I dont know what tribes live near you, but here in michigan the tradition is to open a casino and throw monkeys on the backs of the stupid white man yet again.
No- that's just the way to get money for conservation efforts because the tribes are forced to work within a free market framework.
Most indian tribes are so diluted and tainted by Americanism that they care more about the great Almighty Dollar than living in harmony with the land anymore.
Or so it appears- to get the right to live in harmony with the land one actually needs a lot of cash nowadays. It's amazing what having your neighbors believing that they can actually *own* land will do to your conservation budget.
but IP stands for Intellectual Property instead- totally ignoring the natural resource crisis in the lack of IP addresses! Won't somebody think about the poor little robots?
-------------
The previous message is endorsed by Mom's Old Fashioned Robot Factory:-)
Um, yes. Why do you seem to be construing his comments as anti-Native American? Why is his observation that Native Americans (or American Indian, choose your PC term) aren't "immigrants or the children of immigrants" somehow sad? (It is perhaps inaccurate, in that the distant ancestors of Native peoples did come here from somewhere else.)
I happen to be a bit of a nativist- I actually believe that people born here *should* have more rights than people who come here, if nothing else than the tradition of conservation. This to me is what separates great American families from the European nobility; a tie to the land, in a symbiotic relationship with the land. It's fine to be a naturalized citizen- but you shouldn't expect your adopted country to automatically elect you to office until you at least learn the language better than Arnold has. It bugs me that millions of citizens get shoved out of work yearly to make room for immigrants; it discourages me that any pro-environmental group of any sort would support the excessive population growth that immigration has caused since the borders were thrown open in 1965. It especially discourages me because the *only* strategy in the war on terror that is likely to work in the long run is national isolationism. And I just don't see any first generation immigrant voting for that.
Our country is made up of immigrants. Your place of birth should not disqualify someone from serving as president or vice president.
We have to remember that we are all immigrants or the children of immigrants, with, of course, the exception of the Native people of this continent.
Which is sad, because so many Native American Tribes support many of the goals of the Green Party- living with the land and on the land, not changing the land, is a traiditon in many Native American religions- and the Green Party would do well to remember that TRADIDITON is supported by CULTURE and WHERE YOU GREW UP. Those who grow up in an area are far more likely to be environmentally aware- especially of population growth related problems- than those who came from elsewhere.
Oh, I don't know, how about the former being legal and common practice then and the later being illegal now? I mean just the reference of a "non-OSHA approved" building tells you something is much better today than 2 centuries ago.
When the punishment is only a fine, it's not illegal, it's a valid business decision based on costs and benefits. But you're right to a certain extent- at least there's a government oversight committee telling us which businesses should be charged more to do business.
What "town" do you live in? The most expensive town in the USA is White Plains, where $700/month will rent you a 15x10 walk-in closet. I could house 4 slaves in that space, and I'm not especially brutal.
Portland, OR, a similar closet will cost you $600/month here.
Let's crunch those numbers, shall we? $912.50x4=$3650 for your budget for four slaves. $700x12 means you'll spend $8400 in RENT alone. So where I'm wrong in saying it isn't one month's rent- it ain't four slaves worth on your budget either. So let's do a real budget. $8400/year for rent. Say $25/month for food per slave, that's an additional $1200/year for food for our four slaves. I'll grant you that you can "get by" with $80 worth of clothing, IF the weather isn't too extreme- in most of the US though you'd have to double that for summer and winter weight uniforms, to $160/year. Thus food, clothing, and shelter ALONE are worth $9760/year (I begin to see why the poverty line is double that- at $18,000 per year for a family of four). Break it back down- $2440/year for a slave, or $6.67/day for food, clothing, and shelter alone. But that's for a REALLY stupid slave holder- one who doesn't want to see his "Herd" of slaves increase with children, one who's willing to let a $1000 investment (the price of a slave today in Sudan) go down the drain due to illness. So we add in another $1200/year for a cheap HMO. We're now back up to $3640/year. Now I don't want to pay $11,500/year to hire a free overseer to make this slave work- so other benefits are needed. Trasnportation costs an additional $20/month at today's energy prices if you use public transit. That's $240/year- we're now up to $3880/year in the US. Now taxes on all this value added stuff- you can bet the state's going to want a part of the profits from legalizing slavery, very likely an additional 50%, we're now up to $5820. Now add a family of four- what you're going to need just to keep your initial capital investment of $2000 in a male and a female slave, because eventually they're going to die and need replacing. That quadruples our cost, to $23280/year, or $63.79/day, or $3.98/hr/slave. Now remember, any service person in the United States who *may* recieve tips is only required, at minimum wage, to be paid $2.13/hr. Suddenly- slaves as servants (or even McDonald's hamburger flippers) no longer make economic sense.
But the fact that slavery still exists today contradicts you- or why do you think USA manufacturers are so happy to outsource?
Because the cost of living is so much cheaper elsewhere- but this discussion was originally talking about Lincoln freeing the slaves in the south. In the United States, so other countries are outside of the discussion.
Normal public schools are agents of the federal Congress.
Now that's the most rediculous statement I've ever heard. Public schools in Oregon are paid for by local property taxes. School Boards do the hiring. Federal Congress never enters into the decision of who to hire and who to fire.
That anecdote only undermines your position.
Only because you're predesposed to removing the free speech rights of other people just so you don't have to be tollerant of their beliefs.
No he didn't. He could decide to starve or directly kill the slave at any time. Sure, if he's economically rational, he'll want to keep some of them alive- a concern Wal-Mart shares.
Wal*Mart has no up-front investment- most of their jobs are low- or no-skill, and take about 3 minutes worth of training time. Given a federal government that works very hard at keeping the unemployment rate above 4%, it's far simpler to replace minimum wage workers than it was for a southern plantation owner to visit the slave auction.
And the ability to quit if you don't like it, and a lot fewer people beating on you with horsewhips.
That's one of the big improvements of the low-wage movement over slavery from the point of view of the owners- hiring overseers is cheaper and easier as well. Plus, Starvation, Homelessness, and Bankruptcy work far better for workplace retention than a horsewhip ever did.
False. If slavery were legal today, the daily cost would be between $0.90 (young female) and $2.50 (adult male).
Really? Then how come the poor can't survive on, gee, about 8x that ammount, requiring charity instead? I'm sorry- that figure just doesn't fit costs in the United States for basic surival needs (food, clothing, shelter, medical care). Heck- $2.50/day comes to about $912.50 annually; shelter alone in my town is more than that monthly. So no- that figure is incorrect.
I wouldn't mind a daughter- and I got the wife and son the geekyest way imaginable- computerized dating service. We'll try for a daughter next time- but first we've got to get my 16 month old son to figure out that HIS bed is the twin in the other room, not mommy and daddy's king size waterbed....
SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES. (a) AUTHORIZATION.--The President is authorized to use theArmed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessaryand appropriate in order to-- (1) defend the national security of the United States againstthe continuing threat posed by Iraq; and (2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Councilresolutions regarding Iraq. (b) PRESIDENTIALDETERMINATION.--In connection with theexercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use forcethe President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafteras may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercisingsuch authority, make available to the Speaker of the House ofRepresentatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate hisdetermination that-- (1) reliance by the United States on further diplomaticor other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequatelyprotect the national security of the United States against thecontinuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to leadto enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Councilresolutions regarding Iraq; and (2) acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistentwith the United States and other countries continuing to takethe necessary actions against international terrorist and ter-rorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, orpersons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the ter-rorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001. (c) WARPOWERSRESOLUTIONREQUIREMENTS.-- (1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION.--Consistent withsection 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congressdeclares that this section is intended to constitute specific statu-tory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of theWar Powers Resolution. (2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS.--Nothing inthis joint resolution supersedes any requirement of the WarPowers Resolution.
SEC. 4. REPORTS TO CONGRESS. (a) REPORTS.--The President shall, at least once every 60 days,submit to the Congress a report on matters relevant to this jointresolution, including actions taken pursuant to the exercise ofauthority granted in section 3 and the status of planning for effortsthat are expected to be required after such actions are completed,including those actions described in section 7 of the Iraq LiberationAct of 1998 (Public Law 105-338)PUBLIC LAW 107-243--OCT. 16, 2002LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.J. Res. 114 (S.J. Res. 45) (S.J. Res. 46):HOUSE REPORTS: No. 107-721 (Comm. on International Relations).CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 148 (2002):Oct. 8, 9, considered in House.Oct. 10, considered and passed House and Senate.WEEKLY COMPILATION OF PRESIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS, Vol. 38 (2002):Oct. 16, Presidential remarks and statement. (b) SINGLECONSOLIDATEDREPORT.--To the extent that thesubmission of any report described in subsection (a) coincides withthe submission of any other report on matters relevant to thisjoint resolution otherwise required to be submitted to Congresspursuant to the reporting requirements of the War Powers Resolu-tion (Public Law 93-148), all such reports may be submitted asa single consolidated report to the Congress. (c) RULE OFCONSTRUCTION.--To the extent that the informationrequired by section 3 of the Authorization for Use of MilitaryForce Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1) is included inthe report required by this section, such report shall be consideredas meeting the requirements of section 3 of such resolution.
Now some would say that taking the President's word for these reports being completed properly is, at best, naive. And while the reports have come through- they haven't exactly fit Section 3's requirements.
He was probably too far out of the loop, in Florida.
Given today's communications technology, there is *NO REASON* not to fit every form of transportation the President has with a rolling, 24 PDA grid of VideoConferencing PDAs hooked up by sattelite and VPN to the war room, just in case.
If by some odd chance my attempt to create a virtual political party becomes real- and time is ticking down to initial launch November 6th- this WILL be a major plank in my platform.
Any political leader who earns more than $100,000/year needs to be on call, directly, 24x7.
And even my IPAQ can play full motion video conferencing, given a big enough network connection.
True enough- though in my state, the state taxes on similar items outdistance these 2:1. It's part of the complaint that brought us to the mess Oregon is in right now- anti-tax activists, tired of the hidden taxes, reduced Orgon basically down to a one-legged stool for major taxes (no sales tax, minimal state property tax, major state income tax) and ignored the user taxes- thus the user taxes had to go up to make up the difference. Unfunded federal mandates like No Child Left Behind just make the problem worse.
Is that why the ACLU is so against the pledge of allegiance?
Seriously though- if we're trying to teach the kids tolerance for others in the culture, then shouldn't they have to learn to listen to such things, even if they don't join in?
An example: the Baptist Church down the street recently sponsored a block party. Like most Baptists, they believe in a theological concept called Once Saved Always Saved (OSAS). OSAS believers say that if you pray the sinner's prayer, you're saved. So like most events put on by OSAS, they had public prayer- in a public park- across the street from my house. I'm Catholic. I don't believe in OSAS- but I believe in constant conversion, it was just a matter of changing a few words here and there in my mind to an Act of Contrition.
All Gods are really one, when you get into comparative religion, it's just different views of the same God. The athiest material god of science is just another view of the Christian God. It'd be a good thing for children to learn to respect all Gods.
Actually we are also not supposed to have a standing army (the constitution does allow for a Navy. Were we in the first gulf war long enough for it to be illeal?
I'm not sure- but it did take more than 72 hours, which seemed to be Reagan's limit before recalling the troops.
The kind of things people demand from the fed creates a concentration of money which can not help but suck the power from the states. I could never understand why my state taxes are so much lower than the fed. I go to school in the state, the police and fire are from the state, 95% of the roads I drive on are state roads,.... (NOTE I DO NOT WANT MY STATE TAXES HIGHER so get away you wallet snatching libs)
You're obviously not in Oregon then- our state taxes are higher than the fed when you take all of them into account (actually, most states are likewise- hidden gas sales taxes pay for the roads, hidden sin taxes to pay for police and fire and medical, etc). I work for State Government- in the Department of Transportation, I know where our funding comes from.
But bear in mind the "anti-federalits" were not against the ferderal republic, they were against giving it undue power.
Right- and since the federal government has indeed gained undue power- they were RIGHT.
The Confederated Colonies before that had more freedom, as far as the people were concerned. But that was bad for the rich landowners- the small minority that wished to opress the majority.
No they are born out of the fact I have rights, not rights given to me by the government but rights that the government can *not* take away. In Germany during ww2 the majority commited aweful offences against a minority of people. The will of the majority must *never* interfere with our inalienable rights. The will of the majority should however be given voice when it does not do so.
I'd cry Godwin's Law, but I think I brought it on myself. I'll just point out that Nazis never were a numerical majority in Germany- people voted for them out of fear.
Quietly before kids get to the classroom *nothing* but when the kids are in the classroom she is an agent of the state.
Funny, I know of no state that requires teachers take an oath before getting a license to practice. Plus, the First Ammendment says nothing about *agents of the state*- only *Congress*.
Evidance?
Most recent one I heard about was a couple of years back- a football team in a middle school in some southern state which had a tradition of the captain of the football team (not the coach, but one of the kids) praying before every game over the loudspeaker. Until the school got sued by the ACLU, of course.
More recent actions in my home town (Portland, OR metro area) have included Boy Scouts wearing their uniforms to school (because the Boy Scout Oath makes a reference to God), the pledge of allegiance, a kid who blasphemied (come on- all kids swear and curse at some point, it's not a formal prayer!), and of course, the US Army recruiters.
Alll related to this issue of restricting speech to protect people who apparently not able to tolerate the free speech of others.
Than the true free market is impossible, and thus so is the true democratic system.
Neither are impossible now- they were in the past but not now. You see, the main problem in the past was never tyranny of a minority or a majority- it was the speed with which decisions could be made.
Im sorry I think you have me confused with a Bush supporter...
I am too- but it doesn't change the fact:
No they gave him authority, and yes it it just *as* dammning. It was also damn stupid of him not to request a specific document for Iraq.
BTW, thank you for forcing me to research this- I never knew *why* the Constitutional Party had a problem with this. It turns out that this is an authority that Congress can't delegate- to have troops involved in war for more than a specific amount of time, Congress MUST reconvine and declare war officially- and they haven't. They didn't for Korea, they didn't for Vietnam, they didn't for any of Reagan's wars (though he was carefull to keep them under the limit), Gulf War I, Afghanistan, or Gulf War II. NONE of them have been constitutionally approved wars. A resolution isn't good enough. Damn- and I spent a lot of time arguing the other way just a few days ago.
Slashdot Mirror
I dont know what tribes live near you, but here in michigan the tradition is to open a casino and throw monkeys on the backs of the stupid white man yet again.
No- that's just the way to get money for conservation efforts because the tribes are forced to work within a free market framework.
Most indian tribes are so diluted and tainted by Americanism that they care more about the great Almighty Dollar than living in harmony with the land anymore.
Or so it appears- to get the right to live in harmony with the land one actually needs a lot of cash nowadays. It's amazing what having your neighbors believing that they can actually *own* land will do to your conservation budget.
but IP stands for Intellectual Property instead- totally ignoring the natural resource crisis in the lack of IP addresses! Won't somebody think about the poor little robots? :-)
-------------
The previous message is endorsed by Mom's Old Fashioned Robot Factory
Um, yes. Why do you seem to be construing his comments as anti-Native American? Why is his observation that Native Americans (or American Indian, choose your PC term) aren't "immigrants or the children of immigrants" somehow sad? (It is perhaps inaccurate, in that the distant ancestors of Native peoples did come here from somewhere else.)
I happen to be a bit of a nativist- I actually believe that people born here *should* have more rights than people who come here, if nothing else than the tradition of conservation. This to me is what separates great American families from the European nobility; a tie to the land, in a symbiotic relationship with the land. It's fine to be a naturalized citizen- but you shouldn't expect your adopted country to automatically elect you to office until you at least learn the language better than Arnold has. It bugs me that millions of citizens get shoved out of work yearly to make room for immigrants; it discourages me that any pro-environmental group of any sort would support the excessive population growth that immigration has caused since the borders were thrown open in 1965. It especially discourages me because the *only* strategy in the war on terror that is likely to work in the long run is national isolationism. And I just don't see any first generation immigrant voting for that.
Got to learn to hit preview- nowhere in this post did I spell TRADITION right!
China is currently using different methods of getting energy than burning dinosaurs,
Since when? Next to the United States, Europe and Japan, they're the Saudi's fourth biggest customer.
Our country is made up of immigrants. Your place of birth should not disqualify someone from serving as president or vice president.
We have to remember that we are all immigrants or the children of immigrants, with, of course, the exception of the Native people of this continent.
Which is sad, because so many Native American Tribes support many of the goals of the Green Party- living with the land and on the land, not changing the land, is a traiditon in many Native American religions- and the Green Party would do well to remember that TRADIDITON is supported by CULTURE and WHERE YOU GREW UP. Those who grow up in an area are far more likely to be environmentally aware- especially of population growth related problems- than those who came from elsewhere.
Oh, I don't know, how about the former being legal and common practice then and the later being illegal now? I mean just the reference of a "non-OSHA approved" building tells you something is much better today than 2 centuries ago.
When the punishment is only a fine, it's not illegal, it's a valid business decision based on costs and benefits. But you're right to a certain extent- at least there's a government oversight committee telling us which businesses should be charged more to do business.
What "town" do you live in? The most expensive town in the USA is White Plains, where $700/month will rent you a 15x10 walk-in closet. I could house 4 slaves in that space, and I'm not especially brutal.
Portland, OR, a similar closet will cost you $600/month here.
Let's crunch those numbers, shall we? $912.50x4=$3650 for your budget for four slaves. $700x12 means you'll spend $8400 in RENT alone. So where I'm wrong in saying it isn't one month's rent- it ain't four slaves worth on your budget either. So let's do a real budget. $8400/year for rent. Say $25/month for food per slave, that's an additional $1200/year for food for our four slaves. I'll grant you that you can "get by" with $80 worth of clothing, IF the weather isn't too extreme- in most of the US though you'd have to double that for summer and winter weight uniforms, to $160/year. Thus food, clothing, and shelter ALONE are worth $9760/year (I begin to see why the poverty line is double that- at $18,000 per year for a family of four). Break it back down- $2440/year for a slave, or $6.67/day for food, clothing, and shelter alone. But that's for a REALLY stupid slave holder- one who doesn't want to see his "Herd" of slaves increase with children, one who's willing to let a $1000 investment (the price of a slave today in Sudan) go down the drain due to illness. So we add in another $1200/year for a cheap HMO. We're now back up to $3640/year. Now I don't want to pay $11,500/year to hire a free overseer to make this slave work- so other benefits are needed. Trasnportation costs an additional $20/month at today's energy prices if you use public transit. That's $240/year- we're now up to $3880/year in the US. Now taxes on all this value added stuff- you can bet the state's going to want a part of the profits from legalizing slavery, very likely an additional 50%, we're now up to $5820. Now add a family of four- what you're going to need just to keep your initial capital investment of $2000 in a male and a female slave, because eventually they're going to die and need replacing. That quadruples our cost, to $23280/year, or $63.79/day, or $3.98/hr/slave. Now remember, any service person in the United States who *may* recieve tips is only required, at minimum wage, to be paid $2.13/hr. Suddenly- slaves as servants (or even McDonald's hamburger flippers) no longer make economic sense.
But the fact that slavery still exists today contradicts you- or why do you think USA manufacturers are so happy to outsource?
Because the cost of living is so much cheaper elsewhere- but this discussion was originally talking about Lincoln freeing the slaves in the south. In the United States, so other countries are outside of the discussion.
Finally- a reason for Bush to have asked his daddy to get him into the National Guard- so he wouldn't have to follow illegal orders.
CERTAINLY the leader of the free world should be AT LEAST as avaialable as a California Sheriff- or a judge- or a doctor.
What gets me is that nobody's thought to use the technology we have to make this easier.
Normal public schools are agents of the federal Congress.
Now that's the most rediculous statement I've ever heard. Public schools in Oregon are paid for by local property taxes. School Boards do the hiring. Federal Congress never enters into the decision of who to hire and who to fire.
That anecdote only undermines your position.
Only because you're predesposed to removing the free speech rights of other people just so you don't have to be tollerant of their beliefs.
No he didn't. He could decide to starve or directly kill the slave at any time. Sure, if he's economically rational, he'll want to keep some of them alive- a concern Wal-Mart shares.
Wal*Mart has no up-front investment- most of their jobs are low- or no-skill, and take about 3 minutes worth of training time. Given a federal government that works very hard at keeping the unemployment rate above 4%, it's far simpler to replace minimum wage workers than it was for a southern plantation owner to visit the slave auction.
And the ability to quit if you don't like it, and a lot fewer people beating on you with horsewhips.
That's one of the big improvements of the low-wage movement over slavery from the point of view of the owners- hiring overseers is cheaper and easier as well. Plus, Starvation, Homelessness, and Bankruptcy work far better for workplace retention than a horsewhip ever did.
False. If slavery were legal today, the daily cost would be between $0.90 (young female) and $2.50 (adult male).
Really? Then how come the poor can't survive on, gee, about 8x that ammount, requiring charity instead? I'm sorry- that figure just doesn't fit costs in the United States for basic surival needs (food, clothing, shelter, medical care). Heck- $2.50/day comes to about $912.50 annually; shelter alone in my town is more than that monthly. So no- that figure is incorrect.
Geekier yet is the standard Radio Atomic Clock- you can get them for $10 at Fry's and they never require a 9V backup battery at all.
Where the heck was this outsourced to? What are those comments in, Pourtegese?
I wouldn't mind a daughter- and I got the wife and son the geekyest way imaginable- computerized dating service. We'll try for a daughter next time- but first we've got to get my 16 month old son to figure out that HIS bed is the twin in the other room, not mommy and daddy's king size waterbed....
It's b) that I can't figure out. Who is so hard up for things to do that they spend hours staring at the neighbor's house?
Namu Amida Butsu.
Yep- that's the Buddhist form- doesn't change much even in non xtian religions, does it?
Oh yeah!
One should never seek to ridicule the true believer- no mater how ridiculous their beliefs seem to you.
It took me a while, but yes I can- http://www.c-span.org/resources/pdf/hjres114.pdf is the PDF of the actual resolution. I reference for you the following section:
Now some would say that taking the President's word for these reports being completed properly is, at best, naive. And while the reports have come through- they haven't exactly fit Section 3's requirements.
He was probably too far out of the loop, in Florida.
Given today's communications technology, there is *NO REASON* not to fit every form of transportation the President has with a rolling, 24 PDA grid of VideoConferencing PDAs hooked up by sattelite and VPN to the war room, just in case.
If by some odd chance my attempt to create a virtual political party becomes real- and time is ticking down to initial launch November 6th- this WILL be a major plank in my platform.
Any political leader who earns more than $100,000/year needs to be on call, directly, 24x7.
And even my IPAQ can play full motion video conferencing, given a big enough network connection.
True enough- though in my state, the state taxes on similar items outdistance these 2:1. It's part of the complaint that brought us to the mess Oregon is in right now- anti-tax activists, tired of the hidden taxes, reduced Orgon basically down to a one-legged stool for major taxes (no sales tax, minimal state property tax, major state income tax) and ignored the user taxes- thus the user taxes had to go up to make up the difference. Unfunded federal mandates like No Child Left Behind just make the problem worse.
Is that why the ACLU is so against the pledge of allegiance?
Seriously though- if we're trying to teach the kids tolerance for others in the culture, then shouldn't they have to learn to listen to such things, even if they don't join in?
An example: the Baptist Church down the street recently sponsored a block party. Like most Baptists, they believe in a theological concept called Once Saved Always Saved (OSAS). OSAS believers say that if you pray the sinner's prayer, you're saved. So like most events put on by OSAS, they had public prayer- in a public park- across the street from my house. I'm Catholic. I don't believe in OSAS- but I believe in constant conversion, it was just a matter of changing a few words here and there in my mind to an Act of Contrition.
All Gods are really one, when you get into comparative religion, it's just different views of the same God. The athiest material god of science is just another view of the Christian God. It'd be a good thing for children to learn to respect all Gods.
Actually we are also not supposed to have a standing army (the constitution does allow for a Navy. Were we in the first gulf war long enough for it to be illeal?
.... (NOTE I DO NOT WANT MY STATE TAXES HIGHER so get away you wallet snatching libs)
I'm not sure- but it did take more than 72 hours, which seemed to be Reagan's limit before recalling the troops.
The kind of things people demand from the fed creates a concentration of money which can not help but suck the power from the states. I could never understand why my state taxes are so much lower than the fed. I go to school in the state, the police and fire are from the state, 95% of the roads I drive on are state roads,
You're obviously not in Oregon then- our state taxes are higher than the fed when you take all of them into account (actually, most states are likewise- hidden gas sales taxes pay for the roads, hidden sin taxes to pay for police and fire and medical, etc). I work for State Government- in the Department of Transportation, I know where our funding comes from.
But bear in mind the "anti-federalits" were not against the ferderal republic, they were against giving it undue power.
Right- and since the federal government has indeed gained undue power- they were RIGHT.
The Confederated Colonies before that had more freedom, as far as the people were concerned. But that was bad for the rich landowners- the small minority that wished to opress the majority.
No they are born out of the fact I have rights, not rights given to me by the government but rights that the government can *not* take away. In Germany during ww2 the majority commited aweful offences against a minority of people. The will of the majority must *never* interfere with our inalienable rights. The will of the majority should however be given voice when it does not do so.
I'd cry Godwin's Law, but I think I brought it on myself. I'll just point out that Nazis never were a numerical majority in Germany- people voted for them out of fear.
Quietly before kids get to the classroom *nothing* but when the kids are in the classroom she is an agent of the state.
Funny, I know of no state that requires teachers take an oath before getting a license to practice. Plus, the First Ammendment says nothing about *agents of the state*- only *Congress*.
Evidance?
Most recent one I heard about was a couple of years back- a football team in a middle school in some southern state which had a tradition of the captain of the football team (not the coach, but one of the kids) praying before every game over the loudspeaker. Until the school got sued by the ACLU, of course.
More recent actions in my home town (Portland, OR metro area) have included Boy Scouts wearing their uniforms to school (because the Boy Scout Oath makes a reference to God), the pledge of allegiance, a kid who blasphemied (come on- all kids swear and curse at some point, it's not a formal prayer!), and of course, the US Army recruiters.
Alll related to this issue of restricting speech to protect people who apparently not able to tolerate the free speech of others.
Than the true free market is impossible, and thus so is the true democratic system.
Neither are impossible now- they were in the past but not now. You see, the main problem in the past was never tyranny of a minority or a majority- it was the speed with which decisions could be made.
Im sorry I think you have me confused with a Bush supporter...
I am too- but it doesn't change the fact:
No they gave him authority, and yes it it just *as* dammning. It was also damn stupid of him not to request a specific document for Iraq.
BTW, thank you for forcing me to research this- I never knew *why* the Constitutional Party had a problem with this. It turns out that this is an authority that Congress can't delegate- to have troops involved in war for more than a specific amount of time, Congress MUST reconvine and declare war officially- and they haven't. They didn't for Korea, they didn't for Vietnam, they didn't for any of Reagan's wars (though he was carefull to keep them under the limit), Gulf War I, Afghanistan, or Gulf War II. NONE of them have been constitutionally approved wars. A resolution isn't good enough. Damn- and I spent a lot of time arguing the other way just a few days ago.