Did YOU vote?

04 Nov 2014 12:15 #11 by Jekyll
Replied by Jekyll on topic Did YOU vote?
Outstanding SC, THANK YOU! I thought it was funny about the judges too. I read through every one of them and voted down several. I hope you voted to keep Susan L. Fisch. She presided over my DUI case and all the good things said about her are true. Thanks again and we'll see what happens tonight.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

04 Nov 2014 12:51 - 04 Nov 2014 12:52 #12 by ScienceChic
Replied by ScienceChic on topic Did YOU vote?
I can't remember if she was one or not, but I'm glad to hear you had a good experience for something like that. I know of others who have not.

I have to share this video that just came across my Twitter feed from Eric Gorski , Education Reporter for The Denver Post. Go Kyffin Cougars! B)


"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther

The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill
The following user(s) said Thank You: Jekyll

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

05 Nov 2014 11:33 #13 by ComputerBreath
Replied by ComputerBreath on topic Did YOU vote?
Yes, I voted. I am a permanent mail-in/drop off person.

One of the things that was repeatedly told me when I was in the military was that because we were given the right to vote we should take it.

In the two countries I was stationed in outside of the U.S., it was anathema to them that we were given the choice of who to vote for and what to vote for.

My eldest son; however, was so pissed off at all of the ads, including the ones they snuck in on Facebook, that he didn't vote at all. When one of those polling calls came in a couple weeks ago, that is exactly what he told them.

I think all of the ads, whether negative or not, were too numerous and bombarded TV watchers so much, that I can understand his attitude.

As long as there is a working brain cell inside me, I will ALWAYS vote.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Jekyll

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

05 Nov 2014 11:47 #14 by Jekyll
Replied by Jekyll on topic Did YOU vote?
I can see your sons side of it as well. I went back in to KGS yesterday (yes, for more smokes, lol) and asked one of the other young gals I hadn't seen if she was registered to vote. She said "yes" and I asked if she voted, and that's when it went sour. She said the EXACT same thing your son did. Tired of the political ads and the general feeling of hopelessness, that her vote didn't really matter. Not sure why I didn't get much in the way of electronic (phone, internet, etc) ads but I sure as heck got a ton in the mail! Course, I just threw all of it out the minute I pulled it out of the p.o box. :biggrin:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

05 Nov 2014 11:54 #15 by Blazer Bob
Replied by Blazer Bob on topic Did YOU vote?

ComputerBreath wrote: Yes, I voted. I am a permanent mail-in/drop off person.

One of the things that was repeatedly told me when I was in the military was that because we were given the right to vote we should take it....


My memory is a bit hazy that far back but I think enlisting is what first got me to pay attention. I can remember the days as an adult when the only part of the paper I read were the comics and the op-eds because I regarded them as adult comics.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

05 Nov 2014 12:26 #16 by ZHawke
Replied by ZHawke on topic Did YOU vote?
I can understand the attitude, too, with regard to advertising bombardment. That also, then could arguably beg a question whether or not money in politics might have played a role in the outcomes we've been seeing? It's been estimated these mid-term elections cost upwards of 4 billion dollars, the highest total ever for mid-terms. Again, could this have played a role?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

05 Nov 2014 12:51 #17 by Jekyll
Replied by Jekyll on topic Did YOU vote?
I've never seen the amount of advertising like I did this cycle. It was WAY over the top. I can think of a lot better things that four billion coulda been spent on myself, but that's a whole other topic. Good point though.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

05 Nov 2014 15:46 #18 by PrintSmith
Replied by PrintSmith on topic Did YOU vote?
And we also saw record turnout levels this midterm. Might the additional "call to action" that is part and parcel of such advertising have inspired others to make sure they voted instead of acting out in some useless way by failing to cast a ballot?

The surest way to remove money from politics is not to pass a law, it's to limit the scope and reach of the value associated with spending that money, in other words to limit the scope and reach of the federal government. The only reason $4 billion is spent on elections is that the return on that investment far exceeds the amount invested.

What would happen, for instance, if tomorrow the federal government abolished the Social Security and Medicare programs, stopped collecting taxes from current workers to pay for the current subsidies and told the States that they would have to care for their own citizens on their own. Think that might reduce the amount of money that AARP, the drug industry, and the insurance companies selling Medicare supplement insurance shoveled into the national races? I'm betting it would. How many other federal programs that are similarly beyond any intended reach of the federal government contribute to the problem that many seem to believe exists?

And, just for grins and giggles, what do you suppose would happen to all those seniors who are currently being subsidized by today's workers? Do you think their children would let them starve and freeze on the street? Do you think the charities in the State would simply stand by and do nothing? Do you think the State legislatures would also stand by and do nothing? Of course not. That isn't the character of the citizens of the States that make up this Union. But it sure would make a lot of difference in how important elections deciding who sat in Congress were, wouldn't it. It would make your State and local elections a lot more relevant than they are today, wouldn't it.

You want to be done with $4 Billion midterm elections? Have the fewest number of your tax dollars being sent to Washington DC instead of the vast majority of them. Return the federal government to the enumerated powers delegated to it by the Constitution and dispense with all the invented powers the federal government has created for itself. Then, and only then, will you achieve the desired end of having so much money spent to elect members to Congress and to select a president.

It's not that the perceived problem doesn't have a solution, it's that the solution isn't something that the populace has the will to effect.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

05 Nov 2014 20:02 - 05 Nov 2014 20:03 #19 by ZHawke
Replied by ZHawke on topic Did YOU vote?

PrintSmith wrote: Return the federal government to the enumerated powers delegated to it by the Constitution and dispense with all the invented powers the federal government has created for itself.


Long post to get to an oft repeated single point, PrintSmith. Question is, what specifically constitutes the "enumerated powers delegated to it by the Constitution and dispensing with all the invented powers the Federal government has created for itself"? We've been down this road before, and you've been very vague in tap dancing around this issue. Which agencies/functions/powers/programs/laws/amendments specifically would you eliminate in order to achieve your stated position? How would you go about achieving that lofty, but what some would posit to be "unrealistic" goal?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

06 Nov 2014 11:41 #20 by PrintSmith
Replied by PrintSmith on topic Did YOU vote?
Department of Education, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and every other individual welfare program funded via the levying and collection of federal income taxes, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, R&D grants, tax exemptions carved out for individual companies or industries, the list is nearly as long as the number of federal budget items.

As to what constitutes the enumerated powers, that is contained in Article I Section 8 of the Constitution. It is quite specific as to what the enumerated powers of the Congress are:

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;

To establish post offices and post roads;

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;--And

To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.


Do you see a power delegated to provide individual welfare subsidies of any stripe let alone the huge variety of stripes that currently exist? Do you see a warrant of power to guarantee loans made by banks to anyone regardless of what the purpose of the loan is? The federal government is currently guaranteeing home loans, education loans, business loans, and other varieties of loans between institutions and individuals both domestically and internationally. Where is the delegation of power to do that?

Certainly the Congress was delegated the power to hire an artist to produce a specific piece for the federal government, a portrait of the president as an example. But to then turn around and say that allows it to subsidize an individual artist to pursue their art however they wish is to invent a new power for itself. Do you see that difference? One is proper under the Constitution, one is not. For the Congress to appropriate money to develop a new battle rifle for use by the army is a proper exercise of delegated powers, but not in the manner that is currently being done. The proper way is to tell the arms manufacturers that the army is interested in a new battle rifle, if you are interested bring a prototype for examination. The improper way is to provide seed money to 30 different companies, many of which donated money to your campaign and your party, to see what they come up with.

The proper way of developing alternative energy is to issue a RFP for a solar array to run the Capital and hire one of them to build the array. The improper way is to guarantee loans to 30 different companies, the heads of which made contributions to your campaign and your party, with no product so as to help them develop their product.

The first, in both examples, is a delegated power of Congress. The other is a power Congress invented for itself. Thomas Jefferson said it best in a letter written to William Johnson in 1823:

On every question of construction, let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.

Now if you are of the opinion that the ACA, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, SNAP and every other individual welfare subsidy currently provided by the federal government conforms to the intent that was understood at the time the Constitution was adopted instead of being real world examples of trying what meaning may be squeezed from the text or invented against it I'd love to have that discussion with you.

One point before you begin. I am not necessarily opposed to providing these subsidies as many of them address real world needs. I am, however, opposed to having the federal government be the level of government from which these subsidies originate. Remember, my objection is that the majority, instead of the minority, of my tax dollars are going to Washington DC. That doesn't mean I would be opposed to paying the same, or perhaps higher, taxes at the local and State level to address these same issues, it means I am opposed to sending those tax dollars to the federal government.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.154 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum
sponsors
© My Mountain Town (new)
Google+