The Slackertarian

New Year's Resolution

2012-01-08T16:20:00.002-06:00

Hello my non-existent readers.

It's election season and I thought maybe it was time to start posting my usual anti-government rantings again.

There was no real response to the open letter.

Here's what Senator Amy Klobuchar's office sent in response:

Thank you for taking the time to e-mail me. We have received your message. One of the most important parts of my job is listening to what the people of Minnesota have to say to me. I am here in our nation’s capital to do the public’s business on behalf of the people of our state.

Please continue to visit my website at http://www.klobuchar.senate.gov to follow what I am working on, both in Washington and Minnesota. It is frequently updated with current news and events regarding my work in the U.S. Senate.

Additionally, many constituents ask about tracking the progress of legislation. One useful tool is to regularly check my website. Another resource I recommend is the Library of Congress legislative information website, http://thomas.loc.gov. I hope you find this information helpful

- Amy

Please do not reply to this email address. The best way to contact me is through my website at http://www.klobuchar.senate.gov. Thank you!

Gee, thanks Amy. To her credit and in all fairness, I also got this in response the very same day. I still get shined on, but it is by far to most personal response I've ever received from an elected official.

Dear (name removed to protect the guilty):

Thank you for taking the time to write to my office about your disapproval of the federal government. Based on your letter, it is clear to me that you have thought about this issue at length. It is always helpful to hear people's ideas and our office will consider your views as we go forward. I appreciate that you shared your thoughts and concerns with me.

One of the most important parts of my job is listening to what the people of Minnesota have to say to me. I am here in our nation’s capital to do the public’s business and to serve the people of our state. I hope you will contact me again about matters of concern to you.

Sincerely,

Amy Klobuchar
United States Senator

"Thanks for the letter kid (pat on the head) now run along." Yeah, sure Amy, whatever you say.

My Representative, Betty McCollum sent this in response:

Dear Friend:

Thank you for contacting me. I appreciate hearing from you and value your comments and questions.

Due to the large volume of correspondence I receive, please look forward to receiving a response from me via US Postal Mail or e-mail in the coming weeks. If you need immediate assistance, please contact my St. Paul office at (651) 224-9191 or my Washington, DC, office at (202) 225-6631.

Sincerely,

Betty McCollum
Member of Congress

I have yet to receive any further correspondence from Representative McCollum. Way to be in touch with your constituents Betty. These people do not care one bit what I think or what I say. The only thing I have to offer them is one measly vote and that's just not enough for them.

Alas, I am subject to the taxation and the above "representation" for the time being.

/sigh

Feel free to comment

An open letter to the President and Congress

2009-04-20T16:20:00.002-06:00

Dear Mr. President and members of Congress

I am a 38 year old construction worker who has had enough of the federal government and I want out. Our Declaration of Independence states that "...whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government"

I believe our government has been destructive of these ends for many decades. The power of the state is used more to supercede the rights of the individual and less to protect these rights. Therefore I wish to withdraw my consent to be governed. I would like to "opt out" so to speak. I would like to opt out of being taxed by the federal government in exchange for not using any federal sevices. This means that I would never take a penny from Social Security or Medicare or any other federal program, ever, for the rest of my life. I would never be deemed a "burden on the system". Even if it means that I can no longer use the federal highway system, so be it. I think this a fair exchange for I would still follow the laws of my state, county and city. The federal government has been too far gone for far too long and I want out of it. I implore you Mr. President, members of Congress, please release me.

Don't get me wrong here, I'm not seeking to abandon my fellow Americans in need, in fact the opposite is true. I feel that I can do much more good with my hard-earned money when I get to decide whom I wish to help. I also believe that it is used much more efficiently in this manner. To put it bluntly, government bureaucracy is wasteful, incompetent and is about as friendly in nature as a bulldozer. I'm not wasteful, I'm not incompetent and I'm very friendly. Please have faith that I am a good American.

I am not naive and know that this will never come to pass. I also realize that this letter will not recieve the full consideration it duly deserves. For if you release me from my federal bondage, others might see my success and wish to also free themselves. I realize that this cannot happen, for it would undermine your power and authority over us and possibly alter our current form of government. I do not believe that you will let this happen even though our founding documents declare to the world that this is our right as human beings. Despite all of that, I felt the need to express my feelings to you anyway while I still had the right to do so. If you do in fact read this, thank you for taking the time to do so.

Sincerely,

One American

Not everyone was shocked

2009-03-22T16:20:00.000-06:00

3 simple rules

2009-03-08T16:20:00.001-06:00

Looking at how the government violates (on a daily basis) the rules laid our for it I ask; "Why should I follow their rules?" The only answer I can come up with that makes any sense is that the government will use force against me if they catch me.

But what about the government? What happens when they don't follow their own rules? We get more unconstitutional laws than we can possibly know. We're expected to follow laws that they are not allowed to be making. Then when the government gets called out on these violations the courts redefine words in order to side with the government. And we're expected to think that this is how a free society functions.

This country went from a nation of rugged individuals to a nation of laws. There isn't one part of your life that doesn't have some kind of legislation attached to it. A truly free society does not need millions of laws, so many that no person could possibly know every one them, yet "ignorance of the law is no excuse". It's a joke.

A truly free society only needs 3 laws:

Law #1 Any kind of assault is strictly forbidden. This covers murders, kidnappings, rape, battery, domestic abuse, etc.

Law #2 Theft of any kind is strictly forbidden. This covers robbery, burglary, carjacking, hijacking, confidence scams, fraud, etc.

Law #3 The private property rights of others shall not be violated. This covers trespassing, vandalism, etc.

These are the acts of criminality where there is to be government intervention once one of these laws are broken. Punishment for violating these simple rules should be severe and ignorance should be no excuse. We have the right to life and liberty (see rule #1) and we have the right to pursue happiness and the right to our justly acquired property (See rules #2 and #3) after that, the government needs to just stay out of our way and let us be free to decide for ourselves the day-to-day functions of our lives and society.

Humanity as a whole would be in a much better place right now if the world's governments concentrated only on enforcing 3 simple rules and left people alone.

Government fixes don't work

2009-01-23T16:20:00.001-06:00

The government tried to "fix" the economic "downturn" last year by handing money out to Americans. Did that work? Nope. How much did it cost? $168,000,000,000. Of course most won't complain because they got a check and don't really care beyond that. Nobody seems to make the connection that this government "fix" failed miserably to the tune of $168,000,000,000.

We were told that if Bear Stearns was not bailed out that the economy would go bad and things would get worse. Bear Stearns was bailed out for about $30 billion, but that didn't stop AIG from needing a 120+ billion rescue did it? Did bailing out Bear Stearns keep Lehman from sinking? Nope, the government had to give JP Morgan $87 billion to buy Lehman. Did any of that help the economy? Nope.

We were told that if the government didn't act quickly with these bailouts (hundreds of billions of dollars and trillions more to come) the economy was going to take a huge downturn and people would lose their jobs. The government acted quickly with no oversight of the money and started handing it out like candy at Halloween. Did any of that work? Nope, businesses are going under and shedding jobs like a dog sheds hair and banks are going under left and right.

The government's plan now is to spend more money and cut taxes. Hmmm, didn't George W. do that? They want to do yet another "economic stimulus" (because the last one worked so well right?) plan and "fix" the economy. We're told that if the government doesn't act quickly, things are going to get worse. Looks to me like things only get worse when the government tries to fix them. How many times are you going to fall for it?

That guy says it better than I ever could

2008-12-14T16:20:00.000-06:00

"That guy" would be a one William N. Grigg. And what he says better than I could can be found here. There is also a link to his Pro Libertate Blog in the links section on the right of this page. I haven't read everthing of his, but I like what I've read so far and find very little to disagree with. Enjoy, I'm goin on vacation.

We're hosed

2008-12-12T15:06:00.003-06:00

That's pretty much all I wanted to say.

Don't look for things to get better anytime soon, the government is trying to fix it.

Divide et impera

2008-11-02T16:20:00.001-06:00

Divide and Rule. It's the oldest trick in the book and it still works to this very day. The key to this strategy is fear. One of the best ways to divide is to get your adversary to fear their peers just as much or more than they fear you. If you can get your adversary to destroy themselves, that leaves you all the stronger. It's brilliant and it always works.

I'm sure everyone is familiar with the military aspect of "divide and conquer" but there is also the political, which can be far more dangerous than any military force. Divide and rule is how the Nazis conquered Germany, by exploiting a depressed and angry population and turning it on itself. They pointed their fingers in blame at the Communists and the Jews and turned the population's attention to them while they planned and did unspeakable things. By the time the population got wise it was much too late. The government was too powerful and authoritarian for anyone to do anything about it.

Divide and Rule is how the Soviets came to power in Russia during WWI. The Communists turned the working-class against the "elite" and turned the population's attention to them while they planned and did unspeakable things. By the time the population got wise it was much too late. The government was too powerful and authoritarian for anyone to do anything about it.

Divide and rule is working today, right now in America. The Statists (Democrats and Republicans) have turned Americans against each other. They even use the above parties (Nazi and Communist) as epithets to each other. Liberals accuse conservatives of being Nazis and conservatives accuse liberals of being communists. I call them both what they are, authoritarian statists, liberal or conservative, republican or democrat. Those are just the labels they use to divide people against each other while they plan and do unspeakable things.

No matter who gets elected this week, the government wins and we lose. The government will get more powerful and more authoritarian and soon there will be nothing any of us can do about it.

One world economy?

2008-10-24T04:20:00.001-06:00

You hear all the time that "it's a global economy" and that we must all now "think globally". Now that the entire global economy runs on fiat floating currencies, the next logical step in the process is to universalize things. Especially now during this time of "global crisis". Is it just me, or does it seem like the world economy has been set on 'fail'? The biggest power-grabs happen during the worst of times. And power isn't always at the hand of government.

Now I'm not fully on board with the "New World Order" crowd but I can see where they are coming from to a certain extent. I just don't think a one world government can be pulled off. There is way too much "bad blood" between the peoples of this world. It also doesn't make any sense to me. If they actually achieved a single-world-government, who would they go to war with? How could they have a warfare-state to profit from if everyone is saluting the same flag? Where's the money in that? It would pretty dumb for Montana to go to war with Idaho right? Now expand that same concept to a global scale with the entire world under one flag. See what I mean?

I've heard the conspiracy talk about merging all of the "Continental Unions" into some sort of New World Order government under the U.N. or something similar. The following quote leads me to believe that's not the case even though it has been used by the NWO crowd to support their claims.

Permit me to issue and control the money of the nation and I care not who makes its laws. — Mayer Amsched Rothschild

If this is for real and people such as Rothschild are to be taken at their word, then it is not a one world government they seem to desire. There is little to profit from there. A one world economy would make more sense in my opinion. The conflicts remain and the profit potential is unlimited. It ensures constant destruction and the profits from the sale of arms. If you're the guy making Tomahawk Missiles, then you need people using them so that you can supply those people with more missiles. In order for that to happen, those people need someone to shoot. In order for that to happen you need war, in order to have war, you need conflicting governments. Those conflicting governments borrow money (at interest of course) from their respective central banks in order to buy Tomahawk Missiles. It is in the bank's best interest to keep the missile guy in business is it not?

It also assures constant rebuilding and the profits from construction projects. Once the conflict has moved on to a new theater, someone has to re-build what all of those missiles, rockets, bombs, artillery and small-arms-fire destroyed. Much of this destruction is to infrastructure such as roads, bridges, power-plants, water treatment facilities and so on. In most places it is the government in charge of securing the funds for these endeavors. So they borrow money from the central bank in order to rebuild the infrastructure.

Now, what if every government in the world had to go to the same central bank or some kind of conglomerate of central banks to borrow their money from in order to fund their conflict with their neighbor or to fight against "rebels"? And what if those same governments have to go to that same central bank to borrow money to rebuild infrastructure? Who wins? Who has the power now?

If the world is run by a single government, the missile business drops off and the borrowing stops. Under a one world economy funded by a single entity, the missile guy continues to stay in business and flourish, right along with the lending entity. While the average citizen, no matter what nation, is none the wiser. Is the world being set up to fail in order to achieve these ends? I don't know. I'm just asking questions that came to mind.

What is money?

2008-10-11T16:20:00.001-06:00

This video is much like the last one I posted, but I thought this one was better and more importantly, shorter. Enjoy.

I found this documentary rather educational

2008-10-07T16:20:00.001-06:00

Mostly this is a history of central banking and fractional reserve banking. Part I gives us an accounting of central banking from the Roman Empire up to the early 20th century. Part II picks up there and goes into the history of the US Federal Reserve System and our current fractional reserve banking system.

Part II

This documentary was made around 1995. Look at where we are today.

The economic planks

2008-09-28T16:20:00.001-06:00

After the past couple of weeks, The following things may be subject to change. Here's the (D) and (R) economic planks from their platforms. Since the (D)s were first last time, we'll start with the (R)s this time.

Washington’s Failure: the Scope of the Problem

The federal government collects $2.7 trillion a year from American families and businesses. That's $7.4 billion a day. Even worse, it spends over $3 trillion a year: $8.2 billion a day. Why? Largely because those who created this bloated government will not admit a single mistake or abolish a single program. Here are some staggering examples of the overall problem:

Recent audits show that 22% of all federal programs are ineffective or incapable of demonstrating results.

69 separate programs, administered by 10 different agencies, provide education or care to children under the age of 5.

Nine separate agencies administer 44 different programs for job training.

23 separate programs, each with its own overhead, provide housing assistance to the elderly.

With so many redundant, inefficient, and ineffective federal programs, it is no wonder that the American people have so little confidence in Washington to act effectively when federal action is really needed.

The Budget Process — A Fraud that
Guarantees Runaway Spending

For more than three decades - since enactment of the Budget Act of 1974 by a Democrat-controlled Congress - the federal government has operated within a rigged system notable for its lack of transparency. The earlier approach - annual passage of the appropriation bills, amended and voted up or down, with the numbers there for all to see - had its flaws and generated much red ink. But its replacement, the current budget process, only worsened the money flow and came to rely on monstrous omnibus spending bills. The results are adverse to all seeking to limit government's growth. For example:

The budget process assumes every spending project will be on the books forever, even if the law says the spending will expire - but it assumes tax relief will be temporary.

It treats well-deserved tax cuts as a kind of spending, so that letting Americans keep more of their earnings is considered the same as more spending on pork projects.

It fails to recognize the positive impact that lowering tax rates has on economic growth.

In its deceptive and irresponsible accounting, an increase in a program's funding is actually a decrease if it is less than the rate of inflation.

Once a budget is produced under that system, the budget law itself limits the time
Congress can consider it before voting.

Moreover, the budget's review process is a sham. Of the $3 trillion spent annually, only onethird is reviewed each year during the budget and appropriations process. The remaining $2 trillion automatically goes to interest on the national debt or entitlements. And because the budget process assumes an automatic increase in spending, the debate on the remaining one-third is only over how much more spending to approve.

Finally, while government requires corporations to budget for future pension and health care costs, our government ignores those requirements. No family or private sector business could keep its books the way Washington keeps ours.

A Plan to Control Spending Republicans will attack wasteful Washington spending immediately. Current procedures should be replaced with simplicity and transparency. For example:

We favor adoption of the Balanced Budget Amendment to require a balanced federal budget except in time of war.

Earmarking must stop. To eliminate wasteful projects and pay-offs to special interests, we will impose an immediate moratorium on the earmarking system and reform the appropriations process through full transparency. Tax dollars must be distributed on the basis of clear national priorities, not a politician's seniority or party position.

Government waste must be taken off autopilot. We call for a one-year pause in nondefense, non-veterans discretionary spending to force a critical, cost-benefit review of all current programs.

We call for a constitutionally sound presidential line-item veto.

If billions are worth spending, they should be spent in the light of day. We will insist that, before either the House or Senate considers a spending bill, every item in it should be presented in advance to the taxpayers on the Internet.

Because the problem is too much spending, not too few taxes, we support a supermajority requirement in both the House and Senate to guard against tax hikes.

New authorizations should be offset by reducing another program, and no appropriation should be permitted without a current authorization.

Congressional ethics rules governing special interests should apply across the board, without the special exemptions now granted to favored institutions.

We support the Government Shutdown Protection Act to ensure the continuance of essential federal functions when advocates of pork threaten to shut down the government unless their wasteful spending is accepted.

We will insist that the budget reasonably plan for the long-term costs of pension and health care programs and urge the conversion of such programs to defined contribution programs.

The Republican Agenda:Using Tax Relief to Grow the Economy

Sound tax policy alone may not ensure economic success, but terrible tax policy does guarantee economic failure. Along with making the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts permanent so American families will not face a large tax hike, Republicans will advance tax policies to support American families, promote savings and innovation, and put us on a path to fundamental tax reform.

Lower Taxes on Families and Individuals

American families with children are the hardest hit during any economic downturn. Republicans will lower their tax burden by doubling the exemption for dependents.

New technology should not occasion more taxation. We will permanently ban internet access taxes and stop all new cell phone taxes.

For the sake of family farms and small businesses, we will continue our fight against the federal death tax.

The Alternative Minimum Tax, a stealth levy on the middle-class that unduly targets large families, must be repealed.

Republicans support tax credits for health care and medical expenses.

Keeping Good Jobs in America

America's producers can compete successfully in the international arena - as long as they have a level playing field. Today's tax code is tilted against them, with one of the highest corporate tax rates of all developed countries. That not only hurts American investors, managers, and the U.S. balance of trade; it also sends American jobs overseas. We support a major reduction in the corporate tax rate sothat American companies stay competitive with their foreign counterparts and American jobs can remain in this country.

Promoting Savings through the Tax Code

We support a tax code that encourages personal savings. High tax rates discourage thrift by penalizing the return on savings and should be replaced with incentives to save. We support a plan to encourage employers to offer automatic enrollment in taxdeferred savings programs. The current limits on taxfree savings accounts should be removed.

Fundamental Tax Reform

Over the long run, the mammoth IRS tax code must be replaced with a system that is simple, transparent, and fair while maximizing economic growth and job creation. As a transition, we support giving all taxpayers the option of filing under current rules or under a two-rate flat tax with generous deductions for families. This gradual approach is the taxpayers' best hope of overcoming the lobbyist legions that have thwarted past simplification efforts.

As a matter of principle, we oppose retroactive taxation, and we condemn attempts by judges, at any level of government, to seize the power of the purse by ordering higher taxes.

Because of the vital role of religious organizations, charities and fraternal benevolent societies in fostering charity and patriotism, they should not be subject to taxation.

In any fundamental restructuring of federal taxation, to guard against the possibility of hypertaxation of the American people, any value added tax or national sales tax must be tied to simultaneous repeal of the Sixteenth Amendment, which established the federal income tax.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, here's what the (D) have planned.

Jumpstart the Economy and Provide Middle Class Americans Immediate Relief

We will provide an immediate energy rebate to American families struggling with the record price of gasoline and the skyrocketing cost of other necessities. We will devote $50 billion to jumpstarting the economy, helping economic growth, and preventing another 1 million jobs from being lost. This will include assistance to states and localities to prevent them from having to cut their vital services like education, health care and infrastructure.

We will quickly implement the housing bill recently passed by Congress and ensure that states and localities that have been hard- hit by the housing crisis can avoid cuts in vital services. We support investments in infrastructure to replenish the highway trust fund; invest in road and bridge maintenance and fund new, fast-tracked projects to repair schools. We believe that it is essential to take immediate steps to stem the loss of manufacturing jobs. Taking these immediate measures will provide good jobs and will help the economy today–but generating truly shared prosperity is only possible if we also address our most significant long run challenges like the rising cost of health care, energy, and education.

Invest in Manufacturing and Our Manufacturing Communities

We will invest in American jobs and finally end the tax breaks that ship jobs overseas. We will create an Advanced Manufacturing Fund to provide for our next generation of innovators and job creators; we will expand the Manufacturing Extension Partnerships and create new job training programs for clean technologies. We will bring together government, private industry, workers, and academia to turn around the manufacturing sector of the U.S. economy and provide assistance to automakers and parts companies to encourage retooling of facilities in this country to produce advanced technology vehicles and their key components. We will support efforts like the recently proposed Senate Appropriations measure that gives manufacturers access to low- interest loans to help convert factories to build more fuel-efficient vehicles. And we will invest in a clean energy economy to create up to five million new green-collar jobs.

Our manufacturing communities need immediate relief. And we will help states and localities whose budgets are strained in times of need. We will modernize and expand Trade Adjustment Assistance. We will help workers build a safety net, with health care, retirement security, and a way to stay out of crippling debt. We will partner with community colleges and other higher education institutions, so that we're training workers to meet the demands of local industry, including environmentally- friendly technology.

Creating New Jobs by Rebuilding American Infrastructure

A century ago, Teddy Roosevelt called together leaders from business and government to develop a plan for the next century’s infrastructure. It falls to us to do the same. Right now, we are spending less than at any time in recent history and far less than our international competitors on this critical component of our nation’s strength.

We will start a National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank that can leverage private investment in infrastructure improvements, and create nearly two million new good jobs. We will undertake projects that maximize our safety and security and ability to compete, which we will fund as we bring the war in Iraq to a responsible close.

We will modernize our power grid, which will help conservation and spur the development and distribution of clean energy. We need a national transportation policy, including high-speed rail and light rail. We can invest in our bridges, roads, and public transportation so that people have choices in how they get to work. We will ensure every American has access to highspeed broadband and we will take on special interests in order to unleash the power of the wireless spectrum.

Support Small Business and Entrepreneurship

Encouraging new industry and creating jobs means giving more support to American entrepreneurs. We will exempt all start-up companies from capital gains taxes and provide them a tax credit for health insurance. We will provide a new tax credit for small businesses that offer quality health insurance to their employees. We will work to remove bureaucratic barriers for small and start-up businesses–for example, by making the patent process more efficient and reliable. Our Small Business Administration will recognize the importance of small business to women, people of color, tribes, and rural America and will work to help nurture entrepreneurship. We will create a national network of public-private business incubators and technical support.

Economic Stewardship

Since the time of our Founders, we have struggled to balance the same forces that confronted Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson–self- interest and community; markets and democracy; the concentration of wealth and power, and the necessity of transparency and opportunity for each and every citizen. Throughout this saga, Americans have pursued their dreams within a free market that has been the engine of America's progress. It's a market that has created a prosperity that is the envy of the world, and opportunity for generations of Americans. A market that has provided great rewards to the innovators and risk-takers who have made America a beacon for science, technology, and discovery.

But the American experiment has worked in large part because we have guided the market's invisible hand with a higher principle. Our free market was never meant to be a free license to take whatever you can get, however you can get it. That is why we have put in place rules of the road to make competition fair, open, and honest. We have done this not to stifle–but rather to advance prosperity and liberty.

In this time of economic transformation and crisis, we must be stewards of this economy more than ever before. We will maintain fiscal responsibility, so that we do not mortgage our children’s future on a mountain of debt. We can do this at the same time that we invest in our future. We will restore fairness and responsibility to our tax code. We will bring back balance to the housing markets, so that people do not have to lose their homes. And we will encourage personal savings, so that our economy remains strong and Americans can live well in their retirements.

Restoring Fairness to our Tax Code

We must reform our tax code. It’s thousands of pages long, a monstrosity that high-priced lobbyists have rigged with page after page of special interest loopholes and tax shelters. We will shut down the corporate loopholes and tax havens and use the money so that we can provide an immediate middle-class tax cut that will offer relief to workers and their families. We’ll eliminate income taxes for millions of retirees, because every senior deserves to live out their life in dignity and respect.

We won’t increase taxes on any family earning under $250,000 and we will offer additional tax cuts for middle class families. For families making more than $250,000, we’ll ask them to give back a portion of the Bush tax cuts to invest in health care and other key priorities. We will expand the Earned Income Tax Credit, and dramatically simplify tax filings so that millions of Americans can do their taxes in less than five minutes.

Reforming Financial Regulation and Corporate Governance

We have failed to guard against practices that all too often rewarded financial manipulation instead of productivity and sound business practices. We have let the special interests put their thumbs on the economic scales. We do not believe that government should stand in the way of innovation, or turn back the clock to an older era of regulation. But we do believe that government has a role to play in advancing our common prosperity: by providing stable macroeconomic and financial conditions for sustained growth; by demanding transparency; and by ensuring fair competition in the marketplace.

We will reform and modernize our regulatory structures and will work to promote a shift in the cultures of our financial institutions and our regulatory agencies. We will ensure shareholders have an advisory vote on executive compensation, in order to spur increased transparency and public debate over pay packages.

Fiscal Responsibility

Our agenda is ambitious–particularly in light of the current Administration’s policies that have run up the national debt to over $4 trillion. Just as America cannot afford to continue to run up huge deficits, so too can we not afford to short-change investments. The key is to make the tough choices, in particular enforcing pay-as-you-go budgeting rules. We will honor these rules by our plan to end the Iraq war responsibly, eliminate waste in existing government programs, generate revenue by charging polluters for the greenhouse gases they are releasing–and put an end to the reckless, special interest driven corporate loopholes and tax cuts for the wealthy that have been the centerpiece of the Bush Administration's economic policy.

We will not raise taxes on people making less than $250,000, and will eliminate all income taxes for seniors making less than $50,000. We recognize that Social Security is not in crisis and we should do everything we can to strengthen this vital program, including asking those making over $250,000 to pay a bit more.

The real long-run fiscal challenge is rooted in the rising spending on health care, but we cannot address this in a way that puts our most vulnerable families in jeopardy. Instead, we must strengthen our public programs by bringing down the cost of health care and reducing waste while making strategic investments that emphasize quality, efficiency, and prevention. In the name of our children, we reject the proposals of those who want to continue on George Bush's disastrous policies.

So there you have the compiled version of what the (R)s and (D) have planned for the economy. And once again, just for giggles, here's the the (L) platform concerning the economy.

Government Finance and Spending

All persons are entitled to keep the fruits of their labor. We call for the repeal of the income tax, the abolishment of the Internal Revenue Service and all federal programs and services not required under the U.S. Constitution. We oppose any legal requirements forcing employers to serve as tax collectors. Government should not incur debt, which burdens future generations without their consent. We support the passage of a "Balanced Budget Amendment" to the U.S. Constitution, provided that the budget is balanced exclusively by cutting expenditures, and not by raising taxes.

Money and Financial Markets

We favor free-market banking, with unrestricted competition among banks and depository institutions of all types. Individuals engaged in voluntary exchange should be free to use as money any mutually agreeable commodity or item. We support a halt to inflationary monetary policies, the repeal of legal tender laws and compulsory governmental units of account.

Monopolies and Corporations

We defend the right of individuals to form corporations, cooperatives and other types of companies based on voluntary association. We seek to divest government of all functions that can be provided by non-governmental organizations or private individuals. We oppose government subsidies to business, labor, or any other special interest. Industries should be governed by free markets.

Labor Markets

We support repeal of all laws which impede the ability of any person to find employment. We oppose government-fostered forced retirement. We support the right of free persons to associate or not associate in labor unions, and an employer should have the right to recognize or refuse to recognize a union. We oppose government interference in bargaining, such as compulsory arbitration or imposing an obligation to bargain.

Free Trade and Migration

We support the removal of governmental impediments to free trade. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demand that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders. However, we support control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who pose a threat to security, health or property.

You can get with this, or you can get with that

2008-09-15T16:20:00.000-06:00

Now that the parties have put out their platforms, what are the differences. The next few posts will look at their stances on various issues like Foreign Policy, Fiscal Policy, and a few domestic policies. I'll try to match these up as best as I can for quick and easy comparison.

As far as Foreign policy goes, here are highlights from the (D) Platform:

We will re-center American foreign policy by responsibly redeploying our combat forces from Iraq and refocusing them on urgent missions. We will give our military a new mission: ending this war and giving Iraq back to its people. We will be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in. We can safely remove our combat brigades at the pace of one to two per month and expect to complete redeployment within 16 months. After this redeployment, we will keep a residual force in Iraq to perform specific missions: targeting terrorists; protecting our embassy and civil personnel; and advising and supporting Iraq’s Security Forces, provided the Iraqis make political progress.

At the same time, we will provide generous assistance to Iraqi refugees and internally displaced persons. We will launch a comprehensive regional and international diplomatic surge to help broker a lasting political settlement in Iraq, which is the only path to a sustainable peace. We will make clear that we seek no permanent bases in Iraq. This is the future the American people want. This is the future that Iraqis want. This is what our common interests demand.

Defeating Al Qaeda and Combating Terrorism The central front in the war on terror is not Iraq, and it never was. We will defeat Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan, where those who actually attacked us on 9-11 reside and are resurgent.

Win in Afghanistan

Our troops are performing heroically in Afghanistan, but as countless military commanders and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff acknowledge, we lack the resources to finish the job because of our commitment to Iraq. We will finally make the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban the top priority that it should be. We will send at least two additional combat brigades to Afghanistan, and use this commitment to seek greater contributions–with fewer restrictions–from our NATO allies.

We will focus on building up our special forces and intelligence capacity, training, equipping and advising Afghan security forces, building Afghan governmental capacity, and promoting the rule of law. We will bolster our State Department’s Provincial Reconstruction Teams and our other government agencies helping the Afghan people.

We will help Afghans educate their children, including their girls, provide basic human services to their population and grow their economy from the bottom up, with an additional $1 billion in non- military assistance each year–including investments in alternative livelihoods to poppy-growing for Afghan farmers–just as we crack down on trafficking and corruption. Afghanistan must not be lost to a future of narco-terrorism–or become again a haven for terrorists.

Seek a new partnership with Pakistan

The greatest threat to the security of the Afghan people–and the American people–lies in the tribal regions of Pakistan, where terrorists train, plot attacks and strike into Afghanistan and move back across the border. We cannot tolerate a sanctuary for al Qaeda. We need a stronger and sustained partnership between Afghanistan, Pakistan and including necessary assets like satellites and predator drones–to better secure the border, to take out terrorist camps, and to crack down on cross-border insurgents.

We must help Pakistan develop its own counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency capacity. We will invest in the long-term development of the Pashtun border region, so that the extremists’ program of hate is met with an agenda of hope. We will ask more of the Pakistani government, rather than offer a blank check to an undemocratic President. We will significantly increase non- military aid to the Pakistani people and sustain it for a decade, while ensuring that the military assistance we provide is actually used to fight extremists. We must move beyond an alliance built on individual leaders, or face mounting opposition in a nuclear-armed nation at the nexus of terror, extremism, and the instability wrought by autocracy.

Combat Terrorism

Beyond Afghanistan and Pakistan, we must forge a more effective global response to terrorism. There must be no safe haven for those who plot to kill Americans. We need a comprehensive strategy to defeat global terrorists–one that draws on the full range of American power, including but not limited to our military might. We will create a properly resourced Shared Security Partnership to enhance counter-terrorism cooperation with countries around the world, including through information sharing as well as funding for training, operations, border security, anti-corruption programs, technology, and targeting terrorist financing.

We will pursue policies to expand our understanding of the circumstances and beliefs that underpin extremism, so that we can effectively address them. A crucial debate is occurring within Islam. The vast majority of Muslims believe in a future of peace, tolerance, development, and democratization. A small minority embrace a rigid and violent intolerance of personal liberty and the world at large. To empower forces of moderation, America must live up to our values, respect civil liberties, reject torture, and lead by example.

We will make every effort to export hope and opportunity–access to education, secure food and water supplies, and health care, trade, capital and investment. We will provide steady support for political reformers, democratic institutions and civil society that is necessary to uphold human rights and build respect for the rule of law.

Prevent Iran from Acquiring Nuclear Weapons

The world must prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. That starts with tougher sanctions and aggressive, principled and direct high- level diplomacy, without preconditions. We will pursue this strengthened diplomacy alongside our European allies, and with no illusions about the Iranian regime. We will present Iran with a clear choice: if you abandon your nuclear weapons program, support for terror, and threats to Israel you will receive meaningful incentives; so long as you refuse, the United States and the international community will further ratchet up the pressure, with stronger unilateral sanctions; stronger multilateral sanctions inside and outside the U.N. Security Council, and sustained action to isolate the Iranian regime.

The Iranian people and the international community must know that it is Iran, not the United States, choosing isolation over cooperation. By going the extra diplomatic mile, while keeping all options on the table, we make it more likely the rest of the world will stand with us to increase pressure on Iran, if diplomacy is failing.

De-Nuclearize North Korea

We support the belated diplomatic effort to secure a verifiable end to North Korea’s nuclear weapons program and to fully account for and secure any fissile material or weapons North Korea has produced to date. We will continue direct diplomacy and are committed to working with our partners through the six-party talks to ensure that all agreements are fully implemented in the effort to achieve a verifiably nuclear-free Korean peninsula.

Stand with Allies and Pursue Diplomacy in the Middle East

For more than three decades, Israelis, Palestinians, Arab leaders, and the rest of the world have looked to America to lead the effort to build the road to a secure and lasting peace. Our starting point must always be our special relationship with Israel, grounded in shared interests and shared values, and a clear, strong, fundamental commitment to the security of Israel, our strongest ally in the region and its only established democracy.

That commitment, which requires us to ensure that Israel retains a qualitative edge for its national security and its right to self-defense, is all the more important as we contend with growing threats in the region–a strengthened Iran, a chaotic Iraq, the resurgence of al Qaeda, the reinvigoration of Hamas and Hezbollah. We support the implementation of the memorandum of understanding that pledges $30 billion in assistance to Israel over the next decade to enhance and ensure its security.

It is in the best interests of all parties, including the United States, that we take an active role to help secure a lasting settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with a democratic, viable Palestinian state dedicated to living in peace and security side by side with the Jewish State of Israel. To do so, we must help Israel identify and strengthen those partners who are truly committed to peace, while isolating those who seek conflict and instability, and standing with Israel against those who seek its destruction.

The United States and its Quartet partners should continue to isolate Hamas until it renounces terrorism, recognizes Israel's right to exist, and abides by past agreements. Sustained American leadership for peace and security will require patient efforts and the personal commitment of the president of the United States. The creation of a Palestinian state through final status negotiations, together with an international compensation mechanism, should resolve the issue of Palestinian refugees by allowing them to settle there, rather than in Israel. All understand that it is unrealistic to expect the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949. Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel. The parties have agreed that Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations. It should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths.

Expand the Armed Forces

We support plans to increase the size of the Army by 65,000 troops and the Marines by 27,000 troops. Increasing our end strength will help units retrain and re-equip properly between deployments and decrease the strain on military families.

Revitalizing and Supporting the Military

To renew American leadership in the world, we must revitalize our military. A strong military is, more than anything, necessary to sustain peace. Ending the war in Iraq will be the beginning, but not the end, of addressing our defense challenges. We will use this moment both to rebuild our military and to prepare it for the missions of the future. We must retain the capacity to swiftly defeat any conventional threat to our country and our vital interests. But we must also become better prepared to take on foes that fight asymmetrical and highly adaptive campaigns on a global scale.

We will not hesitate to use force to protect the American people or our vital interests whenever we are attacked or imminently threatened. But we will use our armed forces wisely, with others when we can, unilaterally when we must. When we send our men and women into harm's way, we must clearly define the mission, listen to the advice of our military commanders, objectively evaluate intelligence, and ensure that our troops have the strategy, resources and support they need to prevail.

We believe we must also be willing to consider using military force in circumstances beyond self-defense in order to provide for the common security that underpins global stability–to support friends, participate in stability and reconstruction operations, or confront mass atrocities. But when we do use force in situations other than self-defense, we should make every effort to garner the clear support and participation of others. The consequences of forgetting that lesson in the context of the current conflict in Iraq have been grave.

Anyways, that's the juicy stuff that folks are talking about. I left the rest out. Now, let's look at what the (R) Platform has to counter this.

Iraq

A stable, unified, and democratic Iraqi nation is within reach. Our success in Iraq will deny al Qaeda a safe haven, limit Iranian influence in the Middle East, strengthen moderate forces there, and give us a strategic ally in the struggle against extremism. To those who have sacrificed so much, we owe the commitment that American forces will leave that country in victory and with honor. That outcome is too critical to our own national security to be jeopardized by artificial or politically inspired timetables that neither reflect conditions on the ground nor respect the essential advice of our military commanders. As the people of Iraq assume their rightful place in the ranks of free and open societies, we offer them a continuing partnership.

Afghanistan

In the seven years since U.S. troops helped topple the Taliban, there has been great progress but much remains to be done. We must prevail in Afghanistan to prevent the reemergence of the Taliban or an al Qaeda sanctuary in that country. A nationwide counterinsurgency strategy led by a unified commander is an essential prerequisite to success. Additional forces are also necessary, both from NATO countries and through a doubling in size of the Afghan army. The international community must work with the Afghan government to better address the problems of illegal drugs, governance, and corruption.We flatly reject the Democratic Party's idea that America can succeed in Afghanistan only by failure in Iraq.

Pakistan

We must expand our ties with the government and the people of Pakistan. We support their efforts to improve democratic governance and strengthen civil society, and we appreciate the difficult but essential role Pakistan plays in the fight against terror.

Terrorism and Nuclear Proliferation

The attacks of September 11, 2001 were a pivot point in our national experience. They highlighted the failure of national policy to recognize and respond to the growth of a global terror network. They should have put an end to the Democrats' naive thinking that international terrorists could be dealt with within the normal criminal justice system, but that misconception persists.

The gravest threat we face - nuclear terrorism - demands a comprehensive strategy for reducing the world's nuclear stockpiles and preventing proliferation. The U.S. should lead that effort by reducing the size of our nuclear arsenal to the lowest number consistent with our security requirements and working with other nuclear powers to do the same. In cooperation with other nations, we should end the production of weapons-grade fissile material, improve our collective ability to interdict the spread of weapons of mass destruction and related materials, and ensure the highest possible security standards for existing nuclear materials wherever they may be located.

But that is not enough. We must develop and deploy both national and theater missile defenses to protect the American homeland, our people, our Armed Forces abroad, and our allies. Effective, layered missile defenses are critical to guard against the unpredictable actions of rogue regimes and outlaw states, reduce the possibility of strategic blackmail, and avoid the disastrous consequences of an accidental or unauthorized launch by a foreign power.

Iran

We express our respect for the people of Iran who seek peace and aspire to freedom. Their current regime, aggressive and repressive, is unworthy of them. The Iranian people, many of whom risk persecution to speak out for democracy, have a right to choose their own government.

As a rogue state, Iran's leadership supports terror, threatens its neighbors, and provides weapons that are killing our troops in Iraq. We affirm, in the plainest words we can use, that the U.S. government, in solidarity with the international community, will not allow the current regime in Tehran to develop nuclear weapons.

We call for a significant increase in political, economic, and diplomatic pressure to persuade Iran's rulers to halt their drive for a nuclear weapons capability, and we support tighter sanctions against Iran and the companies with business operations in or with Iran. We oppose entering into a presidential-level, unconditional dialogue with the regime in Iran until it takes steps to improve its behavior, particularly with respect to support of terrorism and suspension of its efforts to enrich uranium. At the same time, the U.S. must retain all options in dealing with a situation that gravely threatens our security, our interests, and the safety of our friends.

North Korea

The U.S. will not waver in its demand for the complete, verifiable, and irreversible dismantlement of North Korea's nuclear weapons programs, with a full accounting of its proliferation activities. We look toward the restoration of human rights to the suffering people of North Korea and the fulfillment of the wish of the Korean people to be one in peace and freedom.

The Middle East

The momentum of change in the Middle East has been in the right direction. From Morocco to the Gulf States, the overall trend has been toward cooperation and social and economic development, especially with regard to the rights of women. We acknowledge the substantial assistance the U.S. has received from most governments in the region in the war on terror. Those countries that have made peace with Israel, whether officially or in fact, deserve our appreciation and assistance.

We urge the continued isolation of groups like Hamas and Hezbollah because they do not meet the standards of the international community. We call for the restoration of Lebanon's independence and sovereignty and the full implementation of all UN resolutions concerning that country. The struggle in which we are engaged is ideological, not ethnic or religious. The extremists we face are abusers of faith, not its champions. We appreciate the loyalty of all Americans whose family roots lie in the Middle East, and we gratefully acknowledge the contributions of American Arabs
and Muslims, especially those in the Armed Forces and the intelligence community.

Israel

Israel is a vigorous democracy, unique in the Middle East. We reaffirm America's commitment to Israel's security and will ensure that Israel maintains a qualitative edge in military technology over any potential adversaries. Israel must have secure, defensible borders and we support its right to exist as a Jewish state able to defend itself against homicide bombings, rocket and mortar fire, and other attacks against its people.

We support the vision of two democratic states living in peace and security: Israel, with Jerusalem as its capital, and Palestine. For that to become a reality, the Palestinian people must support leaders who reject terror, embrace the institutions and ethos of democracy, and respect the rule of law. We call on Arab governments throughout the region to help advance that goal. We support Jerusalem as the undivided capital of Israel and moving the American embassy to that undivided capital of Israel.

The U.S. seeks a comprehensive and lasting peace in the Middle East, negotiated between the parties themselves, without the imposition of an artificial timetable, and without the demand that Israel deal with entities which continue to pledge her destruction. At the heart of any peace process must be a mutual commitment to resolve all issues through negotiation. Part of that process must be a just, fair, and realistic framework for dealing with the Palestinian refugee issue. Like all other elements in a meaningful agreement, this matter can be settled only on the basis of mutually agreed changes that reflect today's realities as well as tomorrow's hopes.

So there you have it, the foreign policy planks of the two parties as far as the main issues go. I don't see much in the way of any real change to our foreign policy from either party, they each just want to run the same show their own way. By way of comparison, here's the entire foreign policy plank of the Libertarian party platform.

3.1 National Defense

We support the maintenance of a sufficient military to defend the United States against aggression. The United States should both abandon its attempts to act as policeman for the world and avoid entangling alliances. We oppose any form of compulsory national service.

3.3 International Affairs

American foreign policy should seek an America at peace with the world and its defense against attack from abroad. We would end the current U.S. government policy of foreign intervention, including military and economic aid. We recognize the right of all people to resist tyranny and defend themselves and their rights. We condemn the use of force, and especially the use of terrorism, against the innocent, regardless of whether such acts are committed by governments or by political or revolutionary groups.

Now that's real change. Too bad that Americans aren't interested in any real change.

The RNC came to town

2008-09-05T16:20:00.004-06:00

Before reading this, check the update to the last post.

So the RNC has finally started in my home city of St. Paul, MN. Oh joy, I get to witness our Police State first hand. The night before the Convention started, I went down to the Xcel Energy Center (well, as close as I could get) to see the cop convention. I was not disappointed.

Those pictures are from the day before the convention. On the last day of the convention I decided to check out the "unauthorized protest". The city decided to not let any of the marchers into downtown or anywhere near the Xcel Energy Center. I imagine this is due to the few troublemakers from earlier in the week. It seems the actions of a few troublemakers ruined it for the many later down the line. The march started at the Capitol. Between the Capitol and "The X" is I-94. All the bridges were blocked off by riot police and snow plows.

The cops kept these people who weren't causing any trouble (they rounded up most of the bad ones earlier in the week and some before the convention even started) from walking the streets in protest, and then when the people kept marching anyway into the night, they flash-banged, teargassed, pepper sprayed and later corraled onto a bridge where they were subsequently arrested for (get this) "illegal assembly".

So much for the right to peaceably assemble on the streets we pay for. But the State has this trick, they'll let you speak as loud as you want to, but they get to choose where and for how long. Then their defense is always "Well, we DID let you speak". Too bad that they shield the people who should be hearing it from doing so.

Here are some video highlights from this past week, for they tell the story much better than I could ever hope to.

You can see local news coverage of this here, here, here, here, (listen for the cop to ask about "illegal propaganda") here, here, here, and here.

I end with this:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Time for the police state to rear its ugly head...again

2008-08-24T16:20:00.005-06:00

I had not been born yet when this went on, but I wonder if I will not see history repeat itself yet again. The people involved above were protesting the Viet Nam War and were obviously very angry about their gov't going against their wises. You see how they were treated by their gov't.

Tomorrow starts the Democratic Convention of '08 and the cops are ready. In fact, they've become downright paranoid. They've already arrested a man who apparently picked the wrong hotel in making his travel plans.

Big Brother is watching.

DENVER - The security command center looks like a room straight out of a Hollywood thriller -- its long rows of tables set with phones and laptops, flat screens on the walls with zooming satellite images of downtown Denver.

It's a 24-hour nerve center for command-level authorities keeping a watchful eye over security for this week's Democratic National Convention. If protesters -- or anyone -- tries anything unlawful, leaders of 62 agencies ranging from the Secret Service to the city's waste department will be watching and responding.

As I write this, two people have already been arrested for not doing anything wrong.

One was told he was being arrested for having his face covered with a black scarf on convention grounds, and another was placed into custody for not cooperating with police after coming to the first protester's defense. Both were placed in plastic handcuffs and escorted to a police van.

It will be interesting to see how all of this plays out.

UPDATE: Here's how it played out.

Great Men? Pt 2 Abraham Lincoln

2008-08-17T16:20:00.000-06:00

Yup, I'm questioning old "honest Abe's" greatness this time. One of our so-called greatest Presidents ever was anything but great in my mind. When I was in school I was told all of these great things about Lincoln, and I believed them. Once I was long out of school, I learned a few things about Lincoln that made me think he wasn't such a great guy after all. I won't go into great detail here, I'm just going to point out a couple of things that made a liberty-minded individual such as myself question the greatness of this man, and to further question the education system that taught me to practically idolize him.

I was told that the War between the States was predominantly about slavery, that Lincoln wanted to free the slaves and that he used a War to get it done. I later found out that they lied to me. Here's a quote from Lincoln concerning slavery and Southern secession.

I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." ... My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views. I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men everywhere could be free.

Abraham Lincoln, August 22, 1862.

So here I find out that Lincoln was much more interested in "saving the Union" than he was in freeing slaves. Seems to me that Lincoln was all about the power of the Federal Gov't and how dare these people attempt to use their Constitutionally outlined right to secede. He used conscription, suspended habeas corpus and by way of force solidified the power of the Federal Gov't over what were designed to be sovereign States.

Though he does claim that he wishes that all men be free, I later learned that free didn't exactly mean equal to Mr. Lincoln.

I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.

-Abraham Lincoln, September 18, 1858

So if I'm to take "honest Abe" at his word here, he was a genuine, dictionary-definition racist. Hmmm, didn't learn that in gov't school. I guess they didn't want us black kids in class to call John Wilkes Booth a hero. Instead, they made Booth out to be some psycho-crazy actor. Shouting "Sic semper tyrannis" (Thus always to tyrants) after bustin' a cap in a tyrant doesn't seem so crazy to me when put into the proper historical context. Now, I'm not one for violence and I personally do not condone what Booth did, but in the words of comedian Chris Rock, "I ain't sayin' it's right, but I understand". But don't just take my word for it, check for yourself into Lincoln.

Great Man? Not so much.

Great Men? Pt 1 Woodrow Wilson

2008-08-10T16:20:00.006-06:00

They say that Woodrow Wilson was a great President, one of our top 10. Personally, knowing what I know now, I would call him the worst thing that ever happened to America. Many of yesterday's and today's problems can be laid directly at this man's feet. Before you call me crazy, hear me out.

First we'll start with the 16th Amendment which gave the US gov't the power to reach right into our pockets.

Then there was the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 which turned over the control of our money to a privately owned central bank. Congress created a central bank and then gave that bank powers specifically deligated to Congress. Now we know why they needed the 16 Amendment, so they could just take from us the money needed to pay back what they borrowed (on the credit of the United States, with interest) from the Federal Reserve.

Then after campaigning on the fact that he kept us out of WWI, he got us right into it after a British ship carrying some Americans (and ammunition for the British war effort) who were too stubborn or stupid to heed the warning, was sunk off the coast of Ireland. American involvement in WWI directly led to WWII which directly led to the Cold War and all the problems and blowback associated with it IMO.

So we have this "great" man that gave Congress the power to tax us in exchange for a central bank that they could borrow from on our credit. Gave America a war it didn't need or want, and gave the government even more power over people's lives. Well, he did grant women the power to vote, I'll give him that, even though I think it was more public pressure than it was so much Woody being a nice guy. Anyone in that office would have had to do the same IMO, it was just "that time" I think.

So when you look at your check and see how much the gov't took from you, thank Woody.

When you see prices going up up up because your dollar is worth less and less and less because the Federal Reserve is cranking out money like a counterfeiter with a shiny new press, thank Woody.

When you marvel in disgust at the U.S.'s hideous foreign policy that pretends to "make the world safe for democracy", thank Woody.

Great man? I think not.

How do you do it?

2008-08-03T16:20:00.002-06:00

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Now that our government has become destructive to the ends of securing our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. How does one go about altering or abolishing this out of control government that thinks nothing of locking you up or killing you when attempt to excercise this fundamental right?? This nation's founders had essential help from France when they broke themselves away from King George III and they used violent revolution to achieve this. But what does one do now? There is no friendly competitor sympathetic to the cause of liberty to draw the resources and manpower needed to do such a thing today. I agree with many others that armed revolt against the United States Government is absolutely out of the question, it simply is not an option. So where do we go from there? How do you do it?

Society has become so dependent on government that abolishing it is out of the question also. Advocating the abolishment of government just makes one look like a crazy person to the conditioned general public and generates no sympathy to the cause. In fact the opposite tends to happen and the public supports the government's aggression towards the "resistor". We're only left with altering our form of government in my opinion. So where do we go from there? How do you do it?

Tough and complex questions for sure. How does one use a corrupted system to fix a corrupted system? There are many approaches to be taken. I think that a broad combination of the following things can go a long way to achieving the goal of altering our government through non-violent means. Some of these are things that are already being done with some success.

I like what DownsizeDC is doing, there's a link there on the right. Check 'em out, sign up and tell your representatives exactly what you think on any of a number of issues. Counter the lobbyists by joining the biggest grassroots citizen lobby in America. They don't know you're displeased if you do not tell them.

Neutralize the 2 party system's lock on government. Stop voting for (D)s and (R)s and clog the legislative system and executive offices with 3rd party office holders of many flavors, Greens, Reformers, "Connies", Libertarians, etc... If the government can't get enough of themselves to agree, then there is total gridlock and they can't damage our rights any further by passing more laws against us and issues might actually get thoroughly debated. Unless of course you like the direction this country is headed, then by all means disregard these suggestions and vote accordingly (D) or (R), thinking that you're going to see any real changes made for the better of this country.

Know your rights. Don't let agents of the State push you around, stand up for yourself by knowing your rights and fully exercising them at every opportunity. Too many people just follow orders because the person with the gun on one hip, billy club on the other, mace, handcuffs and a radio to call in reinforcements if necessary, can be a bit intimidating. Don't be scared, they don't like to be dragged into a courtroom to try and justify their violations of your rights. They merely try to get you to unknowingly waive them, and most folks eagerly comply without even knowing it. Know your rights, understand them, use them.

Question the legitimacy of the system. IF you end up in a run-in with the State, ask questions, lots of them. Make them explain to you exactly what they are doing to you and how they are doing it to you. Put them into a position where they have to either admit that they are nothing more than people willing to use force against you in order to gain your compliance or to reach into your pocket, or let you go. They don't seem to like that, especially the ones who don't carry the guns, it makes them uncomfortable to be associated with the guns. Use it to your advantage.

Cameras cameras cameras. Many States and cities are installing more and more cameras to watch you and to keep you in compliance. So do the same, point a camera back at them and keep them in compliance with your rights. It's hard for them to violate your rights and then stand in a courtroom lying about it when you can produce video evidence. It's no longer your word (an accused "criminal") against theirs (the saintly and "honest" law enforcement officer) in a system that is predisposed to take their word over yours. If you can, keep a camera with you and film any and all interaction with the government, no matter how irrelevant the interaction may seem, it just may be the thing that keeps you from being railroaded into a prison cell.

If all else fails, there's always non-compliance, civil disobedience and non-violent protest. One only need look to the works of Ghandi and Martin Luther King for examples of the real, hands-on, in-your-face attempts to expose the system of coercion and violence. Of course, this involves much self-sacrifice and possibly a long incarceration or even in the cases of the afore mentioned men, death. If one is to go this route, it would be wise to be careful and to know exactly what you're getting into. This course of action is for people who have been pushed to their limit and have little, if anything, to lose, or they have made the sufficient preparations. When one stands right up to the State and does not back down, the State is more than willing to make an example of you, be ready for it.

I think if more people took the government to task for the things they do and don't do, and stopped letting the government act like their third parent, things might just get better. Call me an optimist.

He's not going to save us

2008-07-27T16:20:00.000-06:00

As I look around at America, it seems that many folks are hanging all of their "hope" on one man. Barack Obama. They get all excited and happy thinking that things are going to change. Just like they did a couple of years ago when the (D)s were set to take back the majority in Congress. Remember that? Remember that they were going to clean up the corruption? Remember that they were going bring the troops home and put an end to the war in Iraq? Remember all the great stuff they promised to do if only you put them in charge? What was the approval rating of Congress again? Oh yeah, 9%.

I see it happening all over again with Senator Obama. I see very high expectations being set, and worse, I see Obama acting as though he can meet these impossible expectations. The man is no Ann Sullivan. Yet some people seem to have it in their heads that this one man can single-handedly bring down the price of oil, fix the economy, "give" everyone "affordable" healthcare, bring the troops home from Iraq, win the War on Terror in Afghanistan, make the US's enemies like him by just having a little chat with 'em, create jobs, reduce America's dependence on foreign oil, make everyone be nice to each other and fix all of America's problems.

It's not going to happen. People are just falling for a scam. The (D)s have sat on their hands for a year and a half with the excuse of "there's not a (D) in the White House" in hopes of getting one elected and thereby consolidating power to one side of the aisle. And the way people are fawning all over Obama, they'll likely get it. But he's not going to save us.

Why the "American Idea" didn't work

2008-07-20T16:20:00.002-06:00

As I look at this country and its history, it's stunning to me how far away from the "American Idea" the US has gone and why so few seem to care. The United States of America was intended not to be a place of a single King or an overbearing central government. It was to be a nation of "Kings", where everyone is to be their own King along with the rights, and more importantly, the responsibilty that goes along with it. The form of government created was intended to protect these rights and enforce those responsibilies. Aaaah, the good 'ol days.

When I was in school, I was taught that America was created by rugged individualists who just wanted the government to leave them alone as long as they aren't violating another's rights. But then I look around at America today and I don't see much of that, especially living in a big city. I continually see folks crying to the government to do all kinds of things it was never meant to do, like keeping the boogey-man out of their closets or take care of them when they're old or infirmed or just plain poor. Gone is the drive for self-determination and more than generous nature. Gone is the rugged individualism and the "get the government out of my business" attitude amongst the major populace. And I ask myself, "why did it get this bad?"

So I thought about it and came up with an answer that I find to be quite plausible. So here goes. From what I've heard and read, most of the Colonists of England were satisfied with King George III for the most part. They weren't too happy about the 1% tax, but they did have the might of the British Empire to protect them. A few of the more prominent Colonists felt that they had the means and ability to protect their lands on their own, without the British Crown, and they felt that these taxes were merely theft. Of course they were right, King George III was in fact stealing from the Colonies though taxation. So they did all that stuff you learned about in school, declaration of independence, constitution, bill of rights, all that good stuff to which most only pay lip service. But taxes and being ruled were a way of life, people were used to it, that's just how it was. I see those parallels today.

Most of the people back then, just as now, were happy being ruled. They were semi-ok with taxes as long as they were low, and they liked that secure feeling of living in a strong nation-state. The Founding Fathers themselves even had a hand in setting us down this path the country has taken. George Washington, at the behest of Alexander Hamilton (big time Federalist) put down the Whiskey Rebellion in the 1790's, mostly to flex the bigger, stronger, faster muscle of the newly revamped Federal government. The issue? Taxes of course. John Adams signed into law the unconsitutional Alien and Sedition Acts. Thomas Jefferson went to war with the Barbary Pirates on foreign shores with no formal Congressional declaration of war. What did the people do about these incidents of the government violating its own rules? Not much, we're now taxed on our incomes, property, sales transactions, vehicles etc. The Alien Enemies Act is still on the books, and still unconstitutional. And the US has been going to war without a formal declaration from Congress for decades now. The only real difference between then and now is that now it's much worse.

Now, just as it was then, the "mob mentality" is one that tolerates gov't theft, abuse and waste. One that embraces rulership so that they can have that secure feeling that they love so much. The majority of Americans have never been on board with the "American Idea", and little by little over two centuries, cast it aside. Now, we have come full-circle and are being ruled once more. There are just more Kings now.

It's the LAW!!

2008-07-13T16:20:00.001-06:00

It's the cop-out line of all time. When people see the government oppressing others, they cop right out and excuse the government's malevolence with three little words..."it's the law" and then they are done thinking. People don't seem to care about right and wrong anymore or they confuse "right and wrong" with "legal and illegal". If it's legal, it must be right and if it's illegal, then it must be wrong. And somehow it has become the government's job to determine what is right and wrong through the legal system. It's crazy. Throughout human history there are many examples of the law being used to do some of the most heinous crimes against other humans ever. And people still fall back on that same lame and failed argument.

It seems that people either don't make the connection or they don't understand or they just deny the fact that throughout history it was the law that made slaves of people. It was the law that displaced millions of people from their homelands. It's the law that has been used to commit genocide all over the world, most notably, it was the law that led to sending Jews, Gypsies and other "undesireables" to the ovens and gas chambers. It was the law that killed millions in the old Soviet Bloc nations. It was the law that prevented my mother and father from going to the same grade school, eating at the same diner, or having their clothes washed at the same cleaners, or drinking at the same fountain. It was the law and the people who supported and made them that did this to people.

It is the law that's been used to deny, disregard and ignore the natural born rights of others, instead of doing as intended and protecting these rights of ours. And it's your fault. It is you that asks for these things from your "leaders". It is you that gets them when there's enough of you crying loud enough. It is you that says "there should be a law". It is you that demands that the government interject itself into the private affairs of your neighbors because you don't like what they do. It is you that doesn't want to take responsibilty for your life and it is you that expects the government to steal from your neighbors so that they can take care of you. It is you who want to rule over others through the government's laws.

We as humans only have a few rights that need protection, so why do we have so many laws? What are those laws doing, other than violating the rights of this person or that group of people? All of humanity's real crimes have been forbidden by "civilized" societies for millennia, yet over that time we now have tomes and tomes of law that we as citizens are expected to know. Despite the fact that nobody knows all of the laws, not even the people who make and enforce them.

The idea of "ignorance of the law is no excuse" was implemented during a time when the "rule of law" was more along the lines of the "rule of rights". A time when you knew you were doing wrong if you stole another's property, committed fraud against them, or assaulted or killed them. No sane person could commit any of those crimes and then stand in judgement and claim "I didn't know...". It was not meant for a time when you would be expected to know how high you can build your fence, how long your grass can be, when you can water your grass, how big to build your garage or deck or porch. What you can sell or not sell with or without a license, the tint on your car's windows...The list goes on.

Your leaders have used the law, at your request, to become your rulers. Don't complain when they rule you. You asked for it...and you got it.

It's a celebration b**ches, enjoy yourselves!

2008-07-04T04:20:00.000-06:00

Spending the weekend away from the city to go excercise some of the little freedom we have left.

Have a happy and safe 4th everyone.

Rights

2008-06-29T16:20:00.004-06:00

It seems many people, including some Supreme Court Justices don't exactly know just what a 'right' is. This week's post is dedicated to rights.

First off, having a right means that you do not have to seek the approval of another. For instance, I have a right to say whatever I want to. This means that I don't have to ask permission to speak, I don't have to "register" my words, I don't need a permit to write what I want to and I don't have to go through a "background check" to make sure that my words aren't coming from someone deemed "dangerous". Rights are not subject to regulation, for a regulated right is no longer a right, it is a granted privilage.

Second, rights are derived from property. If one has no property (including themselves) then they have no rights. My body is my property, this is where my right to life and liberty are derived from. I can live my life how ever I want to and do to my body what ever I feel like doing. I didn't have to ask anyone's permission to have 'Slacker' tattooed across my back, I didn't have to get a permit or a license, I just did it, it's my property. Since one is not born without a body, everyone has some rights. These are the rights we are born with. We don't have any other rights than these until we acquire more property like land and material possessions.

Now that we've established what rights are and where they come from, let's look at where many Americans go wrong concerning their rights and where they come from. Too many times I've heard that "the Constitution gives us the right..." It does no such thing, the US Constitution cannot give us what we are all born with and already have. These days the Constitution is used more to infringe upon our rights than to protect them.

There are no "collective rights", how can there be? If I as an individual have certain rights, and they are the same rights as everyone else, then how can a group of people have more rights than I do? They can't, but the world's majority has been convinced that they can. Of course having guns helps, there isn't a society in the world where its citizenry is not under the threat of violence for "non-compliance" of this rule or that rule. Individuals have rights, and those rights do not supercede the rights of any other individual, therefore there are no "collective rights", and the government has no rights. The gov't is comprised of individuals, those individuals, even as a likeminded group, do not have any rights that supercede that of any other individual. Sadly, this is just truth and not the reality of things.

That's where I start to lose people. They say that I've got it all wrong and then they bend over backwards justifying certain people ruling over others who have done nothing wrong. They justify punishing people for what they could have done and they justify gov't thievery. Then people completely turn off and call me an Anarchist who has no respect for "the rule of law". While they are right in that I have no respect for the "rule of law". (that's another post though) I'm not an Anarchist and I do have the utmost and undying respect for the "rule of rights". Most people have more respect for people's individual rights than they have for the rule of law, most people violate the law in some way, Most don't violate people's rights in any way.

Few people look at this from a perspective like that. It is my wish that more folks would, especially voters, elected officials and appointed judges. Too many of these people spend too much time and energy implementing ways to achieve their goals at the expense of people's individual rights. Whether it be the voters who favor and advocate these things, the elected officials who implement the policies for the right "price", or the appointed judges who give these policies the veil of legitimacy.

When the law is used to chisel away rights instead of protect them, a free society is no longer free, it is ruled.

"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams

I'll drink to that Sam!

Pakistan

2008-06-22T16:20:00.004-06:00

It seems the US is in a bit of a dilemma in Pakistan. The United States Gov't actively supports a former dictator turned President who many of the Pakistani people want out. The US gov't is busy trying to stabilize a coutry that they de-stabilized and at the same time, their undying support of Musharraf is cracking the stability of a country that does have nuclear weapons.

Musharraf is walking a thin line and is playing both sides to the best of his advantage. On the one hand, he lends the US just enough support to look like he's helping in the Global War on Terror and therefore gettin buttloads of miltary aid. On the other hand, he placates the Taliban enough to where they don't organize the people to boot him and the new gov't out and therefore maintaining some stability. Now things are getting a little dicey.

There are now Pakistani troops dying at the hands of NATO, and NATO troops dying at the hands of Pakistani troops who are sympathetic to the Taliban in these cross border skirmishes. What is the US to do? If the US doesn't pressure Musharraf to reign in his military, then these actions continue and possibly expand the war into Pakistan despite the wishes of Pakistan's dictator. If they pressure him and he cracks down, it just festers more hatred for him and the United States Gov't as he will be seen for what he is, a US puppet and they will either oust him, or kill him.

At the same time and for the same reasons, Musharraf's tit is in a ringer here also. If he is too sympathetic to the Taliban, the US cuts ties and declares Pakistan a supporter of terrorism and it's game on. If he's too sympathetic to the US, then the people kick him to the curb and take over Pakistan, and its nuclear arsenal.

I have a bad feeling about this whole Pakistan situation and I hope the US gov't doesn't create an enemy out of an ally....again.

Entangling alliances

2008-06-15T16:20:00.002-06:00

"The Great War" as it was called while it was going on, was also called "The War to end all Wars". As history has shown us, the complete opposite ended up being the result. World War 1 is arguably the most pivotal point in modern world history. The world, and especially the United States is still dealing with its effects today, nearly 100 years later.

The world before WWI was a world of Empires. The mightly British Empire, the Russian Empire, the French Colonial Empire, the Ottoman Empire, the Austria-Hungary Empire and so on. Even the United States was on the road to Empire with its swift victory over the Spanish Empire and gaining its territories of the Phillipines, Guam, Puerto Rico. The European Empires all had these little "alliances" to help defend one another. Seemed like a good idea at the time, until these alliances were put to the test. Here's an illustration of these "entangling alliances"

With Nationalism running rampant throughout Europe, and diplomatic tensions running high long after the Franco-Prussian War, these alliances (which seemed like a good idea at the time) were soon seen as a powder keg that only needed a small spark to explode into the biggest war Europe had ever seen to date. That small spark came on June 28, 1914. Some Austrian Prince was murdered by some whacked-out Serbian. Within days the powder keg exploded and the world was at war.

George Washington warned of these entangling alliances and WWI showed the ultimate result of what he was warning the newly formed United States not to engage in. It's too bad that these words were not adhered to. Once the U.S. got into an entangling alliance with the "Great Powers" of Europe, our fate as free Americans was sealed.

The Great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign Nations is in extending our comercial relations to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements let them be fulfilled, with perfect good faith. Here let us stop.

Europe has a set of primary interests, which to us have none, or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence therefore it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations & collisions of her friendships, or enmities.

Our detached & distant situation invites and enables us to pursue a different course. If we remain one People, under an efficient government, the period is not far off, when we may defy material injury from external annoyance; when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality we may at any time resolve upon to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or War, as our interest guided by justice shall Counsel.

Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European Ambition, Rivalship, Interest, Humour or Caprice?

'Tis our true policy to steer clear of permanent Alliances, with any portion of the foreign World--So far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it--for let me not be understood as capable of patronising infidility to existing engagements, (I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs, that honesty is always the best policy)--I repeat it therefore, Let those engagements. be observed in their genuine sense. But in my opinion, it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them.

-George Washington, September 19th 1796

Once the United States got involved with Europe's never-ending problems, it made those never-ending problems our never-ending problems, as we (the people) are those who pay the ultimate costs in blood, treasure and resources.

With "The Great War" raging in Europe, the United States started out with the correct policy of non-intervention. Woodrow Wilson was elected on the promise of keeping the US out of Europe's war. The War in Europe was grinding to a stalemate and the fragile balance was heavily tipped to one side with the introduction of the untouchable industrial might of the United States. The 'other side' realized the ramifications and thought they were quitting while they were ahead. The harsh treaty that followed only served to create fuel for a continuation of Europe's War to end all Wars.

That fuel caught on fire in Germany during the Great Depression in the form of National Socialism. Germany, seeking revenge over Versailles was gaining its old lands back and was seeking Imperial expansion. Germany's expansion into Poland put the entangling alliances to the test once more. Again, within a few decades, Europe was in the midst of another bloody war. The US gov't used taxpayer money to lend and lease instruments of war to the Allied forces in Europe and drew the ire of the Axis Powers. And once again the American people were drawn into Europe's problems.

Since that time, the United States has been forever tied to the never-ending problems of Europe and now Europe's former Colonies and spoils of war such as Viet Nam, Iraq and Palestine. The US's entangling alliance with Europe has the US needlessly involved in such organizations as NATO and the United Nations. The enangling alliances of the United States have even spread to places like Korea, Japan, Central America, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Egypt, Colombia and dozens of others. You and I and every other taxpaying American is paying to maintain these alliances that George Washington warned of and now further Wars in the Middle East and Central Asia seem to be looming on the horizon due to the United States' most entangling alliance of all, the alliance with Israel.

Call me old fashioned, but I'd prefer the United States phase its way back into a non-interventionist foreign policy and leave the nations of the world to defend themselves while the US defends itself. There is much wisdom in the warnings from the past. It's a shame that more people, particularly the ones in power, do not heed these warnings and instead use fear to manipulate the populace into supporting a policy that is unecessary, expensive and doomed to ultimate failure in the long term.

Happy (Founding) Father's Day.

It DOES happen in America

2008-06-08T16:20:00.000-06:00

For the people who think that it doesn't or can't happen in America, I've compiled some interesting videos and stories that I found that illustrate a number of examples of the United State's gravitation towards a Police State. Now, in order to have a police state, certain things need to be going on...like:

Blatant violations of the First Amendment by cordoning off neighborhoods and keeping people from freely assembling: check

"Police in neon yellow vests stopped motorists traveling through the main thoroughfare of Trinidad — a neighborhood near the National Arboretum in the city's northeast section. Police checked drivers' identification and turned away those who didn't have a "legitimate purpose" in the area, such as a church visit or doctor's appointment."

Blatant violations of the second amendment complete with unconstitutional gun confiscations: check

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Blatant violations of the 4th Amendment and property rights: check

Suspicionless checkpoints: check

Remind you of anything? "Your papers please!"

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Police intimidation, threats and brutality: check

Taking joy in shooting protestors in the head with rubber bullets: check

Shooting the unarmed with real bullets: check

Intimidating raids at public schools: check

This one I think is the most sinister of them all. It targets children and gets them used to the idea of being unreasonably searched with no probable cause. The intimidating tactics also serve to teach these children to fear the State and obey the unconstitutional orders of the "authorites" or face dire consequences. These children will grow up to accept whatever draconian measures the State hands down in the name of safety. In fact, they will demand them. On that note I end this week's post with a couple of quotes from some old dudes who knew what they were talking about.

"When the government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.” –Thomas Jefferson

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -attributed to Benjamin Franklin

Jokes and Punchlines

2008-06-01T16:20:00.000-06:00

Here are some jokes and punchlines that you probably won't find very funny.

The Joke: The US Gov't thinks it can keep terrorists from entering this country illegally.

The Punchline: The Gov't can't even keep Mexican peasants from crossing the southern border virtually at will.

---------------

The Joke: The US Gov't thinks it can get illegal drugs off of the streets of this nation.

The Punchline: The Gov't can't even keep illegal drugs out of America's prisons.

---------------

The Joke: The US Gov't thinks it can spread freedom 1/2 way around the world.

The Punchline: The Gov't is infringing upon more and more freedoms Americans enjoy at home.

---------------

The Joke: The US Gov't thinks abstinence programs, archaic sex laws and shielding kids from seeing a boobie on TV will keep them from having sex.

The Punchline: The United States has one of, if not the highest teenage pregnancy rates of the industrialized world and 1 out of 4 American teenage girls have had a sexually transmitted disease.

---------------

The Joke: The United States is the freest place on Earth

The Punchline: The United Sates has the highest prison population on Earth. Nearly 25% of the world's incarcerated are imprisoned in a country that holds about 5% of the world's population.

---------------

The Joke: Our political candidates speak highly of the US Constitution and Bill of Rights.

The Punchline: Our leading political candidates have all had a hand in the further circumvention of these rules they have sworn an oath to uphold and protect.

----------------

The Joke: The US Gov't speaks highly of the military and the service of its members.

The Punchline: The US Gov't wears them thin and treats them poorly when they return from combat.

----------------

The Joke: Americans are ready for change.

The Punchline: The only presidential candidates who offered real changes are all out of the running and never had a chance of winning in '08.

The jokes are on us. Americans are paying dearly for the punchlines and I'm not laughing.

The price of Oil

2008-05-25T16:20:00.001-06:00

So I asked my Bro what I should write about this week, and he tells me to write about how the oil speculators are driving up the price of oil to the detriment of the American economy. Well, I'm no expert by any means and I certainly appreciate my Bro's confidence in me to write something intelligent about this subject but I'm going to have to defer to the internet on this one. So I did a little poking around and here's what I learned about this subject. Google is my friend, and the speculators are just a smaller portion of a bigger picture.

The problem I found is that nobody knows anything, especially the speculators. They have no clue how much oil is left under the ground, they have no idea when or where geo-political strife will actually disrupt oil supplies and they have no clue what the oil producing nations policies will be from day to day. They just guess and panic at any hint of a supply disruption and everyone follows suit and wham-O, the price of oil goes up on thin information. I guess that's why they call it speculation. Yet this is the system that's relied on to set the price of oil and gas. Seems like a system that's open to abuse from "middle men". And these middle men seem to stay off of the radar, (until now.) When people start getting upset about oil prices, they immediately turn to the oil corporations in hopes of catching them price gouging.

These oil companies are turning record profits year after year and that gets people upset when the price of gas jumps up. Nevermind the speculators who drove the price up over a comment by some foreign leader or because the Israelis and Palestinians are fighting again as if that's some kind of factor in supply. If one looks at this logically, it makes sense that these corporations keep turning record profits for supplying an ever increasing demand. There are more cars on the road every year from the year previous, so it stands to reason that selling more product year after year is going to increase profits (even at the same margin) year after year. If last year was a record year, and the year before that, what do you think this year will be like?

It seems to me that the biggest factor in the current price of oil is that it is sold on the world market in what are called "Petrodollars", these are US dollars and the US dollar has been on the decline for sometime now. Most of the world's oil is in the hands of national governments and these governments take these petrodollars and use them as their reserve currency which goes to back their local currencies, if I understand correctly that is. Again, I'm no expert. The biggest problem I see here is that these nations cut production and tighten up the supply anytime they feel like they're starting to run out. Or maybe they just want to squeeze more money out of a barrel of oil, who knows?

If the US dollar is worth less and less, then it stands to reason that the petrodollar is in the same shape. In fact, the US dollar is getting to the point where some oil producing nations don't want to use the petrodollar anymore and want to switch to a stronger currency such as the Euro. That would be very bad for the US dollar and pretty much send it right to the mat faster than some of Mike Tyson's old opponents. The US gov't cannot afford that and will not hesitate to go to war in order to keep the dollar dominant on the world stage.

Excerpt from a 2005 Energy Bulletin article:

Contemporary warfare has traditionally involved underlying conflicts regarding economics and resources. Today these intertwined conflicts also involve international currencies, and thus increased complexity. Current geopolitical tensions between the United States and Iran extend beyond the publicly stated concerns regarding Iran’s nuclear intentions, and likely include a proposed Iranian “petroeuro” system for oil trade.

Similar to the Iraq war, military operations against Iran relate to the macroeconomics of ‘petrodollar recycling’ and the unpublicized but real challenge to U.S. dollar supremacy from the euro as an alternative oil transaction currency.

It is now obvious the invasion of Iraq had less to do with any threat from Saddam’s long-gone WMD program and certainly less to do to do with fighting International terrorism than it has to do with gaining strategic control over Iraq’s hydrocarbon reserves and in doing so maintain the U.S. dollar as the monopoly currency for the critical international oil market. Throughout 2004 information provided by former administration insiders revealed the Bush/Cheney administration entered into office with the intention of toppling Saddam Hussein.[1][2]

Candidly stated, ‘Operation Iraqi Freedom’ was a war designed to install a pro-U.S. government in Iraq, establish multiple U.S military bases before the onset of global Peak Oil, and to reconvert Iraq back to petrodollars while hoping to thwart further OPEC momentum towards the euro as an alternative oil transaction currency (i.e. “petroeuro”).[3] However, subsequent geopolitical events have exposed neoconservative strategy as fundamentally flawed, with Iran moving towards a petroeuro system for international oil trades, while Russia evaluates this option with the European Union.

The Iraq issue seems to have been dealt with concerning the petrodollar. I find it very telling that the US government has been rattling its sabre at Iran and more recently, tensions are building with Russia over NATO expansion creeping ever closer to their border. The speculators seem to be cashing in on these tensions and are taking advantage of people's fears while the oil corporations take the heat for it.

The price of oil has many factors available for speculators to exploit. Supply and demand issues, geo-political strife and tensions, and a weakening dollar. Fixing the dollar issue would go a long way in fixing the oil price issue, but that's just speculation on my part.

The Bill

2008-05-18T16:20:00.004-06:00

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.

That is the preamble to the Bill of Rights. 10 Amendments were put in place in order to outline just what rights of the people that the government absolutely could not violate. These sacred things were to be protected from the government at all levels, no State government's laws could supercede US Constitution, including and especially the Bill of Rights. At the same, time the Federal government could not overstep the bounds that this document placed upon it. Contrary to popular belief, this document does not grant people rights, it is supposed to protect the rights we are all born with.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The free excercise of religion is prohibited in many ways by the gov't. Just ask people like Rastafarians, or some of the more obscure sects of Mormons and Seventh Day Adventists if they are prohibited from excercising their religions freely. Actually, there is no need to ask, the US drug laws prohibit Rastafarians from freely excercising their religion and one need look no further than the Branch Davidians or the FLDS for further examples of these gross violations of people's religious rights.

Freedom of speech and expression no longer exists in this country, for we have obscenity and profanity laws that revent people from making their own repsonsible choices as to what they want to see on "free" (non-cable, non-satellite) television and radio.

The "Press" is still free to the point where any one of us can be the "press", all you need at minimum is pencil and a piece of paper and you are the "press" free to publish whatever you like. Under that criteria, I'm the "Press". So far I've been able to say whatever I like with no repercussions. But the "Mainstream Media" (where most of America gets its news) is another story all together, all they do is repeat whatever "press release" (propaganda) that's handed down from the gov't. They do very little in the way of asking critical questions or seeking transparency from the gov't. They do just enough to keep the lowest common denominator satisfied.

The right to peaceably assemble is gone. Protest permits, gov't imposed protest routes and times etc... Free speech zones. I can't count how many videos I've seen of the gov't becoming violent towards the peaceably assembled. But don't take my word for it, look for yourself, YouTube is your friend.

The right to petition the government for redress of grienvances is still fully intact, but the lawyer types who run things figured out that Americans don't have any right to actually have those grievances redressed. Convenient eh? You can complain about injustice to the gov't all you want to without becoming a "politcal prisoner", but the gov't doesn't have to do anything about it. They don't even have to acknowledge it...and they don't.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The United States has over 20,000 gun laws. Let alone all of the other laws regarding the bearing of arms, like knives and such. After Katrina and after last year's tornadoes in Kansas, the gov't went around confiscating guns from law-abiding citizens because they felt threatened. The 2nd Amendment doesn't say "...shall not be infringed, unless we feel threatened", does it?

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Well that's good, the Army can't throw a slumber party at your house without your permission. Makes me kind of wonder where all of those National Guard guys stayed down in N.O. after Katrina. I don't know if they stayed in anyone's houses without their permission nor am I going to pretend to, but it does beg the question.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Where does one even start? How about the TSA? How many unreasonable seizures do they do on a daily basis? Is it reasonable to confiscate 4oz of lotion when 3oz is ok to pass through? What is it about that extra ounce of lotion that makes it a "reasonable seizure"? And if you don't show them your papers, they get pretty testy.

How about warrantless wiretaps? Or the "search now, get warrant later" policy the US now has? Or the monitoring of library records, bank transactions without probable cause or warrants? (See: USA PATRIOT ACT)

How about "no-knock" raids against people for posessing non-governmentally approved substances?

How about the cops lying (threatening to get the K-9) and tricking people into believing that they can search their vehicles for any reason they like? This happens every single day in America.

No person shall be held to answer for any capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Just ask Jose Padilla about "due process" and "fair and speedy trials".

"Eminent domain" laws are heavily abused by State governments. Best Buy Company's corporate HQ is sitting on land that used to belong to a prominent car dealer in the area. Best Buy wanted that spot, so the State condemned the land and kicked the car dealer off of his property and now Best Buy Company's shiny new HQ is sitting right on that condemned land. See how that works?

Then there's the case of Kelo vs. City of New London, Conn. where people had their homes taken away and the land turned over to Pfizer. The US Supreme Court upheld the State's blatant abuse of the 5th Amendment.

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

I refer you once again to Jose Padilla. Also see: Military Commisions Act of 2006

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

One can still get a trial by jury in a civil case. This seems to be the only Amendment that has gone untampered.

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

I think they needed to put who gets to decide what's excessive, cruel and unusal in there. How many people have been given a bail amount that they can't possibly pay? I think that if this Amendment were true in the way I interpret it, Bail bondsmen wouldn't have much of a market.

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

If this is true, then why do so many States have laws against gay marriage? This Amendment is supposed to protect our individual rights that are not enumerated in the Constitution. I don't see anything about marriage in the Constitution, therefore this Amendment should apply to same-sex couples that seek to unify should it not?

What about the rights of property owners to decide whether they want a legal activity enjoyed on their property or not? If this Amendment were true, then there wouldn't be any smoking bans on privately owned property, would there?

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

This Amendment has become totally useless. The Federal Gov't always pulls its trump card of "Federal Highway funding" when they want to turn the screws to the States. The States no longer get to decide at what age their young people can start legally consuming alcohol. They aren't allowed to decide their own drug policies. California has legalized the medical use of marijuana, yet the Feds come in and raid these facilities, confiscate everything and leave. They don't arrest anyone and nobody is charged with a Federal crime, they just steal. The people have even less in the way of "personal choice" rights that don't violate anyone else's rights at all.

After reading the preable to this "Bill of Rights", I ask, what has it done and what is it doing now to prevent misconstruction or abuse of gov't powers?? The US Gov't with the help of crooked, agenda-driven judges and a complacent populace have turned this important document into the equivalent of a painting in a museum, it's nice to look at, but it serves no real purpose other than to give one a pleasant feeling, for it no longer protects our natural-born rights anymore.

Those evil corporations

2008-05-11T16:20:00.001-06:00

I hear and read all of the time about the "Evil Corporations" and how greedy and corrupt they are. Then of course that's followed by how the government needs to do something to reign these evildoers in. This just shows the lack of critical thinking from these complainers. They are right in a sense though, corporations are evil, but not in the way that the complainers would have you believe.

The complainers would have you believe that these evil corporations do nothing but exploit, cheat and cut corners in order to fill their greedy pockets. Of course they have no response when I bring up things like the Ronald McDonald House, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation or how Target gives 5% of its profits to local communities etc... They never seem to see the true evil of the corporation.

As the Wiki link shows, corporations are a creation of government and operate under their own system of law. Businesses can and do exist without government, corporations cannot. No government, no corporation. Corporations operate under the protection of government, they operate outside of the laws that apply to the rest of us. And certain corporations or groups of corporations have the power to manipulate the government and its laws for their benefit and to the detriment of the consumer. In this manner corporations ARE evil.

But the complainers only focus on the effects of the benefits and detriments and don't look any further than that and then complain that the government doesn't do enough and how these corporations need to be taxed and regulated more heavily. For some reason these people confuse corporations with charities, I mean how dare someone actually make a profit from supplying a demand. The horror. And of course, government intervention is always the plan to fix that "problem".

Then when someone brings up getting the gov't out of the picture and moving towards a more free market system, they get all alarmist about the corporations and their evil and greed and stress the need for gov't. Of course they are overlooking the fact that in a true free market, the entity known as the coporation would not exist, nor would the gov't protectionism that comes along with it.

Corporations are greedy and so is the government, the only difference is that one can take steps to avoid any greedy corporation they don't like and not give them any money by not doing any business with them, without having armed officers show up and force your compliance like the government does. When given the choice between Big Business and Government, I'll take big business every time. If/when I don't like a particular business, I can kick them to the curb without the goon squad showing up.

Where did this "Healthcare Crisis" come from?

2008-05-04T16:20:00.004-06:00

We hear it all the time, "healthcare crisis", and then we hear from our Presidential candidates about their plans to fix it. Kind of makes one start to wonder how this crisis began in the first place. So I did a little diggin around about the history of gov't healthcare in America. It didn't take me long at all to find a 15 year old article by Terree P. Wasley explaining how our healthcare crisis got to where it was in 1993. He couldn't have pointed out a more perfect case of the government creating a crisis and then making things worse with more meddling and interference instead of less.

The following are exerpts from this enlightening article:

HEALTH CARE COSTS and coverage have become a dominant force in almost everyone's life over the course of the past fifty years. Before many workers change employment, they must weigh the costs of changes in health coverage. Many people are left out of the insurance market, either because they can't get it or can't afford it. Patients complain that doctors don't listen anymore and are anxious to slap their physician with a lawsuit for the slightest imperfection in care. Physicians are tired of struggling under mountains of paperwork from the government and insurance companies when all they want to do is treat patients.

And the costs keep going up. With health care expenditures expected to reach $830 billion in 1992 and $1.5 trillion by the year 2000, the American public wonders where it is all going.(1) No one can figure out the answer, and all everyone knows is that costs are too high and too many people are falling through the cracks of the health care system.

Sound familiar? They were talking about massive rises in cost 15 years ago and now today the forecast is for total collapse of not only gov't medical benefits but retirement benefits also before mid-century, right around when the Generation X'ers (the second baby-boom) should be hittin retirement age. The government "safety net" that I'm paying for now won't be there for me when I need it if the gov't keeps up with what the doomsday forecasters predict. Look what a more modern forecast looks like. They might have been lowballin' in '93.

By 1930, the United States had as many or more medical, nursing, and dental schools and hospital beds per unit of population as it has today. The Great Depression, however, slowed the expansion of health care facilities and personnel. Many Americans had trouble paying for the medical care they needed. Doctors tried to make allowances for patients in financial straits, but hospitals, with higher fixed costs, had much less flexibility. Between 1929 and 1930, average hospital receipts plummeted from more than $200 per patient to less than $60. Hospitals then began to turn to insurance plans as a way to guarantee a steady cash flow by spreading the financial risk.

The first plan was introduced in 1929 at Baylor University Hospital in Dallas, Texas. By paying a monthly fee in advance, a group of 1,500 school-teachers contracted with the hospital to provide care should they need it. The fee was paid whether or not the individual teacher ever used the services.

Soon, groups of nonprofit hospitals in several cities organized multiple hospital insurance plans. These plans gave subscribers a choice of medical care providers and therefore attracted more patients, strengthening the income to the participating hospitals. This multiple hospital plan served as a model for Blue Cross, established in 1932 in Sacramento, California. These hospital plans changed the concept of insurance and forever changed the American health care system. Unlike other forms of insurance, the primary purpose of these plans was not to protect consumers from large, unforeseen expenses, but rather to keep hospitals in business by guaranteeing them a regular income. While these plans benefited consumers by giving them a predictable method of paying for their medical care, they contained serious flaws that would become increasingly apparent as our health care system developed.

Like everything else, it started out as a good idea. The country was in tough times and pooling resources to keep the hospitals open with the benefit of care when needed isn't a bad idea. It certainly wasn't perfect but I think the market could have handled the imperfections much better than the government has over the past decades. The gov't started screwing with things right away.

The institutionalization of Blue Cross/Blue Shield as the dominant provider of health care insurance was due in some part to interference in the market by the government on behalf of the Blues. The AMA and the American Hospital Association (AHA) lobbied for legislation to exempt Blue Cross plans from normal insurance regulations and receive federal tax exemption as nonprofit organizations. These benefits gave the Blues an enormous advantage over other insurers, and until the 1980s the Blues never held less than 40 percent of the entire health insurance market.

Nothing like having friends in high places. How can one realistically compete for any length of time when the big guy doesn't have to pay any taxes? Seriously, isn't this corruption? Things only got worse from there.

The major development in health care during the 1940s was the growth of employer-provided health insurance. World War II brought about a shortage of labor and wartime wage and price controls prohibited employers from increasing salaries to attract workers. However, in 1942 the War Labor Board decided that fringe benefits up to 5 percent of wages would not be considered inflationary. Employers began to offer health benefits as a way of providing additional compensation. Total enrollment in group hospital plans grew from less than 7 million to about 26 million subscribers from 1942 to 1945.(4)

Concurrently, the Internal Revenue Service ruled that the purchase of health insurance for workers was a legitimate cost of doing business and could be deducted from taxable business income. The IRS also ruled that workers did not have to include the value of health insurance benefits in calculating their taxable income. These rulings amounted to a giant tax incentive for both employers and taxpayers and did much to institutionalize employer-provided health care into the system.

And so the beast is born. Thanks to the government's usual manipulation through non-taxation, healthcare became a carrot for employers to dangle in front of employees. Once the labor unions got on board with this, it was truly over for any kind of free market healthcare where individuals choose their insurers and providers instead of their employers through whatever plan(s) they offer.

An entirely new system of health care financing was created during the decades of the 1940s and 1950s. Government encouraged the development and expansion of provider-oriented insurance plans that ultimately distorted the health care delivery system. Employer-provided plans offering first-dollar (front-end) and routine care coverage contributed significantly to the rise in health care costs. The preponderance of employer-provided insurance worsened the position of those without health plans because of the inflationary effect of third-party payment.

Health insurance policies that cover first-dollar expenses pay for routine care. One defect in these policies is the lack of coverage for the medical calamities that economically wipe out a patient and his family. Front-end health insurance operates contrary to all other forms of insurance, like auto insurance, where a driver insures against catastrophic damages and loss, but pays out-of-pocket costs for routine repairs and maintenance as well as for small damages.

Why do people purchase first-dollar, routine care coverage for health care when they wouldn't think of purchasing that coverage for their automobile? Simply stated, they do so because the tax code encourages them to do so. Health insurance plans are viewed as tax-free compensation, not as insurance. Workers then favor coverage that pays for routine care, freeing up their discretionary income for other uses. Insurance is no longer used for its normal purpose of spreading risk, but for tax avoidance.

Now the workers are trapped into this failed system, again due to the usual gov't manipulation through non-taxation. The people have now been manipulated into wanting and more importantly, needing this system in place.

Besides enacting tax incentives that skewed the insurance market, government intervention generated another problem in the industry -- "experience rating." Because the Blues were protected by government due to their exemption from taxes and reserve requirements, they had a competitive advantage over commercial insurers. Commercial insurers turned to "experience rating" their insurance plans as a way to compete against the Blues. They began to sell insurance to employers with relatively healthy, low-risk employees at cheaper rates than the Blues. Since the Blues often were required by law to use a "community rating" system, they responded to this competition by receiving permission to use a "modified" community rating to reflect experience.

Insurance companies calculated premiums for group plans based on those working for a single employer. As a result, smaller companies with fewer employees over whom to spread costs generally must pay more for insurance. Additionally, they face the risk of large premium increases or even cancellation if only one employee becomes ill. Had the government not intervened on behalf of the Blues and provided them legislative protection, the "experience rating" system might not have developed, a system that results in a significant portion of small businesses not able to afford health insurance coverage for their employees.

Isn't one of the biggest problems facing healthcare today the issue of small businesses not being able to afford healthcare coverage for their employees?? Despite all that the government has done over the last 40+ years, nothing has changed.

So far we've seen what happens when the gov't just tweaks things through tax policy and such. Now let's look at what happened once the government became directly and intimately involved.

The expansion of employer-provided health care accentuated the medical needs of those without insurance, primarily the unemployed, poor, and elderly. As the 1960s began, pressures began to build for some sort of government health program that would provide care for these groups. Dissatisfied with a piecemeal approach, champions of the New Deal programs of the 1930s began agitating anew for a national health plan, while groups such as the AMA, fearing adoption of such a program, advocated decentralized, state-administered programs that would maintain the autonomy of physicians and hospitals. A compromise was reached in 1965, and the Medicare program was born.

The largest portion of the program, Medicare Part A, was a slimmed-down version of the universal social insurance scheme advocated by proponents of national health insurance. The other section, Medicare Part B, was a voluntary program to cover physician services, paid for by a mixture of premiums and general federal revenues. Medicaid was based on the alternative originally proposed by the AMA. It paid for medical care for the poor, regardless of age, financed by a combination of matching federal and state funds and administered by the states. In an instant, with the passage of Medicare and Medicaid the federal government became the largest single purchaser of health care.

In it's quest to help, the government merely opened the floodgates for the problems and worse, the "fixes" that we've been dealing with since.

The third-party payment system now dominated the health care industry. Most Americans were covered either by private health insurance or a government program for their hospital and physician costs. But Medicare and Medicaid brought the same defects found in the private insurance industry to the health care landscape, accelerating the rate of medical price inflation already set in motion by cost-plus reimbursement, lack of patient incentive to control costs, and first-dollar coverage.

Hospitals charged Medicare for the "reasonable costs" of treating patients, and doctors were reimbursed for their "reasonable and customary" fees. According to Joseph Califano, a former Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW) secretary, federal adoption of the cost-based, fee-for-service reimbursement system became a blank check for American hospitals and doctors. The rate of increase in hospital spending, which had averaged 8.8 percent between 1960 and 1965, almost doubled, approaching an average annual increase of 15 percent from 1965 to 1970.

In response to White House pressure to get the plan off to a running start, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare wrote regulations regarding reimbursement that were extremely beneficial to the medical industry. Not only did doctors get the power to charge "reasonable" and "customary" fees, they also received significant control over how Medicare would set such fees. Hospitals were successful in getting the interest on current and capital debt included in reimbursement costs, and they pressured HEW to pay for depreciation on buildings and equipment that had been purchased with federal funds under the Hill-Burton Act. In addition, government officials agreed to give them a 2 percent add-on to their actual costs for treating Medicare patients. According to Joseph Califano, "the 2 percent was a bribe to get the hospital industry to cooperate with Medicare."

The government gave the healthcare industry a blank check of taxpayer money. What do you think happened after that?

THE COST EXPLOSION IN HEALTH CARE

The eruption in health care costs over the past few decades has been staggering. Personal health care expenditures per capita increased from $82 in 1950 to $2,511 in 1990.(10) By the year 2000 the health care bill is expected to top $5,551 for each man, woman, and child in the United States.

That's right. The "per person" cost in '07 was $7,600

As costs continued to escalate through the 1970s and 1980s, what did government do to rectify the situation? Did it rescind the tax incentives, laws, restrictions and regulations imposed on the health care market that skew behavior and result in increased demand for medical care with little concern for cost?

The answer to this question is No. Instead of removing the controls, incentives and restrictions that were distorting the market, the federal government attempted to stifle the outcome of bad policies with a whole host of new controls and regulations. The focus of all the legislation in recent years has been to control medical prices and hold down costs, specifically by applying additional restrictions to physicians, hospitals, and even patients.

Health Maintenance Organizations (HMO) were created and promoted by Congress in 1973 as a solution to rising costs. They fell under a significant amount of regulation, including requiring all companies with twenty-five or more employees to offer an HMO plan to their workers. As a result of grants and loans to encourage HMO growth, and employer interest in controlling health care costs, HMOs grew from twenty-six plans with about 3 million subscribers nationwide in the early 1970s to 556 plans with 35 million enrollees by 1991.

The little creature created from the Great Depression in order to help us, has now become Godzilla to our Tokyo.

As many as 9.3 million people lack health insurance because of current government policies.

This was in 1993, I wonder what that number is now. The rest of the article is very informative and worth the full read. Think about what the gov't has done over the last 15 years to "fix" the problems, and then look at what our Presidential candidates plan to do and what Congress is pushing for and ask yourself if you really want the gov't to do anymore fixing. The author concludes:

CONCLUSION

In spite of the best efforts of business and the presumably good intentions of government, health care costs are still out of control and rising. The problem remains: Until we change the fundamental defects in the system, no amount of tinkering will result in a significant slowing or reversal in the direction of increased costs. The government's hodgepodge of health care programs, its continual interference into the market, and the protection of its (and the medical communities') preferred methods of care, have distorted the market and created a built-in structure of cost escalation.

Recent calls for overall reform of the health care system have brought forth a plethora of plans. Most receiving attention involve more government control and regulation, such as global budgets and the forced use of managed care. These "solutions" will prove to be bandaids and will not provide a permanent resolution of the health care problem. The only solution to rising health care costs is to allow a system based on the market, one that offers citizens maximum freedom of choice and responsibility in purchasing their health care. Only then will we see a health care system offering sufficient coverage and good quality care at costs that all Americans can afford.

Terree P. Wasley is (was?) an economic consultant specializing in health care issues, Washington, DC.

Distractions

2008-04-27T16:20:00.000-06:00

Oh look, something shiny!

Many apologies to the faithful readers of this blog, all 3 of you, (nyuk nyuk nyuk) but I've been kind of distracted. Nothing worse than a slacker blogger with ADD.

I still have things to say and rants to go on but lately I find myself starting posts here and then 1/2 way through I scrap the whole thing because I thought of something else. But then I end up not liking that one or it ends up being three sentences and then I get frustrated and turn my attention to the shiny object of the moment whether it be what's on TV or some violent, shoot-em-up, don't-let-your-young-children-play-this video game, or some movie, or my favorite, take a nap. ZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzz

Here's the very abridged version of my thoughts over the past few weeks of no posts here:

dateline The Slacker 4/5/08: Who gives a crap what Obama's pastor says or thinks? He's not running for President.

dateline The Slacker 4/12/08: Hillary Clinton is all bitchy because this was her Presidency served up on a silver platter until this dude came out of nowhere because everybody jumped on his jock after "the big speech" he gave at the '04 (D) convention and asked "why ain't he runnin'?"

dateline The Slacker 4/20/08: McCain is probably going to be our next President after the (D)s "snatch defeat from the jaws of victory" (to quote a friend)

dateline The Slacker 4/26/08: The State owns your children, just ask those folks in Texas.

dateline The Slacker 5/2/08: The banks and the Chinese are probably going to end up being the ones economically stimulated once all the checks clear.

So there, now I feel better and a little more than caught up. Apologies again for the month-long wait to read what The Slacker has to rant about.

Government created "Crimes"

2008-03-30T16:20:00.001-06:00

Webster's defines a crime as:

1: an act or the commission of an act that is forbidden or the omission of a duty that is commanded by a public law and that makes the offender liable to punishment by that law; especially : a gross violation of law

So all one has to do to be a criminal, is violate the law. Therefore, all the government has to do in order to create more people to punish (preferrably through fines) is make a new law. Yes, it's just that simple. There need not be a victim, you merely have to be found in violation of "the rules" and the State will use this as justification to take one's hard earned money, their justly acquired property or even their precious liberty by throwing them in jail simply for behaving in a matter that the State or "society" does not like.

Now let me be clear here by defining what I believe a crime really is. A crime, a real crime, involves a victim first and foremost. Second, there must be some kind of violation of an individual's right to life, (murder laws) liberty, (kidnapping laws and laws against coercion) or justly acquired property, including and especially their own body (laws against theft, vandalism, trespassing and assault). In other words, once force or fraud (or both) has been initiated by one onto another or their property. Once one or more of these criteria have been met, then justice must be done and this is where I see the small role of government coming into play. Also, the government or State cannot be the victim of a crime. Individuals are the only ones who can be victims of these crimes and sometimes one crime has many victims.

The United States is a nation of laws. A ridiculous amount of laws, more laws than one could possibly memorize in a lifetime. Yet "ignorance of the law is no excuse" say our rulers. Mind you, this became policy when our laws dealt strictly with the real crimes outlined above. One knows when they are doing another wrong, one knows when they are taking what is not theirs and they know they're wrong when they hit first or "start it". Therefore in that context, ignorance is no excuse at all and one should be punished for their crime(s) against another.

In every Statehouse and in Washington D.C., we have what are commonly called "lawmakers" when a more accurate term would be "crimemakers" because that's their primary function, create crimes. All of the real crimes are outlawed in every industialized nation and even some third world countries. Any laws that have been made after dealing with the real crimes only go to serve two simultaneous funcions. The first function is for the majority of people to exert their will upon the minority and control their behavior (because they don't like it, a.k.a. "the tyranny of the majority") and the second function is to generate revenue for the government and its bloated bureaucracies. The most blatant examples of these are:

The recent rash of smoking bans: The tyranny of the majority of non-smokers making criminals out of smokers and/or business owners who allow a legal activity on their private property. The fines are high, so people are either forced to comply or pay heavily. Coercion at its best.

Every single vice law on the books:

-Prostitution, as much as many people find abhorrent, is merely the voluntary, mutually beneficial exchange between individuals that really isn't the business of the general public. It may be the business of a married man's wife and family, but beyond that it should be nobody else's concern.

-Gambling, as much as many people find immoral, is a voluntarily entered risk/reward scenario that really isn't the business of the general public. And funny how gambling is illegal unless it is governmentally approved, sanctioned, for charity or gov't is the outright supplier of "games of chance" (got your lottery ticket?) then, and only then is gambling 'ok' because the gov't is protecting you from bookies, numbers runners, backroom card games and street corner dice games.

-Drugs, sheer hypocrisy. Drug dealing is another mutually consentual exchange among individuals. Many drugs are abused by the general public, the most popular being alcohol followed by nicotine and legal prescription drugs. Yet possession of non-governmental, non-society approved drugs will get your property seized, you a fine, locked up, or killed by the State.

In fact, anytime money is exchanged between individuals or between an individual and a business, (legal or "illegal") the State tries to (many times successfully) get its grubby hands in there for its "cut".

The laws that deal with one's property:

-Property tax laws. If it is your property, then why do you have to pay the State yearly tribute in order to keep it?

-Vehicle registration laws. If it is your vehicle, then why do you have to pay the State a yearly tribute in order to get a sticker that says your vehicle is approved for another year?

Many traffic laws are merely revenue generators for the State. There are many real world examples of people driving more cautiously when there are less "commands" distracting them. Do the autobahns run red with any more blood and carnage than any other highway system? No. But these laws are huge money makers for the Sate.

Just about every gun law is unconstitutional and serves only to make criminals of people who have done no harm to anyone.

I could go on for pages listing examples but I think you get the idea by now and can take this and apply it to any law that does not deal with the real crimes. The more laws the government makes, the more criminals they make. 1 out of every 99.1, or 2.3 million+ American are behind bars. This does not take into account how many people are currently on parole or probation which is loss of liberty without the incarceration. I'm sure some of these people should be locked up and/or monitored by the State, as long as they were rightly convicted of a real crime.

Many...in fact I'll go out on a limb here and say that a majority of the US prison/jail population is comprised of non-violent drug offenders who have committed no real crime. Because after all, they're easy targets and locking them up is big money for the State. The "Land of the Free" has the largest prison system in the world. Think about that the next time you hear the phrase "There should be a law".

The old woman and the snake

2008-03-25T16:20:00.000-06:00

To me, the attitude of the American voting public is much like the story of "The Old Woman and the Snake" which goes something like this:

An old woman is walking along the road when she comes across a snake being pecked at by crows. She runs the crows off and takes the snake home. During the time she is nursing and caring for the snake, they become friends and they share many happy times together. Then one day, the old woman comes home from the market and the snake, now well rested and healthy, rears back and sinks his teeth right into the old woman's calf and injects his venom into her. The old woman falls to the floor, bewildered and paralyzed. As she lay there she exclaims "You've bitten me! I'm dying! Why oh why, after all I have done for you and after we had become such good friends have you done this to me?"

The snake looks the old woman right in the eyes as she draws in her last breath and says "Look bitch, you knew I was a snake when you took me in!"

People dismiss the misleading things that these politicians say and put their full support behind them, fully knowing what these people are. They pull out all of the tired old excuses of "Well [insert politician here] did it too!" or "Well [insert politican here] was worse!" or the ever popular "[insert candidate here] is the lesser of two evils" They care for and nurse these "snakes" into governing positions.

Then when these people get into office and establish themselves, they then look out for their own interests. That's when the American public starts crying about how these people are liars, how they're corrupt, ineffective and "the worst ever". They then exclaim "Why do they forsake us when WE'RE the ones who put them in office?!?!"

That's when I wanna say "Look, you knew they were snakes when you voted them into office!"

And that's when Dick Cheney looks you in the eye and says "So?"

The dollar

2008-03-16T16:20:00.001-06:00

Nobody seems to care about the dollar, oh they cry and whine about high prices and inflation but they seldom seem to fully understand what's going on. They seem to think that inflation just means higher prices and the government should "do something about it" as if they have control over what businesses charge for their goods and services. They don't understand that the higher price is not because the company is charging more for their product, it's because the dollar used to purchase these goods and services is worth less.

The price of oil is over $100/barrel and gold is over $1000/oz but nobody seems to be making the connection when reporting these things in the news. They didn't make the connection 35 years ago either. Even McDonald's is trying to cloud over the facts with one of their new ads, stating that the dollar "is strong" and the "dollar is looking good" because you can get what used to be a 59cent burger for $1.00 and you can get 4 McNuggets for a dollar, nevermind that you could get 6 for the same price just last year. We're not supposed to notice that part though, we're supposed to be happy that we can still get a few fast food menu items for a dollar. Seems the general public will never make the connection and will keep themselves ruled by fiat currency. Here's what Murray Rothbard had to say in his book "What Has Government Done to Our Money?":

To gauge the economic effects of inflation, let us see what happens when a group of counterfeiters set about their work. Suppose the economy has a supply of 10,000 gold ounces, and counterfeiters, so cunning that they cannot be detected, pump in 2000 "ounces" more. What will be the consequences? First, there will be a clear gain to the counterfeiters. They take the newly-created money and use it to buy goods and services. In the words of the famous New Yorker cartoon, showing a group of counterfeiters in sober contemplation of their handiwork: "Retail spending is about to get a needed shot in the arm." Precisely. Local spending, indeed, does get a shot in the arm. The new money works its way, step by step, throughout the economic system. As the new money spreads, it bids prices up--as we have seen, new money can only dilute the effectiveness of each dollar. But this dilution takes time and is therefore uneven; in the meantime, some people gain and other people lose. In short, the counterfeiters and their local retailers have found their incomes increased before any rise in the prices of the things they buy. But, on the other hand, people in remote areas of the economy, who have not yet received the new money, find their buying prices rising before their incomes. Retailers at the other end of the country, for example, will suffer losses. The first receivers of the new money gain most, and at the expense of the latest receivers.

We, the general taxpaying public are those "latest recievers" and the Federal Reserve plays the role of counterfeiter when they print more currency and mint more coins to put into the system with nothing of any value behind it. It costs the US Mint more to make some of our coins than the face value of those coins.

The Mint has coined American money since 1792. Until recently, Mint officials say, no American coin had ever cost more to produce than it was worth.

Congressman Ron Paul laments:

"Now, we cannot even maintain a zinc standard."

Now, people have tried to get away from this system by voluntarily trading for goods and services with silver backed Liberty Dollars but this apparently became too popular and drew the ire of the US government claiming the "coins" are counterfeit currency (I guess the real counterfeiters didn't like the competition) and they raided the Liberty Dollar facility and confiscated all of their precious metals last fall. It is the claim of the United States Government that this, a silver Liberty with a face value of $20...

...could easily be confused with this, a platinum coin with a face value of $100 that I have never even seen until today...

Therefore making the Liberty Dollars "Counterfeit Currency" in the eyes of the US Government. Rightfully, The Liberty Dollar has since resumed business and are currently sueing the US government. They are now selling "Arrest Dollars" to drum up support. I think I might just buy a few myself.

The government has once again shown its heavy hand when it comes to people's voluntary interactions and trade with each other. I think the biggest mistakes the founding fathers made was putting the following things in the hands of the central government: "To borrow money on the credit of the United States", "To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes" and "coining money and regulating the value thereof." These three mistakes have lead us to where we are now and the complex global and domestic issues we are currently facing. I end this week's post with another quote to think about from Mr Rothbard's book:

"With fiat money established and gold outlawed, the way is clear for full-scale, government-run inflation. Only one very broad check remains: the ultimate threat of hyper-inflation, the crack-up of the currency. Hyper-inflation occurs when the public realizes that the government is bent on inflation, and decides to evade the inflationary tax on its resources by spending money as fast as possible while it still retains some value. Until hyper-inflation sets in, however, government can now manage the currency and the inflation undisturbed. New difficulties arise, however. As always, government intervention to cure one problem raises a host of new, unexpected problems."

The new '-ism'

2008-03-08T16:20:00.001-06:00

During the 19th and 20th centuries in Europe, several political ideologies emerged, there was already Nationalism (where the 'nation' as a whole, gov't and people, are supposed to be superior to the individual), then came Communism (where the people as a whole are supposed to be superior to the individual and the State), then came Nationalism's psychotic sibling, Fascism (where commerce and industry take the place of the people), then came Communism's kinder gentler sibling, Socialism (where the State provides certain things for people through wealth redistribution)

Meanwhile, on this side of the pond, this country founded upon individualism (where the rights of the individual are superior) observed and tried various elements of these philosophies and sent the idea of individualism by the wayside rather quickly. But the US didn't outright adopt any of the above ideologies of rampant nationalism or communism or fascism or socialism. Instead, it seems to me anyway, they've slowly, surely taken on a new philosophy, Statism, where the State is superior to that of commerce, industry, the people as a whole and/or the individual.

It is now the State and the interests and people that benefit the State that must be protected above all else. The State uses your money and the blood of your loved ones to do this and they sell "the big lie" by convincing the public that they need the State to protect and take care of them and more importantly, the children. And the people are following right along, just like they always do and have done for centuries.

The "Party"

2008-03-03T16:20:00.002-06:00

Former MN Governor Jesse Ventura said of our "two-party" system: "Well, at least we have one more party than the old Soviets did"

I used to get a good laugh at just how true this once was. More and more I'm starting to see that we don't have a two-party system, we have one party with two factions known as the democrats and republicans. Both factions are statist in nature and prey upon the fears that they create for the public. They both have their areas of "control", the (D)s play upon domestic fears in order to obtain more gov't control of things such as health care etc... The (R)s play upon the fears of a foreign enemy in order to obtain more gov't control of things like the telecom and travel industry.

No matter who "we, the people" elect to office, it's the State that wins, and we lose. Whether it's the (D)s or (R)s now, the gov't will take more control of our lives. It's almost like these people are working in shifts, oh they'll feign outrage at what the other faction does (gotta make it look good) but they never actually do anything about it, they just hem and haw and come up with lame excuses as to how it's the other faction's fault that they couldn't get it done.

Take the latest congressional shift to the (D)s in '06. The (D)s campaigned on ending the Iraq War and returning our civil liberties by revising or repealing the USA PATRIOT ACT. What have they done to achieve these ends? Nothing. In fact, they stood idly by as the Executive granted itself unprecedented new unilateral powers. They continue to fund the war. And they soon will be giving the Telcoms immunity for their violations of our liberties and the law for the benefit of the State. They use the excuse that there isn't a (D) in the White House.

So now the nation is primed and ready to elect a (D) to office, they could run a ham sandwich up against McCain and win. It's time for their shift and they'll get to use all those new powers that the Executive signed to itself. Of course when this happens the (R) will do a good job of playing the role of opposition with their cries of "abuse of power!", meanwhile they'll do nothing and use the excuse that they aren't in charge anymore. Around and around and around it goes, meanwhile the State gets more and we get to keep less and less of our hard-earned assets, our liberties and control over our lives.

Ron Paul

2008-02-17T16:20:00.000-06:00

This week's installment of "As the voting public gets ready to sign up for more of the same" will be highlighting the positions of candidate Ron Paul

Foreign Policy:

Iraq:

The United States invaded Iraq under false pretenses without a constitutionally-required declaration of war. Our Founders understood that how we go to war is as important as when we go to war, which is why they vested the power to declare war in the Legislative Branch. The resolution passed in Congress authorizing the president to use force in Iraq said nothing about the U.S. Constitution, but it mentioned the United Nations a dozen times. The United States should never go to war to enforce UN resolutions!

Our continued presence in Iraq is serving as a recruiting tool for al-Qaeda. A recent National Intelligence Estimate found that the U.S. presence in Iraq has had a “rejuvenating” effect on the terrorist group. Proponents of the surge say that we are achieving victory. However, even if the level of our troops being killed has declined, they are still being targeted and the Iraqi government is no closer to stability, meaning that the violence will continue.

While we keep our focus on Iraq indefinitely, bin Laden remains free to plot his next attack, and can continue to portray us as occupiers and recruit more volunteers to his cause. Shortly after 9/11, I voted for the authorization to go into Afghanistan because it told the president to do what he already had the authority to do: go after the ones who directly hit us. I was extremely disappointed that the mission there changed to one of nation-building.

Military experts, including Generals Barry McCaffrey and John Batiste, have sounded the warning that our military is stretched so thin because of Iraq and our other commitments that, as General Batiste put it recently, “our Army and Marine Corps are at a breaking point with little to show for it.” A weakened and over-committed military is a recipe for a national security disaster. Meanwhile, Washington continues to talk about how many other countries it could send troops to.

As if a national debt topping $9 trillion is not bad enough, each day this war is fought, deficit spending increases. To avoid raising taxes and the subsequent anger that would follow come election time, the federal government will continue to borrow money from countries like Saudi Arabia and China, making your children and grandchildren’s futures dependent on the actions of other nations and selling out our national security to the highest bidder.

Make no mistake, as Congress spends more and more, there will be less and less to fund Social Security and Medicare, the programs Washington has made us dependent on, without a massive tax increase. Meanwhile, bin Laden proclaims that our falling dollar is a sign that al-Qaeda’s “bleed-until-bankruptcy plan” is working.

On my first day as commander-in-chief, I will direct the Joint Chiefs of Staff and our commanders on the ground to devise and execute a plan to immediately withdraw our troops in the safest manner possible.

Those who caution that leaving Iraq would be a disaster are the same ones who promised the conflict would be a “cake-walk.” It is impossible to tell how long we will have to stay and how many lives we will have to lose if we wait for political factions that have been at war for centuries to come together.

As long as we occupy Iraq, the violence against our troops will continue, and the Iraqi government will become more dependent on us. It is in the best interests of the Iraqi people that we return their country to them immediately. Indeed, violence has already gone down in the areas that are not as heavily occupied.

It is now time to bring our troops home. We must return our focus to finding bin Laden and making sure that we can be prepared for any future threats against our national security.

The war in Iraq was sold to us with false information. The area is more dangerous now than when we entered it. We destroyed a regime hated by our direct enemies, the jihadists, and created thousands of new recruits for them. This war has cost more than 3,000 American lives, thousands of seriously wounded, and hundreds of billions of dollars. We must have new leadership in the White House to ensure this never happens again.

War and Foreign Policy

Both Jefferson and Washington warned us about entangling ourselves in the affairs of other nations. Today, we have troops in 130 countries. We are spread so thin that we have too few troops defending America. And now, there are new calls for a draft of our young men and women.

We can continue to fund and fight no-win police actions around the globe, or we can refocus on securing America and bring the troops home. No war should ever be fought without a declaration of war voted upon by the Congress, as required by the Constitution.

Under no circumstances should the U.S. again go to war as the result of a resolution that comes from an unelected, foreign body, such as the United Nations.

Too often we give foreign aid and intervene on behalf of governments that are despised. Then, we become despised. Too often we have supported those who turn on us, like the Kosovars who aid Islamic terrorists, or the Afghan jihadists themselves, and their friend Osama bin Laden. We armed and trained them, and now we’re paying the price.

At the same time, we must not isolate ourselves. The generosity of the American people has been felt around the globe. Many have thanked God for it, in many languages. Let us have a strong America, conducting open trade, travel, communication, and diplomacy with other nations.

Homeland/National Security:

National Defense

A defense policy designed to keep Americans safe should start with the idea that we must secure our borders from those who would cross them to do us harm. Currently, the United States maintains hundreds of thousands of troops in more than 100 foreign countries. In many cases, they are there to defend foreign borders. Maintaining such a global empire drains nearly one trillion dollars from the U.S. economy each year, while offering very little real security for the American people. What’s worse, our U.S. Border Guards are sent overseas to places like Iraq while our own borders remain porous and vulnerable.

According to the 9/11 Commission Report, the terrorists who attacked the U.S. on September 11, 2001, had obtained some 24 visas to enter the United States under false pretenses or with incomplete or misleading applications. All these should have been caught and refused. The fact that this did not happen is another indictment on our inadequate border security system.

As president, I would:

* Make securing our borders against a possible terrorist threat the top defense priority. No one who seeks to do us harm should be allowed to cross the border into U.S. territory. After all, a defense policy should benefit those who actually pay for it: the American people.
* Re-focus the efforts of our military and intelligence services on locating those individuals who planned the terrorist attacks on the U.S. and who remain at large. It must be made clear that the United States cannot be attacked with impunity. When I voted for the authorization to use force against those who attacked us in 2001, I did not imagine that we would be getting bogged down for years in a nation-building exercise in Afghanistan while the perpetrators remain at large. Efforts in that part of the world should be exclusively focused on apprehending those responsible for the attacks against the United States.
* Push for a complete overhaul of U.S. intelligence requirements and capabilities. For far too long, Congress has operated under the assumption that simply spending more on the intelligence community would make it more effective and efficient. We have unfortunately learned the hard way that this is not a wise approach. I have consulted with numerous current and former intelligence professionals about the need to re-assess our intelligence community and how it should function, and I will take action to implement such reforms as president.

I have introduced several pieces of legislation designed to strengthen our capability to find the 9/11 perpetrators and protect our nation against future attacks:

* H.R. 3216 would authorize the president to issue letters of marque and reprisal, naming private sources who can capture or kill our enemies. This method works in conjunction with our military efforts, creating an incentive for people on the ground close to bin Laden to kill or capture him and his associates. Letters of marque are especially suited to fight against individuals who can melt into the civilian population or hide in remote areas.
* H.R. 3305 would allow pilots and specially assigned law enforcement personnel to carry firearms in order to protect airline passengers. Pilots must have the choice to carry weapons as a last line of defense against future hijacking attempts.
* H.R. 3217 would prohibit the issuance of student, training, vocational, and diversity visas without presidential review to anyone from a country that repeatedly supports terrorism or does not cooperate fully with U.S. antiterrorism efforts.

Keeping America safe and secure is about more than the size of the defense budget or the number of U.S. military personnel. An America-first defense policy understands the need to rationally assess the threats that do exist to the United States and then figure out what we can do to minimize those threats. We must be willing to ask and answer the hard questions. Has our foreign policy of interventionism overseas increased or decreased the threats to our security? When we interfere in a foreign election or foment unrest abroad, are the people more or less likely to harbor ill-feelings toward the United States and the American people?

We must move beyond the assertions of some that “they hate us because we are prosperous and free” and earnestly attempt to understand what it is that motivates others to wish us harm and then to act upon those wishes. We must understand that many of the threats to the United States from overseas come from non-state actors rather than states. I have consulted and will continue to consult defense experts who are well-versed in such important topics as fourth generation warfare and how the U.S. can respond to emerging trends and threats.

A defense policy for the United States should first seek to make Americans safer. A foreign policy of non-interventionism overseas will be the first step in reducing threats to the U.S. My policy will enable us to focus our resources where they belong: in defense of the United States and the American people. An America-first defense policy will not go abroad seeking monsters to slay, but will deter through strength and lead by example.

Economic/Fiscal Policy:

Working Americans like lower taxes. So do I. Lower taxes benefit all of us, creating jobs and allowing us to make more decisions for ourselves about our lives.

Whether a tax cut reduces a single mother’s payroll taxes by $40 a month or allows a business owner to save thousands in capital gains taxes and hire more employees, that tax cut is a good thing. Lower taxes allow more spending, saving, and investing which helps the economy — that means all of us.

Real conservatives have always supported low taxes and low spending.

But today, too many politicians and lobbyists are spending America into ruin. We are nine trillion dollars in debt as a nation. Our mounting government debt endangers the financial future of our children and grandchildren. If we don’t cut spending now, higher taxes and economic disaster will be in their future — and yours.

In addition, the Federal Reserve, our central bank, fosters runaway debt by increasing the money supply — making each dollar in your pocket worth less. The Fed is a private bank run by unelected officials who are not required to be open or accountable to “we the people.”

Worse, our economy and our very independence as a nation is increasingly in the hands of foreign governments such as China and Saudi Arabia, because their central banks also finance our runaway spending.

We cannot continue to allow private banks, wasteful agencies, lobbyists, corporations on welfare, and governments collecting foreign aid to dictate the size of our ballooning budget. We need a new method to prioritize our spending. It’s called the Constitution of the United States.

No Taxes on Tips

It is an outrage that waiters, waitresses, and other service-sector employees have to pay taxes on the tips they earn. The IRS makes an estimate of how much service-sector workers will make in tips, and taxes them on it even if the taxpayer did not actually earn as much as the IRS' estimate!

Tips provide a substantial portion of the income of many service-sector employees, many of whom are young people just trying to make a few extra dollars to get through school, or single parents often balancing two jobs while trying to make enough to raise a family. This tax amounts to nothing more than the federal government punishing these employees for working hard and doing their jobs well.

I have introduced H.R. 3664 in Congress to end this problem. The Tax Free Tips Act of 2007 will exempt tips from federal income and payroll taxes. Ending taxes on tips will give workers an immediate pay raise, letting them keep more money to put toward things like a house or car payment, their retirement, or their own and/or their children's education.

When you give someone a tip, you should not have to simultaneously tip the federal government.

The Inflation Tax

Today, the federal government burdens us with one of the most dangerous taxes it can impose — the inflation tax. When the federal government finds that it cannot afford its out-of-control spending, and is unwilling to directly tax the public, it resorts simply to creating the money out of thin air.

Inflating the money supply is the easiest form of financing the government. The Federal Reserve, an unelected and unaccountable private organization, pumps more dollars into the economy whenever it chooses. Because the public is forced to accept these bills, the Fed essentially gets away with legally counterfeiting. We cannot possibly expect the government to control spending when it has a blank checkbook.

This greatly benefits the politicians and special interests — they are able to finance the massive welfare-warfare state. But how does this inflation affect you?

Basic economics tells us that the more there is of a good, the less valuable it becomes. This is also true of money. The dollar is worth four cents of what it was when the Federal Reserve was created in 1913.

Day by day, every dollar you have is being devalued. You pay an inflation tax without even realizing it because you are forced by a falling dollar to pay more for goods and services.

The disastrous fiscal policies of our own government, marked by shameless deficit spending and Federal Reserve currency devaluation, are some of the greatest threats facing our nation today. It is this one-two punch — Congress spending more than it can tax or borrow, and the Treasury printing money to make up the difference — that threatens to impoverish us by further destroying the value of our dollars.

By legalizing competing currencies, we can end the Federal Reserve’s stranglehold on our money supply and begin to restore value to the dollar. But Congress will continue to spend extravagantly until we the people make our views known at the ballot box.

American Independence and Sovereignty

So called free trade deals and world governmental organizations like the International Criminal Court (ICC), NAFTA, GATT, WTO, and CAFTA are a threat to our independence as a nation. They transfer power from our government to unelected foreign elites.

The ICC wants to try our soldiers as war criminals. Both the WTO and CAFTA could force Americans to get a doctor’s prescription to take herbs and vitamins. Alternative treatments could be banned.

The WTO has forced Congress to change our laws, yet we still face trade wars. Today, France is threatening to have U.S. goods taxed throughout Europe. If anything, the WTO makes trade relations worse by giving foreign competitors a new way to attack U.S. jobs.

NAFTA’s superhighway is just one part of a plan to erase the borders between the U.S. and Mexico, called the North American Union. This spawn of powerful special interests, would create a single nation out of Canada, the U.S. and Mexico, with a new unelected bureaucracy and money system. Forget about controlling immigration under this scheme.

And a free America, with limited, constitutional government, would be gone forever.

Let’s not forget the UN. It wants to impose a direct tax on us. I successfully fought this move in Congress last year, but if we are going to stop ongoing attempts of this world government body to tax us, we will need leadership from the White House.

We must withdraw from any organizations and trade deals that infringe upon the freedom and independence of the United States of America.

Healthcare:

The federal government decided long ago that it knew how to manage your health care better than you and replaced personal responsibility and accountability with a system that puts corporate interests first. Our free market health care system that was once the envy of the world became a federally-managed disaster.

Few people realize that Congress forced Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) on us. HMOs rose to prominence through federal legislation, incentives, and coercion.

Now, the Food and Drug Administration's bias toward large pharmaceutical companies enlarges their power, limits treatment options, and drives consumers to seek Canadian medicines. Regulations from D.C. make it virtually impossible for small business owners to cover their employees. Thanks to government interference in the health care market, many Americans, including the unemployed and those who work for small businesses, cannot afford health insurance. This causes the uninsured to seek basic medical care at already overcrowded emergency rooms, further driving up health care costs and causing premiums to rise for those with insurance.

The federal government will not suddenly become efficient managers if universal health care is instituted. Government health care only means long waiting periods, lack of choice, poor quality, and frustration. Many Canadians, fed up with socialized medicine, come to the U.S. in order to obtain care. Socialized medicine will not magically work here.

Health care should not be left up to HMOs, big drug companies, and government bureaucrats.

It is time to take back our health care. This is why I support:

* Making all medical expenses tax deductible.
* Eliminating federal regulations that discourage small businesses from providing coverage.
* Giving doctors the freedom to collectively negotiate with insurance companies and drive down the cost of medical care.
* Making every American eligible for a Health Savings Account (HSA), and removing the requirement that individuals must obtain a high-deductible insurance policy before opening an HSA.
* Reform licensure requirements so that pharmacists and nurses can perform some basic functions to increase access to care and lower costs.

By removing federal regulations, encouraging competition, and presenting real choices, we can make our health care system the envy of the world once again.

Health Freedom

Americans are justifiably concerned over the government’s escalating intervention into their freedom to choose what they eat and how they take care of their health.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), in order to comply with standards dictated by supra-national organizations such as the UN‘s World Food Code (CODEX), NAFTA, and CAFTA, has been assuming greater control over nutrients, vitamins and natural health care providers to restrict your right to choose the manner in which you manage your health and nutritional needs.

I have been the national leader in preserving Health Freedom.

I have introduced the Health Freedom Protection Act, HR 2117, to ensure Americans can receive truthful health information about supplements and natural remedies.

I support the Access to Medical Treatment Act, H.R. 2717, which expands the ability of Americans to use alternative medicine and new treatments.

I oppose legislation that increases the FDA‘s legal powers. FDA has consistently failed to protect the public from dangerous drugs, genetically modified foods, dangerous pesticides and other chemicals in the food supply. Meanwhile they waste public funds attacking safe, healthy foods and dietary supplements.

I also opposed the Homeland Security Bill, H.R. 5005, which, in section 304, authorizes the forced vaccination of American citizens against small pox. The government should never have the power to require immunizations or vaccinations.

Social Security:

Our nation’s promise to its seniors, once considered a sacred trust, has become little more than a tool for politicians to scare retirees while robbing them of their promised benefits. Today, the Social Security system is broke and broken.

Those in the system are seeing their benefits dwindle due to higher taxes, increasing inflation, and irresponsible public spending.

The proposed solutions, ranging from lower benefits to higher taxes to increasing the age of eligibility, are NOT solutions; they are betrayals.

Imposing any tax on Social Security benefits is unfair and illogical. In Congress, I have introduced the Senior Citizens Tax Elimination Act (H.R. 191), which repeals ALL taxes on Social Security benefits, to eliminate political theft of our seniors’ income and raise their standard of living.

Solvency is the key to keeping our promise to our seniors, and I have introduced the Social Security Preservation Act (H.R. 219) to ensure that money paid into the system is only used for Social Security.

It is fundamentally unfair to give benefits to anyone who has not paid into the system. The Social Security for Americans Only Act (H.R. 190) ends the drain on Social Security caused by illegal aliens seeking the fruits of your labor.

We must also address the desire of younger workers to save and invest on their own. We should cut payroll taxes and give workers the opportunity to seek better returns in the private market.

Excessive government spending has created the insolvency crisis in Social Security. We must significantly reduce spending so that our nation can keep its promise to our seniors.

The Drug War:

I would like to draw an analogy between the drug war and the war against terrorism. In the last 30 years, we have spent hundreds of billions of dollars on a failed war on drugs. This war has been used as an excuse to attack our liberties and privacy. It has been an excuse to undermine our financial privacy while promoting illegal searches and seizures with many innocent people losing their lives and property. Seizure and forfeiture have harmed a great number of innocent American citizens.

Another result of this unwise war has been the corruption of many law enforcement officials. It is well known that with the profit incentives so high, we are not even able to keep drugs out of our armed prisons. Making our whole society a prison would not bring success to this floundering war on drugs. Sinister motives of the profiteers and gangsters, along with prevailing public ignorance, keep this futile war going. Illegal and artificially high priced drugs drive the underworld to produce, sell and profit from this social depravity. Failure to recognize that drug addiction, like alcoholism, is a disease rather than a crime, encourage the drug warriors in efforts that have not and will not ever work. We learned the hard way about alcohol prohibition and crime, but we have not yet seriously considered it in the ongoing drug war.

Corruption associated with the drug dealers is endless. It has involved our police, the military, border guards and the judicial system. It has affected government policy and our own CIA. The artificially high profits from illegal drugs provide easy access to funds for rogue groups involved in fighting civil wars throughout the world. Ironically, opium sales by the Taliban and artificially high prices helped to finance their war against us. In spite of the incongruity, we rewarded the Taliban this spring with a huge cash payment for promises to eradicate some poppy fields. Sure.

For the first 140 years of our history, we had essentially no Federal war on drugs, and far fewer problems with drug addiction and related crimes was a consequence. In the past 30 years, even with the hundreds of millions of dollars spent on the drug war, little good has come of it. We have vacillated from efforts to stop the drugs at the source to severely punishing the users, yet nothing has improved. This war has been behind most big government policy powers of the last 30 years, with continual undermining of our civil liberties and personal privacy. Those who support the IRS's efforts to collect maximum revenues and root out the underground economy, have welcomed this intrusion, even if the drug underworld grows in size and influence.

The drug war encourages violence. Government violence against nonviolent users is notorious and has led to the unnecessary prison overpopulation. Innocent taxpayers are forced to pay for all this so-called justice. Our eradication project through spraying around the world, from Colombia to Afghanistan, breeds resentment because normal crops and good land can be severely damaged. Local populations perceive that the efforts and the profiteering remain somehow beneficial to our own agenda in these various countries.

Drug dealers and drug gangs are a consequence of our unwise approach to drug usage. Many innocent people are killed in the crossfire by the mob justice that this war generates. But just because the laws are unwise and have had unintended consequences, no excuses can ever be made for the monster who would kill and maim innocent people for illegal profits. But as the violent killers are removed from society, reconsideration of our drug laws ought to occur.

A similar approach should be applied to our war on those who would terrorize and kill our people for political reasons. If the drug laws and the policies that incite hatred against the United States are not clearly understood and, therefore, never changed, the number of drug criminals and terrorists will only multiply. Although this unwise war on drugs generates criminal violence, the violence can never be tolerated. Even if repeal of drug laws would decrease the motivation for drug dealer violence, this can never be an excuse to condone the violence. On the short term, those who kill must be punished, imprisoned, or killed. Long term though, a better understanding of how drug laws have unintended consequences is required if we want to significantly improve the situation and actually reduce the great harms drugs are doing to our society.

The same is true in dealing with those who so passionately hate us that suicide becomes a just and noble cause in their effort to kill and terrorize us. Without some understanding of what has brought us to the brink of a worldwide conflict in reconsidering our policies around the globe, we will be no more successful in making our land secure and free than the drug war has been in removing drug violence from our cities and towns.

Without some understanding why terrorism is directed towards the United States, we may well build a prison for ourselves with something called homeland security while doing nothing to combat the root causes of terrorism. Let us hope we figure this out soon. We have promoted a foolish and very expensive domestic war on drugs for more than 30 years. It has done no good whatsoever. I doubt our Republic can survive a 30-year period of trying to figure out how to win this guerilla war against terrorism. Hopefully, we will all seek the answers in these trying times with an open mind and understanding.

Education:

The federal government does not own our children. Yet we act as if it does by letting it decide when, how, and what our children will learn. We have turned their futures over to lobbyists and bureaucrats.

I support giving educational control back to parents, who know their children better than any politician in D.C. ever will.

The federal government has no constitutional authority to fund or control schools. I want to abolish the unconstitutional, wasteful Department of Education and return its functions to the states. By removing the federal subsidies that inflate costs, schools can be funded by local taxes, and parents and teachers can directly decide how best to allocate the resources.

To help parents with the costs of schooling, I have introduced H.R. 1056, the Family Education Freedom Act, in Congress. This bill would allow parents a tax credit of up to $5,000 (adjustable after 2007 for inflation) per student per year for the cost of attendance at an elementary and/or secondary school. This includes private, parochial, religious, and home schools.

Another bill I have sponsored, H.R. 1059, allows full-time elementary and secondary teachers a $3,000 yearly tax credit, thus easing their financial burden and encouraging good teachers to stay in an underpaid profession.

I have also introduced legislation to help families cope with the out-of-control costs of higher education. H.R. 193, the Make College Affordable Act, creates a full tax deduction for undergraduate college tuition, reasonable living expenses, and interest on qualified student loans.

Many parents have already shown their desire to be free of federal control by either enrolling their children in private schools or homeschooling them. And students enrolled in these alternatives have consistently performed better and tested higher than those in state-run schools.

Years of centralized education have produced nothing but failure and frustrated parents. We can resurrect our public school system if we follow the Constitution and end the federal education monopoly.

Home Schooling

My commitment to ensuring home schooling remains a practical alternative for American families is unmatched by any Presidential candidate.

Returning control of education to parents is the centerpiece of my education agenda. As President I will advance tax credits through the Family Education Freedom Act, which reduces taxes to make it easier for parents to home school by allowing them to devote more of their own funds to their children’s education.

I am committed to guaranteeing parity for home school diplomas and advancing equal scholarship consideration for students entering college from a home school environment.

We must have permanency in the Department of Defense Home School Tier 1 Pilot Program, providing recruitment status parity for home school graduates. I will use my authority to prevent the Department of Education from regulating home school activities.

I will veto any legislation that creates national standards or national testing for home school parents or students. I also believe that, as long as No Child Left Behind remains law, it must include the protections for home schoolers included in sec. 9506 (enshrining home schoolers’ rights) and 9527 (guaranteeing no national curriculum).

Federal monies must never be used to undermine the rights of homeschooling parents. I will use the bully pulpit of the Presidency to encourage a culture of educational freedom throughout the nation.

Immigration:

The talk must stop. We must secure our borders now. A nation without secure borders is no nation at all. It makes no sense to fight terrorists abroad when our own front door is left unlocked. This is my six point plan:

* Physically secure our borders and coastlines. We must do whatever it takes to control entry into our country before we undertake complicated immigration reform proposals.
* Enforce visa rules. Immigration officials must track visa holders and deport anyone who overstays their visa or otherwise violates U.S. law. This is especially important when we recall that a number of 9/11 terrorists had expired visas.
* No amnesty. Estimates suggest that 10 to 20 million people are in our country illegally. That’s a lot of people to reward for breaking our laws.
* No welfare for illegal aliens. Americans have welcomed immigrants who seek opportunity, work hard, and play by the rules. But taxpayers should not pay for illegal immigrants who use hospitals, clinics, schools, roads, and social services.
* End birthright citizenship. As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be citizens, the incentive to enter the U.S. illegally will remain strong.
* Pass true immigration reform. The current system is incoherent and unfair. But current reform proposals would allow up to 60 million more immigrants into our country, according to the Heritage Foundation. This is insanity. Legal immigrants from all countries should face the same rules and waiting periods.

And there you have it, Dr. Paul's positions on the important issues. I hope this helps you become a better informed voter. End of Series.

Mike Huckabee

2008-02-10T16:20:00.000-06:00

This week's installment of "As the voting public gets ready to sign up for more of the same" will be highlighting the positions of candidate Mike Huckabee

National Security/Foreign Policy: Iraq

* Iraq is a battle in our generational, ideological war on terror.
* The Democrats deny that the war in Iraq is part of the war on terror even as we fight Al Qaeda there. Al Qaeda seeks permanent bases in Anbar province to plot and train against us.
* General Petraeus and our troops are giving their all to provide a window of opportunity for the Iraq government to succeed, while the Democrats are running for the exit doors.
* The surge is a military means to achieve the political end of sectarian reconciliation among the Iraqis.
* Setting a timetable for withdrawal is a mistake. This country has never declared war until "a week from Wednesday," we have always declared war until victory.
* I am focused on winning. Withdrawal would have serious strategic consequences for us and horrific humanitarian consequences for the Iraqis.
* I support a regional summit so that Iraq's neighbors become militarily and financially committed to stabilizing Iraq.

Iraq is a battle in our generational, ideological war on terror. The Democrats delusionally deny that the war in Iraq is part of the war on terror even as we fight Al Qaeda there. Al Qaeda is a major ally of the Sunni insurgents in their fight against the Shiite majority. One of the most significant events in the Iraq War was Al Qaeda's bombing of the Shiites' Golden Mosque in Samarra in February 2006. That bombing led to the dramatic rise in sectarian violence between Sunnis and Shiites we've seen ever since, furthering Al Qaeda's goal of fomenting chaos and civil war. What's in it for them? They need territory, a place to plot their evil and train their murderers for another September 11. Al Qaeda intends to keep and expand its bases in the Sunni area of Anbar province. But we've made great progress in denying Al Qaeda that Anbar sanctuary, where the Commandant of the Marines, General Conway, says that "we have turned the corner." Fourteen of Anbar's eighteen tribal leaders no longer support Al Qaeda.

General Petraeus and our troops are giving their all to provide a window of opportunity for the Iraqi government to succeed, while the Democrats are running for the exit doors. The surge has only been in place since the middle of June, but progress has already been made. It's way too early to write an obituary for the surge as the Democrat defeatists are doing. Having unanimously confirmed General Petraeus to lead the surge, the Democrats should let him do the job they sent him to do and await his report in mid-September. They're Monday morning quarterbacking while we're still playing the game, and some of us are playing to win.

To pressure the Iraqis into seizing the day before darkness descends, President Bush and Secretary Gates have been emphatic that this window will not remain open forever. At the same time, setting a timetable for withdrawal tells our enemies they don't have to win, they just have to wait. We have never in our history declared war until "a week from Wednesday," we have always declared war until victory.

I am focused on winning. Withdrawal would have serious strategic consequences for us and horrific humanitarian consequences for the Iraqis. If we leave, Iraq's neighbors on all sides will face a refugee crisis and be drawn into the war: Iran to protect the Shiites; Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Jordan to protect the Sunnis; and Turkey to protect its control over its own Kurd population. Iraq is a crossroads where Arab meets Persian and Kurd, Sunni meets Shiite, so if it's not a peaceful buffer, it can easily become a tinder box for the region. When we deposed Saddam, we emphasized Iraq's central location as a prime place to establish democracy and have it spread. That was the potential dramatic upside. Now we're faced with the potential dramatic downside that the terrorists are fighting to take advantage of: Iraq's central location as a prime place to create chaos and have it spread .

I support a regional summit so that Iraq's neighbors become financially and militarily committed to stabilizing Iraq now rather than financially and militarily committed to widening the war later. This summit will add more voices, Muslim voices, to the pressure to perform we're already applying to the Maliki government.

National Security/Foreign Policy: War On Terror

* I believe that we are currently engaged in a world war. This war is not a conventional war, and these terrorists are not a conventional enemy.
* The top priority of the President as Commander in Chief is first and foremost protecting our own citizens.
* With a focus on renewed diplomacy and inclusion, we can accomplish the goals of our nation without having to go it alone.
* During the Cold War, we had hawks and doves, but this new war requires us to be a phoenix, rising reborn to meet each new challenge and seize each new opportunity.
* As President, I will fight this war hard, but I will also fight it smart, using all our political, economic, diplomatic, and intelligence weapons as well as our military might.
* The terrorists train in small, scattered groups. We can accomplish a great deal with swift, surgical air strikes and commando raids by our elite units.
* We have to get tough with President Musharraf who has allowed Al Qaeda and the Taliban to have bases in Waziristan.
* We don't have a dog in the fight between Sunnis and Shiites - our enemy is Islamic extremism in all its guises.
* The long-term solution is to empower moderates in the region by attacking the underlying conditions that breed terror.
* Part of winning the war on terror is achieving energy independence.
* I believe in the Powell Doctrine of using overwhelming force to accomplish a mission.
* I have the executive and crisis management experience, the judgment and the temperament to be an effective commander in chief.
* I will expand the army and increase the defense budget.

I believe that we are currently engaged in a world war. Radical Islamic fascists have declared war on our country and our way of life. They have sworn to annihilate each of us who believe in a free society, all in the name of a perversion of religion and an impersonal god. We go to great extremes to save lives, they go to great extremes to take them. This war is not a conventional war, and these terrorists are not a conventional enemy. I will fight the war on terror with the intensity and single-mindedness that it deserves.

The top priority of the president as Commander in Chief is first and foremost protecting our own citizens. While we live in a neighborhood of nations and must strive to be good neighbors, as President, I will ensure the peace, safety, and well-being of American citizens at home and abroad.

While I prefer America to be safe and secure within her own borders rather than loved and appreciated abroad, I believe we can accomplish both goals. We can resurrect relationships with our allies and neighbors. With a focus on renewed diplomacy and inclusion, we can accomplish the goals of our nation without having to go it alone.

When the sun rose on September 11, we were the only superpower in the world; when the sun set that day, we were still the only superpower, but how different the world looked. During the Cold War, you were a hawk or a dove, but this new world requires us to be a phoenix, to rise from the ashes of the twin towers with a whole new game plan for this very different enemy. Being a phoenix means constantly reinventing ourselves, dying to mistakes and miscalculations, changing tactics and strategies, rising reborn to meet each new challenge and seize each new opportunity.

As president, I will fight this war hard, but I will also fight it smart, using all our political, economic, diplomatic, and intelligence weapons as well as our military might. The terrorists unfortunately have a great many sympathizers all over the world, folks who are happy to show up and be filmed shouting "Death to America," but the actual number of those willing to blow themselves up is relatively few, and they train and plot in small, scattered groups.

It's an enemy conducive to being tracked down and eliminated by using the CIA and the Pentagon's Joint Special Operations Command. We can accomplish a great deal, we can achieve tremendous bang for the buck, with swift, surgical air strikes and commando raids by our elite units, working with friendly governments, as we've done with the Ethiopians in Somalia. These operations are impossible without first-rate intelligence. When the Cold War ended, we cut back on our human intelligence, just as we cut back on our armed forces, and both have come back to haunt us. As President, I will beef up our human intelligence capacity, both the operatives who gather information and the analysts who figure out what it means.

Right after September 11, with wounds fresh and emotions running high, President Bush declared that all other countries were either for us or they were for the terrorists. Such a black-and-white stance doesn't work in the Arab and Muslim worlds, where there are more shades of gray than you'll find at Sherwin-Williams. Is President Musharraf of Pakistan for us 100%? No, since September 11, he's been playing both ends in the middle to survive. At the moment he's pulled too far away from us. While we have been focused on Iraq, Al Qaeda and the Taliban have expanded their training camps in the Waziristan region of Pakistan with impunity. This bodes ominously not just for Afghanistan, but also for Al Qaeda's plotting and training for more attacks all over the world, including here in the United States. This is the direct result of an ill-conceived autonomy agreement President Musharraf made with Waziristan's tribal leaders. In fact the tribal leader Musharaff has praised for fighting foreign terrorists, Mullah Nazir, recently said that he would protect Osama bin Laden! We have to get tough with Mursharraf and re-calibrate the carrots and sticks we use with him. Pakistan is the fifth largest recipient of American aid, and right now we're not getting real good value. We're in a game of chicken with this military dictator: he warns us not to pursue terrorists across the border with Afghanistan, not to strike their bases on his territory because it could cause his government to fall and an even less friendly figure to take his job. But we have to make clear to him that he is of no use to us if he allows the Taliban and Al Qaeda to use his territory with impunity. The current situation highlights that, despite our generous aid, both the Taliban and Al Qaeda enjoy a disturbing degree of popularity in Pakistan. Ultimately it is this popularity contest, this war of ideas, that we have to win. Creativity and flexibility are Musharraf's keys to retaining power.

Creativity and flexibility are our keys to dealing with him and other Muslim leaders. Instead of asking if someone is for us, instead of demanding that every ally be at the level of Great Britain, I will ask if we should be for them, if they can be useful in any way, however limited, however temporary.

The terrorists have succeeded in dividing us over how to fight them, but we are not taking full advantage of their divisions and of the broader divisions in the region. For example, Hamas, Al Qaeda, and Hezbollah are all terrorist groups, but Hamas and Al Qaeda are Sunni and hate Hezbollah, which is Shiite, as much as they hate us. We are worried about the Iranians extending their sphere of influence west, but so are the Sunni Arabs in Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan, who dislike the Iranians not just because they are Shiites, but because they are Persians. Fighting smart means learning the neighborhood, achieving a level of political, religious, and cultural sophistication about the Arab and Islamic worlds that will pay huge dividends for us. We have to know the cast of characters, not just the national political leaders and their leading opponents, but the clerics, the tribal and clan leaders. We get criticized for our arrogance, but it's our ignorance that's killing us.

As for the underlying dispute between Sunnis and Shiites that's been going on for fourteen hundred years, we don't have a dog in that fight. Our enemy is Islamic extremism in all its guises. The Saudis want us to support extremist Sunni groups to counter growing Iranian influence. The Saudis assure us that they can control these groups and keep them from turning against us. We saw how well that turned out with Al Qaeda. I will support moderates, not extremists, with no favoring of Sunnis or Shiites.

The long-term solution to terror is to empower moderates in the region. My goal in the Middle and Near East is to correctly calibrate a course between maintaining stability and promoting democracy. It's self-defeating to try to accomplish too much too soon, you just have elections where extremists win, but it's equally self-defeating to do nothing. First, we have to destroy the terrorists who already exist, then we have to attack the underlying conditions that breed terror, by creating schools that offer an alternative to the extremist madrassas that take impressionable children and turn them into killers, by creating jobs and opportunity and hope, by encouraging a free press and other institutions that promote democracy. The recent rising appeal of Al Qaeda across North Africa - Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia - shows why we have to do better in the war of ideas - and soon.

In the past, we've been constrained from helping some of the good guys because our dependence on oil has forced us to support repressive regimes, to conduct our foreign policy with one hand tied behind our back. It's time, it's past time, to untie that hand and reach out to the moderates with both hands. Oil has not just shaped our foreign policy, it has deformed it. When I make foreign policy, I want to be able to treat Saudi Arabia the same way I treat Sweden, and that requires us to be energy independent. These folks have had us over a barrel - literally - for way too long. The first thing I will do as President is send Congress my comprehensive plan for energy independence. We will achieve energy independence by the end of my second term. We will explore, we will conserve, and we will pursue all avenues of alternative energy - nuclear, wind, solar, hydrogen, clean coal, biodiesel, and biomass.

If I ever have to undertake a large invasion, I will follow the Powell Doctrine and use overwhelming force. The notion of an "occupation with a light footprint" that was our paradigm for Iraq always struck me as a contradiction in terms. Liberating a country and occupying it are two different missions. Occupation inevitably demands a lot of boots on the ground. Instead of marginalizing General Shinseki when he said we needed several hundred thousand troops for Iraq, I would have met privately with him and carefully weighed his advice and his underlying analysis.

Our current armed forces aren't large enough - we have been relying far too heavily on our National Guard and our Reserves, we have worn them out. When our enemies know that we are spread thin, they're more apt to test us by provoking a crisis. Having a sizeable standing army actually makes it less likely that we'll have to use it. So I will increase the defense budget. We have to be ready to fight both conventional and unconventional wars against both state and non-state enemies. Right now we spend about 3.9% of our GDP on defense, while we spent about 6% in 1986 under President Reagan. I would return to that 6% level. I believe we can do this without raising taxes. I will limit increases in other discretionary spending and rely on the normal increase in federal tax revenue that is generated annually as Americans' incomes rise.

Crises arise suddenly and unpredictably, and no one has the database for every possible scenario. What we have to evaluate is the strength of a leader's operating system, because if that's sound, he can always add the data. I'll be an effective commander in chief because I have executive experience and crisis management experience. My record as Governor shows that I'm intellectually curious, a quick study, and have sound judgment. I will get advice from a broad circle with differing perspectives and portfolios; encourage dissent and stay out of the bubble; refuse to wilt under criticism, but also be flexible and ready to change course if a policy isn't working. I will communicate my rationale for our foreign and defense policies clearly and frequently to Congress and to the American people.

Foreign Policy: Israel

* I am a steadfast supporter of Israel, our staunch ally in the War on Terror, the only fully-functioning democracy in the Middle East, and our greatest friend in that region.
* The United States must remain true to its long-standing commitment to the Israeli people.
* As President, I will always ensure that Israel has access to the state-of-the-art weapons and technology she needs to defend herself from those who seek her annihilation.

I've visited the Middle East extensively over the past thirty-five years, including nine trips to Israel. I salute and support Israel as our staunch ally in the War on Terror and our greatest friend in that region. As the only fully-functioning democracy in the Middle East, Israel occupies a unique position both geographically and geopolitically. Israel is an important partner in the spread of freedom and democracy throughout the Middle East and the world.

The United States must remain true to its long-standing, bipartisan commitment to the Israelis. I will always ensure that Israel has access to the state-of-the-art weapons and technology she needs to defend herself from those who seek her annihilation.

Cuba Policy

* I am committed to being a staunch ally in the cause of a free and democratic Cuba, where Fidel Castro's communist totalitarian dictatorship has oppressed the Cuban people for nearly five decades.
* The United States must continue to lead the world in condemning the human rights abuses inflicted on the Cuban people and isolating Castro's tyrannical regime both economically and diplomatically.
* As President, I will oppose any efforts to lift trade and travel restrictions on the Cuban dictatorship and will veto any legislation seeking to lift these restrictions until three conditions are met: scheduling of free, fair and internationally-supervised multi-party elections, freeing of all political prisoners, and legalization of all political activity and civil liberties.

For 48 years, Cuba's communist dictatorship has been a destabilizing force in our hemisphere. Fidel Castro has supported and promoted violent revolution as well as terrorist activity. Cuba remains on the U.S. Department of State's list of nations that sponsor terrorism. Castro's brand of tyranny is now evident in the dictatorial actions of Venezuela's Hugo Chavez. In sum, the demise of the Castro regime would be a welcomed development for our hemisphere and for the Cuban people.

United States policy toward Cuba is clear. The 1996 Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act (Libertad Act) provides a road map for America's goal of expediting a transition to democracy in Cuba and assisting the Cuban people in a post-Castro democratic transition. As President, I will enforce and implement all provisions of U.S. law governing policy toward Cuba including the Libertad Act. I will continue President Bush's policy of pursuing indictments against any Cuban officials, including Raul Castro, responsible for crimes against U.S. citizens. I will further support efforts to bring to justice any American fugitive criminals receiving safe haven in Cuba. The Castro dictatorship is an outlaw regime. As President, my administration will treat it as such.

Fiscal/Econimic Policy:

* I support the FairTax.
* As Governor of Arkansas, I cut taxes and fees almost 100 times, saving the taxpayers almost $380 million. I left a surplus of nearly $850 million, which I urged should go back to the people.
* Our massive deficit is not due to Americans' being under-taxed, but to the government's over-spending.
* To control spending, I believe the President should have the line-item veto.
* I believe in free trade, but it has to be fair trade.
* Globalization, done right, done fairly, can be the equivalent of a big pay raise by allowing us to buy things more cheaply.
* I support making the Bush tax cuts (set to expire in 2010) permanent.
* Furthermore, I believe that we need to expand upon these cuts by further reducing marginal rates on individual and corporate income, instituting credits for tuition, and eliminating the “death tax.”

I'd like you to join me at the best "Going Out of Business" sale I can imagine - one held by the Internal Revenue Service. Am I running for president to shut down the federal government? Not exactly. But I am running to completely eliminate all federal income and payroll taxes. And I do mean all - personal federal, corporate federal, gift, estate, capital gains, alternative minimum, Social Security, Medicare, self-employment. All our hours filling out forms, all our payments for help with those forms, all our shopping bags filled with disorganized receipts, all our headaches and heartburn from tax stress will vanish. Instead we will have the FairTax, a simple tax based on wealth. When the FairTax becomes law, it will be like waving a magic wand releasing us from pain and unfairness.

The FairTax will replace the Internal Revenue Code with a consumption tax, like the taxes on retail sales forty-five states and the District of Columbia have now. All of us will get a monthly rebate that will reimburse us for taxes on purchases up to the poverty line, so that we're not taxed on necessities. That means people below the poverty line won't be taxed at all. We'll be taxed on what we decide to buy, not what we happen to earn. We won't be taxed on what we choose to save or the interest those savings earn. The tax will apply only to new goods, so we can reduce our taxes further by buying a used car or computer.

Our current progressive tax system penalizes us for working harder and becoming more successful. As we climb the ladder, the government lurks on each rung, hungry for a bigger bite out of our earnings. The FairTax is also progressive, but it doesn't punish the American dream of success, or the old-fashioned virtues of hard work and thrift, it rewards and encourages them. The FairTax isn't intended to raise any more or less money for the federal government to spend - it is revenue neutral.

Expert analyses have shown that the FairTax lowers the lifetime tax burden of all of us: single or married; working or retired; rich, poor or middle class.

The FairTax will instantly make American products 12 to 25% more competitive because the cost of those goods will no longer be inflated by corporate taxes, costs of tax compliance, and Social Security matching payments. When we buy products now, those taxes are built into the cost, so all of us pay corporate taxes indirectly on top of the personal taxes we pay directly. Compliance costs are just make-work with no real added value, yet they consume as much as 3% of our gross domestic product annually. These costs are an especially heavy burden on small businesses, which generate most of our jobs.

If you buy a bottle of domestic wine, you're paying the taxes/compliance/matching payments of all the folks who produced the grapes, the wine, the bottle, the cork, the label. If you buy a bottle of French wine, the producers had their Value Added Tax rebated to them when the wine was exported. So French consumers pay those taxes, but you don't. Our current tax system puts our goods at a disadvantage both here and overseas. Other governments give their goods an advantage on the world market, an advantage estimated at 18% compared to American goods.

So no matter how hard Americans work, no matter how innovative and creative we are, no matter how superior our products are, we suffer from a built-in competitive disadvantage simply because of our tax system. A recent study by MIT found that our tax system deprives us of about $1 billion in exports annually. When you export over-priced goods as we have, you inevitably end up exporting jobs and industries as we now are. We are the square peg trying to fit into the round hole of international trade. The rest of the world isn't going to change, it's time that we do.

Under the FairTax, American companies are far less likely to move overseas and foreign companies are far more likely to come here, hiring Americans to build and work in their new plants. The FairTax encourages growth by promoting investment and capital formation.

We have to scrap a 20th century tax system that is holding us back and keeping us down in the 21st century. The FairTax is the path to greater prosperity and job security for us and for our children.

As Governor of Arkansas, I pushed through the Arkansas Legislature the first major, broad-based tax cuts in state history - a $90 million tax relief package for Arkansas families. I also doubled the standard deduction to $2,000 for single taxpayers and $4,000 for those who are married. Some taxes I eliminated entirely: the marriage penalty, bracket creep caused by inflation, income tax on poor families, and capital gains on home sales. To encourage investment, I cut capital gains for both individuals and businesses. To help people better themselves, I provided tax credits for employee training and education. In total, I cut taxes and fees nearly 100 times during my ten-and-a-half years as Governor, saving the people of Arkansas almost $380 million.

When I left office in early 2007, Arkansas had nearly $850 million in state surplus, which I urged should go back to the people in the form of either a tax rebate or tax cut.

I believe that our massive deficit is not due to Americans' being under-taxed, but due to the federal government's over-spending. Achieving and maintaining a balanced federal budget is an important and worthy goal necessary to our long-term economic well-being. To achieve a balanced federal budget, I believe the President should have the line-item veto.

I believe in free trade, but it has to be fair trade. We are losing jobs because of an unlevel, unfair trading arena that has to be fixed. Behind the statistics, there are real families and real lives and real pain. I'm running for President because I don't want people who have worked loyally for a company for twenty or thirty years to walk in one morning and be handed a pink slip and be told, "I'm sorry, but everything you spent your life working for is no longer here."

I believe that globalization, done right, done fairly, can be a blessing for our society. As the Industrial Revolution raised living standards by allowing ordinary people to buy mass-produced goods that previously only the rich could afford, so globalization gives all of us the equivalent of a big pay raise by letting us buy all kinds of things from clothing to computers to TVs much more inexpensively.

Healthcare:

* The health care system in this country is irrevocably broken, in part because it is only a "health care" system, not a "health" system.
* We don't need universal health care mandated by federal edict.
* We do need to get serious about preventive health care.
* I advocate policies that will encourage the private sector to seek innovative ways to bring down costs.
* I value the states' role as laboratories for new market-based approaches.
* When I'm President, Americans will have more control of their health care options, not less.
* As President, I will work with the private sector, Congress, health care providers, and other concerned parties to lead a complete overhaul of our health care system.
* Our health care system is making our businesses non-competitive in the global economy. It is time to recognize that jobs don't need health care, people do, and move from employer-based to consumer-based health care.

The health care system in this country is irrevocably broken, in part because it is only a "health care" system, not a "health" system. We don't need universal health care mandated by federal edict or funded through ever-higher taxes. We do need to get serious about preventive health care instead of chasing more and more dollars to treat chronic disease, which currently gobbles up 80% of our health care costs, and yet is often avoidable. The result is that we'll be able to deliver better care where and when it's needed.

I advocate policies that will encourage the private sector to seek innovative ways to bring down costs and improve the free market for health care services. We have to change a system that happily pays $30,000 for a diabetic to have his foot amputated, but won't pay for the shoes that would save his foot.

We can make health care more affordable by reforming medical liability; adopting electronic record keeping; making health insurance more portable from one job to another; expanding health savings accounts to everyone, not just those with high deductibles; and making health insurance tax deductible for individuals and families as it now is for businesses. Low income families would get tax credits instead of deductions. We don't need all the government controls that would inevitably come with universal health care. When I'm President, Americans will have more control of their health care options, not less.

I also value the states' role as laboratories for new market-based approaches, and I will encourage those efforts. As President I will work with the private sector, Congress, health care providers, and other concerned parties to lead a complete overhaul of our health care system, not more of the same, paid for by Uncle Sam at the expense of hard-working families.

Health care spending is now about $2 trillion a year, which is close to $7,000 for each one of us. It consumes about 17% of our gross domestic product, easily surpassing the few European nations where spending is close to 10% and far higher than any other country in the world. If we reduced our out-of-control health care costs from 17% to 11%, we'd save $700 billion a year, which is about twice our annual national deficit.

Our health care system is making our businesses non-competitive in the global economy. General Motors spends more on health care than it does on steel, $1,500 per car. Starbucks spends more on health care than it does on coffee beans. We have an employer-based system from the 1940's, a system devised not because it was the best way to provide health care, but as a way around World War II wage-and-price controls. Costs have skyrocketed because the party paying for the health care - the employer - and the party using the health care - the employee - are not the same. It is human nature to consume more of something that is essentially free.

Workers complain that their wages are stagnant, but businesses reply that their total compensation costs are rising significantly because they are paying so much more for health care. Health care costs are adversely affecting your paycheck, even if you're healthy. Some Americans are afraid to change jobs or start their own businesses because they're afraid of losing their health insurance. It is time to recognize that jobs don't need health insurance, people do, and to ease the burden on our businesses. Our employer-based system has outlived its usefulness, but the answer is a consumer-based system, not socialized medicine.

Social Security: No information could be found at the official Huckabee website concerning Mr. Huckabee's position concerning this issue.

The Drug War: No information could be found at the official Huckabee website concerning Mr. Huckabee's position concerning this issue.

Education:

* I believe that every child should have the opportunity for a quality education that teaches the fundamental skills needed to compete in a global economy.
* Music and the arts are not extraneous, extra-curricular, or expendable - I believe they are essential. I want to provide every child these "Weapons of Mass Instruction."
* Our future economy depends on a creative generation.
* We need to judge the success of our schools by the results we obtain, not the revenue we spend.
* Test scores rose dramatically when I was Governor of Arkansas because of my education reforms.
* I have been a strong, consistent supporter of the rights of parents to home school their children, of creating more charter schools, and of public school choice.
* We need a clear distinction between federal and state roles in education. While there is value in the "No Child Left Behind" law's effort to set high standards, states must be allowed to develop their own benchmarks.

I believe that every child should have the opportunity for a quality education that teaches the fundamental skills needed to compete in a global economy. As I traveled the country and the world over the last decade bringing jobs to Arkansas, the business leaders I met weren't worried about creating jobs, they were worried about finding skilled and professional workers to fill those jobs.

In addition, I want to provide our children what I call the "Weapons of Mass Instruction" - art and music - the secret, effective weapons that will help us to be competitive and creative. It is crucial that children flex both the left and right sides of the brain. We all know the cliché of thinking outside the box: I want our children to be so creative that they think outside the cardboard factory. Art and music are as important as math and science because the dreamers and visionaries among us take the rough straw of an idea and spin it into the gold of new businesses and jobs. It is as important to identify and encourage children with artistic talent as it is those with athletic ability. Our future economy depends on a creative generation.

Music has always been an important part of my life. I still play bass guitar in my band, Capitol Offense.

As Governor of Arkansas, I undertook several initiatives to encourage arts in education. I passed landmark legislation to provide music and art instruction by certified teachers for all Arkansas children in grades one through six, forty minutes a week. As Chairman of the Education and Arts Commission of the States, I created a two-year initiative called "The Arts - A Lifetime of Learning," which promotes the benefits of arts education to all fifty states.

Students with strong art and music programs have higher academic achievement overall, are far more likely to read for pleasure and participate in community service, and are less likely to engage in delinquent behavior. These programs have a powerful effect in leveling the academic playing field for students from lower socio-economic backgrounds. The study of music improves math scores, spatial reasoning and abstract thinking.

The success of our schools has to be judged by the results we obtain, not the revenues we spend. A focus on true quality rather than mere quantity requires us to set high standards for our students and teachers, measure their performance diligently, and hold educators and administrators accountable for the results in an atmosphere of transparency and efficiency.

As Governor of Arkansas, I created intensive reading and math programs that went back to basics. I started with elementary students and, as those children thrived, I expanded the program to middle and then high schools. Our test scores rose dramatically. I then created one of the most demanding high school curricula in the country, and the number of students taking advanced placement classes grew by leaps and bounds.

I opposed the teachers' union and got the Fair Dismissal Law passed, which allowed us to terminate poorly performing teachers. To attract top talent, I raised teachers' salaries from among the lowest in the nation to among the most competitive. I created systems to make our schools accountable to both parents and taxpayers by insisting on transparency in how money is spent, efficiency in putting money into classroom programs rather than administrative costs, and clear responsibility of all employees for the tasks assigned to them.

As Governor, I fought hard for more charter schools, with their strong parental involvement and their unique ability to serve as laboratories for education reform, and for the rights of parents to home school their children. I am a strong supporter of public school choice. I am proud that my three children attended public schools from K through twelve, as did my wife and I.

In addition to my gubernatorial experience, I have significant national experience in education policy. I was Chairman of the National Governors Association from 2005-2006 and also Chairman of the Education Committee of the States from 2004-2006, working with governors, legislators, and education chiefs from all fifty states to advance education policy and conduct research on effective trends in education.

We need to test teachers as well as students, replace teachers who aren't competent, and impose reasonable waiting periods for teachers to gain tenure. We should provide bonuses and forgive student loans for high-performing teachers to work in low-performing schools. Just as there are executives in the corporate world who specialize in turning around failing companies, we need teachers who are "turn-around specialists" for failing schools.

Typical employment procedures provide a disincentive for teachers and often discourage potentially good teachers from entering what I consider to be a noble profession. Educators and teachers should be involved in the design of compensation initiatives that encourage training and promote performance based on merit, so that our children can have the best education in the world.

As President, my education agenda will include working towards a clear distinction between the federal role in assisting and empowering states and in usurping the right of states to carry out the education programs for their students. While there is value in the "No Child Left Behind" law's effort to set high national standards, states must be allowed to develop their own benchmarks.

As President, I will use my broad and deep expertise in education policy to lift up our children and America's economic future.

Immigration:

Governor Huckabee believes:

* Securing our borders must be our top priority and has reached the level of a national emergency.
* I support the $3 billion the Senate has voted for border security. This money will train and deploy 23,000 more agents, add four drone planes, build 700 miles of fence and 300 miles of vehicle barriers, and put up 105 radar and camera towers. This money will turn "catch and release" into "catch and detain" of those entering illegally, and crack down on those who overstay their visas.
* In this age of terror, immigration is not only an economic issue, but also a national security issue. Those caught trying to enter illegally must be detained, processed, and deported. As Governor, I ordered my state troopers to work with the Department of Homeland Security to arrest illegals and enforce federal immigration law.
* I oppose and will never allow amnesty. I opposed the amnesty President Bush and Senator McCain tried to ram through Congress this summer, and opposed the misnamed DREAM Act, which would have put us on the slippery slope to amnesty for all.
* I oppose and will not tolerate sanctuaries for illegals. The federal government must crack down on rogue cities that willfully undermine our economy and national security.
* I oppose giving driver's licenses to illegals and supports legislation to prevent states from doing so. In 2005, I signed legislation that prevents illegals in Arkansas from getting driver's licenses.
* I will stop punishing cities which try to enforce our laws and protect the economic well-being, physical safety, and quality of life of their citizens.
* I oppose and will not tolerate employers who hire illegals. They must be punished with fines and penalties so large that they will see it is not worth the risk.
* I oppose the economic integration of North America that would create open borders among the United States, Canada, and Mexico. I will never yield one iota or one inch of our sovereignty.
* I will take our country back for those who belong here. No open borders, no amnesty, no sanctuary, no false Social Security numbers, no driver's licenses for illegals.

I know that securing our borders must be our top priority and has reached the level of a national emergency. I am as sick and tired as you are that it is harder for us to get on an airplane in our home town than it is for all these illegals to cross our international border unchallenged.

We cannot stem the tide of illegals until we turn the tide. Before you fix the damage to your house caused by a leaking roof, you have to stop the leak, which I am determined to do.

I supported the $3 billion Congress passed this summer for border security. This desperately-needed money will train and deploy 23,000 more agents, add four drone planes, build 700 miles of fence and 300 miles of vehicle barriers, and put up 105 radar and camera towers. This money will turn "catch and release" into "catch and detain" of those entering illegally and crack down on those who overstay their visas.

But where is this $3 billion? The President threatened to veto the bill it was part of! Now the Senate has again voted for this money as part of the Defense Bill. I will continue to fight until we get these funds.

In this age of terror, immigration is not only an economic issue, but also a national security issue. We must know who is coming into our country, where they are going, and why they are here. All those who are caught trying to enter illegally must be detained, processed, and deported. As Governor, I ordered my state troopers to work with the Department of Homeland Security to arrest illegals and enforce federal immigration law.

I oppose and will never allow amnesty. I passionately rejected the amnesty bill that President Bush and Sen. McCain tried to ram through Congress this summer after secret meetings of an under-the-radar cabal of amnesty-loving senators.

I opposed the misnamed DREAM Act, which was a nightmare because it would have put us on the slippery slope to amnesty for all. Because once we open that door even a crack, we'll never get it closed again.

I oppose and will not tolerate sanctuaries for illegals. The federal government must enforce our existing laws by cracking down on rogue cities and towns that willfully undermine our economy and our homeland security by giving benefits and protection to illegals. The consequences for illegal entry must be swift, certain, and uniform throughout our country.

I oppose giving driver's licenses to illegals, such as Governor Spitzer tried to do in New York. I support legislation that would prevent the states from granting this privilege to illegals. In 2005, I signed legislation that prevents illegals in Arkansas from getting driver's licenses.

I will stop punishing cities which are trying to enforce our laws. I will appoint judges who will uphold the law, not side with the ACLU against cities like Hazelton, Pennsylvania, which are trying to protect the economic well-being, physical safety, and quality of life of their citizens.

I will not tolerate employers who hire illegals - they must be punished by fines and penalties so large that they will understand it is not worth the risk. Once again, as with Hazelton, liberal judges are gumming up the works. Right now, a court in San Francisco -- Pelosiland - has delayed enforcement of the "no match" letters for Social Security numbers that the Department of Homeland Security will use to crack down on those who hire illegals. If illegals cannot find work, they will go back where they belong. I will do everything I can to hasten their trip home by denying them employment.

I strongly oppose the economic integration of North America that would have open borders among the United States, Canada, and Mexico. I know we must have closed and secure borders. I will never yield either one inch or one iota of our sovereignty. I will recognize no authority but our Constitution.

I will take our country back for those who belong here and those who are willing to play by the rules for the privilege to come here. No open borders, no amnesty, no sanctuary, no false Social Security numbers, no driver's licenses for illegals.

I will Implement a broad-based strategy that commits the resources of the federal government to the enforcement of our immigration laws and results in the attrition of the illegal immigrant population.

The Secure America Plan

A 9-Point Strategy for Immigration Enforcement and Border Security

Overview: Implement a broad-based strategy that commits the resources of the federal government to the enforcement of our immigration laws and results in the attrition of the illegal immigrant population.

1. Build the Fence

* Ensure that an interlocking surveillance camera system is installed along the border by July 1, 2010.
* Ensure that the border fence construction is completed by July 1, 2010.

2. Increase Border Patrol

* Increase the number of border patrol agents.
* Fully support all law enforcement personnel tasked with enforcing immigration law.

3. Prevent Amnesty

* Policies that promote or tolerate amnesty will be rejected.
* Propose to provide all illegal immigrants a 120-day window to register with the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services and leave the country. Those who register and return to their home country will face no penalty if they later apply to immigrate or visit; those who do not return home will be, when caught, barred from future reentry for a period of 10 years.
* This is not a "touchback" provision. Those who leave this country and apply to return from their home country would go to the back of the line.

4. Enforce the Law on Employers

* Employment is the chief draw for most illegal immigrants and denying them jobs is the centerpiece of an attrition strategy.
* Impose steep fines and penalties on employers that violate the law.
* Institute a universal, mandatory citizenship verification system as part of the normal hiring process.
* Prevent the IRS and the Social Security Administration from accepting fraudulent Social Security numbers or numbers that don't match the employees' names.*

5. Establish an Economic Border

* Move toward passage of the FairTax.
* The FairTax provides an extra layer of security by creating an economic disincentive to immigrate to the U.S. illegally.

6. Empower Local Authorities

* Promote better cooperation on enforcement by supporting legislative measures such as the CLEAR Act, which aims to systematize the relationship between local law and federal immigration officials.
* Encourage immigration-law training for police. Local authorities must be provided the tools, training, and funding they need so local police can turn illegal immigrants over to the federal authorities.

7. Ensure Document Security

* End exemptions for Mexicans and Canadians to the US-VISIT program, which tracks the arrival and departure of foreign visitors. Since these countries account for the vast majority of foreigners coming here (85 percent), such a policy clearly violates Congress' intent in mandating this check-in/check-out system.
* Reject Mexico's "matricula consular" card, which functions as an illegal-immigrant identification card.

8. Discourage Dual Citizenship

* Inform foreign governments when their former citizens become naturalized U.S. citizens.
* Impose civil and/or criminal penalties on American citizens who illegitimately use their dual status (e.g., using a foreign passport, voting in elections in both a foreign country and the U.S.).

9. Modernize the Process of Legal Immigration

* Eliminate the visa lottery system and the admission category for adult brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens.
* Increase visas for highly-skilled and highly-educated applicants.
* Expedite processing for those who serve honorably in the U.S. Armed Forces.
* Improve our immigration process so that those patiently and responsibly seeking to come here legally will not have to wait decades to share in the American dream. Governor Huckabee has always been grateful to live in a country that people are trying to break into, rather than break out of.

*This policy will be drafted to comply with the final federal court decisions on this issue.

Note: This plan is partially modeled on a proposal by Mark Krikorian, Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies. ("Re: Immigration: Ten Points for a Successful Presidential Candidate," National Review, May 23, 2005.)

And there you have it, Mr. Huckabee's positions (or lack thereof) on the important issues. I hope this helps you become a better informed voter. Stay tuned for the last candidate of the series.

Hillary Clinton

2008-02-03T16:20:00.001-06:00

This week's installment of "As the voting public gets ready to sign up for more of the same" will be highlighting the positions of candidate Hillary Clinton

Foreign Policy:

Ending The War In Iraq

Hillary Clinton has announced her plan to end the war in Iraq and urged President Bush to act immediately.

"Our message to the president is clear. It is time to begin ending this war -- not next year, not next month -- but today.

"We have heard for years now that as the Iraqis stand up, our troops will stand down. Every year, we hear about how next year they may start coming home. Now we are hearing a new version of that yet again from the president as he has more troops in Iraq than ever and the Iraqi government is more fractured and ineffective than ever.

"Well, the right strategy before the surge and post-escalation is the same: start bringing home America's troops now."

If President Bush does not end the war, when Hillary Clinton is president, she will. Her three-step plan would bring our troops home, work to bring stability to the region, and replace military force with a new diplomatic initiative to engage countries around the world in securing Iraq's future. Hillary has been fighting every day in the Senate to force the president to change course. And today she described how she would bring the war to an end.

Starting Phased Redeployment within Hillary's First Days in Office: The most important part of Hillary's plan is the first: to end our military engagement in Iraq's civil war and immediately start bringing our troops home. As president, one of Hillary's first official actions would be to convene the Joint Chiefs of Staff, her Secretary of Defense, and her National Security Council. She would direct them to draw up a clear, viable plan to bring our troops home starting with the first 60 days of her Administration. She would also direct the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs to prepare a comprehensive plan to provide the highest quality health care and benefits to every service member -- including every member of the National Guard and Reserves -- and their families.

Securing Stability in Iraq as we Bring our Troops Home. As president, Hillary would focus American aid efforts during our redeployment on stabilizing Iraq, not propping up the Iraqi government. She would direct aid to the entities -- whether governmental or non-governmental -- most likely to get it into the hands of the Iraqi people. She would also support the appointment of a high level U.N. representative -- similar to those appointed in Afghanistan, Bosnia, and Kosovo -- to help broker peace among the parties in Iraq.

A New Intensive Diplomatic Initiative in the Region. In her first days in office, Hillary would convene a regional stabilization group composed of key allies, other global powers, and all of the states bordering Iraq. The- mission of this group would be to develop and implement a strategy to create a stable Iraq. It would have three specific goals:

* Non-interference. Working with the U.N. representative, the group would work to convince Iraq's neighbors to refrain from getting involved in the civil war.
* Mediation. The group would attempt to mediate among the different sectarian groups in Iraq with the goal of attaining compromises on fundamental points of disputes.
* Reconstruction funding. The members of the group would hold themselves and other countries to their past pledges to provide funding to Iraq and will encourage additional contributions to meet Iraq's extensive needs.

As our forces redeploy out of Iraq, Hillary would also organize a multi-billion dollar international effort -- funded by a wide range of donor states -- under the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to address the needs of Iraqi refugees. And as we replace military force with diplomacy and global leadership, Hillary will not lose sight of our very real strategic interests in the region. She would devote the resources we need to fight terrorism and will order specialized units to engage in narrow and targeted operations against al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations in the region.

Americans are ready for a leader who will restore America's reputation in the world, and Hillary is prepared to lead America back in the right direction.

The next president's most urgent task will be to restore America's standing in the world to promote our interests, ensure our security, and advance our values.

America is stronger when we lead the world through alliances and build our foreign policy on a strong foundation of bipartisan consensus. As president, Hillary will lead by the words of the Declaration of Independence, which pledged "a decent respect to the opinions of mankind."

We know we need global coalitions to tackle global problems like climate change, poverty, AIDS, and terrorism. And to keep our country safe, we need to start engaging our enemies again. During the Cold War, with missiles pointed at us, we never stopped talking to the Soviet Union. That didn't mean we agreed with them or approved of them. But it did mean we came to understand them -- and that was crucial to confronting the threats they posed.

Hillary knows that America must remain a preeminent leader for peace and freedom, willing to work in concert with other nations and institutions to reach common goals. Hillary has put forth an aggressive plan to support public schools in developing countries in an effort to achieve universal primary education for the 77 million children around the world who aren't in school because they are too poor.

Ready to Lead

As First Lady and U.S. senator, Hillary visited more than 80 countries and met countless world leaders as America's representative. In the Senate, Hillary has continued to promote America's interests through her work on international affairs.

Senator Clinton takes very seriously the threats we face from terrorism. She believes President Bush's singular focus on Iraq has distracted him from waging the war on terror effectively and emboldened our enemies. As president, she will be tough and smart in combating terrorism.

Hillary has steadfastly fought for Israel's right to exist peacefully and to defend its people against terrorism. She has condemned Hamas's rise to power. She has spoken out against the problem of anti-Semitism in Palestinian textbooks and condemned Iran's conference on the Holocaust. She also successfully helped Magen David Adom join the International Red Cross and Red Crescent movement.

She has continued to advance peace in Northern Ireland by maintaining close ties with Irish leaders and promoting business partnerships between Northern Ireland and the United States.

Hillary has been a forceful and consistent advocate for a more robust response to the violence in Darfur since May 2004. She has raised the issue with the Bush administration and pushed for more resources for peacekeeping efforts.

Homeland Security: No information found at the official Hillary '08 website concerning Ms. Clinton's postion on this issue.

Fiscal/Economic Policy:

Hillary has a plan to restore America's middle class. After six and a half years of Bush administration policies, the middle class is struggling to succeed in an economy that is leaving more and more Americans behind.

Income inequality has risen to the highest levels since 1929, and wages have stagnated. In the meantime, health care premiums and college tuition have skyrocketed, squeezing middle class families who have largely relied on their home equity to make ends meet. The burgeoning problems in the housing market further threaten many middle class families.

Understanding that a vibrant middle class is essential to America's prosperity, Hillary will implement a broad set of policies to once again restore opportunity for all Americans.

Hillary's economic blueprint to restore the American middle class includes:

* Lowering taxes for middle class families.
* Providing quality, affordable health care to every American.
* Making college accessible and affordable.
* Confronting the growing problems in the housing market.
* Bolstering retirement security by promoting savings and investment.
* Returning to fiscal responsibility and moving towards balanced budgets.
* Harnessing innovation to create the high-wage jobs of the 21st century.
* Creating a $50 billion Strategic Energy Fund to jumpstart research and development of alternative energies.
* Strengthening unions and ensuring our trade laws work for all Americans.

As president, Hillary will:

1. Lower taxes for middle class families by: extending the middle class tax cuts including child tax credit and marriage penalty relief, offering new tax cuts for healthcare, college and retirement, and expanding the EITC and the child care tax credit.
2. Harness the power of innovation to create high wage jobs of the 21st Century. Investments in alternative energy can create new jobs for the 21st century; expanded access to broadband will bring opportunities to underserved and disadvantaged communities; the manufacturing base can be re-energized through creative partnerships; and increased government support for research will stimulate the development of new technologies and life-saving medicines. Hillary will restore integrity to science policy, reversing Bush administration policies that are holding our nation back.
3. Empower our workers and ensure that all Americans contribute their fair share. Hillary will ensure that unions, which have played an important role in forming and sustaining the middle class, are strong. She will also ensure that trade policies work for average Americans. Trade policy must raise our standard of living, and they must have strong protections for workers and the environment.
4. Restore the basic bargain. Hillary will restore the basic bargain that if Americans work hard and take responsibility, government will do its part to make sure they have the tools to get ahead.
5. Return to fiscal responsibility. After six and a half year of President Bush's fiscal irresponsibility, Hillary wants America to regain control of its destiny. She will move back toward a balanced budget and surpluses. Hillary believes that we should develop a set of budget rules similar to those we had in the 90s which required us to fund new expenditures with new revenues or cuts in other areas.

Comprehensive Government Reform

Americans are ready for a government that puts competence ahead of cronyism.

In the past seven years, we've seen the president hand out jobs to his friends who were not qualified. Give out no-bid contracts to Halliburton. Fire U.S. attorneys who tried to uphold the law. And then there was Hurricane Katrina -- when a natural disaster became a national disgrace. It's a government of the few, by the few, and for the few -- and good luck to everyone else.

Well, how about this for a new approach? No more cronyism, no more corruption, and no more deception. And here's an old-fashioned idea: let's start appointing qualified people to positions of power again.

Government certainly isn't the answer to all our problems. But good government -- smart government -- can be a partner for progress. It can help solve problems and accomplish things together we could never accomplish alone.

We all know that in order to meet the challenges of our day -- to lift up our middle class and hard working families; to establish universal health care, energy independence, and fiscal responsibility; to end the war in Iraq and restore our leadership around the world -- we need a government that will rise to the occasion. We need a return to transparency and a system of checks and balances, to a president who respects Congress's role of oversight and accountability. We need a 21st century government to meet our 21st century challenges.

Hillary has proposed a comprehensive, 10-point plan to restore Americans' confidence in their government by increasing transparency and cutting waste and corruption. Her plan includes:

* Banning Cabinet officials from lobbying a Hillary Clinton administration.
* Strengthening whistleblower protections.
* Creating a public service academy.
* Ending abuse of no-bid government contracts and posting all contracts online.
* Cutting 500,000 government contractors.
* Restoring the Office of Technology Assessment.
* Publishing budgets for every government agency.
* Implementing Results America Initiative to track government effectiveness.
* Tracking and eliminating corporate welfare.
* Expanding voting access and safeguarding voting machines.

Ready to Lead

In addition to her comprehensive plan for government reform, Hillary has proposed a detailed plan to restore professionalism to the Department of Justice. Under President Bush and his attorneys general, partisanship and cronyism have driven investigations, case selection, and the hiring of new career personnel. We have to believe that justice is blind in America and that our government will effectively and impartially uphold the law. Hillary has a plan to restore that belief. She will:

* Rebuild the Department of Justice's traditional role in defending civil rights and the rule of law, and review charges of improper, politically motivated hiring.
* Help local school districts pursue voluntary integration and reduce racial inequality, in the face of a Supreme Court decision limiting districts' options.
* Strengthen our voting laws so that every citizen can fully exercise his or her constitutional right to vote.
* Combat ongoing racial and sex discrimination in the labor market by improving laws and expanding enforcement.
* Modernize and strengthen the federal hate crimes law.

Hillary has also outlined a set of proposals to end the Bush administration's war on science and to restore scientific integrity to government decision-making. She will:

* Rescind the ban on ethical embryonic stem cell research.
* Ban political appointees from unduly interfering with scientific conclusions and publications.
* Direct department and agency heads to safeguard against political pressure that threatens scientific integrity and to promote transparency in decision-making.
* Appoint an Assistant to the President for Science and Technology Policy and strengthen the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.

Healthcare/Medicare:

Hillary's American Health Choices Plan covers all Americans and improves health care by lowering costs and improving quality. It speaks to American values, American families, and American jobs.

It puts the consumer in the driver's seat by offering more choices and lowering costs. If you're one of the tens of million Americans without coverage or if you don't like the coverage you have, you will have a choice of plans to pick from and that coverage will be affordable. Of course, if you like the plan you have, you can keep it.

* Affordable: Unlike the current health system where insurance premiums send people into bankruptcy, the plan provides tax credits for working families to help them cover their costs. The tax credits will ensure that working families never have to pay more than a limited percentage of their income for health care.

* Available: No discrimination. The insurance companies can't deny you coverage if you have a pre-existing condition.

* Reliable: It's portable. If you change or lose your job, you keep your health care.

If you have a plan you like, you keep it. If you want to change plans or aren't currently covered, you can choose from dozens of the same plans available to members of Congress, or you can opt into a public plan option like Medicare. And working families will get tax credits to help pay their premiums.

Small businesses are the engine of new job growth in the U.S. economy but face bigger challenges when it comes to providing health care for their employees. Hillary would give tax credits to small businesses that provide health care to their workers to help defray their coverage costs. This will make small businesses more competitive and help create good jobs with health benefits that will stay here in the US.

Insurance companies won't be able to deny you coverage or drop you because their computer model says you're not worth it. They will have to offer and renew coverage to anyone who applies and pays their premium. And like other things that you buy, they will have to compete for your business based on quality and price. Families will have the security of knowing that if they become ill or lose their jobs, they won't lose their coverage.

Nobody has worked harder or longer to improve health care than Hillary Clinton. From her time in Arkansas when she improved rural health care to her successful effort to create the SCHIP Children's Health Insurance program which now covers six million children, Hillary has the strength and experience to ensure that every man, woman and child in America has quality, affordable health care.

Click here to read a summary of the plan.

Social Security: No information found at the official Hillary '08 website concerning Ms. Clinton's postion on this issue.

The Drug War: No information found at the official Hillary '08 website concerning Ms. Clinton's postion on this issue.

Education:

Improving Our Schools

From her days as a staff attorney for the Children's Defense Fund (CDF) working as an advocate for children with special needs to her leadership of the Arkansas Educational Standards Committee, Hillary has been a passionate advocate for providing greater educational opportunities to all children. Her work for CDF helped pave the way for the Education for All Handicapped Children Act, the first time children with special needs were guaranteed the right to a free, appropriate public education. Her work in Arkansas led to tangible results: teacher salaries doubled, class size fell significantly, learning standards and assessments were implemented, and students were given much greater access to higher-level science and foreign-language courses. Hillary also brought Home Instruction Program for Preschool Youngsters, a model parent education program, to the state in order to better prepare all children to start school.

As the nation's First Lady, Hillary promoted the Prescription for Reading program, encouraging pediatricians to "prescribe" that new parents read to their children. She helped create Early Head Start in order to prepare students from low income backgrounds for school. She also spearheaded the administration's efforts to grow an after-school program from a pilot program of $1 million to a $1 billion program, serving children in all 50 states. As a senator, Hillary worked to reform and fully fund No Child Left Behind. She helped enact legislation to recruit and retain teachers and principals to high-need areas. She has been committed to strengthen and fully fund our special education system. She also helped fight off efforts by the Bush administration to slash afterschool funding by 40 percent. As president, Hillary will fight for each and every child in America to have access to the highest quality schools so that they can fulfill their potential and reach their dreams.

Ready to Lead

Early Childhood Education

Hillary knows that parents are our children's first teachers, and the early years have a tremendous impact on their lives. That is why she will invest heavily in proven strategies to get all children ready for school, including:

* Nurse home visitation programs to help new parents develop parenting skills.
* Quality child care and Head Start.
* Pre-kindergarten for all four-year olds.

K-12

Hillary also knows that we have to improve our K-12 system in order to ensure that every child is prepared to compete in an increasingly global economy. As president, she will:

* End the unfunded mandate known as No Child Left Behind.
* Meet the funding promises of IDEA to ensure that children with special needs get the attention and support they deserve.
* Recruit and retain thousands more outstanding teachers and principals, especially in urban and rural areas.
* Cut the minority dropout rate in half.
* Create "Green Schools" in order to reduce energy costs and eliminate environmental hazards that can hinder children's development.
* Expand early-intervention mentoring programs to help one million at-risk youth aspire for college and job success.
* Identify at-risk youth early on and provide $1 billion in intensive interventions, such as early college high schools and multiple pathways to graduation, to get them back on track.
* Double the after school program to ensure that 2 million young people have a safe and stimulating place to go between 3 and 6 p.m.
* Invest $100 million in a new public/private summer internship program.
* Provide opportunity for 1.5 million disconnected youth in job programs linked to high-growth economic sectors.

College Access

In the 21st century, a college education is more important than ever. Hillary believes it's time for a new bargain with the American people -- a bargain that gives all Americans willing to work hard the tools they need to get ahead. Her plan will make college more affordable and accessible so that every American who has earned it and wants to go has the chance to get a college degree. As president, she will:

* Create a new $3,500 college tax credit.
* Increase the maximum Pell Grant.
* Strengthen community colleges through a $500 million investment.
* Create a graduation fund to increase college graduation rates.
* Increase to $10,000 the college scholarship for those who participate in AmeriCorps full-time for one year.
* Get rid of the red tape in financial aid.
* Hold college costs down and hold colleges accountable for results though an online college cost calculator, a college graduation and employment rate index, and truth in tuition disclosure.
* Challenge selective colleges to expand access for students from low-income communities.

Immigration:

Reforming our Immigration System

Our immigration system is in crisis. The laws we currently have on the books are inadequate and no longer serve our best interests. As a nation, we place a premium on compassion, respect, and policies that help families, but our immigration laws don't reflect that.

Hillary has consistently called for comprehensive immigration reform that respects our immigrant heritage and honors the rule of law. She believes comprehensive reform must have as essential ingredients a strengthening of our borders, greater cross-cooperation with our neighbors, strict but fair enforcement of our laws, federal assistance to our state and local governments, strict penalties for those who exploit undocumented workers, and a path to earned legal status for those who are here, working hard, paying taxes, respecting the law, and willing to meet a high bar.

Hillary strongly believes we need to do more to know who is in our country by securing our borders and ensuring that employers comply with the law against hiring and exploiting undocumented workers. She supports deploying new technology that can help stop the flow of undocumented immigrants into the country and an employer verification system that is universal, accurate, timely, and does not lead to discrimination and abuse by employers.

Along with these changes, Hillary believes we need to repair those broken portions of our immigration system that irrevocably damage families and force citizens and lawful immigrants to choose between their newly adopted country and living with their spouse or children. We have a national interest in fostering strong families. This is why she introduced an amendment during consideration of the immigration reform bill that would have taken steps to protect the sanctity of families. Our American values demand no less.

And Hillary understands that our immigration policies have a direct impact on American workers. She opposes a guest worker program that exploits workers and creates a supply of cheap labor that undermines the wages of U.S. workers. Hillary believes all workers deserve safe conditions and decent wages. She supports an Ag Jobs program, which will keep our agricultural industry vibrant while enabling agricultural workers to receive the fair wages and labor protections they ought to receive.

When Hillary is president, comprehensive immigration reform will be a top priority.

Ready to Lead

Hillary has advocated for policies to help smooth the transition of legal immigrants once they arrive in the U.S. so that they can add to our economy and culture.

* She championed the Legal Immigrant Children's Health Improvement Act, which would give states the option to provide federally funded Medicaid and SCHIP benefits to low-income legal immigrant children and pregnant women.
* She wrote the Access to Employment and English Acquisition Act to meet the growing demand for English language courses and other job skills.
* She strongly supports the DREAM Act, which provides a path to citizenship through military service or higher education for children who were brought to the U.S. by their parents.
* She offered an amendment to make family reunification the guiding principle of our immigration system.

And there you have it, Ms. Clinton's positions (or lack thereof) on the important issues. I hope this helps you become a better informed voter. Stay tuned for next week's (R) candidate.

Mitt Romney

2008-01-27T16:20:00.000-06:00

This week's installment of "As the voting public gets ready to sign up for more of the same" will be highlighting the positions of candidate Mitt Romney

Foreign Policy:

Confronting Radical Jihad

Jihadism – violent, radical, fundamental Islam – is this century’s nightmare. It follows the same dark path as last century’s nightmares: fascism and Soviet communism. Many still fail to comprehend the extent of the threat posed by radical Islam, specifically by those extremists who promote violent Jihad against the United States and the universal values Americans espouse. Yet, the consequences of ignoring this threat – such as a radicalized Islamic actor possessing nuclear weapons – are simply unacceptable.

The Romney Plan:

To meet today's challenges, we must mobilize and integrate all elements of national power in unstable areas where traditional civilian agencies cannot operate effectively and traditional military power alone cannot succeed.

Create A Special Partnership Force (SPF). The SPF will integrate all elements of national power under a new force with leadership drawn from a core group of our Army Special Forces trained to work with civilian governments and intelligence personnel to form a new capability that is:

* Focused on locally-targeted efforts to win support in the community while identifying, isolating and eliminating terrorist elements.
* Highly integrated and able to mobilize all elements of national power, including humanitarian and development assistance and rule of law capacity building.
* Closely coordinated in partnership with local governments.
* Intelligence driven.
* Agile and flexible in its operations.
* A sustainable effort in contested areas and sanctuaries of Jihadist groups.

Launch A New Type Of Marshall Plan Unifying Nonmilitary Sources Of Power To Support Moderate Muslims. As President, Governor Romney will call together our Middle East allies and the major nations of the developed world to establish a "Partnership for Progress and Prosperity."

This Partnership will assemble the resources of all developed nations to assure that threatened Islamic states have public schools, micro-credit and banking, the rule of law, human rights, basic health care, and competitive economic policies. Resources would be drawn from public and private institutions, and from volunteers and NGOs.

Strengthen Global Alliances. The failure of efforts such as the United Nations Human Rights Council has given multilateralism a bad name. America’s strength is amplified when it is combined with the strength of other nations.

We need to expand alliances such as NATO and efforts among the world's leading nations to face the new threat of radical Jihad and increase our homeland security. We need to build global and regional capacities and networks of law enforcement and intelligence officials to confront Jihadists and other transnational threats.

Combating Nuclear Terrorism

We are faced today with the horrific proposition that those who speak of genocide are developing the capability to carry it out. It’s time to face the reality of the Iranian threat, take Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at his word and act accordingly. We must tighten economic sanctions against Iran, isolate Iran diplomatically, and make it clear to the Iranian people that while nuclear capabilities may be a source of pride, it can also be a source of peril.

The Romney Plan:

Tighten Economic Sanctions Against Iran. Governor Romney has called for strategic divestment from companies that support the Iranian regime's dangerous actions, using efforts similar to the actions taken against Apartheid South Africa.

Isolate Iran Diplomatically. Their leaders should be made to feel like those of Apartheid South Africa. Until there are indications that high level engagement would do anything other than reward bad behavior, the United States should not engage Iran in direct, bilateral negotiations over their nuclear weapons program. Finally, Iran’s President Ahmadinejad should be indicted under the terms of the Genocide Convention for incitement to genocide.

Have Arab States Join This Effort To Prevent A Nuclear Iran. These states should support Iraq's government; turn down the temperature of the Arab-Israeli conflict; stop the financial and weapons flows to Hamas and Hezbollah; and tell the Palestinians to drop their terror campaign and recognize Israel’s right to exist.

Make It Clear To The Iranian People That While Nuclear Capabilities May Be A Source Of Pride, It Can Also Be A Source Of Peril. If nuclear material from their nation falls into the hands of terrorists and is used, it would provoke a devastating response from the civilized world. The military option remains on the table.

Governor Romney Believes We Must Expand And Accelerate Efforts To Combat Nuclear Terrorism By Taking The Following Actions.

Expanding And Accelerating Actions To Combat Nuclear Terrorism. The Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism, which was launched last year, was a good start. Yet our efforts need to be greatly accelerated and expanded. Combating the threat of nuclear terrorism needs to be a top Presidential priority.

Empowering A Senior Ambassador To Lead Efforts To Prevent Nuclear Terrorism. We should appoint a new Ambassador-at-Large to prevent nuclear terror. He or she would have the authority and resources needed to work across government agencies and departments to ensure that our strategies both here and abroad are coordinated.

Strengthening Latin American Allies and Confronting Tyrants

It is time for the United States to adopt a Latin American strategy that will strengthen human rights and freedom, stand by our friends and allies, advance our own interests, and weaken the threat of the Castro regime, Chavez, and any other dictator with the intent of taking away the freedom of people.

The Romney Plan:

It is time for the United States to adopt a Latin American strategy that will strengthen human rights and freedom, that will stand by our friends and allies, that will advance our own interests, and that will weaken the threat of the Castro regime, Chavez, and any other dictator with the intent of taking away the freedom of people.

Continue To Isolate Castro With Economic And Diplomatic Sanctions. America will never back down to the Castro brothers. There will be no accommodation, no appeasement. There will be no end to our insistence that political prisoners are set free, and that Cubans themselves are finally given the privileges that today are enjoyed only by Castro’s cronies, and by foreign tourists. After 50 years, with so much suffering, so much sacrifice, we will not relent until the day when the Castro brothers meet their ignominious end and their history is written among the world’s most reviled despots, tyrants and frauds.

Help Our Friends. Foreign aid and foreign investments must be focused on those who stand alongside us. In spite of great progress over the last few decades, tens of millions in the Western Hemisphere still live in poverty. United States aid and investment programs promote transparency and the economic and political reforms needed to spur development.

Act To Inform Public Opinion In Latin America. We should use our world renowned media and communications savvy to spread the truth about American freedom, and Castro tyranny. New strong-men ('caudillos') must not reverse the Hemisphere's hardfought economic and political freedoms. The United States and our partners in the region must continue to reject the policies of leaders such as Venezuela's Hugo Chavez that move to consolidate power, limit dissent and revert to failed socialist policies.

Improve Our Economic Ties. The President has negotiated vital free trade agreements with Latin American neighbors like Peru, Colombia and Panama, but some Democrats in Congress are so beholden to their labor bosses, that they have refused to pass them. It is time to put the interests of humanity and of the nation first.

Rebuild Relationships Of Respect And Trust And Friendship. Our Latin American friends must always feel welcome in the White House.

Solve The Problem Of Illegal Immigration By Securing The Border And Reaffirm Our Appreciation Of Legal Immigration. We are a nation of immigrants, and they have contributed a great deal to our culture of hard work, entrepreneurship, faith in God, love of family, and respect for human life.

Never Ignore Latin America. It is a great deal easier to prevent a crisis than to solve one. Since the end of the Cold War and since the terror of 9/11, America has become so preoccupied with other regions that we have forgotten our friends in our own Hemisphere. We need robust cooperation to expand opportunities in the Hemisphere and address common threats such as drug trafficking and terrorism.

Homeland/National Security:

Keeping Americans Safe at Home and Abroad

We must strengthen our military by increasing the size of our military by 100,000 troops and dedicating at least four percent of our gross domestic product to defense. We must transform our domestic civilian international efforts to meet a new generation of global challenges and ensure that our intelligence and law enforcement efforts are able to address threats before they reach our shores.

The Romney Plan:

A Stronger Military. We must increase the size of our military by 100,000 troops. In addition, we should increase to at least four percent of our gross domestic product to defense. This kind of investment will make up for critical gaps in the modernization of our equipment, personnel and health care efforts. However, as we invest in our military, we must ensure that funds are used to address critical needs of the men and women of our Armed Forces, not political or contractor interests.

Transform And Strengthen Our Domestic Civilian International Efforts To Meet A New Generation Of Challenges. Building on the Goldwater-Nichols military reforms of the 1980s, we need to ensure that our civilian instruments of national power have the ability to build joint efforts among our civilian agencies and empower Regional Deputies with clear lines of authority, sufficient budgets and the responsibility to develop and execute regional plans and strategies. We must also constantly challenge bureaucratic "group think" and revitalize our national security structures so we have the capabilities needed to meet 21st century challenges.

Strengthen Strategic Planning. Many of our civilian national security and foreign policy structures were created decades ago. Today we need strengthened capabilities to strategically integrate all elements of national power. National Security Council staff must be empowered and accountable for reaching out to divergent viewpoints and challenging policies and proposals.

Protect The Homeland. While there has been much emphasis on protecting facilities and responding to attacks, a key priority must be prevention. Today, protecting the homeland must begin far from home. Intelligence and law enforcement efforts able to address threats before they reach our shores must be a priority for U.S. and international action. This will demand new U.S. capabilities, stronger international alliances and integration of our federal actions with international, state and local efforts.

Economic/Fiscal Policy:

Winning the Global Economic Competition

America faces economic challenges at home and abroad. We must improve America’s global competitiveness and unleash the American economy by rolling back tax rates across the board, eliminating taxes on middle class savings, making the Bush tax cuts permanent, lowering the corporate tax rate, making health care expenses tax deductible and eliminating the death tax once and for all.

The Romney Plan:

Improve America's Global Competitivenes

Lower The Corporate Tax Rate. Make America's business environment competitive with the rest of the world to attract capital and encourage investment.

Strengthen Education. Emphasize math and science, while promoting innovative approaches such as charter schools and public-private partnerships, to ensure American workers have the intellectual capital and skills to compete in the 21st century economy.

Improve Worker Retraining. Consolidate and streamline the numerous federal programs in this area, and focus on giving workers the skills they need to succeed in a global economy.

Reform Our Immigration Laws. End illegal immigration, but encourage legal immigration and streamline the system to recruit and retain highly-skilled workers and welcome the best and the brightest from around the world to our universities.

Unleash The American Economy

Lower Taxes For All. Lower income tax rates across the board to reward productivity and leave more money in the economy for consumption and investment.

Zero Rate On Middle Class Savings. Eliminate all taxes on interest, dividends, and capital gains for anyone with Adjusted Gross Income under $200,000 to make it easier for the middle class to save.

Make The Bush Tax Cuts Permanent. Extend the progrowth tax cuts on income, capital gains, and dividends implemented by the Bush Administration that will otherwise expire in 2011.

Eliminate The Death Tax Once And For All. Allow families to pass their hard-earned savings, and assets from businesses to farms to homes, from one generation to the next without the federal government taking a cut.

Provide Regulatory Relief. Eliminate cumbersome and unnecessary regulations and bureaucracies that hinder economic growth and job creation.

Implement National Tort Reform. End the frivolous lawsuits and excessive non-economic damages that burden American companies with excessive tort costs.

Build And Repair Transportation Infrastructure. Invest in infrastructure projects critical to the national economy and its flow of goods and people, instead of funding home-district pork.

Curbing Out of Control Federal Spending

Politicians from both parties in Washington, D.C. have spent too much money on too many programs for far too long. We must establish strict spending limit, conduct a stem-to-stern review of the federal government, reform entitlements and institute the line-item veto if we’re going to bring fiscal discipline and strong management back to Washington.

The Romney Plan:

Bring Fiscal Discipline And Strong Management To Washington

Establish Strict Spending Limits. Veto domestic nondefense discretionary appropriations that increase spending by more than inflation minus one percent.

Conduct Stem-To-Stern Review. Re-examine and evaluate all federal spending programs to identify waste, duplication, and inefficiencies that can be eliminated.

Reform Entitlements. In a forthright and bipartisan manner, as President, Governor Romney will work with Congress to address the looming budget crisis caused by increasing entitlement spending.

Institute The Line-Item Veto. Give the President the same power held by most state governors, to veto individual elements of a spending bill and strip out unnecessary spending.

Give President Flexibility. Authorize the Executive Branch to spend up to 25 percent less than Congress appropriates for a given project or agency.

Restore Supermajority Requirement. Impose congressional rule requiring a three-fifths (60%) supermajority to pass any law that would raise taxes.

Healthcare/Medicare:

Reducing Spiraling Health Care Costs

Rather than relying on a one-size-fits-all, government-run system, we must recognize the importance of the role of the states in leading reform and the need for innovation in dealing with rising health care costs and the problem of the uninsured. By expanding and deregulating the private health insurance market, we can decrease costs and ensure that more Americans have access to affordable, portable, quality, private health insurance.

The Romney Plan:

Use A Free Market, Federalist Approach To Make Quality, Affordable Health Insurance Available To Every American

Deregulate State Markets. Encourage states to eliminate the cumbersome insurance regulations that drive costs up and providers out of the market.

Fix The Tax Code. Level the playing field by making all health care expenses tax deductible, eliminating the special treatment afforded employer-provided health plans.

Stop The Free-Riders. Use some of the money currently spent on providing expensive "free care" for the uninsured at emergency rooms to instead help the truly needy buy private insurance.

Reform The Medical Liability System. Institute federal caps on non-economic and punitive damage awards to eliminate frivolous lawsuits and bring an end to the practice of defensive medicine.

Promote Innovation In Medicaid. Give states flexibility to spend their Medicaid dollars in whatever way they find most efficient and effective.

Bring Health Care Into The 21st Century. Improve quality and enhance transparency by introducing the same competitive forces that drive innovation in other sectors of the economy.

Social Security:

No information could be found on the official Romney '08 website concerning Mr. Romney's position on Social Security.

The Drug War:

No information could be found on the official Romney '08 website concerning Mr. Romney's position on the drug war.

Education:

Raising the Bar on Education

Improving our schools is critical to the future of our country and our economy. Closing the achievement gap in our schools is the civil rights issue of our time. While there is a proper role for the federal government to play in education, it is not in telling parents, teachers, kids and local authorities what to teach or how to run their schools.

Excellence in Education:

Improving our schools is critical to the future of our country and our economy. Governor Romney also believes that closing the achievement gap in our schools is the civil rights issue of our time.

Governor Romney Believes Our Education System Works Best When We Have More Local Control Of Our Schools. While there is a proper role for the federal government to play in education, it is not in telling parents, teachers, kids and local authorities what to teach or how to run their schools.

Governor Romney's Conservative Strategy To Raise The Bar In Education:

Governor Romney Will Promote School Choice. He believes that when parents and kids are free to choose their school, everyone benefits. That's because competition and choice in educational opportunities – whether it comes from private schools, charter schools, or home schooling – makes traditional public schools better and improves the quality of education for all of America's kids. Governor Romney believes that it is especially important that students in failing schools be able to exercise school choice so that they can get access to the resources and opportunities they need to succeed.

Governor Romney Has Proposed A Federal Home Schooling Tax Credit. As of 2003, there were nearly 1.1 million home schooled students in the United States. Governor Romney believes that parents who want to home school their kids should be able to do so. To help them, he will provide a tax credit to help defray the educational expenses of parents who home school their kids.

Governor Romney Will Improve Upon And Enhance No Child Left Behind (NCLB). He believes that No Child Left Behind has played an important role in stressing the role of accountability and high standards in improving our schools. Governor Romney will improve NCLB by giving states that meet or exceed testing requirements additional flexibility in measuring student performance. He will also improve the law by focusing more attention on individual student progress, rather than the overall progress of schools.

Governor Romney Will Honor Teaching As The Profession It Truly Is. He believes that good teachers should be rewarded for their hard work and dedication to the important cause of educating our children. He will support performance-based pay and other initiatives that encourage our best teachers to teach in our highest-need schools.

Governor Romney Will Ensure Our Kids Get The Education They Need To Excel In The Jobs Of The New Economy. He will focus our efforts in fields like math and science, while promoting innovative approaches such as charter schools and public-private partnerships. Governor Romney will ensure that the workers of the future have the intellectual capital and skills they need to compete in the new global marketplace.

Immigration:

Ending the Tide of Illegal Immigration

The number of illegal immigrants in the U.S. has exploded in the last decade from 3 million to over 12 million. We must secure the border, implement an enforceable employer verification system, punish sanctuary cities and reject amnesty if we are to restore Americans’ faith in the rule of law.

The Romney Plan:

Stop Illegal Immigration

Secure The Border. Follow through on Congressional commitment to build a physical and technological fence along the southern border, and secure other points of entry.

Implement An Enforceable Employer Verification System. Issue a biometrically-enabled and tamperproof card to non-citizens and create a national database for non-citizens so employers can easily verify their legal status in this country.

Reject Amnesty. Do not give amnesty or any special pathway to those who have come to this country illegally.

Punish Sanctuary Cities. Cut back federal funding to cities that are "sanctuaries" for illegal immigrants and refuse to comply with federal law or aid federal law enforcement.

Improve Interior Enforcement. Provide resources to enforce immigration laws throughout the nation, and crackdown on employers who continue to hire illegals with stiffer fines and penalties.

Encourage Legal Immigration. Streamline the system to recruit and retain skilled workers and welcome the best and the brightest from around the world to our universities.

And there you have it, Mr. Romney's positions (or lack thereof) on the important issues. I hope this helps you become a better informed voter. Stay tuned for the last (D) candidate, Hillary Clinton.