I Just Got A Survey

The "Republican National Committee; 2009 Obama Agenda Survey"

It's a multiple choice deal: I am given Yes / No / No Opinion to choose from for my answers. My answer will appear and comments in parenthesis.

1. Do you agree with Barack Obama's budget plan that will lead to a $23.1 trillion defict over the next ten years?

No.

2. Do you believe that the federal government has gone too far in bailing out failing banks, insurance companies and the auto industry?

Yes. (I also don't think that this is purely a Democrat or Obama issue.)

3. Do you support amnesty for illegal immigrants?

No. (I also extend the welcome mat for any and all legal immigrants.)

4. Should English be the official language of the United States?

Yes. (Duplication of paperwork savings would be immense. It would also encourage immigrants into assimilating into our culture.)

5. Are you in favor of granting retroactive Social Security eligibility to illegal immigrants who gain U.S. citizenship through an amnesty program?

No. (I don't want them to be citizens in the first place!)

6. Are you in favor of the expanded welfare benefits and unlimited eligibility (no time, education or work requirements) that Democrats in Congress are puching to pass?
No. (I'm of the opinion that welfare is breaking our bank, expanding it will accelerate the process.)

7. Do you beleive that Barack Obama's nominees for federal courts should be immediately and unquestionably approved for their lifetime appointments by the U.S. Senate?

No. (The process should be the same regardless of who is president. If you are going to go through a nominee's life with a nit-comb, we do it to all nominees. If we rubber stamp, we rubber stamp for all.)

8. Do you believe that the best way to increase the quality and effectiveness of public education in the U.S. is to rapidly expand federal funding while eliminating performance standards and accountability?

No. (I want the feds out of education. What performance standards and accountability? I want k12 to be deunionized too!)

9. Do you support the creation of a national health insurance plan that would be administered by bureaucrats in Washington D.C.?

No. (Nor would I want a state health insurance plan that would be administered by bureaucrats in Tallahassee. Private would be just fine, and eliminate the state border as a barrier to competition between insurance companies.)

10. Do you believe that the quality and availability of healthcare will increase if the federal government dictates pricing to doctors and hospitals?
No. (More but harder does not work.)

11. Are you confident that new medicines and medical treatments will continue to be developed in the federal government controls prescription drug prices and sets profit margins for research and pharmaceutical companies?

No. (Socialism is dangerous. Fascism is dangerous. This is both.)

12. Are you in favor of creating a government funded "Citizen Volunteer Corps" that would pay young people to do work now done by churches and charities, earning Corps Members the same pay and benefits given to military veterans?

No. (When you hire them, they stop being volunteers. I don't like how they linked this to parity with veterans. Separate issue.)

13. Are you in favor of reinstituting the military draft, as Democrats in Congress have proposed?

No. (The all volunteer military we have now is far superior to the draft armies we used to have; for many reasons.)

14. Do you believe that the federal government should allow the unionization of Department of Homeland Security employees who serve in positions critical to the safety and security of our nation?

No. (I don't think any government employee at any level should be allowed to be in a union. Ever. Period.)

15. Do you support Democrat's drive to eliminate worker's right to a private ballot when considering unionization of their place of employment?

No. (The entire point of a private ballot is so the employee can vote their conscious without worry of retribution or sanction from the union organization or fellow employees!)

Comments Were Thus

11th-Oct-2009 04:24 pm (local)

chesterharvey97

I tend to agree with most of the answers Thag gave I did not get a questionaire. #6 we need more restrictions as it it is doesn't help the people that really need it. It only helps those that don't want help or to work for generation after generation. Very few people that go onto welfare ever get off. And when the average person does need a little help they don't qualify because of this. It isn't working. OVer half of my students were only in school because they had no choice it was go to school or get a job and you can be in school for a long time and still get benefits. #9 it sucks when you call for insurance and are told, we don't cover Florida. Well if Florida can't be covered then we should be allowed to go outside the sate borders to find it. I have a little confusion : why is it okay for the government employees to have a union but no others?

Reply Thread Link Delete Spam Screen Freeze Track This Select

14th-Oct-2009 12:34 pm (local)

anglave

First, let me say that I agree with essentially all of McThag's answers as given. Second, and the reason for this comment, it appears to me that this "survey" is highly slanted. So, though I did not receive the survey, here are my own answers: 1. I don't know enough about the specifics of President Obama's budget plan to agree or disagree with it. Though I suppose there will always be elements of any budget plan that I dislike. I also want to know who's estimate of the deficit is used and *stated in the question*. Even if I were fully in favor of the President's budget, and even if it were likely to reduce the deficit, quoting a huge deficit number "over the next ten years" would make it sound very negative. 2. Yes. I think a huge majority feels this way. But, as McThag points out, this isn't strictly an Obama or Democrat issue. This question might as well be "Do you like cake?". Most people are going to answer "yes". And they're going to subconsciously feel more in agreement with the sentiments of the survey writers. 3. No. However, I'm not sure "amnesty" is the right word here. From what I've read, President Obama has said he "favors legislation that would bring illegal immigrants into the legal system by recognizing that they violated the law, and imposing fines and other penalties to fit the offense. The legislation would seek to prevent future illegal immigration by strengthening border enforcement and cracking down on employers who hire illegal immigrants, while creating a national system for verifying the legal immigration status of new workers." So that plan sounds ok to me. Fewer illegals living in the US, stronger prevention of future illegal immigration, and a better system for legal working status verification. 4. Yep 5. This is the same question as #3, cleverly re-stated to threaten your social security benefits. 6. No, I'm not in favor of that. Is anyone? Seriously, someone suggested this in Congress? The question certainly implies that someone did, and in fact that it's a party plan. 7. Nope. We grill the nominees. As we have. I bet you can name at least two Obama nominees whose names you've picked up in the news recently specifically because they DID get raked over the coals. This question seems to imply that there is the widespread belief that President Obama's nominees are or should be "rubber stamped". I find that suspicious. 8. No. Does anyone? Does Obama, since that's what your question implies? 9. No. Does anyone? "Administered by the bureaucrats in Washington D.C?" Seriously? Can you find any American Citizen who would answer "yes" to this? 10. No. 11. No. Ok, that's three questions in a row about the evils of government administered health care. Is the Obama administration honestly plotting to put D.C. bureaucrats in charge of dictating pricing to doctors and hospitals, and in charge of prescription drug prices and profit margins? Because that's clearly what these questions imply. And no, I wouldn't support those actions. 12. It depends a lot on how it's done. I'm in favor of organizing volunteer (and possibly low-paying) work for our Nation's youth. There are a lot of civic and community benefits that could come from such a program. Learning the value of labor, community involvement and commitment, teamwork, pride. Obviously I'm not in favor of replacing existing volunteer community service organizations with a paid National organization, as the question implies. 13. No. So far as I'm aware, no one is. Rumors about reinstating the draft circulated pre-election. Few took them seriously then. Is anyone still talking about this as though it were an actual possibility? 14. No. 15. Huh? I'm completely ignorant of this issue. Could you provide a link, maybe? Dear McThag, I hope the above doesn't offend you. I in no way intend it as an attack. My first and strongest response to the "survey" was that it is actually "propaganda", and I wanted to point out why I see it that way. I respect, and for the most part agree with, your answers. It's the questions I distrust.

Reply Thread Link Delete Spam Screen Freeze Track This Select

14th-Oct-2009 01:38 pm (local)

mcthag

Critique of Anglave's answers. 1. There's a 23.1 trillion dollar plan you support? I don't support any $23.1 trillion debt budget. 2. 3. Illegal aliens have broken the law. There are procedures in place and punishments assigned to this transgression of the law. To not apply it to the people who have broken said law, prior to prosecution, is amnesty. The word is used correctly here, I think you are merely used to it being used incorrectly on the news. 4. 5. 6. Yes, Congress has suggested this; many times in fact. They have been progressively making more and more people eligible for years. If you steal from Peter to pay Paul you generally have the support of Paul. Once Paul is hooked on the product, he will vote for it to continue. 7. The reason this is asked is after going through every nominee from the Bush administrations with a fine tooth comb for eight years the current Congress doesn't want the current president's nominees to be subjected to the same scrutiny and are taking procedural steps to prevent the sort of vetting they pioneered way back in 1988. 8. There are bills that the president has indicated he would sign that do this. This is what the teacher's unions want and he owes them for their support. It's also just a continuation of a trend that's been happening since the Carter admin. 9. I can find some that do support it. Not many, and most are either already receiving government funded medical or just want someone else to pay their way. 10. 11. Maybe not Obama plotting, per se, but the Democrats are certainly trying and the president is the titular head of the party. I love how people address this like DC hasn't been dictating prices for years. What details we do have of the "we didn't read it" health care bill do indeed indicate that they will put D.C. bureaucrats in charge of dictating pricing to doctors and hospitals, and in charge of prescription drug prices and profit margins. 12. No, you are not obviously opposed. 13. Technically, with selective service registration we have a draft NOW. 14. 15. Look up "Employee Free Choice". I'd provide a link to a rebuttal of the plan, but you've said in other comments that I can't link you to biased sources and anyone with an opinion will be biased. ;) Essentially, to vote union, or not, is done with a secret ballot. Originally this was so the company could not take action against the employees who voted to organize. Now the unions are having trouble getting new businesses to organize and want to be able to influence the workers by seeing who voted for or against.