In the next Presidential Debates, Each Candidate Must Identify Which Lobbyist Paid for Which Thing They are About To Say!

The biggest topic of discussion is campaign disclosure issues. With Congress having the worst American reputation in history, mainly due to corruption. With the outing of George Stephanopolis, Hilary’s mining deal, the hacking of every federal server by Anonymous and other unexpected revelations, nobody can hide their string-pullers anymore.

One of the bigger initatives sweeping the country is the push for a requirement for politicians to pre-identify who is telling them to say what. This would be required in all of their writings and speeches. It goes like this:

In each policy statement, Candidates must now identify which lobbyists paid for the next statement that they make.

For Example:

Debate Moderator – “Candidate #1, What is your position on net neutrality?”

Candidate #1 –  “Per Eric Schmidt & Google, my position is that it should be controlled by Silicon Valley and my campaign investors”

Debate Moderator– “Candidate #2, What is your position on attacking Iran?”

Candidate #2 – “Per Raytheon Corporation and Halliburton, my position is that we should go to war on them.”

Debate Moderator – “Candidate #1, What is your position on regulating Wall Street in light of the fact that every bank and investment group has now been found guilty of corruption and manipulation?”

Candidate #1 – “Per Goldman Sachs and AIG, we should talk a big story about cracking down on Wall Street but, in reality, do thing and put no executives in jail”

Debate Moderator – “Candidate #1, What is your position on CleanTech and green energy?”

Candidate #1 – “Per Kleiner Perkins, Frank Giustra and Goldman Sachs, we should do what-ever uses lithium ion batteries and their associated mining deals.”

Debate Moderator – “…and now a question for both candidates: Are you really nothing more than corporate whores who have sold off every last shred of your integrity to private billionaires and special interests?”

Both Candidates, In Unison – ” Per ALEC (And ALICE) you are taking a negative view of corruption. It is the best way to serve the people we work for…”

TAGS:  Presidential elections, presidential debates, 2016 election, political corruption, ALEC, ALICE, FEC, FEC Corruption, Presidential corruption, Congressional corruption, Elected official corruption, Congressional brib