Trade is by definition free. You have something I want, I have something you want and we each think we are better off by switching. That's trade. It is free. Any of the governmental "free trade" deals, CAFTA, NAFTA, what the hell are they AFTA? have nothing to do with free trade. These deals specify & codify what trade you cannot have. You cannot sell sugar for less than ..., I'm against governmental "free trade". I'm for trade. Dr. Ron Paul has it right.
Is Ron Paul our best candidate?
I'm voting for him, too.
This cycle, the dems are up because, for some reason, people against the war think dems will get us out. Hillary and Barack (and everyone else) express dislike of the war, but won't guarantee ever leaving Iraq. If the repubs pick Ron Paul, he take the whole war issue away from the dems and makes it a positive one for the repubs.
Ron would own the debate. That guy is a combination tank and laser in a debate. I would dearly love to see a Ron Paul-Hillary Clinton debate. Now, that's my idea of television!
Should we bring back a different kind of draft?
I and the 13th amendment agree that involuntary servitude is unconstitutional. While the supreme court did rule that conscription was constitutional (in 1918 during war), that was only for an army, not for some politically correct peace corp program.
Anything government does sucks. Volunteerism is too important to leave in the hands of bureacrats to screw up. Encourage people to join the Humanitarian Core, sure. Enslave them to do it? Idiotic.
(sarcasm on) As a side issue, instead of drafting young men for war in the prime of life and useful potential, let's draft retired people over 65 living on social security. We'd reduce entitlement expenses and since they are all used up anyway and a drain on society, let them die in Iraq. It's not that hard to point a gun and pull a trigger. Even with arthritis, I'm sure the oldsters could do it. (sarcasm off)
Uncertain GOP Race Shifts to SC, Nev.
"Relates to: John ....." everyone but RON PAUL!!!
Article references Nevada: "Turnout is expected to be low roughly 25,000 and that could pave the way for a strong finish, perhaps even first place, by libertarian Ron Paul."
But that isn't important enough to have RON PAUL linked to the article.
Uncertain GOP Race Shifts to SC, Nev.
<div class="special-box" style="width:270px;">
<div style="border:solid 1px #CCC">
<div class="ta-c p-10" style="background:#FFF;border-bottom:solid 1px #CCC">
<a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/news/uncertain-gop-race-shifts-to-sc-nev/30089/photos/&imageId=7792">
<img src="http://image.politicalbase.com/uploads/people/15000/14237/040ce75d-01ae-4c4e-b0a6-d1dfa468f319_240.jpg" style="border:solid 3px #CCC;"/>
</a> <br/>
<div class="ta-l p-8" style="border:solid 1px #DDD;">
<span class="strong">Mitt Romney</span><br/> <span class="dgray f-10">Republican Presidential hopeful, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, right, sits with his grandson Parker Romney, as he waits to be introduced at a campaign stop in Bluffton, S.C., Wednesday, Jan. 16, 2008. (AP Photo/LM Otero)</span>
</div>
<table class="list">
<tr>
<td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/mitt-romney/14237/">Biography</a></td>
<td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/mitt-romney/14237/issues/">Issues</a></td>
<td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/mitt-romney/14237/money/">Fund Raising</a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/mitt-romney/14237/rivals/">Rivals</a></td>
<td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/mitt-romney/14237/supporters/">Supporters</a></td>
<td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/mitt-romney/14237/affiliations/">Affiliations</a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/mitt-romney/14237/photos/">Photos</a></td>
<td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/mitt-romney/14237/videos/">Videos</a></td>
<td class="alt"><a href="http://www.politicalbase.com/people/mitt-romney/14237/forums/">Forums</a></td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p>The race ever more chaotic, four Republicans are angling for superiority in a fast-approaching presidential primary in South Carolina, a state known for rough-and-tumble politics and predicting the outcome of the GOP nomination.</p>
Although Nevada holds caucuses Saturday as well, the spotlight is on the first-in-the-South primary; no Republican since 1980 has won the party nod without a South Carolina triumph.
"Truly anything can happen," Katon Dawson, the state party chairman, said Wednesday, hours after Mitt Romney won his native Midwestern state. "Michigan just shuffled the deck. It's a whole new game in South Carolina, and, with the undecideds, it can go any way."
The latest South Carolina polls show a close race. A flood of negative phone calls, hard-hitting mail and late-deciders could change that overnight.
Not even two weeks into voting, three candidates each have one major win thanks to three different constituencies, a reflection of a deeply divided GOP and the absence of an obvious successor to President Bush.
Mike Huckabee, the former Arkansas governor and ordained Baptist minister, prevailed in the Iowa caucuses with the support of fellow evangelicals. John McCain, the four-term Arizona senator, repeated his 2000 victory in New Hampshire with the overwhelming support of independents. And Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, rallied Republican loyalists to post his first major win in Michigan; he also won barely contested Wyoming.
On Wednesday, the three set their sights on South Carolina, where rival Fred Thompson, the actor and former Tennessee senator, has been camping out with hopes of a surprise upset that would upend the race yet again.
Such an extraordinarily fractured field plays right into the strategy of former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, last year's national front-runner who is on the brink of irrelevancy after badly losing the first four contests.
Giuliani has planted himself and his dwindling campaign account in Florida in hopes of winning its primary Jan. 29, grabbing its winner-take-all 57 delegates and emerging as the GOP leader heading into Feb. 5 when some two dozen states vote.
South Carolina and Nevada are next up and the race dynamics could shift thereafter.
"A different person will win Saturday in South Carolina," Thompson declared in Laurens, S.C., an obvious reference to himself given that he hasn't prevailed to date.
The Tennessean figures he has a home-field advantage in the Southern state. He needs a win to keep his fragile and cash-strapped candidacy alive. Anything less than first place would probably force him to drop out.
After a third-place win in Iowa, Thompson skipped New Hampshire and Michigan for a bus tour through South Carolina. He styled himself as the most consistent conservative and a states-rights candidate. He is trying to take votes from Huckabee's far-right support by portraying his rival as liberal on everything from economic issues to foreign policy. More contrasts are certain in the final days.
Huckabee hopes to rally religious conservatives in the Bible Belt as he did in the Heartland with a pitch that's heavy on faith and helping the working man. His base is in the ultraconservative Upstate around Greenville and Spartanburg. Still, he's not taking that region for granted; he will campaign by plane and bus across the state.
Huckabee's aides view South Carolina as a race between their boss and McCain but also are awaiting any impact Romney may have following his win in Michigan. Huckabee also is bracing for criticism from Washington-based interest groups, such as the anti-tax group, the Club for Growth, which is seeking to derail him. The former Southern governor argues that he's an outsider who can clean up Washington.
Romney threatens to take conservative votes from Thompson and Huckabee if he gets any bounce out of Michigan.
Next to McCain, he has one of the strongest organizations in South Carolina, and has laid the ground work to capitalize on a victory. He has spent more than $3 million on TV ads and direct mail. After spending months struggling to find a clear message, he's sticking with one that worked in Michigan an economic appeal amid job losses combined with a fix-Washington pitch to voters seeking change.
He's splitting the next four days between South Carolina and Nevada.
Romney is the only top Republican contender to pay serious attention to the Western state's caucuses; 31 delegates are at stake compared with 24 in South Carolina. Nevada ranks in the top five of states with the most Mormons and, as a member of that faith, Romney could benefit. Turnout is expected to be low roughly 25,000 and that could pave the way for a strong finish, perhaps even first place, by libertarian Ron Paul. The Texas congressman has been on TV and radio in the state for a long stretch.
"I'm not looking for gold stars on my forehead like I was in first grade. I want delegates," Romney said in Bluffton, S.C. He lowered expectations for himself in South Carolina, while raising them for McCain, saying the senator had the primary "pretty well wrapped up."
McCain hopes that's the case. He is banking on his three rivals splitting the right-flank vote and giving him an avenue to win among moderate Republicans whose numbers have swelled in the state in the eight years since he lost to George W. Bush. This time, it's McCain who has locked up the endorsements of much of the state's GOP establishment.
A former Vietnam prisoner of war with decades of experience on military issues, McCain is emphasizing his background as he argues that he's the most qualified to be commander in chief. The pitch could play well in a state with large numbers of active duty military and veterans. McCain also is arguing that he's the most likely to win against a Democrat in the fall, and will put his economic pitch up against Romney's, claiming that the ex-governor's record on the economy is nothing to brag about.
"We need your vote, and if we can get it, we're going to win in South Carolina," a cautious-though-optimistic McCain said in Greenville, S.C.
<br class="clear-both"/>
Should Jenny Granholm be recalled or resign?
Bruce - dead bodies everywhere. Personal taxes up 12%.
Now she wants to repeal the service tax she had to have and increase the new MI Corporate Gross Receipts/Income Business tax rate by 33%--and it hasn't even taken place yet.
I'm "blown away".
Elections need to be publicly funded
I can't imagine a bigger waste of money than to public fund a candidate's election.
No qualifying funds, no government administered fund to dole from, no restrictions on contributions from any source in any amount.
Will there be graft, influence peddling, bought votes? Yes. How is that any different than it is now? At least I don't want to be forced to subsidize it. If I trust someone and they promise to vote the way I want, then great. If they don't, I will support someone else.
Sorry Bethany/JDubb, your reading is simply wrong. When the constitution talks about "the people", it speaks of individuals. If it says "the states", it means the states as sovereign collectives of individuals, it says state. The constitution is not vague on this point. See 9th & 10th amendments. Any other reading doesn't make any sense.
Now to your point about the need for the 2nd amendment, as to perhaps its obsolescence, we can talk. What you have to do is repeal the 2nd amendment, or amend it to limit access to guns/or other bad things, or allow states to restrict access to guns as they think best. You simply cannot make a case for ignoring or mis-reading the constitution because it is convenient today. That road is serious trouble. Do you want people reading "Jerry Falwell Christian" when it says "Religion", because that is what a party in power wants it to read? Should freedom of the press only mean newspapers printed a sheet at a time, but allow government to regulate large dailys, TV, Radio and internet blogs?
Should Jenny Granholm be recalled or resign?
Dave, you are mostly correct. Michigan is in trouble due to the large share of Michigan economy that are ailing auto companies. I don't blame her for that at all. I do blame her for everything she has done to make it worse. Tax increases, ever-expanding state budget, and the fraudulent schemes noted above. Michigan might be a decent place to bring a company, if you are good friends with Jenny
Should Jenny Granholm be recalled or resign?
She gave Toyota a sweet-heart deal that cost Michigan taxpayers $16,000,000 by cancelling a bid where another bidder offered more.
She gave a no-bid contract to a supporter for a new state police post in Lansing that should cost taxpayers more.
Three of her departments blew past their legally authorized spending limits in last years' budgets, with no consequences to those in charge.
Michigan is in a one-state depression under her watch and the solution she pushed through the legislature is -- 12% increase in personal taxes, and a brand-new sales tax on certain services, that just happen to not have strong lobbying presence in Lansing.
Should we bring back a different kind of draft?
People can make a difference right where they live, in whatever way they are best suited. There is no reason to use force to make someone join a group to be told how to "do something good." Given the efficiency and brilliant planning exhibited by the Bush administration in operating the Iraq war, we'd probably have a $3,000,000 soup kitchen that doesn't serve soup to 50 people who don't need or want it.
The 2nd amendment clearly states that people have a right to own arms. The federal government may not pass any law restricting, licensing, controlling, limiting an individual's right to be armed however he chooses. An examination of works around the time of the constitution shows that the reason people felt so strongly about the right to carry guns, was that they did not trust ANY governmental authority. Their history (and subsequent history) gave many examples of how a disarmed people are harmed.
The fact that the supreme court in the 30's didn't follow the constitution, and that congress continues to pass legislation infringing on the 2nd amendment rights, doesn't mean they don't exist. It just means that we have given them up.
