Michigan Votes Forum

 okay, so granmole is moving on to 'bigger and better things', when are we going to be 'BLOWN AWAY'?  it seems that she is leaving just when all the hard work is needing to be done. what's up with that?

hmmm... could it be that she NEVER INTENDED TO DO ANYTHING AT ALL OTHER THAN TO GET APPOINTED TO A CABINET POST?

i certainly don't see anything positive she accomplished here. i think we've been lied to again.

well, this opens up a great opportunity to hold president obama responsible for all of his promises, as well as each and every other elected official out there. it's time to hold their feet to the fire.

don't promise what you don't plan on delivering. jennie never learned that, now she's out.

Well Said..As long as jenny or one of her fellow anti-business travelers is running the show we will just continue our slide into the abyss.

No more evidence is needed than the fact that as michiganistan burns these idiots stay up late to argue about a stupid smoking ban.

As Sarah Palin said "Looks like all you folks need a little adult supervision"

 i've got a dumb question for you....

how come is it that the blogs on this site are all decidely LEFT LEANING? are there no CONSERVATIVE BLOGS worth quoting?

all of the "blogs" i've read are very left of center, i shudder to think what would be on here if this were not a CONSERVATIVE group running this site...

just a thought... merry christmas to one and all.

crazycajun.

First an announcement: The MichiganVotes "blog aggregator" program will be replaced shortly with a different program that displays the name of the blog from which each recent post comes (the lack of which is an egregious shortcoming in the current program, a Yahoo product.)

The answer to your question is that the number of righty blogs and lefty blogs this site takes feeds from are about even. The reason it seems like there are more lefties is because the leading lefty blogs in this state add posts more frequently during the day. Our aggregator (and the new one to come) displays the most recent posts from all the blogs we enter into it's blog roll. So if one side updates its blogs more often, there will be more posts showing from that side.

This site will try to include the most prominent blogs from each side in its aggregator. That's somewhat subjective, but not entirely so. Michigan Liberal or Right Michigan have new postings several times each day and rank relatively high in traffic ratings, so they are prominent. A blog with little traffic and few updates isn't.

There will be some additions to the blog feed when the new aggregator is installed and this may balance things out a bit, but no guarantees.

 well, that makes sense... thanks.

now, if we could only get the libs out of the government service, the world would be better

One of the things I most appreciate about MichiganVotes is that its synopses of legislative bills are (with very rare exceptions) reliably factual and objective.  That sets the stage for what could be good and constructive commentary and discussion of the bills from a wide range of political perspectives.

I also appreciate the essentially neutral posture taken by the administrator regarding blog feeds to the MichiganVotes site.  Diversity of opinion and viewpoint is inherent in a democratic society like ours and effectively reconciling those differences is essential to our success as a state and nation.  Reasoned and respectful discussion that embraces all views is an important step toward that reconciliation.

 how about having an ACCOUNTABILITY TEST?

let's see how accountable the detroit school board holds themselves for the poor performance they have shown lately. i say that the entire system should be scrapped and started over from scratch. let's have detroit do what's best for detroit and leave the state out of it. let's also find the teacher with the highest failure rate (notice i DIDN'T say DROPOUT rate.) and fire them on the spot.

let's also hold the teacher's union responsible for providing us with totally unqualified teachers for about the last twenty or so years. that means that the union hasn't held up it's part of the bargain. they promised us PERFORMANCE from the members of the teacher's union, and so far, i have seen none.

let's also quit CODDLING STUDENTS. it's about time DISCIPLINE was returned to the schools. if the parents have a problem with it, they can take their little darlings to PRIVATE SCHOOL.

these ideas WORK, even in a chocolate hell hole like new orleans. their magnet school system is among the best in the country, even after the storm.

Yeah, what ever happened to that idea where they were going to make schools post their accounts online? Sure would be interesting to see where they spend OUR MONEY.

 i would like to see the amount that the school boards and teachers spend on union dues in a year. that should clear up a lot of questions about where the money is going.

but of course, that is none of our business, according to the unions.

 last year, ford and the u.a.w. negotiated a contract for ford's employees.

it was 2,218 pages. at five billable lawyer hours per page at over $100.00 an hour, that's a LOT of money down the tubes because some union rep wants it in writing specifically what negro workers are allowed to do.

no wonder our auto companies are falling off of the face of the earth, if the unions are putting up this kind of garbage as "change for the better".

 governor granholm was on the tube this morning, complaining that the money from the first round of bailouts (which the republicans voted against) was being used (as expected) NOT to give relief to those with mortgage problems about to have their homes forclosed, but TO BUY MORE BANKS.

she complained that since the bailout money landed in the banker's laps, several BIG POWERFUL BANKS have scooped up several OTHER BIG POWERFUL BANKS.

and she didn't see this coming???

what does she suppose will happen when the rest of the money hits?

the democrats were in such a rush to give this money to the banks WITH NO STRINGS ATTACHED that they now stand flat footed in absolute wonder when this kind of thing happens.

THESE are the people we must trust our next four years to.

THESE are the people who will SUPPOSEDLY bring about change for the better.

with granholm looking like a ten year old in a casino, wondering where the money went, and obama CRAWFISHING on all of his campaign promises, and the liberal media finally having it dawn on them that they have been used to instil not CHANGE, but MORE OF THE SAME, it's not looking too friendly in old washington city these days.

now, let's see who the democrats decide to hold accountable.,.. themselves... or the previous administration?

the governor has blamed engler for all her problems and mistakes for two terms, let's see how long these guys try the same trick.

 accountability...

1. find the name of the person who has it listed on their death certificate that they ACTUALLY DIED OF SECOND HAND SMOKE.

2. find the medical necessity for partial birth abortion.

3. find out what the mayor of new york wants to do with the pictures wal-mart must now take in order to get a zoning variance on manhattan island.

4. find out what michigan plans on doing with all those names and addresses of all those gun owners, along with the serial numbers of those guns. they CERTAINLY haven't used the information to REDUCE GUN CRIME.

5. find out why it's perfectly okay for the police to pull people over for no other reason than that they are driving on public roads at two thirty in the morning.

 6. let's find out what exactly the state is doing with the money it makes from 'BAD DRIVER FEES'. if the taxes we pay are not enough, then perhaps it's time we cut some spending. hey, there's an idea the lefties never thought of.

Cut Spending??? BwwaaaaHaHa

What are you thinking? Cutting spending is something us little people do when things get tight, not mommy govenment.  Either the lefties are dumb as rocks or they think we are. I would really like to see a detailed account of where all this money goes. We could probably cut the so called law enforcement budget in half and not notice a thing. Most of the revenue agents, oop's I mean cops spend their days hiding and writing bull squeeze tickets to pad the cities bank accounts and ruin good folks lives. The cops pull anybody over for driving at night hoping to get some poor guy that had a few beers but never venture into the neighboorhoods where just seeing a cop car will cut crime. They have turned us into a police state and it's going to get much worse. After all, who can be against more police? It's like when the teachers unions want more money and if you say no to throwing more money down that black hole you are against "the children".

After the coronation tomorrow the productive class are going to see their taxes go way up.

Since the new pick doesn't seem to have to pay his taxes the rest of us are just going to have to get creative.

Hold onto your wallets, Change is Coming

 i wonder what the detroit police are going to do when all this mess get's going? how are they going to keep up with the tally? who is going to go out and collect all the bodies?

i can almost imagine detroit and flint's murder rate TRIPLING once it's realized that there will no longer be any consequences for murder. the democrats WILL forgive anything, except 'MURDER BY THE STATE', sometimes known as THE DEATH PENALTY.

 they say that the right wingers are paranoid.

today, president obama WAS RE-SWORN IN. all because one single word was out of order during the first oath of office. it must matter a lot to have a president stop in the middle of his first day in office to be RE-SWORN. democrats on the news shows all said it was UNIMPORTANT, and that no thought should be given to it.

i'd say it was pretty conservative of him to want to 'cover all the bases' like that.

at least his first executive order didn't involve gays in the military.

crazycajun:

they say that the right wingers are paranoid.

Paranoid? Maybe. Seems it is spelled out in the Constitution, (Article II, Section 1) the exact wording for the Presidential oath, and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court messed it up. This Chief Justice is a "conservative". Maybe that's the reason Obama didn't vote to confirm him when he was in the Senate. Or maybe that's the reason the Chief messed it up.

crazycajun:

today, president obama WAS RE-SWORN IN. all because one single word was out of order during the first oath of office. it must matter a lot to have a president stop in the middle of his first day in office to be RE-SWORN. democrats on the news shows all said it was UNIMPORTANT, and that no thought should be given to it.

i'd say it was pretty conservative of him to want to 'cover all the bases' like that.

The news media also have reported that at least two other presidents retook the oath after having been sworn in under what some loonies might see as "questionable" circumstances.  One was Calvin Coolidge.

You bet the re-do was conservative move.  It truly is a breath of fresh air to see conservatism manifest itself in caution and circumspection rather than radical carelessness.  Change for the better.

One also has to wonder about Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts’ credentials as a so-called “strict constructionist” when it comes to Constitutional questions and matters.  He not only bungled the Constitutional script for the presidential oath, he ad-libbed and tagged on a “so help me God” finale to it.

Consider this passage from a longer discussion of that and related issues prepared recently by Charles C. Haynes of the First Amendment Center:

… Didn’t George Washington himself add “so help me God” to the oath — and hasn’t every president since followed his example? And hasn’t clergy-led prayer always solemnized these occasions, reminding us of our religious heritage?

 

Actually, the answer is “no” to all of the above. Despite what we may have learned in school, Washington did not add “so help me God,” or at least there is no historical evidence of his having done so. The story of Washington adding these words to the oath didn’t appear until 65 years after he was sworn in as president.

 

Of course, Washington may not have felt the need to mention God in the oath (or have a member of the clergy pray), as his inaugural address was filled with references to the Almighty — and even included a prayer.

 

Not until 1881, when Chester A. Arthur becomes president after the assassination of James Garfield, do we have a documented case of “so help me God” being added to the official oath. Today’s practice of the chief justice’s asking the president to repeat the phrase dates only to 1933. Moreover, clergy-led inaugural prayer is also of fairly recent vintage, having started in 1937.

 

By Charles C. Haynes

First Amendment Center senior scholar

01.18.09

There’s the facts, folks.  Make of them what you will.

 so, what the finest teachers in the world (public school teachers) tell your children about what happened on the first (and every other) inauguration is WRONG????

THEY LIED?????

HOW DARE THEY??????

i don't know what happened on that first inauguration, i wasn't there. but benjamin franklin was, and he wrote about it. so was john adams, he wrote about it.

several other people wrote about it.

we still have their letters. unless of course, THEY are lying too.....

 you may have something there... the chief justice may have recognized something he didn't like about our president, and did his small part to impede him.

who knows... perhaps you can ask the chief justice for yourself.

or you could wait till he decides to retire and read his memoirs.

 how about we hold each and every mother who gets an abortion, no matter how, no matter where, ACCOUNTABLE for the death of the child in her womb?

just like the left WANTS to hold people responsible for drunk driving when no accident has occured. no harm has been done, and you are only stopping him because of WHAT MIGHT (BUT HASN'T) HAPPENED.

the state likes to take responsibility for OTHER things, like the medical bills of people injured in accidents, so let them TAKE THE RESPONSIBILITY for punishing a mother who kills her child.

Sounds like someone may have gotten stopped for drunk driving.

 no.

according to...

the sheriff of the city and county of new york, the committee of the senate, george washington himself, john jay, secretary for foreign affairs, henry knox, secretary of war, robert r. livingstone, chancellor of new york, and several other citizens, including benjamin franklin, the first oath of office went like this. 

"A gesture of the Chancellor arrested the attention of the immense assembly, and he pronounced slowly and distinctly the words of the oath. The Bible was raised, and as the President bowed to kiss its sacred pages, he said audibly, "I swear," and added, with fervor, his eyes closed, that his whole soul might be absorbed in the supplication, "So help me God!"

so, you are telling me that all those people thought it important enough to write down, but INIMPORTANT enough to lie about?

yeah... right...

as TRUEBLUE likes to say... pffft.

crazycajun:

according to...

the sheriff of the city and county of new york, the committee of the senate, george washington himself, john jay, secretary for foreign affairs, henry knox, secretary of war, robert r. livingstone, chancellor of new york, and several other citizens, including benjamin franklin, the first oath of office went like this. 

"A gesture of the Chancellor arrested the attention of the immense assembly, and he pronounced slowly and distinctly the words of the oath. The Bible was raised, and as the President bowed to kiss its sacred pages, he said audibly, "I swear," and added, with fervor, his eyes closed, that his whole soul might be absorbed in the supplication, "So help me God!"

The above account of the first US presidential inauguration is plagiarized without even the common courtesy of attribution directly from the following internet web site:

http://clinton4.nara.gov/textonly/WH/Family/html/inauguration_history.html

Its author is unidentified.  The source of that account of the first inauguration is unidentified.  That makes it suspect.

Just thought everyone would like to know.

Keep your scholarship honest!

 all the authors are identified.

all one need do is GOOGLE the words washington's inauguration, and that is what comes up.

do you dispute the writers are HONEST?

remember washington as the president who coined the phrase "i cannot tell a lie"?

i guess you think that the teachers who taught you that were lying too.

clinton said "SO HELP ME GOD." during HIS inauguration. shrillary would have too. so did every other president.

i don't know what your beef is against God, but it must be serious.

crazycajun:

 all the authors are identified.

Not true, crazy.  All the authors are not identified in the passage you plagiarized by copy-and-paste from an internet web site.  The author of the words you copied and pasted was not identified.

do you dispute the writers are HONEST?

The author of the passage you copied and pasted without attribution -- plagiarized -- probably believed what he wrote.  But what one believes may not jibe with the facts or reality, as you demonstrate here quite frequently. 

You probably are not interested in learning the facts about George Washington's inauguration and oath of office, but others may be.  So here goes.

The myth that President George Washington concluded his recitation of the oath of office with the phrase, “So help me God” now is believed by some scholars to have originated with American author Washington Irving, who may have witnessed Washington’s inauguration on April 30, 1789.  Irving was born on April 3, 1783; he would have been six years old at the time of the inauguration.

Scholars and researchers today conclude that no contemporaneous accounts of Washington’s inauguration in 1789 exist,that actually document that he uttered the phrase, “So help me God” at the end of reciting the Constitutionally specified oath of office.

Read an interesting and well documented discussion of the question here:

http://americancreation.blogspot.com/2009/01/so-help-me-god-george-washington-myth.html

Beth Hahn, historical editor for the U.S. Senate Historical Office has acknowledged the lack of reliable documentation regarding Washington’s use of the phrase, in a January 7, 2009 USA Today article by Cathy Lynn Grossman. 

Grossman’s story can be found here: 

http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2009-01-07-God-oath_N.htm

A scholarly essay about Washington’s supposed utterance upon taking the prescribed oath of office in 1789 was penned by Peter R. Henriques, Professor of History, Emeritus, at George Mason University.  Henriques is a recognized expert on Washington, the man.  His essay was published January 12, 2009 on the History News Network internet web site, and begins, “One of the most widely held myths about George Washington is that immediately after he took the prescribed oath to become the nation’s first President, he solemnly added the words, “So help me God” and thus began a tradition that has been followed ever since.”

Note the word, "myth" in Henrique's sentence.

See Henrique’s full essay here:

http://hnn.us/articles/59548.html

remember washington as the president who coined the phrase "i cannot tell a lie"?

Interesting you should bring that up, too.

The George Washington quotation, “I cannot tell a lie,” long has been regarded by scholars as a fabrication by one Mason Locke Weems, an Episcopal Church clergyman-turned-author and bookseller who in 1800 published a Washington biography that he had written. 

A nice, brief essay about this Washington myth published and copyrighted in 2006 by Mary Trotter Klon can be read here:

http://americanhistory.suite101.com/article.cfm/washingtonscherrytree

A more comprehensive discussion of Weems’ made up quote and story about Washington and the cherry tree can be found here:

http://xroads.virginia.edu/~cap/gw/gwmoral.html

The link is to scholarly material in an American Studies program at the University of Virginia.

i guess you think that the teachers who taught you that were lying too.

I don't ever remember being "taught" that business about Washington and the cherry tree in school, as a fact.  At best it always was characterized as a highly suspect and probably apocryphal tale.  I had good teachers and attended good schools.  

clinton said "SO HELP ME GOD." during HIS inauguration. shrillary would have too. so did every other president.

Clinton sure needed God's help.  But your assertion that "every other president" used that phrase, too, is quite false, according to people who actually have expertise in this area of historical study and research.

So far, crazy, if we had to grade your performance on all this you would get an F in mastery of the facts, an F in scholarship, and an F in, to be polite, intellectual integrity.  A clean sweep report card.  

i don't know what your beef is against God, but it must be serious.

God and I are on perfectly amicable terms.  God has no beef with me, and I have no beef with God.  

Evidence clearly shows that you, on the other hand, apparently have a serious beef with facts and reality.  Why is that?

 okay sane...

such SCHOLARLY dissertations must have you dizzy by now.

now, WHY do the public schools CONTINUE TO TEACH THAT WASHINGTON STARTED THE SAYING OF "SO HELP ME GOD"? are they supposed to be lying to our children? why do private school teachers continue to teach it as well? oh, by the way, if your SCHOLARS would have bothered to look in the NATIONAL ARCHIVES, they would have FOUND THE LETTERS FROM EVERY ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE. they can also look in the presidential libraries of john adams, and john quincy adams. there's more in there. do you doubt the voracity of the first, second, and sixth president of the united states? OF COURSE YOU DO.

please... name three presidents who have NOT uttered the words SO HELP ME GOD AFTER TAKING THE OATH.

remember we have the last hundred or so years on either radio or television, and ALL the ones recorded that way HAVE said it.

EVEN the current president said it. not once, but twice.

i still don't understand your beef with God, but God must have done you some serious wrong.

 LOL   What a Joke.  How many times can  you "crazy",  make a complete fool of yourself.

BTW,  nice job on the supporting links "SaneMI",  something "Crazy" has never done (not suprisingly) because he has never said anything credible. 

As with all republicans......its just noise.

Pffffft !

NOTE: It is not against any  forum rules OR SOCIETAL NORMS to state the truth about another posters blatant lies or sheer lack of the facts ! 

crazycajun:

 please... name three presidents who have NOT uttered the words SO HELP ME GOD AFTER TAKING THE OATH..

I can give you one.  Teddy Roosevelt.  

The others you can look up for yourself.

GO !  Go  on ,  learn something for once  on your own , and stop relying on others to do your homework for you.

Everyone manages to post links except for YOU.

Not only do you admit to lacking an education, but you're lazy aswell.

Perhaps THATS why you manage to look like a fool everytime you post.  Stop inflicting your ignorance on everyone else, simply because YOU are too lazy to have NOT persued  an educattion in the past and are  STILL  lazy enough not to bother.

Pffffft !

 try to find this one...

"The phrase "So help me God" is explicitly prescribed in oaths as early as the Judiciary Act of 1789, for U.S. officers other than the President. Although the phrase is mandatory in oaths, the said Act also allows for the option that the phrase to be omitted by the officer, in which case it would be called an affirmation instead of an oath. Quote: "Which words, so help me God, shall be omitted in all cases where an affirmation is admitted instead of an oath."^[26] In contrast, the oath of the President is the only oath specified in the Constitution, which is silent concerning the use of the closing phrase "So help me God", though also allowing for the optional use as an affirmation. In practice, however, most Presidents have opted to take the oath (rather than an affirmation), to use a Bible to do so, and also to close the oath with the customary phrase.

It is uncertain how many Presidents used a Bible or added the words "So help me God" at the end of the oath, or in their acceptance of the oath, as neither is required by law; unlike many other federal oaths which do include the phrase "So help me God."

so, once again... what is your beef with GOD???

it's a simple question. completely personal, no 'sources' necessary. no research necessary. only your personal grudge against a creator.

you remember the creator. the one who endowed us with all those rights?

 so, which truth are you talking about? the truth you espouse loudly, or the truth you VOTED for in the privacy of the voting booth?

a fool who admits to lying to himself and others......

this is what the socialists have championing their cause.

where are YOUR facts?

all we hear from you is trolling.

 Obviously you are confused and must have forgotten who YOUR beef is with.

I simply have pointed out the obvious.  You asked a question, you got an answer.

The rest....your on your own.

Pfffft !

 is PFFFFT... your answer?

are you, like the knight in monty python "fahrrrting in your general direction"?

you give up SO easily when confronted with truth.

"Pffft !"   is more than you deserve, and certainly about all you can comprehend.

Pfffft !

 and trueblue waves the white flag of surrender...

You know, I don't want to create thread drift here but it is worthwhile tossing a "thank you" and "attaboys" to the Mackinac Center and the MichiganVotes forum administrator for changes made in this forum's software and design in November 2008.  

One of the great improvements is the ability to insert hyperlinks that permit posters to quickly and decisively direct readers to internet accessible sources of information (and opinion) upon which they are basing their comments here.  That feature alone really can make the forum more vehicle for thoughtful discussion of issues rather than a vehicle for vitriolic spews aimed at groups and individuals.  It also -- in keeping with the topic of "accountability" -- serves to make posters more accountable for what they say here, by better allowing and enabling participants to sort out the ranters from the thoughtful posters, and make decisions as to poster credibility.

Other good changes include the formatting features that allow participants to set up their posts in more readable form.  That should improve "communication."   One I particularly like is the option to use Boldface, Italic, Underlined or Strikethrough (singly or in combination) to emphasize key words or phrases.  This should help make passages more readable by discouraging use of the internet SHOUTING style employed freely by some posters.  (Of course, some buffoon surely will discover the type options and comobine them with the SHOUTING to make a bigger mess.  It is the law of unintended consequences at work, I suppose.  Alas.)

The final positive change is ability to switch the way we view topics from "flat" to "threaded" view.  This helps us sort out discussions and differentiate between posts of substance and those put up just to get in the "last word."

I think as the new 2009-2010 legislative session really gets rolling (if it ever actually does ) we will see more participation develop in this forum, and perhaps the format changes also will help upgrade the quality and usefulness of the discussion to something beyond mere entertainment. 

I join you in your "attaboy" to the Michigan votes forum for making changes to improve the design of this discussion forum, but I am less optimistic in it's future quality and usefulness. As long as some posters view this forum in terms of a battleground, that is, you either must win or lose, it will drive off the more thoughtful and curious minded participants. This is not to say some knowledge cannot be gained from the more vehement discussions, but I feel people tend to a more defensive posture when engaged in this manner, and become hardened in their positions because of the win/lose tone of discussion. This is certainly no fault of the administration, but rather a normal consequence of a free forum. It is what it is.

I agree with jmangan's points, but always remain optimistic that improvement can happen.

One step to great improvement in forums like this is clear cut rules of engagement enforced by attentive and fair but assertive moderators.  I have seen forums in non-political topic areas transformed to wonderful discussion vehicles by that means, changing the tone from confrontational to collegial.  That doesn't mean homogenization of viewpoints or stifling of dissent and differences of opinion or not dealing with controversial topics.  It means (in this case) restoration and maintenance (or achievement and maintenance) of civility in discussion of political matters that is sorely needed both on localized forums like MichiganVotes and nationally.

Think globally, act locally.  That's good advice that may be applicable here.    

 hey guys...

the TOPIC is accountability.

you haven't stuck to it for quite a while.

you HAVE trolled.

you also need to once again speak to your friend, co-conspiritor, and alter-ego, trueblue.

this place is HIS personal battleground. among others.

now, if you would PLEASE keep ON TOPIC...