Time to vet John Olson

[AquaMan]

You're just dancing around the issue little G. What you want is a candidate to announce he supports your view on abortion even though in his role as elected official he has no ability to change Roe v Wade. Even though they may be the best candiate on all the other issues. That is why our elected officials have so little clout in Washington because as idealogues they soon realize they are dreamers in a community of pragmatics and problem solvers. They are visible and their comrades are respectful of them but in the end they get little accomplished. They realize they cannot be effective without compromise which they refuse to engage in, but they don't want to lose their "phony baloney" jobs, so they keep promising during elections what they know they cannot deliver.

Single issue voters are so easy to manipulate.

[guido911]

Nah, I just accepted that political promises are just that.

They can't "fail" if they never attempt.

Man I hope you are kidding  or being sarcastic with that last sentence. Otherwise, talk about cynicism. Hell, that's like telling a child: "Well, first time at bat and you struck out, Johnny. There's always basket weaving for ya..." It's weak, but even "attempting" is wrong?

[Townsend]

Man I hope you are kidding  or being sarcastic with that last sentence. Otherwise, talk about cynicism. Hell, that's like telling a child: "Well, first time at bat and you struck out, Johnny. There's always basket weaving for ya..." It's weak, but even "attempting" is wrong?

Just making stuff up in your head there?

[RecycleMichael]

You're just dancing around the issue little G. What you want is a candidate to announce he supports your view on abortion even though in his role as elected official he has no ability to change Roe v Wade. Even though they may be the best candiate on all the other issues. That is why our elected officials have so little clout in Washington because as idealogues they soon realize they are dreamers in a community of pragmatics and problem solvers. They are visible and their comrades are respectful of them but in the end they get little accomplished. They realize they cannot be effective without compromise which they refuse to engage in, but they don't want to lose their "phony baloney" jobs, so they keep promising during elections what they know they cannot deliver.

Single issue voters are so easy to manipulate.

H2O boy is exactly correct. Nothing in Washington D.C. is accomplished by the extremists. All the real work is done in the middle.

[Townsend]

All the real work is done in the middle.

...and in the back rooms, under the table, on the down low, etc etc etc.

[nathanm]

All the real work is done in the middle.

It depends on what you mean by real work. If you mean the job of writing more special loopholes into the tax code for the wealthiest few thousand folks and large businesses or subsidizing giant corporations with their small business competitors' tax dollars, no. That part is handled very well by around 530 senators and representatives. Doesn't matter where on the spectrum they fall, chances are they're busy making sure those with the most pay the least proportion of their income.

[RecycleMichael]

Maybe using the word "work" in a conversation about Congress just confuses people.

What I meant to say was that when bills are being voted on in a tight partisan Congress, the centrists are the ones who really get to decide the vote. That gives Senators like Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe real power. It is really the same way in the Surpreme Court apparently. Now that Justice Roberts has voted against his typecast, he is in play.

I wish Oklahoma was in play as a state. I doubt that either Obama or Romney will visit Oklahoma again in 2012.

Now with Bridenstine has upset the incumbent, that seat might be in play. If Bridenstine's votes were mostly votes against Sullivan, then that seat is now in play.  

[guido911]

Just making stuff up in your head there?

Gosh I hope not.  But as it stands we have two newbies running for a seat occupied by a veteran. The only one we know anything about, specifically, is Bridenstine. An honest read of Olson's views from his site leads me to believe that he is pro-union, pro-abortion rights, pro-amnesty (illegals/undocumenteds), and wants to simplify the tax code in part by making corporations pay more. What or how he plans to act consistent with those views, who knows? Does he want "Free Abortions Fridays", increase capital gains taxes to 60% or to push to end right to work? From his site or what you know about the guy, what specifically does he intend to do?

From Bridenstine's website, you kind of at least know where he stands.

Let's illustrate (from their websites).

Healthcare

Bridenstine:

I would vote to repeal and replace Obamacare with a more competitive and cost reducing system.  Healthcare reform should:

   Allow families and businesses to buy insurance across state lines.
   End frivolous lawsuits that result in defensive medicine and exorbitant malpractice insurance premiums.
   Enhance Health Savings Accounts.
   Eliminate exemptions for pre-existing conditions.
   Provide incentives for healthier lifestyles.

Olson:

Affordable and accessible health care for all Americans is a fundamental right. Although the current health care system is far from perfect, we should undertake a bipartisan effort to reach the goal of affordable health care. Elimination of waste and redundancies in cost are necessary to make affordable care a reality.

Right to Life

Bridentsine:

All human life is sacred and begins at conception.  Unborn children should be welcomed in life and protected by law.  New technologies have made embryonic stem cell research unnecessary.  Taxpayer money should never be used to subsidize abortion as is the case in Obamacare.  I would support a human life amendment to the Constitution.

Olson:

Women's rights are currently under attack. In the last few years, government has frequently sought to insert itself into the relationship between women and their doctors. Access to private comprehensive health care should be fully available.

Economy

Bridenstine:

Free markets, economic mobility, and equal opportunity are the drivers of innovation, entrepreneurship, and capital formation.  Every piece of legislation should consider the impact on these drivers.

Our national debt is at a record high of $14.6 trillion and Congress continues to spend out-of-control.  American Treasury Securities have lost their AAA rating, which would normally place upward pressure on interest rates and exacerbate our national deficit.  Instead, the Federal Reserve continues to print money and purchase Treasury Securities to artificially bring their value up and corresponding interest rates down.  This increase in money supply weakens the value of the U.S. Dollar, making the United States an unattractive place to invest money, start a business or grow a corporation.  Joblessness is the result.  This cycle will only stop when the U.S Congress stops spending.

These are the principles that will return America to economic greatness:

   Low taxes
   Fiscal constraint
   Low regulation
   Sound monetary policy
   Tort reform
   Fair trade

In order to establish sound monetary policy, the Fed must focus singularly on price stability.  When the Fed attempts to use the money supply to create full employment or increase economic output, it weakens the dollar, creates inflation, causes bubbles, and intensifies the business cycle.  The financial crisis of 2008 was not caused by "unfettered free markets."  It was caused by government intervention in markets through manipulation of interest rates and money supply.  I would support repealing the Humphrey-Hawkins Act of 1978.

While lowering taxes is good, an overhaul of the tax code is also needed.  I would support the Fair Tax.

Olson:

The future of our economy requires that we do not overburden the nation with debt. Economic heath requires fiscal discipline. We have balanced the budget in the past I will push to do it again using a balanced approach that rebuilds a strong middle class. We must eliminate wasteful spending where we find it. We should increase investments in the higher education and training in the high-tech manufacturing industry. At the same time we must create economic incentives for companies to reinvest more than a trillion dollars of corporate money in the US manufacturing industry.

We must also push for significant tax reform in this country. We cannot balance the books of this country on the backs of the middle class alone. We must simplify the tax code and eliminate loopholes that allow giant corporations to pay a smaller share of the tax burden than the average college student. Fixing the tax code is impossible as long as Representatives put empty pledges over people. I won't make any pledges to any special interests.

Three issues, one specific to me. You may not support what Bridenstine stands for, but if you are looking for a representative to represent your interests, you can at least rule in or rule out this candidate.

[guido911]

H2O boy is exactly correct. Nothing in Washington D.C. is accomplished by the extremists. All the real work is done in the middle.

Well, based on what we know about Bridenstine and Olson, which one is down the middle and which is the extremist?

[AquaMan]

Well, based on what we know about Bridenstine and Olson, which one is down the middle and which is the extremist?

Simple. The extremist is the one you'll vote for.

Seriously, I was speaking of the district's and Oklahoma's past representation. Olson certainly doesn't seem extreme. I haven't met Bridenstine.

[DolfanBob]

A guy I used to run around with a little was one of 11 kids.  I asked if his family was Catholic. As deadpan as possible:

"No my dad just liked to F@#K!"

Are you sure he just couldn't get somebody to pay for his rubbers? oops, sorry. Wrong thread.

[Townsend]

Three issues, one specific to me. You may not support what Bridenstine stands for, but if you are looking for a representative to represent your interests, you can at least rule in or rule out this candidate.

We're making two separate points I believe. 

You are saying you can get usable info that you believe the candidate actually will attempt to follow vs a site where you can get no usable information about a candidate.

I am saying any information about plans the candidate has is moot.  I have doubts in their sincerity.  I imagine the truth would be "I'm putting this on here to get elected." or "I'm not putting this on here because I believe it might cost me the election."

[guido911]

I am saying any information about plans the candidate has is moot.  I have doubts in their sincerity.  I imagine the truth would be "I'm putting this on here to get elected." or "I'm not putting this on here because I believe it might cost me the election."

I think I get your point. My question, I guess, isn't knowledge power? And conversely, to those who say the least, why is that? You ashamed, got something to hide, got no opinion? What?

[Townsend]

I think I get your point. My question, I guess, isn't knowledge power? And conversely, to those who say the least, why is that? You ashamed, got something to hide, got no opinion? What?

I'd imagine Republicans in OK can post as much as they want and can get elected as a Republican.

On the other hand, I'd guess that Democrats in Oklahoma can't post much because they might lose the election if they post what they believe.

[RecycleMichael]

In reality, most campaign websites are put together by campaign staff. They are written to purposely not say too much.

The better bet to find out what a candidate really thinks is to ask them in person. That is what I try to do every time.