On Court: Calif. gay marriage ban is unconstitutional
Posted on February 10 at 8:10 a.m. ( Suggest removal )
Ezoner: Why would a ruling in support of gay marriage have anything to do with animals? We limit laws all the time. For instance a dog can’t drive! A dog can be locked in a kennel however a child can not! Animals cannot speak for themselves anyone who thinks they can marry an animal would have an awfully hard time explaining to anyone how the animal feels about that. It is not discriminatory to limit marriage to humans because animals and children do not have the menial capacity to fully understand the full commitment of marriage. Animals and children and the dead as you also have brought up cannot with clear state of mind make the decision that they would like to be married, that is why there are laws to protect those groups from predatory human adults. I found one of your posts interesting “once the door is open, you cannot only open it for a group of society that YOU deem as acceptable” really because when we gave women the right to vote that was opening a door, do dogs have the right to vote now or do children? Also you keep speaking of how you know that being gay is an illness, I am intrigued to know what your medical and psychological background is to make that statement because the large medical and psychological communities have determined that it is not an illness. Also you stated “extends to an adult and a child” this will not occur because medical professionals will and can state in a court of law that medically a child’s brain is not capable of full understanding of what marriage and love are until an older age, that is why there are laws in place to protect children. This same concept is used when a child commits murder or if your five year old steals a car the child does not get punished the same as if the child were an adult because their brains cannot fully comprehend the consequences of their actions. I do await your response however I hope you state something new instead of simply the same previous posts. Also by the way I am married to a woman so this ruling has no effect on me and quite frankly if two people love each other what business is it of yours?
On Wis. elections board considering review options
Posted on February 7 at 3:10 p.m. ( Suggest removal )
I am shocked that you believe they don’t have a chance in removing him from office. They have a greater percentage of the electorate than successful recalls in the past which have resulted in an overturning. You know walker could have prevented this had he chosen to sit down with the unions and compromise instead he wanted the “bomb” approach and I think it might have blown up in his face.
On Should state create tollways?
Posted on February 3 at 1:02 p.m. ( Suggest removal )
No! We pay gas tax, but the fact is that gas tax is not high enough; gas tax is more fair tax anyway because those who use more gas (i.e. Semis, trucks and SUVs) are the ones who do more damage to the roads. Our legislature stopped the gas tax from automatically increasing to keep up with increasing maintenance costs and then they all turned around and signed a tax pledge to not raise taxes. A toll-way is simply another tax and creates more wear and tear on our side streets which in turn increases costs to local government which in turn has to increase taxes. And the most pathetic excuse is well Illinois does it, just because another state has increased fees for using its interstate system does not mean that it is something we should do or that it is right. And how exactly will this help us be open for business?
Posted on February 2 at 8:44 a.m. ( Suggest removal )
A toll is just another tax. I already pay tax for roads when I pay tax on my gas! If a toll is added then they should remove the tax on gas! And by the way there is not enough funding from the tax on gas because the republicans removed the automatic yearly increases on the gas tax! They stopped that tax and now roads are not funded properly!
On Sex ed, abortion on lawmakers' minds
Posted on January 30 at 7:53 a.m. ( Suggest removal )
Didnt these people run on how they were going to concentrate on jobs?
On Should donors reveal employers?
Posted on January 27 at 7:16 a.m. ( Suggest removal )
Macdaddy: My post had nothing to do with Republican or Democrat, Union or Corporations. I suggested we get rid of ALL donations to people running for public office. They are running to work for US and as such it makes sense to me for US to give them a set amount of money to run for that office. The money is what is making everything corrupt, on both sides. Give each person a set amount to run for the primary, and then each person gets a set amount to run for the election. Get rid of PAC’s and super PAC’s. Make the people running actually accountable for the ads they put out and don’t let other people put ads out for them. I know it is a crazy idea but if an ad is for a candidate or against their opponents the candidate who puts this ad out should be held accountable for this. Why is it a good idea to have unlimited amounts of money in politics, why not concentrate on debates and the people’s views on topics, I am sick and tired of all the political ads. Half of the republican debates are spent discussing how the candidates don’t agree with the ads their superpacs are putting out but they can’t stop it! It is pathetic.
On Should donors reveal employers?
Posted on January 26 at 4:36 p.m. ( Suggest removal )
I find it sickening that people who run corporations want it both ways they want to be able to spend unlimited amounts of money promoting and defending the politicians who they feel will best represent their interests but then they also don’t want the public to know who they are! Why don’t we just have publically funded elections? If someone wants to run for a position they have x amount of dollars that they can use during their entire election given to them and they have to pay for any and all advertisements for them and they are held responsible for the accuracy of those advertisements! It is the ads that everyone hates! It makes our political system a JOKE. Get the money out of politics and start making decisions based on what is best for the American people!
On Gov. Walker says Wis. headed in right direction
Posted on January 26 at 8:39 a.m. ( Suggest removal )
I was reading on recaps of the speech and I find it funny that Walker asked small businesses to hire at least one new person. I don’t know of any business that doesn’t hire people when they need people or that waits for the governor to ask them to hire people before they do. It seems like an idiotic request I mean really if businesses needed to hire they would, it looks like over the past six months they have needed to get rid of employees considering we are going through more job losses.
On Will you be watching Walker’s speech?
Posted on January 25 at 3:19 p.m. ( Suggest removal )
I will not be watching his speech, I have found that his speeches are full of the same empty promises and don’t change. He simply keeps repeating things hoping that we start to believe what he is spreading. Walker is only a smooth talker he has not helped promote this state, heck he is barely in this state. He is only good at promoting himself and he sells himself to any billionaire willing to buy. Like this billionaire in his ad, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/12/20... . Or he uses teachers to lie for him http://uppitywis.org/blogarticle/superin... when their own superintendents admit the teacher was lying!
Page 1 of 57 | Next
On Obama seeks $300 million for Great Lakes cleanup
Posted on February 13 at 2:29 p.m. ( Suggest removal )
Here we go with more SOCIALIST spending! Who the heck wants lakes with clean water! Fish be dammed when the water is bad enough some corporate billionaire with just pay a private crew to clean up the lakes. Oh what the lakes are how big? Never mind I won’t bother cleaning them I will just buy myself an island and ignore the mess my company created. LOL seems logical right?