A Girl Can Dream: The Vow I Would Like 2012 Presidential Candidates to Sign

With the GOP debate in Iowa last week, and all the excitement/controversy surrounding Rick Perry’s announcement of his intention to run this week, I’ve been thinking about what I might realistically hope for in a 2012 Presidential candidate. How about, at the very least, they sign a vow that they will:

1. Repeal Obamacare, preferably within the first week of taking office. If this were done, I would expect the stock markets almost immediately to show signs of recovery. Bonus points: promising to actually reduce (not merely decrease the rate of increase in) government spending — during the first term in office. [Update: Of course I mean the candidate pledges to sign legislation Repealing Obamacare, assuming it is passed by the House and Senate.]

2. Stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons; destroy (or help Israel destroy) any existing nuclear weapons program if necessary. Bonus points: promising to neutralize any state sponsorship of Al-Qaeda or other Islamic terrorism.

3. Never sign a bill into law, the adjudication of which would require interpretation of Islamic law. Bonus points (unrealistic pipe dream): promising to make the separation of church (any church) and state an explicitly acknowledged part of our legal system, so that no judge may be asked to interpret religious law of any kind in the adjudication of disputes, and no religion (or religious rationale) can be the “but-for” cause behind the enactment of any legislation.

4. Never say, “Islam means peace.” Bonus points: having read the Koran and a variety of commentary, including Robert Spencer’s.

Am I asking for too much? Too little? Discuss.

Oh, and if you happen to be a candidate reading this, feel free to sign on, below 🙂


Filed under Uncategorized

17 responses to “A Girl Can Dream: The Vow I Would Like 2012 Presidential Candidates to Sign

  1. Proxywar

    When it comes to Point 2 why must the united states destroy them? What are the chances of actually destorying them anyway if their nuclear program is deep underground underneathe the mountines? Why not just leave this task to isreal and claim plausible deniability?

    • James Reinsma

      Destruction doesn’t necessarily imply military action. We can call them out, boycott, cut any ties, etc. Many diplomatic alternatives can be imposed.

    • I did mention Israel and the words “if necessary” in #2. I do think we should at least give *moral* support to Israel, though. If we tried to claim plausible deniability, that would amount to us saying that we don’t think it’s right to prevent them from getting nuclear weapons. Wouldn’t it?

  2. James Reinsma

    What I see in this article is four goals that all can be accomplished in a four year term. Normally I would share my insight, opinions, and/or questions; but this is really great. I will say this; I think Herman Cain comes closest to all of these goals, but I don’t know if he will be the GOP selection. Well done on this though! Any *reasonable/rational* person would want this goals to be achieved.

  3. James Reinsma

    these goals*

  4. Proxywar

    Point taken on the “if necessary” part and the various means of destroying their nuclear program. As for the plausible deniability part I see as a neutral stance where we just publically deny any knowledge of it (we don’t have to condemn it) and shake their hands for it in private. Perhaps this thinking is too Machiavellian for some.

  5. I think you are asking too much, because politicians are wedded to pragmatism and altruism. I have been tracking political news for 30 years and I have yet to see a politician with any kind of backbone. Most of my ballot choices have been “voting against” rather than “voting for”. I would love to be proved wrong on my pessimistic viewpoint.

  6. I can only disagree with #1. The president has no power, and nor should he, to repeal legislation already signed into law. He can only veto it when it crosses his desk. However, he can simply choose not to enforce a law, but I am not sure how that would work in this case.

    Good list none the less, but I just don’t see any candidate with the spine for this (maybe Bolton) and a snowball’s chance at election given the current depraved state of American society.

    • Yes, I did mean that the candidate would vow to sign legislation repealing Obamacare, which I understand has already been passed in the House once. Is that right? I should hope that by 2013 there would be enough votes in the Senate to repeal it as well. We’ll see…

      • Yes, that is correct about the repeal bill having passed the House. It has not yet passed the Senate, which indicates the necessity for Republicans to oust control of that body from Harry Reid. However, if we had a president with *real* guts, perhaps he/she could even get repeal accomplished with a marginally Democratic Senate, by refusing to sign any legislation whatsoever until the repeal bill was passed in both houses. Such a president could use the “bully pulpit” to explain the evils of this bill while standing firm on his/her ultimatum, and win the battle. The majority of the American people are already in support of repeal so it wouldn’t be too difficult. And this majority is probably not even aware of provisions such as two that I just heard discussed on Rush Limbaugh today: (1) that HHS will have direct, real time access to our bank accounts so that they can debit funds for health care without our consent and (2) that people over the age of 73 will not be eligible for certain treatments. Sickening evils such as these (assuming that what I heard discussed is in fact correct) would make the argument for repeal a slam dunk, in my opinion. But if the Democrats were to put up a fight, this would be “a hill worth dying on” and I, for one, would not hesitate to follow through on such an ultimatum. This is somewhat of a tangent, I guess, since I am not running for president…

  7. Allen

    5. Never say Christianity means peace.

    6. Extract all religious zealots from the Tea Party.

    7. Religion = failed government and failed science

    8. Remove religion from every facet of anything that has to do with anything that deals with tax payer funded anything!

    9. Religion in politics = are you fucking insane!

    10. Did I forget to suggest that religion should be kept from politics?

    11. Until real “tax reform” comes along, tax churches.

  8. M.Stern

    Only #1 is related to political economy. 2-4 are related to Islam. I think your points can be improved:

    1) Reduce taxes to Reagan era rates (28%) and cut or eliminate the capital gains and death taxes.

    2) Repeal ObamaCare and reducing welfare state expenditures on an absolute basis (not just reducing the rate of growth) with the aim of cutting back social welfare expenditures 3-5% year every year

    3) Reduce the regulatory burden including eliminating the Minimum wage laws and other labor interventionism as well as firing Bernanke and ending inflationary fiscal policy.

    4) End the nation-building, democracy-spreading paradigm of warfare that has been in play since the 1950s. Recognize that Islam is the problem and end all democracy spreading projects in Muslim lands. End the COIN nonsense of “winning hearts and minds” and implement non-nation-building strategies of war (Google up “Lilli-Pad Strategy). If the destruction of Iran is called for then warfare must be waged without any attempt at creating a Western style Constitutional Republic there. Our war policy must NOT revolve around saving Muslims from themselves but on saving ourselves from Muslims.

    This should be the Tea Party platform; the bare minimum of it anyway.

    Lastly, Objectivists need to stop fixating on religion and the “Christian theocracy” nonsense. Our first and greatest enemy is the secular Left as it is they that control the universities and are the biggest purveyors of altruism in today’s politics.

    • mentioning != “fixating”

      While I don’t think that the Christian Right is a high priority as a tactical threat right now, I will certainly not ignore or soft-pedal the problems with religious conservatives. To the extent that they are serious, their first loyalty is to God, not to liberty, and not to protecting the United States from its enemies. Let’s not forget George W. Bush.

    • I could combine my points #3 and #4 into one, which would basically deal with the domestic issue of what has been called “stealth jihad.” Then I could add your #1, and elements of your #3. I am doubting that anyone who has any chance of being elected next year will completely eliminate the minimum wage laws and other labor interventionism, so I would incorporate the other two parts of #3.

      Do note that I relegated my “Christian theocracy nonsense” to the “Bonus points” part of #2, and even labeled it an “unrealistic pipe dream” as it would apply to a 2012 candidate. I agree with Andrew, below. My support for a religious conservative candidate will always be properly qualified.

  9. Bill

    Great points.
    Do you think a candidate signing on would get more votes because he did?
    I would add a vow to work for the end of all forms of government support for green/renewable/alternative energy. Government spending would be reduced and everyone’s cost of living would drop.
    Thanks for your efforts.
    P.S. If you start to get some takers on the end of government support for green energy, short corn futures.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.