Wernher — Roleplayer Guild

Byrd Man said
So, for political alignment I would say Wernher's candidate is kind of a moderate conservative with a little libertarian streak, just my take on it, where would everyone else want their political alignment's ally? Presumably a conservative president will have a conservative cabinet, and at least one legislative body will be led by the conservatives.

Ironically, in real life I am a pro-big government communist leaning faggotron, but I think this kind of person would have been funny to RP.

Background wise I imagined the man to be a big name in Intelligence, the kind that's CIA from father to son since it has been founded, so has a great reputation as an intelligent and knowledgeable man regarding international matter as well as understanding of the military, but civilian administration seen with some distrust since he's the kind of guy that likes to keep his involvement as absolute as possible and do without congress or Senate as much as possible, things like using executive orders abusively or try to move a cargo boat of a mega-bill so huge it contains many loopholes and way to interpret a million things differently as to give him a lot of room by using the vagueness of the law.

Popular since his things 'Seem to work', but with crippling controversies on things like the NSA or homeland security. I'd say:

+Economy: Actually manages to get his bet of making a surplus, although a lot of it would have to do with rising global economy as well.
+Foreign Policy: The US stop getting in wars and be the world police while maintaining a presence in NATO.
+Security: Probably 1 highly publicized 'Good job' of intelligence showing his policies are working.

-Welfare: If you want to be on welfare join the army policy making unhappiness among the poorest who were used to higher entitlement.
-Secret Services Black Hole: Something like 200% increase in 'Confidential budgets' about top secret projects which cannot be debated into congress as well as unwillingness to discuss about things like the NSA and PRISM.
-CONTRA-like scandal: The CIA restarting to topple small governments again, maybe something in Venezuela?

Many other things I'd develop on later.

His Face

Here's my try at this.

Foreign Affairs

Is China an economic or military threat to the US?:
Economic most certainly but military-wise, as in the cold war, our nuclear deterrents are I believe more than enough to signify China that there are lines not to be crossed and to insure our own security as well as that of our allies in Asia and through the world. To get back to the economic matter however, we must understand that the Chinese economy depends on western consumption and the debt is not the so called 'Economic Super Weapon' many fears, for if we stop buying Chinese goods, their economy will fail, as surely as our own did when we stopped buying American goods. It is through a common patriotic effort and by allying with other countries that share our same value about decent wages and work security for hardworking citizens that we will go back to our glory days.

Should there be an independent Palestinian state?:
Playing world police is both costly and undesired by the majority of the world, as well as by the majority of US citizens. It is for the United Nations to decide what to do with this matter and if it is the common consensus of the world that the Border should return to the proposed 1947 agreement, then so be it. This doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things for US foreign interest and all would benefit of a more stable middle east.

What is your stance on the War on Terror? Are you in favor of endorsing the Bush Doctrine (pursuing nations that harbor or sponsor terrorism) or are you in favor of a more pragmatic approach to terrorist organizations and the countries in which they operate?:
Are covert drone strikes on terrorist and suspected terrorist locations a policy you would endorse?:
It is my belief that the US of A should make its stance clear to the world that it will not support infringement to its sovereignty through attacks on its people and if we have reasons to suspect terrorists to be hidden in a country, we will demand cooperation or even the freedom of action to act and dispose of these criminals if the government in question, we have reasonable reason to doubt is collaborating or even sponsoring these terrorists. If our demands are refused, this may be considered for cause to war as it could have the serious implication that these states are in direct association with these terrorists. War is no light matter but our army is there to defend the people of this country and by god we will do what we have to do to insure the security of our nation and its people.

Is the authorized arresting and indefinite detaining of suspected terrorists, including US citizens, without charge good for America?:
The judicial system is a long and tedious one and I believe that when state security has reason to suspect a person of terrorism, the delays must be avoided before the suspect can flee, warn its associates or destroy evidence of its act. I however agree that the power of indefinite detaining is a fearsome one indeed and must be limited. My view is that a maximum time of 1 week of detention with sufficient compensation afterward is what is needed and what is acceptable for this country to have maximum safety without falling in wretched dictatorship, although I would be willing to reduce this time to 72 or even 24h if the people feel this would be too much. We must sacrifice some freedom to insure security, but it is to all of the people of this nation to decide together, democratically, what it is they are willing to sacrifice.

Domestic Affairs

Should nonviolent drug users be jailed?
I find that ultimately, those imprisoned in the hell of drugs are victims and that our efforts and resources be directed at those that produce and sell these products. Refusal however, to collaborate with the authorities to catch these people would still be seen as obstruction of the law, and punished as per the law.

Should the federal government increase direct financial aid (loans/grants/debt relief) for college students?
The state should insure all opportunities are given to the people but yet it is not its purpose to regulate the lives of the citizens, in this optic, I would propose that the state should finance those willing and competent enough to study in exchange for a non-armed military service to the state. Obviously, disciplines such as philosophy or women's study, which provide no physical use to an organization such as the army and to which our nation already has an abundance of graduates competing for an already minimal job market, would not be sponsored by such a program. This program would insure an equality of opportunity while giving back to the common wealth of this nation through service and the experts this would provide to the job market.

Are more federal regulations on guns and ammunition needed?
No. Individual states may regulate how they deal with guns but the federal government's job is to manage the security on the federal and international level. Mass killings, while incredibly tragical, are a local concern and it is to local communities to decide how to react in these though times. To ban guns or to insure every teacher has a gun to protect its students are both options to be considered but it would infringe on the rights of the states to force a decision on the entire nation. Check and Balances.

Should gay marriage be legal?
Again another local concern that is of no concern to the federal institutions. I will only say this: Tax regulations regarding to married couples are given in the prospect that these people will give birth to children and thus need the economic resources to raise them well, as such from a legal standpoint, no matter what feelings about adoption people may have, 2 men married together will not have the same tax advantages as a man and a woman. If God would allow the rings to be passed between individuals of the same sex however is I believe a matter for churches to decide, for I am only a politician and not a man of God.

Should the US Constitution and Bill of Rights be amended or updated in any way?
I will leave constitutional matters to the constitutional court, but I will say that we mustn't forget the spirit on which this country was built, that of freedom for all men and women and as a citizen, I do not feel it would be right to change our constitution as to give more restrictions than we already have. Some would say, and in a lot of case would be right to say, that the government already walks a lot on individual freedoms in the name of security. I feel it in many ways is the government's job, the state will always want to get bigger, it tends to do so historically. It is thus the citizens job to protest against this and use the democratic process to put the state where it should be: Within a comfortable distance of our freedom.

Should drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) be allowed?
There is no easy solution for the pollution problems the world face. Fuel fossils, cheap but polluting or greener energies, expensive but clean? I for one believe that intelligent and careful development of our natural resources should be made as to limit the impact on the environment, but I will not hide my enthusiasm to develop new, more secure and safe ways to use nuclear energy, which may provide the green and cheap energy the United States need to secure its future.

Are federal health care reform laws good for America?
To this I will go back to the matter of student loans and say that while I believe that the state can help those in need, it shouldn't either only hand out everything for it makes a man lazy. Many may say that the government has no experience in managing hospital and I will say these people are right, on the civilian level. The military is and will always be the government field of expertise and I believe that we can accommodate the need for healthcare of a citizen which does not have the resources to care for himself, but we will only help a man who is willing to help himself and thus, is willing to give back to society through his hard work after he has been healed and of course, said healing may not be made in the comfort one would be used to in the civilian area. I have served in the army and all I can say is that such is life in the military: You'll live and its what matters.

Economy/Taxes/Entitlement

Is outsourcing jobs to other countries good for America?
No, it is not and while I believe that freedom of trade is good, I believe it is only when the playing field is equal. Many americans and unions have fought hard to be where we are today but our economy, despite our educated and competent workforce, simply cannot compete against the sheer abundance of cheap labor elsewhere. Tariffs should be put on foreign products depending on how unfair their edge is on our own workers. It may rise the price of certain objects, but I believe ultimately the job gain will be more than enough to compensate and all will benefit from a richer America.

Should the federal deficit be reduced without raising any taxes?
As much as possible, yes. The conventional army, in this age of nuclear power is not all that useful and while we must be able to defend ourselves, I believe having more than 3 times the budget of the next military power in the world and in general almost 40% of the entire world's military expenditures is a little bit too much I dare say cutting the military budget as well as many other redundant things in civilian matter is essential not to reduce the deficit, but to eliminate it as soon as possible and have a surplus as to pay back this debt.

Does the US need welfare and food stamp reform or abolishment?
Most certainly some should be reformed and some should be abolished. This isn't about providing 'Decent living' to everyone, it is about allowing everyone to work for his success and the state will insure that you live, nothing more. 'Decent' living, a phone, a car, nice clothes, you will have to work for.

Are illegal immigrants a net gain to the US economy?
They are not, like the chinese, they undercut hard working Americans not only through their will to work, but because these will not pay taxes and be part of the system, thus making them able to work for even less while draining our common resources. This country was built on mass immigration and while I will give my life to protect anyone who migrated legally, got a job and learned to speak english, I believe illegals should be deported and do like everyone: Go through the due process. It is a hard and tedious work and we will do what we can to get those who can benefit america to join it, but it must be done.

Do lower taxes provide incentive for employers to hire more workers?
I do not know any employer except for the Government that will hire more workers when they are not needed but one thing is certain: You must spend money to make money and where there is a penny to be made, someone will take the opportunity. So yes, lowering the taxes will encourage people to spend more, thus creating more jobs, but I do not think that taxing the employers less on the gain they make will make them fire people, because if we take 30 pennies of each dollar he makes, deciding to forsake this dollar will earn him 70 less penies and someone somewhere will take the opportunity of that person having a dollar to spend on something. If you are looking for an advocate about a flat tax, I am not him.

Should Social Security be privatized?
If privatized, social security becomes another business, so the question is redundant. I am however agreeing that it is not the government's place to try and provide 'Satisfaction', it is its place to satisfy a need. People cannot expect to eat a government provided meal and then actually critique the cooking. It will be tasteless, if you're lucky, but it will provide the nutriments you need to be healthy to go on, find a job and earn the quality of life you need. If you're alive, then ok is good enough.

Wernher Member

Status

Bio

Most Recent Posts