|
Post by Karen on Nov 8, 2008 15:01:28 GMT -5
And another tick on the electoral counter Omaha gives its votes to Obama. Julia, having cleaned the kitchen floor and used up all my useful for the day. This news made Nick's day. Go Omaha! OTOH...his brother who lives in Omaha is not a happy camper.
|
|
|
Post by Squeemonster on Nov 8, 2008 15:15:09 GMT -5
It occurs to me to revise my previous statement: the Republicans are not the party of the South. They're they Rural Party. Seems they didn't win a single metropolitan area, at least that I can remember right now. Folks should correct me if I'm wrong. I mean...not even in Nebraska. Not a surprise, what with their whole, "Real Americans live in the country" bit. Dude...MOST Americans live in the cities. Maybe this is why you lost. I guess it depends what you mean by metropolitan, but Huntsville, where Monnie lives, for example, went for McCain. According to wikipedia, Huntsville "is the largest city in northern Alabama in a region of a half-million people, with the city proper having 171,327 residents (2007 estimate)." There are probably others . . . dunno. But living in Ohio, where the state changes from blue to red like it's changing its underwear, I don't get the impression either party should take metro or rural areas for granted. To the credit of all American voters, ultimately, who wins depends on more than party allegiance. Yeah, NASA and Redstone Arsenal I think are what tipped it to McCain here. So, I guess maybe it depends on what fuels each metropolitan area.
|
|
|
Post by Spaced Out Looney on Nov 8, 2008 15:15:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Squeemonster on Nov 8, 2008 15:30:58 GMT -5
I have to share this bit of news that has completely rocked my world. My grandfather on my mom's side of the family is . . . well, he's a racist. He's in his nineties--grew up on a dirt poor farm here in Alabama, big family, and he's always been a racist. Not a violent, join-the-organization racist, but one of those who's never wanted anything to do with other races, who thinks races should be separate, stay separate, and yeah, I'm sure he thinks whites are better than other races.
We've had many an argument about it. He's a good man, loves his family, hard worker, etc. But no one could ever get it through his head how horrible and wrong and sickening his thinking was, or how upset it would make the rest of the family when he said stuff. He didn't care.
That man, my grandfather, on Nov. 4, 2008 voted for an African American man for President.
This, if nothing else that happened during this election did, this tells me that the world really is changing. That anything can happen, that there are limitless possibilities and opportunities in this country.
It's change that I truly do believe in. Yes, we can, people. Now, let's get to work.
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Nov 8, 2008 15:33:10 GMT -5
I guess it depends what you mean by metropolitan, but Huntsville, where Monnie lives, for example, went for McCain. According to wikipedia, Huntsville "is the largest city in northern Alabama in a region of a half-million people, with the city proper having 171,327 residents (2007 estimate)." There are probably others . . . dunno. But living in Ohio, where the state changes from blue to red like it's changing its underwear, I don't get the impression either party should take metro or rural areas for granted. To the credit of all American voters, ultimately, who wins depends on more than party allegiance. Which brings me to a question Give the state of the budget and the need to trim: what do you all think of farm subsidies? It's a touchy subject round these parts.
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Nov 8, 2008 15:36:12 GMT -5
I have to share this bit of news that has completely rocked my world. My grandfather on my mom's side of the family is . . . well, he's a racist. He's in his nineties--grew up on a dirt poor farm here in Alabama, big family, and he's always been a racist. Not a violent, join-the-organization racist, but one of those who's never wanted anything to do with other races, who thinks races should be separate, stay separate, and yeah, I'm sure he thinks whites are better than other races. We've had many an argument about it. He's a good man, loves his family, hard worker, etc. But no one could ever get it through his head how horrible and wrong and sickening his thinking was, or how upset it would make the rest of the family when he said stuff. He didn't care. That man, my grandfather, on Nov. 4, 2008 voted for an African American man for President. This, if nothing else that happened during this election did, this tells me that the world really is changing. That anything can happen, that there are limitless possibilities and opportunities in this country. It's change that I truly do believe in. Yes, we can, people. Now, let's get to work. Whoa. That is really awesome, Monnie. Did he have an explanation for his decision?
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Nov 8, 2008 15:42:20 GMT -5
RE: The Aristocrats - "The final line may simply be seen as the end of a rather bawdy joke rather than a punchline." So - saying the punchline is a request to laugh off the last 8 years of the Bush administration.
|
|
|
Post by Spaced Out Looney on Nov 8, 2008 16:32:27 GMT -5
And another tick on the electoral counter Omaha gives its votes to Obama. Julia, having cleaned the kitchen floor and used up all my useful for the day. It occurs to me to revise my previous statement: the Republicans are not the party of the South. They're they Rural Party. Seems they didn't win a single metropolitan area, at least that I can remember right now. Folks should correct me if I'm wrong. I mean...not even in Nebraska. Not a surprise, what with their whole, "Real Americans live in the country" bit. Dude...MOST Americans live in the cities. Maybe this is why you lost. Republicans being preferred in rural areas makes sense to me. Government provided social services promoted by the Democrats mean less if you have difficulty accessing said services. The perceived value of relying on yourself, your family, and private organizations like churches becomes far greater than the perceived value of anything the government might do (aside from national defense). The desire for the government to keep out of your life, whether its taxes to laws and restrictions, becomes much greater in that situation because there's less benefit to the costs incurred. Of course, the Republicans are also the party of big business, who would also like the government to stay out of their lives but for different reasons. I kind of feel sometimes that the big business folks sort of hoodwink the rural working class folks especially when it comes to things like business regulation, because easing those regulations, particularly the environmental ones, have a detrimental impact on those living in rural areas.
|
|
|
Post by Spaced Out Looney on Nov 8, 2008 16:37:33 GMT -5
I guess it depends what you mean by metropolitan, but Huntsville, where Monnie lives, for example, went for McCain. According to wikipedia, Huntsville "is the largest city in northern Alabama in a region of a half-million people, with the city proper having 171,327 residents (2007 estimate)." There are probably others . . . dunno. But living in Ohio, where the state changes from blue to red like it's changing its underwear, I don't get the impression either party should take metro or rural areas for granted. To the credit of all American voters, ultimately, who wins depends on more than party allegiance. Which brings me to a question Give the state of the budget and the need to trim: what do you all think of farm subsidies? I think it's a sticky situation cause they're detrimental in a lot of ways, but without them, more farmers would go under than already are. I think there needs to be a careful transition to a better farm aid system. What this new system should be exactly, I don't know, but I think I'll defer to Michael Pollan and others for that.
|
|
|
Post by Squeemonster on Nov 8, 2008 17:51:11 GMT -5
I have to share this bit of news that has completely rocked my world. My grandfather on my mom's side of the family is . . . well, he's a racist. He's in his nineties--grew up on a dirt poor farm here in Alabama, big family, and he's always been a racist. Not a violent, join-the-organization racist, but one of those who's never wanted anything to do with other races, who thinks races should be separate, stay separate, and yeah, I'm sure he thinks whites are better than other races. We've had many an argument about it. He's a good man, loves his family, hard worker, etc. But no one could ever get it through his head how horrible and wrong and sickening his thinking was, or how upset it would make the rest of the family when he said stuff. He didn't care. That man, my grandfather, on Nov. 4, 2008 voted for an African American man for President. This, if nothing else that happened during this election did, this tells me that the world really is changing. That anything can happen, that there are limitless possibilities and opportunities in this country. It's change that I truly do believe in. Yes, we can, people. Now, let's get to work. Whoa. That is really awesome, Monnie. Did he have an explanation for his decision? He said he thought he was the best person for the job. And after watching Obama's first press conference yesterday, my grandfather told my mom he thinks Obama's going to be great for the country, and he was proud he voted for him.
|
|
|
Post by Spaced Out Looney on Nov 8, 2008 18:19:38 GMT -5
Whoa. That is really awesome, Monnie. Did he have an explanation for his decision? He said he thought he was the best person for the job. And after watching Obama's first press conference yesterday, my grandfather told my mom he thinks Obama's going to be great for the country, and he was proud he voted for him. That is indeed impressive. My grandparents are very bigoted, but I don't know if that influenced their decision at all. I haven't talked to them about it, but they live in AZ, are elderly, and were really fond of McCain in 2000, so I'm pretty sure they voted for him.
|
|
|
Post by Julia, wrought iron-y on Nov 8, 2008 19:12:22 GMT -5
Which brings me to a question Give the state of the budget and the need to trim: what do you all think of farm subsidies? I think it's a sticky situation cause they're detrimental in a lot of ways, but without them, more farmers would go under than already are. I think there needs to be a careful transition to a better farm aid system. What this new system should be exactly, I don't know, but I think I'll defer to Michael Pollan and others for that. Thing is, most farmers are not subsidized; the closest thing to a universal farm subsidy is the refund on the federal part of fuel tax for vehicles used exclusively on-farm. Some people get some disaster payments some time; crop subsidies and price supposrts are payed mostly to the biggest, richest, "farmers" who are often corporations, some of them multi-nationals.The kind of payments which started in the New Deal and were meant to keep individual farmers in business have been gamed so well by the big guys that they became a tool to drive small farmer's out of business. The biggest FDA administered pay-out program is food stamps; I doubt even Grover Nordquist thinks this is the time to cut that program. Julia, although eligibility for food stamps and WIC have both been cranked down in the past eight years.
|
|
|
Post by Spaced Out Looney on Nov 8, 2008 19:17:29 GMT -5
I think it's a sticky situation cause they're detrimental in a lot of ways, but without them, more farmers would go under than already are. I think there needs to be a careful transition to a better farm aid system. What this new system should be exactly, I don't know, but I think I'll defer to Michael Pollan and others for that. Thing is, most farmers are not subsidized; the closest thing to a universal farm subsidy is the refund on the federal part of fuel tax for vehicles used exclusively on-farm. Some people get some disaster payments some time; crop subsidies and price supposrts are payed mostly to the biggest, richest, "farmers" who are often corporations, some of them multi-nationals.The kind of payments which started in the New Deal and were meant to keep individual farmers in business have been gamed so well by the big guys that they became a tool to drive small farmer's out of business. The biggest FDA administered pay-out program is food stamps; I doubt even Grover Nordquist thinks this is the time to cut that program. Julia, although eligibility for food stamps and WIC have both been cranked down in the past eight years. If the government were just simply to ax the subsidies, how do you think that would change the playing field if at all?
|
|
|
Post by Sue on Nov 8, 2008 19:32:40 GMT -5
I think it's a sticky situation cause they're detrimental in a lot of ways, but without them, more farmers would go under than already are. I think there needs to be a careful transition to a better farm aid system. What this new system should be exactly, I don't know, but I think I'll defer to Michael Pollan and others for that. Thing is, most farmers are not subsidized; the closest thing to a universal farm subsidy is the refund on the federal part of fuel tax for vehicles used exclusively on-farm. Some people get some disaster payments some time; crop subsidies and price supposrts are payed mostly to the biggest, richest, "farmers" who are often corporations, some of them multi-nationals.The kind of payments which started in the New Deal and were meant to keep individual farmers in business have been gamed so well by the big guys that they became a tool to drive small farmer's out of business. The biggest FDA administered pay-out program is food stamps; I doubt even Grover Nordquist thinks this is the time to cut that program. Julia, although eligibility for food stamps and WIC have both been cranked down in the past eight years. So you'd be okay with stopping subsidies? Would there be a huge outcry about causing the cost of food to go up?
|
|
|
Post by Julia, wrought iron-y on Nov 8, 2008 21:35:58 GMT -5
Thing is, most farmers are not subsidized; the closest thing to a universal farm subsidy is the refund on the federal part of fuel tax for vehicles used exclusively on-farm. Some people get some disaster payments some time; crop subsidies and price supposrts are payed mostly to the biggest, richest, "farmers" who are often corporations, some of them multi-nationals.The kind of payments which started in the New Deal and were meant to keep individual farmers in business have been gamed so well by the big guys that they became a tool to drive small farmer's out of business. The biggest FDA administered pay-out program is food stamps; I doubt even Grover Nordquist thinks this is the time to cut that program. Julia, although eligibility for food stamps and WIC have both been cranked down in the past eight years. If the government were just simply to ax the subsidies, how do you think that would change the playing field if at all? I honestly don't know- the best that could happen was that some people would leave the business ; the worst is that it would just be another lever for the big multinationals to put farm land into more intense cultivation (a lot of the current set of subsidies underwrite conservation programs). Subsidies are not nearly as big a budget item as people think they are, either, so the overall impact would be slight. Julia, it's possible that the agricultural economy is so screwed up that any change will default to more negative environmental impact and higher food prices.
|
|