a.SafaLab
The Neolibertarian NetworkLet’s Talk, Let’s Really Talk.
Jon Tester has come out with his official position on Iraq. Same-same as most of the Dems in the Senate and certainly no “plan” to give Bush of what really should be done except the “make a timeline” prattle.
Of course the position statement is one of those talking point memos that doesn’t delve beyond the superficial facade of the debate. It seems most politicians, including Tester, either don’t think the masses have the intellectual curiosity or ability to understand a deeper argument.
Anyhow, I think his position was predictable – damn near pedestrian – and I wonder if that means we’re going to be subjected to similar broad positions with cursory explanations. I suppose that holding Tester to a standard higher than that of other politicians is unfair. I’m not doing that though and I would ask all pols who are attempting to represent me to actually explain the debate behind issues.
I have a series of questions for all of our national candidates that I would liked answered:
1) What’s is your “exit strategy” on the war on drugs?
2) What is your position on farm subsidies generally and protections involving crops like sugar and tobacco more specifically?
3) What industries should we collectively support in the national interest that are not competitive globally?
4) Should our national representatives be forced to join Social Security? Why or why not?
5) How do we prevent campaign finance reform from giving an advantage to the wealthy in elections and creating a government of the elite? (what’s the average net worth of a U.S. Senator? Think Corzine.)
6) Should the tax code be used as an economic device to control the electorate’s behavior?
7) What are your arguments for or against federal term limits?
I have many many more, but this is a beginning and I ask Burns, Morrison and Tester to reply. I doubt that they will but the answers, although complicated, would be telling.
Anyone hwo has additinal questions for these folks feel free to post them in the comments section. I will be revisiting this often.
The information on this site is not intended as individualized investment advice and all investment decisions by a reader must in all cases be made by the reader either individually or together with his/her investment professional. The views expressed in articles appearing on this site are solely those of Dave Budge and should not be attributed to any other person or entity except where expressly stated.
Print This Post
Hmmm, you won’t buy the call for an exit strategy or timeline as anything other than a political ploy, but you arrogantly ask for answers to questions that you have. Hmmm. I see a problem with that crap, Dave. Do you?
No, Irony is far from dead.
You’re putting words in my mouth. I didn’t call it a political ploy, I called it prattle. Take that for whatever you will I guess. Let me tell you another thing, the only Democrat Senator that I have any serious respect for is Russ Feingold. Although I find his argument about setting a timeline as difficult as the GOP stance of not setting one (I’m deeply conflicted thus deeply agnostic on the issue) he explains in clear terms the difficulty of the debate. He has an uncommon level of intellectual integrity. That virtue is why I have called Paul Wellstone one of the most honest Senators in the last 40 years. I can dispute their positions, but I have to admire their intellect and character.
But Bush has delivered an “exit strategy” in one form or another (which I do not defend or reject.) He has said that we will draw down troops when Iraq can stand on its own by training Iraqi troops to do the work. He has only refused to set a date certain for withdrawal – a proposition that has significant intellectual argument supporting it. But short of a policy that says we will be out by a specific date constitutes “no plan” in the political terms of his detractors. I don’t buy it.
Not knowing much about Tester I was disappointed as I found the statement shallow noise (prattle). Should we not expect our representatives to discuss the upsides and downsides of their positions.
Secondly , is it “arrogant” to want to know what our representatives are thinking on the issues that are important to us. I find your insult of me to be without vision or cause. Not only did I call for answers from Tester, I also called for them for Burns and Morrison.
I think you read this post with one eye – your left eye at that.
I apologize for the harsh tone, David, but I find it VERY arrogant to subjectively determine a given stance as “prattle”; and then to springboard to a list of policy questions the answers to which would make *YOU* happy, if of course, they are dealt with to the depth of understanding only you seem to know. Regardless of whether it feels satisfactory to you, setting a timeline for troop withdrawel *is* a plan. In itself it is calling for a deeper explanation from the very people who run this show of how they intend to accomplish goals, and setting accountable for that achievement. Hardly “prattle” at all.
And alluding to the idea that Tester and those like minded in the Senate are simply speaking down to the rest of us with hollow talking points … guess what, David, that really is calling it a political ploy. I’m not putting words in your mouth, simply interpreting the verbage so as to be immediately comprehensible.
[...] Punditry Termites Listening Well, I guess being arrogant or even VERY arrogant is my fatal flaw. Though I’m not convinced it actually is arrogant of me to hope f [...]
Your arrogance is in dissenting with Wulfies world view…don’t do that….he gets very testy. I think that your questions are very pertinant to what is going on in the world today and would have to agree with your assessment of why politicians of any stripe tend to talk down to the poor dumb public. I tend to be more forgiving of Pres. Bush than you but can still recognize his mistakes and take him to task for them. As you point out…not one Democrat has offered a solution to Iraq, prefering to keep screaming at the top of their lungs that we have no “exit stratagy” even though as you note one has been offered repeatedly by the Pres.
On a personal note…I find it hilarious that Wulfie or any of the other “progressives” would accuse you of arrogance when they themselves wallow in it so frequently. Although I tend to the right of you sir, I say keep up the good work, I really enjoy your writings even when disagreeing with them.
Ahh, Jerry. I explained quite clearly where I see arrogance and your response is little more than sticking your tongue out at those meanie liberals. Sad, at best.
Now I know it’s kinda dark in your momma’s basement, Jerry, but surely there must be enough light for you to see that calling for an exit strategy IS a plan for solving our involvement in Iraq … or must coming up with a “solution to Iraq” be more important to Americans than America itself? A rational administration might have had concrete goals and an exit strategy before we spent billions on this deadly lark, but I know, you cut Bush more slack … with never an explanation as to why.
As to your proud claims of taking the Pres to task, no, Jerry, no you don’t. What you do is to drop your little turds in the comments of other’s websites, with nary ever the courage to host one of your own. You haven’t held this administration accountable for anything. And heres the real kicker Jerry: when I disagree with David, I actually let him know it, in no uncertain terms. Pat yourself on the back, loser, because all you can do is try and take advantage of that disagreement to score petty points. Regardless of disagreement, I respect David. If you did, you would actually have the nads to speak up when you disagree. Sadly, you don’t, and you never will. You want buddies, and sympathy for your sad state … not any kind of honesty. But please, keep using the websites of others braver than you to attack me. I rather enjoy the show.
[...] r Conrad Continuing with my response to Conrad’s office to better explain questions I have for the candidates, here are some futher thoughts on the next question. Regarding number 3: 3) Wha [...]