Don't click or your IP will be banned


Hittin' The Web with the Allman Brothers Band Forum
You are not logged in

< Last Thread   Next Thread ><<  1    2  >>Ascending sortDescending sorting  
Author: Subject: I'm Surprised No One Has Mentioned...

Maximum Peach





Posts: 8384
(8385 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/13/2009 at 11:54 PM
The announcement this week that the White House plans to take over the census.

This one seemed to get little notice around here, but maybe I missed it.

I understand that The White House wants to take this from the Commerce Department, and have it run under the direction of Rahm Emanuel. Did anyone else stop-short when hearing this, and wonder: are they kidding?

Let's put this in another context. What if Nixon had said he wanted control of the census? What if Bush (the latter) said his White House was assuming responsibility for this, and Karl Rove was in charge?

I can't imagine that there wouldn't be an outcry. But so far...... crickets......

Are you folks ok with this?

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured
uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,
so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 
Replies:

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 11252
(11270 all sites)
Registered: 3/8/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/14/2009 at 12:05 AM
quote:
The announcement this week that the White House plans to take over the census.

This one seemed to get little notice around here, but maybe I missed it.

I understand that The White House wants to take this from the Commerce Department, and have it run under the direction of Rahm Emanuel. Did anyone else stop-short when hearing this, and wonder: are they kidding?

Let's put this in another context. What if Nixon had said he wanted control of the census? What if Bush (the latter) said his White House was assuming responsibility for this, and Karl Rove was in charge?

I can't imagine that there wouldn't be an outcry. But so far...... crickets......

Are you folks ok with this?


Rich, if this is such a strategic seizure of power then why DIDN'T Rove do it?

 

____________________
"Love Like You've Never Been Hurt"-Satchel Paige

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 25201
(25201 all sites)
Registered: 9/7/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/14/2009 at 12:15 AM
doesn't commerce report to the president through the secretary of commerce?

how is this a seize of power? It is just reorganization.


 

____________________
Keep on Smiling


 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 11437
(11442 all sites)
Registered: 8/21/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/14/2009 at 12:16 AM
quote:
Tell me the implications of this and I'll tell you if I'm OK with it.


Sort of what I was thinking. I know one of Sen Gregg's articulated reasons for withdrawing as Commerce Sec'y was due to the census. I suppose he might not want to take the job if his dept's authority was diminished, but that's just a consideration for him career-wise. I understand that.

Commerce is still an executive dept, so any President could influence the census regardless. If the census was a legislative function, it would be an issue.

I really don't give the census much thought, except when I have to fill out the long version. Ugh.


 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16027
(16019 all sites)
Registered: 10/13/2007
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/14/2009 at 12:28 AM
quote:
Tell me the implications of this and I'll tell you if I'm OK with it.


It determines how voting boundries and districts are drawn up. I have a feeling this is the part they care about.

 

____________________

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 11437
(11442 all sites)
Registered: 8/21/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/14/2009 at 12:36 AM
quote:
quote:
Tell me the implications of this and I'll tell you if I'm OK with it.


It determines how voting boundries and districts are drawn up. I have a feeling this is the part they care about.


Partly true, but Congress draws the districts, based upon the census population figures.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/14/2009 at 09:17 AM
quote:
quote:
Tell me the implications of this and I'll tell you if I'm OK with it.


It determines how voting boundries and districts are drawn up. I have a feeling this is the part they care about.


Please. Republicans wrote the book on re-districting and gerrymandering. See Texas as a prime example.

 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 

A Peach Supreme



Karma:
Posts: 2967
(2973 all sites)
Registered: 7/14/2005
Status: Online

  posted on 2/14/2009 at 10:22 AM
Seven previous Census Directors have signed a letter advising to move the census to an independent agency status from Commerce. We appear to be going in the opposite direction. Cue up the "RW is worse, did worse etc." Wash ,spin, dry, repeat.

 

____________________
Mark Ramsey

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 11437
(11442 all sites)
Registered: 8/21/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/14/2009 at 11:07 AM
I'm going to change my mind here somewhat. From my brief research, the Constitution vests in Congress the manner in which the census (enumeration, as the Constitution puts it) is taken. The statute from Congress that outlines the census procedures states that "the [Commerce] Secretary" is in charge of the census. It is possible Congress might decide to vest census administration in itself.

So therefore the Congress must amend the statute to allow this oversight change if it wants to. Whether such legislation is wise is debatable.

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8384
(8385 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/14/2009 at 11:26 AM
I'm curious Squatch; is everything that has ever been done in the political spectrum justifiable as long as examples of the other side doing it are available to compare against? Do two wrongs make it right if the "other side" ever committed the same offense?

Almost every criticsm of the new administration is replied to with some combination of: "the RW been doing that for years", or "why didn't you guys complain about this when the Republicans were in charge" (even when many of us did), or the always applicable "well Bush was far worse when he did.... " (insert offense here).

When do we reach a point when the correct thing to do is just that, and those doing otherwise - no matter what jersey they've got on - are deserving of critique? Just my opinion, but the team politics of D vs R is a manufactured distraction to keep us from exploring the deeper questions.



Anyway, on the topic of the census.

This isn't a minor issue by any stretch. As mentioned, census results are used to fashion Congressional districts, determine spending and funding for all sorts of projects and special groups, its used to fix many issues about racial makeup and programs designed to address that, and used by states and cities similar purposes. Bottom line; it has a lot to do with who you can vote for and where your tax money gets spent for the next ten years. A party controlling this, without suitable balance from the other side (the situation we now have in Congress) can manipulate many things to their advantage for years to come.

Its suspected this was a big reason Sen. Gregg withdrew from the Commerce post, perhaps not knowing this was planned when first talking to them.

This should be an independent function, as mentioned before. Sure, its been politicized in the past. That doesn't make it right now. But didn't this new administration promise - throughout his campaign and not more than a month ago in his inaugural - to govern beyond the politics of the past. Now we have an act of brazen partisanship well past what any President has tried before regarding the census.

The string of lofty principles that appear worthless now that power has been attained seems to be growing daily. Are you Obama supporters concerned?

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured

uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,

so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8384
(8385 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/14/2009 at 11:30 AM
quote:
I'm going to change my mind here somewhat. From my brief research, the Constitution vests in Congress the manner in which the census (enumeration, as the Constitution puts it) is taken. The statute from Congress that outlines the census procedures states that "the [Commerce] Secretary" is in charge of the census. It is possible Congress might decide to vest census administration in itself.

So therefore the Congress must amend the statute to allow this oversight change if it wants to. Whether such legislation is wise is debatable.
That's a great observation Brock. I've heard one commentary saying that this might prompt a Constitutional fight if the White House proceeds with their plan.

But these guys should know this, right? With all the problems in the nation, doesn't it make you wonder why the administration wants this power, when their hands are already more than filled with things to do? Are they serving the people, or their own interests of power?

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured

uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,

so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 11437
(11442 all sites)
Registered: 8/21/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/14/2009 at 12:11 PM
quote:
quote:
I'm going to change my mind here somewhat. From my brief research, the Constitution vests in Congress the manner in which the census (enumeration, as the Constitution puts it) is taken. The statute from Congress that outlines the census procedures states that "the [Commerce] Secretary" is in charge of the census. It is possible Congress might decide to vest census administration in itself.

So therefore the Congress must amend the statute to allow this oversight change if it wants to. Whether such legislation is wise is debatable.
That's a great observation Brock. I've heard one commentary saying that this might prompt a Constitutional fight if the White House proceeds with their plan.

But these guys should know this, right? With all the problems in the nation, doesn't it make you wonder why the administration wants this power, when their hands are already more than filled with things to do? Are they serving the people, or their own interests of power?


I would not go so far as saying there will be a Constitutional fight, but the planned change is illegal since it goes against the current statute. As a practical matter, if both houses allow a change, and given the current makeup they might, it does not vest any more or less responsibility in the executive branch.

There's nothing inherently wrong w/ reallocation of responsibilities w/in the cabinet. The President might appoint a lapdog Commerce Sec'y, and if the Senate confirms him, any Presidential influence is the same.

And yes, I'm sure former Con Law professor Obama knows this. Maybe he knows he has the votes to get the statute changed too.

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8643
(8641 all sites)
Registered: 12/14/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/14/2009 at 12:56 PM
quote:
I'm curious Squatch; is everything that has ever been done in the political spectrum justifiable as long as examples of the other side doing it are available to compare against? Do two wrongs make it right if the "other side" ever committed the same offense?

Almost every criticsm of the new administration is replied to with some combination of: "the RW been doing that for years", or "why didn't you guys complain about this when the Republicans were in charge" (even when many of us did), or the always applicable "well Bush was far worse when he did.... " (insert offense here).


ST has become very predictable. No I haven't looked them all up, but nearly EVERY response he has made in all threads since Obama was elected has been along the lines you have mentioned Fuji

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 19467
(19481 all sites)
Registered: 6/9/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/14/2009 at 01:37 PM
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----
I'm curious Squatch; is everything that has ever been done in the political spectrum justifiable as long as examples of the other side doing it are available to compare against? Do two wrongs make it right if the "other side" ever committed the same offense?

Almost every criticsm of the new administration is replied to with some combination of: "the RW been doing that for years", or "why didn't you guys complain about this when the Republicans were in charge" (even when many of us did), or the always applicable "well Bush was far worse when he did.... " (insert offense here).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----



ST has become very predictable. No I haven't looked them all up, but nearly EVERY response he has made in all threads since Obama was elected has been along the lines you have mentioned Fuji




Absolutely true, and as I predicted. You have to seperate Obama from his worshippers who can't see the forest for the balls draped across their noses. Now that Obama is in office, he could do the same moves as the previous admin, but its different now. Actually, it is just the duplicit nature of many on the Left that I have talked about for years on here. All of a sudden they give a damn about our troops and military equipment and all of the rest. Plus, it all goes back to the nature of some on the Left, as I have called it on here countless times, where if you take Bush and Republican bashing out of the equation, there is not a lot leftover intellectually. Obama gave that excellent Reagan-esque speech to the business leaders, and some of his followers were benign, clueless and didn't know how to react. Bhawk is the only one admitting problems with some of what the democrats are doing whereas others like Squatch are dusting off the saw horse and bending right on over. There is nothing new about this.

 

____________________

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8384
(8385 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/14/2009 at 02:39 PM
Although he's perfectly capable of doing this himself, I'm gonna defend ST even though I questioned his response earlier.

I've had many good debates with him in the past. Even if we're on different sides of the political spectrum, he has responded to obvious facts and called a lot of things fairly without political agenda.

I'd just like to see us somehow get past the structure of team-alignment that so dominates the political discussions. The differences between D & R are so small as to be not worth debating. Both have worked the system to their team's best interest at the expense of common sense, fiscal respnsibility, Constitutional limits, and the good of the country. We're all paying for that now, but nothing changes in DC. Its all about power and control, no matter which party is currently driving the bus (or ambulance, given our current state).

That's what I saw in this census issue, and obviously in so much other DC antics. Maybe I'm dreaming, but somehow, we gotta get past team politics.

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured

uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,

so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 46739
(46740 all sites)
Registered: 7/8/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/14/2009 at 02:55 PM
quote:
Let's put this in another context. What if Nixon had said he wanted control of the census? What if Bush (the latter) said his White House was assuming responsibility for this, and Karl Rove was in charge?



Looks like the political comparisions were starting in the first post, Rich. If you really didn't want to being party into it, then why did you do just that?

Once again I am mystifed by yet another thread that demands to know why others aren't as ourtaged about something as they should be.

quote:
Do two wrongs make it right if the "other side" ever committed the same offense?



Absolutely not. But, to reach that point, everyone would have to agree and stay true to going past polarized partisianism. That's simply never going to happen. When I hear folks on the "other side" effectively say "f**K bi-partisanship" and "f**k you guys," then what are we left with?

As much as we all try to keep it all within the bounds of this forum, it doesn't really seem to work that way. Political wars have caused more than their share of damage here, and will continue to do everywhere.

Essentially, total polarazation thrives where neither side will be willing to cede one inch to the other side, ever, no exceptions. In the middle lies the endless smoldering resentment that turns to flat out hate. Y'know, I went to the hardware store and noticed that no less that three different homes had American flags being flown upside down, the National symbol of emergency. If that's not sad, I don't know what is.

Getting down to the party vs. party deal, hey, there's all kinds of things I'll admit about the Democrats...plenty of examples throughout history of crooks and liars and racists holding great sway, the Great Society by and large has been a failure, Bill Clinton perjured himself, made some serious mistakes on many issues. Hell, what happened happened. No sense in trying to deny history.

However, after living through the Clinton years, the GOPAC Memo Manifesto, having a President suggest that anyone that wasn't with him was a traitor, and eight years where nobody on the Right really had a serious problem with anything Bush did because the Left was the ones complaining first (and ultimately blaming Clinton for it 95% of the time)...voila! You don't have to admit to anything when you spend all your time attacking the guy that brought it up.

Seems to me that there's alot of folks on the Right that wish to conduct themselves as if the Bush preisdency didn't happen at all. That it doesn't matter what part the GOP had in it whatsoever - and anyone that tries to change anything about what previously transpired, well, they're wrong too. It's like having the kid who breaks your kitchen window with a baseball coming back when you are fixing it telling you that you are doing it wrong.

As far as the issue on the census, looks to me like politicians are try to redistrict to favor their party. Been happening for decades. More people seem to be paying attention now.

I will say that if the GOP, the Right, whatever name you want to you use spent even 50% of the energy they spend blaming the liberals for everything and put that into action on their own agenda, ideas and goals and that package is truly what the majority of Americans would want, then hell, what would it matter who was districted where? Wouldn't they win every election beause things would finally be so conservatively perfect?

 

____________________
"Live every week like it's Shark Week." - Tracy Jordan

 

Sublime Peach



Karma:
Posts: 7260
(7342 all sites)
Registered: 11/29/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/14/2009 at 04:43 PM
quote:
where if you take Bush and Republican bashing out of the equation, there is not a lot leftover intellectually.


I don't know. It seems that intellectualism means elitist and intellectuals are not good, or so goes that old saw. Science under attack by the right, sound bite attack politics that relies on dishonesty and bad faith debate, and finally, all out cultural war against the left. Conservatives want to conserve a society that they want to change. Don't talk to me about intellectual prowess, get a coherent world view first.

 

____________________
I have an idea: let's pretend we're real human beings.

 
E-Mail User

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8384
(8385 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/14/2009 at 06:47 PM
quote:
quote:
Let's put this in another context. What if Nixon had said he wanted control of the census? What if Bush (the latter) said his White House was assuming responsibility for this, and Karl Rove was in charge?



Looks like the political comparisions were starting in the first post, Rich. If you really didn't want to being party into it, then why did you do just that?

Once again I am mystifed by yet another thread that demands to know why others aren't as ourtaged about something as they should be.
Fair enough Hawk. But when do we get to a point that a reasonable majority see right or wrong and identify it as such without passing it through the party filter first? Seems like we've gone way too far in the wrong direction to me.


quote:
I will say that if the GOP, the Right, whatever name you want to you use spent even 50% of the energy they spend blaming the liberals for everything and put that into action on their own agenda, ideas and goals and that package is truly what the majority of Americans would want, then hell, what would it matter who was districted where? Wouldn't they win every election beause things would finally be so conservatively perfect?
No question that the GOP have become a group lacking much message, and worse: a party dragging it's own anchor of failed history because of Bush. It certainly accounts for their lack of support in the last election. I seriously doubt they have what it takes to remake themselves into a group that can be supported because of a good set of principles that are based in common sense and the Constitution.

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured

uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,

so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4772
(4786 all sites)
Registered: 12/5/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/14/2009 at 07:50 PM
The Republican party latched onto an out of context quote by Reagan about government being the problem and that has been their mantra for the last 20 years. I don't understand why they keep running for government office to gain control of the government if they hate it so much.

 

____________________
"Capitalism is the extraordinary belief that the nastiest of men for the nastiest of motives will somehow work for the benefit of all". John Maynard Keynes

 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4058
(4055 all sites)
Registered: 12/11/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/14/2009 at 08:57 PM
Actually, it wasn't an out of context Reagan quote, it was the guys who wrote the documents that set everything up. They explicitly warned us.

 

____________________
Tim L.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/14/2009 at 10:02 PM
quote:
I'm curious Squatch; is everything that has ever been done in the political spectrum justifiable as long as examples of the other side doing it are available to compare against? Do two wrongs make it right if the "other side" ever committed the same offense?


Two wrongs never make a right, but I find it hard not to point out how you folks havent had a single thing to say in 8 years and now all of sudden, you are political critics on a grand scale. Obama has had a whole 3 weeks in office and to hear some of the criticisms you would think he was the worst President ever. And coming from the folks that bring up the Clinton administration almost 10 years later, its hard to take you seriously.


quote:
Almost every criticsm of the new administration is replied to with some combination of: "the RW been doing that for years", or "why didn't you guys complain about this when the Republicans were in charge" (even when many of us did), or the always applicable "well Bush was far worse when he did.... " (insert offense here).


Again, you are trying to compare 3 weeks to 8 years. Do you even realize how dumb that is? Go and look for yourself at the complaints against Obama...its patently ridiculous. And if you cant see the differences in the issues, then my explaining them to you surely wont help.

quote:
When do we reach a point when the correct thing to do is just that, and those doing otherwise - no matter what jersey they've got on - are deserving of critique?


Gosh, and again, where was all this for the last two terms? All of a sudden you guys are world class critics! Its hilarious and sad.

quote:
Just my opinion, but the team politics of D vs R is a manufactured distraction to keep us from exploring the deeper questions.


Speak for yourself. Many here have been trying to do that for a long time now to be called every name in the book, accused of being terrorist sympathizers and worse. The worst people in the world at team politics can be found on the Right.


 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16174
(16174 all sites)
Registered: 10/6/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/14/2009 at 10:11 PM
quote:
Absolutely true, and as I predicted. You have to seperate Obama from his worshippers who can't see the forest for the balls draped across their noses.


Yeah sure Mr. Bandwagon.

quote:
Now that Obama is in office, he could do the same moves as the previous admin, but its different now.


Not even close. When it happens, Ill be the first to complain about it. Or maybe the second. You are always the first to "support" Obama by shiatting on him.

quote:
Actually, it is just the duplicit nature of many on the Left that I have talked about for years on here.


LOL...that means so much coming from the leading hypocrite and well known liar that you are.


quote:
All of a sudden they give a damn about our troops and military equipment and all of the rest.


This line of shiat again? Cmon Derek, dont you have another pony trick?

quote:
Plus, it all goes back to the nature of some on the Left, as I have called it on here countless times, where if you take Bush and Republican bashing out of the equation, there is not a lot leftover intellectually.


Gosh, yeah, because Ol Georgie was so unfairly treated...talk about balls in their face. You fellated Bush on a regular basis and whined occasionally about his lack of a veto (snicker). Yeah, thats some hard criticism there, boy!

quote:
Obama gave that excellent Reagan-esque speech to the business leaders, and some of his followers were benign, clueless and didn't know how to react. Bhawk is the only one admitting problems with some of what the democrats are doing whereas others like Squatch are dusting off the saw horse and bending right on over. There is nothing new about this.


I wonder if Bhawk gets tired of you trying to nuzzle his sack all the time. You spend almost as much time kissing his ass as you do blowing your own horn. If you had any integrity, you might find it embarrassing.

 

____________________
Missing- 245 spines. If found, please send one to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and the rest to the Capitol building care of the Democratic Party.

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8384
(8385 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/14/2009 at 10:13 PM
Wow Squatch. I've agreed many times that Bush and the Republicans were screwing up. I call them out on many subjects. But its all still lumped together as "you folks".

Thanks for making my point

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured

uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,

so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16605
(16605 all sites)
Registered: 6/4/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/14/2009 at 10:14 PM
They would not be doing this if there wasn't something in it for them.

And that goes for no matter who is in office.

 

____________________


R.I.P. Hugh Duty


 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 9637
(9662 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 2/14/2009 at 10:43 PM
I read back over some stories relating to the 1990 and 2000 census and come to the conclusion there is just no way to remove political motivations and influence of both the left and the right depending on who is in charge.
 
<<  1    2  >>  


Powered by XForum 1.81.1 by Trollix Software

Privacy | Terms of Service | Report Infringement | Personal Data Management | Contact Us
The ALLMAN BROTHERS BAND name, The ALLMAN BROTHERS name, likenesses, logos, mushroom design and peach truck are all registered trademarks of THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. whose rights are specifically reserved. Any artwork, visual, or audio representations used on this web site CONTAINING ANY REGISTERED TRADEMARKS are under license from The ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. A REVOCABLE, GRATIS LICENSE IS GRANTED TO ALL REGISTERED PEACH CORP MEMBERS FOR The DOWNLOADING OF ONE COPY FOR PERSONAL USE ONLY. ANY DISTRIBUTION OR REPRODUCTION OF THE TRADEMARKS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE PROHIBITED AND ARE SPECIFICALLY RESERVED BY THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO.,INC.
site by Hittin' the Web Group with www.experiencewasabi3d.com