Universal health care...how does he plan to pay for it? It's not the most terrible idea, but he needs to say how he plans to fund that idea.
Wants to bring back the Estate tax...why tax money that has already been taxed?
His message to Wal Mart...why should they pay more? They work at Wal Mart? They get paid for what they do, they work at a discount retail store. I got paid $7.90 at Best Buy, go after them too for paying their workers low wages.
Wants to invade Pakistan...theres a great idea, let's piss of more people. He also would support an invasion of Iran. I guess as long as Bush isn't the one making the decision to invade a country, that makes it OK.
Supports abortion...just not my thing to kill defenseless human beings.
Against gay marriage...who cares if they get married? If they are in love I'm for it. Why call them civil unions? Because of religion? What about the separation of church and state? The legal definition of marriage should have nothing to do with religion.
Gun control...wants to ban semi automatic firearms. If you are getting mugged or someone has invaded your house and is putting your family in danger I sure hope you are a good shot, because if you miss you will have to reload before you can shoot again. I betcha the guy thats already breaking the law will have a semi automatic weapon, if not a fully automatic weapon. He also voted against exceptions to local weapons bans even if that weapon was used in defending your own household.
Getting rid of the assault weapons ban...OK fine, do you really need a fully automatic M-16? No. I can't imagine hunting with one is that fun. However the language that goes along with the ban is not specific enough. It includes pretty much any weapon that was designed for military use. What if you are a collector of historical artifacts and you have an M1 rifle from WWII? Many would say...thats not an assault rifle...ah but it is because of the language in the new assault weapons ban that only needs one of the criteria used to describe an assault weapon. Because you can place a bayonet on the M1, it becomes an assault riffle.
healthcare:
wait until you get out in the workforce and it'll be interesting to see your opinion. I have healthcare, but for the most part, its pretty crappy. Then i think about how I may want kids one day, my parents near retirement age, my sister, and anyone else i care about.
Obviously the way to fund this thing would be through taxes and if increasing taxes meant getting universal healthcare I'd be for it. You have to make sacrifices if you want something in return and most people do not realize or think about this. They want to have their cake and eat it too....or so the saying goes
[quote If you are getting mugged or someone has invaded your house and is putting your family in danger I sure hope you are a good shot, because if you miss you will have to reload before you can shoot again[/quote
What? Are you defending yourself with a Kentucky Long Rifle? I'm picturing Bleeds in his buckskins, fending off gangstas like Fess Parker at the end of Davy Crockett: King of the Wild Frontier.
BleedsHuskieRed Wrote:Universal health care...how does he plan to pay for it? It's not the most terrible idea, but he needs to say how he plans to fund that idea. Sure he and the others need to tell how they want to pay for it. I am not sure universal hc is the best but if there is a way to successfully mix private sector and governmental hc it would be the best. You still get innovation but also have everyone covered. I think you take what works in "socialist" healthcare systems(French, Canadian etc) and take what works in our hc system to get the best hc system we can get.
Wants to bring back the Estate tax...why tax money that has already been taxed? Not sure. I haven't heard him say it but that doesn't mean he hasn't. Maybe a national lottery to raise funds for heathcare could work instead(may not pay for it all but cuts amt needed in taxes)?
His message to Wal Mart...why should they pay more? They work at Wal Mart? They get paid for what they do, they work at a discount retail store. I got paid $7.90 at Best Buy, go after them too for paying their workers low wages. I agree in a way. Most people who work there are students trying to make money for school, cars, electroics etc). For the most part, these jobs are aren't meant to be career jobs.
Wants to invade Pakistan...theres a great idea, let's piss of more people. He also would support an invasion of Iran. I guess as long as Bush isn't the one making the decision to invade a country, that makes it OK. This is spin and you know it. He said if they have credible info that Bin Laden is there, we would go get him-dead or alive. He is not talking about a full invasion of the country like Bush did.
Supports abortion...just not my thing to kill defenseless human beings. So how many of these unwanted kids are you going to adopt? If there is a God, He will take care of those that perform and have them in the way He sees fit. Why do you feel the need to tell people how they should live? I thought you conservative/libertarian types want government out of our lives?
Against gay marriage...who cares if they get married? If they are in love I'm for it. Why call them civil unions? Because of religion? What about the separation of church and state? The legal definition of marriage should have nothing to do with religion. I agree. Note: I think the abortion issue is also ties with this thinking.
Gun control...wants to ban semi automatic firearms. If you are getting mugged or someone has invaded your house and is putting your family in danger I sure hope you are a good shot, because if you miss you will have to reload before you can shoot again. I betcha the guy thats already breaking the law will have a semi automatic weapon, if not a fully automatic weapon. He also voted against exceptions to local weapons bans even if that weapon was used in defending your own household. Not sure about semi-auto ban but
Getting rid of the assault weapons ban...OK fine, do you really need a fully automatic M-16? No. I can't imagine hunting with one is that fun. However the language that goes along with the ban is not specific enough. It includes pretty much any weapon that was designed for military use. What if you are a collector of historical artifacts and you have an M1 rifle from WWII? Many would say...thats not an assault rifle...ah but it is because of the language in the new assault weapons ban that only needs one of the criteria used to describe an assault weapon. Because you can place a bayonet on the M1, it becomes an assault riffle. I think fully auto should be banned except for military use and maybe a few exceptions but make them very limited. As you say, there really is no need to use one for hunting-there would not be anything left to safely eat which I feel should be why one hunts. If one just kills an animal for fun and leaves it, I don't support that
Huskie03 my friend, instead of increasing taxes, how about we stop spending the money we already have on stupid things like potato museums in Idaho and senior centers in West Virgina?
Now if universal health care is deemed important, than so be it, but just think of the time you've spent interacting at any level of state and local governement. My last DMV visit was over two hours just to change my license from IL to MN. Two hours! Take this example, multiply it by 1000x and there's your government run universal health care. It took the police 45 minutes to respond to an accident on my street in which the driver of the car that hit the tree was bleeding on the sidewalk. 45 minutes! But guess what - the private ambulance service arrived in just about 5 minutes after my 911 call. See the difference? In almost every case, private companies can do a better, more effecient job than any level of government, and can do it an a probable discount.
If you want universal health care, incentize private health care providers to offer affordable plans to individuals. I'd even grudgingly support free health care for any kid up to age 18. But for the love of all things Huskie the government would not be able to provide effective health care.
The answer to responsible health care is not more taxes. The answer is to first spend the money on important items and then return any funds left over back to the people.
To your analogy about eating cake, if the government returned monies to me as a responsible citizen, then I could make a bigger cake, buying more ingredients from local suppliers, which in turn funds the local suppliers ability to offer health care to its employees. Trickle down econ 101. When I receive tax returns, I end up spending 100% of the monies back into the economy. That is good!
As to Obama, who cares. Unfortunately Hillary will be our next president, leading to a disgusting 24 or maybe even 28 yrs of two family rule of this nation. Ugh.
Flames24Rulz Wrote:Go Giuliani.
Mr. 9/11?
What else does he stand for? Besides keeping the status quo in Iraq and attacking Iran?
Lord Stanley Wrote:It took the police 45 minutes to respond to an accident on my street in which the driver of the car that hit the tree was bleeding on the sidewalk. 45 minutes!
Think you can do it better? Go ahead and give it a shot. People like you ***** every time they talk about increasing the police force because "it will increase taxes." There is a definite shortage of police officers in this country.
I work at a retail store and just the other night a guy got off with 5 pairs of shoes. We called police when he ran out the door.. dude didn't even make it out of the parking lot before the cops stopped him. Turns out he had a warrant already. Is this more important than an injured man? Probably not... but the point is they aren't ALWAYS late. Sometimes, they simply have better, more important things to attend to.
If you're like me and have had to rely on the police in a crisis situation and they came through for you, maybe you would appreciate them more.
/rant
Lord Stanley Wrote:Huskie03 my friend, instead of increasing taxes, how about we stop spending the money we already have on stupid things like potato museums in Idaho and senior centers in West Virgina?
Now if universal health care is deemed important, than so be it, but just think of the time you've spent interacting at any level of state and local governement. My last DMV visit was over two hours just to change my license from IL to MN. Two hours! Take this example, multiply it by 1000x and there's your government run universal health care. It took the police 45 minutes to respond to an accident on my street in which the driver of the car that hit the tree was bleeding on the sidewalk. 45 minutes! But guess what - the private ambulance service arrived in just about 5 minutes after my 911 call. See the difference? In almost every case, private companies can do a better, more effecient job than any level of government, and can do it an a probable discount.
If you want universal health care, incentize private health care providers to offer affordable plans to individuals. I'd even grudgingly support free health care for any kid up to age 18. But for the love of all things Huskie the government would not be able to provide effective health care.
The answer to responsible health care is not more taxes. The answer is to first spend the money on important items and then return any funds left over back to the people.
To your analogy about eating cake, if the government returned monies to me as a responsible citizen, then I could make a bigger cake, buying more ingredients from local suppliers, which in turn funds the local suppliers ability to offer health care to its employees. Trickle down econ 101. When I receive tax returns, I end up spending 100% of the monies back into the economy. That is good!
As to Obama, who cares. Unfortunately Hillary will be our next president, leading to a disgusting 24 or maybe even 28 yrs of two family rule of this nation. Ugh.
you bring up very good points. and since i try to think moderately, those ideas i am open to as well. i think the biggest thing is not allowing the private companies to be healthcare's monopoly. force them to be competitive w/ the government. make them earn the average citizen's business. I too, don't like the thought of having a 2 family 24-28 year rule. We need some fresh blood in the white house!
Lord Stanley Wrote:Huskie03 my friend, instead of increasing taxes, how about we stop spending the money we already have on stupid things like potato museums in Idaho and senior centers in West Virgina?
As well as stoping this unneccessary war.
However, if they got rid of "pork" before, Annie Glidden would not be expanded to 4 lanes or the roads built/to be built on the west campus area by the convo. We would not have nano technology eqpt. We would not have the opportunity to open up the cancer center. I would assume all those things would be considered "pork" in Idaho just as you think a "potato museum" is "pork", they may find it important for tourism and economic growth purposes.
RobertN Wrote:quote]As well as stoping this unneccessary war.
How much has been spent on the war? a billion or two?
NIUtrav09 Wrote:Lord Stanley Wrote:It took the police 45 minutes to respond to an accident on my street in which the driver of the car that hit the tree was bleeding on the sidewalk. 45 minutes!
Think you can do it better? Go ahead and give it a shot. People like you ***** every time they talk about increasing the police force because "it will increase taxes." There is a definite shortage of police officers in this country.
OK a little background for you. I applied and was accepted to be a Chicago cop, but turned down the offer because my girlfriend at the time didn't like the idea (yes, I know). After that, I applied to be a Diplomatic Security Officer (the law enforcement arm of the US State Department, sort of a mash of FBI and Secret Service) and made it through 3 out of 4 interviews before being told I didn't have any law enforcement experience and was out of the candidacy. (However, in my group I beat out / had more interviews than a ex Navy Seal and a current Chicago detective.) So I did give it a "shot". A lot more than other people have BTW.... After these two experiences I decided to put my chits into business, where I have seen success that has allowed me to donate time and monies back to the local communities, including United Way and to the local Fraternal Organization of Police. I am also attending a Lions all you can eat spaghetti dinner tonight at the local Scandinavian Society, and am seriously thinking of becoming a Freemason (cue spooky music.) I believe I am doing well more than my fair share to support our community and the police to make this a better place to live, which in turn should allow the police to respond quicker to emergency situations.
Another example.
I live in the City of Lakes - and since I dabble in real estate I understand the importance of location location location. So as a result, I bought a home that looks over a golf course and one of our Minneapolis city lakes.
The area I live in - Lake Hiawatha and Lake Nokomis This summer they remodeled the field house by the lake I live in to the tune of $350,000.00. Now that new field house is positively beautiful, with a 20ft bank of windows overlooking the lake, a new playground and soccer / baseball fields, plus a basketball court and horseshoe pit, (awesome!) and our community hope is that the field house will assist in keeping crime down (there isn't a lot of crime, mostly quality of life issues like graffiti) by giving the local miscreants something to do. This improvement also added residual value to my home, so there is a smile on my face, even though now my property taxes will go up. However, that is over a quarter of a million dollars that could of been spent on at least two, maybe three police officers, if we assume +$100k for training, salary and benefits. So the city of Minneapolis, just in this ONE instance, made the consious decision to retrofit a local fieldhouse to the exclusion of a possible extra 3 police officers. That is why I don't buy your comments on on me and others like me bitching when police don't show up in time - it is the fault of the city, not the taxpayers!
Quote: If you're like me and have had to rely on the police in a crisis situation and they came through for you, maybe you would appreciate them more.
/rant
If you've read any of my other posts, you'll see I am an advocate of conceal and carry, which allows me the benefit of protecting myself and family if the police can't arrive in time. The point wasn't about the police, it was about how the government can't seemingly be relied upon to handle items proscribed to them in a timely and orderly fashion, while perhaps private organizations can. Of course more police are needed, but yes I will complain about taxes being raised as long as there is monies wasted on other seemingly worthless government projects. Your mileage may vary on what we think is important.
RobertN Wrote:Lord Stanley Wrote:Huskie03 my friend, instead of increasing taxes, how about we stop spending the money we already have on stupid things like potato museums in Idaho and senior centers in West Virgina?
As well as stoping this unneccessary war. However, if they got rid of "pork" before, Annie Glidden would not be expanded to 4 lanes or the roads built/to be built on the west campus area by the convo. We would not have nano technology eqpt. We would not have the opportunity to open up the cancer center. I would assume all those things would be considered "pork" in Idaho just as you think a "potato museum" is "pork", they may find it important for tourism and economic growth purposes.
This is definitely the rub. What is important to you and me is almost never important to those without the same interests. Regardless, if crime is a problem in DeKalb, like so many articles seem to suggest, was a cancer center more important than an increased police presence? Someone decided it was, and crime has seemingly increased in DeKalb…….
One little quibble. The roads for the Convo and Annie Glidden were probably paid out of funds collected from the Illinois transportation tax funds, primary monies collected from users of Illinois roadways and gas stations. Illinois money spent on Illinois projects. My complaint is more along federal dollars going to some silly state / federal project along the lines of a potato museum. If the citizens of the great state of Idaho (and all Huskie fans love the state of Idaho this year) want a potato museum, let them pay for it – just like if Springfield wants a Lincoln monument Illinois should pay for it. It not a perfect scheme because what money is state and what is federal is so often blurred.
I would like to see this:
1. Presidential Line Item Veto. If you are trying to get money for local airport expansion tucked into bill on health care, the president can veto that line instead of the whole bill.
2. 100% efficient public transparency to the bills sponsored by Congress, with enough time between bill sponsorship and it being sent to Congress for approval. That way citizens can scrutinize the bill and communicate with their elected representatives should they have issue with certain line items.
3. Prioritization of monies spent as follows:
National Defense. Infrastructure. Emergency Services. Education Funding (not education policy). Remaining monies back to state government, where it is much easier for local citizens to affect spending patterns. Remaining monies back to the taxpayer.
The point being, let the local citizens decide what is the best use of their money. All things considered, if put to a referendum would the denizens of DeKalb County voted for road or police? We'll never know.
RobertN Wrote:Flames24Rulz Wrote:Go Giuliani.
Mr. 9/11? What else does he stand for? Besides keeping the status quo in Iraq and attacking Iran?
Sounds good to me.
Bleeds, how much of this are you twisting and how much are you making up? Why go after Obama? Are you also planning on doing this for the 16 other candidates you do not plan to support?
The answers can be found at
http://www.barackobama.com
RobertN Wrote:BleedsHuskieRed Wrote:Gun control...wants to ban semi automatic firearms. If you are getting mugged or someone has invaded your house and is putting your family in danger I sure hope you are a good shot, because if you miss you will have to reload before you can shoot again. I betcha the guy thats already breaking the law will have a semi automatic weapon, if not a fully automatic weapon. He also voted against exceptions to local weapons bans even if that weapon was used in defending your own household. Not sure about semi-auto ban but
Getting rid of the assault weapons ban...OK fine, do you really need a fully automatic M-16? No. I can't imagine hunting with one is that fun. However the language that goes along with the ban is not specific enough. It includes pretty much any weapon that was designed for military use. What if you are a collector of historical artifacts and you have an M1 rifle from WWII? Many would say...thats not an assault rifle...ah but it is because of the language in the new assault weapons ban that only needs one of the criteria used to describe an assault weapon. Because you can place a bayonet on the M1, it becomes an assault riffle. I think fully auto should be banned except for military use and maybe a few exceptions but make them very limited. As you say, there really is no need to use one for hunting-there would not be anything left to safely eat which I feel should be why one hunts. If one just kills an animal for fun and leaves it, I don't support that
Automatic weapons have been banned since the 1930's, unless you hold a specific federal license.
Please define what an "assault weapon" is. It is a term that is frequently used to elicit an emotional reaction, but it is essentially meaningless. If you are referring to what was included in the "assault weapons ban," that is equally meaningless. That defined specific features, such as a folding stock, or magazine capacity. And, it only banned the import and manufacture, not possession.
cawoo22 Wrote:[quote If you are getting mugged or someone has invaded your house and is putting your family in danger I sure hope you are a good shot, because if you miss you will have to reload before you can shoot again[/quote
What? Are you defending yourself with a Kentucky Long Rifle? I'm picturing Bleeds in his buckskins, fending off gangstas like Fess Parker at the end of Davy Crockett: King of the Wild Frontier.
![[Image: mu06%20021.jpg]](http://www.huskiemobile.com/games/games06/mu06/mu06%20021.jpg)
Lord Stanley Wrote:One little quibble. The roads for the Convo and Annie Glidden were probably paid out of funds collected from the Illinois transportation tax funds, primary monies collected from users of Illinois roadways and gas stations. Illinois money spent on Illinois projects. My complaint is more along federal dollars going to some silly state / federal project along the lines of a potato museum. If the citizens of the great state of Idaho (and all Huskie fans love the state of Idaho this year) want a potato museum, let them pay for it – just like if Springfield wants a Lincoln monument Illinois should pay for it. It not a perfect scheme because what money is state and what is federal is so often blurred.
I was trying to find the article(I have posted them on here before) that shows some/much of the AG road expansion and west campus roads IS coming from federal money attained by Hastert. I will keep looking.
"The bill set aside $14.72 million for DeKalb projects - $6.4 million to widen Annie Glidden Road just south of Lincoln Highway and $8.32 million for developing land owned by Northern Illinois University around the Convocation Center.
Those amounts had been $8 million and $14.4 million, respectively, in a version of the bill before Congress last year. They dropped to $4 million and $7.5 million as of March, as Bush was threatening to veto a more expensive overall transit package.
As a result of the lower funding amount for DeKalb, city officials said last week that they are likely to scale back plans for Annie Glidden by improving the west-side route only to a spot between Highpointe and Ashley drives, not all the way to Fairview Drive.
The federal funding has been expected to cover about 80 percent of the project's overall cost."
http://www.daily-chronicle.com/articles/...news01.txt
GeorgeBorkFan Wrote:RobertN Wrote:BleedsHuskieRed Wrote:Gun control...wants to ban semi automatic firearms. If you are getting mugged or someone has invaded your house and is putting your family in danger I sure hope you are a good shot, because if you miss you will have to reload before you can shoot again. I betcha the guy thats already breaking the law will have a semi automatic weapon, if not a fully automatic weapon. He also voted against exceptions to local weapons bans even if that weapon was used in defending your own household. Not sure about semi-auto ban but
Getting rid of the assault weapons ban...OK fine, do you really need a fully automatic M-16? No. I can't imagine hunting with one is that fun. However the language that goes along with the ban is not specific enough. It includes pretty much any weapon that was designed for military use. What if you are a collector of historical artifacts and you have an M1 rifle from WWII? Many would say...thats not an assault rifle...ah but it is because of the language in the new assault weapons ban that only needs one of the criteria used to describe an assault weapon. Because you can place a bayonet on the M1, it becomes an assault riffle. I think fully auto should be banned except for military use and maybe a few exceptions but make them very limited. As you say, there really is no need to use one for hunting-there would not be anything left to safely eat which I feel should be why one hunts. If one just kills an animal for fun and leaves it, I don't support that
Automatic weapons have been banned since the 1930's, unless you hold a specific federal license.
Please define what an "assault weapon" is. It is a term that is frequently used to elicit an emotional reaction, but it is essentially meaningless. If you are referring to what was included in the "assault weapons ban," that is equally meaningless. That defined specific features, such as a folding stock, or magazine capacity. And, it only banned the import and manufacture, not possession.
OK, I guess it is "assault weapons". Either way, the only both are for is killing humans in mass. Neither should be allowed except for an occasional antique or military use.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/...-ban_x.htm
OK, I guess it is "assault weapons". Either way, the only both are for is killing humans in mass. Neither should be allowed except for an occasional antique or military use.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/...-ban_x.htm
[/quote]
Ok, so then what is an assault weapon? If it is to be banned, it must be something that is identifiable.
That caption on the photo associated with that article is incorrect. That model of rifle was not banned. You couldn't manufacture one with a folding stock, a bayonet lug, or a flash suppressor. You could still own one though. And, none of those features affected how it shoots or what it shoots.