davej wrote:
[quote]SKWEARpeg wrote:
davej wrote:
Keep in mind we .................... as a country.

I guess there are no real answers to who/how to elect individuals into office and who/how to appoint into the supreme court justice positions. There is not a human built that will satisfy all. As far as any politician or Supreme court justice there will be those that love them and those that hate whomever takes the positions. And on both sides of the fence those that love them and those hate them will think that their position of why is that correct opinion. We are all different and our opinions differ. This is the system we have, good or flawed it is what we got. You'll never know if or who can change it for the better until they are elected and then it may be good or to late.


We are a Representative Republic. We choose those individuals we think would best represent our values and ideals, and hopefully, those who will use the Constitution as a guideline, instead of something they need to figure a way around.

Democracies are messy business. Free, open, and honest elections, are constantly under attack. It's what separates us from the Venezuela's and Cuba's in the world.. It's why so many have always challenged the viability of democracies, throughout history. The Constitution, lays down a framework. The Legislative branch, crafts laws that are supposed to fit within that frame work. The Judicial branch, scrutinizes those laws, and decides wherther or not they are Constitutional. The Executive branch, is tasked with enforcing those laws(not making them, through executive orders aimed at circumventing the Legislative branch). When any of the three over step their bounds, and or try to co-op one of the other branches, we are supposed to have a check and balance to rein them in.

So yes, there is a process by which it is supposed to happen. Rather then a mad free for all, we have developed a process of elections, where by individuals can run for office. Based on the candidates beliefs and desire for a party to help support them and give them exposure, they generally end up in one of three or four categories(sometimes many more then that. We'll often have a dozen or more running for POTUS, but 97% of voters never realize that), as far as parties go. This is supposed to help the voters make their decisions based on the history of the party, and how the party has acted. The parties themselves, aren't part of the Constitution. They are just vehicles to an end. This is why a flaming liberal like Michael Bloomberg, ran as a Republican in NYC. Look what didn't happen to Lincoln Chaffee, who decided he could run as a moderate democrat, instead of a liberal republican.

When the parties themselves deviate from a particular path, that has made that parties base see them as attractive, then the voters will migrate away to another option. Or, simply stay home. This is why there are always splits in parties, and constantly a struggle for party unity.

In a nut shell, the party in power in the house and Senate, has the greatest amount of control. However, as we've seen with Obama, when a POTUS wants something bad enough, he can force his will, through veto, or by making things miserable in certain places by how he does and or doesn't enforce laws(Think border enforcement), and by how he spends the funds allocated by Congress. This is how Obama has basically hog tied the current Congress. If the House and Senate aren't willing to work with him, he can shut down the government.
It's interesting how and who gets blamed, when something like this happens. The casual observer, never studies the tug of war behind the curtain. They never quite fully grasp the pain, that certain politicians are willing to foist upon the people, to get what they want(closing National Parks and Monuments, and diverting funds towards pet projects, and way from others).
When the MSM carries the water for a particular party, it even becomes more convoluted. Notice how its always been the mean republicans who shut down the government, never the Presidents, who refuse to rein in the spending they want. There is a story about Solomon trying to sort out the mother of a child. Only by threatening to destroy the child, was he able to determine who the real mother was. She was willing to let the other woman have it, rather then see the child destroyed. Think about fundamentally changing America here. The dems and Obama, have been willing to do pretty much anything, regardless of consequence(which are far ranging), to get what they want, re control. Even act completely unilaterally, as in the ACA.

When both parties jump the shark, as far as tax and spending goes, and become almost mirrored images of each other, then the voter has to make a choice. Do I just want a particular party to win, or do I want to try and figure out if there is a better option out there. Votes reinforce direction. When a party slips to far away from the base, then it will and does suffer. If that part of the base that is disenfranchised, is small and insignificant, then no biggie. If they lose a major portion, then they will get a shellaching at the polls. How much of Trumps support, as well as the results of the last two midterms, comes from the dems path over the last 8 years. Thanks to Boehner and Mcconnell, many voters are looking for an alternative. There is disillusionment in both parties. Trump has found away to capitalise on the angst.

If you don't seek to be personally reponsible for yourself, and let the government do more and more stuff you should be doing for yourself, the government, will gain more and more control. They will tell you what and how to do things. If enough people decide they support higher taxes, but many of those who want it, aren't contributing, it creates friction. All of a sudden some bureaucrat, is deciding how many motorcycles you should have, what kind of gas you should put in them, and how much money you really need, versus how much they should take from you, to reward loyalty to a particular party.....not, to the Constitution

As a Representative Republic, we have the ability to tailor our government the way we think it should be, as long as it goes hand in hand, with the Constitution. When the Legislative branch abstains from making decisions so as not to squander their political capital, and instead, allows legislation from the bench, our Constitution suffers.
We end up not with a "will of the people", but instead, the opinions of 5 of 9 individuals, who were appointed and approved by the POTUS, and the Senate. If those 5 decide they can see something in the Constitution, that allows, or doesn't allow, or that the Constitution doesn't address, then they can try and shoe horn something in, and often do. Hence, the difference between strict Constitutionalist, and Progressive Liberal Judges. The further away from the Constitution we get, the more and more it turns into what somebodies opinion is, at this particular time. Now we've moved away from The Rule of Law, and closer to a chaotic democracy chasing populist movements, and the latest wild hair. The very thing our sytem was supposed to prevent.

As far as knowing about those who we will elect, what is their track record?
If people had chosen to scrutinize Obama closely, and some did, they would know what he has done/said, is the very thing(s) he'd been doing and saying, before being elected to POTUS. He didn't change into something different. He's always considered the US, to be screwed up. He's always thought capitalism and free markets were the the problem, and socialism and more government control the solution. He's always sought out division as a means to an end. He's always been a petty small minded dictator at heart.

I don't think Trump is going to change either, when you get past the lip service.
As with Obama, it's the unscripted things he says, when he thinks he's being smart and intuitive, that tell the tale. It's his willingness to let others pick up the tab, for ideas he's had that went south. It's his willingness over the years, to contribute large amounts of money, to the very type of people, he says he's not. I see those contributions as calculated, not just the cost of doing business. He was rewarding people who were taking the country in a particular direction. He was rewarding people who's ideas, supported abortion, limits on the second amendment, and an ever bigger government with more and more control. Now all of a sudden, The Donald and a whole lot of other democrats, aren't happy. Its everything they ever wanted. We didn't get where we are, overnight. Why reward bad behavior?

We are were we are, because people have chosen the more Liberal path, and the willingness to soak the rich and let the government redistribute wealth. They wanted the government to take more and more responsibility. We're where we are, because people think "wait and see what happens", is a strategy, and more government is the answer. As Cromwell figured out, people want a King. Go figure.

I've voted R my whole life, because it was the party with the most Conservative values. I've held my nose a few times, but the R, IMHO, was always preferrable to the other choices. Think Bush versus Algore, and Bush versus Kerry. I voted Bush versus Clinton, also. Remember "Read my lips".
Not so now. I can't tell the difference.

SKWEARpeg, you, are killing me, with all, those, commas (,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,) STOP, IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Republican Priorities.

NEWS Instead of Helping Flint, Michigan Republicans Just Passed a Bill That Makes Anal Sex Illegal

Norske wrote:
Republican Priorities.

NEWS Instead of Helping Flint, Michigan Republicans Just Passed a Bill That Makes Anal Sex Illegal

See now the thing nobody is saying about Flint is that they are doing something and have been doing things to get thru this for awhile now. What they want just can't be done overnight. They want a whole new water infrastructure paid for by whomever they can get to pay for it besides themselves. Not that I don't think the Rep Gov Ricky boy is somewhat responsible for switching to a different water plant than they had been using causing dirty water issues because I do think he has some blame coming there. But the water lines under the ground going to the houses and thru that city have been there since the 50's and earlier. They were there long before they switched to water from the flint river when this whole thing started. In fact the citizens of flint wanted cheaper water rates than Detroit water dept would give so here Ya go. Watch whatcha wish for. This is now the city's way out of replacing all those old pipes on their dime now we will all pay in the end.

According to that article that bill was attached to a animal rights bill. Maybe someone got caught screwing someone's prettiest sheep. And the other bill in place didn't cover that situation.

Father Pobasturd wrote:
SKWEARpeg, you, are killing me, with all, those, commas (,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,) STOP, IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I'm sorry. Puncuation was never my forte. I always tried to get there early, and often.

davej wrote:
Norske wrote:
Republican Priorities.

NEWS Instead of Helping Flint, Michigan Republicans Just Passed a Bill That Makes Anal Sex Illegal

See now the thing nobody is saying about Flint is that they are doing something and have been doing things to get thru this for awhile now. What they want just can't be done overnight. They want a whole new water infrastructure paid for by whomever they can get to pay for it besides themselves. Not that I don't think the Rep Gov Ricky boy is somewhat responsible for switching to a different water plant than they had been using causing dirty water issues because I do think he has some blame coming there. But the water lines under the ground going to the houses and thru that city have been there since the 50's and earlier. They were there long before they switched to water from the flint river when this whole thing started. In fact the citizens of flint wanted cheaper water rates than Detroit water dept would give so here Ya go. Watch whatcha wish for. This is now the city's way out of replacing all those old pipes on their dime now we will all pay in the end.

According to that article that bill was attached to a animal rights bill. Maybe someone got caught screwing someone's prettiest sheep. And the other bill in place didn't cover that situation.


Look into who made the decision at the local level, to stop using the Detroit source, while the new pipeline was being constructed. This entire story, was clear as a bell, the first day I read about it months ago. A local writer fleshed it out very well, with names etc.. Things I wish I would have saved. They were attempting to get the old system going to create jobs, and skipped right over the problems.
It took about 3 days for the blame game to get going, as soon as everybody saw it was going prime time. It's a classic example of the story morphing and changing to suit the desires of the story teller.

The other thing interesting here, is we've gone from there being limits on lead levels, to all of a sudden any lead is unacceptable in conversation. Anybody who says any level is acceptable, is now demonized in the media. "OH MY GAWD" "HOW DARE YOU!!"

I took my first Lead Removal class, re for demolition/disposal etc, back in 1989. The deal at the time, was "lead was building up in the bodies of the children, and making them stupid". They immediately set blood lead levels, at something in the region of 40ug/dl. They noticed that it was necessary to use chelates to reduce the levels, if it was 45, or above. 45 or above, and the lead was being retained in the childrens bodies. The body can process lead, unless it reaches a certain concenteration, and then it is stored in the bones. Thus, the chelation therapy, and the issue with kids, because they're pint sized systems.

Fast forward a few years into the 90's. It was going to be another asbestos hairy scary pants on fire job creator, but. "For the children" who would say "wait minute?".
When they started testing the kids, they weren't getting practically any hits, near or above the 40ug/dl blood test action point. So, instead of saying "maybe they're stupid because of the social/education environments", it has to be the lead still. So, they lowerd the permissible levels. They've done this about three times now, and they're down to 5ug/dl, as a standard, and still nobody wants to look at social/education nightmares, as the problem.

Anybody remember one of BJClinton's last moves on his way out the door, of lowering the allowable limits of arsenic in drinking water. All of a sudden, levels that had been fine and causing no problems for years, were deemed unacceptable.

Doncha just love it? Politics takes precedence over both safety... and, common sense!

When I found out Trump was running I went right out and changed my 45 year affiliation of Democrat to Republican just so I could vote for Trump in the Pennsylvania primary's. I want him to win because he is the last hope for the US to get back on a winning track. If you vote anything else your helping the US commit the suicide they have been trying to do for a long time now. You seen all the dirty tactics that they have tried so far to keep hm from getting in and he took them by storm. If we left them alone and keep undermining the USA we would surely be speaking a different language here in the next few years. Already chaps my butt that you have to push a button to hear your own language instead of some foreign one. It should be press 1 for Spanish if you want that. The last guy that is still in office got a lot of golfing in and trips to Hawaii in the last 8 years.

Curt wrote:
Well he can't be bought and he says what he thinks regardless so I like it. Maybe he will clean out some of the money sucking trash out of the government and get us back where we should be. Only thing is some one will try and kill him for sure. No one got Obama yet...