2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Its difficult to tell what's the appropriate size of government here. The Northeast has higher state tax...which is likely related to its higher GDP per capita earned. There may be in fact many reasons for that related to ports, additional strains of population or business, etc. We don't know for sure.

In Minnesota's case, we hear constantly how state taxes here are way too high. In fact, it appears that Minnesota has the highest per person state taxes outside of the northeast and california.

So to sum, there may be as you say less competent governing in the northeast. Quality of life measures in the northeast are typically better than you would find anywhere in the south. On the otherhand, there are other cases that I do believe are open and shut cases:

In addition to larger govt, MN has very effective govt.

Many of the smaller state govt states (MS, AL, TN are at the bottom)...are absolutely also ineffective at governing. These states are at or near the bottom of many measures consistently.

http://taxfoundation.org/article/state-and-local-tax-burdens-all-states-one-year-1977-2010

Here's a question for you, though... how do you spend the money? Is a large chunk going to union dues, pension funds, and welfare entitlements, similar to NYS?

The LARGEST fiscal problem that we have ANYWHERE in this country, whether it be federal, state, or local, can be summed up using five words: "We'll pay for it later." Social security, medicare, and pensions fall into this trap. They can't make any interest on the money collected because it's being shelled out to recipients, so because of how it is paid, the only way to see any money from those is for the payees to die. Granted, this is where certain people on my block list will claim that I am calling for a bomb to be dropped on a retirement complex, which is NOT the case, but it is the unfortunate reality of the situation.

With social security and pensions, all you have to do is follow the Chilean model. When it comes to the death benefit, simply turn it into the account under the name of the deceased. As for medicare, start by removing the payment monopoly, and then see where things go from there.

 

[Rover]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

ZOMG!!!! Its true! Knuckledraggers come up with secret plan to throw the election to Romney! Dammit, I never should have underestimated you guys.

Idaho lawmaker shares ‘last chance’ idea to elect RomneyPublished: November 27, 2012

A state senator from north-central Idaho is touting a scheme that’s been circulating on tea party blogs, calling for states that supported Mitt Romney to refuse to participate in the Electoral College in a move backers believe would change the election result.
Sen. Sheryl Nuxoll, R-Cottonwood, sent an article out on Twitter headed, “A ‘last chance’ to have Mitt Romney as President in January (it’s still not too late).”
Constitutional scholar David Adler, director of the Andrus Center for Public Policy at Boise State University, said the plan is not “totally constitutional,” as touted in the article, but is instead “a radical, revolutionary proposal that has no basis in federal law or the architecture of the Constitution.”
Adler called it “really a strange and bizarre fantasy.”
Nuxoll said, “Well, I guess that’s one lawyer.”
Nuxoll said she received the article by email and decided to share it on Twitter. “I post for people to see and think about things and reflect about things,” she said. “I don’t know if it’s realistic.”
The article, by Judson Phillips, a former Shelby County, Tenn., assistant district attorney and founder of Tea Party Nation, posits that if 17 of the 24 states that Romney carried refuse to participate in the Electoral College, the college would have no quorum, throwing the presidential pick to the GOP-controlled House of Representatives.
The problem with that, Adler said, is that it’s based on a misreading of the 12th Amendment, which notes when no candidate receives a majority in the Electoral College, the decision moves to the House, where each state would have one vote and a quorum of two-thirds of the states would be required. “The two-thirds reference in the 12th Amendment is a reference not to the Electoral College but rather to the establishment of a quorum in the House of Representatives,” he said.
To win in the Electoral College, a presidential candidate needs only to get at least 270 electoral votes, Adler said. No quorum is required.
“The author touted by Sen. Nuxoll is confusing the Electoral College with the House of Representatives,” Adler said.
“It is possible that a president might be elected without reports from some states.
George Washington was elected to his first term in 1789 despite the fact that some states were not able to file a report of their electoral votes, owing to a major snowstorm.”
He added, “President Obama’s comfortable margin of victory would preserve his election even if some states were unable to report their election results.”
Nuxoll said she’s not actively working to get Idaho to skip the Electoral College vote.
“It would have to be a coordinated effort among states,” she said. “So it couldn’t be just Idaho.”
She said, “I think it is very, very sad that we elected our current president, because he is definitely not following (the) Constitution. He is depriving us of our freedoms by all the agencies, and so … what I’m thinking is the states are going to have to stand up for our individual rights and for our collective rights.”
Nuxoll won a second Senate term on Nov. 6 with 64 percent of the vote in Idaho’s new legislative District 7, defeating independent Jon Cantamessa.
Copyright 2012 . All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Read more here: http://www.idahostatesman.com/2012/11/27/2360565/lawmaker-shares-last-chance-idea.html#storylink=cpy

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

ZOMG!!!! Its true! Knuckledraggers come up with secret plan to throw the election to Romney! Dammit, I never should have underestimated you guys.

There's no quorum for the electoral college, according to the 12th amendment. Not to mention, you wrote copyrighted material and were dumb enough to include the notice on there. Perhaps a lawsuit is in order.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

I seem to remember that in the mid-2000's, there was talk from the right about removing the filibuster rule to prevent the left from using it, but they didn't want to do it because of what they remember from the early 90's. Look who's talking about it now... http://www.troyrecord.com/articles/2012/11/27/news/doc50b4f625030ac740322518.txt

 

[Rover]

There's no quorum for the electoral college, according to the 12th amendment. Not to mention, you wrote copyrighted material and were dumb enough to include the notice on there. Perhaps a lawsuit is in order.

Get right on that lawsuit Flaggy and give me a call when you've secured all of the proper paperwork. My # is 1-800-EAT-SH..well, I'll let you figure out the rest.

Don't tell me about the quorum rule not applying to the electoral college, tell your militia buddies and fellow Teabaggers.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

As if the GOP didn't have enough challenges. Norquist is going after those who pledge not to raise taxes and do. This is a common behavior for conservatives...religion, organizations like the KKK, radical Islam. Thankfully, this is almost never an issue for liberals.

"Regardless if you agree with us in principle, if you are not a 100% purist we will reject or even hurt you to make a point to others in our movement who are considering moderation."

My intention is not to insult, because I don't know if this is something you truly believe, or are just repeating, but this is a very naive comment.

This clearly defines virtually every primary battle that occurs in this country on both the democrat and republican sides of the aisle. There are numerous democratic candidates who do not commit to sufficient loyalty to union positions, public employee positions, social issues etc..., and who get actively pilloried by their own.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

An ultra-theocon friend cited this article as 'scary' and doesn't believe the art is political satire.

I don't even try to reason with him anymore; it's sad.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

My intention is not to insult, because I don't know if this is something you truly believe, or are just repeating, but this is a very naive comment.

This clearly defines virtually every primary battle that occurs in this country on both the democrat and republican sides of the aisle. There are numerous democratic candidates who do not commit to sufficient loyalty to union positions, public employee positions, social issues etc..., and who get actively pilloried by their own.

I don't see your comment as an insult...but rather see your blindspot as naive. There is no comparison between liberals and conservatives on the matter.

National organization for marriage and Norquist both had purity pledges before the last election. Both are zero tolerance on compromise. Per Newsmax, 258 GOP in congress have signed the Norquist pledge. Where have liberals mandated that everyone in congress sign a similar zero tolerance/no compromise pledge? How many actually have?

Also Norquist has no problem trying to take down whomever in congress signed yet doesn't follow through on the pledge. Again which liberal organizations are actively out trying to take down democrats because they're too moderate? Tea party candidates have the same idea. They have had significant success in taking down more mainstream GOP candidates. And these candidates lost...not because they were bad politicians...but because they were moderates.

IMO the extreme right mirrors the extreme right in other countries such as those in the middle east. In a faar more exteme example, hard core conservative religious terrorists have no problem attacking their fellow moderates...and even do so by design...to discourage their cooperations with more liberal elements in their society. Sounds to me very much like what Norquist is trying to do to some conservatives' political careers.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

An ultra-theocon friend cited this article as 'scary' and doesn't believe the art is political satire.

I don't even try to reason with him anymore; it's sad.

If anyone didn't understand my comments regarding "messiah dictator", that's your explanation.

I think what's even sadder than the "ultra-theocon"'s beliefs is that there are people on the left that actually believe Obama is the messiah (although they don't say the words directly), and the way they fawn over his beliefs (I can name a few who do that here) has a sort of religious tone to it.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

An ultra-theocon friend cited this article as 'scary' and doesn't believe the art is political satire.

I don't even try to reason with him anymore; it's sad.

I think its an interesting piece of art. I think it could be interpreted many ways. One could interpret that Obama is under attack too much, that he is sacraficing himself for the greater good or even that he is like a god. Art can go too far by primarily just being demeaning...but this doesn't. Yet much of the greatness in art in general is in freedom of expression and freedom of interpretation.

 

[joecct]

I think its an interesting piece of art. I think it could be interpreted many ways. One could interpret that Obama is under attack too much, that he is sacraficing himself for the greater good or even that he is like a god. Art can go too far by primarily just being demeaning...but this doesn't. Yet much of the greatness in art in general is in freedom of expression and freedom of interpretation.

Put the Prophet up there and how long do you think it lasts? Free expression my butt.

IMO its blasphemy.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Put the Prophet up there and how long do you think it lasts? Free expression my butt.

IMO its blasphemy.

I can see how the devout would take offense to it, but I wonder if we would see any Code Pink-like actions taken...

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

I don't see your comment as an insult...but rather see your blindspot as naive. There is no comparison between liberals and conservatives on the matter.

National organization for marriage and Norquist both had purity pledges before the last election. Both are zero tolerance on compromise. Per Newsmax, 258 GOP in congress have signed the Norquist pledge. Where have liberals mandated that everyone in congress sign a similar zero tolerance/no compromise pledge? How many actually have?

Also Norquist has no problem trying to take down whomever in congress signed yet doesn't follow through on the pledge. Again which liberal organizations are actively out trying to take down democrats because they're too moderate? Tea party candidates have the same idea. They have had significant success in taking down more mainstream GOP candidates. And these candidates lost...not because they were bad politicians...but because they were moderates.

IMO the extreme right mirrors the extreme right in other countries such as those in the middle east. In a faar more exteme example, hard core conservative religious terrorists have no problem attacking their fellow moderates...and even do so by design...to discourage their cooperations with more liberal elements in their society. Sounds to me very much like what Norquist is trying to do to some conservatives' political careers.

The reason the left doesn't do that is because they aren't free thinkers so they don't have to. They're more like insects. If you disagree with something they say, you get a college-like lecture on why you're wrong, and then a bunch of others swarming in like the Borg attempting to also apply the "re-education" until you are assimilated into their way of thought. I can't remember the last time I saw a free-thinking liberal...

 

[FreshFish]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

I don't see your comment as an insult...but rather see your blindspot as naive. There is no comparison between liberals and conservatives on the matter.

Who is being naive here? Both sides have their own orthodoxies and both sides demand slavish devotion to same. Just because the orthodoxies are different doesn't mean the requirements to adhere to the party line are any different from one side or the other, it merely indicates that the party lines are different.

You probably think that because you are a progressive and you believe yourself to be reasonable then by extension all progressives "must be" reasonable as well. If you don't think there are litmus tests that all left-wing candidates must adhere to, well, what can I say to that? you automatically insulate yourself from any attempt to reach you by reason by defining anyone who disagrees with you as unreasonable.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Put the Prophet up there and how long do you think it lasts? Free expression my butt.

IMO its blasphemy.

So are you saying that you agree with Islam extemists on matters like this?

I'm a Christian and see nothing wrong with this. But my belief has little to do with the relevancy of idols but is rather focused on the Word.

 

[Rover]

I don't see your comment as an insult...but rather see your blindspot as naive. There is no comparison between liberals and conservatives on the matter.

National organization for marriage and Norquist both had purity pledges before the last election. Both are zero tolerance on compromise. Per Newsmax, 258 GOP in congress have signed the Norquist pledge. Where have liberals mandated that everyone in congress sign a similar zero tolerance/no compromise pledge? How many actually have?

Also Norquist has no problem trying to take down whomever in congress signed yet doesn't follow through on the pledge. Again which liberal organizations are actively out trying to take down democrats because they're too moderate? Tea party candidates have the same idea. They have had significant success in taking down more mainstream GOP candidates. And these candidates lost...not because they were bad politicians...but because they were moderates.

IMO the extreme right mirrors the extreme right in other countries such as those in the middle east. In a faar more exteme example, hard core conservative religious terrorists have no problem attacking their fellow moderates...and even do so by design...to discourage their cooperations with more liberal elements in their society. Sounds to me very much like what Norquist is trying to do to some conservatives' political careers.

100% correct here. Conservatism is like a religion, a religion of crabby old people upset that the world has passed them by. If you're on a religious crusade, do you really care if you have to off a few infidels along the way (Lugar, Castle, etc)? Of course not. That's the problem the GOP has right now.

Come 2014, people like Norquist have nothing to lose and everything to gain. With Obama in power for 2 more years, and a difficult road to retaking the Senate (6 seats would be running the table of all potential pickups), a guy like him can use the primaries to croak any Senator who violated his assinine pledge without upsetting the balance of power in DC. In short a perfect storm of opportunity. By convincing the sheeple to take out guys like Lamar Alexander, Saxby Chambliss and Lindsey Graham, a demogauge like Grover gets to enhance his aura at the expense of people who are as conservative as the day is long but apparently lunched with a Dem sometime in the careers.

A lot of people think the GOP will moderate over the next few years. Count me as one who'll take a wait and see attitude on that one. The real power brokers in the party, the media personalities and the activists, have no reason to change the status quo.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Who is being naive here? Both sides have their own orthodoxies and both sides demand slavish devotion to same. Just because the orthodoxies are different doesn't mean the requirements to adhere to the party line are any different from one side or the other, it merely indicates that the party lines are different.

Politicians have points of view and its based on their electorate. I may be wrong, but I think that's politics defined.

The difference is as stated below that one side mandates no tolerance and holds their followers to it. See my post below for evidence.

The reason the left doesn't do that is because they aren't free thinkers so they don't have to. They're more like insects. If you disagree with something they say, you get a college-like lecture on why you're wrong, and then a bunch of others swarming in like the Borg attempting to also apply the "re-education" until you are assimilated into their way of thought. I can't remember the last time I saw a free-thinking liberal...

OK...so at least something that acknowledges that there is a difference between ideologies (and there is).

On this, I see it as a point of view. Your opinion is that liberals don't have free thought. I'd disagree. IMO liberals don't see things in black and white. They see that some things have positives and negatives. They see that there are some times and in some situations that a solution needs to change. This doesn't mean that one has no morals or flip flops...but rather that the tools to be effective or be just change based on circumstances.

You and I just advanced the dialog.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

OK...so at least something that acknowledges that there is a difference between ideologies (and there is).

On this, I see it as a point of view. Your opinion is that liberals don't have free thought. I'd disagree. IMO liberals don't see things in black and white. They see that some things have positives and negatives. They see that there are some times and in some situations that a solution needs to change. This doesn't mean that one has no morals or flip flops...but rather that the tools to be effective or be just change based on circumstances.

You and I just advanced the dialog.

Obviously my POV comes from experience in debates with the left, and I'm talking some of the really out-there ones (uber-communists, Occupy leaders, etc.). It's tough to see when you happen to agree with them on something, just as how you were accusing SJHovey of being naïve when it comes to right-wing extremism. Even I've been accused of being a moderate by the right. Sure I've changed my stance on things as time goes by, but I think a lot of that comes from escaping the brainwashing and looking more towards the real founding principles of the country, which were eliminating tyranny, oppression, and persecution. If you want certain core beliefs, that should be respected, assuming that the core beliefs do not directly infringe on someone else's core beliefs (such as a Jihadist's belief to kill infidels, while those "infidels" have a belief in life and living). That doesn't mean you need to push your beliefs onto other people.

 

[joecct]

So are you saying that you agree with Islam extemists on matters like this?

I'm a Christian and see nothing wrong with this. But my belief has little to do with the relevancy of idols but is rather focused on the Word.

No. But the world seems to be on a "we can do anything as long as we don't offend the Muslims" kick.

God should be revered, not mocked.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

No. But the world seems to be on a "we can do anything as long as we don't offend the Muslims" kick.

God should be revered, not mocked.

It certainly is open hunting season on Christians, and I believe South Park has created satire on that a few times...