The Goat Pen

Wait. The 80 yr old brits had to wait outside of emergency rooms for 20 and 7 minutes respectfully?

The last time I showed up at the ER, with a kid with a tourniquet on his leg, the wait was 45 minutes (Park West, puter - surprised?). The place was packed with indigents and hispanics/latinos. Probably half of those in front of us were receiving non-emergency treatment (again - no surprise). Yessir, we gladly took our place behind those pioneering Americans (or non-
Americans) who have the inalienable God-given right to forego mandatory health coverage in favor of guaranteed on-demand ER treatment regardless of ability or inclination to pay. Hallelujah! (or Aleluya!, con por favor)

...and I LOVE California.

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/will052211.php3

George Will wrote:Brown's plan for balancing the budget is to close about half of the deficit with reductions and fund shifts already approved, and the rest by tax increases. Republican resistance to the taxes is explained by facts provided by Troy Senik, writing in the Manhattan Institute's City Journal:

"Californians already labor under sales-tax rates usually reserved for states without income taxes (at 8.25 percent, the nation's highest) and sharply progressive income-tax rates usually reserved for states without sales taxes (the state's top rate is 10.55 percent, and it doesn't allow you to deduct your federal taxes, as some states with income taxes do)."

Those tax levels are surely related to these demographic facts: Between 2000 and 2010, Los Angeles gained fewer people than in any decade since the 1890s, and Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area have the slowest growth rates since the end of Spanish rule. For the first time since 1920, the Census did not award California even one additional congressional seat.

Yes, all those "additional" seats went to Texas.

Growing up in Massachusetts in the 1980s, California was (IMHO) the perfect place to live. All I wanted to do is grow-up, go to college, move to California, get a job writing code, buy a condo on the coast, and lay on the beach. To me, that would be the perfect life, the DREAM life. I could only say that then because I didn't know any better.

Today, all California is to me, is a place where I must drive to so my daughter can see the Disney Princesses, the panda at the San Diego Zoo, the dolphins at Sea World, and the location of the Carnival cruise ship port. Beyond that, until California takes some serious austerity measures, this beautiful beach state might wind up in the financial mess of other beach "states" like Greece, Spain, Italy, and Portugal!

"knowing that all you have to do is show up each morning, straight and sober, you keep your job harkens back to Industrialized America. That is not the world in which we all now live."

Showing up each morning straight and sober was never the world in which I've lived...

Showing up each morning straight and so ... e lived...

And you still kept your job, right?

Don't miss Muir woods...Yosemite..or Tahoe....other than that, it's a place business goes to die, and illegals go for birthing.

Toemeesleather wrote:Don't miss Muir woods...Yosemite..or Tahoe....other than that, it's a place business goes to die, and illegals go for birthing.

Not too many business relocate TO California. Many business are CREATED in California (what with supply of a technical, educated, workforce and their access to capital/credit) but then those businesses born there, if they wish NOT to die (as you've stated), they typically relocate elsewhere.

Californians are content to severely damage their own critical agriculture industry and put a million people out of work just to preserve a (supposedly) endangered mouse or snail darter fish. They deserve to be impoverished for their own lunatic choices.

Poll on GOP:

Romney 20 percent
Undecided 20 percent
Sarah Palin 12 percent
Gingrich 9 percent
Giuliani 7 percent
Ron Paul 5 percent
Bachmann 4 percent
Herman Cain 4 percent
Mitch Daniels 4 percent
Pawlenty 3 percent
Santorum 3 percent
Jon Huntsman, Gary Johnson and Buddy Roemer all received less than 1 percent.

http://suffolk.edu/46652.html

Owlman wrote:Poll on GOP:

Romney 20 percent
Undecided 20 percent
Sarah Palin 12 percent
Gingrich 9 percent
Giuliani 7 percent
Ron Paul 5 percent
Bachmann 4 percent
Herman Cain 4 percent
Mitch Daniels 4 percent
Pawlenty 3 percent
Santorum 3 percent
Jon Huntsman, Gary Johnson and Buddy Roemer all received less than 1 percent.

http://suffolk.edu/46652.html

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2011/ ... shire.html

Unfortunately, Real Clear Politics hasn't updated it's site yet. They still display Huckabee and Trump as GOP candidates.

Basically, all that matters is the GOP nominate the candidate that has the greatest likelihood of getting the most moderates to vote GOP and not for President Obama in 2012. All signs tend to indicate that person is Mitt Romney. (That was who it was 3 years ago, but the GOP went and fucked it all up on pure name recognition.)

Don't know if he'll win the nomination but I think Pawlenty is the strongest candidate. He bring Indiana definitely (although it'll be very hard for the President to win there), and compete in Ohio which will be the primary determinant imo. I don't think Romney will compete with Obama in Michigan nor Massachusetts.

Professor Tiger wrote:Californians are content to severely damage their own critical agriculture industry and put a million people out of work just to preserve a (supposedly) endangered mouse or snail darter fish. They deserve to be impoverished for their own lunatic choices.

I'd love to just say "Dang right!", but... that's a big ol chunk of farm land they're not planting on for a rat.

There is plenty of farmland they are planting on. I've seen it. And the farmers still have their "Congress Created Dust Bowl" signs up on property that they are putting in saplings for orchards on (we've had two straight years of crazy wet weather). I hate hipocrisy on any side.

Owlman wrote:Don't know if he'll win the nomination but I think Pawlenty is the strongest candidate. He bring Indiana definitely (although it'll be very hard for the President to win there), and compete in Ohio which will be the primary determinant imo. I don't think Romney will compete with Obama in Michigan nor Massachusetts.

Uhhhhhh, Romney WON Michigan AND Massachusetts in the 2008 Primary. Mitt Romney is HUGELY POPULAR in both Michigan and Massachusetts. Yup, if he gets the nomination, rest assured Owl, he wins both of those blue states by 5 points or more.

Not in 2012. Romney is running against everything he said he was for in Massachusetts and he was against the very successful bailout of GM. Big mistake in Michigan.

But hey, maybe you're right.

[youtube]KR_EILTrhmo[/youtube]

Owlman wrote:Not in 2012. Romney is running against everything he said he was for in Massachusetts and he was against the very successful bailout of GM. Big mistake in Michigan.

But hey, maybe you're right.

Romney is an automobile guy that came from an automobile family in Michigan. His dad was President of AMC. Romney was against the bailout not because he is against GM and automobiles. Instead, he was against the union getting everything (which they did) at the expense of the company and (first in line) bond-holders.

Romney wants GM to build cars that they can actually sell. This bailout that the Obama administration gave GM in 2009 does not (in anyway) help GM sell cars. GM made profits the last few quarter by selling off assets like Delphi and such, NOT by selling cars (certainly not enough of them.) You can't sell a car when you are hamstrung on what chasis you can build. GM is hamstrung on the Chasis because (due to their Obama bailout) they are beholden to the unions/collective bargaining and current factory locations.

You don't think Romney is aware of ALL of this?

GM needs another Cadillac CTS, only they need that fantastic piece of engineering to sell like the 1965 Mustang, and they need it NOW. That bailout didn't give them what they really needed.

, he was against the union getting everything (which they did) at the expense of the company and

The bailout worked. Simple message. Romney was agaisnt it.

Romney:

Owlman wrote:

, he was against the union getting everything (which they did) at the expense of the company and

The bailout worked.

...for the union. NOT for the company (and certainly not for the bond holders or the stock holders.) You think they really want to build these Chevy Volts?

and certainly not for the bond holders or the stock holders

The exact people it shouldn't have worked for.

Owlman wrote:and certainly not for the bond holders or the stock holders

The exact people it shouldn't have worked for.

That depends if you have invested money in GM.