Forum Thread

Coffeeville Lake Topics

(Coffeeville Lake Specific)

0 messages

Updated

Off-Topic

Lakes Online Forum

83,623 messages

Updated 5/13/2024 10:35:33 PM

Boat Maintenance

Lakes Online Forum

5,193 messages

Updated 4/3/2024 3:47:36 AM

Coffeeville Lake Fishing

(Coffeeville Lake Specific)

0 messages

Updated

Jokes

Lakes Online Forum

4,169 messages

Updated 4/15/2024 11:05:05 PM

Sports

Lakes Online Forum

4,260 messages

Updated 3/24/2024 9:24:45 AM

Grilling & Recipes

Lakes Online Forum

2,976 messages

Updated 3/20/2024 11:53:43 PM

Tallapoosa River Topics

Lakes Online Forum

98 messages

Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM

Forum Usage Rules

Name:	Barneget -	Reply
Subject:	Cantor is a traitor
Date:	8/24/2010 1:41:02 PM

Story from Politico yesterday. Eric Cantor, House Minority Whip, and heir to the House Majority Leader role, states that "Republicans may roll back their ban on earmarks, as long as the spending items have merit.” This guy has learned nothing over the last 4 years. His role in the next Congress must be minimized. Conservative members of the House should initiate plans now to prevent him, and slime like him, from their continued efforts to destroy our nation.

URL: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0810/41369.html

Name:	MAJ USA RET -	Reply
Subject:	Cantor is a traitor
Date:	8/24/2010 2:29:02 PM

100% of all ear-marks are paid for by taxpayers. Who do these idiots think pays for this swine fat? Does Shelby think that the folks in Maine are going to get the bill for his boatload of Alabama bound bacon? Who pays for Maine’s barrel of pork?

You are RIGHT! They just don’t get it. Pork is just another slick redistribution of revenue… a shell game with our money as the pea!

I'll vote for Rogers. I can't wait to find out who will run against Shelby. I hope I don't end up voting for the lesser of two evils... again. (A protest vote is a vote for the other party. That's how we got Obama.)

Name:	Summer Lover -	Reply
Subject:	Business as usual
Date:	8/24/2010 2:53:03 PM

The D's want to take our money and guns and control our commerce, the R's want to take our personal freedoms and make us into one kind of person. Just more of the same, and the powers that be wonder why so many are pushing for smaller Government.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Cantor is being consistent with his past statement
Date:	8/24/2010 3:37:31 PM

It is not surprising even though according to the legislative record he had not requested any earmarks at least back to 2008. But if you look back he has consistently said the system for earmarks is broken and until fiscal sanity is back there should be a moratorium and he has walked the talk. He called for a moratorium and not elimination of the system altogether which in my view is a shame and a disappointment.

I would like to see it confirmed because Politco is a left-leaning website and may have distorted what he said but based on his past it seems plausible. But if it turns out to be true then he doesn't deserve a leadership position although it seems like you probably can't find a politician that doesn't like earmarks for obvious reasons. Until that system no longer buys votes you will be hard pressed to find a majority in congress that wants to give up earmarks. We as Americans have to say no, we don't want the pork. When you look at the entitlement mentality we have the term fat chance comes to mind.

Name:	Summer Lover -	Reply
Subject:	Cantor is being consistent with his past statement
Date:	8/24/2010 4:01:00 PM

You pegged the "entitlement mentality", that is why we have the Government we voted into office. It is also why we as a country appear to be headed to doom; Iran and North Korea can just hit the bleachers and watch us vote our way into Hades.

Name:	Barneget -	Reply
Subject:	Cantor is being consistent with his past statement
Date:	8/24/2010 4:50:18 PM

Erik Erickson at Red State this morning.....they lean a little further right than Politico

URL: http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/08/24/meet-the-new-boss-same-as-the-old-boss/

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Cantor is a traitor
Date:	8/24/2010 5:12:59 PM

Republicans can say whatever they want, but earmarks are eternal. Everyone says that they are against earmarks, unless, of course, they have merit... tranlating: unless, of course, they benefit my constituents.

Name:	Barneget -	Reply
Subject:	Cantor is a traitor
Date:	8/24/2010 6:24:51 PM

Earmarked spending may well have merit. HOWEVER, there is already an appropriations process in place. Earmarks are the opaque, anonymous add-ons used for buying votes, and generally bringing home the bacon. Translation -- US taxpayer funding for projects beyond the scope of the US Constitution, projects which if needed should be funded entirely by local and state dollars. MM nailed it with the entitlement mentality. When did the feds start spoon feeding the states, both dollars and agenda? Was it the interstate system? HUD? HE&W? If ever there was time for needed change, that time is now. And, for Cantor, with his senior role in opposition leadership, to declare economic business as usual when that business as usual brought us to, and perhaps over, the edge, is traitorious.

Name:	Yankee06 -	Reply
Subject:	Cantor is a traitor?????
Date:	8/24/2010 6:33:35 PM

-As an independent, I see flaws in both parties, ...and strengths in both parties. -Earmarks, as I understand them, are useful if used well, and bad if used ill. -For example, if earmark funds go to some local politician friend for an unnecessary bridge to nowhere, then I'm against it. -However, if the bridge proposal includes a sound argument to prove that "if you build it, they will come," then I might be for it. The argument comes on whether federal funds should be used or local funds. Here in Alabama there are many counties that are just too poor to build such a bridge. But if teh bridge would draw more traffic and business and jobs and taxes and improve interstate traffic patterns, then I'd see the earmark funds as being used well. In this example, these funds help county, state, and interstate business. -Now, a several million dollars earmark to study the dating habits of ardvarks is another issue!

Name:	Barneget -	Reply
Subject:	Cantor is a traitor?????
Date:	8/24/2010 8:10:04 PM

Could todays unnecessary bridge to nowhere be a visionary, futuristic investment? Of course it can! Just like a bridge in the poor area, with limited industry, jobs, skills base. Putting up the interchange may, or may not, produce the desired results in the specified time. The locals have a 5% risk, state 10%, taxpayers all across the country pickup the balance of the tab. IMHO, interchange construction is pork, outside the scope of our Constitution. It is not a Federal issue. It belongs to the local and state governments. My business benefits from the construction of a $66 million 5 lane interchange, built on a road to nowhere. The traffic control system cost nearly $4 mil. So, the city has the interchange for less than the cost of the traffic signals. Federal taxpayers meantime are on the hook for more than $55 mil. Total sales tax generated around the interchange, at 09 rates, would meet the project cost in just under 24 years. Income tax? $66000000/(HC * $10/hr*2080*17%) leads us to a 46.5 year return. 17% is the combined Fed and State rate for $10. 24 years? 46 years? Earmarks or Pork? Typical, I think.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	There are probably good earmarks
Date:	8/24/2010 8:22:21 PM

but the ones that make the news are the ones that are ridiculous. Like everything else in Washington, earmarks get taken to the extreme in an attempt to ensure votes.

Name:	Astro -	Reply
Subject:	About a novel idea
Date:	8/24/2010 9:00:45 PM

Reduce the federal tax rates a lot and let the states increase theirs. Then if Alabama wants a bridge built it can do it. This pork spending in Washington buying votes has to stop somehow. I don't know about the rest of you but I am running out of tax dollars to send up there and see it squandered. I see no reason that my tax dollars should be used to study the sex habits of insects, but maybe that should not apply to the insects in Washington. Every day I get more angry about what is going on in this country and I don't think I am in that boat alone. If the elite does not get it now they will sometime in the future, the hard way.

Name:	Barneget -	Reply
Subject:	There are probably good earmarks
Date:	8/24/2010 9:23:52 PM

I would hope that there are. My issues with earmarks/pork are transparency, and our money sent to DC with a portion hand carried back by some smiling, ribbon cutting, suited hack. WTH? Why should we send money 900 miles away to be returned to us, following careful consultation and consensus building with 534 other members Congress and spent on a project that goes well beyond Federal Constitutional responsibilty? Maybe I am too short sighted, but just maybe I'm right sighted. State/Local issue, state/local responsibility

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	There are probably good earmarks
Date:	8/25/2010 8:21:00 AM

On the surface, I agree with you. It makes more sense for states to decide what they need. But, having seen State/County politics at work, I'm not sure I think things would be much better. When I lived in Northern VA, we had terrible transporation issues. Northern VA constitued the bulk of the tax revenue in VA, yet with the capitol in Richmond, guess where the money was spent. NOT in Northern VA. I see the same in Coosa County. Our roads around the lake are worse for the bad winter we had. No doubt the lake constitues the largest chunk of taxes in Coosa. But, money isn't being spent to fix our roads. And they won't raise the county taxes because the bulk of the population can't afford it.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Cantor is being consistent with his past statement
Date:	8/25/2010 8:37:35 AM

Yeah but all he is doing is regurgitating the Politico piece. Its even linked in his piece. I am not saying Cantor didn't make the statement, all I am saying is it is consistent with what he has said in the past and in my view it should disqualify him from a leadership position. But it won't because I doubt there is anyone better. At least he stuck to his moratorium while many others in the GOP and every single Dem doled out the pork through the earmark process.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Problem with your novel idea
Date:	8/25/2010 8:43:53 AM

Is that what would happen is states run by conservatives would thrive under this system with low taxes and economic freedom creating prosperity while states run by libtards would overtax and over-regulate so businesses leave, they will become sanctuary states so crime and demand for services will go way up, unemployment will soar, the number of state employees will soar and then once bankrupt they will demand federal dollars to bail them out while responsible states will not because they are thriving. Oh wait a second.........that's already happening............

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Where you going to go?
Date:	8/25/2010 8:54:48 AM

Hound, I've made this point before and will make it again. I don't disagree with your assessment of state and local government but the huge difference is if it becomes too intolerable you can always move. If Coosa County is so bad move to Tallapoosa County or if Alabama becomes intolerable move to Florida. But of the federal government becomes intolerable where are you going to move to escape them? Canada? Europe? Mexico?

What local control does, besides comporting with the Constitution and the intent of the Founders as expressed in the Federalist Papers, is it provides you with a choice, an escape option and creates an atmosphere of competition. States compete for new businesses based on a number of factors, including the cost of labor, taxes, transportation, regulatory environment, etc. States that cannot compete are ones like California, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts. Companies and jobs aren't moving into those states, they are moving out in droves. New Jersey alone has had a $7B reduction in payroll in the state in the last several years as companies and people are fleeing the state for lower taxes in neighboring states and even further away.

It is exactly this kind of competition we want to foster and not undermine through greater federal control which in essence just levels the playing field so we are all equally miserable.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Where you going to go?
Date:	8/25/2010 3:58:39 PM

I have no problem with state's competing for jobs, and doing what they need to do to atrract business. I'm just saying that it's not necessarily a cure all to have state and local governments calling the shots. The state and local governments are only as good as the people running them, and if they are inclined to play it straight and not be on the take. There is a lot of graf and corruption at the local and state levels. Do you remember the guy who was feeding the prisoners baloney three times a day, because he got to keep any money he got from the state for maintaining prisoners. Now, I'm sure that rule was enacted to encourage efficient practices and to reward those that managed well. And while I'm not especially concerned about prisoners (defineately not a bleeding heart liberal on that issue), what the guy did was gross mismanagement. My only point is that it doesn't necessarily get better when you offload everything to the state, county and city government. Just because you can get elected doesn't mean you can manage, whether you are a member of Congress, the President or some local mayor. And you can't always move.

Name:	Lifer -	Reply
Subject:	Where you going to go?
Date:	8/25/2010 4:18:19 PM

I agree 100% with both of you. The biggest difference, as I see it, Hound is acountablility. It is much easier and has much more impact when citizens take thier greviances to someone they see in the community, as opposed to a national official who spends 75% of his time in DC, and has handlers and 'people' 100% of the time to run interference. And there is absolutely corruption at every level. In fact at one point in the not so distant past the Alabama Highway Department was rated the most corrupt public agency in the nation. I am not so sure it still isn't right up there at the top of the list.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Where you going to go?
Date:	8/26/2010 8:59:18 AM

No disagreement with what you said although I am of the opinion you can always move, although moving may not be a financially wise thing to do or entail other problems. But it is always an option. With the federal government there is nowhere in this country to run and hide. That in and of itself is an argument for more local control and more limited federal government regardless of whether local government might be worse. With bad local government you can always move or more importantly choose not to move there. With bad federal government there is no way out except to leave the country.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Where you going to go?
Date:	8/26/2010 10:34:55 AM

Lifer raises a good point -- with local government, citizens can actually eyeball officials, and presumably it would not be impossible to vote them out. I confess that I am totally disgusted with government. Obama is a huge disappointment to me, and I believe he will be a one-termer. Disgusted with the entire Congress, who seem to just have fallen to all politics, all the time; with no interest in taking on the economic issues that are plaguing us. It depresses me when I look out on the political horizon and don't even see a viable candidate with some real leadership skills (in lieu of hype).

Quick Links
Coffeeville Lake News
Coffeeville Lake Photos
Coffeeville Lake Videos