Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Heckler on Open thread 11/23
- Phantom on Open thread 11/23
- Heckler on Open thread 11/23
- Phantom on Open thread 11/23
- Phantom on Open thread 11/23
- Phantom on Open thread 11/23
- American_Way on Open thread 11/23
- Phantom on Open thread 11/23
- American_Way on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
125 Comments
Hell, we’ll all vote for Dr Paul!
Hank don’t toy with me I have a bad heart! 8 it is!
Warmachine… let me see if I get this…
“NeoCons are Liberals“
In a way Chas, the origins of the Neoconservatives was they migrated from the Democratic party to the Republican party after they felt that the DNC was going too liberal in the wrong direction. Many of them are confessed Trotskyites, the father and son team of Irving (credited as the father of modern Neo-conservatism) and Bill Kristol. But there are still those who are associated with the Neoconservatives that are register Democrats. It seems that party affiliation has little to do with the ideology. They themselves often refer to the members as “liberal” but it is more in line with the old definition such as with Communism and Socialism. There once was an incident several years ago that the older members argued with the members of the American Socialist party that the neo-cons was the only true socialist!
“Nobody is conservative but Ron Paul”
That is my take but I am more old school too.
“And War is Peace; Freedom is Slavery, and Ignorance is Bliss…. Right???”
That is the thinking of Leo Strauss the mentor of the Movement, you as a member of the “unwashed Masses” are not smart enough and basically aggressive. If you are not distracted and have an enemy real or imaginary to focus your aggression on. You will turn on your masters.
“Ok… you can go back to your padded cell now!! Thanks!! Oh, you might lay off the Jim Beam before the Caucus on Saturday!! LOL”
Yes dear….
6 people dead in a city hall shooting in Missouri. And yet, there are people here in Wichita still complaining about City Hall security. Maybe if one of them happened to be at that meeting in MO they would think differently?
City Hall security protects not only the electeds, but also all citizens who come into the building. The cries of wasteful, unnecessary spending on security are rather few and far between this morning, yes?
Taz I do believe that security is needed at all public places, but this is not comforting.
The reality is there is no protecting against a Nut!
WHAT? You mean they didn’t pay attention to those “no guns allowed” signs?
Where were Nathan and Hank when we needed them? I thought the CC crowd were going to protect citizens from these senseless assaults!
Only when we have stricter gun control will we see less of these tragedys.
Heh, Mary. Looks like cops with guns couldnt prevent the assault. It took a bunch of them to finally put the shooter down.
Prevention and respecting others without the influence or bulliness of being a “Personal Agenda Government” would help. I do not condone the actions of the shooter. I dont believe in handleing a situation with a a gun. I do feel the Government is a bully and needs replaced. I feel it can be done diplomaticly. I feel votes and communication should be preserved and utilized. The Government will use this situation to further set up a “Bully Boundery”. This is sad also. I hope to see more open minded communications and less Bully tactics from either side of or on any issue. Herbert West III west.herb@yahoo.com http://www.wen2k.com
Ron Paul was missing from the ballot at my designated polling place at 6 Lee Avenue Stony Point, NY 10980 in Rockland County NY. Upon mentioning this to the poll workers they proceeded to tell me several times that “He dropped out”. This is my personal account.
The Ron Paul NYC Headquarters was notified and its now in their hands but its your turn to voice your concern and your discontent with the Rockland County Board of Elections who were responsible for this – whether it was a mistake or intentional its unacceptable.
http://www.videosift.com/video/Ron-Paul-Wrongfully-Left-out-of-Ballots
Just passing the word.
It only takes a few minutes to email your congressional representatives and tell them
to support/not support this act:
Senators Introduce Semper Fi Act of 2008
Bill Stops Berkeley Earmarks and Transfers Funds to Marine Corps
http://www.kten.com/Global/story.asp?S=7832341
Looks like 9/11 widows want a true investigation.
9/11 widows call for new investigation 6-Feb-08 09:01 pm 9/11 widows call for new investigation after revelations of White House, commission tiesNick Juliano
Published: Tuesday February 5, 2008
|
The widows whose political activism was largely responsible for the establishment of a commission to investigate the September 11 attacks say a new book revealing the backstory of the 9/11 Commission proves that their initial concerns about its executive director were correct and demonstrate the need for another investigation.
Philip Shenon, who covered the proceedings for the New York Times, has written a new book, The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation, which was released Tuesday. The book reveals the close ties between commission executive director Philip Zelikow and White House advisers Karl Rove and Condoleezza Rice.
The Commission also reveals that aside from one staff member, no one on the 9/11 investigative panel reviewed what was perhaps the most robust treasure trove of pre-9/11 intelligence on al Qaeda — records from the National Security Agency, which conducts electronic surveillance and codebreaking for the US Intelligence Community.
“General Michael Hayden, who headed the NSA at the time, was eager to cooperate and share what his organization had with the 9/11 Commission, but Executive Director Zelikow was not interested,” 9/11 widows Patty Casazza, Monica Gabriellle, Mindy Kleinberg and Lorie Van Auken said in a statement reacting to the book.
“Why didnt Phil Zelikow make reviewing these vital NSA documents a Commission priority?” they ask. “It seems clear that not every fact and lead was followed in this investigation compromising the validity of the Commission’s final report and its findings.”
The 9/11 widows called for Zelikow to resign or be fired from the Commission back in 2004, when his ties with Rice and Rove were first revealed. Shenon’s book, they say, proves their concerns were right all along.
“It is abundantly clear that Philip Zelikow should have immediately been replaced when the first rumblings of his impropriety and conflicts of interest surfaced,” they said. “When all of this information became clear, the Commissioners and the press should have called for Zelikows resignation. We did. Shamefully, most were silent.”
As washingtonpost.com columnist Dan Froomkin notes, “This isn’t the first time it’s turned out that the 9/11 Commission wasn’t getting the full picture. It’s not even the second.”
Bob Woodward revealed in his book State of Denial, that 9/11 Commission members were not told of a July 10, 2001, meeting in which then-CIA Director George Tenet tried to warn Rice and Bush about the need to focus on al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, while the president and his confidant were distracted by their pursuit of a missile defense system.
In another Bush administration exposé, investigative reporter Ron Suskind revealed the president’s brush-off of the ominous memo warning “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.”:
“All right,” Bush told the panicked CIA briefer who interrupted the president’s vacation to deliver the warning in person. “You’ve covered your ass, now.”
The 9/11 widows also fault the Commission for relying too much on information gained from “second and third hand knowledge of interrogations of tortured individuals, detainees that were being held in secret locations.”
They say Shenon’s book reveals information that “only scratches the surface” of what happened within the government before the 9/11 attacks.
“The bottom line is that the most deadly attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor remains dangerously unexamined,” they write. “This can only be remedied with an investigation guided by the facts and conducted outside the reach of those with a vested interest in suppressing the truth.”
The first one the murderer Cookie Thornton shot last night was a cop in the parking lot of the police station.
Cops can’t always protect you. Sometimes you have to protect yourself.
Every time there is a murder in a concealed carry state, the Libs use that to prove how ineffective concealed carry laws are at preventing crime.
1. Is law enforcement now the role of the concealed carry permit holder, and not the police?
2. Do these murderers have concealed carry permits or are they carrying guns illegally?
With all of the charges against Cookie Thornton, why wasn’t he already in jail? With all of those charges, I doubt if he had a permit to legally carry the gun he used last night.
http://www.kansascity.com/news/breaking_news/story/481231.html
Charles Lee “Cookie” Thornton had more than 100 misdemeanor convictions from the city of Kirkwood, including one for an attack against one of the city officials he shot and killed Thursday evening.
Between March 1996 and April 2005, Thornton had been charged with 114 violations of the city’s ordinances. He pleaded guilty or was convicted of most of them, according to court records.
The charges against Thornton stemmed mostly from his unlawful operation of a construction business in the city. But he also had been convicted of assault and battery against Ken Yost, the city’s public works director.
Eagle Beak
Posted February 8, 2008 at 9:40 am | Permalink
Just passing the word.
It only takes a few minutes to email your congressional representatives and tell them
to support/not support this act:
Senators Introduce Semper Fi Act of 2008
Bill Stops Berkeley Earmarks and Transfers Funds to Marine Corps
http://www.kten.com/Global/story.asp?S=7832341
————————————————-
I’m writing to SUPPOR THIS!
Eagle Beak, can you post that handy link to write your Representatives and Senators in Congress?
I meant SUPPORT!!!!
lindainks55
Posted February 8, 2008 at 9:42 am | \l “comment-289729″
Everything I found about NeoCons sounded like really scary S**T to me!
Linda you have only scratched the surface, keep searching and add “Leo Strauss” , Irving Kristol, Project for a new American century. Compare the “Bush Doctrine” to the “Rebuilding of American defenses” then the “Wolfowitz Doctrine”. Do you have a DSL connection? If so then go to Youtube and search for
“The power of nightmares”. It outlines the raise of both the Neoconservatives and the Islamic extremists, which oddly enough occurred at the same time. These videos contain almost all the information I had discovered over the last four years. By the end of it all my friend… You had only thought you were scared!
It is not even a conspiracy, they are open about it and it has been there all this time. Amazing!
Mary Caruso
Posted February 8, 2008 at 8:56 am | Permalink
“WHAT? You mean they didn’t pay attention to those “no guns allowed” signs?
Where were Nathan and Hank when we needed them? I thought the CC crowd were going to protect citizens from these senseless assaults!
Only when we have stricter gun control will we see less of these tragedys.” (”tragedys”, sic)
That is simply ignorant!
Concealed Carry is for protection of self, which includes family and friends present and under immediate lethal threat.
If those present would have been armed and capable of protecting themselves just maybe they wouldn’t have been shot. The fact that two security police were unable to stop the attacker is about the best proof that relying on the police or security is never enough.
Of course I guess they could have pulled out their handy cell phones and called 911, that would have stopped it immediately…NOT!!!
Mary Caruso
Posted February 8, 2008 at 8:56 am | Permalink
Only when we have stricter gun control will we see less of these tragedys.
—————————————————
What specifically, do you propose?
Every time there is a crime, the gun-banners come out of the woodwork and cry for more gun control.
No specific, realistic solutions are ever offerred. But it must sound nice to them to hear themselves advocate “more gun control”, even though they have no idea what they are screaming for, specifically.
It’s like ringing a bell, and watching the mouse run for his cheese. Purely a mindless, conditioned response.
Yet another good reason for John Edwards to be our next AG!
“Yet another good reason for John Edwards to be our next AG!”
Is this the same Edwards who voted for the war, then ran against it? Voted for No Child Left Behind and ran against it?
Russ Feingold said that Edwards ran against everything Edwards ever voted for.
But Linda something I need to make clear, not all “Neo-Cons” are “Neoconservatives”. Many of the rank and file have only been given part of the plan and that has also been diluted. The True Neoconservatives are not always know. You found the link between the Religious Conservatives and the Neo-cons. But once you get into the real agenda and thought process of a Neoconserative. You find that the Religious Conservatives. were used by them, there is no other way to see it. Since the Neoconservatives see Religion as nothing more then a “popular myth” along with “Patriotism“.
Ron Paul kicks McCain’s ass on the economy.
Y’all have to watch this. McCain is a freaking idiot and proves it in this video. What a numb nutz.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJ1OB2iLxcY
Ron Paul is looking better every day.
I’m afraid though, there will be no one for conservatives to vote FOR in November.
But there will be someone to vote AGAINST!
SolDevVB posted February 8, 2008 at 9:56 am
“Can’t seem to find a link for that. Was your statement peer reviewed or more bullshit?”
SolDevVB doesn’t even know what the person he suppports believes.
http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/issues/index.html#/context=detail/issue=climate/candidateA=paul/candidateB=allRep
“[If the government were to play a role] then you have to deal with the volcanoes and you have to deal with the pollution of China. So, do you want to invade China to make sure they don’t pollute? And what are you going to do about the volcanoes? They are all contributing factors to global warming.“
Yeah, Global Warming.
Big Political Topic.
Gosh I hope the next President Cares!
John Edwards AG?
lol!
What in the hell has this man ever done that would qualify him for being AG?
A tort reform attorney that has the ability to channel a fetus’ dying thoughts to a jury? Then he can turn around and support late term abortions!
I’m afraid he is much more qualified to be the next Breck girl!
Good grief Linda!
cosmos supports invading China to enforce global warming compliance.
Ok so from your post cosmos, volcanoes and China do not contribute to global warming?
And do you further support an invasion of China to ensure compliance?
Cosmos the war monger. Whoda thunk it.
We should probably put a big cork in every volcano to stop the CO2 from blasting out.
Dog, I’ve been following your suggestions and doing more reading. How can we spread the word — QUICKLY?? Is it too late to stop them!?
Cosmos,
Wouldn’t starting another war – with China to enforce global warming compliance – cause more global warming. All those air craft and ground vehicles. I have to assume that artillery propellant is destructive as well.
And do you have peer reviewed documentation that volcanoes do not contribute to global warming? The CO2 and chemicals spewing out and all?
Sounds to me like cosmos is supporting polluters. Advocating MORE pollution. For shame cosmos.
How much did you donate to the power company this month cosmos?
SolDevVB posted February 8, 2008 at 10:54 am | Permalink
“cosmos supports invading China to enforce global warming compliance.”
I never said that.
SolDevVB, a Ron Paul supporter, seems to be irrational, and/or a liar.
Cosmos,
Do volcanoes and china produce co2?
CNN just showed Huckabee playing his guitar in Wichita Kansas and say they will carry his speech. Isn’t it wonderful that Kansas is “in play?”
I’ve been talking about this for days…
http://www.kansas.com/business/updates/story/305832.html
And.. btw… wheat was limit up locally at 10am. $10.75. Almost over $11 at Cargill.
I know it sounds good for farmers, but I’m worried about the effects on the rest of the economy. I read yesterday that US wheat stocks are at a 60 year low.
Volcanoes actually tend to have a cooling effect – at least short-term – due to aerosols and particulate. In fact, this likely was part of what happened at the K-T and P-T extinctions.
And I thought I was a poopin’ in tall cotton in September when I sold HALF my crop at $5.85.
You seemed to think the Dr. was dumb for saying volcanoes emit co2. So by taking that stance, you advocate the rest of the statement. Invade China.
So where do you stand? Is Dr. Paul accurate in stating that volcanoes and China emit co2 or do they not?
kfg, I’m worried about that as well.
grrl,
can you put that in lay terms?
Max posted February 8, 2008 at 10:55 am
“We should probably put a big cork in every volcano to stop the CO2 from blasting out.”
Why? Because you believe Ron Paul’s stupid nonsense?
It wont work, and it’s not needed. Improving vehicle mpg by only a small amount would be more effective.
‘Climate myths: Human CO2 emissions are too tiny to matter’
http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change/dn11638
“Measurements of CO2 levels over the past 50 years do not show any significant rises after eruptions. Total emissions from volcanoes on land are estimated to average just 0.3 Gt of CO2 each year – about a hundredth of human emissions (pdf document).“
Total emissions from volcanoes on land are estimated to average just 0.3 Gt of CO2 each year
Cosmos agrees with Dr. Paul. Volcanoes emit co2.
How bout China cosmos? Bet you agree with him on that as well.
Sol, while I’m not kfg, I’ll give translation a shot. There is a limit on the increase or decrease in the the price of futures commodities contracts on the Boards of Trade. I believe the Kansas City Board of trade has a 30 cent limit. Thus, when “wheat is limit up”, this means that the allowed daily increase in price has been attained, and no further increase in the price for the commodity will be allowed that day. Without these limits, the futures markets would be much more volatile (given the fact that the futures markets are very volatile), and could experience, e.g., a $1.00 run up early in the day, followed by a $1.50 decline the same day. This volatility makes it difficult for a producer to determine the best time to market his commodity, as well as for the buyers to determine what price should be paid therefor. Thus, the limits to give some small stability to the market.
kfg will do a lot better job, I’m sure, in answering your question.
Yep, KFG, and all because of farmers jumping on the corn bandwagon, which I don’t blame them for. The prices of wheat, corn and soybeans are going to drive up prices at the supermarket big time. Sucks.
So far Huckabee’s comments have centered around his leading our country to overturn Roe v Wade. He really does know where he is, doesn’t he? He hasn’t gotten to the part about rewriting the Constitution yet.
Linda, sounds like standard fare for Gov. Huckabee. Probably a part of his standard “stump speech”.
Hee hee hee VT. I’m not sure my explanation was better unless the posts are judged on number of words used. I confess to never using one word when seven will do…
And the thing to remember about futures markets is, at some point, the grains that have been promised HAVE to be delivered. Lots of farmers contract their crop to “futures”. Like what is in the field now, has really already been “sold” in the futures market. So…
What happens if the crop is wiped out by one of the above factors? Well, farmers can insure to mitigate their losses.
But it still doesnt put “bread” on the table so to speak, in real terms. There’s lots of protection out there for the growers to avoid disaster.
Not so for the food consumers.
That’s why John Prine had it right when he said we should all “blow up your tvs. Throw away yer papers. Move to the country. Build you a home. Plant a little garden. Eat a lot of peaches. And try and find Jesus on your own.”
Thanx VT.
We’ve already seen horrific (for me anyway) price increases here. They grow a lot of feed corn here. I see signs around the farms “Support Ethanol”. Eggs have triples in price. Milk has doubled.
Dark waters ahead.
And Fridays, the market usually “corrects” for the week. So imagine my alarm that wheat was already limit up at 10am…
Hey Sol? Yer gonna LOVE this:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132×4479138
And solly? Hehehehehe. Why do I think FAT and FLUFFY flour tortillas are going to get thinner pretty quickly. Hee hee hee hee!
Yeah, kfg, forgot that very important point. Limit up by 10 a.m. is indeed cause for concern.
Sol, we here in Kansas are also seeing price increases for eggs and milk (as well as other ‘basics’) which are alarming. I’m sure there in Michigan (right?) where you are that the corn producers are very supportive of ethanol. Makes sense from their perspective to be so and to urge additional support, at least short term (less than 5 years).
And BIG AG plays games.
Ben and Jerry’s vs. MONSANTO
Advertisements [?]*NOTE- Ben& Jerry’s was bought by Dutch conglomerate Unilever in 2000*
Ben & Jerry’s Homemade, one of the first companies to label its ice cream as free of a synthetic hormone, is protesting a move by some states to restrict such labeling.
The South Burlington, Vt., ice-cream maker has joined a national campaign to block what critics say is an effort driven by Monsanto (MON, news, msgs), which markets recombinant bovine somatotropin, or rBST, also known as recombinant bovine growth hormone, or rBGH.
But a newly formed farmers’ group, backed by Monsanto, is pushing for labeling changes, saying the hormone-free labels imply that the milk is safer than other milk, when they say it’s not.
Monsanto, a corporate sponsor of the group, says it’s a question of accuracy in labeling. <— THEIR OWN PRODUCT?
“Monsanto is really an advocate in support of accurate labeling of dairy products in the dairy case,” said Monsanto spokeswoman Lori Hoag.
Others say consumers have a right to know what is and isn’t in their food.
The hormone, which was approved by the Food and Drug Administration to boost production in dairy cows in the early 1990s, was not approved in Canada, Japan or the European Union, largely out of concerns it may be harmful to animals.
And “there are unanswered human questions with it. It probably should never have been approved,” said Michael Hansen, a senior scientist with Consumers Union, which publishes Consumer Reports.
“As people worry about food they eat, the demand has increased,” he said.
The use of the artificial hormones increases the levels of another growth hormone in cows, said Rick North, a spokesman for Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility, a leading critic of rBGH. Elevated levels of that hormone in humans promote cancer, he said.
“There is not absolute proof that shooting cows up with rBGH is increasing cancer rates in humans, however, there is a significant amount of scientific data that is pointing in that direction and our stance is better safe than sorry. That this is an unnecessary risk,” said North.
“From the outset, when rBGH was approved, we wanted to make sure that we were able to tell that message on our packing that the family farmers that provide our dairy have pledged to not use rBGH,” Michalak said. “We thought it was a very important message.”
SolDevVB,
Dead plants also release CO2. What do you and Ron Paul plan to do about dead plants?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Pinatubo#Global_environmental_effects
“This very large stratospheric injection resulted in a reduction in the normal amount of sunlight reaching the earth’s surface by up to 5% (see figure). This led to a decrease in northern hemisphere average temperatures of 0.5–0.6 °C (0.9–1.1 °F), and a global fall of about 0.4 °C (0.7 °F).”
Some days I worry that soon, we wont have the luxury of worrying about the QUALITY of our food.
We’ll be worrying about the QUANTITY.
In America.
And dont even LOOK for the water to wash it down…
Try to find the impact of the 1991 Mt Pinatubo eruption on these CO2 graphs,
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/contents.htm
Note the temperature drop in 1991.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.A2.lrg.gif
Hmmmm…. now THIS is interesting.
I wonder who the committe chair takes orders from?
The ONLY reason this would be done is if the bill was doomed to fail. In the republican dominated legislature.
http://www.kansas.com/news/updates/story/305846.html
Metal Bid Ask Change
Gold $917.80 $918.80 12.81
Silver $17.14 $17.19 0.41
Platinum$1,871.20 $1,881.20 28.80
Palladium$434.10 $439.10 9.66
Updated:2/8/2008 11:58:46 AM CST
Metal commodities are up too….it’s because the dollar is tanking again around the world. What good is the green back when the presses roll them off at a continually increasing rate and they are backed by…..nothing except more rolling off the presses.
The sun is in an inactive period, raising concerns about global cooling.
http://ibdeditorial.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=287279412587175
So cosmos you agree with Dr Paul that volcanoes produce co2. We covered that. I bet you agree with Dr. Paul and China too, no?
Or does china not produce co2?
glad to hear you support Ron Paul’s arguments cosmos. Hope for you yet.
Thanx for the link grrl
No fat tortillas for a while
End the subsidies for ethanol? Let the market dictate the alternative energy source?
Got this from farmie, had to share it…
Created by Bush/Giuliani consultant and Romney supporter Patrick Ruffini, the “F7″ February 7 fundraiser was clearly designed to copy the grasroots fundraising used by the Ron Paul campaign, but instead as a pledge of support for the Republican nominee, John McCain. As of 6:17pm EST, this was their haul:
That’s not a typo. They raised $2,290 dollars from 26 donors. By comparison, anti-war Ron Paul raised $1.8 million in his most recent moneybomb, while Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama have raised at least $11 million in the last 24 hours.
Bomb, indeed, even with the pimping of top con bloggers like Glenn Reynolds.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132×4479138
The Huckster is in money trouble too. Dr. Paul is doing OK with $5,000,000 last month. He may be the only one that can go the distance.
kfg, that was very interesting indeed. Did Neufeld get cold feet? Was there concern that even upon reconsideration (assuming the bill passed, and became law) that the plant would fail under the new limits? Was it because Sunflower just wants to build the darn thing(s) without any further interference or restriction? Just a few of the things running through my addled mind.
The tanking dollar contributed to the US wheat shortage. The weaker the dollar, the more it was attractive to purchase US wheat. Australia had a crop bust, as did Argentina. And Russia has NEVER been able to feed themselves.
Now, the US food processors will have to turn to foreign wheat, paying with an even weaker dollar, if they dont want to pay the price for US wheat.
Your bush markets at work…
The good news? There is only about seven cents worth of wheat in a loaf of bread. But I bet the price will not move PROPORTIONATELY.
Think transportation and mfg costs pushed up by higher oil prices.
Your bush markets at work..
Obviously neufeld got cold feet.
Why?
He couldnt pull the republican dominated legislature together?
Sunflower wanted more?
Sebelius is sweetening the pot somehow?
Sunflower is saying uncle?
I bet we find out next week…
I’ll see if I can find the makeup of the new coal “task force”. I saw it when it was created and gave it a big eye roll.
I think maybe they couldnt even get it out of committee and so now they will punt it to the task force.
I cant imagine steve miller, sunflower, or king coal giving up.
This committee chair from Liberal, who pulled the bill and then refused questions, is the same one who said earlier that his committee would consider or pass NO bills until the Sunflower thing was resolved.
There is some BIG TIME wheeling and dealing going on here.
And I think it has the governor’s, parkinson’s, and joe harkins’ fingerprints all over it.
Ben
Posted February 8, 2008 at 11:24 am | Permalink
Volcanoes actually tend to have a cooling effect – at least short-term – due to aerosols and particulate. In fact, this likely was part of what happened at the K-T and P-T extinctions.
————————————————–
Great News! Then man creating global warming is offsetting all the volcanic activity that would have thrown us into the next ice age!
SolDevVB posted February 8, 2008 at 12:01 pm
“glad to hear you support Ron Paul’s arguments cosmos. Hope for you yet.”
SolDevVB… your irrational posts, and your ignorance about the natural carbon cycle and climate science, do not help Ron Paul.
Outlander, the sun only causes global warming in the daytime.
BREAKING!!!!!!
Maybe this had something to do with neufeld’s cold tootsies? Maybe the “orders” came from bushco or the kansas congressional delegation? Stay tuned…
“EPA’s relaxed emissions rule struck down
Advertisements [?]Source: Associated Press
A federal appeals court struck down a Bush administration policy exempting power plants from certain environmental regulations. The court said the policy was unlawful.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit negated a rule known as cap-and-trade. That policy allows power plants that fail to meet emission targets to buy credits from plants that did, rather than having to install their own mercury emissions controls. The rule was to go into effect in 2010.
The court struck down the cap-and-trade policy and the Environmental Protection Administration’s plan to exempt coal- and oil-fired power plants from regulations requiring strict emissions control technology to block emissions.
New Jersey and many other states challenged the policy in federal court. The agency defended the rule, saying it represented the nation’s first attempt to control such emissions and would reduce mercury emissions by 70 percent.
Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080208/ap_on_bi_ge/epa_mer…
If anyone was wondering what effect Ron Paul’s new hires like Doug Bandow or Daniel McCarthy were having on Ron Paul’s campaign, it was on display when he addressed CPAC late yesterday, the last candidate to speak to the grand ballroom before it was cleaned up for a banquet. Paul’s speech was the most combative I’d ever heard from him, and the message sent out from his campaign was that it wouldn’t be the last. He is not stopping his bid to shore up his House seat. He’s going to be in this race as long as the money’s flowing. At 10 a.m. today he’s speaking at Liberty University, meaning he wants protest votes in the fading GOP race when it goes to Virginia on Tuesday.
The key moments in the speech were harsh statements of his foreign policy and attacks on John McCain. That latter stuff was red meat for this conference. After one subdued mention of McCain’s pledge to keep troops in Iraq for a hundred years if needed, Paul said “McCain” had a few troublesome friends. “One of his friends is named… Feingold!” Then a blast against campaign finance reform. “Another of his friends is named… Kennedy!” Then, an attack on immigration reform. “Another of his friends, although he’s not in the Senate anymore, is Daschle! Tom Daschle. Working with him on raising taxes, not cutting taxes.” All of this got the biggest cheers from the most listless, curious section of the crowd. Kids and middle-aged men who’d had their arms folded for most of the speech started smirking and saying “Yeah!” at every McCain hit.
http://www.reason.com/blog/show/124872.html
SolDevVB… your irrational posts, and your ignorance about the natural carbon cycle and climate science, do not help Ron Paul.
But you agree with what he says cosmos. Volcanoes and China emit co2.
Thanx for your support.
It wont work, and it’s not needed. Improving vehicle mpg by only a small amount would be more effective. Cosmos
Cosmos, the Japanese have higher MPG today, than the US legislated for 2022.
So the solution isn’t forcing the manufacturers to BUILD fuel efficient vehicles –
it is getting Americans to buy them. We love our SUV’s and big pick-em-up-trucks.
(and if you’ve read me before , you know I drive a Hybrid 44 MPG).
From above post, in case you missed it:
In another Bush administration exposé, investigative reporter Ron Suskind revealed the president’s brush-off of the ominous memo warning “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.”:
“All right,” Bush told the panicked CIA briefer who interrupted the president’s vacation to deliver the warning in person. “You’ve covered your ass, now.”
SolDevVB posted February 8, 2008 at 12:31 pm
“But you agree with what he says cosmos. Volcanoes and China emit co2.
Thanx for your support.”
I do not agree with what Ron Paul said,
http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/issues/index.html#/context=detail/issue=climate/candidateA=paul/candidateB=allRep
“[If the government were to play a role] then you have to deal with the volcanoes…”
SolDevVB is a very good reason to not support Ron Paul.
You have already stated cosmos that volcanoes and china emit co2.
Were you lying then or lying now? Ron Paul said the same thing. So do you agree that volcanoes and china emit co2 or don’t you?
Pretty easy questions really. Yes or no. But cosmos can’t even muster that.
SolDevVB,
Ron Paul said that we “have to deal with the volcanoes”.
http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/issues/index.html#/context=detail/issue=climate/candidateA=paul/candidateB=allRep
“[If the government were to play a role] then you have to deal with the volcanoes… ”
We do not have to deal with the volcanoes.
Their CO2 emissions are insignificant compared to human’s.
Volcanoes are part of the natural carbon cycle.
We cannot “deal with the volcanoes”, except to possibly capture a small amount of CO2 from non-erupting ones.
SolDevVB is a very good reason to not support Ron Paul.
What about China?
Freakin IDIOT
cosmos does not want to support a candidate that will end subsidies to big oil?
cosmos supports big oil? Way to go cosmos !!!
What about the United States?
And it gets even better. You truly are a ‘tard cosmos !!!
[Global warming] is a problem. The environments are always better taken care of with strict property rights. Under property rights, you are never allowed to pollute. … What has happened in industrial revolution, big business and government got together and permitted pollution. You ought to be able to stop a neighbor from polluting your land immediately. Just like if your neighbor dumped garbage in your yard, you could call the policemen; that’s the way you should have protection of water and air.
So yeah, cosmos is against Paul. Guess that again puts you as a pro polluter.
Ron Pauls problem now is that hes so far behind in delegates that he has to win almost every free one left, highly unlikely.
Why do you support big oil and polluters cosmos?
Actually the federal government is the Leading polluter in the united states
Tom Paine
Posted February 8, 2008 at 1:35 pm | Permalink
Ron Pauls problem now is that hes so far behind in delegates
There are Romney’s delegates up for grabs. RP’s goal is a brokered convention.
Sol, I’ll predict here that the GOP convention will not be brokered.
VT,
Keep hope alive !!!
RP got $5,000,000 in January alone. McCain tried a money bomb and brought in 2 grand as opposed to the RP bomb of like 1.7 million. Huckster is in money trouble. I am hoping that RP outlasts them at least fiscally.
On the Dem side, it is all about the super delegates. And, if one is a super delegate, which way does one go, or is waiting a better idea?
http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny-opklu085568384feb08,0,692093.column
Yeah, Sol, read about the “money bomb” that Sen. McCain tried; around $2600 raised, IIRC.
Hang in there, Sol; your man may get his wish; I don’t think it will happen, though.
Let the global warming religious inquisition begin!
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=290513
Jail the ‘deniers’! Those who disagree must be silenced and punished!
A good video. The page has a timeline showing the main parts of the video. It gives some background on people Hank Price relies on, like Fred Sietz.
‘Oreskes on “The American Denial of Global Warming” ‘
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008/02/oreskes_on_the_american_denial.php
Sol, with all due respect, you are such a Ron Paul evangelist that you become downright over the top abusive when your boy is questioned.
Personally, I find Ron Paul’s position that “property rights” is the way to address environmental problems like global warming is economically illiterate. Property rights do work well for some environmental issues, such as when an individual or entity’s pollution causes substantial damage to the value of his/her/their neighbor’s property. But on issues like global warming, where such immediate losses of property value do not occur, tragedy of the commons is likely to occur (as is demonstrated moreso in the even greater crisis we are facing in the world’s oceans, there are considerable disincentives to reduce catches when one is competing with others who won’t reduce theirs). Everyone is looking for a short term advantage, and there are disincentives to even minor increases in expenses to reduce CO2 emissions if even one competitor does not honor them. Group rational behavior is not always a hallmark of the market when it competes with advantages between individuals, and libertarian/anarcho capitalist types tend to ignore this reality. To effectively deal with Carbon, federal leadership is required because a patchwork of state or even private differences in regulation will not be as effectively. While such tragedy of the commons is still possible on an international level (which is one of the reasons why treaties such as the Kyoto Protocol have been resisted here), right now, while we are still the largest consumer nation on Earth, our ability to change the behavior of other nations that manufacture goods can still be considerable.
Good GRIEF Proudman!! Will you get off of your pity party??? It’s amazing how much you people were FOR silence and punishment, when Democrats attempted to speak out AGAINST the war… You all wanted those against BushCo and the War, arrested, and found guilty of Treason, and executed or at least life in prison!! Now you are afraid those against global warming will end up in jail, or worse!!
BUT — Global Warming enthusiasts are NOT the kind of people who people put in prison who do not agree with them!!
Re: Max
Back from 2/1/2008.
I thought that this was worth a response, but I didn’t really have the time to take back then.
Let me be clear on several things at the outset. I don’t like a lot of what you post Max. I think some of what you post illustrates some of the very worst traits of what I call coalition conservatives. However, I am also convinced that you are also sincere and honest. And, your flat tax is an interesting proposal, and I think it is courageous to post something like it on a discussion blog like this one (you may not remember, but I have complimented you on posting it before).
At any rate, even though this response will contain some snarkiness, please remember that this response is here because I thought this conversation was worth continuing.
“Horrors (shudder)! Of course, the top 5% of tax payers also pay more in absolute terms than the bottom 95% (60% to 40%). The top 10% pays 70% to 30%, and the top 80% pays 86% to 14%. By the time we get to the top 50%, not only do they pay 97% of the taxes, they make 87% of the income. They have vastly more income to pay taxes on, so of course they are going to contribute more money in income taxes.
This is a problem in your mind and the minds of people like you. The idea that wealth redistribution is such a huge evil.
“ksagnostic
———————————————-
“Sources ksagnostic. Curious as to your website you use. You just making these stats up? Your stats are flawed. Maybe you just can’t type. Or you just plain lie.”
Uhm, no. My source, however, was secondary, but they pulled from the same primary source as you did. It’s just that this source showed up earlier on my google search than the IRS did.
Here was my source:
http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html
Like I said, politically they are probably closer to your point of view than mine.
BTW, here are the figures you posted from the IRS:
2005 Income Share Percentage and Tax Share Percentage
% of Income % of Tax
Top 1%____21.2%_______39.38%
Top 5%____35.75%______59.67%
Top 10%___46.44%______70.30%
Top 25%___67.52%______85.99%
Top 50%___87.17%______96.93%
Bottom
50%_______12.83%____ __3.07%
Now go back and look at my figures:
“Of course, the top 5% of tax payers also pay more in absolute terms than the bottom 95% (60% to 40%).” The actual figure is 59.67%, but I did what you did when you made the 97% to 3% comparison, I rounded up to the nearest whole number. Now note here: “top 10% pays 70% to 30%”. Note here that I rounded down, not up, from 70.30%. At any rate, my information is no different from yours, except for the minor differences of rounding. Thus, your outrageous lying charge is completely out of line.
“Oh and ksagnostic, if wealth redistribution is good, then send a check to me in the amount $10,000.
“What?”
This is why I call you a fanatic. Only a fanatic would draw an equivalence between my giving you $10,000 and my paying a tax on my income, part of which goes to the support of social safety net spending.
“You are ok with other people having THEIR wealth redistributed, but not your own?
“Hmmm…..”
This is a form of rhetorical argument that presumes a response, then replies to the presumed response.
Here is what I said:
“I don’t think the 97% verses 3% is all that grossly unfair (and yes, I am in the upper 50%).”
I actually state here, for the record, that I don’t think that it is unfair that a portion of taxes on my income, from being part of the upper 50%, goes to help support people in the bottom 50%. In other words, I am obviously “OK” with that. Of course, the taxation rules, though complicated, are pretty much the same for everybody. Also, in the end, the top verses bottom 50% is actually an arbitrary division. I am indeed in the top 50%, but I am also in the bottom 75% that only pays 14.01% of the taxes. Someone could also argue that it is outrageous that the top 25% pays benefits for the bottom 75%. But then, the absolute number of those “outraged” by this inequity goes down by half doesn’t it?
“Look up Max’s Modified Flat tax plan if you think I’m some fanatic and cruel towards the poor. It’s very simple, progressive, and anyone earning <$25,000 pays Zero tax.”
Thanks for posting it further down on the 2/1 thread, by the way. Also by the way, I actually disowned the above rhetorical strawman you accuse me of. As I said in the post you replied to:
“What would you prefer Max, that the bottom 50% pay 13% of the income taxes (which would be proportional)? That would be absurd and cruel. The bottom 50% could not afford that. By the way, that is actually a straw man to a certain extent, because as I recall the income tax proposal Max has proposed on this blog would not really do that (he would also exempt the poorest from paying income tax at all).”
So yes, I actually acknowledged in my previous post that your tax plan, as I recalled it, would not “proportionally” increase the tax burden on the lower 50%. But then, that leaves me scratching my head. According to your tax plan, and given the fact that the reason why top income tax earners pay a much higher percentage in absolute tax revenues, I really don’t see much of a change in the percentage of taxes paid under your plan. I am open to explanation on this point. My guess, absent that explanation, is that your flat tax is really a different issue. What you object to, it appears to me, is people in the “bottom 50%”, most of whom wouldn’t pay taxes under your plan at all, getting benefits taken from the wealth of the “top 50%” (but to be honest, even 70%-rounding down of that money comes from the top 10% and 60%-rounding up comes from the top 5%). Which brings me to what I was saying in my previous post. Economics, being the management of finite resources and to acquire potentially infinite wants and needs, still results in the fact that the people from whose income most of the taxes come are still left with far more resouces than those whose income is not supplying most of the taxes. The greater share of money coming from more wealthy taxpayers is coming because they have greater amounts, in absolute amounts, to pay. And they also correspondingly have far more, in absolute resources, left over. The contrast between the wants and needs that the wealthy can meet absent that income is not nearly as great as it is for those, say, on the bottom 25% of the upper 50%, or even the top portion of the lower 50% who are paying about 3% of the total load. And by the way, the comparison between absolute income and percentage of tax revenue collected is not really an appropriate one. The figures just reveal the amount of revenue coming in from the taxes collected, not the amount of their wealth paid.
So what I am left to ask are the following questions, and I honestly do not presume to have the answers.
1) Why are you proposing your flat tax? Do you see it in any way as an attempt to address what you seem to see as a great evil in wealth redistribution? I am thinking that those are actually two different issues, and that you actually see the simplification of taxation as a good thing in and of itself.
2) You did say something about, as I recall, re-federalizing the welfare system so that there are strict eligibility requirements (I did not go back and look it up). I actually tend to agree with you on this to an extent, probably for different reasons (I have worked in human services and have generally found the exporting of some functions to the states, while retaining federal oversight, has resulted in far more cumbersome and contradictory bureaucracy). I am actually interested in how you would address this issue in your opposition to wealth redistribution.
Keep in mind, I do see some of this as a solution in search of a real problem. However, even though I hardly agree with you at all (and I sometimes shake my head at what you post) I do respect the fact that you try to propose solutions to what you see as problems.
Also, I am really busy, so I may not have time to respond immediately to what you post.
“Good GRIEF Proudman!! Will you get off of your pity party??? It’s amazing how much you people were FOR silence and punishment, when Democrats attempted to speak out AGAINST the war… You all wanted those against BushCo and the War, arrested, and found guilty of Treason, and executed or at least life in prison!! Now you are afraid those against global warming will end up in jail, or worse!!
“BUT — Global Warming enthusiasts are NOT the kind of people who people put in prison who do not agree with them!!”
Talk about responding to a straw man (here’s one global warming advocate who said to imprison those who argue against it-so see how they are?) with another bunch of strawmen (damn pro-war conservatives want to jail anti-war liberals for treason). Unless Proudman did really say that (and I would be looking for a suporting link for that.
Chas., you are soooo over the top.
It appears McCain has issues with POW/MIAs.
http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccain.com/
sounds like swift boating 2.0
No wonder he was for campaign reform.
Fire Mary Peters:
http://www.firemarypeters.com/features/why_fire_peters.htm
Abortionist quacks could face higher lawsuit liabilities under a pro-life measure working its way through Missouri’s legislature. Missouri’s current law imposes a $350,000 limit on non-economic damage awards in medical malpractice lawsuits. The bill, recently presented to the House Judiciary Committee, would exempt abortions from that limit.
In addition to helping to protect vulnerable mothers in filthy, unsafe abortion mills, this could drive up the cost of malpractice insurance for abortion mills, an already scandalized racket, eventually cutting down abortion mill profits and shutting down abortion mills. Higher abortion prices will also drive down the number of abortions and thus drive down abortion mill profits.
What’s our abortion mill malpractice suit limit in Kansas? If there is a ceiling, let’s get rid of it. What with other Kansas legislation pending to stop coerced abortions and to enforce informed consent, particularly ultrasound viewing, these items together could shut down all the Kansas abortion mills for good, even before Tiller and Planned Parenthood’s abortionist quacks go to prison.
Keep a good thought.
KsAg… I think you missed what I was saying… I said that those who are on the side of Global Warming are NOT those who would put their opponents in jail… Which was what ProudMan was insinuating would happen to him… because he is ANTI Global Warming..
KsAg… ProudMan is generally in that group of conservatives, and yes, pro-war… who DID call dissenters, and Anti-War advocates, traitors, and wanted some of those anti-war advocates thrown in jail for treason…
Now, where is the straw man??
ProudMan
Posted February 8, 2008 at 2:22 pm | Permalink
Let the global warming religious inquisition begin!
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=290513
Jail the ‘deniers’! Those who disagree must be silenced and punished!
==================================
KsAgnostic — THIS is the post I was responding to… I do believe I had a typo in my response that could have been misinterpreted as something I was NOT trying to say… ok??
The latest on the “rebate” plan, with such information as is available on how it will work.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/02/08/pf/taxes/rebates_what_you_need_to_know/index.htm?cnn=yes
Sol I have to admit after watching Dr. Paul’s speech at the CPAC I found it a little too combative. One of his greatest appeal has been his sane and rational argument that both side can find agreement with. And find a common ground, his attack on Mc Cain’s “friend” implying that it was not their subject matter but rather their party affiliation that was the point of contention. I had my problems with Mc’ Cain – Kennedy, but it was the subject matter and the total openness of it not the fact that Kennedy was attached.
ksagnostic
Under the premise that Dr. Paul operates, the Constitutional restriction placed on the Federal Government.
I.E. interstate commerce, since some pollutions do transcends state lines the Federal government would have the power to interject. But if the pollution does not it would then fall onto property rights and be a matter for the courts and the states.
Hey dog,
Broadview, tomorrow, 8pm. I’ll be an old guy in a black leather jacket and a black driver’s hat. Ksgrm is coming with her grandson.
My wife isn’t coming, she’s pretty much disgusted with the whole affair. The boy has his drill weekend and probably can’t got out of it. I’m waiting to hear from him tonight.
I’m serious about voting for Ron Paul. I think that McCain is probably going to get the delegates here in Kansas but Ron Paul deserves more support than he’s got. I’m about one jelly dough nut away from giving him my vote! We’ll talk!
Hank
I’m not too fired up personally Hank, but will probably stand with Huckabee. I haven’t checked, is Kansas winner take all?
I think it is, but then again, who cares now? It’s not a real caucus in that you ’stand’ for your candidate. We’ll register, sit down and listen to talks for about an hour then vote on a secret ballot.
Breakfast? Coming to breakfast with ksgrm, dog and me? My vote can be bought for a jelly dough nut!
Wow, great post KSagnostic, at 4:11.
Thanks for the time you put into your response, and we seem to have mutual opinions of each other. It would be a pleasant and very surprising change to have a rational discussion even between two (or more will hopefully join) who are 180 degrees (or so it would seem) apart on most issues.
Since I just saw your post and there are many issues addressed, I’ll have to find some time late this evening or tomorrow to respond.
You may be surprised by this conservative’s answers.
When a Ron Paul ad came on this evening I was wondering out loud about WHY Ron Paul’s contributors don’t translate into votes. I told hubby (who pays NO attention to politics!) that he seemed to enjoy great popularity and was way ahead of many in raising money, but didn’t get votes. Hubby said, “Is he the one you don’t take home to Mom?”
Sorry about my sick sense of humor but that cracked me up! Thought there might me someone else who saw the humor in it.
LOL
He’s the kid from the other school you don’t take home to Mom, and you don’t tell your friends about.
Don’t count on me Hank, but I will find you and WD if I can get around by then.
Grudgingly, I’ll have to agree! Most of the time I disagree with ksagnostic’s posts but I do appreciate the time and effort that he brings to the BLOG. Many times I don’t respond because it would require to much time and effort on my part (read lazy). Then there is the times I get scared because he’s starts to make sense!
I’m against a flat tax. I’m for the fair tax.
A flat tax won’t work. It is just a revision of the IRS. It’s very easy to figure how much tax you owe now, what is your taxable income? Go to the tax table and see what you owe. Did they withhold more? You get a refund. Did they withhold less? Send a check in with your return. Very, very simple!
However, if you look at all of the rules, regulations, etc, on how to determine your TAXABLE income they currently fill up eight feet of shelf space! Just going to a flat tax won’t keep the damn politicians from screwing up your TAXABLE income determinations!
Repeal the INCOME TAX. Establish the FAIR TAX!
I think it’s funny Linda!
He’s the kid nobody liked in high school but they hung with him because he had the car!
Hank, if I understand the Fair Tax right, it works like a Mega Sales Tax…
I am assuming that the State and Local Sales Taxes already in force, would remain…
Ex: Some states, PA, for one, already have an 11% Sales Tax… IF you add the 21% (that was the figure I heard) Fair Tax on top of that, folks in PA would be paying 32% in Tax, and the POS…. That is a LOT more than most would be paying in the current IRS system… I think…
and the POS SHOULD read *at* the POS
“Repeal the INCOME TAX. Establish the FAIR TAX!”
Not gonna happen. If they even TRY that, Neal Boortz and John Linder will lose their heads the first day.
When a rich person pays the same percentage of their wealth that a poor one does for a loaf of bread, a “fair” tax would be fair.
Like I say, not gonna happen.
Not really Chas,
The federal income tax as it stands is a festering cancerous sore on the butt of society.
The cost to the economy for collecting, administering and figuring income tax is almost equal to the amount of money the government gets in revenue. In other words, if the revenue to the government from the income tax is 900 billion this year, it will cost the economy almost that much more to collect it.
The fair tax is fair, because it’s not a tax on income, it’s a tax on spending. Let’s say you buy a TV for a $100 dollars. sales tax 7%. You pay $107. The fair tax doesn’t add 22% to that. You have to figure how much the TV would cost if the manufacturer, the wholesaler, the retail outlet didn’t have to withhold income tax, SS, Medicare taxes from their employees wages plus match their SS and Medicare withholding. Depending on the product you buy the decrease in the sales price of a product could reduce from 5 to 50 percent.
If we go to a fair tax, sales taxes will go away and the sales price of products will decrease. In the long run if you only look at individual product prices the fair tax would make things cheaper.
The fair tax will promote saving and investing in the US. It will make the US products more competitive in world market (less jobs lost over seas). And, it will take the power to control our lives with the tax code out of Washington, DC. (It’s figured over half of the Washington lobbyists would be out of a job!)
So, something that you’d normally pay $100 for plus tax would now cost you $100. $100 dollars you did not have to pay income tax on!
lindainks55
Posted February 8, 2008 at 10:57 am | \l “comment-289811″
Dog, I’ve been following your suggestions and doing more reading.
“How can we spread the word — QUICKLY??”
Good question, as I said I first heard of them in 2004 and even then I had a hard time actually accepting it on face value. It just seems to sound too much like just another Conspiracy theory. I grew up hearing about such things as the “John Birch society” and their wild claims that most everyone dismissed as just a bunch of kooks. Another group was “Posse-com-tus” but both are not taken serious except for the Posse is by Law enforcement because they did not recognize any Law enforcement’s authority except for the Elected Sheriff. LOL I was working for the Sheriff’s department at the time I heard about the Posse. I actually saw it! One night a WPD brought in a Posse member and he was fighting the officer. I shouted “STOP IT!” and damn if after seeing my uniform he did!
But it will take just what has happen here, you drop a peal of information and hope that someone checks it out for themselves. It is so unbelievable that one has to realize it for yourself before you will believe. But it does finally after you check it out for yourself become apparent that it is a real possibility.
“Is it too late to stop them!?”
Boy another good question, to be honest since it is hard to say just how wide spread this ideology is.
The argument that is for the actions of constricting Constitutional liberties and Rights works both to the logic of safe guarding America and to the ideology of the Neoconservatives. So who is the Congressman or Senator who simply believe it is the right course to take or is fulfilling the Neoconservatives agenda?
I mean last Sunday Sen. Mc’ Cain said that as the last super power we have the duty to provide security to the world (a part of the rhetoric of the Neoconservatives agenda). But also Sen. Clinton has said things in the past that was a part of the agenda too? Sen. Sessions of Ala actually used the desire to protect and safeguard the liberties and the Constitution as a put down on the Senate floor!
So as to the question if it is too late to stop them? I do not know….
Its a deal Hank, the jelly donut does it needed to be from Krispy cream? LOL yeah I too have been amazed that the Ron Paul excitement has not turned into more votes. BUT then for quite some time I had a hard time finding anyone else that would own up to having voted for President Reagan.
Back to the Donut, what favor do you like?
We’ll deal at breakfast!
Tomorrow Dog!
Driving Miss Hillary:
http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blpic-hillarydrivingmiss.htm
Queen Hillary:
http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blpic-hillaryqueen.htm
Priceless Hillary pose in Iraq:
http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blpic-hillarysoldier.htm
Babies and Rudy love Hillary:
http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blpic-hillaryupclose.htm
http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blpic-hillaryrudy.htm
“A federal appeals court struck down a Bush administration policy exempting power plants from certain environmental regulations. The court said the policy was unlawful.”
Please! Bush policies unlawful? Say it isn’t so.
“1. Is law enforcement now the role of the concealed carry permit holder, and not the police? ”
The CC folks think it’s their civic duty and right to augment the police force. The always say if a CC had been their it wouldn’t happen.
Chas.
I do not appreciate you posting lies about me. Prove that I hold all those positions about jailing people or admit to your lies.
Back it up or admit who you are.
This is one lib that also supports a national sales tax, but ONLY if food and drug items are exempt.
The rich dont pay their fair share NOW, under our pretend progressive tax system.
I’m all for a CONSUMPTION tax that exempts food and drugs. So JR, NO ONE would pay tax on bread, or milk or food items. Or medicines, over the counter or prescriptions.
The rich buy FAR more than you and I. They would pay LOTS more with a consumption tax than they do now with all the income tax loopholes, deductions, and credits.
I know folks love that it would put the IRS “out of business” but I also support tough auditors for the national sales tax as well.
I also support “pay as you go” and no deficit spending for the government. If emergency or circumstances force borrowing? Well, we could raise the national sales tax right away. Or the “borrowing” could be done through regular channels so we could see it.
And… when your government ups spending and raises your taxes… you would notice it right away at the cash register. Not withheld so you dont notice it, or with a shell game of deficit spending that leaves the debt to your children.
I know people think a national sales tax is regressive, but it doesnt have to be. With food and drugs exempted, it would be far more FAIR than the system we have now.
Which is NOT fair at ALL!
larry
Posted February 9, 2008 at 6:28 am | Permalink
“1. Is law enforcement now the role of the concealed carry permit holder, and not the police? ”
The CC folks think it’s their civic duty and right to augment the police force. The always say if a CC had been their it wouldn’t happen.
————————————————–
Augment the police force? Not true. No CC permit holder I know has ever said such BS. That’s not what is taught in CC training.
Larry ignorance might be bliss for you, but what you say here is not true.
The CC permit holder has the ability to protect themselves if faced with lethal harm. The CC permit holder has no obligation to defend others.
There is a detterent to crime in states with CC, as shown by many studies including Kleck, Lott, etc….
But there will never be the complete elimination of crime. Human nature hasn’t changed for thousands or millions of years. And 1 more or 1,000 more gun laws is not going to change that.
The key is law enforcement. And that’s not just the police. It’s the courts, it’s our parole system, and the police. And our elected officials need to ensure those systems are in place, their operations are audited, and operating efficiently.
ksfarmgrrl,
I haven’t read the entire thread. However I assume you are discussing The Fair Tax. I would advise caution in trying to write in exemptions to the tax. Once that starts you open the doors to political favors. Politicians will be under pressure to exempt their corporate supporters.
The prebate planned with HR 25 addresses most of your concerns. Perhaps simply allowing pharmacies to not charge the tax would satisfy where medicines are concerned. Or maybe define a non-profit as a store/business that doesn’t charge the tax. Then hospitals and such could operate without tax concerns.
Like I said, once you start exemptions it begins a tricky business that will likely end up mostly paying for political favors rather than the idealist provisions that began it all.