jackson33

John S; So much of the History of the America's (N&S American Continents), are results of World History, somewhat related to coming out of the "Medieval" period, it would be impossible to pick out individual books. What is now the US was settled by many different cultures from around the World and virtually every European Culture. A good outline to start with would be the following Wiki Timeline, with some seemingly unbiased explanation of hundreds of different issues. I didn't go through much of this, but suspect there are many references, naming books, authors/historians, where the information has come from. If there is a particular period, subject or event your interested in, I might be able to come up with some related books on that topic. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_history Generally speaking, I wouldn't totally rely on any Text Book, used in American Schools (k-12 to most Universities) and would question a good many current Historians evaluations of US History. One author and self taught Historian, that has a good grasp of the cultures in the 17-18th Century American Colonial Cultures is David McCullough, who wrote both "John Adams" and "1776" which were used in an HBO Documentary 2008 (still available). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_McCullough If your interested in what roll Religion played in the formation of the United States, David Barton an Evangelical Minister and political activist (founder of 'Wall Builders') and author in his own right, has some well backed up ideas (actually owns a great deal of historical documents) and worth a look at.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Barton_(author) Personally, I'm just getting into reading Historical Text Books (written in/near time of event) and finding some very interesting comparisons to what is being taught today or even in my time (1950's) to what had been written closer to the times events actually happened.

Since, I also am happy to see bascule posting here again and feel he and several others are articulating the viewpoints of a good share of Americans on political issues (though I disagree on most), would strongly advise judging the content of his post as anything other than honest personal opinion. What frustrates me more than anything in political debate, are half baked opinions to cater to or from the persons true feelings. DH; IMO bascule uses a self defined meaning for "Conservatism" and another for Progressivism/Liberal/Socialist or any other word used to oppose Conservatism itself. My own is really quite simple, Conservatism is the pursuit of a Constitutional Government, State Control of all things agreed to in 1788, a small Federal involvement in anything not delegated to them. It has worked to get the US to the point is was (pick your date, I'd suggest 1965) and can well into the future. I would adamantly oppose the locking of the returning thread offered by a member whom has displayed nothing else but true emotion, which is no less American than that of my own opinions. If you or the "staff" want something to consider, you might notice the increased number of people using the post rating (rep points) to enhance their arguments, which can only lead to folks just leaving your forum. bascule; I'm a little short of time today, but are you sure, in your mind, that the direction of Governments (State/Federal) are favorable to the future of the US, the people/States right to chart their own course in life and most importantly the economical/financial stability of this nation or in fact any nation (comparable in the US to a State). Anyway welcome back....

Moon; "Don't ask don't tell", IS the policy of the US Military and the Nurse openly defied that rule. If then allowed to openly break that rule (will be lost on appeal) any other currently understood decorum for social activity, with in a confined group, could be subject to the rules of the open society. The question was however, "if 100 or 100,000 military personnel asked for an honorable discharge" (for whatever reason, but connected to) would you then oppose those request? If you say yes (you would oppose) and the military cannot allow a mass exodus, then forcing acceptance of a social issue, will be a reality. Since maybe 5% of G/L folks are activist, try to impose their preference on the masses and fewer yet in the military are their to effect change, I have no idea what might happen if and when the rule is lifted (my assertion). What I do have a handle on, is what has happened in the open society and I certainly don't wish that in the confines of the Military Structure. As for Women in the Military, this has long been a problem... http://userpages.aug.com/captbarb/pregnancy.html

Maybe that's why 75% of humanity sincerely believes their journey will in fact be rewarded in some way after death (something after death). While I can't openly agree anyone's journey should be less rewarded than any other or that right and wrong as judged by any society or for that matter any religious philosophy, should be the final determinant, most rational individuals (6.8B) are allowed enough time to judge for themselves, their net value for having lived.

Historical acceptance of virtually anything, might not be the best argument. Aside from this, most military (defenders) were chose, trained, educated and prepared from birth for that purpose.

iNow; Yesterday and after forming my response to your post, Bernie Marcus founder and CEO for years of Home Depot and a thousand times more qualified to explain Federal Intrusion into small business than myself gave the following interview. If you will take the time to watch or any person interested in how so many of today's major employers actually got started and why the system no longer affords the possibility for new business to do the same, you might understand what my concerns are for your generation and future ones.

swansont; While not wanting to go off topic this thread or start a new thread, this was all I could find on the suggested cap for executive Corporate Pay and wish to address...Not only is it a "Targeted" rule, it eliminates your argument for alternative (performance pay) and simply a tax increase for a specific sector of business activity.

Post 18, this thread swansont;

needimprovement; As a reasonably long time casual poster on many forums over many years, the best advise I could suggest, is simply not pay any attention to reputation. First they can be manipulated by a small number of regular posters to a specific forum and/or the staff, with an intent to keep the general forum consensus in line with their standards. Second, IMO the average or casual poster never awards points (either direction) and third, if another poster is somehow impressed or aggravated by a particular post IMO, that person should reply publicly by posting, not secretly. I'd much rather have an opportunity to DISCUSS to cause for decent or show gratitude or be acknowledged for that gratitude, WITH IN the discussion. I have argued these points many times, a few times here, having listed reputable people that have been humiliated into leaving a forum or for some simple disagreement in expressing a viewpoint, been suspended or banned. Unfortunately, there are many posters, some on staff at other forums (or the reverse) that get into a habit of attacking individual poster has they move around the various forums for simply not agreeing on some specific issue.

rigney; Even with today's media, there are 10's of millions feeling as you do and millions of them had never discussed politics, as they are today. In my years with a basically US History education, I've never seen such an overall interest in the Constitution, the principles the Country was founded on or such a rejection of socialism. To be fare, much of the same was going on during the Johnson/Carter era, FDR's reign, Wilson's tenure, but we as a society always had felt the next bunch would lead us back to some sense of sensible order. The unfortunate truth is, History is no longer taught the way it was until the 1960-70's, we have a truly Dependency Class of people unknown before 1970 and our overall demographics are changing. Glen Beck, whether he drew 400,000 or more likely 500,000 plus thousand to the Lincoln Memorial on 8/28, continues to draw 3-4M to is daily TV show (5PM ET, most competitive hour) is only one example. Palin, from accepting the Republican VP nomination in 2008, has tremendous drawing power and people and Chris Christie (New Governor of NEW JERSEY, of all places) is now classified a rising CONSERVITIVE star. Blue Dog Democrats, several pundits and loyal economist are throwing Polosi/Reid/Obama and their policies under the bus. With all this said and maybe 20 other items, I could bring up two things are really bothering me. 1- Obama got elected in my opinion, because he WAS Black, had a Muslim name and was just not another GWB, which media and the Administration continue to run on, not the policies. As it should be, there are and have been millions of minority children and adults, that were and many remain proud of this regardless their well documented economical problems, which I feel his policies are going to hurt the most. He encompassed many minorities and are not going to take any defeat in his policies (understood or not) lightly. 2- And possible most important. I don't see ANYONE on the horizon (Republican/Conservative/Libertarian or whatever), with the possible exception of Christie (unelectable on a National Level) that might even comes close doing what's needed to return Government to Constitutional adherence or briefly said "THE STATES", or even if that's even possible. Then I understand numbers (I think) and what's waiting out there in the future are simply not sustainable and if you get right down to it, many STATES are already past recovery, IMO. In case you haven't already seen this "Debt Clock" site, take a look at a few things. The National Debt...13.5T$. Expected Federal Revenue Fiscal Year 2010 was 2.5T$ and that year ends in 20 days, 350B$ short of expectation and the clincher, US UNFUNDED DEBT (not including States) 115T$. http://www.usdebtclock.org/

In 2010, your filings are based where you fall after deductions, credits or other deductible amounts. Tax Rate Married Couples Filing Jointly - Most Single Filers 10% Not over $16,750 -Not over $8,375 15% $16,750 – $68,000 -$8,375 – $34,000 25% $68,000 – $137,300 -$34,000 – $82,400 28% $137,300 – $209,250 -$82,400 – $171,850 33% $209,250 – $373,650 -$171,850 – $373,650 35% Over $373,650 -Over $373,650 http://www.moneybluebook.com/2010-federal-income-tax-brackets-irs-tax-rates/ Since nobody has any idea what the allowable deductibles and credits will be for 2011 or in fact what over 250K actually means, I'd bet both the upper brackets will increase. Where people are getting lost, is most business and many households can maneuver incomes/deductibles, from or into the following year. Remember nearly half the filers have enough deductibles, to show NO (-0-) taxable income. Ironically, small business has had the option to go Corporate, paying Corporate Tax* or using some form of the Individual Forms. The reason most have stayed away from Incorporation (Farms to you local grocer or gas station) is under the Corporate, that tax has been 39% (100k-335k profit or taxable), some 11% more than some Individuals...Publicly listed/owned Corporations have no choice but do pay a little less (35%) * http://www.smbiz.com/sbrl001.html Pangloss, I'm throwing this info out there, in an effort to demonstrate all that is involved when Federal Taxing is involved. If your paying attention to the rhetoric coming from the Administration, everything involving Credits (Tax Deductible) are "targeted" or meant to specific business models/ or individuals as chose by the Administration. As for hurting 2-3 or 20+% of small business, IMO it's probably closer to the 20% in 2011 and 95% in 2012-2014 as Health Care Cost and mandates take hold. As mentioned, small business can adjust its incomes/expenses to a degree and survive to the 2012 Taxing year, due April 2013. When in comes to lost jobs, IMO it's more the moderate to larger Companies, that will effect the job loss or gains and it's emotionally attached to competitive principles. Most these larger Companies, especially that produce a product are already "International Operations", have manufacturing plants on foreign soil or simply buy products from foreign producers, then distribute under their US name (electronics). iNow, as I understand your base argument, unless you add in GDP which greatly increased, the cost of "Social Programs" (includes Bush's Prescription Drugs) from the 1960-70's (including Fanny and Freddy) and the MOST important factor (STATE/LOCAL TAXES, which decreased middle class disposable incomes), your spinning your wheels. The economy grew and grew rapidly, considering the cost of the "War on Terrorism" (not just the 2 wars). It's off topic on this thread, but IMO if Obama had not tried to enact everything in the first two years, cut the 2009 Budget (as Bush wanted to), said (whether honest or not) he wanted to maintain all the Bush Tax cuts and a few other things, NONE of these discussions would be going on, or would he be facing a two year lame duck Congress and possible one term Presidency.