NEVERENDING ♾️ The NEVERENDING Political Discussion Thread

[The One]

Wrong

The only think hilarious is the concept that the extremest republicans are any worse than the extremest democrats. Cantor turned on the tea-party several times and had a delusional concept of immigration.

I agree... which is why I don't trust any of them to do the right thing. They all want to take from some group to give to their special interest projects.

Requiring that at least SOME of the RECORD profit goes to the people generating the productivity to make that kind of success happen......is the right thing. "They" use to give just enough back that this was never a real issue before.....now their GREED is what caused all of this to even be on our radar.

 

[michaelskis]

Requiring that at least SOME of the RECORD profit goes to the people generating the productivity to make that kind of success happen......is the right thing. "They" use to give just enough back that this was never a real issue before.....now their GREED is what caused all of this to even be on our radar.

Let me guess... business didn't build that, the government did.

I agree that 'some' of the funding should go to particular things in the private sector. For example, Space X is able to operate for a far lower price than the government can do it. (LINK)

But then it all comes back down to 1913 when the 16th and 17th amendments were passed along with the creation of the Federal Reserve. Before that the States had more control on funding projects in their States.

 

[The One]

Well.....

Let me guess... business didn't build that, the government did.

I agree that 'some' of the funding should go to particular things in the private sector. For example, Space X is able to operate for a far lower price than the government can do it. (LINK)

But then it all comes back down to 1913 when the 16th and 17th amendments were passed along with the creation of the Federal Reserve. Before that the States had more control on funding projects in their States.

Government is the reason we don't speak either Japanese or German right now......or Spanish (officially) or Italian or Russian for that matter.......

I wonder how well business would have done in this country without the interstate system??? Without the freight rail system that was more heavily subsidized than ANY other transportation system in the HISTORY OF EARTH, or clean water to keep people alive more than 40 years to buy more stuff..... The list goes on for sooooo long that I could write a great big book.....

 

[ColoGI]

Cantor turned on the tea-party several times and had a delusional concept of immigration.

.

Well, he's a movement conservative and TeaPurty is billionaire insurgency. So of course he's turning on the TP. And his concept of immigration is in line with ~3/4 of Americans. So delusional only those in the bubble and the residents of gerrymandered districts who have self-sorted to rural areas.

 

[imaplanner]

.

The letter behind their name is becoming less and less important as party ideology is just lip service. They all answer to the special interest groups and those with big corporate funding. That is why nothing meaningful that will actually help Americans gets passed.

I used to be in general agreement, that the parties were the same other than social issues. Over the last two years or so I've realized that this is not the case, and that the people pushing the idea that the parties are the same do so in order to discourage turnout which leads to republican victories. Why are the parties not the same? Take citizens united and McCutcheon. One party, the democrats, have been pushing for constitutional fixes to take the money and the legal bribery out of politics. One party, the republicans, are pushing to enable more money and legal bribery in politics. They are not the same. The democrats suck, but the only way we are going to get money and corruption out of politics is by voting republicans out. I know you listen to and read Mark levin, and so do I because I know how influential he is in the republican party. He is adamant, as are most republicans, that more spending in politics is good and that any attempts to limit money in politics is an attack on free speech. If you really think money in politics is the driving force of our country's downhill spiral then the difference between the two parties could not be clearer.

 

[michaelskis]

Government is the reason we don't speak either Japanese or German right now......or Spanish (officially) or Italian or Russian for that matter.......

I wonder how well business would have done in this country without the interstate system??? Without the freight rail system that was more heavily subsidized than ANY other transportation system in the HISTORY OF EARTH, or clean water to keep people alive more than 40 years to buy more stuff..... The list goes on for sooooo long that I could write a great big book.....

Then get writing. :lmao:

I am not anti-government, I am anti-excessive-government. Article I Section 8 of the Constitution calls for the federal government to establish and maintain an army and a navy for national defense. Link to the Constitution of the United States The term 'army' in this context was used to describe the organization of armed troops. The term navy was the ships and other water based infrastructure.

The interstate highway system could still have existed without the passing of the 16th or 17th amendment, the creation of the federal reserve, or several other stupid things that happened during that time period.

I am not saying that the federal government shouldn't exist, I am saying that it should not have the power, money, or control that we see today.

I used to be in general agreement, that the parties were the same other than social issues. Over the last two years or so I've realized that this is not the case, and that the people pushing the idea that the parties are the same do so in order to discourage turnout which leads to republican victories. Why are the parties not the same? Take citizens united and McCutcheon. One party, the democrats, have been pushing for constitutional fixes to take the money and the legal bribery out of politics. One party, the republicans, are pushing to enable more money and legal bribery in politics. They are not the same. The democrats suck, but the only way we are going to get money and corruption out of politics is by voting republicans out. I know you listen to and read Mark levin, and so do I because I know how influential he is in the republican party. He is adamant, as are most republicans, that more spending in politics is good and that any attempts to limit money in politics is an attack on free speech. If you really think money in politics is the driving force of our country's downhill spiral then the difference between the two parties could not be clearer.

McCutcheon is a serious SOTUS blunder. There should be a limit and PACS and super PACs should be done away with. Let a person run on their merits, not their financial contributors.

For years and years the democrats have been so against big money, and wanted to tax them more... but it never happens. For years and years the pro-life movement has been affiliated with the Republicans... yet abortion is still legal in the US. My point is they are all talk but when it comes down to it, the special interest groups actually prevent them from doing anything more than maintain the current direction of spend and increase the size of government while making it harder for middle class jobs, small businesses, and middle class Americans to live here.

At one point I did read Mark Levin. None of the stations here carried him so I have never heard his show. But over the past few years, I have been reading more and more constitutional history and have come to the conclusion that Levin doesn't know what is is talking about half the time. He believes in a strong federal government and a very weak local government.

 

[wahday]

I used to be in general agreement, that the parties were the same other than social issues. Over the last two years or so I've realized that this is not the case, and that the people pushing the idea that the parties are the same do so in order to discourage turnout which leads to republican victories. Why are the parties not the same? Take citizens united and McCutcheon. One party, the democrats, have been pushing for constitutional fixes to take the money and the legal bribery out of politics. One party, the republicans, are pushing to enable more money and legal bribery in politics. They are not the same. The democrats suck, but the only way we are going to get money and corruption out of politics is by voting republicans out. I know you listen to and read Mark levin, and so do I because I know how influential he is in the republican party. He is adamant, as are most republicans, that more spending in politics is good and that any attempts to limit money in politics is an attack on free speech. If you really think money in politics is the driving force of our country's downhill spiral then the difference between the two parties could not be clearer.

I am very much in the same camp. Its hard for me to believe (or admit), but I actually said out loud at the time that there really didn’t seem to be much difference between George W Bush and Al Gore. They were both saying the same crap and I was feeling particularly anti-establishment at the time. I feel like I am in a confessional here, but enough time has elapsed that I can say publicly that I voted for Nader. WTF?! Looking back, its hard for me to believe that I ever felt that way, but there it is. The differences seem much more pronounced these days. But while I did switch from an Independent to a Democrat, I am not above criticizing the Dem party or voting for someone other than the party nominees. I can’t really tell if the differences are actually more pronounced between the parties or if my view has changed as I age. Probably a combination of the two.

 

[Linda_D]

Then get writing. :lmao:

I am not anti-government, I am anti-excessive-government. Article I Section 8 of the Constitution calls for the federal government to establish and maintain an army and a navy for national defense. Link to the Constitution of the United States The term 'army' in this context was used to describe the organization of armed troops. The term navy was the ships and other water based infrastructure.

The interstate highway system could still have existed without the passing of the 16th or 17th amendment, the creation of the federal reserve, or several other stupid things that happened during that time period.

I am not saying that the federal government shouldn't exist, I am saying that it should not have the power, money, or control that we see today.

And who, exactly, should have "the power, money, or control" in any nation if NOT the elected representative government? Big business? Mobs of vigilantes with their own private arsenals? An oligarchy of technocrats?

You (ie,"small government" conservatives of various ilks) deny the reality that the US in 2014 is NOT the same nation it was in 1814. You foster the fiction that this country is still only a collection of isolated, disparate states with markedly different ways of life, when, in fact, we have become far more homogenous in our culture even as our racial, ethnic, and religious backgrounds have become much more diverse. We get our information from the same sources, we shop at the same stores, we follow the same sports, we eat the same restaurants, etc, etc whether we live in New York or Michigan or South Carolina or Nebraska or Arizona or Oregon or Alaska.

The idea of a strong national government isn't some new idea that evil "librals" invented recently. The Civil War settled the issue of whether the US was a nation or a collection of states once and for all. Before the Civil War, people said "the United States are". After the Civil War, "the United States is" became the accepted usage, and reflected the change in the national mind set. That was 150 years ago. It's time for "small government" conservatives to catch up to the rest of the country.

 

[michaelskis]

And who, exactly, should have "the power, money, or control" in any nation if NOT the elected representative government? Big business? Mobs of vigilantes with their own private arsenals? An oligarchy of technocrats?

You (ie,"small government" conservatives of various ilks) deny the reality that the US in 2014 is NOT the same nation it was in 1814. You foster the fiction that this country is still only a collection of isolated, disparate states with markedly different ways of life, when, in fact, we have become far more homogenous in our culture even as our racial, ethnic, and religious backgrounds have become much more diverse. We get our information from the same sources, we shop at the same stores, we follow the same sports, we eat the same restaurants, etc, etc whether we live in New York or Michigan or South Carolina or Nebraska or Arizona or Oregon or Alaska.

The idea of a strong national government isn't some new idea that evil "librals" invented recently. The Civil War settled the issue of whether the US was a nation or a collection of states once and for all. Before the Civil War, people said "the United States are". After the Civil War, "the United States is" became the accepted usage, and reflected the change in the national mind set. That was 150 years ago. It's time for "small government" conservatives to catch up to the rest of the country.

The states should have the power and the control of direct taxation as they are in the best position to serve the residents directly. At times it is a good idea to pool funding for federal use and federal projects, but with far better oversight than what we have had for the past 100 years.

Before 1913 there was a deliberate check and balance system. The Senators were appointed by the state legislature where as the congressional seats were elected by the people. The Senator's roll was to look out for the spending of the federal government as it was the States that funded it. It was primarily made up of state business leaders. Congress (or the 'peoples house' as it was called) had the interest of the individual in mind. That changed as part of the creation of the 16th and 17th amendments. Some, like Ken Burns say that these two were created in conjunction with the 18th amendment a few years later in 1917. The money all comes from personal and business anyways. Personally, I trust my local government and state government a whole lot more than I trust the federal government.

The interstate freeway system can still work as in some ways they are controlled by the individual states now. That is why you have different tolls for different freeways, unless your in MI where the only toll is to cross the Mackinaw Bridge or to go to Canada. But if you go to OH, PA, IN, or IL, you pay tolls. The Military would still operate as it is called out in the constitution as a federal function (although we have pushed the limits on what they can and should be used for several times int he past 100 years). Next you will be telling me that this country was founded as a democracy. We are fed so many myths that people actually start believing the lies as truth.

The Constitution is clear on the roll of the Congress.

Section. 8.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

If you get a chance, read the works of Oliver DeMille, Democracy in America by Tocqueville, The Federalist Papers, , The works of W. Cleon Skousen, the works of Ludwig von Mises, and basically everything written by Thomas Jefferson.

As for following sports, shopping in stores, if that is your argument, why don't we just annex Canada? They have hockey and baseball in the same leagues as the US, Ford, GM, Chrysler, McDonald's, and Wal-Mart all do great business there too. I personally have attended church there and found it to be just like my church here in MI. They drive on the right side of the road with the same cars, drink the same drinks, eat the same foods, wear the same clothes, and listen to the same music. They even shipped Justin Beiber to the US. Furthermore they mostly speak the same language as the US and watch NBC, CBS, ABC, and Fox. Granted they can walk on water during the winter months, but so can people in the northern part of the US. Heck, I hear they also have Planners that post on this forum board too! :-c

Finally, I don't think that the liberals are evil... they are just as misguided as the conservatives and blinded by special interest groups.

 

[otterpop]

I wonder how well business would have done in this country without the interstate system??? Without the freight rail system that was more heavily subsidized than ANY other transportation system in the HISTORY OF EARTH, or clean water to keep people alive more than 40 years to buy more stuff..... The list goes on for sooooo long that I could write a great big book.....

Yes indeed. The federal government gave millions of acres of federal land to railroads in order to build the railway system in the West.

The government built reservoirs to control flooding, to provide irrigation and maintain stream flows on major rivers in order that agribusiness and interstate commerce could thrive.

And the federal government gives out leases (there really is no other way to say it - it is a gift, not a payment) on millions of acres of federal land so ranchers can graze cattle they own but do not have adequate acreage of grass to feed. In order that at least one of these ranchers can refuse to pay his grazing fees and threaten violence when the federal government seeks to evict the freeloader.

And let us not forget the inexplicable amounts of federal monies that go to grants, subsidies, and other funding for Big Business. Apparently they don't need Big Government until it looks like they have to spend thier own money to fund research and development.


:-{

 

[Hink]

If you get a chance, read the works of Oliver DeMille, Democracy in America by Tocqueville, The Federalist Papers, , The works of W. Cleon Skousen, the works of Ludwig von Mises, and basically everything written by Thomas Jefferson.

As for following sports, shopping in stores, if that is your argument, why don't we just annex Canada? They have hockey and baseball in the same leagues as the US, Ford, GM, Chrysler, McDonald's, and Wal-Mart all do great business there too. I personally have attended church there and found it to be just like my church here in MI. They drive on the right side of the road with the same cars, drink the same drinks, eat the same foods, wear the same clothes, and listen to the same music. They even shipped Justin Beiber to the US. Furthermore they mostly speak the same language as the US and watch NBC, CBS, ABC, and Fox. Granted they can walk on water during the winter months, but so can people in the northern part of the US. Heck, I hear they also have Planners that post on this forum board too! :-c

Finally, I don't think that the liberals are evil... they are just as misguided as the conservatives and blinded by special interest groups.

I again would like to note, that our Country is not in 1776, so honestly I could care less what Hamilton, or Jefferson think about our country in present day. Namely because they don't have a clue what it is like because they have been dead for 200 years. I will give you DeMille, I am not familiar with him...

The works of anyone born after 1910 would work for me. At least that person knows we have cars and aeroplanes....

 

[michaelskis]

I again would like to note, that our Country is not in 1776, so honestly I could care less what Hamilton, or Jefferson think about our country in present day. Namely because they don't have a clue what it is like because they have been dead for 200 years. I will give you DeMille, I am not familiar with him...

The works of anyone born after 1910 would work for me. At least that person knows we have cars and aeroplanes....

W. Cleon Skousen is quite good too. He just passed away in 2006. I was deliberate in who I posted because all to often modern authors are associated with one party or another.

I am not looking to go back to 1776, or even 1913. I think legal citizen with an ID over the age of 18 should have the right to vote. I am also a fan of the 21st amendment too.

 

[wahday]

A more federalist system in my mind would result in a less cohesive country. Consider Europe where the efforts to create a unified monetary system with the hopes of having a more stable economy has had such struggle. I think giving more power/rights/control to the states raises the possibility of balkanization and a less homogenous country where interstate mobility (of goods, services and people) may become more difficult which in turn could have a significant impact on economies, among other things. Not to mention conflict and tension between states and a potential erosion of interstate commerce laws as states flex their newfound might.

And while it is easy to say that maintaining infrastructure like the interstate system could be driven by the states, that does not address the issue of establishing massive infrastructure projects to begin with. The federal government is often the only entity with the resources to establish such projects which is why things like electrification, water systems, etc. are so often state-financed (I mean “state” as in federal gov’ts here, not our country’s states). Private industry around the work has typically lacked that kind of might, even though afterwards management of such systems might be privatized.

I am not personally of the opinion that the last 100 years has seen rampant uncontrolled spending or lacked adequate oversight. Are things perfect? Of course not. But I don’t see that shifting more responsibility and power to the states would solve systemic issues. I think you are likely to now have 50 systems that have the same potential for corruption, lack of oversight or otherwise irresponsible behavior rather than one. I guess I just don’t have that much faith in humanity to get things right and keep doing them right. Greed and power corrupt at all levels.

 

[imaplanner]

Wtf? Sen. Cohran appears to admit to having sex with animals?

http://mobile.rawstory.com/all/2014...d-all-kinds-of-indecent-things-with-animals#1

And who, exactly, should have "the power, money, or control" in any nation if NOT the elected representative government? Big business? Mobs of vigilantes with their own private arsenals? An oligarchy of technocrats?

You (ie,"small government" conservatives of various ilks) deny the reality that the US in 2014 is NOT the same nation it was in 1814. You foster the fiction that this country is still only a collection of isolated, disparate states with markedly different ways of life, when, in fact, we have become far more homogenous in our culture even as our racial, ethnic, and religious backgrounds have become much more diverse. We get our information from the same sources, we shop at the same stores, we follow the same sports, we eat the same restaurants, etc, etc whether we live in New York or Michigan or South Carolina or Nebraska or Arizona or Oregon or Alaska.

The idea of a strong national government isn't some new idea that evil "librals" invented recently. The Civil War settled the issue of whether the US was a nation or a collection of states once and for all. Before the Civil War, people said "the United States are". After the Civil War, "the United States is" became the accepted usage, and reflected the change in the national mind set. That was 150 years ago. It's time for "small government" conservatives to catch up to the rest of the country.

We had a system of powerful states and it was not good. That's why we ditched the articles of confederation and drafted the constitution.

 

[michaelskis]

I applaud the President for not rushing back in to Iraq. I think it is a smart decision and to do so would unnecessarily put our troops in harms way.

We had a system of powerful states and it was not good. That's why we ditched the articles of confederation and drafted the constitution.

I agree, too much unregulated power only leads to corruption. Case, in point, the federal government, the most powerful superpower on the planet.

 

[The One]

Well.....

Obama put his foot on the throats of the working man/woman yet again by not supporting the Philly strikes......LAME.....
add it to his list of failures: Allowing guns in National Parks and smashing a previous rail strike effort......Not a friend of the unions at all......how could anyone say he is

 

[Planit]

After sailing through the lower houses, Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) of Louisiana will sign a bill that requires brain dead and vegetative women who are pregnant to be kept alive, regardless of the family wishes, until the fetus is born.

great stuff :-c

 

[Linda_D]

W. Cleon Skousen is quite good too. He just passed away in 2006. I was deliberate in who I posted because all to often modern authors are associated with one party or another.

I am not looking to go back to 1776, or even 1913. I think legal citizen with an ID over the age of 18 should have the right to vote. I am also a fan of the 21st amendment too.

Skousen? Really? He makes Ron Paul look rational.

 

[michaelskis]

Skousen? Really? He makes Ron Paul look rational.

I don't agree with all of his religious concepts, but in terms of understanding how the US was founded, he is right on point.

 

[ColoGI]

After sailing through the lower houses, Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) of Louisiana will sign a bill that requires brain dead and vegetative women who are pregnant to be kept alive, regardless of the family wishes, until the fetus is born.

great stuff :-c

But after you are born - tough rocks, you are on your own. sounds like a George Carlin skit.

 

[michaelskis]

But after you are born - tough rocks, you are on your own. sounds like a George Carlin skit.

I agree. If they are brain dead, then the family should have the choice.

I am currious about your "after they are board comment." Can you expand on that or is it just talking points with no backing?

 

[Whose Yur Planner]

I agree. If they are brain dead, then the family should have the choice.

I am currious about your "after they are board comment." Can you expand on that or is it just talking points with no backing?

I think he is referring to the cutting of SNAP and similar programs the benefit the lower income types.

 

[Planit]

After sailing through the lower houses, Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) of Louisiana will sign a bill that requires brain dead and vegetative women who are pregnant to be kept alive, regardless of the family wishes, until the fetus is born.

great stuff :-c

But after you are born - tough rocks, you are on your own. sounds like a George Carlin skit.

And who will pay for this? You & me. But wait, Medicare/Medicaid is getting cut..oh that's right the Affordable Care Act. But wait, we don't want that either because (although ACA has been challenged and upheld umpteen times) is unconstitutional. And we want smaller government. But wait, we want to tell you ... looks like an energizer bunny - keeps going and going and going right down the rabbit hole.

 

[ColoGI]

I am currious about your "after they are board comment." Can you expand on that or is it just talking points with no backing?

All the backing in the world, for years everyone has understood this. It is from - as I implied - a famous George Carlin skit where he examines the hypocrisy of the ideology that "protects life" and then does everything it can to make life hard for those not part of the tribe.

"If you're pre-born you're fine, if you're pre-school you're ____".

 

[michaelskis]

All the backing in the world, for years everyone has understood this. It is from - as I implied - a famous George Carlin skit where he examines the hypocrisy of the ideology that "protects life" and then does everything it can to make life hard for those not part of the tribe.

"If you're pre-born you're fine, if you're pre-school you're ____".

First of all, George Carlin's political point of view is funny, total BS, but funny.

I think that we need to do a whole lot better with the way we raise our kids in this country. Not only in terms of educational funding, but curriculum too. Common core is the stupidest thing I have heard of in a long time and I think it is going to result in a decrease in our global competitiveness. As for preschool, yes, it is expensive. We looked into sending our oldest to a public preschool the past few years... do you know the response. We were told no because we were not a minority and we made too much money. So, we paid for preschool.

We have a cultural problem in the US. With divorce somewhere between 40% and 50% and the number of births by single mothers without the father present in the house continuing to increase, it is no wonder there is an issue. Financially, it is hard for a single mother to afford the basics in life. These two factors (lack of positive male figure and economic conditions of a single parent household) are the two highest factors for kids joining gangs. In the book Point Man, author Steve Farrar goes into this cultural situation about how we as a society are setting these kids up to fail. Not because the government isn't doing something about it, but because the family structure is not doing something about it in terms of actually raising their children. They go into case study after case study about this topic.

Personally, I know of great resources though different churches and other religious organizations that have done a great job with childcare assistance, financial assistance, and counseling. But because they are 'christian' in nature and are founded on christian principles, (like Salvation Army), haters will protest up and down about this programs, while asking for more money out of my pocket for government agencies.

Speaking of... the government (tax payers) are even funding the wrong educational resources too. Planned Parenthood promoted unsafe sexual practices to someone they thought was 15 years old and promoted BDSM, violence and underage sex. (LINK MAY NOT BE WORK SAFE) This is in addition to the mass killing of unborn children.

You can go on promoting the mass murder of unborn children all you want. Personally, I will stay pro-choice up to the point of conception... then I become pro-life.

 

[rcgplanner]

I am not going to get into the pro-life vs. pro-choice debate but I do find it inherently hypocritical that a major plank of the Republican party for the last 20 plus years has been pro-life yet the policies of the party has made life harder for millions of low-income families. From cutting SNAP and healthcare, to gutting Head Start and workforce training, the GOP has tried damn hard to make the life of many Americans harder. The GOP is more concerned about protecting their corporate cronies instead of the people who they are supposed to represent.

While I will agree that our social programs need to be revamped, taking a hatchet to these programs is not the solution. For a party who is so damn concerned about life they sure as hell don't seem to give a crap about people once they are born. It is frankly disgusting. I am a big proponent of maintaining a basic safety net for all citizens, to me it is a national security issue. If you want a healthy and productive society you can't let your citizens die because of a lack of healthcare or unable to concentrate in school because they are more worried about when they will get to eat again. The argument that there is fraud in social programs is a strawman, if there is fraud then the proper solution is to fix the problems, not gut the entire program and demonize the participants in it. Yet nobody questions corporate welfare. Although I guess since corporations are people too, the GOP is pro-life. :-@

 

[michaelskis]

I am not going to get into the pro-life vs. pro-choice debate but I do find it inherently hypocritical that a major plank of the Republican party for the last 20 plus years has been pro-life yet the policies of the party has made life harder for millions of low-income families. From cutting SNAP and healthcare, to gutting Head Start and workforce training, the GOP has tried damn hard to make the life of many Americans harder. The GOP is more concerned about protecting their corporate cronies instead of the people who they are supposed to represent.

While I will agree that our social programs need to be revamped, taking a hatchet to these programs is not the solution. For a party who is so damn concerned about life they sure as hell don't seem to give a crap about people once they are born. It is frankly disgusting. I am a big proponent of maintaining a basic safety net for all citizens, to me it is a national security issue. If you want a healthy and productive society you can't let your citizens die because of a lack of healthcare or unable to concentrate in school because they are more worried about when they will get to eat again. The argument that there is fraud in social programs is a strawman, if there is fraud then the proper solution is to fix the problems, not gut the entire program and demonize the participants in it. Yet nobody questions corporate welfare. Although I guess since corporations are people too, the GOP is pro-life. :-@

I agree that blanket cuts are not the answer and I think that the GOP is handling that part very poorly. I don't like the subsidies offered to major corporations either.

However, something does need to be done regarding the funding for abortions and the funding for information that will harm children. Planned Parenthood does tons and tons of wonderful things, but there is also a very noticeable part of the it that is horrible.

 

[michaelskis]

Well isn't this interesting. A public school putting a block on "Conservative" websites but not blocking "Liberal" Websites. (LINK) ... Here is the schools response.

It is stuff like this that does not help the case for public school funding. When they do stuff like this, it becomes evident that some public school systems have a not so hidden agenda.

 

[wahday]

However, something does need to be done regarding the funding for abortions and the funding for information that will harm children. Planned Parenthood does tons and tons of wonderful things, but there is also a very noticeable part of the it that is horrible.

I am a little confused by the context for this statement. Planned Parenthood is strictly prohibited from using any federal dollars for abortion related services as per the Hyde Amendment. Abortions comprise only 3% of the services PP provides anyway. Plus, abortion is legal in the United States.

 

[michaelskis]

I am a little confused by the context for this statement. Planned Parenthood is strictly prohibited from using any federal dollars for abortion related services as per the Hyde Amendment. Abortions comprise only 3% of the services PP provides anyway. Plus, abortion is legal in the United States.

Prostitution is also legal in parts of the US... but I won't want my tax dollars going to that either.

In terms of the Hyde Amendment, that is only for federal funds. At least 3 states allow it and several others allow it with court order. Furthermore, the funding allows a shift from their general funds account for services that tax dollars can be used to services where tax dollars can't be used.

It is like building roads. In a CIP if something can be funded with outside dollars, it frees up funding for other things.

 

[Mastiff]

Well, isn't this interesting. An entire state school board is trying to change history through textbooks, effectively putting a block on actual learning! Here's the NEA take on it. (LINK) http://www.nea.org/home/39060.htm

It's stuff like this that makes public education worthless. I mean, you remove Thomas Jefferson to learn about Phyllis Shlaffy and Jerry Falwell? When they do stuff like this, it becomes evident that some public school systems have a not so hidden agenda.

 

[wahday]

Prostitution is also legal in parts of the US... but I won't want my tax dollars going to that either.

In terms of the Hyde Amendment, that is only for federal funds. At least 3 states allow it and several others allow it with court order. Furthermore, the funding allows a shift from their general funds account for services that tax dollars can be used to services where tax dollars can't be used.

It is like building roads. In a CIP if something can be funded with outside dollars, it frees up funding for other things.

Prostitution is only legal in a few rural counties of Nevada, FTR

I believe as many as 17 states allow local tax dollars to be used for "medically necessary" abortions (rape, incest, mother's life is endangered). But if you don't live in any of those states, then your tax dollars are not actually being used, so I think you are in the clear. With federal funding prohibited for this use, this case seems like a good example of asserting states rights which I would think you might support (even if you don't personally agree with the topic). Otherwise, it sounds like you are telling others what they can and can't do with their own tax dollars which in this case involves support of something that is unquestionably legal.

Again, abortion is legal. If you disagree, I think the strategy should be to work to make it illegal, not strangle all attempts to ensure it can be performed in a safe and professional environment, even if that means using tax dollars. And especially if there is a health risk involved or issues like incest and rape. This sounds a bit like the strategy to restrict funding for the ACA to ensure its failure and then turning around and saying "see, I told you it would fail." I think that is an irresponsible strategy because of who ultimately gets hurt. Remember that one of the key arguments for legalizing abortion is not so we can go around killing babies. It was because people were already having abortions and because of its illegality, these were often conducted in unsafe conditions, leading to permanent health problems (like infertility) and even death of the mother. Legalizing it was a strategy to ensure it could take place in a safe and legitimate environment. Abortion rates have actually fallen to their lowest levels since it was legalized, though I wouldn't rush to the conclusion that there is a direct causal relationship here. But it does certainly show that legalization has not contributed to more abortions as many feared.

Personally, I disagree with a lot of uses for my tax dollars, but so long as the uses are legal, I don't feel I have much room to complain. If I disagree, I think the responsible strategy is to seek a change in legislation.

 

[ColoGI]

Well, isn't this interesting. An entire state school board is trying to change history through textbooks, effectively putting a block on actual learning! Here's the NEA take on it. (LINK) http://www.nea.org/home/39060.htm

It's stuff like this that makes public education worthless. I mean, you remove Thomas Jefferson to learn about Phyllis Shlaffy and Jerry Falwell? When they do stuff like this, it becomes evident that some public school systems have a not so hidden agenda.

I'm not doubting your aim, but I don't think you hit your target.

Well isn't this interesting. A public school putting a block on "Conservative" websites but not blocking "Liberal" Websites.

I suspect those who spread these tendentious conspiracies have been duped. People should cease consuming "information" from the source that misleads its consumers or stokes fears of conspiracy to part its audience from their money. Or at least stop spreading such mendacious tripe to the rest of society.

 

[rcgplanner]

Well, isn't this interesting. An entire state school board is trying to change history through textbooks, effectively putting a block on actual learning! Here's the NEA take on it. (LINK) http://www.nea.org/home/39060.htm

It's stuff like this that makes public education worthless. I mean, you remove Thomas Jefferson to learn about Phyllis Shlaffy and Jerry Falwell? When they do stuff like this, it becomes evident that some public school systems have a not so hidden agenda.

Um... the separation of church and state is not "the handiwork of activist judges" it has been tested time and time again by the Supreme Court. :not: And renaming the "trans-Atlantic slave trade" as the "Atlantic triangular trade" is absolutely asinine. The fact that educational professionals like dentists hold this much sway over the curriculum in this state is mind-boggling.

 

[Suburb Repairman]

Well, isn't this interesting. An entire state school board is trying to change history through textbooks, effectively putting a block on actual learning! Here's the NEA take on it. (LINK) http://www.nea.org/home/39060.htm

It's stuff like this that makes public education worthless. I mean, you remove Thomas Jefferson to learn about Phyllis Shlaffy and Jerry Falwell? When they do stuff like this, it becomes evident that some public school systems have a not so hidden agenda.

Yeah, State BOE is awesomely bad here in Texas. The only redeeming value is that we do have good teachers that don't simply follow textbooks, especially when it comes to social studies/history. Well, except if you're stuck at a high school that uses coaches to teach all of the geography/history classes:wall::huh:

 

[otterpop]

Well, isn't this interesting. An entire state school board is trying to change history through textbooks, effectively putting a block on actual learning! Here's the NEA take on it. (LINK) http://www.nea.org/home/39060.htm

It's stuff like this that makes public education worthless. I mean, you remove Thomas Jefferson to learn about Phyllis Shlaffy and Jerry Falwell? When they do stuff like this, it becomes evident that some public school systems have a not so hidden agenda.

Sometimes it is embarrassing to be from the good old USA. Do other first world and second world nations have the same percentage of dumbasses as we do?

A significant portion of our population does not want the facts to cloud what they believe.

Don't get me started on creationism "science" that some states want taught in schools. Besides the fact that creationism is totally laughable, it doesn't even consider the creation stories of other nations? Do they teach the Hopi or Navaho creation stories? Nope. Why? Because creationism is Christian religion, not science.

Great thing about science is that it is real and provable. It takes no faith. Science says this is the way things work and here is the evidence and experimentation that proves why things work this way.

 

[ColoGI]

Sometimes it is embarrassing to be from the good old USA. Do other first world and second world nations have the same percentage of dumbasses as we do?

A significant portion of our population does not want the facts to cloud what they believe.

Which is why when certain advocates say "trust the wisdom of the market", you should reject their proposal/argument/position.

 

[The One]

Yeah.....

Sometimes it is embarrassing to be from the good old USA. Do other first world and second world nations have the same percentage of dumbasses as we do?

A significant portion of our population does not want the facts to cloud what they believe.

Don't get me started on creationism "science" that some states want taught in schools. Besides the fact that creationism is totally laughable, it doesn't even consider the creation stories of other nations? Do they teach the Hopi or Navaho creation stories? Nope. Why? Because creationism is Christian religion, not science.

Great thing about science is that it is real and provable. It takes no faith. Science says this is the way things work and here is the evidence and experimentation that proves why things work this way.

The State Senator in NW Arizona, where I lived for 5 years is holding a meeting about "chemtrails":-o I'm sure the mercury couldn't be coming from the medical waste being incinerated at the local hospital (in the middle of town) each month or a dozen other fact based sources.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/arizona-senator-hosting-chemtrail-forum-article-1.1839792


The amount of military activity over NW Arizona is impressive (air force bases in Phoenix and Vegas, Naval Station in Yuma and California desert)

 

[ColoGI]

The State Senator in NW Arizona, where I lived for 5 years is holding a meeting about "chemtrails":-o

The entire country may not be an Idiocracy, but parts sure are.

 

[The One]

Yup......

The entire country may not be an Idiocracy, but parts sure are.

Is it a coincidence that their metro-statistical area is one of....if not the lowest educated place in the Country???

http://public.tableausoftware.com/shared/QTNQHP4BW?:display_count=yes

Can any of you beat 12% with Bachelors and 4% with Graduate ????

No you can't, here are the lowest in the USA all under 15% Bachelors and higher MSA's

Lake Havasu City-Kingman, AZ Metro Area 12.2
Hanford-Corcoran, CA Metro Area 12.4
Merced, CA Metro Area 12.5
Dalton, GA Metro Area 12.9
El Centro, CA Metro Area 13.2
Odessa, TX Metro Area 13.2
Visalia-Porterville, CA Metro Area 13.3
Morristown, TN Metro Area 13.8
Danville, IL Metro Area 13.9
Madera-Chowchilla, CA Metro Area 13.9
Vineland-Millville-Bridgeton, NJ Metro Area 14
Yuma, AZ Metro Area 14.2
Houma-Bayou Cane-Thibodaux, LA Metro Area 14.4
Bakersfield-Delano, CA Metro Area 14.9
Brownsville-Harlingen, TX Metro Area 14.9
Danville, VA Metro Area 14.9

THE HIGHEST:
45% or more Bachelors and Higher

Boulder, CO Metro Area 58
Ann Arbor, MI Metro Area 50.8
Ithaca, NY Metro Area 49.9
Corvallis, OR Metro Area 48.6
Lawrence, KS Metro Area 48.4
Ames, IA Metro Area 47.7
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV Metro Area 47.6
Iowa City, IA Metro Area 46.1
Columbia, MO Metro Area 45.7
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA Metro Area 45.3

 

[Mastiff]

I'm not doubting your aim, but I don't think you hit your target.

You actually painted my target quite nicely. I was mocking the dubious posting of a conspiracy with a factual account of what's happening in Tejas.

 

[Linda_D]

Is it a coincidence that their metro-statistical area is one of....if not the lowest educated place in the Country???

http://public.tableausoftware.com/shared/QTNQHP4BW?:display_count=yes

Can any of you beat 12% with Bachelors and 4% with Graduate ????

No you can't, here are the lowest in the USA all under 15% Bachelors and higher MSA's

Lake Havasu City-Kingman, AZ Metro Area 12.2
Hanford-Corcoran, CA Metro Area 12.4
Merced, CA Metro Area 12.5
Dalton, GA Metro Area 12.9
El Centro, CA Metro Area 13.2
Odessa, TX Metro Area 13.2
Visalia-Porterville, CA Metro Area 13.3
Morristown, TN Metro Area 13.8
Danville, IL Metro Area 13.9
Madera-Chowchilla, CA Metro Area 13.9
Vineland-Millville-Bridgeton, NJ Metro Area 14
Yuma, AZ Metro Area 14.2
Houma-Bayou Cane-Thibodaux, LA Metro Area 14.4
Bakersfield-Delano, CA Metro Area 14.9
Brownsville-Harlingen, TX Metro Area 14.9
Danville, VA Metro Area 14.9

That's pretty sad. I really expected to find the two metros in my corner of Red Neck Heaven vying for the bottom spots, but they're at 20+ and 15+ percent college grads -- and we have a percentage of Amish who only go to school through 8th grade!

 

[ColoGI]

You actually painted my target quite nicely. I was mocking the dubious posting of a conspiracy with a factual account of what's happening in Tejas.

Right. But the message likely wasn't received by the usual suspect.

 

[michaelskis]

While traveling, I had Chick-fil-a on Friday.

[sarcasm] There was so much hate in that place, it was oozing down the walls. If fact the gay couple sitting at the table next to me were outraged that they received the exact same service as I did. How dare they offer very tasty food with fast and exceptionally friendly service. And then the manager (yes, the manager) had the audacity to walk them to their car with an umbrella because it was down pouring! What next, a live show from Hitler? [/sarcasm]

Ok, in all seriousness, I am happy that those who hate Chick-fil-a and the opinions expressed by the owner don't eat there. The lines are long enough and I don't want to listen to people's whining about how horrible the place is when everything that happens in the restaurants seems to contradict any expression of hate.


As for the AZ and the teachings, frankly, I don't care.

 

[Mastiff]

Right. But the message likely wasn't received by the usual suspect.

You could write that message on a spike and drive it into the skull and it still wouldn't get through that head...

 

[ColoGI]

You could write that message on a spike and drive it into the skull and it still wouldn't get through that head...

+1 .

 

[michaelskis]

I have to admit, I am surprised by this decision.

The Supreme Court sided with Congress on Thursday in the high-stakes power struggle over presidential recess appointments, in which officials are placed in top government jobs temporarily without Senate approval.

The unanimous ruling by the court against the Obama administration could invalidate hundreds of decisions by the National Labor Relations Board, the federal agency at the center of this legal fight.

(CNN LINK)

I am not in favor of the President doing this, but I did not think that SOTUS would rule with a unanimous decision this way.

 

[Suburb Repairman]

I have to admit, I am surprised by this decision.

(CNN LINK)

I am not in favor of the President doing this, but I did not think that SOTUS would rule with a unanimous decision this way.

I want to know if the executive branch could turn around and sue Congress for failing to act in good faith on confirmations & circumventing the intent of their confirmation authority.

 

[michaelskis]

I want to know if the executive branch could turn around and sue Congress for failing to act in good faith on confirmations & circumventing the intent of their confirmation authority.

If Congress can sue the President, then the President should be able to sue congress. I think all the lawsuits make them look like sore losers :loser:, but hey, I don't have faith in either side anymore.

 

[rcgplanner]

I have to admit, I am surprised by this decision.

(CNN LINK)

I am not in favor of the President doing this, but I did not think that SOTUS would rule with a unanimous decision this way.

So this is what our Senate does instead of actually, oh I dunno... their jobs?!

So, party leaders have arranged for a single Republican lawmaker to show up every three days and gavel the Senate to order, wait around for about 30 seconds, gavel it to a close, then leave.

FFS, plus here is another fun fact, Obama has had 32 recess appointments compared to 240 for Reagan, 171 for GW, and 138 for Clinton. But once again Obama is the scourge on the earth and blah, blah... I love how nobody has the cojones to call Congress out on their crap and tell them to actually do thier job. Stop these stupid political tricks and actually take a stand on something and let it have an up or down vote. :-@