http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/10/13/reid-criticizes-mormon-church-proposition-support/?test=latestnews
Draw your own conclusions, but I'm pretty sure people have been excommunicated for less than this.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Friday, October 2, 2009
"Let them eat cake"
How out of touch is Congress? Every local government across the United States has had to make huge cuts in their budgets. People across our country have either lost jobs or taken pay cuts. Hundreds of thousands are unemployed or underemployed. Many are overqualified for the job they have because they can't find jobs in their niche anymore. Everyone is hurting in one way or another. And what does Congress do?...
They vote to give themselves a RAISE!!! OUT. OF. TOUCH.
They vote to give themselves a RAISE!!! OUT. OF. TOUCH.
Thursday, October 1, 2009
California...oh California
California ranks as the 48th most business friendly state! Oh wait, there are only 50 states. Dang, that means it is the third worst state to do business in. Only New York and New Jersey are less business friendly.
California is in bad shape financially. I don't think they have balanced a budget in decades. They run out of money and ask voters to bail them out every election in the form of bonds. They aren't changing anything and so it keeps getting worse. They have a very liberal legislature who doesn't know how to stop all the spending. So the legislature organized a commission to figure something out. The commission is proposing something close to a flat tax...OH THE IRONY!!!! A flat tax is about as conservative a policy as you can get. They are abandoning every liberal fiber in them by even mentioning a flat tax.
For those of you who don't know, a flat tax means everyone pays the same tax rate regardless of how much you make. It doesn't really exist anywhere anymore. Opponents say the rich should pay more because they can afford to. Proponents say you shouldn't punish success. Regardless of the arguments, I do think deep down everyone knows that a flat tax is very business friendly...and that is what California is going for.
This is something to watch because if they go forward with this and it helps them, Obama and the liberal legislature are in trouble. This would put a conservative policy to the test, kind of. There are a lot of other factors in Cali that make it very business unfriendly, but still...pretty interesting. If you are into this kind of thing, and if you are still reading you must be a little.
Who said it?
"If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court. I think where it succeeded was to invest formal rights in previously dispossessed people, so that now I would have the right to vote. I would now be able to sit at the lunch counter and order as long as I could pay for it I’d be o.k. But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society.
"To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, because the civil rights movement became so court focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that. …"
Me now...what this says is that the civil rights movement wasn't successful in the sense that it didn't spread the wealth. This person believes that it is the RIGHT of one person to take another person's money via government taxation. Well, who dunnit? I'm not telling, seriously...guess.
"To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, because the civil rights movement became so court focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that. …"
Me now...what this says is that the civil rights movement wasn't successful in the sense that it didn't spread the wealth. This person believes that it is the RIGHT of one person to take another person's money via government taxation. Well, who dunnit? I'm not telling, seriously...guess.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
