On Sep 15, 1:20*pm, lorad wrote:
On Sep 14, 4:30*pm, dave wrote:

f. barnes wrote:
On Sep 13, 4:18 pm, Day *wrote:

Then look at the school reports athttp://normessasweb.uark.edu/schoolperformance/School/School.php
REPEATEDLY, you see ZERO rates of violence. Drop out rates in the single
digits, graduation rates near or over 90%, 95% attendance.

And the liberals call us ignorant, uneducated, rednecks, and they
won't believe a word you've posted.

I totally believe him. Sounds like a delightful place.

He says there's no violence *in schools, but also brags that parents
hit their children, another form of violence.

Spare the rod and spoil the child.

On average...Who would know better how to raise your kids?
The parents of the kids... or some 'family services' cops dragging
your kids away at the behest of some naturalized mexican case worker?

I *personally* know many parents who have no clue whatsoever how to
raise kids. The kids are hellions and the parents are oblivious to
the world. Often on illicit drugs or just plain stupid pills, they
just don't give a damn. They should be sterilized.

Why is NASA going to use Russian made Rockets to blast into outer Space?
That is vague, vague to me anyway.
cuhulin

Kevin Alfred Strom wrote:

most important statement in the entire document.

Coupled with the Tenth Amendment, _that's_ limited government.



With every good wish,



Kevin.
The Supreme Court has found the Tenth Amendment to be meaningless. The
HOR is the "peoples' house". If it sucks, it's because the people suck.

Grendel wrote:
On Sep 15, 10:04 am, wrote:
On Sep 15, 6:47 am, wrote:





On Sep 15, 8:28 am, wrote:

RHF wrote:
On Sep 14, 1:30 pm, wrote:

- He says there's no violence in schools,
- but also brags that parents hit their children,
- another form of violence.

'Special Dave' was it done in rage and anger . . .
or out of love and goodness ?

It is wrong to strike another, except when in fear of immediate threat
to life and limb.

Well, I have to say, that can be ranked as the most idiotic,
simplistic, ignorant and outright bull**** statement made on the
internet today.

Yol Bolsun,
Grendel.

Your rationale is noted.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Rationale? The ignorance and bull**** factor of that statement is
self explanatory to anyone with a functioning brain.

But as both of you seem to lack that functioning brain, I will gladly
explain just a little of the rationale as to why the statement is
bull****.

First:
For the statement to be even close to accurate, it would have to be
morally reprehensible to spank a child, and it is far from it. You
may not agree with it, but your narrow viewpoint does not dictate the
morals for everyone. (and before you ask, I have found the need to
spank my children.)

Second:
The following activities that involve physical contact would have to
be banned on moral grounds, also:

-Martial Arts
-Taekwondo,
-Jujutsu,
-Karate

-Boxing of all kinds,

I can live with that. It is wrong to use violence to teach.

Day Brown wrote:


The spanking itself is merely the apex of a psychological process which
only takes a few seconds. Without it, such bullies would be physically
abusing smaller kids. Totally avoiding what you say is abuse is not
possible. Controlling it is, and while you may use drugs, I am very
concerned because there are no long term studies of the effect.



That is very twisted. You better stay vin the 19th century. I pity your
children

BTW: the guy with the board is the bully.

I'll bet there's a ****load of wife-swapping where you live. That's
been my experience in these Mayberry Meccas.

lorad wrote:


On average...Who would know better how to raise your kids?
The parents of the kids... or some 'family services' cops dragging
your kids away at the behest of some naturalized mexican case worker?


The schools raise the kids if their lucky. The parents more often than
not just pass on the negative stuff.

wrote:
Why is NASA going to use Russian made Rockets to blast into outer Space?
That is vague, vague to me anyway.
cuhulin


Russian rockets pollute like crazy. They should not get EPA waivers.

On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 15:35:48 -0800, dave wrote:

Kevin Alfred Strom wrote:

most important statement in the entire document.

Coupled with the Tenth Amendment, _that's_ limited government.



With every good wish,



Kevin.
The Supreme Court has found the Tenth Amendment to be meaningless. The
HOR is the "peoples' house". If it sucks, it's because the people suck.

teabaggers hate the 1st, 5th 7th 10th and 14th amendments and are working
to change them. can't wait till they fix the second amendment too
rumor has it they will insert "only white protestant " and "rich" into it
several times. cheaney wants to have haliburton manage it for the
government

On Sep 15, 7:47*pm, dave wrote:
wrote:
Why is NASA going to use Russian made Rockets to blast into outer Space?
That is vague, vague to me anyway.
cuhulin

Russian rockets pollute like crazy. *They should not get EPA waivers.

Baikonur is and always was in Kazakhstan. Doubt if any environmental
laws are in effect over the after all these space and nuclear (!)
testing (the first was above ground and literally killed civilians)
going all the way back to late 40's ...

On Sep 15, 8:03*am, bpnjensen wrote:
On Sep 15, 6:47*am, RHF wrote:



On Sep 14, 10:11*pm, bpnjensen wrote:

On Sep 14, 9:18*pm, wrote:

On Sep 14, 10:32*pm, bpnjensen wrote:

On Sep 14, 3:53*pm, John Smith wrote:

On 9/14/2010 4:05 PM, dave wrote:

...
It's a little late for that.

Where exactly does it say"very limited government"? If the government is
the people why would they want to limit the people?

In the part which says that any powers not given (mentioned) are
reserved for the state and people ... better late than never ....

Regards,
JS

As long as you have a Republic, people will hand over the reigns to
the representatives to do the hard work. *In exchange for having
elected people to sit down and work out the hard and complex details
of difficult legislation, power will be concentrated and expanded in
places that you'd rather not see it. *Such is the nature of a
republic. *People who believe otherwise are fooling themselves.

The only way to avoid this and maintain something other than a
dictatorship, and it is a severely double-edged sword, is through
direct Democracy. *With that, the people make ALL the rules and bypass
the middleman of the republic. *But, beware - there is nothing more
disjointed and cumbersome and damned downright confusing than a set of
laws created by The People.

My guess is that both of these ideas work better on a very small scale
- like in a town or a county. *Once you get to the Statewide level,
things start breaking down again, and at the national level - well,
you see what we have.

You have to choose your poison, or go live in Antarctica.

It work very well in the ancient Greek city-states. Look what had
happened since they have joined the Common Market and EU !

Yes - they were much smaller than 2010 USA. *A lot of history
transpired between the Fall of Greece I and the Fall of Greece II !!!

- Modern Greece is, I am afraid, in a position similar to California.

Los Californianos* need to DEMAND that each and
every one of the California Elected US Senators and
US Congress persons Demand that California get
each and every Dollar Pay by Californians in US
Federal {IRS] Taxes Returned to California in
Federal Spending.http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...27faca882fb518...

* All the Citizens of the 'California Republic'http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Republic
.
Prez-A-Duntz Obama - return to the Citizens of the
California Republic all the US Federal Tax Dollars :
Stop Stealing from California and driving up our
Unemployment and Bankrupting Californiahttp://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.liberalism/msg/c0167411ac...
*.
-wrt- The California State Economy :
A Casualty of the US Federal Government's
Tax and Spend Robbery of the Citizens of
the California Republic (State of California)http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...faa3aa477f59a3...
*.
*.

My theory - The European Union, of which they are now a part, holds
the keys to the treasury and the money machine, much like the US
Treasury. *The larger conglomeration can print money if it needs to
pay off its debts (albeit at an inflated rate), while the individual
nation-state cannot do this (as Greece used to be able to do). *Nether
Greece nor California can print its own $$$ like the larger system, so
they are in economic hot water.

Bruce Jense4n- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

- You're setting up an "us vs. them" paradigm in which it's California
- vs. the rest of the US,
- as though we are somehow separate and not intertwined with the rest
of
- the nation.
-
- You know this is not true.

That is right : 'not true -cause- I did not say anything
about an "Us-versus-Them" pair-of-dimes ;;-}}

In the Federation of States know as the USA :
Each of the States is an Equal Partner and
'Collectively those States are a 'Union'.

-*What is good or bad for other states and
- regions can have comparably
- good and bad effects on California, and vice-versa.

And . . . a $50B Yearly Ecomonic Rape of the
State of California for Decades is 'good' for the
State of California and 'The Union' of All States ?

- Of course, you probably know which states
- rely most heavily on public funding from the feds -
- IIRC, the State that largely complains the most
- about big-brother type government - Alaska -

Yes Alaska gets back $1.88 for each and every
$1.00 it sends to the US Federal Government.

- is alos the biggest sink for federal fuinds per capita.

Yes that is a 'per-capita' number so a state like
Alaska with a relatively small population can
'appear' to be getting a Big Wind Fall when the
Collective Dollar Total is actually smaller than
other States.

- If we, and other "wealthy" (and I use the term
- loosely) states demanded and got our money
- all back in some form, places like Alaska would
- become third-world countries fast.

California with Billions of US Dollars of Deficit
Spending per Year : IS NOT HEALTHY [.]

Don't Want Any of My US Tax Dollars to go to Any
Third World Countries when My Own State is Billions
of Dollars of Deficit Spending in the Red each Year.

-*That would not be good for the people there or
- the Republic.

The US Constitution calls for the the US Federal
Government to 'Promote The General Welfare' and
it is My-Opinion that 'Promoting The General Welfare'
Begins at Home First : In the State of California :
Once California is Economically Healthy again
{has Good General Welfare} then we can share with
the Rest of the "Union".

- As much as I dislike Alaskan politics, I want
- the people there to live satisfactory lives, and
- without the rest of us pitching in to help,

Would you be saying the same thing if it were
a 'southern' State ?

No Where in the US Constitution did I read that
All Member States Had to be Equal in all things.

- it likely won't happen.

Give the Alaska Lands over to the State of Alaska
and allow the Citizens of Alaska to Decide and
Manage their Natural Resources for themselves.

- As a Californian, I am happy to help out.

As a California : I say "California Heal Thy Self !"
Help California First -by- Helping California First
-by- Spending Our California US Federal Tax
Dollars right hear in the State of California to
Re-Build the Economy of California and General
Welfare of the Citizens of the State of California.

- Bruce Jensen

~ RHF - [Viva Los Californianos !]
http://www.loscalifornianos.org/