GOOOH
GOOOH
GOOOH
GOOOH
GOOOH
Home Learn Discuss Act Donate Media Store
Skip Navigation Links  [ SIGN IN OR JOIN NOW ]
Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics |

7 Pages «<23456>»
Suggested Questions for Inclusion Options
pktull
#61 Posted : Tuesday, November 24, 2009 6:23:03 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered

Joined: 9/26/2009
Posts: 283
Location: League City, Texas
Doug,

One thing to remember is that there are no right answers to the questions. So the questions need to ask what a person's position is on any particular topic.

My district may feel a certain way about a topic and your district may feel a different way. So, we may select somebody who would represent us on that topic while you select somebody who represents you on that topic.

This would allow for a more true representation of the candidate's constituents.
Preston Tullos
GOOOH Texas State Coordinator
goooh.tx@gmail.com
BillBoltinghouse
#62 Posted : Thursday, November 26, 2009 3:09:16 PM
Rank: Newbie

Groups: Registered

Joined: 11/26/2009
Posts: 1
I am concerned about all the social engineering and Constitutional Amendments being proposed.
I think that people have a need to read the Constitution Of the USA.
I see potential violations of Personal and State's Rights being proposed.
The Constitution has been violated through amendments time and time again.
Bills being proposed will do exactly what we disdain by spending money (taxes) and increasing the size of government and by mainly violating the freedoms of WE THE PEOPLE!
The USA is not a socialist state nor is it a basis for Marxism as Obama and many are trying to accomplish.
I started to answer the questionnaire, but I found it impossible to answer some of the questions.
We need to repeal a few amendments and return our country to the original intent of the Founding Fathers.
One example was a violation of State's Rights when an amendment placed Senators under the same election plan as the Representatives.

Amendment 17 - Senators Elected by Popular Vote. Ratified 4/8/1913. History

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.

When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.


jwersan
#63 Posted : Saturday, November 28, 2009 12:55:47 PM
Rank: Newbie

Groups: Registered

Joined: 11/28/2009
Posts: 1
I like to see a question that reads somewhat like this..

Repeal/rewite that "Cruel & Unusual Punishment" does NOT include Gas Chambers, Firing Squads, Hangings, Electric Chairs, etc, from usage in executions, and that all use of Lethal Injections will be outlawed...

Death should be FEARED, and swift, not done while asleep.

All death penalties are NOT feared in this country because many years occur BEFORE the penalty is carried out, if ever.

Also add a provision that the families choose the form of execution and a family member, if they choose, is the one to pull the "switch"...
FreedomFromTyranny
#64 Posted : Monday, December 14, 2009 8:17:28 PM
Rank: Member

Groups: Registered

Joined: 11/23/2009
Posts: 18
I believe a relevant question is for or against voting to eliminate the Executive Order.
SteveR_Garner_NC
#65 Posted : Monday, December 21, 2009 10:12:29 AM
Rank: Newbie

Groups: Registered

Joined: 12/21/2009
Posts: 1
While I find many of these proposed changes interesting, I feel that some are getting away from the founding document of our country. While I agree that some of the proposals are a step in the right direction, my main point of diaggreement is that we need to get away from CONGRESS passing legislation that violates the TRUTHS of the constitution. We, as a country, need to give the power back to the citizens and have them held accountable for thier actions. This includes all federal employees and appointees. That said, my suggested change to the questionaire would be an insertion to ITEM 76 to read "..... reducing [ publicly funded ] retirement payments..... ... to include social security payments.
midgetsc
#66 Posted : Tuesday, December 22, 2009 5:05:00 PM
Rank: Newbie

Groups: Registered

Joined: 12/22/2009
Posts: 1
Why is the questionaire so long? I feel there may be a few more questions there than needed, but I also feel that the ones there are revelant, but may be reworded to combine and make the survey shorter
LWSugden
#67 Posted : Wednesday, December 23, 2009 11:36:05 AM
Rank: Member

Groups: Registered

Joined: 12/20/2009
Posts: 11
I am not sure how it should be worded, or even if it would be appropriate to include in the Questionaire or for the Screening process, but here is something that every potential Candidate needs to think about.

The existing parties will fight tooth-and-nail to keep the status quo. They are not going to go down without a fight. And the fight will get dirty. They have a whole arsenal of "tools" that can be used against you, and what they don't have they can buy. With this in mind:

Are you prepared for the scrutiny that you life is about to be placed under? Are you prepared for all of your "skeletons" to be made public? Are you and your family prepared to deal with false allegations and media exposure?

If the answer is "Yes", what would it take to get you to renounce your candidacy? Would money do it? A better job offer? If you cannot be blackmailed, can you be bribed? The obvious answer should be "NO".

Keep in mind that many of the current incumbents are sleazy and will stop at nothing to keep their jobs. Are you ready for that kind of battle?

Just a thought.

pktull
#68 Posted : Wednesday, December 23, 2009 11:51:54 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered

Joined: 9/26/2009
Posts: 283
Location: League City, Texas
That is something to think about. I believe now is the time for all patriots to stand up in front of the bullets from the career politicians. You might get hit but it will be well worth it when we have citizen legislators in office instead of career politicians.
Preston Tullos
GOOOH Texas State Coordinator
goooh.tx@gmail.com
Olediablo
#69 Posted : Wednesday, December 23, 2009 12:07:50 PM
Rank: Newbie

Groups: Registered

Joined: 12/21/2009
Posts: 2
Question: Would you vote for or against a law requiring all LEGAL immigrants to under go a physical screening for all communicable diseases ( to include TB, HIV, STD's etc) before being admitted into the United States. If found to have anyone of these diseases that be a reason for non-admission to the United States.
Festus
#70 Posted : Friday, December 25, 2009 1:25:12 AM
Rank: Member

Groups: Registered

Joined: 12/21/2009
Posts: 19
SeaWasp wrote:
I would like to propose the following questions for the Candidate Questionnaire, or at least similar topics covered:

1. Will you vote for or against a bill to require students to finish school through the 12th grade, not allowing them to drop school, unless they have reached the age of 18, joined the military, or has an extreme family hardship requiring them to work, and to bring back truant officers to enforce this rule?


What are you going to do? Jail them?

Quote:
2. Will you vote for or against a bill to ban special interest lobbyists?


For.

Quote:
3. Will you vote for or against a bill to reduce frivolous lawsuits, including malpractice lawsuits?


Against.

Quote:
4. Will you vote for or against a bill to eliminate the government budgeting policy of “use or lose”? Government agencies frivolously spend billions of dollars at the end of each budget year because they are afraid they will lose what they have not spent and are afraid that their budget will be cut by the same amount the following year.


For.

Quote:
5. Will you vote for or against a bill to eliminate drug, sexual item, and lawyer advertising from television, as it used to be? This way parents will not have to explain what ED is to their kids, doctors wont get bugged by their patients to prescribe certain drugs, and will bring back some respect back to the legal field.


Against. It would be a major expansion of the FCC.

Quote:
6. Will you vote for or against a bill to bring back the truth in advertising law, and eliminate the need for the fast scrolling “fine print” that you can’t even read on TV or listen to on the radio?


Against. It's not the government's job to monitor the gullible.

Quote:
7. Will you vote for or against a bill to provide incentives to businesses to keep jobs from going overseas?


Against. Against subsidies, which is what this question is pertaining too. Corporate welfare. On the other hand, lowering (or eliminating) the corporate income tax, personal income tax, eliminating the requirement of employers providing health insurance and you'll see an increase in businesses and jobs.

Quote:
8. Will you vote for or against a bill to put more regulation on credit bureaus providing fairness to the consumer?


Against, once again it's not the government's job to monitor the gullible.

Quote:
9. Will you vote for or against a bill to bring back parent’s rights to parent their children?


Why create another law. Merely repeal those laws that usurp the parent's rights.

Quote:
10. Will you vote for or against a bill to put a cap on medical malpractice lawsuits?


Against. It's not the government's job to judge the value of a human life.

And now my question: Will you vote for or against eliminating government employee unions?
mochajet
#71 Posted : Saturday, December 26, 2009 5:27:47 PM
Rank: Newbie

Groups: Registered

Joined: 12/26/2009
Posts: 1
mike1951 wrote:
I strongly recommend questions relating to Veterans. The rights of these individuals who were willing to sacrifice all is overlooked in this questionnaire and in our country in general. How embarrassing!

1. Five year tax exemption for service.

2. Appropriately fund for Veteran health care.



Repeal/reform provisions of the Uniformed Services Former Spouse Protection Act that grants payment of military retirement to former spouses who have remarried.
sickofcorruption
#72 Posted : Sunday, December 27, 2009 7:57:15 AM
Rank: Newbie

Groups: Registered

Joined: 12/20/2009
Posts: 4
If we don't get rid of special interest lobbyists it won't matter who goes to Washington. They are part of the reason our politicians are corrupted. They should not be allowed on the Senate and House Floor or be allowed to wine, dine, enterain, or gift our representatives and Senators. There should be a question about this on the Candidate screening form.
Festus
#73 Posted : Sunday, December 27, 2009 10:19:00 AM
Rank: Member

Groups: Registered

Joined: 12/21/2009
Posts: 19
jwersan wrote:
I like to see a question that reads somewhat like this..

Repeal/rewite that "Cruel & Unusual Punishment" does NOT include Gas Chambers, Firing Squads, Hangings, Electric Chairs, etc, from usage in executions, and that all use of Lethal Injections will be outlawed...

Death should be FEARED, and swift, not done while asleep.

All death penalties are NOT feared in this country because many years occur BEFORE the penalty is carried out, if ever.

Also add a provision that the families choose the form of execution and a family member, if they choose, is the one to pull the "switch"...


Allow me to ask you a question:

You're willing to a defenseless person and kill him under the color law under the guise of justice?
nukebubba
#74 Posted : Sunday, December 27, 2009 9:46:37 PM
Rank: Newbie

Groups: Registered

Joined: 12/27/2009
Posts: 1
In addition to the question about limiting Representatives to two terms, I suggest a question:

"Would you vote for or against a requirement that U.S. Senators serve one single term of six years only?"
Nateholio
#75 Posted : Monday, January 4, 2010 5:36:19 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered

Joined: 1/4/2010
Posts: 178
All of these questions (except #2) are related in the fact that they directly effect the economy by partially addressing inflation:

1. Would you be for or against a Constitutional Amendment requiring that the federal government coin gold and silver, as is directed by the U.S. Constitution, and give it a face value equal to the content of gold or silver within it?

2. Would you be for or against a Constitutional Amendment which repeals the "direct election" method of Senators as imposed by the 17th Amendment?

3. Would you be for or against a federal law which imposes fines on a State or punishment of a State's governor, if said State does not pay State debts in gold or silver coin as is directed by the U.S. Constitution?

4. Would you be for or against abolishing the entirety of the current tax system in favor of one which collects taxes from States at the end of the fiscal year based on apportionment?

5. Would you be for or against a Constitutional Amendment which forces the federal government to pay it's debt to U.S. States, legal citizens of said States, and U.S. companies/corporations in gold and silver coin?
The Cold War never ended...socialism still exists
Nateholio
#76 Posted : Monday, January 4, 2010 5:39:05 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Groups: Registered

Joined: 1/4/2010
Posts: 178
Oops, forgot one

6. Would you be for or against a Constitutional Amendment which forces the federal government to only "do business" with nations or entities which pay their debts to the U.S. government in gold and silver coin or other assets with intrinsic value?
The Cold War never ended...socialism still exists
Bob W.
#77 Posted : Sunday, January 10, 2010 2:17:46 PM
Rank: Newbie

Groups: Registered

Joined: 11/30/2009
Posts: 3
I am not sure how to accomplish what I want, but here goes. I went to a mock selection last night. As a upper corner libitarian I know what my views of the world are. On questions, 1 and 20 and one other, of the mock selection when doing the interviews with the other potential candidates I realized that I was discusssing and explaining a potition that was exactly opposit what I had answered when rereading the question. I am not sure if underlining what the central point is...I just don't know. The use of what end up being double negitives are sometimes misleading. There are screening profile and psychological test that use fully worded statements pick the one that best descibes your poistion. It would still work for the seletion process all people only list the items for which you select (b). Just a thought. I wil live with what every you chose. After last night, I am more convinced that this is the first thing I have seen that I believe can work
Ebony Ghost
#78 Posted : Monday, January 11, 2010 10:05:04 PM
Rank: Member

Groups: Registered

Joined: 12/6/2009
Posts: 13
Will you vote for or against requiring judges to inform juries of their right and duty to judge law as well as fact?


Will you vote for or against a provision that stipulates corporations are non citizens with no Constitutional rights.


Will you vote for or against recognizing that the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof," as mentioned in the fourteenth amendment, means that persons of minority age are subject to the jurisdiction of whatever embassy their parents have standing to appeal to?


Will you vote for or against designating the practice, of making political donations to candidates who will not appear on your precinct ballot, as election tampering?

P8RIOT
#79 Posted : Friday, January 15, 2010 7:08:21 AM
Rank: Newbie

Groups: Registered

Joined: 7/13/2009
Posts: 1
I would like to propose a question, or at least discuss it's inclusion.

My question: "Would you support a bill (or Constitutional ammendment) that limits the right to vote to those who pay taxes?"

I realize that there would need to be provisions to include those who may be disabled, retired, etc.; basically those who have paid taxes in the past but are not currently.

In the beginning, voting in our country was a priviledge restricted to Real Property Owners. That would not be practical today because so many people who pay into the system do not choose to own property.

Restricting the right to vote to those who pay into the system through taxes, or as President Obama likes to say "Those who have skin in the game." would keep those who ride the dole on government programs, without any intention of contributing, illegal aliens, and anyone else who drains the system, from voting in those who will provide them with the most benefit. (I have to go research this but voting is not a Right protected by the Constitution; if I'm wrong please correct me. I am aware of the protections under the Voting Rights Act which protect against discrimination, but there are also many in this country who do not have the "Right" to vote; convicted felons for example.)

That is my proposal, let's discuss it.
rolandfrank
#80 Posted : Friday, January 15, 2010 9:53:49 PM
Rank: Member

Groups: Registered

Joined: 12/20/2009
Posts: 13
I think the system tim has developed is really quite good. but when we get to the goal of selecting a rep, here is what I expect. assume I get the position for my district. I would first off be representing people that put me in that place. my personal opinions really need to take a back seat. as tim said we would be expected to be home as much as possible, have meetings to define what the voters want and that is what I would carry to washington and fight tooth and nail for. this would be real representation.

If I sign an oath or what ever to vote as I have said I would, and situations change, or the voters say differently I would of course have to vote the way they say, not what I said I would do.

but we are on the right track and thank god for tim cox and goooh.

just think if we had a huge group in Massachusetts right now.. if we could show some muscle there we could capture the imagination of every single American tired of the same old stuff. we can combine forces with other groups and take washington to the cleaners, drain the swamp!
Users browsing this topic
Guest (3)
7 Pages «<23456>»
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.