I propose states hold a full populous election once per decade. If the majority sees that the way they have chosen is not working, they should have the option of doing what is best for the people. However, they would be required to adopt the federal laws of the party they are switching to in their entirety. And as a penalty their state's votes would not be counted for 2 years in their newly chosen party House and Senate. If in the end it proves one way was better..smug satisfaction should be enough of a reward, it does not mean people have to suffer to prove a point...plus it will mean the states and the parties will still have to listen to the needs of their people, or risk losing the entire states assets and revenue.
When businesses compete the consumer benefits right? Why should government be different? Divide the assets. Let each side fight for our "business". In most cases it comes down to fundamental belief differences, so my theory is, unless one party were to collapse financially, both would maintain the same, or nearly the same number of states. People can change their mind on many things...but there are deeply ingrained things that people will fight to the death over. So avoid the fighting and death and give people the choice.
Romney did not win for several reasons, not one of which is the disillusionment of the US populace with the set of core American values known as "conservativsm". First, Romney was too far to the left. Romney was unable to express his belief in core American virtues because in many cases he does not have them. You may have noticed that Romney signed a health-care mandate law enslaving the people of Taxechusetts. Romney was McStain-lite and it's no wonder many people seeking an American in the Presidency weren't confident in him. You see, the DemocRATS don't have a monopoly on Low Information Idiots, there were enough Americans with their hearts in the right place who were too stupid to realize that another four years of King Obama, Fascist and Traitor, would be the worst thing to ever happen to the United States. Romney had the arrogance of the political inept, and he had Carl Rove helping him, too, to seal the deal. So they forgot all about the basic electioneering every successful campaign has to engage in. Then they ignored that while Obama was from Kenya, he learned how to cheat under the RATS in Chicago.....gee, the RATS don't see anything wrong with Romney getting ZERO votes in 50+ precincts in Philadelphia.... What do the Americans need to regain control of their country in 2016? They need to quit putting RINOS and liberals up front to move "to the center" to the vast enjoyment of the RAT candidate. They need to put an American up as their candidate, and then they need to ignore the propaganda networks and the New York Slimes have to say. Sticking to real American values will do the trick, especially since by 2016 the nation will be past the edge of bankruptcy and the RATS won't have any desire to fix things.
You keep saying that Republicans need to pick up California to win the election. George W Bush and Karl Rove disagree. What really needs to happen is that the country club Republicans need to get ejected from the party. Take their milquetoast candidates with them.
The last thing the socialists want is for all the working people to split away from them....liberals starve if they don't have people to rob.
Actually the only place in America that has more liberals than conservatives is DC. Vermont is very close, but even in California, conservatives outnumber liberals. The problem resides in party affiliation. Conservative Democrats still vote the party line without regard to candidates, even if their vote means voting for value they don't necessarily believe in. One of two things is going to happen: 1. The Democrats will either screw up so many facets of America that a ground swell of opposition will toss them out of power. 2. They'll become more conservative in an effort to maintain their power and voter base.
Until California goes belly up, it won't return to America. What needs to happen is that the GOP controlling the House must REFUSE any and all attempts by the RATS to bailout California, Illinois, or any other state driven into bankruptcy by it's own *******ed socialist foolishness.
I didn't realize you were a family member or firend. Oh that's right, you aren't. So don't make a supposition you can't possibly prove. You're not still pissed that you're actually a Brit are you?
Because you know damn well that it will only be a few years before we conservatives are supporting their system.
It's not just California. The government and NY are broke too. US taps pension fund to avoid passing debt limit WASHINGTON (AP) -- Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner says the government has begun borrowing from the federal employee pension fund to keep operating without surpassing its debt limit. Geithner says in a letter to congressional leaders that the move will free up $156 billion in borrowing authority while Congress debates increasing the $16.4 trillion debt limit. The government reached its borrowing limit on Dec. 31, but began using bookkeeping maneuvers to keep from surpassing it. Geithner has told congressional leaders that Treasury expects to exhaust those measures by mid-February to early March. http://news.yahoo.com/us-taps-pension-fund-avoid-211937220.html To Pay New York Pension Fund, Cities Borrow From It First ALBANY — When New York State officials agreed to allow local governments to use an unusual borrowing plan to put off a portion of their pension obligations, fiscal watchdogs scoffed at the arrangement, calling it irresponsible and unwise. A new borrowing mechanism was approved under former Gov. David A. Paterson. Borrowing From Peter to Pay Peter And now, their fears are being realized: cities throughout the state, wealthy towns such as Southampton and East Hampton, counties like Nassau and Suffolk, and other public employers like the Westchester Medical Center and the New York Public Library are all managing their rising pension bills by borrowing from the very same $140 billion pension fund to which they owe moneyhttp://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/28/n...borrow-from-it-first.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
They don't avail themselves of the opportunities presented to them. I've been hearing commercial spots for "a mind is a terrible thing to waste" for nearly 50 years now. The options are there. You don't have to have a gift for throwing an orange ball through a hoop or the ability to run under a 70 yard pass to excel academically. You just need to take responsibility and apply yourself.
GOPers will never get elected again if they continue to show such contempt for the American people and no shame for their uninhibited looting of the economy for the past 50 years. The party's over.
Many of the RAT-run states are going broke. Nothing should be done to bail any of them out, their citizens have the freedom to leave, to move to other states that won't punish them for working hard and producing. One thing the American-run states should do as soon as possible is to reduce the amount of payment they make to their resident parasites. This will both encourage the parasites to move to RAT-run states, but it will discourage parasites from fleeing the RAT-run states until it's too late.
Hypocrisy inundates. With all this preaching about self-reliance, you shouldn't mind if the children of the rich are cut off from mooching off their parents at age 18: no money for living expenses in college, no trust funds, no inheritance. If we have to do it on our own, so must they. And they will flop completely and run to the Gubmint for welfare. As usual, you only force values on the unprivileged. We far outnumber the Capitaliban and their Heirhead spawn. We can crush them like grapes. It is time to quit whining and start making wine.
The country is browning out and the democrats hope white folks will be too scared to say something about it.
Spoken like a true Communist "progressive".....so now families hard earned wealth is to be distributed according to the musings of a committee rather than the family that built the wealth.....sad that we actually have people that think like this. When the "underpriveledge" want to take money from the rest of us, they are in the position of a child.....the "parent" who is providing for them has the authority to set rules to receive the "goodies"......the wealthy family is not asking for anything from the rest of us so they can choose to set their own rules with regard to distribution of their wealth....see the difference there.....oh never mind.
Because Jews are a multi-issue voting population who think about what their vote means. Most Jews are more liberal than the average american when it comes to social issues as Jews have been on the forefront of most of the progressive actions in this country. From Labor Unions, to Women's Rights, to Civil Rights for Blacks, to the war on poverty and most recently Gay rights. Jews had a large voice in the best of the Occupy movement and Occupy Judaism was one of the most powerful forces for after Hurricane Sandy to get people things they needed. They stand with underdogs. While Israel is important to liberal Jews it isn't the end all and be all and we are often critical of the government while supporting efforts to keep the country a safe place for Jews. It is a complicated relationship.
Yes I see your point, I was generalising about the right however Im willing to bet right here and now that neither these people nor you were bothered about states rights until now.
I've been bothered by it since I started having an interest in the country in grade school and read the Constitution. I can't state when others here had their epiphany.
From where I am from, there are two choices: go to school for five to ten years, incur debt of $80k or more, and have a starting salary at $45k to $60k along with all the nice other things like house, car, food, clothing etc. Or have no education and no student loans but have a job that pays the federal minimum wage or slightly higher. The point is that in Texas, there have been far more lower paying jobs out there, but the cost of housing and transportation have increased where those low paying jobs cannot sustain a family of one, much less a family of two or more. Amd yet, no one is talking about throwing an orange ball or a leather, oblong lall to help someone through life. Yet, people are willing to pay $110 per seat or higher to watch the game. Go figure.
Because the GOP is not willing to listen and that is the contempt the GOP have shown. BTW, propping up a few minorities who believe as the party elites doesn't cut the mustard either.
Not willing to listen to what? What exactly do the Democrats ever compromise on? The left's definition of "listen" must be something along the lines of "thoroughly capitulate." What does this even mean?
