Back to The Blaze »

Comments (150)

• sb36695

  Posted on November 27, 2012 at 10:35pm

  Contrary to what Nancy Pelosi says, food stamps are not stimulative. You need the weathly to provide jobs, pay taxes for schools, etc. Welfare doesn’t provide the necessary tax base. It’s not rocket science!

  Report this comment

  Log in to ReplyReply  

  • DIgnified

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 11:10pm

    Contrary to what you think is what you idio ts conveniently leave out. Let’s look at the top employers in North Dakota http://www.careerinfonet.org/oview6.asp?id=&soccode=&stfips=38&from=State&nodeid=12
    Gee, its all things that need to get money from the federal government.
    How ’bout Wyoming? Petty much the same, with a coal and Walmart included. http://www.careerinfonet.org/oview6.asp?id=&soccode=&stfips=56&from=State&nodeid=12
    The republicans are letting the state/federal government pay to employ its citizens and calling it something else.

    Report this comment

     

  • Ghandi was a Republican

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 12:10am

    You don’t neeed the Federal Government for any of that fool.. What you need is the Federal Government to leave you money with you in the first place and get the h-eel out. Mind the military and Interstate highway affairs and get the H-:: out. THAT’S the Federal Governments job, and that it!
    What’s wrong with you man????

    Report this comment

     

  • MAProg

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 1:23am

    Ghandi: what you’re ignoring is the point being made, that the government subsidizes thoe industries in North Dakota. In fact, if I recall, North Dakota received more federal money than any other state in the country.

    Report this comment

     

  • Balzy

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 2:08am

    @douchified

    sry i couldn’t resist ;D Dude The gov’t has created these situations where all these businesses need there help. especially people that don’t make enough money to survive on what they make, they’re forced to get foodstamps, wic, medicaid etc.

    They take all this money from us that WE have earned, spend it on whatever THEY feel is right. We don’t even have a say in it anymore, don’t bite the hand that tricks you into needed it right? Your main problem is that you don’t believe in yourself or other people, unless they happen to be democrats in office. You for some reason think the gov’t is the only one that knows how to take care of us, we’re too stupid right? You think we don’t wish that our economy would be able to survive through giving all these people there free stuff, OF COURSE WE DO! but sadly that isn’t how life works, if it were meant to be fair then either everyone would work or everyone would have everything they need magically appear. I believe man is supposed to work til he can’t anymore. i also believe that women don’t have to, but they are capable and should have the right to do so. The reason i believe this way is because there are a ridiculous amount of physiological and mental differences between a man and a woman, that prove that they have strengths and weaknesses in different areas. These weaknesses do not cancel their abilities to do anything they want to as the past has proven.

    Report this comment

     

  • Sensible_Centrist_Democrat

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 2:31am

    First, comparing a state like North Dakota to California is ridiculous. The states are vastly different on so many levels.
    Second, where are these figures coming from. It says California’s unemployment rating is 11.7. This is not true. It is 10.1. Yes, this isn’t good. But 10.1 is better than 11.7

    Report this comment

     

  • pdw

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 7:50am

    There is no money created without production.

    Report this comment

     

  • Kregneva

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 9:19am

    The best places in America have a mix of opportunity and risk, with a good standard of living and a balanced safety net to ensure the entire citizenry is productive and engaged. The best citizens in America care about each other in good times and bad, and are fearless, clear-eyed and patriotic. That is why people all over the world are still willing to leave their birth countries to come to California. It’s not a bunch of Ayn Rand Institute blather.

    Report this comment

     

  • Trigus

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 9:25am

    why hash over state vs state – go deeper and lets start looking at the cities.

    Also, the there really is no difference between 10.1 and 11.7 unemployment figures for California. It is still above 10%. Stop trying to defend those who choose to enslave you with “free” social programs, poor education, and high unemployment.

    When a person is dependent on the state, then that person becomes a ward of the state, and thus freely gives up their rights. They then become a slave.

    would have to wager he has child porn and a blow up doll.

    They are so angry even because they won, Why? This is the most asked question I have seen. Deep down I believe they did not want Barry re-elected president and are pissed off that the tea party, far right, and conservatives did not get out to vote. Now the reality of Barry getting 4 more years is a slap in their faces, and they are pissed. How long before Barry makes decrees like Morsi did in Egypt?

    You reap what you sow. Get the message out: I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

    μολὼν λαβέ

    Report this comment

     

  • PubliusPencilman

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 9:27am

    Obviously, a non-story. I’d like to see this list cross-referenced with statistics regarding population and population density. Note that that “best run” states are all states that have extremely low population density, therefore they have far few administrative and social policy challenges.

    Report this comment

     

  • Luckywon

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 10:47am

    Hey, Dignified… on that list of 25 top employers, I count 4 that require state and federal monies. 3 of those 4 are military, and one is an emergency center. The University is state run, but it gets it’s money from tuition. ALL the rest are Private corporations. You really have no clue, do you?

    Report this comment

     

  • notworkingafter2009

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 12:18pm

    Laid off in 2009 and didn’t qulify for the 99 weeks, so I started doing small construction projects for my neighbors, the stste said I needed to be licensed, ok $500 later I have a stste license, to have a state license I have to have Liability Insurance, ok $3,500 later and I have insurance, 2009 paid taxes on $70,000, good first yr. 2010 lost $28,000, not so good. 2011 paid taxes on $4,500, working back into the black. 2011 the Feds come in and say I need to be LEAD certified through the EPA by the end of the year 2012, ok $750 later and I’m LEAD certified and now if I work on a house built before 1978 and I do not follow all of the EPA rules I can be fined $37,500 a day. Every year the regulations go up and my income goes down! I thought if I could only hold on until after Mitt gets into office I could count on more work. Well! I’m closing the doors! As of today I’m $50,000 in debit and no work coming in so, I will become a tacker, everything I can get from the O’bummer I’ll take. America is Dead!

    Report this comment

     

  • glassbeadlady

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 1:41pm

    Nobody move to Utah unless you leave your lib ideas behind. We are dealing with so many Californian’s that bring their politics with them, we may go down the same path. We like Utah just as it is and it has gotten worse in the last five years, un-moral behavior is starting to be accepted and good morals & love of God are being left in the dirt.

    Report this comment

     

  • Chinishque

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 4:51pm

    @Pensil…Get a clue dude, the reason that the federal costs seem high is that infrastructure projects are not based on population but on the project…like resurfacing a freeway. However when the actual cash money is looked at North Dakota pumps far more money into the Feds than they get back…and as far as not having to deal with social issues…lets face it…ND is predominately white christian folks with a strong work ethic and are actually embarrassed if they lose a job and have to go on welfare, they would rather literally shovel **** on the farm then be looked at as a drain on the public…leaches are actually looked at as a bad thing in most of the top states and those people are shunned to the point that they wont want to stay. In urban settings where everyone is on the dole, it is not looked at in the same way. Sucking off the system is seen as acceptable and people are looked at as being stupid if they don’t do it…even if the have an income. My wife’s sister is one of those people. she runs an underground cash-only business out of her home and collects every government benefit she can get her hands on…she didn’t marry the father of her three children nor did she tell the state who the father is…so now the state is the father. He lives with her in the house the state pays for…he deals drugs and they make a good living, drive nice cars, a brand new 80 inch flatscreen and have a pile of cash…the American dream.

    Report this comment

     

  • NavET-SS

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 6:09pm

    The reason you don’t see many of the employers in that list is because they are all small. Small trucking companies that contract most of their work, so the number of employees is small. Drilling companies doing the same thing. Many small businesses supporting the work with mechanics, printers, cleaners, cooks, parts, etc.

    Those are all companies that will be hit hardest with the obama wealthy tax. Each one will be able to spend a little less on contractors, equipment, support staff, etc. an therefore contract the economy a little more. His taxes will do a good job at destroying more jobs, putting more people on welfare and ensuring that the government spends more.

    It’s amazing how little understanding of economics the socialists/communists that are currently in power have.

    Report this comment

     

  • Jaycen

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 9:03pm

    @Dignified

    “The republicans are letting the state/federal government pay to employ its citizens and calling it something else.”

    HEY STUPID, where does the state/federal government get the money?!?!

    Good lord. Progressive Socialists can’t tell the difference between the cause and the effect.

    Report this comment

     

  • DannyBoy13

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 9:23pm

    MAPROG, the government doesn’t subsidize the North Dakota oil exploration. Can you progressives, for once, tell the truth? North Dakota gets more federal money than California? You are whacked!!

    Report this comment

     

  • LetUsReason

    Posted on November 29, 2012 at 1:56pm

    @ GLASSBEADLADY

    Agreed. I work for a company that has its HQ in San Fran but has most of its company/employees operating out of Salt Lake because it’s much cheaper. All the top execs are former hippie diehard libs, and there is a distinct anti-Mormon attitude. My boss told me that he was specifically told not to hire so many white, male Mormons.

    Report this comment

     

• jessieH

  Posted on November 27, 2012 at 10:19pm

  No surprise there. Liberals are bottom feeders.

  Report this comment

  Log in to ReplyReply  

  • MAProg

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 10:23pm

    Except, liberal states tend to have higher median household incomes.

    Report this comment

     

  • SendTheMeteors

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 10:28pm

    I guess that explains why people and companies are flocking to North Dakota, Utah, Wyoming and Iowa to live and start a new business. Many are just bustin’ out to move there.

    Report this comment

     

  • Walkabout

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 11:30pm

    SendTheMeteors

    North Dakota is booming. They are running out of hosing. The private sector is catching up though & much sooner than if it were ran Soviet style.

    Report this comment

     

  • MONICNE

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 11:54pm

    Walkabout is an Australian mischief maker who does not answer the question: What country do you Vote in?

    Thank a Vet

    Report this comment

     

  • pagraywolf

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 9:03am

    Maprog –

    That’s because they are union controlled and are forced to pay more. I left a state like that. I prefer freedom over dollars.

    Report this comment

     

  • RJJinGadsden

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 10:07am

    MAPROG, What is being reported here was just a short time ago in reverse order. So many of the Democrat run states were the most productive. California, NY, along with so many others. Basically from the start of this country and eventually as it grew future states that popped up. You really have to look at the roots of their success. Location first, population density, then natural resources and minerals. States with the best natural seaports thrived first, followed by those with large rivers where inland ports became available. I could go on with each step, but for the most part many of you know the history of this country. It was much later and in the 20th Century that a certain party found a way to buy votes better and faster than the other. Yeah, in my opinion, they are both guilty of that. Its just that the Democrats became the most successful at urinating away funds faster than anybody else. While trying to keep themselves in power they burned their way through as much of their hard taxed money and began to prey harder on their internal businesses and home owners. We are only in first half of the time that people and industry flee these states. That in itself has now redistributed their wealth to the states where these businesses would never have set foot. You foolish Democrats have become cannibals who eat themselves. Maybe you can make it illegal for people and businesses to move. Freedom? No longer with Democrats.

    Report this comment

     

  • mercenary4freedom

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 7:44pm

    Yea genius, because the cost of living is outrageously priced in lib states.

    Report this comment

     

  • Jaycen

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 9:05pm

    @MAPROG

    “Except, liberal states tend to have higher median household incomes.”

    Take the government workers out of the equation and watch the number plummet. Dang, but you’re slow.

    Report this comment

     

• truemedia

  Posted on November 27, 2012 at 10:06pm

  and yet the US citizenry thinks the Republicans are for just the rich and vote Obozo back in? Go figure

  Report this comment

  Log in to ReplyReply  

• MAProg

  Posted on November 27, 2012 at 9:22pm

  Directing a critical eye at the claim of this article: one would benefit from looking at list of all 50 states on the website. After the top five states, it’s much more of a mixed bag between which states are Republican controlled and which are Democratic controlled, and their fiscal health. In fact, many of the traditionally deep red Southern states are low on the list. MA (my home state) is #19, not too bad.

  I’d also direct Blazers to the fact that the top five states are largely rural with small populations. One could argue that this fact confounds the claim made by the Blaze. Perhaps it’s easier to run a state when you have a small, rural population. Honest questions to ask.

  Report this comment

  Log in to ReplyReply  

  • Git-R-Done

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 10:16pm

    Aren’t those Southern states that you dismiss small rural populations just like the top 5 states?

    Report this comment

     

  • MAProg

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 10:26pm

    It’s a valid point. I’m simply trying to demonstrate that the simple correlation the Blaze is attempting to draw is specious. According to the article, energy production accounts for part of the picture in North Dakota, and WYoming. Interestingly, most of the Southern states rank very low on average household income as compared to their more liberal counterparts.

    Report this comment

     

  • TH777

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 10:41pm

    Arizona??? A small rural state? Huh?

    Report this comment

     

  • TH777

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 10:43pm

    California?? A small rural state?

    Report this comment

     

  • MAProg

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 11:02pm

    TH777: did you read what I wrote? Where did I claim that California was a rural state?

    You clearly misread my point. I said the TOP states on the list are composed mostly of small, rural poplations. I’m not sure where you could misinunderstand that. My implication is that states with small, rural populations are arguable cheaper to run, and therefore have less of a financial burden than, say, New York, or Cali.

    My initial point; however, is that the claim the Blaze is making here is specious at best. Beyond the top five states, the correlation between liberal/conservative with good/bad state completely breaks down. In fact, the original website doesn’t even use political party dominance as a metric. If it did, you’d see equally as many red states toward the bottom of the list. This is exemplary of Beck’s tactics: take information, cherry-pick some data, and come to erroneous conclusions.

    Report this comment

     

  • JeffMT

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 11:24pm

    MAPROG:
    A very large reason (VERY LARGE) reason that North Dakota is in the financial shape it is in is due to the oil and gas drilling and production that has skyrocketed there in the past 3-4 years. It is off the charts and shows no signs of slowing down. If anything, it will continue to grow.

    Wyoming is in the financial shape it is in due to not only gas and oil but coal. That, of course, is going to change since coal is basically being regulated out of existence here in the USA. They still have quite a bit of oil and gas production, mostly gas, but once the coal money stops or slows down significantly, the money will stop.

    The fact that Republican-led state governments in these states have encouraged this energy development has played a very large role in those states being where they are today. Montana, for instance, which borders both Wyoming and North Dakota, is ranked 18th in this report. If there was not the obstructionism from the enviros here that there is, Montana could be in the top 5 also. Activity is picking up in eastern Montana as it spills over from ND but there could be a lot more action in central MT and along the Rocky Mountain front than there is. And we have a Dem governor who is not as energy-development friendly as he tells all of you he is when he goes on CNN and MSNBC. Sadly, the new Dem gov will be worse but the Repubs control the legislature so we should be ok.

    Report this comment

     

  • Wisdom7

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 11:30pm

    @MAPROG

    “…most of the Southern states rank very low on average household income as compared to their more liberal counterparts…”

    They also have a lower cost of living so it balances out.

    Report this comment

     

  • MAProg

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 12:08am

    @Jeff: yes, I read the article. Energy production plus small population (cheap state to run) equals North Dakota and Wyoming. The direct correlation between enrgy production and overall health could be contested; however, since Louisiana has a booming oil industry, but is fairly low on the list.

    @Wisdom: not just lower average household income, but higher rates of poverty. You can chalk it off an say there’s a lower cost of living. While that is accurate, it certainly does NOT balance it out. We’re talking 20% in poverty and 20K/yr less income on average in some Southern states.

    Report this comment

     

  • Balzy

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 2:49am

    @maprog

    We’re literally the farthest thing from capitalism that we’ve ever been, we kinda still are but it’s the worst kind. you see the farther you go from lazzes fair, you are ending up socialist and in worst case scenario communist. because those that do not earn the money, don’t show as much care as the person busting their a$$. americans tried all kinds of differant governmental systems and that means socialism too, that’s when they figured out how inefficient it was to dabble with our worklife. once they left us alone to do with the land as we pleased, they had realised we had the potential to create a booming economy all on our own. you see, YOU might think you’re so smart that you think you could tell me how to live. but how bout telling everyone how to live, you think you’d be right everytime? you think you’re not flawed like the rest of us? if you don’t start believing that human beings are capable of thinking for themselves, then don’t expect anyone to think you’re competent either.

    Report this comment

     

  • Balzy

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 3:06am

    please excuse my spelling, i know i’m a bit off topic. i just don’t like it when libs come in to rain on repub’s parades. I’m telling you this because it’s sad that you’re trying to make sense out of non-sense. These states are prey to regulation after regulation, btw did you know that not all regulations yield good results? yes that’s right and how many regulations are made every month or year? I love how women were successful in battling the gov’t out of the operating room, but the gov’t can tell me what i can and can’t grow in my house/yard/farm. They can tell me what i can and can’t put in MY body, they can tell me how to run my business and how i hire. i could go on and on…

    Report this comment

     

  • JeffMT

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 4:22pm

    Rural states with smaller populations are not necessarily easier to run. What happens is that those states have much smaller budgets due to much smaller tax bases. Therefore, there is less to run because there is less funding available.

    The classic and enduring example of this is highways in rural states with small populations. Federal highways, aside from the interstate system, are old, narrow, rutted, riddled with spots of broken up asphalt, center lines not striped, etc. They have been that way forever and always will be because the lion’s share of federal highway dollars go to the interstate highways because they are the most heavily traveled. Makes sense.

    But state highways are in the same condition and because there are many miles of highways and not many residents/taxpayers, the roads don’t get fixed. A state highway that ran thru the little town I grew up in was only paved for 5 miles outside of town, then turned to gravel for the next 7 miles where it connected to another state highway. That gravel stretch was not paved until the ’90′s because there was little money available and it took that long to get to the top of the priority list.

    So, the highway budget is not easier to manage because the state is rural, it is actually difficult because every dollar could be spent on many different state highways, for example, but obviously can only be spent once. Therefore all the other highways are left to ‘wait til next decade’.

    Report this comment

     

  • Jaycen

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 9:02pm

    Massachusettes Progressive Socialist – It’s not the Blaze’s assertion. As usual, the Prog gets it wrong.

    Look up the definition of “news aggregator site”.

    The Prog trolls are out en force on this story. That’s how you know you should pay attention to it.

    Report this comment

     

• LameLiberals

  Posted on November 27, 2012 at 9:14pm

  4 Things will DESTROY the GOP and eventually the USA constitution

  1. As the GOP governors FIX their individual state economies, etc. THE GOP governors STUPIDLY encourage California/liberal states businesses to relocate to Texas/VA, etc. HOW STUPID CAN YOU GET? These IDIOT liberal CEOs then MOVE to a conservative state with all their liberal indoctrinated workers and proceed to DESTROY that conservative state by voting in liberal politicians. This happened to Virginia and many other states.

  2. Bush II started this but Obama put it in gear. Muslims from Somali and other countries are brought in by the HUNDREDS and SEEDED all over the country in small and medium sized towns MOSTLY in the bible belt but from Maine right down to Florida. HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of foreign Muslims are are seeded in strategic CONSERVATIVE areas to BREAK UP THE CONSERVATIVE BASE. Muslims breed – average of 8 children per man versus 1-2 children per Christian man. The French just had a huge protest against Sharia and Muslim influence in their country which Fox New and the LSM including their own media IGNORED. As these Muslim communities GROW, they vote DEMOCRAT even though they are against gay marriage etc, they are for destroying the Constitution and against Christians so they use the democrat party and the democrat party uses them.

  http://www.amazon.com/Terrorist-Next-Door-Government-Deceiving/dp/B0064X7B9ARE/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1354068830&sr=1-1&keywords=the+ter

  Report this comment

  Log in to ReplyReply  

  • LameLiberals

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 10:09pm

    3 Voter Fraud. Until the GOP either ends voter fraud OR GETS IN BED WITH IT and start doing it themselves, they WILL LOSE. Allen West learned this and the guy who ran against Al Franken and even Hillary Clinton (Obama was NOT eligible to be on several state primary ballots – people wen to jail YEARS later but he was president so what do they care)
    http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/51327
    It’s Official: Obama Voter Fraud Reason for “Reelection”/growing Totalitarian Gove

    4. The GOP AND Democrats are DESTROYING civil liberties. The Patriot Act, NDAA, etc. However, the liberals will ALWAYS come on on top and it is the stupid GOP who gave away our freedoms for security which will have the police state THEY HELPED CREAT – eventually attack and destroy them.

    I see no way for the USA Constitution to survive other than to split the country up. RINOS/Liberals in one side and woever on the other and leave a portion for LIBERTARIANS who want nothing to do with any fed departments, SS or government health care in any form (Medicaid/Care/Obama/RomneyCare) and no income tax or The Fed.

    Report this comment

     

  • DIgnified

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 11:13pm

    You’re an idi it. Your completely unaware nature of the GOP fraud means you only look for things to fit your view and leave out things that conflict with what you want things to be. Worthless. Lots of words to say nothing.

    Report this comment

     

  • revelation2012

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 12:56am

    multiple wives and breed them like rabbits – ‘they’ are ‘massing’

    Report this comment

     

  • allconservative

    Posted on November 29, 2012 at 6:26pm

    Indignified SURE loves to use the word “Idiot” huh!??? HAHAHAHA SPEAKING of idiots, why are there some who put complete faith and stock in an unAmerican potus who HAS WRITTEN his disdain for America and western civilization… WE NOW KNOW he is actively funding al quaida. SPEAKING of idiots, they’ll also call Bush an idiot (whose I.Q. is 165) call obama their messaic genius (whose I.Q. is the lowest of all presidents) and like a j-a be all hard headed defending their idiocracy in motion. Obama DID NOT win the election!!! military votes were suppressed, VOTER FRAUD is a FACT that 140% did not show up to vote and PRETTY factly that 100% wouldn’t have went to obama…… so QUIT DEFENDING YOUR J-As, your OBVIOUS parties failures… and your STUPID potus.

    Report this comment

     

• TheWhiteFalcon

  Posted on November 27, 2012 at 8:58pm

  Arizona is in bad shape not due to Governor Brewer, but the utter disaster her predecessor was (not to sound too much like Obama). That was one of the best things Obama did for us-take that idiot to Washington where she belongs.

  The fact that illegal immigration costs the state $1 billion per year (on a total budget of only $10 billion) is responsible for a lot of that debt.

  Report this comment

  Log in to ReplyReply  

  • Hephzibah

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 11:19am

    I scrolled down looking for this response. If you hadn’t posted it, I would have.

    Report this comment

     

  • Steve

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 11:33am

    Having Arizona on this list is ridiculous. This is a political swipe because people don’t like our maverick spirit here. We were loaded up on debt thanks to illegal aliens and our prior governor, who’s now screwing things up in Washington. Brewer has made huge improvements in our debt and is on track to balance the budget. And our poverty level and unemployment are a direct result of the problem with illegals, which the Obama administration is doing everything they can to prevent us from resolving. Illegals using freebies and free healthcare is killing this state. Its the single biggest budget line item by far. Try going to an emergency room in this state…5 hour wait times behind illegals with the flu. And now we’ve got 4 more years of Washington fighting every common sense solution put forward. Elections have consequences.

    Report this comment

     

• GuruMeditation

  Posted on November 27, 2012 at 8:46pm

  The proof is in the pudding.

  Report this comment

  Log in to ReplyReply  

  • drphil69

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 9:15pm

    mmmm….pudding….

    Report this comment

     

• ShyLow

  Posted on November 27, 2012 at 8:44pm

  None of them are for free-markets.
  Atv’s would be legal for the street in these states bringing down cost of transportation

  Report this comment

  Log in to ReplyReply  

  • TheWhiteFalcon

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 9:01pm

    ATV’s were street legal in Arizona last I checked. So are UTV’s.

    Besides, you can carry a gun without a concealed carry permit! What could be more American than that?

    Report this comment

     

  • therealconservative

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 9:03pm

    What does ATV’s have to do with anything?

    Report this comment

     

• Apple Bite

  Posted on November 27, 2012 at 8:44pm

  You look at Iowa and see it’s in control by Republicans, and yet, the vote went to Obama….? Why hasn’t this been highlighted?

  Report this comment

  Log in to ReplyReply  

• GoodStuff

  Posted on November 27, 2012 at 8:22pm

  “49. Rhode Island

  Governor: Lincoln Chafee, Republican”

  Uh…no he’s not.

  Report this comment

  Log in to ReplyReply  

  • texanpatriot

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 9:57pm

    Lincoln Chafee was not a Republican when he was a Republican…

    Report this comment

     

• WiredRight

  Posted on November 27, 2012 at 7:50pm

  “Governor: Pat Quinn, Demorat”… Freudian Slip?

  Report this comment

  Log in to ReplyReply  

  • Bluebonnet

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 7:55pm

    So, what does this tell you? Republican control has best run everything. Dem, like a tick on a hound.

    Report this comment

     

• The-Monk

  Posted on November 27, 2012 at 7:37pm

  So…. if there was no fraud in the election; about 51% of people in the US prefer to be poor and living in run down communities.

  Think Detroit….

  Report this comment

  Log in to ReplyReply  

  • RJJinGadsden

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 10:12am

    Hi MONK, Excellent example. Detroit will likely become something like those more recent ghost towns caused by some chemical catastrophe that we see on TV. Except, Detroit will destroyed itself from within. Industrial and political suicide.

    Report this comment

     

• Individualism

  Posted on November 27, 2012 at 7:30pm

  I wish Republicans could differentiate themselves from the Democrats on the national level like they do on the state level and i am glad for pat mcroy winning the governorship. Maybe in a few years NC can be on the top.

  Report this comment

  Log in to ReplyReply  

  • therealconservative

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 9:36pm

    Yes, we should toss out the Liberaltarians.

    Report this comment

     

  • Individualism

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 11:43pm

    aka neo cons.

    Report this comment

     

• DEMOCRATS.ARE.EVIL

  Posted on November 27, 2012 at 7:28pm

  Ya, but my uncle, Guido Dumbrowski, is a Teamster and he says the Democrats are for the little guy. He’s really smart, Guido is. Didn’t go to school, but he’s got street smarts and knows these things.

  Report this comment

  Log in to ReplyReply  

• SilentReader

  Posted on November 27, 2012 at 7:24pm

  And the Obots could care less as long as they continue to get their handouts from big government that is feeding off the rest of us. Big government is always parasitic. They build absolutely nothing and they feed off we the people who work hard to earn everything we make.

  The entitlement people feed off the productive people.

  Report this comment

  Log in to ReplyReply  

  • DIgnified

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 11:18pm

    Another bleached brained airhead soccer mom. If you idi ots had any actual leg to stand on your posts would include facts, numbers, links, etc. But they don’t. Just more hollow but thurt feelings from the party of the uneducated. Read a book. A nonfiction book.

    Report this comment

     

  • Balzy

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 2:34am

    dude digi,

    you’re quite a character, you follow the same role as an aitheist these days. They realised that there’s no way to express what they believe in, when they kinda don’t believe in anything. So how they express themselves is bashing other religions and how they’re offended is when religious people express themselves. like all you do is tell us why we are wrong and present little facts that are not irrefutable evidence that you’re right. you’re an idealist which is GREAT, but you can’t tell us we are stupid and wrong in a real debate son, you have to prove to us that you’re right.

    Report this comment

     

• Silversmith

  Posted on November 27, 2012 at 7:11pm

  These kinds of statistics should be understandable to everyone. That they are not says a great deal about the electorate.

  Silversmith

  Report this comment

  Log in to ReplyReply  

  • barber2

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 7:23pm

    Yes. And look at how much we have improved under Obama’s Far Left Democrat policies : the world loves us more; our deficit has gone down; we are more united….

    Report this comment

     

  • MAProg

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 11:05pm

    The statistics aren’t as clear as you would think if you’d simply read the actual linked article. Many red states rank far below many blue states. It’s much more of a mixed bag. They only included the top % states for a reason. Beyond that, the correlation the Blaze is trying to paint breaks down. Furthermore, the top two states owe much of their position to their energy production (according to the article), and a feew of the others to agriculture.

    Report this comment

     

  • Silversmith

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 10:32am

    Maprog – All things are in motion. The question is – in what direction? Progressive states are losing ground historically. I feel that is in relation to the poor fiscal management intrinsic to the movement. It will fail when there is no more money to buy votes. After that it’s fascism for control or loss of relevance. MO. I think the Blaze’s opinion holds water, especially when you look at history. Again MO.

    Silversmith

    Report this comment

     

• BlackCrow

  Posted on November 27, 2012 at 7:09pm

  Duh!!!

  Report this comment

  Log in to ReplyReply  

• ShyLow

  Posted on November 27, 2012 at 7:07pm

  To bring down the deficit in any state, you could build condos people could buy and not rent.
  Selling them just above cost,making them out of lasting materials and making the roof-top luxury rent outs, that would pay the cost of the up-keep.

  Report this comment

  Log in to ReplyReply  

  • RightUnite

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 7:30pm

    Don’t you think that if that would actually work, someone would already be doing it?? And who do you propose to build them??? The State?? Seriously?? And who is going to buy them, especially when there are how many people out of work?? Wow… My head is getting ready to explode after that one…. Dayum!

    Report this comment

     

  • ShyLow

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 7:47pm

    Why would it not work? Show me someone who has tried and failed.
    I know it will work.
    Greed and government red-tape is the only hold-up.

    Report this comment

     

  • chips1

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 8:36pm

    We could call it “Section 8 Housing”. How about “Ghetto Land”?

    Report this comment

     

  • ShyLow

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 8:56pm

    I’m talking about people buying and owning their living space. A living space the size of a hotel room shouldn’t cost more than 8 thousand. You can work fast food and afford 8 grand loan for housing.
    Government subsidizing rent at 4 times the cost of what the mortgage would be on 8 grand is bankrupting the states

    Report this comment

     

  • therealconservative

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 9:05pm

    @shylow
    “I know it will work.”

    So put your money where your mouth is.

    Report this comment

     

  • ShyLow

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 12:02am

    If I had money, I wouldn’t be so concerned about having an affordable place to live. I am at least trying to think of solutions. I will donate a few hundred to a contractor that is willing to take up the challenge of affordable housing.
    I hope Glenn’s” Dream Labs “is about connecting people with dreams and maybe a little donation money, with people that have the knowledge and skills to get things done.

    Report this comment

     

• rEt_fiELdoP

  Posted on November 27, 2012 at 6:59pm

  @ OHNOMRBILL

  Seems to me some people simply do not understand how the political system works. Despite the current president’s opportunity to usurp power and get his agenda “on line”, the House and Senate are suppose to be the ones that make it happen. Not a whole lot of difference in state governments eh? A Republican Governor with a democratic House and Senate isn’t likely to go the way of conservatism… Regardless of how much effort is in play, a ball thrown uphill will only go so far….

  Report this comment

  Log in to ReplyReply  

• ShyLow

  Posted on November 27, 2012 at 6:57pm

  These below are not legal in any of those states, so no matter the party, they are still nanny-staters.
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=oh94B448zeQ

  Report this comment

  Log in to ReplyReply  

• Chromo200

  Posted on November 27, 2012 at 6:54pm

  OHNOMRBILL Still the odds are in favor of a Republican getting us out the economic deficit.

  Report this comment

  Log in to ReplyReply  

• My Two Cents

  Posted on November 27, 2012 at 6:46pm

  The term “best run” is in the eye of the beholder. Liberals equate high deficits, high unemployment, low income and poverty to successful fiscal policies.

  Along the same lines, they think Mubarak was an evil dictator while Morsi is an enlightened leader.

  Report this comment

  Log in to ReplyReply  

• RingADingDing

  Posted on November 27, 2012 at 6:45pm

  The point is Ba Ba Booey.

  Report this comment

  Log in to ReplyReply  

• progressiveslayer

  Posted on November 27, 2012 at 6:42pm

  Yeah that’s a big surprise union controlled states are in bad shape and getting worse.

  Report this comment

  Log in to ReplyReply  

• ohnomrbill

  Posted on November 27, 2012 at 6:39pm

  the bottom 5 also has 3 Republicans running those state so whats your poing

  Report this comment

  Log in to ReplyReply  

  • progressiveslayer

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 6:45pm

    The state senate was controlled by the dems in four of those states.

    Report this comment

     

  • Shaqfuey

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 6:57pm

    I certainly wouldn’t consider either Lincoln Chafee or Chris Christie to be conservatives – both are progressive leaning RINOs.

    Report this comment

     

  • TheWhiteFalcon

    Posted on November 27, 2012 at 9:00pm

    Yeah, Christie showed his true colors a few weeks ago.

    Report this comment

     

  • RJJinGadsden

    Posted on November 28, 2012 at 10:14am

    OHNOMRBILL, Incapable of seeing beyond the tip of your nose? You have to ask yourself why those Republicans are in office NOW. Take a look into their more recent pasts, and I bet you will find a lot of blood sucking dems.

    Report this comment

     

« Back to The Blaze