Need Bees Removed?
International
Beekeeping Forums
September 02, 2014, 10:40:47 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: ATTENTION ALL NEW MEMBERS
PLEASE READ THIS OR YOUR ACCOUNT MAY BE DELETED - CLICK HERE
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar bee removal Login Register Chat  

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: I'm Sequestered!  (Read 9318 times)
luvin honey
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 1540

Location: Central WI


« Reply #100 on: March 11, 2013, 12:04:00 PM »

way to avoid the issue!

the filibuster is a tool of the senate.  like it or not, it exists and on rare occasions, it is used. 

i don't really mind if the "work" is held up.  the more they do, the more we lose.  it's not like they do their job anyway.  where are the budgets that they are required by law to do each year?  if they were doing that, we wouldn't have these other debates.

Quote
I was curious what your interpretation of "his reasons" are?

again, if you bother to do even a little of your own work, you would not need to ask. 


And was this your position when Democratic lawmakers left the state rather than being forced to vote on a bill they thought unconstitutional?
Logged

The pedigree of honey
Does not concern the bee;
A clover, any time, to him
Is aristocracy.
---Emily Dickinson
luvin honey
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 1540

Location: Central WI


« Reply #101 on: March 11, 2013, 12:08:32 PM »

absolutely.  every single  program that gets federal dollars, should be getting cut.  they are not.  every government welfare program is now called an "entitlement" and they are off limits.  until we are ready to address the welfare system and the SSI and medicare system, we can't begin to solve the fiscal problems we face.
That's assuming they're all equally necessary/unnecessary or wasteful.
Logged

The pedigree of honey
Does not concern the bee;
A clover, any time, to him
Is aristocracy.
---Emily Dickinson
bluegrass
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 459

Location: CT


« Reply #102 on: March 11, 2013, 12:11:49 PM »

...
I am anti-filibuster on all fronts...  If any of us deliberately held up everybody in our work place for 12 hrs we would get fired.   

Then what is your position on the Union Shop and strikes?  Is not a strike, a picket line, a sit down, or other work stoppage a filibuster?  I think so.  And what is the purpose of a strike?  Is it not so that the workers can have a way to address grievances?  A filibuster is nothing but a strike and the men and women conducting it are forcing the other side to reconsider and often times compromise.  The compromise is not always on the subject being filibustered as was the case this time.

I have worked Non-Union and Union and the only difference I see is that the Union takes money from my check. I think Unions had their place in the past, but are completely ineffective and unnecessary at this point. Labor laws have largely taken on the important rolls that Unions served in the past.

 I do not see a strike as similar to a filibuster. Striking workers give up their pay while on strike... Senators do not while filibustering... they just hold up a vote on something they oppose because they don't have the numbers to strike it down. The original point of a filibuster was to hold up the vote for long enough that some of the supporters would get tired and leave... bringing the numbers closer to failing to pass a measure.

In a filibuster it is rare that the Senator even talks about the topic at hand... as long as they keep talking they can't hold a vote. Thurmond was known to read from a Phone Book when he filibustered.  

 
Logged

Sugarbush Bees
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15115


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #103 on: March 11, 2013, 12:36:21 PM »

Quote
And was this your position when Democratic lawmakers left the state rather than being forced to vote on a bill they thought unconstitutional?

not the first time that's ever been done, but not quite the same, is it?  you don't really compare the two? 

they had every right to vote against it, and every right to challenge it in court.  if the people of your state want to reelect people who simply walk out and fail to do their job, the people of your state have a right to that also.

Quote
That's assuming they're all equally necessary/unnecessary or wasteful.

no, it's assuming that all of them have waste and all of them need to be looked at.  it's also knowing that as the population ages, the programs in place are not stable and supported enough to deal with the increase in those taking and the decrease in those paying.  it's understanding that the more the federal government does, the more it must take from the private sector to do it.  it's understanding that this government believes in "economic fairness" and understanding just what that means.

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
gdoten
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 60


Location: Cow Hampshire


« Reply #104 on: March 11, 2013, 02:43:57 PM »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NPR  -- This details their budget.


Thanks for the link. I wouldn't really call it detailed, but it does read like most of NPRs funding from the government is gone. Let's get rid of the rest.

So let's change the question. How many military furlough days could be restored with the money that is thrown at CPB? A whopping $445,200,000! Maybe someone might know an average cost for a furloughed day. Let's be generous and say it's $500 a day. That's almost one million days right there!
Logged

-glenn-
kingbee
Queen Bee
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1083


Location: Big bend of the Tennessee River


« Reply #105 on: March 11, 2013, 03:51:14 PM »

...
I do not see a strike as similar to a filibuster.  they just hold up a vote on something they oppose because they don't have the numbers to strike it down.


In the above case why would you even bother to have elections just anoint a strong man (or woman) the Queen of Hearts works, and allow you appointed anointed to rule over us like a Mideastern potentate.  It is like the snippet from Senator Paul's speech quoting from "Through the Looking Glass" or Alice in Wonder Land.  I can see that you didn't understand what Senator Paul meant when he said, ".... first the sentence and then the verdict..." He was jabbing Obama's and Holder's drone strike policy with a particularly sharp hat pin to make them uncomfortable by comparing their reign to of the rule of the Queen of Hearts.  I am truly sorry that Senator Ryan's reference to the arbitrary rule of the Queen of Hearts flew right over the heads' of some people posting here.  It should have been clear to any 12 year old who has read Lewis Carrol's story about what Senator Ryan was speaking.   Once the Queen of Hearts cries "Off with his head!" it is then too late to look at the sky or try to hide from her unmanned spot card drone.

http://www.cornel1801.com/disney/Alice-Wonderland-1951/film8.html

...
The original point of a filibuster was to hold up the vote for long enough that some of the supporters would get tired and leave... bringing the numbers closer to failing to pass a measure....


I don't know where you got this idea but in my humble opinion it this is a post modernism piece of information that came right off a high school boys' room wall.

The whole theory behind the filibuster is that no member of the Senate (who looks upon themselves a equals) can interupt one of their fellow members.  It has more to do with the first Amendment and Freedom of Speech than anything else.  The thing that blew the Senate out of the water with Senator Ryan's filibuster was that Senator Ryan actually WORKED while he was conducting his filibuster.  He stood before his pears in the Well of the Senate and held the floor by speaking for almost 13 hours.  Now a days Senators would be more prone to use the wordless filibuster and taking the time they "SAVED" to visit their mistress or maybe one of their constituents wives or husbands.    

...
In a filibuster it is rare that the Senator even talks about the topic at hand... as long as they keep talking they can't hold a vote. Thurmond was known to read from a Phone Book when he filibustered....


I have it on good authority that Ryan would like to have read the Obama Care Law but the blue-reaucrats in DC have still not finished writing the rules for Obama Care and it already is longer than any phone book besides the $20,000 plus yearly per family cost for health insurance that is still soaring like one of President Obama's pilotless drones.   So Senator Ryan used Allice in Wonder Land instead to point out Obama's and E. Holder's ham fisted attempts to execute the sentence (you or I) before we are either convicted or found not guilty.  
Logged
kingbee
Queen Bee
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1083


Location: Big bend of the Tennessee River


« Reply #106 on: March 12, 2013, 04:11:53 PM »

I do feel for beemaster.  But remember things can always get worst, in fact things just did.

The tragedy of sequestration has struck, or more 1984 Big Brother Speak.

What is Uncle Sugar New Speaking about when he says:
"interplay of gender and sexual orientation in obesity disparities."

Here is the translation.

The US government is (was) spending $1,500,000 of beemaster's and others money to study why most (75%) of all lesbians are fat.  The disparity is that almost no gay men are fat, the late John Wayne Gacy not withstanding.

Unfortunately sequestration has set in and now the government only has $1,470,000 to spend on discovering why Rosy O’Donnell is obese.
 
I could have told Ms O'Donnell to “Lay off the chocolate Easter Bunny’s babe, I promise you that they aren‘t going to run away and hide from you.”  I also would have only billed Uncle Sugar a mere $100,000 for these study results.  A bargain at twice the price.

Now I wonder what it would take to convince Uncle Sugar to spend $1,500,000 (Ok Ok $1,470,000) on me to find out why I am ugly?
« Last Edit: March 12, 2013, 05:04:40 PM by kingbee » Logged
bluegrass
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 459

Location: CT


« Reply #107 on: March 13, 2013, 05:45:58 AM »

 
Quote
I am truly sorry that Senator Ryan's reference to the arbitrary rule of the Queen of Hearts flew right over the heads' of some people posting here.  It should have been clear to any 12 year old who has read Lewis Carrol's story about what Senator Ryan was speaking.

Kingbee: I assume you mean Senator Rand Paul of course? You accuse me of not knowing what he was talking about and you don't even know who was doing the talking?
Logged

Sugarbush Bees
kingbee
Queen Bee
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1083


Location: Big bend of the Tennessee River


« Reply #108 on: March 14, 2013, 01:45:16 AM »

Ron Paul, Paul Ryan, and Rand Paul... it all gets so confusing sometimes.  I am aware that the person doing the filibustering was Rand Paul the junior Senator from Kentucky and the son of Representative Ron Paul from Texas.    Rand Paul was elected in 2010.  Rand Paul is a member of class III or team of Senators.  In 2012 we elected new members to class I and in 2014 the II class of Senators are up for election or reelection.  Due to resignations since 2012, in 2014 there will currently be 21 Democrat Senate seats up for election or reelection and 14 Republican seats up for election or reelection not the normal 33 or 34 seats.

I would be a happy camper if the U. S. House of Representatives would only return to the Filibuster Rule that they had before 1843.  The first Closure Rule in the U. S. Senate was not adopted until 1917 during the Wilson Administration.  President Woodrow T. Wilson ran riot over the Constitution and imprisoned opponents to the President and his policies right and left.  Wilson even imprisoned one of his opponents for the Presidency.  The man was Eugine V. Debs and he was sentenced to 10 years in Federal prison for nothing more sinister than making speeches critical of Wilson and WWI.  This hysteria over free speech is the backdrop to the first closure or gag rule passed by the Senate in 1917.  Still the likelyhood of a bill being passed by the Filibustering faction was imposable.  If things like this were not true then why did the law makers of some states recently decamp from their home states and move across state lines and into a cheap motel to avoid attending forced sessions of the state legislature therefore preventing or stopping action by denying the house or senate a quorum?

So there goes the idea that the Filibuster was intended to lull the opposition to sleep.  Before 1917 two or three or maybe only one Senator could hold up all actions in the Senate if they were so mined.  But do remember the Senate Leadership has the power to force attendance at Senate sessions. 

Also remember that there is a little thing called a "point of order" that requires the Clerk of the Senate to call the roll when any Senator calls for a point of order by claiming that there is not a proper number of members present to conduct business.  This alone would prevent a remnant or rump Senate from passing laws without a majority of its members present as it only requires one Senator opposed to the filibuster to remain on duty and awake to prevent a law from passing, he or she will call for a point of order and ask for a roll call giving his faction time to get to the Senate floor.  Therefore the filibuster is terribly hard or the filibustering faction and relatively easy on the non filibustering faction.

The filibuster is absolutely the best friend the little man has in government because it tends to put the kibosh on laws being quickly passed by well organized or well funded Senate factions before anyone knows whats going on or can organize an effective opposition.  The big money will already have their ducks or votes lined up and are only waiting to shoot them all with one shot.  The filibuster in other words tends to restrain the trigger finger of the rich and powerful more than it restrains the common man.
Logged
hjon71
Field Bee
***
Online Online

Gender: Male
Posts: 688

Location: SW Tenn


« Reply #109 on: March 14, 2013, 04:31:42 PM »

It saddens/maddens me to see people get worked up and divided into opposing "camps" over politics. Which is exactly where/how the Powers That Be want you. Continue to support your party and nothing changes. Yes one party gets an advantage on occasion but it is all undone when the power swings back the other way.

My view?
 BOTH Rep. & Dem. are bought and paid for. They are out of touch with the citizenship and in bed with Big Banks and Corporations. If you want to straighten out the mess that is D.C. vote 3rd Party. And no I do not mean Tea Party. How many election cycles do you think it would take for Congress to straighten up and do their job? My guess, not more than 2.

The biggest problem with the economy is not spending. It is Monetary Policy. If you don't understand that, I really fear for the direction we go from here.
Logged
Robo
Technical
Administrator
Galactic Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6403


Location: Scenic Catskill Mountains - NY

Beekeep On!


WWW
« Reply #110 on: March 15, 2013, 05:54:25 PM »

And no I do not mean Tea Party.

Quote
The biggest problem with the economy is not spending. It is Monetary Policy. If you don't understand that, I really fear for the direction we go from here.

Odd,  isn't that the Tea Party platform?
Logged

"Opportunity is missed by most people because it comes dressed in overalls and looks like work." - Thomas Edison


kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15115


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #111 on: March 15, 2013, 07:26:07 PM »

i don't have a problem with 3rd party candidates in theory.  lord knows i'd rather have voted for many of them than the candidate for which i did vote....but, i the couple of election we can point to where 3rd party candidates have made an impact, it has been to the countries detriment. 

Ross Perot contributed to Clintons win.  the list of disasters of the clinton admin is long and culminates with several plane crashes, but that might not be the worst of it.  his presidency gave us Hillary.  until Obama, i would not have thought there was a more duplicitous and far left loon in a position of power.  she has learned to publicly moderate her words, but her heart is pure Marx.

in this last election, Paul contributed to the re-election of Obama.  that 2 to 3% that he pulled, was the margin of loss in most places.  i don't know if an in depth analysis has been done of the voting patterns, but i feel comfortable saying that he had a hand in Obamas win, and he stayed in for purely narcissistic (re:cult leader) reasons. 

so, you have 1/2 a dozen outlier candidates that cover the spectrum of politics, but you are basically throwing your vote away when you vote for them.  if you want a 3rd party candidate that has a chance, you have to have a serious candidate running. 
and i'm wrong about what i just wrote....sometimes you are not throwing your vote away.  sometimes you are throwing it to the very candidate you didn't want......
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
Fox Creek
Field Bee
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 566

Location: Pollock Pines Ca.


« Reply #112 on: March 15, 2013, 09:56:56 PM »

    I'm beginning to wonder..... Conservatives have no party. Real conservatives are routinely ridiculed and dismissed by both the leftist and republicans. Those who want us to follow the constitution are seen as "fringe". As long as the republican party continues to bend and fold for the leftist, our great country will continue to circle the drain. Should conservatives separate themselves from the republicans and allow themselves a clear path to promote their beliefs ?  Would this not be a better way for them to get some traction?
Logged
hjon71
Field Bee
***
Online Online

Gender: Male
Posts: 688

Location: SW Tenn


« Reply #113 on: March 15, 2013, 10:17:38 PM »

Quote

Odd,  isn't that the Tea Party platform?

Spending Reform(+religion?) is the Tea Party platform. Not Monetary Policy.

Monetary Policy deals with how money is created. Another poster stated we get money by selling bonds and that is correct. But to sell a bond to a Bank and pay interest on it when our treasury dept. could print money interest free is ridiculous. Have you any idea how much we pay to service the interest on the national debt every year? If you think that is bad, it is worse.

All our Paper Money is created by the F.R. and we pay interest on it(which is the same as a loan). But where does the money come from to pay that interest? That money must also be created. It doesn't exist yet. So more debt is built into the system.

On top of all that there is the problem of Fractional Reserve Banking which says a bank must keep a reserve of 10% of all loans. Which sounds simple but creates money from nothing which exacerbates inflation and is downright wrong. Basically it works like this:
A Bank can borrow directly from the Central Banks aka The Federal Reserve(at interest of course).
Lets say they borrow $1,000,000.
The bank holds the $1,000,000 in reserve and is legally allowed to loan 10,000,000.
Anytime the money supply expands inflation follows. If you or I did this we would be criminals.
Logged
hjon71
Field Bee
***
Online Online

Gender: Male
Posts: 688

Location: SW Tenn


« Reply #114 on: March 15, 2013, 10:42:52 PM »

 

so, you have 1/2 a dozen outlier candidates that cover the spectrum of politics, but you are basically throwing your vote away when you vote for them.  if you want a 3rd party candidate that has a chance, you have to have a serious candidate running. 
and i'm wrong about what i just wrote....sometimes you are not throwing your vote away.  sometimes you are throwing it to the very candidate you didn't want......

That is exactly the mentality that perpetuates the problem.
Let's distance ourselves one minute from the POTUS and concern ourselves with Congress. Because a real change in attitude here can undo/block almost anything that comes from the President. We must get congress back on track doing what they are supposed to do (Budget,War Declaration,Constitution defense,etc).

If we all agree that Congress is doing a bad job and for just one cycle vote 3rd party instead of worrying about how someone else might vote I believe a 3rd party candidate can win. But only if that happens. If they only gain a significant% of the vote it makes it much easier to get folks to give 3rd parties a serious look and electing them easier.
Logged
buzzbee
Ken
Administrator
Galactic Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5440


Location: North Central PA


WWW
« Reply #115 on: March 16, 2013, 08:34:49 AM »

Money needs to be backed by a product (gold) or service or something of value . Simply printing and distributing it does not create an economy. Currency was just a common denominator to barter for goods and services.
The federal government  spent more than the whole gdp (125 percent) our nation created recently. It is a spending problem. As government gets larger and larger creating more taxes and regulations, there will not be anything to support "money'. It will be paper more worthless than today.
 And the government has no money,only what they confiscate from the people.
The states as a collective really need to re assume the powers the fed has taken from them. The monstrocity is eating us all out of house and home.
Logged
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15115


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #116 on: March 16, 2013, 09:53:26 AM »

as i said, i don't have a problem with 3rd party...but there has to be one that's not a whack job.  perot may have come the closest to not being a nut, but i don't think he's have been a good president.

RP is simply a fruit loop.  i hope his son has not inherited that gene because so far i like him.

i don't think we need to be splitting the votes with 3rd party.  we need to elect constitutional conservative.  that's pretty much the solution and i am finding most of those being supported by the tea party groups.

the tea party has nothing to do with religion, although you will find more constitutional conservatives among non-catholic Christians.  i have no idea why that would be a problem. 
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
hjon71
Field Bee
***
Online Online

Gender: Male
Posts: 688

Location: SW Tenn


« Reply #117 on: March 16, 2013, 03:10:40 PM »

Buzzbee - The Dollars in your wallet are all Fiat currency. They are not backed by gold, but by the good faith and credit of the US economy, directly linked to GDP. I hope everyone knows the Gold standard is gone, nibbled away by both parties but ultimately ended by Nixon.

There is much to be said for not spending more that you make. I agree spending is an issue but not the most important. Spending has to occur in order for money to stay in circulation. That either happens in the private sector or by the government, but it Must occur for an economy to continue. If every person in the U.S. were to pay all their debt off tomorrow and the government cut spending by 50% what will happen? Contraction of the money supply? Reccession? Depression? I will wait for your answer.

As to gold back currency, the is good reason to believe the USA has no gold. What about fort Knox? It hasn't been audited in many years(though there are provisions in law for it every year) and some sources believe its ownership has all been moved to the Central Banks. Of course there is no proof because the Government has no authority to audit the Fed. The lack of records concerning our Gold Reserves is very disturbing by itself, but why audit what doesn't exist?
My point is if the Fed does indeed own most of the gold, and we link our money to it, they still maintain control. And that is a problem. Go back and see what our founding fathers said would happen if Bankers were allowed to control our currency and compare what we see now.

 
« Last Edit: March 19, 2013, 01:33:09 AM by hjon71 » Logged
hjon71
Field Bee
***
Online Online

Gender: Male
Posts: 688

Location: SW Tenn


« Reply #118 on: March 16, 2013, 03:54:45 PM »

Kathy did you check out Gary Johnson?
I haven't found any perfect candidates, Ever. Again my point remains :
What we have is corrupt,lazy & complacent because they know Rep/Dem voters will vote right down the line. So why change?
 I hope you see this is my MAIN point. Any person or party -I don't care who, besides the failures the come from the Main Parties and maintain politics as usual
Logged
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 15115


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #119 on: March 16, 2013, 04:06:36 PM »

Quote
Kathy did you check out Gary Johnson?

yes, and he's another one with some great ideas but no chance.  other than his few followers and those of us who are wonks, most people had no clue he was even running.
i know, you'll say that this is because the majority oppresses these minority candidates.  there's probably some truth to that.  it's the way it is.  better to put up some real conservatives within the main party structure and funding, that split off the vote on well intentioned, but losing candidates that end up throwing the election to undesirables. 

we had a chance in this last election to put a halt to obamas crap.  i don't want to be a saint, killed for my convictions.  i'd rather have part of what i want and what the country needs, than none...
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Beemaster's Beekeeping Ring
Previous | Home | Join | Random | Next
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines | Sitemap Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.559 seconds with 22 queries.

Google visited last this page August 31, 2014, 09:00:20 PM