haha...that would be pretty awesome.
Good luck with that

 

Stumbler, with you as a president, you'd have a ton ofpeople who love you, and a ton of people who'd loathe you.

Just one thing though about the national debt, isn't it like $23 trillion? I'd hate to see the tax raise to cancel that out.

 

1)bomb iraq. 2) lower the age of consent to 14. 3)desolve the irs for a flat tax. Just to name a few.

 

Okay, with the one I highlighted, why?

 

Last time I checked the national debt was $9 trillion. But the bulk of that is being generated through the war in Iraq and our other military exploits. Peace would be a lot cheaper in both the short and long run. I would generate most of it though corporate taxes and the windfalls the oil companies are enjoying.

And the only difference between being President and being here would be the number of people who love me and loath me.

One question. What did the people of Iraq do to us that makes you want to bomb them?

 

If I were president I would impose martial law immediately. I would then place all people groups I find undesirable (parking cops, mall security guards, anyone in a middle management position) under arrest. They would all be shipped to camps where they would be forced to watch every season of Dawson's Creek.

The coup de gras of my term in office would be shipping every emo or goth idiot I can find and sentencing them to one year of surviving without parental or government assistance in the southern Sudan.

People would be so stoked on me.

 

Guess my number was probably skewed... Can't remember where I found it at...

I'm all for getting rid of that debt personally, but didn't, now correct me if I'm wrong, Ben Franklin say "A healthy debt is a sign of a healthy nation"?

Though, 9 trillion isn't what I'd call healthy...

 

I'm not sure "a healthy debt is the sign of a healthy nation" sounds like something the author of Poor Richards Almanac would say but you could be right.

But the thing with $9 trillion national debt is it costs us (I think) something like $450 billion a year in interest alone. Plus most of that debt is owned by China which puts us at their economic mercy. And I think is was Strom Thurman who observed "a billion here and a billion there and pretty soon you're talking about real money."

 

So you go from a huge military/industrial complex to a huge health care industrial complex. Have you seen any government program ever that didn't skyrocket out of control in cost? Besides which, once the government is controlling my health coverage it won't be long before it's trying to control my behavior and they do enough of that already.

I believe this would have very limited benefits. Global terrorism is still a very large problem and it's not just centered in the United States and it was not created by our policies. You can't honestly deal with terrorism until you get at the roots of it and that is religion. It's not so simple as creating a softer, fuzzier version of the U.S.

That's fine as long as you're willing to suffer the recession that will follow as you put thousands upon thousands of people out of work, both soldiers and the companies that make the goods for the military. Also, as you close military bases, towns all over the country will dry up as the money that was keeping them alive is suddenly gone. So while you will indeed have cut spending, all that money you're saving is suddenly going to welfare so you're no better off.

Also you can't just throw money at the problem of poor countries. If you don't have the force to make sure that the money, food and medicines are properly distributed then it just goes in to the hands of the strong men that already control the reason so you're basically funding further genocides and allowing them to strengthen their control on their respective regions. Yet another socialist pipe dream that if you just have enough money all your problems will be solved.

And if you do go in to force them to adopt your policies, aren't you being a dreaded imperialist?

And if you still go in, where will you get the troops and the supplies to support them? You've cut the military to a skeleton crew and closed down or taxed in to closure the companies that were making the things the troops need.

Socialist drivel. What you're basically saying is you would nationalize the profits of companies you feel were too profitable and then redistribute that wealth to the poor. This is socialism that borders on communism.

I'm fine with coming down on companies that employ illegals. Once you've driven out the illegals because there is no longer a place for them to work, then you can invite them back under a simple guest worker program.

To sum up, you're going to tax the companies that make too much money (thus cutting industry and creating no industrial growth), put tens of thousands of people out of work (thereby eliminating a huge tax base both from the corporations and the people) cause a slow, withering death to towns all across America, create a national healthcare system for 300,000,000 people, along with an immense welfare system to go in tandem that will suck the treasure dry in record time, and then raise their taxes to round it off.

I'd assassinate you myself.

-S-

 

First let's do away with the silly notion that you are not a classic conservative ShakeZula.

Yes, I would go from the huge military/industrial complex to a nationalized health care system which would actually cut down on the run away health care costs, provide health care for everyone, and put more money into medical research, prevention programs which would eventually reduce all health care costs and increase the quality of life.

And how naive can you be? As if the government is not trying to control your behavior at this moment and has been for decades and will continue to do so in the future. But the problem is, that's where it ends. They want to preach how to be healthier and yet a huge part of the nation goes without health care. And there is a huge difference between what kind of health care individuals can receive simply due to our class system.

You also over look the benefits of putting more money into research and development of new medicines and treatments as well as creating many more jobs in the health care industry to offset jobs lost in the military industrial complex.

Yes I would most definitely reverse these percentages:

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Total Outlays (Federal Funds): $2,387 billion[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
MILITARY: 51% and $1,228 billion
NON-MILITARY: 49% and $1,159 billion [/FONT]​

*not_secure_link*www.warresisters.org/images/pieFY08.gif​

This statement is simply false. The problems in the Middle East that we are dealing with began with the exploitation of imperialism. Were made much worse by they way the Middle East was betrayed by the west following World War I, which included both the nations of Iraq and Iran. Pushed even further by the west exploitation of the huge Middle East's oil reserves, and the final straw of cramming the state of Israel down their throats and constantly supporting Israel no matter what they did at the expense of the all the other Arab states.

Those are the things that gave rise to the radical Muslims we are dealing with now and our current policies are radicalizing millions more since the war on terror began. You bet acknowledging those past mistakes, trying to correct them and pouring in humanitarian aid to rebuild those countries would most definitely, reduce the hatred towards the US and without the hatred there would be a handful of radical Muslims compared to the millions we are facing now.

What are we in right now ShakeZula? A recession. Why ShakeZula? Because the government has favored the special interests with phony credit programs like subprime loans and the inflation caused by runaway fuel costs. You keep over looking the other aspects of what I had to say. Which is the creation of millions of jobs when we make a concerted effort to switch from Mid East oil to biofuels and renewable energy sources. In this scenario research and development jobs, factory and refinery jobs and the savings in not only the cost of oil, but the savings of having the fuel sources close to the consumers that need them is huge.

And yes, I'm afraid that cutting the pork barrel projects and military bases is something that needs to be done. But again I don't see why they should be kept in existence just because that's the way its always been. They can also be converted to treatment centers, research and development centers and medical centers.

First throwing money at them has got to be more productive than throwing bombs and bullets at them. But here is the fallacy. We have thousands of silos bursting with grain and food that is just sitting there. Food and medicine are way cheaper that bullets bombs military personnel and war. The truth is we can bury the world with food and medicine reducing them to such common commodities that everyone has them and they are essentially worthless and uncontrollable.

And who said anything about forcing anyone or even asking them what their policies are. This is another area to put people to work right here on growing and processing more food and medicines and if we have to just carpet bomb hostile countries with those commodities.

On another thread we discussed mans inhumanity to man and the slaughter death and destruction of the Congo was well explained. All of it, the government instability, the warring factions, the rapes and murders spring from one common source; hunger. Eliminate the single cause and you eliminate all the other negative impacts they create and the US can do this so easily, by growing food instead of paying farmers subsidies not to grow food which is what is happening now.

Once again I never said one word about forcing anyone to do anything. It would not matter what form of government they had, what atrocities they are committing, who's in charge or what value they may have for us. As I said above if we had to we could send in the bombers and bomb them with food and medicine and stay the hell out of their countries and let them solve their own problems.

But any fool should be able to see if we feed people and help take care of them they will not hate us for it. And once their lives become less desperate so do the solutions they use.

See you just can't get past that right wing hawk mindset can you. We don't need troops in other nations to force anything. We are the richest nation on earth and can afford to feed the world if we want to.

Also your comment of taxing companies to closure is one of those Straw man arguments you detest so much. What I said was base taxes on corporations that have passed the threshold from healthy profits to extreme profiteering which is now largely possible through our governments support of greed.

Absolute Straw Man argument ShakeZula because I never said any such thing. What I said was increase taxes right along with the corporation's profit margin.The way the tax structure is set up now all it does is make the rich richer and encourage things like corporate CEO's who receive $150 severance packages for running a corporation into the ground. Everything we have now is designed for nothing more than making the rich richer at the expense of the majority of Americans to the point there is hardly a middle class in our nation any more, its just the rich and the poor.

And yest redistributing the wealth and putting it into new products, new programs and new manufacturing and small businesses would not only be a good idea, it is the only sane thing to do because how long do you think we can continue to allow 1% of the country to control 95% of the wealth at the expense of the other 99% of Americans.

I

This we are in absolute agreement on except you overlook the fact that the illegal immigration problem we are dealing with now is the precise result of the corporate greed and government protection I would work to eliminate.

BULLSHIT is all I can say to this, and point out how hypocritical it is of you not to have any faith in the free enterprise and capitalist philosophies you constantly expound. Cutting the greed out of corporations and the government doesn't hurt anyone but the greedy. Supplying our own fuel and petroleum products would create 100,000 of thousands of new businesses and millions of jobs. And new jobs that would be here not in foreign countries where people work for essentially salve wages.

Go back to the chart at the top of the post and you can easily see that once we curtail our war machine we have more than enough money to provide health care, not to mention the jobs, research and development and new cures and prevention for the diseases that plague us now. We've also got the new fronteer of outer space and the oceans to explore. Not to mention taking steps to save the planet which is the only place we have to live anyway.

Your arguments simply won't stand up in this instance because all you are doing is trying to protect and maintain the failing status quo, but I see you are willing to commit murder to do that.

Yep there you go. Killing people is the answer to everything.

 

Shake and Stumbles.. while both of ya have valid and intellectual points to make in this thread.. I think I'll stump both of ya with my suggestion..

I would make it compulsory for every adult to attend yearly 'sex ed' schools. Here they would learn how t'sex people up.. from 'Blowjobs 101' to 'The Importance of Lube - Advanced +'

 

Actually I really like this suggestion, and happen to think that sexual frustration and dissatisfaction are major contributors to the hostility aggression and violence in out society not to mention the thinking process of people like Bush/Cheney. And did I mention legalizing prostitution and other sex care professionals that would also be part of my agenda.

We'd be a much healthier nation if we just fucked a lot and feared not.

 

I've now got my 'prostitutin' myself for votes' head on.. so bear with me.. blame the OP fer this if yer gonna blame anyone..

Sexual frustration is more than just how many times ya get it.. this is where your 'party' lets the side down.. I'm talkin' about knowin' how t'give head.. and give it well.. how a guy can perform cunnilingus like he was doin' a turn at the royal opera house.. infront of her maj.. anyone can have sex.. but not everyone can get 'good sex'..

I'm speakin' from experience.. I've had both kinds..

 

And when the teacher said "Partner up!" I'd be the one fufilling my teacher student fantasy by waiting till the hot teacher was the only one left to partner up with!

 

See? I'm soo takin' over your country!

O.. Um.. I mean.. Lead it toward sexual freedom.. CD.. vote for me an' the teech would hafta have sex with the students at least once each per.. umm.. term..

Take a ticket an' go find a seat.. lol..

 

You are so right. And I've also had both, but when two people are doing things right its not just sex, and not even making love, its more like a symphony. And there are always new things to learn and try, new things to explore. There's more like a sexual universe instead of just a sex life.

Yeah I'd vote for symphonic fucking.

 

If I was elected I would only have men in my Government with smaller dicks than mine, and only women that wouldn't laugh at the size of it.

And in the interests of transparency, all parliamentary sessions and committees would be televised live, and everyone would be starkers.




PS There would be electronic lie detectors attached to everyone's wrists/appendages ready to provide electric shock treatment.

 

I love you folks that many of you (I´ve read it twice, that´s enough!) want to legalize same sex marriage!
I wonder how long it will take in the country I live in at the moment! Two of our neighbour allow it, we´re backwards!

 

Err...Stumbler, if you wanted to shatter the military/industrial complex, wouldn´t you end up just like J. F. Kennedy?
I saw the movie with Kevin Costner........Kennedy has obviously not been shot by a crazy communist.....
I don´t wanna derail again, I´m a typical derailer!

 

Actually if you've read ShakeZula's post its already been suggested, But I would take as many precautions as possible, and taking a page out of Bill Clinton's play book spend a lot in the Oval Office getting my cock sucked.

And same sex marriages? Sure. I'd push really hard to do away with all laws against victimless crimes and actually try live up to equality standards and get the government the fuck out of the bedroom.