Legislators must reflect our values.  See Foundational American Values

An important sign of an effective leader is taking personal responsibility.  It shows a core confidence that they can handle the reality of making a mistake and are able to be honest with themselves and therefore with you. 

What qualifications are needed for those that create the laws that control our lives?

They (supposedly) represent the interest of their constituency.  Is that enough?

They make laws. 
Should they be professionals in the field of law?   Lawyers, who present the law before a judge either in the role of prosecutor or defender? 
Judges who evaluate if  laws are appropriate and how they apply?
Police who enforce the law?

How about moral law?
What about Orthodox Rabbis?  They are experts in Talmudic Law and often fill the role of judges.
How about Priests and Imams?

And how about Tax law? 
Should they be accountants?

Laws create systems of processes.
Should they be business and software analysts?

Laws have major impact on our economy. 
Should they be economists?

How about all the other fields that the laws affect.  Agriculture, Medicine, Insurance, Military etc.

To create safe efficacious medicine Drug companies employ teams of specialists with hundreds of years of  cumulative experience in biology, genetics, chemistry and other fields related to our bodies.   They conduct hundreds of tests via simulation on a computer, animal testing and clinical trials on humans.  We have a process through the FDA that evaluates and certifies medications before they are allowed to be disseminated.  We have Doctors who evaluate our specific needs and prescribe the correct medications.  Doctors are certified and operate under the Hippocratic oath of “First do no Harm”.  

What code of ethics does Congress operate under?  What certification do they have? 

The one profession Legislators really should be proficient in is Quality Assurance. 

Thought experiments, public opinion polls, photo-ops and endless rhetoric are no substitutes for simulation and field trials.  It is also essential to get feedback after the law is propagated.

Lawyers allowed to run amok in a Socialist environment have driven up the cost of everything.

Why should a Doctor be responsible for a person that neglected their health for 50 years?  Only Socialist Philosophy that removes all responsibility from the victim and the Lawyers who sue make it so.  

 Lawyers increase Health Care costs by forcing doctors to test for everything to avoid being sued for neglect and through malpractice insurance’s rising price. 

Lawyers, who represent one side and carry the Socialist Philosophy of always representing the victim into Judgeship are destroying our Constitution’s boundries on government.  Judges are first Lawyers. Judges need to treat both sides equally.  The two professions seem to be at odds.  A judge who is still a Lawyer is not qualified to Judge impartially. 

President Obama is a Lawyer.  So is his wife.   They are also Socialists and community activists.

Every Democrat nominee since 1984 went to law school (although Gore did not graduate).
Every Democrat vice presidential nominee since 1976, except for Lloyd Bentsen, went to law school.
Harry Reid is a lawyer.  Nancy Pelosi is a lawyer.

Republicans who still represent Foundational American values are business people, doctors, farmers, teachers – real people doing real work… who are often the targets of lawyers.

Lawyers fight for their client – the victim – against the opposing party.  The lawyers view is the same as the Socialist’s view.  
 
Lawyers always parse language to favor their side as do Socialists.  They put down and demonize the other side as the Democrats put down and demonize Republicans.
 
Lawyers use the power of government (the legal branch) to force the opposing party to yield their wealth to their client (victim) just as the Socialist does to equalize results.

Do we limit lawyers or do we fix the laws?  Let’s see what fixing the Law does.  All Laws must be re-evaluated, reconstructed or eliminated if they do not meet the criteria of FAV.

When the Communists take over, that’s what they do.  Shouldn’t we eliminate the Communist laws from our books?

The people had a choice and they chose the Socialists and their values.  Now they have to live with it.
There is only the Socialist option.  The people do not know all their choices.  Education and media predominantly present Socialist values.   Democrat and Republican are also heavily influenced by Socialist values.  Only when all the citizens understand both Socialism and FAV can it be said they made a choice. 

People elect the politicians and can throw them out. 
The system is rigged so that you can't throw them out without paying a heavy price.   Because of the seniority scheme politicians set up for themselves, if you don't re-elect your representative you lose the clout to funnel money to your town, district or state.  See: Taxes – The Socialist Piggy Bank  The solution is term limits and restoring the Constitutional empowerment of the States to collect taxes and fund the Federal government rather than the other way around as it is now.  

People willingly pay income tax so it can't be stealing.

People pay tax not because they are willing but rather because they are not willing to be penalized.  Income taxes are imposed under threat of penalty.

Are you willingly handing over your money to a robber with a gun or avoiding being killed?    If you are robbed every week by a protection racket and you pay regularly are you willing? 

If the protection racket has gone on for many generations the grandchildren may even think it's normal to pay and even believe it  is an obligation.  This was the norm under the Feudal system of peasants, Noblemen and Kings.  This is the norm under our Socialist progressive income tax system that was unconstitutional until 1913.  It required a Constitutional amendment and the collusion of Left wing Supreme Court Justices to redefine Direct taxes as excise taxes to set the present system into place. 

All politicians claim they are telling the truth even when they are contradicting each other. How can you figure out the truth?
You need an interpreter.   Politicians are not speaking the same language as you and I.  It sounds like English but the meaning of the words are changed.   They are deliberately choosing words as lawyers do, to confuse you.   They change words so that a lie sounds like the truth.  Or they redefine a lie as truth so repeating it is telling the truth.  Remember "I did not have sexual relations with that woman"?  If oral sex is not considered sexual relations then Clinton could truthfully say that the charges against him are false.  You won't see a dime in tax increases doesn't mean there won't be tax increases.  It only means that you won't see them.  They will be hidden tax increases through inflation, business tax etc. 
Fox news presents both Democrats and Republicans while NBC and the networks only present the Democrat view.  So how can Democrats claim that FOX is biased?  They have redefined Fair and Balanced to mean the Democrat view.  If you don't agree with them then you are a liar and biased. If you speak up at a Town Hall then you are a Mob.  

Words like Success, goals, change, Democracy, Fair, Activist have different meanings depending on your base Philosophy.   

Who will protect labor from the sweat shop employer, big faceless corporations and other oppressors if not the government?
The people have a lot more power than the government credits them with.  We have community shunning and displeasure with the owners, employees and stockholders, protests, Negative media exposure, boycotts, stock divestiture by mutual funds, the internet, watchdog groups and greater competition for workers if the government butts out.   Unions that don't set wage controls are also an effective measure.

Isn't morality relative.  Why are your morals better than mine or no morals at all?
Morality is a code of conduct within society.  All societies even animal ones have a code of conduct and indeed must for their society to function.   The function of morality is not relative.  The code of conduct of a giraffe society may be no better or worse than one for a lion society from an outside perspective but is of utmost relevance from within those two societies. 

Morality is constructed based on the purpose or foundation of the society.  Judgment of better or worse morality is based on comparing the results of the morality to the purpose and foundation of your society.   Ours is the sanctity of life based on a transcendent authority and power and maximizing individual freedom while also maximizing living together in peace and unity. 

Islamic society's purpose for example is to convert the world to their Religion.  Their morality and code of conduct justify any action even ones we would find morally reprehensible based on the goals of our society. 

Our judgment of morality is relative not morality itself.   Better or worse are the relative terms.   That's true however we must discern and exercise our judgment and decide which morals create a society that we want to live in.   Judgment isn't always correct.  A sociopath or addicts judgment is skewed and morality is not observed.   Do y that they can murder their pleasure or addiction is

Why do we need this? 
To balance safety and freedom.
Let's say you are walking in a crosswalk across a 4 way street.  The people driving the cars to either side of you are stopped obeying a red light.  The cars trying to turn and enter the intersection are stopped because you have the right of way.  Have you ever stopped to consider that the Right of Way is based on the principle of preserving life and that the drivers are stopped because they are being moral?   Without principles and standards of morality you would be run down and killed.    

How can you be against [insert social program] it's for the children?
At the expense of massive debt that we saddle our children with paying.  

You are despicable if you don't support [insert social program].  You have no compassion or humanity.
Government programs are Protection Rackets or Ponzi schemes.  A Protection Racket extorts money from you for Protection from the extortionists themselves. The solution is to get rid of the extortionists.  The government program caused or exacerbated the problem it is treating and is taking advantage of your sense of compassion and humanity to defraud you of your wealth and freedom of choice.   The solution is to withdraw all support for the Government Protection Racket.

Isn't Capitalism evil?
It is Socialist government collusion to game the free market system that is Evil.  The free market system itself, when not interfered with, can not take advantage of anyone as its power is decentralized.  Socialism dictates the market and is the cause of the suffering and evil ascribed to Capitalism.

What's the advantage of a free market?

Disadvantages?

Socialism is compassionate?

Contrast Socialism to Free market.

What's wrong with Unions?
Unions protect workers from abusive work conditions. They give the workers negotiating power as a group for insurance, pensions etc. However, they are destructive to a company and the market once they set wages that aren't tied to merit and prevent employee risk of being fired. At that point the incentive is to slow down and not be productive. This is union abuse of the employer and the consumer whose price increase pays for all this. Extra employees are hired and the company becomes non competitive. The government steps in and further compounds the abuse with taxpayer money.
 

What about those big corporations?
In collusion with government they create regulations that effectively give themselves a monopoly or at least knock out their competition.  Government regulation influenced by special interests is the problem.  The answer is to remove the need for lobbyists and special interests by taking away taxing authority from the Federal Government and putting it back into the hands of the States as the constitution specified before the 16th amendment.  Competition must be protected.

What about Consumer Affairs?  Who will be the consumer's advocate if not the government?
Consumer affairs is a job for Judges and their staff not a state bureaucracy. Government enforces the law.  An impartial Judge must decide before enforcement is called in.