Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance (102147) | |||
Home > OTChat | |||
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance |
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Tue Feb 28 00:40:19 2006, in response to Re: Subtalk politics: at a glance, posted by Train Dude on Mon Feb 27 21:34:12 2006. (Not stated here means agreement.)Gun Control: FOR, so long as the law is written so that criminals can't get their hands on it. HOWEVER, that is a huge slippery slope if you ask me. However, the problem is that police need to be given more power in getting guns off the street through a reduction in the threshold of weapons needed to land a maximum sentence. We do not need more Andrewses and Nemorins, good guys cut down by thugs. Abortion Choice (convenience): AGAINST, assuming that contraception works. If not, then during the first 19 weeks only. Stem Cell Research (Embryonic): Another question I pose. If an embryo is aborted (prior to differentiation and compaction---look up embryonic development if I am confusing you, my apologies), should the woman be given the option of donating the embryo to science? As for the port sale, I am leaning against, but only slightly, partially because of a conflict of interest in who approved it---John W. Snow. (Snow approved a sale of parts of his former company, CSX, to Dubai Ports World last year.) Have the AG and solicitor general (or ombudsman, if there is one) looked at this sale to ensure that everything is on the up-and-up? Patriot Act: FOR, so long as sneaky legislation isn't attached to it. Social Security: The system is broke. But again, Congress needs to listen to the GAO and fight special interests to get the RIGHT formula. Creation in Schools: STRONGLY AGAINST!!! We do not need to be teaching religion in the public schools. Private schools can do what they please. (I myself am a product of the parochial schools.) ADD: Independent ombudsman panel, four judges, one each to be appointed by the Majority and Minority leader of the House and Senate, subject to full Senate approval. This, I would strongly be for. (Such a bipartisan panel would require at least 3 of 4 votes to approve ALL government contracts, and would only be allowed to examine the contract based on possibilities of abuses for waste, and not show a partisan tilt, and to ensure that all contractors strictly abide by laws. In addition, eliminate no-bid contracts. (If Halliburton is the low bidder for a contract, then they get the contract, provided all terms are fulfilled. However, all contractors would be on an even playing field.)) Said panel should also have the authority to issue fines for noncompliance, again, 3 of 4 or all must concur. (3 of 4 ensures that any move is nonpartisan.) |