Sandbox – 22jul15

July 2015
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
	1	2	3	4
5	6	7	8	9	10	11
12	13	14	15	16	17	18
19	20	21	22	23	24	25
26	27	28	29	30	31

OUR LINKS

YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

Sandbox – 22jul15

22 July 2015

[We have been hearing a lot of chest beating about the demise of the Republican Party during the last year. And to hear the same prognosticators, 2016 will pretty much bury the GOP. Here’s a little graphic to ponder. gjr]

Posted in Comment Sandbox

125 responses to “Sandbox – 22jul15”

Paul Emery

23 July 2015

typo “requiring GMO labeling”

LikeLike
George Rebane

23 July 2015

PaulE 921pm – I’m still for states’ rights; don’t know what problem you’re referring to.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

23 July 2015

Paul Emery, why are you not answering BillT’s post about California rejecting you on labels?

LikeLike
Fish

23 July 2015

Posted by: Paul Emery | 23 July 2015 at 09:21 PM
….. but in your view the Feds should have the power to overturn the wishes of the citizens
Not “in my view”……in law. I’d love for Vermont to tell the Feds to pound sand. Six months from now Texas announces it’s going to give 3rd graders automatic weapons 🔫because of “the wishes of the citizens” and you’ll be in a full pearl clutching frenzy about defiance of Federal Law.

LikeLike
Paul Emery

23 July 2015

Todd Bills post is irrelavant to the question Todd. California has the right to reject or require labeling and the voters chose not requiring labeling. In Vermont they did make that requirement but the feds are taking that right away from the citizens of Vermont That is the question at hand.
George
What I am referring to is that the State of Vermont, and possibly other states in the future, have chosen to require GMO labeling for all such foodsold in their state. HR 1599 would take that right away from the states with a
Federal law forbidding States to make that choice.
so called States Rights advocates such as La Malfa are getting behind the Feds having the power to do this despite their so called States Rights advocacy.

LikeLike
George Rebane

23 July 2015

PaulE 948pm – It seems that there is a natural limit to states rights – at least a fuzzy one. It seems silly to have states enact laws that would be difficult if not dangerous to follow in other states. Say if one or a few states decided to adopt the British ‘drive on the left’ law. Or require something of products made in their state that would not be required in other states into which such products were exported. At some level federal law would have to form a common ground rule for the nation. Don’t you think?
Maybe that’s why LaMalfa is backing a unified federal GMO labeling law since food products are always transported across state lines. Anyway, that’s my best guess.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

24 July 2015

Paul Emery, then you are a supporter of Prop 187? Prop 209?

LikeLike
fish

24 July 2015

Uh Oh……looks like we have two chaps trying to one up each other in the new lefty racial pecking order!
http://www.vulture.com/2015/07/jon-stewart-told-wyatt-cenac-to-fck-off.html

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

24 July 2015

Fish I read the article you linked to above. White people, including European Jews, and blacks are 180 degrees out of faze even in comedy. I sure would like to see that end but when you read the comments by the black writer on the Daily Show it does not appear it will.

LikeLike
Jon

24 July 2015

“Maybe that’s why LaMalfa is backing a unified federal GMO labeling law since food products are always transported across state lines. Anyway, that’s my best guess.” GR 10:40
My best guess is that Big Ag supports the Wealthy Rice Farmer and the Wealthy Rice Farmer supports the interests of Big Ag. Its well documented. The Monsanto’s of the world are not too keen on disclosure of GMO.

LikeLike
fish

24 July 2015

Posted by: Jon | 24 July 2015 at 07:57 AM
Probably this as well.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

24 July 2015

Twi Inspector General’s are asking AG Loretta Lynch to open a criminal investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email issues. What chance do you think that has? Maybe ZERO!
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/07/23/criminal-inquiry-sought-in-hillary-clintons-use-of-email.html

LikeLike
George Rebane

24 July 2015

Jon 757am – Now that we have the politics out of the way, perhaps you would also have a more germane viewpoint on the more difficult issue of how to sort out the rights of states and the federal govt when it comes to laws/regs/codes.
As a stake in the ground, progressives have always seen the states as more or less of an inherited nuisance when it comes to governance.

LikeLike
Jon

24 July 2015

How to sort out the rights of states vs. federal govt? LOL. George, I really don’t intend on spending another 4-5 years doing post-graduate work in this area.. But I do support a balance in these difficult. People in Iowa have a right to make laws for the benefit of commerce and doings strictly within Iowa.

LikeLike
Paul Emery

24 July 2015

Well George if you read HR 1599 you will find it reaffirms the need for the FDA, an agency that earlier you expressed a desire to eliminate leaving it’s chores up to the States. This is an example as to why don’t get behind the Tea party Repubs such as LaMalfa because they stand for nothing but Government for the convenience of their financial backers.
Here’s the link again for you to check out.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hr1599
“The Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015 would require the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to regulate the distribution and labeling related to bioengineered foods (often referred to … “

LikeLike
fish

24 July 2015

Posted by: Paul Emery | 24 July 2015 at 10:05 AM
So just so I can follow the usual tortured logic Paul…..the mechanism and authority is still in place for federal regulation to preempt regulation by the states. Is it your claim that George is endorsing centralized regulation at the federal level or are you merely attempting to grind your axe against LaMalfa and the now marginalized Tea Party through our genial host?
You’re a hard guy to follow Paul.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

24 July 2015

As usual crickets on our questions. That is why I usually don’t engage the libs.

LikeLike
Jon

24 July 2015

What serious question of yours remains unanswered? Nothing visible.

LikeLike
Jon

24 July 2015

Just when Todd senses some type of phantom momentum in his Party…in the words of Rick Perry…OOPS!
http://onpolitics.usatoday.com/2015/07/24/poll-republican-party-approval-ratings-lowest-in-decades/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/congress/cruz-mcconnell-lied-on-ex-im-bank-cannot-be-trusted/2015/07/24/0e9b886c-3211-11e5-a879-213078d03dd3_story.html

LikeLike
Jon

24 July 2015

sorry Dr. Rebane, last one meant for Sandbox.

LikeLike
George Rebane

24 July 2015

PaulE 1005am – I don’t think I’ve ever included the FDA in my list of fed departments to eliminate. While they suffer from the usual bureaucratic sclerosis, many of their functions are necessary at the federal level as I discussed in my 1040pm. Should these functions require a separate agency, or should they be melded into another agency is an open question. We do know that their heavy hand has been a bane to the development and approval of pharmaceuticals.

LikeLike
Paul Emery

24 July 2015

Fish
In this case yes George is endorsing Fed regulation over States Rights by his support o the Republican Party and our Congressman.
Todd
sorry you feel insecure engaging with Libertarians such as myself. The Republicratic party is just perfect for those who believe in nothing but the status quo.

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

24 July 2015

Insecure? Hardly, I defeat your ideas all the time. Libs just lie and never answer our questions so what is the point. A conversation is a back and forth. Libs are just “forth”

LikeLike
George Boardman

24 July 2015

This conversation about who should be regulating GMOs is all backwards.
Typically, LIBS want federal regulation because state legislatures can be more easily manipulated by local special interests, while the CONS want to preserve the right of states to operate free of federal interference.
Or is it the other way around? Confusing times indeed.

LikeLike
Jon

24 July 2015

Paul, article about the theater gunman in LA. Does the description of this guy remind you of anyone around here?
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/theater-gunman-angry-man-radical-views-32671638

LikeLike
George Rebane

24 July 2015

GeorgeB 135pm – In general conservatives want states to have minimal federal interference, and liberals are more comfortable with central planning and enforcement.

LikeLike
Paul Emery

24 July 2015

Todd, in this conversation you must be referring to Libertarian (libs) because that’s my party of preference.
George
I don’t want to dwell on this but you must agree with me the irony that in thois situation it’s the so called Conservatives calling for Federal control.

LikeLike
Don Bessee

24 July 2015

Did anyone hear that the infamous Bo Bergdahl (Taliban 5 swap) was busted in Mendocino county in a pot farm raid? The report said the Sheriffs drove him to Santa Rosa and turned him over to an army officer who was taking back to his home base.LOL

LikeLike
fish

24 July 2015

Hey look……a cowardly politico is reacting to less than optimal PR
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/boehner-hillary-immediately-turn-over-email-server_996935.html
Go John Boy Go!

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

24 July 2015

I am truly proud of Ted Cruz for his speech today on the Senate floor.

LikeLike
George Rebane

24 July 2015

PaulE 216pm – Agreed, if the libs really want GMO labeling to become state specific.

LikeLike
Jon

24 July 2015

Todd, I thought you were a Reagan Republican, taught to not speak badly of another fellow Pubber. Cruz ripped one of your leaders Mitch McConnell to shreds and you applaud? Trump has ripped half the Repub field to shreds. What is going on? Very confused.
I love it personally, but its not Reaganesque. Hypocrisy once again?

LikeLike
Bill Tozer

24 July 2015

Babble on Jon Boy. You are still stuck with Hillary. My condolences to you and your loved ones as well.

LikeLike
Bonnie McGuire

24 July 2015

Jon….some of us don’t run with the herd mentality but prefer to think for ourselves. Remember …our constitution is concerned about and protects individuals from group mentality and their media. I used to get a kick out of watching television regarding a Republican making a speech. The reporter gave his or her “interpretation” that wasn’t what I saw and heard. Pay attention, and don’t take honesty for granted.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

24 July 2015

Posted by: Bonnie McGuire | 24 July 2015 at 07:36 PM
That might be relevant Bonnie if Todd had stated that he did NOT follow the 11th commandment, but somewhere here in the last 3-4 days he most emphatically said he DID follow it.
I for one would never agree to such a ridiculous commandment, if you’re an idiot you’re an idiot I don’t care if you’re a Democrat 🙂

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

24 July 2015

Jon you must stay off the bottle. You are incoherent.
Bonnie is right on the money. We on the right are free thinkers and can and do disagree with our leaders and fellow travelers. Liberals are all brain dead zombies and easily led.

LikeLike
Walt

24 July 2015

Funny. LIBS sure live by that “commandment”.
McConnell is more LIB than GOP, so that “commandment” doesn’t apply to him.
But Trump is what we need. LIB news is back to their same old tricks. Manufacturing trouble.

LikeLike
Paul Emery

24 July 2015

George
What I am talki9ng about is the right for States to make that decision themselves without the Feds trumping the, That’s what LaMalfa and the Repubs in the house desire. More Federal control.

LikeLike
Jon

25 July 2015

Walt, Reagan would be considered a RHINO by the standards of the far right, emotion driven loons. Reagan encouraged Mexican and Central American immigration for example.

LikeLike
George Rebane

25 July 2015

PaulE 1118pm – I do know what you’re talking about. Your last statement, if meant as a blanket characterization, is nonsense.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

25 July 2015

Posted by: George Rebane | 25 July 2015 at 08:26 AM
Because Lord knows, blanket characterizations are not allowed here 🙂
I think what Jon is saying is that many of Ronald Reagan’s policies would be considered anathema to the modern Republican Party, and would be opposed by a large majority of the current class of Republican presidential candidates.
For example, Cap and Trade came partly from the Reagan administration using an emission cap to phase out leaded gasoline.
As Governor of California Reagan was pro-choice and expanded Medical coverage.
Reagan increased Social Security taxes and gasoline taxes. Actually Reagan signed at least 10 tax increases as President including taxes for highway funding, on pensions, to fund superfund clean up, and as part of numerous omnibus budget deals.
The budget deficit more than tripled under the two Reagan administrations.
Reagan supported expanded background checks on guns and supported an assault weapons ban.
Reagan agreed to an immigration deal that today would be defined as granting ‘amnesty’ to illegal aliens.
Reagan negotiated nuclear arms agreements with the Soviet Union that could be seen as roughly analogous to the agreements negotiated by President Obama with Iran. Reagan even secretly condoned the sales of arms to Iran.
Reagan raised the debt ceiling 18 times (as did Bush I and Bush II several times).

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

25 July 2015

Oh yeah, I forgot, President Reagan signed the Montreal Protocol, creating a Cap and Trade system to reduce ozone depleting emissions in 1987 🙂

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

25 July 2015

Oops, that should have been in response to Jon’s comments.

LikeLike
fish

25 July 2015

Posted by: Steven Frisch | 25 July 2015 at 08:58 AM
I think what Jon is saying is that many of Ronald Reagan’s policies would be considered anathema to the modern Republican Party, and would be opposed by a large majority of the current class of Republican presidential candidates.
Interesting in that the exchange between Paul and George touched on Saint Ronald not at all.

LikeLike
fish

25 July 2015

See! Evul Corporayshuns will stop at nothing to continue melting the ice caps…..
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/globalwarming/11762680/Three-scientists-investigating-melting-Arctic-ice-may-have-been-assassinated-professor-claims.html
Even co-opting the very forces of nature to carry out their vile deeds!

Professor laxon fell down a flight of stairs at a New year’s Eve party at a house in Essex while Dr Giles died when she was in collision with a lorry when cycling to work in London. Dr Boyd is thought to have been struck by lightning while walking in Scotland.

….struck by lightning?!?!

LikeLike
George Rebane

25 July 2015

SteveF 858am – Now we both know that all generalizations are not created equal – some work and some don’t. Rejecting a particular generalization does not imply that all generalizations should be rejected. And we do admit to different set of generalizations. C’est la vie.

LikeLike
Bonnie McGuire

25 July 2015

One thing I noticed when Reagan was President. The Dems would make a deal with Reagan if he would sign something they wanted, but then when they got what they wanted they renigged on their end of the deal. Their dishonest history is what motivated the Rep lawmaker in Calif to demand the Dems sign their promise before he’d make a deal with them. Also, regarding “trickle down economics.) I think it originated with JF Kennedy. http://www.mcguiresplace.net/Stories-Random%20Thoughts-Looking%20Back%20to%20The%20Future

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

25 July 2015

What the left never understands is there is no “purity” in politics. Many time deals are made that makes no one happy. Reagan was no different. But the reason the left is mad at him is that he defeated their masters of communism. They then could not become the “commissars” over us. So, they are forever denigrating.

LikeLike
Steven Frisch

25 July 2015

Posted by: George Rebane | 25 July 2015 at 11:33 AM
Well of course George your generalizations are valid and mine are not 🙂
Posted by: Bonnie McGuire | 25 July 2015 at 12:25 PM
One thing I noticed Bonnie is that the propensity to renege on ‘deals’ is not a partisan trait….evidenced by the recent propensity of the Republican Congressional leadership to go to the American people and state they are against shutting the government down, then doing it anyway 🙂
Posted by: Todd Juvinall | 25 July 2015 at 12:35 PM
Seriously Todd, I think the point I was making was that there is no purity in politics….its is rubes like you that on one day state “I support the 11th commandment” then on the next day break it.
Re: the whole ‘communism’ ‘commissars’ nonsense, the thing that makes me laugh every day is that you guys still think like its 1964…. it’s like you went into the bunker to watch the Goldwater convention acceptance speech one day and came out the next day and the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence were camping and smoking pot on you front lawn 🙂

LikeLike
Todd Juvinall

25 July 2015

Honestly, Steve Frisch has lost his noggin. He is so pure and right that no one else can possibly be. We call that hubris, and a ego bloated as large as the body. What a hoot.

LikeLike