George Rebane
Eight counties in northeastern Colorado are looking at the possibility of becoming the nation’s 51st state. Like so many idyllic locales in the country, Colorado’s population corridor along the eastern slope of the Rockies has been successfully invaded by progressives immigrating from places like California where they have managed to soil their own nest. And like in California, huge sections of Colorado now suffer taxation and regulation without representation from Denver. So, these eight counties are exploring ways to again become free to pursue their own ideas of life, liberty, and property.
RR readers are familiar with the Great Divide debate that is growing across America as socialism’s autocracy reaches its tentacles into the last lairs of self-reliance and entrepreneurship. (See the Great Divide category link in the right panel.) The Colorado Eight are just the latest jurisdictions to express their yearning for a future not destined for a coerced comprehensive collectivism. (more here, and google ‘8 counties, Colorado’)
These eight counties may be on to something that can help preserve the Union, albeit in a restructured way that allows the Great Experiment bequeathed by our Founders to continue. To the idea of breakaway counties forming their own state (a la West Virginia), I offer that restructuring could come about in certain cases where such counties abut a neighboring state more congenial to the culture and values of such disenchanted populations. In the case of Colorado, these eight counties might consider appealing to Wyoming, if such a realignment is mutually attractive.
Here in California most of the more sparsely populated inland counties already stand raped by regulations from Sacramento and Washington. We have little in common with the liberal legions that dominate the coastal areas, and the two big metropolitan regions of the state. The new state of Sierra(?) is beginning to look better by the day.
There is no guarantee that such a restructuring will work because socialism is a disease powered by ideological evangelism – ‘We know what’s best for you, or else.’ And it spreads virally, appealing to the under-educated with promises of redistribution and through co-opting public education to manufacture more of the under-educated. But then again, we can dream …
[31jul13 update] For completeness, this contribution to RR’s Great Divide category was meant to elicit inputs from the Left that illustrate what drives such a notion of self-governance in the America of the 21st century. As of this writing it has done so in spades.
RR readers are familiar with the Great Divide debate that is growing across America as socialism’s autocracy reaches its tentacles into the last lairs of self-reliance and entrepreneurship. (See the Great Divide category link in the right panel.) The Colorado Eight are just the latest jurisdictions to express their yearning for a future not destined for a coerced comprehensive collectivism. (more here, and google ‘8 counties, Colorado’)
These eight counties may be on to something that can help preserve the Union, albeit in a restructured way that allows the Great Experiment bequeathed by our Founders to continue. To the idea of breakaway counties forming their own state (a la West Virginia), I offer that restructuring could come about in certain cases where such counties abut a neighboring state more congenial to the culture and values of such disenchanted populations. In the case of Colorado, these eight counties might consider appealing to Wyoming, if such a realignment is mutually attractive.
Here in California most of the more sparsely populated inland counties already stand raped by regulations from Sacramento and Washington. We have little in common with the liberal legions that dominate the coastal areas, and the two big metropolitan regions of the state. The new state of Sierra(?) is beginning to look better by the day.
There is no guarantee that such a restructuring will work because socialism is a disease powered by ideological evangelism – ‘We know what’s best for you, or else.’ And it spreads virally, appealing to the under-educated with promises of redistribution and through co-opting public education to manufacture more of the under-educated. But then again, we can dream …
[31jul13 update] For completeness, this contribution to RR’s Great Divide category was meant to elicit inputs from the Left that illustrate what drives such a notion of self-governance in the America of the 21st century. As of this writing it has done so in spades.
While the main implication of the Great Divide has been some new form of the Union that may include restructuring itself as a confederation of groups of more ideologically cohesive states, some considerable number of Americans have also actively been advancing proposals for the secession of their several states. Dr Walter Williams, the John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics at George Mason University, writes in ‘Secession: It’s Constitutional’ –
Since Barack Obama’s re-election, hundreds of thousands of petitioners for secession have reached the White House. Some people have argued that secession is unconstitutional, but there’s absolutely nothing in the Constitution that prohibits it. What stops secession is the prospect of brute force by a mighty federal government, as witnessed by the costly War of 1861.
Secession has again emerged as an active topic of discussion on governance among Americans who reflect on the progress of the Great Experiment while we scale historical heights of ideological polarity as a nation. In response to the pro/con commentaries and initiatives surrounding this issue, the Left has become apoplectic, as we will soon examine. But before we get there I’d like to add to the record a thoughtful essay on the matter by historian Brion McClanahan in which he examines ‘Is Secession Legal?’
So, where are we on this current posting? First, let’s recall that the topic I introduced above and wished readers to consider is not secession, but instead the alternative of restructuring the Union as is being variously proposed today, most recently in the reported eight counties of Colorado. What I wanted to illustrate by this piece is the major force that motivates tens of millions of Americans to now openly talk about such initiatives and examine ways of achieving a more perfect Union. And that force is the response of the Left which arises out of their profound ignorance about the workings of a democracy, especially as it has exercised itself over the life of this democratic republic. An example of such a response has now presented itself in the comment stream.
While not being unique in any sense as evidenced by his like-minded brethren, I’d like to highlight the comments of Mr Steven Frisch on this topic (here and over the years elsewhere in these pages). I pick on Steven Frisch because of the sustained virulence of his remarks (aka attacks) that illustrate the progressive mentality about the notion of the Great Divide. As the CEO of a politically and ideologically active NGO, Mr Frisch is also viewed by many progressives hereabouts as being a leading intellect in their midst so that his words may be taken to represent a sort of pinnacle of thinking from that considerable quarter.
Nevertheless, from his remarks over the years we find that he is poorly read, for he keeps ignoring the national mood on the Great Divide and believes that the entire notion is a hare-brained idea cooked up by yours truly, alone on a forested ridge in our backwoods community. As do all progressives looking for a fundamental transformation of America, he believes himself to be the true patriot and a cut above the rest. From his commentary we see that he considers himself beyond enquiry about another's arguments, and gratuitously supplies what others have really said and thought. It is with those convenient strawmen that he likes to do battle, and over whom he then celebrates his victories.
His profound ignorance of American history and questions of constitutionality is about on par with the cohort he represents. Samplings from such ignorance adorn his main thrust, which for reasons beyond specious is to attack the messenger for even daring to raise the topic of the Great Divide.
In his diatribe you will note that he has not understood the subject of the post, or what are the sentiments of the Coloradans in the eight counties. In his auto-apoplectic state he instead quotes the oath taken by naturalized citizens like me, impugning that somehow introducing commentary and providing a discussion forum for what is going on in the country is treasonous and lese majesty to everything American. And then ascending ever higher on the steps of hubris, he again invites me to go back to Estonia – “you can renounce your American citizenship and get the hell out of my country.”
Did you notice the “my country”? In his froth he overlooks that he was born into MY country, for I was an American before him, and those like me worked hard to preserve and present him with a nation that he and his are now deconstructing.
But perhaps the real pinnacle of his ignorance is his sneering counsel to salve the grievances of the hundreds of thousands of American petitioners, including the Coloradans, by advising them, “I would have them vote George. I would have them vote.” This as if these people have not been voting desperately all of their lives.
What the Frisches of America don’t understand is that carelessly tended democracies come to a time in their evolution at which a minority becomes permanently disenfranchised. In short, a point is passed after which voting no longer works as the proponents and recipients of ever more comprehensive wealth transfer pogroms irrevocably tip the scales. I believe, with accelerating technology, public education in the toilet, and systemic unemployment growing, that we may be past that point now.
What puts paid to this assessment is the unfettered control that the leftwing elites exert on an electorate with a huge and growing component of oblivians and the un/under-educated. Nevertheless, there are at least one hundred million Americans who see the country as having gone terribly wrong, and who are desperately seeking ways to bring back the American dream which is no longer known nor shared by the majority.
Since Barack Obama’s re-election, hundreds of thousands of petitioners for secession have reached the White House. Some people have argued that secession is unconstitutional, but there’s absolutely nothing in the Constitution that prohibits it. What stops secession is the prospect of brute force by a mighty federal government, as witnessed by the costly War of 1861.
Secession has again emerged as an active topic of discussion on governance among Americans who reflect on the progress of the Great Experiment while we scale historical heights of ideological polarity as a nation. In response to the pro/con commentaries and initiatives surrounding this issue, the Left has become apoplectic, as we will soon examine. But before we get there I’d like to add to the record a thoughtful essay on the matter by historian Brion McClanahan in which he examines ‘Is Secession Legal?’
So, where are we on this current posting? First, let’s recall that the topic I introduced above and wished readers to consider is not secession, but instead the alternative of restructuring the Union as is being variously proposed today, most recently in the reported eight counties of Colorado. What I wanted to illustrate by this piece is the major force that motivates tens of millions of Americans to now openly talk about such initiatives and examine ways of achieving a more perfect Union. And that force is the response of the Left which arises out of their profound ignorance about the workings of a democracy, especially as it has exercised itself over the life of this democratic republic. An example of such a response has now presented itself in the comment stream.
While not being unique in any sense as evidenced by his like-minded brethren, I’d like to highlight the comments of Mr Steven Frisch on this topic (here and over the years elsewhere in these pages). I pick on Steven Frisch because of the sustained virulence of his remarks (aka attacks) that illustrate the progressive mentality about the notion of the Great Divide. As the CEO of a politically and ideologically active NGO, Mr Frisch is also viewed by many progressives hereabouts as being a leading intellect in their midst so that his words may be taken to represent a sort of pinnacle of thinking from that considerable quarter.
Nevertheless, from his remarks over the years we find that he is poorly read, for he keeps ignoring the national mood on the Great Divide and believes that the entire notion is a hare-brained idea cooked up by yours truly, alone on a forested ridge in our backwoods community. As do all progressives looking for a fundamental transformation of America, he believes himself to be the true patriot and a cut above the rest. From his commentary we see that he considers himself beyond enquiry about another's arguments, and gratuitously supplies what others have really said and thought. It is with those convenient strawmen that he likes to do battle, and over whom he then celebrates his victories.
His profound ignorance of American history and questions of constitutionality is about on par with the cohort he represents. Samplings from such ignorance adorn his main thrust, which for reasons beyond specious is to attack the messenger for even daring to raise the topic of the Great Divide.
In his diatribe you will note that he has not understood the subject of the post, or what are the sentiments of the Coloradans in the eight counties. In his auto-apoplectic state he instead quotes the oath taken by naturalized citizens like me, impugning that somehow introducing commentary and providing a discussion forum for what is going on in the country is treasonous and lese majesty to everything American. And then ascending ever higher on the steps of hubris, he again invites me to go back to Estonia – “you can renounce your American citizenship and get the hell out of my country.”
Did you notice the “my country”? In his froth he overlooks that he was born into MY country, for I was an American before him, and those like me worked hard to preserve and present him with a nation that he and his are now deconstructing.
But perhaps the real pinnacle of his ignorance is his sneering counsel to salve the grievances of the hundreds of thousands of American petitioners, including the Coloradans, by advising them, “I would have them vote George. I would have them vote.” This as if these people have not been voting desperately all of their lives.
What the Frisches of America don’t understand is that carelessly tended democracies come to a time in their evolution at which a minority becomes permanently disenfranchised. In short, a point is passed after which voting no longer works as the proponents and recipients of ever more comprehensive wealth transfer pogroms irrevocably tip the scales. I believe, with accelerating technology, public education in the toilet, and systemic unemployment growing, that we may be past that point now.
What puts paid to this assessment is the unfettered control that the leftwing elites exert on an electorate with a huge and growing component of oblivians and the un/under-educated. Nevertheless, there are at least one hundred million Americans who see the country as having gone terribly wrong, and who are desperately seeking ways to bring back the American dream which is no longer known nor shared by the majority.
I wish them much success....but I don't see it happening. To set precedent here might start others thinking.......and lord knows we can't have that!
Posted by: fish | 30 July 2013 at 10:50 AM
it will be interesting to see how the opposition emerges and grows to this idea. We may learn a lot in the process. Some times the first try fails, but the second and subsequent succeed. Interesting times ahead.
Posted by: Russ Steele | 30 July 2013 at 03:01 PM
"Is this the 51st state?"
No, it is not.
Posted by: Michael Anderson | 30 July 2013 at 06:48 PM
George,
Have you ever lived in Colorado?
Are you from California?
So I find it a bit ironic that you are writing about Californians leaving the state because the non stop migration of those like yourself to our home state has pushed many long time residents out to states that still have that smaller population and open space feel. I have lived in CA off and on for around 30 years of my life and split the rest of the time between Colorado and Hawaii.
Posted by: Ben Emery | 30 July 2013 at 08:41 PM
Well, how many ways is this post just another example of 'conservatarian' fantasy?
Let's start with the landscape strewn with fantasies of a 51st state breaking off. I sometimes think the 'lost states of the United States' are more numerous than the lost tribes of Israel. Deseret, LIncoln, Jefferson, Texlahoma, Superior, Long Island, Cascadia, Ecotopia, Islandia; each, in different ways, has risen and fallen in peoples hopes and in the case of the last two, utopian fictions.
Next lets ask, is Colorado not a state governed by a Constitution? Don't people in the aggrieved 'eight counties' vote, as part of a state? Elect representatives as part of a state? Doesn't Article III of that state Constitution distribute powers in the state? and Article V. apportion representation? In what world do, "huge sections of Colorado now suffer taxation and regulation without representation from Denver"? Only in 'conservatarian' fantasy land.
And when did we forget the conditions under which West Virginia succeeded from Virginia? The secession of West Virginia was affected during the most difficult and bloody Constitutional crises the nation ever faced, was precipitated by the calling of a state convention of all of Virginia to secede from the Union, and was made operational by the occupation of northwestern Virginia by the Army of the Potomac under George McClellan. How soon we forget.
I wonder how the new state of "Sierra" is going to support itself, since it receives almost twice as much tax revenue as it pays.
And in what world are we as citizens "free to pursue their own ideas of life, liberty, and property." Secession in your mind is all about this concept of people being free to live in a place where "their own ideas of life, liberty and property" can be sacrosanct; the problem of course is that you, and all of us, live in a society, and in the USA we don't get to choose those things for ourselves, we do so as a society. We live in a nation of law, under a Constitution.
George several weeks ago you said that no one else has ever questioned your Americanism.
Here is the verbatim [Todd, you may want to loo up 'verbatim'] Naturalization Oath of Allegiance to the United States of America, and oath that at one time I must surmise you took, since you are not a native born American citizen:
"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the armed forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God."
Defend the constitution and the laws [that includes state constitutions that apportion representation], all enemies foreign and domestic [that includes those who would reject those laws to define 'rights' in their own way].
Here is how you can live under whatever rights you choose--you can renounce your American citizenship and get the hell out of my country. That would work. I hear Estonia is becoming a conservative paradise these days.
Posted by: stevenfrisch | 30 July 2013 at 10:09 PM
By the way I love the fact that one of the most laissez faire economies in the world today is Somalia, because they have almost no law; of course the per capita GDP is $333 per year and frankincense and myrrh are still major exports.
Posted by: stevenfrisch | 30 July 2013 at 10:14 PM
stevenfrisch 1009pm - your comment is so idiotic that I think I'll leave it up as a monument to you. But I will say that your understanding of the material posted on RR is rapidly approaching that of the FUE.
What are people like you going to do with the thousands of Americans who live in those Colorado counties, who live in Texas looking at no less than secession, who live in ..., have them deported also? You people are one scary bunch.
Posted by: George Rebane | 30 July 2013 at 10:58 PM
I would have them vote George. I would have them vote.
Posted by: stevenfrisch | 30 July 2013 at 11:31 PM
Great exchange, guys. This is the meat, and the potatoes.
Steve, my brother-in-law attorney was very disappointed last Friday when the Moonlight fire case he was representing for CalFire was thrown out by the nutty judge who didn't want to empanel a jury because it would have "annoyed the locals." Not sure what locals he was referring to, since the UPS and FedEx guys, as well as all the restaurants in Portola, were absolutely thrilled that a big case was going to bring lots of Big City money to the local community. Funny how people have different perceptions of "justice" and "equality." Oh and yes, have them vote. As long as voting rights are not subject to a lack of equanimity.
George, your fever dreams are becoming more egregious. Is everything OK? Are you sure you shouldn't be living in Grass Valley instead of Nevada City? After all, Nevada City is the Bezerkley of the foothills, and for Christ's sake why park yourself next to all of these kooks??
Posted by: Michael Anderson | 31 July 2013 at 12:05 AM
North Colorado has nice ring to it. North Colorada has an even better ring to it. Looks more like Kansas out there than the Rockies anyway.
I see the first problem. Where is the Capitol going to be? Surely the township of Greeley does not sound like a Capitol City. Sounds more like a place where the old grange hall is still rocking on Saturday night. On second thought, Greeley might be the perfect name for the Capitol reflecting the good citizens of the current NE Colorada.
The second issue is will the folks in NE Colorada still be Broncos fans? These are serious considerations that effect the most crucial aspect of living in Colorada. I figure once a Broncos fan, always a Bronco fan. Never heard of a former Broncos fan, have you? Still, this issue is of great importance and could be a deal breaker if Denver tries some dirty tricks by raising season ticket prices for the good folks who reside in North Colorada.
The third consideration which must be worked out is what kind of food are they going to serve in jail.. I hope it as good as the healthy chef salads they serve in Boulder County jail, not those horrible burned rice and bean quasi burritos they serve in Durgano. Yuck. The good citizens must address paramount issues before moving forward.
Posted by: Bill Tozer | 31 July 2013 at 12:15 AM
Tozer continues to rock the comedy. Hat tip, my friend.
Posted by: Michael Anderson | 31 July 2013 at 12:34 AM
Michael> and for Christ's sake why park yourself next to all of these kooks??
Well speaking for myself, I enjoy real-life Bertolt Brecht play aspect of Nevada City Live unfolding in real time. And heck, I don't have to sit in an ass-aching chair for 3 hours and be attacked by the Epic Theater actors.
Exit question though: who's playing the Nevada City equivalent of Mack the Knife? Me? I'm trying desperately to be Mother Courage, and failing. That may or may not be a good thing.
And Mr. Tozer, excellent commentary. My guess is that they'd be Broncos fans, but not allowed to throw hot dogs and beer during local games, unless the Raiders are in town.
Posted by: Ryan Mount | 31 July 2013 at 06:16 AM
Now the posters are giving this farcical idea the appropriate level of scrutiny it deserves! It is comedy.
Isn't Reinette Macheath?
Posted by: stevenfrisch | 31 July 2013 at 07:13 AM
By the way I love the fact that one of the most laissez faire economies in the world today is Somalia, because they have almost no law; of course the per capita GDP is $333 per year and frankincense and myrrh are still major exports.
ROADZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: fish | 31 July 2013 at 07:17 AM
Don't let another vacation be ruined! Travel to Somalia!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QDv4sYwjO0
Posted by: Ryan Mount | 31 July 2013 at 07:24 AM
I ran across this little explanation of how we got here and thought some of you might enjoy it:
http://thebreakthrough.org/index.php/journal/issue-3/post-truth-pluralism/
Posted by: stevenfrisch | 31 July 2013 at 07:29 AM
Thanks for the advocacy piece Steve.
Progressives are right that we increasingly live in a post-truth era, but rather than rejecting it and pining nostalgically for a return to a more truthful era we must instead navigate the post-truth era to advance liberal values.
Although in order to advance the discussion we should really flesh out the definitions of both "liberal" and "progressive" as they aren't synonymous.
Posted by: fish | 31 July 2013 at 08:08 AM
I get busy for a couple days and the place goes crazy. So many straw men, so little time.
Even Frisch understands laissez faire isn't a synonym for lawless anarchy, but won't let that get in the way of making a false point against his usual targets. Somalia doesn't regulate commerce because it's a failed state, not the other way around.
Regarding the Colorado counties that are unhappy with their Californication, they don't have a snowball's chance in Vegas of becoming a new state but with uniting in that cause they may have a chance in back against Denver's policies.
Posted by: Gregory | 31 July 2013 at 08:22 AM
"We have little in common with the liberal legions that dominate the coastal areas" The liberal legions are everywhere because the conservative gangs are few in number, few in population, and so distant from the thinking of most Americans as to be irrelevant except in their own venues, like this one, or in congress which was purchased courtesy of the Roberts court. BTW, the fascist members of the supremes are now looking at eliminating individual campaign donation limits which are now at $5 million per person per two year election cycle. How many Americans can afford to donate $5mil anyway? Plutocracy at work. Record heat waves all over the planet from Alaska to Siberia to China, but climate change isn't really happening and of course, it certainly isn't the result of petroleum based products spewing into the atmosphere. We all now know that climate change is Obama's doing as is herpes, insanity, bad breathe (sic) and the Californication of the western United States. If Romney would have won would conservatives be screaming about the Aspenification of Redding?
Posted by: Joe Koyote | 31 July 2013 at 10:28 AM
Mr. Koyote, Too much poison oak in Redding. Now, if the Apenification of Redding means getting rid of the plague, the scourge, the menace known as poison oak, then count me in. I don't care if black helicopters spray herbicide on the red leaves or crews from the Conservation Corps hand pull it out. Just get rid of it for once and for all. Ever hear of an Aspen skier with poison oak covering his crotch?? Bet you haven't. Aspenifcation of Redding now!
Posted by: Bill Tozer | 31 July 2013 at 10:40 AM
Again.....a powerful message from Joe Koyote! Now here's Bob with the weather!
Posted by: fish | 31 July 2013 at 10:48 AM
Hummmm... If this actually works, maybe Ca. will follow in CO.'s foot steps.
The dividing line can be the Eastern foot of the Coast range mountains.
A good portion of the state is actually red, but the big city populations
are calling the shots for the rest of the state. So,,, let them have the sliver
of the state they reside in.
In the past, it was a North / South deviation. If that plan is followed,
be sure to keep S.F. and Berkeley on the Southern side.
Rough&Ready can be the new state Capital. ( as reminder that we actually pulled it off....for a while)
Or Maybe LIBS want to remove that bit of history, and add it to their book of revisionism. ( as in,,, "never happened")
Yes,, we had government intrusion and over taxation way back when.
Posted by: Walt | 31 July 2013 at 10:53 AM
This is far more interesting than this North Colorado business:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson_%28Pacific_state%29
They'll actually pulled out their guns! Good times, Noodle Salad I say!
Upsides for a new state of Jefferson: We get a 51st State and finally an odd number of members in the Union, which means we'll probably have a 52nd because Americans hate odd numbers of anything. Note: I vote for annexing Arkansas to bring the number back down to 50 rather than upping it to 52. Can we vote a State out of the Union?
Downsides: The new State capital will be Yreka. We will have 51 States (see above).
Posted by: Ryan Mount | 31 July 2013 at 11:56 AM
"Record heat waves all over the planet from Alaska to Siberia to China, but climate change isn't really happening and of course, it certainly isn't the result of petroleum based products spewing into the atmosphere."
Stierscheisse. Where do you get that stuff?
The arctic is having a record cool summer, the antarctic has record ice extent for their winter, an Alaskan lottery (Nenana Ice Classic) based on when their river ice broke up had the latest breakup in over a century and even James Hansen, in a paper published in January, was forced to note that the 5 year averaged temps had been flat for 10 years.
That's all just weather.
A link for temps for the arctic circle is
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php
It's already the coolest summer since 1958 when the DMI's records start, and looks to be on track for the melt season to only be about a third as long as has been the average for that time.
JK, this is good news. The sky is not falling. You can safely ignore the Chicken Littles you've been listening to.
Posted by: Gregory | 31 July 2013 at 12:56 PM
If the arctic is having a record cool summer, why is the North Pole a lake? Does it always turn into a lake in the summer? from your friends a Fox news
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/07/26/north-pole-now-lake
Posted by: Joe Koyote | 31 July 2013 at 02:02 PM
I wonder how the new state of "Sierra" is going to support itself, since it receives almost twice as much tax revenue as it pays.
I hadn't seen this in the thread and was surprised (I should slow down when I read) that it hadn't turned up. Thanks Steve..... wouldn't want to leave any trope un-uttered!
Posted by: fish | 31 July 2013 at 02:24 PM
fish 224pm - thanks for bringing up that quote from Frisch's 1009pm; I forgot to include it in the 31jul13 update that highlights the man's depleted arguments. What Team Frisch fails to understand is that the new state of Sierra would have co-equal representation in Congress, and thereby receive whatever federal funding Washington deigns to sprinkle over the several states. At every turn, his fundamental understanding of how America works comes up short.
Administrivia - I have posted the 31jul13 update to this commentary.
Posted by: George Rebane | 31 July 2013 at 02:45 PM
At every turn, his fundamental understanding of how America works comes up short.
Unfortunately I think his "understanding" of America as it is today is spot on as it relates to Washingtons "largesse", and like any junkie.... getting through the early days of withdrawal would be miserable. They would be far better off in the long run.
Posted by: fish | 31 July 2013 at 03:33 PM
"If the arctic is having a record cool summer, why is the North Pole a lake? Does it always turn into a lake in the summer? " JK
"Damn, what a gullible breed..." - Agent Kay
JK, while that camera was placed on ice when it was at the North Pole, it was 300 miles away when the picture was taken.
In addition, sea ice moves and (hold your breath) there's less of it in mid summer.
I don't know about you but where I grew up, a body of water 1 foot deep was referred to as a "puddle", and yes, puddles form on sea ice in midsummer. The DMI figure is an average over all the Arctic above the 80th parallel, and the warm spell that preceded the picture that camera took is called "weather".
Posted by: Gregory | 31 July 2013 at 03:37 PM
fish 333pm - without putting too fine of a point on it, I believe that today America is not working, and Steve Frisch has no understanding of how it would work. But you are right in the "as it is today" department.
Posted by: George Rebane | 31 July 2013 at 04:04 PM
Jim Reed (democrat assembly candidate) is actually working on this issue with a supervisor from Riverside and former state assemblyman Stan Statham.
Posted by: Barry Pruett | 31 July 2013 at 06:00 PM
I think America is never going to allow a state to divide into more. Just ain't gonna happen.
Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 31 July 2013 at 06:39 PM
Regarding a previous comment about getting money from the feds. For every dollar New Mexico sends DC they get $2.03 back. California is 43rd with a return of .78 cents. We have Difi and Babs Boxer and the largest Congressional House contingent yet a state with 10% of ours or less gets 3.5 times the return. California's delegation is impotent. They show the fallacy of non-partisan as practiced by the democrat party. It they would represent our state as a California contingent we could get our money's worth but with the democrats in charge we will never see that happen. Yet we keep sending DiFi and Babs and the other do nothing libs to DC. It is hopeless. See this chart.
http://taxfoundation.org/article/federal-taxing-and-spending-benefit-some-states-leave-others-paying-bill-1
Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 31 July 2013 at 06:57 PM
Stan Statham has tried the California Bana split before. I supported but the first time and I would probably help this time but it will not happen.
Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 31 July 2013 at 06:59 PM
ToddJ 659pm - Nowhere here do I hold out promise for such splits or restructurings, only a hope that we might at least give it a fair hearing in the public square.
Posted by: George Rebane | 31 July 2013 at 07:04 PM
"...only a hope that we might at least give it a fair hearing in the public square."
Why?
Posted by: Michael Anderson | 31 July 2013 at 07:31 PM
Why? Because anyone who looks art the California Government can see why. Dems have had the state Assembly for fifty years (save one) and the Senate for longer. A one party hegemony and all the rest of th state is screwed. I suppose MA likes those LA politicians dictating our local issues but many of us don't. I am heartened though by the victory of an R in the Senate from Bakersfield. A lock for dems was breached. Burt the D's still have a super majority.
Oh, and one other reason we are screwed in our state. The Legislature is the only body that can call a Constitutional Convention.
Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 31 July 2013 at 08:37 PM
Todd, the reason the Democrats have a super majority is because the California Republicans screwed the pooch. I have no illusion that the pendulum does not swing. But at the moment, you are on the wrong side of the pit.
BTW, it's not just LA politicos, it's the entire West Coast. Places like Eureka, Point Arena, Marin County, the entire fucking Bay Area (where buttloads of money generate), San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Ventura, LA (as you noted), and the huge San Diego metropolis.
You're a guy plunkin' away on the monkey drum from the middle of nowhere. When you go to Sacto, the suits look the other way, pretending you must be from Alabama.
You should try another tactic. Oh, and BTW, I have that Burning Man ticket you requested. Let's hook up for coffee so we can discuss how you're going to fluff your camp. Peace out.
Posted by: Michael Anderson | 31 July 2013 at 09:02 PM
Todd, just get a motel room. Its cheaper than the 650 smackers they are asking for Burning Man. But, if you and Mr. Anderson went camping and you woke up with a hickie on your neck, would you post it on RR? Inquiring minds would like to know. If not, lets go camping!
Back to my dear misunderstood friend, Mr. J Koyote, who temporarily veered us off the important topic at hand:
http://www.livescience.com/38589-north-pole-lake-disappears.html
There Mr. Koyote, you got your 15 minutes of fame. Now if Northern California split with Southern California, the first thing we should do is cut off any water flowing south until they fill every darn swimming pool in the LA Basin with dirt. Make that organic dirt. Call it going green. Then, if they are behaved, turn the water back on but sparingly.
Posted by: Bill Tozer | 31 July 2013 at 11:02 PM
Mister Tozer,
A stud like Todd will get more than a hickey at Burning Man, of that I can assure you. Just ask TSA! A solid package from stem to stern. But I would definitely suggest that Todd use some sort of prophylactic. After all, Safety Third!!
Bacon candy and fries, yours for the asking. All you have to do is fill out the appropriate request form.
Michael A.
Posted by: Michael Anderson | 31 July 2013 at 11:35 PM
Dr. Rebane, thank you for pointing out the errors of my ways. By-Gum is actually a settlement in Kenya. As used in the English language I have researched its use.
Origin
It is known since the early 19th century, as in this example from James Kirke Paulding (a.k.a. 'Bull-Us, Hector'), 1815:
"By gum, that's jist what I want you to tell me, I swow."
It is still in use in the north of England, although would be considered archaic elsewhere.
Thus, the term is relegated to the Dust Bin of history. I wonder when the noun "dustbin" will also be relegated or delegated to the dustbin of history as well, by golly.
Be that as it may, insurance companies and employers have already started the War on Fat People. First it was a clandestine guerrilla operation, but now the movement has picked up steam and is coming to the forefront. Its coming by hook or by crook or whatever antediluvian phrase you choose. It started with the War on Poverty and ends up as the War on the Obese. Wonder if that means the War Poverty was successful. Either way they ain't going to mess with my bacon, no way nohow.
Posted by: Bill Tozer | 01 August 2013 at 07:14 AM
I wonder when the noun "dustbin" will also be relegated or delegated to the dustbin of history as well, by golly?
Let's hope it's not soon or Michael is so screwed!
Posted by: fish | 01 August 2013 at 07:32 AM
Gosh George
Any idea where I can move where I won't have to pay for the unconstitutional wars started by he Bush administration?
Posted by: Paul Emery | 01 August 2013 at 10:37 AM
Any idea where I can move where I won't have to pay for the unconstitutional wars started by he Bush administration?
Well when you find it let us know.
Posted by: fish | 01 August 2013 at 10:51 AM
Michael Anderson | 31 July 2013 at 09:02 PMI
I appreciate the the proposition of Michael in fondling but I have to pass Mikie, I like girls. But have at it at the Burning Man perv gathering. Better have a zipper on your tent door.
California has a democrat majority which is actually a plurality. All the indies and the green and the incarcerated pervs (your favorite segment Mikie) are unable to win and their votes allow the democrats to win all the seats. Simple to figure out Mikie but I know you know that since you are a "smart" guy. Too funny, you are, as Yoda would say.
Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 01 August 2013 at 11:18 AM
Paul Emery | 01 August 2013 at 10:37 AM
Move to Crawford, Texas PaulE.
Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 01 August 2013 at 11:19 AM
Are they a no war tax zone Todd?
Posted by: Paul Emery | 01 August 2013 at 11:26 AM
PaulE 1037am - I'd consider the same place you moved to after the Gulf of Tonkin.
Posted by: George Rebane | 01 August 2013 at 11:29 AM
George 11:29 AM
You'd think the American public would have been wise after Tonkin but they proved their dumbness by being suckered into the war in Iraq. I'm confident it will happen again.
Posted by: Paul Emery | 01 August 2013 at 12:48 PM
You'd think the American public would have been wise after Tonkin but they proved their dumbness by being suckered into the war in Iraq. I'm confident it will happen again.
I am too....but it really isn't the same public is it?
Posted by: fish | 01 August 2013 at 01:38 PM
Fish
It's the same public consciousness in that Americans tend to think that their government is their friend and they tend to trust it instead of regarding it as their mortal enemy that will lie and enlist their children into senseless wars that are fought for profit.
Posted by: Paul Emery | 01 August 2013 at 02:18 PM
It's the same public consciousness in that Americans tend to think that their government is their friend and they tend to trust it instead of regarding it as their mortal enemy that will lie and enlist their children into senseless wars that are fought for profit.
From everything I've seen here you seem to "think that government is your friend and tend to trust it
instead of regarding it as their mortal enemy that will lie and enlist their children into senseless wars that are fought for profitwhen "free" healthcare is being discussed.Posted by: fish | 01 August 2013 at 02:31 PM
Fish, doctors don't shoot back. That's why.
Posted by: Michael Anderson | 01 August 2013 at 02:48 PM
Presumably your government wouldn't be shooting at you either as one of the potentially conscripted.....but these days who knows.
Posted by: fish | 01 August 2013 at 02:59 PM
Just an idea maybe we should stop talking about government in the United States as a living breathing entity and call it what it really is, Democratic and Republican Party Leadership. When ever we have a problem with "government" understand it is the Democrats and Republicans running the government, not the government. If we had a Libertarian and Greens as our big two we would have a much different type of government. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Government doesn't kill, spy, oppress people, those who control the government do.
Government can be any entity that is excepted as where the rules of society come. In Chicago during prohibition the rules came from the mob. In Palestine the rules come from Hamas, Afghanistan rules come from Taliban, United States of America rules come from the Democratic and Republican Parties.
Posted by: Ben Emery | 01 August 2013 at 03:22 PM
Just an idea maybe we should stop talking about government in the United States as a living breathing entity and call it what it really is, Democratic and Republican Party Leadership. When ever we have a problem with "government" understand it is the Democrats and Republicans running the government, not the government. If we had a Libertarian and Greens as our big two we would have a much different type of government. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Government doesn't kill, spy, oppress people, those who control the government do.
Government can be any entity that is excepted as where the rules of society come. In Chicago during prohibition the rules came from the mob. In Palestine the rules come from Hamas, Afghanistan rules come from Taliban, United States of America rules come from the Democratic and Republican Parties.
I feel like a dog whose just been shown a card trick.
Posted by: fish | 01 August 2013 at 03:39 PM
Fish,
Just trying out some angles.
Posted by: Ben Emery | 01 August 2013 at 03:49 PM
Well your angles work out to: we are not a nation of laws but a nation of men (something I agree with).
Why do you want to participate in this again?
Posted by: fish | 01 August 2013 at 04:00 PM
Ben 03:22
We should take this one step further.
The Republicrats serve the Ruling Class and their purpose is to guarantee wealth for the investors that spend billions to keep them in power. Pretty simple. Governments have always been controlled by the ruling class with the short term exceptions such as revolutions or occasional diversions such as the American experiment of 1776. Things soon correct themselves and it's business as usual. They do allow government to perform maintenance roles such as judical and infrastructure projects and health care (except in this country) but in general they design things to exercise their greed
That's why a third party will never emerge and why the occasionally enlist a Rand Paul types to give the illusion of change to appease the discontented (Tea Party brushfires for example.
I challenge convince me otherwise.
Posted by: Paul Emery | 01 August 2013 at 04:08 PM
PaulE, you should run for office.
Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 01 August 2013 at 04:42 PM
Paul,
Although glorified, the history of what the founders put forward isn't this at all. It is argued that they just wanted to have their own country to be the ruling class but the facts don't match that argument.
The D's and R's have rigged the system that outside of a revolution there will never be a viable third party. I think it is time to dump the antiquated two party system and either embrace IRV or proportionate representation. Once again it will take a revolution for that to happen. The only way to dislodge one of the big two is by doing what the Tea Baggers have done, from within. Unfortunately they are funded and are fighting for what the plutocrats want, which is what we have today without the liberal social programs.
Posted by: Ben Emery | 01 August 2013 at 05:03 PM
No chance I'm not a Republicrat like you are and I'd get squashed. Why don't you give it a go again? You're younger than Hillary, who will surely be our next President.
Posted by: Paul Emery | 01 August 2013 at 05:05 PM
So Paul, @ 01 August 2013 at 04:08 PM
Who are said ruling class? Give us some juicy names.
International? Domestic? Who directs and pulls?
Posted by: Al | 01 August 2013 at 05:35 PM
My 5:05 was meant for Todd
Ben, in your view when did the ruling class reassert their control of this country after the revolution of '76?
Posted by: Paul Emery | 01 August 2013 at 05:38 PM
While I agree with parts of Paul E and Ben E's points, I disagree on one element. Our country was founded on principles. Those principles are based on the government (being evil, power hunger and corruptible) SHOULD be as small as possible so the individual can thrive and pursue life, personal liberty, and Apple Pie as he/she see fit. The least intrusive government into one's life is best. Thus, Mr. Paul and Mr. Ben, if the individual is allowed to thrive (without poisoning his neighbor's well) of course some will become the ruling class (powerful) as some will thrive more than others. It all depends on one's natural talents in their pursuits. Those natural talents and pursuits have always separated the wheat from the chaff.
That is the idea. Having government step in to replace the natural ebb and flow of one rising and another declining is unnatural to say the least.
I feel, despite your correct analysis that our present Great White Father in Washington is corrupt, entrenched, self serving (to say the least), a den of thieves, and packed full with pathological liars and harlots....despite all that somehow I get the feeling that your goals are to make the wealthy and successful and powerful poor. Or at least knock them down to peanut size.
Anything that keeps one from rising to the top (within our laws) is unconstitutional. Thus our disagreements.
I knew Max Foster. Been in his little 850 sq ft house on several occasions. He built that house with his wife and went bankrupt. He dusted himself off and still peddled eggs out of the back of his truck. He died a multibillionaire, still living in his little house. Got up every morning, put his coveralls on and went to the dairy plant to check his cottage cheese. If you saw him you would assume (as I did at first) he was an old maintenance man or custodian. Any thing that keeps anyone from becoming the next Max Foster of Foster Farms is coming from the government, not the individual.
At one time everything you saw on the right going down the old highway belonged to Joe Gallo. Everything you could see on the left belonged to Max Foster. Neither one were political men. Been in Joe Gallo's home as well. Both men gave to the Dems and the Republicans , each and every Dem or Republican running for office or seating in the chair. Didn't matter to them. What mattered to the them and to the politicians was they were the largest employers in the area and it served them and their employees (and the employees' families)and their communities well if they stayed in business.
I get the feeling that one of you fine gentlemen think old Max (he died) or Joe should be taken to the woodshed because they are the enemy of us little people.
Posted by: Bill Tozer | 01 August 2013 at 05:52 PM
So PaulE, it appears you have decides t stay in the whiny class of Americans then. When I ran for Supervisor I was not a partisan. The partisan was my lib opponent. You would have favored her hands down. Anyway, I guess Americans will be stuck with those wascally republicrats since the big talkers like you are afraid to run and put your policies into the country. Amazing.
Oh, and I already did my stint and then went home as the Founders envisioned.
Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 01 August 2013 at 06:01 PM
Todd
Todd, would you like to review with us your failed attempts at State politics or do you want me to do it?
Posted by: Paul Emery | 01 August 2013 at 06:40 PM
Ben, Give us some names.
Posted by: Al | 01 August 2013 at 08:33 PM
PaulE, please tell everyone about my attempt at state government.
Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 01 August 2013 at 08:50 PM
Todd
The details are too boring
As I recall you we're a contender but suffered an early knockout in the pre primaries. I know what it's like. I was TKO'd in the first round of my final Golden Glove attempt in '63.
Posted by: Paul Emery | 01 August 2013 at 09:53 PM
Golden Glove boxer? Note to self: be nicer to Mr. Paul.
This break up talk (secession) is nothing to be scoffed at. Think how suddenly the angry populace changed a nice summer recess for our Congresspersons into a very heated Summer of 2010, turning those boring meet and greet Town Hall meetings into front page news.
This disenchantment with the status quo does not make the front pages anymore, but the undercurrent of anger and feeling that our government can do whatever it wants when it wants and the hell with you all has not gone anywhere. People know that they are being tread upon.
The government follows these secession movements closely and takes them a lot more serious than the average Joe. They know it is totally constitutional and how widespread this feeling is. Perhaps that is why every single department of the US Bureaucracy is loading up on ammo. The entrenched have dug in and are practicing the "all men to battle stations" drills.
Posted by: Bill Tozer | 02 August 2013 at 07:19 AM
The government follows these secession movements closely and takes them a lot more serious than the average Joe. They know it is totally constitutional and how widespread this feeling is. Perhaps that is why every single department of the US Bureaucracy is loading up on ammo. The entrenched have dug in and are practicing the "all men to battle stations" drills.
I still don't see it happening....at least the Greeks took to the streets to get their governments attention.....Americans will show up waving tiny little American flags.....woo hoo!
Hey Stevie as the most ardent defender of the status quo at Rebanes Ruminations why do you think there is so much resistance to secession at the federal level? Using your earlier argument it would be a net positive to let some of these freeloaders go their own way!
Try and keep your response to that length that will keep my eyes from glazing over!
Posted by: fish | 02 August 2013 at 07:42 AM
Mr. Fish, I honestly don't see it happening either. If so, it will be just another Ruby Ridge with the press kept far, far, away. Yep, them Greeks know how to show their displeasure. And so do the Egyptians. The Egyptians just had their biggest anti-government rally in centuries and all our State Department does is send subtle messages to the Brotherhood that we stand with them, not the masses who were demonstrating against another authoritarian government. Think the press and White House called it a "military coup." Did not take long for the Brotherhood's true colors to show and did not take long for our current occupant of the White House to once again stand with the wrong side.
Posted by: Bill Tozer | 02 August 2013 at 08:20 AM
Paul,
"Ben, in your view when did the ruling class reassert their control of this country after the revolution of '76?"
There has never been a time where a small few people didn't control our government. Unfortunately the bankers always seem to be in the middle of the corruption and power mongering. There was a glimpse of what a democratic representative government could look like during the depression through the 60's. I heard this once on a political talk show. Germany had Hitler and we had FDR when our countries were in the toilet.
Attributed to Mayer Amschel Rothschild
"Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes the laws."
Posted by: Ben Emery | 02 August 2013 at 08:43 AM
Good morning Brother Ben. I read this opinion piece by libertarians and thought you might enjoy it. Sounded like they had a nice debate. Fun discussion.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/07/31/will-america-will-soon-fall-as-just-like-rome-did/?intcmp=trending
Posted by: Bill Tozer | 02 August 2013 at 08:56 AM
Well spoken Ben 8:43 AM. One only needs to look at the recent economic debacle to see that the Democrats kept the same economic players in the game that lapped up the big bucks when things crashed in '08. Bernanke was chairman of President George W. Bush's Council of Economic Advisers before Bush appointed him on to be chairman of the United States Federal Reserve and was confirmed for a second term as chairman on January 28, 2010, after being re-nominated by President Barack Obama. Another example is Tim Geithner. creater of TARP and a favorite of the banksters who kept things tidy for his pals during his reign as Treasure chief under Obama. Now Obama is talking about super insider Larry Summers taking over the Fed. I suggest reading this link to Bill Black, who wrote "The best way to rob a bank is to own one" for a summary of how there is little difference whether there is a Republican or Democrat in office when it comes to protecting the Banksters who made billions and paid themselves bonuses while the country plunged into recession.
This, my friends is the ruling class in action.
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04032009/transcript1.html
Posted by: Paul Emery | 02 August 2013 at 09:48 AM
Here are more examples of our fascist state or small ruling corporate class. Monsanto is almost in complete control of the USDA and FDA.
Another Monsanto man in a key USDA post? Obama’s ag policy’s giving me whiplash
http://grist.org/article/2009-09-24-usda-obama-monsanto-organic/
Monsanto and the FDA: Two crime families working a trillion-dollar hustle
http://www.naturalnews.com/039315_Monsanto_FDA_crime_families.html
Winning our Hearts and Minds? Monsanto and Big Food Pull out the Big Guns
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_28005.cfm
Monsanto hired mercenary Blackwater to infiltrate anti-GMO groups
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/297701#ixzz2apd1fEE5
Posted by: Ben Emery | 02 August 2013 at 10:00 AM
Here are more examples of our fascist state or small ruling corporate class. Monsanto is almost in complete control of the USDA and FDA.
Another Monsanto man in a key USDA post? Obama’s ag policy’s giving me whiplash
http://grist.org/article/2009-09-24-usda-obama-monsanto-organic/
Monsanto and the FDA: Two crime families working a trillion-dollar hustle
http://www.naturalnews.com/039315_Monsanto_FDA_crime_families.html
Winning our Hearts and Minds? Monsanto and Big Food Pull out the Big Guns
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_28005.cfm
Monsanto hired mercenary Blackwater to infiltrate anti-GMO groups
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/297701#ixzz2apd1fEE5
Posted by: Ben Emery | 02 August 2013 at 10:01 AM
PaulE 948am - interesting that Moyer's guest Black blames all the banking problems of granting "liars loans" on Bush when it was the Democrats in Congress that demanded such loans be granted wholesale so that that the financial underclass could own their own homes. And Moyer's usual nostrum is to replace the current bureaucratic excesses with even bigger and more comprehensive bureaucracies. To me Moyers has always played the role of the liberal curtain behind which we should not look to see the advance of the progressive agenda. But the man does have his devoted constituency. Oh well.
Posted by: George Rebane | 02 August 2013 at 10:05 AM
George
If you read Bill Black at all you will find that he equally blames Obama for our current situation. You must agree that the "banksters" profited immensely from whatever course the government took and kept their own in office and prevented any serious indictments against any insiders during either administrations reign. Ruling class?
Posted by: Paul Emery | 02 August 2013 at 10:26 AM
George and Paul,
Bill Moyers and Amy Goodman both have a passion towards the truth. Amy does it from the people themselves and Moyers does it through players in a given field.
This is why I push back against the Obama administration being anything about progressive policies. His administration is anti progressive "third way" personified. It is disgusting. We have been seeing this play out in the US since the early 90's. Conservative economic policies, liberal social policies, and an authoritarian military/ security/ drug polices. All of which progressives and libertarians can't stand.
Posted by: Ben Emery | 02 August 2013 at 10:36 AM
Short sighted Ben doesn't realize that a "regulatory capture" has a long history. Milton Friedman wrote about the railroads capturing their regulatory agency well over a century ago; it's what happens when well meaning reformers put a regulatory mechanism in place to fix a real or perceived problem, and when they move on to the next problem those who have an interest in the subject begin merging into the agency. Nothing sinister; there are jobs to be had both in the industry and among the regulators and it tends to be people with knowledge of the industry that gets both sorts of jobs.
In the end, we get regulators who look a lot like the regulated.
The "liar's loans" were made because the folks making the loans weren't keeping them like in the good old days; the Mr.Potter's and the Building and Loans both made loans to keep for their own portfolios. The modern "liar's loans" were made because the Government Sponsored Entities Fannie and Freddie didn't care because they were just mincing the bad paper to sell as "securities" that the world bought because of the false sense they had the good faith of the US government backing them.
Let's not forget: subprime mortgages started off as a Clinton administration pilot program to help the working poor get on the real estate wealth escalator and was pushed by the Clinton administration and mostly Dem congresscritters (like Dodd and Frank) into operation both Countrywide and countrywide.
Posted by: Gregory | 02 August 2013 at 10:37 AM
Black on Obama
BILL MOYERS: To hear you say this is unusual because you supported Barack Obama, during the campaign. But you're seeming disillusioned now.
WILLIAM K. BLACK: Well, certainly in the financial sphere, I am. I think, first, the policies are substantively bad. Second, I think they completely lack integrity. Third, they violate the rule of law. This is being done just like Secretary Paulson did it. In violation of the law. We adopted a law after the Savings and Loan crisis, called the Prompt Corrective Action Law. And it requires them to close these institutions. And they're refusing to obey the law.
Posted by: Paul Emery | 02 August 2013 at 10:38 AM
Reading Ben and Paul E I would guess they should be Ayn Rand and Bill Buckley adherents. Also, Tea Party people as well.
Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 02 August 2013 at 11:00 AM
I like Bill Buckley and have many friends who are in the Tea Party. We have lively discussions but part ways on agreement when they propose the Republican Party as a savior of our rights and freedoms.
Posted by: Paul Emery | 02 August 2013 at 11:14 AM
Those "Bush wars" mentioned above,, must not be all that bad since "O"
has carried on with them, and even started new ones. You know,,, those "not" wars
he got us into without Congressional approval? At least Bush DID get said approval,
and seated LIBS voted for actions as well.
OK,,, It's the in house revisionist's turn...
A person here ( who shall remain nameless) has pals in China.
My Son received a "vacation" to China through his employer. By the time he got back,
he had a new respect for the freedoms right here on U.S. soil.
I wonder if the resident globe trotter can back with the same perspective, or was more than happy with China's way of doing things.
Did you get one of those yellow satchels with Mau and "O" pictured side by side?
Those are a hot item with the devout Commies.
Posted by: Walt | 02 August 2013 at 11:46 AM
"We have lively discussions but part ways on agreement when they propose the Republican Party as a savior of our rights and freedoms." - Paul
One can argue with a straight face that compared to Democrats, they are.
"Todd, the reason the Democrats have a super majority is because the California Republicans screwed the pooch." -manderson
No, the reason Democrats have a supermajority is the massive cash flow from California public employee union dues into Democratic causes from state offices down to elected dogcatchers. At maybe $500 a head per year on average into political causes, it's a huge advantage that has been enjoying positive feedback growth rates since Jerry Brown Version 1 granted collective bargaining power over wages and benefits to public employee unions. This has financed the electing of Democrats who favor more public spending and more union members making more money and donating more to unions via compulsory payroll deductions electing more Dems... and the road goes ever on. Until it can't.
The Feds might bail out Detroit. They won't be able to bail out California when our debts become due and can't be paid.
Posted by: Gregory | 02 August 2013 at 12:13 PM
Walt, you might be amused by this. Working at a local R&D office that had a few Chinese engineers nearing middle age who got out. For giggles, I brought in my official ChiCom "Quotations from Chairman Mao" that I bought in a college bookstore in the '70's. I figured since a billion people were studying it diligently and millions had been killed because of it, it should be read.
Let me say here that Chairman Mao is to philosophy as Rod McKuen is to poetry. It's amazing folks took it seriously, and wouldn't have were bullets and food not involved in it's PR, something the running dog lackeys of the Bourgeoisie just don't get...
My coworkers couldn't believe it! 'Where did you get it? In English? It looks just like the ones we had to have!'
They'd never seen the translation. It brought back memories, and not good ones.
Posted by: Gregory | 02 August 2013 at 12:22 PM
PaulE, you said you would tell everyone about my run for state government (like a threat, too funny) and when I said go for it you respond it is too boring. Cheap.
Also, the Tea Party has people you are pals with but you part ways on them because they want the R's to carry their positions? A bunch of hooey. The democrats will NEVER carry anything the TP want so if you want some change you have to go where it might happen. And, you whine about the R's and then bask in the turmoil between the TP members and the old time R's. So why is that PaulE? Whine about the R's and dislike the TP but relish the fighting between them and the R's? I think you may need medication. LOL!
Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 02 August 2013 at 02:04 PM
Todd
I'm tired of embarrassing you. No one remembers Bernie Rickter anyway. Even his coat tails couldn't advance you out of the bush leagues. Home town boy does bad.
Posted by: Paul Emery | 02 August 2013 at 03:06 PM
George
Here's a couple of questions for you and I'm very interested in your view. Do you believe we have a ruling class in this country? Who are they and how do they influence our government?
Posted by: Paul Emery | 02 August 2013 at 03:37 PM
PaulE, obviously you are fascinated with me because you are always writing me and about me. I feel giddy with your attentiveness. Thanks.
Regarding Richter. He was major proponent of Prop 209 and kept it alive until Ward Connerly came on board and they took it to victory. I am sure you opposed it and were for government giveaways that it took away. Also, since you have no idea about Bernie I will fill you in a tad on the primary of 1992. He was constantly talking in the debates about the need to help the poor inner city black kids and we all could not understand why in the north he thought that was a issue for people to be concerned about. So, since you belittle Bernie I guess you are a hater of the black inner city kids. Too bad.
Regarding coattails? I have no idea what you are talking about. In the Assembly race I spent the least in money but finished third out of seven. So you are right, I could not advance up.
I think you are simply jealous of my life and can't shake me out of tour head. Too funny.
Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 02 August 2013 at 03:59 PM
"Do you believe we have a ruling class in this country? Who are they and how do they influence our government?"
Paul, if you think it of interest, why not state what you think and let George or anyone else respond?
Posted by: Gregory | 02 August 2013 at 04:41 PM
Gregory
I'm sure George has his view on the question.
It's an interesting question Gregory. What's your view? I say follow the money. Who stands to make the bucks by investing in influencing government. I say banksters, military investors and oil companies for a start. Billionaires get there because they can use their money to create an edge to their advantage. Tie it in with international corporations that have no allegiance to any country and you see why we are where we are today. Democracy for sale and sold. That's why we are stuck in a two party system that is really one party with two wings carrying a big fat bird.
Posted by: Paul Emery | 02 August 2013 at 06:26 PM
Let's see Todd Bernie was all for helping inner city black kids, I didn't particularly care for Bernie therefore I hate inner city blacks. Really Todd! That's amazing logic. I think you had too much exposure to Mercury when you were a kid mucking around the river.
Todd 06:01 PM "Oh, and I already did my stint and then went home as the Founders envisioned."
I was making the point that you withdrew from political life not out of choice, as you implied but because you had no where to go. If you would have had your way you would have become a career politican like your idon Tom McClintock.
Posted by: Paul Emery | 02 August 2013 at 07:03 PM
sp: idol Tom McClintock.
Posted by: Paul Emery | 02 August 2013 at 07:07 PM
PaulE, now how do you know if I wanted to be a career politician? Were you listening at the door? What a hoot! I did not make the cut for Assembly and a good man Bernie Richter won. I went on the next year, 1993 and kicked you and your pals ass for a number of years on your quest to Federalize our South Yuba by defeating you time and again. All that with CABPRO, and you know I did, so admit it. LOL! No PaulE, I stayed home and decided to do local private sector stuff unlike you and your ilk. Try harder in making it up, too funny.
I see you still never answer anyone. You disparaged Bernie Richter and then can't take the heat when your ass is showing for your attitude. SOP for you.
Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 02 August 2013 at 08:30 PM
"Do you believe we have a ruling class in this country?"
Not with definitions of "ruling" or "class" that Marx (Karl or Groucho), Engles, or even Ben would agree with.
Posted by: Gregory | 03 August 2013 at 08:33 AM
PaulE 337pm - By Marx's definition all nations that have some version or vestige of privately owned means of production have a ruling class (the capitalists). As to how concentrated this is or how much power they wield is a matter of debate. The freer the markets, the less power ('power elite') members of such a ruling class have. That is why since ancient days the proto-capitalists have always toadied up to the state to enforce diktats which give them exclusivity in one form or another to stifle competition and mangle the markets. And that is why we today witness big corps and other collected interest groups doing the same thing. But the important notion here is that such capitalists find the easiest bedfellows in collective forms of governance that already are predisposed to having an elite decide/delimit how their populations must live.
Libertarian governments of the kind our Founders sought to approximate are hard to control and deliver little benefit to those who seek to mangle the markets, why? simply because such governments control very little of the money flows in the economy. Once government starts controlling large cash flows, then corruption of markets follows very quickly abetted by those capitalists who got there first and seek to maintain their primacy. But then, we all know that.
Posted by: George Rebane | 03 August 2013 at 11:07 AM