TRRK, Not exactly a Rhodes Scholar in econ are ya?

—

Because I am not a supply sider, not a Laffer Curver? I’d say that puts me in the economic mainstream.

As for Pres. Bush 43, he was a Republican, but he spent like a Democrat, he was no conservative. Get done what you can by December, ’cause you’re not going to get anything come next January.

mmfA likes to trot out the percentage of GDP numbers but I have to ask. How many of the proposed changes were passed by a democrat controlled congress? What were the realized effects after eight years? Reagan delivered all four of his proposed economic policy objectives. Just not to the extent that we had hoped. That fact is undeniable and is always overlooked by hacks trying to score political points.

bariatric surgery

With regard to the census, same old, same old. At the inception of our Republic, we didn’t count Blacks as whole people, and the Republicans still don’t want to. The more people that vote, they less likely the Republicans will prevail. A truism!

As for statistical sampling, there is no indication that in a mass count it is less accurate. In fact, there is every indication it is far more accurate. With people like Michelle Bachmann telling residents to engage in illegal activity by refusing to participate, we might even undercount rightist Republicans. Of course, when it finally sank in that she is in danger of losing her Congressional seat to redistricting, her tune changed quickly. Principles, after all, ought be practical in her view.

I really wish he would take his show on the road, a comedy tour if you will; I watched the video hours ago and I’m still laughing!!! Good stuff!

Those places willingly accepting and supporting illegals out to be forced to do so on their own dime…not the taxpayer’s money. By only counting legal persons, the taxpayers wouldn’t be on the hook for the high costs associated with playing nice to illegals.

Progressives hate that. In states like Maryland…illegals vote!

come on man, you can’t have it both ways. For your information, the Constitution states specifically that “Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct…”

Now “by Law direct” notwithstanding, Enumeration means “to ascertain the number of,” or COUNT; or ” to specify one after another, or LIST. (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/enumeration) Statistical sampling inherently yields LESS accurate counts,. The cost to verify the entire population is not much more than what is being spent today, so what’s your problem with a 100% sample? Oh, it’s because the count demographics would turn out the way you wish, and sampling is much easier to fudge.

You betray yourself with your last statement when you claim the census is not to be a true enumeration, but a way to have “the underclass actually [have] a voice in our government. If that ain’t socialism, I don’t know what is.

Cheers, Frank

Republicans are on record against any statistical sampling to attain accurate counts, and have repeatedly adopted obstructionist tactics when the issue of the census arises. Glenn is just the latest huckster in a long Republican line to advocate against the underclass actually having a voice in our government.

NOW has lost it.

I didn’t get that census ad at all. It was stupid. I can’t believe that was the best they could do. What did it even mean?