About Detailed Issues

I think that a candidate should present his ideas, views, positions, and plans in detail.  I did that in 2006 and am doing it again in 2008.  But, there is a danger in doing that.  A voter may agree with me and applaud my ideas and positions in every case but one, and, considering only that issue, vote for my opponent with whom he shares nothing.  (My opponent double talks around all issues hiding his thoughts, if he has any.)  As an example, a college instructor agrees with virtually everything I propose but will not support me because of my proposal for a national program to provide low cost college courses for credit.  He sees it as a threat to his livelihood.  (Actually it would not be.)

People have "hot button" issues, but they should realize that there are multiple issues which are critical to our survival as a nation.  I recently talked to a lady who told me that she didn't care where I stood on anything except education.  I went through my nine proposal areas on education with her.  She was in full agreement and said she was impressed.  I asked her if it was OK if, in addition to dealing with the education issues, I helped end the occupation of Iraq, produced a budget surplus, reduced the trade deficit, produced a workable and affordable universal healthcare program, and a few other things.  She said that if I did all of that she would push me for President. 

If you agree with most of what I present, vote for me. 

My opponent won't tell you where he stands on anything.  His votes and actions show that he supports tax breaks for the rich, windfall profits for the drug companies, giveaways to oil corporations, and the continuation of corruption in Congress.  All of these interests provide him with large campaign contributions and/or personal wealth.  See details on Hobson.