The Race for S.C. Attorney General: Who Will Put the Joker Away?
While the feet of gubernatorial candidates are shuffling as controversy rises like smoke from a burning Rome, another race is a lot quieter but just as important. This race is for Attorney General of South Carolina. There are three candidates as many of you know: Alan Wilson, Leighton Lord, and Robert Bolchoz. All three of these guys are great people. They all know law like they know their wives. They would all do a great job at putting bad guys behind bars. The problem is, South Carolina needs one Attorney General, not three. Let’s get down to business.
I will immediately knock Bolchoz out of the race. He doesn’t have the name recognition or the likability factor to garner the votes this Tuesday. His polling hasn’t been very good and his message has come across as extreme to many. While many agree with him on most issues, his positions would be better suited towards a run for Congress.
I can confidently say this race is between two people: Wilson and “The” Lord. Following in the footsteps of two incredible Attorney Generals, Henry McMaster and Charlie Condon, is going to be quite difficult. What many thought would be hard for McMaster became quite simple. His impressive and almost legendary work against sex offenders has put his predecessor, Charlie Condon, in Columbia’s shadows. The question is: who can take over this office and make McMaster look “average”? Is that even possible?
Leighton Lord touts his experience running triathlons. He uses this as an outreach to kids. When he talked about this experience and his outreach, his hopes were to show how much effort he has put into caring about South Carolina children. Isn’t that nice? However, while “The” Lord has been running triathlons and reaching out to underprivileged kids, Alan Wilson has had his own outreach program.
See, Alan Wilson knows a thing or two about running. He ran as bullets were shot his way in Iraq. He protected Iraqi children from the harsh dictatorship they were used to. He protected kids in Iraq who, compared to America’s underprivileged, were much worse off. Alan put his life on the line as he ran and deflected bullets for children. He doesn’t have to run a triathlon to prove he would protect children in South Carolina, he just puts on his camouflage and shows his medals.
The next experience factor is with prosecuting. Leighton Lord worked in Washington and did a great job putting away “Asian” gangs. He hopes to put “Asian” gangs away in South Carolina too since there is such a problem with them (news to many of us). Leighton was a hard fighter against organized crime and he is a brilliant attorney. There is no question as to his incredible skills, he is truly brilliant. He touts his experience working with prosecutors and telling them what to do while in Washington.
Alan Wilson, on the other hand, knows what the role of a prosecutor is because he was one. Leighton has never prosecuted a case to put a bad guy away. Alan has been assistant attorney general and has helped a “GREAT” attorney General put sex offenders behind bars. Alan didn’t have to work for a Senate Committee, even though he could have, to know about being a prosecutor. He has seen the worst of violence whether in Iraq or on our dangerous streets. Alan has gotten his hands dirty for the people of our state and our World. He knows the only effective way to stop crime is to cut it at crime’s throat. If you don’t believe me, believe the sixty prosecutors around the state that have endorsed him with open arms. Sixty!
Leighton Lord often talks about knowing the proper roles people should play and directing them to do so. He knows what but Alan Wilson knows what and how. Leighton may be a great lawyer who can negotiate a questionable deal with Boeing, but Alan Wilson is a worker than won’t always delegate, he will do. .
Finally, no offense to veterans, Leighton Lord reminds me a lot of the war in Vietnam. It was fought with a bunch of people in Washington that were far away from the battle. They said what to do, but they didn’t know how. This turned out to be a terrible disaster as you may remember. Alan Wilson is an example of the brave men that fought that war, not the bureaucrats that tried to run it. He knows what and he knows how to win no matter the situation. We do not need any more quagmires now do we? Whether he is under fire or is putting a sex offender behind bars, Alan knows how to make us safer.
Many say Alan is “too young and inexperienced.” I have also heard, “this isn’t Alan’s time yet; it’s Leighton’s turn.” But I ask a simple question. Had MANY Republicans not said, “It isn’t ______’s (fill in 2008 Presidential Candidate other than McCain) time yet; it’s McCain’s turn,” our country would be freer and a lot safer right now.
Let’s not make the same mistake many made back in 2008. Even if Alan is young, he has the experience to protect each and every South Carolinian. He has done it on the battlefield and in the court room. His opponent knows how to direct and be a lawyer. But South Carolina doesn’t need another bureaucrat and just another lawyer. South Carolina needs a leader and a fighter too. I hate to say it, but this is something “The” Lord knows little about when it comes to working outside of his law practice.
After knowing, working with, and walking with Alan’s father, Congressman Joe Wilson, I know the set of values and integrity Alan has. He comes from a father that has fought for his country and stood up for his people, even when it was unpopular, against a corrupt President. Alan isn’t his father. Alan has a different drive. He has different goals.
But he has the same personal bravery, integrity, and call to duty for the people of South Carolina. I have no doubt that Alan will stand out and will stand up for South Carolinians. He is a leader and a fighter. He is the stand up guy our state and our family’s need. Alan is the “Batman” to put every “Joker” away. He will be getting my vote on Tuesday, I hope he gets yours.
By Mitchell E. Baroody
A Night with the Governor Candidates: The Good, The Bad, The Contradictory
Tuesday night’s Gubernatorial debate was not the heated explosion some may have hoped for. However, this debate effectively represented each of the candidates for who they are….or who they think they are.
The following is a summary of what I gathered from each candidate: Bauer is confident, knows what he wants, and he wants to cut government waste and stop generational dependency; Gresham Barrett loves God, wants jobs, and has 8 ways to bring them;
McMaster touts his proven leadership abilities, has no clear and decisive plan for anything, but believes he is the only candidate that can effectively execute the laws from the legislature to the homes of the people; finally, Nikki Haley hates government, anyone that disagrees with her ideas, will intimidate those that disagree with her, and is basically Mark Sanford on steroids.
Before I begin a thorough analysis, let me say this. Bauer, Barrett, and McMaster deserve a pat on the back for staying after the debate, answering many questions, and greeting those in attendance including young children that recognized them from TV and school. I will have to say, I am quite disappointed in Mrs. Haley for not taking the time to greet the people in attendance, especially the kids. She obviously thinks her current “Front Runner” status exempts her from meeting the people in Florence, especially kids.
Now for the analysis. First we will start with Gresham Barrett. 
Barrett was impressive and VERY unimpressive on certain issues. He was one of the few that actually mentioned a plan for bringing jobs. He mentioned his 8 step plan and actually knew what each step was.
He identified himself as a job ambassador and constantly referred to former Governor Campbell as someone to idolize himself after. While bringing jobs sounds nice, let’s look at one way he wants to do it. He said that tourism is crucial to making our state grow, especially marketing areas like Myrtle Beach. He mentioned bringing 2,000 jobs by building an oil rig off the shores of the Myrtle Beach area. For this….I say really? Common sense says this is a bad idea right now.
After the disaster in the Gulf, should we truly continue putting faith in offshore drilling, miles and miles from the coast? What if another company messes up and floods our coasts? This will screw up tourism for years. The Myrtle Beach economy would have quite a lot of trouble recovering. This has disaster all over it. These candidates, especially Congressman Barrett, cannot be for beach tourism and for offshore drilling. Gresham continued to indirectly refer to no child left behind, and the bush tax cuts that put our country into an incredible deficit (along with the war).
This only reminded me of one thing, his bailout vote. He seems more and more like the non-conservative President Bush was. I cannot see Gresham as anything more than a Social Conservative. I give him that because he talks the Christian talk. Overall, he’s a nice guy but he didn’t win the debate. Even though I disagree with a great deal of what he says, I give him 2nd place for being decisive. As a candidate, he’s pretty good. But some of his stuff is just hard to stomach.
Attorney General McMaster is another story all together. While he is a friendly guy, amusing to listen to, and fun to watch, there is no way this guy is going to be governor. I’m sorry to bust the bubble of so many, but he isn’t going to do it. This election year is very, very important for our state. People are listening more than ever. When you listen to Henry, who I often refer to as General Lee, he does stay on message.
The bad thing is, his message has nothing to do with actual policies. He touts his experience as an executor, putting sex predators behind bars, and making everything safer. He makes it sound like he is the only one that knows how to do the job because of his tenure bankrupting the state Republican Party and doing a pretty fantastic job as Attorney General. Being Governor and being Attorney General are two different ballgames though. Henry was given the chance to show himself as a true conservative candidate.
All he could say was “I want a strategic plan” for economic development. In other words, there is no plan. His connection to Reagan and his past performances as an executor will make everything fix itself…apparently. I was disappointed most in Henry because he really had a chance tonight…but he failed…not just a fail but a miserable fail. He was fourth place tonight.
While I was very disappointed in Nikki Haley’s sudden rush off, after the debate, I found myself agreeing with her on certain points. For once, we do need to audit every government agency. 
We need to find out where and why our agencies are losing money.
I agree with her on this. She wants to put more energy into small business. I completely agree with her that an environment for small business is necessary. She spoke against the corruption and lack of conservatism in the state house and will fight it. She will also bring more accountability and transparency to the table. Hold up…wait a minute…let’s go back to the corruption first.
She wants to fight corruption in the state house. She said she will exert her influence on legislators that will not support her reform efforts. In other words, she will intimidate legislators into backing her agenda. If they do not, she specifically said, she will expose them in the media through lists. This doesn’t sound too nice. She is going to be a dictator?
I guess having an opinion other than your Governor will no longer be allowed. Furthermore, checks and balances will be history under Nikki. If you disagree, you better just quit or you will be exposed as a burden to the taxpayers.
Next, she spoke about accountability and transparency. Wow….that is all I have to say. Nikki wants more accountability for the legislators. However, according to a credible but unnamed source of mine, she was absent over 70% of the time for these votes in the house. This includes one of the votes that would increase accountability and transparency. Unbelievable huh? It gets better. For a woman touting transparency, she isn’t very transparent.
There is a VERY well known “secret” that was just let out about her and blogger, Will Folks. Many claim it isn’t true. Many of the same people that were talking about how true it was several years ago are now claiming how false it is. The best way this could be solved is if legislators were transparent, right? That is what Nikki would say, correct?
But when asked for her emails and logs as a legislator, she will not clear the air by releasing them. She is talking the talk but not walking the walk. What is the conclusion based on this and her not filing legal action against the alleged accuser? The conclusion is simple. The affair probably happened, as I heard it did several years ago, and she is probably not being very truthful right now. I look forward to seeing more evidence in the upcoming weeks.
As a candidate, she is nothing more than Mark Sanford on steroids. She has the ideologue politics, she may or may not have the mastress, and she doesn’t practice what she preaches. Yikes, four more years of this? She said we need an accountant as Governor. I agree, that would be helpful at times, but the answer isn’t Accountant Haley. A businessman with experience balancing budgets and saving money would be just as effective. Despite everything on the table, she still did better than Henry. I give her third for this debate. Unfortunately, it looks like she will probably lead the pack for first in the primary. But there are still a few days left!
Andre standing under Calhoun in State Senate
Finally, Lt. Governor Andre Bauer. While I have been kind to Andre on my website before, my purpose has been to be very objective in this article…with only slight subjectivity. Andre hasn’t changed very much. He continues to tout the same message he has always been bringing. He wants to bring us out of the Stone Age. Andre said, “The answer to our school systems isn’t throwing money at it.
The answer is to fix the discipline system.” He continued to talk about saving money, how he has always conserved money and in fact, given 400,000 dollars back to the state. He claims to have been the only member to travel and actually sit down with companies to bring them to the state.
If anyone knows how to be a jobs ambassador, Andre does. He only speaks common sense. Everyone can identify with what Andre said tonight. You don’t ever find yourself questioning what he says.
The problem for many is that he makes too much sense. People can’t understand why a politician would be so incredibly upfront. Tonight, he was so confident he answered one question with a simple, “No.” Andre has served in both houses and is a TRUE Conservative.
However, Andre is not the conservative ideologue Nikki Haley is. Andre knows how to work with the legislator to get thins passed that will help the people immediately. Unfortunately, he had to sit and watch Mark Sanford lock the door on communication for eight years. If anything, he knows how NOT to govern.
He pushed off the questions about his personal life saying, “Everyone already knows it. I have nothing to hide.” I thought this was another show of his grace, calmness, and confidence. Tonight, Andre established himself as the one to beat. He spoke common sense with clear plans. His ideas are so innovative like his plans to make South Carolina greener and energy efficient.
There are other ways to fix the energy problem than drilling offshore and hurting tourism by having an oil spill on the coast of our state. Most importantly, he doesn’t shy away from tough issues or even questions.
After the debate, I overheard him being asked a question. The lady asked, “What about homeschoolers. Will you give us tax credits?” His response showed the condition of his conviction. He replied, “You bet. Homeschoolers save taxpayers money. Anything it takes to save taxpayers money, I’m up for it.” Andre talked the talk and walked the walk tonight.
For this, I gave him two thumbs up and can honestly say, in a tight debate, he set himself apart. I think there is little certainty, he won it tonight.
As for the primary, I think what we will see is very simple. Barring overwhelming evidence of an affair coming out against Nikki Haley in the next few days, she makes the run-off with Andre Bauer. Truthfully, it all depends on how much they are all seen and what type of television ads they put on the screen. The next few days and tonight’s debate in Charleston will continue to give a clearer picture. But I don’t’ think it gets clearer than a run off of Bauer and Haley.
Evening Joe: A Heated Debate with One Clear Winner
This past month has been dogged with the Late Night crisis between Jay Leno and Conan O’brien. But apparently, the winds from NBC blew crisis to Charleston on Thursday night. Boy, was the beginning of the Gubernatorial debate interesting.
I sat down in my lazy boy, put my popcorn in my elephant container, and began munching down to Joe Scarborough’s sarcasm. Then a bunch of screeching, scratching, hair pulling, and silence took place. Not to mention, all of Nikki Haley’s speech was silenced. The TV then went blank. I thought of a few reasons this could have happened.
1. CBS affiliate executives have cut down power to preserve it for the upcoming “winter storm disaster” that is expected to hit South Carolina with ice and snow this weekend…we all know the dangers of 1-3 inches.
2. Maria Chapur became angry that she was not invited to be Mark Sanford’s female companion at the SCGOP luncheon in Charleston on Thursday. So, she made her presence known by knocking out the sound guy and hijacking the debate.
3. President Obama’s renewed hope and change from the state of the union was just to divert our attention from the 100% regulations he would now be having over TV stations. That means no more Republican debates and especially no more long narratives from Attorney General Henry McMaster.
4. The only other reason would be that they just had poor sound quality and they didn’t have it all together at first.
So, I stuck with the fourth reason, and it came back on at 8:30. All four of them ready to lead our state into the next decade or were they? So let’s go through each candidate and analyze their performance tonight.
First, I will start from the bottom with Gresham Barrett. As a Citadel colleague, I was really disappointed in his performance. Not that I was even supporting him, but you wish each other the best. Congressman Barrett was less than confident, and sometimes seemed more like a Southern Baptist preacher rather than someone ready to lead our state…amen?
What bothered me most was the defense of his vote for Socialism in the bailout/tarp saga. He consistently defended this vote and refused to back down. I am in disbelief that anyone claiming to be “The 4th most Conservative Congressman” could stand behind a vote like this.
Many in South Carolina’s conservative circles spoke with him the night before he voted and warned him…but he apparently knew best. Barrett went on to not answer questions, beat around the bush, and really did not establish himself as a credible candidate.
He seemed just like acurrent U.S. Congressman should: Uninformed and Out of touch. I am sure that is how many South Carolinians see him as well.
Next, let’s talk about General Robert E. Lee. Excuse me, I mean Attorney General Henry McMaster. Where do I begin…. the other candidates seemed to get tickled every time McMaster would speak. This in return, made things interesting. The only statement that stands out in my mind about him is that he has “the most executive experience” out of all of the candidates. I hear him say that in the midstof his Southern charmed, rambling. While he comes across like a Southern Gentleman, not even waving but bowing at the audience, he too seemed out of touch.
While I appreciate and respect his Conservatism and think he has been one of the best AG’s in S.C. History, I do not believe he showed he could effectively win against Vince Sheheen or Jim Rex tonight.
Often, he didn’t answer the questions, he went on random tangents, and he couldn’t break out of the box and be real with the people. He seemed too much like a polished politician and not a personable statesman that the people will need to move forward with the state’s problems.
Yes, the state should be open for business, but I have a feeling General Henry may open it for business by delegating a lot of the responsibility the way he does in the AG office. While it works as Attorney General, as Governor, we have seen the Department of Commerce’s unimpressive performance. We can’t afford another four years of relying on them.
He finally went on to talk about how he did a great job as Chairman of the Party to bring Republicans to victory. While this may have been true, he failed to mention the financial mess he left when he ran for Attorney General. After his performance tonight, I know one thing…I’m not lovin’ it. So, I don’t think I can “back that Mac” because it may look good, but the intentions it has for each and every one of us may not be so beneficial.
The biggest surprise of the night was Nikki Haley. The “daughter of immigrants” was on top of her game. She did very well. However, I will bring up a few shortcomings. She should have never answered the question about censuring Lindsey Graham. She said she would have! This makes her seem like she is not a compromising figure, something our state greatly needs in the Governor’s office. This is the one thing I will agree on with Senator Robert Ford, yes a democrat.
This also shows the lack of distance between her and Mark Sanford. She continues to keep herself close to “Sanfordesque” positions such as not accepting stimulus funds. The Nikki Haley Campaign analysis is pretty simple. Let’s look at the election between McCain and Obama. People were tired of Bush and tired of anyone similar and too close to Bush. McCain was not different enough. People voted for change because they were sick and tired of the same ole, same ole.
The same principle will apply to South Carolina this election cycle. The non-Sanford candidate is going to be the only hope for Republicans. Nikki Haley is too much like Sanford and will most certainly fail come primaries as a result of it. I see her poll numbers improving a little but she will never make it to the top when the general election comes around in November. Her message will resonate with tea party people and could surprise us come June, but she will never beat Sheheen if he wins the primary (which it looks like he will). However, her performance tonight should be admired. It was something to be proud of.
Finally, tonight’s winner……..Lt. Governor Andre Bauer, a true non-Sanford candidate. His confidence, clear and direct answers, and composure show his maturity from the last few years. Tonight, he was in his element and proved victorious. First, the bad. The hosts ganged up on the poor guy and pulled out all of the bad about him. They mentioned his recent “Animal-kid” comment and his driving record. Andre displayed a bit of arrogance to the female co-host when she lambasted him about the animal comment. He stated that a minority preacher asked him to speak at his congregation.
In response to the female co-hosts continued bullying, he replied, “I’ll give you his number if you want.” Even with this comment, he showed something special…”Straight Talk.” While John McCain often said he was all about straight talk, he hardly showed it. Tonight, a new bearer of this title is Andre Bauer.
When asked which Senator shared his ideology, he quickly stated “Jim DeMint.” He had an answer for everything. They were concise and easy to understand. No elaborate stories, no monologues from “God’s and Generals,” no over-doing religiosity, but just Andre speaking his convictions.
This is the type of Governor South Carolina has been itching for. Tonight, Andre Bauer showed his seriousness about the race. For a while, I had my doubts, but tonight I know he is ready to become Governor of South Carolina. There is no doubt.
If Republicans want to win in November, there must be a lot of thought to who that candidate will be on the other side. If it is Vince Sheheen, which I feel it will be, it will be a tough fight.
All jokes aside, these four candidates are great people. They all have excellent qualities with great intentions. However, when it comes to the difficult opposition this November, in the aftermath of Mark Sanford, the field will be extremely difficult. Too tough for the likes of Nikki Haley and Gresham Barrett. I believe the Attorney General and Lt. Governor are the only two that will stand a chance. While the Attorney General showed he is a good candidate to beat Sheehen, Andre Bauer showed he is the best candidate to not only beat the democrats, but lead our state with honor, integrity, and great vision for the next decade…for this…I salute the Lieutenant Governor.
Click The Link and Take The Poll! Pick the next Governor..
You Pick The Next Governor of S.C.
Breaking The Divide: Changing The GOP Brand
Branded…that is one word I cannot stand. When you are associated with one group, it is believed that you live like and believe like that group. Being branded by a political party is one of the worst problems in politics today. If the political parties knew what they actually stood for, it may not be that big of a problem. However, both major parties in today’s political spectrum have members that seem very displaced and disillusioned with their platform.
The Republican Party couldn’t be further away from knowing where it stands. Does it go Conservative or does it go Moderate? Senator Olympia Snowe consistently shows her moderate views as a Republican; always moving across the aisle to back liberal, progressive reforms. Then there are Conservatives like Jim DeMint who stand their ground and hope for the party to move further to the right.
The Democratic Party is on the biggest move towards the left in its history. Although, the New Deal programs were a pretty big push as well. Every day, America hears of a leftist initiative coming out of the White House and the Democratic controlled Congress. However, they have disgruntled democrats that are commonly called “Blue Dogs.” Whether they disagree socially or fiscally, they still line up with many Republicans just the way Senator Snowe lines up with many democrats.
The question is, where is the median and how do the parties provide separation so that one can clearly stand apart? While the Republicans struggle with moderates and the Democrats struggle with blue dogs, I don’t foresee either leaving their respective parties or forming new ones. A three party system, while a great idea, is not realistic in our country.
Therefore, which party can come on top right now and gain superiority from the disarray? I think it is the Republicans that will come on top if they are willing to make some big changes in the future. There is one key part of the Republican Party that I think is wrong and is continuously being done wrong. If it is not corrected, the party will remain in a quagmire state of disarray. It could grow and become “The Party” if one simple adjustment is made. That is with social issues.
The Republican Party needs to reach out to Fiscally Conservative Democrats and bring them over. They also need to make amends with Socially Moderate liberals within the GOP. Social Issues have been killing the GOP for some time now. It is time to get over them.
First of all, a new stance on the right to life must be taken. While moving towards Conservatism, the Republican Party should move towards a Pro-Choice stance on Abortions. I am sure you have already read my reasoning behind Conservatives backing a Pro-Choice platform, but please hear me out again clearly please. Being Pro-Choice is being Conservative. However, the Party must move towards defining a fetus at conception and giving it rights. Therefore, any abortion would be murder under a new Federal Law. Yeah, this is the roundabout way of eliminating abortions. However, it is the Conservative way of doing it.
Don’t call yourself a Conservative unless you believe a Woman has the right to choose what she does to her body as long as it is not Murder. True Conservative Principle 1, a person should always have the choice to do what they want to their body; the government should NEVER regulate that. However, if there is an embryo in that body, it should not only be defined as a person but its rights should be protected from detrimental procedures just like every other person in this country.
Second, the Republican Party must embrace Domestic Partnerships for all Americans. This should apply to couples of all sexes. Moving towards Conservatism is moving towards keeping the government’s definition of personal lives very minimal. If two women who don’t ever plan to get married and are not lesbian, want to live together in order to make it by, give them the same benefits as a normal couple whether they are gay or not. It is fair.
The government should be equal and fair. Taking these rights, only because of a marriage certificate, is not fair. True Conservative Principle 2, the government should never be bias towards its citizens. The Republican Party should push domestic partnerships because they believe in less government in the lives of Americans. Marriage should be done in a church and is something between heterosexual couples with God. Receiving benefits is a different story.
These two social issues are enough to sway some Conservative Democrats over to the GOP. If the Republican Party did a 180 degree turn on these issues, majorities would be seen all over the country in 2010 and 2012. Many voters are democrat because of social issues. Change the platform, win the voters. To do this, religious Conservatives will finally have to admit that being a Conservative is being anti-government regulation even in the right to life and the right to partnership. Keeping the government out of a woman’s body and a couple’s partnership is also keeping the government out of religion! It works well for everyone!
I believe victory for the Republican Party lies in a move towards a Conservative stance. However, before that move can take place, Conservatism must be redefined from its present meaning. While it may not be popular for a while, it is what Conservatism truly is and it will make the Republican Party the majority party again. Until then, social issues will be the mark of defeat for the Republican Party.
My Theme for the Gop: Fresh Start for Government, Fresh Start at Home, Fresh Start Abroad
In the midst of the ruckus in Washington, some wonder if there is any room for optimism towards the future. The answer is clearly very subjective. If you ask a Democrat if there is room for optimism, they are going to say yes because of the majority in both houses, the white house, and the initiatives that they plan to pass. As for Republicans, it depends on what day and what democratic initiative is about to pass. Some Republicans will say they are optimistic because the democrats under the leadership of Obama have failed at all of their initiatives thus far and the American people now see the light. Then there is the faction of Republicans that is close to building underground shelters for the “ongoing” and “Soon-to-be” communist takeover of America. So they say.
So where do I stand? First, I think both parties have a lot to be proud of. There hasn’t been a great depression, the terrorists haven’t blown up the entire country, the monetary system hasn’t failed yet, and a Russian professor’s prediction of a total collapse starting in October doesn’t seem to be in the works yet. Whoever is in office would be blamed for these consequences, so it is a victory for all Americans, Republicans or Democrats.
On that note, the democrats have made a growing majority of Americans angry and fearful. Taking insurance from 85% of the insured in exchange for a government option isn’t a very good idea. Putting generations into debt, that is democrats including Rep. BOB INGLIS (R-S.C.), with stimulus plans that stimulate rats in San Francisco just don’t get the job done for most Americans. Young men and women dying in Afghanistan without a clear strategy or a Commander in Chief leading, doesn’t sit well with most Americans. Powerful democrats like Rep. Barney Frank openly admitting to plotting the takeover of freedoms and instilling more government regulation in our everyday lives just doesn’t sit too well. The American people are waking up and see what is on the agenda. This, I will have to say, shifts the enthusiasm and optimism to the Republican side.
However, I don’t think the Republican Party is able to lead the way quite yet. There is nothing but bickering, power struggles, and a people identified by an elephant not knowing what their platform really is across the country. Unfortunately, it is a party still creating an identity for itself after losing it during the past election cycle. If the party is going to succeed and take over the country, as the Democrats hand over the reins after failing to make it better, I think they need to consider an achievable battle plan. After a lot of thought, I have created a three-step roadmap or “battle plan” to seeing “Red” these next two election cycles.
- It starts with the platform. When Michael Baroody, one of my heroes, wrote the Republican Party platform in 1980, people had a reason to shout “We See Red.” Republicans knew what they stood for and they had a leader that could clearly articulate it. Instead of being a party of “Straight Talk” and “Mavericking” it is time to go to a three-fold message that we don’t compromise with. A message that goes back to the basics of conservatism and what a Republican really is. I propose the theme, “Fresh Start for government, Fresh Start at home, Fresh Start Abroad.” The fresh start for Government calls for less government, less regulations, more transparency in government, and more accountability in government. The fresh start at home calls for more jobs, energy independence (by drilling offshore, coal and nuclear energy, and preventing any increased energy taxation), welfare reform, lower taxes that help boost the economy, and stronger incentives for joining the military. Finally, the fresh start abroad initiative brings tax payer dollars, given to foreign countries that fail to stand with the U.S. during crisis, back to the American taxpayer, reduces U.S. troop levels across the world, calls for “accountability or abolition” with the U.N., and reaches out to Israel to restore ties destroyed by the Obama Administration
- After a clear platform (above) is created, building enthusiasm and energy across the grassroots level around it is key. Gathering around the candidate will come with time, but knowing what we stand for is the most important thing.
Myself with Energetic Young Republicans Chelsie Paulson and SCGOP 3rd Vice Chairman Adam Piper
Campaigns to energize young people are one of the biggest parts of building this energy and enthusiasm at the grassroots level. If we use technology and many of the techniques our opponents used in the past, we will be seeing a lot of “Red” at the grassroots level. This will bring momentum unseen to the Republican Party in decades. Focusing on our future and not our past, while pushing our platform, will energize all bases and allow the party to pick the best andidates and not the compromise candidates.
- Picking the RIGHT candidates will be a breeze if we accomplish the first two steps. Knowing what we stand for as Republicans and building momentum around the foundation will bring forth energetic leaders that share our values and can promote them as President, in Congress, and in other elected positions. There will not be any “Compromise” candidate as John McCain was. There won’t be any need to stay home at the polls because the candidate just doesn’t share the right values. If candidates back the platform, it will energize Republicans, and energize those seeking office. Therefore, this will energize our government and allow us to see “Red” in the near future.
- The likelihood of any of this happening anytime soon is probably dim. From a South Carolina perspective, it has been great to see the reorganizing of county parties and the energy at tea parties. However, all of these organizations and protests are pointless without a clear plan and a theme for the future. Right now, I see none in the Republican party at least nationally speaking. While I think my plan is great, I am sure a great many would disagree. As for now, I’d call it anybody’s ballgame. Speaking of which, it sure is a shame the Phillies and the Yankees can’t both lose the World Series. I don’t want to cheer for either one! Go Braves!
Myself with Energetic Young Republicans Chelsie Paulson and Adam Piper
Symptom Care, Not Healthcare: What is Real Reform?
Last week, I walked into the MICU at a South Carolina hospital and talked to a physician. He said, “Something needs to be done about this healthcare crisis. I don’t know what though.” No one has the exact answer, but I do know what isn’t the answer and that is a public option healthcare system.
The question is, when discussing healthcare reform, are we headed in the right direction? If you read my writing much, you probably already know what I am going to say. So, for those that don’t, No we aren’t going in the right direction.
First of all, 85% of Americans are insured. Wow! Therefore, Harry Reid’s plan to include the public option is going to hurt the majority of Americans and put them under a moving van while backing up to repeatedly run them over. It is a true American tragedy. The majority screams for no public option yet the minority continues to push it. Would it be too extreme if I called this a Healthcare Holocaust? Maybe not so much.
However, being uninsured isn’t the real problem in healthcare. One of the real problems is Torts. Tort reform is one of the real ways to revitalize our healthcare system. Our brilliant masterminds and architects in the Senate totally left physicians, healthcare professionals, and insurance companies in the dust. While I worked a brief stint in Risk Management at a hospital, I saw everything. People will sew for the smallest things even if they suffer a scratch in a hospital hallway. This causes hospitals, healthcare professionals, and insurance companies to pay out money that is needed to pay for the real problems that happen. Everyone in healthcare and insurance is getting ripped off. TORT REFORM! It is one of the incredibly clear answers.
However, the biggest problem I find is not with tort reform or insurance at all. It is with the way we practice medicine in this country. When I was young, every time I would go to the doctor, I would come home with an antibiotic. Now I’m immune to certain ones and germ resistant bacteria can now take over my body. Maybe that is a slight exaggeration. I just watched my grandmother suffer and I brought home 35 medicines from the nursing home that she used to take daily. I know, you probably think that is a joke but it isn’t. I am confident the medicine only made her sicker and the side effects killed her. We treat every ache and pain with a medicine that does not heal, but takes away the symptoms temporarily. This puts an incredible burden on insurance companies and on the taxpayer. What kind of healthcare is this? It isn’t healthcare, it is symptom care. Drug companies know many cures to diseases, many could release this but the ever so powerful FDA and Drug Companies want MONEY and POPULATION CONTROL, not healthy people! Furthermore, dying people are given treatments that only prolong their suffering and their death. This raises hospital bills that the American taxpayer pays after they die. Much of that money is just assumed by the hospital putting them into debt. What kind of responsibility is this in our system?
We need broad reform, that is true. However, the focus should be taken to our medical schools and not necessarily to the insurance industry. I don’t think an 85% insured rate is so bad. If it ain’t broke don’t fix it, right? In the free country that we supposedly live in, let people be who they are without government intervention. Everyone cannot be the same, we would eliminate the freedom that many of us love if that happened. If someone cannot buy insurance, it is a shame, but it is a necessary evil for our constitutional republic to stay free. So, let’s fix what is broken, the torts and the way we practice medicine. This, in itself, will make insurance and being a healthcare provider much more affordable.
What does being a Conservative really mean?
It has been a week since I have written because I have been dealing with the death of my grandmother. But now, I am back into the action. I have been pondering the past several days on what to write about. New stimulus plans, more healthcare debate, Fox news v.s. Obama. I will be talking about these topics in the next few days but right now, I want to touch on something I find really important: Conservatism.
It appears that the liberals have it together in some aspects for the time being. While they are quickly headed to their demise, they at least know what they believe. On the other hand, conservatives aren’t so sure at times. John McCain called himself a conservative, but is he really? Lindsey Graham still thinks he is a conservative. What is the true reality behind Lindsey’s thoughts and the true reality?
Who is a Conservative? Is it Rush Limbaugh? Ann Coulter? Glenn Beck? Even St. Ronald Reagan as he is often hailed? Maybe it is anyone that is against the Obama administration since Conservative is defined as “Against Change.” Some think it means being a Republican but Sen. Olympia Snowe isn’t a Conservative. Some think it is believing in only the Constitution and nothing more. That is a Constitutionalist or some would say Libertarian philosophy. So what is a Conservative really mean?
I think it is a subjective word but a word with several objective beliefs that are defined by it. A conservative believes in no more government than was originally desired by the founding fathers of a respective institution. While there is room for change in a society, just like a speed limit changes, there is little room for deviation in the area of government involvement in the lives of citizens. In America, a conservative shouldn’t want government programs that go beyond the government’s constitutional responsibility of ensuring justice, tranquility, defense, the general welfare and securing the blessings of liberty.
The founding fathers had no intention of a welfare program that promotes laziness when they sought to promote the general welfare. They had no intention of ensuring justice by making everyone economically equal. They also had no intention of securing the blessings of liberty by fighting imperialistic wars in places like Vietnam and perhaps we can consider Iraq. Yes, I said it. Conservatives believe in government but not a corrupt government that wants to run the people. A Conservative should believe in a Government that wants the people to run it.
Simply put, a Conservative is a person that likes the people running the government only when they don’t have the government’s interests at stake. The people running a government should always have the people’s best interests at stake not an institution that could potentially harm the people.
With so many ideas of Conservatism, I have compiled a top ten list as I often like to do. This top ten list is appropriately titled, “You Might be a Conservative if…..”
- You might be a Conservative if you believe Social Security, Medicare, and Welfare are a complete fraud and abuse of Congress’ constitutional powers of the purse.
- You might be a Conservative if you understand losing the quality of healthcare is the only result of the Government running it. Furthermore, even if there are uninsured, it isn’t the government’s job to pay for their insurance. It is the government’s job to make sure the environment of the nation is healthy and fluid for them to put together the means to provide or not provide for themselves healthcare.
- You might be a Conservative if you believe a little Revolution never hurt anyone as long as the revolution decreases the size of government and increases the size of citizen freedom.
- You might be a True Conservative if you realize being Pro-Life isn’t Conservative. Agreeing that the unborn should be protected and given the same rights as those that are born is extremely important DO NOT MISUNDERSTAND ME. I STRONGLY BELIEVE IN THE SANCTITY OF LIFE. But for argument sake, this isn’t Conservative. Saying the government should regulate a medical procedure for a citizen, is actually quite liberal and not Conservative at all.
- You might be a True Conservative if you believe the government regulating who can be married and who cannot is actually quite liberal and not conservative. Marriage, since it is a religious practice, should actually only be recognized as a religious issue. Deciding on who can be “Married” invades the freedom of every American to make that choice for themselves. Therefore, Domestic Partnerships are actually more Conservative than Marriage. They allow you to choose who you want to have government benefits with, not the government choosing who it will give benefits too. That is true freedom and truly conservative, like it or not.
- You might be a True Conservative if you believe Church and State should be separate. Christianity is a good example. There are many interpretations of God and who he is. Baptists believe “once saved always saved” while Assembly of God Christians, rooted in the Armenian theology, believe you can lose your salvation. As a result of varying interpretations, one denomination in a religious group cannot rule a country because the other will be offended. While all may love God, all share his love and understand his love differently. Therefore, a religion cannot be the basis for a society because it has denominations and as a result, will alienate certain groups within that society even if they are a part of that religion. Sunni vs. Shiite Muslims are a great example of this on-going battle. So, separating church and state is the only way to have a smooth government, smooth civil discourse, and a free society. That is true Conservativism.
- You might be a Conservative if you are eligible for unemployment but don’t file because it means too much government in your personal life. While unemployment is great for those that lose their job, it is not a Conservative program. Unemployment promotes laziness just like welfare. It gives people a reason to stay out of work longer. They are supposed to look for a job, but many just collect the checks and lie every time they report. Not accepting the money is being a True Conservative.
- You might be a Conservative if you vote for the person and not the party. A true conservative will vote for one with the ideals that promote less government in the lives of people and more people in the workings of government. One that understands how bad government can be and has the interests of protecting the people rather than promoting programs to run the people is who a True Conservative will vote for.
- You might be a Conservative if you believe the Great Depression is an example of what True Conservatism should bring. It was a horrible time, but a necessary time. However, it wasn’t a conservative event in history after the New Deal was created. A true Conservative will allow things to fail, without government intervention, even if it means poverty because this also allows things to freely pick themselves back up and work again. The New Deal didn’t get America out of the Great Depression, the war did. Bailouts and stimulus bills are liberal hogwash. A good depression allows for a good cleansing and allows the free market to take back over.
- You might be a conservative if you believe defining a conservative is actually liberal. You may think I’m crazy with this one but here is my reasoning. If you define something, you do not give it room to be further examined or explored for further meanings. It may mean new things in the future. Therefore, a Conservative doesn’t say exactly what he is. He states the core things he believes but allows his belief to constantly be explored, further examined, and further defined because this is true freedom. Having Conservative beliefs cannot be defined by the word Conservative. Constricting these beliefs to that word is putting too much intervention into this important political philosophy.
After reading these, you probably thing I am a little off of my rocker. But it is really how I see the word Conservative. I guess many of us aren’t quite as Conservative as we think we are? The word is abused, misused, and overused. Many don’t know what it means and many claim to be one but have never understood what “one” is. It’s much easier to be a liberal than to be a conservative. Liberals have set rules, regulations, and guidelines. Conservatives live by one principle, “the less control over our lives, the better.” The rest is left for further defining.
*Picture of Me Speaking to South Carolinians for Responsible Government
To Win or Not To Win: The Afghan Dillema
It was September 11th, 2001 and I was learning about Sir Isaac Newton in 8th grade earth science. My teacher was called out of the room, then she came back in with devastating news….New York was under attack and a plane had flown into one of the twin towers. I froze in shock and wondered what this meant for our nation. I got home from school and stayed glued to the television, watching more planes do more of the same. Death was everywhere and I wondered, what did this mean?
I had a sense of pride later that night when my President, George W. Bush, spoke to the American people and let us know we would find those that did it and they would pay. For next few months, a sense of patriotism not seen in years came across the country. People loved the troops, people were proud of our fight against terror, and you saw flags on cars every day. One day….it all stopped.
Today, I look at the news and I see a President that is obviously clueless when managing a war and a fight that could eventually come back home again. At The Citadel, cadets learn to listen to everyone when making a decision. Everyone in the chain of command is vital to an operation. However, sometimes a leader doesn’t listen and that is when things get sticky and the small problem becomes big. President Obama has consistently been told what to do in Afghanistan. Gen. McChrystal, the head General in Afghanistan, asked for 40,000 troops to complete a counterinsurgency to make sure the Taliban do not get back in power and to ensure Al Qaeda stays weak. The President has turned his back on his General and doesn’t seem to be listening.
Last time a General requested a surge, it wasn’t popular but it allowed our troops to stabilize and leave Iraq. General Petraeus was brilliant for recommending and drafting this plan. Why doesn’t President Obama learn from history and see that this is vital for victory in Afghanistan as well? Instead, he mentions possibly working with the Taliban and keeping some of them in power. Are you kidding me?
This is the SAME Taliban that harbored the SAME terrorists who brought so much bloodshed to our country on September 11th. He wants to keep some of them in power and not fight against them? My greatest fear is for the Taliban to reclaim any control over Afghanistan. While Mr. Obama has been waiting to make a decision, the Taliban has been doing what they do best. They just claimed responsibility for a suicide bombing at the Indian Embassy in Afghanistan this week. On Saturday, 8 troops were killed when the Taliban overran their base because there weren’t enough troops there to defend it. This group sounds very amicable to me. The Taliban will bring Shira law, hate for America, and a love for Al Qaeda to the table. If they harbored them once, they will harbor them twice. Furthermore, if Al Qaeda gets a place to train once and conduct a mass attack like September 11th, they will do it again if the Taliban rule.
If he goes with the strategy to ignore top commanders and work with the enemy, our President will be writing a risky future for our country on the wall. If we do not win in Afghanistan, September 11th will not seem so much in the past. It will likely be part of our future again at some point. This President clearly needs to understand how vital it is to listen to those under him; especially since he has never had combat experience or any form of military training to understand the stakes on the ground. Being Commander in Chief means using all of the command under you to make accurate decisions as the Chief decision maker. I think he needs someone to give him the heads up on what his job actually entails. Maybe Truman left a manual in the White House somewhere.
The President claims he has the best people advising him. Advice that comes from people that aren’t Generals. People like Vice-President Joe Biden. This is the same Joe Biden that wanted to split Iraq up into four sectarian regions and eliminate it as a country. He was dead wrong there. Then there is Hillary Clinton. What does she know about War? All she knows about is being a lawyer and covering up her crimes ex. Whitewater, how to bomb a hill or two (from her husband), being an ineffective Senator, and how NOT to pass a Healthcare bill (As she tried in the 90’s). At least she has a few things in common with the President. My stomach hurts when I think about the non-military advice Obama is getting. It is truly scary.
The clock is ticking and I hope we get some sort of decision from the President soon. However, I am afraid this decision may be one that we feel for years to come. Pray for our country, Pray for our troops, and Pray that our President receives wisdom in making these decisions. This isn’t the only crucial decision that needs to be made right now, but our safety is first priority. Therefore, this has to be dealt with and dealt with timely and effectively. To ensure our own safety, we MUST have an Afghanistan that doesn’t harbor terrorist groups.
Like A Thief in the Night
Being a Congressman must be a pretty sweet deal. Over six figures a year, free travel, living expenses, prestige sometimes, oh yeah, did I mention apparently not having to file your taxes? Congressman Joe Wilson received an official slap in the face from House Democrats and seven men that claim to be Republicans, one being Rep. Bob Inglis (R-SC). However, when a powerful democrat is out of line, a disgrace to the office he sits in, and brings discredit to Congress as a whole, what happens? Nothing.
Nancy Pelosi and her thugs killed a Resolution ousting Charlie Rangel (D-NY) as the Chairman of the powerful Ways and Means committee. For those of you who do not know, this is the very committee that provides oversight for the internal revenue of the tax code. Rangel has been under investigation for sometime. While a common citizen would go to jail for not reporting income, Charlie Rangel is living the high life on our tax dollars after not reporting over 1.3 million dollars of income from 2002-2006. This is unbelievable but it gets worse. In 2008, he didn’t disclose 75,000 dollars of rental income. Then, in 2009, an Ethics probe found over 500,000 dollars of unreported assets by Rangel. 
Charlie Rangel’s actions are a breech of the American people’s trust. I believe it is gross poor judgment for any voter to continually put him in office. I am sick and tired of the double standards House Democrats keep using. When a Republican is out of line, it is the end of the world for them. They are thrown under the bus and everyone steps on them while getting off of it. When a democrat goes much further than saying You Lie, every member of the House Majority leadership turns their back and acts as if it is normal and good behavior.
No one with any integrity would allow this crook to continue serving as the chair of one of the top committees in Congress. A few weeks ago, Rep. Jim Clyburn was talking about proper decorum in the House, referring to Rep. Joe Wilson’s comments. Clyburn made it appear he was the father of integrity and that the democrats were the ones enforcing a House of accountability. The Republicans must have really listened to his rant about proper conduct of a House member because of the resolution they drafted for Rangel. It is unfortunate that Rep. Clyburn has apparently changed his mind about enforcing integrity and conduct. Apparently, democrats do not want to be accountable any longer. To be fair, it isn’t just Clyburn. It is Pelosi, Hoyer, and every other democrat that voted to slap Joe Wilson. I am sure Rep. Bob Inglis will join the support group of Charlie Rangel before it is all over as well. So, the resolution failed and a truly guilty crook is off the hook for the time being. A crook that will continue to oversea our tax dollars while he is being investigated by the Ethics Commission. Doesn’t that make you feel warm inside?
My question is, when are the American people going to wake up and demand legislative term limits? Men like Rangel are no different than a dictator coming to power, defaulting on the people’s trust, and spending their money without telling. Isn’t this one of the reasons there are term limits for the President?
Could We Soon See the End of ITAR’s Chokehold on Space Exploration?: My Interview Below
Article Written by Daniel Sims, Columbia University, for Universe Today (NASA Endorsed Publication)
Jeff Foust of The Space Review may have said it best when he claimed that ITAR, a set of trade regulations regarding defense-related trade, was “an acronym that has become figuratively and literally a four-letter word in the industry given the costs, delays, and general uncertainty involved in dealing with those regulations.” No matter where you are on the political spectrum or no matter where you stand on the debate about what’s next in space, you will find people who hate the ITAR’s (
International Trade Arms RegulationsInternational Traffic in Arms Regulations) influence on space commerce. Even in this time of great partisanship, Rep. Howard Berman [D-CA28] along with six Democrats and four Republicans have joined forces to craft a sword that, once given to the president will eliminate ITAR’s influence on space commercial enterprise.The Safeguarding United States Satellite Leadership and Security Act of 2011 is the name of the bill. Also named HR 3288, the act removes spacecraft and related components from the United States Munitions List which is a list of items which are controlled by ITAR. China, Cuba, Iran, Sudan, Syria, and North Korea have restricted access to US spacecraft merchants, easing fears that US technology would fall into the wrong hands.
HR 3288 has created much excitement in the space industry.
“Congress has the opportunity to dramatically improve the competitiveness of the U.S. satellite and space industries and ensure an innovative and thriving U.S. space industrial base,” said Patricia Cooper, the president of the Satellite Industry Association, in a press release. She added that they would be jumping for joy if it weren’t for the “outmoded and overly-restrictive regulation” they say they are under.
Why so much joy? Mitchell Baroody, law student, political analyst, advocate, speaker and told Universe Today that “while ITAR may have some positive effects on National Security, the detrimental effects of these ‘red tape-laced’ regulations cannot be ignored.”
For instance, according to The Space Review in 2006, U.S. Satellite Manufacturers have estimated losses from ‘$2.5 and $6.0 billion since 1999 due primarily to ITAR regulations.’
“When industries become over-regulated, this is what happens,” Baroody said. “As a result of ITAR, even…‘friendly’ foreign countries are weary of dealing with the U.S.”
This makes it difficult for our allies because spacecraft are listed after deadly toxicological agents and before destructive nuclear weapons with all three under the same trade rules. Despite this hilarious position, spacecraft’s removal is still, according to Space Politics, “an uphill battle, as Congress awaits the administration’s export control reform proposals as well as delivery of a final version of a report looking at the national security implications of moving satellite export control reform.”
This uphill struggle against protectionism might not be so bad because over the overwhelming need to create jobs. Baroody acknowledged that there are “many who are advocating protectionist ideals, like Donald Trump advocating increased trade tariffs of 25% with China in April of 2011.”
However, Baroody said, there are many more who know that in the present American economy, people are looking for any feasible solution to export control that has economic benefits. “Unfortunately, becoming more protectionist could have some very negative economic implications for the American consumer,” he said.
Baroody does not foresee this bill being stopped by the protectionist movement. “HR 3288 does not, in any way, benefit the one country who has been treating us unfairly, China,” he said. “This bill should not face an obstacle, in reference to protectionism.”
To Baroody, the thought “that idealists tendencies, which are not accurate, can dominate and win over more jobs, more freedom for American business, and more money in the pockets of Americans is…sickening.”
Some could counter-claim saying national security is at risk, but Baroody thinks the US government has gone too far.
“Before the satellite industry was given such a devastating blow in 1999, it is fair to say there was not enough oversight. However, putting satellites on the munitions list went way too far,” he said. “Now, American Manufacturers are winning with HR 3288 and American security is being preserved because the malevolent nations are excluded from being sold these satellites and components.”
Drilling down to the mechanics of the law, this is the only route Congress can take to export reform as Baroody explains: “Title 22 USC § 2778 (The ITAR) gives Congress oversight in munitions list removal. The President has to present any removals to Congress and cannot remove anything until 30 days have passed upon notification of the Speaker and specific committees. They specifically authorized the President to have discretion in removal. In HR 3288, Congress authorizes the President to remove the satellites and related components only if this does not cause a threat to National security.” In other words, congress can’t remove the spacecraft from the munitions list themselves.”
The Safeguarding United States Satellite Leadership and Security Act of 2011 is not perfect. “The bill includes risk-mitigating licensing controls, procedures, and safeguards,” Baroody said. “Red-tape and regulations are always going to get in the way of commerce, regardless of whether it involves space or some other category of commerce. If you put aside the risk mitigating licensing controls, procedures, and safeguards and look at America’s tax system, the answer is obvious.”
“The red-tape a company has to go through to get a product to market, like a satellite, can also be just as bad as paying more for it,” Baroody continued. “Having to paddle through the exorbitant amount of regulations to ensure you are legally allowed to sell your product and your buyer is allowed to keep it, is detrimental to every business. We should have regulations, but they should be within reason and should make sense. Government should not babysit our industries but they should keep an eye on them to make sure no one is getting hurt and the American people are being reasonably protected”.
This bill even has international implications. In an interview for The Space Review Dennis Burnett, vice president of trade and export controls for EADS North America expressed that “You cannot build a big sophisticated satellite without US parts and components, you just cannot do it…Those components might comprise no more than five percent of the satellite, but still, it’s a very important five percent.”
Because of this international impact, the bill was referred to the Foreign Affairs Committee on November 1st. This so called ‘Congress of specialists’ will, if they give the bill their time, study the bill then report on it. If the committee doesn’t give the bill their time, it will die there. Only after the committee’s review will there be a vote on the elimination of the ITAR.
11/28/2011 | Categories: Political Thought | Tags: GOP, SCGOP, Mitchell Baroody, Baroody Conservative, Space, HR-3288, Universe Today, Munitions List Bill, U.S. Munitions, China Trade, Trade Tariffs, ITAR, U.S. Space Agency, Space Review, Conservative Commentary, South Carolina Republican, Gingrich Nominee | Leave A Comment »