oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

Either Lasher is taking the day off or he just can't answer my question. He told me that he could come by the words on so many sources from Google or some other place like that, but he just has never tried to get 'er done.

Lasher Loc: Georgia

That's because you are nothing but an old fart who sits on his lazy fat ass all day long stirring shit and trying to make people think you have some sense in that balding pin-head of yours, moron.

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

So you aren't going to explain IQ to me till you call me a few names? Have you done so enough, yet? :mrgreen:

Lasher Loc: Georgia

I am not going to explain anything to you from now on, oldroy, because as I said, you are a shit stirrer - what the country folks used to call a "puddin' stick." It was used to redistribute the tall piles of "waste" in the bottom of outhouses.

Poohlover71 Loc: Washington State

But unfortunately, it won't be the end... He's gonna drag allof them, and maybe a few more relatives that he picks up there, all the way back here and we gotta continue to support them.

alex Loc: michigan now imperial beach californa

if you were to use the quote reply box instead of the reply box it is easier to see who and about what you are addressing

Lasher Loc: Georgia

There you go with those rules again.

straightUp Loc: California

And that's fine for the rage rallies - but when people start having intellectual conversations the difference becomes important.


Yes, I understand the struggle with federal influence over education and I have mixed feelings about it. But if education or some part of education is brought under federal jurisdiction the 10th won't be "blown out" as long as the change is mandated constitutionally, as an amendment for example.


In my intro post, I mentioned my feelings about this. I think the nation is far too large for one central government to control. I am something of an anti-federalist in that sense. In fact, the framers of the Constitution originally intended to provide one representative for every 50-60,000 people. That's pretty decent representation. Today, the average size of a district is 700,000 people and growing. That's NOT very good representation. From 1790 to 1910, the number of districts increased every ten years in order to keep up with the increasing population. In 1910 the number of representatives reached 435. In 1929 Congress passed a bill that says the number of representatives will stay at 435 regardless of how large the population gets. That should have been the indication way back then that the country has outgrown it's federal government.

You might want to take a look at this...
http://www.thirty-thousand.org/

straightUp Loc: California

Let me get this straight... You are saying that we spent $1.4 billion just on Michelle Obama in one year... I don't buy it.

Again... You're either going to have to provide some sources or the numbers along with your comments goes in the "I hate Obama" bucket.

straightUp Loc: California

Personally, I'd rather see my president flying around the world and talking to people about political issues than hiding out on his ranch. As far as I am concerned, it's money better spent.

Lasher Loc: Georgia

Have they told you yet?

Lasher Loc: Georgia

Don't you mean flying around the world bowing and scraping to petty dictators and tyrants? In Russia, several Russians snubbed Obama and refused to shake hands with him. Also flying around to golf courses and basketball games? Face it, Obama is a disgusting embarrassment to this country, not the scum who voted for him, but the decent folks who didn't even vote for either stooge of the Zionists.

straightUp Loc: California

In light of what's happening in Syria, that isn't surprising - it means that Obama is standing his ground and it pisses the Russians off. I guess you think that's a bad thing.


Absolutely! Do you have any idea how much business is accomplished on golf courses and at sporting events? Why do you think our stadiums are being overtaken by corporate boxes?

Here's something else you probably haven't thought of... The president actually has two jobs...

1. Head of Government
2. Head of State.

The British have a much better system, where each job is handled by a different person... the Prime Minister is the head of government, rolls up his sleeves and get's to work while the monarch serves as the Head of State, so special appearances, ceremonies, all that good-will stuff. But unfortunately, our system saddles the president with both jobs.

Throughout human history heads of state have always appeared in extravagant settings and much of it has to do with representing the power or importance of the nation he represents. Cathedrals are a great example of using extravagance to represent importance and as silly as it seems, it DOES have an effect on people. So it makes sense that being head of state still carries that stipulation. If we had a president that insisted on driving his own car and eating out of brown bags to save money, the message he would be sending the rest of the world would be that the USA is poor and incapable - just look at their leader eating P&J sandwiches. How sad.

So excuse me for saying this, but you guys are bitching about something you don't really understand and you're doing it because first and foremost you hate the president... Everything else is subsequent.


Stooges of the Zionists? Are you being anti-Semitic now?

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

I took a look at your suggested thing and couldn't help wondering if any people today really do understand about representative districts. 40 years ago Kansas still had 6 Reprentatives just as they did when I was in high school. They were drawn out in nearly square districts and most people were satisfied but then the Congress came up with the one man, one vote principle and when we hit four representatives to keep the districts even in population the state looked a bit gerrymandered and seemed it had been. I lived the rest of my life in what we call the Big First district and as it grew in geographic size it came to include the west half of the state and then very near the middle (north and south) went meandering toward the northeast. Since it had to continue changing because of it being primarily rural the cities (as we call them) in the central part got shifted back and forth from the 1st to the 2nd. My county got included in one of those shifts and is now in the 4th with a Rep who lives in Wichita which is the biggest city in the state and has a number of union people working in it. I want back in the 1st because the Rep is the best one the state has, of its four.

I am sure that Democrats would say that Kansas has been gerrymandered but I can just hear what those in the northeast would have said if they hadn't become the 2nd district and had had to exist with the rural people of the south, west and north.

There is no better way to do this with the one man, one vote principle but some fool always tries.

Are you wanting to change the whole size of the House into maybe 1500 or more? Is there much sense in building a bigger building for them? Maybe we need to expel all the illegals in the nation to allow the number represented to be smaller.

Naw, many people on the left want only to write a new Constitution because this example of how useless the present one can be shown to be about this one question. I say the document has worked very well up to the progressive era and now those people want to write a new one.

All your good post had nothing at all to do with Obama taking all those females with him to Africa in it but this one by me had nothing to do with the topic either.

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

Try this source just for kicks. I haven't worked up a hate for Obama, yet, but it is coming, I am sure.