Is Wind Power Worth It?

The actual problem with the Democrats is that they have no spine, are unwilling to stand up for what the base of the party wishes. The Democractic Senators and Representatives are drinking from the same well of money interests that the Republicans do. Until we limit the influence of lobbyists, we will not be a government that can respond to the will of the people. Only when that is possible does the issue of party come into play.

Paraphasing Jefferson: "Beware the moneyed interests"

b. Farmer the people.

Bit Farmer wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@supernews.com:

Translation; limit free speech and the Constitutional right to petition the government.

today's DemocRATic Party is the party of George Soros,MoveOn.org,and the rest of the Leftist communists. They have a history of supporting racism,too.

Bit Farmer wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@supernews.com:

I also think that part of the problem is that the idea of civil fiscal responsibility has been taken over by religious reactionaries, and the idea of social justice ahs been taken over by ultra-socialists.

I think that most people, if spoken with as individuals taken out of the crowd (and therefore less subject to the influences of what's come to be called "groupthink") pretty much believe that gov.t should be fiscally responsible, *and* pretty much leave individuals alone to pursue life, liberty, and what ehy deem to be happiness.

Party politics has destroyed the Common Ground we all share as Americans, and thereby polarized many people into uncomprimising either-or camps.

Personally, I think that it's more Constitutional to have a fiscally- responsible, and minimal, gov.t, *and* maximize both personal liberty, and equality under the law. From what I can tell, although the Constitution suppoerts mejority rule, it *also* protects the civil rights of those who are not part of the majority - a.k.a. social justice. What's happened, however, is that, as a party platform, "fiscal responsibility" has become inextricably intertwined with *reducing* liberty for specified unpopular minorities, whereas conversely, "social justice" has come to be perceived in socialistic terms and therefore inextricably intertwined with big gov.t, and big spending, which increasingly seeks to make responsible people pay tro support irresponsibile people.

The problem I see is that neither platform, as far as I can tell at least, is any more Constitutional than the other... :(

Jim Yanik wrote in news:Xns9AEA6BE0B8C48jyanikkuanet@64.209.0.87:

What do lobbyists have to do with either? The problem isn't with what they say, the problem is in the marginal legality of their financial influence.

Kris Krieger wrote in news:fOednQq7WOIy0xLVnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.com:

"lobbyists" are people representing a group of other people,pooling their resources.

Jim Yanik wrote in news:Xns9AEA93C25FB01jyanikkuanet@64.209.0.84:

WHich is fine until gifts of various sorts become bribes. Lobbyists have huge amounts of money at their disposal, and between that, and the power held by large corporations, they have *far* greater access to politicians than does someone with barely enough to cover his stay at the local budget hotel. If some politician has a change to be wined'n'dined at an elegant five-star restaurant in an exclusive area of town, do you seriously think such an offer would be turned donw in favor of having a chili dog with someone representing a bunch of peons, or *worse*, going "Dutch"?

Money is power - andyoen whose ever functioned in the real world or business and politics, or has at all studied politics and government, knows that. And lobbyists have a lot of money at their disposal which they can use to influence political decisions that affect everybody. It'd be one thing is aeveryone who sought to petition the gov.t was doing so from a level playing field, but they're not - more money = more access = more influence over political decisions.

And then you get caught...

...Jim Thompson

HERE IS SOME POLITICS FOR YOU:

own

It's in the same dark place.

al which

ing

ccess

Damn.!! Looks to be a Chevy dealer.

I was really hoping this giant 30x60 foot American flag was hoisted over some Toyota dealership..... :)

-mpm

Why not? Many Toyota models are made in Tennessee or California.

...Jim Thompson

-- | James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at

Liberals are so cute.  Stupid as bricks, but cute.

Kris Krieger wrote in news:iZSdnSpMHNpa4xLVnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.com:

We have laws concerning bribes and gifts.

so,to 'save' the People,you would cut off their access to the representatives. You would diminish the People's access while not affecting the elites access.

doesn't sound very democratic nor very smart.

own

But flexed a little differently.

ess

WOW. That is *SO* impressive.

A whole *ONE* congress critter indicted (not yet convicted) by the Feds since 1993.

When there are so many bent ones to choose from and so many snouts deep in the lobbyist funded trough. It should be like shooting fish in a barrel. Hard to believe that guys like Abramoff caught red handed dishing out bribes pleaded guilty.

It really is true that America has the best politicians that money can buy.

Regards, Martin Brown

I always thought so, until I discovered that the sneaky Europeans had already skimmed the scum off the political pond, before we arrived. The best we can buy are the leftovers, that weren't corrupt enough for Europe. :(

Jim Yanik wrote in news:Xns9AEABED9C2463jyanikkuanet@

You are the one cheering the notion that wealth should be required for access. I'm the one saying that politicians should be equally willing to meet with "average Joe" constituents, and representatives thereof, over a chili dog.So, jsut who is it who is militating to cut the People off from access to their representatives?

?!?!

That is so astoundingly and pathetically *backasswards* from what I said, that I can only conclude you're deliberately trolling.

You're the one with the reading-comprehension problem.

Good luck with that.

No, wealth would be required if you had to personally live in Washington to petition your representatives. Lobbyists allow a group (say the Sierra Club) to collectively hire someone to represent their views.

It is *exactly* what you said. You may not realize it, but...

No, you haven't thought your asinine position through.

Indeed.

krw wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@news.individual.net:

Oh, nice pull at the heartstrings to try to confuse the issue with emotionalism, Bravo.

A lot of politicians, including both presidential candidates, have been expressing concern over the influence of lobbyists with huge amounts of money at their disposal.

No, it isn't.

It's quoted right above:

THe influence is also subtler, but I've been assuming tht most people here have a general awareness of politics and issues - maybe that's an incorrect assumption on my part, but I go by it in order to save at least

One issue of major concern is the influence of lobbyists.

As above. If its asinine to be concerned that more money equates to both more political access,a nd more political influence, then at least I have one honking huge hell of a lot of company.

The interaction of lobbyist's with politicians has degraded into "legalized" graft. Not long ago the term "lobbying" meant "making your case", or "negotiating your position". In today's political scene it more often than not simply means "Payola", or "Bribery". The lobby's and their tactics (IMHO), are NOT the problem. Our elected representatives who accept the bribes along with a legal system that (historically) has not sentenced white collar criminals to anything more than token prison terms are the major culprits. It is truly a "justice" system developed and evolved via the "Golden Rule", in that "those with the gold, make the rules..." I am of the belief as well as historical observation that the Republican and Democratic parties do not represent the issues facing our citizens of this nation, but actually mirror the lobbyists who support them, beginning with the ones who have contributed the most money. But, of course they SAY they support these causes and issues, however, rarely does that translate into action after the elections are over. It is back to business as usual, working for their REAL employers, the lobbies! I guess it is logical that it would "follow the money", but if we as citizens are willing to accept the status quo, we are getting what we deserve. Not bad for "The greatest nation on earth". Unfortunately, the solution is not as simple as drilling a bunch of oil wells on protected wildlife refuges, or building a bunch of nuclear power stations, or hiring the Koreans and Japanese to design and build better individual transportation alternatives. That would only allow our morally defunct system to operate in a greener or efficient way. We continue to treat the symptoms of our country's problems and issues, while being blind to their root causes. Morals and common sense values are what we lack in politics and until we modify the system to allow enforcement of effective prosecution of white collar/political criminals, as well as provide a way these people can be ousted from office sooner than in the same decade the crime was alleged to have occurred, without the ability to be pardoned by their successors this country will continue to lose wealth and stature to other nations and our quality of life will be compromised at the individual citizen level more and more. Hey! what do you expect? The same criminals we put into office are still "driven' the bus..".