It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Candidate Declaration: iori_komei, Socialist

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 6 2007 @ 09:11 PM
link   
OK... I just want you to take a look at this link and tell me what you think. Yes, I know it can be argued that the site is biased. But I, and I am sure many other Americans, think along the same lines. This is the main reason I have a hard time supporting socialized health care.

[edit on 6-3-2007 by LostSailor]




posted on Mar, 7 2007 @ 01:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by LostSailor
No one gets refused medical care in the U.S. right now.


Uh, sure. I've personally seen evidence to the contrary.

Every point in that site is refutable, aswell.. but as Iori said, it's a discussion for another time and place.



posted on Mar, 7 2007 @ 05:41 PM
link   
I'm thinking that I already have said things that satisfy some of those
questions, but all in al, those questions are nto very good excuses,
and I have answers to them all.



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 10:34 PM
link   
I just realized that there is a very important issue that I have not
stated my opinion on very well.

There will be some who make there decision based on if someone is
Pro-Life or Pro-Choice, and this is a subject area I feel I should
address further.

I do not believe in the death penalty.

I believe in a womans right to choose.

I believe in assisted suicide, and consenting suicide.


Those three do seem to be the main topics that comprise the Pro-
Choice, Pro-Life debate.


Anyways, that's alll for now.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask.



posted on Mar, 15 2007 @ 10:47 PM
link   
iori, good luck on the battle grounds my man.

You will notice that I am asking most of the candidates this question, as it may sway my own, and even others, in their voting.

Simple question, yet very efficient.

In one sentence, Why should I vote for you?




posted on Mar, 15 2007 @ 10:53 PM
link   
Finally! a question that I don't have to write an essay of a reponse!


My answer:
Because I stand for freedom, equality and the democratic process.



posted on Mar, 15 2007 @ 11:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by iori_komei
Finally! a question that I don't have to write an essay of a reponse!


Precisely.


Originally posted by iori_komei
My answer:
Because I stand for freedom, equality and the democratic process.


Do you honestly believe that separates you from any of the competition?



posted on Mar, 15 2007 @ 11:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by chissler
Do you honestly believe that separates you from any of the competition?


Yes, yes I do.

However, it also depends on the depth to, some candidates only go up to
a certain point wiht them, and indeed I'll admit the democratic process is
something that in some areas I believe in further expansion, but in others
I'm happy how it is.



posted on Mar, 18 2007 @ 09:21 AM
link   
Excuse me, I've got some follow-up questions to some of your primary platform statements.


Originally posted by iori_komei



Originally posted by iori_komei
I believe that the Constitution guarantees us this right [to bear arms] for a reason. Beyond that, I believe that the right to own guns is a freedom, and as such should not be denied or limited. I believe that many of the current restrictions need to be either re-formed or gotten rid of completely.


Can you tell us what specifically in your Socialist ideology permits the unrestricted ownership of firearms?



Originally posted by iori_komei
I believe that, at whatever point that the majority have a 70%+ survival
rate, that that should be the point that an abortion can not be had,
however, at any time before that point I believe a woman has the right
to an abortion.


If elected, would you instruct the Justice Department to make a legal challenge that would support your thinking? If you would do this, can we assume that you would appoint liberal thinkers to the Supreme Court?



Originally posted by iori_komei
I would/will work to cancel some of the more unneeded government
projects.


Knowing that you would face a hostile Congress, how would you go about determining what is a wasteful program?



Originally posted by iori_komei
I will work to raise the the minimum wage to $8.50.


What is your justification for $8.50 per hour as an acceptable minimum wage? Why not more?


Originally posted by iori_komei
I will get rid of most taxes, apart from sales tax, and introduce a new
tax system that instead takes 30-50% (but no more than 50%) of an
individuals paycheck. This money would than be split various times and a certain percentage of it would be put into different government programs.


Knowing how difficult tax reform is, how would you do this? Would this be a legislative package that you'd send to Congress during your first 100 days in office? If so, what concessions are you willing to make if House and Senate leaders are not with you?


Originally posted by iori_komei
I will work to create social programs to guarantee that everyone has
required to live a semi-comfortable life.


What would you define as "comfortable," and how would you reconcile that estimate with your Socialist beliefs if the level of comfort turns out to be unattainable?



Originally posted by iori_komei
On one hand, it [the death tax]is good when it comes to people like Paris Hilton, on the other hand it can be negative for people who are on the lower end of the income bracket. I think that this is something that needs to be dealt with on an individual case by case basis.


Your statement suggests that you disapprove of inherited money. Would I be permitted to keep my millions if I earned them in my lifetime, and didn't pass them on to my blood relatives?



Originally posted by iori_komei
I believe that going into Iraq was one of the greatest blunders made.
I believe that we need to leave Iraq, however just up and leaving all
the sudden is not the greatest idea. I support a gradual withdraw over a 5-7 year period, with more empha-sis put onto defence, and teaching/training the Iraqis to be able to do the job themselves.


Assuming that you got your way, how would you allocate spending for the military during and after thw withdrawl? Would you increase or decrease the size of the military?



Originally posted by iori_komei
Building a wall [on the Mexican border] would not only further tarnish our image in the eyes of the rest of the world, but it would be a waste of money/resources that can/could be spent on much more important/positive things.


Given that the flow of illegals from Mexico is not likely to slow down for quite some time, how would you securethe southern border?



8 - Your stand on other security issues such as security in our ports etc ...




Originally posted by iori_komei
I believe that securing our ports and other cargo facilities is very
important. As such I believe that we need to put more resources/money into protective measures, such as nuclear material detection systems and
chemical/biological agents scanners.


Why does port security matter more than border security?


I believe that the infringements made not only on the people of this
country, but also of the innocent individuals in other countries is
deplorable and treasonous. I think that wiretaps and other such measures should have a great level of oversight and should be legal (that is OKed by the courts), and need to be made precise, that is clearly stating when, who, what, where and how long such measures will be in place.


Your statement suggest that you would not ask the Congress to repeal the Patriot Act and other intrusive legislation. Knowing that increased oversight of these programs means an increase in the Federal bureaucracy, how do you justify this position?



Originally posted by iori_komei
I am not sure of a cabinet yet, but I do have one adviser thus far.


Ooh, that sounds juicy. Care to tell us who it is?



posted on Mar, 18 2007 @ 09:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
Can you tell us what specifically in your Socialist ideology permits the unrestricted ownership of firearms?


Absolute personal freedom so long as you are not directly non-
consentuallyinfringinf upon the freedoms of anyone else.

And Socialism is part of my overall Ideology.
That, and socialism does not equate to no freedoms.




If elected, would you instruct the Justice Department to make a legal challenge that would support your thinking? If you would do this, can we assume that you would appoint liberal thinkers to the Supreme Court?


If Roe v. Wade was seriously challenged by those who wanted to restrict
Abortion, than I would, but overall for the time being I'm fine with how
it is currently.

I would appoint those to the supreme court that believe in freedom,
equality, peace and progression.




Knowing that you would face a hostile Congress, how would you go about determining what is a wasteful program?


If it supports religion, or has no use, such as a bridge betwen an
uninhabited island and someplace with 100 people.




What is your justification for $8.50 per hour as an acceptable minimum wage? Why not more?


Because in the present I think 8.50 is an adequate minimum wage that
would allow an individual to both survive, and have some creature
comforts.




Knowing how difficult tax reform is, how would you do this? Would this be a legislative package that you'd send to Congress during your first 100 days in office? If so, what concessions are you willing to make if House and Senate leaders are not with you?


I would personally go to the Senate and House and explain to them
why I think this should be done, and answer all of there questions.

If after that, they were still not convinced, well I would decide what
actions to take then, based on current events, and knowledge.




What would you define as "comfortable," and how would you reconcile that estimate with your Socialist beliefs if the level of comfort turns out to be unattainable?


I define it as having both the neccesities to survive (I.E a home & food),
and also somethings to make them comfortable, like telecommunications.

I'm honestly not really sure how to answer the next part, but it would
depend on the socioeconomic climate of the time, so I can't really
answer, without knowing the future at least.




Your statement suggests that you disapprove of inherited money. Would I be permitted to keep my millions if I earned them in my lifetime, and didn't pass them on to my blood relatives?


I do dissaprove of it, yes, it only furthers the attitude of not having to
do anything, when it comes to great amounts of it.

Well, if you are dead, how do you plan on keeping it?
Could you explain what you mean?




Assuming that you got your way, how would you allocate spending for the military during and after the withdrawl? Would you increase or decrease the size of the military?


During it, I would put money into defencive technologies, and medical
equipment, as well as defencive wepons (it sounds like an oxymoron, I
know) and into rebuilding projects.

After the withdrawal, I would significantly cut the amount of money go-
ing into the military, and reallocate that moeny to things like Education,
Healthcare, Social programs and Scientific research & Projects.

I would let anyone who no longer wished to be in the military quit with
whatever benefits packages they were orginially promised.
I really can not change the size of the military, as it is on a volunteer
basis.

I would however increase the amounts of Aircraft, and Naval ships and
ground vehicles by roughly 15%, as well as increase the use of robotic
technologies, to require fewer sodlier be put in harms way in any future
combat.




Given that the flow of illegals from Mexico is not likely to slow down for quite some time, how would you secure the southern border?


I would do this really by decreasing the number who came here in the
first place, this would be done both through helping Mexico become at
or near are socioeconomic level, and by more progressive immigration
policies.

In the end, there really is'nt a whole ot that can be done without making
Mexico a better place for the people to live in.




Why does port security matter more than border security?


Well that depends on what you mean by border security.

I would have the same basic scanners as those at the ports set up at
border crossings, and would require the same level of ID checking.

In the end to, it really is easier and quicker to do.




Your statement suggest that you would not ask the Congress to repeal the Patriot Act and other intrusive legislation. Knowing that increased oversight of these programs means an increase in the Federal bureaucracy, how do you justify this position?


I would do everything in my power to get the Patriot Act repealed.
What I mean though is that Wiretapping, when Oked by the courts,
is legal without it, and that needs a great amount more oversight
and transparency.

I justify it by making people safer from unjustified intrusions into
there personal lives.



Originally posted by iori_komei
Ooh, that sounds juicy. Care to tell us who it is?


Well, considering an adviser is suppose to provide me with opinions that
are not biased by outside pressure, no.

I do however now have a Running Mate and one Cabinet member as well
as an advisor.



posted on Mar, 24 2007 @ 03:28 PM
link   
Being that, for all intensive purposes I am an Atheist, I am sure that
there are some people who question my 'morality', that is what moral
code do I follow.

So here are the ethical principles that I follow.


  • Respect nature, do it as little harm as possible.
  • Help others; do not take advantage of them.
  • Be honest and trustworthy; do not sacrifice ethics for profit.
  • Work to better yourself and humanity as a whole.
  • Live comfortably, not luxuriously.
  • Respect others opinions, even if you disagree with them.
  • Protect freedom; never sacrifice it.
  • Life is precious, only kill to protect (an)other[s].


[edit on 3/24/2007 by iori_komei]



posted on Mar, 27 2007 @ 10:28 PM
link   
After doing some thinking, and believe me it took me ages to figure
out a good one, I've come wup with a campaign phrase for anyone
whom is interested.

'I. Kare'
as in
"Vote for me because I. Kare."



posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 07:53 AM
link   
Do you believe in the obligations under NATO?

Do you believe in the UN?

What would be the cornerstones of your first 100 days foreign policy?



posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Freedom ERP
Do you believe in the obligations under NATO?


I'm not sure what those are, but I'm supposing coming to Europes
defence if they are attacked is the basics, so yes, I do.




Do you believe in the UN?


The idea behind the U.N. is a good and noble one, but the U.N has
become corrupt, freedom hendering (I speak of the drug treaty with
this) and pretty much useless.

I support reforming the U.N though.




What would be the cornerstones of your first 100 days foreign policy?


Ending the war, or atleast seting a timeline to have all troops out of
Iraq within five years

Cooperating in peacekeeping missions in Darfur.

Ending the trade embargo with Cuba.

Reofrming or eliminating trade deals with countries that are not Free
and Democratic.



posted on Mar, 30 2007 @ 07:01 AM
link   
Thanks for the answers, iori.

You talk about reform of the UN. Do you have specifics?



posted on Mar, 30 2007 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Freedom ERP
Thanks for the answers, iori.

You talk about reform of the UN. Do you have specifics?


Well I'm sure there are many different things that I would like to
have reformed that I am not aware of, but there are a few specific
things I mean.

-Treaties and other such legislation that hinders freedom.
The U.N should not have the power to even try to create such,
and as such I believe in setting it up where such things can not
be implemented.
By freedom I mean personal, individual freedom, not like groups
or countries.

-Security Council permanence.
The security council is not something that should be a permanent seat,
that gets to decide who can be on it.
I believe in implementing a system wherein the security council is
expanded to a seat of 20 member states and every 5 years half of
those change to the next five countries in line, so that every ten years
the security council seats will have completely changed.
Of course to only countries that met the standards of a liberal democracy
and a free (as in civil liberties, freedom of the press etc) state.



posted on Apr, 2 2007 @ 05:57 PM
link   
After reporting on a recent story about a free trade deal between the
U.S. and S. Korea, I realized I've not stated my position on the matter
of free-trade.


As a Socialist some people may think I am against free-trade.
They would be wrong.

I believe in Fair Free-Trade, as long as the country is Free and
Democratic.
That is free-trade, but set up in such a way as to be fair, and not
allow a monotonous market takeover by a few powerful countries
that will cause prices to rise in one of the countries.

I support NAFTA, though I think it needs some minor reforms.


I don't support any kind of Free-Trade deal with PRChina.



posted on Apr, 3 2007 @ 06:51 AM
link   
What is your defination of Free and Democratic?

MODS - Sorry for the one liner but sometime the questions I want to ask start as one liners



posted on Apr, 3 2007 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Freedom ERP
What is your defination of Free and Democratic?
one liner but sometime the questions I want to ask start as one liners


Free as in at the very least the same social freedoms that we are
suppose to have in the United States.

Democratic as in well, a democratically elected government.



posted on Apr, 3 2007 @ 04:00 PM
link   
So you want to take a flat HALF of my hard-earned money?

Sorry, not only will this severely damage the economy, but why should half of my income go to the government?

And you want everyone to pay this 50%, or do you want it to be prgoressive, regressive, or something else?



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join