Political opinions and views

Post Reply New Topic

Ah, college station? I learned most(I suppose almost all) of what I know through my own studies to be honest. Oh, ok, a program to pursue your interest in it, cool. I am actually going to take an econometrics class next semester. I don't think I am as interested in econometrics as you are, I would probably be good at it though as I have taken a few statistics classes and higher level math classes.

Abortion- For. A lot of people who get abortions would make bad parents...either because they don't like kids, or because they're worthless degenerate scum. It lowers the crime rate.

Secularism- For. Freedom of religion would still be intact, of course.

War- Against, unless someone else attacks us first.

Military- Shouldn't be so damn huge.

Healthcare- should be nationalized. It should be practically free except for in cases where it's a health problem caused by vices, stupidity (like lighting yourself on fire), or cosmetic surgery (like sex changes, a nose job) unless it's so bad that you need it to live a normal life.

Education- needs more funding. America's education is currently the worst in the industrialized world. Schools in bad areas especially need more funding, so the disadvantaged can have a chance to rise out of poverty.

Welfare- Needs stronger controls to make sure it doesn't go to a) lazy people b) people who breed too much and c) illegal immigrants.

Tax system- Should be simplified, yet progressive.

Social Security- I think people should save for their own retirement if they can, but I think there should be a small social security bank for the disadvantaged who deserve it.

Terrorism- Just continue keeping tabs on our borders and airports....it seems to work.

Civil rights- All people should have equal rights and equal opportunities.

Same sex marriage- For. There isn't any real reason why it should be illegal. At the very least, just call it something different (like the whole "civil union" thing)

Economic system- Capitalism-------Centrism---x----Communism (X marks the spot)

Capital punishment- For the worst of criminals, it's necessary. I don't know how expensive the "injections" are, but if they're too expensive, just a quick bullet to the brain will do.

Smoking- I think from public outdoor areas it should be mostly banned (especially at places like hospitals), but private businesses should decide whether or not they want it.

Drugs(Excluding Alcohol and Caffeine)- Legalize pot I guess, but just put a "sin" tax on it like cigs and booze. The rest should still stay illegal though.

Colonialism- When Africa dies of AIDS, I want a piece , but otherwise no no no.

Military intervention to stop human rights abuses- Their problem, not mine. Besides, who are we to say what "human rights abuses" are? There are a lot of things other countries do that we don't like, but that's because of different cultures.

Civil gun ownership- Should be allowed, except for criminals. Also, only shotguns/pistols/hunting rifle type things.

Censorship- Nein! Free speech is very important. Even for people who are "racist" and "discriminatory." I also think that there should be a part of the radio/television that isn't controlled by government where you can go "at your own risk"

Copyright- For, usually. I think if the person who made it died though, it should be free for the taking (nobody deserves money for Frank Sinatra's music but Frank Sinatra). Also, for TV shows that aren't on the air or on DVD, I think those should be able to be downloaded.

Action to reduce the effects of climate change- Yes! Think of the future.

Animal rights- I want to be able to eat animals if i want. I should be able to wear fur if I want. Of course I don't support killing endangered species though, but if you really don't want animal products, don't buy animal products.

Violence in video games- Goes back to the whole "freedom of speech" thing. The rating labels should stay though, so people can know what they're buying.

Globalization- No! We don't need Western CEO moneyhogs garnering even more than the excessive salaries they have from other nations.

Federalism- Yes, government is needed. Otherwise anarchy will ensue, then eventually some group will just end up ruling anyway.

Nuclear weapons- For. At least it keeps people from attacking each other, ha.

Minimum wage- For. People need to be guaranteed a decent wage.

Balanced Budget- For. Debt will probably be the death of us. America spends 20% of its entire budget on paying off debt. This could be used for better things like education.

Stem Cell (Research) - For. It'll bring important medical technology innovations.

Energy- We need to research economically sound, yet clean fuels. Factories that billow out smoke should be taxed.

Environment- We need to have some environment preserved. Plants are also nice because they give us more oxygen. Cities should try to plant more things.

Immigration- Needs to be limited. Too many immigrants is a strain on the economy and social structure (ethnic strife and all that)

Iraq- It was a huge mistake, but now that we're there, we're morally obligated to fix it.

Iran- We should give them a big hug, but make sure they don't point something at Israel.

North Korea- REALLY keep an eye on these guys.

Foreign Policy (ect...)- No intervening. We should just lay back and try to be friendly with everyone. The only way we should ever do anything is if someone attacks us.

(Labor) Unions - Are good. If one person (boss man) has too much money it's bad for the economy anyway. My dad is also in a union, and it makes sure he doesn't get shitworth working conditions.

Yeah you'll be a good at it. A basic understanding of stat is probably all you need, so you seem very prepared. You should let me know how it goes for you.

Ok, I will.

To add to that...


Stem Cell (Research) (ie: embryonic, adult, funding of, restrictions to, ect...)- For.

Energy (oil, clean coal, wind, solar, ect...)- Nuclear, Biodiesel, and Hydrogen fuel cells all the way.

Environment (EPA, Endangered Species Act, Government position on global warming, market based vs. regulatory based solutions)

Homeland Security- Neutral, I don't know enough about it.

Immigration (Amnesty vs. Deportation vs. Something in Between)There should be a cap on it and only educated English speaking immigrants should be let through, along with genuine refugees, who should be given courses in English language and law.. If they commit a crime then they should be deported. All others should be sent back to where they came from.

Iraq- Withdraw all but a contingent for spec ops.

Iran- Negotiate, deal with and let them have nukes. They aren't a global threat, and if they feel threatened, they're much more likely to use nuclear weapons against the West and Israel.

North Korea- Invade if neccessary, they are a threat to global security and an impoverished nation that could do with freedom.

Israel- Sort the situation out and make the nations involved negotiate.

Middle East in general- Educate people, and stop treating them like dirt. Withdraw most of the forces there, so many religious nuts. Deal with middle eastern countries and give them money to rebuild.

Foreign Policy- Ally with powerful nations and also trade with smaller nations. If there is political crisis in a weak country, exploit it, even invade and colonize it if they need stability.

(Labour) Unions- Depends. Ensuring good working conditions and pay would be better, labour unions hold businesses and services hostage by striking. Generally against, there shouldn't be a need for it if the government ensures good, standard conditions in the first place.

War on Terrorism (Generally)- For, but it's not being conducted with the right tactics and strategy. You need more precision bombing and covert ops. What've the SAS been doing, I wonder? Yet again, I think they are using them, they keep such covert operations secret. Though it would be a morale boost to know if they are using spec ops. Bin Laden is asking for a .50 BMG sniper round to the head.

Business taxes- Only tax profits and environmentally unfriendly activities. Businesses should be given some slack, and the government should deal with them, and provide incentives and rewards for various projects.

Business regulations- Regulations to ensure that businesses do not use underhanded or dirty tactics. Balance worker and business rights.

State companies- If a service needs to be run by the government- E.g military development and armaments companies, as well as certain research and state construction/development companies.
[/quote]

Abortion: Difficult one... I'd have to say pro-choice.

Secularism: The United Kingdom must be a secular country. We have enough religious nutjobs across the UK as it is. We don't need any more.

War: If it's to protect us (and that includes overseas territories, Spanish and Argentinians take note!) or our allies from attack then it is neccessary. We must protect ourselves.

Military: We need a more powerful military. The Army is being stripped relentlessly.

Healthcare: Privatise the lot and have a voucher system. The entire system will go to pot eventually anyway.

Tax system: Try to steal as little from the people as possible.

Terrorism: It's part of life, I'm afraid. Make precautions but don't go over the top, like banning civil liberties protests and so on.

Civil liberties: Repeal all of Labour's legislation to do with erasing civil liberties and set up a British 'Bill of Rights'. Remove ourselves from the EU and resume trading with Commonwealth and the rest of the world.

Same sex marriage: I don't see why not.

Economic system: Free-market.

Capital punishment: Against.

Smoking: Should have its tax reduced. Smoking in pubs and so on would be up to the choice of the landlord. It would be made illegal in all restaurants though - fag smell when you're eating is disgusting.

Drugs: Legalise the lot.

Colonialism: Was a good thing for Britain and the wider world. I think parts of a scheme based on a benevolent Empire should return in order to help certain African nations. We must never give up our current overseas territories without the consent of the local population. Spain and Argentina: hands off!

Military intervention to stop human rights abuses: What, like Iraq?

Civil gun ownership: Liberalise it slightly.

Censorship: Usually wrong although I have seen stuff on the Internet that I later wished I hadn't. Doesn't mean I want someone telling me what I can and can't watch though. Is often used to oppress people who wish to speak out.

Copyright: I'm for it.

Climate change: We are insignificant. The Earth does its own thing.

Violence in video games: I like playing violent video games. Make them as gory as you like, as long as there are age limits.

Globalisation: For.

Federalism: I'm a Unionist. So, no.

Nuclear weapons: Not a lot you can really do about them. They will sit there. Keep them.

I think that should cover it.

http://money.cnn.com/2007/05/02/news/ec ... tm?cnn=yes



just a related newsstory.

That's just one reason why I support Biodiesel and not Ethanol fuel.

I never was all that clear on Politics (I left in a few that I thought didn't really need to be changed) but here goes...

Abortion- For, so long as it does not discriminate against Aspies. A foetus is not sentient.

Secularism- For, I am secular, there is a difference:evil: , but religion should not be discriminated against.

War- Mostly uneccessary, look to Sweden for guidence if possible?

Military- Should be relative to any imminent threat.

Healthcare- Should be free(state run) for all, so long as it is neccessary to ensure the wellbeing of a person. Non-reconstructive cosmetic surgery is not. Though private medical services should be allowed as an alternative.

Education- I support state eduction, including university, though private education companies should be allowed to run as well.

Welfare- Australia does it pretty well already.

Income tax system- Should be progressive, and based on careful analysis of costs of living and what people can afford.
(However the maximum rate should be 40%.)

Pensions- Should not be taxed, should be generous, and efforts should be taken to help the old and poor. People should be encouraged to save for their retirement though.

Terrorism- Steps should be taken to peacefully negotiate with and shut down terrorist groups, though if this fails, they must be destroyed.

Same sex marriage- For, it is their choice, and it bothers no-one except some religious groups ect.

Capital punishment- For, unreformable people should not be allowed to live, and or where it seems "logical", the Unabomber for example.

Smoking- Ban, in close nit public places, it does not reduce health for those near unless they are in doors, and people should be allowed to have their rights.

Harder recreational drugs(Excluding Alcohol and Caffeine)- Banning them doesn't do any good, and again it takes away a persons rights, even if that right is to harm themselves slowly (What next? Banning cutting?).

Colonialism- For, so long as it is beneficial for both nations involved.

Military intervention to stop human rights abuses- Depends on the case?

Civil gun ownership- For, it gives people a sense of security and defence, and people should have the right to defend themselves. People who want a gun must prove that they are mentally stable enough and law abiding enough to have one. Criminals should be banned from having guns. Only certain guns should be allowed, such as pistols. rifles, and shotguns. Ownership limit must be 21 years of age.

Censorship- Against, however harmful things such as promotion of racism ect should be subtly but severly hindered, such as it getting no publicity It shouldn't seem like Censorship.

Copyright- Content owners must be paid for what they own. [Not clear on subject]

Action to reduce the effects of climate change- Should be encouraged.

Violence in video games- So long as there are age limits and such, no harm done.

Globalization- For, to a degree I suppose. [Not clear on subject]

Federalism- I support a two-tier system. Federal governments should make certain laws, and State governments should make other laws. It allows for more freedom and better management.

Nuclear Weapons- For, they are great for turning the world into child's (Bush) play thing.

Minimum wage- For, ensures that people are guaranteed a "reasonable" amount of pay.

Damnit, I am so clueless when it comes to the Commercial aspect of Politics.

I am also for Animal Welfare, not Animal Rights.

The economic issues? I would say that a large percent of people are clueless or close, it explains the large gap between economists and voters on economic issues. After all, one group must be clueless or the other must, and considering that one puts a lot more effort in understanding, I would bet they are the knowledgeable ones.

Yeah, but I'm afriad that I'm even more clueless than people my own age. I just never thought about it, even now that I've been looking into it a bit I'm still in the dark on simple things.

I'd say I'm probably split down the middle between Libertarian and a more Liberal bent, in regards to the economic issues.

Hard to say, people your age(and probably of all issues) are often not the sharpest tools in the shed on economics.

So moderate of some form I would guess on economic issues?

No I noticed some things mentioned here that I didn't quite understand in my post about my own political views, and I've also talked a bit with people my age, and although they do tend to focus on leisurely things they do still seem to have a grasp of things that I don't, remember I live in a different country to you so things work differently here.

No more like I'm not sure where I stand, I feel that things like Welfare are important for example, but I've heard that the Public can do a better job of taking care of those sorts of things, but also even if I were to come to a decision on that I still have to decide on whether or not these things are good at all, for example if you take away suport for the arts, or science does it make it harder for them or does it make them try harder? Does it give them more freedom or does it give them less? These are also things I have trouble with in the social side of politics, because it seems to me that for example Homosexuals have been down trodden for a long time, and they're better for that, not worse, because it gives them perspective, just like it gives the rest of us perspective, and it makes the majority weak and inane because they become complacient.

Possibly. I know you live in a different country, however, most people in most developed nations are stupid on economics.

Well, right, most sides have some element of truthfulness to them, the real question ends up which logical systems seem more robust and which side seems more supported by empirical evidence.

(I kinda started drifting off towards the middle)

Abortion-I believe that the decisions that mandated abortion be legal, Roe v. Wade, and Doe v. Bolton as well as Planned Parenthood v. Casey were incorrect constitutionally. I do not believe any language in the constitution guarantees the right to an abortion at any stage, and I find the idea that concept that such a constitution error should be affirmed on the grounds it is precedent to be highly dubious.

Recently, the Supreme Court affirmed 5-4 (Kennedy writing for the court, with Scalia and Thomas writing separate concurring decisions) the constitutionality of the Federal ban on partial-birth abortion (or dilation and extraction, if you prefer). The decision was a narrow one and did not actually overturn any previous abortion ruling since Roe, including Stenberg v. Carhart (opinion for the court written by O'Connor), a case in which the court struck down a Nebraska partial-birth abortion ban. Both Scalia, and Thomas in their concurrences noted their objections to previous rulers. They also noted the issue of commerce clause was never raised by either party. If indeed the commerce clause would be prohibitive to the federal government in this case, then the abortion lobby could very well have an argument towards the conservatives to strike the law down.

I myself am not sympathetic towards such an argument generally being my more Hamiltonian approach on the commerce clause. My ultimate desire, once Casey is reversed is first to move as many states to prohibit abortion (with the exception of the life of the mother) as possible, and then proceed with a Human Life Amendment to The Constitution of the United States. I do not see this happening any time soon however.

Secularism-I endorse a secular government, rather then a theocratic one. This, however, does not mean the same thing necessarily as a member for the group "Americans for the Separation of Church and State." I do not wish to remove religion from the public square. I believe, in fact, that religious bodies, and people has a fundamental right to speak out openly, and without fear of retribution. This, of course, does not mean they should have rights that others do not, or should have the right to encourage violence or practice it.

The United States of America is a Christian country. That's a controversial statement to make, of course, however statistically it's absolutely true. I think, perhaps, you could argue that half of the self-identified Christians are only nominally so (in the United States, more in Western Europe). The use of religious phrases, biblical quotations in the texts of politicians, as well as the use of chaplains in the military and the halls of congress is very controversial but at the same time historically rather normal. In some European countries, the churches are publicly funded (and less attended), which is seems to me more serious then arguments about whether religious charities should get money.

War-I believe that war is a neutral word. It is the purpose of a particular war is the defines whether a war is positive or negative, in my opinion. I oppose the concept of pacifism not because those who practice it and believe in it are bad people themselves but because it lacks understanding at how both the human individual and societies in general behave. As General Patton wrote to his wife in 1944:

Military-The current armed forces, especially the army, are too small and underfunded to meet the current needs. The post-cold war cut backs (especially those during the Clinton years) were simply too deep, with the military forces cut nearly in half. Defense Secretary Gates has proposed an increase of 92,000 troops. This has yet to be passed by Congress. I personally think that this would be a step in the right direction, but based on my (not expert) opinion more will be needed.

Healthcare-There is a problem with the healthcare system in the United States. However, switching over to a nationalized healthcare system such as exists in Canada or Iceland would not solve the problem. The problems of nationalized healthcare are already evident, as a Canada-style system has never been tried on the level of a country such as the United States. A legitimate question then can be asked: Why are health care costs so high? There are a few reasons, at least. One is junk lawsuits that force doctors insurance premiums to go up and also drive many of them out of some states. The other issue is what private insurance tends to cover. Currently, the way insurance developed it many company plans tended to cover everything under a specific dollar amount (doctor's visits, prescription drugs). Unfortunately, this provided a motivation for people to seek treatment more often then they naturally would for things they wouldn't necessarily need, and hence drove insurance rates sky high. Basically, the current insurance system has it backwards.

Education-Kids in public schools when tested at Kindergarden test great compared to kids in rest of the world. At fourth grade they drop to the middle. At 8th grade they drop to the bottom. Public schools are, with some exceptions, not too good. Unfortunately, they are also notoriously difficult to reform partially because of very powerful unions and sometimes incompetent beurocrats, not to mention a eccletic mix of politically correct, and overprotective rules, regulations, and courses.

I support vouchers (including to religious schools) for kids at failing schools. I do not feel that the public school system should be ended at this time. I support mandatory attendance of a school those under the age of 16, unless that person is homeschooled.

Should evolution be taught? Yes, it's the most widely accepted theory on the...um...thing. Intelligent design? No. Not enough...stuff...there. Full blown creationism in science class. No no no. A sticker saying "Evolution is a theory, people should think critically." No...although I think it should be left to local school boards (although the all-out creation very well have a first amendment issue).

Welfare-The Welfare Reform bill signed into law by President Clinton, and extended by President Bush has been a huge success. Numerous persons have moved off the rolls and climbed onto the ladder of financial independence. Poverty, and crime in the inner cities has diminished from where it was.

Tax system-The current income tax is archaic, and punishes success (it does, after all, tax income rather then wealth). I support a flat tax, or a consumption tax. However in the second case, first I would advocate, as would be necessary, the repeal of the Sixteenth Amendment. I do not think either of these particular options are likely in the near future.

Pensions [Social Security]-Social Security must be gradually repealed if we are to stave off, at a minimum, economic stagnation.

Terrorism-Islamist terrorism of the type represented by al-Qaeda (Sunni) and Hezbollah (Shi'a) represent a danger to both the United States and the rest of the world. It is vital that we improve airport, port, and border security, disrupt terrorist networks, and continue to break up terrorist plots.

If something much worse then 9/11 happens, say something that kills 30,000, it is impossible to predict how Americans, Britons, the French, ect...will react. The entire situation will change, though.

Civil rights-Opposed renewal of unmodified Civil Rights Act (what a start!) on grounds it was passed as an "emergency" bill during the 1960s when the South was still segregated and the KKK was murdering innocent people (it was passed again and signed into law by Reagan, and this bill was passed again and signed into law by Bush). I thought critics (many Southerners) rightly asked why the bill at least didn't apply to the whole country instead of just the South and a few counties in the Western states. They could have also pointed out that Northern Blacks are once again returning to the South that so persecuted their ancestors. This isn't to say racism doesn't exist (it does, in fact that is probably why Bobby Jindal isn't governor of Louisiana although he may be soon enough). I would have voted for the bill back when it was originally proposed, though.

As for interracial marriage or things like that I have no problem. I think people of different races are perfectly capable and and believe in, as the Constitution says, "all men are created equal."

I oppose renewed effort to pass the "Equal Rights Amendment," but not because I want do deny women equality. Federal law (and the laws of every state) already prohibits discrimination against women so the amendment is unnecessary. The only thing it would do is provide a court to misinterpret.

Same sex marriage-Against. Also against civil unions. Also against sodomy laws (although the Supreme Court was wrong legally to declare them unconstitutionally). I think in re: to adoption a married couple should be given preference over a gay couple, but a gay couple should be given preference over a single person.

Economic system-Free market capitalism preferred. In terms of regulations, the U.S. has a lot of paperwork regulations ie: don't do the paperwork or make a mistake on it you can get in trouble or in some cases go to jail. It also has lots of unnecessary licenses set up for "incumbents" trying to protect their businesses. In the U.S. it's virtually impossible to, say, open a fruit stand in a day because of paperwork, licenses and regulations. But in Hong Kong, which is run by the Communists, you can.

of Capital punishment-Reluctant supporter, a. The thing that has always bugged me about capital punishment is the prospect of an innocent person getting executed. It wasn't that I thought it was wrong to execute a murderer. I think that's perfectly ethical, and indeed the moral thing to do. But...an innocent person.

Of course, admittedly, despite what "Project Innocent" tells you there aren't tons of innocent people (the people they list aren't really innocent when you look into it) getting executed. But the idea of executing an innocent person bugged me.

Dennis Prager mentioned on the radio something that had an effect on me. He said that those who support the death penalty were responsible for the innocent people that died. He then mentioned that convicted murderers who go to prison often kill guards, later are paroled and kill again (on rare occasion even those sentenced to death have there sentenced commuted and get out on parole and kill). He noted the fact that if, acknowledging the responsibility for death penalty advocates in the death of the innocent, death penalty opponents would admit their responsibility for the greater number of dead caused by the still living convicted murderers.

Smoking-I don't support smoking restrictions on private property. I am not sure of my feeling regarding high smoking taxes. I don't know enough information.

Drugs(Excluding Alcohol and Caffeine)-I oppose the legalization of narcotics.

Colonialism-I'm not sure why in regards to U.S. policy I can say here. Chinese are expanding there influence in the Sudan. That's bad. They don't own it though. um...

Military intervention to stop human rights abuses-If the US congress forces cuts funding for Iraq, and so forces a withdrawal, I think Bush should maybe propose a joint US-EU intervention in the southern Sudan. It would have to be serious though, not a Somalia do-over. ADDENDUM: Not so sure on the Sudan intervention anymore.

Civil gun ownership-I support the second amendment.

Censorship-Oppose censorship for political reasons.

Copyright-Support, although the amount of time the copyright holds is absurdly long now (although congress does have that power).

Action to reduce the effects of climate change-Nothing!

Animal rights-I support (reasonable) laws against animal cruelty. I do not put an animal on a level of a human being.

Violence in video games-I support a ratings system. A lot of people think that requiring parents to accompany youths to buy "M" rated games is a big deal but I don't think it can reasonably defined as censorship. Honestly even if they had lots of games that were barred for those under 17 I wouldn't see it as some kind of problem. I might have been bugged if I was a kid, but that was different.

Globalization-A word that polls negatively. I think because it implies a sort of organized process. Anyway, no problem here.

Federalism-I believe in...yes. Scalia is good on this. I'm getting tired.

Nuclear weapons-Ronald Reagan once described MAD as like having two gun fighters with loaded pistols pointed at each other for eternity. Nuclear weapons scare me just like they scared him, although I'm no Ronald Reagan. Fortunately, because of the Reagan-Gorbachev summit meetings we no longer stand on the brink of blowing our selves to bits. However, the massive (but smaller then previous) nuclear arsenals of the United States, Russia, as well as the large and growing nuclear arsenal of China, and newborn arsenal of Pakistan, and India are certainly a concern. North Korea, believed to now or soon to possess both nuclear weapons and missile technology to hit the west coast of the United States is worrisome since the Kim Jong Il and the DRPK do not inspire the sort of confidence that Russia or China do. Then again Russia itself as to the security of it's warheads. Iran also has an active program. (Who did I leave out? Oh yes, the UK, France, um...Israel, at one time South Africa had them, and Japan could.)

What do I think about all of this rambling nonsense? I support continued negotiations with Vladimir Putin's Russia for verifiable reductions in nuclear missiles as well as delivery systems. I also believe that we should continue previous offers to give Russia access to use the U.S. Strategic Defense Initiative on their own soil as part of such cooperation. We need to keep an eye of China while any reductions continue (in retrospect Reagan's offer to Gorbachev for a total elimination of nuclear weapons really wouldn't have worked considering China). Work on SDI must continue especially re: North Korean threat.

Minimum wage-Harmful to the low-skill workers, and the poor. Eliminate. (This won't happen though).

Balanced Budget-Opposed to balanced budget amendment. It would constrain the ability of congress in emergencies (congress in WWII had a deficit of 50% more then revenue). Also, any such amendment would make courts potentially have the power to force congress to do it's will. This has happened in several states. Finally, I am not entirely convinced of the terrible damage of deficits if they are under control. In fact, the United States has been able to proceed with successful growth despite enormous deficits.

Stem Cell (Research) (ie: embryonic, adult, funding of, restrictions to, ect...)-I am opposed for ethical reasons and while since there seems to be a general lack of success compared to other stem cells using embryonic stem cell research. I an not a big fan of government funding of medicine generally.

Energy (oil, clean coal, wind, solar, ect...)-Nuclear, clean coal, not solar.

Environment (EPA, Endangered Species Act, Government position on global warming, market based vs. regulatory based solutions)-I'm not sure if I would eliminate the EPA all together if I could. If you look back the Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, and Bush II administrations have each seen marked improvements in conditions of the environment (air quality, water quality, ect...) This probably has allot to do with technology. One argument is that both approaches, the left wing regulatory approach, and the right wing market approach actually can have a positive impact.

I think the endangered species act should be tweaked as to allow more leeway on a case by case basis not to ruin individuals and families lives.

I do not believe that global warming/climate change is predominately caused by man.

Homeland Security-Why did I create this category? It's headed by Michael Chertoff. He used to be a federal prosecutor. He went after the mob!

Immigration (Amnesty vs. Deportation vs. Something in Between)-Something in between but not the Bush plan (something more conservative). We need border fence/wall. I'd write more but I'm tired.

Iraq-Don't I write about that enough?

Iran-Nuke is unacceptable, but don't attack now definitely. There is time...Not sure about current Bush approach. Do we really want to prop up the current President? I would think trying to encourage revolt would be better. Maybe U.S. just doesn't have crap inside Iran.

North Korea-State department is engaging them. I don't know why. Doesn't seem very smart to me.

Foreign Policy (ect...)-It's a "journal." Not a "magazine." Get it right.

Personal Tax (since strictly speaking one could support a non-income tax based system)-Why did I create this category? It was unnecessary.

Social Security-ditto.

(Labor) Unions-Paulie, You better not turn your back on the Union.

War on Terrorism (Generally) Union is in capital letters, is that a Civil War reference?

Line-Item Veto-Unconstitutional. Opposed.

Last edited by jimservo on 13 May 2007, 9:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.