So, when are you planning to start?
- Do you have large sums of money?
- Barring that, do you know people who will give you large sums of money?
What’s your position on relations with Canada?
Never! Now go away, you silly person.
No, don’t. 
- Not that much.
- No, but I hope to meet them, and real soon!
I’m in favor of them.
No, seriously. Canada is one of our most stalwart and longlasting friends in the community of nations, a strong democracy, a beautiful land and a great nation, and I’d want to do all I could to ensure that it remains so. I have fond memories of traveling through Canada, including to Toronto, Banff, Vancouver and Calgary over the years. I would be very interested in meeting with Prime Minister Harper soon after taking office to see how we could be an even better neighbor. I would also, to the degree he felt it helpful, want to do all I could to ensure that Canada remained united. A balkanized Canada or an independent Quebec would not, in my judgment, be in the U.S. national interest.
Please do! Just wear something underneath, for chrissakes.
What qualifications would I need to present to be your Secretary of Defense and minister of war?
Like shoes and socks?
That reminds me, if you do get elected and I throw my support to you, would you consider reestablishing the Department of the Navy and appointing me either Secretary or Assistance Secretary of the Navy?
I believe I would do you proud in such a position.
Jim
Ambitious, aren’t you? You want two titles!
Send me a resume, please. My SecDef will be a military veteran, very familiar with a broad array of defense issues, personable, well-respected on Capitol Hill (or have the potential to become so), know American and military history very well, be an excellent administrator and decision-maker, and have a good personal rapport with me. If these qualifications are met, I’d be very pleased to appoint the first woman or member of a minority to the post.
Directly beneath the kilt, wiseguy. And not just a blue ribbon, either.
I’m sure you would, Jim, and right now you’re the clear front-runner for the post. However, I’m likely to keep the current overall structure of the DoD. I probably wouldn’t reestablish the Department of the Navy as a Cabinet-level post, unless you had a good argument for it and would be willing to do the heavy lifting on Capitol Hill to get it done.
Tell me why (other than an understandable and commendable love of the Navy) you favor this?
okay, on that part we agree, enforcing existing laws is better than drafting new ones, to paraphrase a famous wall-crawling philosopher “With great power comes great responsibility”, firearm ownership is not to be taken lightly, it requires responsibility and maturity, something shown to be lacking in criminals and the mentally disturbed, however, children, if supervised well, can (and in my opinion should) be taught safe and responsible firearm handling techniques
part of the reason for underage firearms problems seems to be that firearms have a “mystique” about them, they’re seen as “cool”, if a child is taught proper firearms control/handling/maintenence when they show themselves to be serious and mature enough to handle the responibility, it would take away a lot of the “mystique” associated with guns, it ceases to become a “cool forbidden item” and becomes another tool, a tool to be respected, like a chain saw, a circular saw/power drill/other power equipment, or an alligator…
I agree. Probably the best thing the NRA has ever done is emphasize gun education and safety for target-shooting clubs, hunters, Scouting, etc. I still don’t expect their endorsement.
(This was regarding harm-reduction policies regarding sex and drug use.)
I’ll be more specific, and try not to ask a loaded question. (It’s a very loaded issue, I’m sure you’ll agree.)
One of President Bush’s more contentious acts of domestic policy–in my mind, anyway–was the establishment of grants available to schools that taught abstinence-only sex education; specifically, it requires schools receiving the funding to teach that condoms are unreliable and that the only safe sex is no sex at all. Do you have a plan in mind regarding this federal grant, which is currently in effect?
Interesting. I hadn’t thought about it that way. I’m still torn on this, but you make a good point and I agree with you on a lot of the other issues. I’ll hear you out on this as it develops, if it does.
That’s fair enough; unfortunately, each year that tuition and fees continue to soar, more students become indebted to the government while others (particularly those who don’t meet the requirements for being considered independent: over 24 or married or a veteran, as I understand it) suffer academically because of the financial lengths they go to to stay in school. The bubble may burst slowly, if at all, considering that the schools apparently make enough money from those who can afford their education without help, and are apparently content to let the government take care of many of the rest. In the meantime, would you consider federal incentives to lower tuition and the publishers’ markups on textbooks?
Excellent!
From a federal perspective, what would constitute a demonstrable problem? Would a particular standard for demonstrating such problem be established?
Given that already-existing economic sanctions with Sudan have just been increased; and that a UN Security Council declaration about the situation in Darfur would require the cooperation of China, who so far support the Sudanese government; what’s your take on economic sanctions against Sudan and China?
A proposed marijuana legalization bill in Nevada would have established a “state border” patrol system to keep legal weed from spilling over into states where it’s not welcome. Do you feel there’s a federal role in regulating the cross-state transfer of weapons in similar fashion? Nevada itself is a great example; many guns on the streets of California are said to come from Nevada and Arizona, where gun control laws are laxer and there is apparently no viable means of keeping them within state lines.
I did not know that. Good info, thanks!
(Keep me in mind for that janitorial post, too! 
)
Anyway, I like the way you think. I can’t 100% promise you my vote at this point, but you have a much firmer grasp on it than anyone else.
Thanks, Fetus, for sharing your thoughts. To address your most recent questions:
Abstinence-only sex education: I’ve read several critiques of this, including the unintended consequence that teens who attend such classes are more likely to practice oral or anal sex and thus increase their potential exposure to various STDs. While it’s true that the safest sex is no sex at all, that’s a completely unrealistic attitude to the problem. Most American teens, awash in hormones and subjected to a lifelong media bombardment of sexual imagery and content, are going to have sex. Condoms are not foolproof, but are the best way we know of to prevent STD transmission and cut teen pregnancy rates. I’d want to discuss this with my new Secretary of HHS, Surgeon General and the director of the CDC, but from what I know now, I’m skeptical of abstinence-only sex education.
Federal incentives to lower tuition and publishers’ markup on textbooks: I was a college and law school student once, not so long ago, so I know how onerous tuition expenses and textbook purchases can be to students. I’m still not convinced that there’s a Federal role on these issues, however. Some law and medical schools offer partial forgiveness of student loans for recent graduates who agree to a term of public service (in remote, underserved towns, to the urban poor or on Indian reservations, for instance), and perhaps something similar could be devised for undergraduate colleges, too. Maybe in conjunction with AmeriCorps? I’d have to give that some thought.
Drugs in public schools: By “demonstrable problem,” I meant that the principal and school administration become aware that there’s drug dealing on the premises and/or that more than a few students are often under the influence during the school day. It’s a local issue, though, and ought to be dealt with locally. Law enforcement grants are offered by the Department of Justice to support local police under the rubric of “ensuring drug-free schools,” and I’d certainly support continuing those programs.
Economic sanctions against Sudan and China: I welcome President Bush’s recent stepped-up sanctions against the genocidal regime in Khartoum; I only wish this had come earlier. Although I strongly supported sanctions against China at the time of the appalling Tiananmen Square massacre, such sanctions have little if any international support now, nearly 20 years later. Despite its troubling policies in Tibet and towards Taiwan, I would not support sanctions against China at this time.
Interstate transfer of firearms: Yes, I think the Federal government has a role to play here. You mentioned guns bought in Arizona and Nevada turning up in California,and you’re right. New York City has similar problems with New Hampshire guns, I’ve read, and Washington, D.C., with weapons bought right next door in Virginia. Each of those cities has tough gun-purchase and possession laws, rendered almost impotent by the interstate gun trade. One goal of mine would be to make Federal licensing of private firearms dealers more stringent, and to suspend or revoke licenses for those whose guns are used in more than one crime (the Brady Center has identified, using ATF records, several notorious private dealers whose guns have been used in many dozens of crimes). I also support closing the so-called “gun show loophole,” which permits guns to be bought and sold without any background check, for cash on the barrelhead, often to criminals through “straw man” buyers.
Another policy statement.
The Environment: We only have one planet, and we should take much better care of it. The Bush Administration has time and again favored polluters over the public interest; that must change. Industry and polluters should not be writing our environmental regulations behind closed doors. I favor much stronger environmental protection measures to ensure that clean air and water are available for all. China has now surpassed the U.S. as a producer of greenhouse gases, and we need to more aggressively work with our partners in the international community to address global climate change.
Energy policy: I favor increased and sustained research in synthetic fuels, nuclear fusion, clean coal, solar power and cogeneration. There is no reason for us to forever be in thrall to unstable oil-producing baronies.
Space exploration: I strongly support a mix of both manned and unmanned space exploration. Humanity’s destiny will someday lie in space; we should rebuild a vigorous, risk-taking but safety-conscious NASA. I would also increase funding for efforts to locate and track near-Earth objects which might pose a catastrophic risk to life on our planet.
Government secrecy: The government belongs to the people of the United States. They have a right to know what it is doing with their tax dollars. I will return to the Clinton-era presumption that all government documents should be declassified after ten years, unless there are vital national-security reasons why classification should be maintained. Political embarrassment is not a “vital national-security reason.” I will also greatly increase the number of FOIA staffers to more timely process public requests for information. The Washington Post recently noted that some FOIA requests have been pending for 20+ years, and that is simply unacceptable.
Medal of Honor: A pet project: I will posthumously award William B. Cushing, “Lincoln’s commando,” the Medal of Honor, and promote him to captain of the U.S. Navy. See: William B. Cushing - Wikipedia
Well, you have support on all of these issues 100%.
Jim (BTW: Your Email address is not working for some reason, could you Email me if it has changed? Thanks for the Book.)
What is your stand on the Great Lakes Basin water use issues? Specifically, “diversion”?