My Interview With DarkWind

[Pumpkin Row]

Darkwind

Sorry I'm putting this interview up late, I had a long night and ended up sleeping instead.

Remember that if at any point, you don't want to answer a question, please just say "Pass". I'll ask a few questions at a time, if you think I'm asking too many or too few at once, you can ask me to increase or decrease the amount at any time.

I'll ask a few repeat questions to get a reading on your stances, and then continue from there.

Hypethetically, if you ran in the most recent election, which party would you run as part of? Why?

If you had to choose a member of the forum as your running mate, who would you choose? Why? If you weren't limited to a member of the forum, then who would you choose? Why?

Assuming you won the election, what would you do in your first 100 days, and what would your ultimate goal for your first term be? Why?

What would your response to ISIS be? Why?

What's your opinion on the current state of our education system? Why?

 

[Darkwind]

Darkwind

Sorry I'm putting this interview up late, I had a long night and ended up sleeping instead.

Remember that if at any point, you don't want to answer a question, please just say "Pass". I'll ask a few questions at a time, if you think I'm asking too many or too few at once, you can ask me to increase or decrease the amount at any time.

I'll ask a few repeat questions to get a reading on your stances, and then continue from there.

Hypethetically, if you ran in the most recent election, which party would you run as part of? Why?

If you had to choose a member of the forum as your running mate, who would you choose? Why? If you weren't limited to a member of the forum, then who would you choose? Why?

Assuming you won the election, what would you do in your first 100 days, and what would your ultimate goal for your first term be? Why?

What would your response to ISIS be? Why?

What's your opinion on the current state of our education system? Why?

Give Me a bit. I have to do a few other things tonight. Tomorrow for sure.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I am waiting with baited breath.....

















Maybe beer breath but what's the difference on the internet?

 

[Pumpkin Row]

I thought I specifically said that people could just reply whenever. I never said these were live interviews...

 

[Darkwind]

Darkwind

Sorry I'm putting this interview up late, I had a long night and ended up sleeping instead.

Remember that if at any point, you don't want to answer a question, please just say "Pass". I'll ask a few questions at a time, if you think I'm asking too many or too few at once, you can ask me to increase or decrease the amount at any time.

I'll ask a few repeat questions to get a reading on your stances, and then continue from there.

Hypethetically, if you ran in the most recent election, which party would you run as part of? Why?

If you had to choose a member of the forum as your running mate, who would you choose? Why? If you weren't limited to a member of the forum, then who would you choose? Why?

Assuming you won the election, what would you do in your first 100 days, and what would your ultimate goal for your first term be? Why?

What would your response to ISIS be? Why?

What's your opinion on the current state of our education system? Why?

Let Me try that again.

Hypothetically, if you ran in the most recent election, which party would you run as part of? Why?

I’ll take this question as a reference to the recent Presidential election since that would have the most reach to a forum like this one. No one here would be particularly interested in what I would do as a local congressman or state senator.

There is no specific party that I agree with 100% and a few that I could agree with a few items on issues. Given that the setup of today’s election process requires participation in one of the four major political parties, I would likely run as an Independent.

I would register as an Independent, but make it clear to them when I won their nomination that I would be advancing my own political platform. The reason I would not choose any of the other parties is the power structure. There are far too players in these parties whose sole interest is in maintaining their hold on power and the money that flow into these parties. If I could, I would declare the run for President without a party affiliation, but that isn’t realistic until major reformations happen.

If you had to choose a member of the forum as your running mate, who would you choose? Why?

I think that I would choose Foxfyre. She brings a foundational level of common sense to any policy thought process and is able to articulate her reasoning on any issue well. She would also provide a solid counterweight to me as I tend to want to get something done, rather than wait until all the facts are available before acting.

If you weren't limited to a member of the forum, then who would you choose? Why?

I would likely ask Ted Cruz or Carly Fiorina as a running mate if I had to choose among the current nationally known names. Carly for the same reason I would pick Foxfyre. She shows a practical side that stems from a solid foundation of common sense and isn’t really cowed by people who disagree with her. Ted Cruz because in the world of Washington D.C., it always pays to have a lawyer who also understands the game being played in the Congress.

Assuming you won the election, what would you do in your first 100 days, and what would your ultimate goal for your first term be? Why?

If you look at the history of the first 100 days of a President, you’ll see that it was an arbitrary milestone set on the basis of FDR and related to what he would do during a single 100-day session of the Congress.

The first hundred days of the first-term presidency of a President of the United States are sometimes used to measure the successes and accomplishments of a president during the time that the president's power and influence are at their greatest.[1] The term was coined in a July 24, 1933, radio address by U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt, although he was referring to the 100-day session of the 73rd United States Congress between March 9 and June 17, rather than the first 100 days of his administration.[1][2]

First hundred days - Wikipedia

I’m not a big believer in the milestone itself. Too much of what the President can and cannot do is outlined by the Constitution and opposition in the Congress. Which ties into what I would try to accomplish as President and the President’s role in our government. To understand what I would do in my first 100 days you’d have to understand how I view the office of the President.

My candidacy and Presidency would hinge on the philosophy that the federal government is primarily a tool of the people to represent the United States to the nations of the world. My first 100 days would be heavy on foreign policy that promotes and defends the United States ahead of all other nations. I would be the kind of President who would refer social issues to the States because that is not the role of the federal government. To that end, I would:

Provide the President's budget request with the following guidelines.

• Baseline budgeting is to be eliminated from the budget. Each department of the federal government must provide documentation on the effectiveness of their program and they are not to assume that spending 100% of their budget in the previous FY is a guarantee that they will receive their funding request. Under no circumstance should a budget start with an immediate increase.
• Money spent on other nations would as a means of diplomacy come to an end. The money would be made available to aid in times of disaster and for humanitarian relief. However, no money will be given to any nation that does not have a government that has been elected by the people and has in place, some form of legal and binding limitations on the power of that government. It does not have to be a Constitution, per se, but there must be a way that elected representatives can be removed from office after due process. I would watch carefully any and all elections in which the winner is the winner because people would be killed if they did not vote for him or her.
• I would direct the DoD to come up with a plan that allows them to maintain bases in regional sections of the world if that base would provide cover for our interests in the world. Any nation in which we held a base that does duty as a defense of that nation as well as promoting our interests, would have to provide monetary compensation for their defense. Any land used for a United States base would not be leased, but purchased from the host nation and become sovereign U.S. Soil. I would also direct the DoD to review all programs and do away with obsolete systems in favor of more modern systems that place us at an overall overwhelming advantage against any three enemies we may face.
• I would begin a four-year program of reducing the budget of every department by 15% a year for each of the first four years (with the exception of the defense department which would be required to find 15% a year in fraud, waste, and abuse cuts to their budget. If they fail to meet this requirement, they would face a review in which the difference between the FW&A cuts was not met would be debited against their overall budget for that year.
• Finally, no budget would be enacted that was more than one fiscal year in advance. I would put an end to the ten-year budget projections.

All spending cut savings would be applied to the national debt and no tax decrease would be enacted until such time as the debt was paid.

I would work with Congress on fair and balanced oversight with regard to commerce between the States (That is their function in our government) but leave social issues up to the States and make it known that the federal government’s budget is not a slush fund for social engineering projects.

I would ensure that our commitments to our vets and the promises made to them came before any benefit to the States or special interest groups would be considered.


This would be the bulk of the first term and first 100 days. As you can see, it is focused primarily on those specific duties of the President, who is first and foremost, the chief law enforcement authority and representative of our nation to the world. The duties and responsibilities would be focused on what is best for America and nothing else.

What would your response to ISIS

If ISIS had not demonstrated an ability to touch any nation on this planet with its ability to export terrorists, I would have promoted a policy to isolate Syria with support to the surrounding nations to keep them in check and let them kill each other. However, they have demonstrated that they have powerful allies in Turkey, Iran, and a few other nations willing to give them access to resources they would not normally have. I would charge the leaders of the US Military to come up with a strategy that can pen them into the confines of the geography, but barring that I would run a full sweep of the entire country with an overwhelming aerial campaign of known ISIS strongholds. I would be all for putting tactical troops on the ground in an effort to cull the ISIS members from the civilian population. However, My terms of the rules of engagement are that our troops are to engage the enemy wherever they can be found and to defend themselves at all costs without requiring permission first. In fact, the entire issue is far too complicated for a simple policy statement, but you did ask.

What’s your opinion on the current state of our education system? Why?

Again, this is a very broad topic and difficult to encapsulate in a simple policy statement. The United States spends more per pupil than any other nation on the planet, and we rank poorly for that expense. The problem with education is that it straddles two concerns with regard to the United States.

States rights.

Education is a states rights issue and with regard to problems in educating young people, often adheres to social concepts associated with regional values. The States struggle to bring timely and appropriate educational techniques and materials to the students because of resource dampening regulations forced upon them by an uncaring and distant educational overseer; The federal government. Each State should be permitted to set their educational goals for their citizens, with a minimum of educational standards that they must adhere too.

Education as a security issue for the United States.

An educated populace benefits everyone, but more importantly, and educated populace also promotes an ability by the citizens to recognize threats to the security and sovereignty of the country. Give we are a nation that governs ourselves from electing people from the population, it is in our best interests to have a population that can think critically, weight historical mistakes against current policy, promote good education in succeeding generations, and prosper in the day to day life we all have to manage. To this end, I would propose a conclave of individuals who would be representatives from each state to be commissioned to define the goals of education in America. These goals would be to determine what it is we are educating our young people to do with regard to vocation and State needs, and what the national standard for achieving success in these goals would be.

This of course, merely scratches the surface of what is at stake for this issue, but the single most important aspect of this policy is to ensure that it is not the interests of national politicians that are being met, but those of the people.

If you wish to get a more in-depth response on this or any other issue as it pertains to how I would act if I won the Presidency, may I suggest you limit the topic/issue to one or two? Many issues would require a detailed answer on current practices, personal moral choice, and vision of what should be done that could run to five or ten thousand words answers. This reply alone is over 1900 words and it touches on just surface thoughts that are condensed into summary policy.

Thanks.

 

[Foxfyre]

Darkwind

Sorry I'm putting this interview up late, I had a long night and ended up sleeping instead.

Remember that if at any point, you don't want to answer a question, please just say "Pass". I'll ask a few questions at a time, if you think I'm asking too many or too few at once, you can ask me to increase or decrease the amount at any time.

I'll ask a few repeat questions to get a reading on your stances, and then continue from there.

Hypethetically, if you ran in the most recent election, which party would you run as part of? Why?

If you had to choose a member of the forum as your running mate, who would you choose? Why? If you weren't limited to a member of the forum, then who would you choose? Why?

Assuming you won the election, what would you do in your first 100 days, and what would your ultimate goal for your first term be? Why?

What would your response to ISIS be? Why?

What's your opinion on the current state of our education system? Why?

Let Me try that again.

Hypothetically, if you ran in the most recent election, which party would you run as part of? Why?

I’ll take this question as a reference to the recent Presidential election since that would have the most reach to a forum like this one. No one here would be particularly interested in what I would do as a local congressman or state senator.

There is no specific party that I agree with 100% and a few that I could agree with a few items on issues. Given that the setup of today’s election process requires participation in one of the four major political parties, I would likely run as an Independent.

I would register as an Independent, but make it clear to them when I won their nomination that I would be advancing my own political platform. The reason I would not choose any of the other parties is the power structure. There are far too players in these parties whose sole interest is in maintaining their hold on power and the money that flow into these parties. If I could, I would declare the run for President without a party affiliation, but that isn’t realistic until major reformations happen.

If you had to choose a member of the forum as your running mate, who would you choose? Why?

I think that I would choose Foxfyre. She brings a foundational level of common sense to any policy thought process and is able to articulate her reasoning on any issue well. She would also provide a solid counterweight to me as I tend to want to get something done, rather than wait until all the facts are available before acting.

If you weren't limited to a member of the forum, then who would you choose? Why?

I would likely ask Ted Cruz or Carly Fiorina as a running mate if I had to choose among the current nationally known names. Carly for the same reason I would pick Foxfyre. She shows a practical side that stems from a solid foundation of common sense and isn’t really cowed by people who disagree with her. Ted Cruz because in the world of Washington D.C., it always pays to have a lawyer who also understands the game being played in the Congress.

Assuming you won the election, what would you do in your first 100 days, and what would your ultimate goal for your first term be? Why?

If you look at the history of the first 100 days of a President, you’ll see that it was an arbitrary milestone set on the basis of FDR and related to what he would do during a single 100-day session of the Congress.

The first hundred days of the first-term presidency of a President of the United States are sometimes used to measure the successes and accomplishments of a president during the time that the president's power and influence are at their greatest.[1] The term was coined in a July 24, 1933, radio address by U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt, although he was referring to the 100-day session of the 73rd United States Congress between March 9 and June 17, rather than the first 100 days of his administration.[1][2]

First hundred days - Wikipedia

I’m not a big believer in the milestone itself. Too much of what the President can and cannot do is outlined by the Constitution and opposition in the Congress. Which ties into what I would try to accomplish as President and the President’s role in our government. To understand what I would do in my first 100 days you’d have to understand how I view the office of the President.

My candidacy and Presidency would hinge on the philosophy that the federal government is primarily a tool of the people to represent the United States to the nations of the world. My first 100 days would be heavy on foreign policy that promotes and defends the United States ahead of all other nations. I would be the kind of President who would refer social issues to the States because that is not the role of the federal government. To that end, I would:

Provide the President's budget request with the following guidelines.

• Baseline budgeting is to be eliminated from the budget. Each department of the federal government must provide documentation on the effectiveness of their program and they are not to assume that spending 100% of their budget in the previous FY is a guarantee that they will receive their funding request. Under no circumstance should a budget start with an immediate increase.
• Money spent on other nations would as a means of diplomacy come to an end. The money would be made available to aid in times of disaster and for humanitarian relief. However, no money will be given to any nation that does not have a government that has been elected by the people and has in place, some form of legal and binding limitations on the power of that government. It does not have to be a Constitution, per se, but there must be a way that elected representatives can be removed from office after due process. I would watch carefully any and all elections in which the winner is the winner because people would be killed if they did not vote for him or her.
• I would direct the DoD to come up with a plan that allows them to maintain bases in regional sections of the world if that base would provide cover for our interests in the world. Any nation in which we held a base that does duty as a defense of that nation as well as promoting our interests, would have to provide monetary compensation for their defense. Any land used for a United States base would not be leased, but purchased from the host nation and become sovereign U.S. Soil. I would also direct the DoD to review all programs and do away with obsolete systems in favor of more modern systems that place us at an overall overwhelming advantage against any three enemies we may face.
• I would begin a four-year program of reducing the budget of every department by 15% a year for each of the first four years (with the exception of the defense department which would be required to find 15% a year in fraud, waste, and abuse cuts to their budget. If they fail to meet this requirement, they would face a review in which the difference between the FW&A cuts was not met would be debited against their overall budget for that year.
• Finally, no budget would be enacted that was more than one fiscal year in advance. I would put an end to the ten-year budget projections.

All spending cut savings would be applied to the national debt and no tax decrease would be enacted until such time as the debt was paid.

I would work with Congress on fair and balanced oversight with regard to commerce between the States (That is their function in our government) but leave social issues up to the States and make it known that the federal government’s budget is not a slush fund for social engineering projects.

I would ensure that our commitments to our vets and the promises made to them came before any benefit to the States or special interest groups would be considered.


This would be the bulk of the first term and first 100 days. As you can see, it is focused primarily on those specific duties of the President, who is first and foremost, the chief law enforcement authority and representative of our nation to the world. The duties and responsibilities would be focused on what is best for America and nothing else.

What would your response to ISIS

If ISIS had not demonstrated an ability to touch any nation on this planet with its ability to export terrorists, I would have promoted a policy to isolate Syria with support to the surrounding nations to keep them in check and let them kill each other. However, they have demonstrated that they have powerful allies in Turkey, Iran, and a few other nations willing to give them access to resources they would not normally have. I would charge the leaders of the US Military to come up with a strategy that can pen them into the confines of the geography, but barring that I would run a full sweep of the entire country with an overwhelming aerial campaign of known ISIS strongholds. I would be all for putting tactical troops on the ground in an effort to cull the ISIS members from the civilian population. However, My terms of the rules of engagement are that our troops are to engage the enemy wherever they can be found and to defend themselves at all costs without requiring permission first. In fact, the entire issue is far too complicated for a simple policy statement, but you did ask.

What’s your opinion on the current state of our education system? Why?

Again, this is a very broad topic and difficult to encapsulate in a simple policy statement. The United States spends more per pupil than any other nation on the planet, and we rank poorly for that expense. The problem with education is that it straddles two concerns with regard to the United States.

States rights.

Education is a states rights issue and with regard to problems in educating young people, often adheres to social concepts associated with regional values. The States struggle to bring timely and appropriate educational techniques and materials to the students because of resource dampening regulations forced upon them by an uncaring and distant educational overseer; The federal government. Each State should be permitted to set their educational goals for their citizens, with a minimum of educational standards that they must adhere too.

Education as a security issue for the United States.

An educated populace benefits everyone, but more importantly, and educated populace also promotes an ability by the citizens to recognize threats to the security and sovereignty of the country. Give we are a nation that governs ourselves from electing people from the population, it is in our best interests to have a population that can think critically, weight historical mistakes against current policy, promote good education in succeeding generations, and prosper in the day to day life we all have to manage. To this end, I would propose a conclave of individuals who would be representatives from each state to be commissioned to define the goals of education in America. These goals would be to determine what it is we are educating our young people to do with regard to vocation and State needs, and what the national standard for achieving success in these goals would be.

This of course, merely scratches the surface of what is at stake for this issue, but the single most important aspect of this policy is to ensure that it is not the interests of national politicians that are being met, but those of the people.

If you wish to get a more in-depth response on this or any other issue as it pertains to how I would act if I won the Presidency, may I suggest you limit the topic/issue to one or two? Many issues would require a detailed answer on current practices, personal moral choice, and vision of what should be done that could run to five or ten thousand words answers. This reply alone is over 1900 words and it touches on just surface thoughts that are condensed into summary policy.

Thanks.

Well I'm honored to be included and based on the platform you outlined, I think I would likely enter into serious negotiations with you and if we were clear on a couple of things, I would accept.

One thing I would insist on running as an independent, however, is to form our own organizational structure be that Tea Party or Reform Party or Independence Party or whatever we chose to call it because a strong grass roots structure in every state would be necessary to win the election AND put enough pressure on the permanent political class in Congress to work with us or else.

I am talking not a coup here, but a bloodless revolution with the intent of restoring the constitutional core and intent for the republic.

Still want me?

 

[Darkwind]

Darkwind

Sorry I'm putting this interview up late, I had a long night and ended up sleeping instead.

Remember that if at any point, you don't want to answer a question, please just say "Pass". I'll ask a few questions at a time, if you think I'm asking too many or too few at once, you can ask me to increase or decrease the amount at any time.

I'll ask a few repeat questions to get a reading on your stances, and then continue from there.

Hypethetically, if you ran in the most recent election, which party would you run as part of? Why?

If you had to choose a member of the forum as your running mate, who would you choose? Why? If you weren't limited to a member of the forum, then who would you choose? Why?

Assuming you won the election, what would you do in your first 100 days, and what would your ultimate goal for your first term be? Why?

What would your response to ISIS be? Why?

What's your opinion on the current state of our education system? Why?

Let Me try that again.

Hypothetically, if you ran in the most recent election, which party would you run as part of? Why?

I’ll take this question as a reference to the recent Presidential election since that would have the most reach to a forum like this one. No one here would be particularly interested in what I would do as a local congressman or state senator.

There is no specific party that I agree with 100% and a few that I could agree with a few items on issues. Given that the setup of today’s election process requires participation in one of the four major political parties, I would likely run as an Independent.

I would register as an Independent, but make it clear to them when I won their nomination that I would be advancing my own political platform. The reason I would not choose any of the other parties is the power structure. There are far too players in these parties whose sole interest is in maintaining their hold on power and the money that flow into these parties. If I could, I would declare the run for President without a party affiliation, but that isn’t realistic until major reformations happen.

If you had to choose a member of the forum as your running mate, who would you choose? Why?

I think that I would choose Foxfyre. She brings a foundational level of common sense to any policy thought process and is able to articulate her reasoning on any issue well. She would also provide a solid counterweight to me as I tend to want to get something done, rather than wait until all the facts are available before acting.

If you weren't limited to a member of the forum, then who would you choose? Why?

I would likely ask Ted Cruz or Carly Fiorina as a running mate if I had to choose among the current nationally known names. Carly for the same reason I would pick Foxfyre. She shows a practical side that stems from a solid foundation of common sense and isn’t really cowed by people who disagree with her. Ted Cruz because in the world of Washington D.C., it always pays to have a lawyer who also understands the game being played in the Congress.

Assuming you won the election, what would you do in your first 100 days, and what would your ultimate goal for your first term be? Why?

If you look at the history of the first 100 days of a President, you’ll see that it was an arbitrary milestone set on the basis of FDR and related to what he would do during a single 100-day session of the Congress.

The first hundred days of the first-term presidency of a President of the United States are sometimes used to measure the successes and accomplishments of a president during the time that the president's power and influence are at their greatest.[1] The term was coined in a July 24, 1933, radio address by U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt, although he was referring to the 100-day session of the 73rd United States Congress between March 9 and June 17, rather than the first 100 days of his administration.[1][2]

First hundred days - Wikipedia

I’m not a big believer in the milestone itself. Too much of what the President can and cannot do is outlined by the Constitution and opposition in the Congress. Which ties into what I would try to accomplish as President and the President’s role in our government. To understand what I would do in my first 100 days you’d have to understand how I view the office of the President.

My candidacy and Presidency would hinge on the philosophy that the federal government is primarily a tool of the people to represent the United States to the nations of the world. My first 100 days would be heavy on foreign policy that promotes and defends the United States ahead of all other nations. I would be the kind of President who would refer social issues to the States because that is not the role of the federal government. To that end, I would:

Provide the President's budget request with the following guidelines.

• Baseline budgeting is to be eliminated from the budget. Each department of the federal government must provide documentation on the effectiveness of their program and they are not to assume that spending 100% of their budget in the previous FY is a guarantee that they will receive their funding request. Under no circumstance should a budget start with an immediate increase.
• Money spent on other nations would as a means of diplomacy come to an end. The money would be made available to aid in times of disaster and for humanitarian relief. However, no money will be given to any nation that does not have a government that has been elected by the people and has in place, some form of legal and binding limitations on the power of that government. It does not have to be a Constitution, per se, but there must be a way that elected representatives can be removed from office after due process. I would watch carefully any and all elections in which the winner is the winner because people would be killed if they did not vote for him or her.
• I would direct the DoD to come up with a plan that allows them to maintain bases in regional sections of the world if that base would provide cover for our interests in the world. Any nation in which we held a base that does duty as a defense of that nation as well as promoting our interests, would have to provide monetary compensation for their defense. Any land used for a United States base would not be leased, but purchased from the host nation and become sovereign U.S. Soil. I would also direct the DoD to review all programs and do away with obsolete systems in favor of more modern systems that place us at an overall overwhelming advantage against any three enemies we may face.
• I would begin a four-year program of reducing the budget of every department by 15% a year for each of the first four years (with the exception of the defense department which would be required to find 15% a year in fraud, waste, and abuse cuts to their budget. If they fail to meet this requirement, they would face a review in which the difference between the FW&A cuts was not met would be debited against their overall budget for that year.
• Finally, no budget would be enacted that was more than one fiscal year in advance. I would put an end to the ten-year budget projections.

All spending cut savings would be applied to the national debt and no tax decrease would be enacted until such time as the debt was paid.

I would work with Congress on fair and balanced oversight with regard to commerce between the States (That is their function in our government) but leave social issues up to the States and make it known that the federal government’s budget is not a slush fund for social engineering projects.

I would ensure that our commitments to our vets and the promises made to them came before any benefit to the States or special interest groups would be considered.


This would be the bulk of the first term and first 100 days. As you can see, it is focused primarily on those specific duties of the President, who is first and foremost, the chief law enforcement authority and representative of our nation to the world. The duties and responsibilities would be focused on what is best for America and nothing else.

What would your response to ISIS

If ISIS had not demonstrated an ability to touch any nation on this planet with its ability to export terrorists, I would have promoted a policy to isolate Syria with support to the surrounding nations to keep them in check and let them kill each other. However, they have demonstrated that they have powerful allies in Turkey, Iran, and a few other nations willing to give them access to resources they would not normally have. I would charge the leaders of the US Military to come up with a strategy that can pen them into the confines of the geography, but barring that I would run a full sweep of the entire country with an overwhelming aerial campaign of known ISIS strongholds. I would be all for putting tactical troops on the ground in an effort to cull the ISIS members from the civilian population. However, My terms of the rules of engagement are that our troops are to engage the enemy wherever they can be found and to defend themselves at all costs without requiring permission first. In fact, the entire issue is far too complicated for a simple policy statement, but you did ask.

What’s your opinion on the current state of our education system? Why?

Again, this is a very broad topic and difficult to encapsulate in a simple policy statement. The United States spends more per pupil than any other nation on the planet, and we rank poorly for that expense. The problem with education is that it straddles two concerns with regard to the United States.

States rights.

Education is a states rights issue and with regard to problems in educating young people, often adheres to social concepts associated with regional values. The States struggle to bring timely and appropriate educational techniques and materials to the students because of resource dampening regulations forced upon them by an uncaring and distant educational overseer; The federal government. Each State should be permitted to set their educational goals for their citizens, with a minimum of educational standards that they must adhere too.

Education as a security issue for the United States.

An educated populace benefits everyone, but more importantly, and educated populace also promotes an ability by the citizens to recognize threats to the security and sovereignty of the country. Give we are a nation that governs ourselves from electing people from the population, it is in our best interests to have a population that can think critically, weight historical mistakes against current policy, promote good education in succeeding generations, and prosper in the day to day life we all have to manage. To this end, I would propose a conclave of individuals who would be representatives from each state to be commissioned to define the goals of education in America. These goals would be to determine what it is we are educating our young people to do with regard to vocation and State needs, and what the national standard for achieving success in these goals would be.

This of course, merely scratches the surface of what is at stake for this issue, but the single most important aspect of this policy is to ensure that it is not the interests of national politicians that are being met, but those of the people.

If you wish to get a more in-depth response on this or any other issue as it pertains to how I would act if I won the Presidency, may I suggest you limit the topic/issue to one or two? Many issues would require a detailed answer on current practices, personal moral choice, and vision of what should be done that could run to five or ten thousand words answers. This reply alone is over 1900 words and it touches on just surface thoughts that are condensed into summary policy.

Thanks.

Well I'm honored to be included and based on the platform you outlined, I think I would likely enter into serious negotiations with you and if we were clear on a couple of things, I would accept.

One thing I would insist on running as an independent, however, is to form our own organizational structure be that Tea Party or Reform Party or Independence Party or whatever we chose to call it because a strong grass roots structure in every state would be necessary to win the election AND put enough pressure on the permanent political class in Congress to work with us or else.

I am talking not a coup here, but a bloodless revolution with the intent of restoring the constitutional core and intent for the republic.

Still want me?

Hmmm......Do you like grilling?

We definitely could get into some negotiations over a platform. There are a few items on the T.E.A. Party and Reform Party platforms I don't really adhere to ('d have to go look them up again because I haven't been to their websites in a while) but I'm sure we could find some common ground.

 

[Foxfyre]

Darkwind

Sorry I'm putting this interview up late, I had a long night and ended up sleeping instead.

Remember that if at any point, you don't want to answer a question, please just say "Pass". I'll ask a few questions at a time, if you think I'm asking too many or too few at once, you can ask me to increase or decrease the amount at any time.

I'll ask a few repeat questions to get a reading on your stances, and then continue from there.

Hypethetically, if you ran in the most recent election, which party would you run as part of? Why?

If you had to choose a member of the forum as your running mate, who would you choose? Why? If you weren't limited to a member of the forum, then who would you choose? Why?

Assuming you won the election, what would you do in your first 100 days, and what would your ultimate goal for your first term be? Why?

What would your response to ISIS be? Why?

What's your opinion on the current state of our education system? Why?

Let Me try that again.

Hypothetically, if you ran in the most recent election, which party would you run as part of? Why?

I’ll take this question as a reference to the recent Presidential election since that would have the most reach to a forum like this one. No one here would be particularly interested in what I would do as a local congressman or state senator.

There is no specific party that I agree with 100% and a few that I could agree with a few items on issues. Given that the setup of today’s election process requires participation in one of the four major political parties, I would likely run as an Independent.

I would register as an Independent, but make it clear to them when I won their nomination that I would be advancing my own political platform. The reason I would not choose any of the other parties is the power structure. There are far too players in these parties whose sole interest is in maintaining their hold on power and the money that flow into these parties. If I could, I would declare the run for President without a party affiliation, but that isn’t realistic until major reformations happen.

If you had to choose a member of the forum as your running mate, who would you choose? Why?

I think that I would choose Foxfyre. She brings a foundational level of common sense to any policy thought process and is able to articulate her reasoning on any issue well. She would also provide a solid counterweight to me as I tend to want to get something done, rather than wait until all the facts are available before acting.

If you weren't limited to a member of the forum, then who would you choose? Why?

I would likely ask Ted Cruz or Carly Fiorina as a running mate if I had to choose among the current nationally known names. Carly for the same reason I would pick Foxfyre. She shows a practical side that stems from a solid foundation of common sense and isn’t really cowed by people who disagree with her. Ted Cruz because in the world of Washington D.C., it always pays to have a lawyer who also understands the game being played in the Congress.

Assuming you won the election, what would you do in your first 100 days, and what would your ultimate goal for your first term be? Why?

If you look at the history of the first 100 days of a President, you’ll see that it was an arbitrary milestone set on the basis of FDR and related to what he would do during a single 100-day session of the Congress.

The first hundred days of the first-term presidency of a President of the United States are sometimes used to measure the successes and accomplishments of a president during the time that the president's power and influence are at their greatest.[1] The term was coined in a July 24, 1933, radio address by U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt, although he was referring to the 100-day session of the 73rd United States Congress between March 9 and June 17, rather than the first 100 days of his administration.[1][2]

First hundred days - Wikipedia

I’m not a big believer in the milestone itself. Too much of what the President can and cannot do is outlined by the Constitution and opposition in the Congress. Which ties into what I would try to accomplish as President and the President’s role in our government. To understand what I would do in my first 100 days you’d have to understand how I view the office of the President.

My candidacy and Presidency would hinge on the philosophy that the federal government is primarily a tool of the people to represent the United States to the nations of the world. My first 100 days would be heavy on foreign policy that promotes and defends the United States ahead of all other nations. I would be the kind of President who would refer social issues to the States because that is not the role of the federal government. To that end, I would:

Provide the President's budget request with the following guidelines.

• Baseline budgeting is to be eliminated from the budget. Each department of the federal government must provide documentation on the effectiveness of their program and they are not to assume that spending 100% of their budget in the previous FY is a guarantee that they will receive their funding request. Under no circumstance should a budget start with an immediate increase.
• Money spent on other nations would as a means of diplomacy come to an end. The money would be made available to aid in times of disaster and for humanitarian relief. However, no money will be given to any nation that does not have a government that has been elected by the people and has in place, some form of legal and binding limitations on the power of that government. It does not have to be a Constitution, per se, but there must be a way that elected representatives can be removed from office after due process. I would watch carefully any and all elections in which the winner is the winner because people would be killed if they did not vote for him or her.
• I would direct the DoD to come up with a plan that allows them to maintain bases in regional sections of the world if that base would provide cover for our interests in the world. Any nation in which we held a base that does duty as a defense of that nation as well as promoting our interests, would have to provide monetary compensation for their defense. Any land used for a United States base would not be leased, but purchased from the host nation and become sovereign U.S. Soil. I would also direct the DoD to review all programs and do away with obsolete systems in favor of more modern systems that place us at an overall overwhelming advantage against any three enemies we may face.
• I would begin a four-year program of reducing the budget of every department by 15% a year for each of the first four years (with the exception of the defense department which would be required to find 15% a year in fraud, waste, and abuse cuts to their budget. If they fail to meet this requirement, they would face a review in which the difference between the FW&A cuts was not met would be debited against their overall budget for that year.
• Finally, no budget would be enacted that was more than one fiscal year in advance. I would put an end to the ten-year budget projections.

All spending cut savings would be applied to the national debt and no tax decrease would be enacted until such time as the debt was paid.

I would work with Congress on fair and balanced oversight with regard to commerce between the States (That is their function in our government) but leave social issues up to the States and make it known that the federal government’s budget is not a slush fund for social engineering projects.

I would ensure that our commitments to our vets and the promises made to them came before any benefit to the States or special interest groups would be considered.


This would be the bulk of the first term and first 100 days. As you can see, it is focused primarily on those specific duties of the President, who is first and foremost, the chief law enforcement authority and representative of our nation to the world. The duties and responsibilities would be focused on what is best for America and nothing else.

What would your response to ISIS

If ISIS had not demonstrated an ability to touch any nation on this planet with its ability to export terrorists, I would have promoted a policy to isolate Syria with support to the surrounding nations to keep them in check and let them kill each other. However, they have demonstrated that they have powerful allies in Turkey, Iran, and a few other nations willing to give them access to resources they would not normally have. I would charge the leaders of the US Military to come up with a strategy that can pen them into the confines of the geography, but barring that I would run a full sweep of the entire country with an overwhelming aerial campaign of known ISIS strongholds. I would be all for putting tactical troops on the ground in an effort to cull the ISIS members from the civilian population. However, My terms of the rules of engagement are that our troops are to engage the enemy wherever they can be found and to defend themselves at all costs without requiring permission first. In fact, the entire issue is far too complicated for a simple policy statement, but you did ask.

What’s your opinion on the current state of our education system? Why?

Again, this is a very broad topic and difficult to encapsulate in a simple policy statement. The United States spends more per pupil than any other nation on the planet, and we rank poorly for that expense. The problem with education is that it straddles two concerns with regard to the United States.

States rights.

Education is a states rights issue and with regard to problems in educating young people, often adheres to social concepts associated with regional values. The States struggle to bring timely and appropriate educational techniques and materials to the students because of resource dampening regulations forced upon them by an uncaring and distant educational overseer; The federal government. Each State should be permitted to set their educational goals for their citizens, with a minimum of educational standards that they must adhere too.

Education as a security issue for the United States.

An educated populace benefits everyone, but more importantly, and educated populace also promotes an ability by the citizens to recognize threats to the security and sovereignty of the country. Give we are a nation that governs ourselves from electing people from the population, it is in our best interests to have a population that can think critically, weight historical mistakes against current policy, promote good education in succeeding generations, and prosper in the day to day life we all have to manage. To this end, I would propose a conclave of individuals who would be representatives from each state to be commissioned to define the goals of education in America. These goals would be to determine what it is we are educating our young people to do with regard to vocation and State needs, and what the national standard for achieving success in these goals would be.

This of course, merely scratches the surface of what is at stake for this issue, but the single most important aspect of this policy is to ensure that it is not the interests of national politicians that are being met, but those of the people.

If you wish to get a more in-depth response on this or any other issue as it pertains to how I would act if I won the Presidency, may I suggest you limit the topic/issue to one or two? Many issues would require a detailed answer on current practices, personal moral choice, and vision of what should be done that could run to five or ten thousand words answers. This reply alone is over 1900 words and it touches on just surface thoughts that are condensed into summary policy.

Thanks.

Well I'm honored to be included and based on the platform you outlined, I think I would likely enter into serious negotiations with you and if we were clear on a couple of things, I would accept.

One thing I would insist on running as an independent, however, is to form our own organizational structure be that Tea Party or Reform Party or Independence Party or whatever we chose to call it because a strong grass roots structure in every state would be necessary to win the election AND put enough pressure on the permanent political class in Congress to work with us or else.

I am talking not a coup here, but a bloodless revolution with the intent of restoring the constitutional core and intent for the republic.

Still want me?

Hmmm......Do you like grilling?

We definitely could get into some negotiations over a platform. There are a few items on the T.E.A. Party and Reform Party platforms I don't really adhere to ('d have to go look them up again because I haven't been to their websites in a while) but I'm sure we could find some common ground.

As a Tea Partier, there are really only three agenda items:

1. Fiscal responsibility, integrity, and accountability with the government spending no more than it takes in; i.e. a balanced budget and start paying down the debt..

2. Maximum liberty for the people with the federal government imposing no more laws and regulation than is necessary and taking no more in taxes than is required to meet constitutional obligiations. That would eliminate about half the size of the federal government right there.

3. Constitutional respect with the federal government doing no more than it is constitutionally authorized to do and enforcing the Constitution as intended.

Your platform contained a lot of specifics that would fit within these parameters; for instance abolish baseline budgeting and go to zero base budgeting. And reward employees for saving the government money instead of spending as much as they can get.

 

[Darkwind]

Darkwind

Sorry I'm putting this interview up late, I had a long night and ended up sleeping instead.

Remember that if at any point, you don't want to answer a question, please just say "Pass". I'll ask a few questions at a time, if you think I'm asking too many or too few at once, you can ask me to increase or decrease the amount at any time.

I'll ask a few repeat questions to get a reading on your stances, and then continue from there.

Hypethetically, if you ran in the most recent election, which party would you run as part of? Why?

If you had to choose a member of the forum as your running mate, who would you choose? Why? If you weren't limited to a member of the forum, then who would you choose? Why?

Assuming you won the election, what would you do in your first 100 days, and what would your ultimate goal for your first term be? Why?

What would your response to ISIS be? Why?

What's your opinion on the current state of our education system? Why?

Let Me try that again.

Hypothetically, if you ran in the most recent election, which party would you run as part of? Why?

I’ll take this question as a reference to the recent Presidential election since that would have the most reach to a forum like this one. No one here would be particularly interested in what I would do as a local congressman or state senator.

There is no specific party that I agree with 100% and a few that I could agree with a few items on issues. Given that the setup of today’s election process requires participation in one of the four major political parties, I would likely run as an Independent.

I would register as an Independent, but make it clear to them when I won their nomination that I would be advancing my own political platform. The reason I would not choose any of the other parties is the power structure. There are far too players in these parties whose sole interest is in maintaining their hold on power and the money that flow into these parties. If I could, I would declare the run for President without a party affiliation, but that isn’t realistic until major reformations happen.

If you had to choose a member of the forum as your running mate, who would you choose? Why?

I think that I would choose Foxfyre. She brings a foundational level of common sense to any policy thought process and is able to articulate her reasoning on any issue well. She would also provide a solid counterweight to me as I tend to want to get something done, rather than wait until all the facts are available before acting.

If you weren't limited to a member of the forum, then who would you choose? Why?

I would likely ask Ted Cruz or Carly Fiorina as a running mate if I had to choose among the current nationally known names. Carly for the same reason I would pick Foxfyre. She shows a practical side that stems from a solid foundation of common sense and isn’t really cowed by people who disagree with her. Ted Cruz because in the world of Washington D.C., it always pays to have a lawyer who also understands the game being played in the Congress.

Assuming you won the election, what would you do in your first 100 days, and what would your ultimate goal for your first term be? Why?

If you look at the history of the first 100 days of a President, you’ll see that it was an arbitrary milestone set on the basis of FDR and related to what he would do during a single 100-day session of the Congress.

The first hundred days of the first-term presidency of a President of the United States are sometimes used to measure the successes and accomplishments of a president during the time that the president's power and influence are at their greatest.[1] The term was coined in a July 24, 1933, radio address by U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt, although he was referring to the 100-day session of the 73rd United States Congress between March 9 and June 17, rather than the first 100 days of his administration.[1][2]

First hundred days - Wikipedia

I’m not a big believer in the milestone itself. Too much of what the President can and cannot do is outlined by the Constitution and opposition in the Congress. Which ties into what I would try to accomplish as President and the President’s role in our government. To understand what I would do in my first 100 days you’d have to understand how I view the office of the President.

My candidacy and Presidency would hinge on the philosophy that the federal government is primarily a tool of the people to represent the United States to the nations of the world. My first 100 days would be heavy on foreign policy that promotes and defends the United States ahead of all other nations. I would be the kind of President who would refer social issues to the States because that is not the role of the federal government. To that end, I would:

Provide the President's budget request with the following guidelines.

• Baseline budgeting is to be eliminated from the budget. Each department of the federal government must provide documentation on the effectiveness of their program and they are not to assume that spending 100% of their budget in the previous FY is a guarantee that they will receive their funding request. Under no circumstance should a budget start with an immediate increase.
• Money spent on other nations would as a means of diplomacy come to an end. The money would be made available to aid in times of disaster and for humanitarian relief. However, no money will be given to any nation that does not have a government that has been elected by the people and has in place, some form of legal and binding limitations on the power of that government. It does not have to be a Constitution, per se, but there must be a way that elected representatives can be removed from office after due process. I would watch carefully any and all elections in which the winner is the winner because people would be killed if they did not vote for him or her.
• I would direct the DoD to come up with a plan that allows them to maintain bases in regional sections of the world if that base would provide cover for our interests in the world. Any nation in which we held a base that does duty as a defense of that nation as well as promoting our interests, would have to provide monetary compensation for their defense. Any land used for a United States base would not be leased, but purchased from the host nation and become sovereign U.S. Soil. I would also direct the DoD to review all programs and do away with obsolete systems in favor of more modern systems that place us at an overall overwhelming advantage against any three enemies we may face.
• I would begin a four-year program of reducing the budget of every department by 15% a year for each of the first four years (with the exception of the defense department which would be required to find 15% a year in fraud, waste, and abuse cuts to their budget. If they fail to meet this requirement, they would face a review in which the difference between the FW&A cuts was not met would be debited against their overall budget for that year.
• Finally, no budget would be enacted that was more than one fiscal year in advance. I would put an end to the ten-year budget projections.

All spending cut savings would be applied to the national debt and no tax decrease would be enacted until such time as the debt was paid.

I would work with Congress on fair and balanced oversight with regard to commerce between the States (That is their function in our government) but leave social issues up to the States and make it known that the federal government’s budget is not a slush fund for social engineering projects.

I would ensure that our commitments to our vets and the promises made to them came before any benefit to the States or special interest groups would be considered.


This would be the bulk of the first term and first 100 days. As you can see, it is focused primarily on those specific duties of the President, who is first and foremost, the chief law enforcement authority and representative of our nation to the world. The duties and responsibilities would be focused on what is best for America and nothing else.

What would your response to ISIS

If ISIS had not demonstrated an ability to touch any nation on this planet with its ability to export terrorists, I would have promoted a policy to isolate Syria with support to the surrounding nations to keep them in check and let them kill each other. However, they have demonstrated that they have powerful allies in Turkey, Iran, and a few other nations willing to give them access to resources they would not normally have. I would charge the leaders of the US Military to come up with a strategy that can pen them into the confines of the geography, but barring that I would run a full sweep of the entire country with an overwhelming aerial campaign of known ISIS strongholds. I would be all for putting tactical troops on the ground in an effort to cull the ISIS members from the civilian population. However, My terms of the rules of engagement are that our troops are to engage the enemy wherever they can be found and to defend themselves at all costs without requiring permission first. In fact, the entire issue is far too complicated for a simple policy statement, but you did ask.

What’s your opinion on the current state of our education system? Why?

Again, this is a very broad topic and difficult to encapsulate in a simple policy statement. The United States spends more per pupil than any other nation on the planet, and we rank poorly for that expense. The problem with education is that it straddles two concerns with regard to the United States.

States rights.

Education is a states rights issue and with regard to problems in educating young people, often adheres to social concepts associated with regional values. The States struggle to bring timely and appropriate educational techniques and materials to the students because of resource dampening regulations forced upon them by an uncaring and distant educational overseer; The federal government. Each State should be permitted to set their educational goals for their citizens, with a minimum of educational standards that they must adhere too.

Education as a security issue for the United States.

An educated populace benefits everyone, but more importantly, and educated populace also promotes an ability by the citizens to recognize threats to the security and sovereignty of the country. Give we are a nation that governs ourselves from electing people from the population, it is in our best interests to have a population that can think critically, weight historical mistakes against current policy, promote good education in succeeding generations, and prosper in the day to day life we all have to manage. To this end, I would propose a conclave of individuals who would be representatives from each state to be commissioned to define the goals of education in America. These goals would be to determine what it is we are educating our young people to do with regard to vocation and State needs, and what the national standard for achieving success in these goals would be.

This of course, merely scratches the surface of what is at stake for this issue, but the single most important aspect of this policy is to ensure that it is not the interests of national politicians that are being met, but those of the people.

If you wish to get a more in-depth response on this or any other issue as it pertains to how I would act if I won the Presidency, may I suggest you limit the topic/issue to one or two? Many issues would require a detailed answer on current practices, personal moral choice, and vision of what should be done that could run to five or ten thousand words answers. This reply alone is over 1900 words and it touches on just surface thoughts that are condensed into summary policy.

Thanks.

Well I'm honored to be included and based on the platform you outlined, I think I would likely enter into serious negotiations with you and if we were clear on a couple of things, I would accept.

One thing I would insist on running as an independent, however, is to form our own organizational structure be that Tea Party or Reform Party or Independence Party or whatever we chose to call it because a strong grass roots structure in every state would be necessary to win the election AND put enough pressure on the permanent political class in Congress to work with us or else.

I am talking not a coup here, but a bloodless revolution with the intent of restoring the constitutional core and intent for the republic.

Still want me?

Hmmm......Do you like grilling?

We definitely could get into some negotiations over a platform. There are a few items on the T.E.A. Party and Reform Party platforms I don't really adhere to ('d have to go look them up again because I haven't been to their websites in a while) but I'm sure we could find some common ground.

As a Tea Partier, there are really only three agenda items:

1. Fiscal responsibility, integrity, and accountability with the government spending no more than it takes in; i.e. a balanced budget and start paying down the debt..

2. Maximum liberty for the people with the federal government imposing no more laws and regulation than is necessary and taking no more in taxes than is required to meet constitutional obligiations. That would eliminate about half the size of the federal government right there.

3. Constitutional respect with the federal government doing no more than it is constitutionally authorized to do and enforcing the Constitution as intended.

Your platform contained a lot of specifics that would fit within these parameters; for instance abolish baseline budgeting and go to zero base budgeting. And reward employees for saving the government money instead of spending as much as they can get.

All issues that I can get behind, to be sure. I would, however; impose a moratorium on taxation until such time as the spending cut savings that are applied to the debt either pay the debt off in its entirety or lower the debt to a fraction of 1% of the GDP. That would also be conditioned to a positive reduction in the national debt. It is My belief that to cut spending and then to cut taxes to match would reach a form of balanced budget, but that would keep the national debt in suspension or falling behind on interest payments alone. It may be that not all of us agreed with the policies that brought us to this pass, but we're all going to have to bite the bullet and continue with the taxes as they are until such time as our children and our grandchildren are not saddled with 50,000+ dollars of debt when they draw their first breath.

 

[Foxfyre]

Darkwind

Sorry I'm putting this interview up late, I had a long night and ended up sleeping instead.

Remember that if at any point, you don't want to answer a question, please just say "Pass". I'll ask a few questions at a time, if you think I'm asking too many or too few at once, you can ask me to increase or decrease the amount at any time.

I'll ask a few repeat questions to get a reading on your stances, and then continue from there.

Hypethetically, if you ran in the most recent election, which party would you run as part of? Why?

If you had to choose a member of the forum as your running mate, who would you choose? Why? If you weren't limited to a member of the forum, then who would you choose? Why?

Assuming you won the election, what would you do in your first 100 days, and what would your ultimate goal for your first term be? Why?

What would your response to ISIS be? Why?

What's your opinion on the current state of our education system? Why?

Let Me try that again.

Hypothetically, if you ran in the most recent election, which party would you run as part of? Why?

I’ll take this question as a reference to the recent Presidential election since that would have the most reach to a forum like this one. No one here would be particularly interested in what I would do as a local congressman or state senator.

There is no specific party that I agree with 100% and a few that I could agree with a few items on issues. Given that the setup of today’s election process requires participation in one of the four major political parties, I would likely run as an Independent.

I would register as an Independent, but make it clear to them when I won their nomination that I would be advancing my own political platform. The reason I would not choose any of the other parties is the power structure. There are far too players in these parties whose sole interest is in maintaining their hold on power and the money that flow into these parties. If I could, I would declare the run for President without a party affiliation, but that isn’t realistic until major reformations happen.

If you had to choose a member of the forum as your running mate, who would you choose? Why?

I think that I would choose Foxfyre. She brings a foundational level of common sense to any policy thought process and is able to articulate her reasoning on any issue well. She would also provide a solid counterweight to me as I tend to want to get something done, rather than wait until all the facts are available before acting.

If you weren't limited to a member of the forum, then who would you choose? Why?

I would likely ask Ted Cruz or Carly Fiorina as a running mate if I had to choose among the current nationally known names. Carly for the same reason I would pick Foxfyre. She shows a practical side that stems from a solid foundation of common sense and isn’t really cowed by people who disagree with her. Ted Cruz because in the world of Washington D.C., it always pays to have a lawyer who also understands the game being played in the Congress.

Assuming you won the election, what would you do in your first 100 days, and what would your ultimate goal for your first term be? Why?

If you look at the history of the first 100 days of a President, you’ll see that it was an arbitrary milestone set on the basis of FDR and related to what he would do during a single 100-day session of the Congress.

The first hundred days of the first-term presidency of a President of the United States are sometimes used to measure the successes and accomplishments of a president during the time that the president's power and influence are at their greatest.[1] The term was coined in a July 24, 1933, radio address by U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt, although he was referring to the 100-day session of the 73rd United States Congress between March 9 and June 17, rather than the first 100 days of his administration.[1][2]

First hundred days - Wikipedia

I’m not a big believer in the milestone itself. Too much of what the President can and cannot do is outlined by the Constitution and opposition in the Congress. Which ties into what I would try to accomplish as President and the President’s role in our government. To understand what I would do in my first 100 days you’d have to understand how I view the office of the President.

My candidacy and Presidency would hinge on the philosophy that the federal government is primarily a tool of the people to represent the United States to the nations of the world. My first 100 days would be heavy on foreign policy that promotes and defends the United States ahead of all other nations. I would be the kind of President who would refer social issues to the States because that is not the role of the federal government. To that end, I would:

Provide the President's budget request with the following guidelines.

• Baseline budgeting is to be eliminated from the budget. Each department of the federal government must provide documentation on the effectiveness of their program and they are not to assume that spending 100% of their budget in the previous FY is a guarantee that they will receive their funding request. Under no circumstance should a budget start with an immediate increase.
• Money spent on other nations would as a means of diplomacy come to an end. The money would be made available to aid in times of disaster and for humanitarian relief. However, no money will be given to any nation that does not have a government that has been elected by the people and has in place, some form of legal and binding limitations on the power of that government. It does not have to be a Constitution, per se, but there must be a way that elected representatives can be removed from office after due process. I would watch carefully any and all elections in which the winner is the winner because people would be killed if they did not vote for him or her.
• I would direct the DoD to come up with a plan that allows them to maintain bases in regional sections of the world if that base would provide cover for our interests in the world. Any nation in which we held a base that does duty as a defense of that nation as well as promoting our interests, would have to provide monetary compensation for their defense. Any land used for a United States base would not be leased, but purchased from the host nation and become sovereign U.S. Soil. I would also direct the DoD to review all programs and do away with obsolete systems in favor of more modern systems that place us at an overall overwhelming advantage against any three enemies we may face.
• I would begin a four-year program of reducing the budget of every department by 15% a year for each of the first four years (with the exception of the defense department which would be required to find 15% a year in fraud, waste, and abuse cuts to their budget. If they fail to meet this requirement, they would face a review in which the difference between the FW&A cuts was not met would be debited against their overall budget for that year.
• Finally, no budget would be enacted that was more than one fiscal year in advance. I would put an end to the ten-year budget projections.

All spending cut savings would be applied to the national debt and no tax decrease would be enacted until such time as the debt was paid.

I would work with Congress on fair and balanced oversight with regard to commerce between the States (That is their function in our government) but leave social issues up to the States and make it known that the federal government’s budget is not a slush fund for social engineering projects.

I would ensure that our commitments to our vets and the promises made to them came before any benefit to the States or special interest groups would be considered.


This would be the bulk of the first term and first 100 days. As you can see, it is focused primarily on those specific duties of the President, who is first and foremost, the chief law enforcement authority and representative of our nation to the world. The duties and responsibilities would be focused on what is best for America and nothing else.

What would your response to ISIS

If ISIS had not demonstrated an ability to touch any nation on this planet with its ability to export terrorists, I would have promoted a policy to isolate Syria with support to the surrounding nations to keep them in check and let them kill each other. However, they have demonstrated that they have powerful allies in Turkey, Iran, and a few other nations willing to give them access to resources they would not normally have. I would charge the leaders of the US Military to come up with a strategy that can pen them into the confines of the geography, but barring that I would run a full sweep of the entire country with an overwhelming aerial campaign of known ISIS strongholds. I would be all for putting tactical troops on the ground in an effort to cull the ISIS members from the civilian population. However, My terms of the rules of engagement are that our troops are to engage the enemy wherever they can be found and to defend themselves at all costs without requiring permission first. In fact, the entire issue is far too complicated for a simple policy statement, but you did ask.

What’s your opinion on the current state of our education system? Why?

Again, this is a very broad topic and difficult to encapsulate in a simple policy statement. The United States spends more per pupil than any other nation on the planet, and we rank poorly for that expense. The problem with education is that it straddles two concerns with regard to the United States.

States rights.

Education is a states rights issue and with regard to problems in educating young people, often adheres to social concepts associated with regional values. The States struggle to bring timely and appropriate educational techniques and materials to the students because of resource dampening regulations forced upon them by an uncaring and distant educational overseer; The federal government. Each State should be permitted to set their educational goals for their citizens, with a minimum of educational standards that they must adhere too.

Education as a security issue for the United States.

An educated populace benefits everyone, but more importantly, and educated populace also promotes an ability by the citizens to recognize threats to the security and sovereignty of the country. Give we are a nation that governs ourselves from electing people from the population, it is in our best interests to have a population that can think critically, weight historical mistakes against current policy, promote good education in succeeding generations, and prosper in the day to day life we all have to manage. To this end, I would propose a conclave of individuals who would be representatives from each state to be commissioned to define the goals of education in America. These goals would be to determine what it is we are educating our young people to do with regard to vocation and State needs, and what the national standard for achieving success in these goals would be.

This of course, merely scratches the surface of what is at stake for this issue, but the single most important aspect of this policy is to ensure that it is not the interests of national politicians that are being met, but those of the people.

If you wish to get a more in-depth response on this or any other issue as it pertains to how I would act if I won the Presidency, may I suggest you limit the topic/issue to one or two? Many issues would require a detailed answer on current practices, personal moral choice, and vision of what should be done that could run to five or ten thousand words answers. This reply alone is over 1900 words and it touches on just surface thoughts that are condensed into summary policy.

Thanks.

Well I'm honored to be included and based on the platform you outlined, I think I would likely enter into serious negotiations with you and if we were clear on a couple of things, I would accept.

One thing I would insist on running as an independent, however, is to form our own organizational structure be that Tea Party or Reform Party or Independence Party or whatever we chose to call it because a strong grass roots structure in every state would be necessary to win the election AND put enough pressure on the permanent political class in Congress to work with us or else.

I am talking not a coup here, but a bloodless revolution with the intent of restoring the constitutional core and intent for the republic.

Still want me?

Hmmm......Do you like grilling?

We definitely could get into some negotiations over a platform. There are a few items on the T.E.A. Party and Reform Party platforms I don't really adhere to ('d have to go look them up again because I haven't been to their websites in a while) but I'm sure we could find some common ground.

As a Tea Partier, there are really only three agenda items:

1. Fiscal responsibility, integrity, and accountability with the government spending no more than it takes in; i.e. a balanced budget and start paying down the debt..

2. Maximum liberty for the people with the federal government imposing no more laws and regulation than is necessary and taking no more in taxes than is required to meet constitutional obligiations. That would eliminate about half the size of the federal government right there.

3. Constitutional respect with the federal government doing no more than it is constitutionally authorized to do and enforcing the Constitution as intended.

Your platform contained a lot of specifics that would fit within these parameters; for instance abolish baseline budgeting and go to zero base budgeting. And reward employees for saving the government money instead of spending as much as they can get.

All issues that I can get behind, to be sure. I would, however; impose a moratorium on taxation until such time as the spending cut savings that are applied to the debt either pay the debt off in its entirety or lower the debt to a fraction of 1% of the GDP. That would also be conditioned to a positive reduction in the national debt. It is My belief that to cut spending and then to cut taxes to match would reach a form of balanced budget, but that would keep the national debt in suspension or falling behind on interest payments alone. It may be that not all of us agreed with the policies that brought us to this pass, but we're all going to have to bite the bullet and continue with the taxes as they are until such time as our children and our grandchildren are not saddled with 50,000+ dollars of debt when they draw their first breath.

No argument for me on the debt. However history clearly demonstrates that the right kind of tax cut at the right time can dramatically INCREASE treasury revenues due to economic stimulus which is definitely something we would want to promote.

So let's see if President Trump and the congress can get that done before we run and if so, I will agree to hold the line on taxes as they would be when we take over. If not, I do think that will need to be done to get people back to work and ease the strain on social services.

 

[Darkwind]

Let Me try that again.

Hypothetically, if you ran in the most recent election, which party would you run as part of? Why?

I’ll take this question as a reference to the recent Presidential election since that would have the most reach to a forum like this one. No one here would be particularly interested in what I would do as a local congressman or state senator.

There is no specific party that I agree with 100% and a few that I could agree with a few items on issues. Given that the setup of today’s election process requires participation in one of the four major political parties, I would likely run as an Independent.

I would register as an Independent, but make it clear to them when I won their nomination that I would be advancing my own political platform. The reason I would not choose any of the other parties is the power structure. There are far too players in these parties whose sole interest is in maintaining their hold on power and the money that flow into these parties. If I could, I would declare the run for President without a party affiliation, but that isn’t realistic until major reformations happen.

If you had to choose a member of the forum as your running mate, who would you choose? Why?

I think that I would choose Foxfyre. She brings a foundational level of common sense to any policy thought process and is able to articulate her reasoning on any issue well. She would also provide a solid counterweight to me as I tend to want to get something done, rather than wait until all the facts are available before acting.

If you weren't limited to a member of the forum, then who would you choose? Why?

I would likely ask Ted Cruz or Carly Fiorina as a running mate if I had to choose among the current nationally known names. Carly for the same reason I would pick Foxfyre. She shows a practical side that stems from a solid foundation of common sense and isn’t really cowed by people who disagree with her. Ted Cruz because in the world of Washington D.C., it always pays to have a lawyer who also understands the game being played in the Congress.

Assuming you won the election, what would you do in your first 100 days, and what would your ultimate goal for your first term be? Why?

If you look at the history of the first 100 days of a President, you’ll see that it was an arbitrary milestone set on the basis of FDR and related to what he would do during a single 100-day session of the Congress.

I’m not a big believer in the milestone itself. Too much of what the President can and cannot do is outlined by the Constitution and opposition in the Congress. Which ties into what I would try to accomplish as President and the President’s role in our government. To understand what I would do in my first 100 days you’d have to understand how I view the office of the President.

My candidacy and Presidency would hinge on the philosophy that the federal government is primarily a tool of the people to represent the United States to the nations of the world. My first 100 days would be heavy on foreign policy that promotes and defends the United States ahead of all other nations. I would be the kind of President who would refer social issues to the States because that is not the role of the federal government. To that end, I would:

Provide the President's budget request with the following guidelines.

• Baseline budgeting is to be eliminated from the budget. Each department of the federal government must provide documentation on the effectiveness of their program and they are not to assume that spending 100% of their budget in the previous FY is a guarantee that they will receive their funding request. Under no circumstance should a budget start with an immediate increase.
• Money spent on other nations would as a means of diplomacy come to an end. The money would be made available to aid in times of disaster and for humanitarian relief. However, no money will be given to any nation that does not have a government that has been elected by the people and has in place, some form of legal and binding limitations on the power of that government. It does not have to be a Constitution, per se, but there must be a way that elected representatives can be removed from office after due process. I would watch carefully any and all elections in which the winner is the winner because people would be killed if they did not vote for him or her.
• I would direct the DoD to come up with a plan that allows them to maintain bases in regional sections of the world if that base would provide cover for our interests in the world. Any nation in which we held a base that does duty as a defense of that nation as well as promoting our interests, would have to provide monetary compensation for their defense. Any land used for a United States base would not be leased, but purchased from the host nation and become sovereign U.S. Soil. I would also direct the DoD to review all programs and do away with obsolete systems in favor of more modern systems that place us at an overall overwhelming advantage against any three enemies we may face.
• I would begin a four-year program of reducing the budget of every department by 15% a year for each of the first four years (with the exception of the defense department which would be required to find 15% a year in fraud, waste, and abuse cuts to their budget. If they fail to meet this requirement, they would face a review in which the difference between the FW&A cuts was not met would be debited against their overall budget for that year.
• Finally, no budget would be enacted that was more than one fiscal year in advance. I would put an end to the ten-year budget projections.

All spending cut savings would be applied to the national debt and no tax decrease would be enacted until such time as the debt was paid.

I would work with Congress on fair and balanced oversight with regard to commerce between the States (That is their function in our government) but leave social issues up to the States and make it known that the federal government’s budget is not a slush fund for social engineering projects.

I would ensure that our commitments to our vets and the promises made to them came before any benefit to the States or special interest groups would be considered.


This would be the bulk of the first term and first 100 days. As you can see, it is focused primarily on those specific duties of the President, who is first and foremost, the chief law enforcement authority and representative of our nation to the world. The duties and responsibilities would be focused on what is best for America and nothing else.

What would your response to ISIS

If ISIS had not demonstrated an ability to touch any nation on this planet with its ability to export terrorists, I would have promoted a policy to isolate Syria with support to the surrounding nations to keep them in check and let them kill each other. However, they have demonstrated that they have powerful allies in Turkey, Iran, and a few other nations willing to give them access to resources they would not normally have. I would charge the leaders of the US Military to come up with a strategy that can pen them into the confines of the geography, but barring that I would run a full sweep of the entire country with an overwhelming aerial campaign of known ISIS strongholds. I would be all for putting tactical troops on the ground in an effort to cull the ISIS members from the civilian population. However, My terms of the rules of engagement are that our troops are to engage the enemy wherever they can be found and to defend themselves at all costs without requiring permission first. In fact, the entire issue is far too complicated for a simple policy statement, but you did ask.

What’s your opinion on the current state of our education system? Why?

Again, this is a very broad topic and difficult to encapsulate in a simple policy statement. The United States spends more per pupil than any other nation on the planet, and we rank poorly for that expense. The problem with education is that it straddles two concerns with regard to the United States.

States rights.

Education is a states rights issue and with regard to problems in educating young people, often adheres to social concepts associated with regional values. The States struggle to bring timely and appropriate educational techniques and materials to the students because of resource dampening regulations forced upon them by an uncaring and distant educational overseer; The federal government. Each State should be permitted to set their educational goals for their citizens, with a minimum of educational standards that they must adhere too.

Education as a security issue for the United States.

An educated populace benefits everyone, but more importantly, and educated populace also promotes an ability by the citizens to recognize threats to the security and sovereignty of the country. Give we are a nation that governs ourselves from electing people from the population, it is in our best interests to have a population that can think critically, weight historical mistakes against current policy, promote good education in succeeding generations, and prosper in the day to day life we all have to manage. To this end, I would propose a conclave of individuals who would be representatives from each state to be commissioned to define the goals of education in America. These goals would be to determine what it is we are educating our young people to do with regard to vocation and State needs, and what the national standard for achieving success in these goals would be.

This of course, merely scratches the surface of what is at stake for this issue, but the single most important aspect of this policy is to ensure that it is not the interests of national politicians that are being met, but those of the people.

If you wish to get a more in-depth response on this or any other issue as it pertains to how I would act if I won the Presidency, may I suggest you limit the topic/issue to one or two? Many issues would require a detailed answer on current practices, personal moral choice, and vision of what should be done that could run to five or ten thousand words answers. This reply alone is over 1900 words and it touches on just surface thoughts that are condensed into summary policy.

Thanks.

Well I'm honored to be included and based on the platform you outlined, I think I would likely enter into serious negotiations with you and if we were clear on a couple of things, I would accept.

One thing I would insist on running as an independent, however, is to form our own organizational structure be that Tea Party or Reform Party or Independence Party or whatever we chose to call it because a strong grass roots structure in every state would be necessary to win the election AND put enough pressure on the permanent political class in Congress to work with us or else.

I am talking not a coup here, but a bloodless revolution with the intent of restoring the constitutional core and intent for the republic.

Still want me?

Hmmm......Do you like grilling?

We definitely could get into some negotiations over a platform. There are a few items on the T.E.A. Party and Reform Party platforms I don't really adhere to ('d have to go look them up again because I haven't been to their websites in a while) but I'm sure we could find some common ground.

As a Tea Partier, there are really only three agenda items:

1. Fiscal responsibility, integrity, and accountability with the government spending no more than it takes in; i.e. a balanced budget and start paying down the debt..

2. Maximum liberty for the people with the federal government imposing no more laws and regulation than is necessary and taking no more in taxes than is required to meet constitutional obligiations. That would eliminate about half the size of the federal government right there.

3. Constitutional respect with the federal government doing no more than it is constitutionally authorized to do and enforcing the Constitution as intended.

Your platform contained a lot of specifics that would fit within these parameters; for instance abolish baseline budgeting and go to zero base budgeting. And reward employees for saving the government money instead of spending as much as they can get.

All issues that I can get behind, to be sure. I would, however; impose a moratorium on taxation until such time as the spending cut savings that are applied to the debt either pay the debt off in its entirety or lower the debt to a fraction of 1% of the GDP. That would also be conditioned to a positive reduction in the national debt. It is My belief that to cut spending and then to cut taxes to match would reach a form of balanced budget, but that would keep the national debt in suspension or falling behind on interest payments alone. It may be that not all of us agreed with the policies that brought us to this pass, but we're all going to have to bite the bullet and continue with the taxes as they are until such time as our children and our grandchildren are not saddled with 50,000+ dollars of debt when they draw their first breath.

No argument for me on the debt. However history clearly demonstrates that the right kind of tax cut at the right time can dramatically INCREASE treasury revenues due to economic stimulus which is definitely something we would want to promote.

So let's see if President Trump and the congress can get that done before we run and if so, I will agree to hold the line on taxes as they would be when we take over. If not, I do think that will need to be done to get people back to work and ease the strain on social services.

I can agree but would ask you to consider this. The opposition is likely to do what they can to prevent any such stimulus from working. Its a matter of optics that they cannot allow any program that may work to actually work, it would disrupt their bid for power. My approach is a "Bird in the hand" type philosophy, and as the debt comes down, and if spending is checked and held in place, the growth from economic expansion would provide an ever increasing surplus to provide toward the debt. Hence the comment about a positive rate of reduction in the debt. All of that would be contingent upon what we would inhert taxwise, of course.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

Well, since I have the two of you here, as running mates, what would be your strategy for defeating Hillary and Trump? We'll just assume that you're running against both in the presidential election, since it's easier than asking about each individually.

Darkwind

The rest of these questions are for you, specifically.

Do you believe in man-made global climate change? If so, why, do you believe that it's catastrophic, and if anything, what would you do to combat it? If not, why not?

If you had to choose a political party that most closely aligned with your own views, which would it be? Why? This question encompasses ALL parties, not just the major ones.

What are your views on Obamacare and healthcare as a whole? Why?

What are your views on abortion, and why?

What are your views on the death penalty? Why?

Do you believe that illegal immigration is currently a problem? Why? If so, what would be your approach to solving that problem?

 

[Foxfyre]

Well, since I have the two of you here, as running mates, what would be your strategy for defeating Hillary and Trump? We'll just assume that you're running against both in the presidential election, since it's easier than asking about each individually.

Darkwind

The rest of these questions are for you, specifically.

Do you believe in man-made global climate change? If so, why, do you believe that it's catastrophic, and if anything, what would you do to combat it? If not, why not?

If you had to choose a political party that most closely aligned with your own views, which would it be? Why? This question encompasses ALL parties, not just the major ones.

What are your views on Obamacare and healthcare as a whole? Why?

What are your views on abortion, and why?

What are your views on the death penalty? Why?

Do you believe that illegal immigration is currently a problem? Why? If so, what would be your approach to solving that problem?

IMO, if President Trump is able to implement at least some of the vision he laid out there for us, he will be unbeatable come the 2020 election--that assumes he chooses to run again. However, if the Congress, both Republicans and Democrats, are able to prevent him from accomplishing that vision just about anybody can beat him come 2020 and we as a nation will be much the poorer for it.

I'm hoping he can get it done so I think Darkwind and I may have to look for 2024 to make our run.

As for beating Hillary? I just don't think that will be that difficult to do.