Thursday June 30, 2016
Jump to content
Last paragraph: All that being said, Mel, I am not a "Republican at any cost regardless." I just want to see integrity in government and a government that obeys the Constitution that created it and told it what to do and what NOT to do. I have never been all that impressed with Republicans holding to that high standard, but I vote for them because some of them do, and that high standard is directly and flagrantly opposed by the Democrats even in their platform, and the Democrats are now operating as openly Marxist. Their entire modus operandi is designed to destroy the first, last, and probably only nation founded upon principles of liberty in the history of the world. And they are doing a good job of it, despite the Republican majority in this State.
Mel, nothing you list there is remotely similar to the description I offered. You list several examples of Democratic Party efforts and results, and one or two cases of either Republican incompetence or Democratic efforts wearing Republican feathers: We call them "RINOs".
I don't know what you mean by "historically" down (seems counter to your own thesis), but you can count on wages buying less and less when the monetary system is based on worthless I.O.U.'s of debt instead of Constitutional money of intrinsic value: The more the government prints and gives, gratis, to the private and illegal foreign corporation called the Federal Reserve System so they can lend it back to government at interest, the less that fiat currency will buy regardless of how much of it you receive in wages. Yes, you can thank the Republican-in-name-only Bankster Cartel member Philander Knox for setting us up for the theft of our gold and silver coin.
The long voting lines are an example of incredible incompetence by certain individuals with an 'R' after their name, but I am certain it was not intentional and was not for nefarious purpose, and the most recent debacle was caused by a vendor since fired, and the whole debacle probably harmed the Republican Party more than it did the Democrats. However, the Democrats look for any excuse to destabilize the system with lawsuits and unjustified calls for impeachment; that's what they do because it is the only way they can get any notice.
Would you also object to a law prohibiting payroll deductions to charities supporting mob hit men? If you want to make charitable contributions to murderers, sign your own checks. Don't expect the State government to give you cover.
You have a problem with employers hiring "droves" (you say) of minimum wage employees and giving them part time status to avoid medical benefits. You can blame ObamaCare for that, Mel. Incredibly expensive. If you want something to object to, how about employers hiring people on a "salaried" basis and working them 60 hours a week so they don't have to pay them overtime? Oh ... are you not aware that the majority of corporate CEOs enjoying the feudal aristocracy benefits of "limited liability" are Democrats?
And hooray for the AZ GOP giving tax breaks (not subsidies) to corporations so they can afford to hire more employees and expand their businesses to the overall economic benefit of the community, Mel. Gives people more wages with which to pay for their own core services instead of robbing the taxpayer for them.
Are you suggesting that the sins of the grandfather Bush should be visited upon the son and grandson? How very Nazi of you. (BTW, if you want to push that meme we can talk about the fraudulent schemes and artifices employed by Killary Rotten Clinton and their bogus "family trust" through which the Clintons sold our uranium to the Russians and through which they receive all their bribes for government services.)
And as always, you jump to whatever conclusion crosses your mind without investigation and without discussion, Teddie boy. And as always, you are wrong: I was born in Oklahoma, raised in the U.S., spent four years not in Russia, but in a country that was advertised as being a "western democracy," but in fact was overrun by the Marxist Mafia, past tense, just as we are being overrun today, present tense. My experiences there is what inspired me to find out why my country, America, was supposed to be "different" and was supposed to be "exceptional" compared to other nations of the world, but was 'way too "just alike" for comfort. I studied, and it took many years to get the whole picture. Contrarywise, Teddie, I don't use the word "comrade" much, though with people like you it would be appropriate -- except you are certainly not my comrade. I do use words like "apparatchik" because that is a word the victims of socialism and communism use to describe the con-artists that suckered them into their dirt-grubbing existence and keep them there. A synonym you might understand is "political operative." I do use words like "useful idiots" because that is the phrase communist apparatchiks like Stalin and Lenin have used, in public, to describe people who fall for their con-game and go around advocating the something-for-nothing con-game like you do because they have never experienced it in reality. A synonym to "useful idiots" in common usage today is "libtard," short for "liberal retard."
So we should try to "strike a balance" by voting for a party whose membership supports everything Karl Marx supported in his Communist Manifesto, including disarming of the people so they have no way to invoke the fundamental "government by the Consent of the governed" principle upon which our nation is founded?
You think we should vote for the party that insists people who work for a living and earn less and less every year because the worthless fiat currency has no intrinsic value, should be robbed of their earnings to support those who cannot or will not work to support themselves? And we should vote for the party hack that not only deprives us of our right to choose to whom our charity should go, but rakes a percentage off the top for his own benefit?
You think we should vote for the party that doesn't believe people should be paid what they're labor is worth, but rather, should be paid more than their labor is worth, requiring the employer to lay off workers to accommodate unrealistic pay scales, and requiring everyone in the community to pinch pennies because they can no longer afford to patronize the businesses?
You think we should vote for the party that insists everyone should be allowed to vote in an election without restriction, whether they are citizens or not, whether they are residents or not, whether they a felons or not, whether they have already voted or not, just so the Marxist Mafia can falsely claim it has a mandate from the people?
You think we should vote for the party that subsidizes every industry or business that it likes, causing every businessperson to get into that activity to receive the loot from the public treasury, until government has to set arbitrarily high prices for the products to cover the costs, and then dump the majority of the products in the landfill because no one can afford them? (This is how dairy marketing boards, egg marketing boards, agricultural marketing boards, poultry marketing boards, beef marketing boards, etc., ad infinitum work. And when challenged by the people they lower their prices to "prove" the law of supply and demand doesn't work, but fail to supply any more of the product, thus "proving" the Marxist system works.)
I've lived in a country that voted your something-for-nothing fantasy party into power, Mr. Mezar, and if you believe your party is necessary for a "proper balance" in politics, then you believe a "proper balance" is a dirt-grubbing existence where only the party apparatchiks can make a living and they don't do any useful work at all.
Actually, Robert, that is an oft-cited meme by those who are impatient with drivers who are somewhat less qualified and therefore more cautious. As a professional driving instructor (retired), I have to say the statistics do not bear out that meme. When slow, hesitant, unsure-of-themselves drivers "cause accidents" it is almost invariably because the other driver was impatient with the less-qualified driver and didn't give THEMSELVES the time and clearance and caution necessary to avoid the collision. The reason DPS tends to concentrate on speeding (it doesn't really, but it often works out that way due to the number of speeders) is because speed kills. It sounds like a trite little sound bite but it is true: It not only kills because higher speed causes greater impact, but more importantly it gives the driver less time to react at all, less time to react with a measured response, and less time to react in the safest manner. The only thing that causes more accidents than speed is tailgating. If you are one car length behind the vehicle ahead for every ten miles an hour of speed (the absolute minimum safe distance) you'd better be paying very sharp attention because if he slams on his brakes and you aren't on your brakes within a half second, you are going to hit him. You are slightly better off if you are sharp enough to know what is right beside you every instant, and have exactly the right tire pressure, because you can make an evasive lane change in less time -- provided he doesn't do the same. (Low tire pressure will cause you to lose control.) There is a lot more to safe driving that herding a chunk of steel down the road, and most drivers haven't had a lick of safety training, like stopping where you can see the rear tires on the ground ahead of you, so a rear-ender doesn't shove you into him. Lots more available in professional driving training; I recommend it.
Leave it to liberal Ted to advocate destruction of our right to travel on public thoroughfares and that drivers should not be required to pay for the carnage caused by their irresponsibility. That is the liberal meme throughout his paragraph above; no one should be required to be responsible for themselves; no one should suffer the consequences of their lifestyle decisions, everyone should be taxed to death to support universal health care that drives the cost of healthcare up until 45% cannot afford it, roadway carnage should be embraced if it prevents law enforcement from interfering with the private right to drive at whatever speed you choose regardless of safety, and collective responsibility is an absolute requirement as long as he is not personally responsible for anything. What a self-destructive collection of conflicting values!
And that, Mr. Aal, is an easy but sophomoric and false meme: When the violators of the principles of safe driving are compelled to pay the costs of enforcement it relieves the safe drivers from having to pay for that for which they are not at fault. Revenue collection by police to pay for enforcement of laws is a lot fairer than requiring the community at large to pay for the carnage caused by doofuses with no respect for the safety or rights of others. My own small town is illustrative: We have a main highway through the middle of our town, four lanes wide with a suicide lane in the middle but no parking lane, one mile almost perfectly straight. No room for an officer to pull anyone over, many businesses and driveways on one side of the street, many fatal accidents until we installed four radar cameras. We've had I think one fatal accident since. And the revenue generated by the speed cameras pays for our patrol contract with the county Sheriff. We are one of two towns in the whole State with a positive cash flow and no need for local taxes. Now, thanks to the AZ-AG ruling, we are going to see a tremendous increase in fatal accidents, and in our taxes to pay for public works and law enforcement, and our cash flow will go negative. I see no increase in our "liberty," which I hold in high esteem, as a result of this ruling.
Huh? That's your point? Sounds to me like the CPS presence between MP235 and 240 is accomplishing its objective. OTOH, "as a former (P)olice (O)fficer," did your training ever let it sink in that traffic law enforcement in some areas -- curvy and steep mountain roads, for example -- contributes to distracted driving and thereby increases the number and severity of accidents?
One quibble, Mr. Jones: The revenue generated by the tickets and all the surcharges and all the rest of it just barely approaches but does not exceed the break even point. This is why (for example) the Beeline is not patrolled on a daily basis. They are too short-handed due to budget constraints to patrol every road every day. They swap around regularly, paying more attention to areas of high risk of dangerous driving.
Can you think of any reason why the law-abiding folks who drive the Beeline should be forced to pay for the damages caused by dangerous drivers who think the law has no purpose beyond profit, when the dangerous drivers can be made to pay for the law enforcement that reduces dangerous driving?
Can you describe a location approaching Corvair Curve where an officer can set up to catch speeders that would not require chasing them into the curve? Do you have sense enough to understand the distraction imposed by the presence of an officer at the side of the road, when drivers need to concentrate on the road ahead and not their rear view to see whether they are being followed by that officer?
In short, Ted, do you have the brains God gave a goose?
Last login: Friday, June 10, 2016