troops out of Iraq!

There’s little question that between the Arab Spring, the killing of bin Laden, the death of deposed Libyan dictator Moammar Gaddafi and now the news of the withdrawal of American troops in Iraq that this has been a momentous year in American foreign policy. And yet, the a recent Gallup poll showed just 2 percent of people thought terrorism was the most important issue facing the country, while anounce 2 percent said war was the most important. By contrast, the economy and unemployment were each above 30 percent.


While those numbers make clear that foreign policy will be on the backburner heading into 2012, it doesn’t mean that Obama’s successes internationally don’t matter. They do. Or at least might. They play into the idea of Obama as leader — as someone who can stand on the world stage and effectively represent the United States’ interests.


To be clear, Republicans are not likely to be swayed into supporting Obama by these successes. But independents who tend to vote less on a single issue — or issues — than on a general feel toward the individuals running for president may be.


Republican reaction?: In the immediate aftermath of President Obama’s withdrawal announcement there was broad silence among the 2012 Republican contenders.


It seems likely that Republicans will seek to acknowledge the end of the war, offer as little public credit to Obama as possible and then return to talking about the economy.


But, politics is unpredictable. If Republican candidates — or the Republican base — decide to take issue with the pull-out then the issue could take a far different course in the primary fight to come.

Republican debate

Perry’s attack on Romney employing illegal immigrant lawn service workers was decidedly personal and aggressive, and, for the first time in these debates, Romney got visibly angry. The extended “let me finish, no let me talk” exchange over immigration rapidly escalated to the point where it was very uncomfortable (and yet strangely alluring) to watch.

The ill will between the men seems to set the stage for a very nasty next few months as the two best-funded candidates in the race (not to mention their super PACs) will soon take to the television airwaves to continue the argument begun last night.

Cain  really showed the gaps in his knowledge when the conversation moved off of the economy. He was shaky on immigration and his answer on negotiating with terrorists directly contradicted a position he had taken only a few hours earlier.

Issue	Republican Party	Democratic Party	Libertarian Party
Social Security	Social security should be privatized (not to be confused with private savings accounts, but rather, private investments).	Social security should remain a government sponsored insurance plan for retirees.	Believe in an "opt out" policy in which one can choose to privately invest (they believe this to be the better option) or go with a government sponsored social security plan.
Jobs	Pro small business. Supports giving small businesses tax incentives so that more jobs can be created.	Encourage businesses to keep jobs here and not outsource them overseas. Supports unions and advocates for the rights of low income workers.	Free market should dictate the job market.
Economy	Supports free market competition and entrepreneurship, corporate deregulation and cutting entitlement spending.	Increase taxes to cut deficit. Believes large deficit negatively affects government services and that low deficits stimulate the economy.	100% Free Market.
Security/Defense	Believe in a proactive military and defense. Supports building weapons and technology that serve to protect our nation. Believe that peace is achieved through strong defense. Increase defense and research budget.	Believe in a limited missile defense. Oppose nuclear buildup in the U.S. Believe that peace is achieved through worldwide relationship building.	Believe in reducing nuclear arms in the U.S. Military should be used to protect people's livery and property only.
Legal/Tort Reform	Supports tort reform and limiting victims compensation, especially for frivolous lawsuits.	Oppose tort reform and oppose limiting liability of doctors and/or businesses.	Generally does not support tort reform.
Tax Reform	Supports tax cuts, low interest rates and the repeal of the death tax penalty in effort to stimulate the economy.	Generally supports raising taxes on the wealthy, lowering taxes for the middle class.	Stridently opposes all government imposed taxes and employer withdrawal of employees money for tax purposes.
Immigration	Generally supports closed or tight borders and tracking system for foreign travelers.	Support illegal alien's ability and right to become citizens and giving them more protections under the law.	Support open borders.
Faith	Religion strongly associated with Republican party. Advocate free exercise of religion.	Strict adherence between the separation between church and state. Promote secular issues and a more secular nation.	Strong belief in separation of church and state and by contrast, Libertarians hold a strong belief in freedom of religion.
Education	Promote school choice/vouchers and homeschooling. Supports voluntary student supported prayer in school. Opposes gender and race quotes in colleges.	Oppose vouchers. Increase NCLB federal funding. Enact new taxes to decrease class size and hire new teachers.	End government financial support of public schools, believe that all public schools should be privatized with tax credit for tuition.
Abortion	Generally pro-life with emphasis on promoting alternatives to abortion.	Generally pro-choice owning the mantra, "Safe, legal, rare."	Adamantly pro-choice but oppose any government financial aid to subsidize abortions.
Energy	Oppose Kyoto treaty. Support tax incentives for energy production.	Wish to find environmentally friendly energy sources and solutions. Oppose increased drilling, especially in the U.S.	Supports deregulation and believes all government energy resources should be turned over to private ownership. Opposes government conservation of energy.
Heathcare	Keep healthcare private. Would like to impose caps on malpractice suits. Supports reformed medicare to give seniors more choices.	Supports more federally funded healthcare programs.	Strongly supports a complete separation of healthcare and state. Supports the deregulation of the healthcare industry.
Foreign Policy	Spread Democracy. Supports UN reform. Wants to stop WMD proliferation countries. Believe that nations who support terrorist are just as bad as the terrorist themselves.	Strongly supports worldwide coalitions and multi-national programs. Supports aid for disadvantaged countries. Supports the UN.	End all foreign aid because it's the same as welfare for nations. Believes that aid perpetuates independence on your government.
Campaign Finance Reform	Generally support soft money contributions from individuals but supports limiting it from corporations. Also supports full disclosure.	Favor more regulation with spending limits on individuals and corporations.	No restrictions on contributions form any legal resident. Believe that politicians holding an office should not be able to run for another seat until term is over.
Environment	Supports privatizing federal land. Believe in cap and trade market based air pollution reductions and that the market should regulate itself.	Generally puts the interest of the environment over business. Wants to maintain federal land under government control.	Believes that land and animals should be sold to private organizations or ranchers and taken out of the hands of the government because private citizens will care for it better.
Guns	Limited gun control.	Strict gun control.	No control whatsoever.
Gay Rights	Oppose gay marriage. Supports constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.	Generally supports gay marriage although Democrats remain largely divided on the issue, as some only support civil unions.	Pro private choice and equality including marriage.

Is there a better way to pick a vice president?

There must be a better way.

Americans are ill-served by this closed-door, autocratic custom — arguably the most anti-democratic aberration in an otherwise sound electoral system. Given the clout of the modern vice president, and with the 2012 Republican National Convention still more than 10 months away, perhaps now is the time to reexamine how America’s major parties choose a vice presidential nominee, that No. 2 who is always but a tragedy away from being the One.

Far from it. Rather, it’s one of the most consequential questions a presidential contender can entertain. For all the debates and primaries we hold while selecting a presidential nominee, it is remarkable how comparatively little time is devoted to vetting the bottom of the ticket. Yet eight sitting vice presidents have risen to the Oval Office after the deaths of presidents, and a ninth did so after Richard Nixon’s resignation. And since 1945, eight vice presidents have gone on to become their party’s nominee for president. A vice president is essentially a president-in-waiting, but Americans use greater scrutiny in selecting federal judges and Cabinet department undersecretaries — all subject to rigorous confirmation processes — than in picking a veep.

Instead, we engage in an odd ritual, a sort of Soviet Party Congress meets the Publishers Clearing House Sweepstakes: A presidential nominee alone makes the selection, assisted by a few advisers and subject to the festive rubber-stamping of ardent supporters. The gratitude of a newly handpicked veep candidate resembles that of a starry-eyed lottery winner — the selection cloaked in mystery, good fortune and a touch of randomness. The announcement, on the eve of the convention, neatly precludes prolonged deliberation.

It is the national interest that most strongly argues for rethinking the veep nomination process. As the vice presidencies of Al Gore and Cheney keenly demonstrated, America’s No. 2 is more powerful than ever, with an independent power base and agenda. We’re past the point where we can be complacent with a selection process as lax as it is monarchical, a system dangerously vulnerable to saddling us with the unwanted or the unqualified.
-Washington Post

Labor Action Plan

On September 8, President Barack Obama called for movement on the Colombia free trade agreement. In late August, a delegation that included U.S. Representative James McGovern visited Colombia where we met with trade unionists, labor activists and workers from the ports, oil palm, oil and auto sectors. We asked them if the labor rights situation in Colombia had improved since the April 15 launch of the Labor Action Plan between the U.S. and Colombia to merit passage of the FTA.

We were informed that while the Labor Action Plan (LAP) is a good step forward, it has so far only led to formal rather than real changes in labor conditions and protection of trade unionists. Twenty-two trade unionists have been murdered so far in 2011, with ten of them killed after the April 15 announcement of the LAP. Death threats and efforts to discredit labor activists also continue. The rate of impunity in cases of murdered trade unionists remains extremely high at 94 percent. The Protection Program noted in the LAP is very slow in responding to the needs of those it is designed to protect. While a decree to contract the 100 labor inspectors promised in the LAP was expedited, no public information is available on their progress.





The LAP, while flawed and insufficient, attempts to get at changing problematic and systematic labor practices that have been in place in Colombia for the past twenty years. While this is a formal step towards turning around Colombia’s labor rights situation, it is clearly insufficient. The Obama Administration and U.S. Congress should not assume that radical changes in conduct will take place overnight. Nor should they make the mistake of thinking that new laws, decrees and plans translate to immediate protections and safeguards for workers. Rather they should closely monitor the LAP’s implementation and determine whether or not progress has been made by actually tracking the realities faced by workers on the ground. They must also insist that beyond the LAP, broader justice issues that generate violence and impunity in Colombia are addressed. Moving forward on the U.S.-Colombia FTA before the latter takes place would only be an injustice to workers in Colombia.

Battleground states

Republican Party of Florida Chairman Lenny Curry discussed key battleground states in the 2012 presidential election.



Curry answers questions from both democrats and republicans

Presidential Conventions

A United States presidential nominating convention is a political convention held every four years in the United States by most of the political parties who will be fielding nominees in the upcoming U.S. presidential election. The formal purpose of such a convention is to select the party's nominee for President, as well as to adopt a statement of party principles and goals known as the platform and adopt the rules for the party's activities, including the presidential nominating process for the next election cycle. Due to changes in election laws and the manner in which political campaigns are run, conventions since the later half of the 20th century have virtually abdicated their original roles, and are today mostly ceremonial affairs.
Generally, usage of “presidential nominating convention” refer to the two major parties’ quadrennial events: the Democratic National Convention and the Republican National Convention.

Sites of the 2012 party convention 

- June 20–22, 2011: Prohibition Party National Convention in Cullman, Alabama Jack Fellure won the nomination.
- October 14–16, 2011: 2011 Socialist Party USA National Convention to be held in Los Angeles, California
- April 18–21, 2012: 2012 Constitution Party National Convention to be held in Nashville, Tennessee
- May 4–6, 2012: 2012 Libertarian National Convention to be held in Las Vegas, Nevada
- June 2012: Americans Elect National Convention held over the internet
- August 27–30, 2012: 2012 Republican National Convention to be held in Tampa, Florida
- September 3–6, 2012: 2012 Democratic National Convention to be held in Charlotte, North Carolina