A Simple Observation About Job Creation and the Free Market
When we talk about how many jobs some government official or entity has created, we are missing the point, and falling into the trap of using the other side’s terminology.
In connection with Karl’s point below about regulation: government doesn’t create jobs, except when government actually hires people. Government creates jobs by getting out of the way.
The free market isn’t some crazy abstract libertarian concept. It is what happen when millions of individuals make decisions on their own about what is best to buy and sell. When those decisions are free and unfettered by government intervention, the results of those decisions are determined by the collective wisdom of all those millions of people. When the decisions are handed down by a central authority, the results are determined by a handful of people who think they are smarter than the country as a whole.
I employ this model in blogging. I rely on readers because I don’t believe in the model of blogging where the blogger is like a cult figure, to whom everyone pays obeisance and talks endlessly about how brilliant they are. I believe in the model of blogging where you bring a bunch of smart people together to form a community. No matter how smart any one blogger may be, chances are their audience is, collectively, smarter. That’s because groups of people tend to have more collective brainpower at their disposal than any one person.
The same goes for the economy. When the central Soviet authority decided who was going to grow how many crops where, they didn’t know what the farmers knew. And people starved.
The free market is just free people making decisions for themselves.
So let’s not talk about who created more jobs. Let’s talk about who got out of the way — and let employers create more jobs.
Like that silly “jobs saved or created” nonsense. On the other hand, what you have now is the evil child of the faculty lunchroom crossed with a corrupt Chicago pol—a bunch of these people running the show.
I’m worried. Because I know both types, and they never, ever admit they made a mistake.
Simon Jester (c8876d) — 12/7/2011 @ 7:44 amthe labor participation rate is back where it was in the Reagan years… in spite of steady population growth!
WINNING!
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 12/7/2011 @ 7:55 amactually I don’t really know what population has to do with it I just threw that in there
waiting to get to work to have coffee this morning
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 12/7/2011 @ 7:59 amPatterico 4 Prez!
Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (552a04) — 12/7/2011 @ 8:13 amNot so fast! Who’s to say he won’t sub-contract the job out?
I keed… I keed.
Colonel Haiku (b19539) — 12/7/2011 @ 8:19 amOkay okay – I get it – I’ll stop commenting…
EricPWJohnson (e83e82) — 12/7/2011 @ 8:30 amTom Freidman likes this so we can be like China.
I heard forced abortions will also be endorsed by Tom Freidman so to combat overpopulation.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/7/2011 @ 8:40 amSince we have a president who believes gains in productivity are fundamentally bad because they allow organizations complete the same tasks with fewer workers and time, we have an administration at odds with basic theory of free market efficiency and a recipe for disaster. The basic conclusion of his message is that he wants American government and business to be fat and lazy so they will retain more workers, screw the competitiveness.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/7/2011 @ 8:52 amNot only that he and his cronies believe paying taxes should go only one way.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/7/2011 @ 8:56 amI think Obama knows he’s not getting reelected and isnt really going to try. He’s just trying to make some kind of line in the sand to point to historically
He’s finished and so are the democrats
What the Republicans ar facing are a more 1920’s problem of Moderates vs Conservatives
Liberalism died yesterday forever – Perry’s ads that he will defend christianity and religion ended this 50 year experiment with godlessness
EricPWJohnson (e83e82) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:02 amI dont think that Perry is in the lead – Perry also did the ad as a clarion call to all people that we are a Religious country – it was more of a PSA than a self promotion
EricPWJohnson (e83e82) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:05 amFWIW, at PowerLine was an articlke on Hayek, one of the points being that a smart economist is one that reaizes how little they know and how great the error thinking that a few people can decide what is best for everybody.
Of course that is part of the “Abolition of Man” paradox (Lewis). Even if an elite few could make decisions and impose them on everyone, it would no longer be “humanity” but an artifically imposed state at the mercy of the whims of a few.
MD in Philly (41d33b) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:09 amYes. We need a less consequential government. That is the core reason Texas is so successful. It just has less government. I find myself never interacting with it, except in relation with my car, or going to a park. I really do have to take care of myself.
This shouldn’t scare folks in Illinois or California. The Texas way is better because employers are less burdened and we aren’t leaving an enormous debt behind for our kids to pay.
Texas is not really conservative enough, yet, but we’re steadily getting better. I think the main reason is we have common sense. Voters are somewhat less prone to supporting sleaze and slick, be it from a democrat or a republican. And I think a certain kind of person just can’t deal with the basic attitudes here, and leaves or never comes.
I can’t think of anything Rick Perry specifically did that managed someone into hiring anybody, yet he’s presided over as much job creation as all other governors combined for some periods of time. I want to give him credit for constantly cutting spending when needed, always running a balanced budget, smart reforms like tort reform. Others want to say Perry deserves no credit for this… he just kept government reduced generally, and the jobs happened organically (other than the ones the government hired… and Texas is a big state with a large government).
I think that is a very nice exposure of the divide in the GOP. Some reject conservatism at a fundamental level, without realizing it. Conservatism is all about letting people organically prosper. It’s not as easy as it sounds. Problems are always cropping up, and you have to manage them and your huge government without being intrusive. It takes more than intelligence… it takes humility and I think a focus on things beyond your personal political goals.
That’s why I find the more shameless politicians are also never conservative. The ones who would say and do anything for power, always use that power to try to force things to get better. Like Romneycare, which made health care much more expensive, but was meant to use socialism to make it cheaper. The many men behind it (and some also worked on Obamacare) share with Obama that attitude of trying to win power. I recall Obama posing as a conservative with references to tax cuts and deficit reductions, and then if he went to another crowd he would say the opposite.
Something has got to change in the common minds of Americans where they recognize this thirst for power and how that is a symptom of liberalism and eventually is poisonous to growth. Even in Romney’s boom years as governor, MA had stagnant growth. As Romney controlled which guns you could buy, outlawed you not having his type of health insurance, screamed about “jobs that kill people” for the environment, gave health care to illegals, pushed for amnesty, the organic stuff that should have been going on couldn’t happen. Growth was flat at best, and major employers were leaving.
Once the citizens of the country wise up and demand their politicians let the country be free to prosper, the democrat party is going to be screwed (as will a powerful wing of the GOP).
There is a further problem, in that excessive government tends to be perverted by the interests of wealthy supporters, and this I do not know the solution to, other than simplifying government to where such perversions are too obvious to attempt.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:22 amLiberalism died yesterday forever – Perry’s ads that he will defend christianity and religion ended this 50 year experiment with godlessness
Comment by EricPWJohnson — 12/7/2011 @ 9:02 am
— One of our “collective brainpower” synapses is misfiring.
Icy (cd23b0) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:23 am“Perry also did the ad as a clarion call to all people that we are a Religious country”
EPWJ – My understanding is that he did them as a clarion call to all people in Iowa. Has he run them anywhere else, like New Hampshire, where people won’t start looking at him even more sideways?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:23 amCan you link this for me?
I really disagree with that sort of argument. Maybe I’m reading this wrong, but I don’t really think Christianity needs an advocate from the government. The people need to be allowed to do whatever they want on their own.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:23 amI’m not particularly religious -but exactly what is wrong with that argument?
The Founding Fathers based a lot of their ideals on the Judeo-Christian philosophy-and ironically the ‘work ethic” is known as a value of ours that springs from that….
I really don’t get why just last election cycle we were told that Guiliani was a no go because of his one divorce …yet it seems those same people went for Cain and now Gingrich-in that order.
madawaskan (89a442) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:31 amPerhaps not everyone has seen the Perry ad:
PROVIDENCE, Rhode Island (AP) — Carolers singing “O Christmas Tree” crashed Rhode Island’s Statehouse tree lighting on Tuesday after Governor Lincoln Chafee unwrapped a controversy by calling it a “holiday” tree.
Chafee insisted his word choice was inclusive and in keeping with the state’s founding as a sanctuary for religious diversity. But he angered some lawmakers, the Roman Catholic Church and thousands of people who called his office to complain that the independent governor was trying to secularize Christmas.
Icy (cd23b0) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:32 am“50 year experiment with godlessness”…?
That is a little much.
madawaskan (89a442) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:33 am“holiday tree”-Gaia forbid you mention what holiday…
madawaskan (89a442) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:34 amPerry is desperate. It’s one of the five stages he has to go through before he gets to acceptance.
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:41 amI’ll need to see it to know for sure.
There may be nothing wrong with it. I don’t mind if Perry says he’s Christian and proud of it. I don’t need the US President ‘defending’ one religion.
I don’t think the federal government should even bother with that kind of business. We have other problems to solve: namely, outlawing federal Romneycare and excessive spending.
Icy is basically Al Sharpton Jr with his trashy little ‘you’re not classy! you’re a bigot!!!!’ screech yesterday’ so I really do need a link.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:42 amMy first impression is probably unfair, but that’s what it sounds like to me, too.
If that’s the case, he’s taking a real step down in my estimation. Conservatism, real conservatism, has been rejected. Perry can’t change that. He could have put a better veneer on it in the debates, but ultimately, the voters are not ready for someone who just says ‘look at how Texas is great if we just make the government less consequential’. They opt for the ‘smarter’ guys who will solve problems via the government.
He should take that rejection as democracy at work. He should keep fighting on these grounds in hopes people start to see the light. But he shouldn’t emulate Huckabee’s 2008 campaign to win over so-cons who are hardly conservative at all.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:46 amDustin
It loads up immediately at rickperry.org
He first says-you don’t need to be in a pew every Sunday-to know there is something wrong with our country…
Then he sets up the contrast-“when gays can serve openly in the military and kids cannot openly celebrate Christmas…”
Then he says he’ll fight to protect “our Christian heritage… not religion.
madawaskan (89a442) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:56 amI’m dissapointed that he’s taken that tack, Dustin,
narciso (87e966) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:56 ambut it’s an indication how ultimately bizarre this campaign has turned out to be.
he’s starting to pro-actively creep me out … and if he’s gonna try and out-bigot Bachmann he needs to pace himself
that’s a marathon not a sprint
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:59 amWhile scanning back to pick a quote for my reply to Dustin’s #22 I found this nugget:
“Perry is the only candidate who served in uniform, and this is a bona fide credential.”
— So now Ron Paul did NOT serve?
Icy (cd23b0) — 12/7/2011 @ 10:00 amThank you. I’m tired today so I’m not really doing the research, but I also just wanted everyone to have access to it before the Al Sharpton ‘that’s racist’ brigade defined it.
I agree with you that this is not really as offensive as I thought it might be.
You’re right… we have a cultural heritage. And it’s being abandoned to our great detriment.
I can see some resenting Perry bringing this up for two reasons.
1) They disagree with social conservatism, such as on Gays in the military
2) They think the number one problem today is not this social stuff, gay marriage, homosexuals in uniform, Christmas etc etc etc. They think the number one problem is our huge government. Our intrusive government that is spending a fortune trying to run everything so some politician can prove he is the solution to our problems.
I think I’m largely in column 2 there. I want Perry to be a broad campaign for limited spending and regulation so that DC is inconsequential. I am willing to stand beside gays and wiccans and whatever you find, so long as we can just get this federal government under control.
Perry’s ad doesn’t offend me. I actually think he’s right on most of that. But I also think this is a ploy for so cons in Iowa, and changes the theme of his campaign. I don’t like this direction.
A good rebuttal is that Perry’s campaign needed some kind of change of direction. I guess I was resigned to him losing the election despite having the best argument and record.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/7/2011 @ 10:06 amIn other news, shades of Kimberlin, the Philly DA will not reindict Danny Faulkner’s killer, Wesley
narciso (87e966) — 12/7/2011 @ 10:08 amCook, aka Mumia Abu Jamal
Thank you for the correction. He did serve in the Air Force, and I simply don’t consider him seriously.
You did indeed lie about my comments in that thread, and you and your buddy are too eager to prove people are intolerant bigots, and opine on how classy they are after you’re done lying.
Sorry, Icy, you are different from Al Sharpton in degree, but the same type.
I have zero respect for people who play that card and can’t back it up, or are obviously being dishonest.
The first couple of times you argued with me, I showed you respect despite showing you to be incorrect (usually, with a yes or no question you were too cowardly to answer other than saying ‘I refuse to answer that !!!).
You were unable to show me the respect I showed you, and you’re a sad small person.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/7/2011 @ 10:09 am“This man is not guided by God or legal reasoning.
So what guided Romney?
We all know. He was trying to con us into voting for him.”
Al Sharpton Jr (cd23b0) — 12/7/2011 @ 10:10 am— Dustin
btw, if all you’ve got is that I forgot about Ron Paul, you should be man enough to apologize, Icy.
But I’ve been down this road a few times before. Your ego is dominating your little internet tirades, so you can’t possibly humble yourself.
Your reaction shows you know you were wrong. You and I both know it, and that’s enough for me.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/7/2011 @ 10:11 amThis is true. Romney’s support for abortion rights and strong gun control are good reasons to say the man should be judged on his own record, not for his religion. That he reversed 100% also shows he’s not guided by principles.
My honest opinion is that these flip flops were guided by political expediency. Icy disagrees, defending Romney. Only he’s not man enough to admit this is exactly what he’s saying.
I think if Romney’s record shows he’s not government according to a religion, then we should not bother voting up or down the man because of whatever religion he claims to hold. I think, as I said in that thread, religion is between Romney and God. I’m voting on the man’s record in office.
Icy decided I am not “classy” because of this, and he and his pal played that old ‘you’re a bigot’ hustle.
Sad.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/7/2011 @ 10:15 amSee, every time I see Obama and job in the same sentence, i think of the book of Job and its story of undeserved suffering. seriously, God, what did we ever do to deserve a president this bad?
Aaron Worthing (e7d72e) — 12/7/2011 @ 10:18 amTaking this back towards the actual topic:
Romney governed strictly. He controlled as much as he could. I don’t think it matters what his true views are on religion because the way he governed failed MA. It left them with little job growth, I think 47th out of 50 states, and also left them with Romneycare, which has lost tens of billions of dollars and increased health care costs.
I don’t think it’s wise to concern ourselves with arguments about Mormons generally, and especially in this case because Romney’s record deviates so far from Mormonism anyway. I mean, come on. Supporting abortion rights for 37 years?
Romney’s iron grip on free choices of his subjects led to a worse life for them. Perry’s loose hand over his citizens has led to organic prosperity. We even have better and cheaper health care.
At the end of the day, no I don’t think someone who championed abortion rights for 37 years is a very good man. Just my opinion. There’s nothing bigoted about it, but he’s the one who took my argument to that point. I didn’t. I only said it’s clear enough that Romney is hardly governing according to any religion, unless there’s a flip flop religion I haven’t heard of.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/7/2011 @ 10:22 amYou did indeed lie about my comments in that thread, and you and your buddy are too eager to prove people are intolerant bigots, and opine on how classy they are after you’re done lying.
— Who is my buddy? Haiku? Agreeing with ONE opinion that someone expresses does not make you buddies. At this point in time I am not supporting a candidate.
Expressing an opinion is not a lie. Milhouse complained that religion shouldn’t even be a part of the discussion, and then couldn’t STFU about religion.
And where did I “opine” about how “classy” I am?
[BTW, you lied about Al Sharpton having a son.]
Icy (cd23b0) — 12/7/2011 @ 10:23 amYa.. Ron Paul “served” a gawd damn gyno flight surgeon-give me a break.
madawaskan (89a442) — 12/7/2011 @ 10:23 amheh
Well, sadly, we elected him. I think that’s probably an underlying point in Perry’s ad, though I disagree with the direction it’s taking.
Ben Shapiro has a really good point detailing how our media is basically propaganda. We’ve lost touch with cultural heritage and replaced it with junk. I think it’s probably true that this is a big reason why a President Obama was possible.
But I just really resist attempts to use religion as an argument. That’s between these guys and God. We can’t judge them or know them on that level, so we should look to their records.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/7/2011 @ 10:25 am“But I also think this is a ploy for so cons in Iowa, and changes the theme of his campaign. I don’t like this direction.”
Dustin – It probably plays well in Iowa but less so in other parts of the country, but it’s a distraction from the more urgent and compelling points on which the Democrats can be attacked IMHO.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/7/2011 @ 10:27 amIt was a joke. I’m saying you’re not as bad as Sharpton, but are on the same dark path where you try to scream ‘I’m offended’ without backing it up with a reasonable argument.
Nowhere. You said I lacked class because I didn’t think Romney’s mormonism was a political issue we should focus on.
Are you too cowardly to even read my comments in that thread? Just hit and run that I’m a bigot or lack class, without reading them at all?
One? If you think I’m talking about once, then you are illiterate.
Yeah yeah yeah, I know, you guys hate Milhouse and EPWJ. Gotta bash them. Fine. Both have annoyed me at times, and both have been pretty damn insightful at times.
What actually happened was Milhouse made a good point that was not offensive, someone claimed he was intolerant, and then a very pleasant discussion of whether the trinity can be understood occurred. If you just ignore all the people claiming they are offended and these honest arguments are intolerant, it was a good thread.
No, saying the trinity cannot be understood is not intolerant. It’s not ugly. It’s not even wrong, in my opinion. If you have a long standing beef with Milhouse, you can read into this some of the problems from his other comments, but as I noted, his argument wasn’t coming from a sneering direction at all.
Anyway, why couldn’t you just disagree without being offended by something you don’t agree with?
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/7/2011 @ 10:31 amAnd of course, Icy, you don’t back any candidate.
Why is it that Romney’s harshest and ugliest defenders say they don’t back anyone. Why maybe Jen Rubin is a straight shooter with no bias. Objectivity!
Meanwhile, I openly admit I support Perry, and even admit this leads to bias. Because to do otherwise is cowardly, Icy.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/7/2011 @ 10:34 amYou do know that abortion is where you kill a baby before it’s born, right?
You realize why I question the power religion has over those who think this is a human right, right? It’s not like I’m particularly unusual for this view.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/7/2011 @ 10:37 am,Obama has stalled the Keystone pipeline, his EPA is regulating farm dust, and milk as if it were an oil spill, every sort of financial regulation except that which prevents an MF Global, he is depleting the SS reserve with these payroll tax cuts, he held off on totally smothering coal, but just for now, I’m sorry Dustin, but Perry has turned into Clayton Williams, and ‘abandon all hope, ye who enter here’
narciso (87e966) — 12/7/2011 @ 10:41 amSorry, Icy, you are different from Al Sharpton in degree, but the same type.
— Sorry, Dustin, but I NEVER NEVER NEVER CALLED YOU A BIGOT. Ya got that, Jack? I wrote (and I quote myself because I love to opine about how classy I am) “Dustin himself doubled down by saying that the primary should not be a referendum on Mormonism because Romney isn’t a ‘real Mormon’ anyway.” I did not accuse you of being prejudiced against LDS; I accused you of questioning Romney’s personal commitment to his faith . . . which is what you did.
I have zero respect for people who play that card and can’t back it up, or are obviously being dishonest.
— Attention everyone: MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell is bigoted against the Moromon Church; Dustin is not!
[There. Is that clear enough?]
The first couple of times you argued with me, I showed you respect despite showing you to be incorrect (usually, with a yes or no question you were too cowardly to answer other than saying ‘I refuse to answer that !!!).
Icy (cd23b0) — 12/7/2011 @ 10:41 am— Really? The Google search thing AGAIN? Let it go, dude!
Ya.. Ron Paul “served” a gawd damn gyno flight surgeon-give me a break.
Comment by madawaskan — 12/7/2011 @ 10:23 am
— Not cool, man.
Icy (cd23b0) — 12/7/2011 @ 10:43 amI’m sorry too.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/7/2011 @ 10:43 amNo Mas, No Mas
http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/dhs-drafts-environmental-justice-strategy/240511
narciso (87e966) — 12/7/2011 @ 10:48 amOften the simple statements are the most profound, and this is one of those times. Plus I really like the blogging analogy.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/7/2011 @ 10:51 am“No, saying the trinity cannot be understood is not intolerant.”
Dustin – Most religions have elements which require faith to believe. It’s a basic feature of religion. Milhouse can inform us whether all elements of Judaism can be understood in this same way “by the human brain.” Milhouse has a long history of denigrating Christianity on this site. Pusillanimous word parsing does not excuse his behavior. As he explained the function of a Catholic priest over the weekend to be anti-protestant, just make the same analogy according to his logic. Since he is Jewish, he is Jewish, it his job to be anti-Christian. I believe that attitude has come out very well in his comments over time here.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/7/2011 @ 10:51 amAlso sorry that Romney’s tiny segment of the party is tearing the rest of it apart. They seem to think this is their party, but it’s really 70-80% opposed.
Maybe we’d be better off as two countries. We’ve got Northeast and Westcoast liberals in both parties who actually seem to like romneycare, learned the wrong lessons from the race hustlers, and apparently you can’t even say the obvious: what kind of priest supports abortion rights?
There is a fundamentally different culture there from here.
We wouldn’t need to argue with eachother so much if we weren’t so tightly bound to each other.
RINOs and liberals whine that flyover country is a recipient of fed money, but from our point of view, it’s just money for crap we don’t need in hopes we become addicted to big government.
Mitt Romney has accomplished the one thing I wanted him to in showing just how deep the divide is, ideologically in this party.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/7/2011 @ 10:58 amYou were unable to show me the respect I showed you, and you’re a sad small person.
— With respect like this ^^^ who needs any disrespect?
btw, if all you’ve got is that I forgot about Ron Paul, you should be man enough to apologize, Icy.
— Did you skip the preamble? “While scanning back to pick a quote for my reply to Dustin’s #22” It’s a sidebar, counselor!
But I’ve been down this road a few times before. Your ego is dominating your little internet tirades, so you can’t possibly humble yourself.
— Help, help! I’m drowning in respect here!
My honest opinion is that these flip flops were guided by political expediency. Icy disagrees, defending Romney. Only he’s not man enough to admit this is exactly what he’s saying.
Icy (cd23b0) — 12/7/2011 @ 11:06 am— Actually, my honest opinion is that I AGREE WITH YOU. And if you think I am now flip-flopping, myself, then I challenge you to find ANY posts within my history on this blog where I have said anything to the contrary! My “defense” of Romney is only to say that I see no good in critiquing his (or Cain’s or Bachmann’s or Newt’s or Perry’s) level of commitment or adherence to his faith. That’s it. That’s all I said.
Mitt Romney has accomplished the one thing I wanted him to in showing just how deep the divide is, ideologically in this party.
Comment by Dustin — 12/7/2011
Please feel free to continue making a total ass of your damn self.
Colonel Haiku (b19539) — 12/7/2011 @ 11:08 amDustin
The Ad’s not running in Iowa but nationwide
pulpits across the country have been waiting for this moment since Reagan left office
And this has been how he rolls, Perry has never hidden or run from his faith
EricPWJohnson (e83e82) — 12/7/2011 @ 11:12 amFWIW, I did not know what Perry looked like when i saw his commercial today on TV in NW Ohio. When I saw the person was running for president, I thought it must have been a third party candidate as I thought the commercial was a little bit too much “in your face”, not necessarily rudely so, but perhaps tactically so.
It basically was, hey, typical person in middle America, the rights of gays to be in the military is promoted and celebrated as a victory at the same time children can’t pray in school- (not that we want to force people to pray, or that we want to go out and persecute homosexuals)- it’s just the America we grew up in is not there anymore, not only some of the bad but a lot of the good. Is that what you really want?
I think it might be an attempt to tap into the psyche that brought out a lot of voters (in 2004?) when gay marriage had been such an issue and there was the big Conservative push-back.
wiccans
MD in Philly (41d33b) — 12/7/2011 @ 11:14 am“I have seen it, and it doesn’t work”.
The land of Madison, Wisconsin is where one can see Wiccans celebrating the Winter Solstice on the front page of the main newspaper, but need to delve deeper into the paper to find anything about Christmas. We have also seen how much the land of Madison, Wisconsin, likes Conservatism.
MD in Philly
Gay marriage, gays in the military is a big issue for conservatives and most Americans
And Perry and most Texans as well as southerners are against it
EricPWJohnson (e83e82) — 12/7/2011 @ 11:19 am“Gay marriage, gays in the military is a big issue for conservatives and most Americans”
EPWJ – Where do those issues poll in the Top 10 currently, though.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/7/2011 @ 11:26 amYou’re right. And I would never manage to run a successful campaign in this country I’m sure, but I liked the limited government stuff a lot more than the cultural lament, as fair as much of it is.
My bubble is burst! I thought Perry was a very well recognized politician, but then, I’ve been in Texas.
I stand corrected. And you’re also right that Perry has always been upfront about his religion, though it’s never seemed pushy to me (happyfeet will probably disagree).
I just think we have this one huge problem we should try to get everyone to unite on. This government is too big, and if someone likes gays in the military, but wants to unite on fighting spending, I think the situation is urgent enough that we need those people.
That’s probably why I liked Mitch Daniels so much. He was the first or second to fall to that nasty whisper campaign that seems to hit everyone but Jen Rubin’s favorite guy ever.
I don’t care that much about the social or religious issues this year. I think we should evaluate them on their ability to cut spending and regulation, and really little else.
It’s like when Romney kept MA’s government massive and then piled on Romneycare regulations. His supporters say he just kept pace with inflation (and pretend Romneycare can’t be mentioned). But what kind of imbecile looks at that massive government and makes it bigger? Oh, but he’s ready for prime time! Ugh.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/7/2011 @ 11:30 am“What actually happened was Milhouse made a good point that was not offensive”
Dustin – What was his good point? An incorrect claim that Trinitarians are polytheists? A claim that Christian faith cannot be understood by the human brain?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/7/2011 @ 11:31 amMy view of the passing parade…
Comment by narciso — 12/7/2011 @ 10:08 am
The court only overturned his penaty sentancing, and that is the trial that the DA has declined to pursue, leaving Mumia on the hook for Life in prison.
Hot-Rod is looking forward to Christmas, in 2025, as he was just sentenced to 14-years in prison.
“… I don’t believe in the model of blogging where the blogger is like a cult figure…”
AD-RtR/OS! (1103d7) — 12/7/2011 @ 11:31 amBut, Obi-Wan Patterico, we need you to know what to think and do; you are our substitute Obama-wan!
btw, you Al Sharpton hustlers can’t expect me to reply to every smear, cry, and lie. I think your credibility is easy for folks to evaluate for themselves.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/7/2011 @ 11:33 amI think if Romney’s record shows he’s not government according to a religion, then we should not bother voting up or down the man because of whatever religion he claims to hold. I think, as I said in that thread, religion is between Romney and God. I’m voting on the man’s record in office.
— I think we should not vote up or down on ANY candidate because of whatever religion they claim to hold.
Icy decided I am not “classy” because of this, and he and his pal played that old ‘you’re a bigot’ hustle.
— I “decided” you are not classy because when it comes to the issue of “religion is between Romney and God” you failed to practice what you preach, instead proffering the theory that Romney is not a devout adherent to his faith.
I wrote: [BTW, you lied about Al Sharpton having a son.]
Dustin wrote: It was a joke. I’m saying you’re not as bad as Sharpton, but are on the same dark path where you try to scream ‘I’m offended’ without backing it up with a reasonable argument.
— First of all, I know it was a joke. Personally, I am done with Sarc/ tags and emoticons; either you get it or you don’t [this means that I was being silly and chose something where I could accuse you of being a liar because you had accused me of being one . . . but I’m done explaining my jokes, as well]. Secondly, I’m not “offended”, again because I don’t think you’re a bigot.
Yeah yeah yeah, I know, you guys hate Milhouse and EPWJ. Gotta bash them. Fine. Both have annoyed me at times, and both have been pretty damn insightful at times.
— Why the accent on the personal, Dustin? I disagree with your opinions; I don’t hate you, or Milhouse, or even the true serial liar among us, EPWJ. And i agree that Milhouse has been pretty insightful at times; the other one . . . not so much.
Anyway, why couldn’t you just disagree without being offended by something you don’t agree with?
Icy (cd23b0) — 12/7/2011 @ 11:34 am— That is precisely what I did.
“His supporters say he just kept pace with inflation”
Dustin – You mean like Perry?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/7/2011 @ 11:36 amIt was nice to see people politely and intelligently disagree with this summary.
there was a nice adult discussion where people discussed whether the trinity = monotheism.
Those who didn’t want to participate in that didn’t need to scream it was intolerant to take one or the other side of it.
This is why you weren’t a part of it. This is literally the exact opposite of what Milhouse said. He said the trinity issue is fairly and understandably resolved by someone saying it’s an act of faith.
You’re twisting what he said to make it sound like he was saying Christianity is insane or stupid, but that’s on you.
I know you have a beef with Milhouse, and when you saw him comment, you hunted for any excuse to launch into an argument. You’ve done that to me, and you’ve done it to people I disagree with (I’ve even cheered that, which I am sorry for).
This need to settle scores is something Icy needs to work on too.
Haiku is just a troll, but you’re capable of more than that, and Icy is too. Jeez. Give people a chance to disagree with you without getting so upset at their ‘intolerance’.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/7/2011 @ 11:38 amdaley, you might want to look at this over at Instapundit…
“THE INNOVATION COSTS REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN CIVILIZATION. ‘We need to innovate just to run in place…’…”
AD-RtR/OS! (1103d7) — 12/7/2011 @ 11:39 amYou need to work a little harder on your understanding.
Romney hugely increased the spending in MA many times higher than inflation with Romneycare. When I pointed this out to you yesterday, you promptly vanished. But let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that Romneycare never happened.
Romney had a huge, bloated government, and he led the way on many increases in spending instead of getting it closer to the optimal size and intrusion. Yes, MA’s government was already way too big when he got there. That is what your excuse amounts to. That Romney’s increases were just a huge government getting bigger naturally.
Now, you’ve already conceded that Romney wanted many of these increases, such as Romney’s increase to education spending. But MA can’t afford such a huge government. Romney should not have been increasing it at all.
You have twisted figures a bit to show this is exactly like Texas having a balanced budget that grows because Texas is growing so much (hence they have more taxpayers and services) and keeps the budget balanced. It’s not.
Sure, if I increase my kid’s allowance by ten percent, that’s similar to if my boss gives me a ten percent raise to Daleyrocks. To the real world, not so much.
But then, this is just debate. You’re wrong on the facts, too. How much did Romneycare cost, Daleyrocks? What percentage of MA’s government does the tens of billions of dollars lost equate to? That’s why you’re doubly wrong. Your argument is unfair.
The truth is also that Romney governed a very short, failed term, and Perry has governed a much longer time over good times and bad, and has seen the share of government he has control over (from fed mandates) shrink. This is not at all comparable to Romney’s record, and of course, he governed during the easy years.
Your analysis suggests Perry and Romney’s direction is the same and their record is equal, and that’s just absurd.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/7/2011 @ 11:47 amI will let your latest cheap slot slide, Dustin, as your recent behavior on this forum is out there for the fine folks who post here to review.
Carry on.
Colonel Haiku (b19539) — 12/7/2011 @ 11:48 amAnd of course, Icy, you don’t back any candidate.
— Okay. Is this one of those “if you don’t stand up for something you will fall for anything” deals? I mean, now that Sparticles is gone I’m certain that Disco Stu will step in to fill that ad hom void.
Why is it that Romney’s harshest and ugliest defenders say they don’t back anyone. Why maybe Jen Rubin is a straight shooter with no bias. Objectivity!
— I was unaware that I was one of Romney’s harshest and ugliest defenders. My philosophy is that until I do make a choice (and perhaps even afterwards) I will defend all of the candidates from unwarranted attacks.
Meanwhile, I openly admit I support Perry, and even admit this leads to bias. Because to do otherwise is cowardly, Icy.
Icy (cd23b0) — 12/7/2011 @ 11:50 am— So I am cowardly because I either, A) have not committed to a candidate this late in the game; or, B) not so secretly am really a Romney supporter. Is that it? For the record (and whatever it matters now) in ’08 I declared, just before the Iowa caucus, my “support” for Giuliani, McCain, Romney, 1-2-3 in that order. I am NOT a Romney fan, but I certainly will support him if he’s the nominee, if for nothing else than to watch Larry O’Donnell’s head assplode on live tv if Mitt wins.
You need to work a little harder on your understanding.
I guess he told you, daley. Bow to your sensei!
Colonel Haiku (b19539) — 12/7/2011 @ 11:50 am“Dustin: Winning Hearts and Minds! A Little Slice o’ Heaven in 2011”
Colonel Haiku (b19539) — 12/7/2011 @ 11:54 am“His listening is fine, it’s just his understanding that comes up a little short.”
AD-RtR/OS! (1103d7) — 12/7/2011 @ 11:56 amAlso, which is easier?
Managing an efficient budget at a steady pace?
Managing a bloated budget at a steady pace?
MA’s government is 50% larger per capita than Texas’s. Romney kept that larger budget growing at pace with Texas’s, that is 50% worse. And then we add on Romneycare, most of the damage designed to occur after the next election, just like Obamacare.
When Obama is out of office and Obamacare’s costs spiral up, will that be President Gingrich’s fault? No. It will be Obama’s. And it’s Romney’s fault that Romneycare was such a massive increase in government spending.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/7/2011 @ 11:57 amYou do know that abortion is where you kill a baby before it’s born, right?
You realize why I question the power religion has over those who think this is a human right, right? It’s not like I’m particularly unusual for this view.
Comment by Dustin — 12/7/2011 @ 10:37 am
— Not quite sure if this was directed at me, or if it was a DohBiden talk-back-at-the-television-in-the-form-of-a-blog-rant moment. Regardless, yes I do know that, Dustin, and it should raise a red flag about potential SCOTUS appointments. Like I said, he’s Haiku’s guy, not mine. I just feel the need to COMPLETELY REFRAIN from questioning his relationship with God; that’s all.
Icy (cd23b0) — 12/7/2011 @ 11:57 am“It’s like when Romney kept MA’s government massive and then piled on Romneycare regulations.”
Dustin – Let’s unpack your Romneycare tirades for a minute since it’s clear you have a problem with the concept.
Prior to Romneycare Massachusetts had 92% of its population insured but was spending tons of money reimbursing health care providers for care for uninsured patients. It also had some of the highest insurance rates in the country thanks to the state of regulation there.
Texas has the highest percentage of uninsured population in the country at something like 26-28% I believe. It costs the state billions a year to reimburse providers for care for uninsured patients, the same problem as Massachusetts, but on a much bigger scale.
Romney’s solution was to eliminate the free rider problem which still plagues Texas by requiring everybody to purchase some form of insurance. That could include signing up for medicare if eligible, employer insurance if offered, or buying it on newly created state exchanges. The intent was to have options available for purchase, including lower premium high deductible catastrophe coverage, with market reforms to address health care cost issues to follow. Instead, the follow on administration dithered and succumbed to lobbying pressure and mandated a gold-plated one-size fits all coverage plan and market reforms have not seen the light of day.
Some commenters claim Romney should be held responsible for the actions of a subsequent administration demonstrably increasing the cost of the program. That’s one point of view.
He’s not running from the plan because he made an attempt to correct a problem costing the state huge amounts of money a year. It has not turned out the way he envisioned.
What is Rick Perry doing to address the same issue in Texas?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/7/2011 @ 12:01 pmIcy,
I liked Giuliani and Thompson in 2008. They were very different socially but I liked them on security issues, and that’s what mattered to me then.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/7/2011 @ 12:04 pm“MA’s government is 50% larger per capita than Texas’s.”
Dustin – Actually, no it’s not when you factor local government into the equation. I proved this to you some time back. Finances are structured differently in the two states. Texas shifts more of the overall burden to local government, while Massachusetts assumes more of the spending burden at the state level. Put them together to get an honest comparison.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/7/2011 @ 12:04 pmAnd this has been how he rolls, Perry has never hidden or run from his faith
Comment by EricPWJohnson — 12/7/2011 @ 11:12 am
— Speaking of doubling down.
What candidates have hidden or run from their faith this time, Eric?
Icy (cd23b0) — 12/7/2011 @ 12:06 pm“The truth is also that Romney governed a very short, failed term”
Dustin – Please define why you feel Romney’s term in office failed. You keep saying it but never spell out your frame of reference.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/7/2011 @ 12:07 pmbtw, you Al Sharpton hustlers can’t expect me to reply to every smear, cry, and lie. I think your credibility is easy for folks to evaluate for themselves.
Comment by Dustin — 12/7/2011 @ 11:33 am
— “I can do that but I don’t wanna” – Bart
Icy (cd23b0) — 12/7/2011 @ 12:11 pm“Romney hugely increased the spending in MA many times higher than inflation with Romneycare. When I pointed this out to you yesterday, you promptly vanished.”
Dustin – Sorry if my schedule conflicted with your comments. If you are going to measure a governor’s spending history infinitely into the history, you and I have nothing to talk about. The facts of Romney’s spending history during his term in office speak for themselves. Stick to that. Speak to events which happened years afterward separately.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/7/2011 @ 12:12 pmEric no matter how many times you do her dirty work for her Lisa Murkowski won’t have sex with you.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/7/2011 @ 12:15 pmThis need to settle scores is something Icy needs to work on too.
— I want a new Life Coach!
[I prefer clarity over agreement — Dennis Prager]
Icy (cd23b0) — 12/7/2011 @ 12:20 pmI’m hanging with Romney, Gingrich, Santorum and Bachmann (in that order) at this point. Any of the candidates – including Paul – would be preferable to seeing Obama re-elected. But given the gravity of the situation, we had better make damn sure that whoever wins the nomination has the best chance of defeating Barack Obama.
Colonel Haiku (b19539) — 12/7/2011 @ 12:21 pm“This is why you weren’t a part of it. This is literally the exact opposite of what Milhouse said. He said the trinity issue is fairly and understandably resolved by someone saying it’s an act of faith.”
Dustin – Correction. I made the comment about faith, #158, and left the discussion, as I believe did Milhouse.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/7/2011 @ 12:24 pmDustin – Please define why you feel Romney’s term in office failed. You keep saying it but never spell out your frame of reference.
Per Dustin, Romney is just a bad man, daley. He’s a better manager (IMHO) than Gingrich… and Perry, for damn sure, pales in comparison to both Newt and Mitt.
Again, just my opinion.
Colonel Haiku (b19539) — 12/7/2011 @ 12:26 pmIcy,
I liked Giuliani and Thompson in 2008. They were very different socially but I liked them on security issues, and that’s what mattered to me then.
Comment by DRJ — 12/7/2011 @ 12:04 pm
— Oh no, DRJ, you said the “T” word! As we speak feets is making his way to the panic room.
Icy (cd23b0) — 12/7/2011 @ 12:26 pm“Eric no matter how many times you do her dirty work for her Lisa Murkowski won’t have sex with you.”
Dohbiden – She might do coke with him though.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/7/2011 @ 12:27 pmNo feets is too busy in his mom’s basement attending to his shrine of Rick Perry.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/7/2011 @ 12:39 pmThe honorable Mr Worthing wrote:
Clearly, Satan was walking to and fro across the country, and when the Lord said, “Hast thou considered the United States, that there is none like it on the earth, a perfect and an upright country, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?”
Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, Doth the United States fear God for nought? Hast not thou made an hedge about it, and about their land, and about all that they hath on every side? thou hast blessed the work of their hands, and their substance is increased in the land. But put forth thine hand now, and touch all that they hast, and they will curse thee to thy face. And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that they hast is in thy power; only upon the people put not forth thine hand.”
Clearly, this explains everything.
The Catholic Dana (3e4784) — 12/7/2011 @ 1:02 pmWho’s Romney? Oh he’s the guy who Perry and Bachman are gaining on, in the polls and came in 2nd to Huckabee after outspending him 20 to 1
EricPWJohnson (e83e82) — 12/7/2011 @ 1:04 pmWhoops!
Romney came in 3rd to Huckabee and McCain sorry!
I saw Anne Romney on Fox this morning – she reiterated what I believe about Mitt that he’s a very generous and sensitive man. A joy o be around. She would make a great first lady and I respect them both and wish them well – whatever state they live in.
EricPWJohnson (e83e82) — 12/7/2011 @ 1:08 pmAnother thing I don’t like about the whole “creating jobs” thing is that it treats jobs as if they were an end in themselves rather than merely a means by which people can obtain money which they can then consume. People forget that the only point of production is to make consumption possible. In an ideal world there would be few jobs, and politicians would brag about how many jobs they had destroyed by making unnecessary. Also, the purpose of any business is not to create jobs but to make money for the owner; creating jobs and having to employ people to fill them is a cost of doing business, an unwanted side-effect, not the goal.
(Yes, I’m keenly aware of the practical need for jobs in our less-than-ideal world. I’m need one myself at the moment; does anyone need any help from someone fluent in English, Legal English, C, SQL, and several other languages? But the need for a job is like the need for a plane ticket; if you must get from A to B and they’re far from each other then you need a plane ticket, but the purpose is to get to B, not to experience the flight, let alone to have and cherish the ticket itself.)
Milhouse (d7842d) — 12/7/2011 @ 1:12 pmFurthermore, the govt does not really create jobs, rather it hires bureaucrats.
The purpose of a job is directly involved in the production of a good or service desired by the public. Govt bureaucrats, OTH, produce no goods, and the service they provide is mostly to administer imposed govt regulations, not services which are freely chosen by consumers. In short, one could argue that govt jobs often interfere with job creation.
The legal field is a unique exception because attorneys make work for other attorneys. I have often mused that the smallest town in the U.S. could make do with a single physician but even there a single attorney would require another attorney as an adversary, and at least one of the two would need to be on the public payroll (with apologies to our blog host).
T (400783) — 12/7/2011 @ 1:13 pmI note that this attitude seems to be shared by those who find it incongruous to call Romney a job-creator when what he did was destroy jobs by making businesses more efficient. People to whom this seems like a contradiction don’t belong in the GOP. There are many things for which Romney deserves criticism, but this is not one of them.
Milhouse (d7842d) — 12/7/2011 @ 1:18 pmLook you either lower taxes for buisnesses or raise taxes on the rich you leftys can’t have it both ways even though they think you can.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/7/2011 @ 1:24 pmComment by The Catholic Dana — 12/7/2011 @ 1:02 pm
When the IslamoFascists detonate a device within an American city,
AD-RtR/OS! (1103d7) — 12/7/2011 @ 1:26 pma lot of people will start thinking about that Old Testament God of fire and fury,
and less about understanding and turning-the-other-cheek.
Many decades ago I read that most Swiss people don’t know the name of the Swiss president. The federal government has so little impact on their lives that they don’t care to follow federal politics, and couldn’t care less who was president. What they care about is their canton, because that’s the government that makes laws that affect their lives.
Milhouse (d7842d) — 12/7/2011 @ 1:30 pmThe most effective government, and the one most easily to influence, is the one closest to The People.
AD-RtR/OS! (1103d7) — 12/7/2011 @ 1:33 pmDC might as well be Whitehall, for all the good – and evil – it brings to our daily lives:
very little of the former, and too damn much of the later.
When obama turns over his jewish voters to the muslims the jews who vote for him will destroy him or not.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/7/2011 @ 1:36 pmIf anything, lay offs would be good for the federal government, of course, but it would take tons of spine to make that happen. Romney’s subordinates who have been outsourcing and cutting fat from investments before and after Romney was involved with Bain would be great advisers to an appropriations committee, but what we need in a president is something with a spine to actually take on the thunderous resistance to this kind of reform.
Romney has also said other things about job creation.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/7/2011 @ 1:36 pmFirst of all how did you get the impression that Giuliani has had only one divorce? Second, I’ve never heard anyone object to his divorces, but to his scandalous behaviour while married. Third, since when was Cain divorced (not that there would be anything wrong with that)? Fourth, where were you lurking, that you got the impression that Giuliani’s personal life was the main obstacle to his success?
Milhouse (d7842d) — 12/7/2011 @ 1:38 pmYou know how to stop income inequality………..why not have poor people start up a business like Bill Gates.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/7/2011 @ 1:41 pmYeah, Giuliani lost because of strategy. Crist delivered Florida to Mccain, who somewhat narrowly beat Romney.
Dustin (cb3719) — 12/7/2011 @ 1:44 pmCrist got what was coming to him though.
What a whore.
happyfeet (a55ba0) — 12/7/2011 @ 2:02 pmMichael Moore pay your fair share.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/7/2011 @ 2:18 pmNothing to see here, yadda, yadda
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-57338546-10391695/documents-atf-used-fast-and-furious-to-make-the-case-for-gun-regulations/
narciso (87e966) — 12/7/2011 @ 3:17 pm“…but what we need in a president is something with a spine…”
President Vertebrate
Colonel Haiku (b19539) — 12/7/2011 @ 3:38 pmThat’s just fine…
Colonel Haiku (b19539) — 12/7/2011 @ 3:38 pmRick Perry says he’s number 2 in the poll at “Hot Gas”.
Colonel Haiku (b19539) — 12/7/2011 @ 3:43 pm“what [Romney] did was destroy jobs by making businesses more efficient.”
Feets had a link to an LA Times column that tended to throw some doubt on utilitarian motives behind Bain Capital generally.
Of 10 purchases averaging $53 Million, 4 ended in bankruptcy after sale by Bain yet they made money on 3 of the 4 and on 8 of the 10.
The prime directive was make money for the investors, NWWT, but making more of it is fallacious.
CNN, they of the oversampled left, have Newt up big in IA, SC and FL and closing to 35/26 in NH.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 12/7/2011 @ 3:55 pmPalin is so dumb………..that she said there are 57 states.
Palin is so dumb Iran will become a nuclear state………….oh wait it will be thanks to Obama.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/7/2011 @ 3:55 pm110. Palin will not endorse before IA.
You know who this helps.
gary gulrud (d88477) — 12/7/2011 @ 4:00 pmFurthermore, the govt does not really create jobs, rather it hires bureaucrats.
Actually, the govt. does create private sector jobs. Just not the jobs the nation needs. With its 5 billion pages of tax laws, it creates plenty of accountant and tax attorney jobs, not the ones we need. Also, with it billions of regulations it creates many private sector compliance employee jobs, again not the jobs that are needed.
If the tax code were simplified, and the unnecessary and stupid regs were done away with, sure there would be some jobs lost, but many more jobs would be created in the production of goods and other areas of employment. It would allow businesses to invest more money in the actual production of goods and in jobs that are actually productive.
peedoffamerican (ee1de0) — 12/7/2011 @ 4:06 pmAccording to OWS people like Michael Moore are patriots for not giving up money to the right wing.
Honestly OWS are hypocrites.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/7/2011 @ 4:13 pmIt’s a wonder he doesn’t lead with this;
http://blog.american.com/2011/12/my-chat-with-gop-presidential-candidate-jon-huntsman/
narciso (87e966) — 12/7/2011 @ 4:14 pmAnd if Cuomo wants to be seen as consistent he should raise taxes on Michael Moore.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/7/2011 @ 4:14 pmComment by Milhouse — 12/7/2011 @ 1:30 pm
Many decades ago I read that most Swiss people don’t know the name of the Swiss president.
They have a seven-member collective presidency called the Swiss Federal Council. The office of president (which office probably has less significance than that of the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court among the justices) rotates every year.
Knowing which one is now the president, is like knowing which country is the president of the United Nations Security Council for this month. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Presidents_of_the_Swiss_Confederation
Elected by the Federal Assembly for one year, the President of the Confederation chairs the meetings of the Federal Council and undertakes special representational duties. Primus inter pares, he or she has no powers above the other Councillors and continues to head his or her department (see President of the Swiss Confederation for full details).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_members_of_the_Swiss_Federal_Council
The Council’s seven members constitute the federal government of Switzerland and serve as the country’s head of state. Each of the seven Councillors heads a department of the Swiss federal administration.[1]
The members of the Federal Council are elected for a term of four years by both chambers of the federal parliament sitting together as the Federal Assembly. Each Councillor is elected individually by secret ballot by an absolute majority of votes. A person elected to the Council by the Federal Assembly is considered a Federal Councillor even if he or she declines the election.[2] Accordingly, the five persons who did so and never assumed office are listed in a separate table below. For the same reason, the principal table only records the date of election, and not the date on which the Councillors assumed their office.
Once elected for a four-year-term, Federal Councillors can neither be voted out of office by a motion of no confidence nor can they be impeached. Re-election is possible for an indefinite number of terms. Parliament has decided not to re-elect a sitting Councillor only four times, and only twice (in 2003 and 2007) since the beginning of the 20th century. In practice, therefore, Councillors serve until they decide to resign and retire to private life, usually after three to five terms of office.[3]
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 12/7/2011 @ 4:27 pmThe picture of the Swiss federal Council in 2011 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bundesrat_der_Schweiz_2011-H25P.jpg
…has eight people in it. Who’s the interloper?!
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 12/7/2011 @ 4:39 pmalso in the picture: the Federal Chancellor).
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 12/7/2011 @ 4:40 pmComment by Colonel Haiku — 12/7/2011 @ 3:43 pm
Rick Perry says he’s number 2 in the poll at “Hot Gas”.
The Hot Air poll has the same accuracy here as the 1936 Literary Digest poll – and for the same reason.
Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb) — 12/7/2011 @ 4:43 pmPerry himself said “Hot Gas”, Sammy. Not sure it was Hot Air he was referring to.
Colonel Haiku (b19539) — 12/7/2011 @ 4:48 pmof course he was referring to hot air he’s not stupid you know
and air and gas are very very similar if you think about it plus they’re invisible so it’s hard to make a word picture in your mind
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 12/7/2011 @ 6:04 pmFor the record, what I wrote was that Mormons are polytheists, which is something nobody can dispute; while Xians, who could also be described as polytheists because of their trinitarian belief, are at least arguably not, because they claim that somehow the three are simultaneously also one. The fact that three being simultaneously one doesn’t seem to make sense isn’t a good argument against it, because the claim is that the fault is not in the assertion but in the human brain. It should be obvious and completely uncontroversial that the human brain is a physical organ, and therefore there must be limits to its comprehension. It stands to reason that there are things that are true, but that we are physically incapable of understanding no matter how intelligent we are, and how long we spend thinking about them, and how carefully they’re explained to us. There’s no a priori reason why the trinity couldn’t be such a concept, and to the best of my understanding that is precisely the claim that Xianity makes. It never occurred to me that anyone would dispute this, let alone somehow read an offense into it.
I have actually been careful to keep my own opinions and beliefs out of the whole thing, and stick to objective facts. It is a fact that Mormons are polytheist; presumably they don’t think this is anything to be ashamed of. It is also (AFAIK) a fact that Xianity claims that the way in which 3 == 1 is one of those things that we’re just not built to understand. If I wanted to insert my own beliefs and opinions into the discussion I’d say what I thought of this assertion.
Milhouse (d7842d) — 12/7/2011 @ 6:29 pmand air and gas are very very similar if you think about it plus they’re invisible so it’s hard to make a word picture in your mind
Comment by happyfeet — 12/7/2011 @ 6:04 pm
Feets, I bet you wouldn’t make that claim after I’ve had some pinto beans, rutabagas, boiled eggs, and a cold beer to top it off, and then let some of my air escape. You would definitely have a very vivid word picture in your mind as you ran screaming from the room while projectile vomiting.
peedoffamerican (ee1de0) — 12/7/2011 @ 6:39 pmWhen the left whine about income inequality they are upset that a guy who works at Mcdonalds isn’t making more than a CEO of a corparation.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/7/2011 @ 6:40 pmHot gas is what comes out of the benevolent colonel haiku’s mouth.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/7/2011 @ 6:41 pmMost Christians believe in the divinity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. In addition, the word used to describe the deity of Jesus, his Father and the Holy Spirit is “trinity”.
As I understand it, Mormons worship God the Father in the name of Jesus Christ… not exalted angels or Moses, Abraham, or John the Baptist, no matter how great they may be in the kingdom of heaven as sons of God who have become “like Christ” (ref: 1 John 3:2). The true definition of polytheism requires that plural gods be worshiped – but the beings that Christ himself describes as “gods” aren’t worshiped by members of the Mormon Church. Mormons worship as monotheists.
Describing them using a pejorative like polytheist as milhouse does is done to make them appear strange… not Christian and it distorts their church doctrine.
Colonel Haiku (b19539) — 12/7/2011 @ 6:49 pmdoh biden, you are one busy, profligate ponce.
Colonel Haiku (b19539) — 12/7/2011 @ 6:52 pmYou are one busy romneybot.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/7/2011 @ 6:55 pmthese rutabagas are very mysterious to me
I should like to taste them please
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 12/7/2011 @ 6:56 pmColonel, do you seriously dispute that Mormons believe there are many many gods, perhaps millions of them? That they believe the God of the Bible is just one of that huge number?
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 12/7/2011 @ 6:58 pmNot only do I dispute it, I say you are ill-informed. Mormons worship one God: (Ref: http://lds.org/scriptures/bofm/1-ne/13.41?lang=eng#41 http://lds.org/scriptures/bofm/2-ne/31.21?lang=eng#21 http://lds.org/scriptures/bofm/mosiah/15.1-5?lang=eng#1-5 http://lds.org/scriptures/bofm/alma/11.26-37?lang=eng#26-37 http://lds.org/scriptures/bofm/morm/7.7?lang=eng#7 http://lds.org/scriptures/pgp/moses/1.20?lang=eng#20 http://lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/20.28?lang=eng#28
Colonel Haiku (b19539) — 12/7/2011 @ 7:09 pmYou preach falsehoods, milhouse. It makes me wonder what your agenda is.
Colonel Haiku (b19539) — 12/7/2011 @ 7:11 pmLook, you have an issue with Romney’s religion, Milhouse, you should vote for someone else.
Colonel Haiku (b19539) — 12/7/2011 @ 7:24 pm“In connection with Karl’s point below about regulation: government doesn’t create jobs, except when government actually hires people.”
Or when it buys things, specially in a time of idleness. But there’s also monetary policy.
salk (bf1ca3) — 12/7/2011 @ 7:30 pmA sampling of the ever even-keeled Dustin’s Greatest Hits… just from this thread:
“You did indeed lie about my comments in that thread, and you and your buddy are too eager to prove people are intolerant bigots, and opine on how classy they are after you’re done lying.
Sorry, Icy, you are different from Al Sharpton in degree, but the same type.
I have zero respect for people who play that card and can’t back it up, or are obviously being dishonest.
The first couple of times you argued with me, I showed you respect despite showing you to be incorrect (usually, with a yes or no question you were too cowardly to answer other than saying ‘I refuse to answer that !!!).
You were unable to show me the respect I showed you, and you’re a sad small person.
Are you too cowardly to even read my comments in that thread?
Meanwhile, I openly admit I support Perry, and even admit this leads to bias. Because to do otherwise is cowardly, Icy.
btw, you Al Sharpton hustlers can’t expect me to reply to every smear, cry, and lie.
You need to work a little harder on your understanding.
This need to settle scores is something Icy needs to work on too.
…but what we need in a president is something with a spine…”
Colonel Haiku (b19539) — 12/7/2011 @ 7:44 pmsome of that is kinda antagonistic the way it reads
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 12/7/2011 @ 7:52 pmIf Mr. Governor Perry’s the nominee we’ll all vote for him though cause of this Obama is so very hurtful to freedom, to prosperity, to hope itself.
Bleakness thy name is America.
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 12/7/2011 @ 7:53 pmWhy do luddites blame our fascination for technology on deforestation?
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/7/2011 @ 7:58 pmfeets-
We had pinto beans and muffins for dinner, very good (if you grew up eating them, I guess).
But rutabagas… tasted one once… (emphasis on once) maybe nk knows how to spice them up so they taste good
I have not studied Mormonism, but what I have understood around the edges is that there is an issue whether the Trinitarian view of the nature of God and the divine/human nature of Jesus is compatible or not compatible with the Mormon doctrines about the same issues
but unless it can be shown where Mormon belief in the nature of God will significantly affect Romney’s views on public policy, i don’t care.
MD in Philly (41d33b) — 12/7/2011 @ 8:06 pmRomney came in 3rd to Huckabee and McCain sorry!
— You had it right the first time; Mitt came in 2nd.
I respect them both and wish them well – whatever state they live in.
Icy (cd23b0) — 12/7/2011 @ 8:14 pm— IMHO, when you can’t even make it to the end of the sentence without tossing in a snark? Not very respectful.
pinto beans I heart a lot I can make a mean mess of pinto beans
but rutabagas… I’ll have to google – me and rutabagas, we live separate lives
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 12/7/2011 @ 8:17 pm“But rutabagas”
Boil, boil, boil the rutabagas. Mash them up with salt and butter!
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/7/2011 @ 8:20 pmummm… google says it’s the same thing as a turnip
mashed turnips are yum! I’ve eaten them since I was a wee little pikachu of uncertain prospects.
how weird
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 12/7/2011 @ 8:22 pmI note that this attitude seems to be shared by those who find it incongruous to call Romney a job-creator when what he did was destroy jobs by making businesses more efficient. People to whom this seems like a contradiction don’t belong in the GOP. There are many things for which Romney deserves criticism, but this is not one of them.
Comment by Milhouse — 12/7/2011 @ 1:18 pm
— Take note, Dustin: this is an area where Milhouse and I are in complete agreement. Making businesses more efficient leads to two direct results: 1) the employees that did not get cut have increased job security because the company is more fiscally sound (Solyndra anyone?)
Icy (cd23b0) — 12/7/2011 @ 8:23 pm2) a more fiscally sound company is in a better position to succeed, expand and eventually hire MORE workers.
“ummm… google says it’s the same thing as a turnip”
That’s a fact, jack.
Cut off the waxy outside. Cut in pieces and boil away.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/7/2011 @ 8:30 pmNote that in post #122 the guy what complained that we shouldn’t be talking about Romney’s religion AT ALL shared with us all another 250 words on the subject about which he previously wrote: “WTF are you even bringing the subject of religion up for? I did not raise it. I have never raised it. You’re the one constantly bringing it up.”
Icy (cd23b0) — 12/7/2011 @ 8:37 pmTo the left who think raising taxes on the rich will solve anything you will be proven wrong when the economy collapses.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/7/2011 @ 8:39 pmAnd cuomo raised the income tax for rich people.
Thanks leftys.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/7/2011 @ 8:40 pmColonel, I have no problem at all with Romney’s religion. Why would I? From my point of view all the candidates believe in at least one false god, so what’s to pick and choose between them? But the point of America is that we set aside our religious differences and work together anyway. That does not, repeat not, mean that we pretend all religions are equally good. Daley in particular seems to labour under this delusion that it’s bigotry and offensive to disapprove of a religion that one believes to be false, or to point out that it is false.
America is where we each stick to our religious beliefs, whatever they happen to be, but tolerate those who differ, even if we’re convinced that they’re Hell-bound (assuming we believe in Hell) or mortally offending the true God/s, or whatever; we don’t go around killing them or imprisoning them or boycotting them, we cooperate on matters of mutual interest, we help them when they need it and look for their help when we need it, and in general treat them in accord with their actions, not their beliefs. And if they happen to be good candidates for office we support them, and we don’t let our opinion of their religion get in the way.
That’s the America I care for anyway. If you want a place where people have to accept all religions and may not say anything to contradict any religion, or even characterise any religion in a truthful way that its members will not like, then you know where to find Canada.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 12/7/2011 @ 8:44 pmthese rutabagas are very mysterious to me
I should like to taste them please
Comment by happyfeet — 12/7/2011 @ 6:56 pm
Cut off the waxy outside. Cut in pieces and boil away.
Comment by daleyrocks — 12/7/2011 @ 8:30 pm
Do not boil, loses too much taste. Instead cook them in a pressure cooker. Takes less time and preserves the flavor. Season with bacon grease and a little sugar to taste. Eat up and gas the neighborhood.
peedoffamerican (ee1de0) — 12/7/2011 @ 8:45 pmIcy, it is a fact that I have never ever raised the topic of Romney’s or any other religion. And I don’t think his religion should be an issue in the election. How you derive from that that I pretend not to want to talk about religion is a mystery to me. It’s an astounding feat of illogic to see a contradiction between my posting on religion and my truthful claim that I am never the one to raise it.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 12/7/2011 @ 8:46 pmI never raise the topic, but if you are going to raise it (and you constantly do) then you have to expect other people to have something to say, and you may not like it. I have never called on anyone to shut up on the topic, but if you don’t want to hear my opinions on it then you should indeed shut up about it. You do not get to give your opinion and then close the topic. Not unless you’re Patterico, which you’re not.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 12/7/2011 @ 8:48 pmUm, I’m pretty sure Dustin’s in agreement too. Why you think he isn’t is another of those mysteries.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 12/7/2011 @ 8:50 pmFeets,
Forgot to add, peel with potato peeler (it’s easier), cut into cubes about 1 inch square, after they are done mash them up with a potato masher. Also salt to taste.
When buying, pick out the ones that are about baseball size–the larger ones tend to be pithy or woody in consistency and are not an enjoyable eating experience. They are also good with some Texas Pete Pepper Sauce added once you get em on your plate.
peedoffamerican (ee1de0) — 12/7/2011 @ 8:54 pmI may have been the one who recently raised Romney’s Mormonism in another thread. It’s not the most important issue in the election but I think it’s worth discussing since at least one poll suggests it could impact the election.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 12/7/2011 @ 8:54 pmIcy, it is a fact that I have never ever raised the topic of Romney’s or any other religion. And I don’t think his religion should be an issue in the election. How you derive from that that I pretend not to want to talk about religion is a mystery to me. It’s an astounding feat of illogic to see a contradiction between my posting on religion and my truthful claim that I am never the one to raise it.
Comment by Milhouse — 12/7/2011 @ 8:46 pm
— If you don’t think it should be an issue in the election (and I agree with that sentiment) then how about you don’t respond when others bring it up IN the context of the election WITHIN a thread that is ABOUT the election?
Icy (cd23b0) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:11 pmFeets,
Try this next time when cooking your Pinto Beans. Get some Butterball Turkey Sausage (it’s similar to Ekrich Polish? sausage). Slice some of into thin round pieces and add it to the beans when you cook them. It seasons them really well and gives them a real good flavor. Also it being made from turkey, it has 60% less cholesterol than regular sausage. They are also very good when grilled.
peedoffamerican (ee1de0) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:11 pm😯 Rutabagas?
Raise taxes in rutabagas making more than $250,000 or whatever dems consider rich.
Dohbiden (ef98f0) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:15 pmPronounced as rute-ah-bay-guz
peedoffamerican (ee1de0) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:17 pmIf you want a place where people have to accept all religions and may not say anything to contradict any religion, or even characterise any religion in a truthful way that its members will not like, then you know where to find Canada.
— You go down the road for a little ways, make sure to take a left turn at Albuquerque, head over to Rancho Cu-ca-mon-ga, and then get out and ask.
Icy (cd23b0) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:19 pmFirst of all this thread isn’t about the election. Second, if someone brings it up then it’s fair game. I will not be silenced by your arbitrary rules. If you don’t want to see it discussed then don’t bring it up and hope nobody else does either.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:26 pm“That does not, repeat not, mean that we pretend all religions are equally good. Daley in particular seems to labour under this delusion that it’s bigotry and offensive to disapprove of a religion that one believes to be false, or to point out that it is false.
America is where we each stick to our religious beliefs, whatever they happen to be, but tolerate those who differ, even if we’re convinced that they’re Hell-bound (assuming we believe in Hell) or mortally offending the true God/s, or whatever;”
Milhouse – Thank you for admitting this was beneath your comments about Trinitarians. Jews believe the Trinity is heretical. They also do not believe Jesus is the son of God. As I keep saying, this is not a religion blog and there are many places to discuss such differences on the internet rather than perseverating on such differences at this site as is your wont.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:31 pmI have admitted nothing of the kind. I stand by every word I wrote on the subject. I didn’t even inject my own opinions or beliefs; I presented the Xian belief from their own point of view. Now that you mention it, as a Jew my own belief is that Jesus was not a god of any kind, neither a whole one nor a third of one, and thus the whole question of three equalling one is moot. I believe he is a false god, and his worshipers are violating the second (or first if you count it that way) commandment. And that’s why Romney believing in thousands or millions of gods is no big deal for me. But from their own point of view the Xian candidates believe themselves to believe in only one god, whereas Mormons don’t even hide their polytheism, or hide from it. They don’t claim that all the gods are really just one, the way some/most Hindus do. They frankly believe in many gods, and that is a fact. Is it a fact that matters to the election? No, and I have made that clear from the start. But you and Haiku have pursued a jihad against me just for mentioning it, and have pretended that merely stating the facts makes me a bigot. For that you are contemptible and should apologise.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:47 pmComment by Milhouse — 12/7/2011 @ 8:48 pm
I never raise the topic, but if you are going to raise it (and you constantly do) then you have to expect other people to have something to say, and you may not like it.
— This time I’m not quite sure who he is talking to, myself or the Colonel; however, if we assume it’s me then my response is that the only time I ever mention Romney’s religion is either in response to another commenter OR when I want to remind everyone (which I will admit I do frequently) that Lawrence O’Donnell of MSNBC is an anti-Mormon bigot.
I have never called on anyone to shut up on the topic, but if you don’t want to hear my opinions on it then you should indeed shut up about it.
— I never said that I didn’t want to hear your opinions on it. [BTW, irony alert: ‘I have never called on anyone to shut up about it . . . but I am now’] What I would rather not hear is the unfettered voicing of your opinions side-by-side with the intellectual equivalent of “don’t blame me, he started it”.
You do not get to give your opinion and then close the topic. Not unless you’re Patterico, which you’re not.
Icy (cd23b0) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:48 pm— First of all, what a lovely characterization of our host as an ivory tower dweller! Secondly, I once again challenge you to link and/or define my expressed opinion on Mormon beliefs. Third, I did NOT declare the topic “closed”; I merely offered you a simple resolution to YOUR complaint.
No irony. I have still not called on anyone to shut up about it. If you think I have then you’re reading-impaired.
Huh?! That was just random and bizarre.
Well in that case I don’t give two figs for what you’d rather not hear. You’re going to hear a lot more of it, every time someone raises the topic.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 12/7/2011 @ 9:54 pm“But you and Haiku have pursued a jihad against me just for mentioning it, and have pretended that merely stating the facts makes me a bigot. For that you are contemptible and should apologise.”
Milhouse – I don’t believe I have said squat about any of your comments concerning Mormonism, so for that allegation you can apologise.
With respect to your strange thoughts about why it would be strange for people to take offense at a commenter suggesting that their religions are second rate, incomprehensible by the human mind or that they are hellbound for believing such nonsense, even without soliciting the commenter’s opinion on such religion, I guess I can only suggest you look within yourself for guidance.
I rarely find a need to offer unsolicited opinions or critiques on matters such as the beliefs of others, especially if my opinions are only based upon book learning, because experience has shown me I rarely understand the subject as well as a believer and such critiques usually do give offense. The beliefs of others are of little concern to me unless they impact my life, such as those of political Islam, where I will take a public stand.
You obviously want to make it known you feel other religions are second class to your own, even if you are willing to cooperate in life to get by with such hellbound believers. I have no desire to make myself feel superior by diminishing others. You can have that act all to yourself.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 12/7/2011 @ 11:37 pmComment by Milhouse — 12/7/2011 @ 9:26 pm
First of all this thread isn’t about the election.
— Patterico: “Let’s talk about who got out of the way — and let employers create more jobs.” If this is not about the election then what the hell IS it about?
Second, if someone brings it up then it’s fair game. I will not be silenced by your arbitrary rules. If you don’t want to see it discussed then don’t bring it up and hope nobody else does either
Icy (c4524c) — 12/8/2011 @ 1:48 am— Okay, so this one must be for someone else, since I, A) have drawn up NO rules, arbitrary or otherwise; B) do not wish for you to be silenced at all; C) did not “bring it up”, not even once. It’s also interesting to note your shifting philosophy on this issue, from “it shouldn’t be an issue” to “if someone brings it up then it’s fair game.”
Many things are good when they serve primarily as something to eat with butter, salt, bacon grease, and sugar in some combination.
I guess it sounds potato-ish enough to me, which I was raised on, to stay with potatoes. But perhaps when I tried one it was a big and woody one that we’ve been warned about.
Whatever else can be said about them, the name is flashier than potatoe, especially in the plural. You can start out with a long rolling “r”, and end with a dramatic extended “z”. A big wet popping “p” to start, not as engaging.
Sliced sausage in beans is a common Puerto Rican dish, many other Latin countries, but I think beans other than pintos are used, at least in my experience.
I wonder if anyone is live blogging Holder’s testimony before Congress….
MD in Philly (41d33b) — 12/8/2011 @ 6:38 amAnd that’s why Romney believing in thousands or millions of gods is no big deal for me.
Keep eff-ing that chicken, milhouse…
Colonel Haiku (b19539) — 12/8/2011 @ 6:56 amToday, while reading through last evening’s comments after having been away from this discussion most of yesterday, I found that there was something I felt needed to be said. Then I read daley’s words at 11:37 pm and realized he had focused on the exact point about which I’d planned to write.
I rarely find a need to offer unsolicited opinions or critiques on matters such as the beliefs of others,…especially if my opinions are only based upon book learning, because experience has shown me I rarely understand the subject as well as a believer…
Those are words worthy of ongoing consideration by all of us, I think.
elissa (92b57f) — 12/8/2011 @ 7:41 amWhat shift? How do those things contradict each other?
Milhouse (d7842d) — 12/8/2011 @ 1:18 pmI notice that you don’t deny it, Haiku. All you have in your arsenal is abuse, abuse, abuse.
Milhouse (d7842d) — 12/8/2011 @ 1:20 pmActually, milhouse, I did refute your specious contention about a million gods, etc., with a post that contained links to scripture that clearly indicated how off base you continue to be. Apparently, the moderator(s) were offended by the links and removed the post. It was post #131, but was removed, for some reason.
Here are a few of them, let’s see if they remain:
http://lds.org/scriptures/bofm/1-ne/13.41?lang=eng#41
http://lds.org/scriptures/bofm/mosiah/15.1-5?lang=eng#1-5
http://lds.org/scriptures/bofm/2-ne/31.21?lang=eng#21
http://lds.org/scriptures/bofm/morm/7.7?lang=eng#7
http://lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/20.28?lang=eng#28
BTW… what you contend is tantamount to me using the crap that comprises the Protocol of the Elders of Zion to smear your religion. I don’t do it because 1) it’s crap and untrue and, 2) it is abusive towards people of the Jewish faith.
Colonel Haiku (687f10) — 12/8/2011 @ 5:15 pmYou keep ducking and weaving, and now throw a bunch of red herrings on the trail.
Your first quote says that there’s only one god on the earth. Yeah, we already know that Mormons believe each god gets a world of his own. There’s only one god on Earth, but what about on other worlds? Each of them has its own god, doesn’t it?
The rest of your quotes are completely off the topic; they say nothing at all about how many gods there are, they just assert that the trinity counts as one god. Fine; what about all the others?
Do you deny that Mormons believe that every good Mormon, who lives a proper life and does all the right things, will become a god and get a world of his own? Do you deny that Mormons believe this is how the God of this world, the God of the Bible, came to be a god? Do you deny that there were other good Mormons on God’s original world, and each of them also became a god just as He did, and is now His equal in every way? And that the god of that world came to that state in exactly the same way, along with many of his fellow inhabitants of whichever world he came from? And that over the course of the history of the multiverse this must have happened to millions of people, each of whom are now gods?
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 12/9/2011 @ 7:27 amYes, oh Person of the Ample Nose, I deny all of your crapisms.
And take that beanie off yer head.
Colonel Haiku (687f10) — 12/9/2011 @ 2:30 pmwell, at least a third of them self-identify as liberals, so their addition to the collective wisdom is basically zero, them being uniformly widiots almost by definition.
Smock Puppet, Winner of the Jeane Dixon Award (aacc3d) — 12/9/2011 @ 9:03 pmomg with the ample nose business that is SO not in the spirit of Christmas
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 12/9/2011 @ 9:04 pmThat’s just something I stole off of a 1974 Don Imus comedy album, Happy. I kid my Jewish brothers.
Colonel Haiku (687f10) — 12/9/2011 @ 9:14 pm1. This is a subject which I plan to address in an upcoming article on my blog. I have tentatively entitled it, “Why All Politicians are Liars.”
2. While a direct cause and effect relationship can be relatively easily proven in the physical universe involving physical / inanimate objects, it is far more difficult to prove such a relationship in the human / emotional universe. In the realm of human / emotional concepts, of which “job creation” and “job pursuits” are subsets, we distance ourselves even further from potential solutions, and complicate the search, when we politicize the discussion.
3. The history of technology, believe it or not, is a relatively recent concept. In fact, a professor at Georgia Tech during the 1970s and 1980s, Melvin Kranzberg, Ph.D., was known as the “Father of the History of Technology.” It is a subject taught in the “social science” arena, not the hard core science arena.
4. By now, you have a hint as to where I am going. Job creation is about technology. Technology is about creativity, innovation, and invention. I was in the technology, innovation, and intellectual property field for years. The inventors with whom I and my firm dealt did not stop to think one minute about any of the factors mentioned above. They innovated and invented because that’s who they are and that’s what drives them spiritually and emotionally, sometimes to the exclusion of other things that drive other folks.
5. When you have a society where a sufficient number, or CRITICAL MASS, of your citizens are inventors, scientists, and engineers, new technologies result. New technologies create new businesses, and new businesses create jobs. Check out the numbers of scientists and engineers being produced by our universities as compared to past years. As a result of my experience in the tech start-up venture capital world, I will concede that fledging businesses or even struggling businesses might consider some of the factors mentioned. However, most good, profitable businesses have savvy people at their helm who figure out the way to make more money, no matter what the environment in which they find themselves. They also work 80-90 hours per week, not 40. They are not of the mindset that they let the factors mentioned above influence their pursuit of profit.
6. Technology waves occur in cycles.
7. Folks in the technology arena claim that “what the world needs now” is another earth-shattering, significant invention which advances the interests of all humankind, no matter the socio-economic status or geographic location: things along the order of the automobile, the airplane, the locomotive, the computer, the personal computer, the Internet. We have not had such a type of invention in a very long time. We are due. In the mean time, the world struggles.
8. American society has become a society obsessed with sound-bites, the superficial, athletes, entertainers, and media talking heads. Some months ago, I wrote a piece entitled, “Does Any One Have a Real Job in America Any More.” In our transition from a manufacturing economy to a service economy, the product (i.e. inventions and technology) production got shifted off shore for profit reasons (which some deem treasonous), and we were left with ad men, salespeople, fast food dispensers, and folks to collect your money.
9. Bottom line: we need more scientists, engineers and inventors to start the process of creating jobs.
10. The cover story on Newsweek some weeks ago discussed how we are killing ourselves from a scientific perspective, and recounted some of our earlier successes. The Chinese are producing kids eager to pursue scientific and engineering careers (in massive numbers). We’re about to get our butts kicked by the sheer numbers alone, unless we wake up and stop the partisan bickering over non-issues.
Reggie Greene / The Logistician (377232) — 12/10/2011 @ 11:44 am