PDA

View Full Version : Having read most ...



Franco
07-29-2009, 09:45 PM
I've read most of the post here on the POTUS forum over the months, and one line sticks in my head the most. Probably because it rings so true and I've read it so many times.

That line is....

We live in Cuba now.

JDogger
07-29-2009, 11:08 PM
I've read most of the post here on the POTUS forum over the months, and one line sticks in my head the most. Probably because it rings so true and I've read it so many times.

That line is....

We live in Cuba now.

Oddly enough, I agree with that line. I think that we, like Cuba find ourselves at the cusp of many changes.
We will not become the Cuba of Castro. That time may well be over.
Flying over Cuba several years ago, on a fly-in to the Caymans, I was struck by the the relative prestine condition of the shorline and reefs compared to the condition of the keys.
When the Castro regime comes to an end, and it will, coastal development in Cuba may well bring the economic stimulus to the US and the gulf coast states that brings both economies out of the doldrums.

JD

Goose
07-30-2009, 04:45 PM
In Castro's Cuba horse-drawn carts have replaced cars and oxen have replaced tractors. Tin cans are recycled into drinking cups and banana peels into Cuban sandals.

Food is rationed, gas is rationed, even sugar is rationed in Castro's Cuba.

Cuba's Castro forbids the release of certain economic data and he once declared GDP a capitalist instrument so he could make certain adjustments and declare Cuba's GDP growing at 5%.

America's Castro, along with his guerillas have been in power for less than a year. America's Castro has only been able to ration medicine and the very air we breathe.

America's Castro has a lot of catching up to do!

We live in Cuba now.

YardleyLabs
07-30-2009, 05:00 PM
If you really can't recognize the difference, you might as well live in Cuba. The weather would be better than where you are. The biggest threat to freedom in this country are right wing (and left wing) extremists ready to throw democracy out the window because they don't like the results of the election. Those are the people who threaten our heritage: not the immigrants, not the liberals, not the moderates or conservatives, not the atheists, and not the religious. The price of freedom is that we fight for the right of the people to determine their government at the ballot box, and we live with the result while preparing for the next election.

Franco
07-30-2009, 05:28 PM
If you really can't recognize the difference, you might as well live in Cuba. The weather would be better than where you are. The biggest threat to freedom in this country are right wing (and left wing) extremists ready to throw democracy out the window because they don't like the results of the election. Those are the people who threaten our heritage: not the immigrants, not the liberals, not the moderates or conservatives, not the atheists, and not the religious. The price of freedom is that we fight for the right of the people to determine their government at the ballot box, and we live with the result while preparing for the next election.

I don't agree. The entitlement mentallity is killing this country and the Dems thrive off of it. Anyone that wants to see the future of this country only need look at California.

The government does not belong in the private sector. GM will ALWAYS be dependent on the goobs for money. Now, they will destroy the best health care system in the world. If they say something will cost $1. better bet on it costing $20. They can't run anything properly and now they want to run the auto, banking, energy and health industry. Major corporations will be leaving our boarders for a more business friendly envirn.

I hope we start hearing talk of succession from our friends over in Texas. Between Texas, Alaska, Oklahoma, Louisiana and a few other states, we would do just fine without the socialist we have now!

road kill
07-30-2009, 05:29 PM
If you really can't recognize the difference, you might as well live in Cuba. The weather would be better than where you are. The biggest threat to freedom in this country are right wing (and left wing) extremists ready to throw democracy out the window because they don't like the results of the election. Those are the people who threaten our heritage: not the immigrants, not the liberals, not the moderates or conservatives, not the atheists, and not the religious. The price of freedom is that we fight for the right of the people to determine their government at the ballot box, and we live with the result while preparing for the next election.

Let me help you out on this.
He knows this is not Cuba.

He is just concerned that it's not the "land of the free any more."

Franco
07-30-2009, 05:44 PM
Let me help you out on this.
He knows this is not Cuba.

He is just concerned that it's not the "land of the free any more."

I couldn't have said it better!

Everything that has made this country great is under attack. From Free Enterprise to Gun ownership is under attack and they do want to tell us how we are to live.

YardleyLabs
07-30-2009, 06:32 PM
[/color]

I couldn't have said it better!

Everything that has made this country great is under attack. From Free Enterprise to Gun ownership is under attack and they do want to tell us how we are to live.
Our taxes are at their lowest levels in 70 years. Gun ownership rights are less threatened than at any time in the last 20 years as evidenced most recently by the fact that 58 senators voted for a national right to carry. Families have more educational options for their children today than at any time in the last 60 years. Voter turnout in the last election was higher than in the last election than at any time in the last 40 years. The number of families on welfare has dropped 50% and the average cash grant for those on welfare has declined as well. Those are the positives.

On the other hand, the median income in the country has declined over the last 20 years as income and wealth has been redistributed to a smaller and smaller percentage of the population. The percentage of all personal income earned by those in the lower 50% of our population has declined by about 40%. Our unemployment rate has doubled and real GDP has been virtually flat for five years. Our national debt doubled between early 2001 and the end of 2008, and has gone up 10% in 2009. The percentage of the population without health insurance has increased dramatically over the last eight years while the cost of health care has grown from 13% of GDP in 2000 (a level maintained for about eight years) to 17% in 2008.

The pendulum has swung very far in one direction -- to the right -- for a long time. It is not the end of the world if it swings back a little in the other direction. We will still end up to the right of where we were when Reagan was President by almost every measure.

Franco
07-30-2009, 08:55 PM
Our taxes are at their lowest levels in 70 years. Gun ownership rights are less threatened than at any time in the last 20 years as evidenced most recently by the fact that 58 senators voted for a national right to carry. Families have more educational options for their children today than at any time in the last 60 years. Voter turnout in the last election was higher than in the last election than at any time in the last 40 years. The number of families on welfare has dropped 50% and the average cash grant for those on welfare has declined as well. Those are the positives.

.

And, Obama accomplished this?

Of course not.

But, lets address the issues you brought up and where they are today.

They way Obama is spending money, to believe that everyone won't being paying substantially more taxes is a pipe dream. How are we going to pay our debts, cover inflation, pay for the TRILLION in pork that Oabma passed off on the previous Congress? Then, there is a trillion in bailout money that the Fed doesn't even know where it went? Now, a government that can't run anything right wants to spend TRILLIONS (don't be fooled by thier accounting because anything the Gov does comes in way over budget) on health care.

To think that our gun rights are secure is not realistic. This is the most left and looney administration in our history. These people are capable of taking stupidity to new lows.

Our public educational system has been dysfunctional since busing started in the 1960' Our public schools are more segragated today than in the 60's. No responsible parent is going to send thier children to a public school where they will become a part of the Hip Hop culture, unless they haven't the money for private schooling. The teachers union should be disbanded.

Welfare is down because they have switched to SS Disablity or Medicare.

I see the world differently and I've never worn rose-colored glasses.

dnf777
07-30-2009, 09:34 PM
I don't agree. The entitlement mentallity is killing this country and the Dems thrive off of it. Anyone that wants to see the future of this country only need look at California.

The government does not belong in the private sector. GM will ALWAYS be dependent on the goobs for money. Now, they will destroy the best health care system in the world. If they say something will cost $1. better bet on it costing $20. They can't run anything properly and now they want to run the auto, banking, energy and health industry. Major corporations will be leaving our boarders for a more business friendly envirn.

I hope we start hearing talk of succession from our friends over in Texas. Between Texas, Alaska, Oklahoma, Louisiana and a few other states, we would do just fine without the socialist we have now!

As a combat veteran who fought for the UNITED STATES of AMERICA, (including Texas, Alaska, Louisiana, and Oklahoma) and the people who live there, I am sickened and offended by that treasonous drivel of secession. What a SHAME it comes from someone who quotes Jefferson in their autograph line. If you want to "start hearing talk of [succession]", don't call yourself an American in front of me please. Thankfully, I realize you don't represent the many good people of those states, who consider such talk anti-American and extreme radical jibberish.

Franco
07-30-2009, 10:02 PM
anti-American and extreme radical jibberish.



That is exactly the way I feel about the current administration and Congress!

Succession will be a big National topic in 2010 no matter how any of us feel about it. Many of us will not be converted to socialist and will resist it.

If you are looking for treason, you need not look much further than Washington DC.

Oh, and Thomas Jefferson would be ill if he were alive today to see our out-of-control government in DC.

YardleyLabs
07-30-2009, 10:08 PM
And, Obama accomplished this?

Of course not.

But, lets address the issues you brought up and where they are today.

They way Obama is spending money, to believe that everyone won't being paying substantially more taxes is a pipe dream. How are we going to pay our debts, cover inflation, pay for the TRILLION in pork that Oabma passed off on the previous Congress? Then, there is a trillion in bailout money that the Fed doesn't even know where it went? Now, a government that can't run anything right wants to spend TRILLIONS (don't be fooled by thier accounting because anything the Gov does comes in way over budget) on health care.

To think that our gun rights are secure is not realistic. This is the most left and looney administration in our history. These people are capable of taking stupidity to new lows.

Our public educational system has been dysfunctional since busing started in the 1960' Our public schools are more segragated today than in the 60's. No responsible parent is going to send thier children to a public school where they will become a part of the Hip Hop culture, unless they haven't the money for private schooling. The teachers union should be disbanded.

Welfare is down because they have switched to SS Disablity or Medicare.

I see the world differently and I've never worn rose-colored glasses.
Franco,

I don't think you wear rose colored glasses, but I think you might have forgotten to return the glasses Ray Charles lent you for Halloween. Hyperbole is often an effective rhetorical device: exaggerate to make your point. However, when you begin to confuse those exaggerations with reality, it is a symptom of paranoid delusion. Obama has been President for six months, If he is already turning our country into Cuba then we must have lived in Maoist China when Reagan was President.

Franco
07-30-2009, 10:32 PM
Franco,

I don't think you wear rose colored glasses, but I think you might have forgotten to return the glasses Ray Charles lent you for Halloween. Hyperbole is often an effective rhetorical device: exaggerate to make your point. However, when you begin to confuse those exaggerations with reality, it is a symptom of paranoid delusion. Obama has been President for six months, If he is already turning our country into Cuba then we must have lived in Maoist China when Reagan was President.

I for one can appreciate a sense of humor.:) Especially, when politics or religion are discussed.

Since my last post, I received a money solicitation call from my state's Republican committee.

Here's the call;

Hello Mr. -----, I'm,-----------with the La. Republican Committee. May I ask you what you feel is the most important issue facing our country today? I replied, out of control spending is #1. She says, you are so correct sir (she would have said correct, no matter what I said). Can we count on you for Xdollars. I said, hell no. I don't want my money going to the reelection campaign of David Vitter and until the Republicans can demonstrate that they have it together, I'll hold on to my cash. Then after along pause, she says, well I'm sorry you feel that way but we need contributions to help Conservatives get elected. I said, when you find some, let me know. I then hung up.

Richard Halstead
07-30-2009, 11:34 PM
Our taxes are at their lowest levels in 70 years.

This percentage you quote probably dosn't include gas taxes paid at the pump, alcohol taxes, cigarette tax, taxes on phone bills, state taxes that have increased because of fed. cuts, etc, etc.

JDogger
07-31-2009, 01:07 AM
It's funny. So many decry the 'entitlement mentality', but aren't we all guilty of it to some degree. We want our infrastucture. Roads, bridges, airports, public lands, schools, police, fire, border, and military protection, etc. We want our medicare and social security and military retirement, and VA benefits, orphans and widows benefits, and disabilty allowances, and Cola increases to all. How are these to be paid for and supported? Taxes?
Used to be, the Fed budget and many states were supported by fees, tariffs and duties, paid by business corporations as a part of their license to conduct business and make a profit. While US corporations still pay some taxes, the tax code has gradually shifted the burden from the company to the consumer.
Ask yourself, how has this happened? Is it maybe because we keep electing those who serve other masters than ourselves? Regardless of party?
As my old friend Billy Boggs used to say to me, "When you point a finger at someone, remember...three point back at you."

Off for a few days to the NM high country.
Living large and proudly liberal regards,

Hugh (JDogger)

dnf777
07-31-2009, 06:44 AM
That is exactly the way I feel about the current administration and Congress!

Succession will be a big National topic in 2010 no matter how any of us feel about it. Many of us will not be converted to socialist and will resist it.

If you are looking for treason, you need not look much further than Washington DC.

Oh, and Thomas Jefferson would be ill if he were alive today to see our out-of-control government in DC.

Secession will be big talk among anti-American radicals, I'm sure. But not in any proud American circles. We deal with discontent in our gov't by democratic elections, not be secession when we don't get our way. We tried that once, remember? I believe it was called the Civil War. I'm sure there's plenty of Al Qeada and Taliban that would cheer on any groups that want to sever the USA.

txbadger
07-31-2009, 07:24 AM
Yardley: "Those are the people who threaten our heritage: "

Really??? Kinda like JFK when he said ".. ask not what your Country can do for you .."?


Yardley: "The number of families on welfare has dropped 50% and the average cash grant for those on welfare has declined as well"

Care to cite a source? The most recent article I found shows an increase: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124562449457235503.html .... and I'm not sure shifting welfare payments to unemployment benefits is a net reduction. That aside, making <$400/month forces me to wonder how they survive?


Yardley said: "Our national debt doubled between early 2001 and the end of 2008, and has gone up 10% in 2009."

Lemme see 10% in 6 months = 20%, at the least, in 12 months which = doubling the underlying in 3.6 years.


"On the other hand, the median income in the country has declined over the last 20 years as income and wealth has been redistributed to a smaller and smaller percentage of the population."

Per the Census folks from 1989 to 2005 median income rose, see page 4: http://www.census.gov/prod/2005pubs/p60-228.pdf

And let's not forget all those rich folks making over 35k/year, about 50% of the population, are paying 97% of the taxes. So what are the other 50% of the people living on....?

Yardley said: "The percentage of the population without health insurance has increased dramatically over the last eight years"

Source? Let's not forget the Kaiser study which shows 15% of the population is without insurance, thereby 85% do. And of that 15% 49% are under age 34 & it's unknown if they want it.

Yardley said: "The pendulum has swung very far in one direction -- to the right -- for a long time."

40 years of frustration, eh? How is that war on poverty going?

Yardley said: "Our taxes are at their lowest levels in 70 years."

Not sure if you're just addressing income tax but if so; in 1989 the highest quintile paid 25.2 & latest data from the Census is 2005 and it was 25.5. Meanwhile the lowest quintile went from 8.5% down to 4.3%. Which means if you're in the lowest you're right and if you're in the highest they're effectively the same.
Source: http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=8885

dnf777
07-31-2009, 07:34 AM
I for one can appreciate a sense of humor.:) Especially, when politics or religion are discussed.

Since my last post, I received a money solicitation call from my state's Republican committee.

Here's the call;

Hello Mr. -----, I'm,-----------with the La. Republican Committee. May I ask you what you feel is the most important issue facing our country today? I replied, out of control spending is #1. She says, you are so correct sir (she would have said correct, no matter what I said). Can we count on you for Xdollars. I said, hell no. I don't want my money going to the reelection campaign of David Vitter and until the Republicans can demonstrate that they have it together, I'll hold on to my cash. Then after along pause, she says, well I'm sorry you feel that way but we need contributions to help Conservatives get elected. I said, when you find some, let me know. I then hung up.

There's something we can agree on! :D

I was interrupted during office hours by a call from Rep. Tom Price's office, requesting me to serve as a "healthcare reform consultant". Listened to a very convincing taped message from dear Rep. Price, then his secretery came back on, gave a little pep talk, then swiftly solicited me for $500 minimum donation. I said "hell no". She said, "oh, many doctors find it easier to give lesser amounts, of say, 400 or 300".

That's when i informed her that from my take on watching national politics, the gov't gives obscene fees (kickbacks) to "consultants", such as Randy Duke Cunningham, not the other way around, and that it is insulting and a waste of my patient's time, to masquerate this thinly veiled solicitation as legitimate concern for American healthcare reform.

Politicians are all a bunch of whores.

In the 90s we ushered in the new Republican congress....seemed GREAT for a while, then the same old crap....

In '06 we were gonna have change for the people......same ol' crap!

In '08, Change we can believe in......he we go again.

In '10 and '12, I doubt we'll have sweeping change, but probably a shift in balance, and let me go out on a limb and predict.........SAME OL' CRAP!

YardleyLabs
07-31-2009, 09:59 AM
Yardley: "Those are the people who threaten our heritage: "

Really??? Kinda like JFK when he said ".. ask not what your Country can do for you .."?

??? I said that the ones threatening our freedoms were those willing to throw out democracy when they disagreed with the vote. How is that related to JFK's inaugural?



Yardley: "The number of families on welfare has dropped 50% and the average cash grant for those on welfare has declined as well"

Care to cite a source? The most recent article I found shows an increase: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124562449457235503.html .... and I'm not sure shifting welfare payments to unemployment benefits is a net reduction. That aside, making <$400/month forces me to wonder how they survive?

When Clinton became President there were about 14 million welfare recipients. That number had declined to about 11 million by the time welfare reform was passed under Clinton in 1996. By 2007, the number was under 4 million. Since 2007, the number has increased as a result of the recession as indicated in the WSJ story, but by an amount that does not even begin to offset the earlier declines. Since national statistics have not been published since 2007, I only said the decline was 50%. As of 2007, the decline from the beginning of the Clinton administration was actually over 70%. (See, for example, http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-05-04-welfare_N.htm). By the way, that decline is much greater than the increase in unemployment beneficiaries since the beginning of the recession.



Yardley said: "Our national debt doubled between early 2001 and the end of 2008, and has gone up 10% in 2009."

Lemme see 10% in 6 months = 20%, at the least, in 12 months which = doubling the underlying in 3.6 years.

Are you assuming that another stimulus bill equal to or larger than the last one is going to be passed in the next few months? That is the only reason the deficit grew so rapidly. The annual deficit at the close of the Bush administration was about a trillion dollars, including an ongoing budget deficit of $700 billion plus the potion of the TARP program spent in 2008. Obama added the stimulus program and has proposed a budget including a deficit comparable to that passed on by Bush. If Obama is reelected, remains President until 2012, and lives within the budget framework he presented to Congress, we will end up with an increase in the deficit comparable to that given to us by Bush. Personally, I would consider that to be outrageous.



"On the other hand, the median income in the country has declined over the last 20 years as income and wealth has been redistributed to a smaller and smaller percentage of the population."

Per the Census folks from 1989 to 2005 median income rose, see page 4: http://www.census.gov/prod/2005pubs/p60-228.pdf

And let's not forget all those rich folks making over 35k/year, about 50% of the population, are paying 97% of the taxes. So what are the other 50% of the people living on....?

Actually, between 1989 and 2006, per capita median income in constant dollars increased about 8%. It went down about 1.3% between 2006 and 2007, before the official beginning of the recession. We won't know the final 2008 numbers until later this year or the final 2009 numbers until 2010. However, based on prior recessions, and based on economic results since 2007, I suspect we will see at best a flat per capita median income in constant dollars. See http://www.census.gov/prod/2008pubs/p60-235.pdf.





Yardley said: "The percentage of the population without health insurance has increased dramatically over the last eight years"

Source? Let's not forget the Kaiser study which shows 15% of the population is without insurance, thereby 85% do. And of that 15% 49% are under age 34 & it's unknown if they want it.

According to the Census Bureau, there were 38.4 million uninsured in 2000 and 45.7 million uninsured in 2007 (see http://www.census.gov/prod/2008pubs/p60-235.pdf). General estimates are that the number of uninsured has ballooned with the recession.



Yardley said: "The pendulum has swung very far in one direction -- to the right -- for a long time."

40 years of frustration, eh? How is that war on poverty going?

Yardley said: "Our taxes are at their lowest levels in 70 years."

Not sure if you're just addressing income tax but if so; in 1989 the highest quintile paid 25.2 & latest data from the Census is 2005 and it was 25.5. Meanwhile the lowest quintile went from 8.5% down to 4.3%. Which means if you're in the lowest you're right and if you're in the highest they're effectively the same.
Source: http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=8885
Under Eisenhower, the maximum income tax rate was about 90%. What is it now?

In 1967, the bottom 60% of the population received 32.1% of personal income. In 2007 they received 26.9% of income. With respect to overall "equity" of income distribution (not a concept I necessarily agree with), the US evidences a bias towards the wealthy radically greater than almost any developed nation and on par with some of the most inequitable governments. The index (called the GINI index) has shifted fairly strongly over the last 40 years towards greater bias to the wealthy. (see for example https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2172.html and http://www.census.gov/prod/2008pubs/p60-235.pdf) Not very good evidence of some great move towards socialism as seems to be the implication of Franco's comments and the comments of the right wing blogdom.

K G
07-31-2009, 10:33 AM
As a combat veteran who fought for the UNITED STATES of AMERICA, (including Texas, Alaska, Louisiana, and Oklahoma) and the people who live there, I am sickened and offended by that treasonous drivel of secession. What a SHAME it comes from someone who quotes Jefferson in their autograph line. If you want to "start hearing talk of [succession]", don't call yourself an American in front of me please. Thankfully, I realize you don't represent the many good people of those states, who consider such talk anti-American and extreme radical jibberish.

dnf, there is a HUGE difference between "secession" and "succession." Maybe Franco is more concerned about who's coming next as opposed to states withdrawing from the Union.....:cool:

kg

Franco
07-31-2009, 11:31 AM
dnf, there is a HUGE difference between "secession" and "succession." Maybe Franco is more concerned about who's coming next as opposed to states withdrawing from the Union.....:cool:

kg

Well, I've never let poor spelling get in the way of a good idea.;-)

The 10th Amendment...will be a big topic in the months to come.


http://www.reason.com/blog/show/135033.html

YardleyLabs
07-31-2009, 11:53 AM
Well, I've never let poor spelling get in the way of a good idea.;-)

The 10th Amendment...will be a big topic in the months to come.


http://www.reason.com/blog/show/135033.html

Tenth Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Court interpretation: This is a truism neither adding nor subtracting anything of substance to the Constitution as adopted. It has only been applied in a small number of cases and then only to restrict the Federal government from explicitly mandating specific behavior on state governments rather than tying such requirements to eligibility for Federal funds as is normally the case (a linkage that has been upheld consistently). It is hard to imagine an industry more clearly linked to interstate commerce than health care, Rick Perry notwithstanding. BTW, in H.R. 3200 (the House Bill for health reform), all mandates affecting states are linked to receipt of Federal funds. States may avoid those mandates by foregoing all Federal funds.

K G
07-31-2009, 11:57 AM
Perhaps the Governor of Texas should make himself a tad more familiar with how the 10th Amendment has been interpreted by the SCOTUS....;-)


Federal Taxing Power .--Not until after the Civil War was the idea that the reserved powers of the States comprise an independent qualification of otherwise constitutional acts of the Federal Government actually applied to nullify, in part, an act of Congress. This result was first reached in a tax case--Collector v. Day. 9 Holding that a national income tax, in itself valid, could not be constitutionally levied upon the official salaries of state officers, Justice Nelson made the sweeping statement that ''the States within the limits of their powers not granted, or, in the language of the Tenth Amendment, 'reserved,' are as independent of the general government as that government within its sphere is independent of the States.'' 10 In 1939, Collector v. Day was expressly overruled. 11 Nevertheless, the problem of reconciling state and national interest still confronts the Court occasionally, and was elaborately considered in New York v. United States, 12 where, by a vote of six-to-two, the Court upheld the right of the United States to tax the sale of mineral waters taken from property owned by a State. Speaking for four members of the Court, Chief Justice Stone justified the tax on the ground that ''[t]he national taxing power would be unduly curtailed if the State, by extending its activities, could withdraw from it subjects of taxation traditionally within it.'' 13 Justices Frankfurter and Rutledge found in the Tenth Amendment ''no restriction upon Congress to include the States in levying a tax exacted equally from private persons upon the same subject matter.'' 14 Justices Douglas and Black dissented, saying: ''If the power of the federal government to tax the States is conceded, the reserved power of the States guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment does not give them the independence which they have always been assumed to have.'' 15

Granted, the dissenting argument asserts the assumption of state's rights, but that argument lost by a vote of 6-2.

Maybe I'm reading this decision wrong, but I'd bet secession is not going to become the panacea that some think it will.

kg

dnf777
07-31-2009, 01:58 PM
dnf, there is a HUGE difference between "secession" and "succession." Maybe Franco is more concerned about who's coming next as opposed to states withdrawing from the Union.....:cool:

kg

Exactly. That's why I put the incorrect spelling in brackets, to acknowledge it was misspelled. In no way am I trying to police grammar and spelling, I'd be out in the street if that were the case.

And Franco, don't forget that is was Jefferson, who negotiated and purchased on behalf of the United States the Louisiana Purchase from France, without consent or approval from Congress...in WHOPPING violation of the powers granted him by the Constitution. Not that it has any bearing on today's topic, but it is ironic, don't you think?

Franco
07-31-2009, 02:36 PM
Not that it has any bearing on today's topic, but it is ironic, don't you think?



Yes, ironic and though Napoleon needed the dough to fight the Brits and Prussians, all I can tell you is that French speaking Louisiana is much better off than English speaking Louisiana.;-)

I saw the latest unemployment figues last week for Acadiana and we are still below 3%, which is considered Full-Employment. This is the first market I've worked in where advertisers don't run Help Wanted advertising, no one to hire! However, when the current goobs get thier Cap N Trade going, I'm sure we will be around 20% unemployed.

dnf777
07-31-2009, 03:01 PM
Yes, ironic and though Napoleon needed the dough to fight the Brits and Prussians, all I can tell you is that French speaking Louisiana is much better off than English speaking Louisiana.;-)

I saw the latest unemployment figues last week for Acadiana and we are still below 3%, which is considered Full-Employment. This is the first market I've worked in where advertisers don't run Help Wanted advertising, no one to hire! However, when the current goobs get thier Cap N Trade going, I'm sure we will be around 20% unemployed.

Are you down on the Delta? I was in NOLA for a year, and DeRidder for two, and never had the time off to make it to Norco.

K G
07-31-2009, 03:05 PM
Exactly. That's why I put the incorrect spelling in brackets, to acknowledge it was misspelled. In no way am I trying to police grammar and spelling, I'd be out in the street if that were the case.

Nor was I. Since both words were spelled correctly where used, I was simply trying to understand the intent. I had a hunch, but then again I know what "assumption" is the mother of....;-)

kg

dnf777
07-31-2009, 04:30 PM
I just saw an interesting interview of Bobby Jindal. After bragging about how Louisiana is outperforming the rest of the country in job growth, etc...it was pointed out to him that after being one of the govs that was going to refuse the stimulus money, he took it, and used it to generate many of the jobs he's bragging about. There was an akward pause, then he pointed out that he did indeed refuse $100,000,000, and went on bragging. It was then pointed out that La accepted $3 billion (minus 100 million) for a net stimulus amount accepted of $ 2 billion, 900 million. (I know, "gotchya journalism")

BTW, I haven't seen "Bobby Jindal" on a birth certificate??!! Were both his parents born in America?? Do you have to be an American citizen to be governor of Louisiana?

Franco
07-31-2009, 07:09 PM
Are you down on the Delta? I was in NOLA for a year, and DeRidder for two, and never had the time off to make it to Norco.


I was born and raised in New Orleans. Hunted the real Mississippi delta below the city whcih still has some great waterfowling. Norco is where the New Orleans club host its trials. Deridder is near Ft Polk, not familiar with the west central part of the state. Since Katrina I've been livivng in the heart of Cajunland, Lafayette.

Gov Jindal, a huge improvement over Blanco but I don't think he could win an election for Presidnet. That's because his personality is more geek than charismatic. He did an awesome job running the state's medical system for Gov Foster. Because of his IQ, he was known as a boy genius around Baton Rouge. His parents converted to Espiscapol when they arrived here from India. I think it is cool that he has Hindu origins as I really like both the Hindu and Budhist religions. I think he would make a great VP and the man is very bright, simplifying the most challenging of problems. He was a pre-med student and was accepted by Tulane as a 15 year old! Not sure how or why he wound up in politics.

I'll add that I think he would make a great head for the Dept Of Education. Two of his very young children can perform at college level in Calculus, the third is too young.

more on B Jindal

Jindal was born in Baton Rouge on June 10, 1971. He graduated from Baton Rouge High School in 1988 and went on to attend Brown University where he graduated with honors in biology and public policy. Following his graduation from Brown he attended Oxford University in England as a Rhodes Scholar, having turned down admissions to medical and law schools at both Harvard and Yale.
In 1994, Jindal went to work for McKinsey and Company as a consultant for Fortune 500 companies before entering public service. In 1996, he was appointed Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals (DHH). There were many issues that needed resolving during his tenure, not the least of which was the growing deficit in Louisiana's Medicaid program. During Jindal's tenure as DHH Secretary, he rescued Louisiana's Medicaid program from bankruptcy, childhood immunizations increased, Louisiana ranked third best nationally in health care screenings for children, and new and expanded services for elderly and disabled persons were offered.
In 1998, Jindal was appointed Executive Director of the National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare. As Executive Director, he was responsible for the day-to-day operations of the Commission, whose work continue to be the driving force behind much of the ongoing debate on how to strengthen and improve Medicare.
At the conclusion of the Commission's work, Jindal was appointed President of the University of Louisiana System, the 16th largest higher education system in the country. While serving as President, Jindal worked to establish areas of excellence at each individual institution.
President George W. Bush appointed Jindal to serve as Assistant Secretary for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services in 2001. In that position, he served as the principal policy advisor to the Secretary of Health and Human Services. He later resigned from the position in 2003 to return to Louisiana and run for elected office for the first time. In that race, Jindal went from being a relatively unknown candidate for Governor, to receiving the most votes in the primary election and eventually 48 percent of the vote in runoff.
In 2004 he was elected to the 109th United States Congress representing the First District of Louisiana. In Congress he was elected Freshman Class President and served on the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, the House Committee on Homeland Security, and the House Committee on Resources. Bobby also served as Assistant Majority Whip. In his first term he passed a number of notable pieces of legislation and played an instrumental role in Louisiana's recovery from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. His noteworthy accomplishments include the passage of legislation to bring significant offshore energy revenues to Louisiana for the first time and legislation that keeps Federal Emergency Management Agency from taxing certain recovery grants as income.
Jindal was re-elected to Congress in 2006 with 88 percent of the vote majority.
Jindal and his wife Supriya have three young children.

dnf777
07-31-2009, 07:43 PM
I was born and raised in New Orleans. Hunted the real Mississippi delta below the city whcih still has some great waterfowling. Norco is where the New Orleans club host its trials. Deridder is near Ft Polk, not familiar with the west central part of the state. Since Katrina I've been livivng in the heart of Cajunland, Lafayette.

Gov Jindal, a huge improvement over Blanco but I don't think he could win an election for Presidnet. He did an awesome job running the state's medical system for Gov Foster. Because of his IQ, he was known as a boy genius around Baton Rouge. His parents converted to Espiscapol when they arrived here from India. I think it is cool that he has Hindu origins as I really like both the Hindu and Budhist religions. I think he would make a great VP and the man is very bright, simplifying the most challenging of problems. He was a pre-med student and was accepted by Tulane as a 15 year old! Not sure how or why he wound up in politics.

I'll add that I think he would make a great head for the Dept Of Education. Two of his very young children can perform at college level in Calculus, the third is too young.

more on B Jindal

Jindal was born in Baton Rouge on June 10, 1971. He graduated from Baton Rouge High School in 1988 and went on to attend Brown University where he graduated with honors in biology and public policy. Following his graduation from Brown he attended Oxford University in England as a Rhodes Scholar, having turned down admissions to medical and law schools at both Harvard and Yale.
In 1994, Jindal went to work for McKinsey and Company as a consultant for Fortune 500 companies before entering public service. In 1996, he was appointed Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals (DHH). There were many issues that needed resolving during his tenure, not the least of which was the growing deficit in Louisiana's Medicaid program. During Jindal's tenure as DHH Secretary, he rescued Louisiana's Medicaid program from bankruptcy, childhood immunizations increased, Louisiana ranked third best nationally in health care screenings for children, and new and expanded services for elderly and disabled persons were offered.
In 1998, Jindal was appointed Executive Director of the National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare. As Executive Director, he was responsible for the day-to-day operations of the Commission, whose work continue to be the driving force behind much of the ongoing debate on how to strengthen and improve Medicare.
At the conclusion of the Commission's work, Jindal was appointed President of the University of Louisiana System, the 16th largest higher education system in the country. While serving as President, Jindal worked to establish areas of excellence at each individual institution.
President George W. Bush appointed Jindal to serve as Assistant Secretary for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services in 2001. In that position, he served as the principal policy advisor to the Secretary of Health and Human Services. He later resigned from the position in 2003 to return to Louisiana and run for elected office for the first time. In that race, Jindal went from being a relatively unknown candidate for Governor, to receiving the most votes in the primary election and eventually 48 percent of the vote in runoff.
In 2004 he was elected to the 109th United States Congress representing the First District of Louisiana. In Congress he was elected Freshman Class President and served on the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, the House Committee on Homeland Security, and the House Committee on Resources. Bobby also served as Assistant Majority Whip. In his first term he passed a number of notable pieces of legislation and played an instrumental role in Louisiana's recovery from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. His noteworthy accomplishments include the passage of legislation to bring significant offshore energy revenues to Louisiana for the first time and legislation that keeps Federal Emergency Management Agency from taxing certain recovery grants as income.
Jindal was re-elected to Congress in 2006 with 88 percent of the vote majority.
Jindal and his wife Supriya have three young children.

He seems like a good guy. Not very polished, but not many "geniuses" are.
I just fear the treatment he will recieve from the people who name-call Obama, question his patriotism, let alone his citizenship status. I heard a woman from Ca stating emphatically that Obama is ineligible to be pres because his Dad was not born in this country??? Jindal may not have a chance.

Franco
07-31-2009, 08:41 PM
I just fear the treatment he will recieve from the people who name-call .

He has his critics here as well because he can't name the starting Defense line of the LSU Tigers and doesn't attend games.;-) However, his credentials are extremely impressive. Heck, he's only 38 years old!

Steve
08-01-2009, 12:14 AM
As a combat veteran who fought for the UNITED STATES of AMERICA, and the people who live there, I am sickened and offended by that treasonous drivel of secession. If you want to "start hearing talk of [succession]", don't call yourself an American in front of me please. Thankfully,

You don't seem to understand the concept of UNITED STATES. Each state was considered sovereign. States joined together for mutual benefit. Now we have reached a point in time that leftists and conservatives are so far apart that there is no room for compromise.

The biggest difference is that we don't need you. You are useless to us, but you need us. You need people out there being productive while you assert your right to control us.

I realize secession will not happen. It is because so many people are in the middle, i.e. apolitical or just apathetic.

Oh yeah, Jefferson also said -
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. I prefer that we just part company.

Bruce MacPherson
08-01-2009, 01:06 AM
As a combat veteran who fought for the UNITED STATES of AMERICA, (including Texas, Alaska, Louisiana, and Oklahoma) and the people who live there, I am sickened and offended by that treasonous drivel of secession. What a SHAME it comes from someone who quotes Jefferson in their autograph line. If you want to "start hearing talk of [succession]", don't call yourself an American in front of me please. Thankfully, I realize you don't represent the many good people of those states, who consider such talk anti-American and extreme radical jibberish.

And as a combat veteran that also fought for the United States of America
and who doesn't think talk of secession under this administration is particularly treasonous, get over yourself.

dnf777
08-01-2009, 06:56 AM
And as a combat veteran that also fought for the United States of America
and who doesn't think talk of secession under this administration is particularly treasonous, get over yourself.

Talk of splitting up the USA IS not only treasonous, it is STUPID. Get over yourself. As for understanding America, please! Read any account of history and see how well the South fared under secession. 'nuff said. This is getting too personal for the list. I wish this would just shut down, so I'll do my part and "part ways" as Steve. Sorry if I took this the personal route with calling secession treason, but I'm too proud of our country, ALL 50 States, to let radical extremism talk of disbanding it under the thin veil of patriotism. This country has endured many bad presidents. Overthrowing democratic elections and having break-away republics (on confederacies) is NOT the American way.

Happy training,
Dave

dnf777
08-01-2009, 07:07 AM
Steve and Bruce,

I do want to sincerely apologize for getting hot under the collar on this subject. We likely have irreconcilable differences of the ramifications and meaning of secession. I may not hate Obama as much as you guys do, but believe me, I'm no fan either. But that's why we have term limits. Our Constitution has gotten us through some pretty rough times, these notwithstanding.
Further insults or name calling serve no purpose, and I will RESPECTFULLY back out of this thread now. Hope to chat more with you guys in the RTF, on more agreeable matters,

Dave

Steve
08-01-2009, 07:43 AM
Steve and Bruce,

I may not hate Obama as much as you guys do, but believe me, I'm no fan either. But that's why we have term limits. Our Constitution has gotten us through some pretty rough times, these notwithstanding.
Dave

First off, I meant you as in the plural of leftists and not you individually.

It is not about Obama. It is about the large number of people in this country who believe in collectivism and are hostile to liberty, who believe they are enlightened and think they know what is best for me, who would call me intolerant, but are unable to see their own intolerance. These people do not believe in our Constitution.

If Obama goes away, these people will still be electing tyrants like Pelosi, Feinstein and Waxman. I do not like the direction these people are pushing our country. Unless something changes, we are heading for a tripping point where we descend into chaos or more likely we slide into a Euro style social welfare state.

YardleyLabs
08-01-2009, 07:52 AM
You don't seem to understand the concept of UNITED STATES. Each state was considered sovereign. States joined together for mutual benefit. Now we have reached a point in time that leftists and conservatives are so far apart that there is no room for compromise.

The biggest difference is that we don't need you. You are useless to us, but you need us. You need people out there being productive while you assert your right to control us.

I realize secession will not happen. It is because so many people are in the middle, i.e. apolitical or just apathetic.

Oh yeah, Jefferson also said -
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. I prefer that we just part company.
This has to be one of the most ridiculous and prejudicial comments I have read. It is equivalent to my saying that you red necks need us liberals because otherwise you're too uneducated and ignorant to know what to do to be productive.

The fact is that no one would be happier with secession than those that hate America the most. A split country, with each side trying to figure out how to organize itself while fighting off attacks from the other would either fade into economic and political obscurity or destroy the world in the process. Those with the power, if they are rational, would have to seriously consider "putting us to sleep" before we could hurt others. Beyond that, of course, is the fact that you would be hard pressed to find any state in the country where a majority of people would favor secession or even where a majority of the people would meet your definition of conservative. Presumably those people would either be forced involuntarily to become part of your rebel state or be expelled.

The issue of whether or not the United States of America is a "voluntary association" was resolved conclusively in 1863. We started as a voluntary association. However, it was an all or nothing proposition. All 13 colonies had to join to create a viable country. Since then each state had to make its own voluntary decision to join and then be accepted to be included in the country. There was never a divorce clause (not even for Texas).

Personally, I only know of one part of our laws that addresses questions of secession. It is Article 3, section 3 of the Constitution:

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."

Your quote from Jefferson came from a letter he wrote from Paris in 1787 to one William Smith. He was talking about an armed insurrection in Western Massachusetts led by Daniel Shay. Jefferson dismissed the rebellion as something that should happen every 20 years or so to refresh the spirit of liberty. That same rebellion spurred the Constitutional Convention to finish its work because of their fear that the spirit of the revolution was being lost in petty acts of anarchy that needed to be stopped.

It's interesting to note that the big push for a stronger national government came from those worried about protecting the rights of property owners from those with less. Madison famously said: "Liberty may be endangered by the abuses of liberty as well as the abuses of power." This was part of an argument for a stronger central government that would be able to put down such insurrections.

dnf777
08-01-2009, 08:12 AM
First off, I meant you as in the plural of leftists and not you individually.

I appreciate that. I didn't take it personally.

My liberal friends think I'm a conservative nut, and my conservative friends all label me as a leftie. I figure that since the truth often lies in the middle (no pun intended), I must be on to something. The important part is that we're all friends at the end of the day.

It would sure suck to need a passport to visit my friends in Texas for dove-hunting.:(

Steve Amrein
08-01-2009, 10:23 AM
I like the sound of "United States" vs something like American Union or Euro American Union. I am afraid that our current and not so distant past leaders are looking to some grand one world order that if not socialist something really close. I see all these folks talk about the right to free health care, college, and cheese. I keep trying to find tax payer bailouts in the constitution but I guess that page is missing. What ever happened to give them a fish or teach them to fish. Government in public business is far worse than religion in government. We have become servants of the government not the other way around.

Steve
08-01-2009, 12:37 PM
I already acknowledged that secession will never happen, but for the fun of it, let's pretend that 50% are capitalistic, freedom loving conservatives and 50% are progressive, left wing statists.


This has to be one of the most ridiculous and prejudicial comments I have read. It is equivalent to my saying that you red necks need us liberals because otherwise you're too uneducated and ignorant to know what to do to be productive.

That is already the way leftists think about the bulk of the people. It's why they try to use the government to bully us into behaving in the "politically correct" manner.


The fact is that no one would be happier with secession than those that hate America the most. A split country, with each side trying to figure out how to organize itself while fighting off attacks from the other would either fade into economic and political obscurity or destroy the world in the process.

I love what used to be America. I would like save at least part of it instead of watching the left turn it into another welfare state. Of course you assume there would fighting between the two. We would be happy to allow you to implement all your ideas and glady accept those who would flee to the "Capitalist Republic of America". Any lefties on our side of the border can spout whatever nonsense they like, but our constitution would protect our citizens from them.




Personally, I only know of one part of our laws that addresses questions of secession. It is Article 3, section 3 of the Constitution

The Constitution was written as a set of rules for what the Federal Government was allowed to due. Since it does not appear in the Const. (trusting your seach) then the Feds do not have the authority to stop it.

Roger Perry
08-06-2009, 11:10 AM
First off, I meant you as in the plural of leftists and not you individually.

It is not about Obama. It is about the large number of people in this country who believe in collectivism and are hostile to liberty, who believe they are enlightened and think they know what is best for me, who would call me intolerant, but are unable to see their own intolerance. These people do not believe in our Constitution.

If Obama goes away, these people will still be electing tyrants like Pelosi, Feinstein and Waxman. I do not like the direction these people are pushing our country. Unless something changes, we are heading for a tripping point where we descend into chaos or more likely we slide into a Euro style social welfare state.

When you say "these people" were you referring to the last administration where Bush said about the Constitution 'It's just a goddamned piece of paper' ?
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_7779.shtml

K G
08-06-2009, 11:30 AM
Whose actions have given more credence to the claim, Roger?

It's a shame that we have to compare them, given all the CHANGE that we were promised. Had we known what kind of CHANGE we were in for, I think it's reasonable to assume that Nov. '08 outcome might have been different.

Hoodwinked again regards,

kg

Uncle Bill
08-06-2009, 05:24 PM
Whose actions have given more credence to the claim, Roger?

It's a shame that we have to compare them, given all the CHANGE that we were promised. Had we known what kind of CHANGE we were in for, I think it's reasonable to assume that Nov. '08 outcome might have been different.

Hoodwinked again regards,

kg


As much as I would like to believe had the American people known, the outcome would have been different, I don't think so. Based on what we were given to support, I think the vast majority of conservatives had little choice in the election...kind of a deja vu for those of us that went through the Nixon/McGovern election.

What IS becoming amusing, regardless of the fall-on-the-sword liberal representation at RTF, is the witnessing of the many Obama voters, be they staunch Democrats, moderates or progressives...whatever they label themselves...that are fleeing the ship. They recognize the folley of this President's overwhelming desire to become the actual messiah he was jokingly referred to during the campaign.

Many of the people that supported him, are finally coming to their senses and realizing Obama doesn't give a damn for them...they are just the fodder for his rise to the throne. With the latest Obama invitation to rat on any American in disagreement with the messianic policies, I suspect my neighbors are reporting me at this moment.

With all the SFN crowd searching for any reason to receive the acceptance and accolades of their messiah, I'm wondering how many additional phone operators the White House has employed to keep up with this newest Obama program...RATGATE!:rolleyes:

UB

BTW, KG, have you seceded from Chattanooga and expanded your horizons?

K G
08-06-2009, 09:30 PM
As much as I would like to believe had the American people known, the outcome would have been different, I don't think so. Based on what we were given to support, I think the vast majority of conservatives had little choice in the election...kind of a deja vu for those of us that went through the Nixon/McGovern election.

Agreed. No Republican could have won this past election, except if Hillary had run...


What IS becoming amusing, regardless of the fall-on-the-sword liberal representation at RTF, is the witnessing of the many Obama voters, be they staunch Democrats, moderates or progressives...whatever they label themselves...that are fleeing the ship. They recognize the folley of this President's overwhelming desire to become the actual messiah he was jokingly referred to during the campaign.

Indeed...and mid-term elections are gearing up. We have HOPE that sanity can be returned to Congress...;-)


Many of the people that supported him, are finally coming to their senses and realizing Obama doesn't give a damn for them...they are just the fodder for his rise to the throne. With the latest Obama invitation to rat on any American in disagreement with the messianic policies, I suspect my neighbors are reporting me at this moment.

I suspect the the "payout" that they expected and haven't received will be reason enough for them to support sanity in the next election...we can HOPE, anyway...


BTW, KG, have you seceded from Chattanooga and expanded your horizons?

Not sure what you mean, Bill....

kg

Uncle Bill
08-07-2009, 12:46 PM
Just funning you KG. Your 'info' used to claim Chattanooga, but now it sez "southeast US"...thus the "expanding your horizons" bit.:D

FWIW, I always secretly wanted to live in the Michigan peninsula, then I could answer those asking me where I was from, I could say, "Uppa US" in my best Italian dialect.;-)

UB

K G
08-07-2009, 01:17 PM
Most folks know where I hail from...I just prefer to claim the region....;-)

kg