1 - 10 Next
The article you cited is about a project in Laughlin, which is 90 miles south of Las Vegas. The Bundy ranch is 80 miles NORTH EAST of Las Vegas. The Laughlin deal was a different project.
In response to:

OkFascist

clidke frawley Wrote: Apr 06, 2014 5:49 PM
Had you read the article, you would know the answer. The Supreme Court ruled long ago that these donor lists are NOT public. The IRS leaked this list to a gay rights group. That is illegal. And it seems to suggest there is, after all, at least a smidgen of corruption at the IRS, despite what our dear leader says.
In response to:

OkFascist

clidke frawley Wrote: Apr 06, 2014 5:46 PM
Typical leftist. Insult and personally attack a person who disagrees with you, even though she did not attack or insult you. Thanks for proving the point of the article.
You should be resistant to Obamacare, too, especially if you consider how much we could have done for the uninsured and LOTS of other people for the same cost (personally I think the gov should stop spending money, but I'm assuming you are a fan of government handouts) OCare is going to cost 2 Trillion dollars over the next 10 years. Do you realize how much money that is? Let me help you. Instead of OCare, we could have given every one of the 50 million uninsured people a check for 40 million dollars. Or we could have given every man, woman and child in the country 6 million dollars. How anyone could support this monstrosity is beyond me.
For the cost of Obamacare for the next 10 years (per the CBO) we could have sent every single one of the 50 million uninsured a check for 40 million dollars. Or, we could have sent every man, woman and child in the country a check for 6 million dollars. I care about the uninsured. It's the stupidity of this 'solution' that pisses me off.
And there's this: The latest report from the CBO said it expects Obamacare to cost roughly 2 trillion over the next 10 years. We were told we desperately needed this law to cover the 50 million uninsured people in America (ever-changing number on that, but at last proclamation, roughly 50 million). So let’s do the math: 2 trillion over 10 years is 200 billion a year. 200 billion divided by 50 million is 4 million per person, PER YEAR. So we could have written a check to every uninsured person for 4 million dollars EACH YEAR over the next 10 years for the same cost. Alternatively, we could have given every man, woman and child in America 6 million dollars. Does anyone seriously think there wouldn’t have been a better way to take care of the uninsured? There are LOTS of things wrong with this law, but the cost alone is reason enough to repeal it.
I agree there are plenty of RINOs that would do us little good if elected. However, there is one benefit if a RINO is the only option: Having a republican president and (hopefully) a republican controlled house and senate would greatly curtail the narrative that the Democrats agenda is the will of the voters ("we won, shut up"), and would also effectively stifle the "Obstructionist" labeling. I hope conservatives will win much more than this, but if nothing else, there is still benefit to having republicans in office rather than democrats. Think of it as a first step--we get republicans in and can then work on getting them to be more conservative (or replacing them with conservatives).
You speak as though there is a limited amount of wealth and so if some people have more, the rest of the people are left with the scraps. This isn't true. Wealth creation is about making the pie bigger, which is what free market capitalism has done. Compare how all strata of society in the US live now compared to 50 years ago. Everybody has more of everything, including the poor. This extra stuff didn't come from nowhere--it came from people creating more wealth. ON the flip side, you have redistribution of wealth which does nothing to increase the pie, it just reallocates the portions to different groups. Raising the minimum wage is a great example. Paying people more to do the same work does nothing to increase the size of the pie. There is not more wealth created, you are just shifting it around. When you take wealth from those who have earned it and give it to others for no reason you kill incentive, which kills wealth creation, which is the only way to increase the pie for everyone.
Why then, has Obama exempted corporate non-profits from Obamacare? Is the defining factor in whether or not you can express your religions beliefs your tax status?
It's not a political statement. Their beliefs dictate that if they include the 4 birth control methods in question, they wil be active participants in abortion, which they cannot do and remain true to their faith. They have already said, many times, that if the court orders them to provide these drugs, they will close the business. This isn't political grand-standing--it is being true to their beliefs. If you know anything about the Green family you know that they have always, consistently lived out their faith to the best of their abilities. I have no doubt that if the ruling goes against them they will close up shop. They are not the type to make idle threats or to exaggerate to make a point.
1 - 10 Next