G W Bush...

[Over59]

I think we have them surrounded.

[Ken J]

City folk tend to be more "societal" whereas rural tend to be more "individual" - - - - - boy thats a new one one Me................. where have I been................

You ought to let all those rural people who would give there right arm for their neighbor know that.

Ken

[rideair]

David,


You are so correct! Thats why the license tag on my Ford Excursion Diesel reads, "LESSGOV".

Paul Waddell

[dscluchfc]

Paul, when I have breakfast with the Governor next week I will tell him you said I was right....hahaaa.

[rideair]

For me, I don't need the govt. telling me how to live my life. I have a wife for that. Tell the governor, him/her should only have two jobs. One, building roads, two, building the military! If I need anything else, I'll call a friend who feels sorry for me or a church who cares. I just wish we could get all the "blue" states to move in together on one side of the country and leave us in the red states alone. Problem is, you got people like "Robert KKK Bryd" who's been a senator longer than I've been living. And that goes for both sides blue/red. You should get 6 years and you're "OUT OF THERE". Oh well, I just keep on being a redneck.

Paul Waddell
WBCCI/WDCU/VAC 1270

[dscluchfc]

Term Limits are a BAD idea.
That would concentrate all the power and institutional knowledge in government staffers that don't have to run for election or answer to The People...(hell, you can't even fire a government employee except for gross negligence of some sort)... and the institutional memory of those elected to office, who have tenure and must answer to The People would be lost.
Term Limits are a BAD idea.

[Stefrobrts]

Originally Posted by Ken J

City folk tend to be more "societal" whereas rural tend to be more "individual" - - - - - boy thats a new one one Me................. where have I been................

You ought to let all those rural people who would give there right arm for their neighbor know that.

Ken

That's not my experience in rural WA! Folks out here have no tresspassing signs and shotguns! Folks keep to themselves, and expect everyone else to do the same. I wouldn't trust these jokers to call the fire dept if my house was burning - they probably wouldn't unless the flames were heading their way!

I love living in the country, but it's certainly not for the neighbors!

But I don't mean to imply that there aren't good people out here. I've known good people in the city too. I guess I'd say that where you live isn't the best predictor of who you are - if that makes any sense.

[85MH325]

Ah... discourse on the merits of communal vs. single living. Amazing... and on AirstreamForusm.com! What a WONDERFUL site!

<Soapbox On>
I have had the good fortune to be raised in western Iowa, live for a time in the deep South, live on an island in the South Pacific for three years, and then live in San Diego a city which grew from 750,000 to about 1.2 m residents in just 10 years. I chose to live in the back-country in Ramona when there were just 7,500 folks in the valley (now there are 40,000?) after living in suburbia, and then later lived in the mid-city. I've worked in La Jolla CA (the Beverly Hills of San Diego), Southeast San Diego, and Barrio Logan. For eight years, I lived and worked in very rural Northern California in Lake County. In the past 8 years, I've lived and worked in rural Iowa agriculture towns of 950 and now 3200. I've had the opportunity to live and/or work in just about every societal strata out there; immigrant communites, small Indian reservations, ghetto neighborhoods, middle class neighborhoods, and with the ultra wealthy as well.

I think perhaps that folks who live in rural areas tend to need (or at least think they need) government less. Because the population density is less, they do more for themselves both because they can, and because they have to. For example, as a kid in rural NW Iowa, I remember all of the farmers getting together and some of the town's folks to shovel out the road into town with front loaders and by hand because the snowplows couldn't get through after the blizzards of 1959-1960.

Rural residents in Iowa have wells, septic, and (at least used to be able to be) energy-independent (that's not necessarily the case any more). They also tend to be more financially independent and, other than ag-business oriented support and subsidy programs, tend not to be consumers of social programs at the same rates as in the cities. (Probably more as a result of lack of availability than need.) Basically, other than roads, rural residents don't expect much of government because they don't need much, and tend not to get much.

In a city, of necessity folks depend on government to keep the infrastructure of their living arrangement in order. They have no idea how their water gets to their faucet or from where, and have no clue what happens to the waste when they flush their toilets. If their route home is temporarily blocked, they're disoriented and have no idea where to go. Emergency services are three phone button pushes away. Social programs are funded and heavily used because of the concentration of people. Historically, during depressions and recessions people have flocked to cities looking for jobs when there were none in agriculture, and cities have had to cope with huge influxes of unemployed, penniless and homeless former rural-dwellers (domestic AND imported).

Fortunately or unfortunately, we tend to want all those around us to be just like us ourselves. It is a comfortable situation when all around you are similar to you. In rural midwest settings, that is more likely to be the case as many of the families in a community are long-time residents of three or more generations. That in itself is a social safety net. Extended family has taken care of itself historically.

That's not the case in cities, and is rapidly changing in rural America as well.

So, IMHO, part of this huge gulf between the rural and urban cultures in the U.S. is an education gap about the differences in needs of each group and between those raised with and who want to continue with a traditional rural self-reliant lifestyle, and those who have flocked to the city and want and need bigger government infrastructure and social programs in order to live.

Once upon a time, rural Americans outnumbered urban Americans ten to one. As you can see, that demographic has changed dramatically to almost one-to-one and I wouldn't be surprised to see a 1 to 1.5 ratio emerge in the next 20 years as cities continue to grow at unprecedented rates. That means that rural voters will, in fact, have less and less pull at the polls.

I fight weekly with our local politicians to provide desperately needed social services for our rural population that they don't understand the needs of because of a lack of exposure. It's frustrating to have a local leader say that he'll personally transport any woman who needs women's health services forty miles to Iowa City in his pickup, but they don't need it here locally, by God. What an amazing mentality as some 55% of our county is comprise of women! And yes, you guessed it, he's a God-fearing, upright and self-rightous local Republican leader, and he has a lot of women who support his views! Unfortunately, they've never had access to care and don't understand what could be available to them.

I have high-school educated (in the 50s) City Council members in a city of 3200 with an annual budget of $15m including municipal utilities, who rail against bringing in well-educated professional managers for City facilities because the salaries would cost too much, even though the facilities cost $5m to build and have an annual budget of $400k. Wow... that would be a great savings to the taxpayers of $5k/annually to fritter away $400k by someone who isn't competent! And of course these Council people are also God-fearing, upright and self-rightous local Republican leaders.

I could go on for hours... but I recognize I've prattled on long enough...

Thanks for indulging my rant. <Soapbox Off>

Roger

[wahoonc]

Tho I usually avoid politics and religion as sources of debate, 'cept'n the Ford,GM and Toyota/Nissan. I currently live in a changing rural enviornment...the urban sprawl is overtaking us...again.

After watching the discussion on "Red and Blue" states...the last time I looked quite of few of them were white from the snowstorm It amazes me how a person with the financial resources of a lot of these politicians can claim to be for the common man...and that includes both sides of the fence.

However as a solution to our problem of "professional" politicians, I hereby propose that we fill the Senate with "normal" everyday citizens...which if I recall my history correctly was the orginal concept! We can accomplish by a form of lottery. If you are and American Citizen in good standing your name goes in the hat, if your name is pulled out off you go to Washington, DC for a 4 year term, once the term is over you go home never to serve again. Face it, the real people in this world (well at least some of them) know that if if is Friday night and you only have $20 in your wallet, you can 1) Fill the gas tank on your vehicle (figuratively speaking) 2) by a 12 pack of beer and Pizza or 3) a carton of Cigarettes. Now if you give a PP that option he is going to buy all of it and let the next guy in line figure out how to pay for it. If "Bubba" is in congress he know that to meet "his budget" he is going to put $5 in the gas tank, buy a quart bottle of beer a slice of pizza and one pack of cigarettes. And still have a buck or two left over just in case. I also have other opinions that are going to stay in the soapbox for the moment, concerning mass transit, healthcare, government officials in general and the ACLU Here's the soapbox...your turn.

BTW FORD

Aaron

[Cruiser]

Originally Posted by 85MH325

I think perhaps that folks who live in rural areas tend to need (or at least think they need) government less...

Most "red" states receive more in government funding, subsidies, programs, etc. than they pay in taxes, while most "blue" states pay more in taxes than they receive in services; "blue" states are in fact subsidizing "red" states.

The point being not that one is better than the other, but that each depends on the other. Our interdependence is an unavoidable aspect of modern life. Even American explorers and pioneers - truly rugged individualists and entrepeneurs - received help from native Americans or got free land or depended on government protection, etc.

I like to think someday we could live "independently" in our Airstream, but then I realize I'm kidding myself. There is dependence built into the trailer itself: We would depend on the original idea (thanks, Wally), someone's enigeering skills, labor to put it together (our trailer was signed behind the insulation by two guys from Riverside, CA, in 1952), materials and resources (probably from a "red" state). To get where we were going, we'd depend on roads (paid for by someone's taxes), a vehicle, and fuel (a whole other issue ). Once there, we'd depend on people not to pollute the water supply, etc.- the list could continue.

Living in a mostly "blue" state in a country awash in "red" counties (for this election cycle), I admit to wanting to draw a line of defense. But I don't think it's realistic, probable, or in the end desirable to separate ourselves entirely. These are the times we've been given. Hopefully we'll make something good out of 'em.

Doug

[john hd]

roger

nice theorys, but you are wrong!

most "country folk" i know are far more aware of how the local government works than any urban counterpart. and therefore, much more wary of it!

take the township i grew up in, population of 100 or so people. all of the folks who make sure the roads get plowed, trash picked up, kids have a place to go to school etc. are known on a first name basis. i remember town meetings being packed during land use meetings or during budget debates. these folks were directly connected to the government. they knew if the town chairman wanted a new snow plow or a stretch of road seal coated,the township would have to collect taxes to pay for it.

direct cause and effect, more government = more taxes! thats why red staters trust goverment less and want less in total. not because they are uninformed or of a lower I.Q. level.

take my home town madison wi for a counterpoint, blue state, blue county, blue city. TAXES COMPLETLEY OUT OF CONTROL!!!! my local government here is comprised of very well educated well meaning complete nanny staters!

there are 20 people on my city council, there are nineteen that have jobs elsewhere in state or local government. there is only one,yes ONE! THAT HAS A "real" job outside government.

they have never in recent history been able to control the spending in our city, ever, that is why i don't like them, trust them, or want them in my pocket book! and very well educated people put them in office!

we have taxi drivers in this town with phd's!!!

thats my rant and i'm stickin to it!

john

[tinsltootsie]

Just to put my two cents in. I read a few of the posts and choose not to read others at this time. I find Mr. Bush and his references to freedom in his inaugeration speech very disturbing. I hope that I am wrong in my feelings about what harm he may do in the next several years. Unfortunately I was not wrong about him in his first term. I do not think we are better off in anyway after his first term. Nor do I think the world or democracy has taken any forward steps during his presidency. Mr Bush and his administration leave me feeling very unsettled and I pray regularly for the safety of the world as well as our very brave military in harm's way. This is a great forum centered around a great American classic, but it appears we are not all in agreement about the man who was just inaugerated. Irregardless of how we all view this person, I know we all want what's best for our country, the world and our military. I voted against him both times, and would like it to be known here, or anywhere, because I did not think he was the best man for the job. I am religious, respect my country, our military. our environment, all life, and the rights of all people. End of subject for me.

[flamingo-kid1]

Originally Posted by tinsltootsie

This is a great forum centered around a great American classic, but it appears we are not all in agreement about the man who was just inaugerated. Irregardless of how we all view this person, I know we all want what's best for our country, the world and our military. I voted against him both times, and would like it to be known here, or anywhere, because I did not think he was the best man for the job. I am religious, respect my country, our military. our environment, all life, and the rights of all people. End of subject for me.

tinsltootsie, you are a brave person and I for one truly respect what you've said here.

(This does not mean that I DIS-respect the others; some people I have had the pleasure of meeting, and liking, and others I do NOT know at all.)

[Stefrobrts]

Welcome to the forum, tinsltootsie!

[Silvertwinkie]

I don't think that brave would be one of the words I would use, but again, one of the perks of living in a place where speech is (somewhat) free.

[tinsltootsie]

Not to misrepresent myself, but I have been on the forum under another username for about a year, but had password problems signing on in my haste to respond to these W posts. I had intended on changing usernames and have notified support to combine my posts under this new username. I hope all views on subjects introduced are welcome. I know all here have been very helpful in any problems we've had restoring our Airstream, and this has been greatly appreciated.

[Stefrobrts]

I thought that was pretty gutsy of you to jump in on this one for your first post I think all views are welcome.

[Over59]

Originally Posted by dscluchfc

Term Limits are a BAD idea.
That would concentrate all the power and institutional knowledge in government staffers that don't have to run for election or answer to The People...(hell, you can't even fire a government employee except for gross negligence of some sort)... and the institutional memory of those elected to office, who have tenure and must answer to The People would be lost.
Term Limits are a BAD idea.

Get rid of the staffers. Make them get real jobs where they make something or do something useful.

[Silvertwinkie]

It appears that under a different user ID, this was not tinsltootsie's first post, again brave isn't what I'd use, but censorship is one that I also I don't like either. Everyone's views should be represented, however, agreement is still optional.

[flamingo-kid1]

Originally Posted by Silvertwinkie

I don't think that brave would be one of the words I would use, but again, one of the perks of living in a place where speech is (somewhat) free.

It IS brave to try to express your opinion in a venue where so many are attacked.

I asked a simple question a page back, and got called an idiot.

Of course the person never really specified his reasoning for saying so.. but I want to go on record as letting you all know that my IQ is not especially low.