Update: Splitting the State of California

Posted by Post Scripts   @   15 October 2013 39 comments

by Jack Lee

The Statehood committee in Butte County is bringing a [Split the State] vote before the Board of Supervisors (in the near future).    However, they first want to inform the public and gain voter support.     As a result, they are holding several meetings open to the public this month in Oroville and Chico.   There will also be some tabling in Paradise and Gridley, but the details have not been submitted as of press time.

The first meeting is set for the 22nd of October (Monday) from 4 pm to 7 pm at the Thermoleto Grange in Oroville. A number of tables will be set up with counselors to answer questions and provide literature how the new State will be formed.

A second meeting will be held at the Butte County Library on Oct. 26th in Chico, from 5:30 pm until 8 pm that will include a guest speakers from the State of Jefferson movement and tables will be set up for group discussions to answers questions or concerns.

———————————————

A vote for Statehood by the Butte County Supervisors is only the first small step. After the counties have all weighed in and there is sufficient support, then it moves to the State Legislature. It is expected there will be anywhere from 20-23 counties that will approve forming a new State. They then have a choice, they or their State representatives in the Assembly or the State Senate can bring a bill to a vote. If it passes in both houses by a simple majority, the next step is to introduce a bill in Congress to form the new State. The Governor need not sign the State bill.   If both houses approve the bill by a simple majority it becomes law a new State is created.

The authority for forming a new State may be found in Article 4, Section 3 of the US Constitution. It’s not in our State Constitution for good reason, States lack the authority and therefore no State Constitution will have language how they can divide their State to form a new State. That power is reserved ONLY for the federal government as outlined in the US Constitution. See the following excerpt from the US Constitution:

Clause 1. New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new States shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.

Clause 2. The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.

You may be wondering, why are the people of the North State trying to form a new State? The answer is fairly simple – it’s all about taxation without representation.

Northern and Southern California are already divided along economic lines as well as different population densities. This is why the issues concerning each are so vastly different. However, because of the apportioned representation in our Capitol, citizens of the north State lack the votes to modify, protect and regulate their areas of concern.

The attention and representation in Sacramento is focused on the greatest population which is overwhelming in the South State. This is why tax expenditures in the State are overwhelming diverted to the South and this is exactly why the North State voters lack fair and equal representation on their issues.

This is not a democrat v republican issue, make no mistake. This is about creating a new State to protect the representation of the voters wherever they may live in the most fair way possible.

The State of Jefferson’s proposed infrastructure would require a fraction of the cost that is currently spent on SoCal. They also seek a cost effective part-time legislature that operates closer to the people that they represent, thus providing more representation and access to the citizens/taxpayers.

They want to create a responsible and sustainable green environment that is also business friendly, something the South State has been unable to do. North State farmers and truckers would no longer be subjected to the heavy regulations that have destroyed so many of them and cost us jobs, but rather they would only seek regulations that are in keeping with the needs of the North State.

The Statehood movement expects that limited laws and regulations would be similar to many business friendly states such as Oregon and Nevada’s.

The seaports in the North State would not be subjected to California’s ultra-restrictive import and shipping regulations that have cost the shipping industry and CA consumers hundreds of millions while adding to the cost of import products.

The North State movement seeks an economy built on limited taxation and limited government that leads to more freedom, more prosperity and a stable revenue stream to maintain the basic responsibilities of government. This would include such things as police and fire protection, roads, highways, etc., It would run much like Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Maine, Mississippi, Nevada, New Mexico, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, and others. They all have part-time legislatures that spend less than 53% of their total time in session and they all have relatively low regulation compared to California, which is the most regulated State in the nation as well as the most taxed. It’s also considered to be the most business unfriendly State and they are hemorrhaging jobs to others States that is causing their economy to collapse. The North State folks hope to escape from all that heavy handed government and provide a better quality of life in the process.

 
 

 

 

 

Filed in Uncategorized 39 comments
Tags : , , , , ,

39 Comments

Comments
Oct 15, 2013
12:17 pm
#1 Princess :

The point that this is not Democrat vs Republican cannot be stressed enough. It is a fact that Northern California does not receive our fair share of Federal dollars for transportation. Most of those improvements go to Southern California. The roads up here are a disgrace. A bullet train is a great idea for this giant state. So why build it in an area already served by an Interstate, Amtrak and airports? Why not build it up north so people who have to drive hours to airports or I5 can have some transportation alternatives? They don’t care about us. Our federal tax dollars bleed south, just like our water.

The arguments will be made that we don’t have a large enough population to support ourselves. That is complete nonsense. Look how nice Oregon and Washington roads are. That could be us if we actually got some funding to build good ones up here.

They can keep their underperforming schools and their massive road projects. We’ll send them our water and our homeless people.

Oct 15, 2013
12:53 pm
#2 Peggy :

Just reading about the mess the Bullet Train is already in is enough to give everyone living in Calif. a migraine.

Jack, Good article. Sent it to all my north Calif. friends.

“California still hasn’t bought land for bullet train route:”

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jan/27/local/la-me-bullet-land-20130127

Oct 15, 2013
1:50 pm
#3 Libby :

“… but no new States shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; ….”

Jack, does this not forbid you to do what you propose to do?

Oct 15, 2013
4:06 pm
#4 Libby :

What I mean is … I don’t think you’re going to get Consent. I really would think that it would be highly unlike.

So, what’s next … guerrilla warfare?

Oct 15, 2013
4:22 pm
#5 Mike :

Great article Jack. You are so right about “Taxation Without Representation”. Our Founding Fathers rebelled over much less taxation and they took a lot bigger risks. We can do this in a legal, constitutional way while they risked their homes, their fortunes and their lives.

The Time Has Come For 51!

Oct 15, 2013
5:01 pm
#6 Peggy :

Libs, it makes more sense if you read the whole sentence.

“…or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.”

In other words states alone can’t form new states, it requires Congress’ approval.

Have another glass of vino.

Oct 15, 2013
5:57 pm
#7 Leslie :

With fewer regulations the State of Jefferson can draw businesses who employ people which in turn makes for a thriving economy, isn’t that what most of us want?

Oct 15, 2013
6:50 pm
#8 Post Scripts :

Leslie, thank you for your comments. Yes, I think it is absolutely possible to have an enviromentally responsible State and a business friendly climate that leads to a thriving economy.

Our nation was built on inspriation, innovation, persperation and dedication. Our successes flourished in that free enterprise system and yet somehow here in California we’ve allowed liberals to move us away from that idealism and we’ve let them create this monsterous welfare State. You would think our State reps would have been smarter than that? Our leaders should know that everytime government attempts to doing anything outside that original blueprint (the Constitution) it’s hurt us, made us weaker and more dependent on big brother.

Oct 15, 2013
7:07 pm
#9 Mark Baird :

The Time Has Come For 51.
Lack of representation is the most important issue we face today. This is an issue that should concern all voters. We would not be the smallest state. We would not be the least populated state. Our economy would be viable from the very beginning, and grow from there. The economic engine of the State of California has been on the same track for decades. California’s debt is unsustainable. Growing every minute of every hour of every day. Should we keep doing the same things and hope for different results over the next fifty years? Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their State. Get signatures call your supervisors, DO SOMETHING!!!
Now is OUR TIME!! THE TIME HAS COME FOR 51.
http://www.jeffersondeclaration.net
help your local Jefferson Declaration Committee to do something historic.

Oct 15, 2013
8:09 pm
#10 Victoria K. Coots :

This just makes sense. California is too large and diverse to be governable as one state. I have been in favor of doing this for quite some time. Thank you for the informative and articulate article on this matter.

Oct 15, 2013
8:14 pm
#11 Victoria K. Coots :

Libby: It states, no new states may be formed from within the jurisdiction of a state W/O THE CONSENT OF THE LEGISLATORS OF THE STATE AND THE CONGRESS.

Oct 15, 2013
9:11 pm
#12 Peggy :

Who lives in a “Death Spiral State?” We do. According to this Forbes article we have more people dependent on the gov’t than work in the private sector.

Do You Live In A Death Spiral State?:

“Don’t buy a house in a state where private sector workers are outnumbered by folks dependent on government.

Thinking about buying a house? Or a municipal bond? Be careful where you put your capital. Don’t put it in a state at high risk of a fiscal tailspin.

Eleven states make our list of danger spots for investors. They can look forward to a rising tax burden, deteriorating state finances and an exodus of employers. The list includes California, New York, Illinois and Ohio, along with some smaller states like New Mexico and Hawaii.

If your career takes you to Los Angeles or Chicago, don’t buy a house. Rent.”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/baldwin/2012/11/25/do-you-live-in-a-death-spiral-state/

Oct 16, 2013
10:38 am
#13 Libby :

I did clarify, people. See Post #4.

Leslie, you’re forgetting what the regulations do. North Dakota just had its first oil spill. Some guy’s wheat field is a toxic sludge. I’m revising my ten-year prediction down to seven.

One of the many things that could sink the Jefferson movement is all the folk who come to realize that they’d rather be “getting by” in a (well, not quite) pristine wilderness than “flush” in a toxic swamp.

Oct 16, 2013
11:00 am
#14 Post Scripts :

Libby, you said “One of the many things that could sink the Jefferson movement is all the folk who come to realize that they’d rather be “getting by” in a (well, not quite) pristine wilderness than “flush” in a toxic swamp.”

Anybody can say anything in this world, but because you do it doesn’t make it true. It’s your extremely minority opinion Libby that conservatives all want to foul the land, air and water and that CA CARB rules have saved the day and kept CA green. Nothing could be further from the truth, yet you still say it and you actually believe it too, that’s the scary part.

A rational person would look at Nevada, Oregon and Idaho, Colorado, etc., and see they enjoy far more freedom than we do in CA and they are not living in a toxic cess pool. A rational person would have more faith in the people who embrace innovation coupled to persperation verses people like yourself who embrace government for their daily bread from craddle to grave.

Freedom means a lot to some people and so does protecting the natural beauty of where we live and our children are raised. These things are not mutually exclusive! We drink the water, we breathe the air and till the soil and eat what we grow, …a rational person understands this. An irrational socialist thinks nothing good can happen without the heavy hand of government on our every move. This is why when their is a new state people who are doers will want to move there while people who are takers will want to live in your old socialist state. Then it will look like East Germany v West Germany. East Germany was not exactly pollution free now was it Libby? By the way, ghettos are pollution too…look at the ghettos your liberals have created in L.A., Richmond and Oakland to name but a few. Don’t you lecture us about pollution in a new state Libby…you don’t have a leg to stand on!

Oct 16, 2013
11:43 am
#15 Libby :

Jack, the citizens of Denver passed some very harsh regulations of the internal combustion engine in order to bring their air quality into an acceptable range.

Oregonians forbid you to pump your own gas, so as to preserve jobs.

If you want to have a State of Jefferson, I’d soft-pedal the “unfettered development” thing.

We need to see some stats on the effectiveness of Rick Perry’s “come rape our state” ads. So far, all I’ve heard are chortles.

Oct 16, 2013
3:30 pm
#16 Tina :

Dallas Federal Reserve President Richard Fisher is proud of the Texas economy and isn’t afraid to let it show:

The governor of California is jogging with his dog along a nature trail. A coyote jumps out and attacks the governor’s dog, then bites the governor. The governor starts to intervene, but reflects upon the movie Bambi and then realizes he should stop because the coyote is only doing what is natural.

He calls animal control. Animal control captures the coyote and bills the state $200 for testing it for diseases and $500 for relocating it. He calls a veterinarian. The vet collects the dead dog and bills the state $200 for testing it for diseases. The governor goes to the hospital and spends $3,500 getting checked for diseases from the coyote and getting his bite wound bandaged.

The running trail gets shut down for six months while the California Fish and Game Department conducts a $100,000 survey to make sure the area is now free of dangerous animals. The governor spends $50,000 in state funds implementing a ‘coyote awareness program’ for residents of the area. The Legislature spends $2 million to study how to better treat rabies and how to permanently eradicate the disease throughout the world.

The governor’s security agent is fired for not stopping the attack. The state spends $150,000 to hire and train a new agent with additional special training, re: the nature of coyotes. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) protests the coyote’s relocation and files a $5 million suit against the state.

The governor of Texas is jogging with his dog along a nature trail. A coyote jumps out and tries to attack him and his dog. The governor shoots the coyote with his state-issued pistol and keeps jogging.

The governor spent 50 cents on a .380-caliber, hollow-point cartridge. Buzzards ate the dead coyote.

And that, my friends, is why California is broke and Texas is not.

Californians are moving to other states as well and for the same reasons.

Oct 16, 2013
4:27 pm
#17 Libby :

Well, if you want to live life in the raw, bloodied, tooth and nail … I don’t know what you’re doing here.

Texas is that’a way.

Oct 16, 2013
10:26 pm
#18 Mark Baird :

Many people, primarily the uneducated, believe that all we want is to cut down all the trees and to kill all the fish. This assertion is so patently ridiculous, it does not dignify an answer. Our heritage, our values, our history all center around responsible stewardship of resources. Who is better qualified to judge and Shepard those resources. The legislators of the Urban South? Or those representatives we elect ourselves? Please take a look at the representative picture! Can you really expect your voice to be heard when your state assemblyman also represents 475,000 others? Your State Senator represents 1,000,000 others! The State of Jefferson is not a license to do harm to the place we all cherish. The State of Jefferson is our chance to give. Our children and grandchildren a place where they might have a future.
The Time Has Come For 51
Mark Baird
Jefferson Declaration Committee
http://Www.jeffersondeclaration.net

Oct 17, 2013
10:48 am
#19 Libby :

“This assertion is so patently ridiculous, ….”

It’s nothing of the kind. All our myriad industrial and environmental regulations are in response to ample evidence that, left to his own devices, a capitalist will do anything, befoul anything, kill anything, for a buck.

Where have you been these last 300 years?

Oct 17, 2013
11:54 am
#20 Post Scripts :

“…left to his own devices, a capitalist will do anything, befoul anything, kill anything, for a buck.” Libby

See, it’s these kind of broad brush statements that undermine your credibility and place you out there on the fringe. No rational person believes this stuff Libby because it only exists in the minds of those extremists on the far left. It’s a shame you always choose to go there, because I think you are well read and politically aware and you could have a more positive influence, if you wouldn’t say such blatantly untrue and inflamatory things.

Oct 17, 2013
1:42 pm
#21 Libby :

“See, it’s these kind of broad brush statements ….”

What? I should name to you every instance of environmental malfeasance from the founding to date? Do I really have to?

Maybe so. Maybe you’ve forgotten Love Canal. First the capitalists throughly polluted a good-sized piece of ground, to the point it made people sick to stand on it, and then! … another capitalist built houses on it, sold them, and did not tell the buyers what they’d be drinking, breathing, and so on. Spawned all sorts of legislation, state and federal, did that little incident.

And it seems I recall something just recently, in the Gulf of Mexico? Remember that one? Demonstrated, actually, how little some of these contractors are impeded by regulations on the books … they just ignore them, kill their employees, and make a big, big, big mess.

Geez.

Oct 17, 2013
3:10 pm
#22 Tina :

Libby: “left to his own devices, a capitalist will do anything, befoul anything, kill anything, for a buck.”

I’m in the response business and this prejudice and vitriol is not only ugly but bereft of facts!

Business people do not set out to destroy!

Business people have been cooperative partners for responsibly cleaning up the environment.

Extremist environmentalists do nothing but make things up, destroy industries that create CLEAN, cheap energy, and frighten people, including children for money.

And you…you just “work the system!”

Bah!

Oct 17, 2013
3:43 pm
#23 Tina :

Love canal was an overblown, over-hyped story from the getgo. Reason Magazine:

In February 1981, reason ran a major investigative article on the Love Canal scandal, in which industrial chemical dump leaks were blamed for birth defects and cancer in a neighborhood of Niagara Falls, New York. “Love Canal: The Truth Seeps Out,” written by the freelance journalist Eric Zuesse, focused chiefly on who was responsible for the chemical wastes that were leaching into the basements of residents’ homes. Digging deep into the property’s history, Zuesse showed that Hooker ElectroChemical had adequately sealed the wastes and had repeatedly warned that the site should never be developed. He noted that chemicals began leaking out only after local and state agencies willfully breached the dump site’s clay seal as part of a development scheme….

The Love Canal incident was a jumping off “crisis” for an emerging radical activist movement (for money!) Consider the number of foundations that soon developed for “awareness” purposes. Consider the environmental fake science that was created by academics using government grants. Consider the carbon exchanges that were created to rake in billions if not trillions (Al Gore created one for himself). And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. People have been filched of their money through unnecessary taxation and regulation and higher prices for energy. In Briton prices for energy got so high that seniors were turning off the heat…some of them died!

We have a system that works. Companies found to be negligent should pay a price through the legal system as BP has for the Gulf spill. This acts as a deterrent to keep industry honest.

See also report here explaining how EPA standards are useless and deter clean up efforts:

When the legislation establishing the Superfund program was enacted in late 1980 in the aftermath of the overblown Love Canal scare, it was assumed that the federal government would move quickly to clean up contaminated sites around the nation. The program instead turned into a bureaucratic morass and litigation magnet, delaying meaningful cleanup in some cases for more than 20 years.

The spill in the Gulf was unfortunate but hardly the tragedy activists profess. The end result is an improvement in safety standards and equipment and valuable lessons for those that have engineered clean up equipment.

Your outrage is emotionally driven and born of radical hype spewed for profit.

There is no way to create that utopian riskless world.

In America freedom has led to amazing innovations that have worked on the whole to improve conditions for the human race and the planet. Our legal system can work to ensure against abuses…when it isn’t exploited by idiots determined to bring America down. I have no desire to live a third world existence.

I would like to live in a state that appreciates freedom and that affords me representation.

Oct 17, 2013
4:17 pm
#24 Libby :

“Love canal was an overblown, over-hyped story from the getgo.”

Our Queen of Denial! … a well-documented Tea-Partier trait.

Check this out, from Salon. I’m reading it, and I’m going: “I know these people!”

“Named “the Loneliest Republican” by the Atlantic, Business Insider politics editor Josh Barro is among the youngest, most prominent and caustic of the Republican writers who’ve raised alarms about the GOP approach to policy and politics ….”

“… at the federal level, you have this core of about a third of the House Republican conference that’s just completely gone bananas. And they are immune to any information about public opinion or the economy. So those people can’t be reasoned with.”

“I think conservative media creates an echo chamber, which allows a lot of these elected officials to believe incorrectly that they have majority support behind them, and that strategies like defunding are going to work. Because of the media bubble, they didn’t realize it wasn’t true. Some of them still don’t understand.”

“After the 2012 election, I thought it was going to teach them a lesson: that when you close yourselves out from the outside world, you start distrusting all outside sources, you can get misled. You had a little bit of soul-searching … That seems to have lasted a couple of months. [Recently] you had Ted Cruz on TV saying about the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, “There were too many government employees in the sample, I don’t believe the poll.” So there is still interest in staying in the bubble.”

Denial of objective reality … a component of crazy. How long you gonna let us call you crazy?

Oct 17, 2013
7:52 pm
#25 Tina :

A young supposedly Republica political commentator tells you what you want to hear. Big deal. I’m not impressed; he’s still wet behind the ears. For all I know he’s a Democrat pulling the usual dirty tricks. If not it’s clear he has no idea what we are up against or how it will affect his future if the radical left keeps winning.

Besides if you think I should listen to him that’s the first clue I need to stick to my guns.

The fact is the Republican party wins when they stick to the conservative message. We lose when we get squishy and move toward the center. We won in the last election; the Tea party made it happen. The problem in the Republican Party is the squishes listen to you and yours and actually believe…pathetic but true. That’s what comes from living in the DC bubble a leftist “town” if ever there was one.

You can call me crazy forever for all I care. I like my bubble better than yours, get over it and yourself.

Oct 17, 2013
11:06 pm
#26 Libby :

“A young supposedly Republican political commentator tells you what you want to hear.”

Ah, Tina, no. He is trying, desperately, to tell YOU, what YOU flatly refuse to hear.

Take the plunge … salon.com … read the whole thing … I double-dog dare you.

Oct 17, 2013
11:08 pm
#27 Libby :

“We won in the last election; ….”

Again, no. That was the election before last. The last one … you lost … big time. Face facts, woman.

Oct 18, 2013
6:00 am
#28 Chris :

Tina: “Besides if you think I should listen to him that’s the first clue I need to stick to my guns.”

Thanks for proving Libby’s point. “The fact that someone outside the bubble thinks I’m wrong PROVES that I should stay in the bubble!”

Tina, I showed you a few days ago a few other Republicans who have also identified the problem of the conservative “echo chamber.” You dismiss these people without engaging with their points.

FOX News had convinced people that Romney was going to win in November. They were convinced that the polls were cooked, that there was some media conspiracy, even though they were accurate.

More recently, Tea Party congressmen like Ted Cruz convinced their more gullible constituents into believing that the shutdown would work for them. Not a single demand of theirs was met. And still Cruz can’t face reality, proclaiming yesterday that the antics around the shutdown represent a “victory” for Republicans! There’s a serious problem when you literally can’t take in information that contradicts your wishes.

“The fact is the Republican party wins when they stick to the conservative message. We lose when we get squishy and move toward the center.”

There’s simply no basis for this wishful claim. Romney’s biggest problem wasn’t that he was too centrist. It was that he pretended to be more radical than he was, embracing classism in order to win votes. This culminated in the “47%” speech wherein he was caught on camera telling rich people how lazy poor people are so that they would give him more money. Insulting nearly half of America this way isn’t “squishy,” it’s radical Randian garbage, and the public revolted.

“We won in the last election”

OK, the first time you said this, I ignored it thinking it was a simple slip, but now I’m legitimately concerned about your memory.

Oct 18, 2013
11:43 am
#29 Tina :

Libby: “Face facts, woman.”

You face facts…we won the last midterm election. We have the House. That is a win and it was won by the Tea Party.

Your winning the Presidency is not all that and it wasn’t by a landslide. You won by 51%…big whoop. We only lost because too many Republicans stayed home and because Obama and his IRS did everything they could to hamper our get out the vote organizations. Corruption helped to give you the WH.

““After the 2012 election, I thought it was going to teach them a lesson: that when you close yourselves out from the outside world, you start distrusting all outside sources”

Funny you should scold with this crazy opinion, and be clear it is only an opinion.

For one thing liberal ideas are not hiding under a rock. Most of us have been relentlessly bombarded with leftist ideas and thinking.

Second, those of us who participate on blogs read articles by leftists every day. We hear their opinions on FOX News from the donkey’s mouths

On the other hand a Yale professor shares his embarrassment in a posted article that belies your bubble theory as something conservatives suffer:

A Yale professor, Dan Kahan, tested 2,000 people and made a surprise discovery, which he said embarrassed him. People who identify themselves as members of the Tea Party do better at science than non Tea party members. Kahan admitted that he didn’t know anyone from the Tea party and got all of his information on them from liberal cable shows and the New York Times, The Huffington Post and Politico.

Kahan claims that liberals are more science savvy than conservatives. But surprisingly, he found that Tea party members were the most savvy of them all. Moreover the findings surpassed the threshold of statistically significance.

Kahan wrote that not only did the results surprise him, they embarrassed him.

“I’ve got to confess, though, I found this result surprising. As I pushed the button to run the analysis on my computer, I fully expected I’d be shown a modest negative correlation between identifying with the Tea Party and science comprehension.”

“But then again, I don’t know a single person who identifies with the tea party. All my impressions come from watching cable tv — & I don’t watch Fox News very often — and reading the ‘paper’ (New York Times daily, plus a variety of politics-focused Internet sites like Huffington Post and POLITICO). I’m a little embarrassed, but mainly, I’m just glad that I no longer hold this particular mistaken view.”

(emphasis mine)

If the Salon article is as wrong as you have been there is no need for me to read it. Thanks for that parting cheap shot…it was as expected.

Apologies to Chris. My time has run out until this evening sometime.

Oct 18, 2013
12:57 pm
#30 Libby :

“If the Salon article is as wrong as you have been there is no need for me to read it.”

But you won’t know unless you do … knowing is what you have to do … and you just can’t bring yourself to do it, can you?

Oct 18, 2013
5:21 pm
#31 Pie Guevara :

Re: “FOX News had convinced people that Romney was going to win in November.”

That deserves a 21 HA salute. I’ll give it one.

Oct 18, 2013
6:38 pm
#32 Chris :

Tina: “You face facts…we won the last midterm election. We have the House. That is a win and it was won by the Tea Party.”

But that is not what you said. You said “last election,” as if the presidential election doesn’t count. And you did the same thing the other day. That makes you look ridiculous.

“Your winning the Presidency is not all that”

!

“We only lost because too many Republicans stayed home and because Obama and his IRS did everything they could to hamper our get out the vote organizations. Corruption helped to give you the WH.”

Evidence, please. From a credible source would be nice.

“Funny you should scold with this crazy opinion, and be clear it is only an opinion.”

It is an opinion that, as I have shown you, many of your fellow Republicans share. It is an opinion we have backed up with evidence, from the denial over the presidential election results to the assertion that the shutdown would be good for Republicans. You have not engaged with the actual merits of the argument. Republicans are a party in denial of reality.

“Second, those of us who participate on blogs read articles by leftists every day. We hear their opinions on FOX News from the donkey’s mouths”

You really believe that liberal opinions are well represented, and accurately represented, on FOX News?

“On the other hand a Yale professor shares his embarrassment in a posted article that belies your bubble theory as something conservatives suffer:”

The article says that the professor’s study found that Tea Partiers had better science scores than non-Tea Partiers. That’s nice, but how is it relevant to this conversation? We’re talking about getting information from different perspectives; the conclusion that Tea Party members are better at science (although I would like to see the actual study; I doubt that they were asked questions about climate change) doesn’t contradict the idea that they live in a media bubble.

Oct 18, 2013
6:42 pm
#33 Chris :

I love that one second, the re-election of Barack Hussein Obama represents the death knell of America, the absolute collapse of the greatest democracy and beacon of freedom that has ever existed on God’s earth…

…and the next moment? “Ain’t no big thang!”

Oct 18, 2013
7:01 pm
#34 Post Scripts :

I’ll also give it one… Ha!

Oct 18, 2013
10:58 pm
#35 Tina :

Chris: “But that is not what you said. You said “last election…”

Yes I did say the last election. I was thinking about Congress when I said it and misspoke…so sue me. I explained in a later comment. As for looking ridiculous, nothing like that has never happened to you…right?

“Evidence please”

Re: many Republicans stayed home

Real Clear Politics:

We can see that the counties clustered around Columbus in the center of the state turned out in full force, as did the suburban counties near Cincinnati in the southwest. These heavily Republican counties are the growing areas of the state, filled with white-collar workers.

Where things drop off are in the rural portions of Ohio, especially in the southeast. These represent areas still hard-hit by the recession. Unemployment is high there, and the area has seen almost no growth in recent years.

My sense is these voters were unhappy with Obama. But his negative ad campaign relentlessly emphasizing Romney’s wealth and tenure at Bain Capital may have turned them off to the Republican nominee as well. The Romney campaign exacerbated this through the challenger’s failure to articulate a clear, positive agenda to address these voters’ fears, and self-inflicted wounds like the “47 percent” gaffe. Given a choice between two unpalatable options, these voters simply stayed home.

RE: IRS targeting conservative organizations

AEI:

It is a well-known fact that the Tea Party movement dealt the president his famous “shellacking” in the 2010 midterm election. Less well-known is the actual number of votes this new movement delivered — and the continuing effects these votes could have had in 2012 had the movement not been demobilized by the IRS.

In a new research paper, Andreas Madestam (from Stockholm University), Daniel Shoag and David Yanagizawa-Drott (both from the Harvard Kennedy School), and I set out to find out how much impact the Tea Party had on voter turnout in the 2010 election. We compared areas with high levels of Tea Party activity to otherwise similar areas with low levels of Tea Party activity, using data from the Census Bureau, the FEC, news reports, and a variety of other sources. We found that the effect was huge: the movement brought the Republican Party some 3 million-6 million additional votes in House races. That is an astonishing boost, given that all Republican House candidates combined received fewer than 45 million votes. It demonstrates conclusively how important the party’s newly energized base was to its landslide victory in those elections, and how worried Democratic strategists must have been about the conservative movement’s momentum.

The Tea Party movement’s huge success was not the result of a few days of work by an elected official or two, but involved activists all over the country who spent the year and a half leading up to the midterm elections volunteering, organizing, donating, and rallying. Much of these grassroots activities were centered around 501(c)4s, which according to our research were an important component of the Tea Party movement and its rise.

The bottom line is that the Tea Party movement, when properly activated, can generate a huge number of votes-more votes in 2010, in fact, than the vote advantage Obama held over Romney in 2012. The data show that had the Tea Party groups continued to grow at the pace seen in 2009 and 2010, and had their effect on the 2012 vote been similar to that seen in 2010, they would have brought the Republican Party as many as 5 – 8.5 million votes compared to Obama’s victory margin of 5 million.The bottom line is that the Tea Party movement, when properly activated, can generate a huge number of votes-more votes in 2010, in fact, than the vote advantage Obama held over Romney in 2012. -Stan Veuger

“You really believe that liberal opinions are well represented, and accurately represented, on FOX News?”

You skimmed through what I wrote didn’t you?

Unless you believe that Democrats don’t speak for the Democrat party? Senators, House members, spokespersons for the President, the President himself? These people appear on Fox news either in person or on tape.

Besides as I have expressed so many times in different ways. The progressive perspective, the moderate Democrat perspective has been well represented in the news from well before there was talk radio or blogs. The alphabet channels on TV that are all in the tank for the President are liberal news outlets.

“That’s nice, but how is it relevant to this conversation?”

He also said he is a liberal that has no Tea Party friends, doesn’t ever watch FOX, gets all his information from liberal sources including liberal blogs. That was the essence of his embarrassment. He realized his expectation that Tea Party people would score low was based on a false impression.

It is relevant because of your assertion that Tea Partyers are in a bubble…an echo chamber.

This professor just expressed what is most likely true for most progressives. They too interact mostly with others like them.

But the environment we have existed in for decades plus the advent of alternative media puts us in the unique position of having considered both sides pretty thoroughly.

Your point is not only inaccurate, since it is based on a liberal caricature of Tea Party people, it is mute.

Snide remarks about our knowledge of climate change will do nothing to get you outside that liberal bubble.

Oct 18, 2013
11:04 pm
#36 Tina :

Chris: “I love that one second…blah blah blah”

Sorry but it wasn’t one second. A change in subject for me takes a lot more time than that (see comment above).

Obama’s policies are killing this nation…no question. Just ask the unemployed and the underemployed.

His win was not by a landslide as Libby suggested. (See Real Clear Politics and AEI in the comment above)

Oh, and don’t tell me those sources have been discredited. If you wish to argue the points then please, make the argument.

Oct 18, 2013
11:05 pm
#37 Tina :

Heck I’ll play:

Ha! Ha! and Ha!

Oct 22, 2013
8:29 am
#38 Peggy :

The Blaze is doing a series on states wanting to divide. California will be included in the series.

“A Special Blaze Report Series: Could Obama’s ’57 States’ Gaffe Become Reality?”

http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/transforming-america-a-special-blaze-report-series/

Oct 22, 2013
10:28 am
#39 Tina :

Peggy thanks for the heads up!

I love the title of the article!

The Jefferson quote is the table we stand upon!

Leave a Comment

Previous Post
«
Next Post
»
G-scale designed by Make Your Own Website In conjunction with Web Hosting   |   Watch Movies Online   |   Computer Repair