The hypocrisy of the Tenthers and states’ rights defenders
Conservative Republicans make a great show about states’ rights these days. It’s all the rage. The Tenth Amendment, they say, limits Congress to those areas in which the Constitution explicitly empowers it to act. All other responsibility resides with the states. They’re also not real happy with the way the commerce clause — in their eyes — has been stretched to apply to areas well beyond what the Founders intended, particularly health care.
Georgia’s Republican congressmen have been among those leading that charge. U.S. Reps. Phil Gingrey and Tom Price — both of whom happen to be physicians — were co-sponsors last year of a resolution declaring that “the very future of freedom and limited government depends on a restoration of American federalism and a real decentralization of government power.”
In remarks on the House floor, Gingrey has protested bitterly against a “‘Washington-knows-best’ solution and a one-size-fits-all approach,” and both men supported a new House rule requiring bill sponsors to cite a specific power enumerated in the Constitution that would authorize the proposed action.
Of course, the true test of your allegiance to principle comes not when you try to use it to restrict what the other guy does, but when you apply it to yourself. It’s all well and good to preach about the sanctity of marriage vows, for example, but the real test comes in whether you honor those vows in your own life.
So I found it interesting that earlier this week, the House Judiciary Committee decided to brush aside supposed concerns about federalism and states’ rights. By a vote of 18-15 — all Republicans for, all Democrats against — it approved a law that would directly pre-empt and override state laws and longstanding state authority and intrude on states’ rights by imposing a federal, one-size-fits-all solution.
The issue was medical malpractice, a favorite conservative cause. According to Politico, the bill in question would put a “three-year statute of limitations on medical lawsuits, cap non-economic damages at $250,000, and limit punitive damages to $250,000 or twice the economic damages, whichever is greater.”
For the moment, let’s set aside debate on the merits of the law and focus on its necessity: Why should Congress interfere in such an area, given that most medical malpractice suits are argued in state courts, under state laws? Until now, every state has had the right to decide such issues on its own. Some states have tough laws, some have more lenient laws. That’s the essence of states’ rights, as I understand it. So what’s the justification for imposing what Gingrey might call “a Washington-knows-best’ solution”?
More importantly, where exactly in the Constitution does it say that Congress shall be empowered to dictate to state governments, state courts, state judges and state juries how they should handle state cases of alleged medical malpractice? What’s the source of that federal authority? I’ve looked in my handy pocket Constitution, and I can’t find such a provision anywhere. Under conservative legal theory, it certainly can’t be the commerce clause, given that the commerce involved is strictly intra-state, not interstate. Most people do not cross state lines to get medical care.
Curious, I went digging into the Congressional Record. Under new House rules, remember, sponsors are required to cite congressional authority for their proposed bill. And sure enough, on Jan. 24, the bill’s sponsor — a “Mr. Gingrey of Georgia” — cited the commerce clause as his authority.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
494 comments Add your comment
Paulo977
February 18th, 2011
10:30 am
FIRST!!
larry
February 18th, 2011
10:31 am
But……but……………but health care reform is unconstitutional according to the same Article in the constitution.
hypocrisy, its one of the Republican platforms .
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
10:33 am
The Tenth! Almost as much fun as the Second! Let the games begin…
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
10:34 am
Jay
Remember the first rule of Logical Political Actions: It’s ok if you are a Republican!!!!!
They don’t have to follow the examples or values they preach about. They only have to pay lip service to them to get full credit with the base. It’s those darned Liberals who have to actually perform those actions to get 10% credit.
Doggone/GA
February 18th, 2011
10:34 am
“hypocrisy, its one of the Republican platforms”
Platforms? Hell, it’s their FOUNDATION
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
10:39 am
LOL @ Doggone!!!!!
stands for decibels
February 18th, 2011
10:40 am
sure enough, on Jan. 24, the bill’s sponsor — a “Mr. Gingrey of Georgia” — cited the commerce clause as his authority.
In a civilized country, this bit of information would be considered the smoking gun, the thing that made the oppo party collectively own up to how they had no case against the constitutional legality of the ACA, and they’d slither off with their tails between their legs and try to focus on some other creative means by which they could rob from the poor and give to the rich.
Peadawg
February 18th, 2011
10:46 am
“They don’t have to follow the examples or values they preach about”
I’ll take the GOP, who actually preach values, over the Dems who preach no values at all. That’s why Dems get away with a lot more in the media and whatnot. I guess you can’t be a hypocrite if you don’t have any values/morals to begin with, huh?
Haywood Jablome
February 18th, 2011
10:46 am
“the very future of freedom and limited government depends on a restoration of American federalism and a real decentralization of government power.”
OK, who ordered this steaming pile of conservative hyperbole? If you can eat the whole thing, you get another one for free!!!
Don’t worry we get plenty of steaming fresh piles several times a day. Some people just can’t get enough.
You want some tea with that?
Granny Godzilla
February 18th, 2011
10:47 am
and I should be surprised?
ah nope.
at least they remembered to note the constitutional authority on this one…the house has missed a couple of those already this session.
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
10:48 am
“Woe unto you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows’ houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.”
(Matthew 23:14)
Didn’t say whether he was talking about Democrats or Republicans…hmmmm
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
10:49 am
No Peadawg — it’s not that Dems have no values, it’s that they don’t feel it is their place to impose their beliefs on others as is a favorite activity of the GOP.
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
10:52 am
….or in other words Peadawg, the Democrats, unlike the GOP, actually espouse to keep government out of our personal lives…something, again, the hypocrites in the GOP like to preach about, but their actions prove otherwise.
Paulo977
February 18th, 2011
10:53 am
Interesting unreported ‘bit’ of news
http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/investing/philly-fed-survey-recovery-taking-hold/19848790/
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
10:54 am
“More importantly, where exactly in the Constitution does it say that Congress shall be empowered to dictate to state governments, state courts, state judges and state juries how they should handle state cases of alleged medical malpractice? What’s the source of that federal authority? I’ve looked in my handy pocket Constitution, and I can’t find such a provision anywhere. ”
No such language exists, Jay. Neither did any such language exist to allow for Social Security, Medicare, etc, etc, etc.
You LIBS opend up this Pandora’s box. You went and made health care a NATIONAL issue, and now you have to live with the consequences of that overreach by having the adults fix your mess. Plus, each individual state got involved with setting insurance winners and losers by restricting who can and cannot sell insurance in a given state, and have also contributed to the mess.
It’s now four states and counting as to those who now refuse to abide by Obamacare, and the DOJ is now asking the judge to clarify his decision in Florida as to the scope of his ruling, which will likely cause an injuction being placed ON THE WHOLE BILL.
You’ve got states making their own laws when the Feds won’t enforce their own, and you have governors telling the President to butt-out of state’s business.
The re-emergence of state supremacy over the Federal government has begun, and it can only lead to a better America for those who value freedom and liberty.
Keep up the good fight!
February 18th, 2011
10:54 am
So when do the Republican governors sue to stop this?
stands for decibels
February 18th, 2011
10:55 am
Haywood @ 10.46, your post reminded me of this oldie-but-goodie…
Peadawg
February 18th, 2011
10:55 am
Bosch @ 10:49
Ah ok, thanks for clearing that up for me.
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
10:55 am
“or in other words Peadawg, the Democrats, unlike the GOP, actually espouse to keep government out of our personal lives”
Just not our wallets . . .
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
10:56 am
Peadawg,
You’re welcome….somebody has to.
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
10:57 am
Dave R.,
Again, it’s about personal responsibility…everybody gets sick, everybody should pay for it, not just those who have insurance.
Jimmy62
February 18th, 2011
10:58 am
The Dems have made health care a national thing controlled by Congress. In order to fix the problems the Dems created, the GOP has to resort to measures it would prefer not to use. But since the Dems made a mess at the Federal level, the only way to fix it is also at the Federal level, and tort reform, if done correctly, can help control rising health care costs brought on by various regulations, and the chaos the Dems have made of the entire sector.
Joe the Plutocrat
February 18th, 2011
10:58 am
as I said yesterday, the Constitution itself is one big “loophole”. plutocracy in action.
Keep up the good fight!
February 18th, 2011
10:59 am
You LIBS opend up this Pandora’s box. You went and made health care a NATIONAL issue, and now you have to live with the consequences of that overreach by having the adults fix your mess
So how exactly are the “adults” fixing this with this federal bill also citing the commerce clause…and do try to be precise without the rant.
larry
February 18th, 2011
11:00 am
Health care is a national issue , is it not? Don’t everyone use and consume health care ? That makes it part of interstate commerce. And makes it constitutional.
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
11:00 am
What was it Paracelsus said when informed that he had been excommunicated by the Pope
AND Luther, “The Pope and Luther discussing theology is like two wh*res discussing chastity.”
Welcome to a slow day here at Belle Watling’s…
Jimmy62
February 18th, 2011
11:01 am
Bosch: The Dems don’t want to impose their beliefs one others? What country have you been living in? Conservatives don’t believe in paying the way of failures, yet the Dems forced us to pay for the failures of GM, Chrysler, and millions of homeowners around the country.
And while I can’t say I disagree with certain other things the Dems have forced on everyone else, the list is a mile long.
Tommy Maddox
February 18th, 2011
11:02 am
Dr. Gingrey is probably already aware that the medical mal caps in Georgia were struck down by the State Supreme Court. This tort reform business propped up by the party of my choice does nothing but interfere with a jury’s right to decide [and a litigant's right to trial so as to obtain] an appropriate damage award.
Hy Dr. Gingrey – you cannot put a limiting price tag on the value someone’s sight, the ability to play ball with your sons, or the ability to walk your daughter down the aisle.
Dusty
February 18th, 2011
11:02 am
Well well, Bookman throws down the glove demanding a fight but the glove is worn thin. Muskets or rusty swords?
How many time can you call a Republican the ugliest name you know and expect it to sound fresh? Doesn’t work any more. Worn out! Tattered! Dirt stained and pitiful!
I’d rather play with Watson. But even he can’t make biscuits without a recipe I hold up my floured hands to prove it. So squeal away, my fine friends. We’ll get 500 echoes here all repeating the same thing and making Bookman happy..
A pox on hypocrisy, you ol repeaters. Go bite a biscuit. At least you’ll be nourished instead of smothered with repetitious insults…
Doggone/GA
February 18th, 2011
11:03 am
“Just not our wallets . . .”
Republicans start two wars, keep the cost off the books, “pay for it” with a tax cut and then institute our largest ever “borrow and spend” programs…but it’s DEMS who are “in” your wallet? Guess again.
Peadawg
February 18th, 2011
11:04 am
Larry,
What would stop the gov’t from mandating we all buy a car from GM to help them recover??? What’s to stop the gov’t from mandating we all get a loan from, say Wells Fargo, if they’re in trouble? Mandating health care is opening pandora’s box that doesn’t need to be opened.
larry
February 18th, 2011
11:04 am
Tommy Maddox
February 18th, 2011
11:02 am
Agree………agree……………agree
Jerry Grillo
February 18th, 2011
11:06 am
Ah yes, Gingrey and Price, two “doctors” who took the hypocritical oath.
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:07 am
Jimmy,
Those “beliefs” have been paid back. Your point?
larry
February 18th, 2011
11:07 am
Do people die if they dont buy a car from GM or get a loan from Wells Fargo ? No they dont. Do they die if they do not use and consume health care? yes they do.
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:09 am
Peadawg,
Stay away from the slippery slope — not everybody has to have a car, everybody does get sick — you’re comparing apples to oranges — one of your strong suits.
Joe
February 18th, 2011
11:09 am
Jay nailed it.
And it’s exactly the same with the Republican’s only other health care “solution”—allowing insurance companies to sell across state lines. That proposal would essentially be the federal government telling elected officials at the state level that they can’t regulate health insurance companies that are selling coverage in their respective states.
Whether you agree with these proposals or not, the states’ rights crowd is for states’ rights—except when they’re not.
Peadawg
February 18th, 2011
11:10 am
larry, lol your argument doesn’t make any sense. My point was what is stopping the gov’t from mandating us to buy ANY private product if they can just sight the commerce clause and vuala! you have to have to buy so-and-so product or pay a fine?
Some People are stupid
February 18th, 2011
11:12 am
Jimmy62-
Conservatives don’t believe in paying the way of failures, yet the Dems forced us to pay for the failures of GM, Chrysler, and millions of homeowners around the country
So I guess you are conveniently forgetting about the Bank Bailout pushed by Bush…
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:13 am
“My point was what is stopping the gov’t from mandating us to buy ANY private product if they can just sight the commerce clause and vuala! you have to have to buy so-and-so product or pay a fine?”
Your point might be valid if at anytime in the history of this country, the government has forced people to buy a product from a particular company, which, to my knowledge has never happened.
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
11:13 am
Peadawg
So, I can count you as one of those who enjoys getting smoke blown up the anal orifice…
joe
February 18th, 2011
11:15 am
Unions are just like herpes…don’t want them, but if you live a lifestyle where you happen to be inflicted, they are impossible to get rid of.
Dusty
February 18th, 2011
11:16 am
There they go…”Republicans start two wars”……….Oh yeah, …skip over Congress led by Democrats who approved those “two wars” and blame it on …..THE REPUBLCIANS!!!! Hot dog Go for it with mustard, onions, chili and the whole works.!
Oh lal lalalala na nana na na Dems were made in heaven. Republicans were sent from ……U know where!!!! Repetition, thy name is LIBBY DEM!
larry
February 18th, 2011
11:17 am
My argument makes plenty of sense………….. everyone in this country is a user of the health care system in this country, one way or the other everyone pays for the use of the health care in this country.
Whether they go to the dr.’s office or the emergency room, everyone pays, including me and you.
Peadawg
February 18th, 2011
11:18 am
Bosch, see my 11:10.
“you’re comparing apples to oranges — one of your strong suits.” – LOL nope. I’m not one of the ones that brings up car insurance when talking about hc mandate.
Jimmy62
February 18th, 2011
11:18 am
Some people: Not at all. I was very against that, as were a lot of conservatives. You might have noticed a little thing called the Tea Party, launched as a reaction against all the bailouts?
My point is that it’s completely inane for someone like Bosch to say that the Democrats don’t try to force their beliefs on others. I agree with the results, but what was the civil rights movement, other than trying to force their beliefs on others? The gay rights/marriage movement? Pro-choice movement?
Never once did I say conservatives don’t do that, too. My point was simply that Bosch’s statement showed a lot of ignorance, and that Democrats over and over and over again try to force their beliefs on the rest of us.
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:19 am
No, Peadawg but you bring up red herrings that make no sense when talking about the health care mandate.
Do you have health insurance now? If so, why do you like paying for others health care costs? If not, then you are free loading off mine — so, stop it.
Doggone/GA
February 18th, 2011
11:20 am
“skip over Congress led by Democrats who approved those “two wars”
History isn’t your strong suit, is it? Congress was not “led” by the Dems in 2001. Yes, some of them voted approval for the “Use of Force Authorization” and I have spit on them here repeatedly for doing so.
Peadawg
February 18th, 2011
11:20 am
“Your point might be valid if at anytime in the history of this country, the government has forced people to buy a product from a particular company, which, to my knowledge has never happened.” – You’re correct. This hasn’t happened in history…..until now. So again, what’s to stop Obama from doing this again for something else? Like I said… Pandora’s box shouldn’t be opened.
Left wing management
February 18th, 2011
11:21 am
Tom Price?
Phil Gingrey?
Are you friggin kidding me?
Say, it possible to be white-skinned and get elected to office in this state without being a neo-cracker who’d be a great extra on the set of Matlock?
Whatever comes out of these neo-crackers’ mouths when they open them don’t mean diddly, to quote one of those other candidates for national office who sounds like a character on The Andy Griffith Show.
Peadawg
February 18th, 2011
11:21 am
Obama’s the one on the slippery slope here, Boschy. Not I.
Jimmy62
February 18th, 2011
11:22 am
Joe : No one said states can’t regulate insurance within their own state. Merely that people should have the right to buy their insurance in a different state if they don’t like the restrictions or requirements their own state has put on insurance.
But hey, thanks for going out of your way to really understand what you are attempting to criticize.
Doggone/GA
February 18th, 2011
11:23 am
“hasn’t happened in history…..until now.”
Except that even “now” no one is being forced to buy from a PARTICULAR COMPANY.
And, personally, I was against that also. I thought, and still think, they should have passed it as a tax for Single Payer healthcare.
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:23 am
“You’re correct. This hasn’t happened in history…..until now.”
When has it happened? When were you forced to buy a product from a one particular customer?
Peadawg
February 18th, 2011
11:24 am
“Except that even “now” no one is being forced to buy from a PARTICULAR COMPANY.” – LOL, no but a particular product….same difference We can go back and forth all day correcting each other like this but y’all get my point.
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:25 am
“and still think, they should have passed it as a tax for Single Payer healthcare.”
Yeap, me too.
Peadawg
February 18th, 2011
11:25 am
Again, Bosch…see my 11:24. Particular product, particular company, same thing smartass.
Left wing management
February 18th, 2011
11:25 am
Whatever comes out of the mouths of neo-crackers like Price and Ginrgrey don’t mean diddly, to quote the honourable Mistah Bahbaaah.
And it don’t mean diddly cause to know what does mean diddly we gotsta follow the moolah. Say it, Lil’ Barry: moooooo -lah. You gotsta follow the mooolah that’s being funneled from the pillagers of our public good to the back pockets of the neo-crackers in the South and their fellow travelers in neo-Confederate sites like New Jersey and now Wisconsin.
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:26 am
“no but a particular product….same difference”
No, Peadawg, it’s not. No one if FORCING you to buy insurance from one particular company — like your “forcing a loan from Wells Fargo” example a bit ago.
Back peddling is NOT your strong suit. Just admit you were wrong and move along.
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:27 am
“Again, Bosch…see my 11:24. Particular product, particular company, same thing smartass.”
Again, dumbass, no it’s not. No one is forcing you to buy insurance from a particular company.
jt
February 18th, 2011
11:28 am
“More importantly, where exactly in the Constitution does it say that Congress shall be empowered to dictate to state governments, state courts, state judges and state juries how they should handle state cases of alleged medical malpractice?”
It doesn’t.
That doesn’t stop the moochers and political leaches that started Medicaide.\
Lay down with dogs, you’ll get fleas.
Mr. Gingrey will soon get a clue. …..nullification.
100 million+ other Americans already have. Tell the federalies what to do.
So be it.
Peadawg
February 18th, 2011
11:29 am
” No one is forcing you to buy insurance from a particular company.” – Nope but they’re forcing us to buy a private product, PERIOD. Good grief man you make my fcking head hurt. You can argue with a brick wall…..
Tommy Maddox
February 18th, 2011
11:29 am
LWM – who are you referring to as crackers?
Normal
February 18th, 2011
11:29 am
Paulo…Interesting article indeed, and on President Obama’s watch too
————————-
Josef,
history question from downstairs…the only thing I could come up with was the publishing of “Huckleberry Finn” and we know where that leads…oy.
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:30 am
“Nope but they’re forcing us to buy a private product”
But that’s not what you said earlier — so, in other words, I’m right.
Normal
February 18th, 2011
11:32 am
Remember folks…Stressed spelled backwards is dessert. There! Tranquility in tortes…
Peadawg
February 18th, 2011
11:33 am
“But that’s not what you said earlier” – Alright and I apologize for not spelling it out for you, punkin. I’ll know next time that you can’t interpret something and must argue over the wording of a comment instead of getting overall point.
Dusty
February 18th, 2011
11:33 am
So, Doggone (11:20) “spits on Democrats” who voted for the conflicts that followed 9/11. They were patriots who did what they found to be the correct move, just a the president did.
Ah, what outreach and compatibiity we find here. Keep spitting , Doggone, ’cause there are going to be a lot of things you don’t like coming up. That’s your way to help things along in this country. Just spit on those you disagree with. Mighty fine! Even Bookman had not thought of that one.
catlady
February 18th, 2011
11:33 am
How many times have our two legislators been sued for malpractice? And how much awarded?
Normal
February 18th, 2011
11:34 am
I heard that the Democrats left Wisconsin to avoid the vote on the union busting law…Good-O! But didn’t the Democrats try that in Texas back when G. W. Bush was Govenor?
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:35 am
Peadawg,
What you wrote was that the government was going to force you to buy a particular product from a particular company — I’m sorry that your too embarrassed to admit your stupid.
George Watson
February 18th, 2011
11:36 am
From the mind of one more capable – it all starts with the individual:
Every individual needs revolution, inner division, overthrow of the existing order, and renewal, but not by forcing them upon his neighbors under the hypocritical cloak of Christian love or the sense of social responsibility or any of the other beautiful euphemisms for unconscious urges to personal power (Jung, 1966:5).
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:37 am
And Peadawg, you never answered my question:
Do you have health insurance? If so, why do you like paying for the health care of others that don’t? I certainly do not.
Tommy Maddox
February 18th, 2011
11:37 am
Now I am confused.
catlady
February 18th, 2011
11:38 am
Enter your comments here
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
11:38 am
“They were patriots who did what they
foundthought to be the correct move, just a the president did.”Left wing management
February 18th, 2011
11:38 am
Tommy Maddox: “LWM – who are you referring to as crackers?”
This morning I heard the honorable Tom Price of Georgia on NPR and it struck me: how cracker-like this conservative mentality that’s got hold of folks down here.
I don’t go for it.
jm
February 18th, 2011
11:38 am
Glad you called them to the mat Jay. They deserve it. Hypocrisy is a common affliction among politicians.
thomas
February 18th, 2011
11:38 am
Enter your comments here
Normal
February 18th, 2011
11:39 am
Dusty,
how many times must you be told that they were voting on lies. If they had had the whole truth, not a Democrat would have voted for the war and four thousand, five hundred plus Children of America would still be alive and over twenty thousand would still have their arms and legs.
Bush lied and our kids died…period.
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:39 am
No thomas, I am entering my comments in the box.
George W
February 18th, 2011
11:39 am
Jay….not very interesting topics today sir.
Peadawg
February 18th, 2011
11:40 am
Alright Boschy, remove the words “GM” and “Wells Fargo”.
What would stop the gov’t from mandating we all buy a car??? What’s to stop the gov’t from mandating we all get a loan? Mandating health care is opening pandora’s box that doesn’t need to be opened.
God this is sad that I actually had to spell it out for you…..
Left wing management
February 18th, 2011
11:40 am
jt 11:28: “That doesn’t stop the moochers and political leaches that started Medicaide.”
Moochers. Political leachers of the world. Unite.
Just try putting your foot on that third rail, traveler. You won’t move from the spot.
Tommy Maddox
February 18th, 2011
11:41 am
I remember when the Crackers used to play across the street from Sears.
jm
February 18th, 2011
11:41 am
or here.
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
11:41 am
left wing
@ 11:21
You’ve got some serious bigotries and prejudices and the expression in such terms as these make it difficult to take what else you might have to say seriously…you might want to curb your enthusiasm!
Normal…
Jefferson Davis took the oat of office of Presidency of the Confederate States of America…APS gave me the day off! Gotta work Monday though. Fifth columnist secessionists, they are!
moonbat betty
February 18th, 2011
11:41 am
We have to pay for health insurance and pension and we’re mad as hell!
thomas
February 18th, 2011
11:41 am
Everyone may get sick….
But everyone does not go to the doctor….. Not just because of religous beliefs, some just choose not to go. And choose to spend their money in another area of their life.
Why should they not be allowed to choose?
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:42 am
Again, Peadawg, you are bringing in red herrings. God, I’m so sad that you don’t know what that is.
“What would stop the gov’t from mandating we all buy a car??? What’s to stop the gov’t from mandating we all get a loan?”
Because we are not biologically conditioned to need cars or loans, but we are all biologically conditioned to get sick — and personally, I’m tired of paying for those who free load off my insurance.
thomas
February 18th, 2011
11:42 am
I honestly have no idea how that happened!
I just checked in on the new topic for 1st time, hit refresh and bam there i was demanding comments!
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:43 am
“Why should they not be allowed to choose?”
Because they choose to live in this country.
Peadawg
February 18th, 2011
11:44 am
“Do you have health insurance? If so, why do you like paying for the health care of others that don’t?”
Yes. I don’t. See, the hc mandate sounds all nice in theory, but when you start saying that the people of this great country HAVE to buy insurance or pay fine…you getting too close to communism. I know some GOPers like to throw that word around a lot(and y’all on here know me and know that I’m not one of those) and most of the time it’s unjustified but when it comes to this hc mandate, it’s justified.
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
11:44 am
Tommy
A friend of mine from North Florida says she’s a Matzoh, a Jewish Cracker!
thomas
February 18th, 2011
11:45 am
Does anyone Know what a “Cracker-like” mentality is?
ANYONE?
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:45 am
thomas,
“there i was demanding comments”
Left wing management
February 18th, 2011
11:45 am
josef nix: “You’ve got some serious bigotries and prejudices and the expression in such terms as these make it difficult to take what else you might have to say seriously…”
Nope. Ain’t bigotry when it’s aimed at neo-crackers and cracker apologists (like jt). It’s good sense!
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:45 am
“Does anyone Know what a “Cracker-like” mentality is?”
Not sure, but I’m sure salt is involved somehow.
Peadawg
February 18th, 2011
11:45 am
“Because we are not biologically conditioned to need cars or loans”
Woosh. That’s the sound of the point STILL going right over your head.
Tommy Maddox
February 18th, 2011
11:46 am
Oh now that makes perfect sense.
thomas
February 18th, 2011
11:47 am
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:43 am
Easy now Bosch,
Are you saying by choosing to live here you give up the right to any other choices that go against the majority?
Especially personal choices like my Personal health care.
Now I know you would not be claiming that, but wanted to inform you that there is going to be someone to accuse you of that very thing.
Peadawg
February 18th, 2011
11:47 am
““Does anyone Know what a “Cracker-like” mentality is?”” – Sorry if this sounds racist, but I would probably guess it the white-equivalent of a “n-word-like” mentality.
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:47 am
“Yes. I don’t.”
????????
“but when you start saying that the people of this great country HAVE to buy insurance or pay fine…you getting too close to communism.”
Oh save me the melodrama. The government tells people they have to do alot of things.
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:48 am
thomas,
No, but if it is the law of the land, and you live in that land, then you abide by that law.
thomas
February 18th, 2011
11:49 am
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:45 am
“Does anyone Know what a “Cracker-like” mentality is?”
Not sure, but I’m sure salt is involved somehow
I hope sodium free!
I don’t drink enough water in the winter and affraid I may have a cracker-like mentality
Moderate Line
February 18th, 2011
11:49 am
Ok. Let’s say Republicans are hypocrits on the Federal vs States power issue. Now look at the impact of malpractice lawsuits. According to an article by AP at least 20% of test are motivated by protecting the doctor from lawsuits.
Defensive imaging accounted for 20 percent of total tests — 11 percent of X-rays, 38 percent of MRIs, 33 percent of CT scans, 57 percent of bone scans and 53 percent of ultrasounds.
Defensive medicine also accounted for 35 percent of costs, nearly all of it from MRIs.
One example: a torn meniscus, a knee cartilage injury that is a leading reason for knee surgery. Studies have shown that a doctor’s judgment based on symptoms and an exam is even better than an MRI to diagnose the condition. Yet patients hardly ever go to surgery without having the imaging test, Flynn said.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110216/ap_on_he_me/us_med_medical_tests_malpractice
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:49 am
Peadawg,
It’s not that I don’t get your point, it’s that your point is stupid and makes no sense to anyone with a functioning brain.
buck@gon
February 18th, 2011
11:50 am
Memo To Jay Jay “Binks” Bookman
From CC Tucker
Hey Buddy, It’s the weekend!! Hadn’t sent you a memo all week & wanted to let my bosses know I’m just doin’ my job, ya know?
Wheeehoooo! You going down to Tongue & Groove for some suds. Wait for me. Black girl gotta get her hair done!
I LOVE this weather and the word hipocrisy. I just LOVE that word when you use it. It keeps ‘em off guard, you know.
It’s the spending Jay Jay. We need to let HIM do what he has to do to get the country back on track. It’s up to HIM, and all we need is a little more money and time. We can’t let Congress get a foothold. This isn’t about money at all. It’s about hypocrisy (how do you spell that word anyway?) and who do you trust, you know? I mean who are you going to trust, Jay Jay? The first historical President we’re all proud of for the first time ever, or some guys who don’t even do what they say they do?
Love ya,
Hugs, xoxo
CC
thomas
February 18th, 2011
11:50 am
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:48 am
Not true!!!!!!
You don’t obey the law of the land……..
What you got about another 4 hours and 40 minutes???????
getalife
February 18th, 2011
11:51 am
“Pandora’s box shouldn’t be opened.”
cons finally got one right.
This is very rare .
Normal
February 18th, 2011
11:52 am
Josef,
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:52 am
thomas @ 11:50 — maybe I haven’t had enough water today, but huh??
Left wing management
February 18th, 2011
11:52 am
What’s a cracker-like mentality?
It’s the thinking of a middle-aged white man who drivers a beat up car with a ‘Bush/Cheney’ sticker on federal highways paid for in previous generations through the very taxpayer supported programs he’s now told to denounce, which he does dutifully.
It’s the thinking of a state lawmaker who attempts to stop implementation of a health reform plan, which itself is a Republican plan, at his state border, claiming that it’s an encroachment of federal powers on his state’s affairs, meanwhile he has no intention of doing anything about the uninsured.
Stuff like that, you know ..
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
11:52 am
See, the hc mandate sounds all nice in theory, but when you start saying that the people of this great country HAVE to buy insurance or pay fine…you getting too close to communism.
So, instead of having everyone pay for their own insurance, you would rather have moochers riding your insurance policy and forcing you to pay more. Ok……
Peadawg
February 18th, 2011
11:52 am
““Yes. I don’t.”
????????”
Alright Bosch, now I’m just feeling sorry for you. I’ll spell it out for you:
“Do you have health insurance?” – Yes.
“If so, why do you like paying for the health care of others that don’t?” – I don’t.
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
11:53 am
Left wing
just go back and insert “Ch*nk,” “Y*d,” “Sp*ck,” “W-p,” “R*ghead” or what have you and see what it comes off as…
You’re simply trying to rationalize your own bigotries and prejudices and, as I said, it weakens your arguments…
George W
February 18th, 2011
11:53 am
THANK JEHOVAH FOR THE CRAKER LIKE MENTALITY!!!
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:53 am
““If so, why do you like paying for the health care of others that don’t?” – I don’t”
I’m really sorry to have to be the one to tell you this Peadawg, but yes, you do.
jt
February 18th, 2011
11:54 am
“Nope. Ain’t bigotry when it’s aimed at neo-crackers and cracker apologists (like jt). It’s good sense!”
I’m alright with being called a “cracker” by a collectivist. In fact, I relish the disdain.
It just shows that I am on the right side of decency……Not unlike the Democrats in Wisconsin. If you have to FLEE, then you are definetly not on the right side of decency.
jm
February 18th, 2011
11:54 am
The stock market has to be one of the coolest things ever. All started under a buttonwood tree…. thank heavens for buttonwood.
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:55 am
Peadawg,
Sorry, I might have misinterpreted your response — when you wrote “I don’t” — did that mean you don’t LIKE paying for it, or that you simply think that you don’t pay for it.
Because you do pay for it.
Dusty
February 18th, 2011
11:55 am
SoCo & Normal,
Retrospect is just fine . But you cannot change history. In the time after 9/11, the information from our best security people, the CIA & British Intel, all led to the same conclusion. Saddam had wmds and was a threat. If all that info was incorrect, nobody knew differently. Our leaders were not ready to let this country be attacked. They decided on prevention.
Now, YOU THINK YOU KNOW BETTER. We do. But that is long after the fact. LONG AFTER THE FACT.
Don’t bother to tell me about the horrors of war. I already know about them.. Every generation of my family has had members in the military including my father, my husband and my son. They served because they loved this country.
If you want to run down our former president and people who served, you can do it. But you disgrace your country after serving yourself in conflicts we have fought in. Why you want to do that may be from personal discomfort. Whatever. But I will not change history for your convenience.
George W
February 18th, 2011
11:55 am
jt…..amen brother.
Peadawg
February 18th, 2011
11:57 am
“I’m really sorry to have to be the one to tell you this Peadawg, but yes, you do.” – Mind reader in the house!!!! LOL!
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:58 am
Peadawg,
No, it’s not mind reading, if you have health insurance — as it stands now, you pay for the health care of those that don’t. Again, sorry to have to break that news to you buddy.
Peadawg
February 18th, 2011
11:59 am
“did that mean you don’t LIKE paying for it” – You asked if I Iike paying for others’ insurance and I said I don’t. Sorry I didn’t spell it out again, I keep forgetting. I don’t like. Better?
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
11:59 am
Hey Dusty!
“If all that info was incorrect, nobody knew differently”
Except all the people who were saying that it was incorrect.
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
12:00 pm
jt
O-si-yo!
Don’t necessarily bother me when somebody calls me a Cracker, a Y-d, a F-g, or whatever, just depends on the mentality prompting it…left wing is just an u-ne-ga duk-sha-ni
George W
February 18th, 2011
12:01 pm
Josef…..that was great hahaha.
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
12:02 pm
Yes, Peadawg, that’s better. So, you don’t like paying for the health care of moochers who get free health care and those costs get passed along to health insurance companies, like yours, for example, but your okay with that? You don’t mind paying for that?
Gee, I thought you were all about personal responsibility and all that, but if you LIKE paying for others health care while they pay nothing, then well, okay…..
Left wing management
February 18th, 2011
12:04 pm
jt: “I’m alright with being called a “cracker” by a collectivist. In fact, I relish the disdain.”
Oooh, nice Roosevelt paraphrase. Touche (but only in form, not content).
Dudley (can the people on tv see me?)
February 18th, 2011
12:07 pm
Why is it ok for black people to call a white person a cracker
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
12:07 pm
Dusty
No matter what Intel said about Hussein, he had nothing to do with Saudi Nationals flying planes into buildings and killing Americans. The appropriate response for 9/11 should have been Tomahawk cruise missiles and B-52’s flattening out any part of Afghanistan/Pakistan where AQ had training camps. We didn’t need boots on the ground, and we didn’t need to take out Saddam.
No amount of revisionism or rhetoric will change my perception on that. Instead of swiftly and decisively punishing those who attacked us, we flailed out like two females fighting using the old windmill fighting style. Instead of precision and decisiveness, we got 10+ years of needless war.
Peadawg
February 18th, 2011
12:07 pm
“Gee, I thought you were all about personal responsibility and all that” – Oh I am punkin. But mandating that everyone must buy insurance or pay a fine is going down what you would, a slippery slope. I also don’t like moochers on food stamps, Medicaid, etc but they don’t seem to bother the left too much.
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
12:07 pm
jt
You can’t join the Cracker club…you have to be white for that…didn’t you get the memo?
getalife
February 18th, 2011
12:07 pm
“Now, YOU THINK YOU KNOW BETTER. We do. But that is long after the fact. LONG AFTER THE FACT”
Dusty,
You were de ad wrong.
Get over it and move forward..
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
12:08 pm
Dudley
It’s not…
getalife
February 18th, 2011
12:08 pm
White powder!
Snort!.
Dudley (can the people on tv see me?)
February 18th, 2011
12:08 pm
SoCo @ 12:07
Love that analogy
Normal
February 18th, 2011
12:09 pm
Dusty,
all I have to say is God love you.
My point is merely this. I want to save American lives and they were wasted. Young men and women who no longer get to live the American Dream. The CIA and British Intelligence were knowingly feeding misinformation to the public as it was later revealed. There was NO reason for the war ON Iraq other than a Teas village idiots delusion. There could have been a should have been further investigation. The Inspectors were already saying there was nothing there. We should have been more thorough.
No Dusty, I do not disgrace my Country, you do. By keeping your head in the sand and repeating the lies, you, ma’am, disgrace the country and all of the young men and women who gave their lives for the lie.
Dudley (can the people on tv see me?)
February 18th, 2011
12:09 pm
Getalife
Share????
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
12:10 pm
SoCo
@ 12:08
Beat me to it…
getalife
George W
February 18th, 2011
12:10 pm
Normal…..I served in Iraq. You are the disgrace.
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
12:10 pm
“I also don’t like moochers on food stamps, Medicaid, etc but they don’t seem to bother the left too much.”
But you are okay with moochers who have a more direct effect on your personal expenses, something that costs you hundreds of dollars, as opposed to a few bucks a year (the food stamp Medicaid folks). Okay, dude, whatever floats your boat.
getalife
February 18th, 2011
12:10 pm
“Share????”
Socialist.
jt
February 18th, 2011
12:11 pm
Left wing management-
In closing, I don’t hold nothing agin ya.
If I felt like you did…………………….that everything cool in the world was only because of the federalies or some union…………………..then I would insult individuals too.
For some people it DOES take the collective intelligence to lead a good life.
For most, we do it on our own…
Your intelligence quota is not your fault….and it is your right to pool your intelligence with everyone else that wants too……..It ISN’T your right to pool everyone’s wealth………..and I love you just the same.
May the State reign down upon you the blessings that you percieve that it can, and may the more intelligent among us not have to listen to you biatch when reality rears its beautiful head.
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
12:11 pm
Later folks! Off to lunch…..
MiltonMan
February 18th, 2011
12:12 pm
hypocrisy? You want hypocrisy – how about Obama praising Egyptians protestors as peaceful but bashing tea party members are racists? No mention of the chosen one on speaking out about the rumors of Wisconsin protestors siptting on people??? The clown president was all over the tea party members on rumors of shouting racial garbage.
How about the Hildabeast in a recent speech about how good it is to protest but during that speech an American vet was hauled out for his silent protest.
Funny to see Jay & his lemmings on here complaining about the republicans yet their foundation is on sinking ground.
Good to see the demorats in this state further & further slide into nothing more than a 3rd party.
jt
February 18th, 2011
12:13 pm
josef nix
I pass for white……………
.
.
when and if I want to .
Dudley (can the people on tv see me?)
February 18th, 2011
12:13 pm
Getalife
Lmfao
MiltonMan
February 18th, 2011
12:15 pm
Normal – sitting on his high thrown just like his man Obama. Hey Normal, you doing anything to close out this war other than post garbage??? Your man told us that he would end the war within 16 months of taking office.
Also, gas is 3+ dollars, who are you libtards going to blame on this?
Peadawg
February 18th, 2011
12:15 pm
Bosch, the day liberals say do away with welfare and entitlements that taxpayers pay for, I’ll be on board with y’all on the health insurance mandate. Deal?
Paulo977
February 18th, 2011
12:15 pm
Doggone..”, they should have passed it as a tax for Single Payer healthcare.” Oh definitely. Unfortunately we as a nation don’t seem to have arrived at the collective consciousness that the total wellbeing of a people is secured when ALL are well serviced !!!
Mr_B
February 18th, 2011
12:16 pm
Jimmy62: Malpractice cost are only a tiny fraction of healthcare spending; less than 1% according to the CBO. And how is tort reform, which only applies to malpractise cases, going to affect the rise in health care costs “brought on by various regulations” as you claim?Georgia managed to institute it’s own caps and so could any other state that felt the need to.
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
12:16 pm
Bosch
See my 11:52
Dudley
That’s the best way to describe what we did. We knew who attacked us on 9/11, and we knew where they trained. We have guided munitions that can almost ring the doorbell before entering the house and decimating the whole damned building. There was, and still is, no reason to have troops on the ground. There are Afghani’s who have no idea of what happened here on 9/11/2001, and it’s been almost 10 whole years. We shouldn’t be bothering innocent civilians. We should have responded quickly and struck with a blow strong enough to let everyone know not to fu*k with us again. Instead, we’re stuck in two countries with no possibility of complete exit before the year 2100.
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 18th, 2011
12:18 pm
Jay:
Serious questions:
1) The language in any Amendment to the Constitution is just as valid as any language in the main body of the text ………………. true or false?
2) What is the purpose of the 10th Amendment?
3) Can you name me just “one” thing in the 10th Amendment to the Constitution that positively and absolutely prohibits federal government involvement ?
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
12:18 pm
jt
I want to see your CDWB card!
Jimmy62
February 18th, 2011
12:20 pm
Why hasn’t Obama shut down Guantanamo as he promised? Why hasn’t he pulled our troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan? Why did it take till Congress was taken over by the GOP to end the Patriot Act?
These are all things that were so important during the campaign, and now the Dems don’t want to talk about them because they know that either Obama is a liar, or that Obama realized Bush was right, and that things are a little more complicated than the left likes to portray.
It’s easier to call the GOP a bunch of names than face the truth.
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 18th, 2011
12:20 pm
Question for all out there:
Do you think it should be legal for demonstrators to demonstrate in front of or picket someone’s private residence ?
getalife
February 18th, 2011
12:20 pm
The first illegal immigrants in our country was the pale face better known as white flower.
The real nativists own the Casinos.
Dudley (can the people on tv see me?)
February 18th, 2011
12:20 pm
SoCo
I agree totally, how many times did they show missiles hitting targets such as front doors, moving vehicles and such. Shoulda just leveled the mountains of Afghanistan and been done with it!
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
12:20 pm
SoCo
@ 12:16
Yep.
Left wing management
February 18th, 2011
12:21 pm
jt: ” ……..and I love you just the same.”
Hey, we gonna just throw love around here are we gonna get on with the shoutin!
Naw, it’s all good. I hear what you’re sayin.
For the record, I descend from crackers. So guess you could say I’m one myself. But I like to take issue with them.
George W
February 18th, 2011
12:21 pm
Ok ladies…I am out heading to Florida for the weekend. Wow it is great to be white and rich!
Adam
February 18th, 2011
12:21 pm
Basically this means that the Republican states rights chant only applies when they want it to, as in cases where they want to do something different than what the federal government would do, or when they don’t need any federal money.
Dudley (can the people on tv see me?)
February 18th, 2011
12:22 pm
Don’t wen want to start with Iraq.
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
12:22 pm
Scout
@ 12:20
No, I don’t.
getalife
The buffalo’s back!
Adam
February 18th, 2011
12:23 pm
0311: Do you think it should be legal for demonstrators to demonstrate in front of or picket someone’s private residence ?
Is the area being picketed on a public area?
Dudley (can the people on tv see me?)
February 18th, 2011
12:23 pm
Oops. Even
larry
February 18th, 2011
12:24 pm
I guess Dusty didnt see or hear about this…………………….
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2011/feb/15/curveball-lies-us-war-iraq-video
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
12:24 pm
Left wing…
Then if you are, say, “being one myself…” and THEN you can be taken more seriously. Folks criticizing their own generally are…
Normal
February 18th, 2011
12:25 pm
George W,
I served in Nam three tours. I can’t help what you feel but I am glad you survived.
Adam
February 18th, 2011
12:26 pm
Jimmy62: Why did it take till Congress was taken over by the GOP
Wait, all of congress was taken over by the GOP and the Patriot Act ended? Must have missed those memos…
getalife
February 18th, 2011
12:27 pm
Yes, instead of dusty screaming at us because she was de ad wrong, she should scream at curveball.
He brags about lying to us.
Normal
February 18th, 2011
12:27 pm
MiltonMan
February 18th, 2011
12:15 pm
Nixon said the same thing but he didn’t either. Anyone here will tell you what I’ve been doing to stop the war. How about you? Are you in uniform yet and ready to go?
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
12:27 pm
Adam
Quo vadis habeas corpus?
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 18th, 2011
12:27 pm
Normal:
3 Tours ? God bless you !
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 18th, 2011
12:29 pm
Adam:
On someone’s property would obviously be tresspassing and taken care of.
So, yes, I am talking about demonstrating on public property (sidewalk, street, etc.) in front of someone’s private residence.
Jay
February 18th, 2011
12:29 pm
Scout:
1.) True.
2.) Its purpose is self-evident.
3.) No. And neither can you. If the Founders had wanted it to be specific, they could have made it so.
Adam
February 18th, 2011
12:30 pm
public property is public property. The only thing you need to do in most places is get a permit approved to demonstrate there.
jt
February 18th, 2011
12:30 pm
josef nix
I’ve got family members who bug me about that all of the time. My name is recorded in several documents.
I am happy to say, just like my Szhitzu dog, I have no papers, although to my wife, I am priceless.
The Tsalagi spirit is stronger than papers. I know when I awake each morning.
getalife
February 18th, 2011
12:31 pm
I watched “The Battle of Marjah” on HBO.
Patraeus was right.
It was like watching paint dry.
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
12:32 pm
Dudley
That’s what the B-52’s are for. I’ve talked to people who served in Vietnam who said they could feel the ground shaking dozens of miles away in S. Vietnam when the B-52’s were bringing the pain to the north. If that’s not a psychological deterrent, I don’t know what else would be.
Why hasn’t Obama shut down Guantanamo as he promised?
He signed the executive order. Congress refused to fund it, based on NIMBY.
Why hasn’t he pulled our troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan?
He’s withdrawn all combat troops from Iraq, and he has plans to begin withdrawl from Afghanistan once it’s feasible to do so.
Why did it take till Congress was taken over by the GOP to end the Patriot Act?
Congress just voted to extend parts of the Patriot Act, therefore it has not ended. You should brush up on current events just a wee bit more.
Feds Out Of The States!
February 18th, 2011
12:35 pm
Yeah and Obama & Dem Co. had nothing but love for States Rights and Arizona’s gun law and immigration law. Currently they have nothing but love for Wisconsin trying to get its budget under control and – GASP! – asking union people to “pitch in” and help fix the budget crisis. Sound familiar libs? And just watch them have meltdowns when more States start rejecting that economic Titanic known as Obamacare.
But we’ve got 10% unemployment after an $800-plus billion stimulus bill was passed; we have a disaster in the making in the Middle East; we have gas prices on their way to $4/gallon this summer (where’s the Bush-like outrage on gas prices, Libs?); we’ve got a massive battle against out of control federal government spending.
Over half a dozen states are in a deep budgetary crisis. Will we be seeing more unions, Obama, and the DNC special interests trying to interfere with States Rights and trying to get their budgets under control? One can only wait and see.
Dudley (can the people on tv see me?)
February 18th, 2011
12:36 pm
SoCo
That’s exactly what I am talking about. And if that don’t work, Then we nuke em till they glow then shoot em in the dark!
jt
February 18th, 2011
12:37 pm
Left wing management
Touche.
You are a good soul… I can feel it……We all go astray from time to time………………..
Repeat three times……………………Federal government,Get thee behind me.(you’ll be alright).
Peace and ……………………listen to the Gourd.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCAM3C3dpIA
Jimmy62
February 18th, 2011
12:39 pm
For those of you who like to bring up the Interstate Highway system as an example of conservatives being hypocrites, several points:
1. Conservatives are for small government, not no government. Even most libertarians think there’s an essential need for government. The problem is most liberals won’t bother to educate themselves on conservative and libertarian beliefs, they rely on buzz phrases reported by the mostly left-wing media rather than actually learning about conservatism and libertarianism.
2. The Eisenhower Interstate Highway System was developed for the military. Civilian use is secondary. But since y’all seem to be hostile to defense spending, I guess that means you are against the Interstate Highway System? Either that, or you are just too ignorant to know the facts.
JohnnyReb
February 18th, 2011
12:39 pm
Can anyone tell me the day of the week and time? I hit my head when laughing frantically reading Bosch’s post back on Page 1 where he states “they (Democrats) don’t feel it is their place to impose their beliefs on others….” Is this blog a parallel universe or what?
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
12:40 pm
ROFLMAO @ Dudley!!!!!!!!!!!!!
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 18th, 2011
12:40 pm
Jay @ 12:29 pm
“Scout:
1.) True.
2.) Its purpose is self-evident.
3.) No. And neither can you. If the Founders had wanted it to be specific, they could have made it so.”
Thanks for your prompt response.
1) Agree
2) Agree
3) I Agree with this caveat:
Since neither you, nor I, nor anyone else can name “one thing” in the 10th Amendment that absolutely prohibits federal government involvement and since as you say the purpose of the 10th Amendment is “self-evident”, then by deduction that Amendment to the Constitution has become de facto null and void ……………….. something the founding fathers also did not intend.
Sadly, when one Amendment is “ignored” that cheapens the authority of the entire Constitution because any part thereof can be next.
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
12:40 pm
Jt
That thing about the Tsalagi spirit and papers…if America knew a tenth of the story that went into THAT paperwork shuffle and is still going on today. Somebody asked Unmentionable about why he does it when he doesn’t “take advantage” of what the papers bring…”pure spiteful meaness!”
Jimmy62
February 18th, 2011
12:41 pm
Whoops… Want to retract my point #2 up there. A little more research proves me to be the ignorant one on that point.
Adam
February 18th, 2011
12:46 pm
0311/Scout: The amendment is not supposed to prohibit. It is instead supposed to help protect the right of states to govern themselves when they wish to do so unless otherwise stated in the Constitution. It is also supposed to help protect the federal government from being thrown completely out of the states on a whim. This is a bit of a conundrum isn’t it? The entire point is that the discussion will ALWAYS continue on. The state doesn’t have absolute power, nor does the federal government.
Kind of like unions versus big corporations. Neither truly has the upper hand, so neither can completely overwhelm the other.
Left wing management
February 18th, 2011
12:47 pm
jt: 12:37
California love!
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
12:47 pm
Jimmy @ 12:41
I can respect you a whole lot more based on that admission. Many here don’t have the testicular fortitude to admit when they are wrong.
kayaker 71
February 18th, 2011
12:48 pm
What are states supposed to do when the Federal Government abdicates it’s responsibility? The Federal Government is supposed to provide for the security of it’s citizens, one of it’s prime duties. Even when American citizens are killed on American soil protecting their property, they do nothing. But when states like AZ have to pass laws to protect their citizens when the Federal Government does nothing, they are racist, overstepping their bounds, insensitive, non-caring….. How dare they project their opinions? How dare they defy the all knowing and compassionate Federal Government? The Wisconsin disagreement is another states rights struggle between it’s citizens the state house. They do not need or want Bozo’s support of the unions which he so graciously gave today. We also didn’t need Bozo’s support of that university professor or his criticism of the police officer that arrested him. It’s none of Bozo’s business.
Normal
February 18th, 2011
12:49 pm
Jimmy62,
for you…
http://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2006/summer/interstates.html
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
12:50 pm
jt
@ 12:37
Ain’t that America!
Mick
February 18th, 2011
12:52 pm
scout
What’s up with the numbers? That crawling eyeball movie scared the bejeebus out of me when I was four…
jt
February 18th, 2011
12:52 pm
josef nix
I toss and turn SOME nights thinking of the “potential” benefits.
But others, I sleep like a lamb.
There are incredible hoops to contend with, and you probably know that I refuse to even wear a selt-belt. Also, my brother is perpetually running from the law. If you are familiar with the process, then you know that problem. And besides, it doesn’t matter except to the feds. My bloodline is documented. (one millioneth part,,all of the people).
Mick
February 18th, 2011
12:54 pm
yaker & co
Why is it that you all have to resort to silly, immature nick names for the president? Are you perpetually going thru puberty? Just asking…
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
12:55 pm
Even when American citizens are killed on American soil protecting their property, they do nothing.
I’m guessing you haven’t been following this trial here:
http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20110214/NEWS01/702149883/0/BLOG47
On Monday, an Arizona jury convicted the former Everett woman of killing two people, including 9-year-old Brisenia Flores. It was all part of a bizarre plot to fight crime on the border with Mexico by staging a deadly home invasion on U.S. soil, prosecutors said.
AmVet
February 18th, 2011
12:55 pm
“I don’t drink enough water in the winter and affraid I may have a cracker-like mentality.”
Now that made for a good guffaw, thomas. Thanks.
Uncle Miltie has got something way up his ___ this afternoon, huh?
At least one of the brats is out for the weekend.
Despite the persona, Tom Price is as spineless and obsequious as they come. I’d love to get on one of his call-in programs and ask him a couple of questions. I pretty much guarantee they would block my number in the future!
jt, I think the line is get thee behind me Satan…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pxEK-bfRBE
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 18th, 2011
12:56 pm
Jay:
“Under conservative legal theory, it certainly can’t be the commerce clause, given that the commerce involved is strictly intra-state, not interstate. Most people do not cross state lines to get medical care.”
You can’t be serious ??
Under the prostitution of the “commerce clause” the Supreme Court “has and will” do anything it wants.
If just “one person” crosses state lines they have their nexus.
The medical equipment crosses state lines so they have their nexus.
A medical employee crosses state lines for their emplyment they have their nexus.
The list is endless.
By the way Jay, I think it is Montana that has passed legislation for a company building firearms in that state claiming that all parts, equipment, employees, etc. are all “interstate” in nature and therefore federal gun laws do not apply.
Do you support that ?
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 18th, 2011
12:57 pm
AmVet:
“Despite the persona, Tom Price is as spineless and obsequious as they come. I’d love to get on one of his call-in programs and ask him a couple of questions. I pretty much guarantee they would block my number in the future!”
Hey ………. watch it !
He fixed my rotator cuff 20 years ago and it’s still working fine …………………..
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 18th, 2011
12:58 pm
Out for awhile.
I am SURE there will be thoughtful, unbiased, well thought out, polite answers to my questions when I return.
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
1:02 pm
I think it is Montana that has passed legislation for a company building firearms in that state claiming that all parts, equipment, employees, etc. are all “interstate” in nature and therefore federal gun laws do not apply.
If they are truly “interstate”, then the raw materials should come from Montana soil, be processed on Montana soil, and the final product assembled in Montana. If one minute part of the manufacturing process originates outside of Montana, then it is not truly “interstate”. I think, however, the word you’re looking for is intrastate. Interstate denotes exchange between two states, and intrastate would mean everything from within the borders of one state.
TnGelding
February 18th, 2011
1:03 pm
Gingrey is better than most of the clowns. We’re all hypocrites.
Futile as it is, you’ve got to admire the GOPs willingness to go to the mat on spending cuts. Never mind the time and money being wasted.
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
1:04 pm
jt
It’s an interesting thing, that one. I’ve been working with a childhood friend who is writing his own family’s story. In our hometown there is a community of Choctaw who “came in here at the turn of the century…” The were led by their minister, Brother Columbus C. a much respected friend of my grandfather’s, They were running from the law. They were descended from those who refused to register under Article 14 of the Treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek and refused to report for Removal as well. The last round ups came in 1906 when this group fled into the backwoods and while not always held in the highest regards by the locals, weren’t turned in either. My friend is taking the oral history and weaving it around the documented to tell the story.
jt
February 18th, 2011
1:08 pm
AmVet
“jt, I think the line is get thee behind me Satan…”
I don’t know about satan, but that song was pure hell. sheeeesh. I believe you once described a song as cantowailing. That was techno canterwailing.
As far as satan or the feds,……………..what’s the diff?
Stalin,Mao,Lincoln………..the results always end up the same.(mass graves).
How are YOU gonna go?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiQoq-wqZxg
Mick
February 18th, 2011
1:17 pm
Stalin, mao, lincoln mentioned in the same breath? Where’s jeff davis?
LIberal Pariah
February 18th, 2011
1:17 pm
Politics is all hypocrisy on both sides because it is all about self-interest and situational ethics. However, few Conservative hypocrisies support murder. Liberals are generally for gun control in the name of saving lives but support abortion which kills millions more. Give me the hypocrisy that doesn’t kill millions.
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
1:18 pm
Mick
I was thinking where’s Andy J! And, yes, imho unreconstructed opinion, Ole Jeff is right in there with the rest of them…
jt
February 18th, 2011
1:22 pm
josef nix
In my youth, we visited some maternal family members literally “on the reservation”. Slightly appalled at what I experienced. Abject poverty. My father (strict scott/irish/whatever) didn’t help by instilling bogus prejudices or some wrong lesson. (Dang Injuns.) (eventhough he married one).
I do not blame anyone in that it was the seventies.
My family is still in the process of overcoming some weird times but I am beyond that flak. Out of respect, I wait for the others to catch up.
Pass it around………………………………………
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwPrcuo_cUE
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
1:23 pm
However, few Conservative hypocrisies support murder.
How many pro-life conservatives are also anti-death penalty?
Adam
February 18th, 2011
1:24 pm
What is actually being proposed in Wisconsin?
Just in case any of you were actually curious why there’s an uproar. I think you conservatives should look very closely.
Adam
February 18th, 2011
1:25 pm
LIberal Pariah/Night Train: Politics is all hypocrisy on both sides because it is all about self-interest and situational ethics. However, few Conservative hypocrisies support murder. Liberals are generally for gun control in the name of saving lives but support abortion which kills millions more. Give me the hypocrisy that doesn’t kill millions.
And what about the South Dakota proposed bill that would make it ok to kill abortion doctors? Do you support that?
Mick
February 18th, 2011
1:26 pm
josef
One day I was looking at my $20 bill and thought WTF? One of the worst basturd presidents in our unholy history…
LIberal Pariah
February 18th, 2011
1:27 pm
SC, a lot more than Gun Control Liberals Supporting Abortion
. Maybe I should have qualified my statement with murder of INNOCENT human beings. I personally am not in favor of the Death Penalty but it is a much more complicated issue than abortion.
George W
February 18th, 2011
1:27 pm
Southern Comfort……#1 the child is innocent #2 the felon is not. #3 eye for an eye.
Dudley (can the people on tv see me?)
February 18th, 2011
1:29 pm
George w
What about turn the other cheek
Mick
February 18th, 2011
1:29 pm
george
Are you ready to raise that innocent child? If not, are ready to supply some welfare for that innocent child? Once again, just asking..
Dudley (can the people on tv see me?)
February 18th, 2011
1:30 pm
Love how the new testament is forgotten when death penalty comes up
Dudley (can the people on tv see me?)
February 18th, 2011
1:32 pm
Mick @ 1:29
You already know the answer to that. Don’t you?
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
1:32 pm
LP
Ok. With the qualifier, your statement is quite different than the original.
George
Murder is murder regardless. The original statement had nothing to do with innocence or guilt.
LIberal Pariah
February 18th, 2011
1:35 pm
New Testament is not forgotten at all. Jesus’ admonition to turn the other cheek is in the context of personal behavior towards individuals. God gave the government the authority to determine when capital punishment is appropriate (Genesis 9:6, Romans 13:1-7).
AmVet
February 18th, 2011
1:35 pm
Corporal, too bad he left medicine for Washington.
But can you snap off a big curve ball?
jt, you don’t know the Bible very well do you?
Nor apparently Irving Berlin who wrote a popular song with that title for the 1936 film Follow the Fleet.
And the Clash is trash. Kinda like an English Ramones. Punk music always sucked…(just my two cents worth.)
jm
February 18th, 2011
1:37 pm
Yeah Wisconsin.
Mick
February 18th, 2011
1:39 pm
jm
If the facts show that in wisconsin that this is all about union busting, nothing more, you’re ok with that?
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
1:40 pm
“Just in case any of you were actually curious why there’s an uproar. I think you conservatives should look very closely.”
Knew it before. Agreed with it yesterday. Hashed it out yesterday. You lost then. You still lose today.
Ezra Klein is a tool worse than Bookman.
Did I cover all the salient points?
Dudley (can the people on tv see me?)
February 18th, 2011
1:40 pm
Amvet
Dude the clash is awesome, the ramones du suck. Really they do.
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
1:40 pm
Adam
But, that’s supposed to help balance the budget.
Normal
February 18th, 2011
1:41 pm
If you are going to be “Pro Life”, you have to be anti-war, anti-execution, and anything else that is anti-life. If not you are just Pro Fetus….and if you are pro fetus, it has to be your responsibility to insure that that life is given everything it needs to be a boon to society and not a burden. If you just try to “save” the fetus and then just leave that life in an unwanted environment, rife with abuse, and with no hope of a good life, then you are no better than one who would leave a dog on the freeway because you didn’t want to feed it anymore.
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
1:43 pm
Dave
So, you believe that a) making a union certify every year and b) not allowing for union dues to be deducted from a paycheck will help balance a budget?
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
1:43 pm
Thank you Normal!!!!!
jm
February 18th, 2011
1:44 pm
Mick 1:39 – its not just about union busting. unless you mean union busting is about cutting the costs of unionized teachers and reducing their collective bargaining rights. either way, I think what they’re doing is great. I have respect for people who feel like they should get a government job that has complete job security and they should get paid more than private sector workers, and that the voters shouldn’t have a say over how much they get paid.
Go wisconsin.
jm
February 18th, 2011
1:46 pm
oops
have respect
have no respect…
Dudley (can the people on tv see me?)
February 18th, 2011
1:46 pm
Omfg. Same stuff from the corporate slaves
Mick
February 18th, 2011
1:46 pm
dave r@ 1:40
The judge, the jury, and the executioner, you missed your calling for the inquisition.
Mick
February 18th, 2011
1:49 pm
jm
See the problem is over collective bargaining, why the heavy hand, these people are taxpayers too, doesn’t that count for something?
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
1:50 pm
mick
Unmentionable’s granddaddy refused to accept the $20 bill in his business, had a sign saying so!
Dudley
Turn the other cheek? :What happens when they slap that one, too,” I asked Granddaddy about that one way back when he was trying to set my moral compass…”Well, Jody,” he said, “the Good Book is silent there. I prefer a .45.”
jt
Unmentionable goes “back to the reservation” ever so often, but it’s to gamble and play golf these days! Seriously, though, he rarely gets into a snit over a lot of this, but the one where he does is when somebody questions his “Indianess” because he is a highly educated professional who lives in Buckhead, so he can’t be “a real Native American.” Folks ask him if he “does Indian things.” “No,” he says, “I do things Indian.”
Dudley (can the people on tv see me?)
February 18th, 2011
1:51 pm
Wah wah wah. I’m not in the union therefore the union must be bad
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
1:51 pm
“So, you believe that a) making a union certify every year and b) not allowing for union dues to be deducted from a paycheck will help balance a budget?”
Not directly, nor do I care if they do. What I do care about is finding any way possible to weaken any stranglehold a union has on a government. It is my contention that only police and fire (and those only in exteme situations such as neglect for their safety) should have the ability to form a union.
Dudley (can the people on tv see me?)
February 18th, 2011
1:53 pm
Josef
Lol
Well gonna take my significant other out on the town. Y’all have fun
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
1:53 pm
Dudley
Clash? Yeah! Still pull out my copy of Sandinista! Ramones? Bleeeah!
jt
February 18th, 2011
1:54 pm
“And the Clash is trash. Kinda like an English Ramones. Punk music always sucked…(just my two cents worth.)”
Whatever dude.
I will weigh your taste in music(clash is trash) the same way I weigh your taste in politics(GO Ralph Nader).HaHaHa…………..Ha..Ha.Ha. You probably listen to ABBA too
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPVQKQgSWgM&feature=related
Mick
February 18th, 2011
1:56 pm
**It is my contention that only police and fire (and those only in exteme situations such as neglect for their safety) should have the ability to form a union.**
Thank god you are not able to dictate those terms because last I heard this is america and if people want to band together to form a perfect union, that is their right, capice?
Dudley (can the people on tv see me?)
February 18th, 2011
1:57 pm
Messed up one day and watched the ramones movie, rock and roll high school, a few years back. Reminded me how much they sucked!
Adam
February 18th, 2011
1:57 pm
Dave R: There is no winning or losing in what I posted. All that was there was what is being proposed. I saw many posts seeming to indicate that this was all about teachers whining about not getting paid enough. That is clearly not the case.
Liberal Pariah/Night Train: I personally am not in favor of the Death Penalty but it is a much more complicated issue than abortion.
Only to YOU. To me, both issues are quite complicated in equal measure.
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
1:58 pm
**It is my contention that only police and fire (and those only in exteme situations such as neglect for their safety) should have the ability to form a union.**
Now that’s an interesting take. I’ll have to give that some thought….
Dudley (can the people on tv see me?)
February 18th, 2011
1:59 pm
AC/DC rules!!!!!!!!!
jm
February 18th, 2011
1:59 pm
Mick 1:49 – sure, of course they’re voters. Hopefully they voted in the last election. When the next election rolls around, they can vote again. In the meantime, they should get back to work. Or do they just plan to let all the kids go uneducated.
Clearly, they are just looking out for the interests of their customers, the kids….. yeah right.
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
2:00 pm
ummm, union busting IS about reducing their collective bargaining rights.
Adam
February 18th, 2011
2:00 pm
It is my contention that only police and fire (and those only in exteme situations such as neglect for their safety) should have the ability to form a union.
I strongly disagree. Safety is not the only reason to form a union, nor is pay. Sometimes it’s about being treated fairly and not being fired for “no reason, or any reason at all.”
Dudley (can the people on tv see me?)
February 18th, 2011
2:02 pm
SoCo
Union bashers are jealous, so they cry and complain aboutnpeople smart enuf to be in one
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
2:02 pm
“Thank god you are not able to dictate those terms because last I heard this is america and if people want to band together to form a perfect union, that is their right, capice?”
Mick:
1. Unions as we are speaking of are far from perfect.
2. The term “union” to which you are referencing is the union of STATES, not a labor union.
3. I do not deny that any number of people can form a group to act in their own interests, however, there is NO RIGHT to dictate their terms to another nor gain favor over another in the Constitution.
I long ago gave up hope that you will understand simple Constitutional concepts.
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
2:03 pm
It is my contention that only police and fire (and those only in exteme situations such as neglect for their safety) should have the ability to form a union.
I’m sure that might be part of the reason that you are an ex-elected official too. I could be wrong though. That is an interesting perspective though. What makes police and fire different? Are they not public employees just as the others are?
Dudley (can the people on tv see me?)
February 18th, 2011
2:03 pm
Gotta go. Later all
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
2:03 pm
“I strongly disagree.”
Color me shocked, leg humper.
jm
February 18th, 2011
2:03 pm
FYI, this is not just about union busting. Wisconsin has a $3B hole 2 years from now to fill if nothing is done to fix the pensions, benefits, etc.
Go Wisconsin.
You liberals always buy the conspiracy theory. When it comes time to fix Medicare and SS, you’re going to be arguing Republicans just want to kill old people…..
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
2:05 pm
“I’m sure that might be part of the reason that you are an ex-elected official too. I could be wrong though. That is an interesting perspective though. What makes police and fire different?”
You would be very wrong (as usual).
We covered this yesterday. Daily and sometimes prolonged stress in dangerous conditions.
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
2:05 pm
I do not deny that any number of people can form a group to act in their own interests, however, there is NO RIGHT to dictate their terms to another nor gain favor over another in the Constitution.
So, the GOP has NO RIGHT to try to dictate their terms in regards to health care or the budget to the Democratic Party? Are you sure that’s the point you’re trying to make?
Nice Guy
February 18th, 2011
2:06 pm
“Sometimes it’s about being treated fairly and not being fired for “no reason, or any reason at all.”
Really, Adam. That’s funny, you know, because that sorta stuff happens all the time.
Riiight.
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 18th, 2011
2:06 pm
Southern Comfort @ 1:02
I think that is exactly how they are doing that. They have tried to cover every angle of the process to keep it intrastate.
However, the Supreme Court does whatever it wants to do.
The oxygen they breathe as they are assembling the weapons comes from interstate winds
Nice Guy
February 18th, 2011
2:09 pm
Hey People, just remember that the Gov. in Wisconsin in a Repub…which means he was put there to cut spending. That’s what he’s doing. Now all you Left-nuts are on the floor like a 4 year throwing a tantrum. That’s embarassing, don’t you think?
Nice.
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
2:09 pm
“So, the GOP has NO RIGHT to try to dictate their terms in regards to health care or the budget to the Democratic Party? Are you sure that’s the point you’re trying to make?”
Sometimes you are deliberately dense, SoCo, and sometimes you just can’t help yourself. I don’t know which one this is.
Can you say “elected officials”? Duh!
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 18th, 2011
2:09 pm
AmVet
“February 18th, 2011
1:35 pm
Corporal, too bad he left medicine for Washington.
But can you snap off a big curve ball?”
You lost me on the above ?????
Nice Guy
February 18th, 2011
2:10 pm
Oh, and I love that Obama has decided to weigh in this issue. Not that its any suprise that he backs unions whenever and for whatever….
I’m with jm. Go Wisconsin.
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 18th, 2011
2:13 pm
Does anyone else want to take a stab at this ?
Since no one seems to be able to name just “one thing” in the 10th Amendment that absolutely prohibits federal government involvement and since the purpose of the 10th Amendment should be “self-evident”, then by deduction that Amendment to the Constitution has become de facto null and void ……………….. something the founding fathers also did not intend.
Sadly, when one Amendment is “ignored” that cheapens the authority of the entire Constitution because any part thereof can be next.
It’s not a liberal or conservative thing …………. it’s respect for the Constitution.
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
2:13 pm
jm
From Jay’s link yesterday:
Despite shortfalls in revenue following the economic downturn that hit its peak with the Bush-era stock market collapse, the state has balanced budgets, maintained basic services and high-quality schools, and kept employment and business development steadier than the rest of the country. It has managed so well, in fact, that the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau recently released a memo detailing how the state will end the 2009-2011 budget biennium with a budget surplus.
Here’s a link to the memo:
http://legis.wisconsin.gov/lfb/Misc/2011_01_31Vos&Darling.pdf
Wisconsin’s budget is in trouble, but only because of giveaways that the governor and GOP dominated legislature passed in January. You should read that report. If they delayed their tax cuts that they just passed, there is no financial crisis. If they offered a deal equal to that of what the fed unions have negotiated, the unions don’t have a leg to stand on. The governor would get the concessions that he wants, and the public employees would be paying more for their benefits, and the taxpayers would not be funding their pensions.
Dave
How is teaching not stressful? With kids bringing guns on campus everyday, how is teaching not dangerous? Police and fire do face dangerous situations on a daily basis, however, they are trained to handle those situations. Teachers are not trained in how to deal with an active shooter situation. Teachers are not taught how to disarm a student armed with a knife or gun.
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
2:18 pm
Can you say “elected officials”? Duh!
Are political parties not groups that are formed to act in their own interests? There are no Cconstitutional rights to form political parties, nor are they protected in the Constitution. Your #3 pretty much said the same thing. Elected officials do not have a right to DICTATE their terms. Everything is done by vote and debate, not dictation.
I’m not being dense at all. You made the statement, not me. Your words are the ones that ring hollow.
jm
February 18th, 2011
2:18 pm
Unions make me sick
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/19/us/19wisconsin.html
jm
February 18th, 2011
2:20 pm
SoCo – not true. There is a real deficit problem a couple of years out, in the billions of dollars, because of the public employee entitlements. The minor tax cuts have nothing to do with it. Hell, I even heard all this on that bastion of conservatism NPR.
jm
February 18th, 2011
2:22 pm
Nice Guy – and all those liberals who say Republicans are just full of BS. Now, they’re doing the spending cuts, thank heavens. Liberals are the ones full of BS, just different BS depending on what’s going on…..
Doggone/GA
February 18th, 2011
2:22 pm
“Unions make me sick”
Hang in there…you’ll have healthcare starting in only 2 years, or so.
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
2:23 pm
SoCo
“Teachers are not trained in how to deal with an active shooter situation. Teachers are not taught how to disarm a student armed ”
Not all are, but some are.It’s relatively new, but more and more the “safety committee” attends “workshops” in just such. Sad, isn’t it?
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
2:24 pm
SoCo, you’re whiffing at EVERYTHING today.
First, there is a 3.8 BILLION deficit in Wisconsin to be made up. Get with the program. They did NOT giveaway that amount in tax breaks.
And really, SoCo? You’re going to hang your hat on teaching being as stressful as running into a burning building? Sorry, I’ve done both and I KNOW which one got my heart-rate to emergency levels. Kids bringing guns on campus every day? Really? Where? Haven’t heard of even a handful in this state in the pat couple of years. I thought you libs didn’t believe in fearmongering . . .
jt
February 18th, 2011
2:24 pm
0311/0317 – 1811/1801
That was a good entry “However, the Supreme Court does whatever it wants to do.
The oxygen they breathe”. crosses state lines.”
Will you answer me one question?…….Do you feel the same if…..
the Federal Government is involved if I choose to grow a marijuana plant in my backyard and SMOKE it?
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 18th, 2011
2:26 pm
jt:
One thing I try to do is be consistent.
If “everything” involved is intrastate, then it’s a state issue.
jm
February 18th, 2011
2:26 pm
First liberal argument: The Republicans are frauds because they aren’t proposing real spending cuts
Second liberal argument: well, now that they’re proposing real spending cuts, these cuts aren’t needed and they’re just out to screw people.
Both arguments: lies.
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
2:26 pm
“I’m not being dense at all. You made the statement, not me. Your words are the ones that ring hollow.”
I always know when you have nothing to add to the substance of a debate when you start nitpicking someone’s wordsmithing.
Adam
February 18th, 2011
2:29 pm
0311/Scout: Does anyone else want to take a stab at this ?
I answered you already.
Dave R: It seems to me today you are playing the role of “Dave R is right, everyone else is wrong, and anyone who dares question or disagree is deserving of mockery, instead of any sort of legitimate response.” You might as well not say anything at all if your only retort to my disagreement is an insult.
Normal
February 18th, 2011
2:30 pm
Josef, SoCo,
Teachers are not trained in how to deal with an active shooter situation. Teachers are not taught how to disarm a student armed ”
Assume the defensive position of hands open and slightly extended (boxers stance)…Rotate 180 degrees, now facing away from armed assailant. Bring left leg forward step….repeat steps until you are out of range.
————-
SoCo,
You, my friend, are really on the mark today! Well done.
Adam
February 18th, 2011
2:31 pm
jm: What is the truth then? It seems to me what is going on is Democrats want to cut things other than entitlements, and Republicans want to cut ONLY entitlements and public radio/broadcasting.
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
2:31 pm
Dave
You’re whiffing…. Even better, you’re fighting using the windmill technique. Where did I say teaching was AS stressful as running into a burning building. You don’t agree with me, however, don’t put words into my mouth that I didn’t say. You’re fairly reasonable, but that’s pure bullsh*t to try to debate me on something I didn’t say. That’s very “conservative” of you, though. I don’t expect anything less from those who are die-hard conservatives.
As far as their budget, I said nothing about outlays. If you bothered to research federal union negotiations, you would know that the Great Saint Ronald Reagan changed the pensions of federal workers so that they are not a burden on taxpayers. Our pensions are just as dependent on the market and social security as the private sector. If Wisconsin followed Reagan’s model, they wouldn’t have the issues with budgets in the future. Check it out if you don’t believe me.
jt
February 18th, 2011
2:32 pm
0311/0317 – 1811/1801
So if a Federal SWAT team showed up at my house because of a few pot plants growing,….would you arrest me?
Would you arrest the citizens of the 10 states that have nullified federal medical marijuana laws if ordered to do so?
I admire your consistency…but often our “war on drugs” culture will destroy it.
What say you?
Adam
February 18th, 2011
2:33 pm
Josef, SoCo,
Teachers are not trained in how to deal with an active shooter situation. Teachers are not taught how to disarm a student armed ”
Well, maybe they should be. But that would require more funding. So f— it, right?
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
2:34 pm
There is a real deficit problem a couple of years out, in the billions of dollars, because of the public employee entitlements.
JM, if that’s the case, how is destroying a union going to change the pensions already promised? What Wisconsin is doing is pure bullsh*t. Read my response to Dave. Reagan has already shown the way to reform pensions and union negotiations without having to destroy unions. It’s a damn shame that people claim to be conservatives, and have no fu*king clue as to what their greatest Icon has really accomplished.
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
2:37 pm
DAVE
@ 2:24
I wish I were at liberty to respond to that. It’s not my perogative, But the statistics are there as a matter of the public record if you want to go looking. This is not just something of anecdotal reference. The state requires this information be reported by time, date and place.
Adam
February 18th, 2011
2:37 pm
SoCo: You make some good points about Reagan. The definition of what a conservative is seems to be changing more and more rapidly.
Nice Guy
February 18th, 2011
2:38 pm
Doggone – “Hang in there…you’ll have healthcare starting in only 2 years, or so.”
But it is so bad, that we are already seeing some negative reprecussions of it NOW.
jm
February 18th, 2011
2:39 pm
Adam 2:31 – wrong. Democrats want to raise taxes and aren’t inclined to cut anything other than the military. Republicans are willing to cut everything and don’t want to raise taxes. Republicans have already cut some military spending and intend to cut much more. Meanwhile, the ball-less democrats are just screaming, whining, playing politics, instead of actually helping to govern the country.
I despise unions. And Obama loves unions. Ergo, I cannot wait to vote R in 2012.
Mick
February 18th, 2011
2:40 pm
dave r
You are a real piece of one sided hot air. All the workers want is some respect to have their union and bargain collectively, period. If wisconsin does have a deficit they have said they are ready to do their part. That’s not good enough for you anti-union zealots, it’s your way or the highway, this is america and that’s not the way it works, deal with it..
Nice Guy
February 18th, 2011
2:40 pm
SoCo – “It’s a damn shame that people claim to be conservatives, and have no fu*king clue as to what their greatest Icon has really accomplished.”
Ah yes, another episode of ‘we love Reagan when he makes our point and hate him when he doesn’t'….
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
2:40 pm
Actually, Adam, I’m playing the “Dave R is right, everyone else is wrong, and anyone who dares bring up the same stupid arguments we hased out yesterday (and the days before) is deserving of mockery, instead of any sort of legitimate response.” game.
People who think they know it all, really tick off those of us who actually do . . .
jm
February 18th, 2011
2:41 pm
Oh, Adam, BTW, 2/3 or more of the federal budgets is entitlements. If they’re not cut, there will not be any military, or any government spending available for anything else in about 15 years. Democraps is an accurate moniker.
Adam
February 18th, 2011
2:42 pm
jm: Well aside from your last post having nothing to do with unions…
Democrats want to raise taxes and aren’t inclined to cut anything other than the military. Republicans are willing to cut everything and don’t want to raise taxes
Please show me where in Obama’s plan he has raised taxes, and also please show me how he has ONLY focused on cutting military. THen, show me how the Republican plan cuts everything. “Willing to cut everything” is just words. Back it up with an actual proposal. If you can show me a Republican plan that LITERALLY cuts everything, I’ll eat my words.
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
2:42 pm
I always know when you have nothing to add to the substance of a debate when you start nitpicking someone’s wordsmithing.
Don’t wanna own up to what you said now… That figures.
jm
February 18th, 2011
2:42 pm
SoCo 2:34 – I see no reason why businesses, or employers of any stripe, should be made to collect dues for unions. If that were the case, then we should be making unions cut their expenses and the wages of their members for any company not making a profit…. but that will never happen.
They BOTH suck
February 18th, 2011
2:43 pm
@ Dave R
“People who think they know it all, really tick off those of us who actually do . . .”
Based on that quote, YOU must really piss off a lot of people…….
Jk………. that was too easy
have a great day
Adam
February 18th, 2011
2:43 pm
Dave R: People who think they know it all, really tick off those of us who actually do . . .
If you really believe you are the latter half of that statement, then you are just an arrogant fool.
Nice Guy
February 18th, 2011
2:43 pm
“That’s not good enough for you anti-union zealots, it’s your way or the highway, this is america and that’s not the way it works, deal with it..”
Really, Mick, is that why a 1,000 plus teachers didn’t show up for work today, is that why the Democratic leadership in Wisconsin is camped out in some hotel in a bordering state and refusing to vote….
Ooooooookkkkkkkk.
jm
February 18th, 2011
2:43 pm
Adam 2:42 – you have blinders on.
Adam
February 18th, 2011
2:45 pm
jm: Where exactly are you getting this idea that 2/3 of the budget is entitlements? If that were true, Obama’s budget must have cut absolutely everything else, since he cut about 1/4-1/3.
jm
February 18th, 2011
2:45 pm
Adam, you’re apparently not aware of the increase in the medicare income cap already passed by obama, and the increase on the application of medicare taxes to investment income (of all things), which is a tax increase.
Not to mention Obama keeps pushing for increases and the only reason we haven’t gotten more is a Republican House.
Reminds me, I may need to take my bond portfolio to the hospital as it gets older…. sure glad I have Medicare to help me cover the health care costs for my bonds!!!
jt
February 18th, 2011
2:45 pm
Under federal law, marijuana is treated like every other controlled substance, such as cocaine and heroin. The federal government places every controlled substance in a schedule, in principle according to its relative potential for abuse and medicinal value. Under the CSA, marijuana is classified as a Schedule I drug, which means that the federal government views marijuana as highly addictive and having no medical value. Doctors may not “prescribe” marijuana for medical use under federal law, though they can “recommend” its use under the First Amendment.
The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), charged with enforcing federal drug laws, has taken a substantial interest in medical marijuana patients and caregivers in general, and large cultivation and distribution operations more specifically. Over the past few years, dozens of people have been targets of federal enforcement actions. Many of them have either been arrested or had property seized. More than a hundred are currently in prison or are facing charges or ongoing criminal or civil investigations for their cultivation or distribution of medical marijuana.
Growing this dangerous drug amonsgt the tomatoes. Is THIS Federal business? Karl Rove and any other “conservative” would think so.(except Ron Paul).
What say you Scout?
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
2:45 pm
josef, and I’m saying that, regardless of the situation, there is NOTHING more stressful (and a function of public safety – a valid Constitutional role of government) than running into a burning building, especially when you don’t knwo how long the structure has been on fire, and where exactly the fire is.
Teaching, regardless of the stress you and others might get from doing so, does not meet the threshold of a truly hazardous profession as fire-fighting and police do. The act of teaching is NOT a life-threatening measure. The act of fire-fighting is. Therefore, I do not think that a union is warranted for teaching.
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
2:45 pm
Ah yes, another episode of ‘we love Reagan when he makes our point and hate him when he doesn’t’
Excellent point, if you were right. I don’t love or hate Reagan. Same as Clinton, Bush I, Bush II, or Obama. They have all been elected to serve, and I respect them for taking that position. Each one of them has done things I agree with, and they have done things I don’t agree with. I enjoy studying history, so there’s no game of love/hate going on.
jm
February 18th, 2011
2:46 pm
Adam
February 18th, 2011
2:45 pm
jm: Where exactly are you getting this idea that 2/3 of the budget is entitlements? If that were true, Obama’s budget must have cut absolutely everything else, since he cut about 1/4-1/3.
DUDE, YOU’RE ON CRACK. GO AWAY.
Mick
February 18th, 2011
2:46 pm
guy
So what do you suggest they do? Bend over and say “thank you sir, may I have another”?
jm
February 18th, 2011
2:47 pm
Adam. You must be the most ignorant person in america…..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fy2010_spending_by_category.jpg
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
2:48 pm
I see no reason why businesses, or employers of any stripe, should be made to collect dues for unions.
Businesses don’t collect dues for unions. When dues are deducted from your paycheck, it’s done as an allottment, just like child support being deducted. You have to authorize that money to be allocated, and it is done just like a direct deposit would be.
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
2:48 pm
“then you are just an arrogant fool.”
I suggest you consult the nearest mirror, leg-humper.
Nice Guy
February 18th, 2011
2:50 pm
Mick – “So what do you suggest they do?”
I suggest they show up and do their jobs, that’s what. There are millions of people in this country who would kill to have those teaching jobs….therefore all those teachers who are lieing about being sick and didn’t come to work the past couple days, should be handed their walking papers. Get out!
buck@gon
February 18th, 2011
2:50 pm
Memo to: My buddy Jay Jay
From: The Cynthia
Hey hey,
I don’t think you’re all so white, Jay. You do have some street cred with the brothers and sisters. I also like the skin cream you’ve been using. It makes you look a little orange in the winter time, but hey, you need to look the part, or you might be considered, I don’t know, hypocritical?
Anyway, sorry to hear about tonight. What’s the guy’s name so I can meet him? If you don’t have email, can I get his ipad number? Pictures are good and an organizational chart would be good too. I want to know really how close he is to the White House, so I can get a good shot at it.
I wrote that crazy article couple of weeks ago so that Rush Limbaugh would notice me, and it didn’t work out. The whole logic was, you know, I write this lunatic stuff and Limbaugh talks about how ridiculous it is, and the guys in the White House would be like, “hey, who’s this fine young thing in Atlanta?” They fly down here in AF1, pick me up and I go have lunch with HIM. Anyway, it didn’t work. I just got on O’Reilly, and that was too late at night–you know they were probably having a rave party at 1600.
So, I’ll try next time. I hoped maybe my civility piece would help. I mean HE needs help if he’s going to support those rich teachers in Wisconsin. Man, those people are NUTS! Do you know how much they make? I’m glad FOR ONCE that I live in Atlanta.
Anyway, I missed my deadline, you know of riding in AirForce One before his term was halfway over. So, I was thinking, hey, maybe I could hitch my wagon to a new guy–some community organizer brother with a law degree from Harvard. Know any? Course you don’t, you’re….
Oh, sorry I mentioned that.
You’re great, Jay Jay!
Hugs,
XOXO
CC
jm
February 18th, 2011
2:50 pm
Adam – the most the POTUS Politician Prostitute wants to do is to freeze spending. At the highest levels ever. Kind of like saying, well, I drink a case of beer a day. But I’ll stop drinking MORE than a case of beer a day going forward. Brilliant.
Mick
February 18th, 2011
2:50 pm
dave r
I used to respect the fact that you said you held public office but it’s easy to see why you probably weren’t reelected and possibly ran out of town … ego maximus
Adam
February 18th, 2011
2:50 pm
Dave R: The difference is I am not so stupid as to believe I know everything.
jm
February 18th, 2011
2:51 pm
SoCo 2:48 – same thing. If they want dues, they should go get the checks from the employees they represent.
Mick
February 18th, 2011
2:52 pm
guy
Whose going to take their place when anyone with a degree of common sense can see that their profession is getting screwed?
jm
February 18th, 2011
2:54 pm
“I am not so stupid as to believe I know everything.”
Well thank heavens for that. Afraid you don’t even know the basics….
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
2:54 pm
DAVE
Not to go into the which is more, but the days of open doors and tornado and fire drills are gone with the wind…the protocols for varying situations are there and we do have drills on those, too, And less you think that this is just something happening in inner city “those people” environments, you might want to check out the protocols in place at some of the most prestigeous institutions, especially those with clienteles considered high risk targets for terrorist attacks. In many of our schools there IS a uniformed and armed policeman present for the duration of the school day and after school activities…don’t confuse “teaching” duties and responsibilities with “teacher/staff” duties and responsibilities….
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
2:55 pm
“The difference is I am not so stupid as to believe I know everything.”
The difference is that I least TRY to know what I’m talking about. You? Not so much.
And Mick, I’m not here to earn any respect. And I’m still active in local politics; in fact, I got a very welcome reception from my former colleagues just last night.
Adam
February 18th, 2011
2:55 pm
jm: That graph has a lot of conflicting colors (or maybe it is my screen) but I added all the big pie slices together except the red one assuming it to be Dept of Defense, and assuming the others to be what you call entitlements. It still does not come to 2/3. I would like to do a better analysis of this or have a graph that’s more like this one:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/02/01/us/budget.html
Not by color, but at least with something telling me what each section is.
I realize that’s a seemingly petty complaint but I really can’t read the graph very well. Is there a better one I can look at, or a breakdown in text? I am serious about analyzing this.
Kamchak
February 18th, 2011
2:55 pm
I despise unions. And Obama loves unions. Ergo, I cannot wait to vote R in 2012.
Shorter jm: I love to play Cowboys and Indians.
Rockerbabe
February 18th, 2011
2:55 pm
Poor republicans, they have been caught, again, speaking out of both sides of their mouths!
I watched PrimeTime Politics on PBS and the state repr that were on, where so upset about getting on $600,000 dollars in the Obama budget for the Savannah Port renovation! My word! These republicans talk and treat President Obama and all Dems like we are dirt beneath their feet and then they want us to go along with their spending plans? Whatever happened to the deficit, the 14+ trillion deficit; I guess when it comes to their earmark request, those are acceptable, but the Dems are not.
If President Obama doesn’t get some of what he wants, then the republicans have not business whinning about not getting what they want! Anyway, if these GA legislators really want money for the Savannah Port improvement, float a bond issue and raise the money that way! This will not contribute to the deficit; one could also raise port usable fees, but the that might eat into the obscene profits of the businessmen-can’t have that. Hey, GA elected legislative leaders, be careful what you ask for, you just might get it!
Nice Guy
February 18th, 2011
2:55 pm
Mick – “getting screwed?”
Really, Mick? Getting screwed? Please, do tell.
Adam
February 18th, 2011
2:58 pm
Dave R: You yourself said you know it all, and are annoyed by others who you claim “think” they know it all. I must not be annoying to you based on that statement, since you don’t actually know it all, nor do I claim to know it all.
jm: So my request for information so I can have “the basics” as you call it, is necessarily a trait of someone who doesn’t know anything about anything?
Nice Guy
February 18th, 2011
2:59 pm
Rockerbabe – “might eat into the obscene profits of the businessmen-can’t have that.”
Wealth envy. Always alive an well on this blog. Always.
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
2:59 pm
same thing. If they want dues, they should go get the checks from the employees they represent.
It’s not the same thing. If it were, I wouldn’t be able to have my 401k funds automatically deducted from my check and forwarded to my account. I wouldn’t be able to have my insurance premiums deducted from my paycheck either. If you don’t think someone should be able to have their union dues pulled in that manner, why should they have anything pulled from their checks?
Nice Guy
February 18th, 2011
3:00 pm
Nice bunt, Kamchak.
Mick
February 18th, 2011
3:00 pm
dave r
Believe it or not, I’m glad to hear that you got a warm reception…I’m into the positive and I try not to take commentary here too personal but unions are a flashpoint for me and this new fangled attitude that they’ve outlived their existence is a fool’s errand.
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
3:00 pm
BTW…I’m truly amiss here going on about teachers and the stress they’re under vis a vis the safety and well being of the students…you want stress? Talk to a school bus driver! Unsung heroes…
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
3:01 pm
“don’t confuse “teaching” duties and responsibilities with “teacher/staff” duties and responsibilities….”
josef, I don’t. But I also ask myself this: “What’s your heart and breathing rate when you’re doing the normal duties you are paid for? How long can you safely and comfortably continue to do your job?”
The answer to #2 for firefighters and police is – not much after age 50.
The answer for #1 is – more than twice their normal rates.
I don’t discount the stress factor in your job, but there are degrees involved that just don’t get you to the level and Constitutionality of public safety personnel, which is why I don’t discount a union possibility for them if their elected leaders don’t staff and equip them properly.
Nice Guy
February 18th, 2011
3:03 pm
Mick – “this new fangled attitude that they’ve outlived their existence is a fool’s errand.”
Hmm. Let’s say it another way: They’ver overstayed their welcome. They’ve become too greedy. They’ve become like 4 year old toddlers who throw temper tantrums when they don’t get what they want. They’ve developed an overwhelming entitlement mentality.
There, that’s better.
jm
February 18th, 2011
3:04 pm
Adam 2:55 – in the 2010 budget, entitlements are closer to 1/2. That is due to elevated military spending on (still) Iraq and Afghanistan. Those costs will be winding down in future budgets. In addition to planned military cuts, by 2015 or so, due also to growth in entitlement spending, they are 2/3 of the budget (Medicare, Medicaid, and SS together).
josef nix
February 18th, 2011
3:05 pm
DAVE
We’ll pick back up on this later…right now I’ve got a couple of errands to run before Friday night music stress relief!
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
3:06 pm
“but unions are a flashpoint for me and this new fangled attitude that they’ve outlived their existence is a fool’s errand.”
Why? They brought about OSHA safety rules. Do we really need more? They brought about the 40 hour work week. Do you really think we’d get away from that? Overtime, child safety laws, etc,etc,etc. Do you really see a need for unions now that the work has been done?
What do they provide TODAY?
A buggy whip served a purpose 100 years ago. It no longer has relevance today. Unions are nothing more than the equvalent of buggy whips.
Mick
February 18th, 2011
3:07 pm
guy
Ever watch a professional athlete or musician and how they sometimes make it look easy? Go into a classroom sometime day and watch the teacher make it look easy. They go home and pick up the paper and see that there are people out there calling them lazy, thugs and worse. People that haven’t walked the walk should be just a bit more careful about talking the talk…I’m talking about you..
Adam
February 18th, 2011
3:08 pm
jm: Nevermind, I found a much easier to read graph, but it’s not as detailed. It also is confusing at first because it is a file that gets edited every year the data comes out. Current analysis is for FY2010: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U.S._Federal_Spending_-_FY_2007.png
According to the chart, entitlements are 43% of FY2010’s budget, not 2/3. Compare to my previous link I posted for percentages and you will see that entitlement spending by percentage went up because a lot of other things were cut. So yeah, SOME entitlements were not reduced by Obama’s first budget proposal, but in NEITHER budget does it approach 2/3. You’ll notice that UI was actually reduced. I’m sure there’s more there that has been reduced as well that can be called an entitlement.
by 2015 or so, due also to growth in entitlement spending, they are 2/3 of the budget
Had you said that in the first place I wouldn’t have argued with you about it! I thought you were talking about the current budget, and as far as I can tell looking back at your posts that is what I can reasonably infer you were talking about.
War spending is definitely a big problem. We need to scale that back, big time. Doing that and cutting military spending, along with some entitlement cuts (but not complete defunding) ought to help a lot, but I still think we do need some tax increases in there somewhere in the long run. Right now it would hurt anyone except the top income brackets to get a tax increase.
jm
February 18th, 2011
3:08 pm
SoCo not all union dues are voluntary. If it is a “union shop” or “agency shop”, dues are required as a condition of employment.
Mick
February 18th, 2011
3:11 pm
dave r
For a politician, what have you learned? What exactly do you know about the teaching profession and what needs to be protected? I guarantee you this, once there is no collective bargaining, katy bar the door because the know-it-alls such as yourself will be deciding what you need, absolute power corrupts, absolutely, there needs to be a check.
jm
February 18th, 2011
3:12 pm
Adam 3:08 – see my 3:04. All the budget problems are entitlement related. Due to baby boomer demographics and the rapid increase in health care costs.
Nice Guy
February 18th, 2011
3:13 pm
Mick – “Go into a classroom sometime day and watch the teacher make it look easy”
My wife was a teacher for many years. Did she sometimes complain about her job, sure, we all do now and then. Did she ever say, “dammit, I’m gonna round up my fellow union members and go on strike.” Hell to the no, Mick. Unions are, for the most part, an EFFing joke. Nothing more. They live in la la land and think they are entitled to everything under the sun…and that security is just a given, no matter what their performance. What a joke. Its time they were weened off the governemnt teat….just a bit….not asking a lot of those folks in Wisonsin.
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
3:14 pm
SoCo not all union dues are voluntary. If it is a “union shop” or “agency shop”, dues are required as a condition of employment.
Such is not the case with public sector unions, which is the union of despise at the particular moment. I don’t think half the officers I work with are union members. However, they do get to share the benefits (if there are any) of union negotiations. It’s the same with police. They do not have to join the FOP to be a police officer.
Nice Guy
February 18th, 2011
3:16 pm
Gotta go folks. Perhaps I’ll jump back on tonight some time after a fair amount of Jack Daniels.
Either way, let the comedy act that is the union and democrats in Wisconsin continue. They are showing their asses….for all to see. Too many Americans are struggling and out of work for these arrogant fools to be on strike from their jobs. You’d think that if anybody could recognize that, it’d be the Left-nuts on here.
Mick
February 18th, 2011
3:17 pm
guy
You’re the joke and your wife probably would like a divorce from someone who considers teachers “weened of the gov’t teat”. She probably got out because she couldn’t handle the stress which you so callously fail to note. Unfortunately she still has to be with you or not.
jm
February 18th, 2011
3:20 pm
SoCo 3:14 – I have no idea if the WI union dues are voluntary or not. Would be interesting to know…. either way, I just don’t have any faith in unions due to my (and friends’) interactions with them.
Adam
February 18th, 2011
3:22 pm
jm: All the budget problems are entitlement related. Due to baby boomer demographics and the rapid increase in health care costs.
I agree with you to a point. And that point is the assumption that ALL of the budget problems are entitlement related. This is not true, and you’ve actually said so yourself.
Like I said, I agree cuts need to be made to nearly everything. But I do not think that cuts need to be complete defunding.
I would appreciate your analysis on the FY2011 budget proposal. The graph is quite easy to read and look at.
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
3:25 pm
” What exactly do you know about the teaching profession and what needs to be protected?’
Why must I repeat what has already been said 10 times in the past 2 days for you, Mick?
Adam
February 18th, 2011
3:25 pm
Nice Guy: Too many Americans are struggling and out of work for these arrogant fools to be on strike from their jobs.
Again with the “They should be happy to have a job/do what master says” argument. I call BS. It’s not fair to boil this protest down to a teachers-only, unions-only protest of not having enough money. What is being proposed is that teachers and other govt unions (except police and fire) cannot organize, cannot collect dues as easily, and cannot have any sort of negotiating position in the future. That can lead to nothing but bad news for schools, teachers, students, and parents.
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
3:27 pm
jm
I understand that. I’ve seen the good and bad side of unions in my short lifetime. I’ve had family members who joined and others who didn’t. I know the steelworkers took good care of my grandfather, and even respected him after he retired. Your lack of faith in unions is probably just like my lack of faith in political parties.
Adam
February 18th, 2011
3:27 pm
Dave R: Which of these is NOT an important profession:
a) Police
b) Fire
c) Teachers
d) EMTs/Emergency services
jm
February 18th, 2011
3:27 pm
Adam 3:22 – of course I’m for cutting military spending too. But that’s not the crux of the problem.
FY 2011- there are 3 or 4 different proposals out there. I think Ryan’s $35B cuts to discretionary are fine, $60 is ok, more than that… on short notice without a lot of thought, possibly of questionable legitimacy.
But since FY 2011 is half over, 2012 matters more.
Obama’s FY 2012 is a complete punt on all the real issues and involves no spending cuts, only a spending freeze on discretionary and an increase in all entitlements. So I think the R’s are doing an ok job with 2011, but 2012 is a bigger deal and that battle royale will be humming along soon enough. Oh yes, and there’s the debt ceiling….
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
3:28 pm
“They brought about the 40 hour work week. Do you really think we’d get away from that? Overtime, child safety laws, etc,etc,etc. Do you really see a need for unions now that the work has been done?”
Actually Dave, except for child labor, we have gotten away from that — I know very few people who work in the public and private world that work 40 hours a week — it’s more like 60-80. Just a personal observation.
In my opinion, it goes with the attitude that workers should be grateful for their jobs — which of course goes without saying, of course they should be grateful, but that should not be confused with their individual rights fought for by the unions.
The attitude of “just shut up and work and be damn glad you have a job” mentality of some is lost on me. Like I said, of course, people are grateful for their jobs, but it used to be the respect went both ways, now it only seems to go one way.
Again, just my two cents.
Mick
February 18th, 2011
3:28 pm
dave r
So you were a classroom teacher dave? You’ve taught for many years and know the lay of land regarding that profession? I was a block mason – for a day, does that qualify me to be called a block mason?
Mick
February 18th, 2011
3:30 pm
bosch
Your two cents at least were minted with some real copper…
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
3:32 pm
Mick,
From the unionized copper mines..
You were a block mason? Cool!
TaxPayer
February 18th, 2011
3:32 pm
Perhaps our distinguished congressmen cited the commerce clause due to suits filed against them while practicing in another state. Who knows how the wiring in a Republican’s brain functions. I suspect it would give pause to Watson trying to sort it out though.
Adam
February 18th, 2011
3:33 pm
jm: Crap I got confused on FY2011 and FY2012. I need to look up a graph for that too, but I agree he punted. His proposal is a first proposal though. It’s not supposed to be the final word. But the argument I see going on is basically this:
Obama: We;re not cutting entitlements, we’ll cut this stuff instead
House Republicans: Oh no, you’re going to cut entitlements, some of them will be cut to zero, and you’re NOT cutting anything else.
Looks to me like the Senate will have to be the final place that the voice of reason takes over and an actual compromise is reached. Which is highly ironic considering the last 2 years.
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
3:34 pm
” Which of these is NOT an important profession?
a) Police
b) Fire
c) Teachers
d) EMTs/Emergency services
All are important, Adam, but only 2 put their lives on the line in the normal and expected execution of their duties. And those same two cannot be performed at expected levels past age 50.
What is you point (as if you had one)?
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
3:35 pm
Dave R.,
“but only 2 put their lives on the line in the normal and expected execution of their duties”
Obviously….you’ve never been around 4th graders with math books!
J/K
Mick
February 18th, 2011
3:37 pm
bosch
Growing up, I helped build three houses with my dad and since he had so many kids, we did it all from ditch digging, block, brick, framing, plumbing, a/c. The only thing he didn’t mess with was the electric because his best friend was an ace electrician. Great, great experience…
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
3:38 pm
Mick, I have taught occasionally in classes, but was not my profession.
Again, what is your point? Make the case that they require soem sort of union protections or don’t; I don’t care. You’re beating a dead horse with me. There is NO safety or consistent stress issue in teaching that would call for a union to be formed.
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
3:40 pm
Mick!
Excellent! That’s one thing I wish I could do – build stuff — I can’t even build cool stuff with Legos — now give me a paint brush and that’s a different story.
Mick
February 18th, 2011
3:42 pm
dave r
How’s about planning periods, supplements for coaching, supplements for teaching inner city, involuntary transfers, voluntary transfers, conflict with administrators, certification, substitute teachers not being used properly. I could go on and on…get the point?
Adam
February 18th, 2011
3:43 pm
Dave R: Thank you. My only point was that all are important. My other point that I have made and hashed out already is that safety of a profession is not the only reason to form a union, and that right should not be denied on such a narrow assumption basis.
Mick
February 18th, 2011
3:45 pm
bosch
A painter!! I can’t even draw a good stick man….how I wish I had that talent. I play some bass and maybe someday will hook-up with so co for an epic get it all out jam…
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
3:46 pm
“get the point?”
No, I don’t. Make the case for unions based on safety or stress in the normal performance of their duties, Mick, or don’t. I don’t care. All you gave me were a laundry list of duties.
Common Sense isn't very Common
February 18th, 2011
3:47 pm
Dissolve the Dept of Ed and see if GA can drop lower than last in the state rankings what with the current politicians in office.
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
3:49 pm
” My other point that I have made and hashed out already is that safety of a profession is not the only reason to form a union, and that right should not be denied on such a narrow assumption basis.”
Which you failed to make, Adam. You want workers to have a say in the rules of the game, when they have no skin in the game. I get it. It doesn’t make it right.
Dr. Pangloss
February 18th, 2011
3:49 pm
Fun fact: the Constitution doesn’t say anything about a right to vote. Maybe we should go all states rightsy and go back to the days when you had to be white, male, over 21 and a substantial property owner to vote–as Tea Party Nation has already advocated.
Adam
February 18th, 2011
3:49 pm
Common: Dissolve the Dept of Ed and see if there even IS a ranking board anymore….
Mick
February 18th, 2011
3:50 pm
dave r
I’ll tell you what, since you are definately slow on the take concerning this issue, stalemate…have a good weekend however, and please do us all a favor, don’t ever run for office again…
Adam
February 18th, 2011
3:52 pm
Dave R: You want workers to have a say in the rules of the game, when they have no skin in the game
On what basis do you say that workers have no skin in the game? What are they then, just humans we’re using until we can replace them with machines?
Common Sense isn't very Common
February 18th, 2011
3:54 pm
Adam – that is true but many seem to advocate getting rid of it so that there won’t be ANY national standards
Adam
February 18th, 2011
3:56 pm
BTW, The First Amendment prohibits the making of any law that interferes with the right to assemble. What the Wisconsin Governor is proposing is actually unconstitutional.
Dusty
February 18th, 2011
3:57 pm
Well, now that I can get back to my computer, let me post just a few lines for those who wish to change history.
Bosch–some people did object to going into Iraq. They did not speak loud enough for congress to hear as it was almost 100% of congress that said go. Did you forget?
Normal–I don’t lie, thank you. Our leaders led us to war because they thought it would prevent perilous attacks on the USA. If you think war is so terrible and it is, why did you sign up three times to join the ARMED FORCES who fight wars? I assume you wanted to protect our country. That is also what President Bush and congress wanted. Do you berate youself along with Bush & Congress?
SoCo–military action in Iraq was started because of dire info on wmds in a country led by an ambitious dictator.. The presence of wmds was thought to be certain by CIA & others. (Afghanistan was attacked because Osama/terrorists was thought to be there.) We cannot now change what was thought to be true in Iraq then. The UN also agreed as did Gen. Colin Powell. That is history.
Larry..Yes, I know about the Iraqi who later confessed to giving false information. Too bad we did not know that until the war in Iraq is over….
Getalife, I will continue to present the facts of history to those who want to change them to suit their present beliefs. If the truth bothers you, go ahead and call it screaming. But take your meds and do not stroke out. .
Mick
February 18th, 2011
4:01 pm
Dusty@3:57
Naive (adj) – lacking developed powers of analysis, reasoning, or criticism: a naive argument
Pogo
February 18th, 2011
4:01 pm
Who wants to bet that not one of the protesters in the streets of Wisconsin voted for the Republican governor. Many are probably not even from Wisconsin seeings how Obama and the DNC have called in their union goons. That means someone else that isn’t being heard did elect him which was obviously the majority. These teachers making $100,000 per year are bitching about carrying a little more of the load for their benefits? Yea right, I have a lot of sympathy for them. They should try it out in the real world.
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
4:03 pm
Pogo,
“These teachers making $100,000 per year are bitching about carrying a little more of the load for their benefits?”
DUDE!! Put down the crack pipe!!
Joe the Plutocrat
February 18th, 2011
4:03 pm
anybody actually read the 10th 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.” Talk about a ‘rock, paper, scissors’ shell game. the Found Fathers saw fit to consider “powers NOT delegated…NOR prohibited by the States..” and were this not vague enough, the threw a bone to “the people’ as if we have a say in any of this mess…
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
4:03 pm
Oh and Pogo,
S’up? I hope you have a good weekend.
But….JUST SAY NO!!!
Mick
February 18th, 2011
4:05 pm
pogo
Is that a fact? $100,000 per year or do you mean a married couple where both are teachers making 50k each?
What say ye if all those people are just wisconsinites?
Left wing management
February 18th, 2011
4:06 pm
So how come Limbaugh no love him some public demos in Wisconsin?
I though the whole point of ransacking Iraq was to bring democracy to it? Remember before the invasion George Bush cynically said “See that’s why we’re going into Iraq. So they can do things like this”.
So was all that just a sham? Uh huh …
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
4:07 pm
Dissolve the Dept of Ed and see if GA can drop lower than last in the state rankings what with the current politicians in office.
Sounds par for the course in this age of “I got mine, screw yours!”
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
4:10 pm
Who wants to bet that not one of the protesters in the streets of Wisconsin voted for the Republican governor.
If any police or fire personnel are supporting the protesters, then you’re probably wrong. The only reason the police and fire were exempted from the bill was because they supported the governor in the past election.
Dusty
February 18th, 2011
4:10 pm
MIck,
If telling the truth is naive, go ahead. Call me just that. I think it iis more naive to try and change what happened in the past. That seems to be what you favor.
jm
February 18th, 2011
4:11 pm
Adam – “Obama: We;re not cutting entitlements, we’ll cut this stuff instead
House Republicans: Oh no, you’re going to cut entitlements, some of them will be cut to zero, and you’re NOT cutting anything else.”
Afraid this is wrong. Obama isn’t cutting anything. Republicans have not said they’re cutting any entitlements to 0, that would be political suicide. They are for cutting the rate of growth in entitlements and instituting some other changes (if they have their way) that would not affect any retiring now or in the near future…. furthermore, they’re cutting SS and Medicare benefits for the wealthy…. despite criticisms that Republicans are only out to help the rich.
Left wing management
February 18th, 2011
4:11 pm
Sorry, left out a line.
I though the whole point of ransacking Iraq was to bring democracy to it? Remember before the invasion George Bush cynically said of all the demonstrations in the streets of London: “See that’s why we’re going into Iraq. So the Iraqis can do things like this”.
So how come all the right wing brigades all bent out of shape?
saywhat?
February 18th, 2011
4:13 pm
The tenthers are just like the fourthers, and every other self-righteous hypocritical conservative whiner. The Constitution is sacrosanct in the defense of whatever point THEY would like to make, until it isn’t.
Common Sense isn't very Common
February 18th, 2011
4:16 pm
gotta love tort reform
Mick
February 18th, 2011
4:17 pm
dusty
Sorry, I am a bit wound up…..people around here assume way too much, sometimes myself included….I’m skeptical of all who hold power, from the boss on up…everybody needs a method to be kept in check, along with the law and that is checked by the courts. Anyway, looks like a great weekend ahead…enjoy
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 18th, 2011
4:22 pm
jt:
To be consistent I would have to agree with you that the manufacturing or use of illegal drugs “within a state” should be a state issue.
However, the entry of drugs from state to state or across our border should remain a federal issue. If the federal government would concentrate all of their efforts there they probably could make more of an impact anyway.
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
4:23 pm
“Maybe we should go all states rightsy and go back to the days when you had to be white, male, over 21 and a substantial property owner to vote–as Tea Party Nation has already advocated.”
Please provide any proof whatsoever that any Tea Party member has called for the above requirements to vote.
The silence will be deafening . . .
MC
February 18th, 2011
4:24 pm
Then you need to try a lot harder Dave R.
Mick
February 18th, 2011
4:24 pm
0311/0317 – 1811/1801
I missed it – where did scout go?
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
4:26 pm
“On what basis do you say that workers have no skin in the game? What are they then, just humans we’re using until we can replace them with machines?”
Frankly, yes. There is NO right to a job. Anywhere. I suggest you think real hard to determine exactly what a “right” is, Adam.
Adam
February 18th, 2011
4:26 pm
jm: Obama isn’t cutting anything.
Even with my cursory understanding of his proposal, and with no graph, I know this is not true. The news stories on it show there have been some cuts, just not to the so called entitlements.
Republicans have not said they’re cutting any entitlements to 0, that would be political suicide. They are for cutting the rate of growth in entitlements and instituting some other changes (if they have their way) that would not affect any retiring now or in the near future…. furthermore, they’re cutting SS and Medicare benefits for the wealthy
Now, those are actually reasonable ideas. I would like to see the proposal they have put forth that details this.
Pogo
February 18th, 2011
4:28 pm
Adam, if teachers were what they were supposed to be and they considered their profession more of a “calling” rather than the easy money they can make from it, I would include them but judging by the intellectual capital that they are supposed to be providing (in the form of “educated” students”) for this country, I would have to say, we could do without many of them we have. If there was more scrutiny on teachers maybe that would make those that do make the grade appreciate their jobs a little more. But right now you can buy an education degree and become a teacher as long as you can get the money (either from your own resources or from the government).
Our students are more ill prepared (and that is saying it nicely) than ever to compete in the world economical environment and the nations test scores prove it. But more importantly, when the “product” that they turn out gets into the real world workplace, they just cannot handle it because they were shafted by schools and teachers who really didn’t give a damn whether the students were prepared or not, as long as they received their money. Education in this country has become public funded industrial greed.
So Fire Fighers? Yes. Police, yes. EMT, yes. Teachers, they need a damned good scrubbing. Empathy and the desire to better people are two of the most important qualities a teacher should have. Greed should not even be included. A decent living for being good at their craft? Yes. But teachers must be held to the same standards as the rest of us in private sector are. If you do not perform, you must go. Tenure should not exist in publically funded institutions because it creates laziness and it creates greed.
Jason
February 18th, 2011
4:28 pm
It makes perfect sense. The Republicans just want to disagree with anything the Democrats propose. If the Democrats were trying to push the medical malpractice issue, then the Republicans would have started crying about state’s right in that case. Some of the items in the health care bill were originally Republican ideas but because Obama pushed it through, they suddenly found it evil.
Adam
February 18th, 2011
4:29 pm
Dave R: You didn’t answer my question. What I asked had nothing to do with “right to a job,” nor did I claim that at any other point. So I ask again:
On what basis do you say that workers have no skin in the game?
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
4:29 pm
“BTW, The First Amendment prohibits the making of any law that interferes with the right to assemble. What the Wisconsin Governor is proposing is actually unconstitutional.”
As usual, Adam, you’re not even REMOTELY right on this issue. The right to “assemble” is the right to meet as a group, whether in public or in private. It has NOTHING to do with forming an association for any purpose.
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 18th, 2011
4:31 pm
Mick:
I’m still here but I needed a unique handle so I could find my posts better when scrolling.
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
4:32 pm
Actually, I did answer your question, Adam. But to spell it out even further, the employer takes the risk. The workers work. You don’t like it? Take the risk yourself.
godless heathen
February 18th, 2011
4:33 pm
Where’s the music?
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
4:34 pm
“considered their profession more of a “calling” rather than the easy money they can make from it”
OMG! Stop it Pogo, you’re killing me!!
Adam
February 18th, 2011
4:34 pm
Pogo: Many of your arguments could be easily applied to any public job, in the forms of corruption and greed. Although Firefighters and EMTs are not traditionally seen as greedy or corrupt, there are some bad apples in the bunch just like in every job. Police is much easier of a target. Who hasn’t heard of police corruption stories? Who hasn’t heard of police greed in the form of drug and money laundering? But of the four, you think only teachers have some kind of greed and aren’t doing their jobs? Of the four, only teachers go on strike with their union for pay raises and for greed whereas police, fire, and EMTs do not ever do that? Of the four, teachers ONLY go on strike for stupid reasons whereas Fire, Police, and EMTs ALWAYS are on the right side of the bargain from start to finish?
Really, it seems you just have something against teachers and education in general. You’re not one of those ones that believes they make $100k per year apiece are you?
godless heathen
February 18th, 2011
4:34 pm
We have a right to some Friday travelin’ music! I say, “To the streets!!”
Mick
February 18th, 2011
4:37 pm
pogo
Where to begin? Notice that you have shifted 100% of the issue on the teacher. Is there less crime because we have the police? Are there less accidents because we have EMT’s?
When you talk about teachers be sure to include the product the parents are sending and most importantly, the student’s responsibility for their self, don’t be so easy to let the student off the hook. Bad teachers – yes, bad cops – yes and so on. What about the great teachers or very good teachers? Why do you focus on the bad, there’s your problem. This is america, there’s some damn good people out there day in and day out, this lack of respect for teachers is peculiar to this country. About those test scores, don’t forget about our population number and entertainment culture. The education is there, which students grab it – nine out of ten, the students with good parents…
AmVet
February 18th, 2011
4:37 pm
Scout.
Rotator cuff injuries? Pitchers? Curve balls?
jt, any time you wanna debate Nader step up to the plate.
And heathen is right.
Where is the tunage?
Dusty
February 18th, 2011
4:37 pm
That’s OK, MIck
Sometimes we all get a bit wound up. You’ll probably be sitting in sunshine this weekend…all relaxed. Have a good one… I will too.
Adam
February 18th, 2011
4:38 pm
Dave R: It has NOTHING to do with forming an association for any purpose
Actually, the Supreme Court has ruled otherwise on more than one occasion.
But to spell it out even further, the employer takes the risk. The workers work
Riiiiiight. Because the only “risk” that exists is one of safety, in a very narrow viewpoint of what safety means, right? Or to put it another way, workers never take any risk unless it’s a risk of dying? And workers never have a vested interest in how well the employer does or in that employer’s image? Risk and “skin in the game” isn’t just about potential for death, Dave.
Some People are stupid
February 18th, 2011
4:39 pm
Dave R-
Wait..I may be late but in reading the question”On what basis do you say that workers have no skin in the game?
Your reply was “employer takes the risk. The workers work”
Please tell me of any successful business without workers?
They both have skin in the game. Employers are motivated by profit, so they need good effecient workers to produce a high quality good/service to make a profit.
The worker receives payment. THey don’t receive payment unless the company maintains some level of profitability, so it is in their interest to do there job in a cost effective manner.
There is never anything that’s onesided…Have you ever heard of the term stakeholder??
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 18th, 2011
4:40 pm
AmVet:
Sorry, I get it now ……….. good comeback.
Actually, I tore it almost completely in two making an arrest ………. but he didn’t get away ………………..
Mick
February 18th, 2011
4:40 pm
scout
Glad you’re here, even though I’m still looking over my back, I agree with your perspective sometimes and feel you’ve got my back..
jm
February 18th, 2011
4:40 pm
Adam 4:26 – let me revise my statement. Obama is not cutting total discretionary spending.
AmVet
February 18th, 2011
4:42 pm
“but he didn’t get away ………………..”
Good!
I’m a big anti-crime guy.
Both the street and white collar varieties.
Which puts me at odds with most Republicans. (grin)
MUSIC! MUSIC! MUSIC! MUSIC!
Adam
February 18th, 2011
4:42 pm
Some People are stupid: Exactly. Although I can point to some successful sole proprietorships but that’s a small segment and is neither here nor there on the actual argument, since a sole proprietor is both the owner and the worker, and both still have skin in the game.
Some People are stupid
February 18th, 2011
4:43 pm
Speaking of cutting spending. I do find it that both the republicans plan and the president’s budget cut the same amount of money…yet for some reason the Republicans are against it….
Only in America can cutting 100 billion out of a 1.5 Trillion dollar deficit be seen as great…oh wow..now its only 1.4 trillion..
Some People are stupid
February 18th, 2011
4:43 pm
ADam-
Even in sole Pro. The employer takes on the role of the worker..
Adam
February 18th, 2011
4:44 pm
jm: Yet. I’m reasonably sure this is just an opening bid for the budget compromise to come.
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 18th, 2011
4:44 pm
Hummmmmm ……………. this is not encouraging:
“Here are the 11 most dangerous cities in terms of crime risk:”
City/ Crime Risk Index
1. St. Louis: 530
2. Atlanta: 484
3. Birmingham Alabama (tie): 380
3. Orlando (tie): 380
5. Detroit: 369
6. Memphis: 361
7. Miami: 346
8. Baltimore: 339
9. Kansas City, Missouri: 337
10. Minneapolis (tie): 331
10. Cleveland (tie): 331
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/The-11-Most-Dangerous-usnews-1262959588.html?x=0
Ragnar Danneskjöld
February 18th, 2011
4:44 pm
Dear Jay, sorry I am late to the party. I fear your lack of Constitutional knowledges perhaps leads to a misconstruction that allows you to incorrectly charge our noble Congressmen with “hypocrisy.” The tort limitation proposed under the commerce clause is at least potentially consistent with the entire purpose of the clause.
You will recall that at the time of the Constitutional Convention, it was a practice of many states to levy duties on goods crossing state lines. Thus was conceived the commerce clause – giving Congress the power to regulate transactions among the states and with foreign countries – and the closely related “full faith and credit clause,” requiring the states to honor the judgments of the courts of other states.
Against this backdrop, over 200 years a wide variance of standards of judgments evolved on medical malpractice among the many states. To the extent that the consequences of those judgments affect only those within the states rendering the judgments, I agree with your argument and affirm that Congress ought not interfere.
However, to the extent that medical malpractice judgments arise from good transacted across state lines – e.g., medical equipment, prosthetics, pharmaceuticals – those bearing the costs of those judgments may well (indeed, likely do) reside in other states.
Thus, if you have one jurisdiction with a whacked out, pro-plaintiff judiciary (let’s call it “California”) rendering massive, and especially “class action,” malpractice judgments, citizens of more rational states are subsidizing the plaintiff enrichment. It is perfectly appropriate for the Congress to thereby regulate these intra-state transactions that have inter-state adverse consequences.
You surely agree that the proposed constriction I describe above is well within the ambit of rational Commerce Clause jurisprudence. One need not go so far as the loopy Gonzales v Raich to support a Federal constriction on State court judgments, and mere advocacy for original-language jurisprudence of the Commerce Clause need not endorse Gonzales v Reich. I respectfully sugges that Messrs. Gingrey and Price likely do not affirm that there is no Commerce Clause, and do not affirm that there is no use for the Commerce Clause. Your allegation of “hypocrisy” is poorly-founded, within the limitations of the argument I offer above.
Adam
February 18th, 2011
4:45 pm
0311/Scout: I actually am surprised that New Orleans is not on the top 10.
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 18th, 2011
4:46 pm
Mick:
Roger that !
I just try to be honest on here but it sures draws a lot of hatred.
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 18th, 2011
4:47 pm
Adam;
Or ChIcago and Washington, D.C. !
jm
February 18th, 2011
4:48 pm
Adam 4:26 – see deficit reduction commission plan
jewcowboy
February 18th, 2011
4:48 pm
Adam,
“0311/Scout: I actually am surprised that New Orleans is not on the top 10.”
That’s what happens when you export your criminal element to Atlanta.
Mick
February 18th, 2011
4:50 pm
0311/0317 – 1811/1801
When I was young, I was told honesty is the best policy. Now that I’m older, it still works for me… I’m telling you that crawling eye movie was made specifically to scare the hell out of a four year old…I’ll never forget it…
saywhat?
February 18th, 2011
4:50 pm
Why is it o.k. for conservatives to have “wealth envy” of teachers who work hard and make personal sacrifices to make on average less than 70k per year, yet wrong for liberals to point out that hedge fund managers, who produce nothing, should pay taxes on their income at the same rate as the aforementinoned teachers?
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 18th, 2011
4:50 pm
Del:
Headline: “Chaos as troops fire on crowds in Bahrain”
Yep ……….. I’ve had troops fire at me and I was in “chaos” ………………….
It kind of goes with the territory !
saywhat?
February 18th, 2011
4:50 pm
aforementioned
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
4:52 pm
So, did Bookman get mugged?
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 18th, 2011
4:52 pm
jewcowboy:
Yep ……….. after the hurricane that’s exactly what happened and a lot of them stayed.
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 18th, 2011
4:53 pm
Mick:
Those movies also came in very handy on a date at a drive-in movie …………………
Dusty
February 18th, 2011
4:53 pm
Bosch,
Whatcha been paintin’? Walls,poster board, canvas, fabric, model airplanes? R U a Picasso or a Rembrandt? I use to like Modiglioni but nawww…How ’bout my favorite Van Gogh???
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 18th, 2011
4:53 pm
Bosch:
Not yet but he knows “hand to hand” combat so I’m betting on him.
jewcowboy
February 18th, 2011
4:54 pm
The New Colossus – Post Katrina Atlanta version
“Give me your thugs, your poor,
Your pistol toting masses yearning to steal from me,
The wretched refuse of your flooded housing projects.
Send these, the homeless, murdering bands of gangs to me,
I lift my 42″ flat screen beside the golden peach!”
Adam
February 18th, 2011
4:54 pm
jewcowboy: That’s what happens when you export your criminal element to Atlanta.
ZING!
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
4:55 pm
Dusty,
Van Gogh is my favorite too! He’s was an interesting feller.
Adam
February 18th, 2011
4:55 pm
jm: deficit reduction commission plan… is that not the bipartisan commission that made recommendations? I was asking for the Republican plan….
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 18th, 2011
4:57 pm
HEADLINES:
Egypt OKs Iran warships through Suez Canal…
Bahrain forces fire on protesters; 50+ injured …
Saudi prince warns of uprising threat…
20 reported dead in Libyan protests…
Egypt’s Top Tycoon Fears Descent Into Anarchy…
Brotherhood’s ’spiritual leader’ preaches in Tahrir Square…
Arab capitals braced for violence as unrest spreads…
Death toll in Yemen mounts as police, protestors clash…
NOT GOOD ……………….
Common Sense isn't very Common
February 18th, 2011
4:57 pm
JCB I thought that we tossed a coin with Houston and lost to get the NO thugs LOL
TaxPayer
February 18th, 2011
4:57 pm
As long as those guys are only operating on Republicans, where’s the harm.
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
4:58 pm
“Actually, the Supreme Court has ruled otherwise on more than one occasion.”
Actually, they have not.
0311/0317 - 1811/1801
February 18th, 2011
4:58 pm
jewcowboy:
Now that was funnny ………………… except it’s true.
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
4:59 pm
” Risk and “skin in the game” isn’t just about potential for death,”
Never said it, never implied it. I am talking financial risk.
jewcowboy
February 18th, 2011
4:59 pm
Bosch,
Speaking of painters, I’m sure you heard this:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ktla-mona-lisa-man,0,3925192.story
Common Sense isn't very Common
February 18th, 2011
5:00 pm
The thugs are self supporting anyway so they must vote for regressives
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
5:01 pm
jewcowboy,
No, I have not! Interesting. The Mona Lisa is a fabulous painting, I remember when I first saw it, I saw surprised at how small it was.
AmVet
February 18th, 2011
5:02 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSYbZTsY-00
jewcowboy
February 18th, 2011
5:02 pm
37,
“except it’s true.”
And that makes me sad
Dusty
February 18th, 2011
5:02 pm
Bosch,
Does that mean you paint….. sunflowers?
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
5:03 pm
“There is never anything that’s onesided…Have you ever heard of the term stakeholder??”
Yes, I have, and there are degrees of skin in the game. Frankly, the employer needs workers, but they don’t need a specific worker, as in YOU. They can always get another worker. On the other hand, the worker needs the employer, and can’t always find another based upon whether the employer is willing to risk money to start up a company.
I’m sorry, but the workers just aren’t all that. . .
TaxPayer
February 18th, 2011
5:07 pm
As long as those two Republican congressmen only operate on like-thinking people such as other Republicans and constitutionalists and Libertarians, etc., then where’s the harm.
Adam
February 18th, 2011
5:07 pm
Dave R: One notable case in which the Supreme Court ruled in favor of freedom of association was in NAACP v. Alabama, where they held that the freedom of association is an essential part of the Freedom of Speech because, in many cases, people can engage in effective speech only when they join with others.
Never said it, never implied it. I am talking financial risk.
So which is it? People can’t form unions unless they risk death, or unless they risk financial harm by not doing so? Seems like you’re making arguments up now. Your consistent argument up to this point has been that police and fire can have unions, and only them, because of how naturally dangerous the job is. When did you EVER talk about financial risk in that?
Dusty
February 18th, 2011
5:07 pm
Jewcowboy, ol’ poet or whatever one might call you,
Are there any statistics to back up your NO claims? I know the rumors but for real? The police probably do not ask “From whence cometh you?”
AmVet
February 18th, 2011
5:10 pm
I’ll tell ya what boys and girls. There are changes at hand.
It’s darn near 70 degrees and the geese are on the move.
I heard them a while ago before I could even see them…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q40h8dPmgwQ
jewcowboy
February 18th, 2011
5:11 pm
Dusty,
“I know the rumors but for real? ”
http://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta/gang-member-given-three-618607.html
http://clatl.com/atlanta/atlantas-drug-war/Content?oid=1270981
jewcowboy
February 18th, 2011
5:14 pm
Dusty,
And another:
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/14271910/detail.html
Adam
February 18th, 2011
5:14 pm
Dave R: but they don’t need a specific worker, as in YOU
I’m sorry, but the workers just aren’t all that
These are two different arguments, neither of which have anything to do with the right of workers to assemble a union. Your first argument is fine, but I’m not arguing that the reason people should be able to form unions is the right to a job. I am instead arguing that any worker in any profession has a right to be part of a union, and that unions can be formed and can bargain for reasons other than safety and pay.
Either the employer owes the workers and the workers owe the employer, OR the workers do NOT owe the employer and the employer does NOT owe the workers. It isn’t one owes and the other does not. Unions exist to help protect the worker’s rights. Employers have the option of being reasonable with their workers or not, and employees have the right to decide if they’re being screwed or not.
Bosch
February 18th, 2011
5:21 pm
Dusty,
I’ll paint damn near anything my dear!
Have a good weekend.
Dusty
February 18th, 2011
5:26 pm
Jewcowboy,
That is downright scary!! Between the NO gangs and the Mexican drug cartels, no wonder we rank high in crime in Atlanta. And these criminals even have assault rifles, etc.!! The police must really have their hands full these days. I don’t envy their job but I surely do appreciate it.
jewcowboy
February 18th, 2011
5:27 pm
Bosch,
Anything huh?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IC-EaHdjtzs
jewcowboy
February 18th, 2011
5:27 pm
Dusty,
“I don’t envy their job but I surely do appreciate it.”
I hear you on that one!
Dusty
February 18th, 2011
5:28 pm
You, too, Bosch, and paint the town red!!
Left wing management
February 18th, 2011
5:45 pm
Dave R. : “The act of teaching is NOT a life-threatening measure. The act of fire-fighting is. Therefore, I do not think that a union is warranted for teaching.”
Since when is hazard alone the condition of having a profession be unionized or not?
Adam
February 18th, 2011
6:10 pm
LWM: It’s not. But according to Dave R, it is. Well, unless it isn’t: “Never said it, never implied it. I am talking financial risk.”
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
6:11 pm
LWM
Dave said that is what he thought should be the reason for having a public employee union. He’s entitled to his opinion, and I don’t think anyone here is going to change it.
Dave R.
February 18th, 2011
7:04 pm
“Since when is hazard alone the condition of having a profession be unionized or not?”
“LWM: It’s not. But according to Dave R, it is. Well, unless it isn’t: “Never said it, never implied it. I am talking financial risk.”
Adam, I have given up on you ever being able to comprehend the English language. YOU brought up the hazardous risk issue as regards a union. I ONLY use stress and safety as a measure for possibly allowing a government union under certain circumstances.
And I have NEVER said, nor implied that there is anything illegal or un-Constitutional in wanting to form a union. On the other hand, there is nothing in the Constitution to keep an employer from firing anyone and everyone who tries to form one in their business.
And you still don’t get it on freedom to assemble, as it means NOTHING about unionizing. Never has.
jconservative
February 18th, 2011
7:13 pm
A Constitution of convenience, as they say.
sleestak63
February 18th, 2011
7:23 pm
Bookman doesn’t support the 10th himself!
zeke
February 18th, 2011
7:36 pm
Well Jay, I can finally agree with you on this one item! THE COMMERCE CLAUSE ONLY ALLOWS THE FEDS TO MEDIATE DISPUTES BETWEEN THE VARIOUS STATES INCLUDING COMMERCE! NOT MEDICAID, NOT WELFARE, NOT UNEMPLOYMENT TAX, ETC., ETC.!!!! OF COURSE YOU WILL AGREE?
Adam
February 18th, 2011
7:58 pm
Dave R: YOU brought up the hazardous risk issue as regards a union
Uh, no I didn’t. You did that.
Dave R@ 1:51: It is my contention that only police and fire (and those only in exteme situations such as neglect for their safety) should have the ability to form a union.
Dave R@ 2:05: “What makes police and fire different?”
We covered this yesterday. Daily and sometimes prolonged stress in dangerous conditions.
Dave R@ 2:45: Teaching, regardless of the stress you and others might get from doing so, does not meet the threshold of a truly hazardous profession as fire-fighting and police do. The act of teaching is NOT a life-threatening measure. The act of fire-fighting is. Therefore, I do not think that a union is warranted for teaching.
Dave R@ 3:01: I don’t discount the stress factor in your job, but there are degrees involved that just don’t get you to the level and Constitutionality of public safety personnel, which is why I don’t discount a union possibility for them if their elected leaders don’t staff and equip them properly.
Do you understand now? You weren’t even responding to me in most of those. At least you’ve been fairly consistent up to the point you started making it about something else entirely in response to me (financial risk).
And you still don’t get it on freedom to assemble, as it means NOTHING about unionizing. Never has.
YES, it DOES. REAL Constitutional scholars disagree with you. They have studied the issue and Supreme Court cases extensively and it is clear that employees DO have a right to organize a union, and that right is protected under freedom of assembly. This does not, however, mean the employer HAS to recognize the union or bargain with it. But the employees DO have that right under freedom of assembly. I dare you to PROVE me wrong, instead of just asserting your apparently know-it-all attitude.
It’s fine to have this all knowing and superior persona, but it is a mask, a fake. And that’s obvious to anyone who reads this exchange with a rational mind. I don’t believe you actually think you know it all, and I don’t believe you, faced with these facts, truly believe you are correct. You just are a hard line CONservative, and you won’t back down from your position and admit you were wrong because you see that as a weakness.
Worry not though. You can save face just by being a typical CON. And a good CON never admits to anything.
Fly-on-the-wall
February 18th, 2011
8:00 pm
I guess the reason why I don’t post here to often is that I’ve yet to see anyone have that ‘ah ha’ moment and actually change their belief in something. Guess this goes back to the tribal thing Jay discussed a few days back. I read the posts and the same people spout the same stuff for every situation Jay or others bring up. No wonder we can’t get anything done in this country.
Adam
February 18th, 2011
8:09 pm
Fly-on-the-wall: You must have missed part of the exchange between jm and myself
Fly-on-the-wall
February 18th, 2011
8:27 pm
Adam, I’m sorry I did miss. That truly would have gone a long way in believing there is hope for this country.
Southern Comfort (E.O.I.)
February 18th, 2011
8:40 pm
I guess the reason why I don’t post here to often is that I’ve yet to see anyone have that ‘ah ha’ moment and actually change their belief in something.
I thought I was about to have one this evening myself. Ali Velshi was interviewing a Rep from Wisconsin and asked the same two questions I’ve been asking about their balanced budget bill.
1) How does stopping someone from having union dues deducted from their paycheck affect the state’s budget balance?
2) How does having a union vote on a yearly basis have an effect on balancing the budget?
The Rep. went off on a tangent about how it was wrong for someone to have money deducted from their paycheck. However, he never even mentioned what the effect would be on the state budget. I was hoping to hear something concrete, even if it was flawed logic. Once again, I heard nothing but deflection. I’m looking for something to change my mind on that bill, but no GOPer is offering it.
s
February 18th, 2011
11:05 pm
Bush/Cheney created a War where none should have been. They lied or had their camp followers lie to further their reasoning for a War in Iraq. It will all come out, it is coming out now, it is only a matter of time. Thousands of Americans have lost their lives and most likely, over a hundred thousand of Iraq’s have lost theirs. The destruction of Iraq and possibly even this country, is on the Bush administrations head. The republicans can deny this all they want but Bush/Cheney have written their own destiny. The History books will say Bush/Cheney created a War where none should have been, and left a stain on this country we should never forget.
The hypocrisy of the Tenthers and states’ rights defenders | Jay Bookman | Slinking Toward Retirement
February 19th, 2011
7:31 am
[...] The hypocrisy of the Tenthers and states’ rights defenders | Jay Bookman. This entry was posted in Constitution, Opinion, Politics, Polititians, US Government, United States and tagged american federalism, bill, bill sponsors, conservative cause, constitution, founders, future of freedom, house judiciary committee, Jay Bookman, marriage vows, phil gingrey, rage, republican congressmen, sanctity of marriage, show, solution, State, test, Washington-knows-best, way. Bookmark the permalink. ← Thomas Alva Edison patents the phonograph — This Day in History — 2/19/1878 [...]
Mr. Right
February 19th, 2011
10:14 am
Scott Walker for president!!
Lil' Barry Bailout
February 19th, 2011
10:14 am
Did you ask Gingrey or Price for the Constitutional rationale on this? Of course not–they would likely give you a perfectly valid argument. And that would ruin your opportunity to play immature gotcha games.
Adam
February 19th, 2011
11:14 am
Just because you have the Constitutional authority to screw people, doesn’t mean you should.
Left wing management
February 19th, 2011
11:30 am
Lil’ Barry Bailout 10:14:
The way you’re talking is actually starting to resemble something approaching coherence. That re-education academy starting to pay off? Well, we can hope, but you got a ways to go still. See, this Tom Price has some trouble with facts. Take this remark from his statement this week on Obama’s proposed budget:
Now, as a doctor and as a parent, I find it astounding that the president has submitted a budget that ignores the recommendations of his own fiscal commission and it punts on all of the tough choices -– including entitlement reform.
Instead, he’s expanded entitlements through ObamaCare –- a government takeover that will destroy 800,000 jobs, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, and will accelerate our path to fiscal ruin.
Why do neo-cracker politicians persist in telling lies about some big bad government takeover of health care? Price is obviously not an ignorant man. He’s just a propagandist, pure and simple. He knows perfectly well that the plan – a privatization fundie’s dream if ever there was one for frick’s sake – is a perfect parody of the real ‘government’ type (single payer) plan that was quickly taken off the table by our right-center president. He just half justifies the lie in his head on the shoddy basis that this will lead to a slippery slope to socialism, which of course is either the delirious fear of the psychotic, or the perfectly sane fear of the Robber Baron health exec who wants to keep his gravy train chugging along.
Then there’s the 800,000 jobs lost lie.
What the CBO actually said:
CBO: People Will Work Less Because Health Care Reform Provisions Increase Their “Financial Resources.” CBO further stated that the “reduction in the supply of labor is largely attributable to the substantial expansion of Medicaid and the provision of subsidies that will reduce the cost of insurance obtained through the newly created exchanges.” CBO explained that these measures “will effectively increase beneficiaries’ financial resources. Those additional resources will encourage some people to work fewer hours or to withdraw from the labor market.” [Congressional Budget Office, 8/10]
See Lil’ Barry. This is what phony Georgia corporatist-mouthpiece politicians give us.
Adam
February 19th, 2011
12:37 pm
Just once I would like to hear someone argue against Obama’s budget without saying that he punted, without referencing the health care law as “ObamaCare,” and without using the term “entitlements” to describe welfare and food stamps and the like. I might start to take the argument seriously if that happened.
Joe
February 19th, 2011
1:16 pm
This shows that power indeed does tend to corrupt, and that constitutions are just pieces of paper that do not enforce themselves. If we truly want to have a constitutionally limited government, the states have the right and duty to nullify unconstitutional federal laws. – http://www.tomwoods.com/learn-about-state-nullification/
WOODSTOCK MIKE
February 19th, 2011
4:15 pm
How about these idiots in Wisconsin.
They cant contribute 12% to their health insurance and 6% to their own pensions?? They are marching the streets because they aren’t willing to contribute anything to their own insurance and pensions!! This is going to make the Dems look like a bunch of whining babies. In this day and age, striking because your own state govt is having to cut back and as a result you may have to actually contribute to things that most Americans pay anyway. I only wish I didn’t have to actually pay into my own retirement and insurance. What an embarassment. This is a dead end road for the Dems.
Left wing management
February 19th, 2011
4:33 pm
Woodstock Mike: In this day and age, striking because your own state govt is having to cut back and as a result you may have to actually contribute to things that most Americans pay anyway
Turn off the FOX and read up on the facts, Mike.
The state is does not “have” to cut back. As I posted over at Wingfield, the shortfall is largely brought about by Rebublican-initiated and tax-related (revenue-undercutting) issues:
“… ($117.2 million) is due to the impact of Special Session Senate Bill 2 (health savings accounts), Assembly Bill 3 (tax deductions/credits for relocated businesses), and Assembly Bill 7 (tax exclusion for new employees).”
Do you want the people who educate your children, protect your streets, put out the fire when your house is burning down rather than pursuing more lucrative private professions to have no rights to a decent pension, or to even be able to organize so they can bargain for more?
Adam
February 19th, 2011
6:11 pm
They cant contribute 12% to their health insurance and 6% to their own pensions??
This is not all there is to it. There is a lot more going on here than you’re apparently privy to.
Shifting Beliefs
February 19th, 2011
9:03 pm
Fly-on-the-wall
February 18th, 2011
8:00 pm
I guess the reason why I don’t post here to often is that I’ve yet to see anyone have that ‘ah ha’ moment and actually change their belief in something.
Then you’re not paying attention. There’s a whole big bunch of us that are all over the lot depending on the issue. We always post under a different handle. Ignore the handful of idiots who post under the same nom de plume every time and have painted themselves into little idealogical corners.
Bill Orvis White
February 19th, 2011
9:23 pm
The Obamacare individual mandate is unconstitutional, that is a fact that you nor any other Socialist-Democrat cannot argue with, Jay. With that fact stated, the individual mandate cannot be separated from the rest of Obamacare, which is a massive, complicated 2,700-page boondoggle of a document.
OK? Now with that fact laid down right here on this board, NONE OF YOU LIBERALS CAN ARGUE THAT OBAMACARE WILL BE COMPLETELY REPEALED once the Senate and the White House are in Republican hands in January 2013!!!!!!!
Right now, thank the Lord Almighty for folk like Attorney General Samuel Olens who will keep Obamacare from coming to Georgia’s soil.
If I were to be an incoming freshman representative or senator come January 2013, I would bring a proposal for an amendment to the Constitution that would explicity spell out that there will never be another debate on implementing socialized medicine on American soil — EVER!
Now onto the 10th Amendment. We here in these great Southern states need to band together to form the Southern Coalition of the United States of America whereby we create our own tax system, print our own monies, trade with ourselves and create a culture of life. We would reject everything that Washington would try to ram down our throats.
Amen,
Bill
Left wing management
February 20th, 2011
1:32 am
Shifting Beliefs: There’s a whole big bunch of us that are all over the lot depending on the issue. We always post under a different handle. Ignore the handful of idiots who post under the same nom de plume every time and have painted themselves into little idealogical corners.
Do you think Jay Bookman posts on here under various noms de plum?
Adam
February 20th, 2011
2:52 pm
There’s a whole big bunch of us that are all over the lot depending on the issue. We always post under a different handle. Ignore the handful of idiots who post under the same nom de plume every time and have painted themselves into little idealogical corners.
So in order to be taken seriously on an issue that might be seen as contrary to a stereotype you’ve been painted into by OTHERS, you have to post under a different handle? You know what I say to that?
F-. THAT. SH*T