Great!! I hope you can make the same kind of ridicule RE. Obama’s campaign lies. And all of the corruption owned by Democratic Congresspersons and Senators, too. You make the important point. I am a disappointed vote who was taken-in by all the Democratic hype in ’08. I will never vote for a Republican but it is hard, too, to vote for corrupt, lying Democrats. They’re no lesser an evil as Obama’s values have demonstrated. He lied to us all in his campaign.
I’ve got a question maybe someone on here could answer…
On the WE Opinion Line today, someone praised Brownback for turning a huge budget deficit from previous Democratic administrations into a surplus in 6 months?
They pulled it out of their backside. The Kansas budget has, by its Constitution, have tp be balanced by the end of every fiscal year. Consequently, agencies, services, roads, etc may go to hell in an handbasket, but the budget gets balanced, because they cannot borrow the difference, at least not without using short-term gimmicks.
Making up stuff that sounds good is as acceptable to these folks as Sam Brownback firing experienced people to replace them with brainless cronies.
Ah, the joy of being a debtor nation run by people who refuse to pay its bills! (The Tea Party).
I bet you thought the USA was a sovereign nation. We negotiated with other countries and businesses sure, but no outside force could dare tell us how to run our nation!
Not now. Thanks to the Tea Party, the ratings agencies — the same trustworthy folks who gave top ratings to Enron and bundled-mortgage securities–are now daring to tell the US how to run its economy. Or else.
Florida is the first state that will require a drug test when applying for welfare (effective July 1st)! Some people are crying this is unconstitutional. How is this unconstitutional? It’s ok to drug test the people who work for their money but not those who don’t?
Freebird, the only problem with this, the people doing the drugs aren’t the ones that will suffer for their drug use. It’s the children they’re suppose to be raising.
Unfortunately, recent Supreme Court decisions (most notably, the Lindsey Earls case) have pretty much defecated on the Fourth Amendment. Nonetheless , it still fails the rational basis test –no coherent government interest is met –other than a “gotcha” to deny desperately needed help, and save the money for tax cuts –and it cannot even be argued that it reduces drug use, “drug-free workplace,” and the like.
It does, though, please the kind of mediocre thugs who think poverty is a moral failing that should be punished by even more poverty.
And by the way, private contracts–however odious–are a different thing from government contracts–a corporation can’t violate the constitutional rights of anyone (civil torts — liabiliity — is another thing, and laws that free them from being sued for wee-wee tests are also unconstitutional).
In general, I have a hard time understanding people who will cheerfully give up their freedoms for the the most foolish and convoluted reasons (hint: Only fools think “drug testing” is about drug abuse).
Let’s get Anthony Kennedy to whip it out and produce..
So you have no problem with taxpayer money going to fund drug use.
Wow. I of course did not even imply such a thing, but I get it: when you get a script for thinking pounded into your head over and over, thinking outside the scripted responses is hard (that incidently, is true regardless of political ideology, left, right, sideways, whatever.
Absent anything I said, the assertion being made–that welfare benefits absent bureaucratic searches for drug metabolites within people’s bodies implies subsidizing drug use–requires twisting common sense into numerous loops. The topological analysis of it might break new ground.
Here’s a clue: all but the most screwed-up welfare recipients will not be spending their meager subsistence on drugs. Those that do will suffer greatly. The vaunted tests , though, make no distinction–they don’t detect addicts, let alone offer treatment.
But they don’t deserve help, right? They’re not you or your own. They’re not like you–the TV said so .
I of course get what passes for your thinking—you’re outraged that $$
might be going to “them”—because they will never be you, even though the rules are of general application, and it only takes some bad luck. This kind of thinking goes back centuries–you are a nobleman if you’re better than them, right?
Airline Flights Could Get Cheaper if FAA Shuts Down Saturday Morning
Airline tickets are going to get cheaper Saturday unless Congress can reach an agreement before midnight on extending authority for the Federal Aviation Administration, which gives airlines the ability to collect taxes on behalf of the government.
If the FAA’s authority is not extended, airlines would no longer have the authority to collect federal taxes, which according to the Air Transport Association, is about $61 on a $300 round-trip airfare.
Long-term authority for the FAA expired in 2007. Unable to agree on long-term funding legislation for the agency, Congress has kept the FAA operating through a series of 20 short-term extension bills.
Freebird wrote: “Take the kids until the parents clean up” –
While this may sound good on a bumper sticker, it won’t work. This implies that drug addicts can just quit on their own due to their own will power.
Alot of drug addicts cannot physically kick the habit without medical treatment. Are taxpayers willing to pay for this treatment?
And exactly who is going to pay for these kids while their parents are cleaning up? We have too many people now not wanting to pay any taxes. You expect them to pay for some druggies’ kids?
To fix the drug problem in this country – we need to stop this useless and wasteful War on Drugs and put some of that money towards treatment.
In the current climate of nobody wanting to pay taxes – that does not seem likely.
Boehner walks out on debt negotiations because he must continue protecting those he refers to as “job creators.” However, we all know they haven’t created any jobs. We also know Boehner (or any other republican) hasn’t introduced a jobs bill — not a single one.
Boehner, where are the jobs from those wealthy job creators you protect? We the people have paid the price for too long. When do those you cater to and protect do their part?
No I don’t really think you were doing meth or something–that’s ridiculous– but based upon your previous reasoning, then we must assume you were, otherwise you would not assert defending the basic human dignity of people like yourself was subsidizing drug use.
Overall, the general arguments being made–talking about how to treat addicts–were so completely beside the point, except to the extent cutting of their only means of support leaves one with a poor desperate addict.
PrairiePopulistsAndProgressives.net 
“I gotta say, of all my issues with Michele Bachmann’s brain, migraines are not even in the top 20.” — Jon Stewart
I agree.
I’m Voting Republican
I’m voting Republican also – in the primary. I want my voice to be heard
Great!! I hope you can make the same kind of ridicule RE. Obama’s campaign lies. And all of the corruption owned by Democratic Congresspersons and Senators, too. You make the important point. I am a disappointed vote who was taken-in by all the Democratic hype in ’08. I will never vote for a Republican but it is hard, too, to vote for corrupt, lying Democrats. They’re no lesser an evil as Obama’s values have demonstrated. He lied to us all in his campaign.
My vote will always go to a person and not to a small letter beside a person’s name. Why in the world would you never vote for a republican?
I have no idea what lies you are speaking of. Maybe you could give some examples and details of your complaints?
I’ve got a question maybe someone on here could answer…
On the WE Opinion Line today, someone praised Brownback for turning a huge budget deficit from previous Democratic administrations into a surplus in 6 months?
Where did this tidbit of knowledge come from?
They pulled it out of their backside. The Kansas budget has, by its Constitution, have tp be balanced by the end of every fiscal year. Consequently, agencies, services, roads, etc may go to hell in an handbasket, but the budget gets balanced, because they cannot borrow the difference, at least not without using short-term gimmicks.
Making up stuff that sounds good is as acceptable to these folks as Sam Brownback firing experienced people to replace them with brainless cronies.
Terrible news out of Norway. Shows how religious fanaticism can be very dangerous, regardless of which religion the fanatics claim to follow.
Yes. Heart wrenching. It takes hate to commit acts this atrocious and religion has through the ages proven to be a way to fan the flames of hatred.
Ah, the joy of being a debtor nation run by people who refuse to pay its bills! (The Tea Party).
I bet you thought the USA was a sovereign nation. We negotiated with other countries and businesses sure, but no outside force could dare tell us how to run our nation!
Not now. Thanks to the Tea Party, the ratings agencies — the same trustworthy folks who gave top ratings to Enron and bundled-mortgage securities–are now daring to tell the US how to run its economy. Or else.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43829257/ns/business-eye_on_the_economy/
Welcome to the Third World, although America can’t get worst then Second. Yet
.
Florida is the first state that will require a drug test when applying for welfare (effective July 1st)! Some people are crying this is unconstitutional. How is this unconstitutional? It’s ok to drug test the people who work for their money but not those who don’t?
Freebird, the only problem with this, the people doing the drugs aren’t the ones that will suffer for their drug use. It’s the children they’re suppose to be raising.
Take the kids until the parents clean up
Drug testing without probable cause will never seem OK to me.
If we drug test when applying for welfare -then we should also drug test all those corporate fat cats before they get one dime of taxpayer money.
This is just fair – don’t you think?
Fair is fair
Of course it’s unconstitutional. Duh.
Unfortunately, recent Supreme Court decisions (most notably, the Lindsey Earls case) have pretty much defecated on the Fourth Amendment. Nonetheless , it still fails the rational basis test –no coherent government interest is met –other than a “gotcha” to deny desperately needed help, and save the money for tax cuts –and it cannot even be argued that it reduces drug use, “drug-free workplace,” and the like.
It does, though, please the kind of mediocre thugs who think poverty is a moral failing that should be punished by even more poverty.
And by the way, private contracts–however odious–are a different thing from government contracts–a corporation can’t violate the constitutional rights of anyone (civil torts — liabiliity — is another thing, and laws that free them from being sued for wee-wee tests are also unconstitutional).
In general, I have a hard time understanding people who will cheerfully give up their freedoms for the the most foolish and convoluted reasons (hint: Only fools think “drug testing” is about drug abuse).
Let’s get Anthony Kennedy to whip it out and produce..
So you have no problem with taxpayer money going to fund drug use.
So you have no problem with taxpayer money going to fund drug use.
Wow. I of course did not even imply such a thing, but I get it: when you get a script for thinking pounded into your head over and over, thinking outside the scripted responses is hard (that incidently, is true regardless of political ideology, left, right, sideways, whatever.
Absent anything I said, the assertion being made–that welfare benefits absent bureaucratic searches for drug metabolites within people’s bodies implies subsidizing drug use–requires twisting common sense into numerous loops. The topological analysis of it might break new ground.
Here’s a clue: all but the most screwed-up welfare recipients will not be spending their meager subsistence on drugs. Those that do will suffer greatly. The vaunted tests , though, make no distinction–they don’t detect addicts, let alone offer treatment.
But they don’t deserve help, right? They’re not you or your own. They’re not like you–the TV said so .
I of course get what passes for your thinking—you’re outraged that $$
might be going to “them”—because they will never be you, even though the rules are of general application, and it only takes some bad luck. This kind of thinking goes back centuries–you are a nobleman if you’re better than them, right?
You’re not, peasant.
what you dont know about me is staggering.
Airline Flights Could Get Cheaper if FAA Shuts Down Saturday Morning
Airline tickets are going to get cheaper Saturday unless Congress can reach an agreement before midnight on extending authority for the Federal Aviation Administration, which gives airlines the ability to collect taxes on behalf of the government.
If the FAA’s authority is not extended, airlines would no longer have the authority to collect federal taxes, which according to the Air Transport Association, is about $61 on a $300 round-trip airfare.
Long-term authority for the FAA expired in 2007. Unable to agree on long-term funding legislation for the agency, Congress has kept the FAA operating through a series of 20 short-term extension bills.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/07/22/faa-headed-for-shutdown-at-midnight-over-congressional-stalemate/
Freebird wrote: “Take the kids until the parents clean up” –
While this may sound good on a bumper sticker, it won’t work. This implies that drug addicts can just quit on their own due to their own will power.
Alot of drug addicts cannot physically kick the habit without medical treatment. Are taxpayers willing to pay for this treatment?
And exactly who is going to pay for these kids while their parents are cleaning up? We have too many people now not wanting to pay any taxes. You expect them to pay for some druggies’ kids?
To fix the drug problem in this country – we need to stop this useless and wasteful War on Drugs and put some of that money towards treatment.
In the current climate of nobody wanting to pay taxes – that does not seem likely.
I know of a group that will treat you and doesn’t cost a dime.
And exactly who is going to pay for these kids while their parents are cleaning up?
The same people that are paying for them now
Hell just called,they want their weather back
I’d be willing to gift wrap it for them! I want them to have it back too.
I’ll chip in for postage
Boehner walks out on debt negotiations because he must continue protecting those he refers to as “job creators.” However, we all know they haven’t created any jobs. We also know Boehner (or any other republican) hasn’t introduced a jobs bill — not a single one.
Boehner, where are the jobs from those wealthy job creators you protect? We the people have paid the price for too long. When do those you cater to and protect do their part?
Boehner, where are the jobs you promised?
Zippy,
FYI, 3 years ago I WAS one of “them”. As I said what you don’t know about me is staggeriong
staggering
So when did you stop abusing drugs?
No I don’t really think you were doing meth or something–that’s ridiculous– but based upon your previous reasoning, then we must assume you were, otherwise you would not assert defending the basic human dignity of people like yourself was subsidizing drug use.
Overall, the general arguments being made–talking about how to treat addicts–were so completely beside the point, except to the extent cutting of their only means of support leaves one with a poor desperate addict.
And achieves nothing of value for the public.
P.S. Or perhaps you WERE doing meth (who knows back when you were drinking, right?).
And you think someone needs to teach you a lesson.
I will type this real slow,never used meth and the things don’t know about me are mind boggling.
You assume one hell of a lot that is not based in fact.
Feel free to enlighten me. I’m reasonable; I will listen.
Funny how foreign the shit tastes when it’s thrown back at you, huh?
I
Perhaps you might want to stick to talking about what you know.