What's new

Rick Perry - Elect Me...

So you're claiming that the states don't have the ability to make up their own laws with regards to who can operate a motor vehicle?

Please, enlighten me on when the Tenth Amendment was tossed out. I might have missed that edition of USA Today...



No worse than this, Garfy:

The states were looking to put unreasonable burdens on the farmers by requiring them to get a CDL for their farm machines (hence Perrys statement about the crazy government). What Perry failed to recognize with his statement was that it was the states that were looking to put the burdens n the farmers not the fed. How the 10th applies to this I do not know. I would think that if it was a over reach, there would have been at least one successful law suit to back your claim. So far it seems that is lacking. The fact still remains that Perry was incorrect when he blamed the DOT for trying to something that they were actually trying to prevent the states from doing. If you take this to it's logical conclusion, Perry is the one who is against states rights since it was they who were trying to stretch the DOT guidelines..

My comment was directed at you specifically in regards to your arrogant and condescending remark. You implied that do to my belief I was unqualified to comment on someone with a different belief system believes.
I love it when athieist liberals try to explain how social and fiscal conservatives are going to respond to a particular candidate....

You are not a monarch. You have no more or less right/ability to comment on anything than anyone else is. If you are unable to see the difference that is not my problem.
 
Funny, the proposed reg's were a cause for worry over a year ago in Pennsylvania.....key words:

Proposed Regulations

February 2010





Link

Looks like this has been an issue at USDOT for quite some time, not just this May.
Here we go again.

Show where the DOT proposed any change in regulation targeting Pennsylvania farmers.

Just because some farm coop newsletter says it it so does not make it real.
 
Here we go again.

Show where the DOT proposed any change in regulation targeting Pennsylvania farmers.

Just because some farm coop newsletter says it it so does not make it real.


So some clairvoyant over a year ago has nothing better to do than pen an article on the subject at hand?

Prove to me its not factual.
 
Funny, the proposed reg's were a cause for worry over a year ago in Pennsylvania.....key words:

Proposed Regulations

February 2010





Link

Looks like this has been an issue at USDOT for quite some time, not just this May.

If a farmer has taken so much as a dime from the federal govenment they should not complain.
 
My comment was directed at you specifically in regards to your arrogant and condescending remark. You implied that do to my belief I was unqualified to comment on someone with a different belief system believes.

You are not a monarch. You have no more or less right/ability to comment on anything than anyone else is. If you are unable to see the difference that is not my problem.

Hmmm.

If you really think you're more qualified to predict how someone who shares my belief system will respond, who exactly is being arrogent and pretentious?

For those of you on the short bus, I'm not claiming to know how someone else with a different belief system would vote.

Just commenting on the irony that someone who doesn't believe in God could have so much insight on how someone who does believe in God would respond to a candidate who is not ashamed of proclaiming their belief in God.

If you don't have faith, frankly, I don't think you're any more qualified to comment on matters of faith than you are on telling me what it's like to live the life of an indigent black prostitute in Haiti.
 
Hmmm.

If you really think you're more qualified to predict how someone who shares my belief system will respond, who exactly is being arrogent and pretentious?

For those of you on the short bus, I'm not claiming to know how someone else with a different belief system would vote.

Just commenting on the irony that someone who doesn't believe in God could have so much insight on how someone who does believe in God would respond to a candidate who is not ashamed of proclaiming their belief in God.

If you don't have faith, frankly, I don't think you're any more qualified to comment on matters of faith than you are on telling me what it's like to live the life of an indigent black prostitute in Haiti.

And yet you are more than willing to say that someone with a different viewpoint is "idiot and ignorant". I wonder if we wander over to the AA forum if we will find you commenting on FA, pilot and MX issues? Pretty impressive that you got your FA quals, Pilots license and A&P license. Most folks are only able to accomplish one or two at the most.

Regardless, if you think I am not going to comment on all things political, religious or anything else I choose just because it does not meet you random standards, I fear you will be disappointed. Feel free to ignore them or comment as you see fit. It's an open forum and you are free to comment as you choose as am I.
 
I don't think you'll find me pretending or assuming to know what a pilot, mechanic, flight attendant, or fleet service clerk feels about a given issue.

Nor will you find me assuming or presuming to know how they'd vote on a tentative agreement.

But please, do try.
 
Why is it the left had a lack concerned with religion and politics when Obama was in Rev (racist) Wrights church for 20+ years? And now they are in a snit over republican candidates religious participation?
 
The states were looking to put unreasonable burdens on the farmers by requiring them to get a CDL for their farm machines (hence Perrys statement about the crazy government). What Perry failed to recognize with his statement was that it was the states that were looking to put the burdens n the farmers not the fed. How the 10th applies to this I do not know. I would think that if it was a over reach, there would have been at least one successful law suit to back your claim. So far it seems that is lacking. The fact still remains that Perry was incorrect when he blamed the DOT for trying to something that they were actually trying to prevent the states from doing. If you take this to it's logical conclusion, Perry is the one who is against states rights since it was they who were trying to stretch the DOT guidelines..


I think you're off the mark...it wasn't the states it was the Fed. Fed doesn't want 50 states or is it 57...with different DOT rules. Fed been trying to get the camels nose inside the tent since 2007.Nothing like states rights getting trampled by the Fed.

What started this? In 2007, the Federal Motor Carrier Administration of the U.S. Department of Transportation audited Pennsylvania’s state highway safety regulations and found them falling short of federal standards. Long-standing and sensible PennDOT exemptions for farm vehicles were determined deficient by Washington even though they are typical of farm vehicle laws nationwide.

Pennsylvania is among only a few states to be audited by USDOT and could lose about $8 million of federal funds for highway safety programs unless acceptable standards are worked out with Washington.

Duh.........
 
As I said earlier. I posted a link directly from the DOT regarding What happened and what their intent was. If you have proof that something else was said or proposed lets see what you have. Other wise I think Im done on this issue. The evidence I have seen shows that Perry was way off base.
 
Back
Top