"All this talk about cutting welfare, Medicare, Social Security, education, etc. How about cutting foreign aid?"
—
"Collective bargaining is not a right; it's a power. Wisconsin Gov. Walker reduced workers' bargaining power. They will have to vote to recertify their union every year, but they won't be forced to pay union dues. Good teachers will receive merit pay. Remember the unions lost a little power. People and companies lose power all the time. But no one lost any rights here."
—
"Congratulations to Wisconsin Gov. Walker for fulfilling his campaign promises. For the first time since President Obama was elected, I'm proud of my country."
—
"Only in Mesa do we ignore what needs to be taken care of and continue spending taxpayers' money. Like paving walkways along a canal when there are sidewalks that need mowed."
—
Your chance to sound off: E-mail Vent submissions to vent@evtrib.com
Dale Whiting posted at 9:04 am on Tue, Mar 15, 2011.
First Venter:
Foreign aid a drop in the bucket. And supporting Libyan rebels falls in that category unless of course you are Ronald Reagan and are trading arms for drugs! Just ask Ollie North! He learned the hard way.
Second Venter:
Perhaps you are correct, they can still bargain collectively. But that was not the way it has been presented by either side. And re-certification annually is not a loss of power to the members. But having salaries changed unilaterally is a blow of bargained for rights. Power is a right. The right to voluntarily ceed pay in hard times is a power. But having those cuts made unilaterally is a loss of right and power. Walker made not bones about his needing to make and acting on these unilatteral power grabs.
Third Venter:
Just how are you qualified to judge that Scott Walker fulfilled any campaign promise? Many of those who voted for him are members of public unions and maintain that he did not make any such representations. Now he and others face some potential recall actions. Me thinks thou art mistaken!
Fourth Venter:
Give me a call. I am always happy to mow sidewalks. Just what sort of a mower would I need?
arizonaboy posted at 10:32 am on Tue, Mar 15, 2011.
Hey Dale Whiting...Take your hate you/I'm better than you pills this AM?
The city looks like a dump, why do we need sidewalks along the canal?
Why can't the city clean up the graffiti problem?
What does our MPD Gang unit actually do?
Lets start cutting uneeded programs.
Lets have a good old roundup and send the illegals back across the border.
arizonaboy posted at 10:47 am on Tue, Mar 15, 2011.
Dale...Are you a writer for the AZ Republic or the Trib?
Accuracy posted at 12:21 pm on Tue, Mar 15, 2011.
Venter wrote: "All this talk about cutting welfare, Medicare, Social Security, education, etc."
---------------------------------------------
All because, left-wing Liberal Democrats are for the spending of Social Security’s annual trust funds and surplus revenue, and even all Social Security (FICA) contribution payroll taxes (by employers and employees), to pay for more “Big Government” programs.
EmperorSmith posted at 1:40 pm on Tue, Mar 15, 2011.
More clandestine
EmperorSmith posted at 1:59 pm on Tue, Mar 15, 2011.
I am retired and not going back.
Dale Whiting posted at 3:57 pm on Tue, Mar 15, 2011.
arizonaboy,
I have had several columnist pieces published in the Trib over the last 9 months.
Accuracy,
Are you saying all of those Republicans who voted to raid Social Security "Trust Funds" were closeted Liberal Democrats?
Smitty,
? Are you also prone to walking in your sleep? This is the first time I have seen someone who can type in his sleep!
Accuracy posted at 6:44 pm on Tue, Mar 15, 2011.
Dale Whiting’s left-wing Liberal question: “Are you saying all of those Republicans who voted to raid Social Security "Trust Funds" were closeted Liberal Democrats?”
----------------------------------------
They certainly WERE NOT Conservatives, like Rep. Ron Paul and others, who have introduced and proposed a plan to STOP the federal government from borrowing against Social Security's annual surplus revenue to fund other "Big Government" programs.
Dale Whiting posted at 7:23 am on Wed, Mar 16, 2011.
Accuracy,
I, too, respect Rep Ron Paul. Much of what he says makes sense. Ron Paul is critical of that group of so called conservatives, whom I call Neo-cons, and would depart from them were it feasible to do so. But in this rediculous two party system we have informally adopted, one must be a loyalist of either the Republican Party or the Democrat Party. No wonder we are seeing so many "independents" these days. They wish to be free of this system.
Perhaps we need a revolution to break away and adopt a parlamentary system where the executive is elected by a coalition of parties who combine in the legislature and where elections can be called when after a "no vote of confidence" occures, a monarch calls for a new government to be formed.
Wouldn't that be revolutionary!
But Accuracy, I remind you of what you said. "left-wing Liberal Democrats are . . . spending . . . Social Security’s annual trust funds and surplus revenue." Now that you admit that some 'big business Neo-con Republicans" joined in, perhaps we shall see more objectivity coming from you hence forth?
Have you any thoughts on what can we do to get Ron Paul elected as President? He certainly is not Neo-con!
Richka posted at 1:23 pm on Wed, Mar 16, 2011.
How about paying the :borrowed" Social Security money back before anything else gets paid? After all, WE and our employers paid in to it. No increase for 2 years in Social Security benefits due to lack of funds is hurting many seniors. I know some that have to live on $25.00 a day. Where is AARP in all of this? Oh yeah, their collecting membership dues.
Richka posted at 1:25 pm on Wed, Mar 16, 2011.
Correction...."they're" not their.
Accuracy posted at 4:45 pm on Wed, Mar 16, 2011.
Yes, and I still say that left-wing Liberal Democrats, like US Senator Harry Reid, D-Nev., are for the spending of Social Security’s annual trust funds and surplus revenue, and even all Social Security (FICA) contribution payroll taxes (by employers and employees), to pay for more “Big Government” programs.
Liberal Dale Whiting is only covering up Sen. Reid's 24 years of Congressional Social Security spending he promoted, by his pointing at Neo-cons in Congress during those 24 years. After-all, left-wing Liberals like Harry Reid is Dale’s favorite.
Richka posted: “How about paying the :borrowed" Social Security money back before anything else gets paid?”
The Social Security Trust Fund actually consists of about $2.6 trillion worth of special Treasury bonds that the government placed into the Fund while Liberal Democrats were using Social Security taxes for other purposes. But now Social Security needs the money back, and the U.S. government is already operating in the red.
This month, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid stated, "Social Security is not a driver of these deficits and debt. And we're not going to balance the budget on the backs of Social Security beneficiaries. It is solvent a hundred percent until the year 2037."
In other words, he (Reid) has no intention while he is in Congress of replacing the dollars Congress diverted from the Social Security accounts.
Dale Whiting posted at 8:56 am on Thu, Mar 17, 2011.
Accuracy,
You're sick! Look in the mirror. Who have you voted for over the past 35 years or so? Have any voted to raid Social Security? I'd wager an honest answer must be "YES."
Well gang,
It's 8:55 a.m. on Thursday, March 17th. And the trib has yet to put out a vent for today, a most auspecious day, St. Patrick's day. Not all Catholics are Irish and not all Catholics are Democrats. But Barach O'bama has an Irish ancestor, this according to that Mormon Family History cite, Ancestry.com. I'm having corned beef and cabbage today. Ern go bragh [or however it's spelled]
Yours truely,
Dale Whiting
A registered Republican since 1968, and a devoted Bill Buckley/Barry Goldwater fan
Eat fish this Friday!
Dale Whiting posted at 9:01 am on Thu, Mar 17, 2011.
P.S. Harry Reid did not address replacing raided dollars. He addressed increasing retirement age or decreasing benefits. He was not asked to address replacing dollars. And even if dollars were replaced, sooner or later we are going to have to make changes [unless of course we swing wide open our doors to Mexico, employ every Jose and Juanita who would cross the borders and start collecting FICA from them. It is our upside down age brackets that are potentially causing our future insolvency problems. But for those Hispanics already here having larger than 2.1 kids per couple, we'd be even worse off.