Submit and Moderate Questions for Bush and Kerry

We're teaming up with the New Voters Project Presidential Youth Debate to ask the two major party candidates "the 12 previously unasked questions that most concern young Americans." This is different from the usual Slashdot interview because we're asking you to submit questions through the New Voters Project site instead of as comments attached to this post. Next week you'll have a chance to help select questions for the candidates from among the top 50 asked by everyone -- not just Slashdot readers -- by first winnowing those down to 20 through the Slashdot moderation system, then by voting on the "final 12" displayed on the New Voters Project site. On October 12 we'll post the answers, and on October 19 we'll post candidate-supplied rebuttals. Note that the idea here is to solicit questions specifically from voters 18 - 35, because this age group tends to vote less than older Americans, plus questions from people 13 - 17 who will be voters before long. But the question selection process is not age-restricted, and it's where your comments and moderation become most important, because one great hope here is to avoid asking questions the candidates have heard (and answered) over and over.

The other question-selecting moderators are groups like Youth Vote Coalition, Earth Day Network, Rock The Vote, Declare Yourself, and 18to35.org, plus lead moderator Farai Chideya.

Anthony Tedesco, founder of the Presidential Youth Debates, has been doing this since 1996. 2004 is the first time an entire online community has participated in the moderation process. It's a logical evolution of the group-questions idea, and Slashdot is the obvious community to choose not only because of the wide range of political views held by Slashdot readers but also because the primary Presidential Youth Debates tech guy, Dan Collis Puro (AKA Hero Zzyzzx), is a Slashdot member himself (and would be happy if you volunteer to help work on their all-FOSS Web site).

Anyway, this is an interesting experiment. Ask your questions, prepare to moderate and comment next week, and to read the candidates' answers and rebuttals when we post them next month.

Comments

should the gov decide who has the right to marry?

[slashcop]

Mr. President, Do you believe the government should decide who should marry who?

Re:should the gov decide who has the right to marr

[Anonymous Coward]

Still trying to marry your sister, eh?

Patriot Act

[Penguinoflight]

When do you think is the appropriate time for the patriot act to expire? What action would be required to remove this "temporary" anti-terrorist legislation?

Re:Patriot Act

[einhverfr]

How do you define victory in the war against terror?

Will this be like the war against drugs which seems to be perpetual and allow the government to fight both sides (Ollie North wasn't exchanging arms for jelly beans, was he)?

My Question:

[Hatta]

The USA incarcerates a greater proportion of its population than any other nation, due to an out of control War on Drug Users. What will you do to keep me, successful student, productive citizen, and pot smoker, out of jail?

Taxes and Spending

[ackthpt]

The ultimate tax cut will be when there is no further servicing, paying interest on, the national debt. US tax payers would need only pay about 50% of what they currently do for approximately the same level of service from the federal government. Further, the extra money left to taxpayers would amount to considerable investment and consumer spending. The federal government has cut tax revenue and returned to deficit spending rather than hold spending below revenue and retire the debt. How would you address balancing the federal budget and paying down the debt, so americans will pay far less in taxes?

Question for President Bush

[kenjib]

President Bush,

You have said that recent CIA estimates of the instability and dire situation in Iraq represent the CIA "just guessing." Since you are choosing to disregard the intelligence community's considered assessment of the situation, on what basis do you formulate your contrary assessment of the situation in Iraq?

Biggest mistake?

[theghost]

What is the biggest mistake you made in the last four years? What were the negative repercussions of that mistake and what have you done to fix it?

In Soviet Russia...

[the MaD HuNGaRIaN]

In Soviet Russia, the government questions YOU!!!

Re:The draft

[Mz6]

Here you go. These are the drafts that are sitting in the House. And I bet you couldn't guess who they are sponsored by? I'll give you a hint, it's not the Reoublicans and Bush.

http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:H.R .163:

http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:S.8 9:

For Both Parties

[geomon]

Why are you so much alike, yet you campaign in a way that makes the American public think that there is a significant difference. I can think of several important areas where you are virtually indistiguishable:

1) Use of Military Power: Both approve of foreign intervention, but one party prefers to get the tacit approval of the international community before invading.

2) Tax Policy: Moving the marginal rates around only makes a difference of a few bucks to the average tax payer. The user fees are almost exclusively a middle-class burden, and neither party looks to decrease any of them.

3) Intellectual Property: Both parties are rushing to become the poster child for media conglomerates. They constantly chastize the 'media', but can't wait to lick their boots when it comes time to pass legislation regarding extending copyright protection (as one sleazy congressperson said: "Forever minus one year").

4) Drug policy: Neither party can put a stop to the madness that the drug war has brought us. Nothing useful has been accomplished in 30 years of police-state enforcement of drug laws. That is, unless you consider the fact that the US leads in per-capita encarceration as a 'positive' social gain.

These are just a few. Why shouldn't we view the Demopublican or Republicratic Parties as two sides of the same bad penny?

Re:For Both Parties

[stratjakt]

How about the now century-plus old campaign to convince Americans there are only two choices?

They've screwed up the election process to make it extremely difficult to get on the ballot in all 50 states. Once upon a time, it was a write in ballot, not multiple choice.

After Perot appeared on the presidential debates, their media buddies helped them screw with those rules to make it virtually impossible for that to happen again.

For that matter, why are there no third parties in this "Youth Debate"? I'll tell you why, the last thing we want to do is have the youth find out that it doesn't have to be a two party system. Young minds are predetermined to see things in black and white anyways.

Go ahead slashdot, help brainwash another generation into believing in this complete perversion of representative democracy.

Of course, they're the same people with the same agenda. All these people screeching "We have to get rid of Bush! Vote Kerry because third party votes are wasted". Gah.

Kerry isn't going to end the war in Iraq, repeal PATRIOT, lower taxes, allow same-sex marraige, he's not going to do anything to change the status quo.

Presidential politics are purely smear campaigns, because there's no issue that they actually differ on significantly.

Futurama:

Jack Johnson "I say my opponents plan goes too far!"

John Jackson "And I say my opponents plan doesn't go too far enough!"

Two-Party System

[damiam]

Do you think that the two-party system is a good thing for America? Would you support voting reforms (instant-runoff, approval voting, etc.) that would make third-party candidates more viable?

Stop Posting Questions!!

[Roofus]

Christ, don't you people even read the damn blurb?

This is different from the usual Slashdot interview because we're asking you to submit questions through the New Voters Project site instead of as comments attached to this post.

Re:Stop Posting Questions!!

[mopslik]

Christ, don't you people even read the damn blurb?

Your ID# is 15591. You should know the answer to that by now.

My Question

[hrieke]

Let's look ten years out. Since we have a wave of baby boomers planning on retirement, what effect will their retirement have on me, my family, and the nation as a whole.
How will we pay for the trillions that Social Security, Medicaid, and all of the other entitlement programs be handled?
How does having countries like Japan, China, and India who are buying our debt (thus allowing us to spend more money than we have), change the equation? How does the fact that Japan is heading for their baby boom retirement in 4 years change our equation?

Please answer in a fashion which is not compatiable to a 10 sound bite.

Thanks

Presidential debates

[moitz]

Mr. President, Senator Kerry, why should Michael Badnarik, David Cobb, Michael Peroutka and Ralph Nader be excluded from the Presidential debates? After all, Al Sharpton, Dennis Kucinich, Howard Dean, John Edwards, etc. were all included in the primary debates.

-moitz-

I HAVE A QUESTION FOR TEH PRESIDENT

[Anonymous Coward]

ME: OMFG have you seen the Halo 2 trailer?!?>11`

PRESIDENCE BUSH: YA!!~ it's like slow and it's telling you all the stuff you did in the first one then the music kicks in and and the chief comes out and gets a gun the earf is on fire and chief is like fuck this im jumping and HE JUMPS PUT OF TEH SPACESHIP with angels singing and he lands on the bad guys and that annoying ai lady is like GO GET EM TIGER! WILDCAT IS ON TEH SPOKE!!!~`1 and theres less polys but rawkin bumb mappings you can view this on a special MICROSOFT xbox disk that comes with EB games store.

Double std in drug enforcemt for african americans

[kenjib]

African americans are convicted for drug related crimes in great disproportion to the frequency with which they commit these crimes relative to other ethnic groups. Further, they are sentenced more harshly relative to other ethnic groups. What do you think is the cause of this severe imbalance in law enforcement and the judicial process, and what can be done to correct the problem?

As a followup question, what effect does this have on the health of democracy in states where a criminal record can render one ineligible to vote?

Re:Question for Mr. Bush

[ejort79]

I think that was the first president Bush http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/George_H._W._Bush

Globalization

[JavaLord]

I'd like to ask both candidates: 1. Do you think it's right for China to have the "Most Favored Nation" status in foreign trade, even though they continually violate people's human rights. and 2. Do you fair trade is fair to the American worker when people overseas can live on less than half the money Americans need to survive here, and companies overseas have no labor laws. Isn't "Fair Trade" as it is championed today just an excuse for US businesses to get cheap, powerless labor?

Re:should the gov decide who has the right to marr

[galaxy300]

But what is the difference between a man marrying a woman, a man marrying a man, and a woman marrying a woman? What real difference is there?

We're not talking about polygamy here, or animal husbandry - just the union of two people in love. Where does the government get off trying to interfere with that?

Re:should the gov decide who has the right to marr

[stinkyfingers]

AyeRoxor!: Mr. President, do you think the word 'whom' has all but died completely? Should it die? Would you pardon it?

Bush: Son, there's no such word as hoom.

Re:Just my luck...

[ackthpt]

. I got my mod points *this* week. Unless they're giving mod points to all (for fairness) ;) Either way, I bet a lot of people will metamoderate that week.

Mr. President,

Should citizens be able to moderate and metamoderate presidential orders?

Killed auto emissions bill (-1 Troll)

Proposed flag burning amendment (-1 Flamebait)

9/11 speech (4 insightful)

Tax cuts (3 Interesting)

Tell everyone to go out and spend that $300 right away (5 Funny)

Record deficit spending (-1 Troll)

Invade Afghanistan in pursuit of al qaeda (5 Interesting)

Invade Iraq (-1 Flamebait)

Gay marriage ban amendment (-1 Flamebait)

For President Bush

[cortez]

Dear President Bush,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's law. I have learned a great deal from you and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them:

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not to Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev. 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev. 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states that he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that, even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Lev. 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there "degrees" of abomination?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the
whole town together to stone them (Lev. 24:10-16)?
Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws (Lev. 20:14)?

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Re:should the gov decide who has the right to marr

[stinerman]

I bet you will not have one reason that holds up to the constitution.

No shit. That's why they're trying to amend it.

Re:From a conservative

[Speare]

I'm sorry to say that the war isn't over

That's because we never officially started a war. Congress and the President conspired to take on a military action that they call a "war" when it suits them, but never to actually produce a declaration of war, a cessation of war, or any other legitimate status. Who wants the formality of Articles of War (as the Constitution requires) when a blank-check, do-what-you-want, whenever-you-want permission slip will do just as well? Especially when people might then be interested to see an official end of wartime status, so the people and courts know when to resume the normal order of protecting those inconvenient things like civil liberties?

"Inter Arma Silent Leges (In times of War, the Law is Silent)."

"We are at war with Eurasia, and we have always been at war with Eurasia."

Re:should the gov decide who has the right to marr

[johnnyb]

First of all, the government doesn't "prevent" marriage. People have marriage ceremonies without the government's consent, and it doesn't matter. The question is (a) should government recognize marriage, and (b) in what cases should government recognize marriage.

If marriage is viewed as an act of love, then government has not reason for involvement whatsoever. However, if you view marriage as the foundation platform for a family, then that view changes, for several reasons:

1) Stronger families mean that there is less need of government intervention in the general case. Strong families have less need of governance.

2) When children enter the picture, you have a lot of issues surrounding care, custody, etc., all for a child which has no real input into the matter.

When marriage is viewed as a foundation for a family, then there are legal reasons for the government to recognize or not recognize certain marriages (but again, legal recognition of marriage is not equivalent with marriage).

On a different topic, one could also point out the absurdity of calling anything between same-sex partners "marriage". Even in the past when same-sex relationships were viewed as being better than man-woman relationships, same-sex relationships were not considered, even for a second, marriage. Why? Because marriage is more about family than it is about affections.

Question for both candidates

[bort27]

Dear President Bush and Senator Kerry,

For the first time in history, this presidential election will make use of electronic voting machines to track more than half of all votes cast nationwide. Diebold is the largest manufacturer of these machines.

The Diebold machines have been proven insecure by numerous security analysts, and contain numerous security flaws. For example, it has been shown that anyone can change the electronic vote tallies by simply writing and executing a five-line computer script.

William W. O'Dell, CEO of Diebold and one of the largest Republican campaign contributors in the state of Ohio, has stated publicly that he will do "everything he can" to get George W. Bush re-elected.

My question is this: While there are clearly several advantages to electronic voting, do you believe that these problems could compromise the integrity of the 2004 election?

Death Penalty and Religion

[at-b]

Mr Bush,

when interviewed during the last presidential campaign, you were asked by an interviewer if you had a role model. To this you replied that Jesus was the closest that you had to one.

During your tenure as Governor of Texas, more people were killed in Texas prisons, enacting the death penalty, than during the tenure of any previous Governor in modern times. You presided over an execution nearly every two weeks from the moment you took office.

Considering the commandment of 'Thou shalt not kill' directly from God, and considering Jesus' stance on killing, how do you explain this glaring discrepancy between 'do as I say, not as I do'?

Thank you for your answer.

Question:

[Exmet Paff Daxx]

Do you feel that all electronic voting machines in use in the United States should produce a verifiable paper record?

Re:From a conservative

[American AC in Paris]

...because, y'know, it says such wonderful things about American values when we calibrate our moral compass based on the actions of Saddam Hussein.

That's something to take pride in, all right. America: We're Not As Bad As Saddam, Dammit!

Re:Mod parent up

[osobear]

I was going to mod the hell out of this story but instead I'll post.

There are some things that are more important than others not because of their immedieate consequences, but because of the CONCEPTS behind them. I agree that for the welfare of the average American, marriage reform won't make much of difference any time soon.

The problem is that this is a slippery slope that we are in the process of sliding down and if we don't grab a branch soon we're gonna hit the bottom fast. If the government can tell me what marriage is about then it's not a huge leap to assume that it can tell me what a "friendship" is. After all, friendship could be a legally viable term: for instance, "friends" are the only people, along with "immediete family" that can come over to watch a movie before I'm illegally displaying it in my house.

Soon I can't be friends with someone officially unless I've known them for 3 months (and see them at least an average of once every 2 weeks with no more than a 4 week break). Maybe friends are people that agree with you... so you, legally speaking, can't have any outside of your political party.

Yeah, it seems pretty silly to me too, but then again so does the government telling me what marriage is.

Re:What, you don't want to be living in sin?

[Knuckles]

If gay people are so desperate to be declared "normal" by emulating the rites and tradition of the patriarchal society that they reject by their lifestyle choice, then they should go see a mental health specialist instead of trying to have laws change to accomodate their insecurities.

Most gay couples I know just want the same legal guarantees as different-sex couples. Such as, if you have lived with your partner in a flat for 20 years and he dies, you don't want to get kicked out of the appartment overnight.

Or, if your partner had an accident and is in intensive care, you don't want to be told by hospital personnel that you can't see him because you are "not family". And that you can't make any decisions on his behalf when he's unconscious, and instead his parents get to make decisions (who maybe have deserted him 20 years ago because he found out he's gay).

Etc, etc.

the predictable copout

[dpilot]

Actually, your 'predictable copout,' is exactly WHY liberals have introduced the Draft. Today's all volunteer army is disporportionately made up of the lower income classes. The idea was to get a draft with fewer loopholes, so that *everyone's* kids would be at risk. It really has little to do with chilren of liberals vs children of conservatives. It has to do with putting some risk in it for the higher-income classes, when they start beating the War Drums. In that light, you can see why the Black caucus is behind the bill. Others get the idea to go to war, but a disporportionate number of Blacks pay the ultimate price.

OTOH, military service is certainly a way for lower income people to bootstrap their way into a better economic class.

Re:should the gov decide who has the right to marr

[Atryn]

Just playing DA here: If the definition of marriage is to move away from the union of a man and a woman, and instead be two consenting people, then why not three?

What is the real difference?

One.

Environment & Corporatism

[Goeland86]

I'm currently enrolled in College, and I had the pleasure of attending a lecture by John F. Kennedy Jr, nephew of President Kennedy. Most of what he said was that President Bush is the worst president the United States have ever had for the environment. He also said that in a real free market companies do NOT pollute, and cited the case of 1100 coal burning plants to produce electricity which produce about 60% of the mercury contaminating the US's waterways today.
Mr. President, you say you share family values. In my family, one of the aspects my parents taught me was to not leave a mess behind me, and also how to take care of the environment. Shouldn't that be part of your plans too? Or do you favor the coal plants more because they donated over $100 million to your campaign? Also, according to Mr. Kennedy's lecture, the mercury contamination in water will be responsible for up to 30,000 deaths a year. That's more deaths than the ones that happened in the Twin Towers on sept. 11th! WHY are you letting American citizens die? And why do you appoint people that fake the numbers when it comes to science? Wouldn't the space shuttle Columbia disaster be related to your negligence in appointing people knowledgeable in critical positions?

Mr. Kerry, what will you do to support the environment? Will you re-open the lawsuits that our President has closed against the coal burning plants? Will you listen to the scientific community in general instead of a selected few that tell you what you want to hear instead of the truth?

Yes, I am a supporter of John Kerry in this campaign, but to be frank it is more because I fear President Bush more than Senator Kerry.

Answers

[daveschroeder]

I don't recall having run into one blinking person who's said that she thinks Bush and his cronies are secretly plotting to reinstate the draft. Heck, Rumsfeld went out of his way to dismiss the military significance of draftees in previous wars, in a move I remember particularly well because it so upset my Uncles down in Oklahoma who served. Your entire premise is a misstatement of the objections to Bush's policy.

There are TONS of websites, blogs, and emails circulating which either imply or directly state that "the administration" is trying to "quietly" bring back the draft. Some even reference the actual bills, but of course don't link to them. Most people just assume what's said is true on its face.

What is said is that Bush's policies have made the reinstatement of a draft more likely, and that the specific changes made to terms of military service -- not allowing scheduled retirements, dramatic changes to the terms of service of the national guard -- amount to a "back-door" draft right now.

That I will agree with. The Guard is being used for tasks for which it was never intended, quite inappropriately in my personal opinion. However, consider that the forces are there, and the current administration, frankly, doesn't want a draft. It was either that, or cripple active forces - or find more soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines elsewhere. I don't agree with it, but since I agree that the radical elements in the mideast as a whole MUST be dealt with, up to and including with force, I agree with the general strategy.

It's funny how your "who's who" of the left in congress didn't include Teddy Kennedy or Mark Dayton. Those were the first names on my lips.

It's not really "funny", and "who's who" was a little tongue-in-cheek, but some of those representatives are pretty darned liberal.

Also funny how the support for H.R. 487 is bipartisan with a slight slant to the Democratic side.

How is that funny? I even noted that. I'm glad that sensible people on both sides of the aisle might be able to collaborate on a bill. What's "funny" is that there's not a SINGLE Republican on the former set of bills.

There are also people in congress from both sides who support the broader "national service" idea this bill was about.

Sure, but I think that's a different discussion. Heck, I think if framed properly, a lot of people would support some kind of "service" (not necessarily military). But I don't think that's what people are talking about when they speak of the "draft".

You're looking at a complicated issue and stomping it flat to score political points.

On the contrary: I simply don't have time to write a novel on the subject on slashdot. I realize it is insanely more complex than what will be discussed here.

This whole issue is ridiculously more complex than what people want to make it out to be. Sometimes I wonder how the United States ever had the will to fight and win the great battles of this century. Oh, yeah... I think I know which candidate you support...

Oh? Please, do tell. Because I really don't particularly like Bush. Or Kerry.

Kerry's detailed policy speech today was fantastic, in my opinion. (I'm glad he's stopped talking about something that happened over three decades ago.) He talks about Al Qaeda being the real enemy. He talks about holding Saudi Arabia accountable and responsible. He talks about becoming independent of mideast oil. He talked about radical Panislamism wanting to use hatred of the West to topple governments in the mideast to develop a new unified empire in the region, to fight the US and the West. He made some really firm statements about the things we should be doing. It all is really, really great rhetoric - and I don't mean that in a derogatory sense.

But how do we do these things?

Al Qaeda *is* the real enemy. And "Al Qaeda" is rooted in the mideast. NOT in Iraq, but in the region. And much of the Arab/Muslim world s