Science and the south.

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by Charles

The reason schools receive federal funding is because the feds took the money in the first place, and then return some of it if you jump through their hoops.

I find this to be unacceptable as I'm not a fan of an ever increasing centralized government, and we supposedly have a constitutional republic as opposed to a democracy.

Why not return much of the governmental control, along with the money, to the states, or "power to the people" as I've heard it put? For no other reason than the corporate interests would no longer be able to control the country by buying off only 535 people.

Personally, if I MUST have a master, I'd like to keep him close enough that I can go burn down his barn if he pisses me off enough. Or I can organize and get his ass voted out of office.

Try going after anyone inside of the beltway and see how far you get.

Chas

Try voting out any powerful people outside of elected office and see how far you get.

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by Charles

The reason schools receive federal funding is because the feds took the money in the first place, and then return some of it if you jump through their hoops.

I find this to be unacceptable as I'm not a fan of an ever increasing centralized government, and we supposedly have a constitutional republic as opposed to a democracy.

Why not return much of the governmental control, along with the money, to the states, or "power to the people" as I've heard it put?

Chas

Some of the states are too crazy and need more federal intervention not less.
It's no longer a matter of what we were supposed to be, we need to be one country or the civil discourse will split us apart again as it did in the mid 1800's. Certainly there are enough tears already to make this obvious.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

Try voting out any powerful people outside of elected office and see how far you get.

Who do you suppose have rigged the system in the first place?

My argument is we would be better off with a less centralized government. They may have to bribe everyone to get their way, instead of using their flunkies on the hill to enact legislation which gives them even more control.

Chas

[Charles]

Originally Posted by noonereal

Some of the states are too crazy and need more federal intervention not less.
It's no longer a matter of what we were supposed to be, we need to be one country or the civil discourse will split us apart again as it did in the mid 1800's. Certainly there are enough tears already to make this obvious.

And do you know what split up apart in the 1800's? It was one section of the country attempting to enforce it's will upon another.

Now perhaps you see rural states as stark raving mad. If so, I have news for you. The rural states see the metropolitan states as stark raving mad as well.

So what's way we stay in our own little would and fuck them up as we see fit instead of trying to bull one another around?

Seems reasonable enough to me.

Chas

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by Charles

Who do you suppose have rigged the system in the first place?

My argument is we would be better off with a less centralized government. They may have to bribe everyone to get their way, instead of using their flunkies on the hill to enact legislation which gives them even more control.

Chas

I dunno......maybe guys like Dave and Chuck Koch? Or J.P. Morgan...back in the day?

And tell me something;

Do you really believe any of those clowns behind the podium are going to give up their connections and power? Do you really expect me to believe the Mitt isn't a liar and only has my interests at heart? Oh, please.

I think politicians are like masturbaters;

There are those that do and those that lie about it.

Dave

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by Charles

And do you know what split up apart in the 1800's? It was one section of the country attempting to enforce it's will upon another.

Now perhaps you see rural states as stark raving mad. If so, I have news for you. The rural states see the metropolitan states as stark raving mad as well.

So what's way we stay in our own little would and fuck them up as we see fit instead of trying to bull one another around?

Seems reasonable enough to me.

Chas

Couple things. The crazy states are fighting progress. This means science as well as social advances. This is simply not healthy for us as a country. This will cost us economically and create social unrest as the gap widens.

It's not a simple matter of a differing opinion.


BTW
It's good to see a little fire in your post.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

I dunno......maybe guys like Dave and Chuck Koch? Or J.P. Morgan...back in the day?

And tell me something;

Do you really believe any of those clowns behind the podium are going to give up their connections and power? Do you really expect me to believe the Mitt isn't a liar and only has my interests at heart? Oh, please.

I think politicians are like masturbaters;

There are those that do and those that lie about it.

Dave

No, I don't trust any of them, as a rule. Every now and then one of them will take the unpopular position, but by and large, they go along to get along.

I guess they have no choice, really.

That's why I don't like a overly centralized government. The more power any one man has makes him less responsible to me.

And as far as the super rich? As far as this country is concerned, they only have to control 535 people.

All I'm doing is advancing the argument that perhaps we've put too much power in too few of hands.

Chas

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by Charles

All I'm doing is advancing the argument that perhaps we've put too much power in too few of hands.

Chas

A much different argument and one I think we can all agree on.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by noonereal

Couple things. The crazy states are fighting progress. This means science as well as social advances. This is simply not healthy for us as a country. This will cost us economically and create social unrest as the gap widens.

It's not a simple matter of a differing opinion.


BTW
It's good to see a little fire in your post.

To start with, we won't get very far by referring to one another as lunatics.

And while I can't speak for every buck toothed knuckle dragger here in fly over country (actually, I'm not speaking for any of them), we are pro science and anything but antisocial.

Just because we don't buy the pie in the sky in no way indicates that we are "stupid".

Now we are fiscally conservative. As I've said before, if green energy becomes affordable and reliable, I'll be the greenest sumbitch on the planet. And so will all of my hillbilly buddies...it's leave them with enough money to buy Colt .45 semi auto's instead of Rock Island knockoffs. Or another pig, or another cow. Any of which will make you more money than my "rekkerd player".

And as far as "social issues", what kind of people do you think we are? We want to see everyone advance their position in life as much as anyone else.

Do you really want to know the difference between us and them, or even you and I?

We all want the same thing, we simply disagree on the path to take us from here to there.

Personally, I welcome a rational discussion. But, on a national level, we don't have a rational discussion...we have soundbites.

We're too busy justifying our own arguments, and rooting for the home team, to realize that we are no different that our opponents.

If we can ever kick all of that bullshit aside, perhaps there is hope.

Chas

[Charles]

Originally Posted by noonereal

A much different argument and one I think we can all agree on.

Wish I'd of said that in the first place.

Would have saved me a lot of keystrokes, as I do have other things to "stroke", not working for the Secret Service and all!!!

Chas