[QUOTE=BMalion]
What is your stand on the Great Lakes Basin water use issues? Specifically, “diversion”?
[/QUOTE]
We’re going to need a sound, reasonable regional approach. No state (not even my beloved Ohio) has a priority or privileged claim to Great Lakes water, as I see it. I believe there’s enough water to go around, and if the affected states can’t amicably reach agreement, Congress will have to take action and lay down some mandates. I’d prefer it didn’t come to that. Incidentally, I would like to see far more research on cost-effective desalinization methods. There’s plenty of water in the world; we just need to figure out a way to better remove the salt.
[QUOTE=What Exit?]
There is an easy solution. It is called Fusion Power. Would you increase, decrease or leave the same the funding for Fusion Research?
Jim (I think I know the answer)
[/QUOTE]
I bet you do. As I said in my post #58 above, I support increasing funding for fusion power research. The French have been at it for awhile, but there’s a lot more to do. If it works - a big “if” - it could transform the world.
FTR, this is exactly what I wanted to hear re gun control.
Same, but let’s not lose sight of the fact that China’s population is much larger than that of the US; they may now be the larger polluter in total, but the damage that the average Chinese citizen inflicts on the environment isn’t even close to what we Americans do.
Bravo! So that we may support and follow your campaign, BTW, can you tell us your real name and/or give us a link to your campaign website?
I strongly support the role of unions in today’s workplace. Although not entirely satisfied with the EFCA, I would sign it if it crossed my Oval Office desk. I’m convinced from the legislative record that there has been recurring if not widespread employer misconduct, coercion and retaliatory firings in past union elections. I would want to address and allay the concerns of the Chamber of Commerce and other opponents of the bill, if possible, but in principle I support it.
As an Ohioan, born and raised, of course I’d say the Buckeyes. But this is no way diminishes my affection for any of my fellow Midwesterners… even Wolverines.
As an Ohioan, born and raised, of course I’d say the Buckeyes. But this is no way diminishes my affection for any of my fellow Midwesterners… even Wolverines.
[/QUOTE]
Hey, that last one is a weasel answer that I would expect of a politician. Be brave and be strong, if you really care say so.
If nothing else, at least Rudy is proud to proclaim his love of the Yankees despite the ill-will this entails.
If you’re elected president, what kind of legacy would you hope to leave behind?
What would set you apart from a generic moderate democrat? are there any radical reforms on your mind?
Can you explain why porous borders are a serious risk? I’m exceedingly skeptical of the whole security argument as used to justify clamping on the U.S mexico border. Millions of people come and go every day for business, vacations, family visits and so on. They use planes to get in and out, so can terrorists. They do not need to fly to mexico and enter illegally.
[QUOTE=Gozu]
If you’re elected president, what kind of legacy would you hope to leave behind?
What would set you apart from a generic moderate democrat? are there any radical reforms on your mind?
Can you explain why porous borders are a serious risk? I’m exceedingly skeptical of the whole security argument as used to justify clamping on the U.S mexico border. Millions of people come and go every day for business, vacations, family visits and so on. They use planes to get in and out, so can terrorists. They do not need to fly to mexico and enter illegally.
[/QUOTE]
I’d hope my legacy would be to have repaired the damage caused by the Bush Administration: protecting the United States while putting our fiscal house in order, renewing our ties to our allies, laying the groundwork for sustainable economic growth, and revitalizing our commitment to the Constitution and the rule of law.
I am more committed to environmental protection and a strong space program than the “generic moderate Democrat.”
Porous borders have at least the potential to pose a serious risk to the country because we can never be sure how the next terrorist attack will arise. Any counterterrorism measures are likely to be very expensive, while potential terrorists can easily and cheaply adjust their tactics. I personally believe we are probably at greater risk from attacks on nuclear power plants or our ports than from hijacked airplanes, but 9-11 casts a long shadow. International trade is extremely important to the American economy. Nevertheless, it is a core function of sovereignty to be able to control your own borders. Right now, and for many years, we have not been able to do that. We can do much better.
[QUOTE=fetus]
What, exactly, do you plan to do about illegal immigration? And how will we know which candidate is you?
[/QUOTE]
I fully recognize the valuable contributions made by immigrants to our country, now and throughout our history. But we are a nation under the rule of law. We cannot tolerate mass lawbreaking and long function as a great republic. Although it was far from perfect, I would have supported the immigration-reform bill which died in Congress earlier this year. For all its flaws, it offered the most realistic approach to the illegal immigration problem I’ve seen in 20 years. We need to be welcoming to legal immigrants, and firm but fair with illegal immigrants, and secure our borders in a lawful and cost-effective way. Consistent with those goals, I’m open to all suggestions.
You’ll know I’m me when you see me in Iowa and New Hampshire. I’ll be the tall guy from Ohio.
