constitutionalive

As so many news commentators have said, there's 6 for one, half a dozen for the other, and ne'er the twain can meet.

SHAME IS, the other democratic party candidates were shoved out of the campaign too early on so that the choice is by default left to two candidates with very large handicaps [no discrimination against disabled intended].

John Edwards has a lovely wife and no "unsavoury" history; he has understanding of agriculture/farming and where to draw the US Constitution line between big business and the Individual.

Howard Dean...could you stop "solomon's blade cutting the baby into two" to satisfy both mothers ? ?
Could you, Mr Dean, get these two candidates to both take a step aside and position a true unifying person in the leading position, with these two volunteering for appropriate cabinet et al. positions to enable the two of them to give the country the best of what they do know/can do, and leave the unifying bit to someone more capable ?

The USA cannot endure another four years of milton-friedman/adam-smith economics-driven policies in the face of the current and impending world and national crises and problems; and let's face it, poor John McCain would never dare do anything else but that.

Can we please please please find a way to take a step back and put the nation and it's needs first, and put a more appropriate and more capable unifying person back into the presidential campaign ? posted 04/28/2008 at 11:26:14

Oil is not going to get cheaper, so what is the massive energy policy changes the USA needs to make in order to restore national financial stability ? Other nations have been making policies to foster the appropriate changes since the early 1990's, but neither the clintons nor the bushes would listen even when the leaders pleaded and warned. Other nations are far in advance of the USA in establishing wind power, investing in alternative energy research, considering short-term solutions such as building more nuclear energy plants to solve the energy crisis at the 20-year-out point. New businesses to advance energy conservation and use of alternative energy have been aggressively supported by other nations' policies. BUT BUT BUT no one has discussed the dilemma we all should face: that computerizaton sucks up electricity/energy and thereby drains energy availability for such important things as heat, food production, water-sewer management, lighting. What happens when USA is forced to choose between heating homes of low-middle income or maintaining the 68-72-degree temperature requirement plus electricity to run supercomputers and millions pc's et al high tech of large corporations ? ? Will the clintonite ethic rule, i.e.," the many must pay the price for the few to advance ?" or, will the reganite-bushes ethic reign supreme, i.e., "there is no such thing as society, only a marketplace" in which case, business needs come first, people without sufficient funds to survive economic darwinism struggle/die off ? ? posted 04/21/2008 at 12:06:44

Folks over 35....remember when the USA was a country of a different culture but more financially strong/ stable, with more future potential, well-respected throughout the world.The clintons made their contribution to the milton-friedman-led economic policies and policy-favoritism of the upper middle class few which destroyed the USA economically/savaged the lower/lower middle class USA in conjunction with the Reagan and Bushes administrations which asserted policies upon the premise that "there is no such thing as societies, only a marketplace". Now, USA intelligent are agreeing with George Soros' opinion that the milton-friedman extremism is not only morally wrong and antithettical to US Constitutional Democracy, it is economically flawed, having produced cataclysmic financial ruin of financial institutions with more to come. Whle Mrs Clinton stated "she is not her husband", who on earth would believe her husband's former administration's ideas and polciies would not sneak back into the USA economy and financial culture through the back door ? Or, who would believe McCain would defy his political party/stray far from the milton-friedman-based-reaganite polcies ? We are left with Obama, and the desperate hope that he has the brains he sells in campaign speeches and the wisdom to gather expertise from former leaders of nations who have successfully sailed the globalization et al. winds of change overtaking the globe, e.g. Brown, Chiraq, et al. The real question is, what policies need to be created/re-established to save the USA whole nation? posted 04/21/2008 at 11:50:16

Since Maria is "lost", I suggest a keen intellect, e.g., Chalie Rose/PBS carry the Shriver ball for the USA by summarizing all of CRS "wise guests' " opinions for USA future success. George Soros chastises US Gov't leaders for being entrenched in wrong political doctrines; Pete Pete Peterson wants to cut all entitlements now ! [what happens to USA economy when elimination of entitlements produces mass bankruptcy/impoverishment/illness/homelessness of the aging?!] Okay, Charlie Rose, ENVISION THE BIG PICTURE FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE: As Soros says, US Gov't MUST embrace appropriate regulation, re-establish TRUE affordable housing [collapsing mortgages were partly caused by obscenely priced average and sub-standard houses! out of sync with wages !] PBS' TS Reid/Frontline this week explained first that USA MUST have a universal healthcare system/offered visions of healthcare systems of other countries which work well/cost less than current US version. Then, the myriad of other social programs which must be restored to JFK/LBJ integrity/levels lifting everyone up to the middle middle class, advancing education which will advance business, science and innovation, and subsidizing the farmers to ensure a stable/affordable food supply for all; i.e., we need Mr Shriver's visions/plans/programs ...NOW...in the USA ...so USA may invest wisely in herself/slingshot out of recession with advanced learning, healthy workers/population, effective, efficient and appropriate social support programs to advance the USA in 21st c. version of world/challenges. posted 04/17/2008 at 12:27:08

Dear God, have mercy on us and help us ! HOW can any non-iraqui qualify to label 'normalcy' in Iraq ? or in anyone else's country for that matter ! And WHY is a US presidential candidate focusing on defining cultural norms for any other country, especially a country whose culture is so utterly diffierent and incomprehensible to all but its own people ?! Mr McCain and the rest of the political candidates 'gang' need to focus on restoring/re-establishing USA Constitutional Democracy Culture, which is MORE than enough to fully occupy ANYone's time for a full 4+ years ! The USA's government is very costly because the USA national "culture and society" has utterly collapsed so that all that is left is the broken down illusion of a nation unified by common interests which form a common culture. Upon discovering the rising costs of governance of the USA, politicos of both democratic and republican parties agree on one thing, "cut the costs of good governance [they argue 'to heck' Individual rights/interests; with "by-for-of the people", was never "real anyway; FF's always meant to establish an absolute-rule-republic of states rights, not Individual's rights" !] posted 04/07/2008 at 11:47:10

Dear Louise in Missouri, et al.,
While there is no defense for murdering innocent people, had y'all watched/listened to the any US et al. news interviewers and those in the know such as Charlie Rose on PBS, you would know that the mindset of the ALQuaeda terrorists is far more serious and well thought out than most could imagine. Please educate yourself, do not provoke terrorism with ignorance which only proves THEIR points and justifications. posted 04/07/2008 at 11:58:04

Bill Clinton is detested BECAUSE HE CHOSE A SEGMENT OF US PEOPLE AND TARGETED THEM FOR SUCCESS WHILE TESTIFYING TO A NEWS REPORTED JUST MONTHS BEFORE THE END OF HIS SECOND TERM OF FFICE THAT "Many people had to pay the PRICE FOR THE few TO GET AHEAD IN USA".
The issue is not that 80% of Americans think the USA is on the wrong track; the world knows the USA has fallen off the rails. The issue is WHAT TRACK SHOULD THE USA BE ON AND WHICH POTENTIAL LEADERS HAVE THE EXPERTISE TO PUT THE USA ON THE RIGHT TRACK. Hillary Clinton's poor memory of her First Lady safe trip to Bosnia implies that under genuine duress of trying to repath the USA, Hillary just wouldn't have the breadth and depth of thought/mind vital to creating/asserting a migration path to a successful restoration of the USA and appropriate new pathways in the 21st century world future.Of course, John McCain indeed would NOT divert sufficiently from the Bush/bush republicanism leadership path in order to put the USA on a proper and appropriate success path to restore the USA and align the USA for success in the 21st century world.And yes, Obama says the right words, but does he understand what their significance is in relation to where the USA and the world currently is in order to develop and lead a migration path for the USA to gradually evolve onto the 'right track' ? posted 04/04/2008 at 11:39:40

Perhaps "too early" is slightly relevant, i.e., UK campaigning for MP's by law can start only 6 weeks ahead of the election, with a required "platform" of policy promises being stated/given to the people [which are continually measured by the UK Press/Media for delivery on those promises after candidates are elected, and if the elected one "fails" to deliver on campaign promises, he/she is hounded into compliance or out of office, whichever the candidate/party comits to...].

Perhaps, Mr Dean, "it is what it is", i.e., neither candidate is the best possible candidate with the best possible policies platform promises relative to the actual very grave crises the country is imminently experiencing, certain to experience within the next 1-15 years. Interesting news interview yesterday noted that money poured into Iraq war would have bailed out social security, medicare, medicaid for every person in the USA for the next 50? years. Perhaps the shortcomings of both these candidates suggests a need for new candidates; someone yesterday mentioned Al Gore [ to address overwhelming climate-change weather crises, natural disasters, food and water shortages. I believe John Edwards would be excellent VP running mate, understanding the essence of the US Constitution and the need to protect US agriculture/food in a 21st century world of food and water shortages !! [need we be reminded that US food and energy independence/abundance was a major cause of winning WWII !] posted 03/28/2008 at 11:51:46

Dems need to unite around a good solution to US grave problems/imminent crises: what will US voters want from a candidate when world food/water shortages hit home in USA ? Who can save the nation from such catastrophe ? Should we not look at Nobel Prize winner, Al Gore, CERTAINLY "appropriately experienced for the presidency [republicans, christians, which would you rather have, money in your pockets or food/water on your tables ?] THINK of consequences of food/water shortages [todays republicans, unlike Eisenhower, are incapable of envisioning consequences since their attitude is "nothing is real unless their accountant says it is so"] ...how would republicans protect themselves from global illnesses, crime and violence which would certainly follow such shortages;organized crime would create a black market for food/water which only the wealthy could afford but which trade would be as dangerous as trading with drug lords ! Any republican who remembers Eisenhower's wisdom must seek to support a presidential candidate who could preempt such devastations which collapse nations and annihiliate cultures/societies;John McCain may be the best republican candidate the party has, but surely, Al Gore has a better comprehension of the problems of food/water shortages. John Edwards has the best understanding the essence of US Constitution, i.e., assertion of rights of The Individual over any government as the definition of American democracy. Perhaps an Al Gore pres candidate, a John McCain VP candidate, and a John Edwards US AG ...could indeed re-unite the nation ? posted 03/28/2008 at 12:19:44

Indeed...but perhaps neither clinton nor obama is the right choice; why not edwards and gore? posted 03/31/2008 at 12:27:18