Tagged: United States of America Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Free Radical 9:18 pm on December 3, 2008 Permalink
    Tags: federalism, , United States of America   

    This is Not Federalism! 

    Obama’s latest misdirection

    Note the quote from David Osborne who apparently studied federalism: “The federal government should create funding and incentives for the states to try their own models to expand access to health insurance and control costs and improve quality.”  This is just the federal government deciding what it wants the states to do and then making them do that by manipulating their funding.  This is directly opposed to the principles of federalism!  What’s more this shows no commitment to let states actually choose their own policies in the long run.  It is just a way to let states try things out so that the federal government can choose the policies it likes once they have been tested and then impose those policies on all states (“where Washington is investing in what works”).

    Wouldn’t it be cool if we had fifty states with different cultures and policies.  We could actually each choose the type of government we wanted to live in.  The hippies could have a big love-fest in California or Vermont. The skinheads would be all holed up in Idaho drinking their haterade.  We libertarians could all move to Montana or Nebraska or someplace like that that would let us be free and keep our own wealth (along with most major industry and big business).  The federal government would protect us all from outsiders and each other and we’d all be happy.  We’d have the kind of government we want and we wouldn’t have to hate our neighbors because they wouldn’t be imposing thier values on us through the government.  This has nothing to do with using states as “laboratories for change.”  I’m just saying…..

    Advertisements
     
    • Don Lando 7:14 am on December 4, 2008 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      States rights has it’s pros, for sure.

      So as long as we’re on the subject, must it be Montana and/or Nebraska? Why not Texas where the real big industry is – energy! It’s that or Alaska, so…

    • Free Radical 9:26 pm on December 4, 2008 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      Yeah Texas and Alaska would probably put together some pretty decent policies too. Personally I find the one a little too hot and the other a little too cold though. Montana offers a happy medium. (=

    • euandus 7:40 am on October 22, 2009 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      On Federalism and industry: I suspect that the latest compromise regarding state banking regulation points to the influence of large corporations on the Congress as a culprit in the on-going eclipse of federalism. I have just posted on this, in case you are interested.

  • A.B.Campbell 5:24 pm on November 21, 2008 Permalink
    Tags: alternative energy, , , , United States of America   

    Career liberal bureaucrats predict the future: NIC 2025 Project 

    Report: U.S. Dominance and Influence Predicted to Fade »FOXNews

    The Bruce wonders why these things weren’t said prior to our election of an inexperienced, ultra liberal candidate over a defense heavy, moderate conservative… of course, I suppose there are so many pinko, career bureaucrats in Washington it shouldn’t surprise me. This thing is just dripping with tree hugging, hippie dippy nonsense. They really stretched to put a positive “you did the right thing in electing leftist Barack Obama” spin on the whole thing. Here’s my favorite part:

    On a positive note it added that an alternative to oil might be in place by 2025.”

    Read the NIC 2025 Project official report: Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World

    Share This:

    deliciousfurldiggstumbleitredditnewsvinefacebookcomimages

     
c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel