Thursday, November 3, 2016

TOMMY SCHRADER FOR CONGRESS ENDORSEMENTS- gina burgess

x
x
TOMMY SCHRADER FOR CONGRESS UNOFFICIAL CAMPAIGN SOCIAL MEDIA PAGE:
 https://www.facebook.com/TommySchraderForCONGRESS/
X
INDIANA 3RD DISTRICT CONGRESSIONAL RACE
x
https://www.facebook.com/GinaMBurgess/posts/10210769141969478
x
G-WIRE/B-LINE
X
X
X
TOMMY SCHRADER FOR CONGRESS UNOFFICIAL CAMPAIGN SOCIAL MEDIA PAGE:
 https://www.facebook.com/TommySchraderForCONGRESS/
X
Tommy A Schrader (Democrat)
Campaign website:    https://www.facebook.com/TommySchraderForCONGRESS/ 
Pepper Snyder (Libertarian)
Campaign website: www.pepperforcongress.com
Jim Banks (Republican)
Campaign website: www.jimbanks.us 
X

TOMMY SCHRADER
http://www.journalgazette.net/news/local/Democrat-Schrader-betting-on-himself-15400723
x

GINA BURGESS COMMENTARY ON TOMMY SCHRADER:
X
So let’s start with the elephant in the room---Tommy Schrader. Personally, I don’t believe him to be qualified for the job, but much of that has been based on my knowing him as of 2011. That was 5 years ago and people change, sometimes for the worse and sometimes for the better. When I took a step back, I had to admit that with very limited resources—he got himself on the ballot---and then with no resources and absolutely no support from anyone---he won his Primary election, fair and square like he did in 2011. The difference---the local political establishment wasn’t going to make the effort to remove him like they did in the 2011 race, especially when they were backing him in 2016 to throw a monkey wrench into the system. Did they use Schrader? Absolutely. Did Schrader use them back. Absolutely. Who was the smarter person there? Schrader---hands down. Like him or not, he deserves credit for using what limited resources he had to get him to where he has gotten.
Schrader doesn’t know how to use technology, which is a common problem among people who struggle with disabilities and are transient, and sometimes homeless. But Schrader knows how to read, knows how to use public resources---the library---and did his best to campaign with no support and a dental-floss budget. He called when he could to find out if people were voting for him. He’s held signs at early voting locations. He even went door to door in some neighborhoods and put himself through the agony of public scrutiny. And let’s be fair here---he has had way more public scrutiny than any other non-presidential candidate in Northeast Indiana.
Where Schrader falls short, however, is that he doesn’t really have his own political platform---or hasn’t used resources to promote his platform. He is genuinely pro-life, pro-gun, pro-beer, pro-porn, and although he is the Democratic candidate, he is pro-Trump. Again, like him or not—that takes some political courage. But when it comes to domestic issues, I don’t know where he stands. For example, on health care reform---I’m pretty sure he is for maintaining “Obamacare,” but I don’t know that he recognizes the problems with Obamacare or if he embraces the “fixes” put forth by either Clinton or Trump.
The last telephone conversation we had, Schrader got impatient with me. He wanted to know who I was voting for and at that particular time, for this particular race, I genuinely didn’t know. I expressed my concern that he may not be qualified enough for this position and upon hearing that, Schrader hung up on me. While that isn’t exactly the way to win a vote, my skin is a little thicker than that---compliments of some of the things I’ve had to deal with behind-the-scenes with certain members of Fort Wayne City Council. But when Schrader hung up on me, he didn’t give me the opportunity to tell him that I was impressed with what seemed to be an unusual clarity about him. It was clear that he was indeed goal-focused and campaign-oriented. It also appeared as though he were on his medications and free of any undue influences of alcohol or other substances. I wanted to hear where he stood on the positions. Sadly, his impatience with my careful deliberation of whom to choose is ultimately what cost him my potential vote. If he loses the Congressional race—and he probably will---I may be more inclined to actually support him in a local election in a few years. If he maintains this new status quo.

xXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
gina burgess commentary:
x
x
UNITED STATES CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATIVE
3rd District of Indiana
MY ENDORSEMENT: My pick is for Libertarian Pepper Snyder. Honestly, this was a more difficult race to choose from than I had initially thought and my endorsement pick actually ended up surprising even me. I really thought I was going to end up endorsing Jim Banks—whom is a really great guy and someone I personally admire. First—to all three of these candidates, I want to give a special shout and kudos. As a group—you have done the most amazing job of representing what it means to be an American. We have the American military hero; we have the all-American Mom-Next-Door; and we have the “real American” who is living in poverty and struggling to get by. In an unusual and positive twist, all three candidates have reached out to me at some point or other and all three candidates have kept the lines of communication open. I value candidates who are accessible and responsive to their constituents and all three of these candidates surprisingly rose to the top here. These guys really made me work---all three deserved to be on the ballot. Yes, all three.

XXXXXXXXXXXXX
THE DUTIES: All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives. Historically, the House of Representatives concerns itself more with domestic affairs than foreign matters, especially as it pertains to taxation and other matters of the purse. ““All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives….”— U.S. Constitution, Article I, section 7, clause 1. http://www.let.rug.nl/…/…/powers-of-the-house-and-senate.php
XX
That leaves me with Jim Banks and Pepper Snyder. I have to admit that between the two of them, I was leaning heavily towards Banks. And, honestly, how could I not---he is a great guy. I’ve publically stated that before. In contrast, Pepper’s initial contact with me didn’t give me the same kind of warm and fuzzy feeling that I like to get from a candidate. There was an initial coolness and distance. That coolness and distance she projects is likely to cost her some votes, which is unfortunate. So, what happened? Why am I endorsing the candidate who was cool versus the candidate I personally admire?
It came down to the issues and a little campaign etiquette. Before I discuss the issues, I want to discuss campaign etiquette. While both of these candidates are running strong campaigns---it’s without a doubt that the Banks campaign is visually stronger. Everywhere you turn, there’s a Banks sign. Both candidates have good, solid websites and good, solid social media presences. But there’s where Banks runs into a bit of a problem with me.
There is just too much of his family in his campaign. Yes, Banks is a family man. Yes, his wife stood in for him in the State Senate so he could fulfill his military duties---and my hat is off to both of the Banks for their public service in both the political arena as well as in the military. But to place his three beautiful little girls front-and-center on his website really rubbed me the wrong way. Children are not political pawns and they are not political bait. While I don’t believe Banks intended that message---I also don’t believe he gave thought to his children’s right to privacy nor the fact that he was subjecting his daughters to the eyes of every creep and sexual pervert out there. It also bothered me that he would have his wife and his daughters on public display like that, especially after recorded audio comments of Trump. And I know that such a presentation has nothing to do with his job---but out of honesty, fairness and full disclosure---that just really rubbed me the wrong way. Mrs. Banks is not the one running for office. The little Banks are also not running for office. Mr. Banks is running for office and his image should have taken the prominent front-and-center on his website.
Incidentally, in a related situation, Pepper Snyder called out Banks for “supporting Trump’s comments” – I could find no evidence of Banks verbally stating that he supported Trumps sexually-charged commentary. If you are going to make accusations like that, you’d better provide documentary evidence in support of such an accusation. Failing to do so is a poor reflection on you and your supporters.
So, now we are to the issues. At first I laughed when I saw the issues both are running on---it’s like they are not even in the same race. Later, as I was trying to figure out who to vote for, I wanted to spank them both. They made comparatively researching their positions significantly more difficult than it needed to be. (Btw, the local PBS station should also be spanked for failing to host a Congressional debate this year among these three candidates so that voters would have a way to differentiate between the two.)
On the issues---Banks relies heavily on his military background. For a congressional position—he relied too heavily on his military background: “After being elected to Congress, Jim's first priority for Baer Field and the people of northeast Indiana will be acquiring newer aircraft such as the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and increasing the number of joint units and missions assigned to Baer Field” And he will seek “a seat on the House Armed Services Committee to closely monitor developments that may impact the 122nd, the Air Guard Base and northeast Indiana's regional defense cluster.” And if he doesn’t get that committee assignment, then what? (As a junior Congressman---it’s not likely that he’ll get his first pick of committee assignments.)
Out of 10 separate issues, 5 of them have to do with military and foreign affairs; 2 of them have to do with religion and morality issues; and the remaining three issues are the most Congressional office oriented: health care, gun control and taxes. Incidentally, after reviewing all the issues it was his stance on three particular issues that caused me to reconsider him as my front runner. Those three issues were health care, veterans and abortion. Essentially, Banks wants to provide for the health care of veterans while eliminating “Obamacare” and forcing women to carry pregnancies to full-term, regardless of the mother’s health or the manner of conception. Banks is so anti-Obamacare that he itemizes what he will do. He is so anti-abortion that he itemizes what he will do. But when it came to veterans---his own military brethren, many of who receive expanded care because of Obamacare and now includes women who could be raped while performing their military tour of duty---he was as vague and as non-descript as he could be. With the House of Representatives focusing more of their time, energy and efforts on the homefront, I just don’t know that Banks is suited for this more domestic position. In sincerity, I think he is better suited for a U.S. Senate position, probably something having to do with the Department of Defense or Foreign Affairs. Domestically, Banks just tanks.
In contrast to the uber- and military-focused Banks, we have Pepper Snyder who is all over the board on issues. She and Banks agree on gun control, namely that there’s this thing called the Second Amendment and that it gives everyone the right to bear arms. But outside of that, there wasn’t a whole lot of topics of mutual discussion.
Her view on corporatism is naïve as are many of her positions having to do with economics, job creation and business. She tries really, REALLY hard to present herself as a business woman, but she fails because---and God bless her for trying---she just isn’t that person. My guess is that was her attempt to try to attract Republicans who don’t like Trump. Honestly, I had to shake my head as I read her take on many social issues. As an act of mercy, I’m not going to go into those issues—except to say it’s really clear that she is a Libertarian working hard to recruit the Democratic vote.
As a campaign strategy, that may be somewhat savvy---she recognizes she needs the numbers and recognizes that many educated Democrats aren’t going to give Schrader much of a chance—especially as local media continues to set the guy up for public scrutiny and public failure. Her pursuit of Democratic votes may also be why she chose to engage in an outdated discussion concerning marriage equality laws (which are currently the law of the land) and probably why she avoided discussions about Obamacare or pro-life rights.
Putting aside her efforts to appeal to Democrats and Republican voters---there were four areas where she did shine and was pretty intensely focused: criminal justice reform, medical cannabis (legalization of marijuana), government spending (a topic Banks avoided all-together, which was a major faux pas given the nature of the House’s control of the nation’s “purse strings”), and her proposal to Audit the Fed.
All four of these position have fiscal consequences and she tackled them from a fiscal perspective. While she may be all over the board and not be an economics major, she has a Ph.D. in common sense. Her criminal justice reforms call for reductions in regulations as they pertain to human behavior---and she rightfully implies that as a nation we have begun to regulate everything whether it needs to be regulated or not. And it’s this over-regulation that is harming our society as different jurisdictions have different laws, regular citizen’s get tripped up in the mess, far too many people are ending up either in prison or in a system short of prison that is highly dependent on a cycle of fines, fees and costs from which some people emerge more harmed than any harm that they allegedly perpetrated in the first place.
Her take on medical cannabis is that it is a natural, non-carcinogenic God-made plant---not a cancer-causing man-made substance like most cigars, cigarettes, pipes, chew, and vapes---and that it in its purest form it has natural healing properties for many diseases and health issues. She is also savvy to note that medicinal cannabis hasn’t been banned because it’s bad for people, but rather it’s been banned because it’s bad for big Pharma profits. To her common-sense, she stopped just short of making it into an agricultural product, which of course it is but that doesn’t bode well for the limited scope that she is trying to get cannabis approved for.
Where Snyder really appealed to me, personally, however was in her pledge to never vote for anything if it increased the federal budget and to audit the Federal Reserve. I was a bit disappointed that she didn’t address the banking matters of Wall Street and never referenced the petrodollar, but her understanding that the Federal Reserve is in need of an audit indicates that domestically, she realizes that there needs to be some changes and that one of those changes is the Federal Reserve. In contrast, Banks is more about preparing for war, keeping our country safe and keeping out those illegal immigrants. By this compare and contrast---Snyder is more suited for the domestic affairs roles associated with the House of Representatives and Banks is more suited for the foreign affairs roles associated with the Senate.
No matter who wins this race---the 3rd District will be well-represented either way. But in the end, for me, it is Snyder for Congress.
THE DUTIES: All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives. Historically, the House of Representatives concerns itself more with domestic affairs than foreign matters, especially as it pertains to taxation and other matters of the purse. ““All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives….”— U.S. Constitution, Article I, section 7, clause 1. http://www.let.rug.nl/…/…/powers-of-the-house-and-senate.php
THE CANDIDATES:
Tommy A Schrader (Democrat)
Campaign website: ??????
JG article: http://www.journalgazette.net/…/Democrat-Schrader-betting-o…
Pepper Snyder (Libertarian)
Campaign website: www.pepperforcongress.com
Jim Banks (Republican)
Campaign website: www.jimbanks.us 
X
X
X
X
X
XX 


Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)