DIYbanter - View Single Post

pyotr filipivich

on Thu, 03 Jan 2013 10:07:24 -0500 typed in
rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 06:00:31 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:
Larry Jaques wrote:
Pete, how would you suggest that we vote for a candidate not of the

Unfortunately, close doesn't count. We have to find better people to
run for office, and make sure they don't have a million skeletons in
their closet. How about requiring a top secret clearance before someone
can run for any office? That would scare the **** out of 99.99% of
potential candidates.

Running for a public office requires a lot of money. Do you think the
special interest groups with the money will ever fund a candidate who
will oppose their agendas in any way?

Two other issues: political contributions were capped in 1974.
They have not been increased since then for inflation. $2,500 Dollars
in 1974 would be $11, 600 dollars in 2012. What that means is that a)
you can't give a candidate a million dollars (or 4 million) with the
expectation of a visit to the White House, or maybe an Ambassadorship.
B) it takes longer to raise a million bucks 2,500 dollars at a time,
than 11,000 dollars at a time. Which is why candidates spend so much
time at fund raisers.
Secondly, the PACs have had a bad effect on party structures. Why
give money to the Party, when you can give it to the Candidate, or to
a PAC for the Candidate? With SUperPACs, now you can spend all you
want, as long as you do not co-ordinate with the campaign, wink, wink,
nudge, nudge, say no more, eh?
--
pyotr filipivich
Question for the gun Control advocates, "Do you agree with
this statement?"
"I would rather have a society without guns, even if it
means that people cannot defend themselves against murder
(with other weapons), rape, robbery, and assault. I would
rather make everyone defenseless than have to endure the
mass shootings that occasionally occur. If that means that
many more people, (particularly the old, the weak, and the
infirm) are subjected to these violent crimes, then so be
it. They'll just have to suffer more. I do claim the power
to dictate whether or not others are able to defend themselves."