People should have to pass drug test to get government assistance.

Governor Mitt Romney and Drugs

• People should have to pass drug test to get government assistance.

2003

• 12-21-2005; Healey kicks off student drug testing program in New Bedford
• 02-21-2003a; Governor Mitt Romney fights for prescription drug coverage for seniors

2005

• 12-20-2005; HEALEY EXPANDS SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT FOR WOMEN
• 07-28-2005; HEALEY ENDORSES MANDATORY OVERDOSE REPORTING BILL

2006

• 06-30-2006; ROMNEY VETOES NEEDLES BILL; Says legislation will worsen heroin crisis by loosening drug paraphernalia laws
• 12-21-2005; HEALEY KICKS OFF STUDENT DRUG TESTING PROGRAM IN NEW BEDFORD

Also see Gangs

People should have to pass drug test to get government assistance.

Reasons to agree

1. I have to pass a drug test to work. I hate work. I wish I could get money for doing nothing. If I have to pass a drug test, to have the honor of working, people should have to pass a drug test, if they want free money.
2. Like a lot of folks in this state I have a job. I work, they pay me. I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as it sees fit. In order to get that paycheck, I am required to pass a random urine test, with which I have no problem. What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who don't have to pass a urine test. Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare check because I have to pass one to earn it for them? Please understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet. I do on the other hand have a problem with helping someone sitting on their ass. Could you imagine how much money the state would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance check????? Please pass this along if you agree or simply Delete if you don't. Hope you all will pass it along, though. Something has to change in this country and soon!!!!! "

Gangs

I would be interested to hear from anyone who has been a victim of gang activity. I think gangs are a big threat to our country. From Norco-terrorist, to the good old fashioned street gangs. I think Mitt Romney has good executive experience working with the police in Massachusetts to stand up to Crime.

Quotes from Governor Mitt Romney about gangs:

• "Gang violence destroys the fabric of our communities and offers nothing but a dead end street to young people drawn in by false hope," said Romney. "This program will encourage communities to develop and pursue promising new strategies that stop the mayhem and bloodshed that gangs inflict."
• Governor Mitt Romney, 12-22-2005 Press Release

• "Our criminal justice and public safety professionals now have a real tool to protect those who join with us to take a stand against crime and violence in our communities," Romney said during the ceremony at St. Peter's School, which specializes in youth programs that have shown great success in keeping students out of gangs and connecting them to their community. "Witnesses who have the courage to come forward and testify should not have to live in fear for cooperating with prosecutors to keep their communities safe."
• Governor Mitt Romney

• "Nothing troubles me more than watching a child's future shatter in a blast of violence. Our call for action will give law enforcement officials additional resources to protect the lives of our children and their families."
• Governor Mitt Romney, 10-01-2004 Press Release

Press Releases from Governor Mitt Romney about gangs:

2004

• 08-26-2004, LT. GOV HEALEY SIGNS BILL CRACKING DOWN ON SOMERVILLE GANGS
• 10-01-2004, ROMNEY ANNOUNCES $1.5 MILLION TO COMBAT GANG ACTIVITY

2005

• 12-15-2005, HEALEY PUSHES TO GIVE PROSECUTORS TOOLS TO PROTECT CRUCIAL WITNESSES IN GANG CRIMES
• 12-22-2005, ROMNEY APPROVES $11 MILLION PLAN TO TARGET GANG VIOLENCE

2006

• 03-06-2006, HEALEY PUSHES FOR PASSAGE OF ANTI-GANG VIOLENCE BILL
• 03-30-2006, ROMNEY SIGNS BILL TO CRACK DOWN ON GANG VIOLENCE
• 05-17-2006, HEALEY AND MENINO ANNOUNCE $3 MILLION GANG-FIGHTING GRANT FOR BOSTON
• 05-18-2006, HEALEY AWARDS GANG-FIGHTING GRANTS TO 15 COMMUNITES

Raising the Bar on Education

Issues / Raising the Bar on Education

Governor Mitt Romney said everyone benefits when parents and kids can choose their schools.

I would like to hear your reasons to agree or disagree; until then, here are my Reasons to agree with Romney:

1. It is best to trust individuals to make decisions for their own lives.
2. Choice is good.
3. School choice is good.
5. Parental Rights and Practicality: While school choice might not be feasible for every family, it honors parents' rights to choose the best educational path for their children, whether Catholic, public, or any other type of school.
6. Informed Decisions: With the freedom to choose, media outlets could offer evaluations and comparisons of schools, fostering a culture where education is a priority, akin to everyday consumer choices. This increased scrutiny and interest could lead to better-informed decisions about children’s education.
7. Choice and Access: Just as bookstores and libraries coexist, providing choice doesn't necessarily harm public schools. The focus should be on ensuring access to education through public, private, or homeschooling options.
8. Use of Tax Money: Questioning the use of tax money for private or homeschooling overlooks the fundamental right of parents to decide the best educational setting for their children.
9. Educational Outcomes: Evidence suggests Catholic and other non-public schools often outperform public schools, hinting at the benefits of competitive educational environments.
10. Competition Drives Quality: Introducing competition among schools, including charter and homeschooling options, raises the quality of public education and aligns with the broader American value of competition improving services.
11. Economic Incentives: While many teachers are motivated by altruism, economic incentives in a competitive educational system could drive improvements across all schools.
12. Government Efficiency: Drawing a parallel with government services like the DMV, the argument posits that government-controlled entities often lack the motivation to excel and improve, a situation that school choice aims to remedy.
13. Critique of Opposition Arguments:
1. Affordability and Equity: Critics argue school choice might not be universally accessible, but this perspective overlooks the direct and indirect benefits to the majority, as well as the potential for a more dynamic educational environment.
2. Historical Misuse of Private Schools: While some argue private schools contributed to segregation in the past, today's school choice mechanisms, like vouchers, aim to democratize access to quality education, potentially reducing educational inequality.
3. Community Impact: Though some believe school choice might erode community cohesion, supporters argue that educational quality and parental empowerment should take precedence, with the belief that better education contributes to stronger communities in the long run.

What are the best objective criteria for measuring the strength of this belief?

1. Academic Outcomes

• Improvement in Student Performance: Measure the academic progress of students who switch to schools of choice compared to those who remain in failing schools. Metrics can include standardized test scores, graduation rates, and college admission rates.

2. Equity and Accessibility

• Demographic Representation: Analyze whether school choice options are equally accessible to students of all socioeconomic backgrounds, races, and abilities. This includes assessing the distribution of resources and opportunities.
• Impact on Segregation: Study the effect of school choice on racial and socioeconomic segregation within and across schools.

3. Systemic Effects

• Impact on Public Schools: Evaluate how the introduction of school choice affects the funding, resources, and student body composition of remaining public schools.
• Overall System Performance: Compare the performance and health of the educational system as a whole in regions with robust school choice options versus those without.

4. Parental and Student Satisfaction

• Satisfaction Surveys: Collect data on satisfaction levels from parents and students involved in school choice programs to gauge perceived benefits or drawbacks.
• Enrollment Trends: Track enrollment patterns over time as an indirect measure of satisfaction and demand for school choice options.

5. Economic Efficiency

• Cost-Benefit Analysis: Assess the financial efficiency of school choice programs by comparing the costs of these programs to their academic and social outcomes.
• Resource Allocation: Examine how resources are allocated among public schools and schools of choice, including per-pupil spending and investment in infrastructure.

6. Long-term Outcomes

• Post-Secondary Success: Monitor the long-term success of students participating in school choice, including higher education attainment and career outcomes.
• Social Mobility: Investigate the impact of school choice on students' social mobility, especially for those from historically underserved communities.

---

Reasons to agree

1. When parents and kids are free to choose their school everyone benefits. +17
2. School choice is good. +13
3. Choice is good. +8
4. It is best to trust individuals to make decisions for their own lives. +3 
5. Its not fair that poor kids have no option but to go to failing schools.
6. Its not good for our future to have segments of our population stuck in failing schools.
7. Kids should have access to the resources and opportunities they need to succeed.

Score: +7 (reasons to agree), + 41/2 [20] (reasons to agree with reasons to agree) = 27

---

Movies that agree:

1. Waiting for "Superman" (2010): This documentary critiques the American public education system by following several students as they attempt to be accepted into a charter school. 

Movies that disagree:

1. The Public (2018): Though not directly about school choice, this movie highlights the broader societal issues contributing to the failure of public institutions, suggesting the need for systemic reform rather than alternatives like school choice. 

---

Interest of those who agree

1. Parents and Students seeking better educational opportunities.
2. Advocates for Market-Based Solutions who believe competition can improve school quality.
3. Charter and Private School Administrators who stand to gain enrollment and funding.

Interest of those who disagree

1. Public School Advocates and Educators concerned about the diversion of funds from public schools.
2. Critics of Segregation and Inequality who argue that school choice can exacerbate educational disparities.
3. Supporters of Community-Based Solutions who favor improving schools through increased funding and community involvement rather than offering alternatives that might only benefit a few. 

---

Books that agree

1. The School Choice Roadmap: 7 Steps to Finding the Right School for Your Child" by Andrew Campanella: Offers a practical guide for parents navigating school choice.
2. "Education Myths: What Special Interest Groups Want You to Believe About Our Schools--And Why It Isn't So" by Jay P. Greene: Debunks common misconceptions about public education and argues for the benefits of school choice.

Books that agree

1.  "Reign of Error: The Hoax of the Privatization Movement and the Danger to America's Public Schools" by Diane Ravitch: Critiques the movement toward privatizing public education, including arguments against school choice.
2. "Slaying Goliath: The Passionate Resistance to Privatization and the Fight to Save America's Public Schools" by Diane Ravitch: Focuses on the efforts to resist educational privatization and supports public education reform.

---

Web pages that agree

1.   Organizations like The Heritage Foundation or The Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice often publish articles and policy papers in favor of school choice, presenting it as a solution to failing schools.

Web pages that disagree

1. The National Education Association (NEA) and American Federation of Teachers (AFT) frequently outline the downsides of school choice on their platforms, focusing on its impact on public education funding and equity. 

We should build and repair transportation infrastructure.

Reasons to agree

1. We should invest in infrastructure projects critical to the national economy and its flow of goods and people, instead of funding home-district pork.

Issues / Strengthening Latin American Allies and Confronting Tyrants

We should weaken the threat of the Castro regime.

Reasons to agree

1. Castro has political prisoners. We should not sit down for coffee with dictators when they put their citizens in jail for what they think.
2. Castro helped the Soviet Union sneak nuclear weapons into Cuba. JFK had to stand up to Khrushchev in order to get them out.
3. Castro was the leader of his country for 49 years. No one should have power that long.
4. Cuba only has one party. One party government is bad.
5. Governments should not be allowed to control the media. Castro controls the media, including the internet.
6. Cubans are rarely permitted to travel abroad. This country is a cage.
7. Cubans are never permitted to create political organizations
8. At best Castro has maintained Cuba's pre-1959 level of development, but at an "extraordinary" cost to the overall welfare of Cubans.
9. When castro was in school he apparently collaborated in an attempt on a rival's life: Masferrer. (Thomas, Hugh : Cuba the Pursuit of Freedom p.523-524)
10. Castro is a liar. In 1957, Castro signed the Manifesto of the Sierra Maestra in which he agreed to call elections under the Electoral Code of 1943 within the first 18 months of his time in power and to restore all of the provisions of the Constitution of 1940 that had been suspended under Batista. Of course, he did not do this. All dictators promise to limit their power once they no longer need it, but they never do. President Bush has expanded the power of the president, but luckily, because of two term limit, he will never benefit permanently from the expanded power. Also there is the possibility that his political opponents will benefit from this expanded power, which would make him think twice about expanding them too much. I personally think Bush's expanded powers are warranted. I think that it was stupid that a warrant to wire-tap did not apply to cell phones, but I am glad that they can be checked by the balance of powers. I am glad that we have congress and the courts to challenge him.
11. Castro almost destroyed the whole planet. No joke. Millions, or perhaps billions of people almost died. Well maybe it wasn't all Castro's fault, but why would somone choose the soviet union over the united states? Anyways Castro chose the Soviet Union, and let them move nuclear weapons onto Cuba, and let them build missile launching sites... So it was the Soviet Union's fault more than Casto's, but gosh, it was close... we are talking about Billions of lives, and he rose to power, and helped cause all these problems.. over throwing the government, and holding onto power, and not following the constitution that he said he would, and then helping the soviets point nuclear weapons at America... we were the good guys, how could he have done that? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis. Castro urged Khrushchev to launch a nuclear first strike against the United States if Cuba were invaded. (Khrushchev, Nikita Sergeyevich (1962-10-27). Letter to Castro (PDF). The George Washington University. Retrieved on 2006-05-11)
12. It has been claimed by the Carthage Foundation-funded Center for a Free Cuba that an estimated 14,000 Cubans were killed in Cuban military actions abroad. Castro would send people overseas to fight in support of Marxist.
13. Just because people got along with Hitler, and Mussolini doesn't make them good people.
14. Thousands of political opponents to the Castro regime have been killed, primarily during the first decade of his leadership.138139 Some Cubans labeled "counterrevolutionaries", "fascists", or "CIA operatives" were also imprisoned in poor conditions without trial.140141 Military Units to Aid Production, or UMAPs, were labor camps established in 1965 to confine "social deviants" including homosexuals, Jehovah Witnesses to work "counter-revolutionary" influences out of certain segments of the population.142 The camps were closed in 1967 in response to international outcries.143 Professor Marifeli Pérez Stable, a Cuban immigrant and former Castro supporter has said that "There were thousands of executions, forty, fifty thousand political prisoners. The treatment of political prisoners, with what we today know about human rights and the international norms governing human rights ... it is legitimate to raise questions about possible crimes against humanity in Cuba."144
15. Castro acknowledges that Cuba holds political prisoners, but argues that Cuba is justified because these prisoners are not jailed because of their political beliefs, but have been convicted of "counter-revolutionary" crimes, including bombings. Castro portrays opposition to the Cuban government as illegitimate, and the result of an ongoing conspiracy fostered by Cuban exiles with ties to the United States or the CIA.145
16. Until 1992 Castro banned Catholics from membership in the Cuban Communist Party which was the only way to get a job and provide for your family. We cannot allow a world like this where you get jobs based on what you believe politically or religiously.
17. Until 1998 Cubans were not allowed to celebrate Christmas. Why do liberals love this guy so much? Liberals are fascist that want to control every aspect of society, just like their hero, Castro.
18. Castro promotes a cult of personality.
19. A lot of Nazis were smart. Just because Castro is smart doesn't mean he didn't almost contribute to millions of American's deaths by asking the soviet union to conduct a first strike on American cities, if things went bad in the Cuban Missel Crisis. All Castro cares about is power. He would rather have Millions of Americans die, than to have been removed from power. Castro and others say Americans are evil, but our presidents aren't willing to kill millions of people just to stay in power... they go out of power after 8 years.
20. Billboards with his picture are very common in the island.162. Castro was accused by American anarchist Sam Dolgoff of "basking in the adulation and servility of his subordinates" and "creating a regime built around the cult of the personality functions" encouraging "the illusion that only he and his select group of revolutionaries have earned the right to wield unlimited power over the people of Cuba."163 Castro has also been described as an example of the rise of a distinct "charismatic leader"164 common to developing nations, and of encouraging the "personality political regime". This theory contends that Castro has maintained power largely through highly visible, charismatic leadership and popular appeals to the Cuban people, though the administration is successful only as long as the leader's charisma lasts. Kind of like Mike Huckabee with all his appeal to the common folks, and hatred of successful people.
21. America hasn't always done well with Cuba, or South America. We have learned from our mistakes. We now want the same things that they want. We want to fight drugs. We want to fight terrorist. We want freedom of speech, we want freedom of press, we want good things on this planet. Just because we were bad in the past doesn't mean that the solution for these countries that don't like us, is to repress their people, and take away freedoms.

Reasons to disagree

1. If Canada and Europe can get along with Cuba, why can't we?
2. Castro gives longs speeches. He must be smart.

More info:

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidel_Castro
2. http://www.state.gov/p/wha/ci/14776.htm

Combating Nuclear Terrorism

• We must not allow a nuclear-9-11.
• We must not allow a nuclear Pearl Harbor.
• We should take Ahmadinejad at his word.
• We should tighten economic sanctions against Iran.
• We should isolate Iran diplomatically.
• We need to communicate to the Iranian people the dangers of being nuclear capable.
• Iran is seeking nuclear weapons.
• Iran's nuclear ambition has nothing to do with clean energy.
• We should not assume that Iran will act responsibly when they have the bomb.

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.

CHALLENGE : We are faced today with the horrific proposition that those who speak of genocide are developing the capability to carry it out. Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has made statements that Israel will be wiped off the map. It's time to face the reality of the Iranian threat, take Ahmadinejad at his word and act accordingly. Iran's ambition to develop nuclear weaponry cannot be clearer: they have a virtually inexhaustible supply of clean natural gas for energy, they have refused offers to supply nuclear fuel for their power. Obviously, their nuclear ambition has nothing to do with clean energy.

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: "Some people, of course, think that it's possible to live with a nuclear Iran. That thinking is based on the theory that Iran, once it's granted the privilege of becoming a member of the nuclear club, that it will be a responsible actor. Neither their words nor their actions justify that kind of thinking." (Governor Mitt Romney, Remarks At Yeshiva University, 4/26/2007)

CHALLENGE: The 1970 Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) was meant to prevent countries from acquiring dangerous nuclear technologies and fissile materials such as plutonium and highly enriched uranium (HEU).

However, effective enforcement of this obligation is often lacking. Consequently, countries can ignore their obligations under the NPT with little fear of sanction or penalty. Given the unstable political and economic situation in many of these counties, there is the real possibility that these nuclear technologies, fissile materials, or even fully assembled nuclear weapons, could find their way to terrorists.

Moreover, the September 11th Commission reported that al-Qaeda had been trying to acquire or build nuclear weapons for well over a decade. Former CIA Director George Tenet said that Osama bin Laden sees the acquisition of WMD as a "religious obligation."

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: "The Iranian regime threatens not only Israel, but also every other nation in the region, and ultimately the world. And that threat would take on an entirely new dimension if Iran were allowed to become a nuclear power. And just think of the signal a nuclear Iran would send to other rogue regimes with nuclear ambitions - this could be the tipping point in the development and proliferation of nuclear regimes." (Governor Mitt Romney, Remarks At The Seventh Annual Herzliya Conference, 1/23/2007)

The Romney Plan:

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

1. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. 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.

Iran’s nuclear ambition has nothing to do with clean energy.

Issues / Combating Nuclear Terrorism

Reasons to agree:

1. Iran has a virtually inexhaustible supply of clean natural gas for energy, but yet the French and Russians are building nuclear reactors for them. I wonder why?
2. Iran has refused offers from us to supply nuclear fuel for their power. I wonder why?
3. A country, like Iran, that says that Israil should be wipped off the face of the planet should not be allowed to own nuclear weapons.
4. We have no problems with Iran getting their power from Nuclear Weapons. We even said we would help them. But they want to use it for weapons, and the argument doesn't work that America has them and so everyone should be able to have them, because in the 50s everyone got together and agreed their was a balance of power between Russia and America, but if Iran gets them, then Saudia Arabia has to get them, and if they get them, Egypt has to get them, and if Egypt gets them their enemies get have to get them, and so everyone signed an agreement that no one else would get them. But Iran complains that Israil has them. Yes, but Israil does not talk about killing it neighbors. Israil did not start any war.

Reasons to disagree:

1. For the same reason that the US encouraged and supported Iran's nuclear program in the first place - because Iran needs to export oil and gas rather than use it at home (Gas is used mostly to repressurize the oil fields, btw)
2. Because Iran has every right to use its own resources for its own benefit and doesn't need to become reliant on foreign energy suppliers.

Jihadism is this century’s nightmare. What do you think?

Reasons to disagree

1. More people die from alcohol than terrorism. 85,000 people die each year because of alcohol Link
   1. 5% of all deaths from diseases of the circulatory system are attributed to alcohol.
   2. 15% of all deaths from diseases of the respiratory system are attributed to alcohol.
   3. 30% of all deaths from accidents caused by fire and flames are attributed to alcohol.
   4. 30% of all accidental drownings are attributed to alcohol.
   5. 30% of all suicides are attributed to alcohol.
   6. 40% of all deaths due to accidental falls are attributed to alcohol.
   7. 45% of all deaths in automobile accidents are attributed to alcohol.
   8. 60% of all homicides are attributed to alcohol.
   9. 100,000 deaths. That's more than a statistic. That is 100,000 individuals with faces. 100,000 individuals with lives not fully lived. 100,000 individuals grieved by mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, and children. Every year.
2. An aggressive China that is willing to kill thousands of people in order to expand, would be this century's nightmare.

Reasons to agree

1. Jihadist are the only people who would use a nuclear weapon.
2. A nuclear weapon would destroy men, women, children. It would destroy homes, and make property un-usable for thousands of years.
3. Some of the people who die from Alcohol, are just killing themselves. Those who would be killed from a nuclear bomb, would be mostly innocent.
4. There can be more than one nightmare. China could go bad, but Jihadism is more likely to.

Below you will see an e-mail I recieved, along with my response:

4.      False. Obama turns 47 on August 4, and if elected would be the 5th youngest person to be president. In fact he will be over 4 years older than Teddy Roosevelt was when he was sworn in after McKinley's assassination, and older than JFK, Clinton, and Grant were when elected. Where are you getting your facts?

Obama would be tied for the 2nd youngest person to be elected president.

Reasons to agree

1. Teddy Roosevelt is the youngest person ever to become President, but he became President at age 42 after the assassination of President McKinley. He was not elected president. People never said, we are comfortable with someone this young being president.
2. JFK was 44. Clinton was 47. Obama would be 47.

Teddy Roosevelt, JFK, and Clinton were more experienced than Obama.

Reasons to agree

1. Harry Truman was right when he said that JFK was too young.
2. Barak's only jobs before becoming elected to the senate were an associate attorney for 3 years, a lecturer of constitutional law for 11 years and a state senator 8 years
3. Teddy Roosevelt was Vice President before he became President.
4. Before TR became Vice President, he served as (1) Governor or New York, (2) Assistant Secretary of the Navy, (3) an Army Lieutenant Colonel and Colonel who organized and led his "Rough Riders" during the Spanish-American War, (4) president of the Board of New York City Police Commissioners, (5) a United States Civil Service Commissioner and (6) a New York State Assemblyman who wrote more bills than any other New York state legislator.
5. Wikipedia: "Roosevelt became president of the board of New York City Police Commissioners in 1895. During the two years he held this post, Roosevelt radically reformed the police department. The police force was reputed as one of the most corrupt in America. NYPD's history division records Roosevelt was, 'an iron-willed leader of unimpeachable honesty, (who) brought a reforming zeal to the New York City Police Commission in 1895.'Roosevelt and his fellow commissioners established new disciplinary rules, created a bicycle squad to police New York's traffic problems and standardized the use of pistols by officers. Roosevelt implemented regular inspections of firearms, annual physical exams, appointed 1,600 new recruits based on their physical and mental qualifications and not on political affiliation, opened the department to ethnic minorities and women, established meritorious service medals, and shut down corrupt police hostelries."

Barack's no TR, JFK, or even BC

Michael Gaynor Michael Gaynor
January 29, 2008

When Ted Kennedy enthusiastically endorsed Barack Hussein Obama for President of the United States, Ted (1) chided Harry Truman for saying that JFK was too young in 1960 and (2) proclaimed that Barack is a bit older than Teddy Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy and Bill Clinton, when they became President.

What Ted (and the media) ignored is that Harry Truman had a point. The Cuban Missile Crisis resulted from Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev's impression, as a result of the Bay of Pigs fiasco and a personal meeting with JFK in Vienna, that JFK would not be strong enough to keep the Soviet Union from installing long-range nuclear missiles in Cuba. Yes, JFK got those missiles out, after taking the world to the brink of nuclear war, and only gave up some American missiles in Turkey in the bargain. But the truth is that JFK was NOT ready to be President on Day One, as the Bay of Pigs fiasco itself conclusively demonstrated. Instead of a successful operation, or no operation, JFK bungled the long-planned liberation of Cuba from the dictatorship of Fidel Castro as badly as possible: by allowing the attack to begin and then denying air cover to the would-be Cuban liberators.

In addition, Barack is no TR, or JFK, or even Bill Clinton.

Barack was an associate attorney with Miner, Barnhill & Galland (three years), a lecturer of constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School (eleven years) and an Illinois state senator (eight years) before being elected to the United States Senate in 2004.

Teddy Roosevelt is the youngest person ever to become President. He became President at age 42 after the assassination of President McKinley.

Right, TR was Vice President before he became President.

Before TR became Vice President, he served as (1) Governor or New York, (2) Assistant Secretary of the Navy, (3) an Army Lieutenant Colonel and Colonel who organized and led his "Rough Riders" during the Spanish-American War, (4) president of the Board of New York City Police Commissioners, (5) a United States Civil Service Commissioner and (6) a New York State Assemblyman who wrote more bills than any other New York state legislator.

Wikipedia: "Roosevelt became president of the board of New York City Police Commissioners in 1895. During the two years he held this post, Roosevelt radically reformed the police department. The police force was reputed as one of the most corrupt in America. NYPD's history division records Roosevelt was, 'an iron-willed leader of unimpeachable honesty, (who) brought a reforming zeal to the New York City Police Commission in 1895.'Roosevelt and his fellow commissioners established new disciplinary rules, created a bicycle squad to police New York's traffic problems and standardized the use of pistols by officers. Roosevelt implemented regular inspections of firearms, annual physical exams, appointed 1,600 new recruits based on their physical and mental qualifications and not on political affiliation, opened the department to ethnic minorities and women, established meritorious service medals, and shut down corrupt police hostelries."

Barack surely is no TR!

Like TR, JFK was the second son of Joseph P. Kennedy and, as such, very well prepared for the Presidency, especially after his older brother, Joseph, died in World War II. A war hero himself, JFK served after the war as a Congressman (six years) and a United States Senator (eight years) before being elected America's second youngest President.

Barack is no JFK.

Bill Clinton, America's third youngest President, served as a University of Arkansas law professor, Attorney General (two years) and Governor of Arkansas (twelve years) before being elected President in 1992.

Barack is no Bill Clinton either.

5.      "Obama has never accomplished anything outside of the classroom." What is this supposed to mean? He has state senator, US senator, a successful attorney, director of a successful community development program in chicago, and held several different non-academic positions prior to going to Law School. He is a father, and a husband. How can you possibly say he has never accomplished anything outside of the classroom. Please back up your statement.

I assumed you would understand that I mean Obama has never accomplished anything NOTWORTHY outside of the classroom. Of course obama has accomplished somethings. All human beings have become potty trained, and done all sorts of crap. My point was, and I think you will have to agree, that Obama has never done anything noteworthy. You mention that Obama was a state senator? Is this noteworthy? If it is, then every senator should run for president. You know how many state senators there are? Small states like Idaho have perhaps a hundred of them... I bet there are thousands of state senators...

6.      "Obama has never had a job in the marketplace." See above. He worked at Eldridge Hayne's Business International Corporation, and it was not an internship.  If Romney can use his time in France as experience that contributes to his candidacy, why can't Obama use a post-collegiate job?

Good point. The point I was thinking of is that Obama has never done anything useful. I do not consider being a civil rights attorney useful. I do not think lawyers contribute to society, but that is a personal opinion. I think most people would agree with you that working as a lawyer prepares you for president about as much as Romney's experience overseas, but come on...your angers is not worth this SMALL, SMALL, SMALL point. You have to agree with me, if you have any credabilty, that working for a law firm does not qualify you to be president. 

7.      "Obama has never run an organization." He was president of the Harvard Law Review, which is pretty much like being the head of a major magazine, only held to a higher standard. He ran Developing Communities Project in Chicago. If you know anything about how government offices work you would know that running a Senate office is pretty much like running a business. There is a staff, there is a budget, you hire, you fire. And of course a presidential campaign is an incredible organization.

Senators have staff of 2 to 6 people, as far as I know. Obama does not run his presidential campaign. He has a campaign manager. Does everyone who runs for president, automatically have the experience you need to run for president, because running for president, qualifies you to be president. You really are an idiot.

8-12 See above. Senator is the boss. Director is the boss. President is the boss.
13-14. I love that your supporting "facts" for why Obama isn't experienced is "Obama just isn't experienced".  This is brilliant logic.

I am not a Bill Maher fan either, but not all experience is equal.  So Bush had 8 years of political experience, at the state level.  Obama had 7 years at the state level in the Illinois senate (also a very populous state, representing part of the 3rd largest city in the country), plus will have had 4 years in the US Senate.  Bush had 8 years of executive branch experience, Barack 0.  

A governor is not in the executive branch.

Barack has 4 years of foreign policy experience, Bush 0 at that time (same as Romney).

?

 I think the point that Maher is making (poorly, I admit) is that there is no broad brush of "experience" than can be painted onto candidates.  There are no specific pre-req's for the presidency (other than age, citizenship and US Birth), so to say one candidate is more experienced than another is not a simple issue of addition.  If that were the case then we would all just vote for the most "experienced" candidate, McCain

Romney is more experienced than Barak Obama. Romney balanced the budget in Massachusetts, without raising taxes. Romney turned around the Olympics, when they were in debt, just a few months after September 11th. Romney has experience in the marketplace. He made companies give him money, in order for Romney to tell them what to do, in order to fix themselves. Obama worked with a criminal, who ran slum housing in Chicago. What good did Obama accomplish? How many people did he get houses for? What did he accomplish?

Obama is naïve

Obama quotes JFK that we should never negotiate out of fear, but that we should never fear to negotiate. He then says that he would have one on one meetings with the president of Iran. Like a lot of things Barak says, this is very idealist and naïve.

It is not fear that keeps us from negotiating with the president of Iran, but honor. The president of Iran kills intellectuals, tortures political opponents, crushes anyone who writes something in a newspaper or blog that is seen as criticizing him.  You don't sit down for a photo-opportunity and coffee with THE GUY who supports Hezbollah, funds insurgents in Iraq, denies the old holocaust, but promises a brand new holocaust.  

It is honor for the dead that he has killed and wants to kill that keeps us from speaking to the president of Iran. It is respect for the political prisoners that have been silenced that keeps us from having a photo-op with the president of Iran. It is respect for a free press that keeps us from having coffee with the president of Iran. It is HOPE for a future that is not dominated by religious extremest, that keeps us from meeting with the president of Iran. It is not fear.

Obama is naïve

Obama quotes JFK that we should never negotiate out of fear, but that we should never fear to negotiate. He then says that he would have one on one meetings with the president of Iran. Like a lot of things Barak says, this is very idealist and naïve.

It is not fear that keeps us from negotiating with the president of Iran, but honor. The president of Iran kills intellectuals, tortures political opponents, crushes anyone who writes something in a newspaper or blog that is seen as criticizing him.  You don't sit down for a photo-opportunity and coffee with THE GUY who supports Hezbollah, funds insurgents in Iraq, denies the old holocaust, but promises a brand new holocaust.  

It is honor for the dead that he has killed and wants to kill that keeps us from speaking to the president of Iran. It is respect for the political prisoners that have been silenced that keeps us from having a photo-op with the president of Iran. It is respect for a free press that keeps us from having coffee with the president of Iran. It is HOPE for a future that is not dominated by religious extremest, that keeps us from meeting with the president of Iran. It is not fear.

Final note

Mormon in America

You should put photos from your kids birthday on the same page

James came on week 39. They induced Alison and Phil 3 weeks early 37

James
I was at work, at McDonalds. Megan was also at work. She went to the Dr. for her check up and they told her to go to the hospital. We met at home. I think it was raining. I talking about how Condi Rice might run for president. Megan got an epidermal.

Look at that forehead! Me 1977

James, July 2004

And then there were 3. 2004. 

Alison
Alison was 6 lb, 15 oz when she was born. She had blondish-red-ish-brownish hair. 90% length, 75% weight for her age. 3 or 4:35. Snowing during the delivery.

Watched Wayne's World (Based in Aurora Illinois), Best Friend's Wedding, and a little of the Simpsons while we waited.

Our son stayed at a friend's from Church, and I came home and watched him, and brought the dog out of the garage this evening...

Of our 3 kids, Megan says that Alison was the easiest to deliver by far.

Megan high on pain medicine and so happy to have her little girl.

Not sure if I should share this sort of messy photos? 

Philip
Philip was our most difficult baby so far. Megan went into active labor 3 months early. The doctor said that if they were unable to stop the pregnancy, that he would have only a 40% chance of living, and then there would be developmental issues. 

They gave Megan a steroid to help his lungs develop. They kept her in the hospital for 2 weeks while they monitored her contractions. It was very scary for a while. After about 2 weeks they sent her home to be on bed rest. Luckily he was able to make it to full term, and he is very big and tough.

Alison changed when Megan had to stay in the Hospital for 2 weeks,
and was on bed rest for 2-1/2 months. She was going through some major
separation anxiety or something. She was so happy to see Megan. 

2010. James loves his little brother so much, and was happy to bring him home. 

And then there were 5

Laub, boy

Putting the Pressure on for Mitt in Illinois!

A Super Day for Mitt

Don't let this happen--vote Mitt!

The brilliant Michael Ramirez.

Come on Illinois!!!

California is going for Mitt---come on Illinois!!

The Trend is Real: Conservatives Rally

Very Close

Today, Romney for President launched its newest web ad, "Very Close."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usBERI87bBA

In 2008, the Republican Party needs a nominee who can debate Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) on the important issues confronting our nation today.  "Very Close" highlights how Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and Sen. Clinton actually agree on more issues than not.  We need "a full-spectrum conservative" like Governor Mitt Romney who can provide a clear conservative contrast with Sen. Clinton.
Script For "Very Close" (WEB:30):

ANNOUNCER:  "Is John McCain really the heart and soul of the Republican Party?
"Imagine a debate between McCain and Hillary Clinton.
"On amnesty for illegal immigrants, they agree.
"On voting against President Bush's tax cuts, they agree.
"On imposing an additional 50 cents a gallon cost on gasoline, they agree.
"On blocking conservative judges, they agree.
"Even Bill Clinton says…"

FORMER PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON:  " 'She and John McCain are very close.'"

ANNOUNCER:  "Don't we need a leader who agrees with conservatives?"

GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY: "I'm Mitt Romney and I approved this message."

AD FACTS For "Very Close" (WEB:30):

ANNOUNCER:  "Is John McCain really the heart and soul of the Republican Party?  Imagine a debate between McCain and Hillary Clinton.  On amnesty for illegal immigrants, they agree."

Sen. McCain And Sen. Clinton Both Voted For The 2006 Senate Amnesty Bill. "Passage of the bill that would overhaul U.S. immigration policies and offer a path to citizenship for most illegal immigrants in the country. It would subdivide illegal immigrants into three groups based on how long they had been in the United States. Illegal immigrants in the country more than five years would be able to stay and earn citizenship; those here between two and five years would have three years to file paperwork for a temporary work visa, after which they would be eligible for permanent legal residency; and those here less than two years would have to return to their native country and go through normal channels if they want to return. It would create a guest worker program that could accommodate an additional 200,000 immigrants a year. It also would authorize increased border security and enforcement provisions, including a requirement for businesses to verify documents of all prospective employees through an electronic system managed by the Department of Homeland Security." (S. 2611, CQ Vote #157: Passed 62-36: R 23-32; D 38-4; I 1-0, 5/25/06, McCain And Clinton Voted Yea)

Sen. Clinton: Immigration Legislation Must Have A "Path To Legalization" For The 12 Million Illegal Immigrants Here.  "Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York said she was disappointed that the Senate did not move forward with its immigration bill and that the cornerstone of any future measure must be a 'path to legalization' for the 12 million undocumented immigrants already here." (Eunice Moscoso, "Democrats Promise Immigration Reform," Cox News Service, 6/30/07)

Sen. McCain Still Supports His Immigration Plan For A "Path To Citizenship." QUESTION: "But fundamentally, I'm wondering, don't you still have the same plan for a path to citizenship that you fundamentally held months ago?" MCCAIN: "Sure." (ABC/WMUR, Republican Presidential Candidate Debate, Manchester, NH, 1/5/08; www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LbTSe6uLqI)
ANNOUNCER:  "On voting against President Bush's tax cuts, they agree."

In 2001, Sen. McCain And Sen. Clinton Both Voted Against The $1.35 Trillion Tax Cut. The bill lowered marginal rates, eliminated the marriage penalty, and doubled the child tax credit. (H.R. 1836, CQ Vote #170: Adopted 58-33: R 46-2; D 12-31; I 0-0, 5/26/01, McCain And Clinton Voted Nay)

In 2003, Sen. McCain And Sen. Clinton Each Cast Two Votes Against The $350 Billion Tax Cut. The comprehensive bill lowered taxes by $350 billion over 11 years – including increasing the child tax credit and eliminated the marriage penalty. (H.R. 2, CQ Vote #179: Passed 51-49: R 48-3; D 3-45; I 0-1, 5/15/03, McCain And Clinton Voted Nay; H.R. 2, CQ Vote #196: Adopted 50-50: R 48-3; D 2-46; I 0-1, 5/23/03, McCain And Clinton Voted Nay)

ANNOUNCER:  "On imposing an additional 50 cents a gallon cost on gasoline, they agree."

McCain-Lieberman Would Dramatically Raise Taxes On All Carbon-Based Fuels, Like Gas For Your Car And Home Heating Oil. "What is not widely understood is that [Sen. McCain] is currently sponsoring legislation that, in the name of fighting global warming, would dramatically raise the tax on all carbon-based fuels, including gasoline, home heating oil, coal, and to a lesser extent, natural gas." (Roy Cordato, "McCain's Costly Tax On Energy," National Review, www.nationalreview.com, Posted 1/10/08)

American Council For Capital Formation Study: McCain-Lieberman Could Hike Gasoline Prices By 50 Cents Per Gallon.  "A study by an economic research institute, the American Council for Capital Formation, underscored these findings, estimating that under S. 139: … By 2020, gasoline prices would increase 30 to 50 cents per gallon."  (H. Sterling Burnett, "Regulating Greenhouse Gas Emissions," National Center For Policy Analysis, 11/18/04)

Sen. Hillary Clinton Has Co-Sponsored McCain-Lieberman. CLINTON: "And we were debating the McCain-Lieberman Bill, which I'm a proud co-sponsor, to try and do something with CO2." (Sen. Hillary Clinton, Remarks At The 17th Annual Energy Efficiency Forum, Washington, DC, 6/14/06)

 

ANNOUNCER:  "On blocking conservative judges, they agree."

Sen. McCain Joined Democrats In The Gang Of 14 And Stopped Sen. Bill Frist From Banning Filibusters. "An effort that started as little more than hallway talk and phone conversations led to a last-minute deal May 23 that stopped Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist's plans to engineer a ruling the next day to bar filibusters of judicial nominations. A group that became known as the 'gang of 14' – seven Republicans and seven Democrats promised to vote against any such change as long as Democrats swore off future judicial filibusters in all but extraordinary cases. That unified promise had the effect of denying Frist the votes he needed to ban the practice altogether." (David Nather, "Senate Races Against The Nuclear Clock On Judges," Congressional Quarterly Weekly, 5/28/05)

Sen. Clinton Was "Certainly Supportive" Of The Gang Of 14. CNN'S JUDY WOODRUFF: "Some people have noted that you chose not to be part of the group that announced the compromise, that worked on the compromise. The Gang of 14. Should somebody make anything of that?" CLINTON: "No. I think that this was a process that a couple of my colleagues started, you know, some weeks ago after Senator Reid could not reach any understanding with Senator Frist. And I thought they were pursuing a noble effort. I didn't know whether they would be successful or not, but I was, you know, certainly supportive of their efforts to try." (CNN's "Inside Politics," 5/26/05)

ANNOUNCER:  "Even Bill Clinton says…"  FORMER PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON:  "'She and John McCain are very close.'"  ANNOUNCER:  "Don't we need a leader who agrees with conservatives?"  GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY: "I'm Mitt Romney and I approved this message."

Former President Clinton: Sens. Clinton And McCain "Are Very Close." "'She and John McCain are very close,' [President Bill] Clinton said. 'They always laugh that if they wound up being the nominees of their party, it would be the most civilized election in American history, and they're afraid they'd put the voters to sleep because they like and respect each other.'" (Alexander Mooney, "Bill Clinton: John McCain And Hillary Are 'Very Close'," CNN's Political Ticker, http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com, Posted 1/25/08)

Mitt on the Move!

FredHeads for Romney