Fair enough....but again I would say that the support from people like me was grudging at best. I supported passage, in the end, mainly because it seemed to drive the right wing into hysterics.

 

And we deserved it, but now,, it's time for us to roll up our sleeves and sharpen our pencils, and I'm NOT referring to that as a weapon........(I know how you liberals are)

 

I supported it because it was the best we could get.

I am concerned about the collective mental health of the American people. The United States was polarized from 1965-75 over the War in Vietnam, and civil rights. One could tell a person's political opinions by looking at that person. Those on the left and right dressed differently and had different hair styles. Nevertheless, a growing economy kept things from getting out of hand. Most Americans were better off than ever before in their lives, and better off than their parents were at their age.

Most white blue collar workers left the Democrat Party in 1968 to vote for Nixon and Wallace. They voted for Nixon in 1972, and never really came back to the Democrat Party. Nevertheless, economic angst was not one of their concerns.

It is now. During the Great Depression many rich people hated Roosevelt, but FDR never had a populist movement on the right to contend with as Obama does.

If the economy and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq take turns for the worse, the secession of the red states may become a serious possibility.

 

Use a pencil, go to jail.

 

It may, I suppose...and that's being discussed as we speak on a different thread. But as I said there, I probably wouldn't be inclined to stand in their way.

It's funny, though...they've run the country pretty much their way for 30 years, and now, after losing one election, they're ready to pick up their toys and go home. Bunch of crybabies.

 

oops

 

That's patently untrue, Ace. Most of the red states receive much more support from the federal government than they pay in taxes. They are, in essence, being subsidized by blue states like California. So if they secede, they'll have to cut services substantially or, heaven forbid, raise taxes. That will be fun to watch.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/8229012/Tax-Donor-or-Contrib-States

http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/sr139.pdf

 

California isn't "taxing its way to destruction". What's happening in this state is largely the long-term fallout from Proposition 13 in the late 1970s. By severely limiting property taxes and imposing a 2/3 approval requirement for new taxes, California has basically starved itself for revenue, while failing to make hard decisions on cutting services. This has been true of Democratic governors, Republican governors, and the stage legislature.

And since nobody has been willing to make hard decisions, the state has simply borrowed ahead by means of bond issues and other accounting tricks, and thus put off the day of reckoning.

Make no mistake, though, reports of people/businesses leaving California in droves are vastly overstated. California still has the largest congressional delegation in the history of the U.S., and has an economy larger than all but seven countries. And it's still growing, though not as fast as it used to.

 

Not to mention that California's federal taxes paid versus benefits received far exceeds their budget deficit. If California wasn't saddled with supporting almost the entire country west of the Mississippi, she'd be just fine.

 

There's another factor. As a result of partisan redistricting deals, almost everyone in the state legislature is in a very safe district. Since they don't fear losing their re-election bids, they aren't predisposed towards negotiating bipartisan solutions to the state's problems. So the Republicans all campaign on the basis of no-new-taxes pledges, and the Democrats say they'll defend state spending programs to the death. Since the budget approval requires a 2/3 vote, the result is that the budget can't be balanced without smoke and mirrors, and maybe a little pixie dust.

 

I can understand that. And, I can tell by your avatar that you're the kind of girl that likes to drive guys crazy.

HD

 

A rich person with any class would rather live in San Francisco or New York than Dallas or Houston. BTW, of large cities San Francisco and New York are among the ten cities with the lowest crime rates. Dallas and Houston are among the ten big cities with the highest crime rates.
http://www.morganquitno.com/cit05pop.htm#500,000+

 

I LIVE to drive guys crazy! There's nothing more fun than getting a man's cock hard.

But I usually don't tease too much without delivering the payoff.

 

Another trend worth noting in the "flyover states" is the gradual emptying out of the rural areas. Most counties in Kansas have fewer people in them than they did in 1900. The exceptions are the urban counties around Kansas City, Lawrence, Topeka, Wichita...

 

I'LL DISAGREE........................

 

some freaky shit going on here with my computer.