Much appreciated quality, kp

In reply to this comment by kronosposeidon:
*quality

Thanks, dag

In reply to this comment by dag:
*promote the truth-speaker.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Join us Blankfist- you know you want to. You can be like Percy who comes back into the fold for the Battle of Hogwarts.

>> ^blankfist:

There's some truth to what he said. Certainly there's been a financial coup d'état. That happened a long time ago, but more recently it can been seen when all the small banks closed right after the generous bailouts.
I just can't get behind the cult of taxation. I don't see that as the correct solution.

Your video, Michael Moore - America is NOT Broke (Madison, WI March 5th), has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Double down!

In reply to this comment by JiggaJonson:
someone private msg me when this is no longer promoted and I'll double down

"Spreading lies?" No, that really is Dear Leader saying we all gots to sacrifice.

Your point is that you have agreed to all the evil guvmint's demands but one: the right to collective bargaining.

Well, here's my take: government workers of any kind shouldn't be allowed to unionize. Period. It was a mistake to ever let it happen.

Wisconsin’s teachers make a little more money than they’re letting on

Even with the concessions, these educators are living large. Don't hold your breath waiting for sympathy, I'm out here in the real performance-based world, the one the schools bash.

I don't remember anyone voting for compulsory education in government schools, overseen by a federal leviathan bureaucracy. There is nothing anywhere in the Constitution about a "right" to a "free" education. If guvmint can force this codswallop on taxpayers whether or not they even have children, then why wouldn't it change the rules mid-game? The socialist wants a government big enough to give him everything he ever wanted, which means it's big enough to take it all away.

Deal.



>> ^ldeadeyesl:

Sigh Looks like Quantum is believing what his news shows are telling him again. Clearly you haven't been well informed on the matter. So as a protester in Madison let me educate you to what we are asking for. Unions have offered to meet all of the financial demands. They offered to sacrifice everything except their future right to collectively bargain. Why is the government demanding to break up the workers right to organize? This whole issue comes to head at a simple difference in belief. The government should hold all the power over workers. Or workers should have some rights. Don't perpetuate all the lies out there. These unions have offered to meet the increases in payment for their benefits. This is about workers rights. Sadly the anti-union interest groups are making it about greed, when that has nothing to do with the issue. People like Quantum don't do the research and spread the lies.

Sigh Looks like Quantum is believing what his news shows are telling him again. Clearly you haven't been well informed on the matter. So as a protester in Madison let me educate you to what we are asking for. Unions have offered to meet all of the financial demands. They offered to sacrifice everything except their future right to collectively bargain. Why is the government demanding to break up the workers right to organize? This whole issue comes to head at a simple difference in belief. The government should hold all the power over workers. Or workers should have some rights. Don't perpetuate all the lies out there. These unions have offered to meet the increases in payment for their benefits. This is about workers rights. Sadly the anti-union interest groups are making it about greed, when that has nothing to do with the issue. People like Quantum don't do the research and spread the lies.

Fingerbang, bang-bang-bang-bang!

Hi Madison Roberts! Any idea where I can purchase a caravan?

Yogi isn't a government acting on behalf of other people. The Government has no personal information. Spreading this information is a good thing, the people who lead us should keep their laundry clean, or face the consequences that people might see.

Now they are facing the consequences and hopefully a lot of civilians are having their eyes opened.
>> ^quantumushroom:

I'm totally intimidated by a guy who lifts lines from Billy Madison. I'm glad you're comfortable that you don't have what it takes to debate anything. Seems pretty common around here. BTW why don't you post all YOUR personal information to teh internets? This will somehow lead to greater transparency and freedom for all. I'm sure most people won't use it to enrich themselves at your expense.
(Double birds)

>> ^Yogi:
QM, nothing you've said is remotely factual or relevant. Your incoherent babbling of bullshit is just the stuff that comes prancing out of your closeted mind like word salad. You are not smart, you are not informed, I award you no points and please shut the fuck up.

I'm totally intimidated by a guy who lifts lines from Billy Madison. I'm glad you're comfortable that you don't have what it takes to debate anything. Seems pretty common around here. BTW why don't you post all YOUR personal information to teh internets? This will somehow lead to greater transparency and freedom for all. I'm sure most people won't use it to enrich themselves at your expense.

(Double birds)


>> ^Yogi:

QM, nothing you've said is remotely factual or relevant. Your incoherent babbling of bullshit is just the stuff that comes prancing out of your closeted mind like word salad. You are not smart, you are not informed, I award you no points and please shut the fuck up.

@blankfist I can't speak for every state (and BTW, this is almost entirely an issue left to the states to legislate on), but there's nothing legally stopping a divorce from being settled out of court in Ohio. You don't even need an arbitrator, if the parties can come to total agreement on the disposition of the custody of the children and all the relevant property disputes. In such cases, the state basically just acts as a witness to the agreement.

Almost no divorces happen that way, largely because the couple can't come to a full and wide-ranging agreement. Not only that, they usually can't even agree to binding arbitration. My parents couldn't, and instead went into the full legal food fight in civil court.

At no point in here do I see how taking civil court off the table helps.

As far as my own parents' divorce proceedings, my observation was that all the advantages went to my dad, largely because he was the sole income earner in our household. The only topic mom seemed to get preference on was with custody, and I think that was more a case of dad relenting than mom getting some sort of preferential treatment.

Even so, unfair laws aren't written in stone, and I'm sure you could cobble together a pretty potent PAC of pissed off rich men who're mad about how women get too much of a free ride when it comes to divorce. Bad judges can be impeached, and many state courts elect their judges anyways (we do here, and they even all have partisan affiliations -- the Ohio Supreme Court is 100% Republican again).

And as far as judges are concerned, I'm sure the voting blocs are driven more by abortion than anything else, and I guarantee you that the abortion-should-be-illegal crowd are a lot more likely to rule against agnostic parents over "proper" Christian ones in divorce proceedings.

In terms of actual statute, I suspect a lot of the stagnation of law in this area is because the law is set at the state level. Just about no one gets into the details of what their state legislature does unless it catches the attention of the national media (e.g. SB1070, Prop 8, Prop 19, Romneycare, etc.). Even a political junkie like me is hard pressed to say what issues my state legislature has even tried to address over its last session.

As far as some sort of anarchist state-free system, let me quote James Madison, who puts it far more eloquently than I do:

But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.

This is videosift, not youtube and most sifters are well informed and certainly know the proper reasoning of the first amendment. It's correct interpretation is exactly how Cenk stated, which makes perfect sense since many of the founders were agnostic at best.

I think the general demeanor of VS is that its denizens are "well informed" in the sense that they carefully follow the far-left blogosphere's opinions as doled out by HuffPo, Kos, et al. I am pleased to introduce actual facts and history to an audience with a rigid and limited mindset.

Cenk and others on the left very much desire the "wall of seperation" to be defined in 'their' way. Problem is that defining it their way requires the burial of facts and history with the substitution of personal interpretation and more than a little willful miscontruance.

For example, just because "the right" doesn't agree with the radical far-left's interpretation of the 1st Ammendment does not mean that they want a 'state religion'. The left for many years has trotted out this crazy 'either or' vision of the right on the issue of seperation of church & state. The level of intolerance inherent within such a view is what makes people protest such innocuities as christmas trees in schools, or the 10-commandments in a courthouse.

Most other folks are far less (for lack of a better word) insane when it comes to the 1st Ammendment. They don't want the states or the Feds imposing a religion on them, but they don't mind innocent, harmless displays OF religion in government or public life. This is where the left totally loses the issue. The right isn't and never has advocated the far-left's racial fear based vision of state-mandated religions. And yet in their fear of such a vision, the neo-lib left has to wrest the 1st Ammendment, Madison, Jefferson, and a host of other things in order to paint the "wall of seperation" in such a way as to advocate their radical interpretation. And so whe Tea Partiers CORRECTLY frame the issue, they flip out as if the TP guy was saying, "And we'll force you all to go to church after we're elected..." because that's how neolibs see it. Craziness.

speaking of original intents, it seems our anti-progress friends have forgotten that that most conservative of founding fathers, the framer of the constitution, James Madison felt so strongly that government should have nothing to do with religion that he was against tax-exempt status for churches and even military chaplains

Billy Madison may be kitsch, but Jimmy Fallon never has been, nor ever will be, funny.