) Minority Religions...
by Electric Angst
What will you do to protect the rights of atheists and those who hold minority faiths, such as Wicca, Santaria, Shinto, et al?
Your answer:
3) Why give a tax cut?
by funkman
With the surplus, everyone has been saying "Let's have a tax cut, Let's have a tax cut." In the meantime, Alan Greenspan and friends are trying to keep inflation and the speed of the growing economy in check so it doesn't burst. Which they are doing by raising interest rates periodically. (6 times this year)
A tax cut flies in the face of what Greenspan is trying to do. A tax cut will inject more money into the economy and do what Greenspan is preventing.
Why is a tax cut so big? Wouldn't the money be better spent on the deficit so when worse times roll along, a tax cut can be easily given by not paying as much on the debt?
Your answer:
4) electoral reform
by carleton
Some people, especially those that favor '3-rd' party candidates, have called for the ending of the electoral college system to be replaced by a simple purely popular vote, or at least allowing for splitting the electoral votes by each state. The best recent example was the Bush-Clinton election. Clinton received 43% of the popular vote (but a sufficient majority of the electoral vote), whereas Perot got at least 10% of the popular vote but zero electoral votes. If memory serves, Vermont is the only state which does currently allow for its votes to be split; if someone wins 60% of the Vermont popular vote, they get 2 votes and the 40% candidate gets 1. This in contrast to California, where someone can get 51% of the popular vote, and therefore gets 53 (or whatever it is nowadays) electoral votes. What is your position on this issue?
Your answer:
5)How Do You Feel About Intellectual Property?
by Phil Gregory
In this age of the Internet, intellectual property has become a very important concept to many people. Many companies make their living on the artificial scarcity provided by intellectual property laws, selling information that they have either created or aggregated. Some others, mostly in the Free Software world, make their living seemingly in spite of these laws, selling their services based on information that is freely given.
Do you feel that out current system of intellectual property is a good one? Which parts of it (e.g. trademarks, patents, copyrights) do you feel are well suited to the world of the Internet and which do you think need to be changed (and, if changes are needed, what changes are needed)?
Your answer:
6) Encryption....
by SquadBoy
Many tech people think that strong encryption is one of the best ways we have to protect freedom both now and for future generations. For example to preserve information that future not so friendly governments may think we don't need to have and to make sure that things we want to have remain private remain private. Given this what would you do to help preserve our right to privacy through the use of strong encryption? Also in a related question what are your thoughts and what do you plan to do about the fact that we can not export many forms of strong encryption?
Your answer:
7) Rising Political Protests
by sterno
In the last year or so we have seen a tremendous escalation in the quantity and size of political protests against globalization and the rising power of corporate multi-nationals. Do you believe that these people have reason to be concerned? If you do believe that they have reason for concern, what steps would you take as president to deal with their concerns?
Your answer:
8) Asteroid Defenses
by Ethelred Unraed
Would you renew funding of programs to research and develop global defense systems against asteroids or other such threats from space?
Your answer:
9) The Future of the Country, and of Humanity
by 11223
I'm very concerned with the future of the country, and about what our national mission seems to be. Looking back through American history, every period seems to have a defining popular mission - like the "manifest destiny" movement in the 19th century, the Depression, World War II, and the Cold War. During these times, there would be one struggle or idea that captivated the attention of the nation, sort of providing a national mission.
I'm a little confused as I look around today. What is our mission? To me, it seems to be "to watch TV and use the Internet." What would you say the defining national mission of today is? What should it be? Furthermore, how would you show this in your activities as a lawmaker? (For instance, if our national mission is the pursuit of science, then would you increase funding for scientific pursuits in the budget?)
Your answer:
Would Bush be a better man if he'd spent 10 years in prison for snorting cocaine when he was young?
Well, he wouldn't be running for President today, which I see as an improvement...
1. War on drugs
"Drug therapies are replacing a lot of medicines as we used to know it."
2. Minority Religions
"Our priorities is our faith."
3. Tax Cut
"It's clearly a budget. It's got a lot of numbers in it."
4. Electoral Reform
(no response)
5. IP
'This campaign not only hears the voices of the entrepreneurs and the farmers and the entrepreneurs, we hear the voices of those struggling to get ahead."
6. Encryption
We cannot let terrorists and rogue nations hold this nation hostile or hold our allies hostile.''
7. Asteriod Defences
"It's going to require numerous IRA agents."
8. The future
"That's a chapter, the last chapter of the 20th, 20th, the 21st century that most of us would rather forget. The last chapter of the 20th century. This is the first chapter of the 21st century."
All quotes from here
ZOMG I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW ABOUT YOUR FEELINGS ON MACINTOSH VERSUS WINDOWS, VI VERSUS EMACS, AND HOW YOU'RE NOT A DORK
http://www.plethora.net/~seebs/pres.html
Also have a look at the description of how Gore sold his vote: http://www.culturaldissident.com/Simpson.htm.
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
this is from
u sh/question/
http://www.webwhiteblue.org/debate/2000-10-15/b
Quote:
Religious Freedom And Tolerance Is A Protected Right
I am committed to the First Amendment principles of religious freedom, tolerance, and diversity.
Whether Mormon, Methodist, Jewish, or Muslim, Americans should be able to participate in their constitutional free exercise of religion. I do not think witchcraft is a religion, and I do not think it is in any way appropriate for the U.S. military to promote it.
endQuote:
Run. I like water. Push My rutabaga.
I think it's time we end the war on drugs. War is never good, except when it increases your approval rating. I would send an ambassador to Drugs and ask them to sign a peace agreement. As far as being an unqualified success, I'm not sure whether Drugs qualifies or not. I will review their voting record with the United Nations.
2. Rights of Atheists and minority religions
I am unfamiliar with some of those religious, but I have heard a lot about Atheists - mostly about their God, Les. I'm not sure that they all believe in Les, because sometimes I hear them called God Les Atheists, and other times Wicked Atheists, so maybe some of them are Wiccans. I am sure they have some rights because I often hear about religious rights.
3. Tax cuts
Everyone needs tax cuts, because tax cuts are money and money is part of the economy and the economy is what Warren Greenspan works for. The economy helps the homeless through EconoLodge, too.
4. 3rd party candidates and the electoral college
Every election people talk about the electoral college. I think we're focusing on the wrong college. According to my figures, there are roughly 500 people from the electoral college that bother to vote for the president. I am quite sure that colleges like Yale have more people that vote for the president, why don't we talk about them? I am in favor of some 3rd party candidates like Ralph Nader. I think he should get more time. Pat Buchanan is bad.
5. Intellectual property
I think everyone should be allowed to own property, not just intellectuals.
6. Exporting strong encryption
Our trade deficit is bad. We need to export more things and if we can export more of our encryptions, that is good. It's better for us to export our encryptions to China than it is to buy them from China. Do you want to give your kid an encryption for Christmas that is labeled "Made in China" ?
7. Political protests against globalization
Globalization is a safe, clean and effective process that no one should be afraid of. I had my car globalized last week and it looks better than it ever did. Sure, some poorer nations are afraid of globalization because they live in dirty huts and have no cars. If they had windows or shoes that could be globalized, they'd realize how good it is.
8. Space defense against asteroids
Stay in the middle. Try to focus on eliminating one asteroid at a time. If you break too many of them up at once, you'll get killed. When you get down to one tiny asteroid, start flying around. Shoot the little saucer over and over to get more points.
9. Our national mission
I think our national mission is to be a nation. Right now we are a republic, but we can do better than that. Our pledge of allegiance says "One nation" not "one republic". We should strive to fulfil our pledge and become a nation under God, invisible, with liberty and justice for all. I think the president hasn't worked on making us invisible, so I will work to increase our stealth technology.
I'm afraid the 'answers' below aren't actually funny. They're what the candidates truly believe. Check www.issues2000.org for confirmation, they're more or less paraphrasing what Gore and Bush have said before. As Lando said.. here goes nothing.
Q: The War on Drugs has been a consistently neglected topic in discussions surrounding this federal election. My question is, do you believe the War on Drugs has been an unqualified success, and if not, what would you change about it if elected president?
Gore: We must protect the young. We must fight drug dealers. Harsher sentences for those who corrupt the young. Etc. Marijuana will not be legalized, Science says it isn't proper. Lead a national crusade against drugs. More $ to fight drugs. Yes, he did pot himself, like 'young people today.'
Bush: Drug on wars has failed with this administration, need to fight a bigger war on drugs, mroe money for fighting this evil. Full background drug use checks for appointees are necessary. Supports military package to Columbia to fight drug supply.
The truth: The war on drugs has failed. US stats show that 75% of all drug users are white, whereas 75% of people imprisoned on drugs offences are black. Criminalization doesn't reduce drug use. Sending weapons to Columbia will turn the country into even more of a civil warzone than it is now. Would Bush be a better man if he'd spent 10 years in prison for snorting cocaine when he was young?
Q: What will you do to protect the rights of atheists and those who hold minority faiths, such as Wicca, Santaria, Shinto, et al?
Gore: Believes in personal approaches to religion, etc.
Bush: When asked who his idol/hero was, answered 'Jesus'. Is in discrepancy with the bible - has put 145 to death under his rule as Gov. of Texas, yet bible claims thou shalt not kill.
The truth: Gore tries to appear tolerant, Bush has to answer to the vast right wing of the Republicans, who are puppets of the Christian right.
Q: With the surplus, everyone has been saying "Let's have a tax cut, Let's have a tax cut." In the meantime, Alan Greenspan and friends are trying to keep inflation and the speed of the growing economy in check so it doesn't burst. Which they are doing by raising interest rates periodically. (6 times this year) A tax cut flies in the face of what Greenspan is trying to do. A tax cut will inject more money into the economy and do what Greenspan is preventing. Why is a tax cut so big? Wouldn't the money be better spent on the deficit so when worse times roll along, a tax cut can be easily given by not paying as much on the debt?
Gore: Doesn't want any tax cuts right now, although future tax reform should give tax breaks to people earning less than $100k, working families, middle class. Wants to end tax marriage penalty.
Bush: Wants to give tax cuts benefitting principally the 10% richest in the country. Claims lower income people benefit more from taxes than the rich.
The truth: Gore says what he thinks will be popular. Bush actually wants to make rich people pay less taxes, to appeal to corporations, etc.
Q: Some people, especially those that favor '3-rd' party candidates, have called for the ending of the electoral college system to be replaced by a simple purely popular vote, or at least allowing for splitting the electoral votes by each state. The best recent example was the Bush-Clinton election. Clinton received 43% of the popular vote (but a sufficient majority of the electoral vote), whereas Perot got at least 10% of the popular vote but zero electoral votes. If memory serves, Vermont is the only state which does currently allow for its votes to be split; if someone wins 60% of the Vermont popular vote, they get 2 votes and the 40% candidate gets 1. This in contrast to California, where someone can get 51% of the popular vote, and therefore gets 53 (or whatever it is nowadays) electoral votes. What is your position on this issue?
Gore: Doesn't want to end electoral college, but wants to look into alternatives.
Bush: Doesn't know. Alternatives, yes...
The truth: Both oppose alternatives but don't say so. In tight elections, swing voters decide everything, and have so far brought victories to both Clinton and Bush Sr in surprise results. This will be the tightest election ever, if the polls are right. Do the math. They would have to completely rebuild their parties' campaign/spending machines to match any changes.
Q: In this age of the Internet, intellectual property has become a very important concept to many people. Many companies make their living on the artificial scarcity provided by intellectual property laws, selling information that they have either created or aggregated. Some others, mostly in the Free Software world, make their living seemingly in spite of these laws, selling their services based on information that is freely given. Do you feel that out current system of intellectual property is a good one? Which parts of it (e.g. trademarks, patents, copyrights) do you feel are well suited to the world of the Internet and which do you think need to be changed (and, if changes are needed, what changes are needed)?
Gore: Supports intellectual property, but wants to see exactly who is getting what in those money/artist relationships, and what damage Napster is doing.
Bush: Supports innovative new ways of music distributions but wants 'artist's rights protected'. His party would crucify him if he didn't try to ban Napster, as they get massive soft money from record companies, etc. The RIAA/MPAA rely on corporate-friendly Republican congresses to pass their dubious laws.
The truth: Both don't want to piss off young voters, which is why they dance around the issue. Bush would be quicker to ban everything suspicious that might upsets corporations.
Q: Many tech people think that strong encryption is one of the best ways we have to protect freedom both now and for future generations. For example to preserve information that future not so friendly governments may think we don't need to have and to make sure that things we want to have remain private remain private. Given this what would you do to help preserve our right to privacy through the use of strong encryption? Also in a related question what are your thoughts and what do you plan to do about the fact that we can not export many forms of strong encryption?
Gore: Doesn't really know, but supports people's right to use what he pioneered. Will look into this. Democrat presidents relaxed crypto exports laws, etc.
Bush: Republicans consider any technological advance, like crypto, to be weaponry that must be horded and protected. Rep-controlled Congress sees no problem with Carnivore.
The truth: Both oppose crypto for everyone, as they're dubious of what people would do, and how that'd be monitored by the state. However, Gore will try to protect people's rights more, sensing pressure from his party and the Left.
Q: In the last year or so we have seen a tremendous escalation in the quantity and size of political protests against globalization and the rising power of corporate multi-nationals. Do you believe that these people have reason to be concerned? If you do believe that they have reason for concern, what steps would you take as president to deal with their concerns?
Gore: Wants to protect consumers' rights, etc, but thinks violence is the wrong way to protest.
Bush: Doesn't understand what the fuss is about, must protect companies from economic damage, must monitor trouble-makers.
The truth: Both are afraid of companies putting the thumb-screws on if there's too much trouble, and are afraid of America's image. Both remember the 60s protests, especially Gore.
Q: Would you renew funding of programs to research and develop global defense systems against asteroids or other such threats from space?
Gore: Doesn't know. Probably not.
Bush: Absolutely loves idea of resurrecting 'Star Wars' programme, putting defense systems into space. The only problem: He wants the weapons to point downwards, to defend the US.
The truth: Bush wants to increase military budget a lot, although all weapons would point at us, rather than the other way 'round. Probably would find no money after that for any other space things, including NASA. Gore wants to fund NASA more, which is where the money *might* come from.
Q: I'm very concerned with the future of the country, and about what our national mission seems to be. Looking back through American history, every period seems to have a defining popular mission - like the "manifest destiny" movement in the 19th century, the Depression, World War II, and the Cold War. During these times, there would be one struggle or idea that captivated the attention of the nation, sort of providing a national mission. I'm a little confused as I look around today. What is our mission? To me, it seems to be "to watch TV and use the Internet." What would you say the defining national mission of today is? What should it be? Furthermore, how would you show this in your activities as a lawmaker? (For instance, if our national mission is the pursuit of science, then would you increase funding for scientific pursuits in the budget?)
Gore: Has as his mission to improv quality of life, provide good future for Americans, protect environment, empower citizens.
Bush: Has as his mission to restore traditional values to America, preside over a healthy, economic country, fight all unwholesome influences.
The truth: Neither of them has a clue about true social undercurrents: Gore is concerned over environmental issues, and where we will all be in 30 years. Bush is concerned with restoring proper values, and protecting the people from that what is evil, like childrens' hearts turning black on the Internet.
The final conclusion: Have a look at www.issues2000.org which will show you all candidates' positions and their quotations on relevant issues. This will be a very, very tight election.
Alex T-B
St Andrews
1) War on Drugs
by Tim Doran
Your answer:
Bush: I say let's execute 'em all! Just like we are in good ol' Texas!
Gore: I already admitted to smoking pot, unlike Bush. Please don't execute me!
2) Minority Religions...
by Electric Angst
Your answer:
Bush: Execute 'em all! The Bible says so!
Gore: Unless they're Buddhists. They have $$$.
3) Why give a tax cut?
by funkman
Your answer:
Bush: Execute 'em all! Oh, sorry, didn't listen to the question. Whatever Mr. Greenspan says....
Gore: We need to put every dollar in an iron clad lock box. Then put the Fed in there with it.
4) electoral reform
by carleton
Your answer:
Bush: When I buy my electoral votes I expect them to stay bought, dammit!
Gore: Ditto.
5)How Do You Feel About Intellectual Property?
by Phil Gregory
Your answer:
Bush: Well, nobody ever accused me of being an intellectual, but I am in favor of property! More property, less taxes!
Gore: Ever since I invented the Internet everybody seems upset. Maybe I should have patented it in the first place....
6) Encryption....
by SquadBoy
Your answer:
Bush: Use all the encryption you want. We'll just find you and execute you anyway!
Gore: Nobody can understand most of what I'm saying anyway, so I don't need crypto. Why should anybody else?
7) Rising Political Protests
by sterno
Your answer:
Bush: Execute those pesky protesters!
Gore: I am concerned about the environment as well; but first let's see how my Oxy stock is doing before I say anything too "radical"....
8) Asteroid Defenses
by Ethelred Unraed
Your answer:
Bush: Absolutely! Star Wars all the way baby!
Gore: Only if I get credit for inventing it.
9) The Future of the Country, and of Humanity
by 11223
Your answer:
Bush: What's wrong with watching TV? Shut up and be happy!
Gore: What's wrong with using the Internet? Shut up and be happy!
#include "disclaim.h"
"All the best people in life seem to like LINUX." - Steve Wozniak
#include "disclaim.h"
"All the best people in life seem to like LINUX." - Steve Wozniak
War on Drugs
If we executed drug users, we wouldn't have the huge drug problem that we have now. Drug users are hurting themselves and I am dedicated to doing whatever it takes to stop them. This is a war, dammit, and there are casualties in a war.
Minority Relitions
I support the right of all minority religions to convert to Christianity.
Why give a tax cut?
Because, moron, I'm running for the fucking president of the United States of America. You think I'm gonna get there without promising a tax cut? Where did you grow up, dumbass?
electoral reform
Wait until next week, if I'm not elected president I promise to spearhead electoral reform.
How Do You Feel About Intellectual Property?
I think that people who are intellectualable have as much right to protect their property as the rest of us.
Encryption....
If people aren't breaking the law, they have nothing to worry about.
Rising Political Protests
If we executed protestors, we wouldn't have a problem with protests. All these people think they know how to run the country, but how many of them are leading in the polls? What's that? None of them are? Hmmmm, I wonder who is, oh yeah, it's me, now sit down and shut up!
Asteroid Defenses
I remember once in the 80's getting all coked out and playing asteroids for like twelve hours straight, man that was a good video game.
The Future of the Country, and of Humanity
Our national mission should be to help large corporations become larger, and to make sure that the poor people who commit crime are executed.
1) War on Drugs
by Tim Doran
The War on Drugs has been a consistently neglected topic in discussions surrounding this federal election.
My question is, do you believe the War on Drugs has been an unqualified success, and if not, what would
you change about it if elected president?
Answer: The war on drugs is a failure. I can speak from personal experience. You can get coke in almost any city in America, especially if you are willing to turn a trick. And this shit is good! Not that shit blow from Mexico, either, good Bolivian, Peruvian stuff. Coca para los todas.
This problem mainly effects poor black people, so frankly, I have little interest in it.
2) Minority Religions...
by Electric Angst
What will you do to protect the rights of atheists and those who hold minority faiths, such as Wicca,
Santaria, Shinto, et al?
Answer: I don't know much about Santana, Shinta, or Etal, but I do know this. I want to move forward, not backward, rightwise, not leftwise, and twirling, forever twirling.
3) Why give a tax cut?
by funkman
With the surplus, everyone has been saying "Let's have a tax cut, Let's have a tax cut." In the meantime,
Alan Greenspan and friends are trying to keep inflation and the speed of the growing economy in check so
it doesn't burst. Which they are doing by raising interest rates periodically. (6 times this year)
A tax cut flies in the face of what Greenspan is trying to do. A tax cut will inject more money into the
economy and do what Greenspan is preventing.
Why is a tax cut so big? Wouldn't the money be better spent on the deficit so when worse times roll along, a
tax cut can be easily given by not paying as much on the debt?
Answer: You talk a lot and I get confused, but I did get the beginning. Because that is what I promised all the rich people that paid to get me into office and I keep my promises. I am rich, my father is rich, my vice president is rich, all my friends are rich. What do we get from the government? Nothing, we pay and get nothing back. We aren't on welfare, foods stamps, we have the best private insurance money can buy, we don't need medicare, medicaid, or any government services. All the government does for us is make us let black kids in our kids schools, pay crack whores to have more babies, and give condoms to children so they fuck like rabbits, and thats not right.
4) electoral reform
by carleton
Some people, especially those that favor '3-rd' party candidates, have called for the ending of the electoral
college system to be replaced by a simple purely popular vote, or at least allowing for splitting the electoral
votes by each state. The best recent example was the Bush-Clinton election. Clinton received 43% of the
popular vote (but a sufficient majority of the electoral vote), whereas Perot got at least 10% of the popular
vote but zero electoral votes. If memory serves, Vermont is the only state which does currently allow for its
votes to be split; if someone wins 60% of the Vermont popular vote, they get 2 votes and the 40% candidate
gets 1. This in contrast to California, where someone can get 51% of the popular vote, and therefore gets
53 (or whatever it is nowadays) electoral votes. What is your position on this issue?
Answer: Again, I became confused on the third sentence. Please keep these short. Why should I want to change this? The system is set up to continue the two party system, of which I am one. If you have more choice, I and my friends have a lesser chance of winning.
5)How Do You Feel About Intellectual Property?
by Phil Gregory
In this age of the Internet, intellectual property has become a very important concept to many people. Many
companies make their living on the artificial scarcity provided by intellectual property laws, selling
information that they have either created or aggregated. Some others, mostly in the Free Software world,
make their living seemingly in spite of these laws, selling their services based on information that is freely
given.
Do you feel that out current system of intellectual property is a good one? Which parts of it (e.g.
trademarks, patents, copyrights) do you feel are well suited to the world of the Internet and which do you
think need to be changed (and, if changes are needed, what changes are needed)?
Answer: Alright, I'm with you on this one, this is money again. The laws have been written with the large companies in mind, not the general population. This is because large companies give money to the parties, specifically my Republican party, and so we try to accomodate those that keep us in office. I will support current intillectural property laws as long as it is politically in my best interest, which right now looks to continue into the foreseeable future. I am here, running for President of the United States, because I can "play ball". John McCain is much more popular than I with the general public, but he can not "play ball" with those at the top of the Republican Party, and as we discussed earlier, the system is set up for the two party and those that fund them.
I am the type of person that believes in keeping things the way they are, as is Al, because I am rich and powerful, and the things that got me here are the things I will continue to support. I will get NOTHING from changing intillectural property laws and all the large companies will lose important revenue streams.
6) Encryption....
by SquadBoy
Many tech people think that strong encryption is one of the best ways we have to protect freedom both now
and for future generations. For example to preserve information that future not so friendly governments
may think we don't need to have and to make sure that things we want to have remain private remain
private. Given this what would you do to help preserve our right to privacy through the use of strong
encryption? Also in a related question what are your thoughts and what do you plan to do about the fact
that we can not export many forms of strong encryption?
Answer: Now we know I am not too smart so I am going to keep this simple. Whatever helps business, I am for. I think this will help businesses, so I am for strong encryption available to them. If I can do this without giving the general population, (i.e. criminals) this strong encryption, I will, but I am told by smart people that this would be impossible, so we'll give it to everyone.
7) Rising Political Protests
by sterno
In the last year or so we have seen a tremendous escalation in the quantity and size of political protests
against globalization and the rising power of corporate multi-nationals. Do you believe that these people
have reason to be concerned? If you do believe that they have reason for concern, what steps would you
take as president to deal with their concerns?
Answer: This is not a problem yet. They are small and ineffectual up till now, so we can ignore them for the forseeable future.
8) Asteroid Defenses
by Ethelred Unraed
Would you renew funding of programs to research and develop global defense systems against asteroids or
other such threats from space?
Answer: Is this Ross Perot? Whoo, you are out there buddy. "Threats from space?" (Someone put a tail on this guy.)
9) The Future of the Country, and of Humanity
by 11223
I'm very concerned with the future of the country, and about what our national mission seems to be.
Looking back through American history, every period seems to have a defining popular mission - like the
"manifest destiny" movement in the 19th century, the Depression, World War II, and the Cold War. During
these times, there would be one struggle or idea that captivated the attention of the nation, sort of
providing a national mission.
I'm a little confused as I look around today. What is our mission? To me, it seems to be "to watch TV and
use the Internet." What would you say the defining national mission of today is? What should it be?
Furthermore, how would you show this in your activities as a lawmaker? (For instance, if our national
mission is the pursuit of science, then would you increase funding for scientific pursuits in the budget?)
Answer: This is right up my alley.
I am for a strong America, a good America. An America that is strong and good. I am against our children being killed, and us losing money. I am for us not dying, and am indifferent to people in other countries dying unless it effects us in a bad way. Africa is far away, black, and has only minimal economic ties, so I will talk about how horrible things are there but will never send our children to fight there.
I am for rich people mainly, but will tell you I am for everyone, even though I do little to nothing for those who actually need help from the government.
I promise to always talk in generallities, like "I am inclusive, not devicive. I want prosperity to continue..." and not talk specifics that make people angry and confused.
Thank you for this time. I hope you understand me a little better now.
- I like pudding.