On The Mormon elephant in the presidential arena

Posted on August 16 at 1:31 p.m. ( Suggest removal )

SloppyJoe, you demonstrate a profound misunderstanding of the Mormon faith. Try asking an actual Mormon what they believe, rather than simply parrot the lies and distortions of whoever is feeding you that garbage. Your statements range from a gross misunderstanding to outright fabrication (e.g. the first Article of Faith reads: "We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost". That is an unambiguous statement affirming their belief in the Holy Trinity).

On City, hospital officials meet with residents about Deerfield Drive expansion

Posted on August 13 at 7:20 p.m. ( Suggest removal )

Sure, it makes no sense to land a helicopter there. But what happens when a patient is taken there by ambulance, and then the decision is made to send them to a level I trauma center (Madison)? It seems very likely that patients would be triaged there, and then, in severe cases, Med-Flight would take them from there to Madison. Not a "blue moon" scenario at all.

On Janesville: City of Raccoons

Posted on August 9 at 8:20 p.m. ( Suggest removal )

Thanks especially for the link, @factsplease.

On Janesville: City of Raccoons

Posted on August 9 at 8:14 p.m. ( Suggest removal )

Thanks- several very helpful suggestions. I feel bad about the whole thing; I mean, in many ways it reminds me of the dogs we have, so it seems arbitrarily cruel to treat one animal as a pet and another as vermin, but at the same time I can't simply allow it to destroy my home.

I think the best (only) solution is to trap it again (the trap is in my attic, so I'm not too concerned about nosy neighbors), and then, once it's trapped, contact the DNR and ask them to take it.

Thanks all.

On Janesville: City of Raccoons

Posted on August 9 at 4:52 p.m. ( Suggest removal )

I'd really like to know whom I should call as well, Greg. We have one in our attic; I trapped it twice, and took it several miles out of town, but it found it's way back. I can't figure out how it's getting in there, either. After taking it to the country the second time, I was told that there is a $1000 fine for transporting a live, wild animal, so apparently live trapping them and releasing them elsewhere is illegal. I can't shoot them in town, I don't want to poison in and have it die somewhere, I'm really at a loss about how to deal with this. He's done quite a bit of damage up there, and the smell is horrible.

On We’ll soon feel impact of of governor's budget pen

Posted on June 30 at 8:27 p.m. ( Suggest removal )

Oh, and it's disingenuous to argue that the wealthy already pay too much because they pay a given percentage of the total tax revenue.
First, the rest of us could pay 100% and still not move that number by much, because the disparity in wealth is several orders of magnitude.
Second, the taxes most of us pay are not income but sales taxes, which are a regressive tax: a fixed tax (e.g. so many cents per gallon of gasoline) consumes a vastly larger portion of a low income persons wealth than it does the most wealthy.
So you can claim that a small increase in income taxes would be detrimental to "job makers" (which is a separate fiction), but the reality is that it's all the other taxes and fees that have impacted any discretionary income for consumers (a.k.a. the actual job makers. You know, demand...)
That and the fact that the job makers are busy making jobs. In China. And India. And Indonesia. And. And... And not here. Trickle down works, alright. We're just not the ones getting trickled on any more. Just tricked.

On We’ll soon feel impact of of governor's budget pen

Posted on June 30 at 8:13 p.m. ( Suggest removal )

Don't bother, i_luv_jvl. His source, the National Taxpayers Union, is a Koch (and, more specifically, a Phillip Morris) front organization: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?tit...

Follow the money.

On Obama releases birth form, decries 'silliness'

Posted on April 27 at 4:35 p.m. ( Suggest removal )

holbachsnature: so what's the alternative? Supply-side and demand-side economics, as preached by the right and left, respectively, both assume a free market in a closed system. Neither actually exists. It doesn't matter which side you dump money into, either way it immediately leaves the economy. You give tax breaks to one side to create jobs, and they do: in China. You give money to the other side to create demand, and it does: for Chinese products. The only realistic solution is to remove the incentive to export jobs.
.
Yes, that will mean that the standard of living will go down, but is there any scenario in which it doesn't? We haven't paid American wages for American products for decades because our economy has always relied on exploitation. That's not a judgment, just an observation. Eventually, however, the people we exploit either get sick of it, get a better offer, or accumulate enough wealth that they begin to compete with us for resources. Our relationship with China in particular is, by design, one way. Money goes in but never comes back out.
.
We're addicted to cheap labor, but like any other addiction, it will kill us unless we give it up. This isn't politics, it's just math. It doesn't matter what we claim to believe, we vote every time we go to Walmart (again- not a judgment. Most products today can't be purchased from a domestic manufacturer even if you tried).
.
We can have jobs, here, today. But it means no more cheap products. If you have a solution that creates jobs at a real living wage that doesn't require significant belt-tightening by every single American then please, let us know. I certainly can't think of one.
.
To put it another way: barring the discovery of a new group of people to exploit, a lower standard of living is an inevitability. The question is simply on whose terms. I prefer the scenario that allows us to retain control of our economy.

On Obama releases birth form, decries 'silliness'

Posted on April 27 at 1:38 p.m. ( Suggest removal )

lol Bond.
Unfortunately, it's a copy. You'd have to send Abby to HI to test the original document (and test the ink, or else they'd claim it was someone else's cert., altered).

I've never understood why it matters. That rule was written in an era that saw royal families marrying for political reasons- so the King of one country was a guy who had never even been there, but married into the job, or was next in like because his aunt had married a duke at one point. So you had Frenchmen running England from Germany (or what we now call the regions in question). It's understandably annoying, or it was back then, but it's not exactly a pressing issue here, today.

Also, Trump? Really? The only thing I can think of that would be more absurd would be fictional characters. I wonder how many votes John Galt would get...

That said, I actually do agree with winterstinks about the what, just not the who. Tarriffs are the only way to rescue what's left of our ecconomy. Of course, that would have the exact opposite effect on prices(they would go up, not down, winterstinks), but whatever.

On Pay to play: Surcharges considered on top of Janesville school sports fees

Posted on April 27 at 1:17 p.m. ( Suggest removal )

And thank you Vigilandy- the 15% statistic is misleading, as they are comparing two sets of numbers. Many of the arguments below are less valid when you change 15% to 50%.