Thread: This Is Not A CraigsList Notice

Tweet

In the middle fifties the "DFW Turnpike" opened as a toll road between Fort Worth and Dallas. It is now part of I-30 and is now Known as Tom Landry Highway.

We were promised that when it was finished the toll requirement would be lifted and it would become a freeway.

You know what? IT DID!

It opened at midnight (I have forgotten the date). After having had a few beers a guy I worked with decided he was going to be the first person to drive on the turnpike. He was too late to be first but he picked up a ticket and set out toward Dallas anyway. After a few minutes he decided he didn't want to go to Dallas, so he drove across the median and headed west.

When he got to the toll booth on the Fort Worth end the attendant looked at him and looked at the ticket and called the police.

He wasn't the first to drive on the turnpike but he was the first person to get arrested on it.

I'm told the fines totaled up to a really impressive sum.

Jim

[QUOTE=pepi;476551]"I also do not want trickel down government.."

Here is a definition of trickle down government...

"Trickle-down economics" and "the trickle-down theory" are terms in United States politics to refer to the idea that tax breaks or other economic benefits provided by government to businesses and the wealthy will benefit poorer members of society by improving the economy as a whole.

And this is our President's position?

Like I mentioned before, we all need to pay attention to what we are voting for, not what we are voting against!

Had you read and/or comprehended the entire listing from Wikipedia that you clipped, you would have learned that the term "trickle down economics" is a derisive term created by the left...................so in that context, yes, that is what our President misrepresents as the position taken by his fiscal opposites.

Perhaps you haven't read all of the posts from the beginning, and I wouldn't blame you as it's a long thread, you would have seen the post where I have referenced Federal data that shows each time tax RATES have been reduced in any segment of our economy, actual REVENUES have increased. The only reason your side of the discussion has been able to demagogue that issue is that SPENDING has also increased with the increased income to the government, usually in excess of the revenue increase (with the exception of the last half of the last decade of the 20th century when the Gingrich led House of Reps forced a responsible budget on the government). Your fellow travelers on the left have chosen to ignore those factual data posted that proves the opposite of the outcomes claimed and continue with the party line from the left.............perhaps you will too.

As for the "Big Bird" cuts, again, you are parroting the leftist media and White House spin, which certainly is your choice and free speech right. However, something to consider that might save you some potential embarassment if you were to encounter a thoughtful person. We are spending 40% more than we take in as a government. If we taxed the entire income of those who earn over 1 million bucks a year, we still wouldn't cover the shortfall. Cuts in spending are necessary even if totally irresponsible taxing were to occur. To use your own example, if PBS is able to cover 85% (some insiders claim upwards of 92%) of it's own operating budget through licensing of Big Bird and other characters (which it does), as well as other donations from Corporations and individuals, along with othert sources of income, what better candidate would there be for cutting of funding that is entirely borrowed than one that "requires" so little public assistance. Surely an effective management team could find a way to cut 10% (choosing a middle figure) of operating costs in order to survive.....................private corporations are often forced by various government intrusions to do so, and manage to survive. The question could be asked, "How serious are you about lliving within a budget if you're unwilling to defund a small portion of such a nearly wholly self sufficient organization as PBS?"

True that was from Wikipedia, but it is how I remember the concept.

And the irony can't be ignored.

With regard to Big Bird, PBS will survive without the 15% that our great nation currently provides. Folks like me will just add a bit more to our donations, because it means that much to us. If we don't have the extra $$, maybe next year. But for MR to pinpoint on that particular issue really showed us where he intends to go.

Outside of currently living in the south and any tendencies that I may have inhabiting places of food and entertainment dives with parrots, I don't parrot my beliefs or statements, being from Oregon I am used to developing my own and never really paid much attention to others.

I realize that we all have a choice of least evil in this one, but at least I know where our President is coming from and where he is headed to. I cannot for the life of me see how having big money (don't forget that small business goes over $200,000) can help me have a better life as a taxpayer.

The other thing I forget sometimes is that the President does not run the country...

Once again this thread is a true representation of the basics of our country, thanks all!

You mean, like Waiting till Iran has the ability to nuke us before we do anything. How about the Small arms treaty Obama's just waiting to sign.. Or the fact that Obama's own wife said his " Home Country " was Kenya. He may have been born here, but America is not his home...

Originally Posted by Hot Rod Surfer

but at least I know where our President is coming from and where he is headed to.

I can't say what I want to here, because of Bill's threat to kill the thread if it gets personal. Steam is coming out of my nostrils right now, but I'll keep quiet. Sorry Ted, I know you posted a "like" to what I had written, but I had to erase it to save the thread.

Originally Posted by Evolvo

It's sure a good thing race isn't part of the equation!!

I was hoping that I could kill that post before anyone read it, but you were too quick for me. And that post was not about race, it was about him having purple lips and being from Kenya. Both true no matter what you and the rest of your ilk say. This man was bought and paid for by George Soros to further the agenda of One World Government and he's doing a fine job at it. When the end finally comes, I'll be killed because I have run out of ammo. I hope you and the rest of those who voted for this man enjoy your serfdom. FREEDOM ISN'T FREE.

Originally Posted by Evolvo

"Education is expensive. Keep that in mind, and you'll never be terribly upset when a project goes awry."

Maybe those on here that get their shorts in a knot over Solyndra should "keep that in mind"!



OCCUPY CHR

Okay, time to get my trouser legs wet again. Just as surfer did by ignoring the point about genuine revenue generation, as you have in the past, I will point out that you miss the real point about anger over Solyndra.

What angers most is the crony relationship between the President and one of his wealthy contributors (actually more than one, as G. Kaiser is the lead dog of a team of wealthy contributors). The apparent quid pro quo of "I give you a bundle of campaign cash, and you repay me with a "loan" for a pixie dust project." This relationship is doubly troubling because of the arranged reversal of the normal proctice of having the Federal Govt in first position as receiver/beneficiary when a bankruptcy is settled. Kaiser and crew were assured some return while we taxpayers were shafted. History is full of innovations coming to market and being successful, nearly all of which were funded by private investment wherein those who contributed had a vested interest in minimizing their loses. Those with good intentions (being generous) throwing other peoples money at a wish and a dream (or was it "HOPE"?) aren't that committed to success of the endeavor. I'd love to hear a defense of those practices.................but as experience has shown us, there won't be a reply.

It does bring up a question though. If this White House thought it necessary to criticize Rick Wagoner, former GM CEO, for flying around in a corporate jet while the company under his leadership/management foundered, and that that "failure" in management was cause to fire him (never mind the facistic nature of Government dictating to a privately held company how it chooses to run itself) shouldn't we consider it consistent with this President's beliefs/actions to fire the CEO of our country who is manageing poorly and spending a LOT of time flying around the country in the world's most expensive corporate jet?

Tech, I really respect your views.

One thing I have been really wondering: as one whom is a lawful supporter of the second ammendment, with a modest investment in metal ( lead, brass, hardened steel ):
I have often considered the great liberty paradox.

Loss of life is the greatest forfeiture of liberty. The second being imprisonment. The third, perhaps forfeiture of physical asset.

So, at what point would I forfeit liberty for its protection?

I'm not tech, though I've known him for many years so I'll answer. Once you forfiet liberty you become a slave.

......Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
Patrick Henry
March 23, 1775

Originally Posted by techinspector1

......Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
Patrick Henry
March 23, 1775

If I could give you ten “likes” I would, Tech! Dear God in heaven that we would once again have as public servants those like Patrick Henry who placed righteousness above re-election.

I just returned from a week in Philadelphia (the birth place of this great nation we call “the United States of America”) and believe every person who lives within the boundaries of this country and enjoys the freedoms therein should be required to visit Independence Hall and acquaint themselves with the history that established America. There’s a story credited to Ben Franklin - as he emerged from Independence Hall at the close of the Constitutional Convention on September 18, 1787. A woman approached him and asked, “Well Doctor, what have we got a republic or a monarchy?” To which Franklin replied, “A republic, madam – if you can keep it.” Two hundred and twenty-five years later I am fearful that we have lost sight of the democratic republic carved out by the first true Americans. These were men who worked hard and expected no hand out from their new “government” rather; they painstakingly purposed to keep the government small and efficient.

For the most part, I believe we do not want our government to tell us what we can and cannot do. We want those we elect to represent who we are and bring our united voices to the forefront and act accordingly. We need to remember that politicians are a commodity and that if they do not perform; we have an obligation to replace them with those who do. I am sick to death of the two party system and the mindset that people have adopted that “all republicans are filthy rich evil people”, or “all democrats are liberal leeches”. We’re first and foremost Americans and unless we once again stand on the principles of right behavior and put aside our individual agendas (read “career politicians”), we will most certainly fall apart. If I could, I’d throw the whole lot of them and start from scratch. In the beginning, we had farmers and merchants – inventors and clerks – doctors and military officers – but the one thing we did not have or need among our founding fathers was career politicians. Too many of our elected officials begin their re-election campaigns the day they first take office and I for one, am tired of it.

I’m pleased to see the shift in the polls – but realize the only poll that counts is the one next month. I’m not too pleased with the current administration and certainly have not seen the “change I’d hoped for…” Mitt’s not perfect by any means, but his qualifications as a business person and a leader are light years ahead of the incumbent who believes printing more money to pay back the Chinese is fiscally prudent and apologizing to the terrorists is acceptable. I’m don’t really care if other countries like the United States of America – I would much rather have them respect and fear us as the leader of the free world.

My two cents…

Originally Posted by Bob Parmenter

Okay, time to get my trouser legs wet again.

I don't know about you Bob, but when this happens to me it's involuntary.

Well Richard.............the standard reply to that would be......................that "depends".

It occurs to me now that that being my typical "whiz into the wind" reference, I may not have used it here before to be meaningful.

With regards to big bird... if we have to choose between staying solvent financially or watching a childs program, is the bird REALLY that important???

REALLY??