Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
France was already seizing American ships before the XYZ incident. Our relationship went sour, IMO, because of the Jay Treaty. France looked at that as a stab on the back because we made a treaty with their dreaded enemy Great Britain.
Then the War of 1812 changed things again.
Because they kept seizing American ships. They were mad at us about the Jay Treaty.
The infamous "XYZ Affair." Why did our relationship with France sour so quickly after the Revolution?
I've been to Ohio, West Virginia, Indiana, Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, Virginia, and Florida. None of these states are as pretty as Kentucky in my opinion. 🙂
I've yet to see a state more beautiful than Kentucky. Rolling meadows with horses, forest covered hills and mountains, lakes, rivers, and green green bluegrass everywhere. Old farms dot the landscape with fields of tobacco, corn, and soybeans. We have natural land bridges and caves. Southern belle cities and towns with some Midwestern appeal. Kentucky can be everything to everyone.
Interesting Choices. I like Barbour but am not convinced that Jindal is the real deal. Jindal's claim to fame seems to be he is doing everything the Democrats in Louisiana don't want him to do. I would love to see somebody truly original come along. Preferably it would be somebody that is beholden to nobody, has original ideas, and has the money to finance a run without having to accept special interest money.The biggest problem is the system itself almost seems as if it is designed to ensure that anyone elected to high office is corrupted by the very process of getting there.
well guvnor barbour's rainy day fund has helped my state out i mean its tapped dry but concidering it helped us out during katrina and this economic trouble he is a great leader he is or was one of the few to be reelected in my states history
He might be one of those guys who is a great governor but would make a bad president. The people in Georgia loved Carter too, but he got in over his head in Washington.
I'm to the point if a Conservative Democrat were to rise up out of nowhere, I would vote for him, her, or it. However, I've lost faith in the political party structure as it is. Both serve the same corporate interests, and as long as that is the case, their ideological differences will be inconsequential. I don't mean to sound cynical about it, but you cannot convince me that either party offers a viable solution to our nation's ills….especially since they both are responsible for the problems we now face. They both spend us into the ground, start open ended wars, and try to sell us a bill of goods that never quite pan out as they say. As long as the American people keep voting in the same elitist club of rulers, we can expect more of the same, and have no one to blame but ourselves.
i hope its Bobby Gendal and Haley Barbour!!
I can live with those two, but will they just be GOP lapdogs or will they be their own men?
Instead of penalties, it would be better to offer incentives. If people can save money by being healthy, maybe more will be encouraged to try harder.
Anyone who will get our troops back home where they belong, is all I want. We need a president who understands that America can no longer afford to be the world's policeman. However, I just don't see any candidate from either party doing much different than what we're doing now. Outside of Ron Paul that is.
Here's where I think the conservative argument is flawed. They are only concerned with the freedom of choice for the unhealthy person, and completely or just about completely ignore the freedom of choice for the healthy person.So, Don, does the healthy person have to be the one who compromises all the time? An example of where I think (IMO) my rights are infringed: Just rode a bike for 25 miles, want to rest on a park bench for a few minutes, some smoker sits next to or upwind from me. Who has to move to get away from the smoke? But if I support banning smoking in public places...OH NO!! All of a sudden I'm a big government lliberal infringing on a person's freedom to smoke.
I'm not saying that. You're a Christian, you do what Christ would do. Don't look to the government to solve this problem. It might create a bigger problem than what you have now.
It is a slippery slope, but if people are stupid enough to make wrong decisions, then how does this NOT affect my freedom if I have to pay for someone else's decisions? Should people be able to have the freedom to smoke anywhere? I think not, because it affects my health. If a business isn't going to regulate smoking or non-smoking areas, then somebody, whether that be state of Federal government, has to.I think the government or a private business should both reward and penalize. I just don't think it's fair to me or healthy people (who usually pay more for healthy food anyway) to have to pay the same for health care as someone who smokes a pack and a half a day and eats Big Macs all the time. But as of now, it is. I'm pretty sure there is a break on life insurance for non-smokers, but I am not so sure there is one for health care...ar least not where I work.My argument is this: You say if a person can makes bad decisions, that's his freedom of choice. Well, where does mine come in? If cafes and restaurants allowed smoking, then I don't have much freedom of choice other than not going.
Surely the art of compromise isn't lost on us all is it?
