And the answer is World War II of course. We didn't delcare war on PRK (Truman), Vietnam(JFK), Grenada/Panama(RR), Iraq 1(GHWB), Afghanistan/Iraq 2 (GWB), or Libya/Yemen/Pakistan/Somolia (BHO). The only one in the list to ignore the War Powers Act (while in force) was BHO.
The Freedom of Information act was passed in 1982 (under the Reagan administration) and did have limits on what could be requested. Is that what you are talking about? The current Administrations directive to the Department of Justice to allow them to not acknowledge the existence of documents wasn't like the restrictions that were in line with FOIA in 1982/83 and this current move sounds completely different from preexisting limits.
For example, would the Administration's delays and resistance to presenting documents to Congress on Operation Gun Runner/Operation Fast and Furious be enabled by the attempted new rule? If implemented, wouldn't this completely undercut Congress's Constitutional role in oversight?
Too long to list. Please see "American History in Black and White", I think you can still get it at any of the big book sellers. Start with the damage the welfare state has done to the Black family (all demographics, actually). Examine rates of illegitimacy from 1960 to 2007 and the absence of fathers in families largely sponsored by government policy. I work with these kids and it's tough on them.
Your argument is specious in that you have presented nothing in support of your allegations.
You forgot to mention Lyndon Johnson, the Senate Majority leader who held up civil rights legislation in the 50's only to sign it in 1964 when 80% of Republicans voting 60% of Democrats provided a veto proof majority to pass it. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 would not have passed without the majority of Republicans voting for it, even though Democrats had a majority in the House and a super majority in the Senate.
One of my favorite pictures of all time is Robert Byrd in a Confederate General's uniform when he played in "Gods and Generals". It fit him well.
So the new Facebook business model is to sell your privacy and then lobby for more government favors? I think it would be a mistake for Facebook to turn into Facebook for Democrats. Competition and the "next new thing" will limit it's effectiveness and also the whole thing intensifies the "we are using you" image.
Democrat rule is the common theme of everything mentioned above. Everything that was in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 had already been passed, and then repealed starting in 1876, just after the Civil War. The Civil Rights legislation had been introduced in the 50's and held up by the man that later signed it.
Knowing a lot of doctors, researchers and scientists, I'm frankly surprised by the 15% number quoted. It seems high. Maybe if you mix the different religions together, the number rises. In some faiths, it is heretical to even question existence while in others it is simply wrong to lie.
The things that needed fixing in health care weren't addressed in Obamacare; like insurance portability across state lines and tort reform. So, doctors now go forward under government control. Private practice is dying, and doctors have all the old burdens plus a lot of new. Medicare was raided for $500Bn to fund Obamacare and the first cut, 30%, in payments to doctors start around December. Add the fact that payments haven't changed in 11 years and then add another 2% cut if the Debt Commission can't get their act together. If you look into the doctor's forums, you'll see that a serious number of them are lining up to quit. The AMA rolled over to help pass the bill and now doesn't have the respect of government or doctors (at least they agree on something). The way the bill was passed was also frightening for the future - "deemed passed". This is a Frankenstein monster.
If you can justify a war, like Libya, with reasoning that it's not war since we aren't putting boots on the ground; then this could be a really bad turn. I don't think that the Libya decision was moral, ethical, or even legal; at least without a fight at SCOTUS. Sending strike aircraft and militarized unmanned vehicles just doesn't seem to be a peaceful thing to do.
Adding this to UAV's is just automating observation. Advances in visualization made this only a matter of time. Happily, the decision to "pull the trigger" is not on automatic and will not be so any time soon. This just helps reduce eye strain of the guys that had to watch the monitors.
That was tried in the US in 1937and it didn't work out well at all. First off, the Buffet exercise is misleading. Warren Buffet earns roughly $100,000 a year in salary. The rest of his income is in long term dividends and capital gains. If you start taxing dividends and capital gains at an even higher rate, history has shown that it will dampen economic activity. Look at the boom President Clinton enjoyed when the rate was dropped to 20%. This proposal isn't talking about taxing dividends, they are talking about taxing earned income (salary). The folks most affected will be the middle class, not the wealthy; and there isn't enough money in that to satisfy the deficit anyway (President Obama's proposed relief is over 10 years and amounts to less than one year's deficit).
Our government simply spends too much vs. what the economy can actually produce. Revenue is roughly $2.2 Trillion per year (last time I looked):
If they don't have the drugs to traffic, they won't have they expensive toys any more - US Gov supplied assault and sniper rifles, gunmen, and big cars. Money fuels what would have been a local problem into a problem that could topple the government.
Seconded! I've used Gutenberg since I first heard about it as an FTP site (mid-80's?). I owe this man many thanks for the hours spent reading Dumas, Homer, Grant, Lincoln, and Augustine as well as others. Latin, German, and French teachers used his site so their kids could get access to literature for their studies. Hart made that possible. Hart was a brilliant man that made his ideas come to reality.
If labor agreements preventing layoffs and providing for expensive labor compared to the private sector are causing this, wouldn't the Post Office be better off going into default to restructure and renegotiate these agreements? A government bailout looks like a way to simply continue the problem and make it worse.
The difference you are looking for is legacy costs for UAW retirees. Note that this was largely made solvent when the government took over GM and Chrysler and took equity from bond holders, non-union retirees, and stockholders and transferred it to the union. 20,000 non-union retirees had their pension taken over by the government at a massive loss to them in benefits. So, it is possible that the legacy price of UAW labor has been transferred to non-union workers, equity holders and tax payers. It didn't go away.
Having taken seconds to do a Google lookup, here are a couple of articles that explain the situation up to the government seizure. http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2007/07/uaw-pricing-themselves-out-of-market.html offers a decent explanation about the "legacy" costs of union workers that have to be factored in to the purchase of a UAW car. http://livingeconomics.org/article.asp?docId=107 points to an article that describes how union legacy costs American car buyers for charges that Japanese car manufactures do not (as of yet) have to consider. The costs haven't gone away. There wasn't a UAW "haircut" in the takeover of GM and Chrysler.
People voluntarily enter into contracts with landlords, there is nothing that forces you to do business with one person or another. People also contract with utilities to get power, water and sewer service. While it is possible to go "off grid" for certain things, laws enacted and enforced by the government limits you on how you get to interact with your neighbors in terms of the kind of crap you get to spew. Also, cardboard boxes get cold in winter.
The US car industry problems are largely caused by the UAW (which owns just under 50% of GM). With $2000-$3000 added to the price of the average UAW built vehicle, corners get cut elsewhere. I'm buying Japanese these days.
The article had some important non-leftwing points as much as people would like to frame this as a leftwing/green/anti-military thing. Conservation can produce good results; reducing the amount of fuel needed to operate a living quarters. With mil-spec stuff, it's always trade-offs though. Weight, cost to purchase, cost to operate and durability always fit in. It's not a bad article in that regard.
If I have to buy a copy for me AND my kids to play a dumb game, we'll skip this one. My kids trade games and sell games back to raise money to buy more games. Limit the number of games that they can afford/plan and the consoles go out too.
Yeah, except that same helicopter (same day, before the 17min Collateral Murder vid) crew DIDN'T fire when children and other noncombatants were present
And that makes firing on a van full of civilians ok exactly how?
Wikileaks wasn't honest from the get-go. The video was that Wikileaks pushed what edited to present our troops in the worst possible way. Also, what dummy goes out and fires at US troops and then jumps into a van with his kids? Is this a Darwin Award moment? The implication that our troops should somehow have had X-Ray vision is interesting.....
Slashdot Mirror
And the answer is World War II of course. We didn't delcare war on PRK (Truman), Vietnam(JFK), Grenada/Panama(RR), Iraq 1(GHWB), Afghanistan/Iraq 2 (GWB), or Libya/Yemen/Pakistan/Somolia (BHO). The only one in the list to ignore the War Powers Act (while in force) was BHO.
The Freedom of Information act was passed in 1982 (under the Reagan administration) and did have limits on what could be requested. Is that what you are talking about? The current Administrations directive to the Department of Justice to allow them to not acknowledge the existence of documents wasn't like the restrictions that were in line with FOIA in 1982/83 and this current move sounds completely different from preexisting limits.
For example, would the Administration's delays and resistance to presenting documents to Congress on Operation Gun Runner/Operation Fast and Furious be enabled by the attempted new rule? If implemented, wouldn't this completely undercut Congress's Constitutional role in oversight?
Too long to list. Please see "American History in Black and White", I think you can still get it at any of the big book sellers. Start with the damage the welfare state has done to the Black family (all demographics, actually). Examine rates of illegitimacy from 1960 to 2007 and the absence of fathers in families largely sponsored by government policy. I work with these kids and it's tough on them.
Your argument is specious in that you have presented nothing in support of your allegations.
You forgot to mention Lyndon Johnson, the Senate Majority leader who held up civil rights legislation in the 50's only to sign it in 1964 when 80% of Republicans voting 60% of Democrats provided a veto proof majority to pass it. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 would not have passed without the majority of Republicans voting for it, even though Democrats had a majority in the House and a super majority in the Senate.
One of my favorite pictures of all time is Robert Byrd in a Confederate General's uniform when he played in "Gods and Generals". It fit him well.
So the new Facebook business model is to sell your privacy and then lobby for more government favors? I think it would be a mistake for Facebook to turn into Facebook for Democrats. Competition and the "next new thing" will limit it's effectiveness and also the whole thing intensifies the "we are using you" image.
For cheap: take the shell off, break the platters & play with the magnets. Otherwise, just take a drill to them.
Democrat rule is the common theme of everything mentioned above. Everything that was in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 had already been passed, and then repealed starting in 1876, just after the Civil War. The Civil Rights legislation had been introduced in the 50's and held up by the man that later signed it.
Knowing a lot of doctors, researchers and scientists, I'm frankly surprised by the 15% number quoted. It seems high. Maybe if you mix the different religions together, the number rises. In some faiths, it is heretical to even question existence while in others it is simply wrong to lie.
The things that needed fixing in health care weren't addressed in Obamacare; like insurance portability across state lines and tort reform. So, doctors now go forward under government control. Private practice is dying, and doctors have all the old burdens plus a lot of new. Medicare was raided for $500Bn to fund Obamacare and the first cut, 30%, in payments to doctors start around December. Add the fact that payments haven't changed in 11 years and then add another 2% cut if the Debt Commission can't get their act together. If you look into the doctor's forums, you'll see that a serious number of them are lining up to quit. The AMA rolled over to help pass the bill and now doesn't have the respect of government or doctors (at least they agree on something). The way the bill was passed was also frightening for the future - "deemed passed". This is a Frankenstein monster.
If you can justify a war, like Libya, with reasoning that it's not war since we aren't putting boots on the ground; then this could be a really bad turn. I don't think that the Libya decision was moral, ethical, or even legal; at least without a fight at SCOTUS. Sending strike aircraft and militarized unmanned vehicles just doesn't seem to be a peaceful thing to do.
Adding this to UAV's is just automating observation. Advances in visualization made this only a matter of time. Happily, the decision to "pull the trigger" is not on automatic and will not be so any time soon. This just helps reduce eye strain of the guys that had to watch the monitors.
That was tried in the US in 1937and it didn't work out well at all. First off, the Buffet exercise is misleading. Warren Buffet earns roughly $100,000 a year in salary. The rest of his income is in long term dividends and capital gains. If you start taxing dividends and capital gains at an even higher rate, history has shown that it will dampen economic activity. Look at the boom President Clinton enjoyed when the rate was dropped to 20%. This proposal isn't talking about taxing dividends, they are talking about taxing earned income (salary). The folks most affected will be the middle class, not the wealthy; and there isn't enough money in that to satisfy the deficit anyway (President Obama's proposed relief is over 10 years and amounts to less than one year's deficit).
Our government simply spends too much vs. what the economy can actually produce. Revenue is roughly $2.2 Trillion per year (last time I looked):
Federal Budget
2008 - $2.9 Trillion
2009 - $3.1 Trillion
2010 - $3.55 Trillion
2011 - $3.82 Trillion
If they don't have the drugs to traffic, they won't have they expensive toys any more - US Gov supplied assault and sniper rifles, gunmen, and big cars. Money fuels what would have been a local problem into a problem that could topple the government.
Seconded! I've used Gutenberg since I first heard about it as an FTP site (mid-80's?). I owe this man many thanks for the hours spent reading Dumas, Homer, Grant, Lincoln, and Augustine as well as others. Latin, German, and French teachers used his site so their kids could get access to literature for their studies. Hart made that possible. Hart was a brilliant man that made his ideas come to reality.
Thanks for everything.
If labor agreements preventing layoffs and providing for expensive labor compared to the private sector are causing this, wouldn't the Post Office be better off going into default to restructure and renegotiate these agreements? A government bailout looks like a way to simply continue the problem and make it worse.
The difference you are looking for is legacy costs for UAW retirees. Note that this was largely made solvent when the government took over GM and Chrysler and took equity from bond holders, non-union retirees, and stockholders and transferred it to the union. 20,000 non-union retirees had their pension taken over by the government at a massive loss to them in benefits. So, it is possible that the legacy price of UAW labor has been transferred to non-union workers, equity holders and tax payers. It didn't go away.
Having taken seconds to do a Google lookup, here are a couple of articles that explain the situation up to the government seizure. http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2007/07/uaw-pricing-themselves-out-of-market.html offers a decent explanation about the "legacy" costs of union workers that have to be factored in to the purchase of a UAW car. http://livingeconomics.org/article.asp?docId=107 points to an article that describes how union legacy costs American car buyers for charges that Japanese car manufactures do not (as of yet) have to consider. The costs haven't gone away. There wasn't a UAW "haircut" in the takeover of GM and Chrysler.
Are you happy now? You made me use Google today.
People voluntarily enter into contracts with landlords, there is nothing that forces you to do business with one person or another. People also contract with utilities to get power, water and sewer service. While it is possible to go "off grid" for certain things, laws enacted and enforced by the government limits you on how you get to interact with your neighbors in terms of the kind of crap you get to spew. Also, cardboard boxes get cold in winter. The US car industry problems are largely caused by the UAW (which owns just under 50% of GM). With $2000-$3000 added to the price of the average UAW built vehicle, corners get cut elsewhere. I'm buying Japanese these days. The article had some important non-leftwing points as much as people would like to frame this as a leftwing/green/anti-military thing. Conservation can produce good results; reducing the amount of fuel needed to operate a living quarters. With mil-spec stuff, it's always trade-offs though. Weight, cost to purchase, cost to operate and durability always fit in. It's not a bad article in that regard.
If I have to buy a copy for me AND my kids to play a dumb game, we'll skip this one. My kids trade games and sell games back to raise money to buy more games. Limit the number of games that they can afford/plan and the consoles go out too.
I want the names of the folks Sony is going to fire, starting with executives.
Deeds count, not marketing slogans.
Yeah, except that same helicopter (same day, before the 17min Collateral Murder vid) crew DIDN'T fire when children and other noncombatants were present
And that makes firing on a van full of civilians ok exactly how?
Wikileaks wasn't honest from the get-go. The video was that Wikileaks pushed what edited to present our troops in the worst possible way. Also, what dummy goes out and fires at US troops and then jumps into a van with his kids? Is this a Darwin Award moment? The implication that our troops should somehow have had X-Ray vision is interesting.....