2 hours ago ·
Inga K. Barks
Thanks James! A mutual friend said you'd hate it because I sympathize with Rubio. But it is a really sad way to lose a race. Especially because he technically did nothing wrong.
2 hours ago ·
Steve Loftus
Good article but boy Rubio will slither on his belly like a snake to get out of this one.
2 hours ago ·
Inga K. Barks
Steve I think it's funny that Grove did the same thing on purpose and her consultant actually told TV that Rubio shouldn't qualify!
about an hour ago ·
Steve Loftus
Machine v. machine in Bakersfield, who is dirtier???????????
about an hour ago ·
Elizabeth Jo Brown-Moore
as I said on the comments on TBC - rules is rules!
about an hour ago ·
Seven Bates
You're right, you can't change the rules; that's why we have judges.
What you're saying is "Obviously the county made the mistake here, not the candidate - but because I side politically against the candidate, I'm gonna say 'rules are rules'."
I think you brought up the very definition of why we have courts for checks and balances to the ... See Morelegislative bodies: they'll look at the circumstances of the case where the county screwed up, and rule fairly. Your "what if someone living 1000 feet outside the district" statement is a straw man logic. The courts would never allow something like that to happen. More to the point, the Kern County Elections Department's mistake is the single most contributing factor to this error, and the judges get to measure that in their ruling.
We have to have judges to be the human beings who choose to slice that baby in half when situations like this arise.
What you're saying is "Obviously the county made the mistake here, not the candidate - but because I side politically against the candidate, I'm gonna say 'rules are rules'."
I think you brought up the very definition of why we have courts for checks and balances to the ... See Morelegislative bodies: they'll look at the circumstances of the case where the county screwed up, and rule fairly. Your "what if someone living 1000 feet outside the district" statement is a straw man logic. The courts would never allow something like that to happen. More to the point, the Kern County Elections Department's mistake is the single most contributing factor to this error, and the judges get to measure that in their ruling.
We have to have judges to be the human beings who choose to slice that baby in half when situations like this arise.
about an hour ago · ·
Seven Bates
On a side note - you're the ONLY conservative to even give Rubio a fair shake. I friggin love you. (I also think Rubio is kind of a doofus, but hey, I'm not in his district)
about an hour ago · ·
Elizabeth Jo Brown-Moore
courts should not be in any of it. so somebody messed up, it wasn't the candidate's fault, but many times we have to just live with decisions whether the cause was our fault or not. It is called the real world. I don't side with or against him - I just feel we try to teach our kids the right way to do things and this is one of those times you bite the bullet and move on. The sun will still come up tomorrow.
about an hour ago ·
Seven Bates
@ Elizabeth - you do understand that we have a three part government for a reason, right? Executive, Legislative, and Judicial. The "Separation of powers" principle?
Of course courts should be involved.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Branches_of_government
Of course courts should be involved.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wi
about an hour ago · ·
James Henderson
well you do sympathize with him...:), but rememember he swore an oath to uphold the constitution....and honestly, I am hearing some shady stuff in you neck of the woods, but its kern co....right?
about an hour ago ·
Elizabeth Jo Brown-Moore
yup - but they get involved in stuff they have no business in because somebody disagrees with what the voters said they wanted so they sue to overturn it. THAT is just wrong IMO. What happened to by the people for the people? THAT went to hell in a hand basket a long time ago.
about an hour ago ·
Elizabeth Jo Brown-Moore
@James - LOL LOL LOL....................YUP!
about an hour ago ·
Seven Bates
That was a quote by Lincoln, Elizabeth. Not a principal of the Constitution, which the separation of powers are.
The courts don't get involved in "stuff they have no business in" because we specifically have the courts as a check of power against the legislature and executive branches of government. The three parts I'm talking about; the courts ... See Moreare part of that. You want them there. They fix it when you have a runaway confessional body that does bad stuff, or a president. They also need to be there when there's a presidential election in Florida and doubts about votes. Remember that?
Don't knock the courts. They're not evil. Nobody tossed any liberties into any handbasket because a court fixed a districting error.
The courts don't get involved in "stuff they have no business in" because we specifically have the courts as a check of power against the legislature and executive branches of government. The three parts I'm talking about; the courts ... See Moreare part of that. You want them there. They fix it when you have a runaway confessional body that does bad stuff, or a president. They also need to be there when there's a presidential election in Florida and doubts about votes. Remember that?
Don't knock the courts. They're not evil. Nobody tossed any liberties into any handbasket because a court fixed a districting error.
about an hour ago · ·
Elizabeth Jo Brown-Moore
They fix it when you have a runaway confessional body that does bad stuff, or a president.
REALLY????
REALLY????
about an hour ago ·
Seven Bates
Yeah Elizabeth. They're there for when an executive of the Government (the President) over steps his bounds. They, along with the legislative branches of the government, can check the powers of the President. That's what the separation of powers is all about.
about an hour ago · ·
about an hour ago · ·
Elizabeth Jo Brown-Moore
Not working too well now is it? Mr. "o" is totally overstepping his alleged power and nobody is stopping him. OH wait-----all his buddies are in power with him.................OK.............got it.
about an hour ago ·
Seven Bates
Elizabeth, the President has not once overstepped the bounds of the office he was elected to. You disagree with his politics, but that's the position of the LOSERS of that election. When your President is in office, the other side feels the same way.
The checks of power are there for abuses of power. His "buddies in power" are people politically ... See Moreon the same side as him. If your side isn't the legislative side in power, then yes, the President gets to push his mandate, his philosophy, and his ideas through. As does the congress. (Within the boundaries of law, as checked by the courts)
You don't like it? Make sure your guy wins next time. Which, has happened a few times in recent history so we're guaranteed to have a conservative president in office again. When that person is elected, they will push forth the political philosophy of the right.
That's politics.
The checks of power are there for abuses of power. His "buddies in power" are people politically ... See Moreon the same side as him. If your side isn't the legislative side in power, then yes, the President gets to push his mandate, his philosophy, and his ideas through. As does the congress. (Within the boundaries of law, as checked by the courts)
You don't like it? Make sure your guy wins next time. Which, has happened a few times in recent history so we're guaranteed to have a conservative president in office again. When that person is elected, they will push forth the political philosophy of the right.
That's politics.
about an hour ago · ·
Elizabeth Jo Brown-Moore
OK................. :-)
about an hour ago ·
Seven Bates
Just stop mistaking the President's differing opinion from yours, with abuses of power. There's a significant difference.
about an hour ago · ·
Elizabeth Jo Brown-Moore
I'm aware of that steven..............I am 65 years old and not an idiot. and my dislike of the man has nothing to do with party - he is shoving stuff down our throats we said we did not want.
about an hour ago ·
Seven Bates
The person saying "that we did not want" is the person who wanted the other guy to win. Meanwhile, the larger number of people who voted (my side) want him to do a LOT of what he's doing. So who is this "we" you're talking about?
BTW, playing the "I'm 65 and not an idiot" logic doesn't play with me. I've met a lot of 65 year old idiots on both sides of the political spectrum.
BTW, playing the "I'm 65 and not an idiot" logic doesn't play with me. I've met a lot of 65 year old idiots on both sides of the political spectrum.
about an hour ago · ·
Gabrielle Martin
And I've met a lot of younger, obviously uneducated libs, who don't put their brains in gear before they set their mouths in motion. Check your numbers, Seven. The MAJORITY of people do NOT want what he is shoving down our throats. Just because YOU want him to change your didies, doesn't mean *I* want him telling me if I can have a hamburger or ... See Morenot. Lighten up. And did you ever learn to 'respect your elders?' We've lived longer and we've experienced more. And we've obviously had a better education. You owe the lady an apology. Are you man enough? Or are you still a little boy? Never mind, with your views, I already know.
about an hour ago ·
Seven Bates
@ Gabrielle - President Obama won both the popular vote and the electoral vote in 2008, exactly what majority do you speak of? Oh the people who oppose Obama but didn't vote? The majority of Americans who negated their ability to complain because they didn't show up in November of 2008? Yeah, and you say I'm the undereducated one? Seriously?
You ... See Moreconstantly like to pull on the tassels of your Ph.D., and assert that I'm uneducated comparatively. Meanwhile, you're the arrogant person asserting that I'm saying something mean to the woman who differed in opinion from me. I didn't say anything mean, or attacking. You did though. You always do, because you don't know how to talk to people without emotions. You don't know how because nobody taught you that in your graduate studies; which appear to be the full span of your education, in spite of your years.
You ... See Moreconstantly like to pull on the tassels of your Ph.D., and assert that I'm uneducated comparatively. Meanwhile, you're the arrogant person asserting that I'm saying something mean to the woman who differed in opinion from me. I didn't say anything mean, or attacking. You did though. You always do, because you don't know how to talk to people without emotions. You don't know how because nobody taught you that in your graduate studies; which appear to be the full span of your education, in spite of your years.
50 minutes ago · ·
Seven Bates
You keep forgetting that in spite of the fact that you don't like the President, or his politics, differing in opinion from him isn't akin to a revolution. That is what elections are for. You assert (in public) that judges are inherently corrupt, or that the president is over stepping his executive powers, then you had better assert it with facts, or you'll get publicly embarrassed - like you do every time you debate me, Gabrielle.
47 minutes ago · ·
Andy Hanson
I think Seven learned what "Separation of Power" is this week. He mentioned it 4 times already. It has no relevence in this thread. Pick another "Governmental sounding phrase" and see if it fits your argument.
43 minutes ago ·
Seven Bates
I think Andy didn't read the article, or the comments above mine. I also think he didn't read the comments fully, or he'd have seen that the discussion of the separation of powers has EVERYTHING to do with this discussion.
42 minutes ago · ·
Seven Bates
Ain't that about right Andy? Y'know, judicial rulings on county elections decisions in error? The rights and necessity for those judges to rule on it?
41 minutes ago · ·
Andy Hanson
I deal with Judges and legal eagles everyday. I don't think you're capable of teaching me anything, Seven. You appear to be just another Lib wanting to sponge off the rest of the working population.
38 minutes ago ·
Seven Bates
Wow, Andy - so you're accusing me of being a system leech? Wow, you know my tax history and my civic volunteering schedule? You can assert, with such clairvoyance, my level of patriotism? You sir, are amazing.
35 minutes ago · ·
Seven Bates
And by the way, conservatives, I'm not trying to teach you anything. I'm merely imploring you to stop being so obtuse.
32 minutes ago · ·
Gabrielle Martin
And YOU sir, need to go get a slurpee and a candy bar, get on your skateboard, and ride away. You are rude, arrogant, and completely out of your league. Go play with children your own age, and leave this discussion to the adults who are old enough to vote.
31 minutes ago ·
Seven Bates
@ Gabrielle - Funny how your defense against my points and facts is to say I'm not in your league and young. My my, you are an intellectual.
30 minutes ago · ·
Gabrielle Martin
@ Andy...I apologize for Seven's remarks...he's just a little boy who didn't even read Inga's column...because, he's 'Hukd on foniks.'
28 minutes ago ·
Seven Bates
Heaven forbid you disagree with my topics of debate - oh, no. Lets belittle him because he's only 32. Wait, that's old enough to vote. That's even 2 years older than the minimum requirements to be a Senator. Hmm...
26 minutes ago · ·
Gabrielle Martin
WHAT 'points and facts'? You haven't even addressed the original subject? LOLOLOLOL! You don't even know what the 'points and facts' ARE.
Oh Seven, you bore me. And it's a good name, considering that's the intellectual age you show here. See ya later, dude. You've intruded into a discussion you know nothing about, disparaged and been ... See Moretotally rude to everyone here, and I hope you are happy. I think it's past your bedtime. And yes, I have a Ph.D. What are YOUR educational achievements? Again, never mind...you've made it quite clear. I'm done trying to educate an arrogant child. Good night, Seven. Go put on your jammies and don't forget to brush your teeth.
Oh Seven, you bore me. And it's a good name, considering that's the intellectual age you show here. See ya later, dude. You've intruded into a discussion you know nothing about, disparaged and been ... See Moretotally rude to everyone here, and I hope you are happy. I think it's past your bedtime. And yes, I have a Ph.D. What are YOUR educational achievements? Again, never mind...you've made it quite clear. I'm done trying to educate an arrogant child. Good night, Seven. Go put on your jammies and don't forget to brush your teeth.
21 minutes ago ·
Seven Bates
@ Gabrielle (sigh) again, another person who didn't read the original article and the comments. And again with the ageism stuff. Accuse me of being the arrogant attacker all you like, it doesn't make it so. I was having a simple discussion with someone else on the board. You got angry and can't communicate without anger, attacks, etc. It's pretty obvious who's got a bedtime she's heading off to.
14 minutes ago · ·
Gabrielle Martin
@Andy..good points, Sir. I appreciate your comments and your attitude. You know whereof you speak. Thank you for being a voice of reason.
2 minutes ago ·
Andy Hanson
about a minute ago ·
Seven, Discretion is the better part of valor. Therefore, I will no longer engage in a battle of wits with an unarmend man.
The story behind this story, is that Michael Rubio is running for a state senate seat, and it was determined recently that he lived one house outside of the district he was running in. It turns out, admittedly, that the Kern County Election Department mistakenly listed his home in the 16th district, when it wasn't. The guy has lived there for years, and voted in the 16th district elections, as a resident there.
So everyone knows this is a SNAFU, but even Inga (who opposes Rubio politically) admitted it wasn't his fault. However, she made a few jabs at him and the left in her article, that made me want to speak up some. She's nice enough to let me, so I continued to discuss it with her fans, who always hate my comments. ;)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inga K. Barks HERE'S MY LATEST COLUMN. I didn't title it. I don't think the rules should be changed for any candidate. but they often are.
James Henderson