Secretary of State Handel Reminds Voters to Bring Photo ID When Voting in the General Primary Election Run-off

Secretary of State Karen Handel today reminded voters to bring photo identification when participating in the August 5, 2008 statewide General Primary Election Run-off. Voters who did not participate in the July 15 General Primary or selected a non-partisan ballot will be able to vote in either the Democratic or Republican Party’s General Primary run-off. Voters who selected a Democratic or Republican Party ballot in the General Primary can only vote in the same party’s Primary run-off.

Voters will be required to show one of the following six forms of photo ID when voting in-person on Election Day:

A Georgia driver’s license, even if expired;
Any valid state or federal government issued photo ID, including a free Voter ID Card issued by your county registrar or Georgia Department of Driver Services (DDS);
Valid U.S. passport;
Valid employee photo ID from any branch, department, agency, or entity of the U.S. Government, Georgia, or any county, municipality, board, authority, or other entity of this state;
Valid U.S. military photo ID; or
Valid tribal photo ID.

If a voter does not have one of these forms of photo identification, they can obtain a free voter ID card at their county registrars’ office or the Georgia Department of Driver Services. Anyone with additional questions about Georgia’s photo ID requirement can visit www.GAPhotoID.com or call toll free (877) 725-9797.

Polls will be open from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, August 5, 2008. Voters can find voter registration information, including polling locations and legislative districts, by visiting http://sos.georgia.gov/cgi-bin/locator.asp.

Voters can request an absentee ballot from their county registrar’s office through Friday, August 1, 2008. All absentee ballots must be received by the county registrar by Election Day, Tuesday, August 5, 2008. Photo identification is not required when voting by mail.

A Special Primary Election will also be held on August 5 for state Senate District 13. The Special Primary will be held in Ben Hill, Crisp, Irwin, Lee, Tift, Turner and Worth counties, and a portion of Wilcox County. Because the Special Primary is in lieu of the General Republican Primary for state Senate District 13, voters will only be able to participate in the Special Primary if they choose a Republican or nonpartisan ballot in the July 15, 2008 General Primary or if they did not vote in the Primary at all.

Karen Handel was sworn in as Secretary of State in January 2007. The Secretary of State's office offers important services to our citizens and our business community. Among the office’s wide-ranging responsibilities, the Secretary of State is charged with conducting efficient and secure elections, the registration of corporations, and the regulation of securities and professional license holders. The office also oversees the Georgia Archives and the Capitol Museum.

Westmoreland: Don’t Leave Town Without a Vote on Energy

Today as members of Congress prepare to begin a five-week recess, U.S. Rep. Lynn Westmoreland implored his colleagues on the floor of the House to stay in session until they can vote on the American Energy Act, which would give our nation an “all of the above” energy policy to increase supply... Click to read: Westmoreland: Don’t Leave Town Without a Vote on Energy

John McCain On Barack Obama's "Air In Our Tires" Energy Plan

"Yesterday, he suggested we put air in our tires to save on gas. My friends, let's do that, but do you think that's enough to break our dependence on Middle Eastern oil? I don't think so." -- John McCain

John McCain
Town Hall Meeting
Racine, WI
July 31, 2008

John McCain: "Senator Obama says that he wants energy independence, but he's opposed to new drilling at home. He's opposed to nuclear power. He's opposed to an innovation prize for electric cars. My friends, we must begin immediately in drilling offshore so we can get some of the oil that's off our own coast. We have to begin that drilling and Senator Obama opposes it. He said that the high cost of gasoline doesn't bother him, only that it rose too quickly.

"Yesterday, he suggested we put air in our tires to save on gas. My friends, let's do that, but do you think that's enough to break our dependence on Middle Eastern oil? I don't think so. So I believe that every energy source needs to be part of the solution. We need to develop new alternative energies like wind, solar, tide, biofuels, but we also need to develop more existing energies like nuclear power and clean coal."

Watch John McCain

Background:

Barack Obama Said That To Save On Energy Americans Can Inflate Their Tires. BARACK OBAMA: "There are things that you can do individually though to save energy; making sure your tires are properly inflated, simple thing, but we could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling, if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could actually save just as much." (Barack Obama, Springfield, MO, 7/30/08)

· Watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XzZNP4tTfV0

Federal Government Must Respect Americans’ Civil Liberties and Privacy, Bob Barr Says

“The Olympics is about to begin in China, but visitors will find themselves living under the same restrictions on their liberties as Chinese citizens,” notes Barr. “The government is forcing foreign-owned hotels to install software to spy on guests’ internet use. The U.S. State Department says both phone calls and emails are subject to surveillance and warns that tourists ‘have no reasonable expectation of privacy in public or private locations.’ It sounds an awful lot like America today,” he says.

“Obviously our government is not the same as the communist government in Beijing. But our government has acquired from Congress—and sometimes simply seized on its own—the power to electronically surveil citizens’ phone calls and e-mails, ” Barr explains. “Under the Patriot Act and the just-expanded Foreign Surveillance Intelligence Act, the federal government can search our homes and computers and monitor our phone conversations and internet use with minimal – if any-- outside oversight. The federal government reportedly retaliated against Qwest Communications for being the only telecommunications company not to cooperate with the Bush administration’s illegal, post-911 phone surveillance program. Indeed, the president of the United States claims that he can designate an American living in America as an “enemy combatant” and thereby deny him any rights under the Constitution,” Barr adds.

“American legislators have been expressing outrage at China’s behavior, but many of them voted to authorize the U.S. government to spy on American citizens,” observes Barr. “America’s reputation, and its credibility to challenge other governments for human rights abuses, has been badly damaged by the U.S. government’s assault on the civil liberties and privacy of Americans in our country.”

“One of the reasons that I am running for president is to restore Washington’s respect for the system of individual liberties and limited government established by the Founders,” says Barr. Unfortunately, the Republican and Democratic parties represent the status quo. In fact, congressmen of both parties have routinely rolled over when presidents have demanded extraordinary powers. “As president, I would order the executive branch to follow the Constitution, and to limit its actions to those authorized by the nation’s fundamental law. I also would submit legislation to Congress repealing any extra-constitutional powers voted for the president. The nation’s highest-ranking public official must be bound by the law and Constitution like everyone else.”

Barr represented the 7th District of Georgia in the U. S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003, where he served as a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, as Vice-Chairman of the Government Reform Committee, and as a member of the Committee on Financial Services. Prior to his congressional career, Barr was appointed by President Reagan to serve as the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia, and also served as an official with the CIA.

Since leaving Congress, Barr has been practicing law and has teamed up with groups ranging from the American Civil Liberties Union to the American Conservative Union to actively advocate every American citizen’s right to privacy and other civil liberties guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. Along with this, Bob is committed to helping elect leaders who will strive for smaller government, lower taxes and abundant individual freedom.

Barr Promises to End Washington’s “Racial Spoils System”

“It took us many years to confront the problems of racism and discrimination in America, but we have come a long way in recent years,” notes Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party candidate for president. “The fact that a leading candidate for president is an African-American speaks volumes about America’s amazing ability to transform itself. This transformation is a testament to the activists involved in the Civil Rights movement four decades ago. But one unfortunate legacy of that era lives on—government racial preferences and quotas in contracting and hiring,” adds Barr.

“Equal opportunity is the essence of the American experience. That is one of many reasons racism and discrimination are so odious: they deny Americans the opportunities that naturally come with citizenship in this great nation. But programs which discriminate against non-minorities are no less unfair,” insists Barr. He points to Small Business Administration Section 8a preferences, Department of Transportation set-asides for minority- (and women-) owned firms, Federal Communications Commission licensing preferences for minorities, federal affirmative action programs and prosecutions that act as de facto quotas, and more.

“The collective impact of these measures is to create a racial spoils system, in which well-connected political operators, under both Republican and Democratic administrations are able to manipulate federal laws, regulations and policies on racial preferences in order gain advantage over competitors. These programs hinder rather than advance genuine racial equality and economic opportunity,” says Barr.

States have been taking the lead in passing constitutional amendments guaranteeing real equality under the law. “Two years ago, for example, Michigan voters approved the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative despite the opposition of virtually the entire political establishment,” notes Barr. “Similar measures are on the ballot this year in Arizona and Colorado, and one has been proposed in Nebraska. I commend activists like Ward Connerly and the citizens of these states for their willingness to fight for equality before the law. But while they can challenge state law, the many abusive federal programs remain unchanged.”

Unfortunately, “both Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. John McCain represent the status quo in Washington. Sen. Obama has denounced the state votes as ‘designed to drive a wedge between people.’ This year, while running for president, Sen. McCain says he supports the Arizona vote. But ten years ago he opposed a similar effort, sounding like Sen. Obama in calling it ‘divisive’. In contrast, I am truly committed to creating a colorblind society,” says Barr.

“If elected, I will insist that all of my appointees treat everyone— job applicants, program beneficiaries, interested citizens—equally. The government must value diversity, while at the same time emphasizing merit and guaranteeing equality. Toward that end I will dismantle discriminatory programs created by prior presidents, and I will send legislation to Congress to eliminate the statutory basis for today’s racial spoils system,” he adds.

“There is much to regret in America’s past treatment of minorities,” admits Barr. “But Americans have worked hard to overcome their mistakes. We should not compound the problems of the past by institutionalizing ‘reverse’ racial discrimination today. Now, more than ever before, we have a chance to build a society in which all Americans, in Dr. Martin Luther King’s eloquent words, ‘will not be
judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character’.”

Barr represented the 7th District of Georgia in the U. S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003, where he served as a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, as Vice-Chairman of the Government Reform Committee, and as a member of the Committee on Financial Services. Prior to his congressional career, Barr was appointed by President Reagan to serve as the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia, and also served as an official with the CIA.

Since leaving Congress, Barr has been practicing law and has teamed up with groups ranging from the American Civil Liberties Union to the American Conservative Union to actively advocate every American citizen’s right to privacy and other civil liberties guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. Along with this, Bob is committed to helping elect leaders who will strive for smaller government, lower taxes and abundant individual freedom.

Latest Congressional Indictment Emphasizes Need for Reform

“This week’s indictment of Republican Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska, the longest serving Republican in the Senate, illustrates how legislators have lost interest in upholding the Constitution or acting on behalf of the public. Although we don’t know the truth of the specific charges against him, Senator Stevens—the promoter of the infamous $223 million ‘bridge to nowhere’—epitomizes what is wrong with Washington today. Federal legislators view their role not as defenders of the citizens’ liberty, but rather as a huge piggy bank full of money at their disposal to buy favors and influence. Winning reelection is far more important to them than respecting the Constitution’s limits on government.”

“The problem of soft corruption in Washington, whereby politicians routinely abuse their power, is bipartisan,” observes Barr. “Often the abuses are legal. For instance, Representative Charles Rangel (D-NY), chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, solicited donations from corporations with business before his Committee for an academic center at the City College of New York to house his papers. Chairman Rangel also authored a $1.9 million earmark for what some critics term the ‘Monument to Me’ center. Moreover, he won two
Department of Housing and Urban Development grants worth nearly $700,000 to refurbish the building to house the center. Whatever the congressman’s intentions, he has misused his position and the federal treasury for personal benefit.”

The problem extends also to major pieces of legislation. Notes Barr, “Congress has just approved a multi-billion dollar housing bail-out largely drafted by Senator Christopher Dodd, who received a cheap loan from Countrywide Financial, which benefited from the bail-out. Congress, including Senators Barack Obama and John McCain, also has agreed to bail out Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, which are overloaded with bad mortgages backed by inadequate reserves, even though Lobbyists for both organizations have close ties to both presidential campaigns.” One of Barack Obama’s housing advisers is Franklin Raines, who was forced out as CEO of Fannie Mae for apparently cooking the company’s books and after receiving a multi-million dollar golden parachute; and Arthur Culvahouse, who heads John McCain’s vice presidential vetting process, was a lobbyist for Fannie Mae.

“Will the insider games and politics-as-usual never end?,” Barr asked, “they obviously won’t if the American people continue to accept the status quo. The political system is broken and neither the Republicans nor the Democrats will fix it,” insists Barr. “That’s why I am running for president. Only Bob Barr and the Libertarian Party offer a real opportunity for reform and change. It’s time to return the federal government to the purposes for which it was created, and make Washington a town in which we can be proud—or at least not perpetually embarrassed.”

Barr represented the 7th District of Georgia in the U. S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003, where he served as a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, as Vice-Chairman of the Government Reform Committee, and as a member of the Committee on Financial Services. Prior to his congressional career, Barr was appointed by President Reagan to serve as the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia, and also served as an official with the CIA.

Since leaving Congress, Barr has been practicing law and has teamed up with groups ranging from the American Civil Liberties Union to the American Conservative Union to actively advocate every American citizen’s right to privacy and other civil liberties guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. Along with this, Bob is committed to helping elect leaders who will strive for smaller government, lower taxes and abundant individual freedom.

Rely on Trade, not Aid, to Help Third World, Says Bob Barr

“The Senate is considering legislation introduced by Sen. Barack Obama to increase U.S. foreign aid. Although the bill’s name, the Global Poverty Act, sounds unobjectionable, the bill would perpetuate the myth that the industrialized nations can eliminate poverty around the world,” notes Bob Barr. “For the past half century the wealthy West has been transferring money—more than $100 billion annually in recent years, and more than $2.3 trillion total—to developing states. Unfortunately, the result has been more poverty and corruption in the recipient countries.”

The measure, already passed in one form by the House, calls on the president to develop a strategy to “cut global poverty in half by 2015 through aid, trade, debt relief,” and other policies. “But Sen. Obama is hostile to free trade, along with much of his Party. And debt relief is just a synonym for more aid. The bill’s most important – and outrageous -- provision dedicates 0.7 percent of America’s GDP to foreign aid, which would be roughly an extra $800 billion over the next dozen years,” notes Barr.

“Where does Sen. Obama expect to get that money, even as he proposes to increase outlays on many other domestic programs? And why does he think that governments which have wasted billions of dollars in the past will put this new money to better use in the future?” asks Barr.

In fact, “there is a far more powerful tool to revitalize Third World economies, and that is the private market,” Barr explains. “Last year $600 billion was invested in and donated to developing countries by private companies and individuals. Expatriate workers sent another $220 billion home in remittances. Poor nations can encourage even more outside assistance as well as domestic production by getting their policies right—liberalizing their economies, protecting human rights, ensuring respect for property rights, and enforcing the rule of law,” Barr adds.

“Rather than passing new laws and calling for new strategies, the U.S. Congress should reduce trade barriers, which would help poor nations participate in the international marketplace, and fix America’s counterproductive tax, regulatory, and budget policies, which would spur growth at home and trade and investment abroad,” says Barr. “What we need is change, but change back to an older policy of limited government and individual liberty, which is what turned America into the globe’s dominant economic power.

Barr represented the 7th District of Georgia in the U. S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003, where he served as a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, as Vice-Chairman of the Government Reform Committee, and as a member of the Committee on Financial Services. Prior to his congressional career, Barr was appointed by President Reagan to serve as the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia, and also served as an official with the CIA.

Since leaving Congress, Barr has been practicing law and has teamed up with groups ranging from the American Civil Liberties Union to the American Conservative Union to actively advocate every American citizen’s right to privacy and other civil liberties guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. Along with this, Bob is committed to helping elect leaders who will strive for smaller government, lower taxes and abundant individual freedom.

Statement by Mayo Clinic re: John McCain

Michael Yardley, Chair of Public Affairs at the Mayo Clinic, today issued the following statement:
"Senator McCain visited the Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, Arizona, yesterday for a routine check of his dermatological health. The biopsy that was performed did not show any evidence of skin cancer. No further treatment is necessary."

Bob Barr Criticizes Barack Obama Plan to Provide Health Insurance for Illegal Aliens

“Neither Sen. Barack Obama nor Sen. John McCain wants to talk about immigration, but the system is broken,” says Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party candidate for president. “Unfortunately, neither of them wants to take the tough steps necessary to secure America’s borders and institute a realistic policy to cut illegal immigration.”

An example of the problem is Sen. Obama’s oft-stated promise to “give health insurance to 47 million Americans who are now without coverage.” Of course, “Sen. Obama doesn’t plan on giving them coverage. He plans on making the taxpayers give them coverage. There’s a big difference,” notes Barr.

But there’s an even more fundamental issue. Approximately one-quarter of those persons who are uninsured are in America illegally. “It’s not fair to expect U.S. taxpayers to pay for health insurance for the citizens of another nation. America’s bloated welfare state is expensive enough, and even after recent reforms it still creates a disincentive to work. Handing out insurance to people who have come to America illegally will encourage even greater illegal immigration,” Barr explains. “And that, in turn, will push up government health care expenditures, creating a vicious cycle of more and more spending and more and more illegal immigration.”

“Instead of increasing the reward for violating the law and America’s borders, the federal government should move in the other direction. It must stop requiring hospital emergency rooms to provide free care for illegal aliens and the courts must stop forcing states to provide free schooling for the children of illegal aliens. This means changing the law and perhaps even the Constitution, but until we do so the government will continue to create a taxpayer-funded draw for illegal immigration,” says Barr.

“There is much to do to construct a rational immigration policy. We must start by securing the border. We should adopt a constitutional amendment, if necessary, to ensure that the children of those here illegally do not automatically become citizens; such a privilege should be accorded only those who are born in this country of parents in this country lawfully. We should also allow more highly-skilled legal immigrants, emphasizing economic productivity over family ties,” Barr explains.

“Most important, we should stop paying people to come here illegally. No more free health care. No more free education. And certainly no free health insurance,” emphasizes Barr. “It’s wrong to make Americans pay for medical treatment of other people. In fact, it’s completely counterproductive and illogical to do so. Eliminating incentives for illegal immigration will be one of the top priorities of the Barr Administration.”

Barr represented the 7th District of Georgia in the U. S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003, where he served as a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, as Vice-Chairman of the Government Reform Committee, and as a member of the Committee on Financial Services. Prior to his congressional career, Barr was appointed by President Reagan to serve as the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia, and also served as an official with the CIA.

Since leaving Congress, Barr has been practicing law and has teamed up with groups ranging from the American Civil Liberties Union to the American Conservative Union to actively advocate every American citizen’s right to privacy and other civil liberties guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. Along with this, Bob is committed to helping elect leaders who will strive for smaller government, lower taxes and abundant individual freedom.

Barr: Government's Fiscal Irresponsibility Reaches New Height with Housing Bail-out

“When George W. Bush entered the White House in 2001, the federal budget was in balance; no longer. This year the deficit is nearly $500 million – half a trillion dollars -- a record, and roughly three times larger than last year’s deficit. Yet, even as the economic downturn is forcing many American families to cut back their spending, Congress just passed and the president is preparing to sign a massive bail-out bill for the housing industry that significantly increases government red ink – raising our national debt to $10.6 trillion,” observes Libertarian presidential nominee and former Georgia congressman Bob Barr.

“Such bipartisan fiscal irresponsibility threatens to bankrupt our nation,” Barr notes, adding, “this housing bail-out, which provides massive new support to federally-sponsored mortgage underwriters Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which already hold some $1.0 trillion in bad loans –will expand further the federal government’s total unfunded liabilities. These new obligations come on top of some $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities for the Medicare and Social Security systems. When will the spending stop?” Barr asks.

“Clearly, the onslaught of red ink will not stop if either Barack Obama or John McCain is elected president,” Barr observes. “Both Senators Obama and McCain backed the housing bail-out, which will continue the practice of subsidizing irresponsible lenders and borrowers that caused the current problem, spend hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on “counseling” for homeowners facing mortgage problems, and enrich activist groups. Both of these major-party nominees support policies to impose massive regulatory burdens on the U.S. economy in the name of fighting climate change. Both of them want more military spending to defend wealthy allies and engage in nation-building, rather than to defend America. And both of them are beholden to lobbyists, who have helped push Congress to approve nearly $100 billion in corporate welfare every year.”

It is high time to say “no” to the status quo, Barr has said. “The American people simply cannot afford more of the same,” insists Barr, “which means more government spending; more special interest pay-offs; more fraud and waste; and continuing to treat American taxpayers like geese to be plucked rather than citizens of a free society and democratic republic.”

Barr has declared that if elected, he “will begin on Day One with a freeze on all discretionary spending,” and a “challenge to Congress to begin dramatically cutting federal spending, not just nibbling at the edges by going after pork barrel spending.” Barr also has said he “will insist that just as we had welfare reform in the 1990s, in a Barr Administration we will have corporate welfare reform, refocus our national defense policy on defense and closing overseas bases and bringing troops home.” Finally, Barr has said he will “push Congress to work with me to reform entitlement spending before it consumes our entire economy.”

“Returning responsible budget-making to Washington won’t be easy,” Barr admits, “but as Ronald Reagan challenged all of us, if not us, who? If not now, when? We owe it not only to ourselves, but more importantly to our children and grandchildren, to return to the principles of limited government and individual liberty.”

Barr represented the 7th District of Georgia in the U. S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003, where he served as a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, as Vice-Chairman of the Government Reform Committee, and as a member of the Committee on Financial Services. Prior to his congressional career, Barr was appointed by President Reagan to serve as the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia, and also served as an official with the CIA.

Since leaving Congress, Barr has been practicing law and has teamed up with groups ranging from the American Civil Liberties Union to the American Conservative Union to actively advocate every American citizen’s right to privacy and other civil liberties guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. Along with this, Bob is committed to helping elect leaders who will strive for smaller government, lower taxes and abundant individual freedom.

McCain: "Obamanomics Is A Recipe For Recession"

"Yet despite his obvious general intelligence, and uplifting and motivational eloquence, Sen. Obama reveals this startling economic illiteracy in his policy proposals and economic pronouncements." -- Michael Boskin

"Obamanomics Is A Recipe For Recession"
By Michael J. Boskin
The Wall Street Journal
July 29, 2008

What if I told you that a prominent global political figure in recent months has proposed: abrogating key features of his government's contracts with energy companies; unilaterally renegotiating his country's international economic treaties; dramatically raising marginal tax rates on the "rich" to levels not seen in his country in three decades (which would make them among the highest in the world); and changing his country's social insurance system into explicit welfare by severing the link between taxes and benefits?

The first name that came to mind would probably not be Barack Obama, possibly our nation's next president. Yet despite his obvious general intelligence, and uplifting and motivational eloquence, Sen. Obama reveals this startling economic illiteracy in his policy proposals and economic pronouncements. From the property rights and rule of (contract) law foundations of a successful market economy to the specifics of tax, spending, energy, regulatory and trade policy, if the proposals espoused by candidate Obama ever became law, the American economy would suffer a serious setback.

To be sure, Mr. Obama has been clouding these positions as he heads into the general election and, once elected, presidents sometimes see the world differently than when they are running. Some cite Bill Clinton's move to the economic policy center following his Hillary health-care and 1994 Congressional election debacles as a possible Obama model. But candidate Obama starts much further left on spending, taxes, trade and regulation than candidate Clinton. A move as large as Mr. Clinton's toward the center would still leave Mr. Obama on the economic left.

Also, by 1995 the country had a Republican Congress to limit President Clinton's big government agenda, whereas most political pundits predict strengthened Democratic majorities in both Houses in 2009. Because newly elected presidents usually try to implement the policies they campaigned on, Mr. Obama's proposals are worth exploring in some depth. I'll discuss taxes and trade, although the story on his other proposals is similar.

First, taxes. The table nearby demonstrates what could happen to marginal tax rates in an Obama administration. Mr. Obama would raise the top marginal rates on earnings, dividends and capital gains passed in 2001 and 2003, and phase out itemized deductions for high income taxpayers. He would uncap Social Security taxes, which currently are levied on the first $102,000 of earnings. The result is a remarkable reduction in work incentives for our most economically productive citizens.

The top 35% marginal income tax rate rises to 39.6%; adding the state income tax, the Medicare tax, the effect of the deduction phase-out and Mr. Obama's new Social Security tax (of up to 12.4%) increases the total combined marginal tax rate on additional labor earnings (or small business income) from 44.6% to a whopping 62.8%. People respond to what they get to keep after tax, which the Obama plan reduces from 55.4 cents on the dollar to 37.2 cents -- a reduction of one-third in the after-tax wage!

Despite the rhetoric, that's not just on "rich" individuals. It's also on a lot of small businesses and two-earner middle-aged middle-class couples in their peak earnings years in high cost-of-living areas. (His large increase in energy taxes, not documented here, would disproportionately harm low-income Americans. And, while he says he will not raise taxes on the middle class, he'll need many more tax hikes to pay for his big increase in spending.)

On dividends the story is about as bad, with rates rising from 50.4% to 65.6%, and after-tax returns falling over 30%. Even a small response of work and investment to these lower returns means such tax rates, sooner or later, would seriously damage the economy.

On economic policy, the president proposes and Congress disposes, so presidents often wind up getting the favorite policy of powerful senators or congressmen. Thus, while Mr. Obama also proposes an alternative minimum tax (AMT) patch, he could instead wind up with the permanent abolition plan for the AMT proposed by the Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charlie Rangel (D., N.Y.) -- a 4.6% additional hike in the marginal rate with no deductibility of state income taxes. Marginal tax rates would then approach 70%, levels not seen since the 1970s and among the highest in the world. The after-tax return to work -- the take-home wage for more time or effort -- would be cut by more than 40%.

Now trade. In the primaries, Sen. Obama was famously protectionist, claiming he would rip up and renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta). Since its passage (for which former President Bill Clinton ran a brave anchor leg, given opposition to trade liberalization in his party), Nafta has risen to almost mythological proportions as a metaphor for the alleged harm done by trade, globalization and the pace of technological change.

Yet since Nafta was passed (relative to the comparable period before passage), U.S. manufacturing output grew more rapidly and reached an all-time high last year; the average unemployment rate declined as employment grew 24%; real hourly compensation in the business sector grew twice as fast as before; agricultural exports destined for Canada and Mexico have grown substantially and trade among the three nations has tripled; Mexican wages have risen each year since the peso crisis of 1994; and the two binational Nafta environmental institutions have provided nearly $1 billion for 135 environmental infrastructure projects along the U.S.-Mexico border.

In short, it would be hard, on balance, for any objective person to argue that Nafta has injured the U.S. economy, reduced U.S. wages, destroyed American manufacturing, harmed our agriculture, damaged Mexican labor, failed to expand trade, or worsened the border environment. But perhaps I am not objective, since Nafta originated in meetings James Baker and I had early in the Bush 41 administration with Pepe Cordoba, chief of staff to Mexico's President Carlos Salinas.

Mr. Obama has also opposed other important free-trade agreements, including those with Colombia, South Korea and Central America. He has spoken eloquently about America's responsibility to help alleviate global poverty -- even to the point of saying it would help defeat terrorism -- but he has yet to endorse, let alone forcefully advocate, the single most potent policy for doing so: a successful completion of the Doha round of global trade liberalization. Worse yet, he wants to put restrictions into trade treaties that would damage the ability of poor countries to compete. And he seems to see no inconsistency in his desire to improve America's standing in the eyes of the rest of the world and turning his back on more than six decades of bipartisan American presidential leadership on global trade expansion. When trade rules are not being improved, nontariff barriers develop to offset the liberalization from the current rules. So no tr ade liberalization means creeping protectionism.

History teaches us that high taxes and protectionism are not conducive to a thriving economy, the extreme case being the higher taxes and tariffs that deepened the Great Depression. While such a policy mix would be a real change, as philosophers remind us, change is not always progress.

Mr. Boskin, professor of economics at Stanford University and senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, was chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under President George H.W. Bush.

Read The Op-Ed

McCain: Statement from Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart

Today, U.S. Representative Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R-FL) issued the following statement on Hispanic outreach efforts:

"Unlike Barack Obama, John McCain doesn't need an introduction to the Hispanic Community. John McCain has been working for more than two decades for the values, principles and issues Latinos cares about. Hispanics will elect the next President of the United States based on who has the best record, experience and is better prepared to move this country forward. John McCain wants to keep taxes low for hardworking families, and small business owners, Barack Obama has stated he will raise taxes. John McCain has an energy plan, and wants to lower gas prices, Barack Obama has no plan. John McCain always put this country first, Barack Obama changes his mind depending on the political calendar."

McCain: Statement on Barack Obama's Canceled Troop Visits in Germany

Today, Command Sergeant Major Craig Layton, USA (Ret.) -- who served as the Command Sergeant Major at Landstuhl -- issued the following statement on Barack Obama's canceled visit to Ramstein and Landstuhl:

"Having spent two years as the Command Sergeant Major at Landstuhl Hospital, I am always grateful for the attention that facility receives from members of Congress. There is no more important work done by the United States Army than to care for those who have been wounded in the service our country. While Americans troops remain engaged in two hot wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, there is a steady stream of casualties to the hospital, and a steady stream of visitors who wish to meet with those troops and thank them for their service.

"Senator Obama has explained his decision to cancel a scheduled visit there by blaming the military, which would not allow one of his political advisers to join him in a tour of the facility. Why Senator Obama felt he needed an adviser with him to visit U.S. troops is unclear, but if Senator Obama isn't comfortable meeting wounded American troops without his entourage, perhaps he does not have the experience necessary to serve as commander in chief."

Command Sergeant Major Craig Layton, USA (Ret.) was the Command Sergeant Major (senior enlisted soldier) at Landstuhl from 2003-2005 and has 31 years of active duty service. He was also the Task Force CSM twice in Kosovo while assigned in Germany from 1999-2005. He also served at the Brooke Army Medical Center and the Great Plains Regional Medical Command from 2005-2007.

Bob Barr Applauds Dick Anthony Heller and Other D.C. Residents for Continuing to Fight for Our Right to Own Firearms

“A little over a month ago, in District of Columbia v. Heller the U.S. Supreme held that the Second Amendment of the Constitution guaranteed individuals the right to own a gun,” notes Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party candidate for president. “That decision required the District to drop its ban on firearm ownership. Unfortunately, however, the city’s response to Heller demonstrates why gun owners can never take their rights for granted.”

The city council “has approved new regulations that make gun ownership as difficult and inconvenient as possible. Residents aren’t even supposed to keep their guns loaded, as if a criminal breaking into their house would give them time to get ready to defend themselves,” says Barr. Indeed, Mayor Adrian Fenty admitted that he wanted to err on the side of restricting firearm ownership. “But the Constitution requires that public officials err on the side of protecting the people’s liberties,” insists Barr. “That includes the right to own a gun.”

Now Dick Anthony Heller, after whom the original case was named, and his fellow plaintiffs have again filed suit against the District to vindicate their constitutional rights. “Dick Anthony Heller and others like him deserve our gratitude, since they are fighting for all Americans. The Supreme Court decision in Heller is a major step forward, but we must continue to be ever vigilant in the face of persistent attacks on our rights. We must to continue to fight to ensure that governments at all levels respect our constitutional right to own firearms,” explains Barr, a strong gun advocate in Congress and member of the Board of Directors of the National Rifle Association.

Barr represented the 7th District of Georgia in the U. S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003, where he served as a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, as Vice-Chairman of the Government Reform Committee, and as a member of the Committee on Financial Services. Prior to his congressional career, Barr was appointed by President Reagan to serve as the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia, and also served as an official with the CIA.

Since leaving Congress, Barr has been practicing law and has teamed up with groups ranging from the American Civil Liberties Union to the American Conservative Union to actively advocate every American citizen’s right to privacy and other civil liberties guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. Along with this, Bob is committed to helping elect leaders who will strive for smaller government, lower taxes and abundant individual freedom.

Bob Barr Criticizes “Jimmy Carter Era” Energy Mentality, Calls for More Energy Development

“As gas prices have risen, policymakers in Washington have exhibited a Jimmy Carter era mentality,” observes Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party candidate for president. “They are upset that Americans use energy, and want government to take over the energy marketplace. But it is government that has left us vulnerable to reduced supplies and higher prices.”

Adds Barr, “legislators denounce speculators, as if people never before attempted to predict future price changes. Politicians criticize oil companies, as if the firms were able to set prices at will. If so, why were prices so low for so long? Most of the so-called solutions being proposed in Congress amount to more regulations and more subsidies, and would make our energy problems worse.”

“One of the worst ideas comes from Republican Sen. John Warner, who wants the federal government to again set a national speed limit. The greatest nonrenewable resource is time, which is why Americans routinely broke the Washington-imposed 55 mph speed limit between 1974 and 1995. Sen. Warner may believe his time is worth nothing, but the Constitution does not empower him and his colleagues to decide how fast people can drive on every road in America. One reason we have state and local governments is to enact traffic laws. That is not the federal government’s responsibility,” explains Barr.

Instead, Congress should get out of the way of energy development. “America’s Outer Continental Shelf is thought to hold some 86 billion barrels of oil. The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge has some eight billion barrels. Oil shale deposits in America’s west could contain the equivalent of as much as 1 trillion or more barrels of petroleum. It’s time we allowed Americans to develop America’s energy resources,” says Barr.

“Congress also needs to reduce the regulatory barriers to new refinery construction, and change environmental rules which mandate the sale of different formulations of gasoline in different regions,” Barr adds. “These government controls drive up gasoline prices. We couldn’t afford the cost during good times. We certainly can’t afford to pay more for unnecessary regulation now.”

For years “Democrats and many Republicans have blocked responsible energy development in America,” says Barr. “The upcoming election gives the American people a real choice. Instead of voting for Tweedle Dee or Tweedle Dumb, they should choose a real alternative: Bob Barr and the Libertarian Party.”

Barr represented the 7th District of Georgia in the U. S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003, where he served as a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, as Vice-Chairman of the Government Reform Committee, and as a member of the Committee on Financial Services. Prior to his congressional career, Barr was appointed by President Reagan to serve as the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia, and also served as an official with the CIA.

Since leaving Congress, Barr has been practicing law and has teamed up with groups ranging from the American Civil Liberties Union to the American Conservative Union to actively advocate every American citizen’s right to privacy and other civil liberties guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. Along with this, Bob is committed to helping elect leaders who will strive for smaller government, lower taxes and abundant individual freedom.

John Oxendine to Speak in Fayette on Saturday

John Oxendine, current Georgia Commissioner of Insurance and candidate for Georgia Governor, will be speaking Saturday at the International House of Pancakes in Fayetteville. The meeting is open to the public. No RSVP required.

Oxendine will be speaking to the Fayette County Republican Party and guests. If breakfast is desired please arrive at 8:30 a.m. To listen to Oxendine and a brief presentation by current Fayette County run-off candidates, 9:00 p.m. is the official start of the meeting.

This is the regular First Saturday GOP Breakfast which is always open to the public, membership is not required.

John McCain Contradicts Himself on Taxes Again, Says Bob Barr

“Where does John McCain stand on taxes?,” asks Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party candidate for president. “He was for higher taxes before he was against them. But now he seems to be in favor of them again,” notes Barr.

“Perhaps Sen. McCain has been in Washington too long to realize, but Americans pay far too much for government. The Tax Foundation says most of us spend nearly four months working for the government, and that doesn’t include the cost of government borrowing or regulation. Yet Sen. McCain opposed President George W. Bush’s tax cuts as being unfair. When he decided to run for president, he decided that he favored making the tax cuts permanent. Which is the real John McCain?,” Barr asks.

Earlier this year Sen. McCain said “no new taxes,” no matter what, but his economic adviser Carly Fiorina recently encouraged the Democrats to be “creative enough” to propose a tax hike on wealthier Americans as part of a Social Security plan. “McCain’s spokesman then insisted that the candidate believes ‘we can fix Social Security without raising taxes,’ but this weekend Sen. John McCain told ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos that ‘There is nothing I would take off the table’,” notes Barr. “That language is Washington-speak and is nothing less than an open invitation to the Democrats to propose tax hikes in the context of negotiations concerning the budget or Social Security reform. We all know how such bipartisan ‘compromises’ end—with spending going up and taxpayers paying more.”

“Taxes are too high. We must reduce the tax burden and make paying taxes less complicated. To do that we have to cut spending. We certainly cannot afford more multi-billion dollar bail-outs, like the housing bill just passed by Congress, with the president’s—and Sen. McCain’s—support,” says Barr. “Real change is never easy to achieve, but it will be impossible unless the next president refuses to support a tax increase, whether in the name of deficit reduction or Social Security reform.”

Sen. McCain has styled his campaign “the Straight Talk Express.” Unfortunately, notes Barr, “the McCain train has run off the rails yet again, as Tax Hike John has taken command. The American people deserve to know which John McCain they would be voting for in November. We can’t afford to elect another status quo politician, who thinks America’s basic problem is that Americans pay too little in taxes.”

Barr represented the 7th District of Georgia in the U. S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003, where he served as a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, as Vice-Chairman of the Government Reform Committee, and as a member of the Committee on Financial Services. Prior to his congressional career, Barr was appointed by President Reagan to serve as the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia, and also served as an official with the CIA.

Since leaving Congress, Barr has been practicing law and has teamed up with groups ranging from the American Civil Liberties Union to the American Conservative Union to actively advocate every American citizen’s right to privacy and other civil liberties guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. Along with this, Bob is committed to helping elect leaders who will strive for smaller government, lower taxes and abundant individual freedom.

Michelle Obama to Address Women for Obama Luncheon in Chicago

Michelle Obama will address a gathering of Women for Obama in Chicago on Monday. There, she will discuss the campaign’s success in reaching women across the country, and discuss why her husband, Democratic Presidential Candidate Barack Obama, will be a champion in addressing the unique challenges facing working women and families. Mrs. Obama will also unveil a Blueprint for America’s Working Women and Families, detailing Barack Obama’s agenda to help women balance work and family, to keep themselves and their families healthy, and to prosper in a changing economy.

Michelle Obama kicked off the Women for Obama program in Chicago in April 2007. Since then, Women for Obama has created a nationwide network of tens of thousands of women working to educate and empower themselves on the issues that are most important to women and families. Throughout the primary, the group has played a key role in Senator Obama’s campaign through its fundraising, grassroots activity and online organizing efforts.

“We know the importance of women’s voices and votes in this election cannot be overstated, and I am so proud of the progress Women for Obama has made over the last year, bringing the issues that are most important to women and families to the center of this campaign,” said Michelle Obama. “As President, Barack will change Washington so that instead of just talking about family values; we actually have policies that value families. Policies that make it easier for working parents to support, care for, and raise their families; policies that no longer force working women to choose between their kids and their careers. Barack understands the struggles working women and families face every day, because the women he loves most in the world have gone through it. That’s why he carries our stories – and the stories of women he’s met all across America – with him every day.”

This luncheon, benefiting the Obama Victory Fund, will take place at the Palmer House Hilton in Chicago on Monday.

McCain Spokesman Tucker Bounds On Barack Obama's Cancelled Visit With The Troops

Fox News' Molly Henneberg: "Tucker joins us from Virginia. So Tucker, Senator Obama decided to not to visit wounded soldiers in Germany when he was there, and this has not gone unnoticed by the McCain campaign. In fact, just a couple of minutes ago on my Blackberry, I got a new statement from your campaign, from a military advisor, Lt. Col. Joe Repya. He says, this is quoting, 'For a young man so apt at playing president, Barack Obama badly misjudged the important demands of the office he seeks. Visiting with world leaders and speeches to cheering Europeans should not be a substitute for comforting injured American heroes.' So you guys think he really made a significant mistake by not going to Landstuhl Medical Center in Germany?"

Tucker Bounds: "It is significant and I think what is most significant about it, Molly, is it speaks to his judgment. He prioritizes throngs of fawning Germans over meeting with wounded combat troops in Germany. And, you know, it really speaks to the experience that Barack Obama lacks. This is a serious position he runs to fill, and he needs to understand exactly where his role is and how important it is to lead as the commander-in-chief."

Henneberg: "Now, the Obama campaign says they didn't want to do it for political purposes, but you were telling me earlier that your campaign wouldn't have criticized him even if he had gone?"

Bounds: "No, that's right Molly. I think there have been nine different excuses out of Barack Obama's campaign as to why that trip and that visit never took place, and all of them fundamentally ignore one fact, which is that he couldn't make time in his schedule to meet with wounded combat troops who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan. And it speaks again to the judgment of the candidate that's running to be the Commander-in-Chief of our military."

Watch The Interview

Senate Should Reject Housing Bailout, Says Bob Barr

“Both the House and President George W. Bush have surrendered in the battle to protect America’s taxpayers from yet another expensive and unnecessary bailout,” says Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party candidate for president. “The $300 billion measure yesterday approved by the House and endorsed by the White House won’t just pay off improvident borrowers and lenders. It will create yet another piggy-bank for activist groups at public expense. Now it is up to the Senate to say no, though that appears unlikely, given the size of the House majority and President Bush’s promise to sign the bill,” notes Barr.

“The sub-prime lending crisis is largely a crisis of government,” adds Barr. “Congress and both Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush pressed banks to lend more money in poor neighborhoods to less credit-worthy borrowers. The Federal Reserve pushed down interest rates to encourage more lending. Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development subsidized home ownership. Now we are all paying the price for a boom gone bust,” says Barr.

“However, Congress insists on exacerbating the problems it helped create,” adds Barr. “This legislation is a shameless special interest Christmas tree: it bails out foolish homeowners and lenders, provides money for the irresponsible Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, diverts taxpayer money to new home buyers, gives the earnings of Americans to state and local governments to purchase foreclosed homes, and takes more money from hard-pressed taxpayers for low-income housing. The bill also increases federally-funded housing insurance and reduces federal restrictions on state tax-exempt housing bonds. We are creating a no-fault economy, in which the taxpayers bail out everyone for every mistake they make,” Barr observes.

“At some point we must say no to more spending,” insists Barr. “We already have a national debt of $9.5 trillion. We are running deficits of $400 billion a year. The Iraq war could end up costing us as much as $3 trillion. It might take tens or hundreds of billions of dollars to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; in fact, they have as much as a trillion dollars worth of bad loans, which the taxpayers risk getting stuck with. Social Security and Medicare have unfunded liabilities in the tens of trillions of dollars. When will it stop?”, asks Barr.

Some people are confused by the federal government. “But Washington is really very easy to understand,” says Barr. “It means more government, more regulation, more spending, and more waste. The latest House bailout is more—much more—of the same. The latest bailout will even spend $210 million on “counseling” programs—which already are widespread—for people with problem mortgages. The taxpayers always are left to pay the bill. ”

Barr represented the 7th District of Georgia in the U. S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003, where he served as a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, as Vice-Chairman of the Government Reform Committee, and as a member of the Committee on Financial Services. Prior to his congressional career, Barr was appointed by President Reagan to serve as the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia, and also served as an official with the CIA.

Since leaving Congress, Barr has been practicing law and has teamed up with groups ranging from the American Civil Liberties Union to the American Conservative Union to actively advocate every American citizen’s right to privacy and other civil liberties guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. Along with this, Bob is committed to helping elect leaders who will strive for smaller government, lower taxes and abundant individual freedom.

Michelle Obama to Address Women for Obama Luncheon in Chicago on Monday

The Obama campaign today announced that Michelle Obama will address a gathering of Women for Obama in Chicago on Monday. There, she will discuss the campaign’s success in reaching women across the country, and discuss why her husband, Democratic Presidential Candidate Barack Obama, will be a champion in addressing the unique challenges facing working women and families. Mrs. Obama will also unveil a Blueprint for America’s Working Women and Families, detailing Barack Obama’s agenda to help women balance work and family, to keep themselves and their families healthy, and to prosper in a changing economy.

Michelle Obama kicked off the Women for Obama program in Chicago in April 2007. Since then, Women for Obama has created a nationwide network of tens of thousands of women working to educate and empower themselves on the issues that are most important to women and families. Throughout the primary, the group has played a key role in Senator Obama’s campaign through its fundraising, grassroots activity and online organizing efforts.

“We know the importance of women’s voices and votes in this election cannot be overstated, and I am so proud of the progress Women for Obama has made over the last year, bringing the issues that are most important to women and families to the center of this campaign,” said Michelle Obama. “As President, Barack will change Washington so that instead of just talking about family values; we actually have policies that value families. Policies that make it easier for working parents to support, care for, and raise their families; policies that no longer force working women to choose between their kids and their careers. Barack understands the struggles working women and families face every day, because the women he loves most in the world have gone through it. That’s why he carries our stories – and the stories of women he’s met all across America – with him every day.”

This luncheon, benefiting the Obama Victory Fund, will take place at the Palmer House Hilton in Chicago on Monday.

Monday, July 28

WOMEN FOR OBAMA LUNCH RECEPTION WITH MICHELLE OBAMA
Palmer House Hilton
17 E. Monroe Street
Chicago, IL

This event is by invitation only

Hannity On Barack Obama's Cancelled Military Visits

"So if you want my take on this, if you want to remember one thing about this trip, is that Barack Obama chose to work out rather than see the wounded troops because he couldn't bring Katie Couric, Charlie Gibson, and Brian Williams with him." -- Sean Hannity

"The Sean Hannity Show"
July 25, 2008

Sean Hannity: "You know I've found one article -- I hadn't known this -- I was telling you earlier the Obama campaign tried to blame the Pentagon. Here he was scheduled. He wanted to go visit this military hospital. It was on the campaign sheet to go visit the military hospital in Germany. And we find out that the only restrictions the Pentagon wanted to impose was their rule against turning visits by politicians into campaign events.

"And, by the way, you know, I know for a fact because I talked to these kids when I went to Walter Reed and Bethesda, that literally the president would sneak on over often to go see these, kids -- you never heard about it, it was never reported. As a matter of fact, I remember I was out there with Ollie North and they said, yeah the president was just here, two days ago, whatever it was. And you know, same thing with Donald Rumsfeld. Donald Rumsfeld used to go over there all the time, but he didn't turn it into a campaign event.

"Anyway, so Obama has it on the schedule. The Pentagon says, look, you can come but they're going to impose their rule against turning a visit by a politician into a campaign event. Now this is what we finally are finding out here. All the Pentagon said is they advised Obama's staff -- yeah of course he can visit the hospital and injured personnel in Germany but only in his capacity as a Member of Congress, in other words without the trappings of a political campaign, which by the way, it's unfair to use sick soldiers who risked their lives as a political prop.

"Obama apparently cancelled the visit and went to work out instead. He went to work out and then said it would be inappropriate as part of a trip financed by his campaign. Well, as John McCain said, it's never inappropriate if you are a United States Senator to visit a sick soldier. It's never inappropriate. There's not one taxpayer in the country that would have any opposition to this nor is there any rules against this. The only difference is the only restriction that was placed is that they don't want to have candidates, you know, using the appearance for some type of political benefit. That wasn't enough. He had to bring along of course the entourage and the multiple 10,000 media press secretaries along with him.

"So if you want my take on this, if you want to remember one thing about this trip is that Barack Obama chose to work out rather than see the wounded troops because he couldn't bring Katie Couric, Charlie Gibson, and Brian Williams with him."

McCain: "Obama's Cancellation Of A Military Hospital Visit Leaves Unanswered Questions"

"The varying explanations for the cancellation of Barack Obama's planned visit today to the U.S. military's Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany are leaving campaign-watchers puzzled." -- The Los Angeles Times

"Obama's Cancellation Of A Military Hospital Visit Leaves Unanswered Questions"
Michael Finnegan and Peter Spiegel
Los Angeles Times'
"Top Of The Ticket" Blog
July 25, 2008

The varying explanations for the cancellation of Barack Obama's planned visit today to the U.S. military's Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany are leaving campaign-watchers puzzled.

Obama had been scheduled to greet U.S. troops at the hospital just before leaving Germany this afternoon for Paris, where he met French President Nicolas Sarkozy at the Elysee Palace.

But first, Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs released a statement Thursday night saying the senator had decided "out of respect for these servicemen and women that it would be inappropriate to make a stop to visit troops at a U.S. military facility as part of a trip funded by the campaign."

The campaign amended that explanation this morning. Obama wanted to thank the troops for their service, but "we learned from the Pentagon last night that the visit would be viewed instead as a campaign event.," Obama advisor Scott Gration, a retired Air Force major general, said in a statement.

On Obama's flight from Berlin to Paris, Gibbs offered more details. Around July 15, the Pentagon approved Obama's visit. But military officials later invoked a rule on political activity at military bases and questioned whether it would cover Obama's visit, Gibbs said.

Obama spokesmen said they were seeking clarification on what the rule is. Gibbs also declined to speculate on why the Pentagon did not cite the rule until Wednesday.

That account, however, didn't square with the Defense Department's explanation. The Pentagon said it informed the Obama campaign on Monday that he and his Senate staff could visit Landstuhl, where wounded soldiers from Iraq and Afghanistan are treated, but that no press would be allowed.

"Sen. Obama is more than welcome to visit Landstuhl or any other military hospital around the world," said Geoff Morrell, the Pentagon press secretary. "But he has to do so, just as any other senator has to do so, in his official capacity. It is not acceptable to do so as a candidate."

"In an election year," Morrell said, "I don't believe that any candidate is allowed to visit a DOD facility with press."

He cited a Pentagon directive that activities "reasonably viewed as directly or indirectly associating the [Defense Department] with a partisan political activity" should be avoided.

Morrell said the U.S. military was prepared to accommodate Obama's traveling press and campaign staff at the passenger terminal at Ramstein Air Base, the U.S. Air Force base in southern Germany where Obama's plane had been cleared to land.

Read The Article

Barr Urges House Judiciary to Hold President Accountable; Testifies on Executive Branch Abuses

In appearing before the House Judiciary Committee, Bob Barr called for “a thorough inquiry into the Bush administration’s attack on the Constitution’s system of separation of powers and checks and balances.” He explained: “It is axiomatic that no matter how much power government has, it always wants more. While the executive branch under George W. Bush has taken this truism to new heights, it is not unique in its quest for power. Unfortunately, the other branches of government have failed to do enough to maintain the constitutional balance. Particularly disturbing has been Congress’ recent reluctance, in the face of aggressive executive branch claims, to make the laws and ensure that the laws are properly applied.

Barr informed Congress that the issue was more than an abstract legal controversy: The failure to check the executive “has inhibited the operation of the separation of powers, necessary to provide the checks and balances which under gird our system of constitutional liberty.” Thus, he added, “if the choice before this Committee is either a constitutional inquiry or a constitutional silence, then by God, I choose a constitutional inquiry” into administration misbehavior, "not silence."

Barr pointed to multiple administration practices: claiming that the president was authorized to override statutes and the Constitution, conducting illegal surveillance of the phone calls of Americans, using executive privilege to frustrate congressional inquiries, claiming “state secrets” to defeat private lawsuits over administration abuses, issuing “signing statements” to justify violating bills that he signed into law, and contending the president alone was authorized to take the nation into war. “In most of these cases, President Bush admittedly built on the extravagant claims of his predecessors. But that makes it even more important for Congress and the courts to confront the executive branch when it pushes too far,” notes Barr. “Otherwise we may never reestablish the constitutional balance.”

Responding to a challenge issued by Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC), Barr said that, if elected president, “I will not use signing statements as has President Bush, to justify disobeying laws passed by Congress. I call on Senators McCain and Obama to promise the same. The American people are entitled to have a president who obeys the law.”

That isn’t all, however. In response to another congressional query, Barr added: “If I am elected, I will stop using the ‘state secrets’ doctrine to hide government misconduct, start following the Bill of Rights, urge Congress to roll back recent legislation expanding surveillance of American citizens under the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act, order executive branch officials properly subpoenaed by Congress to testify, and stop misusing ‘executive privilege’ to avoid being accountable to Congress and the people. Then I would turn my attention to my next week.”

Barr represented the 7th District of Georgia in the U. S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003, where he served as a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, as Vice-Chairman of the Government Reform Committee, and as a member of the Committee on Financial Services. Prior to his congressional career, Barr was appointed by President Reagan to serve as the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia, and also served as an official with the CIA.

Since leaving Congress, Barr has been practicing law and has teamed up with groups ranging from the American Civil Liberties Union to the American Conservative Union to actively advocate every American citizen’s right to privacy and other civil liberties guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. Along with this, Bob is committed to helping elect leaders who will strive for smaller government, lower taxes and abundant individual freedom.

"McCain To Fannie Mae: Go Away"

Politics today is endless self-calculation, but Mr. McCain deserves some credit for bucking the Washington consensus on this debacle." -- The Wall Street Journal

"McCain To Fannie Mae: Go Away"
Editorial
The Wall Street Journal
July 26, 2008

In the rush to bulldoze the Fannie Mae-Freddie Mac and housing bailout bill through Congress this week, scant attention has been paid in Washington to how the U.S. system fell into this hole. Thus it was refreshing to see Senator John McCain step up and speak rude truth to his colleagues about the fiasco in an op-ed piece this week.

"Americans should be outraged at the latest sweetheart deal in Washington," the Republican presidential hopeful wrote in the St. Petersburg Times, stating the clear but all-too-often unspoken reality about this greatest of boondoggles. Yesterday 80 Senators voted to end debate on the bill. Only 13 voted against. That makes it all but inevitable that the bailout will pass today and go to the President early next week. Senator Jim DeMint has slowed the bill by requesting a commitment from his colleagues that sometime in the future, they would hold a vote on barring Fannie and Freddie from lobbying.

Senator McCain, who wasn't present for the cloture vote, also called for an end to their multimillion-dollar lobbying campaign. More importantly, he called for "making them [Fannie and Freddie] go away," as in, be no more. Receivership may indeed by the only option if a regulator can't get the far-flung activities of these two under control.

Politics today is endless self-calculation, but Mr. McCain deserves some credit for bucking the Washington consensus on this debacle. Barack Obama likely won't be in the Senate tomorrow for the vote on the bailout, but voters deserve to know whether he sides with the Beltway mortgage combines or taxpayers when it comes to Fan and Fred.

Read The Editorial And Read John McCain's Op-Ed
---
www.FayetteFrontPage.com
www.GeorgiaFrontPage.com
Community News You Can Use
---

Bob Barr Says: Maintain Economic Growth, Find New Energy Sources, Confront Global Warming

Bob Barr, former Member of Congress from Georgia and Libertarian Party candidate for President, today issued the following statement on energy and global warming:

As America confronts a variety of domestic and foreign challenges in the future, it is essential that we preserve our prosperous, productive, and innovative economy. Without a strong economic foundation, it will be impossible for our nation to deal with the many serious financial, social, and environmental problems facing the U.S.

One of the most complicated and controversial issues facing America is global warming. Although temperatures have increased in recent decades, the scientific community has been unable to make definitive judgments as to the past cause or future course of climate change. Indeed, the models which predict problems in the future did not predict the lack of any temperature increase over the last decade. Unfortunately, many climate processes are not yet clearly understood.

Thus, we need to conduct more and better scientific research about climate change to assess likely problems in the future and develop appropriate solutions. More dialogue is key to understanding global warming and developing the best means of dealing with the important questions surrounding the phenomenon. This dialogue must include scientists from all sides of the issue, including those who are skeptical of the assertion that humans are primarily responsible for global temperature changes and that those changes pose a substantial danger to humanity.

Moreover, we must develop cost-effective policies which will not undermine the U.S. economy. So-called cap and trade legislation, recently rejected by the U.S. Senate, would do grievous damage to the American economy, threatening to create a permanent recession by reversing industrial growth and destroying millions of jobs. Attempting to adjust global temperatures by artificially cutting energy consumption would undermine the very prosperous and innovative market system upon which we must rely for answers to everything from health care to international poverty to environmental protection.

Our energy future must be built on a commitment to both find more conventional energy sources and expand use of alternative fuels. The U.S. has large deposits of petroleum, oil shale, and natural gas. Barriers to their development in the Outer Continental Shelf, Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and other federal lands should be lowered or eliminated, which would provide Americans with a more secure source of energy over the short term and help bring down today’s high prices, which are causing such economic hardship to so many Americans. Such steps would also allow us to begin seriously considering and developing alternative sources of energy that will be essential in the long term.

The development of alternatives to fossil fuels would provide the country with many benefits, ranging from lower CO2 emissions to greater diversity of energy supplies. Given the failure of past government subsidy programs, this transformation can only be led by the private sector.

The government must remove regulatory barriers, which limit the development of alternative as well as conventional energy sources. Moreover, public officials should cease their demagogic attacks on the energy industry, which has made money only by finding, refining, and transporting gasoline, natural gas, and heating oil for the American people. Vote-minded legislators risk creating an environment in which companies are punished for doing good, which will only make them more reluctant to invest in all technologies and fuels, alternative as well as conventional.

Indeed, the challenge of promoting continuing energy innovation should cause us to reconsider other policies which discourage business investment and capital formation more generally. Americans for Tax Reform recently reported that the tax and regulatory burden rose at both the state and national level over the last year. America’s corporate income tax is one of the highest in the world, creating a self-inflicted economic wound. Congress now routinely votes for new spending programs for which we have no way to pay, putting our entire economic future at risk.

The challenges that we face are serious, but I am convinced we can find solutions. We are more likely to develop policies that simultaneously promote economic growth, expand energy supplies, and lessen any adverse effects of climate change, if we promote a genuine dialogue among contending factions. Although I do not agree with the tax and regulatory policies advanced by former Vice President Al Gore, I do believe his call for greater reliance on alternative energy could be given positive effect by American industry. Only the market economy can balance his passion with the reality of preserving the growing economy upon which our future—and that of our children and grandchildren—depends.

We must address the issue of climate change, but do so realistically, recognizing the importance of simultaneously expanding energy supplies and maintaining economic growth. Our greatest strength in confronting the problems of the future is our free market economy. Only by reducing government barriers to private research and development are we going to achieve the innovative, even transformational, changes necessary in the years and decades ahead.

McCain - "Taxpayers On Hook To Bail Out Fannie, Freddie"

"With combined obligations of roughly $5-trillion, the rapid failure of Fannie and Freddie would be a threat to mortgage markets and financial markets as a whole. Because of that threat, I support taking the unfortunate but necessary steps needed to keep the financial troubles at these two companies from further squeezing American families. But let us not forget that the threat that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to financial markets is a tribute to crony capitalism that reflects the power of the Washington establishment." -- John McCain

"Taxpayers On Hook To Bail Out Fannie, Freddie"
Sen. John McCain
St. Petersburg Times
July 24, 2008

Americans should be outraged at the latest sweetheart deal in Washington. Congress will put U.S. taxpayers on the hook for potentially hundreds of billions of dollars to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It's a tribute to what these two institutions -- which most Americans have never heard of -- have bought with more than $170-million worth of lobbyists in the past decade.

With combined obligations of roughly $5-trillion, the rapid failure of Fannie and Freddie would be a threat to mortgage markets and financial markets as a whole. Because of that threat, I support taking the unfortunate but necessary steps needed to keep the financial troubles at these two companies from further squeezing American families. But let us not forget that the threat that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to financial markets is a tribute to crony capitalism that reflects the power of the Washington establishment.

Fannie and Freddie buy home loans from lending institutions and reissue them as marketable securities -- creating a liquid market for mortgage debt that lowers borrowing costs for prospective homeowners. The two institutions have easy access to borrow at low interest rates because they were originally government agencies and continue to be viewed as being backed by the government. The irony is that by bailing them out, Congress is about to make that perception a reality, even though government backing is no longer needed for their original mission. There are lots of banks, savings and loans, and other financial institutions that can do this job.

Fannie and Freddie are the poster children for a lack of transparency and accountability. Fannie Mae employees deliberately manipulated financial reports to trigger bonuses for senior executives. Freddie Mac manipulated its earnings by $5-billion. They've misled us about their accounting, and now they are endangering financial markets. More than two years ago, I said: "If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose." Fannie and Freddie's lobbyists succeeded; Congress failed to act. They've stayed in business, grown, and profited mightily by showering money on lobbyists and favors on the Washington establishment. Now the bill has come due.

What should be done? We are stuck with the reality that they have grown so large that we must support Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac through the current rough spell. But if a dime of taxpayer money ends up being directly invested, the management and the board should immediately be replaced, multimillion dollar salaries should be cut, and bonuses and other compensation should be eliminated. They should cease all lobbying activities and drop all payments to outside lobbyists. And taxpayers should be first in line for any repayments.

Even with those terms, sticking Main Street Americans with Wall Street's bill is a shame on Washington. If elected, I'll continue my crusade for the right reform of the institutions: making them go away. I will get real regulation that limits their ability to borrow, shrinks their size until they are no longer a threat to our economy, and privatizes and eliminates their links to the government.

It's time to get America on the right track by creating the jobs that will build a strong foundation under our housing markets. We need to address the high cost of gasoline and other energy sources, and transform health care to be cheaper, higher quality and built around the needs of patients. But most of all, we need to reform Washington and wrest control from the special interests that have created this problem.

Read The Op-Ed.

Begin Constructive Moves with Iran, Barr Urges

“After emphasizing confrontation and thinly-veiled threats of war for many months, the Bush administration apparently may now be considering initiating some form of diplomatic relationship with Iran. Such a step is long overdue,” notes Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party presidential nominee. “An American diplomat attended talks recently between the European Union and Iran in Geneva. The U.S. should move forward and initiate direct discussions with Tehran. As famed British Prime Minister Winston Churchill told us, ‘it is always better to ‘jaw-jaw than to war-war,’” noted Barr.

“There is no easy answer to the threat of an Iranian nuclear weapon, which would be enormously destabilizing,” explains Barr. But U.S. intelligence doubts the existence of an active Iranian nuclear weapons program, let alone imminent development of a nuclear military device. “We have time to use diplomacy and work with allied nations to dissuade Tehran from taking this provocative step.”

“It is imperative to find a peaceful answer, since war with Iran would be disastrous for all concerned,” emphasizes Barr. “American troops in Iraq would be at risk. U.S. citizens would be targeted for terrorist acts. Tehran could retaliate against Israel. Oil shipments would be disrupted, causing energy prices to soar even higher. Allied states in the Persian Gulf would be vulnerable to attack. Chances for democratic change in Iran would be set back.”

“Military forces is sometimes necessary, but it always should be a last resort and based on true defensive necessity. Our best chance to avoid finding ourselves with no constructive options is to pursue a multi-pronged strategy that includes communication with other governments, including those of our adversaries,” noted Barr, who formerly worked for the CIA and had actually lived in Iran. Barr also notes that such a constructive and multi-faceted strategy is appropriate, since “many times, today’s adversaries wind up being tomorrow’s allies.”

“The U.S. government has an obligation to the American people to make every attempt to find peaceful solutions to even the most serious geopolitical problems,” the Libertarian Party nominee concluded.

McCain - That's Not What He Said: Barack Obama Divided About Jerusalem

Today (July 23, 2008), in an interview with ABC's Charlie Gibson, Barack Obama once again demonstrated that his words on Jerusalem really don't matter. When asked about his direct statement that Jerusalem "must remain undivided" and his subsequent backtracking, Barack Obama said, "I conceded that the wording was poor." Unfortunately, for Barack Obama, poor wording has consequences in foreign policy and it is still not what he said to AIPAC:

BARACK OBAMA: "I Conceded That The Wording Was Poor"...

Tonight, Barack Obama Said "I Conceded That The Wording Was Poor" When He Stated Jerusalem Should Be The "Undivided" Capital Of Israel. ABC's Charlie Gibson: "And then there's the issue of Jerusalem. You've said in the speech, to AIPAC, Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel. And it must remain undivided. When you said that did you not realize the significance that that has for so many people in this region?" Barack Obama: "Well, number one, the fact is that Jerusalem is Israel's capital. And so I was simply saying a fact, with respect to..." Gibson: "You said 'must remain undivided,' those are code words." Obama: "Well the issue of it being undivided, I have said and I said immediately after the speech that that word was poorly chosen, that what I was referring to is making sure that we're not setting up barbed wire across Israel..." Gibson: "But Senator, it was a very simple, declarative statement. It must remain, and you started the paragraph by saying, 'Let me be clear.'" Obama: "Charlie, the day after, or the day of making the speech I conceded that the wording was poor, and it's immediately corrected." Gibson: "Rookie mistake?" Obama: "Well I wouldn't say rookie mistake, I think that veterans make mistakes as well." (ABC's "World News Tonight," 7/23/08)

· Watch Barack Obama.

WORDS MATTER: ABC's Charlie Gibson Repeatedly Presses Barack Obama On His Rather Clear Words

ABC's Charlie Gibson: "When You Said That Did You Not Realize The Significance That That Has For So Many People In The Region?" Gibson: "And then there's the issue of Jerusalem. You've said in the speech, to AIPAC, Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel. And it must remain undivided. When you said that did you not realize the significance that that has for so many people in this region?" Barack Obama: "Well, number one, the fact is that Jerusalem is Israel's capital. And so I was simply saying a fact, with respect to ..." (ABC's "World News Tonight," 7/23/08)

ABC's Charlie Gibson: "Those Are Code Words." Gibson: "You said 'must remain undivided,' those are code words." Obama: "Well the issue of it being undivided, I have said and I said immediately after the speech that that word was poorly chosen, that what I was referring to is making sure that we're not setting up barbed wire across Israel..." (ABC's "World News Tonight," 7/23/08)

ABC's Charlie Gibson: "It Was A Very Simple, Declarative Statement ... You Started The Paragraph By Saying, 'Let Me Be Clear.'" Gibson: "But Senator, it was a very simple, declarative statement. It must remain, and you started the paragraph by saying, 'Let me be clear.'" Obama: "Charlie, the day after, or the day of making the speech I conceded that the wording was poor, and it's immediately corrected." (ABC's "World News Tonight," 7/23/08)

ABC's Charlie Gibson: "Rookie Mistake?" Gibson: "Rookie mistake?" Obama: "Well I wouldn't say rookie mistake, I think that veterans make mistakes as well." (ABC's "World News Tonight," 7/23/08)

WORDS MATTER: After Saying At The Annual AIPAC Policy Conference In June 2008 That Jerusalem Should Be "Undivided," Barack Obama Has Since Backtracked

At The Annual AIPAC Policy Conference, Barack Obama Says Clearly That Jerusalem Should Be The "Undivided" Capital Of Israel. Obama: "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided." (Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks At The Annual AIPAC Policy Conference, Arlington, VA, 6/4/08)

· One Day After The AIPAC Conference, Barack Obama Said The Future Of Jerusalem Would Have To Be Negotiated By Israel And The Palestinians. CNN's Candy Crowley: "I want to ask you about something you said in AIPAC yesterday. You said that Jerusalem must remain undivided. Do Palestinians have no claim to Jerusalem in the future?" Obama: "Well, obviously, it's going to be up to the parties to negotiate a range of these issues." (CNN's "The Situation Room," 6/5/08)

· "Facing Criticism From Palestinians, Sen. Barack Obama Acknowledged Today That The Status Of Jerusalem Will Need To Be Negotiated In Future Peace Talks, Amending A Statement Earlier In The Week That Jerusalem 'Must Remain Undivided.'" (Glenn Kessler, "Obama Clarifies Remarks On Jerusalem," The Washington Post's "The Trail" Blog, www.washingtonpost.com, 6/5/08)

WORDS MATTER: Barack Obama Actually Has A Record Of Saying Jerusalem Should Be "Undivided"

In An American Jewish Committee Election Questionnaire, Barack Obama Said "Jerusalem Will Remain Israel's Capital, And No One Should Want Or Expect It To Be Re-Divided." "The United States cannot dictate the terms of a final status agreement. We should support the parties as they negotiate these difficult issues, but they will have to reach agreements that they can live with. In general terms, clearly Israel must emerge in a final status agreement with secure borders. Jerusalem will remain Israel's capital, and no one should want or expect it to be re-divided." ("Barack Obama Responses," American Jewish Committee, http://www.ajc.org/site/c.ijITI2PHKoG/b.3878133/, Accessed 7/22/08)

In A 2000 Position Paper, Barack Obama Stated That "Jerusalem Should Remain United And Should Be Recognized As Israel's Capital." "Third, he addressed the issue in 2000 in a position paper on Israel as part of his unsuccessful congressional campaign that year. In that paper, he stated, 'Jerusalem should remain united and should be recognized as Israel's capital.'" (Rick Richman, "Obama's Redivided Jerusalem," New York Sun, 7/16/08)

Register for Change Bus Tour Continues Through North Carolina and Georgia

PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- After a successful kick-off tour through Texas, Mississippi and Louisiana last week, Governor Howard Dean continues his national voter registration efforts in North Carolina and Georgia Friday and Saturday. The tour builds on the overwhelming enthusiasm and voter turnout seen during the primaries as Democrats mobilize and organize voters for the fall election.

The cross country, "Register for Change," bus tour started in George Bush's backyard in Crawford, Texas, and will travel cross country heading into the Democratic Convention in Denver.

  FRIDAY, JULY 25

 Raleigh, NC
 REGISTER FOR CHANGE VOTER REGISTRATION EVENT IN RALEIGH
 North Carolina Democratic Party Headquarters
 220 Hillborough Street
 Raleigh, NC

 Event Time: 9:00 AM - 10:00 AM

 * For more information contact Caroline Ciccone at CicconeC@dnc.org.

 Greensboro, NC
 REGISTER FOR CHANGE VOTER REGISTRATION EVENT IN GREENSBORO
 Governmental Plaza
 Greene Street (between West Market and Washington)
 Greensboro, NC

 Event Time: 12:00 PM - 1:15 PM

 * For more information contact Caroline Ciccone at CicconeC@dnc.org.

 Charlotte, NC
 REGISTER FOR CHANGE VOTER REGISTRATION EVENT IN CHARLOTTE
 Margery Thompson Professional Development Center
 428 West Boulevard
 Charlotte, NC

 Event time 3:30 PM - 4:45 PM

 * For more information contact Caroline Ciccone at CicconeC@dnc.org.

 SATURDAY, JULY 26
 Savannah, GA
 REGISTER FOR CHANGE VOTER REGISTRATION EVENT IN SAVANNAH
 YMCA - West Broad Street
 1110 May St
 Savannah, GA

 Event Time: 8:30 AM - 9:30 AM

 * For more information contact Caroline Ciccone at CicconeC@dnc.org.

 Macon, GA
 REGISTER FOR CHANGE VOTER REGISTRATION EVENT IN MACON
 Macon Centreplex Parking Lot
 200 Coliseum Drive
 Macon, GA

 Event Time: 1:30 PM - 2:30 PM

 * For more information contact Caroline Ciccone at CicconeC@dnc.org.

 Atlanta, GA
 REGISTER FOR CHANGE RALLY IN ATLANTA
 Georgia Freight Depot
 65 Martin Luther King Jr. Drive
 Atlanta, Georgia
 Event Time: 5:15 PM - 6:30 PM
 Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin will accompany Gov. Dean at the rally.
 * For more information contact Caroline Ciccone at CicconeC@dnc.org.

McCain - That's Not What He Said: Barack Obama On "Without Precondition"

Today, in Israel, Barack Obama once again demonstrated that his words really don't matter. When asked about his support for meeting with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad "without precondition," Barack Obama said, "I think what I said" was that he would meet with these leaders "at my time and choosing" and with "preparation." Unfortunately, for Barack Obama, that is not what he said and campaigned on for months:

BARACK OBAMA: "What I Said" Was...

Today, Barack Obama Claimed He Said Last Year That He Would Meet With Leaders "At My Time And Choosing" With "Preparation." QUESTIONER: "A year ago in South Carolina you said you would meet, in your first year as president, with President Ahmadinejad without preconditions. Is there anything you have heard today here in discussions with Israeli leaders that has made you rethink that pledge or are you still standing by that?" OBAMA: "Dan, I think you have to take a look at what the question was in South Carolina and how I responded. The question is would I meet with leaders without preconditions in pursuit ... But I think what I said in response was that I would, at my time and choosing, be willing to meet with any leader if I thought it would promote the national security interests of the United States of America. , And that continues to be my position, that if I think that I can get a deal that is going to advance o ur cause, then I would consider that opportunity. But what I also said was that there is a difference between meeting without preconditions and meeting without preparation." (Barack Obama, Press Conference, Sderot, Israel, 7/23/08)

· Watch Barack Obama.

WORDS MATTER: Barack Obama Said He Would Meet With Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad "Without Precondition"

One Year Ago Today On July 23, 2007, Barack Obama Announced He Would Personally Meet With Leaders Of Iran, North Korea, Syria And Other Hostile Nations "Without Precondition." QUESTION: "[W]ould you be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of your administration, in Washington or anywhere else, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea, in order to bridge the gap that divides our countries?"... OBAMA: "I would. And the reason is this, that the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them -- which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration - is ridiculous." (CNN/YouTube Democrat Presidential Candidate Debate, Charleston, SC, 7/23/07)

· Watch Barack Obama Say "I Would" Meet Unconditionally With Leaders Of Iran, North Korea, Syria, And Other Nations

· At A September 2007 Press Conference, Barack Obama Confirmed That He Would Meet Specifically With Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Question: "Senator, you've said before that you'd meet with President Ahmadinejad ..." Obama: "Uh huh." Question: "Would you still meet with him today?" Obama: "Yeah, nothing's changed with respect to my belief that strong countries and strong presidents talk to their enemies and talk to their adversaries. I find many of President Ahmadinejad's statements odious and I've said that repeatedly. And I think that we have to recognize that there are a lot of rogue nations in the world that don't have American interests at heart. But what I also believe is that, as John F. Kennedy said, we should never negotiate out of fear but we should never fear to negotiate." (Sen. Barack Obama, Press Conference, New York, NY, 9/24/07)

· Barack Obama's Campaign Website: "Obama Is The Only Major Candidate Who Supports Tough, Direct Presidential Diplomacy With Iran Without Preconditions." "Diplomacy: Obama is the only major candidate who supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions. Now is the time to pressure Iran directly to change their troubling behavior. Obama would offer the Iranian regime a choice. If Iran abandons its nuclear program and support for terrorism, we will offer incentives like membership in the World Trade Organization, economic investments, and a move toward normal diplomatic relations. If Iran continues its troubling behavior, we will step up our economic pressure and political isolation. Seeking this kind of comprehensive settlement with Iran is our best way to make progress." (Obama Campaign Website, http:/ /www.barackobama.com/issues/foreignpolicy/, Accessed 5/15/08)

Bob Barr Says Privatize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, End Government Subsidies

The latest financial crisis involving Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which guarantee home mortgages, demonstrates yet again how government intervention in private markets almost always comes to grief. Both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are nominally private, but were created by Congress and enjoy significant advantages over truly private companies, including cheaper borrowing, lower capital requirements, and an implicit federal guarantee.

As a result, the two organizations behaved irresponsibly, confident that they were “too big to fail.” They own $5.1 trillion in mortgage debt, almost half of the nation’s total. With the sub-prime lending crisis in full swing, their losses are up, their capital is down, and their ability to borrow is falling. Immediate privatization is difficult because the markets doubt the organizations can survive without government support. Insolvency and a forced asset sale would roil both the housing and financial markets.

These problems are almost entirely the fault of the federal government. Congress created programs to artificially inflate the housing market, established Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to be exempt from normal scrutiny, oversight, and competition, and expanded their activities in response to the sub-prime lending meltdown. Government must get out of the mortgage business, but must do so in a way that least harms taxpayers and the economy.

In the short-term, government has little choice but to provide an explicit but limited loan guarantee, thereby capping the public’s liability, now widely assumed to be without limit. At the same time, Congress must restrict the number and size of loans by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and set more substantial capital requirements, while authorizing greater Federal Reserve oversight of their operations. The organizations must begin downsizing their portfolios, reducing their risks, and reestablishing their financial credibility.

However, the ultimate objective must be full privatization—with both organizations turned into private companies, responsible for their loan portfolios, and without access to government guarantees or other forms of support. Government should not be in the business of creating multi-billion dollar enterprises to manipulate markets for the benefit of one group or another—in this case, in order to shave the interest rates for selected home buyers by a quarter or half percent.

Finally, we must learn the lesson that government subsidy programs almost always end up running out of control, causing financial disaster for taxpayers. A Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac collapse could cost most than $1 trillion. The U.S. already has a $14 trillion national debt. Far worse, the unfunded liabilities of Social Security and Medicare top $100 trillion. American taxpayers cannot afford additional special interest subsidies and bail-outs.

Moreover, the entire economy suffers from the sort of market manipulation practiced by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as well as the multitude of direct housing subsidy programs. Indeed, the impact of the sub-prime lending crisis has gone far beyond the housing market. The largely unaccountable Federal Reserve has made many of these problems worse, by extending further bail-outs and creating additional taxpayer liabilities. Congress must limit the Fed’s activities as well, and force it to act with greater transparency and oversight.