Just a heads up....

Gunner Asch

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 2:28:27 PM4/14/10

to

http://www.examiner.com/x-37620-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m4d13-Special-army-unit-ready-to-be-deployed-on-American-soil-just-before-Nov-elections

Special-army-unit-ready-to-be-deployed-on-American-soil-just-before-
Nov-elections

Im simply nutz eh?

Laugh laugh laugh

Gunner

"First Law of Leftist Debate
The more you present a leftist with factual evidence
that is counter to his preconceived world view and the
more difficult it becomes for him to refute it without
losing face the chance of him calling you a racist, bigot,
homophobe approaches infinity.

This is despite the thread you are in having not mentioned
race or sexual preference in any way that is relevant to
the subject." Grey Ghost

rangerssuck

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 3:19:00 PM4/14/10

to

On Apr 14, 2:28 pm, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.examiner.com/x-37620-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m4d13-Spec...

>
> Special-army-unit-ready-to-be-deployed-on-American-soil-just-before-
> Nov-elections
>
> Im simply nutz eh?
>
> Laugh laugh laugh
>
> Gunner
>

Yes, you are simply nuts.

hal

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 3:58:32 PM4/14/10

to

On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:28:27 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>http://www.examiner.com/x-37620-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m4d13-Special-army-unit-ready-to-be-deployed-on-American-soil-just-before-Nov-elections
>
>
>Special-army-unit-ready-to-be-deployed-on-American-soil-just-before-
>Nov-elections
>
>Im simply nutz eh?

Yep, that would be my conclusion.

Message has been deleted

anorton

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 4:10:25 PM4/14/10

to

"Gunner Asch" <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:j72cs5t25ulr2etco...@4ax.com...

> http://www.examiner.com/x-37620-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m4d13-Special-army-unit-ready-to-be-deployed-on-American-soil-just-before-Nov-elections
>
>
> Special-army-unit-ready-to-be-deployed-on-American-soil-just-before-
> Nov-elections
>
> Im simply nutz eh?
>

So homeland security is fine unless it gets in the way of your fantasy of
overthrowing the government, huh?

For those who aren't nutz, please read the Army Times article as well from
which the examiner editorial extrapolates:
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/09/army_homeland_090708w/
The Examiner editorialist takes one part of one sentence, makes one
paranoid supposition upon another, upon another, and ends up with the
conclusion that the government is planning on declaring martial law, taking
away all our guns and suspending elections.

John R. Carroll

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 5:18:48 PM4/14/10

to

Deucalion wrote:

> Just another thing to thank George Bush for I guess. Once the
> government receives a new power, they hardly ever relinquish it. It's
> a one-way street.
>
> BTW, gunner's heads up is about two years too late. But, it was a
> good thing in gunnerland when Bush started and implemented it.
>
> http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=9869
>
> Be Wary of Using Military as Police
>
> by Gene Healy and Benjamin H. Friedman
>
> Gene Healy is a vice president at the Cato Institute and author of The
> Cult of the Presidency: America's Dangerous Devotion to Executive
> Power. Benjamin H. Friedman is research fellow in defense and homeland
> security studies at the Cato Institute and a PhD candidate in
> political science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
>
> Added to cato.org on December 26, 2008
>
> This article appeared in the Orange County Register on December 26,
> 2008
>
> The mainstream media has finally gotten around to reporting that the
> Pentagon has assigned active-duty troops to a homeland defense
> mission, a historical first. On Oct. 1, the 3rd Infantry Division's
> 1st Brigade Combat Team, freshly redeployed from Iraq, began a
> year-long assignment as a domestic "chemical, biological,
> radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive Consequence Management
> Response Force," or CCMRF ("Sea-Smurf"). The 1st BCT is the first of
> three CCMRF teams, who will comprise 15,000-20,000 soldiers, according
> to the Army. The other two will come from the Army National Guard or
> reserves.
>
> Neither the terrorist threat nor the hazards of bad weather require
> rethinking our traditional reluctance to use standing armies at home.
> We need not fear a coup, but we should worry about misusing our busy
> military for civilian tasks and developing an tendency to rely on the
> troops to answer every scare.
>
> Initial reports were that the 1st BCT might be used to deal with civil
> unrest and crowd control, missions that would be in severe tension
> with the Posse Comitatus Act, the longstanding federal statute that
> restricts the president's ability to use the U.S. military as a
> domestic police force. In September, the Army Times described the
> unit's training as "the first ever nonlethal package that the Army has
> fielded," including beanbag bullets, Tasers and traffic roadblocks.
>
> That report, along with the Bush administration's claim that the
> Constitution allows that president to use forces as he sees fit, no
> matter what Congress forbids, created well-founded fears that the
> CCMRFs first attack would be on Posse Comitatus. Yet Pentagon
> spokespeople deny that forces will be used for law enforcement
> purposes. And one suspects that the Bush administration's monarchial
> view of executive power will be out of fashion come January.
>

"Paradoxically, preserving liberty may require the rule of a single
leader--a dictator--willing to use those dreaded 'extraordinary measures,'
which few know how, or are willing, to employ." -- Michael Ledeen, White
House advisor and fellow of the American Enterprise Institute, "Machiavelli
on Modern Leadership: Why Machiavelli's Iron Rules Are As Timely and
Important Today As Five Centuries Ago"

"Gen. Tommy Franks says that if the United States is hit with a weapon of
mass destruction that inflicts large casualties, the Constitution will
likely be discarded in favor of a military form of government." -- NewsMax,
November 21, 2003

In October 2006, Bush signed into law the John Warner National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007. Quietly slipped into the law at the
last minute, at the request of the Bush administration, were sections
changing important legal principles, dating back 200 years, which limit the
U.S. government's ability to use the military to intervene in domestic
affairs. These changes would allow Bush, whenever he thinks it necessary, to
institute martial law--under which the military takes direct control over
civilian administration.

Sec. 1042 of the Act, "Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies,"
effectively overturns what is known as posse comitatus. The Posse Comitatus
Act is a law, passed in 1878, that prohibits the use of the regular military
within the U.S. borders. The original passage of the Posse Comitatus Act was
a very reactionary move that sealed the betrayal of Black people after the
Civil War and brought the period of Reconstruction to an end. It decreed
that federal troops could no longer be used inside the former Confederate
states to enforce the new legal rights of Black people. Black people were
turned over to the armed police and Klansmen serving the southern plantation
owners, and the long period of Jim Crow began.

During the 20th century, posse comitatus objectively started to play a new
role within the bourgeois democratic framework: as a legal barrier to the
direct influence of the powerful military establishment and the armed forces
over domestic U.S. society. It served to some degree as an obstacle against
military coups and presidents seizing military control over the country.
(However, National Guard troops have been legally available to the ruling
class for use inside the U.S., and there have been other loopholes to the
prohibition of the use of armed forces domestically, as in the mobilization
of Marine troops during the 1992 L.A. Rebellion.)

So the changes to posse comitatus signed into law by Bush are extremely
significant and ominous. Bush has modified the main exemptions to posse
comitatus that up to now have been primarily defined by the Insurrection Act
of 1807. Previously the president could call out the army in the United
States only in cases of insurrection or conditions where "rebellion against
the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the
laws of the United States in any State or Territory by the ordinary course
of judicial proceedings." Under the new law the president can use the
military in response to a natural disaster, a disease outbreak, a terrorist
attack or "other condition in which the President determines that domestic
violence has occurred to the extent that state officials cannot maintain
public order."

The new law requires the President to notify Congress "as soon as
practicable after the determination and every 14 days thereafter during the
duration of the exercise of the authority." However Bush, as he has often
done during his presidency, modified this requirement in his signing
statement, which declared, "The executive branch shall construe such
provisions in a manner consistent with the President's constitutional
authority to withhold information the disclosure of which could impair
foreign relations, the national security, the deliberative processes of the
Executive." In other words, Bush claims that he does not even need to inform
Congress that martial law has been declared!

Changing Role of Military Within the U.S.

This major change in the criteria under which martial law can be declared is
a continuation of a process, begun after 9/11, to dismantle legal barriers
to unrestrained executive, presidential powers.

In 2002, the government created the new Northern Command. This is the first
time since the Civil War that the U.S. military has been given an
operational command inside the continental United States.

In 2005, the Washington Post reported that Northcom had developed battle
plans for martial law in the U.S. One secret document, CONPLAN 2005,
envisions 15 different scenarios where these plans could go into effect.

The U.S. has also used natural disasters like Katrina to push for an
increased role for the military. According to the Washington Post, Bush
advisor Karl Rove told the governor of Louisiana that she should explore
legal options to impose martial law "or as close as we can get."

Spying by the military against U.S. persons, also supposedly prohibited, has
greatly expanded in recent years. Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA)
was created in 2002 supposedly to evaluate threats against Department of
Defense installations. However, a secret 400-page document obtained by MSNBC
revealed that CIFA had spied on more than 1500 "suspicious incidents" during
a ten-month period, including a meeting of Quakers to plan a protest of
military recruiting at local high schools and an anti-war protest in Los
Angeles.

James Risen has exposed in the New York Times and in his book State of War:
The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration that the National
Security Agency, which is under the Department of Defense, has been used in
a massive campaign of illegal spying of U.S. citizens, including tapping
phone calls and monitoring bank and financial records and the internet. (See
Revolution #35, "Spies, Lies, Thugs and Torture.")

In 2006, the Military Commissions Act was passed which, in addition to
legalizing torture, allows the president and military courts to declare
anyone an enemy combatant without basic civil rights like habeas corpus.

Plans for massive detention centers are already being prepared. Pacific News
Service reported that in early 2006, Kellogg Brown and Root (KBR) received a
$385 million contract from the Department of Homeland Security to build
detention and processing facilities to be used "in the event of an emergency
influx of immigrants into the U.S. or to support the rapid development of
new programs."

Would They Really Go That Far?

The Bush Regime's preparations for martial law are part of an extreme
agenda. This is a regime that is setting out to create a world empire that
is unchallenged and unchallengeable and has embarked on an endless war to
bring this about. Along with this, they aim to restructure social relations
in the U.S., doing away with many of the social and economic institutions
that have characterized U.S. society since World War 2. Because of this
extreme agenda, the Bush regime takes very seriously the possibility of
jolts and ruptures and resistance and are preparing very extreme measures to
deal with this.

On February 27, 1933, a fire broke out in the Reichstag (government)
building in Germany. The next day Hitler and his Minister of the Interior
Hermann Goering drafted the Reichstag Fire Decree, which suspended civil
liberties and gave the central government total power. The decree was signed
into law within days. After that point, opposition to Hitler became MUCH
more difficult.

In the U.S. today, extreme measures much like the Reichstag Fire Decree are
already being put into place--making it even more urgent that a determined
struggle be waged to drive out the Bush regime and reverse this dangerous
trajectory.

--
John R. Carroll

RBnDFW

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 4:27:42 PM4/14/10

to

Ok, so as long as they are available, let's send them down to our
Southern border for some real Homeland Security duties

Ed Huntress

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 4:30:05 PM4/14/10

to

"RBnDFW" <burkh...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:hq58g6$r4a$3...@news.eternal-september.org...

Maryland?

--
Ed Huntress

Message has been deleted

Ned Simmons

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 4:40:26 PM4/14/10

to

On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 16:30:05 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
<hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:

>>
>> Ok, so as long as they are available, let's send them down to our Southern
>> border for some real Homeland Security duties
>
>Maryland?

New Hampshire.

--
Ned Simmons

Ed Huntress

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 5:02:59 PM4/14/10

to

"Ned Simmons" <ne...@nedsim.com> wrote in message
news:0u9cs5l64l4v30shk...@4ax.com...

Cripes. That's the Rutabaga Republic. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

Shall not be infringed

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 5:24:10 PM4/14/10

to

On Apr 14, 5:18 pm, "John R. Carroll" <nu...@bidness.dev.nul> wrote:
> Deucalion wrote:
> > On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 12:19:00 -0700 (PDT), rangerssuck
> > <rangerss...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> On Apr 14, 2:28 pm, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>http://www.examiner.com/x-37620-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m4d13-Spec...
>
> >>> Special-army-unit-ready-to-be-deployed-on-American-soil-just-before-
> >>> Nov-elections
>
> >>> Im simply nutz eh?
>
> >>> Laugh laugh laugh
>
> >>> Gunner

Huh? Maybe they'll give them psychrotropic drugs so they'll gun down
American Citizens.

Who was that jackass general that Clinton sent to Bosnia and almost
started WW-III with the Russians?

He was supposedly at Waco. Clionton endorsed him for President.
Clark?

Isn't martial law a form of military government?

You guys said that Bush was setting things up for martial law.

You guys said that Bush was going to implement martial law.

Yo said that Bush was going to suspend elections.

You guys said that Bush was going to suspend the Constitution.

You said all that long after 9/11. If 9/11 wasn't the trigger for
martial law, I don't know what is.

So do you still think Bush will implement martial law?

He better get to it while he's still President.

Shall not be infringed

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 5:24:55 PM4/14/10

to

On Apr 14, 4:27 pm, RBnDFW <burkhei...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Ok, so as long as they are available, let's send them down to our

> Southern border for some real Homeland Security duties-.

DITTO!

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 5:30:21 PM4/14/10

to

"Shall not be infringed" <hot-ham-a...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d74b474c-537c-4ab7...@q15g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...

Oh? Where was the riot? Was there an insurrection we didn't hear about?

>So do you still think Bush will implement martial law?

>He better get to it while he's still President.

Bush is running his chainsaw on the back 40. He's fully occupied, looking
for a tree and chewing gum at the same time.

--
Ed Huntress

Shall not be infringed

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 5:34:23 PM4/14/10

to

On Apr 14, 5:30 pm, "Ed Huntress" <huntre...@optonline.net> wrote:
> "Shall not be infringed" <hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:d74b474c-537c-4ab7...@q15g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...

Most people know it as Flight 93. Civilians ended up protecting the
country.

> >So do you still think Bush will implement martial law?
> >He better get to it while he's still President.
>
> Bush is running his chainsaw on the back 40. He's fully occupied, looking
> for a tree and chewing gum at the same time.

Oh, really? By the way 0bama talks you'd think Bush were still in the
White House fucking things up.

My bad!

Ned Simmons

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 5:47:14 PM4/14/10

to

On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 17:02:59 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
<hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:

>
>"Ned Simmons" <ne...@nedsim.com> wrote in message
>news:0u9cs5l64l4v30shk...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 16:30:05 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
>> <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>> Ok, so as long as they are available, let's send them down to our
>>>> Southern
>>>> border for some real Homeland Security duties
>>>
>>>Maryland?
>>
>> New Hampshire.
>
>Cripes. That's the Rutabaga Republic. d8-)

I think of it as northern Massachusetts. In terms of civil behavior,
not politically. Rutabagas are available from PEI, minus the
riff-raff.

--
Ned Simmons

Message has been deleted

Shall not be infringed

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 6:06:24 PM4/14/10

to

On Apr 14, 6:00 pm, Deucalion <some...@nowhere.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 17:30:21 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
>
>
>
>
>
> <huntre...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
> >"Shall not be infringed" <hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

> In CheeseWorld, it's Obama's fault that Bush put the mechanism in
> place and Obama kept it.

In BobBrockWorld, it's Bush's fault that Johnson put the Stop Loss
mechanism in
place and Bush kept it.

RBnDFW

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 6:19:16 PM4/14/10

to

LOL bring 'em on!

RBnDFW

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 6:21:13 PM4/14/10

to

Stormin Mormon wrote:
> I'm for that. But what are the odds of zero taking that
> action?
>

And negatively impact his future voter base?
I think not

Ed Huntress

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 6:25:57 PM4/14/10

to

"Ned Simmons" <ne...@nedsim.com> wrote in message

news:nsccs5he87cfe5la3...@4ax.com...

Forty years ago you could have bought them from my relatives in Greenland,
NH. <g>

--
Ed Huntress

John R. Carroll

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 7:28:01 PM4/14/10

to

It would be hilarious if Hayworth would pay to have a McCain campaign
commercial run south of the border.
I wonder why he hasn't?
LOL

--
John R. Carroll

Wes

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 6:55:23 PM4/14/10

to

"Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:

>> Ok, so as long as they are available, let's send them down to our Southern
>> border for some real Homeland Security duties
>
>Maryland?

Nah, gotta keep those undesirables from Cook county Ill from invading my state.

I'm waiting for our Southern friends to pipe up about protecting their northern borders.
;)

Wes
--
"Additionally as a security officer, I carry a gun to protect
government officials but my life isn't worth protecting at home
in their eyes." Dick Anthony Heller

Wes

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 7:13:50 PM4/14/10

to

"Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:

>Bush is running his chainsaw on the back 40. He's fully occupied, looking
>for a tree and chewing gum at the same time.

GWB is probably enjoying life. After 8 years on the job, I'm sure he likes the down time.
I hope he gets time in with his mom and dad. They are not spring chickens.

I wonder what he thinks about Obama's current reign. Keep in mind we don't hear him
talking or taking shots at the current President.

I'm sure he has some thoughts on things but he, like his father, have supported their
sucessors as President afaikt.

Wes

Too_Many_Tools

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 7:27:19 PM4/14/10

to

On Apr 14, 1:28 pm, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.examiner.com/x-37620-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m4d13-Spec...
>
> Special-army-unit-ready-to-be-deployed-on-American-soil-just-before-
> Nov-elections
>
> Im simply nutz eh?
>
> Laugh laugh laugh
>
> Gunner
>

> "First Law of Leftist Debate
> The more you present a leftist with factual evidence
> that is counter to his preconceived world view and the
> more difficult it becomes for him to refute it without
> losing face the chance of him calling you a racist, bigot,
> homophobe approaches infinity.
>
> This is despite the thread you are in having not mentioned
> race or sexual preference in any way that is relevant to
> the subject." Grey Ghost

Have you paid your long suffering creditors yet?

TMT

co_f...@yahoo.com

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 8:26:05 PM4/14/10

to

Pretty funny.

The ONLY time the US military has ANY authority over the civilian
population is when the President declares Martial Law is in effect in
a particular geographical area.. The only time the state National
Guard has any authority over the civilian population is when the
governor declares Martial Law is in effect in a particular
geographical area. Without declaring Martial Law, the military are
just civilians like you and me, and are subject to the same criminal
and civilian law.

Paul

Ed Huntress

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 8:46:26 PM4/14/10

to

"Wes" <ClutchAtL...@Gmail.com> wrote in message
news:P_rxn.171740$Bs1....@en-nntp-01.dc1.easynews.com...

I don't know what he thinks. And, Wes, I really don't care.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed Huntress

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 8:47:43 PM4/14/10

to

"Wes" <ClutchAtL...@Gmail.com> wrote in message

news:vJrxn.171728$Bs1....@en-nntp-01.dc1.easynews.com...

> "Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>> Ok, so as long as they are available, let's send them down to our
>>> Southern
>>> border for some real Homeland Security duties
>>
>>Maryland?
>
> Nah, gotta keep those undesirables from Cook county Ill from invading my
> state.
>
> I'm waiting for our Southern friends to pipe up about protecting their
> northern borders.
> ;)
>
> Wes

They tried that once before, didn't they? d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

Ed Huntress

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 8:50:28 PM4/14/10

to

"Shall not be infringed" <hot-ham-a...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:8a1ba4db-a231-423e...@g11g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...

Uh, was that an Arab insurrection? There were about a dozen of them, right?

> >So do you still think Bush will implement martial law?
> >He better get to it while he's still President.
>
> Bush is running his chainsaw on the back 40. He's fully occupied, looking
> for a tree and chewing gum at the same time.

>Oh, really? By the way 0bama talks you'd think Bush were still in the
>White House fucking things up.
>
>My bad!

He fucked things up for a generation or two. It's amazing how little brains
it took for him to do that much damage.

--
Ed Huntress

Ed Huntress

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 8:51:35 PM4/14/10

to

"Shall not be infringed" <hot-ham-a...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:e05c3f55-7ecd-425a...@q15g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...

>New Jersey.

No way. I don't want to be a border state. Let Maryland do it. They have
experience.

>
>Domestic Terrorists are taking control of store PA Systems and making
>stupid announcements.

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 11:19:41 PM4/14/10

to

On Apr 14, 10:54 pm, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 22:20:33 -0400, "Buerste" <buer...@buerste.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >"Gunner Asch" <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:j72cs5t25ulr2etco...@4ax.com...
> >>http://www.examiner.com/x-37620-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m4d13-Spec...

>
> >> Special-army-unit-ready-to-be-deployed-on-American-soil-just-before-
> >> Nov-elections
>
> >> Im simply nutz eh?
>
> >> Laugh laugh laugh
>
> >> Gunner
>
> >Does this mean that crates of 5.56, 7.62, 9 and .45 will be delivered to
> >various areas and can more easily fall off a truck? What will be the ROE?
>
> Indeed it will. And when one considers that the members of the military
> votes 80+% conservative....

Bob Brock and the rest of The Bobs and former Bobs were telling us
that the military was liberal.

Maybe he was thinking of reservists.

> >I hope their footwear will be steel-toed to prevent injuries by those pesky
> >Tea-Party people in their wheel chairs. Will the Panthers mount a
> >counter-offensive?
>
> The Panthers in their wheel chairs will provide a line abreast approach
> and lay down covering batteries of Infamile and barrages of gently

> nudged bottled water.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

William Wixon

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 12:24:06 AM4/15/10

to

i hate initiating an off topic thread. what i usually do is post within an
already existing off topic thread.

i just saw "worse than war" on pbs.

while i was watcing it i thought about ed's posts about our shared duty of
standing up against genocide. (i think previous discussions would fit the
definition of "genocide".) it would be horrific to see corpses lying dead
in the streets of the united states (the images from rwanda, just replace
americans for the rwandans)(it would permanently damage the psyches of our
children). i'm embarrassed to say i didn't realize how right ed was in what
he said. it kinda went right by me. i didn't fully comprehend what he was
writing about. i would've thought you would have had to be there (in a
country that experienced a genocide) to fully comprehend the need to speak
out against it. it's strange what you can learn on a (dumb, stupid,
trivial, waste-of-time) usenet newsgroup. thanks ed for speaking out
against it (having rational arguments against it). i'd say that would be
closer to american patriotism.

worse than war will be rebroadcast on friday.

Worse Than War
Friday, April 16, 2:30am
13 (Thirteen/WNET New York)

Based on Daniel Jonah Goldhagen's book of the same title, this film explores
the anatomy of genocide: why genocides begin, are sustained, and end; why
societies support them; why they happen so frequently; and how the
international community can stop them.

the author/film maker speaking on the making of "worse than war"

http://video.pbs.org/video/1468828387/

Ned Simmons

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 11:35:40 PM4/14/10

to

On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 18:25:57 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
<hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:

>
>"Ned Simmons" <ne...@nedsim.com> wrote in message
>news:nsccs5he87cfe5la3...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 17:02:59 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
>> <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Ned Simmons" <ne...@nedsim.com> wrote in message
>>>news:0u9cs5l64l4v30shk...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 16:30:05 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
>>>> <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok, so as long as they are available, let's send them down to our
>>>>>> Southern
>>>>>> border for some real Homeland Security duties
>>>>>
>>>>>Maryland?
>>>>
>>>> New Hampshire.
>>>
>>>Cripes. That's the Rutabaga Republic. d8-)
>>
>> I think of it as northern Massachusetts. In terms of civil behavior,
>> not politically. Rutabagas are available from PEI, minus the
>> riff-raff.
>
>Forty years ago you could have bought them from my relatives in Greenland,
>NH. <g>

I may have done so. Forty years ago I was in school in Boston and
eating lots of 9 cent a pound rutabaga from the Haymarket.

--
Ned Simmons

Chief Egalitarian

unread,

Apr 14, 2010, 11:59:50 PM4/14/10

to

"Shall not be infringed" <hot-ham-a...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:13b4d7b0-218e-4fa4...@i37g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...

He's a douche bag.

Gunner Asch

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 12:55:57 AM4/15/10

to

On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 20:19:41 -0700 (PDT), Shall not be infringed
<hot-ham-a...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>>
>> Indeed it will. And when one considers that the members of the military
>> votes 80+% conservative....
>
>Bob Brock and the rest of The Bobs and former Bobs were telling us
>that the military was liberal.
>
>Maybe he was thinking of reservists.

Disenfranchised Defenders
Avoiding a repeat of 2000.

On November 19, 2000, we discovered that there are no limits to what
Democrats will do to win an election. The same Democrats who so often
and so loudly protest any real or imagined threat to a minority's right
to vote had desperately worked to disenfranchise a minority group
thought to be friendly to the other side.

With the presidential election hanging by a loose chad in Palm Beach
County, Florida, Dems launched their campaign to disenfranchise military
absentee voters. The memo instructing Democratic election canvassers on
the best means to do so — authored by lawyer Mark Herron — fell into the
hands of a Republican worker, and the Drudge Report promptly published
it.

The Herron memo stated postmark and "point of origin" criteria Herron
maintained could be used to invalidate military ballots. Conveniently,
the memo attached a form that could be duplicated and used to protest
the validity of individual ballots. By the time the Herron memo made
headlines, the Dems were challenging more than 1,500 absentee ballots
(which grew to more than 2,400) mostly from soldiers overseas. This was
almost three times the number of votes — 537 — that proved to be Bush's
margin of victory. Had the Herron scam succeeded, and protests against
those votes been sustained, Al Gore would be in the White House today.

This problem is not unique to Florida, and it didn't just happen in
2000. According to the results of a survey by the Reserve Officers'
Association, ROA estimates that the disenfranchisement rate among
military personnel who try to vote in Florida, Missouri, and South
Carolina is 40-45 percent.

It's not the hypocrisy of what the Florida Dems did that still rankles;
what's most bothersome is who they tried to do it to. Every American has
the right to vote, but were it not for the Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen,
Marines, and Coast Guardsmen who put themselves in harm's way, none of
us would have that right. The warriors and their families have long
memories, and this time they're determined to vote.

For once, at the insistence of Don Rumsfeld, the folks in Fort Fumble
are acting, not reacting, to solve this problem before it repeats
itself.

On March 17, Rumsfeld sent a memo to the Joint Chiefs and Combatant
Commanders telling them how the services will make sure all military
members — and their family members — who are overseas, or stationed here
but are away from home, get the chance to vote, and vote so that no Mark
Herrons can disenfranchise them.

At the heart of Rumsfeld's plan is putting some teeth into the old
Voting Assistance Officer idea. On top of it is a strategy — now
underway — to use both the internet and the Postal Service effectively
to help servicemen and their families request absentee ballots and get
them returned in time to be counted. Last Friday, I spoke to Charlie
Abell, principal deputy undersecretary of Defense for personnel and
readiness. He's the guy who's leading the charge to protect the rights
of military voters and their families.

Abell told me that this is a very high priority for DoD, because it's a
very high priority for the troops and their families, who have a much
higher voter turnout — proportionally — than the general population. He
said, "We know from sampling from the Federal Election Commission [and
other sources] that in year 2000, about 51 percent of the general public
voted. We know from our surveys that about 75 percent of the worldwide
uniformed services military...voted." Over the years, the DoD data show
— unsurprisingly — that those who fight for the right to vote take that
right more seriously than other Americans.

About 200,000 military personnel who tried to vote in 1988 didn't
because they didn't get their absentee ballots at all, or got them too
late to send them back in. Now absentee ballots will be separated from
regular mail and sent both ways — to the soldier, and back to be counted
— faster than the normal military mail. According to Abell, the Postal
Service has agreed to pick up ballots directly from the local precincts
and ballot offices, separate them into special containers, and send them
by Priority Mail to the absentee military members. Return mail will work
the same way. In the 2000 election, many military absentee ballots were
disallowed because they lacked postmarks, which aren't a requirement.
Now, to make sure there's no repeat of this chicanery, military postal
workers are being ordered to hand-cancel every ballot that is sent out
to show clearly when it was mailed. Sorry, Mr. Herron: You'll have to
think up another scam this time.

Rumsfeld's initiative is trying to reach all 1.4 million active-duty
members as well as 1.3 million military family members, the majority of
whom are living away from home, either overseas or stateside. And this
initiative is serious: Every military unit, small or large, has a Voting
Assistance Officer whose job it is to let the soldiers know how they can
get their absentee ballots, and then help them do so. Abell told me that
the goal was for the ratio to be one Voting Assistance Officer for every
unit of 25 to 50 people.

The plan's niftiest aspect is the use of the internet to enable soldiers
to request absentee ballots — and then to download the actual ballot to
fill out and send in. Right now, any soldier or family member can
download the Federal Post Card Application from the government website
designed to help all overseas voters and send it in. Better still, the
Defense Department is getting all the state-ballot request forms and the
ballots themselves loaded onto the system. Most of the states are
cooperating by allowing internet and even faxed ballot requests.

Rumsfeld's memo says, "I want to ensure each service member is handed
the Federal Post Card Application and is offered assistance in
completing the form if needed." Voting Assistance Officers will help
fill out the request forms and — when soldiers ask — help them properly
fill out and mail back the actual ballots. Rumsfeld has tasked the
commanders to designate October 11-15 as Absentee Voting Week. If the
ballots are mailed by October 15, they'll all be where they need to be
in time to be counted. And that is the ultimate goal.

That goal will conflict directly with the coming repeats of the Herron
Florida scam. If you think the Dems won't attack military absentee
ballots in 2004, think again. Military voters are more Republican than
Democrat, and much more conservative than liberal. The Dems know that,
and I don't doubt that they will do this year what they tried to do in
2000.

For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Chuck him out, the brute!"
But it's "Saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot; An' it's
Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' anything you please; An' Tommy ain't a
bloomin' fool — you bet that Tommy sees!

Don Foreman

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 12:58:56 AM4/15/10

to

On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:28:27 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>http://www.examiner.com/x-37620-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m4d13-Special-army-unit-ready-to-be-deployed-on-American-soil-just-before-Nov-elections

>
>
>Special-army-unit-ready-to-be-deployed-on-American-soil-just-before-
>Nov-elections
>
>Im simply nutz eh?
>
>
>Laugh laugh laugh
>
>
>Gunner

A brigade of 80,000 troops? That's field army size, bigger than any
brigade, regiment, division or even corps I've ever heard of.

Gunner Asch

unread,

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 5:00:55 AM4/15/10

to

On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 21:55:57 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Disenfranchised Defenders
>Avoiding a repeat of 2000.
>
>On November 19, 2000, we discovered that there are no limits to what
>Democrats will do to win an election. The same Democrats who so often
>and so loudly protest any real or imagined threat to a minority's right
>to vote had desperately worked to disenfranchise a minority group
>thought to be friendly to the other side.
>
>With the presidential election hanging by a loose chad in Palm Beach
>County, Florida, Dems launched their campaign to disenfranchise military
>absentee voters. The memo instructing Democratic election canvassers on
>the best means to do so — authored by lawyer Mark Herron — fell into the
>hands of a Republican worker, and the Drudge Report promptly published
>it.

Stuff was from Rove & crew.
It leaked out if you were paying any attention.
Made news reports ....

gummer lies again.
--
Cliff

Cliff

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 5:02:49 AM4/15/10

to

On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 21:55:57 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On March 17, Rumsfeld sent a memo to the Joint Chiefs and Combatant
>Commanders telling them how the services will make sure all military
>members — and their family members — who are overseas, or stationed here
>but are away from home, get the chance to vote, and vote so that no Mark
>Herrons can disenfranchise them.

Vote rethug, eh?
LOL ..
--
Cliff

Andrew VK3BFA

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 4:09:36 AM4/15/10

to

On Apr 15, 4:28 am, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.examiner.com/x-37620-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m4d13-Spec...
>

> Special-army-unit-ready-to-be-deployed-on-American-soil-just-before-
> Nov-elections
>
> Im simply nutz eh?
>
> Laugh laugh laugh
>
> Gunner
>

> "First Law of Leftist Debate
> The more you present a leftist with factual evidence
> that is counter to his preconceived world view and the
> more difficult it becomes for him to refute it without
> losing face the chance of him calling you a racist, bigot,
> homophobe approaches infinity.
>
> This is despite the thread you are in having not mentioned
> race or sexual preference in any way that is relevant to
> the subject." Grey Ghost

Bloody Hell Gunner - the world must be a truly frightening place for
you....... conspiracies, people thinking your just plain nuts,
spending too much time alone in the desert, clinging to 1960's work
practices, your own private junkyard..... - not healthy mate. .You
thought about getting counseling, I think your VA people could
organise something......BTW - who the F is Grey Ghost, I asked him, no
reply. Google him, its only your quotes.....

Andrew VK3BFA.

Cliff

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 5:20:50 AM4/15/10

to

On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 01:09:36 -0700 (PDT), Andrew VK3BFA <VK3...@wia.org.au>
wrote:

Probably not.
They never heard of him.

Civil commitment ....

>BTW - who the F is Grey Ghost, I asked him, no
>reply. Google him, its only your quotes.....
>
>Andrew VK3BFA.

--
Cliff

Wes

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 4:43:15 AM4/15/10

to

"Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:

>>>Maryland?
>>
>> Nah, gotta keep those undesirables from Cook county Ill from invading my
>> state.
>>
>> I'm waiting for our Southern friends to pipe up about protecting their
>> northern borders.
>> ;)
>>
>> Wes
>
>They tried that once before, didn't they? d8-)

I think tried once without a manufacturing base to support their efforts. ^o)

Wes

Ed Huntress

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 5:02:10 AM4/15/10

to

"Wes" <ClutchAtL...@Gmail.com> wrote in message

news:EkAxn.257986$Vq1....@en-nntp-03.dc1.easynews.com...

Now they can defend themselves with Toyotas and Hyundais -- if they can get
enough parts from Asia...

--
Ed Huntress

Gunner Asch

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 5:52:26 AM4/15/10

to

On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 01:09:36 -0700 (PDT), Andrew VK3BFA
<VK3...@wia.org.au> wrote:

Actually lad..Im having a rather good time here. I can get the
Leftwingers all riled up and barfing up drool and spew by the gallon.
Watching them demonstrate their mental illnesses, their dishonesty, and
their buffoonery, not to mention their utter stupidity..nay..showing to
one and all just how bloody worthless they are...its fun indeed.

Now you on the other hand...shrug...I understand that you are a bit
"off" mentally, probably te result of a head injury or some dread
disease as a child..and of course have little or no comprehension about
"how things work" in the US, even though you try to make everyone
believe you have a clue.

But..I still rather enjoy reading your fantasies and you do mean well.

Shrug

Gunner

Cliff

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 7:12:53 AM4/15/10

to

On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 02:52:26 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Actually lad..Im having a rather good time here.

New meds?
--
Cliff

Cliff

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 7:13:44 AM4/15/10

to

On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 02:52:26 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I can get the
>Leftwingers all riled up and barfing up drool and spew by the gallon.

Hence most of us are in his killfiles.
Right.
--
Cliff

Gunner Asch

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 6:16:49 AM4/15/10

to

On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 04:43:15 -0400, Wes <ClutchAtL...@Gmail.com>
wrote:

True indeed.

However..that has changed significantly..reversed in fact. It would seem
that manufacturing in the southern states is virutally on the same level
or more than the northern states now.

Shall not be infringed

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 7:02:53 AM4/15/10

to

On Apr 14, 11:59 pm, "Chief Egalitarian" <Egal@legal_egal.law> wrote:
> "Shall not be infringed" <hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:13b4d7b0-218e-4fa4...@i37g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...

If only he were the disposable kind. Someone keeps rinsing him off
and reusing him.

Shall not be infringed

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 7:06:40 AM4/15/10

to

On Apr 15, 12:55 am, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 20:19:41 -0700 (PDT), Shall not be infringed
>

Yep, I remember it all very well. I've had to vote absentee many,
many time except for the time that Bill Clinton wouldn't let me vote
absentee in Arkansas.

Anyway, Bob Brock was telling me how much "The Military" (presumably
his son) hated Bush.

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 2:21:32 PM4/15/10

to

"Eregon" <Era...@Saphira.org> wrote in message

news:Xns9D5B8555...@74.209.131.10...

Which government report is that?

>
> Of course, nobody ever believes either of those sources...<g>
>
> BTW, Ed, the biggest difference between Southern and Union manufacturing
> is that the Southern plants are hiring and the Union plants aren't.

Not really:

http://lehd.did.census.gov/led/JobGainsLosses/2009Q1/A00000E.pdf

There's no real pattern. Even in 2008, some southern states were
experiencing among the highest rates of job losses in manufacturing.

Or do you have more recent, specific comparative data?

--
Ed Huntress

Message has been deleted

Eregon

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 4:58:49 PM4/15/10

to

"Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote in news:4bc7592c$0$5014
$607e...@cv.net:

> There's no real pattern. Even in 2008, some southern states were
> experiencing among the highest rates of job losses in manufacturing.

Yah - Union states.

Union jobs vanish and get replaced by non-Union jobs in other (non-Union)
states.

Texas, for example, has experienced an upswing in new manufacturing as
well as "a rash" of new machine-shop business openings (often in
small/rural towns).

The South is winning!

--

The most frightening sentence in the English Language:

"I'm from the government and I'm here to help you."

Message has been deleted

Chief Egalitarian

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 9:11:21 PM4/15/10

to

"Shall not be infringed" <hot-ham-a...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:39113a34-899a-444f...@b33g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...

I saw him ordering a "Vinegar and Water" at the bar last weekend.

Chief Egalitarian

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 9:15:24 PM4/15/10

to

"Deucalion" <som...@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:mmecs5ld1ophvfgae...@4ax.com...

> On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 17:30:21 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
> <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Shall not be infringed" <hot-ham-a...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

>>news:d74b474c-537c-4ab7...@q15g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...

>>On Apr 14, 5:18 pm, "John R. Carroll" <nu...@bidness.dev.nul> wrote:
>>> Deucalion wrote:
>>> > On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 12:19:00 -0700 (PDT), rangerssuck
>>> > <rangerss...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >> On Apr 14, 2:28 pm, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>http://www.examiner.com/x-37620-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m4d13-Spec...
>>>
>>> >>> Special-army-unit-ready-to-be-deployed-on-American-soil-just-before-
>>> >>> Nov-elections
>>>
>>> >>> Im simply nutz eh?
>>>
>>> >>> Laugh laugh laugh
>>>
>>> >>> Gunner
>>

>>>Huh? Maybe they'll give them psychrotropic drugs so they'll gun down
>>>American Citizens.
>>>
>>>Who was that jackass general that Clinton sent to Bosnia and almost
>>>started WW-III with the Russians?
>>>
>>>He was supposedly at Waco. Clionton endorsed him for President.
>>>Clark?

>>> > Neither the terrorist threat nor the hazards of bad weather require
>>> > rethinking our traditional reluctance to use standing armies at home.
>>> > We need not fear a coup, but we should worry about misusing our busy
>>> > military for civilian tasks and developing an tendency to rely on the
>>> > troops to answer every scare.
>>>
>>> > Initial reports were that the 1st BCT might be used to deal with civil
>>> > unrest and crowd control, missions that would be in severe tension
>>> > with the Posse Comitatus Act, the longstanding federal statute that
>>> > restricts the president's ability to use the U.S. military as a
>>> > domestic police force. In September, the Army Times described the
>>> > unit's training as "the first ever nonlethal package that the Army has
>>> > fielded," including beanbag bullets, Tasers and traffic roadblocks.
>>>
>>> > That report, along with the Bush administration's claim that the
>>> > Constitution allows that president to use forces as he sees fit, no
>>> > matter what Congress forbids, created well-founded fears that the
>>> > CCMRFs first attack would be on Posse Comitatus. Yet Pentagon
>>> > spokespeople deny that forces will be used for law enforcement
>>> > purposes. And one suspects that the Bush administration's monarchial
>>> > view of executive power will be out of fashion come January.
>>>
>>> "Paradoxically, preserving liberty may require the rule of a single
>>> leader--a dictator--willing to use those dreaded 'extraordinary
>>> measures,'
>>> which few know how, or are willing, to employ." -- Michael Ledeen, White
>>> House advisor and fellow of the American Enterprise Institute,
>>> "Machiavelli
>>> on Modern Leadership: Why Machiavelli's Iron Rules Are As Timely and
>>> Important Today As Five Centuries Ago"
>>>
>>> "Gen. Tommy Franks says that if the United States is hit with a weapon
>>> of
>>> mass destruction that inflicts large casualties, the Constitution will
>>> likely be discarded in favor of a military form of government." --
>>> NewsMax,
>>> November 21, 2003
>>
>>>Isn't martial law a form of military government?
>>>
>>>You guys said that Bush was setting things up for martial law.
>>>
>>>You guys said that Bush was going to implement martial law.
>>>
>>>Yo said that Bush was going to suspend elections.
>>>
>>>You guys said that Bush was going to suspend the Constitution.
>>>
>>>You said all that long after 9/11. If 9/11 wasn't the trigger for
>>>martial law, I don't know what is.
>>
>>Oh? Where was the riot? Was there an insurrection we didn't hear about?
>>
>>>So do you still think Bush will implement martial law?
>>
>>>He better get to it while he's still President.
>>
>>Bush is running his chainsaw on the back 40. He's fully occupied, looking
>>for a tree and chewing gum at the same time.
>
> In CheeseWorld, it's Obama's fault that Bush put the mechanism in
> place and Obama kept it.

Hey Douchebag,
At least have the courtesy to keep your word and your New Year's Resolution
by removing the m.s. newsgroup from your off-topic trolls, you bald headed
weak tit.
Signed,
Your willpower

Chief Egalitarian

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 9:16:42 PM4/15/10

to

"Shall not be infringed" <hot-ham-a...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:b9acb224-ff7c-4c45...@z11g2000yqz.googlegroups.com...

> On Apr 14, 6:00 pm, Deucalion <some...@nowhere.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 17:30:21 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

>> <huntre...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>
>> >"Shall not be infringed" <hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com> wrote in

> In BobBrockWorld, it's Bush's fault that Johnson put the Stop Loss
> mechanism in
> place and Bush kept it.
>

Where's BobBrockWorld, another turd world shithole?

Chief Egalitarian

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 9:17:57 PM4/15/10

to

"Deucalion" <som...@nowhere.net> wrote in message

news:6u7fs5p1sscn12n5t...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 09:28:21 -0700, sittingduck
> <du...@spamherelots.com> wrote:
>
>>Deucalion wrote:

>>
>>>>On Apr 14, 2:28ÿpm, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> http://www.examiner.com/x-37620-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m4d13-
>>Spec...
>>>>>
>>>>> Special-army-unit-ready-to-be-deployed-on-American-soil-just-before-
>>>>> Nov-elections
>>>>>
>>>>> Im simply nutz eh?
>>>>>
>>>>> Laugh laugh laugh
>>>>>
>>>>> Gunner
>>>>>
>>>>

>>>>Yes, you are simply nuts.
>>>
>>> Just another thing to thank George Bush for I guess. Once the
>>> government receives a new power, they hardly ever relinquish it. It's
>>> a one-way street.
>>>
>>> BTW, gunner's heads up is about two years too late. But, it was a
>>> good thing in gunnerland when Bush started and implemented it.
>>

>>Maybe it's true, but the troops will be deployed to keep the dipshit
>>republicans and teabaggers from killing themselves when they find out
>>they're going to be big losers once again....
>
> That's the really sad part about it. They really and truly think
> that, if they can just get their people back in charge, everything is
> going to be OK. They are too damned stupid to see that their damned
> people have done just as much (if not more) than the evil Democrats
> have done.

Pure bullshit. Even if back in charge, Obama will be a tough act to follow.

Ned Simmons

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 9:20:19 PM4/15/10

to

On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:19:02 -0600, Steve Ackman
<st...@SNIP-THIS.twoloonscoffee.com> wrote:

>In <0u9cs5l64l4v30shk...@4ax.com>, on Wed, 14 Apr 2010
>16:40:26 -0400, Ned Simmons, ne...@nedsim.com wrote:

>> On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 16:30:05 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
>><hunt...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>>> Ok, so as long as they are available, let's send them down to our Southern
>>>> border for some real Homeland Security duties
>>>

>>>Maryland?
>>
>> New Hampshire.
>
> No need. The border patrol is already there in force.
>Two summers ago, we were headed south on I-93. Just
>south of the notch, we were stopped at a Border Patrol
>checkpoint. Apparently there's now a border between
>the North Country and the rest of the state.

But they're facing the wrong direction...

--
Ned Simmons

John R. Carroll

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 10:54:55 PM4/15/10

to

Eregon wrote:
> "Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote in news:4bc7592c$0$5014
> $607e...@cv.net:
>
>

> The South is winning!

Whatever you say.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/32906678/looting_main_street/1

--
John R. Carroll

Shall not be infringed

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 10:07:33 PM4/15/10

to

On Apr 15, 7:24 pm, Deucalion <some...@nowhere.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 09:28:21 -0700, sittingduck
>
>
>
>
>
> <d...@spamherelots.com> wrote:
> >Deucalion wrote:
>
> >>>On Apr 14, 2:28ÿpm, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>http://www.examiner.com/x-37620-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m4d13-
> >Spec...
>
> >>>> Special-army-unit-ready-to-be-deployed-on-American-soil-just-before-
> >>>> Nov-elections
>
> >>>> Im simply nutz eh?
>
> >>>> Laugh laugh laugh
>
> >>>> Gunner
>
> >>>Yes, you are simply nuts.
>
> >> Just another thing to thank George Bush for I guess. Once the
> >> government receives a new power, they hardly ever relinquish it. It's
> >> a one-way street.
>
> >> BTW, gunner's heads up is about two years too late. But, it was a
> >> good thing in gunnerland when Bush started and implemented it.
>
> >Maybe it's true, but the troops will be deployed to keep the dipshit
> >republicans and teabaggers from killing themselves when they find out
> >they're going to be big losers once again....
>
> That's the really sad part about it. They really and truly think
> that, if they can just get their people back in charge, everything is
> going to be OK.

Your lying. In Ohio, we dumped Mike DeWine, a very liberal
Republican, for Sherrod Brown, a very liberal Democrat.

At least we knew what we were getting with the Democrat, and we'll
deal with him the next go round.

Republicans aren't safe. Conservatives are.

Read this twice. Memorize it. And don't try passing lies for truth
again, you lying skunk.

Shall not be infringed

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 10:16:55 PM4/15/10

to

> http://emytheimmigrant.blogspot.com/2009/04/my-husband-got-especially...http://www.oldhippie.com/forums/us-military-forum/4412-military-hates...http://www.soldiersperspective.us/2009/01/07/bush-military-farewell/

No, it was a different kind of hate. The kind of hate that comes from
making someone keep a promise, an oath.

> Just goes to show that Brock is an ignorant and buffoonish asshole of
> the first water.

Bob served and hated it. So why did his son serve? So he could hate
it, too?

It just doesn't make sense to me.

> But then...that fact has been known for years.
>
> Gunner

Didn't Bob Brock promise to go into hiding?

Eregon

unread,

Apr 15, 2010, 10:25:35 PM4/15/10

to

"John R. Carroll" <nu...@bidness.dev.nul> wrote in news:A-
ednZG0GvDLXlrWn...@giganews.com:

> http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/32906678/looting_main_street/1

Dumbasses dominate governments at every levels.

It's too bad that those particular dumbasses permitted their particular
government to get trapped that way but it's not a regional issue.

There ARE states that prohibit deficit spending by governmental entities.
<grin>

From the article, it'd seem that the county's dumbasses got a bit too
ambitious and stayed in office a bit too long...

John R. Carroll

unread,

Apr 16, 2010, 12:15:30 AM4/16/10

to

Eregon wrote:
> "John R. Carroll" <nu...@bidness.dev.nul> wrote in news:A-
> ednZG0GvDLXlrWn...@giganews.com:
>
>> http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/32906678/looting_main_street/1
>
> Dumbasses dominate governments at every levels.
>
> It's too bad that those particular dumbasses permitted their
> particular government to get trapped that way but it's not a regional
> issue.
>
> There ARE states that prohibit deficit spending by governmental
> entities. <grin>

I think Alabama is one of them.
I know California is.
Both are in financial trouble, although I'd rather be California.

>
> From the article, it'd seem that the county's dumbasses got a bit too
> ambitious and stayed in office a bit too long...

That's half the story.

--
John R. Carroll

Hawke

unread,

Apr 16, 2010, 1:12:29 AM4/16/10

to

>>> "Gen. Tommy Franks says that if the United States is hit with a weapon of
>>> mass destruction that inflicts large casualties, the Constitution will
>>> likely be discarded in favor of a military form of government." --
>>> NewsMax,
>>> November 21, 2003
>>> Isn't martial law a form of military government?
>>
>>> You guys said that Bush was setting things up for martial law.
>>
>>> You guys said that Bush was going to implement martial law.
>>
>>> Yo said that Bush was going to suspend elections.
>>
>>> You guys said that Bush was going to suspend the Constitution.
>>
>>> You said all that long after 9/11. If 9/11 wasn't the trigger for
>>> martial law, I don't know what is.
>>
>> Oh? Where was the riot? Was there an insurrection we didn't hear about?
>

> Most people know it as Flight 93. Civilians ended up protecting the
> country.

>
>>> So do you still think Bush will implement martial law?
>>> He better get to it while he's still President.
>>
>> Bush is running his chainsaw on the back 40. He's fully occupied, looking
>> for a tree and chewing gum at the same time.
>

> Oh, really? By the way 0bama talks you'd think Bush were still in the
> White House fucking things up.
>
> My bad!

At least you have the manners to excuse yourself for making a stupid
statement. Thanks. Now if you could just learn that when a president
fucks things really bad the next guy can't just fix things over night.
It's like if someone burns down your house. It won't be all better the
next week. Just a quick reminder, Bush/Cheney and friends sent the
country into such a complete collapse that it'll actually take years to
fix the things they ruined. It's no wonder Obama is still talking about
Bush. He's still working on fixing what he broke. But don't worry. A
time will come when Obama has finally repaired all of Bush's screw ups.
It will take time though. But at least we no longer have someone in
charge who is ruining things but instead have someone fixing the problems.

A perfect example so you can understand. It's the TV program Holmes on
Homes on HGTV. Mike Holmes is a contractor who comes to people's homes
that have had them screwed up by incompetent and unscrupulous
contractors, we can call them Bush. Then Holmes sets to "make things
right". Which he does but it takes a long time and a lot of money to
repair all the other guys' mistakes. Just like Obama and Bush. Perfect
analogy.

Hawke

unread,

Apr 16, 2010, 1:24:12 AM4/16/10

to

> Given the broadcast media's and government's reports, the NE is already
> down the tubes.
>
> Of course, nobody ever believes either of those sources...<g>
>
> BTW, Ed, the biggest difference between Southern and Union manufacturing
> is that the Southern plants are hiring and the Union plants aren't.

that's because they pay the workers ten bucks an hour or less and give
them no benefits. Why else would anyone open a factory in the south.
It's the only place in the country where they still let management
exploit the workers. In the north they just get more productivity out of
the same workers but they get fair pay and benefits.

Hawke

unread,

Apr 16, 2010, 1:29:00 AM4/16/10

to

That's right. When you looked at the statistics it was not very hard to
figure out which side had all the cards. Yet the south still put the
country through hell and forced the war just to keep from giving up
slavery. All you can say about people who would do that and betray the
country they swore oaths to protect and defend is they were the biggest
assholes in the world.

Hawke

Don Foreman

unread,

Apr 16, 2010, 2:20:22 AM4/16/10

to

On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 22:28:15 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 23:58:56 -0500, Don Foreman
><dfor...@NOSPAMgoldengate.net> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:28:27 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>http://www.examiner.com/x-37620-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m4d13-Special-army-unit-ready-to-be-deployed-on-American-soil-just-before-Nov-elections

>>>
>>>
>>>Special-army-unit-ready-to-be-deployed-on-American-soil-just-before-
>>>Nov-elections
>>>
>>>Im simply nutz eh?
>>>
>>>
>>>Laugh laugh laugh
>>>
>>>
>>>Gunner
>>

>>A brigade of 80,000 troops? That's field army size, bigger than any
>>brigade, regiment, division or even corps I've ever heard of.
>
>
>Yes, it is.
>
>Most interesting, no?

Most incredible, ja! The entire projected population of Fort Stewart,
present base of the 3rd Infantry Div, is less than 80K troops and the
subject brigade is only one of several that comprise the 3rd Division.

http://www.growfortstewart.com/

Don Foreman

unread,

Apr 16, 2010, 3:24:10 AM4/16/10

to

On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 19:24:55 -0400, Deucalion <som...@nowhere.net>
wrote:

>On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 01:09:36 -0700 (PDT), Andrew VK3BFA
><VK3...@wia.org.au> wrote:
>
>>On Apr 15, 4:28�am, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> http://www.examiner.com/x-37620-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m4d13-Spec...

>>>
>>> Special-army-unit-ready-to-be-deployed-on-American-soil-just-before-
>>> Nov-elections
>>>
>>> Im simply nutz eh?
>>>
>>> Laugh laugh laugh
>>>
>>> Gunner
>>>

>>> "First Law of Leftist Debate
>>> The more you present a leftist with factual evidence
>>> that is counter to his preconceived world view and the
>>> more difficult it becomes for him to refute it without
>>> losing face the chance of him calling you a racist, bigot,
>>> homophobe approaches infinity.
>>>
>>> This is despite the thread you are in having not mentioned
>>> race or sexual preference in any way that is relevant to
>>> the subject." �Grey Ghost
>>
>>Bloody Hell Gunner - the world must be a truly frightening place for
>>you....... conspiracies, people thinking your just plain nuts,
>>spending too much time alone in the desert, clinging to 1960's work
>>practices, your own private junkyard..... - not healthy mate. .You
>>thought about getting counseling, I think your VA people could
>>organise something......BTW - who the F is Grey Ghost, I asked him, no
>>reply. Google him, its only your quotes.....
>
>Gunner doesn't qualify for VA benefits. They require a DD-214.

Following is nothing to do with Gunner, it's my own rant:

The VA requires a DD-214 and poverty. If you can afford to drive
yourself to a VA hospital, you're probably not eligible for care
there. Without good insurance or other means, you're better off to
show up at the nearest ER to receive treatment and care hopefully as
good as is provided free to illegal aliens. The triage nurse will
prioritize your need for care vs those with sniffles, injuries from
domestic violence, bellyaches, and hopeful predatory malingerers
encouraged by ambulance chasers after fender benders. They don't give
a shit whether or not you're a vet. They don't ask, don't care, it's
irrelevant. It isn't on the questionaire.

Gasping for breath works fairly well in triage but it'd better be
real because they can spot a fake in a heartbeat, hopefully not a last
heartbeat. Good triage nurses remain calm and make good decisions
under stress.

DD-214 notwithstanding, I don't need or want VA benefits. Being a vet
reliant upon the VA for survival or maintenance care looks to me like
a grim existance.

I've provided for me and us, very glad that I did in preference to
bigger houses and newer cars during our earning years.

That said, it does piss me off that promises made 40 years ago have
been and are so flagrantly disregarded by contemporary bureaucrats and
pols regardless of party.

Our federal government was once generally regarded and respected by
most citizens as a benchmark and bastion of integrity, stability and
strength. That is no longer true. The greater disappointment is that
a majority of citizens and voters find that acceptable.

Larry Jaques

unread,

Apr 16, 2010, 10:25:49 AM4/16/10

to

On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 01:20:22 -0500, the infamous Don Foreman
<dfor...@NOSPAMgoldengate.net> scrawled the following:

I like the picture there of the Apache picking up the Abrahms.
http://www.growfortstewart.com/images/Home_Stewart.jpg
<g>

--
STOP THE SLAUGHTER! Boycott Baby Oil!

wmbjk...@citlink.net

unread,

Apr 16, 2010, 11:15:33 AM4/16/10

to

BS. I know several vets who drive themselves to VA care. One was in
last week for a pacemaker battery replacement. Only complaint I heard
from him is that it's a long drive. I don't think he'd make that one
too loudly though since he chose to live a long way from full-service
VA care.

> Without good insurance or other means, you're better off to
>show up at the nearest ER to receive treatment and care

Well sure, why not shift your costs away from the whole country who
owes you, and onto a much smaller number of folks, thereby driving up
rates for your neighbors?

> hopefully as
>good as is provided free to illegal aliens.

If your argument needs a straw man/scapegoat, then it's a sure sign
that you know it's baloney.

> The triage nurse will
>prioritize your need for care vs those with sniffles, injuries from
>domestic violence, bellyaches, and hopeful predatory malingerers
>encouraged by ambulance chasers after fender benders.

Oooh, scapegoats galore. What about the neighbor kid who keeps walking
on your lawn?

> They don't give
>a shit whether or not you're a vet. They don't ask, don't care, it's
>irrelevant. It isn't on the questionaire.

Oh sure, it's the system's fault that you made the choice to walk into
the wrong place. She should recognize that you're a priority, right?
Think of all the time, money, and mental energy that's wasted on such
stuff. Now imagine everybody getting treated at the best/nearest place
and not having to argue about eligibility. Nah, better to have a
hodgepodge, right?

>Gasping for breath works fairly well in triage but it'd better be
>real because they can spot a fake in a heartbeat, hopefully not a last
>heartbeat. Good triage nurses remain calm and make good decisions
>under stress.
>
>DD-214 notwithstanding, I don't need or want VA benefits.

That's great if you have an honest choice to make, but disgusting when
it made for purely selfish and shameless reasons.

> Being a vet
>reliant upon the VA for survival or maintenance care looks to me like
>a grim existance.

A couple of vets I know *do* live a grim existence. But it's due to
poverty, not the VA. Another, a quad (non-military injury) is getting
about as much support as anybody could rightfully expect. His
caregivers do complain, but it's clear that most of their anger is the
result of the situation in general. One of their complaints is that
the VA won't pay for expensive ($12k) stuff he can't use. The
caregivers believe that he could use it if he had it. The VA spent a
lot of time and expense evaluating his capabilities, while the
caregivers dispute the results based on their wishful thinking.

>I've provided for me and us, very glad that I did in preference to
>bigger houses and newer cars during our earning years.
>
>That said, it does piss me off that promises made 40 years ago have
>been and are so flagrantly disregarded by contemporary bureaucrats and
>pols regardless of party.

Agreed. But this healthcare disaster was a long time in the making.
When it became big news nearly 2 decades ago, were you one of those
people who said "about time", or were you one of those making
anti-Hillary jokes? And when it came up again recently, were you one
of those who said that proposed reforms were too little too late, or
were you one who just said "heeeellll no!"?

>Our federal government was once generally regarded and respected by
>most citizens as a benchmark and bastion of integrity, stability and
>strength. That is no longer true.

Yeah sure, it's the "government's" fault. <snorf> No sense blaming
anybody who expects more services *and* lower taxes, right?

> The greater disappointment is that
>a majority of citizens and voters find that acceptable.

Apparently you imagine yourself in some other camp. Were you in favor
of putting needless war on the country credit card? Were you in favor
of "staying the course", even though you knew that it meant that the
country would be ever less able to afford vet benefits? The naysayers
said it was going to cost trillions, much of it the cost of caring for
hundreds of thousands of vets for decades. What the hell did *you*
think was going to come out of it?

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/kamiya/2008/03/04/trillion_dollar_war
"But the administration's biggest sleight of hand has been ignoring
the enormous future costs of caring for the hundreds of thousands of
disabled veterans who will require vast medical and disability
payments, many for the rest of their lives. Those costs will be
staggering: an estimated $717 billion. Relatively little attention is
paid to those costs, because they haven't shown up on the books yet.
But as the authors point out in one of the book's more arresting
statistics, they're coming: We're already paying $4.3 billion a year
to the veterans of the first Gulf War, which lasted less than two
months and in which only 148 U.S. soldiers were killed. Veterans'
costs for the current Iraq war will certainly dwarf that figure."

Here's the reality of what phony "pro-defense" repugs put on the
credit card:

"California has a vast economy, and the shortfall is massive: $3.3
billion. That's a lot of money -- but just reallocating about one
week's worth of Iraq funding would wipe it out." <more like a month
now>

Wayne

Ed Huntress

unread,

Apr 16, 2010, 2:25:47 PM4/16/10

to

"William Wixon" <wwi...@frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:oFvxn.55083$Ht4....@newsfe20.iad...
>i hate initiating an off topic thread. what i usually do is post within an
>already existing off topic thread.
>
> i just saw "worse than war" on pbs.
>
> while i was watcing it i thought about ed's posts about our shared duty of
> standing up against genocide. (i think previous discussions would fit the
> definition of "genocide".) it would be horrific to see corpses lying dead
> in the streets of the united states (the images from rwanda, just replace
> americans for the rwandans)(it would permanently damage the psyches of our
> children). i'm embarrassed to say i didn't realize how right ed was in
> what he said. it kinda went right by me. i didn't fully comprehend what
> he was writing about. i would've thought you would have had to be there
> (in a country that experienced a genocide) to fully comprehend the need to
> speak out against it. it's strange what you can learn on a (dumb, stupid,
> trivial, waste-of-time) usenet newsgroup. thanks ed for speaking out
> against it (having rational arguments against it). i'd say that would be
> closer to american patriotism.
>
> worse than war will be rebroadcast on friday.
>
> Worse Than War
> Friday, April 16, 2:30am
> 13 (Thirteen/WNET New York)

Aack! I just turned on my TV to watch it. No show. So I looked at your
message again -- it says 2:30 AM! <g>

Oh, well, I tried. I see that WLIW has it on next week -- at times I'm
actually up. d8-)

Thanks for the heads up, William.

--
Ed Huntress

rangerssuck

unread,

Apr 16, 2010, 2:38:34 PM4/16/10

to

On Apr 15, 1:20 am, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 23:24:06 -0500, "William Wixon"

>
> <wwi...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
> >i hate initiating an off topic thread. what i usually do is post within an
> >already existing off topic thread.
>
> >i just saw "worse than war" on pbs.
>
> >while i was watcing it i thought about ed's posts about our shared duty of
> >standing up against genocide. (i think previous discussions would fit the
> >definition of "genocide".) it would be horrific to see corpses lying dead
> >in the streets of the united states
>

> Given that the corpses will for the most part be Leftwingers...it
> wouldnt bother me anymore than viewing the large numbers of opposem
> corpses I see on the roadways in So. California.
>
> After all..its not like Leftwingers are actually human or
> anything..shrug.
>
> Gunner

It should go without saying, but I'll say it anyway: Go fuck yourself,
you self-righteous piece of shit.

Gunner Asch

unread,

Apr 16, 2010, 3:10:43 PM4/16/10

to

On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 01:20:22 -0500, Don Foreman
<dfor...@NOSPAMgoldengate.net> wrote:

>On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 22:28:15 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 23:58:56 -0500, Don Foreman
>><dfor...@NOSPAMgoldengate.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:28:27 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>http://www.examiner.com/x-37620-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m4d13-Special-army-unit-ready-to-be-deployed-on-American-soil-just-before-Nov-elections
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Special-army-unit-ready-to-be-deployed-on-American-soil-just-before-
>>>>Nov-elections
>>>>
>>>>Im simply nutz eh?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Laugh laugh laugh
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Gunner
>>>
>>>A brigade of 80,000 troops? That's field army size, bigger than any
>>>brigade, regiment, division or even corps I've ever heard of.
>>
>>
>>Yes, it is.
>>
>>Most interesting, no?
>
>Most incredible, ja! The entire projected population of Fort Stewart,
>present base of the 3rd Infantry Div, is less than 80K troops and the
>subject brigade is only one of several that comprise the 3rd Division.
>
>http://www.growfortstewart.com/
>

Think 80k troops is enough to hold the US from internal threats?

<G>

Eregon

unread,

Apr 16, 2010, 3:22:50 PM4/16/10

to

"John R. Carroll" <nu...@bidness.dev.nul> wrote in news:I4mdnSicCY-
pS1rWnZ2dn...@giganews.com:

> I think Alabama is one of them.
> I know California is.
> Both are in financial trouble, although I'd rather be California.

You'd rather be in the Granola State?

Why?

The Peoples' Republik uv Kallipornia has been in financial trouble ever
since the Democ-rats took over the Legislature decades ago.

The simplest way to resolve the PRK's financial woes is to simply stop
spending upon non-Public-Safety items: Salaries for elected officials,
pot-hole installation (I've watched the road crews install them),
welfare, and other give-aways. This will, of course, cause the incumbents
to seek alternative sources of income which, in itself, is a worthwhile
goal.

The money saved would eliminate the debts once the top cop got around to
writing a few checks to the creditors. (The current crop of officials
would be too busy job-hunting to sign them.) <G>

John R. Carroll

unread,

Apr 16, 2010, 4:54:18 PM4/16/10

to

Eregon wrote:
> "John R. Carroll" <nu...@bidness.dev.nul> wrote in news:I4mdnSicCY-
> pS1rWnZ2dn...@giganews.com:
>
>> I think Alabama is one of them.
>> I know California is.
>> Both are in financial trouble, although I'd rather be California.
>
> You'd rather be in the Granola State?
>
> Why?

Greater potiential.

>
> The Peoples' Republik uv Kallipornia has been in financial trouble
> ever since the Democ-rats took over the Legislature decades ago.

California's financial woes have nothing to do with party affiliation or
even politician's per se.

>
> The simplest way to resolve the PRK's financial woes is to simply stop
> spending upon non-Public-Safety items: Salaries for elected officials,
> pot-hole installation (I've watched the road crews install them),
> welfare, and other give-aways. This will, of course, cause the
> incumbents to seek alternative sources of income which, in itself, is
> a worthwhile goal.

California isn't spending beyond it's means at all.

>
> The money saved would eliminate the debts once the top cop got around
> to writing a few checks to the creditors. (The current crop of
> officials would be too busy job-hunting to sign them.) <G>

That's one of the problems here.
Politicians are term limited and start looking for their private sector job
as soon as they get themselves reelected.

--
John R. Carroll

Eregon

unread,

Apr 16, 2010, 4:31:47 PM4/16/10

to

"John R. Carroll" <nu...@bidness.dev.nul> wrote in

news:1NmdnTTuEKz5XVXW...@giganews.com:

> California isn't spending beyond it's means at all.

Then just *how* is the PRK in "financial difficulty"?

John R. Carroll

unread,

Apr 16, 2010, 6:11:06 PM4/16/10

to

Because of the way revenues are levied/collected and mandated conditions on
spending imposed through the ballot initiative process.

--
John R. Carroll

Eregon

unread,

Apr 16, 2010, 9:03:09 PM4/16/10

to

"John R. Carroll" <nu...@bidness.dev.nul> wrote in

news:3sWdnbbPOr7_T1XW...@giganews.com:

IOW, the Democ-rats have the money but they can't buy votes with it?

rangerssuck

unread,

Apr 16, 2010, 9:28:17 PM4/16/10

to

On Apr 16, 9:03 pm, Eregon <Era...@Saphira.org> wrote:
> "John R. Carroll" <nu...@bidness.dev.nul> wrote innews:3sWdnbbPOr7_T1XW...@giganews.com:

It couldn't possibly have anything to do with assholes like Gunner not
paying their taxes and living on welfare, could it?

John R. Carroll

unread,

Apr 16, 2010, 11:07:08 PM4/16/10

to

There are a number of connected issues.
Californian's have passed ballot initiatives imposing mandatory spending
requirements as a percentage of revenues, and in some cases dollars, for a
number of things. There are things that can't legally be cut.

Californian's have passed ballot initiatives that make budget surpluses
illegal.
This guarantees that programs that are beneficial or even essential are cut
during the down years.

Californian's have passed ballot initiatives limiting taxes in truly odd
ways. Proposition 13 is a perfect example.

Californian's have passed ballot initiatives that require the State to do
things, like "Three Strikes", but haven't been willing to pay for the
consequences. The prison population in CA is expensive.

Californian's have passed ballot initiatives that require a balanced budget
every year.

Californian's have passed ballot initiatives term limiting most politicians
at the State level.
What we now have is elected officials out looking for their next gig just
about the time they get the hang of the job and they aren't above being
"helpful" to prospective employeers when required. In fact, it's become a
way of life. You learn your job during the first term and then do whatever
is necessary to secure employment when you are term limited out of office.

None of these involve corrupt or incompetent politicians.
We have that as well but not beyond what you'd expect anywhere else.
Californian's are reaping what they have unwittingly sewn.

Like I said, it's stupidity not extravagance.
There is plenty of money around.

--
John R. Carroll