Did Sarah Palin write these questions?

In the previous post I introduced readers to GOOOH, a group that has a plan for returning control of the House of Representatives to the American people.   This new political movement claims to be independent and non-partisan.

Integral to GOOOH's candidate-selection process is that every member of GOOOH -- and would-be candidate -- complete a long questionnaire.   I decided to take the "Candidate Questionaire" myself.  Here are some of the questions, plus my reactions whilst attempting to answer them:

• Can you confirm that you have never been a member of, or made a donation of any amount to, the KKK or NAMBLA, and that you have not made a donation of more than $100 to the ACLU after the age of 30 or after the year 1999?   This GOOOH question equates the ACLU with a group advocating pedophilia and the KKK. 
•  Will you vote for or against amending the Constitution with a “law of predominant majority”, which says the “rights” of groups can be denied if they have consistently demonstrated behavior that 95% of the population considers unacceptable? For example, 95% of the population would likely vote that a public KKK rally should NOT be allowed, overriding the “right” of free speech for that particular group.    How is the government supposed to determine what 95% of the population wants when under 65% of Americans vote in any election?  
  
• Will you vote for or against limiting the fees a plaintiff’s legal representative can receive to one hundred times the amount a plaintiff in the case receives? As an example, if a plaintiff receives $10,000, the combined legal fees could not exceed one million dollars.   Yet no limit on the amount a corporation can spend in its own defense?
• Will you vote for or against providing government funds to the ACLU?  Why always single out the ACLU?
• Will you vote for or against multiplying by ten the prison sentence of those convicted of possessing drugs that are not willing to provide information that leads to the conviction of their supplier?   Let's suppose the supplier is not convicted, say due to a technicality?  
  
• Will you vote for or against reducing farm subsidy allocations by at least 25 percent each year you are in office?  For.
• Will you vote for or against limiting foreign aid to ten or less countries in any year?  "fewer"
• Will you vote for or against a federal budget that includes any item whose benefit is primarily for a single state (e.g., a bridge in Alaska, or a levee in Louisiana)?  After Hurricane Katrina, who would dare equate federal spending on a levee for Louisiana with a bridge (to nowhere) in Alaska?   
• Will you vote for or against only applying the Endangered Species Act to animals that are larger in mass than a marble (i.e. eliminate protection for species such as salamanders, crickets, and spiders), unless a critical contribution to the ecosystem is defined?  Did Sarah Palin write these questions?
  
• Will you vote for or against establishing a .xxx Internet domain (e.g., www.notforkids.xxx) and imposing steep fines and significant jail time for all sites that provide access to pornographic material outside of this domain?  Define pornographic. 
  
• Will you vote for or against limiting total military spending to 3% of GDP, excluding periods when our nation is imminently at risk of war with another country or a recognized military unit (i.e., claiming we are at war with terrorists is not the same as being at war with another country)?  Worth considering.
• Will you vote for or against decreasing total foreign aid contributions to match the average contributions of the leading countries in the world in absolute dollars: Britain ($4.9b), Germany ($5.3b), France ($5.5b), China ($0), Russia ($0), Australia ($1.0b), Canada ($1.0b), and Japan ($9.9b), or approximately $3.5 billion per year ($27.6b / 8)?    An "absolute dollars" criteria means that the average American would contribute less than the average citizen of any other developed country.  What kind of cheapskate rat proposed this question?
• Will you vote for or against United Nations recommendations or dictates given to the United States?  Since the US has a veto on the Security Council,  a "dictate" cannot be issued from the UN to the US.
  
• Will you vote for or against processing all people who commit a crime against a U.S. citizen who are not U.S. citizens in military tribunals instead of the U.S. legal system? (Effectively declaring they do not have the same rights as our citizens.)   "Do unto others..." 
  
•  Will you vote for or against allowing government assistance (of any kind) to a company that has A- or lower bond rating (S&P).  ... government assistance of any kind?

In the previous post, I quoted this GOOOH rule:

Candidates are required to sign a binding agreement, before they are selected, that ensures they will vote according to their documented answers once in office. If they do not, they will be legally obligated to resign within 72 hours. 

 If GOOOH ever gets one of its candidates elected, the movement will surely be a boon to lawyers. The elected GOOOH politician-drones would have no time to legislate.  They will be preoccupied with responding to various lawsuits accusing them of having acted contrary to this or that insanely-worded item on the  Candidate Questionnaire.

If you should want to take this tedious questionnaire yourself (there are better ways to spend your time), visit the GOOOH website.  If you want your answers to count, you will first have to pay GOOOH $100.00.

UPDATE:   One further observation about the GOOOH Candidate Questionnaire has taken some time to sink in.  It occurs to me that many of the questions are worded in a rather tricky way.  That is, the answer seems  straightforward unless you happen know something about the subject (the UN question); or you take the time to think through the implications (plaintiff, foreign aid question, etc).  Many of these question/statements more resemble what a lobbyist would ask to throw a poll or manipulate a state referendum than what sincere citizens would come up with on their own.   Who came up with the questions, and how?

The more fundamental problem isn't the questions themselves, but the premise that citizens know or care  enough about all of these issues that they should even want to hold elected representatives to account for obeying their response to every item on such a survey.  I suspect few people even have a strong opinion -- let alone an informed opinion -- on even half these questions.