Which political party are you?

Posted by metisman (anonymous) on November 6, 2009 at 2:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)

On the national level, I quit voting for either the Repubs or Dems several elections ago. They are totally dependent upon lobbyist money. And spend too much time running for election/raising funds instead of tending to business.

Our governor is no better. I wonder what % of his time is on the job and what % is off flitting around being Presidential?

Posted by Warhog (anonymous) on November 6, 2009 at 6:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Way too much of the time..............................Gov green jeans needs to work at home and finish the job he has, this gov is no more the democrat lite.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on November 6, 2009 at 10:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I want someone to stand up for the Constitution. I am done with both parties. I am tired of people who's only job is to raise money and get re-elected. Done....

Our founding fathers gave us the best plan known to man. We have the power. Government should fear us. We should never fear them. Read what these great men said. They believed in a small limited government. They understood how the system could be stolen from the people. Take the time and read the 10th amendment. It is time to remind Mr. Waltz, Al (I am a Joke) Franken, and Ms Amy what it says and who they work for.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The Tenth Amendment restates the Constitution's principle of federalism by providing that powers not granted to the national government nor prohibited to the states are reserved to the states or the people.

So I ask again please show me where in the Constitution it says we should bail out banks, car companies, health care.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on November 7, 2009 at 7:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Benjamin Franklin noted that "there is a natural inclination in mankind to kingly government." He said it gives people the illusion that somehow a king will establish "equality amoung citizens; and that they like." Franklin's great fear was that the states would succumb to this gravitational pull toward a strong central government symbolized by a royal establishment. He said; "I am apprehensive, therefore--perhaps too apprehensive---that the Government of these States may in future times end in a monarchy. But this catastrophe, I think, may be long delayed, if in our proposed system we do not sow the seeds of contention, faction, and tumult, by making our post of honor places of profit." (Albert Henry Smyth, ed., The Writings of Benjamin Franklin, 10 vols)

Posted by Warhog (anonymous) on November 7, 2009 at 8:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Well said NoDFL, well said, that pretty much sums up my take on things, the guberment is out of control, and we the people were asleep at the controls, we let this happen. For you democrats this goes back further than Bambam try a few presidents ago it was a slippery slope.

Now the hard part begins, the founding fathers were more than just some dead white guys only to be a footnote in history, what they have said and written IS STILL TRUE TO THIS DAY, we just need to open our eyes and read what is written and the true intent of government is laid out before us for all to see, if we have the courage to look.

Here is an idea, read Thomas Paine's Common Sense it is an eye opener.

They had the right idea, we just screwed it up along the way.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on November 7, 2009 at 9:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)

James Madison described the division of labor between the states and the federal government as follows:

The powers delegated by the Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. (Please read that again) Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.... The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State. (Federalist Papers, NO. 45, pp. 292-93)

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on November 7, 2009 at 10:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The American Founders were the first to carefully structure what might be described as America’s Three-headed Eagle. The central head was the law-making or legislative function with two eyes, the house and senate and these both must see eye to eye on any piece of legislation before it can become law. A second head is the administrative or executive department with all authority centered in a single, strong President, operating within a clearly defined framework of limited power. The third head is the judiciary, which was assigned the task of acting as guardian of the Constitution and the interpretation of its principles as originally designed by the Founders.

The genius of this three-headed eagle was not only the separation of powers but the fact that all three heads operated through a single neck. By this means the Founders carefully integrated these three departments so that each one was coordinated with the others and could not function independently of them. It was an ingeniously structured pattern of political power which might be described as “coordination without consolidation.”

The Founder’s view of their new form of government can be further demonstrated by using the symbol of the eagle and referring to its two wings: Wing #1 of the eagle might be referred to as the problem solving wing or the wing of compassion. Those who function through this dimension of the system are sensitive to the unfulfilled needs of the people. They dream of elaborate plans to solve these problems.

Wing #2 has the responsibility of conserving the nation’s resources and the people’s freedom. Its function is to analyze the programs of wing #1 with two questions. First, can we afford it? Secondly, what will it do to the rights and individual freedom of the people?

Now, if both of these wings fulfill their assigned function, the American eagle will fly straighter and higher than any civilization in the history of the world. But if either of these wings goes to sleep on the job, the American eagle will drift toward anarchy or tyranny. For example, if wing #1 becomes infatuated with the idea of solving all the problems of the nation regardless of the cost, and wing #2 fails to bring its power into play to sober the problem solvers with a more realistic approach, the eagle will spin off toward the left, which is tyranny. (Dr. W. Cleon Skousen The 5000 Year Leap)

I think this is where we are at with the health care debate. We are so worried about wing #1 and have forgot about wing # 2 and we are heading at a high rate of speed toward tyranny.

Posted by hardtail (anonymous) on November 7, 2009 at 7:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I never saw the point in being strapped to any party. How can you really solve a problem if you have to think the way your party wants you to? Impossible... Those who are affiliated with any party show that they are unable to think for themselves, like those who listen to the spinning heads such as rush the pill head and the likes are the,,can't think for themselves,, sheep of our society. Poor misguided fools..

Posted by Warhog (anonymous) on November 7, 2009 at 9:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Excellent job NoDFL........................ I wish more people would read this, it would open some people's eyes, I gained knowledge from what you have written.

Thanks

Posted by OldTrojan (anonymous) on November 8, 2009 at 1:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The decline all began with Nixon. The government lost the public trust while he was in office and it has not been recovered since.

Posted by Warhog (anonymous) on November 8, 2009 at 8:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I will see your nixon and and raise you another president, Lyndon Baines Johnson for obvious reasons, but we are close in the time frame and we both can agree on the start of the decline, within a decade.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on November 8, 2009 at 11:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Johnson gets my vote as far as modern times go. However the real problems started with Teddy R and the progressives. They shreaded the Constitution, brought in income tax, and grew the size of government. Until we return to that great idea (A constitutional republic with a small federal government) we will stumple along.

Posted by Truth (anonymous) on November 8, 2009 at 12:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

It is time for a recall vote for Tim Waltz. He is guilty of nonfeasance. According to Section 6 of Article 8 of the Minnesota Constitution we can recall him. The time is now before this guy does anymore damage.

Posted by outoftownlandlord (anonymous) on November 8, 2009 at 12:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Many of the problems we have with the Federal Government today can be traced back to a critical year. That year was 1913, the year in which the 16th and 17th Amendments were ratified and the Federal Reserve Act was passed, which set up the Federal Reserve Bank.

The net effect has been that the states no longer are effective counter-weights to the Federal Government, and the Federal Government now rules with impunity. Indeed, it has reduced the states to pawns in its statist moves.

Perhaps the most insidious practice the Federal Government engages in is that of unfunded mandates, wherein the Federal Government dictates to a state how it must act, while simultaneously compelling the state to pay for the program. Attempts to limit this in the past have failed to stop the harmful practice.

In essence, the states and its citizens are then enslaved by Federal Government. Even the ultra-liberal Janet Napolitano, the former governor of AZ and current Head of Homeland Security recently expressed exasperation with the harmful effects that Washington DC’s unfunded mandates have on the states. One way to turn a Big Government liberal into an advocate for states rights is to just make her responsible for implementing and finding confiscatory takings to pay for a Big Government as mandate.

It is just this outrage felt by both conservatives and liberals in state governments that is pointing to a way forward.

The first step in the process is that the states must assert their sovereignty, which is their right under the 10th amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It reads:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
The glimmer of hope now felt is that many states are beginning to assert their sovereignty.

There is a movement under foot, a bi-partisan movement at the state level, called the 10th Amendment Movement. Within this movement state lawmakers are introducing legislation which asserts their power to regulate matters not specifically and constitutionally delegated to the federal government.

Thirty-five states have introduced similar legislation this year. For those of you keeping count, yes, that is more than a two-thirds majority, which is all that would be required under Article V of the Constitution to call a constitutional convention – the “nuclear option” the states have to modify the constitution and by those means strip the Federal Government of the powers it currently unjustly employs to harm the states. This is a psychologically important fact.

Posted by outoftownlandlord (anonymous) on November 8, 2009 at 12:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Now, there is an additional thing you can do. You can also contact your U.S. Legislators and support the Enumerated Powers Act that has been introduced in the House by John Shadegg.

Tell them you want them to support HR 450.

It won’t limit their powers or what they do, but by requiring all legislation to enumerate powers, it returns the focus to the constitution and builds evidence that can later be used to restrict powers, evidence the states can use later to document abuse and remove federal power.

The United States is a nation of 50 constitutional republics bound by a common federal constitution. The federal government was constitutionally never intended to be a Leviathan and in fact the Constitution was established precisely to prevent what has happened today.

It is the states’ constitutional right to have sovereignty in all areas not expressly delegated by the constitution.

While efforts to overturn the 16th and 17th amendments and abolish the Federal Reserve system face significant uphill battles, the fight is more winnable if the states are willing to reclaim their constitutional sovereignty.

The federal government won’t be reformed from within. Only an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires of liberty in the minds of others can inspire the states to us the power of the 10th Amendment to slay Leviathan.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on November 8, 2009 at 1:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Thanks for the kind words Warhog. Also outoftownlandlord great post and you can quote me anytime. (From post about Waltz).

I wish everyone would wake up. The 2 parties are the problem not the solution.

Posted by Warhog (anonymous) on November 8, 2009 at 4:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This is a lot of information to absorb, this is amazing that people here know more about they way government is suppose to function than the "elected ones". Outoftownlandlord that is a excellent post, I believe you are right on point, the way to fight this the Enumerated Powers Act.

If a con/con is held, I understand that is the "nuke option" but would that also open the door for the supporters of the "big government mob" to do more damage, and go after the constitution to make it a living,breathing document or would the con/con only be used to address only the issue that it was convened for ?

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on November 8, 2009 at 5:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Warhog,

I think you are right about the "nuke option" is right. After all the Constitution came out of a meeting to "fix" the Articals of Confederation. It became clear to the Founders that they had to start a new. They were not even sure if it was legal because each had been charged by their respective states to "fix" the Articals not to start a new.

I think using the 10th amendment is what needs to be done. As I read it there are 36 states who have or are in the proccess of passing some sort of law.

This is AZ law. Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the State of Arizona, the Senate concurring, that:

1. That the State of Arizona hereby claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the Constitution of the United States.

2. That this Resolution serves as notice and demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.

3. That all compulsory federal legislation that directs states to comply under threat of civil or criminal penalties or sanctions or requires states to pass legislation or lose federal funding be prohibited or repealed.

4. That the Secretary of State of the State of Arizona transmit copies of this resolution to the President of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate of each state's legislature and each Member of Congress from the State of Arizona.
http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?...

I know I jumped in hope I did not step on anyone's toes.

Posted by 41057 (anonymous) on November 9, 2009 at 12:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I am proud to say I am the party of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly. May God have mercy on the Democratic Party.

Posted by GH2ORepub (anonymous) on November 9, 2009 at 12:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Truth has it Right---recall Walz NOW!

Posted by ErnieGann (anonymous) on November 9, 2009 at 1:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The Repubs have become "Donk Lite"--if you want to elect a liberal, why would anyone choose a Repub liberal?

I don't support any party. I donate to the NRA, the TEA Party, and other conservative groups. ANYBODY from ANY PARTY can step up and claim the money--but you don't see many liberals doing so.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on November 9, 2009 at 2:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Ok Truth you have me and GH20Repub. What do we need to do? Anyone else out there willing to recall Waltz?

Posted by cabinman (anonymous) on November 9, 2009 at 3:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Really 41057, may god have mercy on the Democratic Party. What is wrong with you?

Posted by Warhog (anonymous) on November 9, 2009 at 5:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I am............................ we need to get the ball rolling, and see even "if" this is possible, the time to be silent is long gone. What you see today is the direct result being silent or "nice".

There is a lot of talented and educated people that have posted here on this subject, I have learned many things, now is the time to be active, we need to get organized, and follow up.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on November 9, 2009 at 6:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I am with you Warhog. We need to do something. We need to start to write letters ever week to the paper (not Just the Trib). We need to call everyday (every hour). We need to have events. Erine gave me some great ideas but it has become clear that we need to act and act fast. One thing is clear there are a lot of inds out there and they are running from Obamacare. Time has come for a change.

Posted by bornFree (anonymous) on November 9, 2009 at 6:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Well this is what our buddy said today.

http://walz.house.gov/apps/list/press/mn...

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on November 9, 2009 at 8:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Thanks bornfree. What a load of crap. He is so out of touch with the people of Minnesota. Time to find a new job Tim. Heard they may be hiring at that great American fun park Wallyworld. (He looks and sounds like John Candy in Vacation) Sorry folks the moose out front should have told you I am voting any old way I want......

Posted by Warhog (anonymous) on November 9, 2009 at 8:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Since the healthcare link was used, I called waltz last thursday and according the phone flunky he was not sure how he was going to vote on this issue. I think we all knew how it was going to go down, but he didn't want to show his hand early after all don't get the serfs worked up, then you might have to answer a hard question or two.

Today I called again, and expressed my displeasure about the vote. I told the phone flunky I was going to support anybody and I mean anybody, up to and including the dog catcher, with time and money, in an effort to make sure he has to find a new job in his next election cycle.

Sometimes the phone flunky will listen and I "assume" they pass on the message, but I have no proof of that.

Some phone flunkys will try to convince you he is right, to the point of arguing with you, it's a potluck who you get, the debater was a guy.

Also check out the posts on "House health bill unacceptable to many in Senate" in the local section some good info.

Waltz's D.C. office number 1 202-255-2472

Posted by newyankee (anonymous) on November 9, 2009 at 9 p.m. (Suggest removal)

When I read the above comments I was impressed and at the same time had a thought. Where does this level of discussion come from? Do these posters get this level of education from school, TV the newspaper or listening to our elected leaders? I think not. There are some pretty darn smart people who have put some time and effort into getting involved and informed. This is the kind of discussion and debate we should have daily. Maybe conservative talk radio is not all “entertainment”?

Get local and get involved! With people as smart as you, I think we can make some change I can believe in.

Posted by cabinman (anonymous) on November 10, 2009 at 10:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)

What about our excellent governor. Cutting funds to most mentally ill and disabled people. All the while he is out parading for the Presidency in 2012. He is also talking about reforming the Minnesota Constitution. What a leader!

Posted by Warhog (anonymous) on November 10, 2009 at 11:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)

cabinman please provide proof of this

Posted by mankind (anonymous) on November 10, 2009 at 1:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Just a quick google search found this

*$236 million reduction of health care, including eliminating the General Assistance Medical Care program, which provides health care for the sickest and poorest Minnesotans, one and a half months sooner than would have happened as a result of Pawlenty’s line-item veto.

*$300 million in Local Government Aid and County Program Aid, primarily used for local public safety and essential services.

Posted by cabinman (anonymous) on November 10, 2009 at 2:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)

— $200 million Reduction of local aids and credits to cities & townships
— $100 million Reduction of local aids and credits to counties
— $67 million Reduction of refunds and other payments
— $236 million Reduction in human services spending
— $100 million Reduction in higher education appropriations
— $33 million Reduction in most state agency operating budgets
— $1.77 billion K-12 education payment deferrals and adjustments
— $169 million Additional revenues through administrative actions

The 236 million in human services spending. Most of the money associated with human services is for the mentally ill and or mentally disabled. This includes, cutting funds for their programs, work programs, rental assistance and in some cases Mental Health Rehabilitation.

Posted by cabinman (anonymous) on November 10, 2009 at 2:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Newyankee you are right about not all conservative talk radio being entertainment. Most of it is crud that is made up to scare you.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on November 10, 2009 at 2:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

cabinman,
Who is scaring who here. Those numbers you post have no links to check. Now lets look at how much spending has increased. 8% per year for the last 10 years. This reduction only took spending back to 2005 levels. Only state government can increase spending when there was no inflation. Really hate to see what they will do when we have real inflation.

Posted by cabinman (anonymous) on November 10, 2009 at 3:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The numbers I posted were from the Postbulletin. I will link to it for you.

http://postbulletin.typepad.com/politica...

It also cost the state up to 4,700 jobs.

http://www.wctrib.com/event/article/id/5...

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on November 10, 2009 at 4:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Last Nov. 4, more than 56% of Minnesota's voters said YES to the Clean Water, Land, and Legacy Amendment to the Minnesota Constitution. Starting July 1, Legacy increased the state sales tax by 3/8 of 1% for 25 years to dedicate funds for lakes, rivers, streams, groundwater, wetlands, prairies, forests, fish, game, wildlife habitat, parks, and trails. The amendment also provides 19.75% of the collected funds for arts, arts education and access, and preservation of history and cultural heritage.

With statewide lobbying by Minnesota Citizens for the Arts, the 2009 Minnesota Legislature appropriated the first Legacy funds for fiscal years 2010 and 2011 (as reported by MCA):

Funding to the arts via the Minnesota State Arts Board and Regional Arts Councils will increase by $21,650,000 per year for the next two years, for a total of $43.3 million. Added to the $8.6 million passed in the state’s economic development bill, there will now be just over $30 million in state funding for the arts annually, compared to just over $10 million annually this year.

Here is how it breaks down in each year, 2010 and 2011:

•$16,775,000 for Arts and Arts Access Initiatives, “to support Minnesota’s artists and arts organizations in creating, producing and presenting high-quality arts activities; to overcome barriers to accessing high-quality arts activities, and to instill the arts into the community and public life in this state.”
•$3,245,000 for Arts Education Collaborations, for “high-quality, age-appropriate arts education for Minnesotans of all ages to develop knowledge, skills, and understanding of the arts”
•$1,080,000 for Arts in Cultural Heritage, “for events and activities that represent the diverse ethnic and cultural arts traditions, including folk and traditional artists and art organizations represented in this state, ” and
•$550,000 for Fiscal Oversight and Accountability (to the MSAB). The first three items above will be available 70% from the MSAB and 30% from the Regional Arts Councils.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on November 10, 2009 at 4:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

2nd part

•In addition to the dedicated funding above, libraries received $4.25 million per year which “may be used to sponsor programs provided by regional libraries, or to provide grants to local arts and heritage programs for programs in partnership with regional libraries,” (i.e., opportunities for artists and arts organizations to work with libraries).
•Also, the Humanities Center received $300,000 per year for “museums and organizations celebrating the ethnic identities of Minnesotans” to re-grant, so there may be further opportunities for artists and arts organizations.
In addition, over the next two years, the Minnesota Historical Society will receive $14.4 million, public television $6.3 million, Minnesota Public Radio $2.65 million, AMPERS (local public radio) $2.65 million, children’s museums $1 million, the Science Museum of Minnesota $900,000, Minnesota Zoos $900,000, libraries $8.5 million, Indian Affairs Council (for projects related to the preservation of native languages) $1.9 million, Perpich Center for Arts Education $1 million, and the Minnesota Humanities Center, $2.1 million. http://minnesotamist.blogspot.com/2009/0...

Lets see we vote to rasie taxes to do this but you get upset because we had to cut cost in other areas? Would it not have been better to have used this money for Schools or help the Medical issues you talk about? Maybe we should not have been lied to about this.

Posted by Warhog (anonymous) on November 10, 2009 at 6:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Tim Pawlenty's decision to make unilateral budget cuts" could "cost up to 4,700 jobs across Minnesota.

Note the word "could" this is at best a guess, far from actual facts. Also consider the source the strib a left leaning newspaper pushing their D.F.L. agenda.

These are extraordinary times when people are getting laid off and unusual amount of job losses, one should expect the state to cut back as well. Revenue declines in the state I.E. higher taxes, less people working, bad business climate, what else would it do? Higher taxes does not equal more revenue to the state, contrary to what the D.F.L. says or thinks smart money moves away from an bad environment.

"In my opinion" the state has a bloated work force and should make cuts to keep in line with the revenue. At my work we have had to do the same thing, why should the state be immune.

They are working for me by working for the state, a state job is not an "entitlement" to ask the state to NOT make job cuts, is in these times is insane and unsustainable.

— $200 million Reduction of local aids and credits to cities & townships
— $100 million Reduction of local aids and credits to counties
— $67 million Reduction of refunds and other payments
— $236 million Reduction in human services spending
— $100 million Reduction in higher education appropriations
— $33 million Reduction in most state agency operating budgets
— $1.77 billion K-12 education payment deferrals and adjustments
— $169 million Additional revenues through administrative actions

The 236 million in human services spending. Most of the money associated with human services is for the mentally ill and or mentally disabled. This includes, cutting funds for their programs, work programs, rental assistance and in some cases Mental Health Rehabilitation.

Who is to blame for this?

We all know programs scream my funding has been cut when they don't get their projected increase in funding, which is NOT a cut in funding.

The D.F.L. had a major hand in the un-allotmentment they made this possible and then they cry foul................ PLEASE

To me it looks like we are spending MILLIONS trying to be like the federal guberment .....................WHY?

Do we NEED a program for everything, I don't think so, I am sure some good programs had lost funding but the state is bloated with programs for everybody. We need a leaner way to provide essential services some of the more useless programs need to go away.

If this can be achieved the state, would have an increase in revenue, we could import something more into the state other than "wards of the state" and "export jobs".

Take a quick look at the low tax states they are not going broke like the high tax states are, the examples are there to follow.

In the state of Minnesota we choose to look the other way and follow the path of California, Michigan, New York.

The blind are leading the blind and blame someone else in their failures.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on November 11, 2009 at 8:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Well said Warhog.

Posted by leftys2221 (anonymous) on November 11, 2009 at 8:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Does every media outlet other then ones that are 100% conservative (faux news) have a liberal agenda? I am sick of hearing that cop out. Talk about people drinking cool aid.

Posted by Warhog (anonymous) on November 11, 2009 at 10:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Well leftys2221 I can count on you....................... do you NOT see an issue with state spending, why are importing "wards of the state" and exporting jobs. Higher taxes or like I like to call it "state sponsored theft" at ever increasing rates will drive big business out, kill small business and drive down quality of life. I have lived in low tax states like Florida, Alaska and lived in high tax state like commifornia.

There is a huge difference in prosperity, poverty, dependence on the guberment, regulations,freedom, and in general quality of life.

Alaska we did have a good quality of life, good infrastructure, good jobs, good regulations for the most part the problem was the feds and air quality in the dead of winter, very few towns had taxes and they were low.

Florida was pretty much the same when I was there except for the feds and air quality, that was not an issue. You have seasonal risks, I have been thru a few hurricanes and I am a better man for it.

Commiefornia really.................... do I need to say more?

Now compare that to say Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Illinois here is the proof click the link http://online.wsj.com/article/SB12027756...

To believe what you want, that IS your right, BUT the state is infringing on MY RIGHTS when people want "big government" to fix everything and somebody else to pay for it.

We need essential services, BUT the arts and farts and other "programs" don't need to put their hands in my back pocket and take money without my consent, that is theft, just so they can be "cultural"

They can make money just like I do, EARN IT !!!

Posted by leftys2221 (anonymous) on November 11, 2009 at 11:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Warhog, can you please stop. When did I ever say I do not have an issue with state spending. I think you should not spend more then you make plain and simple. When have I ever mentioned anything about this or are you just making it up to try to "win" an opinion argument? Who wants big government to fix everything? I don't. Where is that ever mentioned? I pointed out the fact that Pawlenty cut funding to special needs people. I would have to believe that this money could be cut from else where. How old are you by the way? "Arts and Farts", really? Could the country be a better place if the focus was put back on the labor and working class people and not the CEO's and big business barons like Regan set it up as? I think so.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on November 11, 2009 at 12:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)

By JOHN D. MCKINNON
In 1997, Congress passed a budget law that mandated tough curbs on Medicare spending, setting up formulas to reduce doctor payments if broad spending targets were exceeded. But when the formula began taking a serious bite out of doctor reimbursements in 2002, Congress acted to reverse the cuts -- a step it has repeated five times since then.

That history shows why some critics believe billions of dollars in budget savings Congress is promising through its health-care overhaul might never materialize.

Under both Democrats and Republicans, Congress repeatedly has waived curbs it has tried to place on spending. It has given back other savings from the 1997 law to hospitals, skilled nursing facilities and other providers, most notably in 1999. More recently, Congress has twice switched off a cost-saving trigger that was contained in a 2003 bill establishing a Medicare prescription-drug benefit. Congress also frequently has waived budget resolution limits, as well as pay-as-you-go rules requiring offsets for tax cuts and entitlement spending.

The House bill passed last weekend trims government spending in several areas by more than $400 billion, through a combination of cuts falling largely on pharmaceutical makers, private health insurance companies and hospitals.

The 1997 cuts were based on a formula for physician reimbursements that sought to crack down on soaring government health-care spending. The formula effectively set rates for particular services based on broad program-spending targets for each year. If a spending target was missed for one year, the formula reduced reimbursement rates for the next year to make up the difference.

As it turned out, lawmakers underestimated the continuing growth of Medicare spending, and particularly of the number of services provided. By now, the 1997 formula has been amended six times to prevent scheduled cuts from going into effect.

"We've been very aggressive in saying the formula is broken," said James Rohack, president of the American Medical Association. While Congress has agreed with the AMA, it has only provided a series of short-term patches, he said, adding to the future cost of a permanent fix.

The new cuts are different, some experts say, in that they generally can't produce huge unexpected cuts.

"The lesson is that reductions in Medicare don't stick," said Paul Van de Water, of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal think tank.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB12579011...

Do we really think this bill will change anything?

Posted by ErnieGann (anonymous) on November 11, 2009 at 12:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)

For all of the libbies out there wailing about Pawlenty cutting the budget--

Minnesota has a Balanced Budget requirement in its Constitution. See NPR http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display...

The Dems couldn't balance the budget in the allotted time for the legislature, so the Governor was tasked with doing it.

Had the Donks done THEIR job, Pawlenty wouldn't have HAD to. Thank goodness there is an adult on the job!

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on November 11, 2009 at 1:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Very good point Ernie. I notice we all got off subject again. Funny even when we know what they are doing we can't help and fall for it.

Posted by leftys2221 (anonymous) on November 11, 2009 at 2:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Why is it just their fault? He would not sign any of the bills they put in front of him.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on November 11, 2009 at 3:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The Governor just like the President can not spend money. That right is reserved to the house. If the house wanted those bills pass all they had to do is over ride his veto. This is how the system works it is called checks and balances.

Posted by Warhog (anonymous) on November 11, 2009 at 5:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Well I am in my mid 40's leftys2221 so I know what is coming.

I will not see, social security, medicare,medicade all will be bankrupt when it comes time for Warhog to collect, all those programs are unsustainable in their current form.

I have plans in place as well for this as well, I hope they will bear fruit so I don't have to rely on this current system. Note the key word HOPE

We need to take a meat axe to the arts, mpr, and any other art related and useless programs we cannot afford this at this time.

Now the "farts" this in no way was aimed at who you think, Warhog did not declare war against the elderly, both of my parents fall in this category, the current administration is doing that just fine, not me.

I understand their concerns and I am concerned for them, I do not know how to fix that situation, I know somebody smarter than me must have a better idea and a better program than the one that is in place and being proposed .

I am not a cold heartless person, I should have chosen a better word than "farts" but I will do better next time.

"Farts" is other state programs put in place but serve little real meaning and dare I say public good.

Just look at the cities, look at the layers of bureaucracy, local taxes, redundant quberment, this is NOT what the founding fathers meant when they set out the framework of government.

One thing we all can agree on US "out staters" are being pinched, poked, prodded, to pay for programs by people who choose to live in the cities and being sold a bill of goods that fails to deliver.

I want common sense changes made BEFORE we end up like commiefornia, new york, new jersey .

We all will be better off for it, just look around............................ are people going to high tax states NO. People are leaving, and when they do that YOU pay more in taxes, fewer people to tax equals higher taxes for you somebody has to pay.

Time to put the state on a diet, and maybe Warhog as well, we both can loose some "weight"

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on November 11, 2009 at 8:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Warhog,

Welcome to the Revolution......

Nice to see someone else who is planning for a future without Social Security and the rest. Been doing this for years....

Posted by bornFree (anonymous) on November 11, 2009 at 8:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Minnesota has someone to be proud of and it's not the clown the state has just elected as their new senator.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/11/11/m...

Posted by Warhog (anonymous) on November 11, 2009 at 9:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Viva La Revolution...............................................it has to start somewhere, let it start NOW!!

Posted by ErnieGann (anonymous) on November 12, 2009 at 11:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Lefty--the Dems didn't present a balanced budget--it had a $2.7 Billion dollar deficit. With literally less than an hour left in the session, the Dems proposed a wide range of tax increases, rather than spending cuts.

By law, the Governor can only unallott from funds with a DEFICIT--nearly all funds with a deficit come from the General Fund. Funds with a surplus are safe--gas tax funds, user fees, and special taxes like the recently enacted 3/8% Water and Wildlife fund. That means that the places that are targeted are the big ones--in order to shave $2.7 billion, he HAS to get into education and revenue-sharing.

The Legislature wanted him to call a Special Session--it has become almost standard. The Legislature had MONTHS to accomplish its work--and didn't.

Thank God for the legislators in previous years that came up with the Balanced Budget requirement--and thank God that there is an adult in the room with the guts to USE it!

"Unallottment" is simply the LINE ITEM VETO. Now, if we could only get CONGRESS to pass this!

Posted by alhs1975 (anonymous) on November 12, 2009 at 2:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Who would ever think that going to a messageboard for the Albert Lea Tribune would allow someone to read such fiction? NoDFL and Warhog - call me for the next ultra right wing wackjob meeting. I need a good laugh.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on November 12, 2009 at 2:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Warhog,

Isn't nice to see that the only come back some have (alhs1975) is to attack. Have you notice they never have a fact to back up their points. Just attack the messanger. I have read other post from alhs1975 he is a big government, take from the tax payer to line his (her?) wallet. alhs1975 was already whining about not getting paid enough. "By the way albminn - my "9 months of work" averages out to 50 hour work weeks, both in school and at home (we don't get paid overtime for hours over 40 in a week). 37 weeks times 50 hours equals 1850 minutes, divided by 52 weeks equals a year of 35 hour weeks, including vacations and such take a couple of weeks out for vacation and I'm at your 40 hour week for a year. Additionally, I hold three college degrees, have worked for thirty years and have received a number of awards (all non-monetary by the way)- what is the average paycheck for other professionals with that kind of experience, expertise and education"

Here is the one thing about having a free market no one makes you work at a job you don't want to alhs1975. If it is so bad than quit get a different job. Guess what because you are a government employee you work for us. Also why do you need a union to protect you from the government. I don't get it. Isn't the government the savior in your world? Why should you have a union to fight the person you run to for protection. Cops are government workers and they can't strike. Why should you???

But that is off point. Now will come the personal attacks and the name calling. See if he took the time to read he would know 36 states are doing what AZ has done. It won't be long before the people make the changes need to return our government to the people. Remember they work for us.

One last thing..... now I know why teachers are against choice. Without forced public schools maned by left leaning union teachers there would be state controlled information. There is a good reason why all the schools in the USSR had to sing daily prasies to Stalin. Heck it is the same in North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, and oh yea Chicago, New York and others...... Yep God help us all who are forced to send are kids to people like this.....

Posted by leftys2221 (anonymous) on November 12, 2009 at 4:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)

NoDFL, you raised the bar to new and insane heights. Your whole view of people who are not conservative being communists is utterly childish and what faux news is trying to do to this country. You are a carbon copy of what they want and yet we are the ones who are drinking the juice?

How would you want to have education set up in this country? Privately? No public schools at all? What is your plan on that?

You can sit here and call people names and blast your opinions all over everyone but no one else can? When someone else posts their opinion you demand facts yet you rarely supply the same.

What is so wrong with unions? Why is making a place a better place to work a bad thing? Why should the CEO or executives have so much power?

You attack alhs numerous times in your last post and that is exactly what you accused this person of doing to you!

According to you everyone on the left is a "wack job" and every article posted from any other news source OTHER then faux news is "left leaning." Isn't it odd that faux news is the first to tell you that THEY are the only news fair and balanced. DO you maybe think that is to get more views by scaring people just like you into believing it?

Posted by alhs1975 (anonymous) on November 12, 2009 at 5:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

NoDFL

If you need a meeting place, my Dad used to tell me that the Klan used to meet on the south side of Albert Lea lake in the 1930's.- Juglans (sp?)

Your view of America isn't patriotic, it's seditious. You are so far to the right that you wouldn't know compromise (the foundation of democracy) if it bit you in the ass.

Have a nice reactionary day.

Posted by ErnieGann (anonymous) on November 12, 2009 at 5:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Compromise? That has been described as "A wolf and a sheep discussing the dinner menu"!

You can't compromise with a flaming liberal, any more than you can compromise with a terrorist!

"I want to take ALL of your money and spend it as I SEE FIT, not as YOU SEE FIT." THE "COMPROMISE"--"Please, Mr. Liberal, how about if you only take HALF of my money?" (sorry, we've already passed that point!)

When liberals stop proposing off-the wall unworkable dream programs, compromise might be possible--but until then, they will just have to live with their failures--the rest of us will clean up after them as we always do.

Posted by bornFree (anonymous) on November 12, 2009 at 6:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

alhs1975, are you insinuating that NoDFL is somehow a racist? "If you need a meeting place, my Dad used to tell me that the Klan used to meet on the south side of Albert Lea lake in the 1930's.- Juglans (sp?)", when you can't defend yourself adequately you liberals fall back on the buzz word "racist", I know you didn't come out and say it but the "Klan" is always connected to racism, so say what you mean, OK?

Posted by BabyGotBack (anonymous) on November 12, 2009 at 7:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The Klan just isn't connected to racism - it is the epitome of racism.

I have skimmed through all of the comments and while I don't agree with many, I did not see anything that I would consider racist. I did read fairly quickly but nothing I could see. Just because a person has conservative political views doesn't make them a racist.

NoDFL - Don't necessarily always agree with you but I have your back on this one, just like I did for ErnieGann on another post. We shouldn't accuse people of racism just out of nowhere. You and I exchanged some posts on another story and I thought you were all right.

BabyGotBack has your back! :)

Posted by Warhog (anonymous) on November 12, 2009 at 7:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Whooooo Hoooooo………………………….. I am #2 on alhs1975 list

Yessssss……………………. just for you, I will vacuum the red shag wall to wall carpeting and polish up my disco ball, you bring the polyester suits and records, I have some 8 tracks around here somewhere, I will let you in my underground bunker for the next meeting all you had to do was ask, no secret handshake required..

Seriously now there is a group of people who are fundamentally changing the American system, the whole system. This will impact us all, even our good comrades, this will not be good it’s not a matter of being TO THE RIGHT it’s a matter of being right. They system is not perfect but to blow up and re make it in the form Chairman Mao would approve of is not right it’s un-American.

Public Schools need an overhaul even the teacher admitted that, for to long unions and special interests have ruled the roost. Some teachers are good, there are bad apples that are tenured nobody can get rid off that needs to change. Teach what is important not crap like al bores an inconvenient truth that has so little truth in it. Vouches are the way to go students will be better for it, after all one day they will inherit what we have now, and I don’t want a bigger bunch of idiots running things worse than they are being run now.

From leftys2221 “What is so wrong with unions? Why is making a place a better place to work a bad thing? Why should the CEO or executives have so much power?”

It’s their company they will run it as they see fit I would wouldn’t you? Unless you have socialist tendencies then you demand a place at the table just for showing up, and a piece of pie to boot.

Unions in moderation are ok, but just like other things there is no moderation I see it from both sides it’s like a war there is no winner most of the time just losers, and it is the rank and file. You cannot blame everything on the corporation for everything and you have to take responsibility for the workers. I have seen people work less then they should have due to the above issue. I have also been hosed by the corporation as well and the union helped.

Our good comrades on the left say we are “wack jobs” and listen to faux news it is a free country. Yet I don’t complain if you watch chris matthews “Mr. I have a warm tingly feeling running down my leg” Please watch what you want because you can and make up your own mind but at least open your eyes.

But put them in control remember about a few years ago when “Dissent is American” why don’t I hear that today I wonder why Hmmmm…………

Mr alhs1975 “Your view of America isn't patriotic, it's seditious. You are so far to the right that you wouldn't know compromise (the foundation of democracy) if it bit you in the ass.”

That is uncalled for really, I thought you were better than that.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on November 12, 2009 at 8:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

born free and babygotback,

Thanks......

Warhog,
Sorry you are second but don't worry you will still get a trophy :)

alhs1975 and lefty2221,

"When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny." Thomas Jefferson

Posted by Warhog (anonymous) on November 12, 2009 at 9:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey............... 2nd place isn't all that bad, I have to work harder to make #1 on alhs1975's list.

*cough, cough* in my best Austin Powers voice :

Who does # 2 work for ?

Who does # 2 work for?

I have your back too................

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on November 12, 2009 at 9:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

It may be surprising to some how much our Constitution and our life-style is based on principles of Natural Law. For example:
The concept of UNALIENABLE RIGHTS is based on Natural Law. There are 22 of these unalienable rights. I can list them for you if you want.
The concept of UNALIENABLE DUTIES is based on Natural Law. There are 20 of these unalienable duties. I can list them for you if you want.
The concept of HABEAS CORPUS is based on Natural Law.
The concept of LIMITED GOVERNMENT is based in Natural Law.
The concept of SEPERATION OF POWERS is based on Natural Law.
The concept of CHECKS AND BALANCES to correct abuses by peaceful means is based on Natural Law.
The right of SELF-PRESERVATION is based on Natural Law.
The right to CONTRACT is based on Natural Law.
Laws protecting the FAMILY and the institution of MARRIAGE are all based on Natural Law.
The concept of JUSTICE BY REPARATION or paying for damages is based on Natural Law.
The right to BEAR ARMS is based on Natural Law.
The principle of NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION is based on Natural Law. ( the caps is ment to be bold not yelling)

Now these are the rantings of as alhs1975 would call them "ultra right wing wackjob " or as I like to call them the Founding Fathers. I will let you read these and ask is the current government following Natural Law?

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on November 12, 2009 at 9:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Warhog,

What I am trying to understand is how people can defend this government. How anyone can put faith in these guys? I am not talking about a party. I am talking about a system that has turned it's back on the founding principals. I feel this government refues to think about Natural Law. That these laws come from God (or the creator). That as the Founding Father belived Natural Law (true law) is right reason in agreement with nature; it is of universal application, unchanging and ever-lasting; it summons to duty by its commands, and averts from wrongdoing by its prohibitions. It is a sin to try to alter this law, nor is it allowable to repeal any part of it, and it is impossible to abolish it entirely. We cannot be freed from its obligations by senate or people, and we need not look outside ourselves for an expounder or interpreter of it.

It is a code of "right reason" from the God himself. It cannot be altered. it cannot be repealed. It cannot be abandoned by legislator or the people themselves, even though they may pretend to do so. In Natural Law we are dealing with factors of absolute reality. It is in its principles, comprehensible to the human mind, and totally correct and morally right in its general operation.

This is what those who wish to led should believe. We the people are to hold these natural laws close and make the government answer to them. This is the goal of the Constitution.

Posted by NoDFL (anonymous) on November 12, 2009 at 9:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

warhog,

Forgot to say thanks..... Feels good to know people will still stand for something even if they don't agree with that person all the time.