Thursday, June 22, 2006

An open letter to Wade Trombley

O.K. Wade I think we can work something out!
First thing is first, I have finally been afforded an opportunity to read your plaform and have a few things I think you could fine tune. If we can work these things out I believe I can forego the five dollars!
point by point from your website:
As far as Gay marriage goes I can take it or leave it for now. It is not a sticking point. I am a liberal that hopes for equal justice for all, but I am not gay, and I'm going to beat you up on this. I also believe that the rest of the state may have just as much apathy on either side of this issue for the moment, so as you have said let's "not change a thing" (please pass this on to the home office).
Another fine idea of yours would be that you will reduce the amount of red tape in Lansing. Eliminating the SBT is a fine goal as long as a poor working schmuck like me doesn't end up footing the bill. If we are in agreement, I believe you have found common ground with the present governor also.
I am confused by your next point and hope you can clear this up.
You claim that our schools are still based on an agrarian society, and that would lead many to believe you would like a more modern approach, then you lead the reader back to the three R's?! Why? and isn't the curriculum a choice made by local school boards? How are you going to effect change in local school districts, if you are in Lansing? As a small government republican, I would hope you see the pitfall before you. If you were to legislate what children in differing backgrounds and opposite areas of the state were to be taught, wouldn't that be more government on the backs of the people? You mean well, but I fear this is a negative in your column.
The casino!, What a great stance! I like it. More stuff like this will get me to the polling place with a smile on my face! I hate the 3 hour drive, and I can't afford to blow $30 in gas to lose $100 in Illinois. God bless you!
Here we go with the fire the senate thing.
It will likely fail this time and that is not because it is a bad idea. Just that it sells anger in lieu of constructive change.
I am not sure however that all of the proponents of the fire the senate campaign are going to wild about cutting 20% from the Legislature's budget. Not to mention this would likely cause problems for what I see as an eventual passage of Fire the Senate 2.0! One that I hope incorporates funding for our states future endeavors. Maybe something like a healthcare bill, or more likely alternative fuel implementation. Others use the word research, but I believe we have the answers already, and must implement them. The movement also lacks a prize show pig! As Pol once mentioned the name LaFollette, who never became president as his ideas were stolen and became Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal. If you were to carry the torch to lansing with such a message as one of those I have laid out, you too could be a Roosevelt for Michigan! (sorry for the pig reference..and um... the Roosevelt thing).
Cutting funds from the legislature would have been a sure fire way to get voters 8 years ago, but right now the people of this great state want to know they are going to have roads, to waste overpriced gasoline on. We need to know that there will be stability, and infrastructure. "Remember Engler?" Please don't let this be the cry from your opposition.
As far as special interests are concerned, I must ask if you have accepted any money from the NRA? If you have please explain how you don't believe they are a special interest group? Do you accept any funding from other interest groups? If you have not, and would not , say so. Please understand I am looking for someone who is not beholding to anyone but the voter.
Although I am a liberal and generally vote democrat, I have decided for now to forego voting on the democratic ticket at least during the primary, provided I found an acceptable republican to vote for. You could be that republican!
On a more personal note:
I know a couple of Lutherans and find them pleasant to me personally. I have had the occasion to be present at a Lutheran wedding , and although I felt sorry for the sinners that were being wed that day that they were not worthy of gods love, I made sure they understood that mine was unconditional.
I have friends that are also small business owners, and feel their pain and would like to be sure and send someone will represent them, as much as me
You seem like a nice guy, and lets face it there will likely be a republican in Lansing representing my district. I am tired of voting democratic, and finding that either they are really republicans in disguise, or losers that have no chance. The word Agnosticrat should have a little more meaning with that sentence. I have not found any republican that comes as close to what I envision my representative as being as you do at this moment. You want term limits, GOOD!, You dislike the amount of money being spent by special interest groups that steal the voice from the average citizen, GOOD! I hope we can work together on these, and other points, so I can say I have a man in Lansing that truly comes as close to representing me as any republican could!

4 comments:

Pol Watcher said...

Excellent questions. A couple more suggestions, if I may?

1. Are you going to take down your "illegal" signs after the scathing letter in the Banner?

2. Why should anyone vote for you when Brian Reynolds was already in the race with (virtually) the same positions?

Question for Agnosti: Why can't you support Brian Reynolds in the race? Though his signs are small his heart is big, he's already an elected county official with a wide base of support who has made the Courthouse Gang look silly on more than one occassion. We could use somebody like him in Lansing. He's the candidate than anyone not belonging to the NRA or RtL should be looking at. Unfortunately too many are focusing on his appearance in a race where TV has ZERO effect. This is our one chance to get a rep that's a real person and not an empty suit and I see you and others possibly throwing it away because he doesn't wear a suit. Please explain so that I may try to tell you you're wrong ; )

P.S. Nothing against Trombley so far. Just feel he was late to the party and will act as a spoiler if he truly wants change. Bailey, Calley and Vlietstra are more of the same.

agnosticrat said...

Tahnks for the response Wade and Pol, I just got in late and hope to re-read what you both have said in the morning.
I am a little disappointed that from what I see now there is no response in your response?!
Maybe all will look different in the morning!

Boggsone said...

Who the heck is Wade Trombley anyway? Was he at the debate? Which one was he?

Jay said...

Noticed Wade didn't answer Pol's sign question.