mnealtx 0 #26 June 7, 2008 QuoteQuote 3. Removal of ALL political action groups and lobbyists and the requirement that ALL bills submitted must be posted for at least 30 days online for the public to review/comment - TRUE transparency. And add online voting system. The congresspeople are not allowed to pass the bill if less than half voters approved it (if more, they might pass or not pass the bill; in case it doesn't pass it must get 3/4 of voters). I disagree - the 'mob rule' is exactly what the framers of the constitution were trying to get AWAY from when they wrote it. I truly think the two largest problems is the fact that so much pork is 'hidden' within other bills, and lobbyist/PAC influence on politicians. Politics as a 'career' is a close third.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #27 June 7, 2008 Quote No sooner had Clinton's administration balanced (more or less) the budget than the next one went on a spending tear. It's a lot easier to throw money at terrorists, tax cuts, ////////////////////////////////////////////////// First of all Clinton never got close to balancing a bugget. Secound (check out history) cutting taxes stimulates the econmy and produces more tax dollars. No, he did have a balanced budget for a few years. I agree with you in principle on the effect of tax cuts, however. And I agree with the original poster about the 'spending tear', as well. BOTH sides of the aisle in congress are completely out of control in that respect.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnDeere 0 #28 June 7, 2008 Under the Democratic Congress, earmarks have shot back up to the second-highest level in recent history. /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Good notice kallend just maybe you come over to the smarter side (conservative not republican) Nothing opens like a Deere! You ignorant fool! Checks are for workers! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,380 #29 June 7, 2008 Quote4. Strict term limits - two rides around the merry-go-round, and home you go. No, all offices would have a single five year term, with no re-elections allowed. You would be allowed to be elected to another political office only after being out of office for one year. Absolutely *NO* campaigning while in office! Elected officials are to be working for the public and not for themselves!"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnDeere 0 #30 June 7, 2008 $15.6 billion that Bush included in his appropriation request for military construction and veterans affairs. ////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Hmmmm so now we really know what you think about the military!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! We should not fund them, damn war mongers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! God forbid they protect us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! So who is running congress now??????Nothing opens like a Deere! You ignorant fool! Checks are for workers! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnDeere 0 #31 June 7, 2008 QuoteQuoteGiven: Spending has to be controlled in some fashion. Problem: HOW can spending by Congress be controlled? Well, for starters you could stop the war. So who controlls congress ???? And what power do they have????? Ohh thats right they are working on the enviroment!!!!!!!!!!!! Tell congress to stop funding the research of studying how cow farts infect the enviroment.Nothing opens like a Deere! You ignorant fool! Checks are for workers! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #32 June 7, 2008 QuoteQuote4. Strict term limits - two rides around the merry-go-round, and home you go. No, all offices would have a single five year term, with no re-elections allowed. You would be allowed to be elected to another political office only after being out of office for one year. Absolutely *NO* campaigning while in office! Elected officials are to be working for the public and not for themselves! I wouldn't have any huge heartburn about that solution for term limits either.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,620 #33 June 7, 2008 Quote Under the Democratic Congress, earmarks have shot back up to the second-highest level in recent history. /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Good notice kallend just maybe you come over to the smarter side (conservative not republican) And the highest, and third highest, and fourth highest were under a GOP Congress. You delude yourself if you think the GOP Congress and GOP president were fiscally responsible. Self delusion seems a common attribute among conservatives.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnDeere 0 #34 June 7, 2008 Your ignorance is showing, im no republican. I clearly state that im a conservitave. Maybe in your group dem. and liberal are the same but i promice you the "republicans" dont represent me, nor do the dems. They are just a bunch of lieing politicians. You also delude yourself if the think your democrats are being productive and solveing anything but global warming (which is not a problem at all). What hapen to Nancy P. solving oil and gas prices first????Nothing opens like a Deere! You ignorant fool! Checks are for workers! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #35 June 7, 2008 Quote$15.6 billion that Bush included in his appropriation request for military construction and veterans affairs. ////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Hmmmm so now we really know what you think about the military!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! We should not fund them, damn war mongers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! God forbid they protect us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! So who is running congress now?????? You do understand that more exclamation points doesn't mean you have a better point; yes?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
n23x 0 #36 June 7, 2008 My guess is both "no" AND "what the hell does that quote button do!?" .jim "Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #37 June 7, 2008 QuoteQuoteWell, for starters you could stop the war. And the reverse is that you could excessive welfare spending, each applying to a different end of the political spectrum. Now - that said, do you have any suggestions to getting spending by Congress under control? You say it as if the two are mutually exclusive. It's called Guns and Butter for a reason. Yeah, you have to control both. Think of how you'd deal with money issues in your own house if the money got tight. You'd cut out the unnecessary spending. There is a certain amount of military the government has to provide for (as outlined in the Constitution), beyond that, it's unnecessary. The exact same thing can be said about certain parts (but certainly not all) of the welfare system. The war we're fighting in Iraq was, as it turns out, completely optional. Some companies have made a bloody fortune off the war at tax payer expense. We need to stop doing that. Is that the ONLY solution? Hell no. Is it a START? Yeah.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnDeere 0 #38 June 7, 2008 Yes i do understand but i thought i might get A REAL responce. not a BS responceNothing opens like a Deere! You ignorant fool! Checks are for workers! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnDeere 0 #39 June 7, 2008 Another start whould be to stop spending money on BS research but that is not what you mentioned. You made it very clear what you think of the war.Nothing opens like a Deere! You ignorant fool! Checks are for workers! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #40 June 7, 2008 QuoteAnother start whould be to stop spending money on BS research but that is not what you mentioned. You made it very clear what you think of the war. I think you'd need to define "BS research", but research is part of the "butter" side of the equation and I believe I did mention that. Some, strictly pure research might be considered to be "BS" by quite a few people, but that may be because they only get the lame "press release" version of the research and, frankly, couldn't understand the ramifications in greater context simply because they don't HAVE a greater context. Is it worth a few million dollars of my tax money to look for near earth asteroids? Yeah, actually I think so when you consider the potential to possibly save the entire planet. Is it worth a few billion dollars to build a super collider to try to find and understand sub atomic particles? I dunno, fast forward 100 years and tell me if we've figured out how to build a fusion reactor to power the planet or if we've built a space/time travel device. Truth is, nobody actually knows where that research is going -- right now. So, tell me, what research do you consider to be BS? More importantly, how would a congressman know what is and what isn't BS? Is there a limit on pure research? Historically, how would you ever know that research into something as simple as say, a perfume atomizer, wouldn't eventually lead to the development of the jet airplane? By the way, that's exactly what happened. There was a great series on the BBC years ago called "Connections". You should look into it.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnDeere 0 #41 June 7, 2008 Defanition of BS research........ My point of view............ Any research that is pointless except to benofit the state in which a congress man/woman reprosents. Such as enviromental research. The enviroment is not in danger!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Quit researching cow farts and car emisions. Tell you what just go back to researching global cooling like you idiots (in the gov. and special interest groups) did in the 80's. Oh did everybody else forget about that???? Im so sorry for bringing it back up. Just search your local pork barrel projects and see what kind of stupid research there are doing with your tax dollars.Nothing opens like a Deere! You ignorant fool! Checks are for workers! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #42 June 7, 2008 QuoteDefanition of BS research........ My point of view............ Any research that is pointless except to benofit the state in which a congress man/woman reprosents. Such as enviromental research. The enviroment is not in danger!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Quit researching cow farts and car emisions. Tell you what just go back to researching global cooling like you idiots (in the gov. and special interest groups) did in the 80's. Oh did everybody else forget about that???? Im so sorry for bringing it back up. Just search your local pork barrel projects and see what kind of stupid research there are doing with your tax dollars. How do you feel about the state of the education system in the US? Do you think federal money should be spent to ensure all citizens reach a basic level of reading, writing and mathematics?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnDeere 0 #43 June 7, 2008 The education system is so sad. We spend more per child now than ever. (i have 3 kid's by the way) I think that education should be left up to the states not federal. One of the main education problems today is the lack of parental involvement in kids education. I have no problem challenging what the school is teaching my kids. I also teach my kids, and ask what the school system is teaching them. Im NOT the typical parent that expects the SYSTEM to teach them.Nothing opens like a Deere! You ignorant fool! Checks are for workers! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #44 June 7, 2008 Quote We spend more per child now than ever. I don't know if you've heard of this thing called inflation, but we pretty much spend more on everything now than ever. If there is ONE thing society ought to stop bitching about is how much we spend on education. The sometimes freaky details of exactly how we spend it on education is another thing entirely, but the actual amount is trivial when you consider it's the future of your kids and society as a whole. Quote I have no problem challenging what the school is teaching my kids. I'm not certain what you mean. What do you mean by "challenging what the school is teaching my kids"? If, for example, the teacher says that the Ivory Coast is on the West Coast of Africa, do you send a note back asking for proof? Do you question that the value of pi is pretty much 3.1415? Do you question the use of the series comma before the conjunction in a sentence? Or do you mean evolution versus "intelligent design"?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thirdworld19 0 #45 June 7, 2008 Quote Quote We spend more per child now than ever. I don't know if you've heard of this thing called inflation, but we pretty much spend more on everything now than ever. If there is ONE thing society ought to stop bitching about is how much we spend on education. The sometimes freaky details of exactly how we spend it on education is another thing entirely, but the actual amount is trivial when you consider it's the future of your kids and society as a whole. I would agree with JohnDeere - I don't think it is up to the government to educate my children. There have been studies performed regarding money and education. They threw all kinds of money at some school districts for something like 15 years to see if that helped (test scores, rates of graduation, etc) and it had no effect. I also don't believe it is up to the government to ensure that I or anyone else has health care (or welfare/food stamps for that matter). The government is far too intrusive into peoples lives. I think this is a significant issue when determining what government spending is essential. Others may feel that welfare (or whatever program) is essential and want it funded with my taxes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,620 #46 June 7, 2008 Quote Quote Quote We spend more per child now than ever. I don't know if you've heard of this thing called inflation, but we pretty much spend more on everything now than ever. If there is ONE thing society ought to stop bitching about is how much we spend on education. The sometimes freaky details of exactly how we spend it on education is another thing entirely, but the actual amount is trivial when you consider it's the future of your kids and society as a whole. I would agree with JohnDeere - I don't think it is up to the government to educate my children. There have been studies performed regarding money and education. They threw all kinds of money at some school districts for something like 15 years to see if that helped (test scores, rates of graduation, etc) and it had no effect. Please post a cite to those alleged studies Quote I also don't believe it is up to the government to ensure that I or anyone else has health care (or welfare/food stamps for that matter). The government is far too intrusive into peoples lives. I think this is a significant issue when determining what government spending is essential. Others may feel that welfare (or whatever program) is essential and want it funded with my taxes. Poor people dying of starvation in the streets would be better, right?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,620 #47 June 7, 2008 QuoteQuoteDefanition of BS research........ My point of view............ Any research that is pointless except to benofit the state in which a congress man/woman reprosents. Such as enviromental research. The enviroment is not in danger!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Quit researching cow farts and car emisions. Tell you what just go back to researching global cooling like you idiots (in the gov. and special interest groups) did in the 80's. Oh did everybody else forget about that???? Im so sorry for bringing it back up. Just search your local pork barrel projects and see what kind of stupid research there are doing with your tax dollars. How do you feel about the state of the education system in the US? Do you think federal money should be spent to ensure all citizens reach a basic level of reading, writing and mathematics? He should certainly be concerned about the state of spelling education.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #48 June 7, 2008 There you go again, spoiling the perfect subtly of a post.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #49 June 7, 2008 QuoteI don't think it is up to the government to educate my children. Here is where we differ. By all accounts, I'm not what most people would ever consider to be a modest man. I consider myself to be fairly well informed on a wide range of topics. That said, I am modest enough to know that I don't know everything and recognize that, in fact, there are areas I'm woefully lacking in. I think it takes a really "special" kind of person to think he knows enough to even teach his kids to the 6th grade level without any formal training. Now, maybe you actually have a teaching credential of some sort. Ok, then you're a rare exception, but most of the people that want to "home school" their children are really doing them a disservice.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TrophyHusband 0 #50 June 7, 2008 QuoteHa ha. Bush talks a good talk against earmarks too. mccain isn't bush. mccain doesn't just talk the talk, he walks the walk. "Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama www.kjandmegan.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
