Are Democrats in serious trouble?

[Mong Hu]

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/0830genballot.gif

For the first time in history, Gallup finds that Republicans have a double-digit advantage in its generic ballot test.

Gallup has conducted this generic ballot test since 1942, and until this year Republicans never had an advantage of more than 5 points.

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2010/08/gallup_unprecedented_gop_lead.html

I am not a big believer in polls. They rarely tell the entire story but certainly this does not bode well for the prospects of the Democratic party and is the harbinger of good times for the Republicans.

I am curious to no what the board thinks. Will the Republicans take both houses of Congress. Will the Republicans take the House but Democrats retain the Senate or will the Democrats retain control of both houses?

[b756561]

Are Democrats in serious trouble?

For the good of the country, let's certainly hope so.

[slcdragonfan]

I think the Repubs take the House, Demos lose seats in the Senate but hold the majority.

[Mong Hu]

Are Democrats in serious trouble?

For the good of the country, let's certainly hope so.

Yes I understand that your desired outcome is but what do you think the probable outcome will be? Does the graph and poll mentioned above tell of a sweeping defeat for the Democrats or is there more to this story that the polls don't necessarily reveal?

[Mong Hu]

I think the Repubs take the House, Demos lose seats in the Senate but hold the majority.

It would certainly be a remarkable swing in the Senate to go from basically a 40/60 split and twenty votes down to a majority in only one election cycle in which only a third of the seats are up for grabs.

[slcdragonfan]

as far as the poll data, I would want to see several more weeks of data, and particularly closer to the election.

I think people will voice their displeasure in a poll but the result may not match until the trend is better established.

There is certainly enough angst against anybody incumbent. I do have to question some of the tea party candidates though. I am not sure how thoroughly "vetted" they are, and things might pop up closer to the election.

Personally I don't want "angry" people running this country. Resolute and determined is more what I have in mind.

[JagFan]

We will will only know after the election. I do know the Dems will loose seats and their super majority. That is the least that will happen. I will be happy with that.

What would make me ecstatic is for Queen Nancy to loose her Speaker of the House title.:)

[the_phoenix612]

Midterm elections are rarely, if ever, good for the ruling party, especially in times of economic mess.

That said, the Democratic majorities are significant enough, and there are enough Teabag party candidates being nominated that they'll hold onto majorities in both houses rather easily.

[slcdragonfan]

We will will only know after the election. I do know the Dems will loose seats and their super majority. That is the least that will happen. I will be happy with that.

What would make me ecstatic is for Queen Nancy to loose her Speaker of the House title.:)

Pelosi and Boehner gone would make me happy. I dinna like either one.

[15Adragon]

I think the Repubs take the House, Demos lose seats in the Senate but hold the majority.

I think this is the likely result. Taking the Senate would be a major upset, but who knows. One thing is for sure Obama isn't what most thought he was. Several of us knew.

I do miss W.

[JagFan]

Pelosi and Boehner gone would make me happy. I dinna like either one.

I just want Pelosi and that little rat looking Reid gone. Boehner has no power.

[Mong Hu]

Midterm elections are rarely, if ever, good for the ruling party, especially in times of economic mess.

That said, the Democratic majorities are significant enough, and there are enough Teabag party candidates being nominated that they'll hold onto majorities in both houses rather easily.

I included the graph because it made me think of your many posts and references to charts and graphs. Just made me smile. :) I agree the tea party candidates are a wild card. I think it will make this election cycle one of the more interesting as it will be difficult to predict how those candidates will run.

[slcdragonfan]

:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:

http://www.oldsaltblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/ht_whale_onto_boat_100721_ssh.jpg

[the_phoenix612]

I included the graph because it made me think of your many posts and references to charts and graphs. Just made me smile. :) I agree the tea party candidates are a wild card. I think it will make this election cycle one of the more interesting as it will be difficult to predict how those candidates will run.
It has been explained to me numerous times that polls are unreliable and dangerous, and that it is irresponsible of you to post them :)

[kool_kat]

Just get rid of Pelosium:

The new element, Pelosium (PL), has one neutron, 25 assistant neutrons, 88 deputy neutrons, and 198 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it an atomic mass of 312.

These 312 particles are held together by forces called morons, which are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called peons.

Pelosium is inert, and has no charge and no magnetism. Nevertheless, it can be detected because it impedes every reaction with which it comes into contact. A tiny amount of Pelosium can cause a reaction that would normally take less than a second, to take from 4 days to 4 years to complete.

Pelosium has a normal half-life of 2 years. It does not decay, but instead undergoes a biennial reorganization in which a portion of the assistant neutrons and deputy neutrons exchange places.

Pelosium mass will increase over time, since each reorganization will promote many morons to become isodopes.

This characteristic of moron promotion leads some scientists to believe that Pelosium is formed whenever morons reach a critical concentration. This hypothetical quantity is referred to as critical morass.

When catalyzed with money, Pelosium becomes Senatorium, an element that radiates just as much energy as Pelosium since it has half as many peons but twice as many morons.


http://www.xgamesflashx.com/games/thumb/never-ending-smiley-shooting.gif

[b756561]

Yes I understand that your desired outcome is but what do you think the probable outcome will be? Does the graph and poll mentioned above tell of a sweeping defeat for the Democrats or is there more to this story that the polls don't necessarily reveal?

That poll is skewed in that it polls all voters. The polls of likely voters historically have been more accurate (and normally leans more toward the Republican vote.) I think this is an outier poll and we should wait for more polls to report their findings before we put too much faith in it.

As for your actual question, I feel there is only about a 5-10% chance the Republicans will take the Senate and not carry the House also. I think there is only about a 25-30% chance the Republicans will take over both houses of Congress. I give the Republicans a 40-45% (although that number has been rising on almost a weekly basis) chance of taking control of the House but not the Senate. I also feel that if these numbers are not correct, that they will be too low, not too optimistic

At this time I feel the Democrats will still control both Houses, but by extremely small margins. If the elections were held today, I would predict a 51D-47R-2I split in the Senate and a 221D-214R split in the House. This Senate split is very likely to change, perhaps drastically. At this time I give Cal., Wash., and Nev. to the Democrats. By November I can see any or all of them going Republican. (If all three do go Republican, that would make Indpendent Joe Lieberman the kingmaker in the Senate.)

Of equal importance in this election is the governors and the state legislatures races across the country. In 1842 Congress designated the state legislatures the duties of drawing all congressional district lines. With reapportionment coming, the governors will be in a very strong position to have a major effect on the outcome, especially in the Southern states where so many new districts will have to be set up. Gerrymandering will be lifted to a high art. I see the Republicans doing especially well in this area. Right now the split is 26D-24R. If the election was held today, I think the new split would be 31R-18D-1I. Colorado and Florida being the wildcards here. Currently I give them to the Democrats (Colorado) and to the Independents (Florida) but they are both trending toward the Republicans and by November one or both of them may well go Republican, especially Florida.

You asked, these are my predictions.

[the_phoenix612]

Just get rid of Pelosium:

The new element, Pelosium (PL), has one neutron, 25 assistant neutrons, 88 deputy neutrons, and 198 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it an atomic mass of 312.

These 312 particles are held together by forces called morons, which are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles called peons.

Pelosium is inert, and has no charge and no magnetism. Nevertheless, it can be detected because it impedes every reaction with which it comes into contact. A tiny amount of Pelosium can cause a reaction that would normally take less than a second, to take from 4 days to 4 years to complete.

Pelosium has a normal half-life of 2 years. It does not decay, but instead undergoes a biennial reorganization in which a portion of the assistant neutrons and deputy neutrons exchange places.

Pelosium mass will increase over time, since each reorganization will promote many morons to become isodopes.

This characteristic of moron promotion leads some scientists to believe that Pelosium is formed whenever morons reach a critical concentration. This hypothetical quantity is referred to as critical morass.

When catalyzed with money, Pelosium becomes Senatorium, an element that radiates just as much energy as Pelosium since it has half as many peons but twice as many morons.


http://www.xgamesflashx.com/games/thumb/never-ending-smiley-shooting.gif

http://macrochan.org/images/Z/T/ZTLDCJOHCLYZIFNET35PN3SG65JK4GJS.gif

[kool_kat]

http://macrochan.org/images/Z/T/ZTLDCJOHCLYZIFNET35PN3SG65JK4GJS.gif
http://macrochan.org/images/Z/T/ZTLDCJOHCLYZIFNET35PN3SG65JK4GJS.gif

[yankee]

Boehner has no power.

that's what she said.

[the_phoenix612]

http://macrochan.org/images/Z/T/ZTLDCJOHCLYZIFNET35PN3SG65JK4GJS.gif
http://macrochan.org/images/Q/C/QCPATRD5JGUQUS7BKZDY735YEJ5WIUXC.jpeg

[b756561]

Perhaps the most respected political prognosticator in the country is Larry Sabato, a Political Science Professor at the Univ. of Virginia. He runs the website Crystal Ball. Tomorrow (wed.) he is expected to forecast sweeping setbacks on Capitol Hill and the loss of a clutch of state governorships on November 2 (thur.) Here's the website:
http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/
I look forward to hearing what he has to say.

[CoveMom]

Midterm elections are rarely, if ever, good for the ruling party, especially in times of economic mess.




Leaving out the rest of what was in this young person's posts, I am disturbed by the terminology he chooses to use.

Did nobody else notice this???

:eek:

[b756561]

Leaving out the rest of what was in this young person's posts, I am disturbed by the terminology he chooses to use.

Did nobody else notice this???

:eek:

You are right about the terminology. "The RULING party" does that lead next to a RULING CLASS?

[CoveMom]

However you are right about the terminology. "The RULING party" does that lead next to a RULING CLASS?

Hmmm...I just realized I haven't asked you:


Where is your towel?


:cool:

[yankee]

the future of America. :heli:

[BDB]

http://macrochan.org/images/Z/T/ZTLDCJOHCLYZIFNET35PN3SG65JK4GJS.gif

http://macrochan.org/images/Z/T/ZTLDCJOHCLYZIFNET35PN3SG65JK4GJS.gif

http://macrochan.org/images/Z/T/ZTLDCJOHCLYZIFNET35PN3SG65JK4GJS.gif

[b756561]

Hmmm...I just realized I haven't asked you:


Where is your towel?


:cool:

Actually you copied my post before I could revise it. After rereading it I decided I had written more than I should have. If you will notice, I revised my post and took out what should not have been there. I was not in a good mood, but that does not justify what I wrote. I should always reread before I hit post.

[tayb]

I don't even know who to vote for. My choices are a.) A complete dumb:Censor: from the Republican party. b.) A complete dumb:Censor: from the Republican party who is masquerading around as a colonial teabagger. c.) A complete dumb:Censor: from the Democratic party.

Oh the choices. Pardon me if I don't show up at the booths.

[CoveMom]

Actually you copied my post before I could revise it. After rereading it I decided I had written more than I should have. If you will notice, I revised my post and took out what should not have been there. I was not in a good mood, but that does not justify what I wrote. I should always reread before I hit post.

so I edited your edit. happy?


I REPEAT...WHERE IS YOUR TOWEL?

[the_phoenix612]

Leaving out the rest of what was in this young person's posts, I am disturbed by the terminology he chooses to use.

Did nobody else notice this???

:eek:
umm. It's the proper terminology. The party with majorities in the legislature and control of the executive are the ruling party of the United States. That is, they have control over governmental decision making.

[Mong Hu]

:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:

http://www.oldsaltblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/ht_whale_onto_boat_100721_ssh.jpg
Ahhh good memories!!!! I do so love that photo

[Mong Hu]

It has been explained to me numerous times that polls are unreliable and dangerous, and that it is irresponsible of you to post them :)

Yes in fact if you reference my original post you will find my own reservations about polling data expressed there. The reason I asked the question was not because I felt the poll was indisputable proof of the coming demise of the Democratic party but rather to ask what others thought about the coming election and possibly get more of the story to add to my understanding. I would prefer not to base my entire understanding off of polls for as you have noted that could be dangerous and possibly irresponsible. :D

[Mong Hu]

That poll is skewed in that it polls all voters. The polls of likely voters historically have been more accurate (and normally leans more toward the Republican vote.) I think this is an outier poll and we should wait for more polls to report their findings before we put too much faith in it.

As for your actual question, I feel there is only about a 5-10% chance the Republicans will take the Senate and not carry the House also. I think there is only about a 25-30% chance the Republicans will take over both houses of Congress. I give the Republicans a 40-45% (although that number has been rising on almost a weekly basis) chance of taking control of the House but not the Senate. I also feel that if these numbers are not correct, that they will be too low, not too optimistic

At this time I feel the Democrats will still control both Houses, but by extremely small margins. If the elections were held today, I would predict a 51D-47R-2I split in the Senate and a 221D-214R split in the House. This Senate split is very likely to change, perhaps drastically. At this time I give Cal., Wash., and Nev. to the Democrats. By November I can see any or all of them going Republican. (If all three do go Republican, that would make Indpendent Joe Lieberman the kingmaker in the Senate.)

Of equal importance in this election is the governors and the state legislatures races across the country. In 1842 Congress designated the state legislatures the duties of drawing all congressional district lines. With reapportionment coming, the governors will be in a very strong position to have a major effect on the outcome, especially in the Southern states where so many new districts will have to be set up. Gerrymandering will be lifted to a high art. I see the Republicans doing especially well in this area. Right now the split is 26D-24R. If the election was held today, I think the new split would be 31R-18D-1I. Colorado and Florida being the wildcards here. Currently I give them to the Democrats (Colorado) and to the Independents (Florida) but they are both trending toward the Republicans and by November one or both of them may well go Republican, especially Florida.

You asked, these are my predictions.


Thank you for your predictions I appreciate reading a thoughtful post. Your post was excellent. I agree that the Gallup poll of all voters is typically skewed towards Democrats which is what make this particular finding so unusual and made me wonder about, as Paul Harvey used to say, the rest of the story. Currently Rasmussen, who does a similar survey with likely voters, has a generic Republican ballot about 6% points ahead of a generic Democratic ballot.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/generic_congressional_ballot
So why is this poll off and off in a way that defies the typical trend for this type of polling data?

[Mong Hu]

Perhaps the most respected political prognosticator in the country is Larry Sabato, a Political Science Professor at the Univ. of Virginia. He runs the website Crystal Ball. Tomorrow (wed.) he is expected to forecast sweeping setbacks on Capitol Hill and the loss of a clutch of state governorships on November 2 (thur.) Here's the website:
http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/
I look forward to hearing what he has to say.
I gotta like and respect anyone who also reads the Crystal Ball, great website. I have been following Sabato's predictions since the primaries of the last election. A coworker of mine receives the regular email updates and forwards them on to all of us who are interested in political discussion. His analysis and insight is great. I highly recommend him to anyone interested in understanding the modern political landscape.

[Mong Hu]

Perhaps the most respected political prognosticator in the country is Larry Sabato, a Political Science Professor at the Univ. of Virginia. He runs the website Crystal Ball. Tomorrow (wed.) he is expected to forecast sweeping setbacks on Capitol Hill and the loss of a clutch of state governorships on November 2 (thur.) Here's the website:
http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/
I look forward to hearing what he has to say.
Did you read his analysis on the different Senate Classes recently? It was an interesting observation about the nature of Senate elections and an interesting assertion that all Senate classes are not equal.

[CoveMom]

re: Are Democrats in serious trouble?



You tell me...


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100901/ap_on_re_us/us_alaska_senate



While I realize this is an internal Republican/Tea Party struggle, it appears voters (at least in Alaska) are saying "A pox on both your houses" and that cannot bode well for the current majority party. btw I was happy when it was Clinton in the WH and Republicans controlling Congress.


Sorry not to have a poll or a quote from Professor Sabato (and I am a fan) to help bolster my opinion. Oh, wait. NOW I REMEMBER. I am an American and I don't need to PROVE my opinion. (this comment not directed at Mr Hu.)




Where is the option to vote "Lord, I hope so?"

[b756561]

so I edited your edit. happy?


I REPEAT...WHERE IS YOUR TOWEL?

Thank you CoveMom. I sometimes say and do things without thinking them through. That post was a perfect example. There was no need for me saying what I did. I appreciate your understanding and help in that matter.

As for my towel, I'm afraid age is catching up with me. I can not seem to recall what your reference to a towel is alluding to. A quick reminder should jog my memory. I find myself in this embarrasing position more and more these days. :o

[b756561]

Thank you for your predictions I appreciate reading a thoughtful post. Your post was excellent. I agree that the Gallup poll of all voters is typically skewed towards Democrats which is what make this particular finding so unusual and made me wonder about, as Paul Harvey used to say, the rest of the story. Currently Rasmussen, who does a similar survey with likely voters, has a generic Republican ballot about 6% points ahead of a generic Democratic ballot.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/generic_congressional_ballot
So why is this poll off and off in a way that defies the typical trend for this type of polling data?

During the time I have been reading this website I have come to respect your posts above almost any other on this site. I do value your opinions and I do thank you for the compliment. However please remember they are just predictions. I am just as likely to be as wrong as anyone else. They are educated guesses, but guesses never the less.
As for the Gallop Poll to be off, I for one think it is. I believe this to be an outier poll. They come along every so often to every poll out there. It does not jive with the other polls on this same subject. ALL the polls say the voters are breaking toward the Republicans, but this is the only one that says the public is breaking this strongly in this direction. Most pollers have the break at about half this number. I would sure like to see this one be correct, but I just don't give it that much creditability at this time.

[b756561]

I gotta like and respect anyone who also reads the Crystal Ball, great website. I have been following Sabato's predictions since the primaries of the last election. A coworker of mine receives the regular email updates and forwards them on to all of us who are interested in political discussion. His analysis and insight is great. I highly recommend him to anyone interested in understanding the modern political landscape.

Larry Sabato is considered to be perhaps the most respected political prognosticator in the country. I place a great amount of confidence in his political analysis. Always well thought out and always well written. He takes into considerations facts and information clearly above my head and states them in a manner that even an old busybody like myself can understand.

[b756561]

Did you read his analysis on the different Senate Classes recently? It was an interesting observation about the nature of Senate elections and an interesting assertion that all Senate classes are not equal.

Yes I did read that analysis and this is just an example of what I like about him. I had never thought, all the way through, about the different classes among the members of the Senate. You know he is quite correct in his analysis. And in the impact this has on them. An excellent evaluation.

[Mong Hu]

Great article (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/09/02/the_crystal_balls_labor_day_predictions_106988.htm l) from Sabato. After reading the article I am definitely of the opinion that the House will go GOP. I am leaning toward both going GOP but the Senate is still a bit of a stretch. We will see. I am not quite ready to make a prediction on the Senate yet.

[CoveMom]

Thank you CoveMom. I sometimes say and do things without thinking them through. That post was a perfect example. There was no need for me saying what I did. I appreciate your understanding and help in that matter.

As for my towel, I'm afraid age is catching up with me. I can not seem to recall what your reference to a towel is alluding to. A quick reminder should jog my memory. I find myself in this embarrasing position more and more these days. :o


reference your signature...


Douglas Adams. Ford Prefect. Towel. Now?


Mine is in my left front pocket.


:cool:

[15Adragon]

To answer the original question, yes I think they are in serious trouble.

I read that tea has a lot of antioxidants. :p

[b756561]

reference your signature...


Douglas Adams. Ford Prefect. Towel. Now?


Mine is in my left front pocket.


:cool:

Yes, I have my towel and it is sitting right here on top of my mini-refrigirator, where it will remain until May 25th. What surprises me is the man was younger than I am. For some reason I had assumed he was older. I'm beginning to find that most people are younger than I am. That's a real bummer.

[Mong Hu]

Michael Barone has a good piece today in the Washington Examiner (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/09/09/sinking_with_obama_democrats_plan_political_triage _107079.html)

I can't think of a more unpopular major measure passed by Congress since the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854.(he is refering hear to the Health Care legislation)

Back then, the Democrats also had supermajorities in both houses of Congress and a young, previously little known president who had defeated an aging war hero by a decisive margin. They realized that the Kansas-Nebraska Act promoting slavery in the territories would raise some hackles, but expressed confidence that voters would accept it when it was properly explained to them.

They didn't. Voters reduced the number of Democratic House members from 159 to 83, nearly eliminating the party in much of the North. Democrats didn't win a House majority for the next 20 years.

I have not checked the historical veracity of these claims but I generally think of Barone as a pretty straight shooter. His portrayal of Franklin Pierce (President) and voter backlash in the election of 1856 is accurate. The GOP was born in these tumultuous years in part because of the unpopularity of the Kansas Nebraska Act and President Pierce. I do not know if any other legislative initiative between 1854 and now has been so unpopular.

[slcdragonfan]

Michael Barone has a good piece today in the Washington Examiner (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/09/09/sinking_with_obama_democrats_plan_political_triage _107079.html)



I have not checked the historical veracity of these claims but I generally think of Barone as a pretty straight shooter. His portrayal of Franklin Pierce (President) and voter backlash in the election of 1856 is accurate. The GOP was born in these tumultuous years in part because of the unpopularity of the Kansas Nebraska Act and President Pierce. I do not know if any other legislative initiative between 1854 and now has been so unpopular.

Would you consider the Income Tax Amendment a legislative initiative? ;)

I would say that the only question here is "among likely voters" from previous discussions. We all know the demographic turnout for Pres. Obama. He will need that same demographic turnout (which notoriously does NOT turn out) to maintain the House.

If the Repubs gain control of the House, you can expect zero legislation coming out of Congress. That may be good, we will see. I am eagerly awaiting the Republican plank of how to fix the economy.

[15Adragon]

Michael Barone has a good piece today in the Washington Examiner (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/09/09/sinking_with_obama_democrats_plan_political_triage _107079.html)



I have not checked the historical veracity of these claims but I generally think of Barone as a pretty straight shooter. His portrayal of Franklin Pierce (President) and voter backlash in the election of 1856 is accurate. The GOP was born in these tumultuous years in part because of the unpopularity of the Kansas Nebraska Act and President Pierce. I do not know if any other legislative initiative between 1854 and now has been so unpopular.

I like reading Barone. When I get a chance I'll go read this one.

I think everyone with health insurance is about to get a wakeup call when they are presented with their plan costs for 2011. Unless you are protected by a union contract your premiums will rise significantly.

Back to the topic, the Dems are in serious trouble in this election cycle. We will see a lot of incumbent Dems and some R's lose. I think this is very healthy.

[slcdragonfan]

I like reading Barone. When I get a chance I'll go read this one.

I think everyone with health insurance is about to get a wakeup call when they are presented with their plan costs for 2011. Unless you are protected by a union contract your premiums will rise significantly.

Back to the topic, the Dems are in serious trouble in this election cycle. We will see a lot of incumbent Dems and some R's lose. I think this is very healthy.

regarding that: my oldest is 22 going to be 23 this year. She is in college and registered for 12 hours but dropped a course and now is taking 9 hours. She has just discovered she needs some medical treatment but we checked with the insurance company and if she is not a full-time student she won't be covered. I am now checking into the dependent care aspect of this health insurance bill to see if/when that will apply. So for me, I either need to pay $$$ to get her to a regular doctor, figure out how to get free health care for her (it is supposed to be real easy, right? :rolleyes: ), or tell her tough luck.

We can talk about this stuff philosophically all we want, but when it knocks on your door then things look a bit differently.

Who out there can pay $25K for surgery on their own (not defined yet if that is required, just hypothetical)? Who knows how to get that done for free? Please call me....:)

[15Adragon]

regarding that: my oldest is 22 going to be 23 this year. She is in college and registered for 12 hours but dropped a course and now is taking 9 hours. She has just discovered she needs some medical treatment but we checked with the insurance company and if she is not a full-time student she won't be covered. I am now checking into the dependent care aspect of this health insurance bill to see if/when that will apply. So for me, I either need to pay $$$ to get her to a regular doctor, figure out how to get free health care for her (it is supposed to be real easy, right? :rolleyes: ), or tell her tough luck.

We can talk about this stuff philosophically all we want, but when it knocks on your door then things look a bit differently.

Who out there can pay $25K for surgery on their own (not defined yet if that is required, just hypothetical)? Who knows how to get that done for free? Please call me....:)


All good points. Mine are all still younger and I have not had to deal with this.

It is sad that it has come to this and the gov has to intervene or we face financial calamity after a visit to the Dr's office. I certainly don't have the answers and I hope that your daughter is covered and gets the treatment she needs. You are also correct that talking "theory" is one thing and facing "reality" is another. My main concern is about the long term and where this will lead us. I wish you the best in her treatment/care.

[slcdragonfan]

All good points. Mine are all still younger and I have not had to deal with this.

It is sad that it has come to this and the gov has to intervene or we face financial calamity after a visit to the Dr's office. I certainly don't have the answers and I hope that your daughter is covered and gets the treatment she needs. You are also correct that talking "theory" is one thing and facing "reality" is another. My main concern is about the long term and where this will lead us. I wish you the best in her treatment/care.

Thanks. I think there is good and bad in this bill (I know that is not the topic here, but I am frustrated). I wish it provided some competitive method of controlling medical costs and insurance costs. Right now, they can both just pass on whatever they want with little control IMO. No competition.

[JMSFan]

Thanks. I think there is good and bad in this bill (I know that is not the topic here, but I am frustrated). I wish it provided some competitive method of controlling medical costs and insurance costs. Right now, they can both just pass on whatever they want with little control IMO. No competition.

These should have been the major focus of the healthcare bill, but it wasnt.

[slcdragonfan]

These should have been the major focus of the healthcare bill, but it wasnt.

We are in agreement JMSFan. :notworthy
We should mark this down as a significant point in history. :)
There is always common ground if we look hard enough.

[JMSFan]

We are in agreement JMSFan. :notworthy
We should mark this down as a significant point in history. :)
There is always common ground if we look hard enough.

I agree. :yes:

[Firebird]

regarding that: my oldest is 22 going to be 23 this year. She is in college and registered for 12 hours but dropped a course and now is taking 9 hours. She has just discovered she needs some medical treatment but we checked with the insurance company and if she is not a full-time student she won't be covered. I am now checking into the dependent care aspect of this health insurance bill to see if/when that will apply. So for me, I either need to pay $$$ to get her to a regular doctor, figure out how to get free health care for her (it is supposed to be real easy, right? :rolleyes: ), or tell her tough luck.

We can talk about this stuff philosophically all we want, but when it knocks on your door then things look a bit differently.

Who out there can pay $25K for surgery on their own (not defined yet if that is required, just hypothetical)? Who knows how to get that done for free? Please call me....:)

I've been told that you just have to tell the folks at the ER that you are poor and/or illegal and you get all that stuff for free.

[JMSFan]

Thanks. I think there is good and bad in this bill (I know that is not the topic here, but I am frustrated). I wish it provided some competitive method of controlling medical costs and insurance costs. Right now, they can both just pass on whatever they want with little control IMO. No competition.

Heres some more bad. I think we all seen it coming though.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703720004575478200948908976.html?m od=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsTop

"Health insurers say they plan to raise premiums for some Americans as a direct result of the health overhaul in coming weeks, complicating Democrats' efforts to trumpet their signature achievement before the midterm elections.
Aetna Inc., some BlueCross BlueShield plans and other smaller carriers have asked for premium increases of between 1% and 9% to pay for extra benefits required under the law, according to filings with state regulators.
These and other insurers say Congress's landmark refashioning of U.S. health coverage, which passed in March after a brutal fight, is causing them to pass on more costs to consumers than Democrats predicted.
The rate increases largely apply to policies for individuals and small businesses and don't include people covered by a big employer or Medicare."

[JagFan]

Heres some more bad. I think we all seen it coming though.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703720004575478200948908976.html?m od=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsTop

"Health insurers say they plan to raise premiums for some Americans as a direct result of the health overhaul in coming weeks, complicating Democrats' efforts to trumpet their signature achievement before the midterm elections.
Aetna Inc., some BlueCross BlueShield plans and other smaller carriers have asked for premium increases of between 1% and 9% to pay for extra benefits required under the law, according to filings with state regulators.
These and other insurers say Congress's landmark refashioning of U.S. health coverage, which passed in March after a brutal fight, is causing them to pass on more costs to consumers than Democrats predicted.
The rate increases largely apply to policies for individuals and small businesses and don't include people covered by a big employer or Medicare."

Yep- my fear

[15Adragon]

The health care bill will keep the courts and bureaucrats busy for years, actual health care not so much.

[JMSFan]

Yep- my fear

Mine too.
Later on in the article it says that the rate increase is mainly for the new policies being written after Oct 1. , but also says you could be charged higher rates if you modify your existing plan.
My oldest son will be graduating SFA this year, so next year he will be on his own for insurance. So he will see the rate increase right from the start.

[slcdragonfan]

Mine too.
Later on in the article it says that the rate increase is mainly for the new policies being written after Oct 1. , but also says you could be charged higher rates if you modify your existing plan.
My oldest son will be graduating SFA this year, so next year he will be on his own for insurance. So he will see the rate increase right from the start.

If he not immediately employed will you consider adding him to your policy under the new rules? That is one change I liked. It is so difficult to get a job with insurance for a young person nowadays.

We are currently covered by a large company policy through my wife, so those rate increases will probably be delayed. Still waiting to find out however.

[JMSFan]

If he not immediately employed will you consider adding him to your policy under the new rules? That is one change I liked. It is so difficult to get a job with insurance for a young person nowadays.

We are currently covered by a large company policy through my wife, so those rate increases will probably be delayed. Still waiting to find out however.

Oh yea, I will definitely add him. I guess I was trying to be optimistic about him getting employed pretty quick. :D
I have him on my policy right now since he is a full time student, and your point has brought up some questions I need to check into.
Will I have to drop him upon graduation? Then add him back? If thats so, then I will have the rate increase I guess.

[15Adragon]

Oh yea, I will definitely add him. I guess I was trying to be optimistic about him getting employed pretty quick. :D
I have him on my policy right now since he is a full time student, and your point has brought up some questions I need to check into.
Will I have to drop him upon graduation? Then add him back? If thats so, then I will have the rate increase I guess.

I would place a call to my congressman (man in my case) and ask for the details. Stay tuned they will probably change several times...

[JMSFan]

I would place a call to my congressman (man in my case) and ask for the details. Stay tuned they will probably change several times...

Yea, I guess I will.

[stevefoxsc]

think if you call yourself a democrat or a republican you're already in for trouble.

[mad_fan]

Can't say that it matters one way or the other...
Obama is a lame duck...
He can't pass anything with majorities in both houses now...
That's the cost of healthcare reform and failed stimulus...
...
I nevar favor one party rule...I like gridlock...Obama would have been better off with less of a sweep in the last election...
This election is...irrelevant...

[cyfallsbooster2]

I like reading Barone. When I get a chance I'll go read this one.

I think everyone with health insurance is about to get a wakeup call when they are presented with their plan costs for 2011. Unless you are protected by a union contract your premiums will rise significantly.

Back to the topic, the Dems are in serious trouble in this election cycle. We will see a lot of incumbent Dems and some R's lose. I think this is very healthy.

Our company just re-newed.......40% increase due to the new health plan per their explanation. We shopped hard and got that down somewhat, but had to give up some services to do so. Now, how was that plan supposed to help me again? I'm with CoveMom......where is the "I hope so" button?

[Mong Hu]

Would you consider the Income Tax Amendment a legislative initiative? ;)

I would say that the only question here is "among likely voters" from previous discussions. We all know the demographic turnout for Pres. Obama. He will need that same demographic turnout (which notoriously does NOT turn out) to maintain the House.

If the Repubs gain control of the House, you can expect zero legislation coming out of Congress. That may be good, we will see. I am eagerly awaiting the Republican plank of how to fix the economy.

I have researched a little and considered the 16th over the past several days. The 16th was proposed in 1909 by William Howard Taft. At the time the Republicans controlled both houses of Congress. They controlled the House by a 215 to 176 margin and the Senate by a 60 to 32 margin. During the midterms the Republicans lost control of the House to the Democrats. After 1911 the Democrats controlled the House with a 233 to 161 majority. That means that the Democrats gained 54 seats in the House.

Certainly something happened to tick off the public during the first two years of the Taft administration as even in the Senate the Republicans went from holding a 60 to 32 majority to a 54 to 42 majority (two additional states were added thus the differing totals for number of Senators in the 61st and 62nd Congresses respectively). The question is was this discontent a result of the mere proposal of the 16th amendment?

I am not certain of this. In the initial proposal that Taft put forward in an address to Congress in June of 1909 he stated that

a 2% federal income tax on corporations would be instituted for the privilege of doing business as an artificial entity and of freedom from a general partnership liability enjoyed by those who own the stock

This was not to be a tax on the general population as a whole, although the final wording of the amendment made no such distinction:

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

The amendment was said to be popular among the Western States which typically where strongholds for the Republican party at that time but where much less popular in the Eastern more populated States. And indeed when you look at the shift the Republicans were soundly defeated in many of the House races in New York, New Jersey, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. This would certainly lend credence to the idea that the 16th was an unpopular legislative initiative. Was it however unpopular through out the country? While it was certainly unpopular in the East it is much harder to draw conclusions about the country as a whole.

Certainly Taft did loose the Presidency in the election of 1912 but their were other events that certainly could have contributed to his eventual defeat (the worst defeat of an incumbent President in history by the way, he only won 8 electoral votes). The passage of the 17th amendment, allowing popular election of Senators for the first time, was certainly significant but again it seems odd that this would have been a significant problem for just as Taft framed the original income tax proposal in populist language, the passage of the 17th would have had a populist appeal. The explanation of the election results of 1912 centers much more on the split with in the Republican party. Teddy Roosevelt ran against Taft and this accounts more for Taft's abysmal performance. Indeed if you look at the popular vote count Taft and Roosevelt accounted for 7.5 million votes to Wilson's 6.3 million.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f9/1912_Electoral_Map.png/800px-1912_Electoral_Map.png

So in answer to your question yes I would consider the 16th amendment a legislative initiative but I am not sure it would rise to the level of the unpopularity of Kansas Nebraska although I am not sure that the Health care does either.

So is it the government's job to fix our economy? Is our government responsible for running our economy? I think it is a question that is very close to the heart of the differences between Republicans and Democrats at least ideologically if not practically.

As always great post. I love that you brought up the 16th as a possible other example of unpopular legislative initiatives. Are there any others out there? I don't think it is a question that is easily answered but from a historical perspective it is certainly possible that the 16th might be right up there. Your posts always make me think and I usually end up reading and researching more as a result of your thoughts. Thank you.

[dragonsdaddy]

I've been told that you just have to tell the folks at the ER that you are poor and/or illegal and you get all that stuff for free.

if by all that stuff, you mean the least that can be done to keep you from dying in the er, you are likely right. and there's still a chance that a bill collection agency might hunt down your assets too.

[drgnbkr]

Back to the thread title...Did anyone see obama today as he put everyone to sleep during his press conference? If that had been Bush the media would have demanded a drug test. He was slurring and generally having a miserable time staying on task.

[slcdragonfan]

...

So is it the government's job to fix our economy? Is our government responsible for running our economy? I think it is a question that is very close to the heart of the differences between Republicans and Democrats at least ideologically if not practically.

As always great post. I love that you brought up the 16th as a possible other example of unpopular legislative initiatives. Are there any others out there? I don't think it is a question that is easily answered but from a historical perspective it is certainly possible that the 16th might be right up there. Your posts always make me think and I usually end up reading and researching more as a result of your thoughts. Thank you.

WOW! Outstanding research, that was interesting. Didn't realize that Taft had the worst defeat ever but, when considering the split vote for Teddy it certainly makes sense. I concur it is part of the heart of the differences.

I think the government has a role in the economy, as you point out, what that role is and the extent of it is I think at the root of the foment in this country.

[b756561]

WOW! Outstanding research, that was interesting. Didn't realize that Taft had the worst defeat ever but, when considering the split vote for Teddy it certainly makes sense. I concur it is part of the heart of the differences.

I think the government has a role in the economy, as you point out, what that role is and the extent of it is I think at the root of the foment in this country.

After Taft left the White House, he did not just fade away into history. In 1921 he fulfilled a lifelong ambition when he became the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, a position he held until his death in 1930. As such, he became the only person to ever hold the position of the leader of the executive branch and leader of the judicial branch of our government.

[slcdragonfan]

After Taft left the White House, he did not just fade away into history. In 1921 he fulfilled a lifelong ambition when he became the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, a position he held until his death in 1930. As such, he became the only person to ever hold the position of the leader of the executive branch and leader of the judicial branch of our government.

I didn't know that either. How unanimous was his placement, was it considered controversial?

Also, the following was very interesting in light of the original poll topic:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/theweek/20100910/cm_theweek/206948

I think point 5 is likely correct.

[b756561]

I didn't know that either. How unanimous was his placement, was it considered controversial?

Also, the following was very interesting in light of the original poll topic:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/theweek/20100910/cm_theweek/206948

I think point 5 is likely correct.

Yeah, I called that Gallup Poll an "outier" the moment I saw it.
The following was taken directly from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"On June 30, 1921, following the death of Chief Justice Edward Douglass White (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Douglass_White), President Warren G. Harding (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_G._Harding) nominated Taft to take his place, thereby fulfilling Taft's lifelong ambition to become Chief Justice of the United States. There was little opposition to the nomination, and the Senate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate) approved him 60-4 in a secret session on the day of his nomination, but the roll call (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roll_call) of the vote has never been made public.[38] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Howard_Taft#cite_note-37) Taft received his commission immediately and readily took up the position, serving until 1930. As such, he became the only President to serve as Chief Justice, and thus the only former President to swear in subsequent Presidents, giving the oath of office to both Calvin Coolidge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvin_Coolidge) (in 1925) and Herbert Hoover (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Hoover) (in 1929).
Taft remains the only person to have led both the Executive (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_(government)) and Judicial (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judiciary) branches of the United States government (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_government_of_the_United_States). He considered his time as Chief Justice to be the highest point of his career; allegedly, he once remarked "I do not remember that I was ever President".

[Mong Hu]

WOW! Outstanding research, that was interesting. Didn't realize that Taft had the worst defeat ever but, when considering the split vote for Teddy it certainly makes sense. I concur it is part of the heart of the differences.

I think the government has a role in the economy, as you point out, what that role is and the extent of it is I think at the root of the foment in this country.

Well thank you for the compliment but I have to tell you that even though I thought the question and the research was interesting I myself felt like the post was dry and over analytic. I think when F18 described the political threads as "narcolepsy inducing" I am pretty sure he had posts like my prior post and probably this one in mind. :o

At any rate I am glad that you thought it contained some interesting observations. What I found interesting is how both the examples of the Kansas Nebraska Act and the 16th amendment call into question the commonly held modern day perception (or misperception) of the history of Washington D.C.. We often hear today that Washington is broke. I have come more and more to believe that it is not. Rank partisanship has been the norm in Washington for most of our history. Even the red state blue state divide that we see today is nothing new. In the elections referenced in my post the division was plain to see. (For instance in 61st Congress of the United States only 6 of the 46 states had one R senator and one D senator. All the other 40 were represented by one party. 27 states were represented by delegations in the House that were all Democrats or all Republicans. Only 5 of the 46 states had delegations that contained fewer than 70% of the dominant party. In other words all the states were pretty partisan even back then.)

I believe that the division goes all the way back to the founding of our country (Hamilton/Jefferson anyone?). The division remains, IMHO, a question about the role of government. The North in favor of a stronger government (Hamilton) and the South in favor of a weaker government (Jefferson). The issue has manifest itself in a myriad of ways from national banks (at least three times) to slavery to taxes to social security to healthcare today but always the underlying issue has been how much do we want our federal government to do, more or less?

I believe the period beginning with FDR and the New Deal lasting really until the 80's is the exception. The Great Depression saw the complete collapse of the limited government argument (today's conservative movement)at the national level and the resulting big government hegemony. The growth of government went on virtually unopposed at the national level until Reagan. Even since Reagan while conservatives have spoken of limited government they have done nothing to actually limit government (other than lower taxes) and in fact have done almost as much as the liberals (until Obama) to grow government since Reagan.

I too believe that the governments actions have a role in the economy if for no other reason than the government controls taxation and taxation affects economic behavior but that is different than saying that the government is responsible for the economy. I believe that is how we treat our government more often than not (i.e. when the economy is good we like our government and when the economy is bad we do not like our government) and I believe that it is at least to some degree to the detriment of our own freedoms.

Any way all of this discussion is leading me more and more to the conclusion that yes in fact the Democrats are in big trouble this coming November. Health care is unpopular and the economy does still suck. This is a one two punch that, baring some Republican melt down, very well could knock the Democrats out of majorities in both houses.

[Mong Hu]

After Taft left the White House, he did not just fade away into history. In 1921 he fulfilled a lifelong ambition when he became the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, a position he held until his death in 1930. As such, he became the only person to ever hold the position of the leader of the executive branch and leader of the judicial branch of our government.
He is often considered by historians to be a much better Chief Justice than he was a Commander and Chief.

[Mong Hu]

I didn't know that either. How unanimous was his placement, was it considered controversial?

Also, the following was very interesting in light of the original poll topic:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/theweek/20100910/cm_theweek/206948

I think point 5 is likely correct.

This is the general point I have always tried to make about polls when arguing about them on this board and is in fact why I wanted take part in this discussion. Polls are just never the entire story. They are a great tool to help us understand but to base our understanding of anything on polls is a fools errand IMHO. Good article:)

[b756561]

He is often considered by historians to be a much better Chief Justice than he was a Commander and Chief.

That might be because he considered himself a jurist much more than he considered himself a politician. Taft was never happy in politics. However he was a true patriot and gave away his own personal happiness to come to the call of his country. Especially in his later years, he often essentialized his existance around the study of law. That was where he found true happiness.

[QQQ]

Come election day, none of this matters except those that are motivated to get out of their chair and treck down the block with their voter ID card. Here's the folks that can be counted on to vote:
1. Senior citizens: they are always pissed at what the politicians are doing to screw with their only source of income
2. Folks with Special interests: the ones that get the free money & don't have to really work for it
3. Civil Rights advocates: this list is always growing.... get designated as a protected class and ...... just line up behind the rest of um.
4. Gun lobby: The Russians are coming.... we must defend our land..... no wait...... Al Quaida.... Muslims..... Oprah.....

Here's the ones that voted last time that won't get near the polls this time
1. Those that wanted "Change".... do you see them rallying..... they aren't coming around this time..... they got duped and would still get those silly text messages
2. The middle class.... they are in a different line this time........ the unemployment line..... so they don't have the time to spend at a silly polling place.
3. NASCAR crowd.... see 2 above
4. You, you, you, you and ME. So, I'm betting there's more senior citizens able to get in the van this year.... hopefully the weather will be nice.

I hope the senior citizens fire every one of them.

[dragonsdaddy]

Come election day, none of this matters except those that are motivated to get out of their chair and treck down the block with their voter ID card. Here's the folks that can be counted on to vote:
1. Senior citizens: they are always pissed at what the politicians are doing to screw with their only source of income
2. Folks with Special interests: the ones that get the free money & don't have to really work for it
3. Civil Rights advocates: this list is always growing.... get designated as a protected class and ...... just line up behind the rest of um.
4. Gun lobby: The Russians are coming.... we must defend our land..... no wait...... Al Quaida.... Muslims..... Oprah.....

Here's the ones that voted last time that won't get near the polls this time
1. Those that wanted "Change".... do you see them rallying..... they aren't coming around this time..... they got duped and would still get those silly text messages
2. The middle class.... they are in a different line this time........ the unemployment line..... so they don't have the time to spend at a silly polling place.
3. NASCAR crowd.... see 2 above
4. You, you, you, you and ME. So, I'm betting there's more senior citizens able to get in the van this year.... hopefully the weather will be nice.

I hope the senior citizens fire every one of them.to be replaced with??? i'd love to think there's a "change" for the better this time, but i am so past jaded with electable politicians of any stripe, it almost seems pointless. i will feel better if the boys win next week, i promise.

[GoOwls]

Can't say that it matters one way or the other...
Obama is a lame duck...
He can't pass anything with majorities in both houses now...
That's the cost of healthcare reform and failed stimulus...
...
I nevar favor one party rule...I like gridlock...Obama would have been better off with less of a sweep in the last election...
This election is...irrelevant...

I totally agree. I've been saying that for 25 years. Gridlock makes mostly only the important bills go through and we don't get stuck with the failed stimulus and the doomed to fail healthcare bills.

BTw, not saying that this is a good idea, but just for argument:

Would it have been better to give the 800 billion stimulus to the people to spend as needed instead of giving it to corporations?

$800 bil. divided by approx. 150 million taxpayers is approx. $5333 per taxpayer. If a two parent family got ahold of $10,666 where would that money have been spent and wouldn't it have mostly gone to small businesses, the ones who create jobs and are hurting right now. Each dollar would have gotten spent over and over and over again....now that would have been a stimulus.

[JMSFan]

I totally agree. I've been saying that for 25 years. Gridlock makes mostly only the important bills go through and we don't get stuck with the failed stimulus and the doomed to fail healthcare bills.

BTw, not saying that this is a good idea, but just for argument:

Would it have been better to give the 800 billion stimulus to the people to spend as needed instead of giving it to corporations?

$800 bil. divided by approx. 150 million taxpayers is approx. $5333 per taxpayer. If a two parent family got ahold of $10,666 where would that money have been spent and wouldn't it have mostly gone to small businesses, the ones who create jobs and are hurting right now. Each dollar would have gotten spent over and over and over again....now that would have been a stimulus.

Not an original thought. Alot of people have said the same thing.

[GoOwls]

Not an original thought. Alot of people have said the same thing.

Please show me where I said or implied it was an original thought....:eek:

I'll wait.......(GoOwls taps foot on floor, waiting for mythical Unicorn that does not exist))

[BDB]

Please show me where I said or implied it was an original thought....:eek:

I'll wait.......(GoOwls taps foot on floor, waiting for mythical Unicorn that does not exist))

failowls having an original thought is truly a unicorn.

[GoOwls]

failowls having an original thought is truly a unicorn.

Oh.....looky who's head just popped out his arse.....whassup there, prez....:rofl:

[JMSFan]

Please show me where I said or implied it was an original thought....:eek:

I'll wait.......(GoOwls taps foot on floor, waiting for mythical Unicorn that does not exist))

Ok, sorry.... My bad.

I overreacted because I have heard so many others say the exact same thing the past couple of years.
Again, Im sorry for misunderstanding.

[BDB]

Oh.....looky who's head just popped out his arse.....whassup there, prez....:rofl:

so i peak my head out of my *** at the world and it turns out the economy hasn't collapsed.

[JMSFan]

so i peak my head out of my *** at the world and it turns out the economy hasn't collapsed.

...

[BDB]

...

if it had to do with *** and collapse, i was prolly with you. if not, PM it :laugh

[JMSFan]

if it had to do with *** and collapse, i was prolly with you. if not, PM it :laugh

ok

[dragonsdaddy]

I totally agree. I've been saying that for 25 years. Gridlock makes mostly only the important bills go through and we don't get stuck with the failed stimulus and the doomed to fail healthcare bills.

BTw, not saying that this is a good idea, but just for argument:

Would it have been better to not take the tax payers money in such an onerous, stifling rate in the first place. you know, maybe with tax cuts?

$800 bil. divided by approx. 150 million taxpayers is approx. $5333 per taxpayer. If a two parent family got ahold of $10,666 where would that money have been spent and wouldn't it have mostly gone to small businesses, the ones who create jobs and are hurting right now. Each dollar would have gotten spent over and over and over again....now that would have been a stimulus.fify. of course that wouldn't serve the real agenda of the left which is rather well addressed in socialist writings from last century-wealth redistribution.

[dragonsdaddy]

so i peak my head out of my *** at the world and it turns out the economy hasn't collapsed.

if collapse was the change we should have been hoping for, then i agree. if improvement was the standard to which we were aspiring, then, not so much.

[Mong Hu]

Top 10 signs Democrats are in trouble:

Number 1 ........ Harry Reid tweets with Lady Gaga (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/federal-eye/2010/09/harry_reid_to_lady_gaga_i_hear.html)

Really? Do we need any other reasons not to vote for Democrats this coming election cycle:rofl:

[Mong Hu]

Just goes to show that politicians really do listen to meat heads

http://img.metro.co.uk/i/pix/2010/09/13/article-1284364185111-0B28FC10000005DC-367624_466x734.jpg

:laugh:laugh:laugh:laugh

[JMSFan]

Top 10 signs Democrats are in trouble:

Number 1 ........ Harry Reid tweets with Lady Gaga (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/federal-eye/2010/09/harry_reid_to_lady_gaga_i_hear.html)

Really? Do we need any other reasons not to vote for Democrats this coming election cycle:rofl:

Number 2 ......... will any democrat or liberal deny what this jughead just said?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpaAxL6Oz_8

[Mong Hu]

Political outsider and long shot candidate Christine O'donell upsets GOP congressman Mike Castle in Delaware GOP primary. Castle was almost a lock for the GOP in Delaware with double digit leads over his Democratic challenger. This certainly changes the complexion of things on the senate side of the equation. Many say it is now impossible for the GOP to take the Senate.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/senate/christine-odonnell-upsets-mike.html?hpid=topnews

Does this, along with defeats of GOP candidates like Murkowski in the recent Alaskan primary, bolster Democratic claims that the sentiment is anti-incumbent not necessarily anti Democrat?

I think the mood is certainly anti incumbent (which is still bad news for the Democrats as most of the incumbents are Democrats) but I think it is still very anti Democrat as well. I don't see why this is so hard to understand the Democrats shoved through a healthcare bill that most people did not want and still do not want. When you do things we don't like you will lose come the next election. It is about the Healthcare Bill. Democrats want to chalk this up to a poor economy and surely that is a relevant factor but to me it is more about the majority completely ignoring the American Public. As I said earlier this will be a crazy election.

[Dawg Fan]

Hell, I am anti incumbent. They just about all suck!

[15Adragon]

Political outsider and long shot candidate Christine O'donell upsets GOP congressman Mike Castle in Delaware GOP primary. Castle was almost a lock for the GOP in Delaware with double digit leads over his Democratic challenger. This certainly changes the complexion of things on the senate side of the equation. Many say it is now impossible for the GOP to take the Senate.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/senate/christine-odonnell-upsets-mike.html?hpid=topnews

Does this, along with defeats of GOP candidates like Murkowski in the recent Alaskan primary, bolster Democratic claims that the sentiment is anti-incumbent not necessarily anti Democrat?

I think the mood is certainly anti incumbent (which is still bad news for the Democrats as most of the incumbents are Democrats) but I think it is still very anti Democrat as well. I don't see why this is so hard to understand the Democrats shoved through a healthcare bill that most people did not want and still do not want. When you do things we don't like you will lose come the next election. It is about the Healthcare Bill. Democrats want to chalk this up to a poor economy and surely that is a relevant factor but to me it is more about the majority completely ignoring the American Public. As I said earlier this will be a crazy election.

R's and D's have shown their arrogance for a while now and it is time for the voters hold them accountable. The anti-incumbent, anti-big gov, anti-debt, anti-war, anti-tax factions will align and make for some strange coalitions in November. There will be casualties on both sides. We can see several examples where the Tea Party is knocking out R's with the inside track for D's like Dirty Harry. Eventhough I am a consistent R, it is OK with me. Sure I would rather have the R, but I like the message it sends. The R's need accountability too. Fire away...

[SWMHebron]

Hell, I am anti incumbent. They just about all suck!

This.

[GoOwls]

so i peak my head out of my *** at the world and it turns out the economy hasn't collapsed.

If you remember, I said it would probably be late this year or early next year.....not time yet grasshopper.

BTW, have you noticed the stock market jump up and down like a meth head on a trampoline?

It's up when the news is bad and down when the news is good....sometimes it's up when it's good and down when it's bad, as logic would normally dictate.

We have a "new normal" which was created by lack of consumer confidence. There is plenty of money on the sidelines right now to invest, but people are keeping it in cash because they lack any certainty of their future.....they don't trust the govt....they can't plan out 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, because the feds won't give them hard numbers of how high taxes will go, how much healthcare will cost them, how inflation to pay for govt. programs (stimulus) will figure in...people with cash are plain scared to let it go befcause there is nothing consistant to invest in and they already lost 55% during Obama's first year, so they aren't too keen about losing the rest.

The economy "could" go up, but the downside is much more likely as the Obama taxes hit next year and the business owners further grab their pocketbooks to protect against taxation and inflation.

Not that you understand a damn thing a big boy talks about.....:rolleyes:

[BDB]

Hell, I am anti incumbent. They just about all suck!

+1.

atleast vote for the funniest or prettiest one. it worked for clinton/dubuyuh/nobamanation.

[BDB]

http://www.jamesgunn.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/spin-doctors.jpg
my favorite band....


as if you had to explain.

[pied]

If you remember, I said it would probably be late this year or early next year.....not time yet grasshopper.

BTW, have you noticed the stock market jump up and down like a meth head on a trampoline?

It's up when the news is bad and down when the news is good....sometimes it's up when it's good and down when it's bad, as logic would normally dictate.

We have a "new normal" which was created by lack of consumer confidence. There is plenty of money on the sidelines right now to invest, but people are keeping it in cash because they lack any certainty of their future.....they don't trust the govt....they can't plan out 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, because the feds won't give them hard numbers of how high taxes will go, how much healthcare will cost them, how inflation to pay for govt. programs (stimulus) will figure in...people with cash are plain scared to let it go befcause there is nothing consistant to invest in and they already lost 55% during Obama's first year, so they aren't too keen about losing the rest.

The economy "could" go up, but the downside is much more likely as the Obama taxes hit next year and the business owners further grab their pocketbooks to protect against taxation and inflation.

Not that you understand a damn thing a big boy talks about.....:rolleyes:


Few things before I repost what you actually said.

Dow Closing figures:

11/3/08 (date before election).............9,319
11/4/08 (date of election)...................9,625

1/16/09 (date before innaguration)........8,281
1/20/09 (date of innaguration)..............7,949
1/21/09 (date after innaguration)..........8,228

1/20/10 (one year after innaguration)...10,603

Curious as to how you lose 55% when the market goes from 7,949 to 10,067 in Obama's first year?




Closing figure as of this post on 1/31, 10,067

Damn straight it was...and you better get your boot straps laced up.....below 8,000 by the end of October, maybe below 6,000 if a full panic sets in when the inflation, interest rates, continued housing value losses, etc., come to roost.

November does not look very good for Democrats here on January 31....as I see it.



Closing figure as of this pos on 2/9, 10,058
I didn't run away, I have a job and must pay for your roads to drive mommy's car on.

I said 6,000 if a full panic set in....8,000 was the number I claimed and I stick by it....if it doesn't get to 8,000, it will be very close.

Sure, fenix, bet something mommy can provide for you. I'm a mailman with limited funds and I don't bet....I feel it's not right to bet....but a friendly wager is fine with me....just our honor on the line and a bowl of fresh crow.

I say in the neighborhood of 8,000 by October 31....;)




The Dow is currently at 10,552.

[the_phoenix612]

Thought this was interesting, just a selectively edited version of a wikipedia article:

The Know-Nothing Tea Party movement was a nativist American political movement of the 1840s and 1850s early 21st century. It was empowered by popular fears that the country was being overwhelmed by German and Irish Catholic Hispanic and Arab Muslim immigrants, who were often regarded as hostile to Anglo-Saxon values and controlled by the Pope in Rome Osama bin Laden. Mainly active from 1854 to 1856 2009 to 2010, it strove to curb immigration and naturalization, though its efforts met with little success. Membership was limited to Protestant males dominated by Christians of British lineage over the age of twenty-one forty. There were few prominent leaders, and the largely middle-class and entirely Protestant Christian membership fragmented over the issue of slavery social issues. Most ended up joining the Republican Party by the time of the 1860 2012 presidential election.EDIT: aww, the strikethroughs didn't carry over. Anything before a bolded word is struck through.

[DragonWatcher]

Political outsider and long shot candidate Christine O'donell upsets GOP congressman Mike Castle in Delaware GOP primary. Castle was almost a lock for the GOP in Delaware with double digit leads over his Democratic challenger. This certainly changes the complexion of things on the senate side of the equation. Many say it is now impossible for the GOP to take the Senate.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/senate/christine-odonnell-upsets-mike.html?hpid=topnews

Does this, along with defeats of GOP candidates like Murkowski in the recent Alaskan primary, bolster Democratic claims that the sentiment is anti-incumbent not necessarily anti Democrat?

I think the mood is certainly anti incumbent (which is still bad news for the Democrats as most of the incumbents are Democrats) but I think it is still very anti Democrat as well. I don't see why this is so hard to understand the Democrats shoved through a healthcare bill that most people did not want and still do not want. When you do things we don't like you will lose come the next election. It is about the Healthcare Bill. Democrats want to chalk this up to a poor economy and surely that is a relevant factor but to me it is more about the majority completely ignoring the American Public. As I said earlier this will be a crazy election.

The tea party in Delaware just ended whatever chance the GOP had at winning the senate.

[the_phoenix612]

The tea party in Delaware just ended whatever chance the GOP had at winning the senate.
whoop

[dragonsdaddy]

The tea party in Delaware just ended whatever chance the GOP had at winning the senate.

mark

[the_phoenix612]

mark
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/09/14/nrsc-no-plans-to-fund-odonnell/

When your own Senatorial Committee refuses to fund you, you kinda know you have no chance.

[mad_fan]

The tea party in Delaware just ended whatever chance the GOP had at winning the senate.

We'll probably just go away in November...

[mad_fan]

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/09/14/nrsc-no-plans-to-fund-odonnell/

When your own Senatorial Committee refuses to fund you, you kinda know you have no chance.

Welcome to yesterday...got anything today...

[the_phoenix612]

Welcome to yesterday...got anything today...
nah, I wasn't online last night. Never came home.

[mad_fan]

nah, I wasn't online last night. Never came home.

NEWS...no one cares about your posting habits...

[CoveMom]

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2010/09/14/nrsc-no-plans-to-fund-odonnell/

When your own Senatorial Committee refuses to fund you, you kinda know you have no chance.

mad_fan welcomed you to yesterday. Here, this is today:

I have included an excerpt from Mr. Stephanopoulos' blog to make it easier for you to see the relevant part.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2010/09/christine-odonnell-on-roves-un-factual-remarks-and-republican-cannibalism.html

Update: The National Republican Senatorial Committee will support the O’Donnell campaign, according to a statement that was just released by its chairman, Sen. John Cornyn.

“I reached out to Christine this morning, and as I have conveyed to all of our nominees, I offered her my personal congratulations and let her know that she has our support. This support includes a check for $42,000 – the maximum allowable donation that we have provided to all of our nominees – which the NRSC will send to her campaign today,” Cornyn said in the statement.

[mad_fan]

mad_fan welcomed you to yesterday. Here, this is today:

I have included an excerpt from Mr. Stephanopoulos' blog to make it easier for you to see the relevant part.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2010/09/christine-odonnell-on-roves-un-factual-remarks-and-republican-cannibalism.html

Can you pie chart that???
:)

[the_phoenix612]

mad_fan welcomed you to yesterday. Here, this is today:

I have included an excerpt from Mr. Stephanopoulos' blog to make it easier for you to see the relevant part.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2010/09/christine-odonnell-on-roves-un-factual-remarks-and-republican-cannibalism.html
lol.

The NRSC has pledged 2.5 million to the races that count. 42 grand to O'Donnell is a joke.

For madunderscorefan:
http://i613.photobucket.com/albums/tt218/the_phoenix612/a09b094f.jpg?t=1284601916

[CoveMom]

Can you pie chart that???
:)

He's an aggie now. I thought Mr. Stephanopoulos' and Mr. Cornyn's words were small enough for him. You really think I need to get him a chart?


:rolleyes:

[CoveMom]

Can you pie chart that???
:)

He's an aggie now. I thought Mr. Stephanopoulos' and Mr. Cornyn's words were small enough for him. You really think I need to get him a chart?


:rolleyes:

APPARENTLY NOT!!!


attention the_phoenix612

please read the big red purple letters in the blue box below.


Update: The National Republican Senatorial Committee will support the O’Donnell campaign, according to a statement that was just released by its chairman, Sen. John Cornyn.

“I reached out to Christine this morning, and as I have conveyed to all of our nominees, I offered her my personal congratulations and let her know that she has our support. This support includes a check for $42,000 – the maximum allowable donation that we have provided to all of our nominees – which the NRSC will send to her campaign today,” Cornyn said in the statement.


:rolleyes:

[15Adragon]

The tea party in Delaware just ended whatever chance the GOP had at winning the senate.

Watch out for Wis and Calif...don't put your glass of tea down just yet.

[the_phoenix612]

APPARENTLY NOT!!!


attention the_phoenix612

please read the big red purple letters in the blue box below.




:rolleyes:
condescension duly noted. I'll try to keep any such emotion out of my post.

42K is the maximum allowed to the candidates PERSONALLY, but both senate committees have ways around that, through PACs and the like, so the NRSC has given 2.5 million to Republican candidates in Florida, Colorado, and other "winnable" races.

Large letters, colored letters, polka-dotted letters doing a line dance wouldn't change the fact that you're shouting out nothing more than an admission that you're half-informed, at best.

[the_phoenix612]

Watch out for Wis and Calif...don't put your glass of tea down just yet.
was it the candidate for California or Nevada that wants to move to a chicken-based economy?

[JagFan]

APPARENTLY NOT!!!


attention the_phoenix612

please read the big red purple letters in the blue box below.




:rolleyes:

She also raised over $500,000.00 today from her website.

[the_phoenix612]

She also raised over $500,000.00 today from her website.
right. I trust those numbers. And Glenn Beck had MILLIONS at his rally :rolleyes:

[JagFan]

right. I trust those numbers. And Glenn Beck had MILLIONS at his rally :rolleyes:

Of course you don't trust those numbers. They are scary.

Your obsession with Glen Beck is noted. What rally?

[DragonWatcher]

She also raised over $500,000.00 today from her website.

Castle primary voters supports Coons over O'Donnell 44-28 in general election from Public Policy Polling.

[DragonWatcher]

She also raised over $500,000.00 today from her website.

Looks like she can pay for rent for a few more months on her personal property.

Per her former campaign manager-"This is her third senate race in five years. As O'Donnell's manager, I found out she was living on campaign donations - using them for rent and personal expenses, while leaving her workers unpaid and piling up thousands in debt. She wasn't concerned about conservative causes. O'Donnell just wanted to make a buck."

[JagFan]

Looks like she can pay for rent for a few more months on her personal property.

Per her former campaign manager-"This is her third senate race in five years. As O'Donnell's manager, I found out she was living on campaign donations - using them for rent and personal expenses, while leaving her workers unpaid and piling up thousands in debt. She wasn't concerned about conservative causes. O'Donnell just wanted to make a buck."

Honestly I only heard of her today. I am impressed with her win and the amount of money she raised. That is all. I know nothing about her, yet and I will do my own research but love the fact that it got Phoenix all lathered up. Nothing more nothing less. :)

If she used campaign funds for personal use she would be in jail. No? Just asking, I don't know.

[b756561]

Honestly I only heard of her today. I am impressed with her win and the amount of money she raised. That is all. I know nothing about her, yet and I will do my own research but love the fact that it got Phoenix all lathered up. Nothing more nothing less. :)

If she used campaign funds for personal use she would be in jail. No? Just asking, I don't know.

You only go to jail if you get caught and convicted. You're innocent until then.

[the_phoenix612]

You only go to jail if you get caught and convicted. You're innocent until then.
unless you're black.

[b756561]

unless you're black.

Or Polka-dotted.

[the_phoenix612]

Or Polka-dotted.
that's weird.

[patient1019]

Saw a good political cartoon in the UT student paper the other day. Showed "the voters" running through a meadow, arms extended, toward "the Republicans", also with arms extended. "The Republicans" were yelling, "But I haven't learned a thing!" Voter response: "Neither have we!"

About sums up my thoughts on the midterms. I identify as Libertarian, just as a disclaimer, and think all politicians are idiots.

[b756561]

that's weird.

So are you. But in a nice way.

[CoveMom]

condescension duly noted. I'll try to keep any such emotion out of my post.

42K is the maximum allowed to the candidates PERSONALLY, but both senate committees have ways around that, through PACs and the like, so the NRSC has given 2.5 million to Republican candidates in Florida, Colorado, and other "winnable" races.

Large letters, colored letters, polka-dotted letters doing a line dance wouldn't change the fact that you're shouting out nothing more than an admission that you're half-informed, at best.

You know what? Every single time I think that perhaps you've gotten past the point where you can dish it out but not take it...you just pile more on.

:rolleyes:

Now. Here is what I understand about big time politics and wanting YOUR party to win. The NRSC will spend money proportionate to the chances of winning in any area. They will, as I have now noted TWICE only officially give $42,000 to any single candidate's official campaign fund. At this point in time the committee and the RNC do believe that the races in California and Florida and Wisconsin are where the money needs to be. As soon as there is a stronger feel for the sentiment of voters in DE and perhaps NH, that may change. The day or two after an election does not reflect reality in any race, no matter the outcome. Too many folks still upset "their" guy/gal did not win. Money is not allocated equally across the board in any case. The most populous state of importance in this election cycle (CA) will of course get more in the way of "issue" ad spending and donations to PACs that are friendly to the Republican cause. The Democrats are doing the same.

I simply posted my first link to refute your claim (based on an article in the WSJ, yes) that O'Donnell would not be getting support from the NRSC. That article was dated 14 September, the day of the election while active campaigning to get out the Castle vote was still ongoing. Scare tactics towards voters are not the exclusive property of the Democrat Party. Republicans do it too.

You chose to not simply acknowledge a change in sentiment but to belittle the candidate (and by extension the voters who placed her on the November ballot) with a pie chart (yes, provoked by mad's comment) that showed the $42,000 in relation to the currently planned expenditures for other races. DE is a very small place compared to every other state in the Union except Rhode Island. Don't forget that.

Keep on dreaming. I have a feeling we will all wake up on the first Wednesday in November 2010 surprised by quite a few results. This is, after all, the "Throw the Bums Out" or "I'm Mad as Hell and I'm Not Going to Take it Anymore" election.



jmo.

:)

[the_phoenix612]

You know what? Every single time I think that perhaps you've gotten past the point where you can dish it out but not take it...you just pile more on.

:rolleyes:

Now. Here is what I understand about big time politics and wanting YOUR party to win. The NRSC will spend money proportionate to the chances of winning in any area. They will, as I have now noted TWICE only officially give $42,000 to any single candidate's official campaign fund.
This is just blatantly false. The NRSC gives 42K directly to their candidates and then as MUCH AS THEY WANT to the candidates' PACs. To try to make a distinction between the two concepts is dishonest.
At this point in time the committee and the RNC do believe that the races in California and Florida and Wisconsin are where the money needs to be. As soon as there is a stronger feel for the sentiment of voters in DE and perhaps NH, that may change. The day or two after an election does not reflect reality in any race, no matter the outcome. Too many folks still upset "their" guy/gal did not win. Money is not allocated equally across the board in any case. The most populous state of importance in this election cycle (CA) will of course get more in the way of "issue" ad spending and donations to PACs that are friendly to the Republican cause. The Democrats are doing the same.
Problem is, the TV money they have to spend is not limited to a "Delaware Market". Delaware is part of the Philadelphia TV market, making TV time much more expensive than average.
I simply posted my first link to refute your claim (based on an article in the WSJ, yes) that O'Donnell would not be getting support from the NRSC. That article was dated 14 September, the day of the election while active campaigning to get out the Castle vote was still ongoing. Scare tactics towards voters are not the exclusive property of the Democrat Party. Republicans do it too.

you're right, and I failed to acknowledge it. I found myself yesterday in the strange position of being a full day behind the interwebz in terms of news and posting. I was a step slow, and instead of bogging down in arguing about days, I accepted your post and moved on.

You chose to not simply acknowledge a change in sentiment but to belittle the candidate (and by extension the voters who placed her on the November ballot) with a pie chart (yes, provoked by mad's comment) that showed the $42,000 in relation to the currently planned expenditures for other races. DE is a very small place compared to every other state in the Union except Rhode Island. Don't forget that. Small =/= cheap. See above Philadelphia TV market comment. Don't forget that.

Keep on dreaming. I have a feeling we will all wake up on the first Wednesday in November 2010 surprised by quite a few results. This is, after all, the "Throw the Bums Out" or "I'm Mad as Hell and I'm Not Going to Take it Anymore" election. no argument here. Midterms after a big election are nearly always catastrophic for the majority population, especially lately.



jmo.

:)

You attack me for ignoring a post, which I didn't really (though I DID fail to acknowledge it), but go on to ignore all of mine. This is, honestly, behavior I didn't expect from a poster of your caliber. You and I have had some wonderful discussions on here and I'm sad to see that you have fallen into the GoOwls/ODB trap of hyper-politicizing your posts and stopped having open, honest discussions of the kind we have had in the past.

42,000 dollars is not proportionate to other Senatorial races in terms of the Delaware Senatorial race, especially when the GOP needs every senate seat they can possibly win to get a majority. The fact that GOP leadership initially said such terrible things about O'Donnell and then are still running as far away from her as they can does two things: makes Coons' job a thousand times easier, and shows that the GOP leadership is losing control of their party.

fivethirtyeight.com projected a 94.4% chance of Castle winning the seat over Coons. The projection for O'Donnell? 16.3%. Thanks, Sarah Palin, for the free Senate seat :)

[15Adragon]

You attack me for ignoring a post, which I didn't really (though I DID fail to acknowledge it), but go on to ignore all of mine. This is, honestly, behavior I didn't expect from a poster of your caliber. You and I have had some wonderful discussions on here and I'm sad to see that you have fallen into the GoOwls/ODB trap of hyper-politicizing your posts and stopped having open, honest discussions of the kind we have had in the past.

42,000 dollars is not proportionate to other Senatorial races in terms of the Delaware Senatorial race, especially when the GOP needs every senate seat they can possibly win to get a majority. The fact that GOP leadership initially said such terrible things about O'Donnell and then are still running as far away from her as they can does two things: makes Coons' job a thousand times easier, and shows that the GOP leadership is losing control of their party.

fivethirtyeight.com projected a 94.4% chance of Castle winning the seat over Coons. The projection for O'Donnell? 16.3%. Thanks, Sarah Palin, for the free Senate seat :)

1). Who cares about a majority in the Senate. It just makes Olympia and Joe L the power brokers for everything... I would rather gain control of the House. They are much more aggressive in the House.

2). The R's losing control of their party is a good thing. I am ready for the next generation of conservatives to take over after this tea party movement has run its course. ( see Gov La, Va congressman, etc..)

Also, old White Castles served his purpose by keeping Biden Jr from inheriting the seat and then he too got spanked... LOL in Del. Great stuff.

[CoveMom]

You attack me for ignoring a post, which I didn't really (though I DID fail to acknowledge it), but go on to ignore all of mine. This is, honestly, behavior I didn't expect from a poster of your caliber. You and I have had some wonderful discussions on here and I'm sad to see that you have fallen into the GoOwls/ODB trap of hyper-politicizing your posts and stopped having open, honest discussions of the kind we have had in the past.

42,000 dollars is not proportionate to other Senatorial races in terms of the Delaware Senatorial race, especially when the GOP needs every senate seat they can possibly win to get a majority. The fact that GOP leadership initially said such terrible things about O'Donnell true and then are still running as far away from her as they can no longer true does two things: makes Coons' job a thousand times easier, and shows that the GOP leadership is losing control of their party. i guess i see it as they are finding out that their leadership positions are not as secure as they thought (you know, the whole "We the People" thing :)

fivethirtyeight.com projected a 94.4% chance of Castle winning the seat over Coons. The projection for O'Donnell? 16.3%. Thanks, Sarah Palin, for the free Senate seat :)


I wasn't politicizing this. You did by making such a huge pie chart. I was just poking fun.

And the term "officially" should have tipped you off without having you call my assertion "blatantly dishonest" since we had a prolonged battle about Campaign Finance Reform in this country when McCain was full of himself in the past. It was sarcasm. The Constitution and the 1st Amendment (IN MY OPINION) lost that battle. Hope McCain is happy now. He did too.


Today's polls (as close as they are to the election Tuesday) are showing a marked improvement of Ms. O'Donnell's chances. Have no fear, most Republicans will close ranks in DE. The registered Independents are the prize however and we don't yet know how they will break. Nor do "we" care.


Remember from past discussions, I am a Libertarian at heart and one who likes Gridlock in Congress especially when times are as tough as they are now. I am also a small business owner who is still not getting a salary for myself (or any profit for that matter) and the crap they are all playing now is making me nuts.

For instance, this provision about providing the IRS the names of companies from whom I order in excess of $600.00 in goods per year is ludicrous. We are all required to report Corporate/Business income. Me AND my suppliers. Now the government is, in essence, requiring me to report my suppliers income for them so it can be "checked" and there can be no other possible reason for it. The government doesn't give a rat's behind what I buy, they only care how much I pay for it and that I get taxed on what I sell it for. I find it incredible that they now want me to do the job of the internal revenue service. Gridlock would have prevented this measure from being enacted. Now, politics one upmanship is preventing its repeal.

sorry, i'll get off the soapbox now. although you and i are on different ends of the political spectrum (judging by our postings alone) i think we agree that we are each entitled to our opinions and that neither major Party has a lock on absurdity.

attack you? no, you are an aggie. i was attacking your status as such. if you want to call it an attack and not a statement of fact.....;)


enough of this. let's move on to another argument.

[the_phoenix612]

I wasn't politicizing this. You did by making such a huge pie chart. I was just poking fun.

And the term "officially" should have tipped you off without having you call my assertion "blatantly dishonest" since we had a prolonged battle about Campaign Finance Reform in this country when McCain was full of himself in the past. It was sarcasm. The Constitution and the 1st Amendment (IN MY OPINION) lost that battle. Hope McCain is happy now. He did too.


Today's polls (as close as they are to the election Tuesday) are showing a marked improvement of Ms. O'Donnell's chances. Have no fear, most Republicans will close ranks in DE. The registered Independents are the prize however and we don't yet know how they will break. Nor do "we" care.


Remember from past discussions, I am a Libertarian at heart and one who likes Gridlock in Congress especially when times are as tough as they are now. I am also a small business owner who is still not getting a salary for myself (or any profit for that matter) and the crap they are all playing now is making me nuts.

For instance, this provision about providing the IRS the names of companies from whom I order in excess of $600.00 in goods per year is ludicrous. We are all required to report Corporate/Business income. Me AND my suppliers. Now the government is, in essence, requiring me to report my suppliers income for them so it can be "checked" and there can be no other possible reason for it. The government doesn't give a rat's behind what I buy, they only care how much I pay for it and that I get taxed on what I sell it for. I find it incredible that they now want me to do the job of the internal revenue service. Gridlock would have prevented this measure from being enacted. Now, politics one upmanship is preventing its repeal.

sorry, i'll get off the soapbox now. although you and i are on different ends of the political spectrum (judging by our postings alone) i think we agree that we are each entitled to our opinions and that neither major Party has a lock on absurdity.

attack you? no, you are an aggie. i was attacking your status as such. if you want to call it an attack and not a statement of fact.....;)


enough of this. let's move on to another argument.

I don't think you've ever told me where you went to school. Was it someplace good?

[Mong Hu]

I less than 48 hours Christine O'Donnell has raised 1.1 million dollars. Perhaps she should just send the 42,500 back. She seems to be doing just fine on her own.

[pied]

I less than 48 hours Christine O'Donnell has raised 1.1 million dollars. Perhaps she should just send the 42,500 back. She seems to be doing just fine on her own.

Things like that blow me away some times. How much money could we raise to end world hunger or cure cancer. There are many other examples of course, they are breaking ground on a $60M football stadium for Allen HS. I'll step away now.

[15Adragon]

I less than 48 hours Christine O'Donnell has raised 1.1 million dollars. Perhaps she should just send the 42,500 back. She seems to be doing just fine on her own.

Anything is possible in this next election. Anything! I noticed the Ct senate race which was considered a lock has closed the gap to 6%. Nv, Calif, and several others are all trending away from the Dem.

I don't think the pundits fully understand the passion that is out there. We could be in for a shocker on election day.

[slcdragonfan]

I less than 48 hours Christine O'Donnell has raised 1.1 million dollars. Perhaps she should just send the 42,500 back. She seems to be doing just fine on her own.

This whole tea party thing is reminiscent of the Republican Revolution of "young Turks" who swept into office in 1994. There was so much promise then, with many saying they supported term limits, bright-eyed, brimming with ideals. 14 years later, they seem just the same as who they replaced.

While I am an optimist, I do not have high hopes for these new "young Turks".

If you go back and look at O-Donnell's background you see she ran forthe Senate in 2006 AND 2008. By glomming onto the tea-party movement she has made headway, but is she "really" a tea-party candidate or simply a political opportunist?

Here is an interesting piece:
She's been a Delaware resident since 2003, moving to Wilmington to work for the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, a conservative think tank and book publisher. That experience seems to have cemented O'Donnell's reputation as a firebrand in conservative circles: She ended up suing that (now-former) employer for $6.9 million, alleging gender discrimination. In 2008, she dropped the suit, citing the burden of legal fees.

Aren't the tea party folks agin the whol civil rights thing and "spurious" lawsuits?

After college, O'Donnell moved to Washington, D.C., first working for an anti-pornography group, then taking jobs with the Republican National Committee and with Concerned Women for America, an anti-feminist group.

Seems odd in light of the previous quote, but the bigger point is she was an RNC employee in the 1990's.

And in addition to her MTV clip, she's also now being dogged by footage of a 1998 appearance on Bill Maher's "Politically Incorrect" in which she insisted that lying is always wrong, even for European families harboring Jews in their home during World War II as Nazis came to their door.

That is an interesting topic too, but I'll just drop it here and allow others to comment.

Who is tea party sensation Christine O’Donnell? (http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20100915/el_yblog_upshot/who-is-tea-party-sensation-christine-odonnell)

My main point is that she appears to be just more of the same, not part of some new movement or set of ideals but rather someone who has found a way to utilize the tea-party movement to her advantage.

If she is elected, I would love to revisit her congressional record in 8 years.

[JagFan]

Anything is possible in this next election. Anything! I noticed the Ct senate race which was considered a lock has closed the gap to 6%. Nv, Calif, and several others are all trending away from the Dem.

I don't think the pundits fully understand the passion that is out there. We could be in for a shocker on election day.

I think people are angry at everyone currently holding office.

I saw it here in my little town. Pretty much every incumbent was thrown out of office in May. From the Mayor, City Council, to the school board. We just voted yesterday for an ISD tax increase- we said no.

There is a lot of passion out there and people are paying attention this time.

[15Adragon]

I think people are angry at everyone currently holding office.

I saw it here in my little town. Pretty much every incombant was thrown out of office in May. From the Mayor, City Council, to the school board. We just voted yesterday for an ISD tax increase- we said no.

There is a lot of passion out there and people are paying attention this time.

I agree there is a ton of anti-incumbent (R & D) anger and also anti-establishment. A lot of folks who thought they liked "change" 2 years ago are giving "change" another try. Some by just staying home.

[JagFan]

I agree there is a ton of anti-incumbent (R & D) anger and also anti-establishment. A lot of folks who thought they liked "change" 2 years ago are giving "change" another try. Some by just staying home.

I find with the people I talk to any elected official that proposes/or voted for spending money or raising taxes right now is in trouble.

[15Adragon]

I find with the people I talk to any elected official that proposes/or voted for spending money or raising taxes right now is in trouble.

We are seeing voter initiated term limits. :D

[CoveMom]

I don't think you've ever told me where you went to school. Was it someplace good?

You picked A&M. You knew what that would bring. Develop that famous Aggie Thick Hide now and when you get older you will be able to tell the best Aggie Joke with a sincere smile. You know the one where you say....

"What do you call an Aggie 5 years after he graduates?"
































BOSS.



(School of Life, I don't plan on graduating for another 40 or so years)

[JagFan]

We are seeing voter initiated term limits. :D

That we are and I am all for it. Especially on the national level.

Here locally I loved our mayor she is a great lady and was sad when she lost. But I did support changes in the LISD. We were spending foolishly on some things and it needed to stop. The voters stopped it cold.

[the_phoenix612]

You picked A&M. You knew what that would bring. Develop that famous Aggie Thick Hide now and when you get older you will be able to tell the best Aggie Joke with a sincere smile. You know the one where you say....

"What do you call an Aggie 5 years after he graduates?"
































BOSS.



(School of Life, I don't plan on graduating for another 40 or so years)
So I'm assuming you're at least not a tshirt fan of life? :)

[CoveMom]

So I'm assuming you're at least not a tshirt fan of life? :)

I definitely earned this t-shirt...

[mad_fan]

How do you know a Democrat is in trouble???

He/she is arguing that a tea party candidate is the best thing to happen for him/her...
:rofl:
:yes:

[mad_fan]

I definitely earned this t-shirt...

THAT t-shirt is all wet...
And I like it!!!
:D

[CoveMom]

THAT t-shirt is all wet...
And I like it!!!
:D

RedRage00 will have a comment on this comment....

[b756561]

how do you know a democrat is in trouble???

He/she is arguing that a tea party candidate is the best thing to happen for him/her...
:rofl:
:yes:

+1

[15Adragon]

A couple of interesting articles on the Tea Party. It will be interesting to observe how all of this plays out over time.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703440604575496221482123504.html

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-09-16/stop-ridiculing-the-tea-party/?cid=hp:mainpromo4

[drgnbkr]

There seems to be an obvious anit-liberal bias out there..From NJ to VA to Mass to Delaware....The proof is in the votes...it is not about Republicans vs. Democrats, this time it is Conservative vs. Liberal.

[Mong Hu]

A couple of interesting articles on the Tea Party. It will be interesting to observe how all of this plays out over time.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703440604575496221482123504.html

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-09-16/stop-ridiculing-the-tea-party/?cid=hp:mainpromo4
Both excellent articles IMHO. Powers writes and excellent article from the liberal side and Noonan from the conservative side.

I love how powers draws the comparison's to how the liberals treated Goldwater and how they are treating the Tea Party.

I also thought Noonan's yardstick analogy (including the fact that she called it a YARD stick) was wright on the mark with how I have felt for some time. It is the reason that a lot of Republicans are going down right now.

If you have the time I thought this was an excellent read along the same lines as the Noonan article only in much greater detail. It is a long read so be forewarned. Only open it if you are really interested in politics.
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/07/16/americas-ruling-class-and-the/print

[Mong Hu]

67% of Americans told Battleground that they were "extremely likely" to vote. Another 24% of Americans told Battleground that they were "very likely" to vote in November.

These conservatives are an overwhelming majority of America. In responding to Question D3 of the latest Battleground Poll, which asks respondents to describe themselves ideologically, these are the responses: "very conservative," 22%; "somewhat conservative," 36%; "moderate," 6%; "somewhat liberal," 24%; "very liberal," 8%; and "refused/unknown," 4%. Fifty-eight percent of Americans describe themselves as "conservative," and when those who are "moderate" or "refused/unknown" are removed from the pool, conservatives outnumber liberals by 64% to 36%. Moreover, conservatives are much more likely to describe themselves as "very conservative" than liberals are to describe themselves as "very liberal."

From the following article:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/09/conservative_america_ready_to.html

Referencing this poll:
http://www.tarrance.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/BG-40-Questionnaire.pdf

[15Adragon]

Both excellent articles IMHO. Powers writes and excellent article from the liberal side and Noonan from the conservative side.

I love how powers draws the comparison's to how the liberals treated Goldwater and how they are treating the Tea Party.

I also thought Noonan's yardstick analogy (including the fact that she called it a YARD stick) was wright on the mark with how I have felt for some time. It is the reason that a lot of Republicans are going down right now.

If you have the time I thought this was an excellent read along the same lines as the Noonan article only in much greater detail. It is a long read so be forewarned. Only open it if you are really interested in politics.
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/07/16/americas-ruling-class-and-the/print

Thanks for the link to the article. Yes, it was long, but I did read it. He really sheds some light on the divide we have in this country. There are many points of interest and insight. Also, I noticed that the Am. Spectator has another related article out. I'll post the link although I haven't read it yet. It looks like another long one, but with a different author.

http://spectator.org/archives/2010/09/22/the-disgrace-of-the-ruling-cla

[Mong Hu]

Thanks for the link to the article. Yes, it was long, but I did read it. He really sheds some light on the divide we have in this country. There are many points of interest and insight. Also, I noticed that the Am. Spectator has another related article out. I'll post the link although I haven't read it yet. It looks like another long one, but with a different author.

http://spectator.org/archives/2010/09/22/the-disgrace-of-the-ruling-cla

Thanks for reading the article. I had actually read the article you linked today already. I am not a regular reader of the American Spectator but I may begin looking more at this publication.

[Mong Hu]

A quote from Mrs. Velma Hart,

Quite frankly, I’m exhausted – I’m exhausted of defending you, defending your administration, defending the mantle of change that I voted for, and deeply disappointed with where we are right now. I have been told that I voted for a man who said was going to change things in a meaningful way for the middle class. I’m one of those people and I’m waiting, sir. I’m waiting. I don’t feel it yet. And I thought while it wouldn’t be in great measure, I’d feel it in some small measure. I have two children in private school and the financial recession has taken an enormous toll on my family. My husband and I have joked for years that we thought we were well beyond the hot dogs and beans era of our lives, but, quite frankly, it’s starting to knock on our door and ring true that that might be where we’re headed again, and, quite frankly, Mr. President, I need you to answer this honestly. Is this my new reality?

Youtube link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCN-AirxKWg&feature=related)

This was an Obama voter making these statements. This is bad news for Mr. Obama and likewise for his Party. It means that those on whose support they must rely can not be counted on to provide such support. Mrs. Hart is not a Tea Party supporter. She is, as she said herself, someone who looks to the federal government, the President, to provide meaningful change. Tea Party activists would more likely say that the meaningful change from the federal government they are looking for is less federal government so that they themselves can provide meaningful change. Mrs Hart is looking for change from the top down which puts her squarely in Mr. Obama's corner. For her to be asking such questions indicates that indeed Mr. Obama's most stalwart supporters are questioning his ability and by proxy the Democratic Party's ability to deliver on the promises they have made. This is bad news for Democrats this November IMHO.

[15Adragon]

A quote from Mrs. Velma Hart,



Youtube link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCN-AirxKWg&feature=related)

This was an Obama voter making these statements. This is bad news for Mr. Obama and likewise for his Party. It means that those on whose support they must rely can not be counted on to provide such support. Mrs. Hart is not a Tea Party supporter. She is, as she said herself, someone who looks to the federal government, the President, to provide meaningful change. Tea Party activists would more likely say that the meaningful change from the federal government they are looking for is less federal government so that they themselves can provide meaningful change. Mrs Hart is looking for change from the top down which puts her squarely in Mr. Obama's corner. For her to be asking such questions indicates that indeed Mr. Obama's most stalwart supporters are questioning his ability and by proxy the Democratic Party's ability to deliver on the promises they have made. This is bad news for Democrats this November IMHO.

This IMHO is the defining moment so far for the Obama Administration. I didn't see this until last night and I was speechless. This lady nailed it in describing how a lot of folks feel right now.

[slcdragonfan]

Quite frankly, I’m exhausted – I’m exhausted of defending you, defending your administration, defending the mantle of change that I voted for, and deeply disappointed with where we are right now. I have been told that I voted for a man who said was going to change things in a meaningful way for the middle class. I’m one of those people and I’m waiting, sir. I’m waiting. I don’t feel it yet. And I thought while it wouldn’t be in great measure, I’d feel it in some small measure. I have two children in private school and the financial recession has taken an enormous toll on my family. My husband and I have joked for years that we thought we were well beyond the hot dogs and beans era of our lives, but, quite frankly, it’s starting to knock on our door and ring true that that might be where we’re headed again, and, quite frankly, Mr. President, I need you to answer this honestly. Is this my new reality?

A quote from Mrs. Velma Hart,



Youtube link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCN-AirxKWg&feature=related)

This was an Obama voter making these statements. This is bad news for Mr. Obama and likewise for his Party. It means that those on whose support they must rely can not be counted on to provide such support. Mrs. Hart is not a Tea Party supporter. She is, as she said herself, someone who looks to the federal government, the President, to provide meaningful change. Tea Party activists would more likely say that the meaningful change from the federal government they are looking for is less federal government so that they themselves can provide meaningful change. Mrs Hart is looking for change from the top down which puts her squarely in Mr. Obama's corner. For her to be asking such questions indicates that indeed Mr. Obama's most stalwart supporters are questioning his ability and by proxy the Democratic Party's ability to deliver on the promises they have made. This is bad news for Democrats this November IMHO.

I'm thinking she doesn't really know hard times from a windshield if she still has two kids in private school. In fact, I think what a whiner.

I had friends in high school who had their 12-year old sister calling the electric company to keep them from turning off the electricity, and they didn't even have air conditioning! Dad gone, Mom working as a file clerk in a male-oriented company that most assuredly was male-biased. If you looked in their fridge you might see 3-4 eggs, a quart of milk, some bread, and maybe mayo. Some onions too. Kids walked everywhere, forget cars or even bicycles.

THAT is freaking hard times. And Mojotrain can tell you even more difficult times. Hot dogs and beans would have been a great meal to them. Many of us are privileged, and have a sense of entitlement. Hard times are not when you eat beans and franks, or have to drive a 3 year-old car. hard times are when you have NOTHING to eat, can't afford the rent, lose the house, have the kids working so they have money for food, no shoes, can't participate in extracurricular events because they can't afford it, and so on. Those kids ate one meal a day unless they got enough out of their job to pay for it. This girl worked at a root beer stand for .90 cents/hour, and if a mug was broken she had to pay for it.

Some people need to get a grip. That is where we would have been with a lot more people if we hadn't stopped the bleeding. And that is directly the result of "self-regulation" and deregulation.

So how to fix? Get more of what broke it in the first place?

[15Adragon]

I'm thinking she doesn't really know hard times from a windshield if she still has two kids in private school. In fact, I think what a whiner.

I had friends in high school who had their 12-year old sister calling the electric company to keep them from turning off the electricity, and they didn't even have air conditioning! Dad gone, Mom working as a file clerk in a male-oriented company that most assuredly was male-biased. If you looked in their fridge you might see 3-4 eggs, a quart of milk, some bread, and maybe mayo. Some onions too. Kids walked everywhere, forget cars or even bicycles.

THAT is freaking hard times. And Mojotrain can tell you even more difficult times. Hot dogs and beans would have been a great meal to them. Many of us are privileged, and have a sense of entitlement. Hard times are not when you miss a vacation or when you eat beans and franks, hard times are when you have NOTHING to eat, can't afford the rent, lose the house, have the kids working so they have money for food, no shoes, can't participate in extracurricular events because they can't afford it, and so on.

Some people need to get a grip.

OK, so you are saying you have to be destitute to be able to say how you feel otherwise you are a whiner. Yes, I agree that we should be grateful for what we have, etc... but you can be plugged in and working for things you believe in and be exhausted from fighting unnecessary uphill battles.

This lady clearly had worked hard to get where she was and wasn't excited about seeing a return to lesser circumstances for no apparent reason. Also, I wouldn't focus on her "beans and hot dogs" comment as her central message. That was at the end after her points had been made and quite well I thought. I thought she spoke from the heart.

[Dawg Fan]

I'm thinking she doesn't really know hard times from a windshield if she still has two kids in private school. In fact, I think what a whiner.

I had friends in high school who had their 12-year old sister calling the electric company to keep them from turning off the electricity, and they didn't even have air conditioning! Dad gone, Mom working as a file clerk in a male-oriented company that most assuredly was male-biased. If you looked in their fridge you might see 3-4 eggs, a quart of milk, some bread, and maybe mayo. Some onions too. Kids walked everywhere, forget cars or even bicycles.

THAT is freaking hard times. And Mojotrain can tell you even more difficult times. Hot dogs and beans would have been a great meal to them. Many of us are privileged, and have a sense of entitlement. Hard times are not when you eat beans and franks, or have to drive a 3 year-old car. hard times are when you have NOTHING to eat, can't afford the rent, lose the house, have the kids working so they have money for food, no shoes, can't participate in extracurricular events because they can't afford it, and so on. Those kids ate one meal a day unless they got enough out of their job to pay for it. This girl worked at a root beer stand for .90 cents/hour, and if a mug was broken she had to pay for it.

Some people need to get a grip. That is where we would have been with a lot more people if we hadn't stopped the bleeding. And that is directly the result of "self-regulation" and deregulation.

So how to fix? Get more of what broke it in the first place?

What I find interesting is how you zero in on the private school angle and use it for the basis of your argument. What do you know about the public schools in her neighborhood? Considering that almost all public schools teach down for the slowest or dumbest in the class, is it possible they they are using every extra dime to put those kids there so they can get a quality education? Any chance they understand how hard it is to get ahead in this world with some of the public education available and want their kids to have more potential for scholarships when they graduate high school? Probably didn't enter your mind. Maybe we should know more about the individual before we judge them don't ya think?

[Mong Hu]

New Democratic Logo

http://assets.democrats.org/images/blog/blog_post-logo_tag.gif

Hopefully they didn't pay to much for this burst of creativity. Didn't they just do the change thing?

[mad_fan]

New Democratic Logo

http://assets.democrats.org/images/blog/blog_post-logo_tag.gif

Hopefully they didn't pay to much for this burst of creativity. Didn't they just do the change thing?

That'll work great on the range...with the red dot or the amber dot...:yes:

[Mong Hu]

That'll work great on the range...with the red dot or the amber dot...:yes:
I stand corrected. I had not thought of how that logo would go with my .357 magnum. It is sublime insights such as this that indeed make the yard the MAD_HOUSE. The logo is brilliant and will no doubt be a big hit at the firing range.

[mad_fan]

I stand corrected. I had not thought of how that logo would go with my .357 magnum. It is sublime insights such as this that indeed make the yard the MAD_HOUSE. The logo is brilliant and will no doubt be a big hit at the firing range.

Welcome to THE_SIG...:yes:

[Mong Hu]

Welcome to THE_SIG...:yes:
Does this mean that I am back in the good graces of the underscore after the debacle of the ND/MSU thread?

[mad_fan]

Does this mean that I am back in the good graces of the underscore after the debacle of the ND/MSU thread?

I'm not the police of the world...
Kick all the puppies you need to...
:)

[slcdragonfan]

OK, so you are saying you have to be destitute to be able to say how you feel otherwise you are a whiner. Yes, I agree that we should be grateful for what we have, etc... but you can be plugged in and working for things you believe in and be exhausted from fighting unnecessary uphill battles.

This lady clearly had worked hard to get where she was and wasn't excited about seeing a return to lesser circumstances for no apparent reason. Also, I wouldn't focus on her "beans and hot dogs" comment as her central message. That was at the end after her points had been made and quite well I thought. I thought she spoke from the heart.

The circumstances she is in are not the result of 2 years of policy but rather 18-20 years of policy. It is simpleton to blame one person.

[mad_fan]

The circumstances she is in are not the result of 2 years of policy but rather 18-20 years of policy. It is simpleton to blame one person.

Did not read...

[slcdragonfan]

What I find interesting is how you zero in on the private school angle and use it for the basis of your argument. What do you know about the public schools in her neighborhood? Considering that almost all public schools teach down for the slowest or dumbest in the class, is it possible they they are using every extra dime to put those kids there so they can get a quality education? Any chance they understand how hard it is to get ahead in this world with some of the public education available and want their kids to have more potential for scholarships when they graduate high school? Probably didn't enter your mind. Maybe we should know more about the individual before we judge them don't ya think?

Now, I want you to imagine she was a Republican, and said the same things against the Republican. Would you say the same thing?:)

As far as public schools, when and where I grew up, NOBODY went to private schools, that was like going to the moon. This is called making a choice. If I choose to eat beans and hot dogs to send my kids to private school, I sure am not going to whine how Obama hasn't helped me. I thought we were about making choices and living with the consequences?

And yes we should know more about the individual.

[mad_fan]

Now, I want you to imagine she was a Republican, and said the same things against the Republican. Would you say the same thing?:)

As far as public schools, when and where I grew up, NOBODY went to private schools, that was like going to the moon. This is called making a choice. If I choose to eat beans and hot dogs to send my kids to private school, I sure am not going to whine how Obama hasn't helped me. I thought we were about making choices and living with the consequences?

And yes we should know more about the individual.

Did not read...

[slcdragonfan]

Did not read...

Did not read....

[slcdragonfan]

Did not read...

Did not read....

[mad_fan]

Did not read....

Read...for lack of original content...

[slcdragonfan]

Read...for lack of original content...

Read. I understand from Mong that we were required to post whether we read or not? Is there a rule requiring original content?

[mad_fan]

Read. I understand from Mong that we were required to post whether we read or not? Is there a rule requiring original content?

Did not read...

[Mong Hu]

The circumstances she is in are not the result of 2 years of policy but rather 18-20 years of policy. It is simpleton to blame one person.

Are you calling our President a simpleton? :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtVldtqBGAE

[dragonsdaddy]

New Democratic Logo

http://assets.democrats.org/images/blog/blog_post-logo_tag.gif

Hopefully they didn't pay to much for this burst of creativity. Didn't they just do the change thing?

as it turned out, i wasn't completely ready for a change in 08, but i definitely am now.

[Mong Hu]

I'm thinking she doesn't really know hard times from a windshield if she still has two kids in private school. In fact, I think what a whiner.

I had friends in high school who had their 12-year old sister calling the electric company to keep them from turning off the electricity, and they didn't even have air conditioning! Dad gone, Mom working as a file clerk in a male-oriented company that most assuredly was male-biased. If you looked in their fridge you might see 3-4 eggs, a quart of milk, some bread, and maybe mayo. Some onions too. Kids walked everywhere, forget cars or even bicycles.

THAT is freaking hard times. And Mojotrain can tell you even more difficult times. Hot dogs and beans would have been a great meal to them. Many of us are privileged, and have a sense of entitlement. Hard times are not when you eat beans and franks, or have to drive a 3 year-old car. hard times are when you have NOTHING to eat, can't afford the rent, lose the house, have the kids working so they have money for food, no shoes, can't participate in extracurricular events because they can't afford it, and so on. Those kids ate one meal a day unless they got enough out of their job to pay for it. This girl worked at a root beer stand for .90 cents/hour, and if a mug was broken she had to pay for it.

Some people need to get a grip. That is where we would have been with a lot more people if we hadn't stopped the bleeding. And that is directly the result of "self-regulation" and deregulation.

So how to fix? Get more of what broke it in the first place?

I will agree that Mrs. Hart and her family seem to be doing OK but does this response in any way address the original point. I still think she is a pretty typical Obama supporter that is frustrated and disappointed with this administration. Is this not a bad sign for the Democrats this November?

I will also agree that many Americans today, perhaps even most, do not know what true hardship really is (myself included). We have heard stories and may know someone, usually a grandparent or perhaps a parent who has endured hardship but many of us simply don't understand the concept in any personal or meaningful way. Our experience with hardship is many times second hand at best.

You believe that it is deregulation or self-regulation that has gotten the country into this mess and that it is then the government who must regulate us and get us out. On this point then we disagree. We may have created a mess for ourselves (I personally feel that the government through regulation has done a fair amount to get us into this mess i.e. Fannie and Freddie) but isn't that part of being free. If we are to be free must we not accept the consequences of our actions and deal with them ourselves rather than asking someone else (the government) to take care of us. When you are free failure is always an option and I myself would rather deal with the consequences of failure and be free than be shielded from negative consequences and live under the heal of any other man (i.e. government).

So perhaps, yes, if the government had not intervened the conditions would be even worse although you can not know how much worse with any degree of certainty but why do we fear hardship? Why do we fear failure? Do we not preach to our children the virtue of facing a challenge and overcoming it? Does not God himself teach in I Peter chapter 1 verses 6-9 that through trial we are strengthened? Is it not the great challenges faced by my grandparents generation (the Great Depression and WWII) that gave them the opportunity to earn the monicker which today is so oft used to describe them as "The Greatest Generation"? What is that old coaches saying, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger? Are we so weak that we fear our own demise at the hint of adversity? Perhaps it is to our detriment as a nation that we have faced so little adversity.

I say let the automotive companies and the big banks fail, they deserve it if they behaved foolishly. We will be fine. The sun will rise on a new day. It may be hard for a time but I have been raised and trained by my parents and every coach I have ever had to rise and meet challenges and to overcome adversity. I have been raised not to shy away from things that are difficult but to embrace the struggle and overcome. Bring on the franks and beans (I hate beans) I would rather deal with franks and beans than be a subject of a man such as Barney Frank. Does this make me radical? Perhaps, but if it does then I count myself in good company for this is the same sentiment expressed by the likes of Patrick Henry when he said on March 23, 1775, "Is life so dear,...as to be purchased at the price of chains? Forbid it Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!

While you are correct in lamenting our countries lack of familiarity with true hardship I would be equally correct in the observation that we do not understand tyranny. We have been so long sheltered from the fetters of oppression and tyranny so as to be completely ignorant of its visage. Our knowledge of the dangers of government is, just as our knowledge of the trials of hardship, at best second hand. It is learned from immigrants and history books. (I offer the following story (http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/09/life_under_communism.html) as an example of this second hand knowledge. It is the story of a family of immigrants from the former Yugoslavia if you care to read it) I submit that it is the threat of tyranny and not hardship that is the greater in these modern times for hardship may be encountered free of human invention and be overcome or at least made tolerable by a small number banding together were as tyranny is wholly a self inflicted wound which is historically overcome only through the struggle of an entire society and at that not with out tremendous cost in blood and treasure. This is my fear, the fear of tyranny and not the fear of hardships for with hardships you may still be free but with tyranny you will inevitably suffer both.

As always slcdragonfan thank you for making me think I hope that I have returned the favor. Don't worry if you didn't read it I don't think you will be fined as my posts are beyond what is legally acceptable on a football message board so you are exempt from having to have read it I am sure.

[slcdragonfan]

I will agree that Mrs. Hart and her family seem to be doing OK but does this response in any way address the original point. I still think she is a pretty typical Obama supporter that is frustrated and disappointed with this administration. Is this not a bad sign for the Democrats this November? yes it is a bad sign for Democrats.

I will also agree that many Americans today, perhaps even most, do not know what true hardship really is (myself included). We have heard stories and may know someone, usually a grandparent or perhaps a parent who has endured hardship but many of us simply don't understand the concept in any personal or meaningful way. Our experience with hardship is many times second hand at best.

You believe that it is deregulation or self-regulation that has gotten the country into this mess and that it is then the government who must regulate us and get us out.
Not exactly. I am not sure Government is the solution, I AM certain that we need some amount of regulation to create and maintain a level playing field. We have had this discussion before wrt Social Darwinism and T Roosevelt.

On this point then we disagree. We may have created a mess for ourselves (I personally feel that the government through regulation has done a fair amount to get us into this mess i.e. Fannie and Freddie) but isn't that part of being free. If we are to be free must we not accept the consequences of our actions and deal with them ourselves rather than asking someone else (the government) to take care of us.
This is true. However, there are often consequences that are not of our own making but of others. We still have to pay those. Wouldn't it be nice to try and limit those occurrences?

When you are free failure is always an option and I myself would rather deal with the consequences of failure and be free than be shielded from negative consequences and live under the heal of any other man (i.e. government).
Well, I agree with that too. What is free? You have read The Jungle I am sure, what about their "freedom". There should be a balance here.

So perhaps, yes, if the government had not intervened the conditions would be even worse although you can not know how much worse with any degree of certainty but why do we fear hardship? Why do we fear failure? Do we not preach to our children the virtue of facing a challenge and overcoming it? Does not God himself teach in I Peter chapter 1 verses 6-9 that through trial we are strengthened? Is it not the great challenges faced by my grandparents generation (the Great Depression and WWII) that gave them the opportunity to earn the monicker which today is so oft used to describe them as "The Greatest Generation"? What is that old coaches saying, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger? Are we so weak that we fear our own demise at the hint of adversity? Perhaps it is to our detriment as a nation that we have faced so little adversity.
Here I think you have wandered. :) If we can make changes to avoid needless hardship, shouldn't we? Do you think those people that went through the Great Depression WANTED to go through it, or would voluntarily go through it again? or should?

I say let the automotive companies and the big banks fail, they deserve it if they behaved foolishly.
They couldn't have acted as foolishly if the laws put into place during the 1930's hadn't been overturned during the '90's and early '00's.

We will be fine. The sun will rise on a new day. It may be hard for a time but I have been raised and trained by my parents and every coach I have ever had to rise and meet challenges and to overcome adversity. I have been raised not to shy away from things that are difficult but to embrace the struggle and overcome. Bring on the franks and beans (I hate beans) I would rather deal with franks and beans than be a subject of a man such as Barney Frank.
But yet you subject yourself to such as Glenn Beck? :)


Does this make me radical? Perhaps, but if it does then I count myself in good company for this is the same sentiment expressed by the likes of Patrick Henry when he said on March 23, 1775, "Is life so dear,...as to be purchased at the price of chains? Forbid it Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!

While you are correct in lamenting our countries lack of familiarity with true hardship I would be equally correct in the observation that we do not understand tyranny. We have been so long sheltered from the fetters of oppression and tyranny so as to be completely ignorant of its visage. Our knowledge of the dangers of government is, just as our knowledge of the trials of hardship, at best second hand. It is learned from immigrants and history books. (I offer the following story (http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/09/life_under_communism.html) as an example of this second hand knowledge. It is the story of a family of immigrants from the former Yugoslavia if you care to read it) I submit that it is the threat of tyranny and not hardship that is the greater in these modern times for hardship may be encountered free of human invention and be overcome or at least made tolerable by a small number banding together were as tyranny is wholly a self inflicted wound which is historically overcome only through the struggle of an entire society and at that not with out tremendous cost in blood and treasure. This is my fear, the fear of tyranny and not the fear of hardships for with hardships you may still be free but with tyranny you will inevitably suffer both.
Our greatest danger of tyranny comes from the fear manipulation that we encounter every day. Muslims, terrorists, Marxists, etc the chant grows louder and the voices of reason get drowned out by a mob that is angry, but not quite sure what it is angry about. It is quite different from when companies hired goons to come out and beat and kill people. Now we are angry because of hot dogs and beans and our kids private school tuition is too high. There was much more to fear in the Patriot Act and our subsequent moves against terrorism. Tell me this, you are willing to endure hardship in the name of freedom, are you also willing to take a greater risk of terrorism in the same name of freedom? Most on here argue greater government control there, invasion of our freedoms. :rolleyes:


As always slcdragonfan thank you for making me think I hope that I have returned the favor. Don't worry if you didn't read it I don't think you will be fined as my posts are beyond what is legally acceptable on a football message board so you are exempt from having to have read it I am sure.
Yes, it can be a good discussion, I enjoy these as well. Like all of us, I get fed up at times with various things and perhaps go over the top.


I read the article. I abhor Communism and what it represents. But this is an extreme comparison.

[15Adragon]

The circumstances she is in are not the result of 2 years of policy but rather 18-20 years of policy. It is simpleton to blame one person.

It is simpleton to just brush off what Obama has done these past two years as business as usual. He has exploded the deficits while enacting a very radical agenda and striking out on unemployment. One nice thing about capturing the House is that we may actually have a little oversight again in DC. I bet the paper shredders are humming...

[Dawg Fan]

Now, I want you to imagine she was a Republican, and said the same things against the Republican. Would you say the same thing?:)

As far as public schools, when and where I grew up, NOBODY went to private schools, that was like going to the moon. This is called making a choice. If I choose to eat beans and hot dogs to send my kids to private school, I sure am not going to whine how Obama hasn't helped me. I thought we were about making choices and living with the consequences?

And yes we should know more about the individual.

you seem to want to make it a republican/democrat thing. My point is you like to chastise people for judging without knowledge and you turn around and do the same thing. Back when I went to public school they actually failed students that didn't make the grade and private schools were not in high demand but they were there. Mostly Christian and Catholic schools. Today, public schools pass just about everyone whether they have learned anything or not. Times have changed and if I had the opportunity to do it over, I would have found a way to send my kids to a private school. When they went to college it almost overwhelmed them the first year because of the level of education they were being administered and the shear stress of adjusting to a serious and much more difficult curriculum. They were not prepared for what they were going into and I blame that on the government and the rules they place on teachers these days. I was lucky in that my high school had teachers that taught us college prep in the standard courses when we were seniors. She made Obama look bad and I am guessing that pissed you off. She made an analogy to get her point across. The point isn't whether she will have to eat beans and hot dogs but if we all have to go back to eating beans and hot dogs.

[slcdragonfan]

It is simpleton to just brush off what Obama has done these past two years as business as usual. He has exploded the deficits while enacting a very radical agenda and striking out on unemployment. One nice thing about capturing the House is that we may actually have a little oversight again in DC. I bet the paper shredders are humming...

- and so would have any Republican regime.
- what "radical" agenda, healthcare? While the bill is far from perfect, it has many components we have needed for years. It needs fixing, not trashing.
- you don't think the unemployment might be a function of decisions made in the past, such as the tremendous amount of offshoring of manufacturing and IT jobs? That started when Perot ran for office. He warned us, but we decided he was crazy. What is interesting is Mong just said let the bank and car companies fail. If the Republicans had done that, how many do you think would be out of work right now?

It would really have been interesting to see what a Republican Pres and Congress would have done differently. Only thing I see? No healthcare bill.

A balanced view would recognize that Republican or Democrat, the past several years would have rolled pretty much the same. excepting Healthcare. And the amount of hysteria over that bill is amazing. Mob mentality rules right now wrt that bill.

[slcdragonfan]

you seem to want to make it a republican/democrat thing. My point is you like to chastise people for judging without knowledge and you turn around and do the same thing.
For that I apologize. She just hit me wrong. But making choices and living with them is a core part of our belief system is it not?

Back when I went to public school they actually failed students that didn't make the grade and private schools were not in high demand but they were there. Mostly Christian and Catholic schools. Today, public schools pass just about everyone whether they have learned anything or not. Times have changed and if I had the opportunity to do it over, I would have found a way to send my kids to a private school. When they went to college it almost overwhelmed them the first year because of the level of education they were being administered and the shear stress of adjusting to a serious and much more difficult curriculum. They were not prepared for what they were going into and I blame that on the government and the rules they place on teachers these days. I was lucky in that my high school had teachers that taught us college prep in the standard courses when we were seniors. She made Obama look bad and I am guessing that pissed you off.
No, actually I could care less one way or the other about Obama except I feel he has been unduly demonized and I like portions of the health care bill. I felt the same way about Bush, except he and his team lied to us about Iraq. In fact, if you recall, I voted for McCain.

She made an analogy to get her point across. The point isn't whether she will have to eat beans and hot dogs but if we all have to go back to eating beans and hot dogs.


I'll leave her alone and simply say, for most of us, we want our cake and we want to eat it too. We didn't want to save the car companies, we didn't want to rescue the banking system, yet we complain about unemployment. We want a balanced budget yet 60% of the budget last I heard (I'm sure some smart fella will confirm or not) is social security type things, not much room to cut. But we don't want to increase taxes. How do you balance that?

[b756561]

I'll leave her alone and simply say, for most of us, we want our cake and we want to eat it too. We didn't want to save the car companies, we didn't want to rescue the banking system, yet we complain about unemployment. We want a balanced budget yet 60% of the budget last I heard (I'm sure some smart fella will confirm or not) is social security type things, not much room to cut. But we don't want to increase taxes. How do you balance that?

Cut spending......

Does Social Security really need to be there to put your kids through college? It does that you know. Cuts can and should be made.

[slcdragonfan]

Cut spending......

Does Social Security really need to be there to put your kids through college? It does that you know. Cuts can and should be made.

Just wondering, how old are you, i.e. what decade? 30's, 40's, 50's? I just want to understand where you are in your lifespan to better understand how you view SS. Not trying to be argumentative, just want to understand.

My SS is not putting any kids through school by the way, can you tell me how to do that? Do I have to die first? Or my wife?

Sure, here are what the cuts are....raise the "full" SS age to 67. Constrain the "draws" on it. Now what?

And by the way, this has been a problem my whole adult life. I remember back in 1979 thinking I could not depend upon SS for my retirement because it wouldn't be there for me. Multiple administrations later, and multiple parties later, we are still talking the same thing, only now I have paid in for over 40 years. To me it is groundhog day. Same story and argument, different year.

Here is another idea, but difficult to implement. offshoring has winnowed out jobs and thus contributions to the SS fund from both employers and employees alike. How about we find a way to recapture that money? The jobs disappeared, not the people.

[the_phoenix612]

Cut spending......

Does Social Security really need to be there to put your kids through college? It does that you know. Cuts can and should be made.

First place that needs cuts is the incredibly wasteful military acquisition procedures, and the bloated inefficiencies of the military. It is the single biggest drain on the budget and it is wholly hypocritical for people to attack overspending and waste but call for more military spending with no overhaul of the system, a system in which private contractors make millions and millions of dollars to serve our troops spoiled food, cut corners wherever possible (including burning trash on bases, leading to carcinogenic smoke being inhaled by our troops), and violate innumerable international laws, creating international incidents that undermine our national security.

[JMSFan]

I'll leave her alone and simply say, for most of us, we want our cake and we want to eat it too. We didn't want to save the car companies, we didn't want to rescue the banking system, yet we complain about unemployment. We want a balanced budget yet 60% of the budget last I heard (I'm sure some smart fella will confirm or not) is social security type things, not much room to cut. But we don't want to increase taxes. How do you balance that?

I cant say much about how we can fix things here, because I dont really know. But I can relate to her feelings of helplessness and the frustration of going back to a way of living like before.
I think the difference between then and now is the confidence level isnt the same.

[slcdragonfan]

I cant say much about how we can fix things here, because I dont really know. But I can relate to her feelings of helplessness and the frustration of going back to a way of living like before.
I think the difference between then and now is the confidence level isnt the same.

True. But I also think that some of the confidence we have had since 1990 was related to unsustainable bubbles; tech around 2000, internet stocks, housing prices bubble, tranching of loans meaning anyone buys a house, and so on.

Think 1920's. At least we have, for the most part, avoided the 1930's....so far.

I'll say this, I know that being jingoist is a recipe for disaster in that it might create trade wars and then everything topples. But we must find a way to stimulate an American-based production and research.

I am somewhat disappointed in Obama. I was hoping that the new leader of America would have a vision that American's could grab onto. We had the Kennedy moon shot, where American's united in national pride to accomplish something incredible. At the same time, new industries were invented, new products.

What we need is a visionary who can lead us to a new "moon shot", developing new American industry and providing a vision for the future. There are few if any visionary leaders around.

[b756561]

Just wondering, how old are you, i.e. what decade? 30's, 40's, 50's? I just want to understand where you are in your lifespan to better understand how you view SS. Not trying to be argumentative, just want to understand.

My SS is not putting any kids through school by the way, can you tell me how to do that? Do I have to die first? Or my wife?

Sure, here are what the cuts are....raise the "full" SS age to 67. Constrain the "draws" on it. Now what?

And by the way, this has been a problem my whole adult life. I remember back in 1979 thinking I could not depend upon SS for my retirement because it wouldn't be there for me. Multiple administrations later, and multiple parties later, we are still talking the same thing, only now I have paid in for over 40 years. To me it is groundhog day. Same story and argument, different year.

Here is another idea, but difficult to implement. offshoring has winnowed out jobs and thus contributions to the SS fund from both employers and employees alike. How about we find a way to recapture that money? The jobs disappeared, not the people.

To begin with, the jobs won't disappear if we make it profitable for the businesses to do business here. Too many people have the wrong idea about what businesses are all about. They are not there to be good citizens, they are not started so that they can give people jobs, businesses are started for the sole purpose of making a profit and the bigger the profit the better. Remember, if a business fails to make a profit, that business (unless bailed out by the government) will go out of business. If a business can make more money operating overseas instead of in the USA, then isn't it only GOOD business sense to transfer the jobs overseas?

Next, I am from the 50's. About the earliest 50's you can be. I am right at retirement age and even though I have paid into SS all my life, I will not be eligible for any SS. I'm a public school teacher so I have to pay into two systems but only receive benefits from one.

The Stevens family is my example for my college statement. The father died and the government (SS) ended up paying those kids all the way through college. Four boys and they all received their college education through SS benefits.

Next, where to cut? why not take out all the special programs that have been added to SS over the years, such as the college education. I do not have a problem with the government helping young people get a college education, but use another program to do it not SS. FDR started SS as a SUPPLEMENT to old age retirement. It was never intended to be a persons sole means of retirement. It especially was never intended to be the mechanism for putting people through college.

And you are correct in saying "SAME **** DIFFERENT DAY."
The problem is that congress has been raiding the SS funds for about 40 years now. Everyone knew that this would eventually create a problem. Well that "eventually" is almost upon us. Anytime now, the people paying in SS will not be paying in as much as the government has committed to paying out. Where will the additional money come from?

[15Adragon]

- and so would have any Republican regime.
- what "radical" agenda, healthcare? While the bill is far from perfect, it has many components we have needed for years. It needs fixing, not trashing.
- you don't think the unemployment might be a function of decisions made in the past, such as the tremendous amount of offshoring of manufacturing and IT jobs? That started when Perot ran for office. He warned us, but we decided he was crazy. What is interesting is Mong just said let the bank and car companies fail. If the Republicans had done that, how many do you think would be out of work right now?

It would really have been interesting to see what a Republican Pres and Congress would have done differently. Only thing I see? No healthcare bill.

A balanced view would recognize that Republican or Democrat, the past several years would have rolled pretty much the same. excepting Healthcare. And the amount of hysteria over that bill is amazing. Mob mentality rules right now wrt that bill.

Very little energy left in the tank to revisit all of Ocarter's first term accomplishments, but everywhere we needed a few minor improvements we were given a 2,000+ page bill full of stuff that would take months to decipher. Here is an article that just came out today on HC 6 months later...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/Obamacare-is-even-worse-than-critics-thought-960772-103571664.html

On Perot, we are close to agreement. As quirky as he was, he was spot on on a number of the big issues. He just had a real "his way or the highway" style that wasn't suited for politics.

Finally, you bring up the R congress and what they would have done differently. They wouldn't have given the stimulus to the public sector unions (huge) and they would have already extended the tax cuts, and yes they would have kept funding O's good war. :D

[slcdragonfan]

To begin with, the jobs won't disappear if we make it profitable for the businesses to do business here. Too many people have the wrong idea about what businesses are all about. They are not there to be good citizens, they are not started so that they can give people jobs, businesses are started for the sole purpose of making a profit and the bigger the profit the better. Remember, if a business fails to make a profit, that business (unless bailed out by the government) will go out of business. If a business can make more money operating overseas instead of in the USA, then isn't it only GOOD business sense to transfer the jobs overseas?

All correct. So, if you look at how China does business, the water in some locations is so polluted it glows in the dark, is killing people that drink it, the milk is killing children, there is cadmium in the toys, look at how catfish are raised in Vietnam as opposed to here, look at the air in Bejing (with people wearing dust masks), children working hours are much longer...I can go on. Perhaps a better way is to say that imported goods must meet certain basic manufacturing requirements and sanitary requirments, etc. And then put a levy on those imported good to pay for enough inspectors to check them. If I recall correctly Bayer and Krupp were highly profitable in Nazi Germany during WWII using POW/concentration camp labor.

Next, I am from the 50's. About the earliest 50's you can be. I am right at retirement age and even though I have paid into SS all my life, I will not be eligible for any SS. I'm a public school teacher so I have to pay into two systems but only receive benefits from one.
OK, so we understand each other. Are you OK with changing the teacher pension system to reduce your payments so that the system is stronger? By how much? The pension plan was based upon a certain base rate of return, if that is not occurring then the pensions should be adjusted, correct? By the way, those companies working for a profit in many cases dumped their pensions on the American people. See United, Delta, USS, etc.

The Stevens family is my example for my college statement. The father died and the government (SS) ended up paying those kids all the way through college. Four boys and they all received their college education through SS benefits.
I understand that. It is a hard choice, but hard choices have to be made. I wonder what percentage and what the raw dollars are that would be saved?

Next, where to cut? why not take out all the special programs that have been added to SS over the years, such as the college education. I do not have a problem with the government helping young people get a college education, but use another program to do it not SS. FDR started SS as a SUPPLEMENT to old age retirement. It was never intended to be a persons sole means of retirement. It especially was never intended to be the mechanism for putting people through college.
IMO, we tell kids join up and serve your country. College bennies can accrue from that. Otherwise, do what I did and probably you as well, work our way through college.


And you are correct in saying "SAME **** DIFFERENT DAY."
The problem is that congress has been raiding the SS funds for about 40 years now. Everyone knew that this would eventually create a problem. Well that "eventually" is almost upon us. Anytime now, the people paying in SS will not be paying in as much as the government has committed to paying out. Where will the additional money come from?

yep...40 years later, same issue. But I personally believe that neither party has the cojones to deal with it. It means losing a portion of the electorate that has a high turnout percentage.
It will have to be a crisis event for Congress to act. Can you imagine what would be said if Obama tried to raise this issue just as we have discussed? What would the Republican party say about that? "OBAMA WANTS TO DESTROY YOUR SS RETIREMENT INCOME!".
:D

By the way, the exact same thing the Democrats would say in the same position. We have both heard it before...

[slcdragonfan]

Very little energy left in the tank to revisit all of Ocarter's first term accomplishments, but everywhere we needed a few minor improvements we were given a 2,000+ page bill full of stuff that would take months to decipher. Here is an article that just came out today on HC 6 months later...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/Obamacare-is-even-worse-than-critics-thought-960772-103571664.html

On Perot, we are close to agreement. As quirky as he was, he was spot on on a number of the big issues. He just had a real "his way or the highway" style that wasn't suited for politics.

Finally, you bring up the R congress and what they would have done differently. They wouldn't have given the stimulus to the public sector unions (huge) and they would have already extended the tax cuts, and yes they would have kept funding O's good war. :D

I know, this stuff just tires a man out. :)
Personally, I have used "groundhog day" as an example. The other example is "Charlie Brown's Football". We just keep swinging at it and missing.

I do not see a leader out there with the charisma and vision to lead America.

[slcdragonfan]

I did a pretty good job staying outa here for a while. I think I will go back into my cocoon. See you around election time, I am looking forward to our new Congress fixing our ills and getting our country on track.....;)

[Dawg Fan]

I did a pretty good job staying outa here for a while. I think I will go back into my cocoon. See you around election time, I am looking forward to our new Congress fixing our ills and getting our country on track.....;)

don't hide out, I enjoy your point of view and discussions. You are one of the few who can discuss a point of view without calling names and your answers are always well thought out. I may not always agree but I do respect your opinion.

[b756561]

Originally Posted by b756561 http://forums.5atexasfootball.com/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://forums.5atexasfootball.com/showthread.php?p=1612539#post1612539)
To begin with, the jobs won't disappear if we make it profitable for the businesses to do business here. Too many people have the wrong idea about what businesses are all about. They are not there to be good citizens, they are not started so that they can give people jobs, businesses are started for the sole purpose of making a profit and the bigger the profit the better. Remember, if a business fails to make a profit, that business (unless bailed out by the government) will go out of business. If a business can make more money operating overseas instead of in the USA, then isn't it only GOOD business sense to transfer the jobs overseas?

All correct. So, if you look at how China does business, the water in some locations is so polluted it glows in the dark, is killing people that drink it, the milk is killing children, there is cadmium in the toys, look at how catfish are raised in Vietnam as opposed to here, look at the air in Bejing (with people wearing dust masks), children working hours are much longer...I can go on. Perhaps a better way is to say that imported goods must meet certain basic manufacturing requirements and sanitary requirments, etc. And then put a levy on those imported good to pay for enough inspectors to check them. If I recall correctly Bayer and Krupp were highly profitable in Nazi Germany during WWII using POW/concentration camp labor.

I didn't say it was what was the best thing to do. I said from a business standpoint, I can't blame them for shipping the jobs overseas. You seem to be the one who is concerned about the environment and the health of the local population. While you would hope a business will look at these factors and take them into consideration, please understand if it comes right down to it, that business will usually take the profit and stay in business as opposed to caring for the environment and going out of business. Why is that? Because in real life which product will people buy? The one that costs $99.00, is made in America by a company friendly to the environment and that boasts a quality place to work OR the same quality product that is made in China (under the conditions you stated) that only costs $49.99. Honestly, which product is most likely to be bought by the American consumers. They want quality at a cheap price. And if they can't have that, they at least want a cheap price. How many businesses will choose the first way and for how long can they stay in business? Like it or not, they have to make a profit.


Next, I am from the 50's. About the earliest 50's you can be. I am right at retirement age and even though I have paid into SS all my life, I will not be eligible for any SS. I'm a public school teacher so I have to pay into two systems but only receive benefits from one.
OK, so we understand each other. Are you OK with changing the teacher pension system to reduce your payments so that the system is stronger? By how much? The pension plan was based upon a certain base rate of return, if that is not occurring then the pensions should be adjusted, correct? By the way, those companies working for a profit in many cases dumped their pensions on the American people. See United, Delta, USS, etc.

Yes but if I'm exempted from receiving SS then shouldn't I also be exempted from having to pay into it? Why should I be taxed twice to get what others only have to be taxed once to get? As for lowering the pension payment, I vote to get rid of the excessive spending (such as college for your kids) so that the system isn't in trouble to begin with. TOO MANY people try to look at ways to raise extra money instead of looking for ways to cut excessive spending.


The Stevens family is my example for my college statement. The father died and the government (SS) ended up paying those kids all the way through college. Four boys and they all received their college education through SS benefits.
I understand that. It is a hard choice, but hard choices have to be made. I wonder what percentage and what the raw dollars are that would be saved?
I do not know the answer to your question, but I do know that a trillion dollars here and a trillion dollars there and pretty soon you're talking about real money. WHY is SS paying for their education? I had to pay my own tuition. What makes those boys so great that they should get it for free and use my tax dollars to pay for it? Let's see, I have to get a job to pay my way thru college and I have to pay taxes at that job to put those boys thru college so they don't have to work while going thru college on my money. I think I got that correct. Yeah, that's sounds fair to me. How about you? Does that sound like the American Way to you?

Next, where to cut? why not take out all the special programs that have been added to SS over the years, such as the college education. I do not have a problem with the government helping young people get a college education, but use another program to do it not SS. FDR started SS as a SUPPLEMENT to old age retirement. It was never intended to be a persons sole means of retirement. It especially was never intended to be the mechanism for putting people through college.
IMO, we tell kids join up and serve your country. College bennies can accrue from that. Otherwise, do what I did and probably you as well, work our way through college.


And you are correct in saying "SAME **** DIFFERENT DAY."
The problem is that congress has been raiding the SS funds for about 40 years now. Everyone knew that this would eventually create a problem. Well that "eventually" is almost upon us. Anytime now, the people paying in SS will not be paying in as much as the government has committed to paying out. Where will the additional money come from?
yep...40 years later, same issue. But I personally believe that neither party has the cojones to deal with it. It means losing a portion of the electorate that has a high turnout percentage.
It will have to be a crisis event for Congress to act. Can you imagine what would be said if Obama tried to raise this issue just as we have discussed? What would the Republican party say about that? "OBAMA WANTS TO DESTROY YOUR SS RETIREMENT INCOME!".
:D
Yeah, kinda reminds me of what happened when Bush tried to put forward an idea about reforming SS.

By the way, the exact same thing the Democrats would say in the same position. We have both heard it before...

And we will hear it some more.

See my answers in red.

[Mong Hu]

You know it is not good when they start blaming each other!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100928/pl_afp/usvotepoliticsobama_20100928185238

[b756561]

You know it is not good when they start blaming each other!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100928/pl_afp/usvotepoliticsobama_20100928185238

+this - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703882404575520044037709702.html?m od=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop=

[JMSFan]

It just gets worse.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704116004575522073624475054.html?m od=WSJ_newsreel_opinion


"Americans stubbornly resist this landmark legislation in part because virtually every major claim about its benefits is turning out to be false—and people recoil when misled."

[Mong Hu]

Well here we are at the end of the governments fiscal year and still no budget proposal has been approved by either the House or the Senate to even send to the President,:mad: and this with huge majorities in both chambers and a President of the same political party. At least in '95 the congress passed a budget and the government shutdown happened because the Democratic President couldn't agree with a Republican controlled congress. At least they were talking. We don't even have a plan to talk about right now but isn't that the point I guess the Democrats don't want us talking about what they are doing. In an election year how is this not a huge story?:(

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-09-30-congress_N.htm

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/democrats-and-2010-budget-fiasco

[b756561]

Well here we are at the end of the governments fiscal year and still no budget proposal has been approved by either the House or the Senate to even send to the President,:mad: and this with huge majorities in both chambers and a President of the same political party. At least in '95 the congress passed a budget and the government shutdown happened because the Democratic President couldn't agree with a Republican controlled congress. At least they were talking. We don't even have a plan to talk about right now but isn't that the point I guess the Democrats don't want us talking about what they are doing. In an election year how is this not a huge story?:(

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-09-30-congress_N.htm

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/democrats-and-2010-budget-fiasco

It isn't a big story because the LIBERAL MEDIA is not going to make a big story out of something that will hurt their chosen party. Something like 70-80% of the national news media admit to voting Democratic.

[CoveMom]

I'll leave her alone and simply say, for most of us, we want our cake and we want to eat it too. We didn't want to save the car companies, we didn't want to rescue the banking system, yet we complain about unemployment. We want a balanced budget yet 60% of the budget last I heard (I'm sure some smart fella will confirm or not) is social security type things, not much room to cut. But we don't want to increase taxes. How do you balance that?

small point here. pet peeve of mine.


Of course what you mean here is "We want to eat our cake and have it too" right?

anyone can have cake and eat it, but to have it when finished with the exercise of masticating, swallowing, and digesting....now that would truly prove to be paradise.


ya'll carry on the srs debate.

CM

;)

[slcdragonfan]

small point here. pet peeve of mine.


Of course what you mean here is "We want to eat our cake and have it too" right?

anyone can have cake and eat it, but to have it when finished with the exercise of masticating, swallowing, and digesting....now that would truly prove to be paradise.


ya'll carry on the srs debate.

CM

;)

yah

[chhspantherfan]

this is some good copypasta

Thank God For President Obama

Written by a 82 year old very wise lady.

That is right - THANK GOD FOR THE PRESIDENT

1. He destroyed the Clinton Political Machine - Driving a stake through the heart of Hillary's Presidential
aspirations - something that no Republican was never able to do. Remember when a Hillary Presidency scared
the daylights out of you!

2. He killed off the Kennedy Dynasty - No more Kennedy's trolling Washington looking for booze and women
wanting rides home. American women and Freedom are safer tonight!

3. He is destroying the Democratic Party before our eyes!
- Dennis Moore had never lost a race - quit
- Evan Bayh had never lost a race – quit
- Byron Dorgan had never lost a race – quit
- Bart Stupak – quit
- Harry Reid - soon to be GONE!

These are just a handful of the Democrats whose political careers Obama has destroyed! By the end of 2010
dozens more will be gone.

In December of 2008 the Democrats were on the rise. In the last two election cycles they had picked up 14 senate
seats and 52 house seats. The press was touting the death of the Conservative Movement and the Republican
Party.

In just one year, Obama put a stop to all of this and will probably give the house, if not the senate back to the
Republicans.

4. He has completely exposed liberals and progressives for what they are. Every Generation seems to need to
relearn the lesson on why they should never actually put liberals in charge. He is bringing home the lesson very
well.
- Liberals tax, borrow and spend - check
- Liberals won't bring themselves to protect America - check
- Liberals want to take over the economy - check
- Liberals think they know what is best for everyone - check
- Liberals aren't happy till they are running YOUR life - check

5. He has brought more Americans back to conservatism than anyone since Reagan. In one year he has
rejuvenated the Conservative movement and brought out to the streets millions of Freedom Loving Americans.
Name me one other time in your life that you saw your friends and neighbors this interested in taking back America!

6. His amazing leadership has sparked the greatest period of sales of firearms and ammunition this country has
seen. Law abiding citizens have rallied and have provided a "stimulus" to the sporting goods field while other
industries have failed, faded or moved off-shore.

7. In all honesty one year ago I was more afraid than I have been in my life. Not of the economy but of the
direction our country was going. I thought Americans had forgotten what this country was all about. My
neighbors, friends and strangers proved to me that my lack of confidence of the Greatness and Wisdom of the
American people was flat wrong.

8. When the American People wake up no smooth talking TelePrompter reader can fool them!
Barack Obama woke up these Great Americans! Again I want to say Thank You Barack Obama! This is exactly
the kind of hope and change we desperately needed!

[b756561]

this is some good copypasta

Thank God For President Obama

Written by a 82 year old very wise lady.

That is right - THANK GOD FOR THE PRESIDENT

1. He destroyed the Clinton Political Machine - Driving a stake through the heart of Hillary's Presidential
aspirations - something that no Republican was never able to do. Remember when a Hillary Presidency scared
the daylights out of you!

2. He killed off the Kennedy Dynasty - No more Kennedy's trolling Washington looking for booze and women
wanting rides home. American women and Freedom are safer tonight!

3. He is destroying the Democratic Party before our eyes!
- Dennis Moore had never lost a race - quit
- Evan Bayh had never lost a race – quit
- Byron Dorgan had never lost a race – quit
- Bart Stupak – quit
- Harry Reid - soon to be GONE!

These are just a handful of the Democrats whose political careers Obama has destroyed! By the end of 2010
dozens more will be gone.

In December of 2008 the Democrats were on the rise. In the last two election cycles they had picked up 14 senate
seats and 52 house seats. The press was touting the death of the Conservative Movement and the Republican
Party.

In just one year, Obama put a stop to all of this and will probably give the house, if not the senate back to the
Republicans.

4. He has completely exposed liberals and progressives for what they are. Every Generation seems to need to
relearn the lesson on why they should never actually put liberals in charge. He is bringing home the lesson very
well.
- Liberals tax, borrow and spend - check
- Liberals won't bring themselves to protect America - check
- Liberals want to take over the economy - check
- Liberals think they know what is best for everyone - check
- Liberals aren't happy till they are running YOUR life - check

5. He has brought more Americans back to conservatism than anyone since Reagan. In one year he has
rejuvenated the Conservative movement and brought out to the streets millions of Freedom Loving Americans.
Name me one other time in your life that you saw your friends and neighbors this interested in taking back America!

6. His amazing leadership has sparked the greatest period of sales of firearms and ammunition this country has
seen. Law abiding citizens have rallied and have provided a "stimulus" to the sporting goods field while other
industries have failed, faded or moved off-shore.

7. In all honesty one year ago I was more afraid than I have been in my life. Not of the economy but of the
direction our country was going. I thought Americans had forgotten what this country was all about. My
neighbors, friends and strangers proved to me that my lack of confidence of the Greatness and Wisdom of the
American people was flat wrong.

8. When the American People wake up no smooth talking TelePrompter reader can fool them!
Barack Obama woke up these Great Americans! Again I want to say Thank You Barack Obama! This is exactly
the kind of hope and change we desperately needed!

That I like. Pass it on to other sites.

[BDB]

this is some good copypasta

thank god for president obama

written by a 82 year old very wise lady.

That is right - thank god for the president

1. He destroyed the clinton political machine - driving a stake through the heart of hillary's presidential
aspirations - something that no republican was never able to do. Remember when a hillary presidency scared
the daylights out of you!

2. He killed off the kennedy dynasty - no more kennedy's trolling washington looking for booze and women
wanting rides home. American women and freedom are safer tonight!

3. He is destroying the democratic party before our eyes!
- dennis moore had never lost a race - quit
- evan bayh had never lost a race – quit
- byron dorgan had never lost a race – quit
- bart stupak – quit
- harry reid - soon to be gone!

These are just a handful of the democrats whose political careers obama has destroyed! By the end of 2010
dozens more will be gone.

In december of 2008 the democrats were on the rise. In the last two election cycles they had picked up 14 senate
seats and 52 house seats. The press was touting the death of the conservative movement and the republican
party.

In just one year, obama put a stop to all of this and will probably give the house, if not the senate back to the
republicans.

4. He has completely exposed liberals and progressives for what they are. Every generation seems to need to
relearn the lesson on why they should never actually put liberals in charge. He is bringing home the lesson very
well.
- liberals tax, borrow and spend - check
- liberals won't bring themselves to protect america - check
- liberals want to take over the economy - check
- liberals think they know what is best for everyone - check
- liberals aren't happy till they are running your life - check

5. He has brought more americans back to conservatism than anyone since reagan. In one year he has
rejuvenated the conservative movement and brought out to the streets millions of freedom loving americans.
Name me one other time in your life that you saw your friends and neighbors this interested in taking back america!

6. His amazing leadership has sparked the greatest period of sales of firearms and ammunition this country has
seen. Law abiding citizens have rallied and have provided a "stimulus" to the sporting goods field while other
industries have failed, faded or moved off-shore.

7. In all honesty one year ago i was more afraid than i have been in my life. Not of the economy but of the
direction our country was going. I thought americans had forgotten what this country was all about. My
neighbors, friends and strangers proved to me that my lack of confidence of the greatness and wisdom of the
american people was flat wrong.

8. When the american people wake up no smooth talking teleprompter reader can fool them!
Barack obama woke up these great americans! Again i want to say thank you barack obama! This is exactly
the kind of hope and change we desperately needed!

and they smell bad, too!

[b756561]

and they smell bad, too!

While that is true about some Democrats, I wouldn't lump all of them in the same box like that.

[BDB]

While that is true about some Democrats, I wouldn't lump all of them in the same box like that.

if you only knew...

[mojotrain]

this is some good copypasta

Thank God For President Obama

Written by a 82 year old very wise lady.

That is right - THANK GOD FOR THE PRESIDENT

1. He destroyed the Clinton Political Machine - Driving a stake through the heart of Hillary's Presidential
aspirations - something that no Republican was never able to do. Remember when a Hillary Presidency scared
the daylights out of you!

2. He killed off the Kennedy Dynasty - No more Kennedy's trolling Washington looking for booze and women
wanting rides home. American women and Freedom are safer tonight!

3. He is destroying the Democratic Party before our eyes!
- Dennis Moore had never lost a race - quit
- Evan Bayh had never lost a race – quit
- Byron Dorgan had never lost a race – quit
- Bart Stupak – quit
- Harry Reid - soon to be GONE!

These are just a handful of the Democrats whose political careers Obama has destroyed! By the end of 2010
dozens more will be gone.

In December of 2008 the Democrats were on the rise. In the last two election cycles they had picked up 14 senate
seats and 52 house seats. The press was touting the death of the Conservative Movement and the Republican
Party.

In just one year, Obama put a stop to all of this and will probably give the house, if not the senate back to the
Republicans.

4. He has completely exposed liberals and progressives for what they are. Every Generation seems to need to
relearn the lesson on why they should never actually put liberals in charge. He is bringing home the lesson very
well.
- Liberals tax, borrow and spend - check
- Liberals won't bring themselves to protect America - check
- Liberals want to take over the economy - check
- Liberals think they know what is best for everyone - check
- Liberals aren't happy till they are running YOUR life - check

5. He has brought more Americans back to conservatism than anyone since Reagan. In one year he has
rejuvenated the Conservative movement and brought out to the streets millions of Freedom Loving Americans.
Name me one other time in your life that you saw your friends and neighbors this interested in taking back America!

6. His amazing leadership has sparked the greatest period of sales of firearms and ammunition this country has
seen. Law abiding citizens have rallied and have provided a "stimulus" to the sporting goods field while other
industries have failed, faded or moved off-shore.

7. In all honesty one year ago I was more afraid than I have been in my life. Not of the economy but of the
direction our country was going. I thought Americans had forgotten what this country was all about. My
neighbors, friends and strangers proved to me that my lack of confidence of the Greatness and Wisdom of the
American people was flat wrong.

8. When the American People wake up no smooth talking TelePrompter reader can fool them!
Barack Obama woke up these Great Americans! Again I want to say Thank You Barack Obama! This is exactly
the kind of hope and change we desperately needed!

Worth coming back from a "yard" vacation to comment.

Excellent post, astute observations and comments.

[Mong Hu]

6. His amazing leadership has sparked the greatest period of sales of firearms and ammunition this country has
seen.


Went to the gun store to pick up ammo for the .357 and it was 60$ a box. That's more than 1$ per round. Guy behind the counter said they can't keep it in stock.

[b756561]

Went to the gun store to pick up ammo for the .357 and it was 60$ a box. That's more than 1$ per round. Guy behind the counter said they can't keep it in stock.

See, Obama is helping the economy.

[JMSFan]

http://online.wsj.com/video/the-only-policy-left-growth/30DDA790-CDF5-4D7F-9FD2-9E84F7228A79.html

A WSJ opinion about the only policy that we should be concerned with right now.

[b756561]

http://online.wsj.com/video/the-only-policy-left-growth/30DDA790-CDF5-4D7F-9FD2-9E84F7228A79.html

A WSJ opinion about the only policy that we should be concerned with right now.

Well said. Now if people will just go to the polls and back it up. As for Republican leaders willing to take on the challenge, Haley Barbour from Mississippi seems to be the best that is testing the waters for a presidential run. Not saying he would be the best president, just that of those I see thinking about running, he is the one who appears to have the best grasp of what this country needs to jump start our economy and get us back onto the road to recovery.

[dragonpants]

Well said. Now if people will just go to the polls and back it up. As for Republican leaders willing to take on the challenge, Haley Barbour from Mississippi seems to be the best that is testing the waters for a presidential run. Not saying he would be the best president, just that of those I see thinking about running, he is the one who appears to have the best grasp of what this country needs to jump start our economy and get us back onto the road to recovery.

So how do we restart the growth process?
In the past tax cuts have done it, however they do not work without CUTTING SPENDING.
I am no economist but that must be done, those that benefit most from tax cuts are the small business owner not the huge conglomerates and ultra wealthy they have teams that do nothing but make sure their tax liability is limited.
The flat tax seems to the most fair, however no one can come up with a fair number and many think that a flat tax may be higher than most are paying now because no one wants to curb spending, including the repubs, although they talk a good game and always have the dems to blame it on, but they do not want to cut entitlements to their constituents either because they might not get reelected.
I am all for free trade but how about fair trade. Everything you buy is from the far east, even some high end stuff but we need to have fair tariffs to give the American manufacturer a shot at being competitively priced. Imagine how many jobs would be created if we could increase manufacturing 10%.
The labor unions are another story and I know there are tons of union folks out there that are good people but they are killing big business. Ever wonder why honda and toyota can sell a car that has more bells and whistles runs better and longer and is made here in the United States? :rolleyes:

Not hard to figure out now is it.

When is the last time you heard someone raving about their Chevy that just turned 200,000 miles and just had routine maintenance? Same thing with Ford and Dodge.
But when someone says my camry just turned 200k and no problems the guy driving the chevy says, yeh those japanese cars just run forever.

Makes you scratch your head huh?

[b756561]

So how do we restart the growth process?
In the past tax cuts have done it, however they do not work without CUTTING SPENDING.
I am no economist but that must be done, those that benefit most from tax cuts are the small business owner not the huge conglomerates and ultra wealthy they have teams that do nothing but make sure their tax liability is limited.
The flat tax seems to the most fair, however no one can come up with a fair number and many think that a flat tax may be higher than most are paying now because no one wants to curb spending, including the repubs, although they talk a good game and always have the dems to blame it on, but they do not want to cut entitlements to their constituents either because they might not get reelected.
I am all for free trade but how about fair trade. Everything you buy is from the far east, even some high end stuff but we need to have fair tariffs to give the American manufacturer a shot at being competitively priced. Imagine how many jobs would be created if we could increase manufacturing 10%.
The labor unions are another story and I know there are tons of union folks out there that are good people but they are killing big business. Ever wonder why honda and toyota can sell a car that has more bells and whistles runs better and longer and is made here in the United States? :rolleyes:

Not hard to figure out now is it.

When is the last time you heard someone raving about their Chevy that just turned 200,000 miles and just had routine maintenance? Same thing with Ford and Dodge.
But when someone says my camry just turned 200k and no problems the guy driving the chevy says, yeh those japanese cars just run forever.

Makes you scratch your head huh?

Businesses create jobs that enhance the economy, not government. Each and everytime government starts sticking their noses into the private workplace, or creating jobs that compete with private enterprise, the economy goes south. The more they regulate the further south the economy goes. Yes we need regulations, not trying to deny it. Just remember, everytime government adds more regulations to American businesses, the more those jobs will go overseas.

This is not just a Federal problem, it is even more a state and local government problem. Take the municipal government and the school systems for example. In the name of helping the community they create daycare centers, tennis lessons, gymnastic lessons, trash collectons, etc. While these activities may help the city coffers and lower the prices for the consumers, what else does it do? It drives out the private providers of these services. Sometimes they are driven out of business because they are not providing a quality service. Sometimes they are driven out because they can't afford to compete with city or school services. The city will use the tax dollars from these private businesses to go into competition against these businesses. The city/school can charge customers lower prices because they have the facilities provided for free and have such a lower overhead. Even if they don't create a profit, the city/school comes through with tax revenues to keep them in operation until they can drive the private providers out of business and then they have a monoploy on that service. Bye, bye private enterprise, hello government jobs. And who pays for those government employees? Us the taxpayers. Not saying the city/school does not do a good job, just saying what happens to the private enterprises that were creating jobs AND paying taxes? The city I live in has done all these things and has even talked about taking over the convenience stores in the city. Gas prices are too high don't you see and the citizens deserve to buy their gas from the city. You see the city doesn't put profits above providing a low-cost service like those "greedy" (actual term used at the city meeting) gas station owners.

[Mong Hu]

More bad news from Gallup today for the Democrats.

http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/ljyye_6souqhlv8lbultxg.gif


http://www.gallup.com/poll/143363/GOP-Positioned-Among-Likely-Midterm-Voters.aspx


Along with some interesting analysis from Michael Barone.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/gallups-astonishing-numbers-and-the-lake-superior-congressional-districts-104321583.html

The Gallup high turnout and low turnout numbers suggest it looks like 1894, when Republicans gained more than 100 seats in a House of approximately 350 seats.

This would mean a pick up in today's house of more than one hundred and twenty seats for the Republicans. Of course races traditionally tighten as the election draws near and I am sure this one will be no different and polls are of course fallible as Barone himself states in his article.

Polling theory tells us that at least one out of 20 polls is simply wrong, that is, the results differ from what you would get from interviewing the entire population by more than the margin of error.

All this to say things are still not looking good for Obama's party come November.

[chhspantherfan]

More bad news from Gallup today for the Democrats.

http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/ljyye_6souqhlv8lbultxg.gif


http://www.gallup.com/poll/143363/GOP-Positioned-Among-Likely-Midterm-Voters.aspx


Along with some interesting analysis from Michael Barone.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/gallups-astonishing-numbers-and-the-lake-superior-congressional-districts-104321583.html



This would mean a pick up in today's house of more than one hundred and twenty seats for the Republicans. Of course races traditionally tighten as the election draws near and I am sure this one will be no different and polls are of course fallible as Barone himself states in his article.



All this to say things are still not looking good for Obama's party come November.



kinda like screaming "Down with the establishment" and then turning around and saying, " Where is the establishment?"

oh, wait .................................;)

[drgnbkr]

kinda like screaming "Down with the establishment" and then turning around and saying, " Where is the establishment?"

oh, wait .................................;)

Or, we have met the enemy and it are us!:p At the very least, the country is making a huge swing to the conservative side....Parties are not as important this time around.

[slcdragonfan]

Or, we have met the enemy and it are us!:p At the very least, the country is making a huge swing to the conservative side....Parties are not as important this time around.

more importantly, ping me if you want to go to the game. I am considering the higher rent seats but they are reserved. :)

[mojotrain]

more importantly, ping me if you want to go to the game. I am considering the higher rent seats but they are reserved. :)

You don't have reserved seats?

[mad_fan]

and they smell bad, too!

They smelt less bad when a trillion US dollars meant something...

[mad_fan]

Went to the gun store to pick up ammo for the .357 and it was 60$ a box. That's more than 1$ per round. Guy behind the counter said they can't keep it in stock.

Reload...
Sell for cash...
Avoid tax...
Behave European...
Win...
...
Underground economies=Americas future...

[slcdragonfan]

You don't have reserved seats?

I never was able to coordinate the day for us to sit all night and buy tickets, was not clever like others to hire someone, and I got in free for many years because I handled parking @ the stadium. This week it sounds like it will be so crowded I might have to sit on the visitor side.

I WILL buy reserved seats this year, or die trying. They are not that easy to get.

How are you doing mojotrain?

[tayb]

I can't wait for conservatives to tell us how this country should be run! Only to fail miserably just as the liberals have. And then listen to the liberals tell us how this country should be run! Only to fail miserable. And then listen...

Down with the establishment! Let's kick the Dems out of office! That way we can get absolutely nothing accomplished, do more damage to this country, continue to let the national debt spiral out of control, and have someone new to blame instead.

Democrats = Republicans.
Liberals = Conservative.

They just can't agree on HOW to destroy the country.

[drgnbkr]

I can't wait for conservatives to tell us how this country should be run! Only to fail miserably just as the liberals have. And then listen to the liberals tell us how this country should be run! Only to fail miserable. And then listen...

Down with the establishment! Let's kick the Dems out of office! That way we can get absolutely nothing accomplished, do more damage to this country, continue to let the national debt spiral out of control, and have someone new to blame instead.

Democrats = Republicans.
Liberals = Conservative.

They just can't agree on HOW to destroy the country.

Conservatives are a bit more business friendly than the current bunch don't ya think? We need jobs and consumer spending, not the highest number of people on food stamps in history...

[dragonpants]

Businesses create jobs that enhance the economy, not government. Each and everytime government starts sticking their noses into the private workplace, or creating jobs that compete with private enterprise, the economy goes south. The more they regulate the further south the economy goes. Yes we need regulations, not trying to deny it. Just remember, everytime government adds more regulations to American businesses, the more those jobs will go overseas.

This is not just a Federal problem, it is even more a state and local government problem. Take the municipal government and the school systems for example. In the name of helping the community they create daycare centers, tennis lessons, gymnastic lessons, trash collectons, etc. While these activities may help the city coffers and lower the prices for the consumers, what else does it do? It drives out the private providers of these services. Sometimes they are driven out of business because they are not providing a quality service. Sometimes they are driven out because they can't afford to compete with city or school services. The city will use the tax dollars from these private businesses to go into competition against these businesses. The city/school can charge customers lower prices because they have the facilities provided for free and have such a lower overhead. Even if they don't create a profit, the city/school comes through with tax revenues to keep them in operation until they can drive the private providers out of business and then they have a monoploy on that service. Bye, bye private enterprise, hello government jobs. And who pays for those government employees? Us the taxpayers. Not saying the city/school does not do a good job, just saying what happens to the private enterprises that were creating jobs AND paying taxes? The city I live in has done all these things and has even talked about taking over the convenience stores in the city. Gas prices are too high don't you see and the citizens deserve to buy their gas from the city. You see the city doesn't put profits above providing a low-cost service like those "greedy" (actual term used at the city meeting) gas station owners.


I agree with you, I am all about smaller government and less regulation. I agree that lot's of the pandering needs to go away to help the small business person however those things take years to change and we need something to happen faster.
I do not think there is anyone that is going to argue that the economy does not significant improvement. But at this point how does a business increase just create more jobs? It all sounds good but doing it is another thing. The economy is many times tied to housing and we now have the lowest interest rates in history and still a stagnant housing market.
I am really looking for answers, I do not have them.

[slcdragonfan]

I agree with you, I am all about smaller government and less regulation. I agree that lot's of the pandering needs to go away to help the small business person however those things take years to change and we need something to happen faster.
I do not think there is anyone that is going to argue that the economy does not significant improvement. But at this point how does a business increase just create more jobs? It all sounds good but doing it is another thing. The economy is many times tied to housing and we now have the lowest interest rates in history and still a stagnant housing market.
I am really looking for answers, I do not have them.

there is currently a moratorium on foreclosures as a result of the "robo-signer" and other business practices. This applies to certain companies. What does this mean? longer period of time to work off the bad mortgages, people sitting in houses not paying rent in some cases. Point? It will take a very long time for the foreclosure elephant to be digested by the snake that swallows it. No housing building means no new appliance sales, flooring, sheetrock, shingles, etc. Now, how did we get here again?

By the way, we have more consumer spending now, and rail traffic is peaking upwards, but no jobs. Ask yourself why. Could it be related to the gutting of American manufacturing? and the gutting of the IT infrastructure? Seems China is starting to pick up, last I heard. Of course, I detest the government intervention in saving Chrystler and GM and AIG, and etc, BUT....if they are gone, what would be the result? Last time we saved Chrystler we made pretty decent coin if I recall correctly.

Anyway, the issue is, the tie between stimulus spending/consumer spending to job creation and growth is an old model, assuming the relationship holds true within the consuming country. not true in a global economy.

We need to make things and do things here.

And this is not about government regulation making it too hard for business. It is STRICTLY about cost of the employee.

[slcdragonfan]

and, on another note:

Minimum Wage: A 'Snakepit' Issue for the GOP? (http://news.yahoo.com/s/atlantic/minimumwageasnakepitissueforthegop5264)

The Constitution gives Congress the power “[t]o regulate commerce…among the several states,” a power which even ultraconservative Justice Antonin Scalia agrees gives Congress broad authority to regulate “economic activity.” Moreover, the Supreme Court unanimously upheld the first federal minimum wage law in a 1941 decision called United States v. Darby. That decision did not just uphold the minimum wage, it also expressly overruled an egregious 1918 decision striking down federal child labor laws. Darby therefore provides a frightening window into just what America would look like if it were ever ruled by Joe Miller’s twisted constitution. If Congress lacks the power to enact the basic employment laws like the minimum wage, then it also lacks the power to enact other fundamental labor protections such as regulating child labor.


Now, of course, some will say "that's the price we pay for freedom". I say, at what price, that type of freedom?

[mojotrain]

I never was able to coordinate the day for us to sit all night and buy tickets, was not clever like others to hire someone, and I got in free for many years because I handled parking @ the stadium. This week it sounds like it will be so crowded I might have to sit on the visitor side.

I WILL buy reserved seats this year, or die trying. They are not that easy to get.

How are you doing mojotrain?

Doing great. Trying to stay away from fights:). On SLC season tickets? Is it like Permian, once you have them you have automatic rights to pick them up every year? We can also pass those rights on to any one we wish when and if we decide to let them go, via a written note. I picked up my first two from a friend who moved to Houston in 1965. Then 13 years ago I married into four more then picked up two more from a very old couple who decided the stairs were too steep. It's my goal to get control of all 9,000 on the home side.

[slcdragonfan]

Doing great. Trying to stay away from fights:). On SLC season tickets? Is it like Permian, once you have them you have automatic rights to pick them up every year? We can also pass those rights on to any one we wish when and if we decide to let them go, via a written note. I picked up my first two from a friend who moved to Houston in 1965. Then 13 years ago I married into four more then picked up two more from a very old couple who decided the stairs were too steep. It's my goal to get control of all 9,000 on the home side.

:rofl:

;) I'll start with just two, thank you. And I won't live long enough to get 8 I assure you.

[mojotrain]

:rofl:

;) I'll start with just two, thank you. And I won't live long enough to get 8 I assure you.

Then the SLC system to secure tickets differs from ECISD?

[slcdragonfan]

Then the SLC system to secure tickets differs from ECISD?

You have renewal rights. But in the past there have been only a few offered up for sale. There is also an "option" fee or something like that. Personally, I have always liked sitting down in the Senior parents section or near it with a lot of the more strident parents and fans. Those are all GA tickets.

[mojotrain]

You have renewal rights. But in the past there have been only a few offered up for sale. There is also an "option" fee or something like that. Personally, I have always liked sitting down in the Senior parents section or near it with a lot of the more strident parents and fans. Those are all GA tickets.

Oh, ok. Get back to your president bashing.;) No wait a minute! You and the Dr. or some other highly esteemed citizens of SL storm the ADs office and request that tickets options can be passed on to friends or family.

[Mong Hu]

and, on another note:

Minimum Wage: A 'Snakepit' Issue for the GOP? (http://news.yahoo.com/s/atlantic/minimumwageasnakepitissueforthegop5264)



Now, of course, some will say "that's the price we pay for freedom". I say, at what price, that type of freedom?

Interesting article. I had not heard of this before but I have been looking into it since I read your article. I in particular have been researching some of the Supreme Court cases that have been referenced.

U.S. v. Darby (1941) (http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/darby.html)
Hammer v. Dagenhart (opinion) (1918) (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0247_0251_ZO.html)
Hammer v. Dagenhart (Discent) (1918) (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0247_0251_ZD.html)
Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0022_0001_ZO.html)

I think the Hammer case in particular sums up the arguments pretty well if you read both the opinion and the dissent. Gibbons was written by Marshall and so obviously reflects all the sentiments associated with the Federalist positions on government and the constitution. I thought that the Darby decision was the least interesting of the bunch.

I believe a minimum wage is a good thing and I have never questioned the Federal governments ability to institute a minimum wage but I do not object to questioning that authority. I also do not object to letting states set their own minimum wages as it pertains to that states own economic circumstance. I believe in giving as much control as possible to local governing authorities (the more local the better). Would it be bad to allow states to set their own minimum wages. I would fight in the state in which I reside for a minimum wage.

Limited government (i.e. freedom) was a radical idea when our country was founded and it remains so to this day.

[slcdragonfan]

Interesting article. I had not heard of this before but I have been looking into it since I read your article. I in particular have been researching some of the Supreme Court cases that have been referenced.

U.S. v. Darby (1941) (http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/darby.html)
Hammer v. Dagenhart (opinion) (1918) (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0247_0251_ZO.html)
Hammer v. Dagenhart (Discent) (1918) (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0247_0251_ZD.html)
Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0022_0001_ZO.html)

I think the Hammer case in particular sums up the arguments pretty well if you read both the opinion and the dissent. Gibbons was written by Marshall and so obviously reflects all the sentiments associated with the Federalist positions on government and the constitution. I thought that the Darby decision was the least interesting of the bunch.

I believe a minimum wage is a good thing and I have never questioned the Federal governments ability to institute a minimum wage but I do not object to questioning that authority.
Agreed.

I also do not object to letting states set their own minimum wages as it pertains to that states own economic circumstance.
strongly agree. Minimum wage in NY is something completely different than minimum wage in Mississippi.

I believe in giving as much control as possible to local governing authorities (the more local the better).
Agreed.
Would it be bad to allow states to set their own minimum wages. I would fight in the state in which I reside for a minimum wage.

Limited government (i.e. freedom) was a radical idea when our country was founded and it remains so to this day.

^^^

[Mong Hu]

^^^
I really don't think you and I are that far apart. I think my posts come off so conservative because I am responding to particular points and I am arguing from the conservative perspective and you likewise are arguing from the more liberal perspective. I believe government regulation is needed. Big companies have shown through out the industrial history of the United States that they are willing to abuse people. I just think that we should be very weary of government and the power it wields because it is far greater than the power of any company. I would just assume keep government and companies small.

[slcdragonfan]

Mong, I am still pondering my response to your response to my response re: healthcare. It will take some time as you noted....

I truly believe that if people have open discourse without rancor, for the most part they can find common ground. Where they do not, if their opinions are fairly considered and well-expressed, at least we can have an understanding of where people are coming from with their stances.

Nothing wrong with a heated debate, but discussion that attacks the individual as we see so often here does nothing but denigrate, it does not further the person's cause.

Less government vs. more government is how one might stage the debate.
Leveling the playing field to limit the control of factions is another way to frame it.

Somewhere between is the answer. And we must, all of us, understand that the media and different factions (including liberal) have reasons why that want us emotional and "mob-like" rather than rational and considering other opinions. How you frame this issue and "win" with that framing is how you gain control. I never doubt for one minute that the people running for office from either party are, for the most part, working in self-interest.

[dragonpants]

You have renewal rights. But in the past there have been only a few offered up for sale. There is also an "option" fee or something like that. Personally, I have always liked sitting down in the Senior parents section or near it with a lot of the more strident parents and fans. Those are all GA tickets.

You can renew them provided that your payment is on time and there is no wavering on that. You cannot transfer them to someone else either. You can only own up to 4 (per household). There is also a seat license, $50 per year or 3 years for $90 and then $15 a game per seat so if you pay your seat license yearly( I pay for 3 at a time) so for a year you are looking at $125 plus parking.

[chhspantherfan]

Conservatives are a bit more business friendly than the current bunch don't ya think? We need jobs and consumer spending, not the highest number of people on food stamps in history...

http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/images/item/0702-stimulusbenefits.jpg

[dragonpants]

Mong, I am still pondering my response to your response to my response re: healthcare. It will take some time as you noted....

I truly believe that if people have open discourse without rancor, for the most part they can find common ground. Where they do not, if their opinions are fairly considered and well-expressed, at least we can have an understanding of where people are coming from with their stances.

Nothing wrong with a heated debate, but discussion that attacks the individual as we see so often here does nothing but denigrate, it does not further the person's cause.

Less government vs. more government is how one might stage the debate.
Leveling the playing field to limit the control of factions is another way to frame it.

Somewhere between is the answer. And we must, all of us, understand that the media and different factions (including liberal) have reasons why that want us emotional and "mob-like" rather than rational and considering other opinions. How you frame this issue and "win" with that framing is how you gain control. I never doubt for one minute that the people running for office from either party are, for the most part, working in self-interest.

Main focus of media is to get ratings
Main focus of politicians is to get re-elected

People seem to not keep that in mind and I think we have an unrealistic view that the people we elect truly want to represent their constituents, I think by and large they do as long as it does not interfere with keeping their cushy job.
If Congress is willing to have the same health care coverage that they just voted for, then I think we might a real debate. If they would scoff at it why is it good for those of us that they represent?

Another question and I know it is going to come across badly, but if I am paying more in taxes or premiums or whatever the hell they call the funding of this thing than someone who is paying nothing, am I entitled to better coverage or faster service or something. I know the answer but why not?

While I think our property taxes are absolutely ridiculous and Robin Hood is wealth redistribution, I know a different topic, anyway, I pay more in property taxes and school taxes that someone whose home is worth significantly less, at least in that scenario I understand that when I buy it, while it is unfair I know that if I want a certain home that is nicer etc that tax increase comes with it, under healthcare I pay more and get the same. Where is the logic in that?

By the way property taxes should not be based on your home value but the volume of land that you own, period.

[mojotrain]

You can renew them provided that your payment is on time and there is no wavering on that. You cannot transfer them to someone else either. You can only own up to 4 (per household). There is also a seat license, $50 per year or 3 years for $90 and then $15 a game per seat so if you pay your seat license yearly( I pay for 3 at a time) so for a year you are looking at $125 plus parking.

Dang! I bet that keeps all of the riff faff out.

[GoOwls]

http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/images/item/0702-stimulusbenefits.jpg

So let me get this straight....Obama and Co. managed to cherry-pick the best values to pursue in the stimulus package and it's still this freakin bad.....gotcha....;)

[the_phoenix612]

So let me get this straight....Obama and Co. managed to cherry-pick the best values to pursue in the stimulus package and it's still this freakin bad.....gotcha....;)
do you really not understand that the stimulus could have worked, even without immediately instituting major economic growth? From the point we were at, simply stopping the bleeding is a success. It's still too early to make conclusive statements one way or the other, but the correlation is certainly strong, if not the causation.

[mad_fan]

http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/images/item/0702-stimulusbenefits.jpg

I hope they qualify us all for food stamps...okay that's not reasonable...how able the poor people below $250000 per year...or did they move the rich line again???
I need some food stamps to simulate the economy!!!

[mad_fan]

I hope they qualify us all for food stamps...okay that's not reasonable...how able the poor people below $250000 per year...or did they move the rich line again???
I need some food stamps to simulate the economy!!!

Sign me up for Unemployment Insurance and I'll stay hope...because in this chart...creating/maintaining a job is worthless...
But we knew that from the last stimulus...
...
If we all stay home the economy will really take off...
:rolleyes:

[Mong Hu]

Ah the hope and change, note the video of David Axelrod below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJWclx7H2tg

After accusing the chamber of commerce of being a front from foreign money to buy off our elections he proceeds to say he has no idea where the money is coming from. You can certainly make the claim that not knowing where the money is coming from may present the chance of corruption and in fact maybe the likely-hood of it but he just basically admitted that the Democrats have made these accusations with out evidence and further that it is the responsibility of the accused to prove that they are innocent of these accusations. Now that is a change.

[b756561]

Ah the hope and change, note the video of David Axelrod below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJWclx7H2tg

After accusing the chamber of commerce of being a front from foreign money to buy off our elections he proceeds to say he has no idea where the money is coming from. You can certainly make the claim that not knowing where the money is coming from may present the chance of corruption and in fact maybe the likely-hood of it but he just basically admitted that the Democrats have made these accusations with out evidence and further that it is the responsibility of the accused to prove that they are innocent of these accusations. Now that is a change.

Obama et al. are attacking the Chamber of Commerce. The chamber's sin, they dared to disagree with Obama. For this, the White House has called for the IRS and the Justice Department to investigate the C.of C. and to jail all guilty parties. Since the C. of C. won't devulge the source of their contributions, they must be illegal. The Unions don't devulge the names of their donors either. Will Obama go after them also? Fat chance. They must be good guys, they support Obama. So of course everything they do is not only legal but righteous also.

The President is belittling his office and I find that very sad. He called out Karl Rove and the Chamber of Commerce as crooks on national TV and then has NOTHING to back it up. The President stooping so low as to participate in character assasination. Even more sad, it is done for no reason other than political gain on Obama's part. Mr. President in America you are innocent until proven guilty. Under our system, Art. II of the Constitution, gives the president the law enforcing power of the United States. That makes the president, essentially, the nations top cop. Every cop knows you get your evidence together before you start calling people crooked.

[drgnbkr]

Obama et al. are attacking the Chamber of Commerce. The chamber's sin, they dared to disagree with Obama. For this, the White House has called for the IRS and the Justice Department to investigate the C.of C. and to jail all guilty parties. Since the C. of C. won't devulge the source of their contributions, they must be illegal. The Unions don't devulge the names of their donors either. Will Obama go after them also? Fat chance. They must be good guys, they support Obama. So of course everything they do is not only legal but righteous also.

The President is belittling his office and I find that very sad. He called out Karl Rove and the Chamber of Commerce as crooks on national TV and then has NOTHING to back it up. The President stooping so low as to participate in character assasination. Even more sad, it is done for no reason other than political gain on Obama's part. Mr. President in America you are innocent until proven guilty. Under our system, Art. II of the Constitution, gives the president the law enforcing power of the United States. That makes the president, essentially, the nations top cop. Every cop knows you get your evidence together before you start calling people crooked.

At least it re-enforces just how "pro-business" this bunch is....:rolleyes:

[b756561]

At least it re-enforces just how "pro-business" this bunch is....:rolleyes:

As opposed to how anti-business Obama and his cohorts are.