No. of Recommendations: 0
The main thing I have a problem with, the guy essentially lied on his parade application. Said the float would say "watermelons for sale". Then he changes it to a float advertising "White History Month".

Philosophically, how is this any different from "Black History Month" or "Hispanic History Month"? Answer - it is not.

So, was this float racist?

JLC

http://now.msn.com/white-history-month-float-stuns-fourth-of...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Well, "White History Month" is like an appendix. Is it really necessary?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
So, was this float racist?

If our aspiration is to be a truly color-blind society, then by definition, it is no more racist than 'Black History Month', because it is simply the other side of the coin. Racist liberals, of course, will argue that 'white history' must be racist, while 'black history' is not, because they don't understand either logic or the concept of a truly color-blind society, perhaps because it is a terrifying notion to them.

Though you didn't ask, while the float is IMO profoundly stupid, it is no more stupid than an 'Obama 2012' bumper sticker. Both serve as 'teachable moments' for us to use with our children, as they illustrate the virtue of living in a society that not only tolerates, but has enshrined in its very Constitution the concept of free expression, while also illustrating that it is so core to our country and its founding that any idiot can avail themselves of its protection.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"White History Month".

Philosophically, how is this any different from "Black History Month" or "Hispanic History Month"? Answer - it is not.


Well, we disagree to a point. I have no idea of your age or educational background. I started public school in Topeka, KS the very year the elementary schools were desegregated. Unknown to most, Topeka also has a sizeable Mexican population, the legacy of the AT&SF Railway. In my K-12 years there was only white history. Hispanics were mentioned pretty much only in reference to the Conquistadores (Coronado supposedly made his way to Central Kansas), and there was a passing reference to slavery, but primarily regarding the antebellum difficulties with Missourians who wanted Kansas to be admitted as a slave state. Nowadays I suspect the usefulness of "ethnic" months has dwindled a lot as, I hope, "regular" history has been expanded to include other than what while folks done did.

I do, however, love an ethnic food fair. When I worked in Van Nuys, CA the office resembled the UN. About four times a year we did a pot luck lunch, and the world was represented. And yes, there was white trash food too, including some of my faves such as stuffed eggs and "So Good You'll Smack Your Momma" corn pudding.

So, was this float racist?

Of course not. The poor misunderstood farmer just wanted to sell watermelons. And, borrowing from Dorothy Parker, "I am Marie of Rumania."

Phil
Rule Your Retirement Home Fool
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Though you didn't ask, while the float is IMO profoundly stupid,

____________________________________

I disagree, though I hate the float with a passion. I hate that folks think this is required, but I do not disagree

There is no path out of where we are except through it.

I see many who believe we do not have a problem as sever as we do, or that somehow playing nice will work all of a sudden after getting kicked in the groin repeatedly while following the kickers demand that you fight by Marquis of Queensberry rules

There is only one way out now and it is confrontation on all fronts.

this is nothing but confronting reality. It is saying YES THIS IS STUPID WHY ARE YOU FORCING ME TO DO THIS DUMB STUFF?

Listen to liberals, read them, to the degree possible understand them.

They are in a fantasy dome that was allowed to exist because Conservatives did not take the lies seriously not did they respond to the constant spin because it was simply too stupid to bother with.

The lies through being repeated often enough without refutation became truths.

We let this happen, because we were embarrassed to be as nasty as liberals.

Bad mistake
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
If our aspiration is to be a truly color-blind society

When did that happen? I must have missed the memo.

I admit that I had high hopes after the 2008 election that perhaps we were finally clearing ourselves of our horrible racial history. And to a large extent we have. But I still see 92% of black voters picking Obama in the 2012 election and North Carolina racing to disenfranchise black voters before the ink was dry on the SCOTUS's disemboweling of the Voting Right Act, so I'm not the only one who didn't hear.

Phil
Rule Your Retirement Home Fool
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 11
and North Carolina racing to disenfranchise black voters before the ink was dry on the SCOTUS's disemboweling of the Voting Right Act

WTH are you talking about? Perhaps I need to be a bit more specific:

I REJECT THE PREMISE THAT VOTER ID DISENFRANCHISES ANYONE EXCEPT FRAUDULENT VOTERS.

I BELIEVE THAT ANYONE WHO SPEAKS OF IDENTIFICATION BEING EQUAL TO DISENFRANCHISEMENT IS EITHER A LIAR OR A DUPE.

If there are provisions in the NC law that specifically target minorities, please advise.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
I REJECT THE PREMISE THAT VOTER ID DISENFRANCHISES ANYONE EXCEPT FRAUDULENT VOTERS.

I BELIEVE THAT ANYONE WHO SPEAKS OF IDENTIFICATION BEING EQUAL TO DISENFRANCHISEMENT IS EITHER A LIAR OR A DUPE.


I don't even want to go there. In the Church of Liberalism there are basic tenets. It as useless to debte these points with liberals as it is to offer counter arguments against Jesus, Mohammed, or any other object of deification.

The Earth is flat and that's that.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Anything liberals don't like is racist. It is their way of shutting down contrary views and imposing their own standards on speech. Thought Control, pure and simple.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Perhaps I need to be a bit more specific:

Not at all. We simply disagree as to the politicians' motivation, targeted voters, and effect. Such is life.

We also seem to disagree about whether such events rise to the level of requiring all caps. I subscribe to the "Everyone Gets His Lunch" school and believe that efforts to suppress the vote will eventually come back to bite the proponents in the ass. I also have infinite patience.

Phil
Rule Your Retirement Home Fool
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
This is nothing but confronting reality. It is saying YES THIS IS STUPID WHY ARE YOU FORCING ME TO DO THIS DUMB STUFF?

As difficult as it is to do, the only way "through" reverse racism is by "extinction" of the behavior, a component of "operant conditioning."

Extinction is caused by the lack of any consequence following a behavior. When a behavior is inconsequential (i.e., producing neither favorable nor unfavorable consequences) it will occur less frequently. When a previously reinforced behavior is no longer reinforced with either positive or negative reinforcement, it leads to a decline in that behavior.

Operant conditioning is a type of learning in which an individual's behavior is modified by its consequences; the behaviour may change in form, frequency, or strength. Operant conditioning is a term that was coined by B.F Skinner in 1937. The word operant can be described as, "an item of behavior that is initially spontaneous, rather than a response to a prior stimulus, but whose consequences may reinforce or inhibit recurrence of that behavior."
[Source: Wiki]

Example: If FeedMeNOWHuman and MrCheeryO's postings are consistently ignored, they'll eventually go away. Likewise charges of racism. The preferred response is, as the British say, "Keep calm and carry on."
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 11
I subscribe to the "Everyone Gets His Lunch" school and believe that efforts to suppress the vote

I subscribe to all efforts to "suppress" fraudulent voting.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I REJECT THE PREMISE THAT VOTER ID DISENFRANCHISES ANYONE EXCEPT FRAUDULENT VOTERS.

I BELIEVE THAT ANYONE WHO SPEAKS OF IDENTIFICATION BEING EQUAL TO DISENFRANCHISEMENT IS EITHER A LIAR OR A DUPE.
_______________________________________________________

If you repeat a lie often enough and loud enough it becomes true

Liberals do not believe their owners do that. This is one of the issues where if you are not a complete dupe it is more obvious than perhaps any other.

The swill that Dems repeat with vehement righteousness if friggin hilarious if you can look past the actual consequences of folks acting on believing such garbage.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Example: If FeedMeNOWHuman and MrCheeryO's postings are consistently ignored, they'll eventually go away. Likewise charges of racism. The preferred response is, as the British say, "Keep calm and carry on."
_______________________________________

It is unfortunately impossible for me to shut down ABC< NBC, MSNBC, CNN, huffingtonPost, mediamatters, commondreams.....


I can choose to ignore tha but sticking one's head in the sand like an ostrich does not ever work.

SO your point is actually rather silly. Sorry.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
It is unfortunately impossible for me to shut down ABC< NBC, MSNBC, CNN, huffingtonPost, mediamatters, commondreams..... I can choose to ignore tha but sticking one's head in the sand like an ostrich does not ever work. SO your point is actually rather silly. Sorry.

Oh, I know one single person can't shut down The Beast. I'm just saying that not participating is the only rationale thing one single person can do.

I consider librul media the same as tabloid jeernalism, and we've see what tabloid publications and now tabloid TV has done to society.

That's all I'm sayin'.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I have no idea of your age or educational background.

Feel free to check my profile, you'll be able to guess both more or less.

I started public school in Topeka, KS the very year the elementary schools were desegregated.

I'll one up you. I grew up on military bases and at various times had as my best friend: white, black, asian, latino, catholic, protestant, mormon, and buddhist. Probably the most desegregated that society will ever be. Kids were kids and we played although at times we did pick up on comments that adults made but always wondered what the deal was.

Was the float racist, no. Was it stupid, yes. But no more so than any other insertspecialinteresthere month.

JLC
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
We also seem to disagree about whether such events rise to the level of requiring all caps.

Maybe so, but I guess my patience is a lot less than yours. I'm pretty tired of people ignoring actual voter fraud as a justification for voter ID, not to mention the existence of voter ID in many states already.

I also have infinite patience.

That's a good thing, because it's going to be a while before all those dead people who voted for Democrats in the past are going to be able to get voter ID under the new laws.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I grew up on military bases and at various times had as my best friend: white, black, asian, latino, catholic, protestant, mormon, and buddhist. Probably the most desegregated that society will ever be. Kids were kids and we played although at times we did pick up on comments that adults made but always wondered what the deal was.

That begs the question of what you were taught in history classes or what your non-white-protestant best friends might have thought. I'm reminded of Senator Oren Hatch (R-UT), hardly a flaming liberal, who is not a fan of school prayer. It has a direct correlation to his growing up Morman in Pennsylvania.

My point about [fill in the blank] history month is that there was pretty much nothing about Non Northern European actions taught in relation to American History when I was in school. As I noted before, I hope for today's students this has changed.

Phil
Rule Your Retirement Home Fool
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Oh, I know one single person can't shut down The Beast. I'm just saying that not participating is the only rationale thing one single person can do.
______________________

I could not disagree more heartily

The only actual rational thing one can do, is mae quite certain that a liberal never feels free to voice their opinion in the public square and that others will acquiesce

There is a reason you can go to a dinner with relatives or be at work and liberals can voice their opinions and conservtives are quiet.

It is people that believe as you believe, and it has been a force in helping to destroy America. Do not get me wrong, I believed the same thing, except now I know I was both wrong and stupid and that I aided not my opponents but my enemies.

My enemies were not my co-workers, but the folks who fed them their BS and amde them feel it OK to be the compassionate and public for their were right -- no matter how much harm they did

I was complicit in that harm, in that I allowed them to spout nonsense without rebuttal

Do you think there is a reason every political candidate acts as if he is winning regardless of what he actually knows at any point in time?

People will gravitate toward the perceived winner. MY silence was not a show of class as you believe and I believed but rather a tour de force of stupidity in allowing liberalia to be seen as more dominant and in having it seem as if I agreed, due to my silence, and that is how it is perceived

As I admit I once was, you are completely and utterly wrong.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
It is people that believe as you believe, and it has been a force in helping to destroy America. Do not get me wrong, I believed the same thing, except now I know I was both wrong and stupid and that I aided not my opponents but my enemies.

I'm talking about the media. News outlets are profit-seeking entities. They exist on sales of their paper news, views on their media and clicks on their sites. The only way to stop tabloid jeernalism is not to buy tabloids. The only way to stop librul leaning news is to not support them financially.

One can still express oneself through outlets that agree with one's point of view.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
One can still express oneself through outlets that agree with one's point of view.
______________________________

Your enemy does not preach to the choir, and is doing a very good job of beating the heck out of what you believe in.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Well...

FOXNEWS America's No. 1 source for news...

Television is the main place Americans say they turn to for news about current events (55%), leading the Internet, at 21%. Nine percent say newspapers or other print publications are their main news source, followed by radio, at 6%.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/163412/americans-main-source-news...

I can eschew librul media and support media that best reflects my POV.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
My point about [fill in the blank] history month is that there was pretty much nothing about Non Northern European actions taught in relation to American History when I was in school.

If you think about it, most of American history IS Northern European history. At least the founding of the colonies. Yes, you move south and west you have overlap with Latin America and Asian history. Good portions of which I was exposed. I'm sure my experience was not your average experience though.

Unfortunately, education has become political (or maybe it always was). Why is Cinco de Mayo made into a big deal (when it really isn't)? So kids can be "forced" to learn about Mexico during the school year. Mexico's independence was won while schools are out, so no opportunity to learn.

As I noted before, I hope for today's students this has changed.

IMHO, it has the potential to get worse. I remember reading about some "new, updated history book" that had dropped Paul Revere in favor of Oprah Winfrey. Really?

What is next, ditching George Washington for American Idol?

JLC
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Why is Cinco de Mayo made into a big deal (when it really isn't)?

I've always assumed it's the tequila bottlers' equivalent of St. Patrick's Day.

Phil
Rule Your Retirement Home Fool
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
My point about [fill in the blank] history month is that there was pretty much nothing about Non Northern European actions taught in relation to American History when I was in school. As I noted before, I hope for today's students this has changed.

When I was in school it was not thought necessary to assign every important figure in US history to a racial niche without regard to whether race was relevant.

Nor was it thought necessary to exaggerate people's prominence in history in order to have races be "appropriately" prominent.

American history was about America and American people, not American races.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I say, so what, he can do whatever he wants to do. People will let him know if they disagree with him or not believe me.

Have you hugged a white person today? :) I haven't, but in a few minutes, I'm going to hug and smooch a white dog and a black and white one too as we settle down for some boob tube family time. :)

LuckyDog
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I remember reading about some "new, updated history book" that had dropped Paul Revere in favor of Oprah Winfrey. Really?

What a riot!

I love this commercial about Paul Revere.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urdPARN999o
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I subscribe to all efforts to "suppress" fraudulent voting.




There isn't any fraudulent voting to speak of. It's another conservative lie, just like the claim that they want to ban abortion because they care about the unborn. Conservatives are the first ones in line at the clinic when their daughter gets preggers.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
That begs the question of



No, it prompts the question.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
TMFPMarti,

We [THEMATHISNEAR and TMFPMarti] simply disagree as to the politicians' motivation [as to whether they intend "racing to disenfranchise black voters"], targeted voters [of voter ID laws], and effect.

I admit I'm not really following this thread, just happened to see selected portions of posts.

But are you seriously suggesting that laws requiring voters to show identification at the polls are intended to disenfranchise any significant number of legitimate voters?

And if so, are you suggesting the laws do (or would) actually achieve such disenfranchising? If so, for specific laws, or voter-ID laws inherently (regardless of efforts made to minimize voter impact)?

Phil
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
But are you seriously suggesting that laws requiring voters to show identification at the polls are intended to disenfranchise any significant number of legitimate voters?

Not a doubt in my mind.

And if so, are you suggesting the laws do (or would) actually achieve such disenfranchising?

It remains to be seen. My favorite story from the unintended consequences file came in the Kansas primary when a judge known by every precinct worker was turned away because he didn't have photo ID.

It's time for some good old fashioned door-to-door canvassing and assistance in getting the necessary papers. In not too much time the answer, I hope, will be no.

Phil
Rule Your Retirement Home Fool
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
But are you seriously suggesting that laws requiring voters to show identification at the polls are intended to disenfranchise any significant number of legitimate voters?

Not a doubt in my mind.
-----------------------------------------------------
http://www.aim.org/special-report/the-lefts-national-vote-fr...

As two New York Democrats recently caught in a vote fraud scandal told police, “voter fraud is an accepted way of winning elections…”

Do you think the two democrats are lying?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Do you think the two democrats are lying?

Gee, I thought they all did.

Phil
Rule Your Retirement Home Fool
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Do you think the two democrats are lying?

Gee, I thought they all did.
------------------------
You lost. Thanks for playing.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 21
But are you seriously suggesting that laws requiring voters to show identification at the polls are intended to disenfranchise any significant number of legitimate voters?

Not a doubt in my mind.


You do realize that a fraudulent vote disenfranchises a voter on the other side, right?

Or perhaps you just don't care.

Well, it is a documented fact, not subject to your doubts or lack thereof, that voter fraud exists. Anyone in law enforcement will tell you that there is more crime than that which is apprehended and reported. There are people like myself who actually want to stop said fraud. There are legion Democrats who want to continue to perpetuate said fraud, because they know it works to their benefit. They know well that a few stolen elections makes a difference.

In short, I don't give a damn what you doubt or believe. Voter fraud needs to be stopped, and there are plenty of people kicking up dust and using disenfranchisement as a convenient excuse. Hence my comment that anyone arguing that voter ID equals disenfranchisement is either a liar or a dupe. If you disenfranchise 100 voters but stop 10000 fraudulent votes, most people would say that's an acceptable outcome. Well, most honest people, anyway.

As to your story of the judge being turned away, GOOD! Maybe some high-profile people need to set an example of showing up to the polls actually complying with the law.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
But are you seriously suggesting that laws requiring voters to show identification at the polls are intended to disenfranchise any significant number of legitimate voters?

What a specious librul argument. Requiring voter ID as a means to disenfranchise voters is just an excuse for libruls to continue vote fraud. There are no Americans who don't have bona fide identification, and they should be required to show it at the voting poll. If necessary, this country should develop fingerprint ID to solve the problem once and for all.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
But are you seriously suggesting that laws requiring voters to show identification at the polls are intended to disenfranchise any significant number of legitimate voters?

Not a doubt in my mind.

And just how does this disenfranchisement occur?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Well, it is a documented fact, not subject to your doubts or lack thereof, that voter fraud exists.

Had I been asked that question my response also would have been "Not a doubt in my mind." My earlier comment was about the body of election laws some states were rushing to pass. My opinion of their intent remains the same.

As for ID at the polling place, it doesn't seem to me that it's much of a deterrent. Someone who wants to vote fraudulently can just vote absentee. I think the best place to attack it is registration.

When I moved to Kansas in 1999 and went to register I took my passport to prove I was who I said I was and a citizen, and my lease to prove that I lived where I said I did. They didn't want to see anything. When I first registered to vote, in Chicago in 1970, at least I had to show a birth certificate.

Alas, given a recent SCOTUS decision it appears that more stringent registration requirements would require an Act of Congress, so we know how much chance that has, at least until 2015.

Phil
Rule Your Retirement Home Fool
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
As for ID at the polling place, it doesn't seem to me that it's much of a deterrent. Someone who wants to vote fraudulently can just vote absentee. I think the best place to attack it is registration.
-------------------------------------------------------
That reminds me of the liberal argument when republicans want to reform social security, it goes something like this:

Conservative Cal: I want to reform Social Security.

Liberal Libby: Why, Medicare is in much worse shape.

Conservative Cal: Lets reform Medicare then.

Liberal Libby: Conservative Cal wants to throw Granny off a cliff!!!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
As for ID at the polling place, it doesn't seem to me that it's much of a deterrent. Someone who wants to vote fraudulently can just vote absentee. I think the best place to attack it is registration.

If voter fraud is non-existent, why even bother to requrie registration?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
If voter fraud is non-existent, why even bother to requrie registration?
---------------------------------------------------------
Good point, registration is racist because minorities hate paperwork, it's not fair.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
As two New York Democrats recently caught in a vote fraud scandal told police, “voter fraud is an accepted way of winning elections…”

Do you think the two democrats are lying?
____________________________________________________

Damn, I feel like I am caught in one of those Star Trek episodes where SPock tells the machine a lie while the machine knows that Vulcans are not allowed to lie

HELP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 7
But are you seriously suggesting that laws requiring voters to show identification at the polls are intended to disenfranchise any significant number of legitimate voters?

What a specious librul argument. Requiring voter ID as a means to disenfranchise voters is just an excuse for libruls to continue vote fraud. There are no Americans who don't have bona fide identification, and they should be required to show it at the voting poll. If necessary, this country should develop fingerprint ID to solve the problem once and for all.

_________________________________________

It used to be that the most corrupt talking point for libs was the voting issues.

Because after all is said and done. Even if the absurd claim that is suppressed the vote, no one could ever actually explain why it would suppress blacks more than non-blacks

Remember, you can not even get a job today, with the proof folks want for voting, this is not an onerous requirement

I would think anyone not corrupt to the core, could see an argument that it would suppress non_Dem votes, as Dem precincts are over run with people like ACORN(whatever their name is now) that would ensure that no one who wanted to vote there would have a problem.

But anyway, now?

How is Benghazi not just as if not more corrupt?

Hos is the IRS scandal not more corrupt. Have you seen the reasoning that libs justify this with? Logic was screaming for mercy for months before it finally died altogether with the last batch of lies and requests for immunity



These lousy humans even lie about a man being on a boat when folks seehim there. After they are caught, they still keep lying, it is like Dems are doing that old Monty Python routie with the dead parrot

These are folks that have just turned the bend, they have decided whatever is their goal is more important than integrity, and that all measurement of success is the ability to win elections.

It is a fairly unbelievable scenario, so many refuse to believe how bad they have actually become, but they have. They are as bad as they appear for the appearance, is what they are actually really truly doing!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Well, if you're arguing that we should have more stringent voter registration, we're in violent agreement. But you must know that Democrats will claim racism to protect voter fraud, just like they have been. I'm fine with taking away absentee voting, too, but that's going to trigger another Democrat battle cry (notice how they actively deny voter fraud -- that's a tell, BTW). I don't care if we use the 'purple thumb' approach like they used in Iraq, but doesn't it seem just a LITTLE problematic that Iraq can have more secure elections than we can?

It is NOT racist to want FAIR elections.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
as Dem precincts are over run with people like ACORN(whatever their name is now) that would ensure that no one who wanted to vote there would have a problem.

If every Dem votes, fine, but I have a real problem with (1) paying taxes to fund groups like ACORN and (2) dead people voting Democrat.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I'm fine with taking away absentee voting, too,

Gotta disagree on that one. I had to vote absentee several times in my working years because I was going to be out of town on election day. BUT it's possible to cross-check the signature on the absentee package with the signature on the registration card. Just requires devoting the resources to it.

Phil
Rule Your Retirement Home Fool
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I have a real problem with . . . dead people voting Democrat.

But not Republican <g>? I've had the mail of several dead Kansans forwarded to me as part of administering their estates. In each case I've eventually gotten something from the election board indicating that the registration was going to be canceled if the person didn't vote in the next election or two. Why can't they set up a notification system similar to what Social Security gets so that the election officials are notified at the time of death?

Phil
Rule Your Retirement Home Fool
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Liberal Libby: Conservative Cal wants to throw Granny off a cliff!!!

And give her cancer, steal her kids birth control, ship her off in chains, and tie her dog the the roof of his/her car.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
I have a real problem with . . . dead people voting Democrat.

But not Republican <g>?


I'm not going to argue that there aren't fraudulent Republican votes cast. There probably are. I want all fraud to stop and anyone tampering with the process to be prosecuted. It's a bit ironic that the Democrats who want us to trust Government (as it spies on us more every day) are the same ones who support and/or engage in fraud that would destroy trust in the political process. Just more endemic dishonesty and hypocrisy.

Why can't they set up a notification system similar to what Social Security gets so that the election officials are notified at the time of death?

I'd prefer one that actually works. There are many cases of people receiving SS benefits for years after their deaths. Surprisingly, the Government has a poor record of recovering such waste/fraud/abuse.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 16
But are you seriously suggesting that laws requiring voters to show identification at the polls are intended to disenfranchise any significant number of legitimate voters?

Not a doubt in my mind.

And just how does this disenfranchisement occur?


And does requiring ID to get welfare deprive honest law-abiding Americans of benefits they are legally entitled to, to a greater extent than it deters welfare fraud?

Does requiring ID to cash a check or use a debit card deprive honest law-abiding Americans of proper access to their own money, to a greater extent than it deters improper use of those instruments?

Does requiring ID to buy an alcoholic beverage, or tobacco, deprive honest law-abiding Americans of proper access to their favorite recreational drugs, to a greater extent than it discourages illegal underage use of those drugs?

What is so special about voting, that it needs to be doable without ID when so many other routine activities require ID?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Liberal Libby: Conservative Cal wants to throw Granny off a cliff!!!

And give her cancer, steal her kids birth control, ship her off in chains, and tie her dog the the roof of his/her car.
_________________________
\
Then, after breakfast, we get some energy and stop being nice guys!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
What is so special about voting, that it needs to be doable without ID when so many other routine activities require ID?

The answer, of course, is that Democrats willfully misrepresent the issue by claiming disenfranchisement and racism, because they know they can't defend fraud. Democrats know that the best defense is a lying-@$$ offense.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
The answer, of course, is that Democrats willfully misrepresent the issue (of voter fraud) ...

You might find this article interesting;
Policy Brief on the Truth About "Voter Fraud"
http://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/policy-brief-truth-abo...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
There are many cases of people receiving SS benefits for years after their deaths.

Many? I suspect hyperbole. One is too many, granted, but as a percentage of benefit recipients, "many" such cases? I doubt it.

It's hard to die without a death certificate being issued. Seems to me that Vital Statistics could cc Elections. Might not be perfect, but it would catch most, which is better than what goes on today. Probably wouldn't even require legislation.

Phil
Rule Your Retirement Home Fool
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. is universally regarded as one of the most influential and liberal justices of the second half of the 20th century.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
You might find this article interesting;
Policy Brief on the Truth About "Voter Fraud"
http://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/policy-brief-truth-abo......


One of the Left's favorite types of reasoning is circular reasoning, as in:
1) There is no evidence of voter fraud.
2) The evidence that does exist doesn't matter.
3) We will argue against any measures that would actually determine, measure, or deter voter fraud, because, after all, it doesn't exist.

That's why I usually put liberal circular reasoning into the circular file.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. is universally regarded as one of the most influential and liberal justices of the second half of the 20th century.

As nominated by the equally influential and liberal president Dwight D. Eisenhower.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
That's why I usually put liberal circular reasoning into the circular file.

Are your trying to say this study conflicted with the reputable studies you supplied links to? Or are you just saying it disagreed with your unsubstantiated notions, and therefore has no value?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Many? I suspect hyperbole. One is too many, granted, but as a percentage of benefit recipients, "many" such cases? I doubt it.

You do know that 'many' and 'most' have different meanings, right?

I wouldn't say that SSA pays most people incorrectly, but I don't have a high degree of confidence in the Government's ability to detect and diligently correct mistakes. Here's a couple links for you, if you're interested, though they are dated (but given the explosion in people on disability, they probably understate the problem, if anything):

http://money.cnn.com/2011/09/07/pf/social_security_benefits_...
http://money.cnn.com/2011/08/17/pf/social_security_deaths_mi...

Also, keep in mind that SSDI's inability to evaluate applicants properly isn't classified as fraud, but still results in payments to people that don't deserve it (and probably denied payments to people who do).

Not only that, but given the level of honesty in the current Administration, and its proclivity for going after average Americans with whom it doesn't agree (and we still don't have anyone at the IRS that has been held responsible for it), I think expecting something like the 0bama Admediastration to police elections basically makes re-election moot. 'What do you know, that name is almost the same as this guy, so that's ANOTHER Republican that doesn't get to vote! And the Democrat isn't quite at room-temperature, so I'm sure we can get their next-of-kin to fill out the absentee ballot... aw, heck, we'll just check the box for them...'
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
It's hard to die without a death certificate being issued. Seems to me that Vital Statistics could cc Elections. Might not be perfect, but it would catch most, which is better than what goes on today. Probably wouldn't even require legislation.

One issue is that people don't have GUIDs. So matching up a death certificate with a voter registration (or anything else) is tricky and not 100% reliable.

People get incorrectly logged as dead rather less often, I think, than they continue to get benefits after actually being dead - but it does happen, and there are horror stories about the consequences. (When your Social Security check is cut off, your bank account is frozen pending contact with your executor, your landlord wants his rent, and you really seriously need to go grocery shopping...)
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. is universally regarded as one of the most influential and liberal justices of the second half of the 20th century.

As nominated by the equally influential and liberal president Dwight D. Eisenhower.
------------------------------------------------------
I just copied what the website said where you got your "study". It came from the section titled "Celebrating John Brennan" so i'm assuming they like his liberalness. What difference does it make who nominated him? Didn't Reagan nominate someone who ended up being more liberal than first thought?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
http://www.pewtrusts.org/our_work_report_detail.aspx?id=8589...

Approximately 24 million—one of every eight—voter registrations in the United States are no longer valid or are significantly inaccurate.

More than 1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as voters.

Approximately 2.75 million people have registrations in more than one state.


Have a day.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 7
I think a lot of the problems with absentee ballots could be solved with <gasp> stricter restrictions on them. Back when my DH (was assigned overseas in the 80's (and I joined him there), we had to vote absentee in Florida -

Back then at least, Florida had strong rules on absentee ballots. We had early deadlines to meet to request the ballot, then when it arrived, we voted, sealed it in another envelope, then had 2 witnesses sign off that we were who we said we were when we signed the outer envelope. - one had to be an officer or a notary. I'm fairly sure I was asked to present ID.

omg - I'm Hispanic - I guess I was being disenfranchised and didn't know it!

I think my current state is much more lax about absentee voting.

Voting is a right, but it's also a privilege. If you can't think critically enough to follow simple rules, should you really be voting?

Always ;-)
Hunzi
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
What difference does it make who nominated him?

It makes no difference who nominated Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. - - - just as it makes no difference as to his political beliefs. My post had nothing to do with Justice William J. Brennan, Jr., only with the policy brief I linked. Did you choose to ignore this study simply because the law school conducting the study was named after a man you might consider liberal?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Did you choose to ignore this study simply because the law school conducting the study was named after a man you might consider liberal?
------------------------------------------------------------
I chose to disregard it because i went to the "about us" section and it said they were non-partisan, and then i went to the "Celebrating John Brennan" section and it said he was the most liberal judge of the 20th century. If they're non-partisan why are they celebrating? I feel the same way about that "think tank" Center On Budget And Policy Priorities which Jared Bernstein was on the board of, their mission is about social justice and "fairness", and all their "studies call for more redistribution, what are the chances. Sorry, i don't buy what they're selling.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Approximately 24 million—one of every eight—voter registrations in the United States are no longer valid or are significantly inaccurate.

More than 1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as voters.

Approximately 2.75 million people have registrations in more than one state.


OK - That was an interesting response, but I was responding to some of your comments on voter fraud. And now you're trying to shift the subject to inaccurate voter registrations? Nice try, but no cigar.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Of course you don't see anything. Millions of opportunities for voter fraud couldn't possibly lead to voter fraud. You want me to prove the exact amount of voter fraud, while you claim that any attempts to ensure that only legal voters can be allowed to vote are disenfranchising and racist. Well, you and your side haven't proven disenfranchisement, despite yelling about it for years, so I don't feel like you've earned the right to expect anything, except perhaps the directions back to PA.

You will stand in the way of anything that would actually make the vote fair and honest, because you support stealing elections. You and the rest of the left lie every time you open your mouths, from Kerry's yacht to Benghazi to IRS to DOJ to Trayvon to Corzine to the cost of Obamacare to whatever issue comes up. Nice try at seeming reasonable, but no cigar.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Of course you don't see anything. Millions of opportunities for voter fraud couldn't possibly lead to voter fraud. You want me to prove the exact amount of voter fraud, while you claim that any attempts to ensure that only legal voters can be allowed to vote are disenfranchising and racist. Well, you and your side haven't proven disenfranchisement, despite yelling about it for years, so I don't feel like you've earned the right to expect anything, except perhaps the directions back to PA.
----------------------------------------------------------
If felons didn't illegally vote there would be no Al Franken in congress.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
What is so special about voting, that it needs to be doable without ID when so many other routine activities require ID?

Preach it, brutha!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Of course you don't see anything. Millions of opportunities for voter fraud couldn't possibly lead to voter fraud.

I saw your post for what it was - an attempt to deflect the conversation. If you see inaccurate voter registrations as an opportunity for voter fraud, why not correct the registration process?




You want me to prove the exact amount of voter fraud, while you claim that any attempts to ensure that only legal voters can be allowed to vote are disenfranchising and racist.

I guess this means you can't find a reputable study that contradicts the information I provided. Not too much of a surprise.



You will stand in the way of anything that would actually make the vote fair and honest, because you support stealing elections.

The voting process is fair and honest.



You and the rest of the left lie every time you open your mouths, from Kerry's yacht to Benghazi to IRS to DOJ to Trayvon to Corzine to the cost of Obamacare to whatever issue comes up.

Wow! And I thought your last post didn't stay on topic - you know - voter fraud? It's funny - you seem to find disenfranchising people from their right to vote as justified -BUT- disenfranchising people from their right to guns is despicable?

Let me know when you something more than your unsubstantiated opinion on voter fraud to offer. Until then ...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I think expecting something like the 0bama Admediastration to police elections basically makes re-election moot. 'What do you know, that name is almost the same as this guy, so that's ANOTHER Republican that doesn't get to vote! And the Democrat isn't quite at room-temperature, so I'm sure we can get their next-of-kin to fill out the absentee ballot... aw, heck, we'll just check the box for them...'

OK, now I see that I can put this thread on ignore. We're not talking about fair and properly run elections, we're bashing Dems, with extra Obama. I can draw no other conclusion when I see I'm dealing with someone who doesn't even acknowledge who administers elections in the US.

Bye now.

Phil
Rule Your Retirement Home Fool
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
From John Mauldin:

This week’s Outside the Box is guaranteed to upset you. It is about Medicare fraud. Warning: it was written by a very conservative analyst and is “pro” the Ryan plan. I want you to read it not because I am trying to get you to support the Ryan plan but to get a handle on the size of Medicare and Medicaid fraud and just how easy it is to perpetrate. There may well be better ways than the Ryan plan as advocated here, but something must be done. Want to cut spending by $1 trillion in ten years? Eliminate the fraud. If American Express can hold fraud to 0.3%, maybe we should outsource our Medicare fraud detection to them. I say that only slightly tongue in cheek. This outraged me. I knew it was bad, but I had no idea… The piece is short, but it will strike a nerve, I bet.

Entitlement Bandits
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/271006/entitlement-ba...

In Brooklyn, a dentist billed taxpayers for nearly 1,000 procedures in a single day. A Houston doctor with a criminal record took her Medicare billings from zero to $11.6 million in one year; federal agents shut down her clinic but did not charge her with a crime. A high-school dropout, armed with only a laptop computer, submitted more than 140,000 bogus Medicare claims, collecting $105 million. A health plan settled a Medicaid-fraud case in Florida for $138 million. The giant hospital chain Columbia/HCA paid $1.7 billion in fines and pled guilty to more than a dozen felonies related to bribing doctors to help it tap Medicare funds and exaggerating the amount of care delivered to Medicare patients. In New York, Medicaid spending on the human-growth hormone Serostim leapt from $7 million to $50 million in 2001; but it turned out that drug traffickers were getting the drug prescribed as a treatment for AIDS wasting syndrome, then selling it to bodybuilders. And a study of ten states uncovered $27 million in Medicare payments to dead patients.

These anecdotes barely scratch the surface. Judging by official estimates, Medicare and Medicaid lose at least $87 billion per year to fraudulent and otherwise improper payments, and about 10.5 percent of Medicare spending and 8.4 percent of Medicaid spending was improper in 2009. Fraud experts say the official numbers are too low. “Loss rates due to fraud and abuse could be 10 percent, or 20 percent, or even 30 percent in some segments,” explained Malcolm Sparrow, a mathematician, Harvard professor, and former police inspector, in congressional testimony. “The overpayment-rate studies the government has relied on . . . have been sadly lacking in rigor, and have therefore produced comfortingly low and quite misleading estimates.” In 2005, the New York Times reported that “James Mehmet, who retired in 2001 as chief state investigator of Medicaid fraud and abuse in New York City, said he and his colleagues believed that at least 10 percent of state Medicaid dollars were spent on fraudulent claims, while 20 or 30 percent more were siphoned off by what they termed abuse, meaning unnecessary spending that might not be criminal.” And even these experts ignore other, perfectly legal ways of exploiting Medicare and Medicaid, such as when a senior hides and otherwise adjusts his finances so as to appear eligible for Medicaid, or when a state abuses the fact that the federal government matches state Medicaid outlays.

Government watchdogs are well aware of the problem. Every year since 1990, the U.S. Government Accountability Office has released a list of federal programs it considers at a high risk for fraud. Medicare appeared on the very first list and has remained there for 22 straight years. Medicaid assumed its perch eight years ago.

How can there possibly be so much fraud in Medicare and Medicaid that even the “comfortingly low” estimates have ten zeros? How can this much fraud persist decade after decade? How can it be that no one has even tried to measure the problem accurately, much less take it seriously? The answers are in the nature of the beast. Medicare and Medicaid, the two great pillars of Pres. Lyndon Johnson’s “Great Society” agenda, are monuments to the left-wing ideals of coerced charity and centralized economic planning. The staggering levels of fraud in these programs can be explained by the fact that the politicians, bureaucrats, patients, and health-care providers who administer and participate in them are spending other people’s money — and nobody spends other people’s money as carefully as he spends his own. What’s more, Medicare and Medicaid are spending other people’s money in vast quantities. Medicare, for example, is the largest purchaser of medical goods and services in the world. It will spend $572 billion in 2011. Each year, it pays 1.2 billion claims to 1.2 million health-care providers on behalf of 47 million enrollees.

*****

Why do you think election fraud is "hyperbole?"
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 10
Why do you think election fraud is "hyperbole?"

_________________________________
Well, were I to guess, I would say because he is a liberal and all argument that does not support their agenda is hyperbole

The whole problem with not being able to determine election fraud, is that the system is just so easy to scam, that catching anyone, in particular when the folks running they system really do not appear to want to, is almost impossible.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 6
<Someone who wants to vote fraudulently can just vote absentee. I think the best place to attack it is registration.>


That may be.

In the last election I was bothered by posted results from many local districts that showed Obama receiving 100% of the votes cast in the district. What really bothered me was some of the districts showing that 100% of registered voters cast their votes. Nobody had to work overtime, was sick, was out of town without having an absentee ballot, or was otherwise occupied with an activity that had nothing to do with voting. 60% turnouts are considered heavy. 100% is simply unheard of outside of 2828's hometown.

Back in the day Joe Stalin famously said whats important is not who votes. Let everyone vote. What matters is who counts the votes.

100% turnouts and 100% lockstep voting suggests that something smells a least a little bit. I remember Sergio Aragones and his "drawn out drama's in the Mad magazine of my youth. He showed an election being held in a generic latin american country. There was a long line of voters on the "Vote Si" line. There wasn't a single voter on the "vote No" line. However there were several military guys standing on the Vote No line with machine guns in their hands.

I know Chicago has long been known as a place where the 100% of registered voters number has been exceeded, often by more voters than can be found in the cemetaries. This usually gets brought up when one is trying to determine if Illinois. Louisiana or New Jersey is the most flagrantly corrupt place in the country. Depending on the individual catagory, each place has established its top ranking for things that do not smell right.

I just feel that there should be some process that most can agree on that can minimize the excesses and the blatant irregularities that occur far too often in many of our elections. I don't care what orgainzation one belongs to, there is never going to be 100% agreement or even 100% participation in any vote, especially as your numbers get larger. It just defies human nature.


BG
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
I just feel that there should be some process that most can agree on that can minimize the excesses and the blatant irregularities that occur far too often in many of our elections. I don't care what orgainzation one belongs to, there is never going to be 100% agreement or even 100% participation in any vote, especially as your numbers get larger. It just defies human nature.

Yep, and if you try to rein in any of the corruption, you'll be called a racist who only wants to disenfranchise minorities.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
warrl,

What is so special about voting, that it needs to be doable without ID when so many other routine activities require ID?

Largely, that would be the 24th amendment. It makes a bit more sense if you ask, why is it OK to require a permit and fee to own a gun, but not a low-cost ID for voting? The reason is, the 24th amendment specifically forbids "any poll tax or other tax" for voting.

Now, perhaps that doesn't apply if the ID is completely and totally free of any charge of any sort (whether monetary or otherwise). But it is what is "special about voting".

Phil
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Now, perhaps that doesn't apply if the ID is completely and totally free of any charge of any sort (whether monetary or otherwise). But it is what is "special about voting".

And the Second Amendment uses the words "shall be infringed," yet look at what we have. So what's your point?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
"shall NOT be infringed." My brain operates faster than my fingers.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
warrl,

One issue is that people don't have GUIDs. So matching up a death certificate with a voter registration (or anything else) is tricky and not 100% reliable.

People actually do have GUIDs... just not all people. In California, the process of getting a GUID is called "Live Scan". Anyone who works in certain occupations has to go to a Live Scan location and present ID and be fingerprinted. Most everyone who is arrested is Live Scanned.

The DOJ/FBI claims that the fingerprints so collected are unique to each individual, and they issue a unique identifier to each person Live Scanned (or come up with the identifier that was previously issued when that person was Live Scanned before).

So, basically, if you're ever arrested for anything non-trivial, you have a GUID. And if you're ever arrested again, you can claim whatever name you like and the DOJ is going to identify you as the person you were at your previous arrest. Whether they use this system to identify deceased persons, I don't know (although clearly they don't if any of the fingers are missing!).

Now I suspect that if you had proof that there are two people who Live Scan to the same fingerprint data, you would just mysteriously disappear. So I'm pretty sure they really are unique.

Phil
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Largely, that would be the 24th amendment. It makes a bit more sense if you ask, why is it OK to require a permit and fee to own a gun, but not a low-cost ID for voting? The reason is, the 24th amendment specifically forbids "any poll tax or other tax" for voting.

Now, perhaps that doesn't apply if the ID is completely and totally free of any charge of any sort (whether monetary or otherwise). But it is what is "special about voting".


We've been down that road. Even stipulating completely free IDs is not good enough for libs, because they want to keep the door wide open for vote fraud. I wonder why that is.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
It is a fairly unbelievable scenario, so many refuse to believe how bad they have actually become, but they have. They are as bad as they appear for the appearance, is what they are actually really truly doing!

The liberal response to being caught in a lie is to lie more, and faster. They hope that some of the BS will stick. For LIV's, it actually works some of the time.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
What is so special about voting, that it needs to be doable without ID when so many other routine activities require ID?
LBJ said it best...

But about this there can and should be no argument. Every American citizen must have an equal right to vote. There is no reason which can excuse the denial of that right. There is no duty which weighs more heavily on us than the duty we have to ensure that right.


LBJ believed, as do I, that democracy demands that everyone get a say in the government. Every right, in a democracy, flows from the right to vote. You may not think that having an ID is difficult, for you it probably is not. What about for the 20 year old that lives in the inner city, does not drive, and is poor? Should he be denied his voting rights so that phantom voter fraud is stopped? It is pretty simple, the states that are passing voter ID laws are not doing it to prevent fraud, they are doing it to suppress the vote of truly poor people.

Charles
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
LBJ believed, as do I, that democracy demands that everyone get a say in the government. Every right, in a democracy, flows from the right to vote. You may not think that having an ID is difficult, for you it probably is not. What about for the 20 year old that lives in the inner city, does not drive, and is poor? Should he be denied his voting rights so that phantom voter fraud is stopped?
_______________________________

No he shouldn't and he should not be denied a job either.

He can't get one without the ID he would need to qualify to vote.

Please stop the nonsense, this is embarrassing and silly, try better lies, I am sure there are sites that can give you better garbage than this stuff.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Even stipulating completely free IDs is not good enough for libs, because they want to keep the door wide open for vote fraud.

That's how it appears to me. Otherwise, why wouldn't both parties want fair and accurate elections?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
The liberal response to being caught in a lie is to lie more, and faster. They hope that some of the BS will stick. For LIV's, it actually works some of the time.

Rick Santelli on how easy it is to lob one right over the heads of most Americans.

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?play=1&video=3000181940

RS: I'd like to welcome a very special guest. I love wednesdays and I love reading Holman Jenkins Jr.'s column in the Journal every Wednesday. Thanks for taking the time to be our guest.

HJ: My pleasure. Great to be with you.

RS: Thelma and Louise, taking that last shot, boom. Are the biggest economies of the world delusional, Holman? Are they looking at the fact that whether it's Japan, Europe, U.S., to the lesser extent China, thinking that if they use the market and interest rates as little toys to fix things or make things better, if they fail nobody can take our place. That seems to be the logic I see. How do you see it?

HJ: Yeah, I see it the same way. Governments everywhere have accumulated 50 years of excesses, high taxes, high regulation, retirement and medical systems. They can't sustain themselves, and they know they've got to fix this problem, but instead the last -- since the crisis, basically they are relying on central bank to somehow patch things over by printing money, and it's not working. I don't think that people fail to understand what needs to be done but the political cost of doing it for any given politician at any given moment is too high, so let's just hand it off to Ben Bernanke, he'll take care of things for a while by printing some bucks.

RS: Bernanke, of course, is not only going to give the speech later on today, the minutes of the last Fed meeting come out, Holman. You now, listen...Princeton professor, super smart guys, but in the end let's keep it simple. He has calibrated our economy to basically run the carburetor at low interest, low interest rates is the calibration. What makes him think recalibrating is going to be easier or even work? Are we going to be able to sunset some of these post-crisis programs, specifically leading to low interest rates and high stock prices?

HJ: That's the $64 trillion question. I mean, it's amazing. you know, for 20 years the independent central bank was the icon. It was the altar we worshipped at. Countries even wrote central bank defense into law. That went out window so quickly in 2008 which makes you think it was an illusion and now we have all these policies meant to keep goosing this economy we refuse to reform, and it's hard to see how he ends it. Of course he wants to, wants to get back to the position where the central bank controls the value of the dollar and preserves its purchasing value, but he can never get back there. He's got to fill in for all the fiscal policies and regulatory policies that governments won't adopt. So I don't see how he's getting out of it. He's sending a signal, yes, please give me a way out, but I don't actually see it happening.

RS: Final question in the last few seconds. When i talk to people outside of what I do... friends, relatives... they hardly know who Ben Bernanke is. Do you think a big part of this problem is that the general public can't keep up with complicated topics? Is this something that -- that has the ability to change any time soon?

HJ: I don't know. I think I'd worry more when everybody knows who Ben Bernanke is because that's when things are really hitting the fan. Most people, thank God, and have lives that are more interesting to them than the financial news and still are engaged with their families, their jobs, their careers, their projects. The time to worry is when everyone knows who Ben Bernanke is and praying somehow that he can rescue them from a situation he can't rescue them from.

RS: Holman, thanks for taking the time to be the guest today and I'll look forward as usual to every Wednesday to reading your column.

HJ: Great to be with you. Thanks so much for having me.

RS: Carl, Kelly, back to you.


And so it goes.

http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/z/handsome-black-boy-child-bagg...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
What about for the 20 year old that lives in the inner city, does not drive, and is poor?

He's got to have ID to get an EBT card, doesn't he?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
LBJ said it best...

But about this there can and should be no argument. Every American citizen must have an equal right to vote. There is no reason which can excuse the denial of that right. There is no duty which weighs more heavily on us than the duty we have to ensure that right.


There is nothing in there which argues against requiring EVERYONE to have proper ID to vote.

In fact, it's an argument FOR voter ID: in order to insure that nobody loses their right to vote because someone else already voted in their name - and that nobody's vote loses its proper effectiveness because somebody else voted in the names of a large number of fictitious people.

What about for the 20 year old that lives in the inner city, does not drive, and is poor?

He probably already has an ID.

If not, the same organizations that are so eager to get people registered to vote and get them to the polls can help him get an ID.

Every voter-ID proposal I've seen either included provisions for free IDs, or was from a state that already had provisions for free IDs.

Should he be denied his voting rights so that phantom voter fraud is stopped?

Again with the "phantom" stuff? Which is it: are you that dishonest, or that oblivious?

Our voting system is very carefully designed to make fraud very difficult to detect, but nonetheless people are going to prison for vote fraud.

It is pretty simple, the states that are passing voter ID laws are not doing it to prevent fraud, they are doing it to suppress the vote of truly poor people.

As evidenced by the provisions in those proposals explicitly designed to make sure the proposals would not have any such effect, and to answer any and every specific objection about how they would have that effect.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
307wolverine,

And the Second Amendment uses the words "shall not be infringed," yet look at what we have. So what's your point?

The point is, the constitution guarantees both the right to vote and the right, for example, to keep and bear arms. But for voting, it goes on to say that no fee shall be charged. For the right to keep and bear arms, it permits a fee provided that fee doesn't reach a ridiculous level (and therefore become infringement). At least that's how the Supreme Court reads it.

So that's what's "special about voting". In the Constitution, voting has a special section prohibiting any fee no matter how small. The other rights don't.

Phil
Print the post Back To Top
Advertisement