tomh
I just watched the Nebraska Senate debate. Bob Kerrey won it going away. The Nebraska seat is back in play
One of the strongest arguments for euthanasia is the moral argument. That arguement states that it is more "moral" to let someone die than to live in a certain state. It is simply more "moral" let grandma pass then to keep her alive in severe pain for a few more weeks or months. There certainly are moral arguements both ways. Many families have faced these moral decisions about a loved one and there certainly is no easy answer.
Yesterday the Nebraska GOP took a backhanded swipe the Pennsylvania plan for getting rid of winner-take-all electoral votes. The reasoning was that by allocating electoral votes by district would help Democrats in some Nebraska districts.
In separate action, the committee approved a resolution that would deny party support to any Republican state senator who fails to support legislation returning Nebraska to a winner-take-all presidential electoral vote system Read more: http://journalstar.com/...
Read more: http://journalstar.com/...
The Wisconsin Senate is still changed. In fact it has severally restricted Walker. Right now the GOP has a one seat majority and three weak Republicans. All of them have veto power over anything Walker wants to accomplish.
The GOP has once again telegraphed their punch on the recall election. They are going to say the those who left the State were not doing there job. This argument is seriously flawed. Quorum requirements exist to protect the rights of the minority. Using the quorum requirement as a negotiating stategy is open to both parties. QUORUM IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE LEADERSHIP!! It is up to the Majority to prevent this from happening by negotiating in good faith. In fact the GOP was given opportunities to prevent this. When the Democrats were in charge they prevented this by bargaining in good faith. What is worse is the failure of Republican's to defend their actions in court.
I have just finished reading Alberta Darling's "survey". Like any survey the makeup of the group being survey is crucial and the methodolgy used is also critical. However, no where can I find who was surveyed and what methodolgy was used. However there are several reasons to be suspect of the results. First it seems to comply with her view exactly. Secondly, the questions were poorly worded. She asked if people would rather see their taxes increased or spending reduced. Of course most people say they want there taxes not to increase and they want to see spending reduced. The trick to find out how to reduce spending in a way the does not adversely effect people. That is like asking do you want to sacrifice or do you want others to sacrifice. Surpirse! Surpirse! most people want others to sacrifice. Of course I will give up deserts with tuesday's lunch. I am hoping some one in Wisconsin can get more data on this bogus survey and use it to expose the hypocracy of Albert Darling.
There are two mysteries concerning the open meetings act violations. First why do it in the first place. Secondly, why not use the easy fix rather than let the matter go through the courts. I think I have derived a thesis that answers both questions. Remember the Wisconsin Senate could have done this at any time. The could have always stripped the non-fiscal provisions and voted the union-busting parts from the very onset. However, it would have destroyed their lie that it had some fiscal necessity. Here is what I believe happened. The Democrats are outnumbered 19-14 in the Senage. That may seem like a comfortable lead but is really is not that great. Three defections could doom the bill. Secondly remember that some of those Republicans are sitting in Democratic districts and have needed union votes to win. Finally, the GOP knew that once a recall started they would have 4-5 vulnerable senators. Fitzgerald had already lost one vote. That means that he had an 18-15 majority. I am guessing he lost one more. That means that at least 3 Republicans have to cast an unpopular deciding vote. He knew that if only one decided to visit the restroom during the voting the measure would not pass. So he had to violate the open meetings law in order to prevent a return of the Democrats. That also explains why there has been no revote. If one more Republican either flips or abstains the measure will not pass. By passing the bill before the Democrats return there would be not deciding votes.
2008 Presidential poll. Obama tied in Pennsylvanis and leads by 3 points in Wisconsin. A Muhlenberg poll released shortly before the 2008 election showed Obama and McCain tied. A PPP poll released at the same time show Obama leading McCain by a mere three points in Wisconsin.
Many polls have a huge Republican bias in there polling data. However, a closer inspection shows something quite different. I just finished reading about the Sestak poll in Pennsylvania today. It showed a huge lead for Tommey. However, there appeared to be a serious flaw in the sample group.
Upload logo
Choose a logo image in .gif, .jpg, or .png format.
Delete logo
Choose File