Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Some of Wes Clark’s “domestic” ideas

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
CarolNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 08:46 PM
Original message
Some of Wes Clark’s “domestic” ideas
Much is written about Wes Clark’s ideas on foreign policy and national security and the like. A few months ago the General spoke at Central Michigan University. His talk was about America’s role in the world and national strategy but he held a press conference with members of the campus media before the speech and some wise questioner asked him about his domestic ideas. It's something he really doesn't get to talk about often enough but that doesn't mean he isn't thinking about it...Here’s what he said...


Q: What are some issues that you would like to see tackled domestically?

WKC: Health care, a better business environment, a revised labor policy in America, a real energy policy in America and an investment in America’s future through technology and the environment. So, all of that, and all of that has to be done in a way of engaging our people more in our form of government. So let me just tick off a couple of things.

Education. Start with pre-school. Every child in America should have pre-school before kindergarten, a real learning experience. And we need to fix Americans’ secondary education through improved parent-teacher work at the elementary school level and additional programs to emphasize high school graduation and competency. There shouldn’t be a child in America who’s qualified to go to college who can’t go because they lack money. We’re the wealthiest society in the world and we’ve got to invest in our future and the best way to do that’s through education. And then the fourth plank I would say is that there must be continuing adult education. Americans today can’t expect to stay in the same job or even the same profession for the majority of their working lives and so they have to graduate from high school or college with the expectation of continuing adult growth which will include periods of classroom education, online education or other skill and knowledge acquiring efforts throughout a lifetime of personal growth and development. So, that’s the education piece.

Health care. I’m in favor of, first of all, making sure that every person has access to affordable, meaningful health insurance by expanding the Children’s Health Insurance Programs from the bottom, working Medicare from the top, and moving toward a national single payer system. I think we’ve got to be able to reduce the costs in health care through greater reliance on evidence-based medicine and with evidence-based medicine there will come some reform in the legal processes and also some reform in the provision of malpractice insurance. The next element in health care that I want to emphasize is preventive and diagnostic care. I think that we’ve got to really work to reward people’s good health behavior and ensure that every American, as they hit the magic age of 40 or maybe 38, they get the kind of preventive and diagnostic care that can work to inform them and offset, or educate them on how to beat the sort of debilitating aging illnesses like hardening of the arteries or diabetes, these kinds of preventable aging diseases which are responsible for so much hardship in America.

A better business environment. I think we’ve got to make this country the country of choice for every energetic entrepreneurial young person in the world. Whether that’s reform of the visa system alone or whether it means provision of greater public-private partnerships, greater opportunities for university associations, more government money put into small business administration to provide lower cost small business loans for high technology companies, we’ve got to grow jobs in this country that are meaningful jobs with real technology.

Labor unions have played an important part in America’s economic future but now it’s about more than collective bargaining, because we’re really in a global labor market. Corporations go where they can produce for the least and then they use transportation to send goods or ideas back across borders. So what we’ve got to do is, we’ve got to be able to help the working people in America grow, not being dependent on a corporation but being dependent on their own support network, whether this comes from unions or some union-like, quasi-union-like, concept like a guild where people can go in and receive employment counseling, education counseling, personal development counseling, support for moving...(phone rings)These are all things that can be done and should be done inside the American labor movement.

I talked about energy. We should be 20% sustainable by 2020 and that means we’ve got to move more toward wind and solar. We’ve got to really work carbon capture so we can use America’s coal reserves. And we’ve got to improve the efficiency of energy usage in America.

And then technology. We need to move beyond the defense technology. We need to be looking at other kinds of technology--material, science, green technology, new alternative energy systems, batteries, many other types of technology need to be exploited, supported by the government and moved out, as well as life science technology.

Those are some of my ideas.

Later in the press conference, a questioner asks about nuclear energy....

Q: (regarding energy policy) would nuclear fit into that at all?

WKC: We’ve a got a little bit more work to do on nuclear. We’re fortunate. We’ve got nuclear now and since Three Mile Island we haven’t had any problems but we are building up residues of spent nuclear fuel and we don’t really have an adequate means of handling nuclear fuel in America. If you were to go out to Nevada and ask that question, people in Nevada would tell you 12,000 years is not long enough to protect the ground water under my land and they’d be right in speaking it because we just don’t know. Nuclear materials are highly corrosive and they’re very dangerous and the danger is very long lasting. So I’d like to see us do a lot more research on materials required to safeguard spent nuclear fuel--things like carbon fiber, new carbon fiber, bucky tubes and that sort of thing which are very very strong but not able to be corroded by the kinds of heat and acidity that typically comes with the spent fuel.


Audio of the press conference and the speech (although the speech audio is really hard to listen to), courtesy of The Central Monitor, can be found here: http://www.thecentralmonitor.com/wordpress/2007/04/03/audio-from-gen-clarks-press-conference-and-speech-available/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
LBJDemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 08:48 PM
Response to Original message
1. Um
I like what he says about moving towards single-payer health care, but the idea of MORE visas being issues and treating the race to the bottom as inevitable - that stuff bothers me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 08:54 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Can you pull out the quote that bothers you?
I don't think he means we should strive to continue the race to the bottom.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LBJDemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. OK. Here:
"I think we’ve got to make this country the country of choice for every energetic entrepreneurial young person in the world. Whether that’s reform of the visa system alone."

H1-Bs do to white collar workers what the illegal immigration situation and future "guest worker" program does to blue collars. There are plenty of underemployed American engineers and computer programmers already.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LBJDemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. And also:
"Corporations go where they can produce for the least and then they use transportation to send goods or ideas back across borders. So what we’ve got to do is, we’ve got to be able to help the working people in America grow, not being dependent on a corporation but being dependent on their own support network"

His tone regarding offshoring is less condemnatory than Hillary Clinton's.

Look, I'm skeptical that any president, Dem or GOP, is going to seriously raise tariff barriers on any country. I just would hope that the Democrat would lower America's barriers more gradually. And the usual Democratic position, which John Kerry espoused in 2004, is to advocate, albeit vaguely, to put more labor and environmental provisions in new trade agreements. Clark's remark seems like a step back from even that.

Clark is easily my second favorite after Edwards, at least at this point; but this doesn't sound good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #8
13.  "this doesn't sound good" sounds hollow and contrived on your part considering the context
of this interview. Remember that Clark's not running, and so, this wasn't a policy speech .....just some informal tibits.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LBJDemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #13
22. Is it because I'm an Edwards supporter?
You could at least, out of politeness, give me the benefit of the doubt. Are you bitter because the media promoted Edwards as the Southern candidate instead of Clark even though Clark did really well in NH? Well, that's not my fault. And I am a Clark supporter.

It's always a rude comment from you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 11:08 PM
Response to Reply #22
25. Do I sound like I was born yesterday?
You take a single sentence and sternly say...."doesn't sound good"....

Always a rude comment sounds like an exaggeration to me....but then, I forgot, I'm just pouting mad cause the media decided to kiss Edwards' ass instead of Wes Clark's! :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CarolNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #8
14. Well, he was speaking of the role he saw for labor unions...
considering the current state of the world. The fact is that offshoring does happen and lots of people are seriously hurt by it. Creating an environment where one doesn't have to count on such corporations totally for one's well being and livelihood, where you have a support system to fall back on if the corporation screws you, sounds like a good idea to me. Whatever measures are put in place, I don't think you're going to get these companies to all fall right in line.

It was just a quick little answer to one question. Perhaps in a situation where he had a chance to expand on his ideas to deal with the offshoring situation he'd say something that would make you feel better. And perhaps not. he's not going to make everyone happy all of the time but he sure makes me happy a lot of the time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 09:47 PM
Response to Reply #8
16. I don't get what you're getting from that quote, but that's fine.
My take is that he means for the American worker to be less dependent upon "the company" so that the company doesn't hold as much sway over the American worker.

It was more of a labor union comment than a policy comment.

Or, at least that's the way I viewed it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wesin04 Donating Member (188 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-20-07 06:01 AM
Response to Reply #16
27. That's exactly what he was saying,
He's saying if you are not so dependent upon all corporate benefits, you aren't going down if something happens. You'd have a support network for your benefit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 09:56 PM
Response to Reply #8
19. Well, here's more.....
Clark states......"You have to understand also, I taught economics and political philosophy. I’ve worked in the civilian side of the Office of Management and Budget in the White House, I’m a businessman. I have, like, four different businesses. I consult for various different companies and I’ve been around the block a few times. So I’ve got strong ideas.


A few are here..... http://securingamerica.com/node/2134

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CarolNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 09:59 PM
Response to Reply #19
21. I really liked this speech, Frenchie...
Thanks for linking it.

He has, I think, a lot of good ideas on how we can use and revitalize unions to help deal with the pressures and problems confronting the working man in today's world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
monkeyhq Donating Member (39 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 08:49 PM
Response to Original message
2. I love him.
I really, really love him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ValiantBlue Donating Member (32 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 09:00 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. He is a clear thinker
He has solid, well thought out ideas on everything (foregin and domestic policies). It would not suprise me if he is seriously mentioned as a Vice President candidate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elleng Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-20-07 12:34 AM
Response to Reply #5
26. How about encouraging him to run for PRESIDENT!
He'd be an asset to any ticket, especially a ticket that he leads; a 4-star general isn't exactly 'second-chair' material.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GainesT1958 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 08:58 PM
Response to Original message
4. Just some of the reasons why...
My wife and I supported him so strongly in 2004. As I've often said: the Repubs had THEIR Supreme Allied Commander as president (Ike); we ought to have OURS as president, too!

If Al doesn't run, I sure wish Gen. Clark would!

B-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
welshTerrier2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 09:07 PM
Response to Original message
6. publically financed campaigns? energy conservation?
any ideas what his views are on these issues?

too many Dems are pushing the x% from renewables by year Y. what guarantee is there that such programs will be sufficient to stem the tide of global warming? i think we need to cut back on our energy intensive lifestyles. We need real mass transit. We need mandatory reductions in auto use. And any other ideas we can think of. has Clark spoken about a real energy conservation program?

and publically financed campaigns? gotta push for that. there simply is no alternative. those failing to put this at the very top of their agenda do NOT understand the crisis we have.

does anyone know Clark's views on these issues?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 09:23 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. Here....
Stance on publically financed campaigns.
(note that this is from 2003....so I don't know if and how his views may have changed on this).
http://www.vote-smart.org/npat.php?can_id=53157#582

Stance on energy conservation program in 2003.
http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Wesley_Clark_Energy_+_Oil.htm
http://www.clark04.com/issues/environment/
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/1023
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Rinaldo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #6
15. Hi WT2
Somewhere on a yellow pad I have some notes I took while seeing Wes Clark speak at Colgate University in February, and I also have an audio tape. Unfortunately I had to leave on a business trip 6 hours after the event, so I didn't have time to write anything up immediately, and obviously I then didn't when I got back either. But if Clark announces I will tear apart the house and find it because of several things that he said that night which I would want to share more widely. One of them was a powerful statement in favor of public financing made during the question and answer period as an aside to a question asked. It wasn't a specific proposal Clark was talking about, but his sentiments were powerfully expressed. I know I was very very pleased by his comment at the time.

I don't have time now to begin to field your other question WT2, but I know that renewable energy has always been a topic Clark cares deeply and feels strongly about, and in fact it was the technology panel that Clark spoke on at last year's Yearly Kos.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
welshTerrier2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 11:06 PM
Response to Reply #15
24. long time no see ...
how's it going, buddy?

Clark sounds pretty good on environmental issues.

perhaps for another thread, i'm very, very concerned with his position on trade. would it be fair to call him a "free trader"?

am I correct in remembering that he supports NAFTA and the WTO? i'm deeply concerned about that but maybe that should be saved for a separate thread. it sounds like Clark, perhaps with the exception of coal, has some pretty good positions on the environment and global warming.

as for the business I raised about harsh, mandatory conservation measures, for example a 50% reduction in national auto use, I'd like to hear more about his views ... and yours ... i just don't see, given the risks, how we can avoid doing more than tinkering with technology. if we overdo it with conservation measures, we can always relax them.

Has Clark said anything about either ruling out being a VP candidate or even being a VP candidate on a specific ticket? I assume since he's keeping the door open that he has NOT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Rinaldo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-20-07 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #24
28. Short on time but a quick response
I don't think it would be fair to call Clark a "free trader" unless you use a pretty broad definition of that term. He comes much closer to being a "fair trader" who believes that increased international trade is ultimately benefitial to all concerned if managed properly. Yes the devil is in the details to be sure, but I've heard Clark comment on how in the initial surge of expansion that free trade agreements of the 90's ushered in, the U.S. did not adaquately anticipate and/or factor in the negative aspects of what went with that expansion the way it happened. Clark is a strong environmentalist and a strong advocate for Unions. I tend to trust his instincts here and I believe that his thinking in this area is still evolving. It is one of the areas that I would like to see Clark update and flesh out more in the context of a Presidential run. While he remains a non candidate it seems most of the media is only interested in Clark's views on national security.

Clark obviously didn't rule out running for President in 2004 either, but he strongly discouraged any interest in his becoming VP then. There are rumors that he told Kerry that he would not consider being VP unless Kerry was convinced that he could not win the race without Clark on the ticket. Even if you dismiss that as heresay, Clark's public comments and the lack of any "campaign" for him to win the VP slot in 2004 (aside from the efforts of some of his grass roots supporters urging Kerry to pick Clark) argue against his interest in that post.

But who knows for absolute certain under any and all circumstances? Clark hasn't absolutely ruled it out any firmer than Gore has ruled out running for Pres I suppose. I doubt Clark wants to be VP though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CarolNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #6
17. energy conservation
I actually think he's more focused on efficiency and developing energy sources such as wind and solar rather than things like mandatory reductions in auto use. I agree with you, though. We need to cut back on our energy intensive lifestyles.

One thing I do know is that he is always conscious of how certain measures will affect those least able to afford it. Listening to him speak on this one time made me think of things I hadn't considered before.

Here's a piece from his appearance at the Clinton Global Initiative (I think from 2005):

I'd like to just focus on transportation for a second. Because if you look at transportation, it is one of the toughest areas to get a grip on. Americans love their cars. Cars are not distributed in proportion to income. Lots of people who don't have very much income need their transportation. Lots of people in my part of the country drive a long way to work every day. And when people have that raise in gasoline tax and stuff, there's got to be some way to make that not so regressive in its impact.

So we really need to focus on cafe standards, raising cafe standards. We really need to make sure that those who are least advantaged in society don't bear the brunt of the burden in fixing the transportation usages. We need to look, in addition to cars and trucks ... we need to be looking at aircraft. Because aircraft are a tremendous contributor to global warming, and it's going to increase in recent years.

So I think it's appropriate to ask government to take strong measures like the measures that are illustrated in here. And I hope we'll be able to get the political head of steam up to do it.

http://securingamerica.com/node/1172


Unfortunately, I don't know what the "strong measures" he was talking about asking the government to take. It's not part of the WesPAC transcript and I don't think the Clinton Initiative site has transcripts from 2005.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
welshTerrier2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #17
23. his mass transit stuff and opposition to rationing gas by price sound good
thanks Carol ... i like the stuff you posted.

i hope we all demand more from all Democrats on fighting global warming. they are all pushing technology and renewables. i'm all for it. but we should make them answer this question: are their proposals sufficient to prevent an environmental catastrophe? they never address that. so, 15% renewables by 2020. fine. will that solve the problem? 25% by 2025. great. will that solve the problem?

if we can do this "on the cheap" that's just great. but we cannot afford to fail. my take is that until someone can answer the BIG QUESTION with reasonable scientific certainty, we have to "throw everything we have" at global warming.

it's not a politically popular thing to do. we can't let that matter.

and i like Clark's focus that for many, transportation is a necessity. rising gas prices are a highly regressive form of gas rationing. it is unacceptable to deprive people of NECESSITIES they cannot afford. Period. That goes for gasoline and mass transit fares and home heating and health care and food and clothing and shelter and perhaps even child care.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CarolNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-20-07 09:20 PM
Response to Reply #23
30. you're welcome
I agree that this is so serious and we cannot afford to get it wrong. Drastic measures, whatever, we've got to do something. There are friggin' whole islands, whole little island nations, that are going to sink into oblivion soon if we don't do something...and maybe it's even too late to do something about it already. And these people on these islands, the ones who will be affected most, they aren't the ones contributing to the global warming but here we are, consuming energy like crazy without a thought for how we're affecting anyone else. Arghh!

But here's where a little bit of my faith in Clark comes in. I know he's well aware of the problem. I've seen him speak on it a number of times. When asked to recommend a book for Clarkies to read a couple of years back, he immediately suggested one on global arming. He believes the consequences if we do nothing will be catastrophic. He often speaks of how we also have to deal with the consequences of the damage that's been done already no matter what we do to try to put a stop to further damage. And he's a problem solver. I trust, if there's a way to do this, he'll find it.

You know, I used to think that rising gas prices wouldn't be such a bad way to force people to conserve. But here I am sitting in NYC, with mass transit all over the place, able to obtain whatever I need within walking distance, from the post office to the grocery store to the laundry to the Western Union office to the shoe store to the pharamcist and so on and so on. I don't have a car. I don't need a car. And so it was OK as far as I was concerned if the gas prices rose. Self-centered thing that I am. But, as I said, then I heard Wes Clark speak about how those who can least afford to be affected would be most affected and I started thinking of a whole lot of things I hadn't considered before.

We do have to do something and it has to be something that's not going to place all or most of the burden on those who are already shouldering so much of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
welshTerrier2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-20-07 09:28 PM
Response to Reply #30
31. he recommended a book on "global arming"?
the military-industrial-Congressional complex is killing this country and now he wants the whole world to get in on the act ???

heh ... sorry, just couldn't resist ... i know what you meant to type ...

does anyone besides me find this typo a little humorous?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CarolNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-20-07 09:45 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. haha!
you have me chuckling to myself at least...I think I still have time to fix it but I'll leave it as is...I guess I should proofread before I submit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IA_Seth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 09:16 PM
Response to Original message
9. Inspiring and Depressing
Inspiring because I agree with 90% of what he says on all policies, domestic and foreign.

Depressing because I don't hear his type of leadership, knowledge, and willingness to say the hard things from any other candidates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 09:19 PM
Response to Original message
10. He's my guy! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UrbScotty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 09:29 PM
Response to Original message
12. WARNING: The site is EXTREMELY CONSERVATIVE - do NOT go there!
It's a shame, because Clark has some damn good ideas.

A better article on Clark's visit can be found here:
http://media.www.cm-life.com/media/storage/paper906/news/2007/04/04/News/Clark.Military.Should.Be.Last.Resort-2821672.shtml
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CarolNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #12
18. Geez....
Edited on Tue Jun-19-07 10:07 PM by CarolNYC
It is a conservative site but they did take the time to attend the press conference and speech, ask questions, and record both events. If a progressive organization from the school had done so, then I could have linked from a progressive site. Either they haven't got one there or whatever one they have didn't have it's act together enough to attend and record the events.

In any event, I thank these guys for making these files available, even if they are *gasp* conservatives!!! I wouldn't have heard them otherwise. Actually, one of these guys made an appearance at Clark's CCN blog to discuss some stuff from the speech with the CCNers. There wasn't exactly a lot of agreement but the conversation was very civil (It is possible to talk civilly with some members of "the other side". Who would think, huh??) and, although he disagreed with a lot of Clark's ideas on America's role in the world and Iraq, etc, he was impressed with Clark.

Oh, and thanks for the link to the school newspaper article. I wish they'd recorded the event.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-19-07 09:57 PM
Response to Original message
20. On immigration.....
Edited on Tue Jun-19-07 09:58 PM by FrenchieCat
Wes Clark stated..."On immigration, ... I guess they’re going to put a fence across the Southwest border or at least parts of it. You know the thing about a fence is that, if you don’t deal with the issues, the fence is just an eyesore and an embarrassment. In some places, a fence, for a little while, can help. In San Diego, it kept people from just running across railroad tracks and running past the INS, but the real solution is to deal with the government of Mexico.
http://securingamerica.com/node/2134

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ArkySue Donating Member (647 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-20-07 02:43 PM
Response to Original message
29. K and R
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 02:48 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC