Natural resources are so vast that no single individual or business is going to protect them; they don't have an incentive to.
We absolutely have to restrain concentrations of wealth in industry from spoiling the situation for everybody.
It's healthy for government to be a kind of moral catalyst, using the bully pulpit of high office.
I think coercive taxation is theft, and government has a moral duty to keep it to a minimum.
My slogan when I ran was that there is no such thing as government money, there is only taxpayer's money, and that cut pretty deep.
Micro managing anything is not a great role for government.
It's not good for government to tell people that the world owes them a living and that things are free.
I think transportation and corrections are not the first two areas that I would go looking for massive change.
I extend that to the abortion issue, I extend that to the so-called gay rights issue, I think this is a freedom principle and consistent with the analysis in the economic area as well.
We need a complete ban on soft money, which is sort of an enveloping problem, and a ceiling on the amount of money that can be spent on a given race.
Do we believe that there is equal economic opportunity out there in the real world, right now, for each and every one of these groups? If we believed in the tooth fairy, if we believed in the Easter Bunny, we might well believe that.
I suggest to you that increasing the size of America's economic pie - which can be achieved only if everybody has a seat at the table - is the most important challenge facing our country today.
Speaking of tax fairness, it was Senator Kerry who voted to increase the income tax on senior citizens on Social Security, earning as little as $32,000 a year.
People aren't stupid. I mean, people remember in 1990, the unemployment rate was 10 percent. Now it's 4 _ percent. We've got 1/4 million jobs that we've created.
