Republicans Strive to Harm?

 The discussion regarding the Democrats Targeting Mills Wealth at MinnPost took an interesting turn.

"I do find it interesting that Liberals pride themselves on being tolerant and accepting of different people, yet they seem happy that the ads are trying to drive wedges by making people envious and jealous of the Mills family. A local group that seems to have made their money by providing good products for good prices. Definitely one of my favorite places to shop.

And of course there was that goofy hair ad where they replay the same clip over and over. I guess this is likely good news, it likely means they have nothing of substance to go after him for." G2A 

"No John, I don't envy his wealth, I don't need it. I'm not jealous of him or his family, from their history, it sounds kind of sad. I dislike Mills because he is arrogant, smarmy, and has a vision for this country that is designed to make life worse for people like me and those I care about. Why is that so hard for conservatives to accept? It is possible to think a person is a jerk, independent of their financial status." Matt

 "Then all the ads mentioning his salary, family wealth, etc should be stopped?

Personally I don't know if he is arrogant, smarmy, etc. I have never talked with the man.

And the correct statement would be . "I believe his vison will make life worse for ..."
I am always amazed that people think Republicans are actively trying to "make life worse" for their constituents. Many of whom are just like you. The reality is that they believe in a different way of making life better for us." G2A


"I don't believe they have any care for their liberal constituents at all. Then again I don't think they care about the conservative ones without money to fund campaigns either. You forget, I'm a cynic. Go ahead and believe your "just like me" malarkey all you like, conservatives don't care about me and mine, and never will. Don't act so surprised when I express my distaste for them as a result. You're all welcome to change your views and behavior if you'd like to win my support or assistance, but of course that won't be happening in my lifetime, so here we are." Matt

What I was fascinated by is the idea that Matt truly seems to believe that all Republican politicians care about are the wealthy.  I mean almost half the population of American citizens vote Republican, including people who are poor, middle class and wealthy, White, Black, Hispanic, Religious, not Religious, etc.

I mean both the Democrats and Republicans believe in a mixed economy.  The Democrats just want to pull it to the Socialism side and the Republicans want to pull it towards the Capitalism side.  Do all Liberals truly believe that the Republicans are out to "make life worse for people like me and those I care about"???  I mean wouldn't that be kind of counterproductive and likely to annoy their voters who come from almost every demographic?

Just a note: from what I can tell Matt's household is middle to upper middle class.  And I am guessing White, but I have no idea.

Thoughts?

Minnesota: Then and Now

As promised in G2A MN Elections, here are the calcs and sources.

1964 Cost per capita in 1964 dollars
$2 Bil/3,413,864 =
$586/person

2014 Cost per capita in 2014 dollars
$57.5 Bil/5,379,139 =
$10,689/person

1964 Cost per capita in 2014 dollars
($586/18)110=
$3,580/person

Change is cost
$10,689/$3580 = 2.99 times

State and Local Spend
FRED GDP DEF
MN Population History

And here are some responses and questions.

"Therefore "local / state government" costs 3X what it did in 1964. Since much of the additional cost goes to education, special education and health/human services, are we getting 3X the value?" G2A

"So, what do you think the State could do for its people with the same level of spending as 50 years ago? Annual expenditures of $19.257B. Ready. Set. Go." Joel

"All of the things that government did 50 years ago, when everything was just great. I think it's just like our school district. We still produce the same number of national merit scholars as we did back when we spent half as much. Anyone want to bet that MN has done not quite as well?" J

Thoughts?

Control Freaks: GOP or DFL?

My spending proof will need to wait another day or so, I misplaced a source and need to find it again...  To fill the void: here is a new discussion from the MinnPost Is the Party Over for the Independence Party article.  A couple of the other readers disagree with the following Nolan diagram.

 

This Nolan Diagram would likely draw similar criticism. For diagrams see G2A Moderate MN.

In summary, they think that only the GOP is interested in using governmental laws to control the behaviors of others. (ie social engineering, morality, etc)  I'll let their statements speak for themselves.

"Let me spell it out for you...your perception of what a liberal democrat is nothing but myth. And it seems to me that the only party that continues to want people to tow a certain line is the GOP. They're the party of social engineering." Jason

"Democrats and Liberals have a long list of principles we're very passionate about. One of them is allowing people the freedom to have their own principles." Paul

 "As we have discussed here over and over again, Liberal Democrats want many many laws to control the actions and behaviors of people based on their beliefs. Here are just a few:
- forced acceptance of the gay lifestyle in private arenas
- forced purchase of birth control methods that are against a group or individual's morals
- loads of regulatory emission control laws
- endless attempts to control gun ownership
- forcing to employers to pay employees more than the market requires.
- forcing people to pay to subsidize the health insurance, food bills, housing, etc of other citizens
- oppose free trade: try to limit the choices of people and businesses
- limit legal immigration by giving illegal immigrants priority
- other

All of these being excellent examples of why the image creator placed both the DFL and GOP below the Independents on the social freedom axis. Both groups avidly pursue laws to control other citizens." G2A

 "Right and you're so moderate that you only listed "Lib'rul offenses." 'Loads' and 'endless' and 'forcing' of things going on here... long on drama and short on specifics, or thought, or empathy. I notice the homophobia is still present, as ever." Jonathan

"The point of disagreement was regarding the DFL and their desire to use Laws to control personal freedoms. Paul and Jason denied this reality. I argue that they belong in the lower portion of the diagram along with the GOP.

If you want me to list how the GOP wants to use Laws to control personal freedoms. Here you go...
- Force women to carry embryo / fetus to birth.
- Deny people the right to physician assisted suicide.
- Deny people to marry a person of the same sex.
- Deny people the right to clean water and air.

As for things that both sometimes support...
- Deny people to be legal prostitutes, strippers, etc
- Deny people access to certain drugs
- Deny people the freedom to gamble
- Excessive taxes to disuade people from smoking/drinking

Now have I shown that I can see both sides?" G2A

Now what is interesting about this topic is that the far right conservatives say the same thing about Democrats.  It seems that both sides want to complain about Government mandated "Social Engineering" while striving to use it to their party's advantage.  Therefore they believe they belong in the upper half of the diagram or at least in the middle, and for sure not below the center line.  I mean both think they are fighting for freedom, not against it...

Thoughts?

Who are the Independent Party Supporters?

I joined in on the comments here.  MinnPost Is the Party Over for the Independent Party  It has many people commenting on what the Independent Platform is.  Here is what I think the supporters look like.

"I thought an Independent was just a Fiscally Conservative Democrat or a Socially Liberal Republican, since neither of the parties have room for these folks." G2A

Paul disagrees:

"Yes and No:  The IP party is comprised of republicrats and conservative libertarians, - THAT'S what makes it branch of the republican party rather than a truly "independent" party. In some ways it's an even narrower dogma than either of the major parties.
Meanwhile the democrats have "room" for Colin Peterson while the republicans have no "room" for Arne Carlson. The size of the democratic "tent" is part of their problem, it's rather like herding cats on occasion. The increasingly exclusive membership of the republican party, and the republican nature of the IP, has become it's downfall. The IP and the republicans represent two faces of the same dogma. I don't think even Arne Carlson "fits" in the IP because he may fail the fiscal conservative test.
We've seen so-called "conservatives" make this mistake before, they decide they're a "majority" of some kind, i.e. "moral" or "silent" majorities only to find out that the population is more liberal than they realized, and getting more liberal as time goes by. The IP thought that they were appealing to a majority, they're simply wrong, the more people get a look at the IP the more disinterested they are." Paul

I like how this Nolan Diagram depicts it.  I assume many more people would vote Independent if they could explain this better, standardize their platform and have a chance of winning...

Thoughts?

MN Elections: What Matters

I just left a somewhat cynical comment over at MinnPost McFadden and Franken

It went something like this.  Is it worth spending any time talking about who will be the most effective politician if elected?

I mean Franken and many other DFL candidates want to make taxes very progressive on people and companies that are financially successful, and they want to give that money to people who are not financially successful whether those people make responsible decisions, work hard, etc or not.

So people who support somewhat arbitrary government mandated wealth transfer will vote DFL and those against it will vote GOP as usual.  With this in mind...

• Who are the undecideds?
• What percent of citizens do you think are in this group?
• What do you think will sway them?

I am guessing less than 20% are in that moderate undecideds group...

MinnPost Mills
MinnPost Gov Debates

281 Care and Right to Lie in Politics

Hey 281 Care made the news and I think it says they made their point, as convoluted as it is... 

MinnPost The Right to Lie

Numbers Guy, Thoughts?

Others, Thoughts?

This particular referendum is what drew me into Blogging...
G2A CARE 281 Letter
G2A CARE 281 at It Again 1
G2A CARE 281 at It Again 2
G2A Referendum Passes

Koch Brothers: Heroes or Villains

I thought this was a fascinating video clip.
CNN Democrats Favorite Bogeymen

Personally, unless they are trying to rule us through generosity...  I vote heroes...

Thoughts?

Here are some more links:
Those Evil Koch Brothers
Wiki Koch Brothers
Koch Brothers Exposed
Forbes Inside the Koch Empire

Who is Being Pre-Judiced?

I questioned the folks crying racism and bashing the cops/city at MinnPost. MinnPost Skyway Arrest Video Of course you can guess the comments that generated.  To which I responded with.

"I guess I have never seen what this gentleman looked like, sounded like or smelled like at that moment. The commenters here want to jump to the conclusion that these officers were raving racists out to harass the Black citizen.

What if... They were just good cops who could tell that something was off with the gentleman. Check out the book "Blink".

I find it interesting that this group of commentors dislikes people who are prejudice, yet they have no problem judging the police officers from a poor quality video clip.

I acknowledge that they may or may not have profiled, but I sure don't know for sure one way or another. You must see more here than I do. Or you think you do." G2A

An interesting point I had not heard before was that this victim did have marijuana on him when he was arrested.  Video  More interesting is that it does not look like he was charged with possession.


Washington Times St Paul Man
Fox Dad to File Lawsuit

Thoughts?

Give How Much, To Do The Right Thing?

I am finding it interesting in this discussion thread that people who have very strong opinions regarding what tax rate is FAIR...  Have very little willingness to express what level of charitable giving should be expected of us American citizens.  MinnPost GOP Values

Brag vs Facts vs Motivate:

Often folks here state their inaccurate belief that Conservatives are selfish, greedy, money oriented, not compassionate, etc. And there are some that are, just like there are Liberals who do not give to charity or volunteer. My point in sharing is not to brag, since that would make no sense since I have not attained my personal goal.

My point in sharing is to help the readers understand how one can be generous and compassionate, while not believing in government mandated wealth transfer. Which seems to be a very foreign concept around here.

Also, I am hoping that some readers would accept my challenge to set a personal charitable giving target and pro-actively work towards attaining it. This can be through giving money or time. And for you single folks out there, I had a very Conservative friend who volunteered through a singles organization.

Remember: the more you give, the more you attain... " G2A 

 

"The more you give, the more you attain:

I don't give with the idea of attaining anything, whether it's tax deductions, bragging rights, or personal goals. By the same token, I cannot abide the currently fashionable term "giving back."

There are things we should do because they are the right things to do." RB
 

"Win Win

Do you have something against being healthier, happier, more fulfilled, more socially connected, etc?   PS Mag Be Happier, Spend on Others

So how much should a person give or volunteer to do the right thing?
Us silly Christians picked ~10% as an ideal amount, what do the non-religious think is the "right" amount?

Can't abide.  Isn't "giving back" the liberal mantra in justifying "tax the rich"?

Your comment is interesting with that in mind." G2A

So with this in mind:

• what do you think people should give or do for charity and others to be doing the "right" thing?
• have you set goals for yourself?
• do you monitor and work to improve your performance?
• does giving and helping others make you feel better?
• other?

Could You Personally Stop a Beating Heart?

The comments here took kind of a weird bounce and it gave me even a stranger thought that could not get by their Moderator.  MinnPost GOP Priorities

"Better Opportunities for Children"

In the same paragraph as you seem to be supporting better opportunities for children, you support abortion rights so as not to "obliterate the legal concept of privacy". Let's pause for a moment and consider those two ideas together. A moment wasn't long enough.

How about giving a child a chance to live, how is that for an opportunity?" Steve

"You consider Paul's comment inconsistent because you believe a fetus is the same thing as a child.

But for someone who does not believe a fetus is the same thing as a child, there is no inconsistency whatsoever.

It is unlikely that repeating this clarification will change your beliefs in any way, but it is still worth repeating it." Pat

 "Pat, Roe v Wade acknowledges that a fetus is a person once viability is attained.

"The Court later rejected Roe's trimester framework, while affirming Roe's central holding that a person has a right to abortion until viability.[1] The Roe decision defined "viable" as being "potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid", adding that viability "is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade

Now I know you pro-abortion folks like to say a fetus is not a "human", therefore lessening the tragedy of what is occurring... (ie dehumanize it) But here is something that should probably concern you. With improvements in medical technology, I am guessing the number of weeks to viability will continue to drop. That should make for some interesting court cases." G2A

Now my strange unacceptable comment went something like this...

"Being raised a farm boy, I am comfortable with hunting, killing and cutting up various animals. I am comfortable falling in a feed lot and cleaning up terrible messes. (ie sometimes it gets slippery) I am even ok with killing a sick family pet to put it out of its misery. However, I simply could not with my own hands discontinue the life of a 12+ week or older fetus.

Pat's comment made me wonder. Would folks who consider a 12+ week old fetus "inhuman" be willing to personally squeeze that little body until it's heart stopped beating? I mean if it is truly no different than some cancer cells or a mole, then it shouldn't be a problem.  If they did personally stop that heart, would their conscience plague them?" G2A

So what do you think, do these folks truly see the 12+ week old fetus as similar to a tumor?  Or is their dehumanizing it actually their way to protect themselves from the consequences of the action that is occurring?  And the freedoms they are defending?"

Thoughts?

Education: Apples and Oranges

I thought this was a wonderfully pragmatic look at the topic.

Education: Apples and Oranges

Though I don't think the Teacher's Unions or some others will like all the comments.

Thoughts?