They did that with the stimulus bill, they brought it out in the morning and Queen Pelosi said.... VOTE!
They did that with the climate bill where 300 pages were added at 3AM, then the next morning Queen Pelosi said ... VOTE!
ObamaCare is getting fudged behind closed doors in secret.... Queen Pelosi will bring it out first thing of a morning ans say... VOTE!
Behind closed door and in secret. That is the legecy of this 111th congress.Why do congressional liberals hide their legislation behind closed doors until it's time to vote?Pork, pork and more pork.
Oh, and if the public won't really know what their representatives are voting on, they can't flood their offices with calls and emails and letters about how they think their representatives should vote.
The Representatives have forgotten their true purpose - to REPRESENT their constituents. Now, all they want to do is get more power and keep their constituents in the dark about things so they won't be held accountable.
Shameful.Why do congressional liberals hide their legislation behind closed doors until it's time to vote?
you sound totally unbiased. i respect your opinion!Why do congressional liberals hide their legislation behind closed doors until it's time to vote?You mean as opposed to the congressional conservatives and neocons who ran Congress for several years? You have no basis and no case on which to criticize liberals. We are seeing more proposed legislation online than we have ever seen.
Because they know no one will stand for the nonsense if they find outWhy do congressional liberals hide their legislation behind closed doors until it's time to vote?I suppose they could use fabricated evidence and third-party interviews to justify a war...
You do realize committee's in our government include members from both parties right?Why do congressional liberals hide their legislation behind closed doors until it's time to vote?
Wrong. They're doing exactly what previous Congresses have done--doing final reconciliation behind closed doors. It's called a "conference committee," and it's nothing new. The only thing that's new is your interest in the legislative process.
That is not the way the process worked. False.Why do congressional liberals hide their legislation behind closed doors until it's time to vote?
These are just a few examples of Obama and the Democrats pulling the rug out from under us...people should be asking why the stimulus we had to have won't be used until 2010 and 2012 and why the health care bill won't go into effect until 2013, after the 2012 elections.
They don't. Failed question.
You nailed it!!
just another example of obama's transparency. the king and queen gotta go while there's still time to try to fix the disaster we're about to be in.
These sheep don't want to hear it...NOTHING will shake their faith in the One.
Neo,...Uh, I meant Obama will fly, and save us all from ourselves. And he will make all the mean white people give their money and goods away to black and minorities and the homeless. Then he will force them to keep working and tax them at 100%, and then he will reveal himself, and the little liberal pantywaists on here will be like, " we didn't know, it's not our fault"!
Morons
Patriot Act...mmkay?
At least they are letting Republicans to be involved in the committee process. After the way Republicans ran things before 2006, anyone with any kind of memory would realize that Democrats are being quite open and inclusive.
Saturday, February 18, 2012
Does anyone know where you can read the specifics of the debt legislation?
I'd like to see what the cuts are.Does anyone know where you can read the specifics of the debt legislation?http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/鈥?/a>
What was the last piece of legislation that Republicans supported that favored the good of the many over the..?
good of the few?
Time after time the Republicans come down on the side of helping out the few whether it be the health insurers in the health care reform bill or the uber wealthy (tax cuts during the Bush years).
When was the last time the Repubs actually voted for something that helped out the majority of Americans against the desires of their wealthy campaign contributors?What was the last piece of legislation that Republicans supported that favored the good of the many over the..?They believe that all those things you cited are actually good for the average Joe. So they will cite those things again and again, in spite of evidence to the contrary.
Some of them even think we paid 100 million for the Louisiana Purchase, when the actual cost was $15 million. And the purchase of Alaska was half that.What was the last piece of legislation that Republicans supported that favored the good of the many over the..?
Trust me, by coming down on the side of fiscal responsibility and anti-manipulation, the GOP has shown the country its willingness to stand up for what is right for the country.
Harry Reid is a low life liar and manipulator evidenced by the arm twisting of Senators from New Orleans and Arkansas. Partisan voting is as un-American in principal as Communism is righteous.
I wish people like you who ignore the numbers and just look at the superficial promise of the democrats, would wake up and do your homework. I'm confident that you too will see the fallacy in the democratic proposal.What was the last piece of legislation that Republicans supported that favored the good of the many over the..?Your "(tax cuts during the Bush years)" were for everyone employed.....income tax.
That didn't take much looking.
Clinton had the income tax at 39%, Bush lowered it to 36%, 0bama will raise it back to 39%, supposedly in 2010 but now he states he will wait for the economy to recover.What was the last piece of legislation that Republicans supported that favored the good of the many over the..?
And 850 billion to 1.2 trillion for less than 10% of the population is any better? Lets not forget the 100 million dollar Louisianna Purchase. This bribe cost more than what we paid for Alaska.What was the last piece of legislation that Republicans supported that favored the good of the many over the..?Bush's tax cutsWhat was the last piece of legislation that Republicans supported that favored the good of the many over the..?
That's not how the GOP rolls!
Ummmm ? ... Oh I give up !
Time after time the Republicans come down on the side of helping out the few whether it be the health insurers in the health care reform bill or the uber wealthy (tax cuts during the Bush years).
When was the last time the Repubs actually voted for something that helped out the majority of Americans against the desires of their wealthy campaign contributors?What was the last piece of legislation that Republicans supported that favored the good of the many over the..?They believe that all those things you cited are actually good for the average Joe. So they will cite those things again and again, in spite of evidence to the contrary.
Some of them even think we paid 100 million for the Louisiana Purchase, when the actual cost was $15 million. And the purchase of Alaska was half that.What was the last piece of legislation that Republicans supported that favored the good of the many over the..?
Trust me, by coming down on the side of fiscal responsibility and anti-manipulation, the GOP has shown the country its willingness to stand up for what is right for the country.
Harry Reid is a low life liar and manipulator evidenced by the arm twisting of Senators from New Orleans and Arkansas. Partisan voting is as un-American in principal as Communism is righteous.
I wish people like you who ignore the numbers and just look at the superficial promise of the democrats, would wake up and do your homework. I'm confident that you too will see the fallacy in the democratic proposal.What was the last piece of legislation that Republicans supported that favored the good of the many over the..?Your "(tax cuts during the Bush years)" were for everyone employed.....income tax.
That didn't take much looking.
Clinton had the income tax at 39%, Bush lowered it to 36%, 0bama will raise it back to 39%, supposedly in 2010 but now he states he will wait for the economy to recover.What was the last piece of legislation that Republicans supported that favored the good of the many over the..?
And 850 billion to 1.2 trillion for less than 10% of the population is any better? Lets not forget the 100 million dollar Louisianna Purchase. This bribe cost more than what we paid for Alaska.What was the last piece of legislation that Republicans supported that favored the good of the many over the..?Bush's tax cutsWhat was the last piece of legislation that Republicans supported that favored the good of the many over the..?
That's not how the GOP rolls!
Ummmm ? ... Oh I give up !
What do you think would happen if we didnt have animal welfare legislation?
should the question not be why do we have animal welfare legislation and no one follows the guidelines?animals are not protected by these rules if so there would not be the amount of cruelty that goes on.animals being transported for slaughter are treated horrendously animal testing its barbaric animals being skinned alive for there fur and the ongoing battle against cruelty animals are equals in my eyes and the legislation does not protect them at all take a look on Peta's website www.peta.com or www.rspca.co.uk and see if theses animals are protectedWhat do you think would happen if we didnt have animal welfare legislation?You would be seeing domestic animals on the menus of some ethnic cuisine restaurants.What do you think would happen if we didnt have animal welfare legislation?
Things would be as they were for hundreds of years before there was any such legislation. Humane people would treat animals humanely pretty much. Inhumane people would treat animanls inhumanely. Pretty much the way it is after such legislation. The few who would really abuse or neglect their animanls will do so no matter what legislation you pass. You still have to enforce any law you make.What do you think would happen if we didnt have animal welfare legislation?That stupid yapping poodle next door would be on my BBQ Pit...........What do you think would happen if we didnt have animal welfare legislation?
Same as now, people who give a crap do the right thing and people who get a kick out of tormenting dumb creatures wouldn't.
The law can't force people to be good parents or pet owners, its not what its there for. The law is to enable prosecution and punishment for people who can't or won't regulate their own behaviour.What do you think would happen if we didnt have animal welfare legislation?the best stir fry i ever cooked was made with mangy mutt
Things would be as they were for hundreds of years before there was any such legislation. Humane people would treat animals humanely pretty much. Inhumane people would treat animanls inhumanely. Pretty much the way it is after such legislation. The few who would really abuse or neglect their animanls will do so no matter what legislation you pass. You still have to enforce any law you make.What do you think would happen if we didnt have animal welfare legislation?That stupid yapping poodle next door would be on my BBQ Pit...........What do you think would happen if we didnt have animal welfare legislation?
Same as now, people who give a crap do the right thing and people who get a kick out of tormenting dumb creatures wouldn't.
The law can't force people to be good parents or pet owners, its not what its there for. The law is to enable prosecution and punishment for people who can't or won't regulate their own behaviour.What do you think would happen if we didnt have animal welfare legislation?the best stir fry i ever cooked was made with mangy mutt
Sarbanes - Oxley Legislation take care of Whistle Blowers, does that include someone bullied by the boss?
Sarbanes-Oxley Legislation came out in 2002, to protect employees from retaliation if they come forward and say anything about the corporation and their financial reports that may not be completely true. Does this law include blowing the whistle on poor behavior? I know you have 90 days from the retalatory act to file a report with OSHA, but I am unsure if there is another law that fits bad behavior better?Sarbanes - Oxley Legislation take care of Whistle Blowers, does that include someone bullied by the boss?SOX will not help you in this matter. It was legislation passed to swing power back into the auditiors hands and make the heads of the companies more liable for the financial statements among other things. It would help you if you knew your boss was engaged in activities to help the company tinker with the financial statements or commit fraud. but it's not help for bad behavior.Sarbanes - Oxley Legislation take care of Whistle Blowers, does that include someone bullied by the boss?There may be a "bad behaviour" law out there--gods know we've tried to legislate everything else--but it isn't Sarbox.tagalog translator edelbrock
What is the name of the legislation where FDR signed where servicemen can come home and recieve funds?
The Serviceman's Readjustment Act of 1944, or the GI Bill as commonly known. It provided tuition and living expense for college or vocational training, or one year's unemployment compensation for all members of the military. It also provided loans to purchase a house (VA loan guarantees).
Two year's later most US colleges and universities had tripled the size of their enrollments.What is the name of the legislation where FDR signed where servicemen can come home and recieve funds?The G.I. Bill (officially titled Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944, PL345) provided for college or vocational education for returning World War II veterans (commonly referred to as GIs or G.I.s) as well as one year of unemployment compensation. It also provided loans for returning veterans to buy homes and start businesses.
Two year's later most US colleges and universities had tripled the size of their enrollments.What is the name of the legislation where FDR signed where servicemen can come home and recieve funds?The G.I. Bill (officially titled Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944, PL345) provided for college or vocational education for returning World War II veterans (commonly referred to as GIs or G.I.s) as well as one year of unemployment compensation. It also provided loans for returning veterans to buy homes and start businesses.
Has your state drafted or passed legislation claiming sovereignty and do you support it?
These non-binding resolutions are stupid. Legally invalid, and a waste of time.
Edit: No, they are not binding upon anyone. They're pointless. The people who wrote them, voted for them, and support these resolutions don't know what the 10th Amendment means. That's probably why they think it's some kind of magic pill.Has your state drafted or passed legislation claiming sovereignty and do you support it?Yes! It is in legislation now and I am so proud of my state standing up for states rights and my rights.Has your state drafted or passed legislation claiming sovereignty and do you support it?
My state did it back in 1995.Has your state drafted or passed legislation claiming sovereignty and do you support it?umm lemme check
NOHas your state drafted or passed legislation claiming sovereignty and do you support it?
No, my state is not one of them, sadly. I wish they would. I would support such a move wholeheartedly.
Adam B, you are wrong. These are binding according to the 10th amendment to the US Constitution which allows the states to run themselves. The federal government has been, and is increasingly, trying to take over state juristiction.Has your state drafted or passed legislation claiming sovereignty and do you support it?Yes, I'm going to a rally in Concord on Wednesday to support HCR6, which is a bill currently labeled ITL in the NH legislature that is almost word for word taken from the Kentucky Resolutions.
And yes, Adam B. the resolutions are binding. The only question is whether or not the federal government decides to agree that it has violated the 9th and 10th amendments hundreds of times and as such has caused the dissolution of the Union.Has your state drafted or passed legislation claiming sovereignty and do you support it?
Sadly, my state has not drafted or passed such legislation, but they are one of the states considering it and I would support it 100%. At this point, I would even support my states secession from the Union. I feel that it is going to take drastic measures to restore the freedoms that we have lost over the years and clear the corruption that is so prevalent in our federal government. If it takes a revolt on the part of the states to make it happen, so be it!
Edit: No, they are not binding upon anyone. They're pointless. The people who wrote them, voted for them, and support these resolutions don't know what the 10th Amendment means. That's probably why they think it's some kind of magic pill.Has your state drafted or passed legislation claiming sovereignty and do you support it?Yes! It is in legislation now and I am so proud of my state standing up for states rights and my rights.Has your state drafted or passed legislation claiming sovereignty and do you support it?
My state did it back in 1995.Has your state drafted or passed legislation claiming sovereignty and do you support it?umm lemme check
NOHas your state drafted or passed legislation claiming sovereignty and do you support it?
No, my state is not one of them, sadly. I wish they would. I would support such a move wholeheartedly.
Adam B, you are wrong. These are binding according to the 10th amendment to the US Constitution which allows the states to run themselves. The federal government has been, and is increasingly, trying to take over state juristiction.Has your state drafted or passed legislation claiming sovereignty and do you support it?Yes, I'm going to a rally in Concord on Wednesday to support HCR6, which is a bill currently labeled ITL in the NH legislature that is almost word for word taken from the Kentucky Resolutions.
And yes, Adam B. the resolutions are binding. The only question is whether or not the federal government decides to agree that it has violated the 9th and 10th amendments hundreds of times and as such has caused the dissolution of the Union.Has your state drafted or passed legislation claiming sovereignty and do you support it?
Sadly, my state has not drafted or passed such legislation, but they are one of the states considering it and I would support it 100%. At this point, I would even support my states secession from the Union. I feel that it is going to take drastic measures to restore the freedoms that we have lost over the years and clear the corruption that is so prevalent in our federal government. If it takes a revolt on the part of the states to make it happen, so be it!
Is Obama like FDR with his legislation for economic recovery from an economic slump?
FDR had the first and second new deals.
Obama had the bailout and health care reform (so far).
Please answer thoroughly, include educated, non-hostile statements, and provide factual evidence supporting your argument.Is Obama like FDR with his legislation for economic recovery from an economic slump?hoodrich is pretty right here, but he gives FDR too much credit. FDR prolonged the depression 7 years.
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/FDR鈥?/a>
capitalistic economies go up and down, government intervention usually hurts more than it helps.Is Obama like FDR with his legislation for economic recovery from an economic slump?
Yes.
They both made it worse!!!!!!Is Obama like FDR with his legislation for economic recovery from an economic slump?It doesn't really require great detail. They both spent money to kickstart the economy. it's a gamble, but it can work, especially, in FDR's case, if you have a couple of years making money out of war before you join in.Is Obama like FDR with his legislation for economic recovery from an economic slump?
FDR- used direct hiring for shovel ready jobs building things we needed like parks, roads, the golden gate bridge, and Hoover dam.
obama- ummmmm, errr, created some nothing government jobs, and uh? dug a tunnel for some turtles in Florida for some reason.Is Obama like FDR with his legislation for economic recovery from an economic slump?"Please answer thoroughly, include educated, non-hostile statements, and provide factual evidence supporting your argument."
You realize you're in Y!A, right?Is Obama like FDR with his legislation for economic recovery from an economic slump?
Obama hasn't done anything near what FDR did in getting the economy back on track. Under Obama, most of the federal money spent thus far has gone to banks and financial institutions that got the economy in a mess in the first place. Even with huge deficit spending by FDR, it took WWII to really dig America out of depression. America already has two wars going now. Maybe USA ought to escalate the wars, put them to an end and further stimulate the economy.
Obama had the bailout and health care reform (so far).
Please answer thoroughly, include educated, non-hostile statements, and provide factual evidence supporting your argument.Is Obama like FDR with his legislation for economic recovery from an economic slump?hoodrich is pretty right here, but he gives FDR too much credit. FDR prolonged the depression 7 years.
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/FDR鈥?/a>
capitalistic economies go up and down, government intervention usually hurts more than it helps.Is Obama like FDR with his legislation for economic recovery from an economic slump?
Yes.
They both made it worse!!!!!!Is Obama like FDR with his legislation for economic recovery from an economic slump?It doesn't really require great detail. They both spent money to kickstart the economy. it's a gamble, but it can work, especially, in FDR's case, if you have a couple of years making money out of war before you join in.Is Obama like FDR with his legislation for economic recovery from an economic slump?
FDR- used direct hiring for shovel ready jobs building things we needed like parks, roads, the golden gate bridge, and Hoover dam.
obama- ummmmm, errr, created some nothing government jobs, and uh? dug a tunnel for some turtles in Florida for some reason.Is Obama like FDR with his legislation for economic recovery from an economic slump?"Please answer thoroughly, include educated, non-hostile statements, and provide factual evidence supporting your argument."
You realize you're in Y!A, right?Is Obama like FDR with his legislation for economic recovery from an economic slump?
Obama hasn't done anything near what FDR did in getting the economy back on track. Under Obama, most of the federal money spent thus far has gone to banks and financial institutions that got the economy in a mess in the first place. Even with huge deficit spending by FDR, it took WWII to really dig America out of depression. America already has two wars going now. Maybe USA ought to escalate the wars, put them to an end and further stimulate the economy.
Should legislation be altered or struck down by judicial rulings in our democracy?
What do you think?Should legislation be altered or struck down by judicial rulings in our democracy?Yes if they violate the constitution in any fashion they should be.
What are some of the laws and legislation set up to protect the homeless?
Does anyone know?What are some of the laws and legislation set up to protect the homeless?most shelters, food banks and soup kitchens are run by charities, that is to say, NOT the government. (most often, some kind of church.)
There's no specific laws for the homeless. (there is social sevrvices, but that's not just for the homeless.)What are some of the laws and legislation set up to protect the homeless?I don't know about your state but each state does have a provision in the laws for weather..in other words if it's really cold they won't kick them off the heating grills...Otherwise homeless people are given the same protections under the law and non homeless people.english to arabic superchips
There's no specific laws for the homeless. (there is social sevrvices, but that's not just for the homeless.)What are some of the laws and legislation set up to protect the homeless?I don't know about your state but each state does have a provision in the laws for weather..in other words if it's really cold they won't kick them off the heating grills...Otherwise homeless people are given the same protections under the law and non homeless people.
How do you find recent delegated legislation that has been made?
OPSI (the ridiculous 'new' name of Her Majesty's Stationery Office)
The chronological tables are at:
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/stat.htm
These are from 1987 onwards and since you wanted 'recent' secondary legislation, these are presumably the ones you require.
If you only know the name of the secondary legislation, you can search by name.
The OPSI site also has functionality for an RSS feed for new secondary (ie delegated ) legislation at http://www.opsi.gov.uk/legislation/whats鈥?/a>
Remember, you'll have to search separately on OPSI for delegated legislation for the devolved parts of the UK
The secondary legislation does not contain the amended versions of the instruments, obviously.
How do you find recent delegated legislation that has been made?Halsbury's Statutory Instruments in the public library. Go to a loose leaf update and hope it is updated. If you want to go further The stationary office (HMSO) will sell you copies. You will need to be more specific than this How do you find recent delegated legislation that has been made?http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk is a useful source for older legislation
Is the American system of legislation being eroded by only having two parties?
Both parties, Republican and Democratic, are the only two major parties in todays political system. Are we allowing them to degredade our system of governing. This is susposed to be a system of the people and by the people. Most politicians in the big arena have millions of dollars, yet most of americans don't. Should there be a working class party?
Don't get me confused, I am not suggesting Ron Paul?Is the American system of legislation being eroded by only having two parties?They two party system has worked in the past, but now with this current administration it has been broken. The only way to fix this problem is to introduce a four party system. This way there is balance because no one side controls the congress or the house. They have to actually debate the issues not pat each others back by passing bills that are full of ear marks and pork belly spending.Is the American system of legislation being eroded by only having two parties?The two party systems have created Corporate US Government. Bush is the President of this Corporate US Government. The Agencies of this Corporate US Government are sub-corporations. Our Republic is not represented by this Corporate US Government but it is controlled by this Corporate US Government. This Corporate US Government is based on commerce. The Corporate US Government Department of Justice does not administer law based on Constitutional law. The Corporate US Government Department of Justice administers law based on ADMIRALTY LAW (commerce). We the People, need to take back our Republic so that the voice of the People can control their own Government. The American Public must be educated and wake up to these facts as they exist.Is the American system of legislation being eroded by only having two parties?No its being erodded by liberal judges making laws form the bench, instead of following the laws congress makes.Is the American system of legislation being eroded by only having two parties?
It would be nice to have an Independent Minority in the House to keep both parties in Check.
Don't get me confused, I am not suggesting Ron Paul?Is the American system of legislation being eroded by only having two parties?They two party system has worked in the past, but now with this current administration it has been broken. The only way to fix this problem is to introduce a four party system. This way there is balance because no one side controls the congress or the house. They have to actually debate the issues not pat each others back by passing bills that are full of ear marks and pork belly spending.Is the American system of legislation being eroded by only having two parties?The two party systems have created Corporate US Government. Bush is the President of this Corporate US Government. The Agencies of this Corporate US Government are sub-corporations. Our Republic is not represented by this Corporate US Government but it is controlled by this Corporate US Government. This Corporate US Government is based on commerce. The Corporate US Government Department of Justice does not administer law based on Constitutional law. The Corporate US Government Department of Justice administers law based on ADMIRALTY LAW (commerce). We the People, need to take back our Republic so that the voice of the People can control their own Government. The American Public must be educated and wake up to these facts as they exist.Is the American system of legislation being eroded by only having two parties?No its being erodded by liberal judges making laws form the bench, instead of following the laws congress makes.Is the American system of legislation being eroded by only having two parties?
It would be nice to have an Independent Minority in the House to keep both parties in Check.
Legislation of marijuana and alcohol: How do lawmakers decide?
which forms of self anesthetization drugs are legalized?
I never thought I would be asking this question here, but the question never seems to go away. What is your opinion?Legislation of marijuana and alcohol: How do lawmakers decide?May I offer the following as food for thought.
As a police officer, I see more issues involved with the usage of these two elements
than most civilians do in a life time. My uniformed officers deal with the front line issues
involved in the usage of both, I could list statistics till the cows come home, on how much
of a negative effect these two elements have on our society, Most Domestic assaults are
caused by alcohol or drugs. Either one or the other household member becomes a victim.
Domestic violence is a train wreck looking to occur when either party is involved with the above.
25% of the Homicides I handle are alcohol or direct drug usage involved.
40% of the Armed Robbery's in my jurisdiction are related to drugs or alcohol usage.
These are social issues that are trying to be handled criminally and through legislation. Both
are failing miserably. Interdiction. Rehabilitation. Treatment. Are the keys to success of lessening
these problems.
Until we come to a meeting of the minds on how best to deal with the above problems, I will
be looking at increased statistics. Thanks for asking, Just a thought.Legislation of marijuana and alcohol: How do lawmakers decide?This subject tends to be controversial for any number of reasons.
Substance abuse takes many forms, and not all the substances are illegal or even regulated. One can argue against any substance that can be abused based on its potential for abuse. One can argue in favor of them as being beneficial if not abused.
I liked the first answer to this question from the police officer, because he deals with the specific problems abuse of these two substances (and other illegal drugs besides marijuana) cause. Note I said abuse. That can be extended to include trafficking issues.
The majority of people who use alcohol do so responsibly and in moderation. Those who abuse it cause any number of problems and not everyone who abuses it abuses it all the time. Responsible alcohol use means keeping it under control and not driving if enough has been consumed to impair. Alcoholism is a condition that affects a comparatively small percentage of alcohol consumers. It is a complex issue. I believe alcohol should be legal and its use regulated. I favor a legal drinking age of 21 and that driving while intoxicated should be punished at least as severely as it is now, but much more consistently. It should be noted that past attempts to prohibit sale and use of alcoholic beverages resulted in very high profits for organized crime. Also, some doctors say a moderate consumption of alcohol can have positive health benefits.
Marijuana is a bit more complex. While it has been argued that its effects are less damaging than those of alcohol, as an illegal substance there is little or no quality control. At a time when this society is trying to limit or eliminate tobacco use it makes little sense to increase the access and acceptability of a drug that must be smoked to have whatever effects it is going to have. It would seem to me that the active ingredient--if found to have a beneficial medical effect--should be legal if it can be produced in a different form such as a pill or liquid and if its quality and effect can be regulated. It should also be noted that as an illegal drug, marijuana is far more profitable than it would be if it were legal and regulated.
I've never used marijuana. I have used alcohol and have on occasion abused it.
Under no circumstances, regardless of what legal status these drugs are given, should socially harmful abuse or illegal trafficking be allowed or encouraged.
It seems to me that our society should be trying to find out what social inducements exist that result in any drug being abused. The culprit might well be not the drug, but the social environment that leads to its abuse. If we can find ways to make smoking less acceptable and less practiced we should be able to find ways to halt abuse of drugs, illegal, legal, or regulated.
Long answer, and I hope it makes sense.Legislation of marijuana and alcohol: How do lawmakers decide?Do you live in a dry county?
Be sure here you can wash your car with Chablis in Burgundy only the description care will make you drunk!don't smell the screen
there is a difference between alcololic beverages and Marijuana we call this **** Haschich muslim word
translation murderer.
I have seen what plan Ron Paul to shortsocket traffics:free markett!
About drugattic a prescription would be a better solution to limit to control .Legislation of marijuana and alcohol: How do lawmakers decide?
Alcohol is taxed about 100%.
MJ isn't that is how they decide:
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$…
I never thought I would be asking this question here, but the question never seems to go away. What is your opinion?Legislation of marijuana and alcohol: How do lawmakers decide?May I offer the following as food for thought.
As a police officer, I see more issues involved with the usage of these two elements
than most civilians do in a life time. My uniformed officers deal with the front line issues
involved in the usage of both, I could list statistics till the cows come home, on how much
of a negative effect these two elements have on our society, Most Domestic assaults are
caused by alcohol or drugs. Either one or the other household member becomes a victim.
Domestic violence is a train wreck looking to occur when either party is involved with the above.
25% of the Homicides I handle are alcohol or direct drug usage involved.
40% of the Armed Robbery's in my jurisdiction are related to drugs or alcohol usage.
These are social issues that are trying to be handled criminally and through legislation. Both
are failing miserably. Interdiction. Rehabilitation. Treatment. Are the keys to success of lessening
these problems.
Until we come to a meeting of the minds on how best to deal with the above problems, I will
be looking at increased statistics. Thanks for asking, Just a thought.Legislation of marijuana and alcohol: How do lawmakers decide?This subject tends to be controversial for any number of reasons.
Substance abuse takes many forms, and not all the substances are illegal or even regulated. One can argue against any substance that can be abused based on its potential for abuse. One can argue in favor of them as being beneficial if not abused.
I liked the first answer to this question from the police officer, because he deals with the specific problems abuse of these two substances (and other illegal drugs besides marijuana) cause. Note I said abuse. That can be extended to include trafficking issues.
The majority of people who use alcohol do so responsibly and in moderation. Those who abuse it cause any number of problems and not everyone who abuses it abuses it all the time. Responsible alcohol use means keeping it under control and not driving if enough has been consumed to impair. Alcoholism is a condition that affects a comparatively small percentage of alcohol consumers. It is a complex issue. I believe alcohol should be legal and its use regulated. I favor a legal drinking age of 21 and that driving while intoxicated should be punished at least as severely as it is now, but much more consistently. It should be noted that past attempts to prohibit sale and use of alcoholic beverages resulted in very high profits for organized crime. Also, some doctors say a moderate consumption of alcohol can have positive health benefits.
Marijuana is a bit more complex. While it has been argued that its effects are less damaging than those of alcohol, as an illegal substance there is little or no quality control. At a time when this society is trying to limit or eliminate tobacco use it makes little sense to increase the access and acceptability of a drug that must be smoked to have whatever effects it is going to have. It would seem to me that the active ingredient--if found to have a beneficial medical effect--should be legal if it can be produced in a different form such as a pill or liquid and if its quality and effect can be regulated. It should also be noted that as an illegal drug, marijuana is far more profitable than it would be if it were legal and regulated.
I've never used marijuana. I have used alcohol and have on occasion abused it.
Under no circumstances, regardless of what legal status these drugs are given, should socially harmful abuse or illegal trafficking be allowed or encouraged.
It seems to me that our society should be trying to find out what social inducements exist that result in any drug being abused. The culprit might well be not the drug, but the social environment that leads to its abuse. If we can find ways to make smoking less acceptable and less practiced we should be able to find ways to halt abuse of drugs, illegal, legal, or regulated.
Long answer, and I hope it makes sense.Legislation of marijuana and alcohol: How do lawmakers decide?Do you live in a dry county?
Be sure here you can wash your car with Chablis in Burgundy only the description care will make you drunk!don't smell the screen
there is a difference between alcololic beverages and Marijuana we call this **** Haschich muslim word
translation murderer.
I have seen what plan Ron Paul to shortsocket traffics:free markett!
About drugattic a prescription would be a better solution to limit to control .Legislation of marijuana and alcohol: How do lawmakers decide?
Alcohol is taxed about 100%.
MJ isn't that is how they decide:
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$…
Isn't it ironic that Obama is outraising McCain, when McCain's signature legislation was campaign finance?
It sure says alot about the effectiveness of McCain-Feingold doesn't it?
Now we hear Republicans complaining about Obama "buying" this election. So which is it? Is Obama "buying" the election, which proves that McCain's most famous legislative accomplishment is effectively useless? Or is he playing fair, and the Maverick(tm)'s legislation is helping to keep the playing field even and keep big money from ruining Washington, DC?Isn't it ironic that Obama is outraising McCain, when McCain's signature legislation was campaign finance?McCain is exploiting loopholes in his own campaign finance laws, for example...the RNC is allowed to run campaign ads on his behalf, without actually donating to the campaign....this somewhat levels the playing field, but it isn't even close to the funds Obama has at his disposal.Isn't it ironic that Obama is outraising McCain, when McCain's signature legislation was campaign finance?In order for intelligence to exist, there has to be stupidity
Now we hear Republicans complaining about Obama "buying" this election. So which is it? Is Obama "buying" the election, which proves that McCain's most famous legislative accomplishment is effectively useless? Or is he playing fair, and the Maverick(tm)'s legislation is helping to keep the playing field even and keep big money from ruining Washington, DC?Isn't it ironic that Obama is outraising McCain, when McCain's signature legislation was campaign finance?McCain is exploiting loopholes in his own campaign finance laws, for example...the RNC is allowed to run campaign ads on his behalf, without actually donating to the campaign....this somewhat levels the playing field, but it isn't even close to the funds Obama has at his disposal.Isn't it ironic that Obama is outraising McCain, when McCain's signature legislation was campaign finance?In order for intelligence to exist, there has to be stupidity
I have a question about the proposed legislation for the extension of the housing tax credit.?
If the new legislation is passed and the income limitations are removed, would I be able to claim the credit even though I purchased my house earlier in the year?I have a question about the proposed legislation for the extension of the housing tax credit.?Since nothing has been passed in to law there's NO possible way to answer the question.
The odds of another credit are not that hot. Sales tend to slump during the winter months anyway, so I'd speculate that no action will be taken until late Winter or early Spring. That of course is only a guess.
The odds of a larger credit or higher income limits or removal of the first time buyer requirement are even less.
The odds that it would be retro-active to any purchases in 2009 are pretty much zero. Congress surprised everyone when the current credit was back-dated to January 1, 2009. That proves that anything CAN happen, but don't hold your breath!cb radio translate japanese to english
The odds of another credit are not that hot. Sales tend to slump during the winter months anyway, so I'd speculate that no action will be taken until late Winter or early Spring. That of course is only a guess.
The odds of a larger credit or higher income limits or removal of the first time buyer requirement are even less.
The odds that it would be retro-active to any purchases in 2009 are pretty much zero. Congress surprised everyone when the current credit was back-dated to January 1, 2009. That proves that anything CAN happen, but don't hold your breath!
Gays: Do you think hate crime legislation is good or bad?
I think the laws are hypocritical. Your views.Gays: Do you think hate crime legislation is good or bad?As a gay, I'm against hate crime laws. For me, a crime is a crime..a murder is a murder. The *why* really isn't all that important, unless of course, mental illness played a part.Gays: Do you think hate crime legislation is good or bad?
It depends on how they're implemented. Nothing should abridge free speech or the free exercise of religion (or irreligion). To that end, I think that hate crime legislation should apply to religious groups. Jerks who terrorize a group of people with violence should fall under hate crime legislation.
I'm not sure how effective hate crime legislation is. People don't go gay bashing because they're rational, or because they fear the law.Gays: Do you think hate crime legislation is good or bad?Bad. Crime is crime. There are already laws to prevent violence, etc, against people, regardless of gender, race, sexuality, creed, etc.Gays: Do you think hate crime legislation is good or bad?
Hate crime legislation is a good thing, people who's are motivated by hate deserve more time in the slammer.Gays: Do you think hate crime legislation is good or bad?Hate crimes are sadly NECESSARY to add Penalty to Perpetrator!!
It depends on how they're implemented. Nothing should abridge free speech or the free exercise of religion (or irreligion). To that end, I think that hate crime legislation should apply to religious groups. Jerks who terrorize a group of people with violence should fall under hate crime legislation.
I'm not sure how effective hate crime legislation is. People don't go gay bashing because they're rational, or because they fear the law.Gays: Do you think hate crime legislation is good or bad?Bad. Crime is crime. There are already laws to prevent violence, etc, against people, regardless of gender, race, sexuality, creed, etc.Gays: Do you think hate crime legislation is good or bad?
Hate crime legislation is a good thing, people who's are motivated by hate deserve more time in the slammer.Gays: Do you think hate crime legislation is good or bad?Hate crimes are sadly NECESSARY to add Penalty to Perpetrator!!
Should there be a change in legislation that limits woman's rights to abort if the father wants the baby?
Could that include other family members? How would that happen?Should there be a change in legislation that limits woman's rights to abort if the father wants the baby?There should be a change in legislation and this is why...
Some will argue that it's a woman's right to choose. If she chooses to abort she is relinquishing her parental rights. If the male wants to keep the child, he should be allowed to force her to carry the baby to term. She has no other involvement with the child.
If you don't think this is fair, reverse the roles. If the woman chooses to keep the baby and the male wants her to abort it, he is responsible for the baby's financial care via child support for 18 years. Let him walk scot free or pay 9 months of child support while the baby is incubating. And then he has no other involvement with the child.
The bottom line is this: which is more important, the egg or the sperm? Current legislation obvioiusly favors the egg, however, without a sperm there is no baby. I think it's a 50/50 split. What good for one, is good for all. Change the legislation.Should there be a change in legislation that limits woman's rights to abort if the father wants the baby?
I most definately believe that if the father wants the baby, he should be given that opportunity. My Girlfriens is currently with child and i would not ever allow her to have an abbortion. (she would never want to). Now youll have these womens rights people saying well its their body, thats bull ****.
edit: Ill modify this a little and say that this should be circumstantial. I definately do not think that if 2 people are together that one should she should be able to go behind his back. However in cases of rape, or abandonment, i do not think that the "father" needs to be located.Should there be a change in legislation that limits woman's rights to abort if the father wants the baby?women have become too selfish, i am convinced that fathers have rights too.Should there be a change in legislation that limits woman's rights to abort if the father wants the baby?
No there shouldn't be a change in legislation. The right to have a baby is solely a woman's decision. Even if the father did want to keep the baby he's not the one to make that decision because he isn't that will have to carry a growing fetus for nine months. I personally believe that its solely a woman's choice whether to bring another human being into this world.
I'm not a feminist but I do believe that this is the best way to go.Should there be a change in legislation that limits woman's rights to abort if the father wants the baby?Suppose the child was conceived during rape. Would the rapist be allowed to stop the abortion? Suppose the conception took place during a wild weekend where the mother had sex with multiple partners. Would all the partners be allowed to stop the abortion? These are real possibilities; perhaps remote but still possible.
Then there is the sticky issue of family. How closely related does a person have to be to stop an abortion? Technically we can trace our DNA back to a few common ancestors.
It is up to the woman whether or not she wants to be responsible for bringing a life into this world or not. Lets leave it at that. If you are opposed to abortion, fine; go and convince women not to abort their babies. However, outlawing abortions is the dumbest thing a society can do.
The only way a family member could technically stop an abortion is to prove the woman is incompetent and be given power of attorney over the woman. Then they would also have to monitor the woman 24/7 to make sure she does not try to abort the fetus herself.Should there be a change in legislation that limits woman's rights to abort if the father wants the baby?
There is the obvious stipulation of consensual sex. Common sense dictates that a victim of rape who becomes pregnant as a result is the sole decision maker. The only problem with that is that there will be cases of fathers filing lawsuits against women whom they claim aborted their child without their consent. Obviously, the woman would have had to claim rape in order to carry out the abortion without a father's consent which causes a whole other mess of problems, not to mention abortion clinics having to "store" samples of DNA tissue from aborted fetuses for evidence! It creates a ton of new mess from a legal standpoint, but in my opinion, it would be worth it!
RickyRed makes an excellent point. If a woman gets to choose whether or not to be responsible for a baby, then the man should also have that right as well. He should be able to say, "OK if you want it, but I don't" and be able to walk away free of any support, financial or otherwise. Women want to argue that "it's MY body". Well, men ought to have the right to say "it's MY wallet"!
Another point in the "it's MY body" argument that seems often overlooked is that since a female can choose to remove a beating heart from her womb, then she should also have the right to remove her own beating heart, yet this is considered suicide! But wait- it's HER body, isn't it? How can it be suicide to remove her own beating heart from HER body and yet not be considered homicide to remove someone else's beating heart from HER body?
Pro- choicers are selfish, there's no way around it. It's NOT the end of the world to have a baby! There are plenty of people willing to adopt and no end to the rewards for raising the child yourself! Considering the options, abortion is akin to choosing amputation of limbs and replacing them with prosthetics because it's quick and easy and there's somewhere that you want to be RIGHT NOW even though modern medical alternatives could save the limbs with (9) months of surgery and physical therapy and still get you where you want to be later.
It's sad, really. Think of all the wonderful people that could have been walking amongst us today had they not been aborted...
Some will argue that it's a woman's right to choose. If she chooses to abort she is relinquishing her parental rights. If the male wants to keep the child, he should be allowed to force her to carry the baby to term. She has no other involvement with the child.
If you don't think this is fair, reverse the roles. If the woman chooses to keep the baby and the male wants her to abort it, he is responsible for the baby's financial care via child support for 18 years. Let him walk scot free or pay 9 months of child support while the baby is incubating. And then he has no other involvement with the child.
The bottom line is this: which is more important, the egg or the sperm? Current legislation obvioiusly favors the egg, however, without a sperm there is no baby. I think it's a 50/50 split. What good for one, is good for all. Change the legislation.Should there be a change in legislation that limits woman's rights to abort if the father wants the baby?
I most definately believe that if the father wants the baby, he should be given that opportunity. My Girlfriens is currently with child and i would not ever allow her to have an abbortion. (she would never want to). Now youll have these womens rights people saying well its their body, thats bull ****.
edit: Ill modify this a little and say that this should be circumstantial. I definately do not think that if 2 people are together that one should she should be able to go behind his back. However in cases of rape, or abandonment, i do not think that the "father" needs to be located.Should there be a change in legislation that limits woman's rights to abort if the father wants the baby?women have become too selfish, i am convinced that fathers have rights too.Should there be a change in legislation that limits woman's rights to abort if the father wants the baby?
No there shouldn't be a change in legislation. The right to have a baby is solely a woman's decision. Even if the father did want to keep the baby he's not the one to make that decision because he isn't that will have to carry a growing fetus for nine months. I personally believe that its solely a woman's choice whether to bring another human being into this world.
I'm not a feminist but I do believe that this is the best way to go.Should there be a change in legislation that limits woman's rights to abort if the father wants the baby?Suppose the child was conceived during rape. Would the rapist be allowed to stop the abortion? Suppose the conception took place during a wild weekend where the mother had sex with multiple partners. Would all the partners be allowed to stop the abortion? These are real possibilities; perhaps remote but still possible.
Then there is the sticky issue of family. How closely related does a person have to be to stop an abortion? Technically we can trace our DNA back to a few common ancestors.
It is up to the woman whether or not she wants to be responsible for bringing a life into this world or not. Lets leave it at that. If you are opposed to abortion, fine; go and convince women not to abort their babies. However, outlawing abortions is the dumbest thing a society can do.
The only way a family member could technically stop an abortion is to prove the woman is incompetent and be given power of attorney over the woman. Then they would also have to monitor the woman 24/7 to make sure she does not try to abort the fetus herself.Should there be a change in legislation that limits woman's rights to abort if the father wants the baby?
There is the obvious stipulation of consensual sex. Common sense dictates that a victim of rape who becomes pregnant as a result is the sole decision maker. The only problem with that is that there will be cases of fathers filing lawsuits against women whom they claim aborted their child without their consent. Obviously, the woman would have had to claim rape in order to carry out the abortion without a father's consent which causes a whole other mess of problems, not to mention abortion clinics having to "store" samples of DNA tissue from aborted fetuses for evidence! It creates a ton of new mess from a legal standpoint, but in my opinion, it would be worth it!
RickyRed makes an excellent point. If a woman gets to choose whether or not to be responsible for a baby, then the man should also have that right as well. He should be able to say, "OK if you want it, but I don't" and be able to walk away free of any support, financial or otherwise. Women want to argue that "it's MY body". Well, men ought to have the right to say "it's MY wallet"!
Another point in the "it's MY body" argument that seems often overlooked is that since a female can choose to remove a beating heart from her womb, then she should also have the right to remove her own beating heart, yet this is considered suicide! But wait- it's HER body, isn't it? How can it be suicide to remove her own beating heart from HER body and yet not be considered homicide to remove someone else's beating heart from HER body?
Pro- choicers are selfish, there's no way around it. It's NOT the end of the world to have a baby! There are plenty of people willing to adopt and no end to the rewards for raising the child yourself! Considering the options, abortion is akin to choosing amputation of limbs and replacing them with prosthetics because it's quick and easy and there's somewhere that you want to be RIGHT NOW even though modern medical alternatives could save the limbs with (9) months of surgery and physical therapy and still get you where you want to be later.
It's sad, really. Think of all the wonderful people that could have been walking amongst us today had they not been aborted...
How will Kennedy's proposed legislation help anyone? His health insurance proposal calls for businesses to be?
fined if they do not offer health insurance and for individuals to be fined if they do not chose to get either private insurance or a public plan?
How will this NOT cripple both the economy and businesses?How will Kennedy's proposed legislation help anyone? His health insurance proposal calls for businesses to be?I am unsure why business's need to offer to pay for health insurance anyway...it is major burden to them
Why can't we do away it and people pay themselves and have a one payer system
PBS.org had a very informative show regarding this idea
Need to look at who is preventing any reform from happening and why
it is the insurance companies who want it to remain the same
and doctors are protesting the fact that they have to spend time on the phone with the insurance companies fighting for their patients non stop
The insurance companies remain the problem and turn away anyone with illness...people believe they are covered but soon as find out they are sick they find themselves in debt a was not
We need to look at many different ideas and think outside the box to have real reform
What he proposes is to ensure all people are covered and no one left out and do not believe that fines are the way to go
As the reform is in early stages...best to get ideas out as the ones we have now do not work....it will go no where and not law so best to keep putting forth ideas....any out there?How will Kennedy's proposed legislation help anyone? His health insurance proposal calls for businesses to be?
Kennedy....HELP??? I don't think so.........Let him answer the questions about Mary Joe before screwing up our health care systemHow will Kennedy's proposed legislation help anyone? His health insurance proposal calls for businesses to be?He doesn't care who it cripples, as long the the govt./politicians get their cut.How will Kennedy's proposed legislation help anyone? His health insurance proposal calls for businesses to be?
Think about it. Social Security dead by 2017. States cannot afford their own welfare programs. Medicare is in very serious trouble. Ohio has completely cut out heating bill assistance which has run out of money, etc... With current deficits, not including future ones, our tax base with the loss of the middle class means virtually zero money in the treasury. I think it is way to optimistic to assume it will ONLY cripple the economy and businesses. I plan on leaving the USA immediately after graduation upon any credible job offers to areas of the world I am looking at. People have always asked me where would I go that is better than here. In four years, that is going to be a long list. How bad will it get here? Here's a couple of clues. Stalinist USSR and Mao's China. Hitler's Germany is another possibility. If you think it cannot happen here, you're not watching the news.How will Kennedy's proposed legislation help anyone? His health insurance proposal calls for businesses to be?Have you read the proposed legislation?How will Kennedy's proposed legislation help anyone? His health insurance proposal calls for businesses to be?
Federal government's interference in health care is unconstitutional (I DARE ALL OF YOU TO PROVE ME WRONG). If Comrade Kennedy is so confident in government interfered health care, he should go to Washington General Hospital (or the nearest public health clinic) the next time Mary Jo Kopekne's ghost visits him. Anyone who has confidence in the federal government's handling of health care should look at education, the welfare state programs, Socialist Insecurity, Medicare and Medicaid, all failed agencies of the federal government.
Darcy, how many of the people "turned away" by insurance companies waited until they needed help before they got insurance? If the federal government didn't interfere and make up so many useless rules health care would be a LOT cheaper. How's this for an idea - I go to a doctor, I pay; you go to a doctor, you pay? Personal responsibility - what a concept!
How will this NOT cripple both the economy and businesses?How will Kennedy's proposed legislation help anyone? His health insurance proposal calls for businesses to be?I am unsure why business's need to offer to pay for health insurance anyway...it is major burden to them
Why can't we do away it and people pay themselves and have a one payer system
PBS.org had a very informative show regarding this idea
Need to look at who is preventing any reform from happening and why
it is the insurance companies who want it to remain the same
and doctors are protesting the fact that they have to spend time on the phone with the insurance companies fighting for their patients non stop
The insurance companies remain the problem and turn away anyone with illness...people believe they are covered but soon as find out they are sick they find themselves in debt a was not
We need to look at many different ideas and think outside the box to have real reform
What he proposes is to ensure all people are covered and no one left out and do not believe that fines are the way to go
As the reform is in early stages...best to get ideas out as the ones we have now do not work....it will go no where and not law so best to keep putting forth ideas....any out there?How will Kennedy's proposed legislation help anyone? His health insurance proposal calls for businesses to be?
Kennedy....HELP??? I don't think so.........Let him answer the questions about Mary Joe before screwing up our health care systemHow will Kennedy's proposed legislation help anyone? His health insurance proposal calls for businesses to be?He doesn't care who it cripples, as long the the govt./politicians get their cut.How will Kennedy's proposed legislation help anyone? His health insurance proposal calls for businesses to be?
Think about it. Social Security dead by 2017. States cannot afford their own welfare programs. Medicare is in very serious trouble. Ohio has completely cut out heating bill assistance which has run out of money, etc... With current deficits, not including future ones, our tax base with the loss of the middle class means virtually zero money in the treasury. I think it is way to optimistic to assume it will ONLY cripple the economy and businesses. I plan on leaving the USA immediately after graduation upon any credible job offers to areas of the world I am looking at. People have always asked me where would I go that is better than here. In four years, that is going to be a long list. How bad will it get here? Here's a couple of clues. Stalinist USSR and Mao's China. Hitler's Germany is another possibility. If you think it cannot happen here, you're not watching the news.How will Kennedy's proposed legislation help anyone? His health insurance proposal calls for businesses to be?Have you read the proposed legislation?How will Kennedy's proposed legislation help anyone? His health insurance proposal calls for businesses to be?
Federal government's interference in health care is unconstitutional (I DARE ALL OF YOU TO PROVE ME WRONG). If Comrade Kennedy is so confident in government interfered health care, he should go to Washington General Hospital (or the nearest public health clinic) the next time Mary Jo Kopekne's ghost visits him. Anyone who has confidence in the federal government's handling of health care should look at education, the welfare state programs, Socialist Insecurity, Medicare and Medicaid, all failed agencies of the federal government.
Darcy, how many of the people "turned away" by insurance companies waited until they needed help before they got insurance? If the federal government didn't interfere and make up so many useless rules health care would be a LOT cheaper. How's this for an idea - I go to a doctor, I pay; you go to a doctor, you pay? Personal responsibility - what a concept!
Which political party routinely proposes legislation to further the idea of the Nanny State?
Another easy one, what say you?Which political party routinely proposes legislation to further the idea of the Nanny State?Any thinking person knows that it is the Democratic party. The delusional dems are just, well, delusional.Which political party routinely proposes legislation to further the idea of the Nanny State?
Republicans. See "gay marriage" constitutional amendments for the latest details.
You know the party that tells you who you should marry, wants to ban publications that they don't think you should be reading and programming they don't think you should watching (see porn), dictate what kind of sex you can have and approve of which genders you can have it with, what religion you must be, I could go on and on. Republicans make this too easy.Which political party routinely proposes legislation to further the idea of the Nanny State?Republicans...hands down.
Republicans
In his new book, economist Dean Baker debunks the myth that conservatives favor the market over government intervention. In fact, conservatives rely on a range of “nanny state” policies that ensure the rich get richer while leaving most Americans worse off. It’s time for the rules to change. Sound economic policy should harness the market in ways that produce desirable social outcomes – decent wages, good jobs and affordable health care.Which political party routinely proposes legislation to further the idea of the Nanny State?Studies show that the welfare queen idea has roots in both race and gender. Franklin Gilliam, the author of a public perception experiment on welfare, concludes that:
"While poor women of all races get blamed for their impoverished condition, African-American women commit the most egregious violations of American values. This story line taps into stereotypes about both women (uncontrolled sexuality) and African-Americans (laziness)."
Studies show that the public dramatically overestimates the number of African-Americans in poverty, with the cause of this attributed to media trends and its portrayal of poverty.[9] Political scientist Martin Gilens found that the media shifted its focus on poverty from white Appalachian farmers and factory closings during the 1960s, to a very darker image following civil unrest in major US cities.[9] By 1973, 75% of magazine pictures featured African Americans as the face of welfare, despite African Americans making up only 35% of welfare recipients.[9] This darkening of welfare recipients was accompanied by a feminization of poverty during the same time, where from the 1970s onwards, women became the predominant face of poverty.[3][1]
Franklin Gilliam’s study examined the intersection of people’s attitudes on race, gender, and the media. The experiment showed an 11-minute news clip, with a welfare story embedded at some point in the clip, to two groups of participants. Each welfare clip had a different recipient -- one with a white woman and the other with a black woman. The results showed that people were extremely accurate in their recall of the race and gender of the black female welfare recipient, confirming that the gendered and racial narrative had entered common knowledge and that implicit associations were often made.[3]Which political party routinely proposes legislation to further the idea of the Nanny State?
Republicans.
they wait until they have made huge fortunes on a loophole, then propose a law to close the loophole, and find another one, blaming the old one on democrats.
Republicans once again.Which political party routinely proposes legislation to further the idea of the Nanny State?
Repubic ians.
Republicans lately and they will take the mantle of being the least fiscally conservative of any governance over the last 30 years, just based on the growth of the national debt under Reagan, Bush 41 and Bush 43.
Dems do Nanny state stuff while Reps do Ninny state stuff. Substance versus symbolism. Any gay flag burners in your area lately?
None. That is a construct of the uber-Right wing of the Repugnican party...IOW, its a made-up crock of crap!
Both parties do this.....I wouldn't say either one has a leg up on the other here...
Depends on whether the "child" getting the nanny is a giant corporation or investment bank trying to have all regulation on it's particular industry removed ... in which case the party proposing the legislation is the Republican party.....
by the way how has all that deregulation that's occurred since Reagan working out.... so far only the airlines and the entire banking industry have failed but hey....at least Bush has weakened environmental laws so my air is dirtier... wait that's not good for anyone or anything, is it?
....or whether you are talking about a nanny state as it relates to individuals getting an affordable education or welfare when they are down and out... or affordable healthcare so they don't die unnecessarily just because they don't have the funds.... or maybe even a doctor who was willing to help the poor by accepting medicare/medicaid at his/her office that now (or at least through last week) was looking at a huge pay cut because of Medicare "reform" ..... in which case I think you have to say that it's almost always a Democrat proposing such legislation. ( And related to the last example given...Democrats working to override vetoes so we can actually get something done in our government... including making sure our doctors get paid and not our insurance companies).
Hope this answers your "softball" of a question.... and I wish I lived in the close-minded, sound-bite world you live in. It would simplify everything... and I like you... could go around thinking I was right all the time but never really looking at the problem with any depth. Yep... your black and white world must be a comforting place to live.... too bad it only exists in your head.
President Franklin Roosevelt’s socialistic program he called our “Second Bill of Rights.”
By 1944, when he began his fourth term (he was the only President unconstrained by the traditional limit of two terms), President Roosevelt candidly acknowledged in his State of the Union message that the New Deal welfare state was not part of the original Constitutional government of the United States and that the Constitution had never been amended, in accordance with the express provision of Article V, to legitimize the welfare state:
We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all – regardless of station, race, or creed. Among these are: The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries, or shops or farms or mines of the Nation; The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation; The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living; The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad; The right of every family to a decent home; The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health; The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment; The right to a good education. All these rights spell security.
It is this “Second Bill of Rights” aspect of the liberal paradigm that leads today’s public, ignorant of history, to believe that health care and other welfare benefits are literally “constitutional rights.”
Republicans
the one that wants to control the bedroom but not the boardroom.
The Democrats..
The one that is running a communist for president this year.
Republicans. See "gay marriage" constitutional amendments for the latest details.
You know the party that tells you who you should marry, wants to ban publications that they don't think you should be reading and programming they don't think you should watching (see porn), dictate what kind of sex you can have and approve of which genders you can have it with, what religion you must be, I could go on and on. Republicans make this too easy.Which political party routinely proposes legislation to further the idea of the Nanny State?Republicans...hands down.
Republicans
In his new book, economist Dean Baker debunks the myth that conservatives favor the market over government intervention. In fact, conservatives rely on a range of “nanny state” policies that ensure the rich get richer while leaving most Americans worse off. It’s time for the rules to change. Sound economic policy should harness the market in ways that produce desirable social outcomes – decent wages, good jobs and affordable health care.Which political party routinely proposes legislation to further the idea of the Nanny State?Studies show that the welfare queen idea has roots in both race and gender. Franklin Gilliam, the author of a public perception experiment on welfare, concludes that:
"While poor women of all races get blamed for their impoverished condition, African-American women commit the most egregious violations of American values. This story line taps into stereotypes about both women (uncontrolled sexuality) and African-Americans (laziness)."
Studies show that the public dramatically overestimates the number of African-Americans in poverty, with the cause of this attributed to media trends and its portrayal of poverty.[9] Political scientist Martin Gilens found that the media shifted its focus on poverty from white Appalachian farmers and factory closings during the 1960s, to a very darker image following civil unrest in major US cities.[9] By 1973, 75% of magazine pictures featured African Americans as the face of welfare, despite African Americans making up only 35% of welfare recipients.[9] This darkening of welfare recipients was accompanied by a feminization of poverty during the same time, where from the 1970s onwards, women became the predominant face of poverty.[3][1]
Franklin Gilliam’s study examined the intersection of people’s attitudes on race, gender, and the media. The experiment showed an 11-minute news clip, with a welfare story embedded at some point in the clip, to two groups of participants. Each welfare clip had a different recipient -- one with a white woman and the other with a black woman. The results showed that people were extremely accurate in their recall of the race and gender of the black female welfare recipient, confirming that the gendered and racial narrative had entered common knowledge and that implicit associations were often made.[3]Which political party routinely proposes legislation to further the idea of the Nanny State?
Republicans.
they wait until they have made huge fortunes on a loophole, then propose a law to close the loophole, and find another one, blaming the old one on democrats.
Republicans once again.Which political party routinely proposes legislation to further the idea of the Nanny State?
Repubic ians.
Republicans lately and they will take the mantle of being the least fiscally conservative of any governance over the last 30 years, just based on the growth of the national debt under Reagan, Bush 41 and Bush 43.
Dems do Nanny state stuff while Reps do Ninny state stuff. Substance versus symbolism. Any gay flag burners in your area lately?
None. That is a construct of the uber-Right wing of the Repugnican party...IOW, its a made-up crock of crap!
Both parties do this.....I wouldn't say either one has a leg up on the other here...
Depends on whether the "child" getting the nanny is a giant corporation or investment bank trying to have all regulation on it's particular industry removed ... in which case the party proposing the legislation is the Republican party.....
by the way how has all that deregulation that's occurred since Reagan working out.... so far only the airlines and the entire banking industry have failed but hey....at least Bush has weakened environmental laws so my air is dirtier... wait that's not good for anyone or anything, is it?
....or whether you are talking about a nanny state as it relates to individuals getting an affordable education or welfare when they are down and out... or affordable healthcare so they don't die unnecessarily just because they don't have the funds.... or maybe even a doctor who was willing to help the poor by accepting medicare/medicaid at his/her office that now (or at least through last week) was looking at a huge pay cut because of Medicare "reform" ..... in which case I think you have to say that it's almost always a Democrat proposing such legislation. ( And related to the last example given...Democrats working to override vetoes so we can actually get something done in our government... including making sure our doctors get paid and not our insurance companies).
Hope this answers your "softball" of a question.... and I wish I lived in the close-minded, sound-bite world you live in. It would simplify everything... and I like you... could go around thinking I was right all the time but never really looking at the problem with any depth. Yep... your black and white world must be a comforting place to live.... too bad it only exists in your head.
President Franklin Roosevelt’s socialistic program he called our “Second Bill of Rights.”
By 1944, when he began his fourth term (he was the only President unconstrained by the traditional limit of two terms), President Roosevelt candidly acknowledged in his State of the Union message that the New Deal welfare state was not part of the original Constitutional government of the United States and that the Constitution had never been amended, in accordance with the express provision of Article V, to legitimize the welfare state:
We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all – regardless of station, race, or creed. Among these are: The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries, or shops or farms or mines of the Nation; The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation; The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living; The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad; The right of every family to a decent home; The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health; The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment; The right to a good education. All these rights spell security.
It is this “Second Bill of Rights” aspect of the liberal paradigm that leads today’s public, ignorant of history, to believe that health care and other welfare benefits are literally “constitutional rights.”
Republicans
the one that wants to control the bedroom but not the boardroom.
The Democrats..
The one that is running a communist for president this year.
Will the ethics and lobby reform legislation will make a difference in congress?
Do you beleive this will cause any difference in the day to day operation of Congress, or is it filled with loopholes?Will the ethics and lobby reform legislation will make a difference in congress?No, it won't make a difference. And it shouldn't. People like to complain about lobbyists. But they really need to look into a mirror. Lobbyists work for us. One of the most powerful lobbies in the country is the AARP, for old people. Or how about the NRA, for gun owners. Or Sierra Club, for greens. Or the Chamber of Commerce, for small business owners. The list is endless.
We need lobbyists. I don't have the time or money to make my voice heard to my congressman. If there is an issue that I care about, I can simply donate money to the organization and let them do the work for me.publishing companies spanish translation online
We need lobbyists. I don't have the time or money to make my voice heard to my congressman. If there is an issue that I care about, I can simply donate money to the organization and let them do the work for me.
Why Has Obama Been So Effective in the Lame Duck Session in Getting Legislation Through?
Major legislation passed since the Midterm election:
December 8, 2010: Claims Resolution Act of 2010.
December 13, 2010: Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010.
December 17, 2010: Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010.
December 22, 2010: Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010.
New START Treaty Ratified.Why Has Obama Been So Effective in the Lame Duck Session in Getting Legislation Through?it is because Republicans are helping him.Why Has Obama Been So Effective in the Lame Duck Session in Getting Legislation Through?
Because he compromised with the Republican leaders who insisted that the tax cut be extended for everyone, including the rich. Once he gave them that, the threat of filibuster lifted and they reluctantly allowed him to go ahead with those programs.Why Has Obama Been So Effective in the Lame Duck Session in Getting Legislation Through?Obama didn't have jack to do with it. But it's easy to get what you want, when you have no ethical restrictions or dogma holding you back.Why Has Obama Been So Effective in the Lame Duck Session in Getting Legislation Through?
Because many of the Democrats supporting the bills do not have to worry about being re-elected, they were handed their walking papers.Why Has Obama Been So Effective in the Lame Duck Session in Getting Legislation Through?Because he is doing his thing. People were sleeping on him because he was trying to clean up GW Bush mess. Now he can do what he was voted in to do.Why Has Obama Been So Effective in the Lame Duck Session in Getting Legislation Through?
hes the sh!t
December 8, 2010: Claims Resolution Act of 2010.
December 13, 2010: Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010.
December 17, 2010: Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010.
December 22, 2010: Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010.
New START Treaty Ratified.Why Has Obama Been So Effective in the Lame Duck Session in Getting Legislation Through?it is because Republicans are helping him.Why Has Obama Been So Effective in the Lame Duck Session in Getting Legislation Through?
Because he compromised with the Republican leaders who insisted that the tax cut be extended for everyone, including the rich. Once he gave them that, the threat of filibuster lifted and they reluctantly allowed him to go ahead with those programs.Why Has Obama Been So Effective in the Lame Duck Session in Getting Legislation Through?Obama didn't have jack to do with it. But it's easy to get what you want, when you have no ethical restrictions or dogma holding you back.Why Has Obama Been So Effective in the Lame Duck Session in Getting Legislation Through?
Because many of the Democrats supporting the bills do not have to worry about being re-elected, they were handed their walking papers.Why Has Obama Been So Effective in the Lame Duck Session in Getting Legislation Through?Because he is doing his thing. People were sleeping on him because he was trying to clean up GW Bush mess. Now he can do what he was voted in to do.Why Has Obama Been So Effective in the Lame Duck Session in Getting Legislation Through?
hes the sh!t
What has Obama done in legislation that would constitute presidency?
Seriously, I can't find one single thing the man has accomplished.What has Obama done in legislation that would constitute presidency?Obama supporter Sen Kirk Watson when asked what are Obama's accomplishments ,went blank. LOL!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d91jxghT…What has Obama done in legislation that would constitute presidency?
And I quote: "Perfect, that was just the answer I was looking for!!!" In other words, you already made up your mind and weren't asking a genuine question in the first place. Typical.
You have all of it right there. But according to the smoke he has been blowing up everybody's @$$ he is the greatest thing to happen to this country since WOW, thats right he thinks he is the greatest of all time and if you listen to his blind sheep they believe it. And if PB would check there is always some junior Senator's name attached to a lot of bills that are introduced it is a way of getting them recognitionWhat has Obama done in legislation that would constitute presidency?Damn Bob, looks like you got a mouth full with that question. Guess you can't ask something like that again.What has Obama done in legislation that would constitute presidency?
He hasnt he uses dirty politics look!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9CRgFO2m…
His legislative record is posted here constantly. If you're not willing to look at it then that's your choice. It doesn't mean that the record doesn't exist.What has Obama done in legislation that would constitute presidency?
He missed the most votes in the senate, if he promises to not do anything as president, just like he did in the senate I would actually vote for him, because I believe the President has no power, unfortunately he keeps promising that he would be King and do this and that and the other. He should run based on his senate experience, and claim that he would choose not to do anything most of the time, and let the elected officials do their job.
Dear Lord! Not this same question again...
-Obama passed legislation with Republican Senator Jim Talent to give gas stations a tax credit for installing E85 ethanol refueling pumps. The tax credit covers 30 percent of the costs of switching one or more traditional petroleum pumps to E85, which is an 85 percent ethanol/15 percent gasoline blend.
-After a number of inmates on death row were found innocent, Senator Obama worked with law enforcement officials to require the videotaping of interrogations and confessions in all capital cases.
-His first law was passed with Republican Tom Coburn, a measure to rebuild trust in government by allowing every American to go online and see how and where every dime of their tax dollars is spent.
-Obama created the Illinois Earned Income Tax Credit for low-income working families in 2000 and successfully sponsored a measure to make the credit permanent in 2003. The law offered about $105 million in tax relief over three years.
-Obama joined forces with former U.S. Sen. Paul Simon (D-IL) to pass the toughest campaign finance law in Illinois history. The legislation banned the personal use of campaign money by Illinois legislators and banned gifts from lobbyists. Before the law was passed, one organization ranked Illinois worst among 50 states for its campaign finance regulations.
-As a member of the Veterans’ Affairs Committee, Senator Obama has fought to help Illinois veterans get the disability pay they were promised, while working to prepare the VA for the return of the thousands of veterans who will need care after Iraq and Afghanistan.
-He traveled to Russia with Republican Dick Lugar to begin a new generation of non-proliferation efforts designed to find and secure deadly weapons around the world.
-Obama has been a leading advocate for protecting the right to vote, helping to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act and leading the opposition against discriminatory barriers to voting.
- In the U.S. Senate, Obama introduced the STOP FRAUD Act to increase penalties for mortgage fraud and provide more protections for low-income homebuyers, well before the current subprime crisis began.
-Obama sponsored legislation to combat predatory payday loans, and he also was credited with lobbied the state to more closely regulate some of the most egregious predatory lending practices.
-Barack Obama introduced the Patriot Employer Act of 2007 to provide a tax credit to companies that maintain or increase the number of full-time workers in America relative to those outside the US; maintain their corporate headquarters in America; pay decent wages; prepare workers for retirement; provide health insurance; and support employees who serve in the military.
-Obama worked to pass a number of laws in Illinois and Washington to improve the health of women. His accomplishments include creating a task force on cervical cancer, providing greater access to breast and cervical cancer screenings, and helping improve prenatal and premature birth services.
-Obama has introduced and helped pass bipartisan legislation to limit the abuse of no-bid federal contracts.
-Obama and Senator Feingold (D-WI) took on both parties and proposed ethics legislation that was described as the “gold standard” for reform. It was because of their leadership that ending subsidized corporate jet travel, mandating disclosure of lobbyists’ bundling of contributions, and enacting strong new restrictions of lobbyist-sponsored trips became part of the final ethics bill that was signed into law.
Furthermore: http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/2008022…
Gee, *eight* thumbs down. In other words, many people can't stand the fact that he actually does have some credentials. I guess even more of you need to grow up.
Obama: 46 years old. Bill Clinton was younger when elected in 1992. Obama: 11 years experience in the Illinois and National Senates. Hillary Clinton has 7 years in the National Senate. Obama: Qualified in other areas such as legislative law. Bush: Served as governor of Texas and had no other experience prior to his presidency. I have no problem with people criticizing Obama for a lack of experience provided they acknowledge that neither does anyone else in that case.
Obama passed legislation with Republican Senator Jim Talent to give gas stations a tax credit for installing E85 ethanol refueling pumps. The tax credit covers 30 percent of the costs of switching one or more traditional petroleum pumps to E85, which is an 85 percent ethanol/15 percent gasoline blend.
-After a number of inmates on death row were found innocent, Senator Obama worked with law enforcement officials to require the videotaping of interrogations and confessions in all capital cases.
-His first law was passed with Republican Tom Coburn, a measure to rebuild trust in government by allowing every American to go online and see how and where every dime of their tax dollars is spent.
-Obama created the Illinois Earned Income Tax Credit for low-income working families in 2000 and successfully sponsored a measure to make the credit permanent in 2003. The law offered about $105 million in tax relief over three years.
And...
-Obama joined forces with former U.S. Sen. Paul Simon (D-IL) to pass the toughest campaign finance law in Illinois history. The legislation banned the personal use of campaign money by Illinois legislators and banned gifts from lobbyists. Before the law was passed, one organization ranked Illinois worst among 50 states for its campaign finance regulations.
-As a member of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, Senator Obama has fought to help Illinois veterans get the disability pay they were promised, while working to prepare the VA for the return of the thousands of veterans who will need care after Iraq and Afghanistan.
-He traveled to Russia with Republican Dick Lugar to begin a new generation of non-proliferation efforts designed to find and secure deadly weapons around the world.
-Obama has been a leading advocate for protecting the right to vote, helping to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act and leading the opposition against discriminatory barriers to voting...
And...
- In the U.S. Senate, Obama introduced the STOP FRAUD Act to increase penalties for mortgage fraud and provide more protections for low-income homebuyers, well before the current subprime crisis began.
-Obama sponsored legislation to combat predatory payday loans, and he also was credited with lobbied the state to more closely regulate some of the most egregious predatory lending practices.
-Barack Obama introduced the Patriot Employer Act of 2007 to provide a tax credit to companies that maintain or increase the number of full-time workers in America relative to those outside the US; maintain their corporate headquarters in America; pay decent wages; prepare workers for retirement; provide health insurance; and support employees who serve in the military.
And...
-Obama worked to pass a number of laws in Illinois and Washington to improve the health of women. His accomplishments include creating a task force on cervical cancer, providing greater access to breast and cervical cancer screenings, and helping improve prenatal and premature birth services.
-Obama has introduced and helped pass bipartisan legislation to limit the abuse of no-bid federal contracts.
-Obama and Senator Feingold (D-WI) took on both parties and proposed ethics legislation that was described as the "gold standard" for reform. It was because of their leadership that ending subsidized corporate jet travel, mandating disclosure of lobbyists' bundling of contributions, and enacting strong new restrictions of lobbyist-sponsored trips became part of the final ethics bill that was signed into law.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d91jxghT…What has Obama done in legislation that would constitute presidency?
And I quote: "Perfect, that was just the answer I was looking for!!!" In other words, you already made up your mind and weren't asking a genuine question in the first place. Typical.
Report Abuse
What has Obama done in legislation that would constitute presidency?"NOTHING"You have all of it right there. But according to the smoke he has been blowing up everybody's @$$ he is the greatest thing to happen to this country since WOW, thats right he thinks he is the greatest of all time and if you listen to his blind sheep they believe it. And if PB would check there is always some junior Senator's name attached to a lot of bills that are introduced it is a way of getting them recognitionWhat has Obama done in legislation that would constitute presidency?Damn Bob, looks like you got a mouth full with that question. Guess you can't ask something like that again.What has Obama done in legislation that would constitute presidency?
He hasnt he uses dirty politics look!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9CRgFO2m…
His legislative record is posted here constantly. If you're not willing to look at it then that's your choice. It doesn't mean that the record doesn't exist.What has Obama done in legislation that would constitute presidency?
He missed the most votes in the senate, if he promises to not do anything as president, just like he did in the senate I would actually vote for him, because I believe the President has no power, unfortunately he keeps promising that he would be King and do this and that and the other. He should run based on his senate experience, and claim that he would choose not to do anything most of the time, and let the elected officials do their job.
Dear Lord! Not this same question again...
-Obama passed legislation with Republican Senator Jim Talent to give gas stations a tax credit for installing E85 ethanol refueling pumps. The tax credit covers 30 percent of the costs of switching one or more traditional petroleum pumps to E85, which is an 85 percent ethanol/15 percent gasoline blend.
-After a number of inmates on death row were found innocent, Senator Obama worked with law enforcement officials to require the videotaping of interrogations and confessions in all capital cases.
-His first law was passed with Republican Tom Coburn, a measure to rebuild trust in government by allowing every American to go online and see how and where every dime of their tax dollars is spent.
-Obama created the Illinois Earned Income Tax Credit for low-income working families in 2000 and successfully sponsored a measure to make the credit permanent in 2003. The law offered about $105 million in tax relief over three years.
-Obama joined forces with former U.S. Sen. Paul Simon (D-IL) to pass the toughest campaign finance law in Illinois history. The legislation banned the personal use of campaign money by Illinois legislators and banned gifts from lobbyists. Before the law was passed, one organization ranked Illinois worst among 50 states for its campaign finance regulations.
-As a member of the Veterans’ Affairs Committee, Senator Obama has fought to help Illinois veterans get the disability pay they were promised, while working to prepare the VA for the return of the thousands of veterans who will need care after Iraq and Afghanistan.
-He traveled to Russia with Republican Dick Lugar to begin a new generation of non-proliferation efforts designed to find and secure deadly weapons around the world.
-Obama has been a leading advocate for protecting the right to vote, helping to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act and leading the opposition against discriminatory barriers to voting.
- In the U.S. Senate, Obama introduced the STOP FRAUD Act to increase penalties for mortgage fraud and provide more protections for low-income homebuyers, well before the current subprime crisis began.
-Obama sponsored legislation to combat predatory payday loans, and he also was credited with lobbied the state to more closely regulate some of the most egregious predatory lending practices.
-Barack Obama introduced the Patriot Employer Act of 2007 to provide a tax credit to companies that maintain or increase the number of full-time workers in America relative to those outside the US; maintain their corporate headquarters in America; pay decent wages; prepare workers for retirement; provide health insurance; and support employees who serve in the military.
-Obama worked to pass a number of laws in Illinois and Washington to improve the health of women. His accomplishments include creating a task force on cervical cancer, providing greater access to breast and cervical cancer screenings, and helping improve prenatal and premature birth services.
-Obama has introduced and helped pass bipartisan legislation to limit the abuse of no-bid federal contracts.
-Obama and Senator Feingold (D-WI) took on both parties and proposed ethics legislation that was described as the “gold standard” for reform. It was because of their leadership that ending subsidized corporate jet travel, mandating disclosure of lobbyists’ bundling of contributions, and enacting strong new restrictions of lobbyist-sponsored trips became part of the final ethics bill that was signed into law.
Furthermore: http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/2008022…
Gee, *eight* thumbs down. In other words, many people can't stand the fact that he actually does have some credentials. I guess even more of you need to grow up.
Obama: 46 years old. Bill Clinton was younger when elected in 1992. Obama: 11 years experience in the Illinois and National Senates. Hillary Clinton has 7 years in the National Senate. Obama: Qualified in other areas such as legislative law. Bush: Served as governor of Texas and had no other experience prior to his presidency. I have no problem with people criticizing Obama for a lack of experience provided they acknowledge that neither does anyone else in that case.
Obama passed legislation with Republican Senator Jim Talent to give gas stations a tax credit for installing E85 ethanol refueling pumps. The tax credit covers 30 percent of the costs of switching one or more traditional petroleum pumps to E85, which is an 85 percent ethanol/15 percent gasoline blend.
-After a number of inmates on death row were found innocent, Senator Obama worked with law enforcement officials to require the videotaping of interrogations and confessions in all capital cases.
-His first law was passed with Republican Tom Coburn, a measure to rebuild trust in government by allowing every American to go online and see how and where every dime of their tax dollars is spent.
-Obama created the Illinois Earned Income Tax Credit for low-income working families in 2000 and successfully sponsored a measure to make the credit permanent in 2003. The law offered about $105 million in tax relief over three years.
And...
-Obama joined forces with former U.S. Sen. Paul Simon (D-IL) to pass the toughest campaign finance law in Illinois history. The legislation banned the personal use of campaign money by Illinois legislators and banned gifts from lobbyists. Before the law was passed, one organization ranked Illinois worst among 50 states for its campaign finance regulations.
-As a member of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, Senator Obama has fought to help Illinois veterans get the disability pay they were promised, while working to prepare the VA for the return of the thousands of veterans who will need care after Iraq and Afghanistan.
-He traveled to Russia with Republican Dick Lugar to begin a new generation of non-proliferation efforts designed to find and secure deadly weapons around the world.
-Obama has been a leading advocate for protecting the right to vote, helping to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act and leading the opposition against discriminatory barriers to voting...
And...
- In the U.S. Senate, Obama introduced the STOP FRAUD Act to increase penalties for mortgage fraud and provide more protections for low-income homebuyers, well before the current subprime crisis began.
-Obama sponsored legislation to combat predatory payday loans, and he also was credited with lobbied the state to more closely regulate some of the most egregious predatory lending practices.
-Barack Obama introduced the Patriot Employer Act of 2007 to provide a tax credit to companies that maintain or increase the number of full-time workers in America relative to those outside the US; maintain their corporate headquarters in America; pay decent wages; prepare workers for retirement; provide health insurance; and support employees who serve in the military.
And...
-Obama worked to pass a number of laws in Illinois and Washington to improve the health of women. His accomplishments include creating a task force on cervical cancer, providing greater access to breast and cervical cancer screenings, and helping improve prenatal and premature birth services.
-Obama has introduced and helped pass bipartisan legislation to limit the abuse of no-bid federal contracts.
-Obama and Senator Feingold (D-WI) took on both parties and proposed ethics legislation that was described as the "gold standard" for reform. It was because of their leadership that ending subsidized corporate jet travel, mandating disclosure of lobbyists' bundling of contributions, and enacting strong new restrictions of lobbyist-sponsored trips became part of the final ethics bill that was signed into law.
Legislation & scientific institutes relating to wild animals?
I'm currently working on a wildlife %26amp; rehab assignment which asks for a report covering the legislations and scientific institutes which relate to the health and safety of wild animals. Does anyone have any ideas on what they are, and/or involve?
Thanks.Legislation %26amp; scientific institutes relating to wild animals?go to the lion man web site ,he`s in new zealand,and get there contact details,good luck with that one...
Thanks.Legislation %26amp; scientific institutes relating to wild animals?go to the lion man web site ,he`s in new zealand,and get there contact details,good luck with that one...
How will dental insurance become affected by the new healthcare legislation?
No change. Dental insurance is completely different than health insurance.How will dental insurance become affected by the new healthcare legislation?Nobody ever lost their home by having a cavity and not having a dental policy, so no changes to dental insurance policies were made.How will dental insurance become affected by the new healthcare legislation?Not at all. It is not mentioned in the bill as far as I can find out.
http://www.healthcare.govHow will dental insurance become affected by the new healthcare legislation?my employer pays mine so it should stay the same I hope.
http://www.healthcare.govHow will dental insurance become affected by the new healthcare legislation?my employer pays mine so it should stay the same I hope.
What dog breeds are targeted in the US Breed Specific Legislation?
pitbull terriers, (which includes pit mixes), rottweilers, doberman pinschers are main targets, however, it also depends on the state that you live in - i am fortunate, in that i live in NJ and BSL is banned here, this link gives more info about "bully breeds"
http://apbt-bsl.com/modules.php?name=New鈥?/a>What dog breeds are targeted in the US Breed Specific Legislation?Do you even have to ask??? It's Pit Bulls and not because they're bad dogs. They get a bad rap because of people that train them to fight and attack.
Every pit I've ever known is sweet and lovable. There are a couple in my neighborhood right now that are deathly afraid of their own shadows!What dog breeds are targeted in the US Breed Specific Legislation?
Many of the "working" breeds. Basically any kind of a guard dog can be part of BSL.What dog breeds are targeted in the US Breed Specific Legislation?There is no national BSL, but a lot of other juridictions have proposed, or enacted bans or restrictions on all sort of dogs. Including the ones maintaned by homeowners insurance companies, I have seen:
Chows
Great Danes
Akitas
Malamutes
Siberian Huskies
Dobermans
Rottweilers
"Pit Bull" - Am. Pit Bull Terrier, Am. Staffordshire Terrier or anything with a similar appearance
Presa Canarios
Wolf Hybrid
And never fear, if the folks pushing this get their way, they will eventually work their way down to collies, goldens, yorkies, etc.
Even a small breed can be nasty, and give a good bite.What dog breeds are targeted in the US Breed Specific Legislation?It varies by location.
Common ones are bully breeds, rotties, dobermans, chows, pits or anything that based on its looks might have pit in it (such as any large mouthed lab mix), but it can be virtually anything.
Many dogs that arent actually banned places end up being disallowed under BSL because when mixes are included it is solely up to the gov't official. Most people in the world cant identify more than 5 or 6 dog breeds and have no chance identifying a mix.What dog breeds are targeted in the US Breed Specific Legislation?
Right now the top of the list is pit bulls, Rottweilers and Presa Canario. Two decades ago it was Dobermans. There is a lot more, but this is all that i know about. They are the ones talked about all the time anyway. Are you looking to get a dog and you don't want one on the list? The reason why i ask is cause in my opinion it's not the dog it's the owner. I own a Doberman and i know it's still on the list, but he is so sweet, loving and friendly.
BSL is BS.
BSL is just another way for politicians and people who are afraid of certain breeds of dog to act like they are solving a problem.
BSL is ignorance at its best.
How about punishing people who act irresponsibly rather than punishing innocent animals.
Protest BSL wherever you can.
I recognize that this is not an answer but I detest BSL.What dog breeds are targeted in the US Breed Specific Legislation?
Rather than a complete breed ban, I think it would be more effective if there was temperament testing for specific dogs. Not the breed but the temperament of a specific dog.
I also think that people should have to go to school to learn more about aggression %26amp; how to control it. Or pass a test directed towards ones knowledge of canine behavior.
I own aggressive dogs %26amp; I respect a strong temperament. As a trainer that was my specialty. I went to school to learn how to train them, 8 to 10 hours a day, 6 days a week for 8 months. I also studied wolves in the wild. I have read Conrad Lorenz's books on aggression. Not only canine behavior but animal behavior, which includes man kind.
If we can get the general public more educated %26amp; take the breeding out of the hands of the ignorant, we wouldn't have the issues we have to day.
With the exception of the Pitt types the others are good dogs. I have worked with them all %26amp; found that controlled aggression gives you a very dependable dog.infiniti g37 the office full episodes
http://apbt-bsl.com/modules.php?name=New鈥?/a>What dog breeds are targeted in the US Breed Specific Legislation?Do you even have to ask??? It's Pit Bulls and not because they're bad dogs. They get a bad rap because of people that train them to fight and attack.
Every pit I've ever known is sweet and lovable. There are a couple in my neighborhood right now that are deathly afraid of their own shadows!What dog breeds are targeted in the US Breed Specific Legislation?
Many of the "working" breeds. Basically any kind of a guard dog can be part of BSL.What dog breeds are targeted in the US Breed Specific Legislation?There is no national BSL, but a lot of other juridictions have proposed, or enacted bans or restrictions on all sort of dogs. Including the ones maintaned by homeowners insurance companies, I have seen:
Chows
Great Danes
Akitas
Malamutes
Siberian Huskies
Dobermans
Rottweilers
"Pit Bull" - Am. Pit Bull Terrier, Am. Staffordshire Terrier or anything with a similar appearance
Presa Canarios
Wolf Hybrid
And never fear, if the folks pushing this get their way, they will eventually work their way down to collies, goldens, yorkies, etc.
Even a small breed can be nasty, and give a good bite.What dog breeds are targeted in the US Breed Specific Legislation?It varies by location.
Common ones are bully breeds, rotties, dobermans, chows, pits or anything that based on its looks might have pit in it (such as any large mouthed lab mix), but it can be virtually anything.
Many dogs that arent actually banned places end up being disallowed under BSL because when mixes are included it is solely up to the gov't official. Most people in the world cant identify more than 5 or 6 dog breeds and have no chance identifying a mix.What dog breeds are targeted in the US Breed Specific Legislation?
Right now the top of the list is pit bulls, Rottweilers and Presa Canario. Two decades ago it was Dobermans. There is a lot more, but this is all that i know about. They are the ones talked about all the time anyway. Are you looking to get a dog and you don't want one on the list? The reason why i ask is cause in my opinion it's not the dog it's the owner. I own a Doberman and i know it's still on the list, but he is so sweet, loving and friendly.
BSL is BS.
BSL is just another way for politicians and people who are afraid of certain breeds of dog to act like they are solving a problem.
BSL is ignorance at its best.
How about punishing people who act irresponsibly rather than punishing innocent animals.
Protest BSL wherever you can.
I recognize that this is not an answer but I detest BSL.What dog breeds are targeted in the US Breed Specific Legislation?
Rather than a complete breed ban, I think it would be more effective if there was temperament testing for specific dogs. Not the breed but the temperament of a specific dog.
I also think that people should have to go to school to learn more about aggression %26amp; how to control it. Or pass a test directed towards ones knowledge of canine behavior.
I own aggressive dogs %26amp; I respect a strong temperament. As a trainer that was my specialty. I went to school to learn how to train them, 8 to 10 hours a day, 6 days a week for 8 months. I also studied wolves in the wild. I have read Conrad Lorenz's books on aggression. Not only canine behavior but animal behavior, which includes man kind.
If we can get the general public more educated %26amp; take the breeding out of the hands of the ignorant, we wouldn't have the issues we have to day.
With the exception of the Pitt types the others are good dogs. I have worked with them all %26amp; found that controlled aggression gives you a very dependable dog.
Name the piece of legislation from 1995 that allowed states to set their own highway speed limits?
National Highway Designation ActName the piece of legislation from 1995 that allowed states to set their own highway speed limits?National Highway System Designation ActName the piece of legislation from 1995 that allowed states to set their own highway speed limits?Try this site as well....................................
http://www.polisci.wisc.edu/users/mdull/鈥?/a>
http://www.polisci.wisc.edu/users/mdull/鈥?/a>
How do lobbyists get legislation passed that they want without being in congress?
They spend millions of dollars, and now that the supreme court ruled corporations have no spending limit they'll probably spend billions of dollars. They are undermining the morals of the country and we the people should be outraged. Vote only for constitutionalists to congress who won't sell out the country.How do lobbyists get legislation passed that they want without being in congress?They do it by paying bribes in many form to individual Representatives and Senators.
These bribes are called campaign contributions and many other legal ways to bribe them.How do lobbyists get legislation passed that they want without being in congress?As of now there are no responses but by the time I'm finished writing this, there will be tons of replies telling you that lobbyists buy off politicians to get what they want. To an extent, that's true, but it's not the whole story.
Lobbyists' jobs are rooted in the First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law ... abridging ... the right of the people ... to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
This means that people, usually groups, pay someone to "petition" congressmen and senators. They don't generally "get legislation passed that they want" -- most of the time they get provisions that they want or don't want inserted or stricken from a large bill. For example, credit unions may all want the same thing out of the newly released financial reform bill, so their group -- such as the Credit Union Legislative Coalition -- lobbies Congress to get that thing into or out of the bill. Sometimes the groups lobbying are "evil" -- oil companies, military-industrial complex manufacturers, insurance companies -- and sometimes they are "good" -- ASPCA, homeless groups -- but they all have a right to be heard.
A good share of the top lobbyists on K Street in Washington (where most major lobbying firms are located) are former congressmen and senators, so they have relationships with many current congressmen and senators. That greatly expands their influence. Other lobbyists are former congressional staffers or heads of large companies or interest groups.
Lobbyists have too much influence in Washington, there is no doubt about that. But they are not evil.How do lobbyists get legislation passed that they want without being in congress?They talk to members of Congress. Or more accurately, they talk to the Congress members' employees. They make arguments on behalf of the issues they care about. They print materials that support their causes. They invite staff to meetings and parties so that they can mingle with them and form relationships, and they use those relationships to encourage members of Congress to vote in their favor.
Money, of course, also plays a role. Lobbyists are not legally allowed to bribe elected officials, but the organizations they represent are allowed to contribute money to Congress members' campaigns. Most Congress members are more likely to support a bill if they know that the bill is supported by groups that support them. Likewise, they know that if they vote certain ways they are more likely to get needed funding from powerful organizations.
These bribes are called campaign contributions and many other legal ways to bribe them.How do lobbyists get legislation passed that they want without being in congress?As of now there are no responses but by the time I'm finished writing this, there will be tons of replies telling you that lobbyists buy off politicians to get what they want. To an extent, that's true, but it's not the whole story.
Lobbyists' jobs are rooted in the First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law ... abridging ... the right of the people ... to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
This means that people, usually groups, pay someone to "petition" congressmen and senators. They don't generally "get legislation passed that they want" -- most of the time they get provisions that they want or don't want inserted or stricken from a large bill. For example, credit unions may all want the same thing out of the newly released financial reform bill, so their group -- such as the Credit Union Legislative Coalition -- lobbies Congress to get that thing into or out of the bill. Sometimes the groups lobbying are "evil" -- oil companies, military-industrial complex manufacturers, insurance companies -- and sometimes they are "good" -- ASPCA, homeless groups -- but they all have a right to be heard.
A good share of the top lobbyists on K Street in Washington (where most major lobbying firms are located) are former congressmen and senators, so they have relationships with many current congressmen and senators. That greatly expands their influence. Other lobbyists are former congressional staffers or heads of large companies or interest groups.
Lobbyists have too much influence in Washington, there is no doubt about that. But they are not evil.How do lobbyists get legislation passed that they want without being in congress?They talk to members of Congress. Or more accurately, they talk to the Congress members' employees. They make arguments on behalf of the issues they care about. They print materials that support their causes. They invite staff to meetings and parties so that they can mingle with them and form relationships, and they use those relationships to encourage members of Congress to vote in their favor.
Money, of course, also plays a role. Lobbyists are not legally allowed to bribe elected officials, but the organizations they represent are allowed to contribute money to Congress members' campaigns. Most Congress members are more likely to support a bill if they know that the bill is supported by groups that support them. Likewise, they know that if they vote certain ways they are more likely to get needed funding from powerful organizations.
What are the new legislation passed regarding tax preparers from foreign country?
- because I talked to someone from outside America and they mentioned tax law that avoids foreigners do taxes-specifically, (e.g)a company will hire people for instance from India, and people from America will call the tax software support and will be directed to Indians and then this was avoided by this law, to give jobs to Americans.What are the new legislation passed regarding tax preparers from foreign country?There is a disclosure issue.
If I hire someone to do my tax return and they intend to send my tax information and forms to India to be processed, they absolutely must tell me that they are doing it and give me the opportunity to refuse.
Outsourcing was getting big in 2005 until articles were published stating that it was being done. Clients of the firms doing it (large, large firms!) were very upset to find out that their personal data was sent to another country...not to mention a few well-publicized data theft cases. Many companies decided the backlash of paying a foreigner $20/hour vs a US person $40/hour wasn't worth it the ill will.
AICPA disclosure rules require that the firms tell their clients if someone else does the work. The practice of having a subsidiary company in another country no longer cuts as an excuse of not having to admit the work is done overseas.
If I buy tax software to do my taxes and call with a question, the company is allowed to outsource the calls to a call site in India, but the quality of the answers are subject to the training level of the people answering the phones. Personally, I like the fact that if I call the IRS with a tax question, I will only talk to a call site based in the USA and the person answering the phone is either a US Citizen or Resident Alien. In addition to the fact that my tax dollars are paying for a US person to answer the phone, the person answering the question is subject to the same exact tax laws I am.
If I hire someone to do my tax return and they intend to send my tax information and forms to India to be processed, they absolutely must tell me that they are doing it and give me the opportunity to refuse.
Outsourcing was getting big in 2005 until articles were published stating that it was being done. Clients of the firms doing it (large, large firms!) were very upset to find out that their personal data was sent to another country...not to mention a few well-publicized data theft cases. Many companies decided the backlash of paying a foreigner $20/hour vs a US person $40/hour wasn't worth it the ill will.
AICPA disclosure rules require that the firms tell their clients if someone else does the work. The practice of having a subsidiary company in another country no longer cuts as an excuse of not having to admit the work is done overseas.
If I buy tax software to do my taxes and call with a question, the company is allowed to outsource the calls to a call site in India, but the quality of the answers are subject to the training level of the people answering the phones. Personally, I like the fact that if I call the IRS with a tax question, I will only talk to a call site based in the USA and the person answering the phone is either a US Citizen or Resident Alien. In addition to the fact that my tax dollars are paying for a US person to answer the phone, the person answering the question is subject to the same exact tax laws I am.
What measures, other than legislation, have been adopted to improve race relations in the UK since 1979?
I'm doing A2 Politics and I'm trying to do an essay on race relations in the UKWhat measures, other than legislation, have been adopted to improve race relations in the UK since 1979?whatever they've done - they haven't done a good job of it - flooding the country with immigrants - white and other races has made a right mess of the place. Indigenous people just perceive they are at the back of the queue for services that they paid for.
Name the piece of legislation from 1995 that allowed states to set their own highway speed limits?
Maybe this will help
http://www.hoover.org/publications/polic鈥?/a>Name the piece of legislation from 1995 that allowed states to set their own highway speed limits?Try this site as well............................
http://www.cnn.com/US/Newsbriefs/9509/9-鈥?/a>
http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/bills鈥?/a>disneymovieclub window tinting
http://www.hoover.org/publications/polic鈥?/a>Name the piece of legislation from 1995 that allowed states to set their own highway speed limits?Try this site as well............................
http://www.cnn.com/US/Newsbriefs/9509/9-鈥?/a>
http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/bills鈥?/a>
Should we pass emergency legislation that mandates Sarah Palin wear those sexy glasses whenever in public?
There oughta be a law, I tell you!Should we pass emergency legislation that mandates Sarah Palin wear those sexy glasses whenever in public?I chuckled in real life.
Should I feel bad?Should we pass emergency legislation that mandates Sarah Palin wear those sexy glasses whenever in public?
LOl...........I 2nd that MOTION...she is HOT!!!!!!!!Should we pass emergency legislation that mandates Sarah Palin wear those sexy glasses whenever in public?Way to respect a VP candidate for her intellectual prowess and ability.
she is pretty hot....mccain is a lot of things, but he's not blind...Should we pass emergency legislation that mandates Sarah Palin wear those sexy glasses whenever in public?who can argue with thinking like yours..even the Euro community will say "oooo..la la"Should we pass emergency legislation that mandates Sarah Palin wear those sexy glasses whenever in public?
Grow up
That would be great, I would rather look at her glasses than Obamas ears.Should we pass emergency legislation that mandates Sarah Palin wear those sexy glasses whenever in public?
Seems you have a lot of respect for the presidency. No
Gosh, are you people THAT nervous that you have go on about nonsense like this?
So, now you pick on someone who wears glasses?? Weak, weak, I tell ya'!
Again..Mmmmmm k =)
http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m249/鈥?/a>
-
Republicans and their pundits are indicating that Palan is a risky move for McCain; perhaps the glasses are included.
women in a position of power terrifies you doesn't it?
lol
Maybe there will be a Palin Man to oppose Obama girl.
and non-sensible shoes, except when wearing outdoor gear!
I am going to have to thirden that motion as well. Put it to a roll-call vote.
Oh yeah she is hot. Intellectual prowess? Is that why the media is fawning over Obama? Or is it because he is an "African American"?
Is that all ya got?!!
When someone comes along as talented as she is but she doesn't agree with your ideology you have to find something to complain about because you can't find anything substantively wrong with her.
palin jane
I just noticed her glasses. I think they are very attractive on her. If I had to wear glasses, I would hope I looked that good in them. Passing emergency legislation....I think not! lol Wonder who the designer is? I'd buy them for sun glasses!
Thanks for the Kazuo Kawasaki info Kelly W. I'm going to check them out. I need a new pair of sun glasses!
Palin wearing her sexy rimless Kazuo Kawasaki eyewear is soooo hot.
I thought you "conservatives" were against such government intrusion. And if you think Sarah Palin is sexy, then you need your own glasses cleaned! You think she wears glasses to see better? She wears them to hide her wrinkles! She's 44 going on 60! And STILL McCain thinks she looks young!
Should I feel bad?Should we pass emergency legislation that mandates Sarah Palin wear those sexy glasses whenever in public?
LOl...........I 2nd that MOTION...she is HOT!!!!!!!!Should we pass emergency legislation that mandates Sarah Palin wear those sexy glasses whenever in public?Way to respect a VP candidate for her intellectual prowess and ability.
she is pretty hot....mccain is a lot of things, but he's not blind...Should we pass emergency legislation that mandates Sarah Palin wear those sexy glasses whenever in public?who can argue with thinking like yours..even the Euro community will say "oooo..la la"Should we pass emergency legislation that mandates Sarah Palin wear those sexy glasses whenever in public?
Grow up
That would be great, I would rather look at her glasses than Obamas ears.Should we pass emergency legislation that mandates Sarah Palin wear those sexy glasses whenever in public?
Seems you have a lot of respect for the presidency. No
Gosh, are you people THAT nervous that you have go on about nonsense like this?
So, now you pick on someone who wears glasses?? Weak, weak, I tell ya'!
Again..Mmmmmm k =)
http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m249/鈥?/a>
-
Republicans and their pundits are indicating that Palan is a risky move for McCain; perhaps the glasses are included.
women in a position of power terrifies you doesn't it?
lol
Maybe there will be a Palin Man to oppose Obama girl.
and non-sensible shoes, except when wearing outdoor gear!
I am going to have to thirden that motion as well. Put it to a roll-call vote.
Oh yeah she is hot. Intellectual prowess? Is that why the media is fawning over Obama? Or is it because he is an "African American"?
Is that all ya got?!!
When someone comes along as talented as she is but she doesn't agree with your ideology you have to find something to complain about because you can't find anything substantively wrong with her.
palin jane
I just noticed her glasses. I think they are very attractive on her. If I had to wear glasses, I would hope I looked that good in them. Passing emergency legislation....I think not! lol Wonder who the designer is? I'd buy them for sun glasses!
Thanks for the Kazuo Kawasaki info Kelly W. I'm going to check them out. I need a new pair of sun glasses!
Palin wearing her sexy rimless Kazuo Kawasaki eyewear is soooo hot.
I thought you "conservatives" were against such government intrusion. And if you think Sarah Palin is sexy, then you need your own glasses cleaned! You think she wears glasses to see better? She wears them to hide her wrinkles! She's 44 going on 60! And STILL McCain thinks she looks young!
How does the military support legislation that conflicts with Constitutional Law?
I would really like to know what your point is. Do you have something specific in mind? Were the Congress to pass legislation that conflicted with the constitution the military would not rise up to destroy congress. That is not our role. We in the military, just like you at home would demand that this law be reviewed and struck down by the SCOTUS. That is part of our checks and balances.
Now a different situation might be if a law were passed that involved the military. A wild example might be what if President XXX declared martial law under authorization of congress and ordered the US Armed Forces to begin rounding up all the brown eyed people and killing them. Regardless of any law giving the president this authority, we are bound to protect and defend the Constitution and would recognize this as an illegal order and we would not obey.
Members of our forces are never bound by law to conduct what they believe to be an illegal act. This is not to say we can question every order or we should protest every order until we get a court ruling. If I tell a private to do something he feels is incorrect yet it causes no damage or danger to himself or others, he should conduct that act and then take it up with the chain of command. If I told a private to do something that would injure himself or others or be so egregious as to cause damage to the United States, then he should refuse the order.How does the military support legislation that conflicts with Constitutional Law?We do need you to be more specific. What act caused you to believe that the military supports unconstitutional legislation?
Now a different situation might be if a law were passed that involved the military. A wild example might be what if President XXX declared martial law under authorization of congress and ordered the US Armed Forces to begin rounding up all the brown eyed people and killing them. Regardless of any law giving the president this authority, we are bound to protect and defend the Constitution and would recognize this as an illegal order and we would not obey.
Members of our forces are never bound by law to conduct what they believe to be an illegal act. This is not to say we can question every order or we should protest every order until we get a court ruling. If I tell a private to do something he feels is incorrect yet it causes no damage or danger to himself or others, he should conduct that act and then take it up with the chain of command. If I told a private to do something that would injure himself or others or be so egregious as to cause damage to the United States, then he should refuse the order.How does the military support legislation that conflicts with Constitutional Law?We do need you to be more specific. What act caused you to believe that the military supports unconstitutional legislation?
Do you think that legislation encouraging teachers to "teach to a test" effects critical thinking in students?
Facts are easily measured by a standardized test, but what about critical thinking skills?Do you think that legislation encouraging teachers to "teach to a test" effects critical thinking in students?Rarely is critical thinking even appreciated at College level. Name, Dates, %26amp; Places is easy to be taught by rout, but when was the last or even the 1st time you saw on a test "What difference did the information/example just given make in your own life?"
Grading Names, Dates, %26amp; Places is also easy for a lazy instructor.Do you think that legislation encouraging teachers to "teach to a test" effects critical thinking in students?
no. Being able to answer a multiple-choice question doesn't show any ability to reason. Teaching to the test is a plague on our education.Do you think that legislation encouraging teachers to "teach to a test" effects critical thinking in students?There are tests to measure critical thinking skills.
However, it's not politically correct to teach children to think. It's better to make them memorize a series of useless facts so they fall for nonsense like creationism and trickle down economics.
politicians come up with the stupid test and requirements to try and stunt the students knowledge and ability to thinkDo you think that legislation encouraging teachers to "teach to a test" effects critical thinking in students?"No Child Left Behind" sucks. Teachers spend the first half of the school year teaching a test. They don't have time to teach spelling or any other fundamental of learning. The former administration literally "left our children behind" with this little piece of legislation.Do you think that legislation encouraging teachers to "teach to a test" effects critical thinking in students?
Critical thinking comes after the sift out the idiots who can't learn the material. They call it college.
yes i doDo you think that legislation encouraging teachers to "teach to a test" effects critical thinking in students?
It's one of Bush's crazy ideas. The purpose was to tamp down creativity and out of the box thinking in order to control both students and teachers. The next step was to discharge those teachers whose students' scored low on the tests, and in addition to close down those schools whose student test scores were low.
The correct solution was to develop new programming, but Bush essentially did not provide adequate funding, because education was not one of his major concerns
Hope this helps
Grading Names, Dates, %26amp; Places is also easy for a lazy instructor.Do you think that legislation encouraging teachers to "teach to a test" effects critical thinking in students?
no. Being able to answer a multiple-choice question doesn't show any ability to reason. Teaching to the test is a plague on our education.Do you think that legislation encouraging teachers to "teach to a test" effects critical thinking in students?There are tests to measure critical thinking skills.
However, it's not politically correct to teach children to think. It's better to make them memorize a series of useless facts so they fall for nonsense like creationism and trickle down economics.
politicians come up with the stupid test and requirements to try and stunt the students knowledge and ability to thinkDo you think that legislation encouraging teachers to "teach to a test" effects critical thinking in students?"No Child Left Behind" sucks. Teachers spend the first half of the school year teaching a test. They don't have time to teach spelling or any other fundamental of learning. The former administration literally "left our children behind" with this little piece of legislation.Do you think that legislation encouraging teachers to "teach to a test" effects critical thinking in students?
Critical thinking comes after the sift out the idiots who can't learn the material. They call it college.
yes i doDo you think that legislation encouraging teachers to "teach to a test" effects critical thinking in students?
It's one of Bush's crazy ideas. The purpose was to tamp down creativity and out of the box thinking in order to control both students and teachers. The next step was to discharge those teachers whose students' scored low on the tests, and in addition to close down those schools whose student test scores were low.
The correct solution was to develop new programming, but Bush essentially did not provide adequate funding, because education was not one of his major concerns
Hope this helps
Where do lobbyists get information on pending legislation?
I've been trying to find information on unpassed bills currently in Congress, but have had little luck. So, I'd like to know how lobbyists get information on pending legislation to discuss with Congressmen. Is there some kind of "pendinglegislation.com" I can visit or would I need to actually go to Capitol hill to be able to research unpassed bills? If it matters, I'm trying to research defense issues.Where do lobbyists get information on pending legislation?While most lobbyists are there in Congress and talking to Congressmen and Senators so they are able to get a grip on the rumor mill and then work it down to the Committee in which the legislation is stalled in.
There is one place you can use, as I do frequently, to find out about legislation. This site is commonly called "Thomas", it is maintained by the Library of Congress. http://thomas.loc.gov/
Information on this site is usually about a day behind for it must wait for the close of Congressional Activities before it can post any info on legislation as it moves through the process.
You can search by a word or by the bill number if you have or know it. For example, give HR 3200 a try; this is the House version of the Health Care Reform...be patient while downloading it as it has a thousand pages.
For the topic of defense simply type that into the search window and be sure that you have designated the "word/phrase" method. Good luck as there are 399 pieces of legislation concerning defense.Where do lobbyists get information on pending legislation?lobbyists lobby for what they believe in, their company, their bosses, etc etc, so they just get all their ideas from those places.Where do lobbyists get information on pending legislation?Lobbyist write the laws they want passed and hand it to their whore in congress.
I don't want to give real whores a bad name because they do provide a service as opposed to our whores in congress that do that part backwards.
There is one place you can use, as I do frequently, to find out about legislation. This site is commonly called "Thomas", it is maintained by the Library of Congress. http://thomas.loc.gov/
Information on this site is usually about a day behind for it must wait for the close of Congressional Activities before it can post any info on legislation as it moves through the process.
You can search by a word or by the bill number if you have or know it. For example, give HR 3200 a try; this is the House version of the Health Care Reform...be patient while downloading it as it has a thousand pages.
For the topic of defense simply type that into the search window and be sure that you have designated the "word/phrase" method. Good luck as there are 399 pieces of legislation concerning defense.Where do lobbyists get information on pending legislation?lobbyists lobby for what they believe in, their company, their bosses, etc etc, so they just get all their ideas from those places.Where do lobbyists get information on pending legislation?Lobbyist write the laws they want passed and hand it to their whore in congress.
I don't want to give real whores a bad name because they do provide a service as opposed to our whores in congress that do that part backwards.
Did they pass the legislation to forgive the $7500 tax credit if you bought a house this past year?
I heard that there was language in the Recovery Act that said they would forgive the tax credit given to the persons who bought a house last year. Just wondering if anyone knew what happened or have links? I just can't find anything online and have searched everywhere.Did they pass the legislation to forgive the $7500 tax credit if you bought a house this past year?It is all spelled out in IRS Form 5405 which you can download from irs.gov. If you got up to $7500 tax credit for a purchase in 2008, it is still a no interest loan that you need to pay back. But you get up to $500/yr property tax credit ($1000 if married filing jointly) even if you do not itemize, which should help pay it back.Did they pass the legislation to forgive the $7500 tax credit if you bought a house this past year?no. the $7,500 must repaid over 15 years. for those who purchased a home on or after 1/1/09 they receive $8,000 and do not have to repay it if they live in home 36 months.Did they pass the legislation to forgive the $7500 tax credit if you bought a house this past year?no, you still have to pay it back.yamaha outboards apa 6th edition
Why was there so much legislation in Victoria in 1958?
We were just wondering why so many pieces of major legislation were passed in this year? Was the government of the time rapidly changing the law, or maybe simply codifying what already existed in common law?
CheersWhy was there so much legislation in Victoria in 1958?There was a reinvention of government's role around that time
CheersWhy was there so much legislation in Victoria in 1958?There was a reinvention of government's role around that time
Shouldn't Nancy Pelosi be punished for stopping ALL legislation while trying to make Bush look worse?
Come on, everybody knows she is SITTING on her as* and making Congress sit on it's as* while the election unfolds.
The democrats say they will punish Liberman; but shouldn't Pelosi be punished for STOPPING Congress while the election unfolds? She is punishing America!
How is that HOPE %26amp; CHANGE?Shouldn't Nancy Pelosi be punished for stopping ALL legislation while trying to make Bush look worse?Palin should take Nancy up to Alaska, put her on an ice flow and wave bye bye
McCain Palin
Experience we needShouldn't Nancy Pelosi be punished for stopping ALL legislation while trying to make Bush look worse?
Actually your so-called 'question' is so full of lies that it's hard to take it seriously.
Because legislation has gone through and passed in the house while Polosi has been Speaker your first major lie is obvious. She couldn't have stopped ALL legislation because it hasn't been stopped. Not even most of it has been stopped.
All lies supporting the original lie are lies by default. It's like McCain lying about the jet sold on E-Bay for a profit when the jet was never sold on E-Bay and when it was sold it was sold for a loss.Shouldn't Nancy Pelosi be punished for stopping ALL legislation while trying to make Bush look worse?Sure -- if the Republicans are punished at the same time for the record number of filibusters they used to stop any legislation proposed by any Democrat.
I would support expulsion from the Senate and withdrawing their service pay for any Republican who was involved in the ongoing filibusters -- and stiff prison sentences on a remote island.
Are you saying Nothing has been done? LMAO
1. Ethics reform. Before leaving town for the traditional August recess (or "district work period" as Congress always calls it), they did pass what Common Cause calls the most far-reaching ethics and lobby reform since Watergate. So while there is impatience and disappointment in Congress from many on the left, not everyone on the left feels that way. Also touting the ethics reform is Public Citizen, founded by Ralph Nader. Having worked on the Hill, I think Washington will always be Washington, and we've had complaints about elected officials' ethics since Washington himself. That won't change. But the bill does expand lobbyist disclosure of megacontributions from different sources that lobbyists bundle together, requires disclosure of who in Congress has inserted specific earmarks into appropriation bills, bans access of Senators-turned-lobbyists to the Senate gym, increases the amount of time elected and other officials must wait after leaving their job before they can lobby, and denies Senators and Representatives their pension if convicted of a felony. The legislation has been sent to President Bush.
2. Raised the minimum wage. This is the accomplishment you've probably heard touted the most by Democrats. The minimum wage is going to $7.25/hr. from $5.15 over the course of three years. The minimum wage hadn't been raised in a decade, the longest period the minimum wage has ever gone without being increased since it was enacted during the Great Depression. The President signed this.
3. Voted to raise fuel economy standards for the first time in 30 years as part of a comprehensive energy bill. The House and Senate have passed different versions of energy bills, and the differences must still be worked out through a conference committee. The Senate voted to raise Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, which if passed into law, would be the first time Congress has increased CAFE standards since the 1970's. Cars would go from 27.5 mpg currently to 35 mpg over time. The energy bill in the House requires all investor-owned utilities to produce 15% of their energy from renewable sources by 2020 (wind, solar, etc.). The bills also repeal some of the tax favors that went to big energy interests in 2005.
4. Restored fiscal responsibility by bringing back Pay-As-You-Go. Congress used to have rules called Pay-As-You-Go, or PAYGO, meaning that any tax cut or spending increase had to be paid for somewhere else in the budget. The Republican Congress allowed this to expire. The Democrats have brought it back. And all the new spending initiatives the Democrats have proposed are paid for either through cuts in other places or closing tax loopholes. Since our government owes $9 trillion (the national debt), or about $30,000 for each man, woman, and child in the U.S., I consider this change to be one of the most important things the new Congress has done.
5. Increased student financial aid. Pell Grants have been stuck at the same level the past six years, in spite of skyrocketing tuition at most universities. The House and Senate have passed the Higher Education Access Act, that would not only increase Pell Grants, but provides one of the biggest increases in student financial aid since the GI Bill. The House and Senate are working out their differences in a conference committee, so this has not been sent to the President for his signature yet. It may face a veto since it pays for this by cutting payments to college loan lenders.
6. Implemented the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. This bill has been sent to the President.
7. Expanded health insurance for uninsured children. The House and Senate have passed differing bills to expand the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), which in Arizona is known as KidsCare. Since its creation, KidsCare has reduced the percentage of Arizona kids without health insurance from 25% to 15%.
8. Iraq and Immigration. These are the two areas where Congress has not accomplished even minor change, and these are two of the biggest issues in America. I will skip immigration and leave a final note on Iraq. Congress did send President Bush a bill with a timeline requiring U.S. troops to leave Iraq, but it was vetoed.
What has Bush Let get through this year?Shouldn't Nancy Pelosi be punished for stopping ALL legislation while trying to make Bush look worse?IDK. Is it legal to punish someone because they are stupid? Why does San Francisco want to punish the country by voting for legally incompetent fools for office? Why does the majority of Democrats in the House of Rep. make the same incompetent fool speaker?
Some questions just have no answers. But I do think the Republicans should take a page from the Democratic play book and begin an investigation of her. Then have her impeached. Dingy Harry Reid too!
McCain/Palin '08Shouldn't Nancy Pelosi be punished for stopping ALL legislation while trying to make Bush look worse?
yes! she ignores the people she is supposed to listen to. she is arrogant and she is ignorant .70% of Americans want something done about getting ourselves out of this energy crisis while the democrats in congress talk about rivers in Vermont. i don't know why the democrats put up with her? if this is the party that wants to run the country then we sure don't need them.
Yes, but do you think the people in her district are going to vote her out?
I doubt it, too.
The best way to punish her is to strip her of her 'queen bee' title by the Americans voting Democrats out of the House majority!Shouldn't Nancy Pelosi be punished for stopping ALL legislation while trying to make Bush look worse?
Yes, I think so. BTW - Filibustering is an old and respected tactic used in Congress since it's inception. Simply not playing when you know you are going to lose, is not.
Yeah, Bush is too easy a target hes already half in the bag. Keeping any more BUSHISMs from becoming law is reason to applaud.
Keep up the good work Nancy.
Pelosi is a complete idiot, and the democrats should be ashamed that she represents them.
Nazi Pelosi should be kicked out of office for not doing her job! Unfortunately, the dweebs in San Fransisco love her
Thank God somebody is providing adult supervision for Bush.
yes - she should be - the people who elected her should not REELECT her that is how she should be punished.
Pelosi is the worst thing to happen to America since Obama.
yes she should be sent packing! and the democrat congress' approval rating is WHAT?? like 20%? But it's all Bush's fault... of course!
Yes--but unfortunately the Democratic party rewards incompetence.
Is Nancy Pelosi running for office???
yes we need to set up another government branch that gets rid of Politicians since they would never impeach themselves
I am not a Bush fan by a long shot but Pelosi should get the boot.
maybe for violating the Logan Act
Democrat policy at work
Yes
pelousy sucks, she hopes for the worst for our country
The democrats say they will punish Liberman; but shouldn't Pelosi be punished for STOPPING Congress while the election unfolds? She is punishing America!
How is that HOPE %26amp; CHANGE?Shouldn't Nancy Pelosi be punished for stopping ALL legislation while trying to make Bush look worse?Palin should take Nancy up to Alaska, put her on an ice flow and wave bye bye
McCain Palin
Experience we needShouldn't Nancy Pelosi be punished for stopping ALL legislation while trying to make Bush look worse?
Actually your so-called 'question' is so full of lies that it's hard to take it seriously.
Because legislation has gone through and passed in the house while Polosi has been Speaker your first major lie is obvious. She couldn't have stopped ALL legislation because it hasn't been stopped. Not even most of it has been stopped.
All lies supporting the original lie are lies by default. It's like McCain lying about the jet sold on E-Bay for a profit when the jet was never sold on E-Bay and when it was sold it was sold for a loss.Shouldn't Nancy Pelosi be punished for stopping ALL legislation while trying to make Bush look worse?Sure -- if the Republicans are punished at the same time for the record number of filibusters they used to stop any legislation proposed by any Democrat.
I would support expulsion from the Senate and withdrawing their service pay for any Republican who was involved in the ongoing filibusters -- and stiff prison sentences on a remote island.
Are you saying Nothing has been done? LMAO
1. Ethics reform. Before leaving town for the traditional August recess (or "district work period" as Congress always calls it), they did pass what Common Cause calls the most far-reaching ethics and lobby reform since Watergate. So while there is impatience and disappointment in Congress from many on the left, not everyone on the left feels that way. Also touting the ethics reform is Public Citizen, founded by Ralph Nader. Having worked on the Hill, I think Washington will always be Washington, and we've had complaints about elected officials' ethics since Washington himself. That won't change. But the bill does expand lobbyist disclosure of megacontributions from different sources that lobbyists bundle together, requires disclosure of who in Congress has inserted specific earmarks into appropriation bills, bans access of Senators-turned-lobbyists to the Senate gym, increases the amount of time elected and other officials must wait after leaving their job before they can lobby, and denies Senators and Representatives their pension if convicted of a felony. The legislation has been sent to President Bush.
2. Raised the minimum wage. This is the accomplishment you've probably heard touted the most by Democrats. The minimum wage is going to $7.25/hr. from $5.15 over the course of three years. The minimum wage hadn't been raised in a decade, the longest period the minimum wage has ever gone without being increased since it was enacted during the Great Depression. The President signed this.
3. Voted to raise fuel economy standards for the first time in 30 years as part of a comprehensive energy bill. The House and Senate have passed different versions of energy bills, and the differences must still be worked out through a conference committee. The Senate voted to raise Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, which if passed into law, would be the first time Congress has increased CAFE standards since the 1970's. Cars would go from 27.5 mpg currently to 35 mpg over time. The energy bill in the House requires all investor-owned utilities to produce 15% of their energy from renewable sources by 2020 (wind, solar, etc.). The bills also repeal some of the tax favors that went to big energy interests in 2005.
4. Restored fiscal responsibility by bringing back Pay-As-You-Go. Congress used to have rules called Pay-As-You-Go, or PAYGO, meaning that any tax cut or spending increase had to be paid for somewhere else in the budget. The Republican Congress allowed this to expire. The Democrats have brought it back. And all the new spending initiatives the Democrats have proposed are paid for either through cuts in other places or closing tax loopholes. Since our government owes $9 trillion (the national debt), or about $30,000 for each man, woman, and child in the U.S., I consider this change to be one of the most important things the new Congress has done.
5. Increased student financial aid. Pell Grants have been stuck at the same level the past six years, in spite of skyrocketing tuition at most universities. The House and Senate have passed the Higher Education Access Act, that would not only increase Pell Grants, but provides one of the biggest increases in student financial aid since the GI Bill. The House and Senate are working out their differences in a conference committee, so this has not been sent to the President for his signature yet. It may face a veto since it pays for this by cutting payments to college loan lenders.
6. Implemented the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. This bill has been sent to the President.
7. Expanded health insurance for uninsured children. The House and Senate have passed differing bills to expand the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), which in Arizona is known as KidsCare. Since its creation, KidsCare has reduced the percentage of Arizona kids without health insurance from 25% to 15%.
8. Iraq and Immigration. These are the two areas where Congress has not accomplished even minor change, and these are two of the biggest issues in America. I will skip immigration and leave a final note on Iraq. Congress did send President Bush a bill with a timeline requiring U.S. troops to leave Iraq, but it was vetoed.
What has Bush Let get through this year?Shouldn't Nancy Pelosi be punished for stopping ALL legislation while trying to make Bush look worse?IDK. Is it legal to punish someone because they are stupid? Why does San Francisco want to punish the country by voting for legally incompetent fools for office? Why does the majority of Democrats in the House of Rep. make the same incompetent fool speaker?
Some questions just have no answers. But I do think the Republicans should take a page from the Democratic play book and begin an investigation of her. Then have her impeached. Dingy Harry Reid too!
McCain/Palin '08Shouldn't Nancy Pelosi be punished for stopping ALL legislation while trying to make Bush look worse?
yes! she ignores the people she is supposed to listen to. she is arrogant and she is ignorant .70% of Americans want something done about getting ourselves out of this energy crisis while the democrats in congress talk about rivers in Vermont. i don't know why the democrats put up with her? if this is the party that wants to run the country then we sure don't need them.
Yes, but do you think the people in her district are going to vote her out?
I doubt it, too.
The best way to punish her is to strip her of her 'queen bee' title by the Americans voting Democrats out of the House majority!Shouldn't Nancy Pelosi be punished for stopping ALL legislation while trying to make Bush look worse?
Yes, I think so. BTW - Filibustering is an old and respected tactic used in Congress since it's inception. Simply not playing when you know you are going to lose, is not.
Yeah, Bush is too easy a target hes already half in the bag. Keeping any more BUSHISMs from becoming law is reason to applaud.
Keep up the good work Nancy.
Pelosi is a complete idiot, and the democrats should be ashamed that she represents them.
Nazi Pelosi should be kicked out of office for not doing her job! Unfortunately, the dweebs in San Fransisco love her
Thank God somebody is providing adult supervision for Bush.
yes - she should be - the people who elected her should not REELECT her that is how she should be punished.
Pelosi is the worst thing to happen to America since Obama.
yes she should be sent packing! and the democrat congress' approval rating is WHAT?? like 20%? But it's all Bush's fault... of course!
Yes--but unfortunately the Democratic party rewards incompetence.
Is Nancy Pelosi running for office???
yes we need to set up another government branch that gets rid of Politicians since they would never impeach themselves
I am not a Bush fan by a long shot but Pelosi should get the boot.
maybe for violating the Logan Act
Democrat policy at work
Yes
pelousy sucks, she hopes for the worst for our country
Has obama ever worked with the republicans on any legislation?
How can he untie the country if he won't work with the GOP?Has obama ever worked with the republicans on any legislation?HE"S NEVER WORKED, AT ALL!!!!
Look at his voting record!!! He's just another "welfare bum", collecting a "check" for doing NOTHING!!!!Has obama ever worked with the republicans on any legislation?
He worked with John McCain, and George Bush on immigration reform. Obama did try to get them to not give blanket amnesty to all illegal aliens but in the end he compromised and agreed with their position to get the legislation passed. If they had agreed to his compromise they might have gotten it passed.
He reached across the aisle even before he had a national office giving speeches trying to help John McCain get support in Illinois for his rejection of the Bush tax cuts both times. He was in the Illinois legislature at the time where he frequently crossed party lines, but everybody does in Illinois politics.
Of course, the fact of the matter is that only McCain would need to work across the aisle. Obama will enjoy a majority in both houses of congress. In fact, Democrats should consider throwing the election. If Sidney the third is elected Democratic gains in the off year election will give them a veto proof majority. The only thing that makes me against that is McCain starting wars all over the world.Has obama ever worked with the republicans on any legislation?His legislation is often proposed with Republican co-sponsorship, which brings me to another point: he is bipartisan in a good way. According to me, bad bipartisanship is the kind practiced by Joe Lieberman. Bad bipartisans are so eager to establish credentials for moderation and reasonableness that they go out of their way to criticize their (supposed) ideological allies and praise their (supposed) opponents. They also compromise on principle, and when their opponents don't reciprocate, they compromise some more, until over time their positions become indistinguishable from those on the other side.
This isn't what Obama does. Obama tries to find people, both Democrats and Republicans, who actually care about a particular issue enough to try to get the policy right, and then he works with them. This does not involve compromising on principle. It does, however, involve preferring getting legislation passed to having a spectacular battle. (This is especially true when one is in the minority party, especially in this Senate: the chances that Obama's bills will actually become law increase dramatically when he has Republican co-sponsors.)
"By most accounts, Obama and Lugar's working relationship began with nukes. On the campaign trail in 2004, Obama spoke passionately about the dangers of loose nukes and the legacy of the Nunn-Lugar nonproliferation program, a framework created by a 1991 law to provide the former Soviet republics assistance in securing and deactivating nuclear weapons. Lugar took note, as “nonproliferation” is about as common a campaign sound-bite for aspiring senators as “exchange-rate policy” or “export-import bank oversight.”"
Those are some of the wonkier things he's done. (There are others: introducing legislation to make it illegal for tax preparers to sell personal information, for instance, and legislation on chemical plant security and lead paint.) He has done other things that are more high-profile, including:
His "health care for hybrids" bill
An Energy Security Bill
Various bills on relief for Hurricane Katrina, including aid for kids and a ban on no-bid contracts by FEMA
A public database of all federal spending and contracts
Trying to raise CAFE standards
Veterans' health care
Making certain kinds of voter intimidation illegal
A lobbying reform bill (with Tom Coburn), which would do all sorts of good things, notably including one of my perennial favorites, requiring that bills be made available to members of Congress at least 72 hours before they have to vote on them.
And a proposal to revamp ethics oversight, replacing the present ethics Committee with a bipartisan commission of retired judges and members of Congress, and allowing any citizen to report ethics violations. This would have fixed one of the huge problems with the present system, namely: that the members have to police themselves.
He has a decent record of getting his proposals enacted.
Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act"
"Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act", which passed the Senate in May 2006, but failed to gain majority support in the
House of Representatives.
"Iraq War De-Escalation Act of 2007," a bill to cap troop levels in Iraq, begin phased redeployment, and remove all combat brigades from Iraq before April 2008.
A provision from the Obama–Hagel bill was passed by Congress in December 2007 as an amendment to the State-Foreign Operations appropriations bill.
State Children's Health Insurance Program providing one year of job protection for family members caring for soldiers with combat-related injuries.
Lugar-Obama Nuclear Proliferation BillHas obama ever worked with the republicans on any legislation?Well, first of all, I would prefer that he UNITE the country, not UNTIE it.
But here is a small piece of the information you're looking for:
In the Illinois State Senate, he worked with both Democrats and Republicans to help working families get ahead by creating programs like the state Earned Income Tax Credit, which in three years provided over $100 million in tax cuts to families across the state. He also pushed through an expansion of early childhood education, and after a number of inmates on death row were found innocent, Senator Obama worked with law enforcement officials to require the videotaping of interrogations and confessions in all capital cases.
In the U.S. Senate, he has focused on tackling the challenges of a globalized, 21st century world with fresh thinking and a politics that no longer settles for the lowest common denominator. His first law was passed with Republican Tom Coburn, a measure to rebuild trust in government by allowing every American to go online and see how and where every dime of their tax dollars is spent. He has also been the lead voice in championing ethics reform that would root out Jack Abramoff-style corruption in Congress.
As a member of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, Senator Obama has fought to help Illinois veterans get the disability pay they were promised, while working to prepare the VA for the return of the thousands of veterans who will need care after Iraq and Afghanistan. Recognizing the terrorist threat posed by weapons of mass destruction, he traveled to Russia with Republican Dick Lugar to begin a new generation of non-proliferation efforts designed to find and secure deadly weapons around the world. And knowing the threat we face to our economy and our security from America's addiction to oil, he's working to bring auto companies, unions, farmers, businesses and politicians of both parties together to promote the greater use of alternative fuels and higher fuel standards in our cars.Has obama ever worked with the republicans on any legislation?
He worked with Dick Lugar on Nuclear non-proliferation. He also passed bipartisan legislation that expanded health care coverage to 154,000 Residents in Illinois. He also passed the healthcare justice act with a republican co-sponsor.
His very 1st vote with the GOP winners was this week when he said he will vote ( reluctantly he admits) with the GOP to approve the surveillance bill. Of course he has to say that or be labeled soft on terror.
Still, saying he'll vote aye is not the same as doing it.Has obama ever worked with the republicans on any legislation?
No he hasn't.
McCain has many many times worked with the Dem's, even at the risk of being ostracized by his own party, which he was many times.
Obama is all talk, talk is cheap, actions speak louder than words, ie McCain
Sure he did. and thats an understatement. matter of fact
he worked with them right up to the vote, Then turned his
back on them. left them twisting in the wind, And either
voted present or against them. You sure can trust Obama.
he's barely been involved in any legislation period, and considering his far-left Socialist stance, it's unlikely he will do any party uniting
This is where McCain shows that he is a true leader, unlike Obama he has worked with Democrats time and time again to pass workable (not perfect) legislation.
Did he ever work with anyone on any legislation? Or did he ever work on any legislation?
he hasn't even worked long enough with the dems or in Politics never mind working with GOP
he has no credibility
No - there aren't any Muslim republicans for him to agree to work with.
Better question, has he ever worked?
Probably only McCain, oops sorry you said Republican. McCain is a RINO.
he has, look at the facts, not the hype
Yes.
Yes he has, when he was in Illinois senate
Look at his voting record!!! He's just another "welfare bum", collecting a "check" for doing NOTHING!!!!Has obama ever worked with the republicans on any legislation?
He worked with John McCain, and George Bush on immigration reform. Obama did try to get them to not give blanket amnesty to all illegal aliens but in the end he compromised and agreed with their position to get the legislation passed. If they had agreed to his compromise they might have gotten it passed.
He reached across the aisle even before he had a national office giving speeches trying to help John McCain get support in Illinois for his rejection of the Bush tax cuts both times. He was in the Illinois legislature at the time where he frequently crossed party lines, but everybody does in Illinois politics.
Of course, the fact of the matter is that only McCain would need to work across the aisle. Obama will enjoy a majority in both houses of congress. In fact, Democrats should consider throwing the election. If Sidney the third is elected Democratic gains in the off year election will give them a veto proof majority. The only thing that makes me against that is McCain starting wars all over the world.Has obama ever worked with the republicans on any legislation?His legislation is often proposed with Republican co-sponsorship, which brings me to another point: he is bipartisan in a good way. According to me, bad bipartisanship is the kind practiced by Joe Lieberman. Bad bipartisans are so eager to establish credentials for moderation and reasonableness that they go out of their way to criticize their (supposed) ideological allies and praise their (supposed) opponents. They also compromise on principle, and when their opponents don't reciprocate, they compromise some more, until over time their positions become indistinguishable from those on the other side.
This isn't what Obama does. Obama tries to find people, both Democrats and Republicans, who actually care about a particular issue enough to try to get the policy right, and then he works with them. This does not involve compromising on principle. It does, however, involve preferring getting legislation passed to having a spectacular battle. (This is especially true when one is in the minority party, especially in this Senate: the chances that Obama's bills will actually become law increase dramatically when he has Republican co-sponsors.)
"By most accounts, Obama and Lugar's working relationship began with nukes. On the campaign trail in 2004, Obama spoke passionately about the dangers of loose nukes and the legacy of the Nunn-Lugar nonproliferation program, a framework created by a 1991 law to provide the former Soviet republics assistance in securing and deactivating nuclear weapons. Lugar took note, as “nonproliferation” is about as common a campaign sound-bite for aspiring senators as “exchange-rate policy” or “export-import bank oversight.”"
Those are some of the wonkier things he's done. (There are others: introducing legislation to make it illegal for tax preparers to sell personal information, for instance, and legislation on chemical plant security and lead paint.) He has done other things that are more high-profile, including:
His "health care for hybrids" bill
An Energy Security Bill
Various bills on relief for Hurricane Katrina, including aid for kids and a ban on no-bid contracts by FEMA
A public database of all federal spending and contracts
Trying to raise CAFE standards
Veterans' health care
Making certain kinds of voter intimidation illegal
A lobbying reform bill (with Tom Coburn), which would do all sorts of good things, notably including one of my perennial favorites, requiring that bills be made available to members of Congress at least 72 hours before they have to vote on them.
And a proposal to revamp ethics oversight, replacing the present ethics Committee with a bipartisan commission of retired judges and members of Congress, and allowing any citizen to report ethics violations. This would have fixed one of the huge problems with the present system, namely: that the members have to police themselves.
He has a decent record of getting his proposals enacted.
Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act"
"Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act", which passed the Senate in May 2006, but failed to gain majority support in the
House of Representatives.
"Iraq War De-Escalation Act of 2007," a bill to cap troop levels in Iraq, begin phased redeployment, and remove all combat brigades from Iraq before April 2008.
A provision from the Obama–Hagel bill was passed by Congress in December 2007 as an amendment to the State-Foreign Operations appropriations bill.
State Children's Health Insurance Program providing one year of job protection for family members caring for soldiers with combat-related injuries.
Lugar-Obama Nuclear Proliferation BillHas obama ever worked with the republicans on any legislation?Well, first of all, I would prefer that he UNITE the country, not UNTIE it.
But here is a small piece of the information you're looking for:
In the Illinois State Senate, he worked with both Democrats and Republicans to help working families get ahead by creating programs like the state Earned Income Tax Credit, which in three years provided over $100 million in tax cuts to families across the state. He also pushed through an expansion of early childhood education, and after a number of inmates on death row were found innocent, Senator Obama worked with law enforcement officials to require the videotaping of interrogations and confessions in all capital cases.
In the U.S. Senate, he has focused on tackling the challenges of a globalized, 21st century world with fresh thinking and a politics that no longer settles for the lowest common denominator. His first law was passed with Republican Tom Coburn, a measure to rebuild trust in government by allowing every American to go online and see how and where every dime of their tax dollars is spent. He has also been the lead voice in championing ethics reform that would root out Jack Abramoff-style corruption in Congress.
As a member of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, Senator Obama has fought to help Illinois veterans get the disability pay they were promised, while working to prepare the VA for the return of the thousands of veterans who will need care after Iraq and Afghanistan. Recognizing the terrorist threat posed by weapons of mass destruction, he traveled to Russia with Republican Dick Lugar to begin a new generation of non-proliferation efforts designed to find and secure deadly weapons around the world. And knowing the threat we face to our economy and our security from America's addiction to oil, he's working to bring auto companies, unions, farmers, businesses and politicians of both parties together to promote the greater use of alternative fuels and higher fuel standards in our cars.Has obama ever worked with the republicans on any legislation?
He worked with Dick Lugar on Nuclear non-proliferation. He also passed bipartisan legislation that expanded health care coverage to 154,000 Residents in Illinois. He also passed the healthcare justice act with a republican co-sponsor.
His very 1st vote with the GOP winners was this week when he said he will vote ( reluctantly he admits) with the GOP to approve the surveillance bill. Of course he has to say that or be labeled soft on terror.
Still, saying he'll vote aye is not the same as doing it.Has obama ever worked with the republicans on any legislation?
No he hasn't.
McCain has many many times worked with the Dem's, even at the risk of being ostracized by his own party, which he was many times.
Obama is all talk, talk is cheap, actions speak louder than words, ie McCain
Sure he did. and thats an understatement. matter of fact
he worked with them right up to the vote, Then turned his
back on them. left them twisting in the wind, And either
voted present or against them. You sure can trust Obama.
he's barely been involved in any legislation period, and considering his far-left Socialist stance, it's unlikely he will do any party uniting
This is where McCain shows that he is a true leader, unlike Obama he has worked with Democrats time and time again to pass workable (not perfect) legislation.
Did he ever work with anyone on any legislation? Or did he ever work on any legislation?
he hasn't even worked long enough with the dems or in Politics never mind working with GOP
he has no credibility
No - there aren't any Muslim republicans for him to agree to work with.
Better question, has he ever worked?
Probably only McCain, oops sorry you said Republican. McCain is a RINO.
he has, look at the facts, not the hype
Yes.
Yes he has, when he was in Illinois senate
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)