Dog Brothers Public Forum
Return To Homepage
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
February 28, 2015, 09:05:16 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
85066 Posts in 2266 Topics by 1068 Members
Latest Member: cdenny
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 127
201  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: US Foreign Policy: 31% approve on: November 30, 2014, 05:17:05 PM
202  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Immigration issues on: November 30, 2014, 04:30:30 PM
ccp:  "we should be making a better case how this is NOT about those from Latino countries."

That's right.  But Democrats are winning 71% of the Asian American vote by keeping this issue on the front burner as well:

"the increased competition hurts those here more than it helps"

The increased supply of low skill, low wage workers lowers the wage and raises the unemployment for the existing workers, all other things held constant.  Working class whites get that.  Working class minorities should be persuadable on this point. 

A sane and logical immigration policy would bring in a manageable flow of workers with a balance of different skills and different places of origin.   America by design is a melting pot, E pluribus unum.    America under Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Jarret and the gang is something entirely different, politically warring groups fighting to divide up the spoils of the all-powerful, crony, redistributive system.

I look forward to Crafty's legal answer as to why this executive order is different, why it is unconstitutional.  In the meantime, suffice it to say that Obama's actions are ANTI-constitutional, clearly designed to work against the intentions and written meanings of the constitution.  Crafty also has written about how people learn in different ways other than simple logic.  The SNL skit (already posted) reaches more persuadable voters than the technical points sought:

From the constitution:
"Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress exclusive authority to “establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization ….”  And it is the president’s constitutional duty, under Article II, Section 3, to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed ….”

   - If people see wiggle room in that, it is because they want to see wiggle room in that, not because the articles and laws were written unworkably ambiguous.

"Worse than Nixon."  - George Will (before this action)
journalists did not ask the pertinent question: “Where does the Constitution confer upon presidents the ‘executive authority’ to ignore the separation of powers by revising laws?” The question could have elicited an Obama rarity: brevity. Because there is no such authority.

"a monarch decrees, dictates, and rules through fiat power"
    - Alexander Hamilton,  Federalist 69

26 Violations of Law by the Obama Administration ( overlaps the issues of immigration and unconstitutional as well as failing to faithfully enforce the laws, such as the 2006 Security Fence Act):  This law requires that "at least two layers of reinforced fencing" be built along America's 650-mile border with Mexico. So far, just 40 miles of this fence have been built – most of it during the Bush Administration.   - Anyone, please point out the wiggle room in that Congressional Act.

President Obama's Top 10 Constitutional Violations Of 2013
We are SHOUTING this because it keeps happening!

Crafty:  Some random thoughts, (not in his order)

"c) Have a think tank do some serious work on drafting and alternative to birth babies bootstrapping their parents into America."

   - Hard to believe this isn't done and ready to go.  One example below, I see that Harry Reid proposed exactly that in 1993!
In the exercise of its powers under section 5 of the Fourteenth Article of Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, the Congress has determined and hereby declares that any person born after the date of enactment of this title to a mother who is neither a citizen of the United States nor admitted to the United States as a lawful permanent resident, and which person is a national or citizen of another country of which either of his or her natural parents is a national or citizen, or is entitled upon application to become a national or citizen of such country, shall be considered as born subject to the jurisdiction of that foreign country and not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States within the meaning of section 1 of such Article and shall therefore not be a citizen of the United States or of any State solely by reason of physical presence within the United States at the moment of birth.

"b) Specify criteria to define if/when the border is secure."

   - Yes, and then require something like a 3 year delay to follow compliance, ensuring the criteria is truly and permanently met, before changing any of the legal status sought for millions.

"d) As a political matter and a human kindness matter I suspect there will be some people for whom amnesty is a fair call.  Newt Gingrich, tried making this point during the FL debates with his comments about not deporting Grandma after 20 years, but Romney mugged him from the right.  The point remains, at some point it will be a good call to apply some sort of statute of limitations concept."

   - Yes, there needs to be some concession on this from Republicans, with a delay after the other requirements are met.  (BTW, this is a reason to not take Romney fully at his word.  His positions are politically strategic more than principled.  This is one too many flip flops for my taste, and still needs to make one more on government mandated healthcare insurance.)

"e) keep alive the distinction between work papers and citizenship."

   - This is part of the trap that is set.  Dems are deeming legalization without citizenship, while they compare legal and not eligible to vote - with slavery.  The only distinction being that I think it was Democrats who supported slavery!

"a) Pass a bill with enough funding to fg deport all eleven million.  Specify that all 11M are to be deported, period.  If not, specify who not-- e.g. do we really want to deport someone who came here as a baby and has lived here essentially all his life and thinks of himself as an American?"

   - This is more of the trap set for Republicans by the Dems.  If you don't do this, then his action is justified, it is argued.  If you do, then you lose the votes of Hispanics, Asian Americans, etc. forever.

Ask Marco Rubio, you don't just step forward honestly and negotiate in good faith with these people.  Instead, you set your own traps along the way for them.  Call votes that put them on the spot, such as fixing birthright misinterpretation, funding the fence, setting up employment verification, etc.  How about holding hearings on the economic effect on low age Americans of having all these people entering?  And reach these people on other issues at the same time.

You cannot have a real solution while the Gruberized President is in charge of the enforcement apparatus.  JMHO
203  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Immigration issues - He Changed the Law on: November 28, 2014, 05:26:17 PM
Crafty poses a tough challenge. 

"I am still waiting for a response to the OLC's arguments justifying the EO."

Previously:  "The standard he cites is not FDR, but the APA and SCOTUS decisions."

From the piece:  "Congress passed the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which has served ever since as the legal charter of the modern administrative state."

   - There isn't an act of a congress, from 80 years ago or any other time, that changes the constitution and the relationship between the branches of government contained in it.

"the Supreme Court ... Heckler v. Chaney,... In a decision joined by seven other justices, Justice William Rehnquist noted that, “This Court has recognized on several occasions over many years that an agency’s decision not to prosecute or enforce, whether through civil or criminal process, is a decision generally committed to an agency’s absolute discretion.” "

   - Generally?  Absolute??  Really??!?  My guess is that he referring to enforcement of individual cases, not to changing the entire immigration system or things like the EPA writing new laws or changing existing ones.

Eric Holder's OLC:  "This discretion is rooted in the President’s constitutional duty to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,”

   - Yes it is!  This isn't a case of an executive not having the resources to enforce the law, in spite of the numbers you cite, 11 million illegals and only funding to allow deportation of 400,000 per year.  That was the limitation BEFORE this executive order.  The point of the executive order is described in the President's own statement, "I changed the law".  He is declaring his intent to NOT faithfully execute the law.  This was NOT a mis-speak.  The speech in question had 91 1st person references in it, I, me, my, while the relevant articles of the constitution refer to specific roles for the House, Senate, and President, and back to the House and Senate for super-majorities when the different branches are not in agreement.  The constitution gives the Legislative branch power to over-ride the Executive to make law, but not vice versa!

I know you are looking for a technical argument to explain how this is different from all other executive orders and over-reaches, and the related Supreme Court cases, but one more incremental expansion of these encroachments becomes unconstitutional whenever a challenge makes it to the Court and 5 Justices deem what the President already admitted, he [effectively] changed the law.

In the meantime, this is a political matter to be tried in the court of public opinion.  People see this for what it is, one person making or changing law in defiance of the constitutional process.  See the SNL skit, and see the Obama statement mentioned.

"Right now the Reps are getting maneuvered into supporting breaking up families with American children and illegal alien parents." 

   - Republicans were not deporting more illegals than Obama.  And if they returned minors crossing the border to their families, and/or made the proposal to "fix" the 14th amendment right now, they would be on record as opposing the further breakup of families caused by our broken system.  How about taking positive actions rather than always reacting to the Ayers and Pliven agenda?

"... this becomes yet another case where the Reps are seen as meanies."

   - There isn't really a way around that without abandoning the rule of law.  I admired Marco Rubio's attempt to engage the other side and solve this, but no one liked the results that came out of that.  I also asked here, just before the executive order, what would comprise a good comprehensive bill from our point of view.  Now the ball is in the President's court because he took it.  We can box him in but we don't have a simple way to solve this IMHO.
204  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential on: November 28, 2014, 10:45:41 AM
Obama is working at reducing the numbers of all working people.

True.  That cuts both ways politically.  People may want to vote to protect benefits, but may want to vote for better opportunities for their offspring.  Obama couldn't run on his agenda again - now that it is fully exposed.  Decreasing workforce opportunities isn't what made Bill Clinton appear successful.  Quite the opposite.  I fail to see how some old, white, rich Grandma is going to excite minorities, young people, or working whites about their prospects for the future continuing the same, failed policies.

If you and your family really are dependent on government benefits, you should vote for the side that will grow the economy and revenues that fund our support system.
205  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential, Why Gallup poll signals trouble for Hillary on: November 28, 2014, 09:59:30 AM
With all the focus on chasing Black and Hispanic votes, sometime they forget to pursue the other demographics, like white, working people. 

"Obama’s approval rating has dropped 13 points among college-educated whites, but a remarkable 21 points among the non-college educated. Why the difference?

(We aren't talking about people who hate Obama and all Democrats, we are talking about people who initially supported him.)

The Obama administration has been bad for higher-income Americans, but not disastrous. Quantitative easing has re-inflated the stock market, and middle-aged “knowledge workers” have suffered less than other groups. But for the working class, there is nothing good to be said about Obamanomics: high unemployment, a scarcity of full-time work, skyrocketing prices of food and fuel, more expensive health care, anemic economic growth, and wage decline caused in part by competition with unprecedented numbers of legal and illegal immigrants. What’s to like? Nothing."

When Hillary runs in 2016 as the heir of Obama’s liberal economic and immigration policies, she will not have [Obama's] built-in advantage with minorities. There is no reason why any substantial number of working-class people, white or minority, would wish for another four years of Obama’s policies. Nor–to put it delicately–is there anything about Hillary’s persona that will endear her to the majority of such voters.

...expect a backlash against Obama’s economic and immigration policies in 2016 that will take pundits–not to mention Hillary–by surprise."

John Hinderacker, Powerline
206  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Pilgrims' earliest communal farming failed miserably, private property succeeded on: November 28, 2014, 09:43:08 AM
William Bradford, Governor of the Plymouth Colony, reports that, at that time, he and his advisers considered “how they might raise as much corn as they could, and obtain a better crop than they had done, that they might not still thus languish in misery.” And “after much debate of things,” he then adds, they chose to abandon communal property, deciding that “they should set corn every man for his own particular” and assign “to every family a parcel of land, according to the proportion of their number, for that end.”

The results, he tells us, were gratifying in the extreme, “for it made all hands very industrious” and “much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been.” Even “the women now went willingly into the field, and took their little ones with them to set corn; which before would allege weakness and inability; whom to have compelled would have been thought great tyranny and oppression.”

Moreover, he observes, “the experience that was had in this common course and condition, tried sundry years . . . amongst godly and sober men, may well evince the vanity of that conceit of Plato’s and other ancients applauded by some of later times . . . that the taking away of property and bringing in community into a commonwealth would make them happy and flourishing.” In practice, America’s first socialist experiment “was found to breed much confusion and discontent and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort.”

Professor Paul Rahe, writing at Powerline, 2009
207  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Illegal immigrants will receive Social Security, Medicare under Obama Action on: November 28, 2014, 09:23:17 AM
I need Gomer Pyle's accent to properly say:  Well surprise!  Surprise!  Surprise!

Who saw this coming?

Washington Post, Nov 25, 2014

Illegal immigrants could receive Social Security, Medicare [and everything else] under Obama action

Under President Obama’s new program to protect millions of illegal immigrants from deportation, many of those affected will be eligible to receive Social Security, Medicare and a wide array of other federal benefits, a White House official said Tuesday.
208  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Romney swallows amnesty on: November 28, 2014, 09:08:14 AM

I think we can say at this point, Romney is running for President.  In some ways he is the strongest candidate.  In a few crucial areas, he is not.  One is Romneycare/Obamacare, and with that, the tie with Gruber. 

Now he would like to reverse course on amnesty.  How about telling us what changed since "self-deportation"?  He has already reversed course too many times.  He has too much ability to say what different people want to hear, in Massachusetts, in Republican primaries, and in a general election, and not enough adherence to principles for my taste.

What Republican strategy is that, to do it exactly Obama's way, give him credit, solve nothing and get nothing in return?
209  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Immigration issues on: November 28, 2014, 08:56:28 AM
" accuse Obama of screwing up immigration and move on to other things"

Non starter for me.

To clarify, nothing positive is going to happen in the next two years on immigration.  The President proved himself unable to negotiate in good faith.  

On November 4th Republicans won a wave election.  The President and his party were shellacked, or whatever term people want to use.  Ever since, we have been on defense, because that is his strategy.

Shouldn't it be the other way around?  He is governing this country into an economic, cultural and strategic ash-heap.  We should be on offense and he should be on defense, IMHO.

What about holding hearings on the enforcement and implementation of the last immigration law passed by congress?  He says the fence is built, yet infants and children are walking through?

Moving on would also follow passage in congress of the constitutional amendment.  Move that debate to the states for action.  

A debate that centers on the plight of the people already here, when no one is sending them home anyway, favors him.
210  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Dr. Ben Carson on immigration, Sticking to the rule of law isn’t heartless on: November 28, 2014, 08:37:16 AM
Like many Americans, I appreciate the plight of billions of people throughout the world who would like nothing more than to find themselves in the United States, where they could enjoy a much higher standard of living and wonderful opportunities for advancement.

It certainly seems like a compassionate thing to offer them legal status in America and the opportunity to pursue their dreams. It should first be considered, however, that we have millions of people already mired in dire poverty in our inner cities, rural townships, and places such as Appalachia who would certainly appreciate a helping hand before we extend one to foreigners. The same principle is seen when you board an airplane and hear the announcement, “In case of an emergency, oxygen masks will drop from the ceiling. Put yours on first, and then administer help to those around you.” There are many around us already in need of help.

According to President Obama, only those 5 million or so illegals who have been in America for five years or more will benefit from his largesse. He indicates that they will not be eligible for health care and other benefits. Obviously, this fits right into the same category as his promise: “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.”
Once illegals have legal status, it will be difficult to deny them any of the multitudinous entitlements that are freely distributed throughout our society. Also, we must remember that illegals who have been here for less than five years only have to claim that they have been here longer than that in order to collect goodies. In effect, instead of helping 5 million people, we probably will be aiding at least twice that many.

Even this would not be a problem if we had plenty of money, but the sad fact is our national debt is approaching $18 trillion. If you paid that back at a rate of $1 billion per day, it would take nearly 50 years. Many powerful nations before us have met their fate through fiscal irresponsibility. What makes our leaders think we are immune from the destructive forces of a shaky financial foundation?

The founders of our nation feared that the time would arise when an individual or group of individuals in our government would become intoxicated with their power and attempt to impose their will upon the entire society through dictatorial decrees rather than through the legal process established by our Constitution. For this reason, they established three separate but equal branches of government, dividing the powers. This ingenious method of power division worked beautifully until recently, but one hopes we are about to experience a demonstration of how the separation of powers preserves the integrity of our system. It will require that the legislative and judicial branches of government manifest the necessary courage to stand up for the people they represent.

The American people should not be manipulated into believing that they are heartless simply because they want to preserve the rule of law in our nation and look after their own before they take in others. We also have to consider the millions of people who have immigrated here legally, as well as those who are in the queue. It is incredibly unfair to them to grant amnesty to those who have jumped ahead of them in line illegally. I hope all of our government officials will recall the words of the Pledge of Allegiance, with particular emphasis on the part that says: “with liberty and justice for all.”
211  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Immigration issues on: November 28, 2014, 12:20:16 AM
Agreeing with Obj on this point, this President isn't going to do any more enforcement over the rest of his term than what they were doing the first 6 years.  I can't see how any bill with any language changes that.  What are we going to do if he ignores the next law, sue him, de-fund him, impeach him, just like we aren't doing now?

One thing Republicans could pass is the 14th Amendment fix to end the misinterpretation of anchor babies.  That does not go to Obama desk.  If passed by the House and Senate, it goes the the state legislatures.

To give an 'anchor baby' citizenship is to break up a family, assuming we intend to enforce laws in the future.  Let them apply as a family in the normal line.

Obama is approaching this piecemeal; so can the Republicans. 

If certain actions and results must come before amnesty, such as the amendment, a fence, an airtight visa system, an employer verification system, then get started on those first.

If we don't favor full, unconditional amnesty, then require the President to rescind his executive order before negotiations begin on a comprehensive bill.  He won't do it. 

Other things Republicans can do:  accuse Obama of screwing up immigration and move on to other things.  Pass the economic agenda now that we should run on in 2016.  Let him veto, and then run on it.  Fry the administration on IRS targeting, Fast and Furious, Benghazi, Obamacare, and every other lie.  Hold hearings on the results of previous programs, cash for clunkers, crony solyndra governmentism,  shovel ready jobs, dismantling of the workforce, epidemic of disability and food assistance claims, dual mission Fed, government's role in mortgages, etc.
212  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Government programs, spending: Our GIANT Welfare State on: November 26, 2014, 12:06:59 PM
Forgotten in all of this is how much these programs harm their recipients!
"We have the world’s second-largest welfare state — just behind France."

Our giant welfare state
By Robert J. Samuelson  November 25   Washington Post

We Americans pride ourselves on not having a “welfare state.” We’re not like Europeans. We’re more individualistic and self-reliant, and although we may have a “social safety net” to protect people against unpredictable personal and societal tragedies, we explicitly repudiate a comprehensive welfare state as inherently un-American.

Dream on.

Call it a massive case of national self-deception. Indeed, judged by how much of their national income countries devote to social spending, we have the world’s second-largest welfare state — just behind France.

This is not just conjecture. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) — a group of wealthy nations — has recently published new figures on government social spending. Covered is unemployment insurance, disability payments, old-age assistance, government-provided health care, family allowances and the like. By this measure alone, the United States is hardly a leader. It ranks 23rd in the world with social spending of roughly 19 percent of gross domestic product (GDP). This is slightly below the OECD average of 22 percent. France is the champ at nearly 32 percent. (The data are generally the latest available, including some estimates for 2014.)

But wait. Direct government spending isn’t the only way that societies provide social services. They also channel payments through private companies, encouraged, regulated and subsidized by government. This is what the United States does, notably with employer-provided health insurance (which is subsidized by government by not counting employer contributions as taxable income) and tax-favored retirement savings accounts.

The OECD report brims with insights about welfare systems. Did you know, for example, that China — heir to a communist social system — has a puny welfare state compared with most wealthy nations? In 2009, its social spending equaled 7 percent of GDP. Or did you realize that, despite all the talk of “austerity,” government social spending has hardly been reduced in most countries. The OECD reports cuts in a few nations (Greece, Germany and Canada, among them) but also finds that “in most countries social spending remains at historically high levels.”

The main message that Americans can take from this report is that we need a higher level of candor. The very complexity of our hybrid system seems intended to disguise the reality that we have a welfare state. We have created a new vocabulary to validate our denial. From our “safety net,” we distribute “entitlements” that are not “handouts” and don’t qualify as “welfare” payments. We pretend (or some of us do) that our Social Security taxes have been “saved” to provide for our retiree payments, when today’s Social Security checks are mainly financed by the payroll taxes of today’s workers, just as yesterday’s checks were financed by the taxes of yesterday’s workers.

If we were more honest about these matters, we might have an easier time debating what are admittedly difficult and unpopular choices. Who deserves benefits, how much and why? What are the consequences for taxpayers and the larger society? Does our hybrid mix of public and private power make sense? These are insistent issues that won’t vanish even though we pretend they don’t exist.

In the United States social spending is the second highest in the world ...
A focus on public budgets misses two important features that affect social spending totals and international comparisons of social expenditure: 1) private social expenditure and 2) the impact of tax systems.

213  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: WSJ: Riley: The Other Ferguson Tragedy on: November 26, 2014, 11:29:33 AM
Jason Riley is right.  I thought Giuliani was clumsy in making his points in the heated exchange on Meet the Press, but he introduced crucial facts that didn't go away just because distractions followed.

If you are a black who was murdered, there is a 93% chance your murderer was black, even though blacks comprise only 13% of the population.

With rounding, there is a zero percent chance your murderer was a cop, or a white cop.

Because of thugs like Brown and terrible crime statistics in certain black neighborhoods, there is a much larger need for a police presence.  That presence is there to protect black victims!  Because of those population statistics, there is something like an 87% chance (or greater) that the additional cops available for those assignments are not black.  If you are in that neighborhood and your mind is consumed with race-centric thinking, and you are black and a police officer is white, then everything that happens appears to be racial when mostly it is not.

I believe the high crime level in these neighborhoods is not racial, but cultural, and is accelerated by a half century or more of our failed social spending programs that tear apart the families in these neighborhoods, who happen to be disproportionately black.  The males are free to go through life without the responsibilities that keep the other males in our society from being criminals and street thugs.  (Proof that this is cultural, not racial, comes from the fact that blacks not in this environment don't behave like this and whites and others living in this culture do.)  The result of our policies is that many, many males go through life diverted away from the moral and financial burdens and responsibilities of getting a good education, job, credit, mortgage, home, supporting your family financially and otherwise, and keeping your criminal record clean.
214  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The war on the rule of law on: November 26, 2014, 10:44:52 AM
"Well?  Does this have merit?"


FDR is hardly the gold standard for following the constitution and Galston is paid to balance the WSJ editorial page with a  liberal, opposing view. 

Pres. Obama is not constrained by resources; his enforcement of the laws is constrained by his ideology.  You can find his reasons and motives for his actions in his own words.

Constitutional would be for the head of the executive branch to declare that he is doing he level best to uphold the current laws as written and passed until he can win enough votes in the legislative branch to get those laws changed to the way he would prefer them.  IMHO
215  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Rant: Ferguson and the Liberal false logic string I call "And Another Thing..." on: November 26, 2014, 09:51:24 AM
Ferguson offers a good opportunity to point out a very commonly used, liberal (false) logic string that I call "And another thing..."

So often the first thing a liberal says, the premise or foundation of their larger argument, is false.  Then, instead of backing up the first (false) point, they continue on with second and third points and so on, as if each additional point further demonstrates the validity of the first (false) point

Here it is out of Ferguson.  The (false) logic behind the big uproar goes something like this:  Not only did Blacks fail to get justice in this case, but did you know all these other things about racism in America?

The starting point is false - as usual.  Justice was done in this case.  A big, stupid man attacked a cop with a gun and ended up dead.  The cop used justifiable force to protect his own life.  Race had nothing to do with the attack, the struggle or the shooting.  Race had nothing to do with the legal proceedings that followed.  The Grand Jury included a mixture of races; they looked at everything and judged fairly.  If anything they bent over backwards because of the potential race implications of the result.

The starting point in the current "no Justice, no peace" arson and disruption campaign is that Brown and his family failed to get justice because he is black.  In addition to that (and another thing...), this is what always happens in America.  Life is really unfair to blacks everywhere, all the time.  The liberals and agitators making this point and organizing these protests have no qualms about the fact that their launching point for such an important campaign is abjectly false.

Even if one of the supporting points has truth in it, it is a new or separate point, not support for the original, false starting point, as presented.

Similar examples of this are found in most liberal arguments on issues, such as income inequality, minimum wage, war in Iraq, taxes on the rich, education funding, you name it.
216  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: Law Enforcement issues and LE in action on: November 25, 2014, 06:37:03 PM
"Attack a police officer and bad things will happen to you."

  - Agree. Attacking an armed cop is beyond stupid in so many ways.

"Plenty of evidence that corroborates the witness statements that this was a lawful use of force."

  - I agree.  It was a very credible statement that the officer believed if he took another hit he could be knocked out or killed. 

My question, if we had the film of this and watched and studied it and were assigned to train a group of officers tomorrow how to handle the same set of circumstances next time, is there anything we would ask an officer to do differently?

217  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics - Ferguson on: November 25, 2014, 10:42:46 AM
St. Louis County Police Sgt. Brian Schellman said this morning that at least 61 people were arrested. Charges ranged from burglary to trespassing to receiving stolen property.

As of 8:30 a.m., area hospitals reported a total of 23 injuries including three admissions and two gunshot victims.

The chaos started when the first account of the incident said he was shot in the back, from a distance, for no reason.   Gradually we found out that isn't what happened. Because of the rules of the system, the officer's account of it didn't come out until now. 

I wonder how many innocent people the police in that area have been shooting that people would widely believe the first story?  How often when the innocent people are shot in the back for no reason by the police does the justice system fail to hold the officer accountable and people have to take to the streets for justice?  Relative to the ongoing level of crime against each other, the answer to those questions is pretty close to zero.

Recently I heard an ad on liberal-radio looking for protesters and donations to fight against the police state.  Maybe we will find out from the arrest who these people really are and where they are from.

Another question comes to mind, if all these people in this community are really so anti-big-government and dissatisfied with the status quo, why did they just vote 94% Democrat?   (See Ferguson State Senate district 14
218  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Law Enforcement issues and LE in action, What Darren Wilson told the Grand Jury on: November 25, 2014, 09:53:46 AM
I wonder what law enforcement people here think of the actions of the officer, as we know them, in this strange incident.

It is some kind of an ego or I dare you thing for pedestrians to intentionally compete with cars for space in a street, with sidewalks available on both sides and no doubt a law or two against blocking traffic.  For Brown, the obvious thing to do would have been to move over, at least when confronted by the police.  That isn't what happened here.  In this case, the officer spoke to them, perhaps with sarcasm.  Brown swore at him and walked on, according to this story.  Wilson called for back up and pulled out to block and confront them.

At the point where they walked on, we might all say in hindsight, the rest wasn't worth it.  But isn't that when an area becomes, what they call in other countries, a Police no-go zone?

It started with a simple request — "will you just walk on the sidewalk?" Forty-five seconds later, Michael Brown lay sprawled on the street, shot dead by a police officer who had never before fired his gun in the line of duty.

And as he drove away from the 18-year-old's body, heading to the Ferguson police station to wash Brown's blood from his hands and surrender his gun, all Officer Darren Wilson could think was, "I'm just kind of in shock of what just happened. I really didn't believe it."

Those were the words he shared with a grand jury.  And late Monday, Wilson's explanation of that deadly day in early August became public for the first time, in a small part of an enormous trove of documents released by St. Louis County Prosecutor Robert McCulloch.

Thousands of pages of police interviews, autopsy reports and secret testimony — including Wilson's — were made public after McCulloch announced the grand jury's decision not to indict Wilson in Brown's death.

Until late Monday, Wilson's voice had remained silent, and the general story line went largely unchallenged: White police officer shoots unarmed young black man trying to surrender on a summer day in a St. Louis suburb.

But on Monday, Wilson's terror and panic were plain to see in 90 pages of his testimony before the grand jury on Sept. 16 and an 18-page interview with detectives that was recorded Aug. 10, the day after Brown's death.

Wilson was leaving an earlier call, having assisted the mother of a sick infant, when he saw Brown and another young man walking down the middle of the street, forcing traffic to slow and swerve around them. The police officer told the grand jury that he drove up, stopped his car and asked Wilson, "What's wrong with the sidewalk?"

In Wilson's account, it was all downhill from there. Brown swore at the officer, and the two men walked away. So Wilson called for backup, threw his police-issued Chevy Tahoe into reverse and cut the young men off.

As he opened the door, he testified, Brown slammed it shut on Wilson's leg. The officer told Brown to get back and opened the door again.

"He then grabs my door again and shuts my door," Wilson told the grand jury. "At that time is when I saw him coming into my vehicle.... I was hit right here in the side of the face with a fist."

The two men scuffled, Wilson said, and when he struggled to gain some control over the situation "and not be trapped in my car anymore," he grabbed Brown's arm. "The only way I can describe it is I felt like a 5-year-old holding on to Hulk Hogan."

Brown, he said, looked like a "demon."

I've never used my weapon before
- Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson on shooting of Michael Brown
When Wilson drew his gun from inside his car and told Brown to get back or he would shoot, the officer said, "he immediately grabs my gun and says, 'You are too much of a [coward] to shoot me.'"

Wilson said he pulled his gun because "I felt that another one of those punches in my face could knock me out or worse." Brown was bigger than the 6-foot-4 officer, and stronger, too. "I'd already taken two to the face, and I didn't think I would, the third one could be fatal if he hit me right."

Wilson ultimately got out of the car, and Brown began to run away. Then he stopped. And turned. And began to run back toward the officer. He made a fist with his left hand and reached under his shirt with his right. Wilson testified that he kept telling him to get on the ground. Brown didn't.

"I shoot a series of shots," Wilson said. "I don't know how many I shot, I just know I shot it."

Later, in front of the grand jury, Wilson was asked whether he had ever had to use excessive force in the line of duty before Aug. 9.

"I've never used my weapon before," he replied.
219  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Sen. Rand Paul - to introduce war declaration on: November 24, 2014, 10:55:51 AM
I tried to read this carefully to see if it is a spoof.

Rand Paul demands Obama go to war with ISIS
BY PAUL BEDARD | NOVEMBER 24, 2014 | 4:52 AM


Likely 2016 GOP presidential candidate Sen. Rand Paul today released his draft of a “declaration of war” resolution against ISIS, expanding his foreign policy efforts.

“When Congress comes back into session in December, I will introduce a resolution to declare war against ISIS. I believe the president must come to Congress to begin a war and that Congress has a duty to act. Right now, this war is illegal until Congress acts pursuant to the Constitution and authorizes it,“ Paul said.

The release came as news leaked that President Obama was firing Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, in part for a weak effort against ISIS.


Whereas Article I, section 8, of the United States Constitution provides, ‘‘The Congress shall have the Power to . . . declare war’’;

Whereas President George Washington, who presided over the Constitutional Convention, lectured: ‘‘The Constitution vests the power of declaring war with Congress. Therefore no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they have deliberated upon the subject, and authorized such a measure.’’;

Sign Up for the Washington Secrets newsletter!
More Stories
Obama's 203rd round, 7 hours at 'one of the most exclusive golf courses in the world'
BY PAUL BEDARD | 11/23/14 7:51 AM

President Obama in Las Vegas played his 203rd round of golf at one of the top course in the world.
Zogby Report Card: Score two for Obama, immigration, Keystone XL
BY PAUL BEDARD | 11/21/14 1:52 PM

John Zogby: Give Obama credit for showing leadership on immigration and the Keystone XL pipeline.
Obama fundraises off immigration speech, seeks $1,000 contributions
BY PAUL BEDARD | 11/21/14 12:53 PM

President Obama is using his immigration speech to seek donations up to $1,000.
Bill Gates joins bid to promote, restore House page
BY PAUL BEDARD | 11/21/14 8:21 AM

New effort to promote, restore House page program features Bill Gates, a former page.
TV ad: Obama finally builds Reagan's 'shining city on a hill'
BY PAUL BEDARD | 11/21/14 8:10 AM

A new TV ad says President Obama is fulfilling Ronald Reagan's pro-immigration agenda.

Rand Paul demands Obama go to war with ISIS

Whereas James Madison, father of the Constitution, elaborated in a letter to Thomas Jefferson: ‘‘The constitution supposes, what the History of all Governments demonstrates, that the Executive is the branch of power most interested in war, and most prone to it. It has accordingly with studied care vested the question of war in the Legislature.’’;

Whereas James Madison wrote in his Letters of Helvidius: ‘‘In this case, the constitution has decided what shall not be deemed an executive authority; though it may not have clearly decided in every case what shall be so deemed. The declaring of war is expressly made a legislative function.’’;

Whereas the organization referring to itself as the Islamic State has declared war on the United States and its allies; And

Whereas the Islamic State presents a clear and present danger to United States diplomatic facilities in the region, including our embassy in Baghdad, Iraq, and

Whereas the Islamic State presents a clear and present danger to United States diplomatic facilities in the region, including our embassy in Baghdad, Iraq, and consulate in Erbil, Iraq:

Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,


This joint resolution may be cited as the ‘‘Declaration of War against the Organization known as the Islamic State’’.


(a) DECLARATION.—The state of war between the United States and the organization referring to itself as the Islamic State, also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), which has been thrust upon the United States, is hereby formally declared pursuant to Article I, section 8, clause 11, of the United States Constitution.

(b) AUTHORIZATION.—The President is hereby authorized and directed to use the Armed Forces of the United States to protect the people and facilities of the United States in Iraq and Syria against the threats posed thereto by the organization referring to itself as the Islamic State, also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

RELATED: Obama extends U.S. combat role in Afghanistan


(1) SCOPE OF AUTHORITY.—Nothing in this section shall be construed as declaring war or authorizing force against any organization—

(A) other than the organization referring to itself as the Islamic State, also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS); or

(B) based on affiliation with the organization referring to itself as the Islamic State, also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

(2) LIMITATION ON USE OF GROUND COMBAT FORCES.—Nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing the use of ground combat forces except—

(A) as necessary for the protection or rescue of members of the United States Armed Forces or United States citizens from imminent danger posed by the organization referring to itself as the Islamic State, also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS);

(B) for limited operations against high value targets; or

(C) as necessary for advisory and intelligence gathering operations.



Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1547(a)(1)), Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1544(b)).

(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS.—Nothing in this resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1541 et seq.).

RELATED: Attention: 105 admirals, two generals warn that U.S. safety threatened by spending cuts


The authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107–243; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) is hereby repealed.


The Authorization for the Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) does not provide any authority for the use of military force against the organization referring to itself as the Islamic State, and shall not be construed as providing such authority.


The Authorization for the Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) shall terminate on the date that is one year after the date of the enactment of this joint resolution.


The declaration and authorization in this joint resolution shall expire on the date that is one year after the date of the enactment of this joint resolution.
220  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Cognitive Dissonance of His Glibness, Hagel out, War is back on? on: November 24, 2014, 10:50:10 AM
Hagel leaving under pressure

Hagel was picked for his anti-war Republican credentials.  Also because he was considered a bit of a boob that wouldn't interfere with the White House could control the Defense Dept.  We will learn more as this unfolds.

Slow response to ISIS, Ebola.

Wasn't up to the job

How do you spell Scapegoat?

Meanwhile, in a Shift, Obama Extends U.S. Role in Afghan Combat

Surrender isn't turning out to be the best peace strategy.

The Obama learning curve (or lack thereof) has been so painful to so many people on so many fronts.
221  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Four Words That Could Kill Obamacare, King v. Burwell on: November 24, 2014, 10:30:19 AM
In a case likely to be heard in March and decided in June, the justices will dissect the meaning of four words on page 95 of the 906-page Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act — four words that could render health insurance premiums unaffordable for millions of Americans.

Tax credits will be available through so-called exchanges, or online marketplaces, "established by the State."

Whether you look at meaning of the words or context, tax credits are only available through so-called exchanges, or online marketplaces, established by the State.

Now we will see if 5 Justices can read written law.
222  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / With 3 Words Obama Admits His Just-Announced Immigration Actions Are Illegal on: November 24, 2014, 10:20:09 AM
Obama answers constitutional question with a 3 word misdirection:

If you have children, you understand the rhetorical value of misdirection.

When I was a boy, two of my brothers and I were in the kitchen downstairs with Nan, when we heard a loud crash upstairs.

Nan hollered up the staircase at our other brother, “What are you doing up there?”

His answer was immediate, in just two words: “Coming down.”

And so he did.

We all agreed it was a masterful answer, in that it was both true, and it deflected any real truth-telling. We never did find out what caused the crash.

President Obama is less skilled than my little brother. After all, Obama’s deflection during last night’s immigration speech took three words — 50 percent more.

Here are those three words: “Pass a bill.”

Here’s the context…

Obama: “And to those members of Congress who question my authority to make our immigration system work better or question the wisdom of me acting where Congress has failed, I have one answer: Pass a bill. I want to work with both parties to pass a more permanent legislative solution. And the day I sign that bill into law, the actions I take will no longer be necessary.
223  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Hillary on Obama's Executive Order on: November 24, 2014, 10:07:45 AM
"I was hopeful that the bipartisan bill passed by the Senate in 2013 would spur the House of Representatives to act, but they refused even to advance an alternative. Their abdication of responsibility paved the way for this executive action, which follows established precedent from presidents of both parties going back many decades."
    - Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Not exactly putting a lot of distance between herself and the failed President.

Friends and supporters of Hillary say she will make and announce her decision in mid January.  If she is out, people will need to know.  If she is in, that is too early.  As a candidate people might expect her to have a view on the issues.  The one above she come to regret.  On Keystone XL pipeline?  6 years of study and still no opinion.  Can a candidate for President really not have a position on something that very simply needs just a yes or a no?

Everything she is doing now looks like she is preparing to run.  And every piece of news and feedback that comes back to her says don't do it.
224  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential, Elizabeth Warren 67 in 2016, should wait her turn? on: November 24, 2014, 09:59:44 AM
" and women voters who will vote for her [Hillary Clinton] because she is a woman"

Same for Elizabeth Warren?  She is the current rock star of the left.  The energy in the Dem party, if there is any, is on the left.  Should Elizabeth Warren wait because this is Hillary's turn?   Warren will be 67 (1/2) in Nov 2016 (Hillary is 67 now).  And then 71 and 75 in the next two go-arounds.  Good luck with that.  In both parties, all potential candidates have to figure that this is their best chance.

I think it's almost certain Warren runs if Hillary doesn't.  (I fear Warren more than Hillary.)  Is Warren too good a friend to run against Hillary?

Warren said of Hillary in People magazine's gushing spotlight:   “We have talked. It’s not much more than that. Not much more,”
225  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential - Jim Webb on: November 21, 2014, 11:38:09 AM
He is not my choice, but wouldn't it be nice if Democrats offered a choice who had the best interests of the country in mind. 

Jim Webb is in - if enough people put forward enough financial support.

14 minute introductory video:
226  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Immigration issues on: November 21, 2014, 11:32:35 AM
If I am not mistaken, the permits are going to be paid for by the fees charged the illegals.

IMO this self-funding thing (also see Elizabeth Warren's work on self funding the Consumer Agency) is a deeply unC'l evasion of Congress's power of the purse.

From what I have read, this is true, at least in part.  Still there are parts of it that can be de-funded, and for him to run his government outside of constitutional framework is to drive his approvals numbers down even worse.

If he is deferring deportation on only 5 million of 11 million (I don't believe those numbers), then will he be deporting the other 6 million?  Or is he lying and deceiving again?  I think we all know.

He needs to be called out on his hypocritical incrementalism.  When he says no healthcare for illegals, he means healthcare next, but not in the CBO numbers required for passage.  When he says work legally but not vote, he means, how dare you let them work but not vote!  When he says only those who have been here 5 years, he means that in 5 more years we'll have all of them, and a much bigger round to follow.  If he says any one thing and not the other, you can bet he is going for the latter.

Barack Obama makes Bernie Madoff look like an harmless, well-intentioned salesman.
227  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Cochrane: What the Inequality Warriors really want on: November 21, 2014, 11:07:21 AM
This is a great piece!  I wish more people would think the phony, inequality question all the way through.  You are not harmed by the success of others - except when the system of big government is set up to grant favorable treatment to the powerful.  Treat all people equally under the law.   Then the more your neighbor succeeds, the more likely they are hire you or your kid, or to buy your product or service, and to not be a burden on our resources and the safety net.  Jack Kemp said, the problem with the rich is that we need more of them.

"A critique of rent-seeking and political cronyism is well taken, and echoes from the left to libertarians. But if abuse of government power is the problem, increasing government power is a most unlikely solution."

(In economics, rent-seeking is spending wealth on political lobbying to increase one's share of existing wealth - without creating wealth.)

"Cronyism results when power determines wealth. Government power inevitably invites the trade of regulatory favors for political support. We limit rent-seeking by limiting the government’s ability to hand out goodies."

"Prosperity should be our goal. And the secrets of prosperity are simple and old-fashioned: property rights, rule of law, economic and political freedom. "

Note that when the inequality attackers won and took over all branches of government, inequality increased!

Illegitimate power and unequal treatment under the law, these are issues and crimes against the republic.  Inequality is a fact, not an issue. It is the existence of rungs on the economic ladder.  A perfect fight against inequality would leave everyone on the bottom rung, with no steps going up.
228  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Immigration issues, Michael Ramirez on: November 21, 2014, 10:35:36 AM
229  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Immigration issues on: November 21, 2014, 10:24:48 AM
"That task begins with Congress refusing to allow a dime of money to be spent executing this unlawful amnesty. This a routine, constitutional and crucial application of congressional power."

I agree with Sen. Sessions.

From National Review:
House Republicans should consider a bill to fund the government except for Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS), the agency in the Department of Homeland Security responsible for implementing the president’s order, and perhaps a few other selected portions of the administration. They could then propose a bill funding these agencies, including in it a prohibition against executing the president’s amnesty. Democrats would have little excuse not to pass the former bill, and, were the president to sign it, both sides could proceed to a focused argument on immigration funding. If the president were to veto the larger bill, or Democrats to block it, a shutdown might occur — but the White House, or congressional Democrats, might end up shouldering the blame.

I have been reading and listening to the Republican side play defense on this issue the whole time Obama has floated and then delivered it.  The Republicans should stay focused on their own issues.  When the new congress convenes, pass these budget measures without fanfare and put the spotlight back on the issues on which they just ran and won, and the issues they want to win on in 2016.
230  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Immigration issues on: November 20, 2014, 06:39:17 PM
Here's my suggestion for the Reps:

The underlying hold up is that the border is not protected , , , so PROTECT THE BORDER.

Pass a bill that genuinely closes the border.  Make Obama face signing or vetoing it.

This seems to me a good tip of the spear for everything else.

Proposing to add to Crafty's proposal.

1. "Pass a bill that genuinely closes the border."

2.  People also come here legally and then overstay their temporarily legal status.  Add genuine enforcement of that to the bill.

3. The 14th amendment begins:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.

That does not mean foreigners can drop in for an anchor baby, but it needs to be clarified which can only be done through the constitutional amendment process.  Pass that separately.

4. (Updating my post, there is no need for Republicans to make any deal with those who are here until the constitutional crisis of the President's orders is resolved.)

231  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Money, the Fed, Banking, Monetary Policy, Dollar & other currencies, Gold/Silver on: November 20, 2014, 10:36:22 AM
Do crises drive prices up in the current context?  The middle east is in an accelerating burn, and oil prices are falling , , ,

Off the top of my head this looks more like a play to play for time if/when there is a run on the ruble.

Great points.  In other crisis, in Iraq, Iran, the Gulf, Libya, threat of war anywhere, it seems that all crisis drive up the price of oil.  Why not now?

In Iraq, ISIS the aggressor wants control of the oil production and revenue, not disruption.  It's quiet in Iran while they build their nuclear arsenal without objection.  America is gushing with oil from fracking and Saudi is boosting supply while global demand is likely flattening.

For Russia, their crisis is the falling price of oil.  Their current conflict is Ukraine today and maybe the Baltic States tomorrow.  Since the Russian side is both the energy producer and the attacker, I guess there is no current threat of disruption to make the oil futures market nervous.  Ukraine relies on Russian gas and oil, so they would not attack those supply lines even if they could.

Agree, he is setting aside reserves as safely as possible to protect the Ruble, or for himself somehow.   What we never know is what global trouble Putin has in mind next. 
232  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Immigration, Senate Bill, Executive Order on: November 20, 2014, 10:11:43 AM

Is there a "comprehensive" bill out there that does satisfy these concerns?

It is unfortunate that when America elected a constitutional law lecturer, they got a guy that would govern within the cracks and crevasses between the articles of the constitution instead of following its words, meaning and and intent.

Kids used to be taught in school that for a bill to become law it must first pass with majority votes in both the House and Senate, and then go to the President to be signed signed or vetoed, etc.

The president has discretion to prioritize enforcement based on limited personnel and resources, but not to unilaterally make or change laws passed by congress. 

The President is not required to take care that the laws be completely executed. That would be impossible given finite resources. The President does have power to make enforcement choices. However, he must make them faithfully.
   - Georgetown University law professor Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz

Former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales:
Anyone who intends to sue the president over his anticipated executive action on immigration will have to overcome "two significant hurdles." The plaintiffs will have to show that the president has abused his discretion; and the plaintiff must have standing to bring a legal challenge.
233  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Putin stockpiling gold on: November 19, 2014, 12:41:54 PM

Yes, Putin is an interesting adversary, very calculating.  With low oil costs I'm surprised he has excess currency.  I suppose he can't buy dollars or euros right before he triggers the next crisis to drive oil prices up. 
234  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2016 Presidential on: November 19, 2014, 12:20:59 PM
Whoever it is must have what it takes to beat the Hillary, her machine, the Pravdas, and women voters who will vote for her because she is a woman.

Bland, competent, white male with good record will NOT be enough.

Back to Carson and Rubio who I think could reach more people and break that stereotypes, but have no real executive experience?  I think you just knocked out almost every other mentioned Republican name.  I guess Chris Christie is not bland and Bobby Jindal isn't white.  As I said, there are going to be difficult trade-offs.

Your view of Hillary's status and political strength is different than mine.  

If it is Hillary, or Elizabeth Warren, and maybe even if it isn't, someone on the R ticket needs to be female.  Here we go again with the Palin type VP choice, this time Nikki Haley, Kelly Ayotte, Susana Martinez?  (I googled those 3 names and it was hard to find a 4th.  Maybe Mary Fallin, Gov of Oklahoma?

For the record, I am not conceding Scott Walker is bland.  Just passing on what is being said.  I think he will run and we will see.  

I lean toward Rubio at the start for the reasons Crafty is suggesting.  He puts excitement into the idea of freedom in a way that no one since Reagan could.  He looks white and with Cuban descent does not share common heritage with most US Hispanics, but he speaks fluent and passionate Spanish and has a chance to make our case to a lot of people.

Crafty, Who do you see that is ready, and not white, male and bland?
235  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The US Congress; Congressional races, Keystone XL Pipeline, Mary Lanrdieu on: November 19, 2014, 09:55:09 AM

The pipeline has no environmental impact and is the safest way to transport a fuel we need for transportation and her state needs economically. The House again passed it.  The Dem Senate just voted it down; got 59 votes instead of the needed 60.

 Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-Louisiana) needed a win on this for her Dec 6 runoff.  Harry Reid, Barbara Boxer and the rest could care less (because she was going to lose anyway).  The Republican Senate coming in will pass it.  Goodbye Mary Landrieu.  The Republican takeover will now jump to +9.  Dem losses are -9.  Net shift in votes is 18.  And the margin is high enough for Republicans to have a good shot of retaining control in the next, much harder cycle.
236  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / 2016 Presidential: John Podhoretz on Scott Walker on: November 19, 2014, 09:44:31 AM
Republican primary voters want "someone who reflects their values and beliefs, who’ll stand up for conservative principles — and who has proved he can win.
Walker appears to hit this trifecta."

Scott Walker was elected three times in a state Barack Obama carried twice.

He is the preferred choice mostly of people who have read about him and not seen or heard him.

Podhoretz:  "He has kept a relatively low national profile, appearing infrequently on TV. And for those who have heard him speak, the experience is not exactly transporting: He’s colorless and unexciting to watch."

I wish Walker had Rubio's charisma or that Rubio had Walker's executive experience.  Walker is just fine in front of the camera, articulate and business-like.  Is that what people will want?  Or will they want the Greek, styrofoam towers again?  The coming primary season is going to involve difficult choices and trade-offs.

We want to win the next election, and win on and with our principles, not win an election by running away from principles.
237  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Education - Grubered on: November 19, 2014, 09:30:59 AM
From Cognitive Dissonance of the Left:

I wonder what places like MIT think that people like Gruber are doing to their brand name.  The main reaction seems to be, sorry he got caught, take down those videos and references.

I notice that MIT is closing its Economics Department, (merging it with Harvard).

These guys that advance lies to the nation in order to advance a socialistic takeover of the country, that is worth it, are called "center-left"??!!
238  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Climate Model Predicts Very Cold Winter in Northern Hemisphere on: November 19, 2014, 08:57:04 AM
A rare siting of real science and journalism below.  14.1 million square kilometers of snow coverage is a lot!  No mention of CO2.  No doubt Martha Raddatz and Candy Crowley will be all over this.  (The leftist Guardian missed this data and went ahead with the usual diatribe, snow cover gone from the Rockies by 2100:

Siberian snow cover is causing the cold air here.  What caused the increase in Siberian snow cover?  Warmth?  If so, then the earth has self correcting (negative feedback) mechanisms?  Where are those in the IPCC model??

Climate Model Predicts Very Cold Winter in Northern Hemisphere

About 14.1 million square kilometers of snow blanketed Siberia at the end of October, the second most in records going back to 1967, according to Rutgers University’s Global Snow Lab. The record was in 1976, which broke a streak of mild winters in the eastern U.S. In addition, the speed at which snow has covered the region is the fastest since at least 1998.

Taken together they signal greater chances for frigid air to spill out of the Arctic into more temperate regions of North America, Europe and Asia, said Judah Cohen, director of seasonal forecasting at Atmospheric and Environmental Research in Lexington, Massachusetts, who developed the theory linking Siberian snow with winter weather.

“A rapid advance of Eurasian snow cover during the month of October favors that the upcoming winter will be cold across the Northern Hemisphere,” Cohen said in an interview yesterday. “This past October the signal was quite robust.”...

Last year, 12.85 million square kilometers covered Eurasia at the end of October. By January, waves of frigid air were pummeling the U.S.
239  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of His Glibness, Immigration depresses wages on: November 19, 2014, 08:35:41 AM
“...This huge influx [of immigrants added to the labor force every year] ... threatens to depress further the wages of blue-collar Americans and put strains on an already overburdened safety net.”  - Barack Obama, Audacity of Hope, 2006
Who knew??
So, if one knew that,and their intent was to Cloward-Piven the U.S., they would do what exactly?

If he was trying to shrink the workforce, stop startups, stall the economy and put as many people as possible on an assistance dependency track at every phase of their life (witness "Life of Julia"), what would he do differently?  Absolutely nothing!

Obama knew the influx of Hispanics hurts economic opportunity for American Blacks (see paragraph at the link before the one quoted) and he still won 98% of blacks on reelection promising open blorders.

Is this intentional or are they stupid or ignorant.  Both.  I actually think a lot of the ivory tower academics, even in economics, appear ignorant of basic forces in economics in their writing and policies. 

Liberals and leftists know they are giving up growth with their anti-growth policies but they think what is left of the economy will have no choice but to produce and fund the programs and freebies they desire.  (And The Dual Mission Fed will print the rest!) To them, getting their side reelected indefinitely is a far bigger win than peace or economic success.

But it is not the intent of Obama and the politicians that is crucial.  It is the intent of the Obama and his Democratic voter that matters.  They don't like Republicans but they also don't like what they are seeing behind their own curtain.  At some point the results of leftist over-reach government speak for themselves.  Now we see a good number of these people become what the experts call "persuadable".
240  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Vanishing White Democrat... on: November 19, 2014, 08:05:14 AM
Whites are a shrinking majority, but still a pretty big group to offend and lose with all the division politics.  If you listen or study the Obama speech that rose him to prominence, it was all about unifying not dividing, where getting elected was all about dividing into groups.

The racial gap and the gender gap both cut both ways.  As pointed out, the difference is that the Republicans desperately want the votes of the groups they have been losing, and the Dems don't seem to give a damn groups outside their targets.
241  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Cognitive Dissonance of His Glibness, Immigration depresses wages on: November 18, 2014, 11:34:56 PM
“...This huge influx [of immigrants added to the labor force every year] ... threatens to depress further the wages of blue-collar Americans and put strains on an already overburdened safety net.”  - Barack Obama, Audacity of Hope, 2006

Who knew??
242  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: Prayer for Victor Davis Hanson on: November 18, 2014, 11:17:57 PM
Saddened to learn that the daughter of Victor Davis Hanson, author, educator, columnist, died on November 13 after a short illness.
Susannah Merry Hanson was 27.

243  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Media Issues on: November 18, 2014, 11:05:44 PM
We haven't seen a revelation of a president caught lying to the American people like this since the day Alexander Butterfield told the nation about listening devices installed in the Nixon White House:

We know who was paying Gruber.  We know what he was telling them behind closed doors.  We know the lies and deception were intentional, and we heard the lies repeated over and over, without hesitation or regret - in order to get a government takeover of healthcare.

They defrauded the American people, the CBO and the US Supreme Court.

Is there someone in the mainstream media who has fully covered the details and significance of this story?
244  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Republican leadership... on: November 17, 2014, 11:50:18 AM

Matthew's piece is not a hit piece on Republicans - far from it.  He's simply saying the Republicans need to stand their ground and let the blame fall where it belongs - on the Democrats and Obama.  The American people are vastly in favor of stopping Obama in his tracks - despite the fact that the media - even most pundits at Fox News - don't freakin' get it!  These idiot Republicans are so afraid of the media that they can't see this landslide victory right in front of their faces for what it is:  an unmistakable, unequivocal mandate to STOP THE OBAMA AGENDA NOW!!!

Thanks.  I get it that 'lilly-livered wimps' wasn't his characterization.  wink

It is certainly time to discuss the options available to stop the Obama agenda.  But in public and on these shows, Republicans don't need to overstate their recent win or over-reach their own new power.  That was the error made by Bush after reelection in 2004, by Obama after reelection in 2012, and by the Democratic congress when they seated their 60th Senator, all causing the pendulum of power to keep swinging back and forth.  When Obama makes his next over-reach, the story should be about Obama's over-reach, not about Republicans making scary, empty threats.  Our job is to govern soberly and responsibly, whatever that entails, and to stop his agenda mostly by winning the public and winning the next election.  Cutting back on unforced errors is part of that.  Moving forward on own positive agenda is the biggest part of that.  Investigating, answering and thwarting Obama and the Democrats is the least pleasant part of the job of governing.  

We can take unconstitutional acts by the President to the courts and to the people.  The power of the purse is a fact that does not need to be accompanied with talk of a total shutdown.

Crafty asks: "When you deport these illegals, what happens to the children?  Do you tear families apart?  Do you deport these American citizens?"

In the first place, we are deporting nearly no one before or after this coming action so the point seems hypothetical if not moot.  If you did send adults back home and THEY want their families intact, presumably they would take their children with them.  We, who support some kind of border control and rule of law, are NOT the ones splitting up families.  It would take some level of credibility and compassion on the issue to make a reasonable case of that.  To just shout, send them all home, or, to hell with their families, is to lose all Hispanic- and Asian-American votes.

Obama spells it out with  a clearer incentive than a welfare application.  Father a child while you are here and you are in forever.  And as this wave looks at getting legalization, the next wave starts rolling in.  Very hard to stop.  That's why we look for comprehensive reform.  If it doesn't end with a rule we would enforce, why change any rules?
245  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The US Congress; Congressional Budget Office fell for Gruber's diversions on: November 17, 2014, 10:56:44 AM
Is there going to be hearings and reform of this perverted, taxpayer funded, office of stooges and puppets?

"Two well-placed sources on Capitol Hill say that the Congressional Budget Office effectively used Jonathan Gruber’s model to score Obamacare. "

Yes they did.  And the Supreme Court did not.  It was a budget buster if scored honestly and unconstitutional as it was sold.  Odd that it is those of us who saw through the deception who are most upset about it.
246  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Iraq, Saddam Hussein Speech, 2/27 1991, Withdrawal from Kuwait, secular dictator on: November 17, 2014, 10:44:07 AM
As we re-debate the Iraq war(s) and what to do with "secular" dictators, I have been looking for the speech that Saddam gave in March 1991 accepting the UN resolutions that ended the Persian Gulf War at that time with a conditional ceasefire.  Not finding that speech, I post this Saddam speech from a week earlier for the record.  I count at least 60 references in one speech to God, the Almighty, Infidels, Holy War, Muslims, Islam, Islamic Faith, Mujahedeen, etc. plus verses quoted from the Koran.  That is a lot of religion for a man said to be secular.

In the name of God, the merciful, the compassionate.

O great people; O stalwart men in the forces of holy war and faith, glorious men of the mother of battles; O zealous, faithful and sincere people in our glorious nations, and among all Muslims and all virtuous people in the world; O glorious Iraqi women:

In such circumstances and times, it is difficult to talk about all that which should be talked about, and it is difficult to recall all that which has to be recalled. Despite this, we have to remind of what has to be reminded of, and say part -- a principal part -- of what should be said.

We start by saying that on this day, our valiant armed forces will complete their withdrawal from Kuwait. And on this day our fight against aggression and the ranks of infidelity, joined in an ugly coalition comprising 30 countries, which officially entered war against us under the leadership of the United States of America -- our fight against them would have lasted from the first month of this year, starting with the night of 16-17 [ January ] , until this moment in the current month, February of this year.

It was an epic duel which lasted for two months, which came to clearly confirm a lesson that God has wanted as a prelude of faith, impregnability and capability for the faithful, and a prelude of an [ abyss ] , weakness and humiliation which God Almighty has wanted for the infidels, the criminals, the traitors, the corrupt and the deviators.

To be added to this time is the time of the military and nonmilitary duel, including the military and the economic blockade, which was imposed on Iraq and which lasted throughout 1990 until today, and until the time God Almighty wishes it to last.

Before that, the duel lasted, in other forms, for years before this period of time. It was an epic struggle between right and wrong; we have talked about this in detail on previous occasions. The Age of the Showdown

It gave depth to the age of the showdown for the year 1990, and the already elapsed part of the year 1991.

Hence, we do not forget, because we will not forget this great struggling spirit, by which men of great faith stormed the fortifications and the weapons of deception and the Croesus [ Kuwaiti rulers ] treachery on the honorable day of the call. They did what they did within the context of legitimate deterrence and great principled action.

All that we have gone through or decided within its circumstances, obeying God's will and choosing a position of faith and chivalry, is a record of honor, the significance of which will not be missed by the people and nation and the values of Islam and humanity.

Their days will continue to be glorious and their past and future will continue to relate the story of a faithful, jealous and patient people, who believed in the will of God and in the values and stands accepted by the Almighty for the Arab nation in its leading role and for the Islamic nation in the essentials of its true faith and how they should be.

These values -- which had their effect in all those situations, offered the sacrifices they had offered in the struggle, and symbolized the depth of the faithful character in Iraq -- will continue to leave their effects on the souls.

They will continue to reap their harvest, not only in terms of direct targets represented in the slogans of their age -- whether in the conflict between the oppressed poor and the unjust and opportunist rich, or between faith and blasphemy, or between injustice, deception and treachery on the one hand and fairness, justice, honesty and loyalty on the other -- but also the indirect targets as well. Shake the Ranks of the Infidels

This will shake the opposite ranks and cause them to collapse after everything has become clear. This will also add faith to the faithful now that the minds and eyes have been opened and the hearts are longing for what the principles, values and stances should long for and belong to.

The stage that preceded the great day of the call on 2 August 1990 had its own standards, including dealing with what is familiar and inherited during the bad times, whether on the level of relations between the ruler and the ruled, or between the leader and the people he leads.

The relations between the foreigners among the ranks of infidelity and oppression and among the region's states and the world had their own standards, effects and privileges that were created by the Arab homeland's circumstances, and which were facilitated by propaganda, which no one could expose more than it has now been exposed.

The conflict was exacerbated by the vacuum that was created by the weakness of one of the two poles that used to represent the two opposite lines in the world. However, after the second of August 1990, new concepts and standards were created.

This was preceded by a new outlook in all walks of life, in relations among peoples, relations among states, and the relations between the ruler and the ruled, and by standards of faith and positions; patriotism, pan-Arabism, and humanitarianism; holy war, faith, Islam, fear and non-fear; restlessness and tranquillity; manhood and its opposite; struggle, holy war and sacrifice, and readiness to do good things and their opposite.

When new measures spring forth and the familiar, failed, traitorous, subservient and corrupt [ people ] , and tyrants are rejected, then the opportunity for the cultivation of the pure soil will increase in its scope, and the seeds of this plant will take root deep in the good land, primarily, the land of the Arabs, the land of the revelation and the messages, and the land of prophets. Quotes From the Koran

God says: "Like a goodly tree, whose root is firmly fixed, and its branches reach to the heavens. It brings forth its fruit at all times, by the leave of its Lord." [ Koranic verses ]

Then everything will become possible on the road of goodness and happiness that is not defiled by the feet of the invaders nor by their evil will or the corruption of the corrupt among those who have been corrupted, and who spread corruption in the land of the Arabs.
Moreover, the forces of plotting and treachery will be defeated for good. Good people and those who are distinguished by their faith and by their faithful, honorable stands of holy war will become the real leaders of the gathering of the faithful everywhere on earth, and the gathering of corruption, falsehood, hypocrisy and infidelity will be defeated and meet the vilest fate.

The earth will be inherited, at God's order, by His righteous slaves. "For the earth is God's, to give as a heritage to such of his servants as he pleaseth; and the end is best for the righteous." [ Koranic verses ]

When this happens, the near objectives will not only be within reach, available and possible, but also the doors will be open without any hindrance which might prevent the achievement of all the greater, remoter and more comprehensive objectives, to the Arabs, Muslims and humanity at large.

Then, also, it will be clear that the harvest does not precede the seeding, and that the threshing floor and the yield are the outcome of a successful seeding and a successful harvest. Even Greater Harvest to Come

The harvest in the mother of battles has succeeded. After we have harvested what we have harvested, the greater harvest and its yield will be in the time to come, and it will be much greater than what we have at present, in spite of what we have at present in terms of the victory, dignity and glory that was based on the sacrifices of a deep faith which is generous without any hesitation or fear.

It is by virtue of this faith that God has bestowed dignity upon the Iraqi mujahedeen, and upon all the depth of this course of holy war at the level of the Arab homeland and at the level of all those men whom God has chosen to be given the honor of allegiance, guidance and honorable position, until He declares that the conflict has stopped, or amends its directions and course and the positions in a manner which would please the faithful and increase their dignity.

O valiant Iraqi men, O glorious Iraqi women. Kuwait is part of your country and was carved from it in the past.

Circumstances today have willed that it remain in the state in which it will remain after the withdrawal of our struggling forces from it. It hurts you that this should happen.

We rejoiced on the day of the call when it was decided that Kuwait should be one of the main gates for deterring the plot and for defending all Iraq from the plotters. We say that we will remember Kuwait on the great day of the call, on the days that followed it, and in documents and events, some of which date back 70 years.

The Iraqis will remember and will not forget that on 8 August, 1990, Kuwait became part of Iraq legally, constitutionally and actually. They remember and will not forget that it remained throughout this period from 8 August 1990 and until last night, when withdrawal began, and today we will complete withdrawal of our forces, God willing. Circumstances of Withdrawal

Today certain circumstances made the Iraqi Army withdraw as a result of the ramifications which we mentioned, including the combined aggression by 30 countries. Their repugnant siege has been led in evil and aggression by the machine and the criminal entity of America and its major allies.

These malicious ranks took the depth and effectiveness of their aggressiveness not only from their aggressive premeditated intentions against Iraq, the Arab nation and Islam, but also from the position of those who were deceived by the claim of international legitimacy. Everyone will remember that the gates of Constantinople were not opened before the Muslims in the first struggling attempt, and that the international community [ placed ] dear Palestine's freedom and independence in oblivion.

Whatever the suspect parties try, by virtue of the sacrifices and struggle of the Palestinians and Iraqis, Palestine has returned anew to knock at the doors closed on evil.

Palestine returned to knock on those doors to force the tyrants and the traitors to a solution that would place it at the forefront of the issues that have to be resolved; a solution that would bring dignity to its people and provide better chances for better progress.

The issue of poverty and richness, fairness and unfairness, faith and infidelity, treachery and honesty and sincerity, have become titles corresponding to rare events and well-known people and trends that give priority to what is positive over what is negative, to what is sincere over what is treacherous and filthy, and to what is pure and honorable over what is corrupt, base and lowly. The confidence of the nationalists and the faithful mujahedeen and the Muslims has grown bigger than before, and great hope more and more.

Slogans have come out of their stores to strongly occupy the facades of the pan-Arab and human holy war and struggle. Therefore, victory is [ great ] now and in the future, God willing. 'Shout for Your Victory'

Shout for victory, O brothers; shout for your victory and the victory of all honorable people, O Iraqis. You have fought 30 countries, and all the evil and the largest machine of war and destruction in the world that surrounds them. If only one of these countries threatens anyone, this threat will have a swift and direct effect on the dignity, freedom, life, or freedom of this or that country, people and nation.
The soldiers of faith have triumphed over the soldiers of wrong, O stalwart men. Your God is the one who granted your victory. You triumphed when you rejected, in the name of faith, the will of evil which the evildoers wanted to impose on you to kill the fire of faith in your hearts.

You have chosen the path which you have chosen, including the acceptance of the Soviet initiative, but those evildoers persisted in their path and methods, thinking that they can impose their will on their Iraq, as they imagined and hoped.

This hope of theirs may remain in their heads, even after we withdraw from Kuwait. Therefore, we must be cautious, and preparedness to fight must remain at the highest level.

O you valiant men; you have fought the armies of 30 states and the capabilities of an even greater number of states which supplied them with the means of aggression and support. Faith, belief, hope and determination continue to fill your chests, souls and hearts.

They have even become deeper, stronger, brighter and more deeply rooted. God is great; God is great; may the lowly be defeated.

Victory is sweet with the help of God.
247  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Republican Leadership: Lily-livered Wimps... on: November 17, 2014, 09:55:02 AM
Obj,  You have two points in there that I also wanted to bring forward.  One is that, "the last government shutdown (caused by the President, not Republicans) led to the recent landslide victory of Republicans." - Obj     "The episode sent the unmistakable message that GOPers were champions of freedom of choice in health care." - FrontPage

Yes.  Republicans like Lee and Cruz and the House majority took a hard stance in defense of principles.  The immediate reaction was outrage and false blame, but the lasting effect was that, for a moment, we ended the blurred lines and lit up a clear distinction between our votes and their failed policies.  Unlike Republicans supporting federal mortgage agencies, Republicans writing Romneycare, Republicans expanding the federal Department of Education and increasing spending overall, we drew a clear line for the public to see on a crucially important matter and gained immensely from it.

Secondly, this is an amazing shift in public opinion on immigration reform brought on by the over-reaches of power by Pres. Obama:

"Oregon, a longtime Democrat stronghold, delivered a stark warning on illegal immigration to the president’s party ... the vote to overturn the statute providing driver’s licenses [to illegals] was a lopsided 66.4 percent to repeal compared to just 33.6 percent to uphold the law."

All of that said, I don't see why an opinion piece about Democrats ready to obliterate the constitution for political gain has to be written as a hit piece on Republicans.   
248  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Pathological Science on: November 17, 2014, 09:27:14 AM
" Grubering is when politicians or their segregates engage in a campaign of exaggeration and outright lies in order to “sell” the public on a particular policy initiative.  The justification for Grubering  is that the public is too “stupid” to understand the topic and, should they be exposed to the true facts, would likely come to the “wrong” conclusion.  Grubering is based on the idea that only the erudite academics can possibly know what’s best of the little people.  Jefferson would be turning in his grave."

This is a great point and a great post.  The concept applies way beyond healthcare and climate alarmism as well.  The whole leftist economic model is based on Grubering.

I only regret that we couldn't make a more universal verb out of the entire Democratic party of the last 10 years instead of out of one obscure academic whose work they used.
249  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Sen. Rand Paul on Bill Maher on: November 17, 2014, 08:58:32 AM

Rand Paul is a very talented and thoughtful guy.  However, I don't agree him on these points in question nor do I like the way he frames his arguments on them.  See the current Oval Office occupant, any bozo can have opposed the Iraq war from the start and be consistent in that now.  But then what?  Do nothing in Iraq in light of the 23 reasons given in the military authorization in Iraq?  Allow a rogue regime to gas its own people, support terrorism, shoot at American planes and attack 4 neighbors with no consequence?  Stick with the failed consequences of sanctions that empower the regime and weaken the people?  There is a burden is on opponents of war at this level to say what is the other way.  Open dialogues with murderous dictators to change their ways?  Just hope for the best?  At the least we could have toppled Saddam and left the place in chaos a lot earlier with more of our own resources intact.  Or we could have greatly weakened Saddam, without toppling his regime, if leaving regimes like this in place is the policy.  But to say no consequence for complete violation of Iraq's surrender terms a decade earlier is to make the word of the US, UN and coalition utterly meaningless.

Dropping the entire 'war on drugs' is not a of action from here.  We haven't yet digested the data coming from cannabis edibles and we want to legalize meth?  What else, wouldn't we also end FDA and the entire prescription and pharmacy process if illegal drugs are legalized?  End medoical licensing too, let people be responsible for their own choices.  I might prefer all of that, but it would be last on the list of basic freedoms lost that I want back first.  Keeping the fruits of our labor, dismantling coercive government and ending the welfare state would come first.  You need to bring back personal responsibility before making all dangerous choices legal.  On those points with Bill Maher and the reachout to the left, Rand Paul is silent.  

Federal decriminalization of personal quantities of pot is what can be done right now with majority support and then expressly leave that jurisdiction to the states.  If you favor full legalization, that is your first step.  If you favor keeping laws in line with acceptable behavior of the times, that is the logical step.  If you favor moving power out of Washington, that is one move you can make right now in the right direction.

Releasing all non-violent criminals is not the best course or the best rhetoric for a politician.  See posts by our ccp, perhaps we are imprisoning too few of our white collar criminals, not too many.  Laws need teeth, and enforcement.  Laws we don'[t want to enforce should be repealed.  Aren't theft and fraud non-violent crimes, and bilking the public and taxpayers?  We want no meaningful consequence for those?  Repeal the unhelpful laws and release the people being held on those repealed laws, but to trade reckless rhetoric for popularity is what sank so many other up and coming politicians - like Obama.
250  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Way Forward for the American Creed on: November 11, 2014, 09:14:01 PM
It's time for a 'way forward' discussion.  We need to a) stop or slow down the Obama era growth of government, b) govern in a way that keeps control of congress in the next election cycle, c) make proposals that are realistic and possible to pass now, and d) set the table to win back the Presidency.  

Bipartisan policies imploded at the end of the Bush years.   Wrongheaded policies like government-based mortgage finance were supported by Democrats and many elected Republicans known as RINOs.  The Obama years in contrast involved mostly a straight partisan divide, like Obamacare on one side and trying to repeal it on the other.  This election saw the first split in the Democrats, with 'red state Democrats' trying to running away from the President's agenda for their own survival.  

Now we have divided government in a divided nation and need to build gently on this to win going forward.  Many Dem voters lost faith in their party and policies, but have not yet jumped fully to the other side.  

Some conservatives are now pretending we hold all the cards. But we hold more like half the cards and should proceed with that in mind.   There needs to be a way forward for the right in between RINOism and purity.  We need proposals that follow, not violate, our principles, and attract support from the middle.  We need to take small steps in the right direction and make the left's accusations against us clearly false.  When they say handouts to the rich, starving the poor, taking away Granny's meds, shutting down roads and bridges or anything like that, we need to be ready to show it is not true.

Here is the beginning of a list, not in order of importance:

1)   Crack down on Cronyism.

2)  End Too Big to Fail.  Big enterprises get the protections that small enterprises receive.

3)  De-criminalize small quantities of pot at the federal level.  

4)  Take the lead legalizing safe, over-the counter birth control.  

5)   Give anti-abortion activism an anti- late term abortion focus.

6)  Drop the subject of gay marriage.  Let  the states and courts sort it out.

7)  Repeal or cut only the taxes that are really unpopular and unproductive for now.  No Democrat ran on a platform of supporting the medical device tax.  Most Democrats won't oppose its repeal.  No Democrat ran on having the US corporate tax rate highest in the world, driving out our best companies.  No reasonable Dem will oppose reform.  Pass what can be passed now with at least some bi-partisan support and put it on President Obama's desk.

8.)  Replace and re-name Obamacare.  Take a version of what Dick Morris called the Republican plan, get some support from the other side and re-name it.   Provide tax credit subsidies for all who need them to buy health insurance and incorporate the basic consumer protections.  Insurers cannot discriminate based on pre-existing conditions nor can they either terminate coverage or raise rates when their customers become ill.  Eliminate the coercive aspects of ObamaCare.  Nobody has to buy insurance nor does any employer have to offer it.  Those who do purchase insurance can get as much or as little coverage as they want.  One size will no longer attempt to fit all.  Extend Medicare coverage to those who are sickest with the highest medical bills, so the government pays for all their costs.

9)  Pass real immigration reform.  Enforce our borders, really, enhance security overall, and offer a tough set of criteria for staying here legally if you are already fully established here and contributing positively to the well-being of the country.  Make the main parts inseparable; people here stay legally only if the inflow stops.

10)  Restrain and prioritize spending but have every statement about restraint start with the affirmation that we are committed to retaining a safety net for the truly needy.

11)  Pass laws that require adherence to constitutional law, such as a law requiring Presidents to go to congress in order to launch military interventions of the type he launched in Libya.  Limit the UN and other international encroachments on national and individual liberty.   Reaffirm specific states' rights and responsibilities in federal law.

12) End the federal 21 drinking age.  They vote.  They drive.  They serve.  Leave it to the states.

13) Keep the internet private, tax free, and retain US sovereignty over it.

14)  Last (for now) but not least, reform the dual mission of The Fed.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 127
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!