User Profile: ecbuck


Member Since: May 19, 2012

CommentsDisplaying comments newest to oldest.

  • February 6, 2014 at 6:08pm

    Regan’s Debt to GDP at exit was lower than 5 of the previous 10 administrations and lower than every administration since, this despite the fact he had a democratic congress. He cut the marginal tax rates for everyone – not just his “hollywood buddies” and we had explosive growth in the economy and tax receipts despite the tax rate cuts. By the way, cutting tax rates worked similarly for Kennedy and Bush.

  • November 11, 2013 at 7:21pm

    “I can’t think of any other legitimate wars.”
    You should have stopped after “think”

    ” Our government sided with STALIN – shouldn’t that clue you in?”
    What, we should have “sided” with HITLER??
    Are you unaware of the post war division of Germany? Of the cold war? Stalin and the US had a common enemy. We didn’t “side” with him.

  • November 9, 2013 at 10:39am

    ‘”So you should be told at hiring, that your life is not worth the risks of those potential lawsuits,”

    My life isn’t worth the risk of a lawsuit???? Yours might not be, but I guarantee if it comes down to my life versus a lawsuit, you better start hiring some lawyers.

  • September 13, 2013 at 10:13am

    “But the Kass arguments do not fit our science of water and dehydration as much as he is pushing.”

    In other words – her arguments don’t hold water.

  • August 21, 2013 at 3:01pm

    Really voice? Then why didn’t they do it before? The fact is corporations have (at least had) no obligation to provide health care. They did it as a benefit. As an incentive to have people join their company. Now that “incentive” costs more than it is worth and they justifiably will do anything they can to cut that cost. The opponents of Obamacare realize how economics works and predicted this outcome long before Obamacare was enacted. Supporters were/are willfully ignorant and just “hope and change” corporations and people will work against their own self interest for “the greater good”. They won’t.

  • August 8, 2013 at 11:01am

    Proud — it is well established law in Colorado (an open carry and must issue concealed carry state) that businesses can have a “no gun” policy. There is nothing unconstitutional about that – stupid but not unconstitutional. Rental housing is a business and has the same privileges. They can’t change a lease after the fact but any new lease or renewal could implement those terms.

    As it turns out Douglas County is actually a fairly conservative part of Colorado. They recently kicked out the teachers union for example. I totally buy the story that some nitwit in the management company acted on his own to implement the policy and when the more conservative board heard about it they overruled.

  • August 7, 2013 at 10:23am

    That’s $15.9 Billion

  • August 7, 2013 at 9:27am

    Really? Then who made up the $15.9 million deficit the USPS ran last year?

  • August 7, 2013 at 9:25am

    @captaincool No one wants to “force” her to do anything. If the job entails work that is against her religion, then she shouldn’t take the job. Taking that job was her choice – she wasn’t forced into it. If she wants that job, she has to do what her employer wants her to do – regardless of her religion. So you are right, in general, cons don’t want people to be forced to do things against their religion (unless their religion his harmful to others) but there is no hypocrisy here because she wasn’t forced to take the job. But then you probably believe she has a “right” to that job and that the job should conform to her.

  • July 20, 2013 at 4:23pm

    Zappa, we have spent enough time looking. The evidenece isnt there. If you want keep pushing your Chicken Little fantasies , spend your time and dime and let use know when you find something real.

  • July 19, 2013 at 10:42am

    Contrary to the implication in the article, this pro 2nd amendment rally wasn’t scheduled for the Aurora anniversary. It was scheduled to to counter the anti-2nd amendment rally schedule by Bloomberg’s group who, as was pointed out by Brown who was “politicizing the Aurora massacre to promote gun control.”, which is exactly what they are doing. Not to mention, this group glorifies the likes of the Boston Bombers and Chris Dorner as “victims of gun violence”. That is the real “slap in the face” to the people of America.

  • July 11, 2013 at 1:34pm

    Poop-Nose – If you think WalMart is “gross” don’t shop there. But I like shopping there and I like the fact that folks will have an opportunity to have a job. Minimum wages are merely a way to cause higher unemployment.

  • July 5, 2013 at 9:49pm

    I am as conservative as you get and repudiate most everything the Udalls have stood for politically. However, I fully respect this man’s appreciation of the wilderness (small w) and have no qualms with him hiking alone. That was the choice he made and while not necessarily the safest, it was his choice to make… and one I in my 50s have made in the past.

  • June 29, 2013 at 11:10am

    I believe Danny was mocking Diana Degette – one of Colorado’s US Representatives, who made that argument when pushing for gun control. Like “sendinthemeteors” she is clueless about what she is trying to ban.

  • June 27, 2013 at 8:12pm

    Sensible – Please read Federalist Paper 41 – written by Madison – the primary author of the constitution. In this paper he totally dismisses your definition “general welfare” and points out that the actual powers of the Federal government are enumerated and limited. He makes the great point that there would be no need for a specific list if “general welfare” meant anything Congress may deem for the general welfare. Healthcare is not an enumerated power. For that matter neither is regulating energy, eduction and 75% of everything else this government does.

  • June 27, 2013 at 7:58pm

    Sacwood – Right ….. because the government is so good at running such programs. BTW, you been to the post office lately? Looked at the solvency of Social Security and Medicare? Single payer – no thanks.

  • June 17, 2013 at 6:04pm

    There is no Constitutional basis for “Federal contingency rules” regarding voting outside the rules specific the the Amendments I cited which cover sex, age, race and taxes.

  • June 17, 2013 at 5:05pm

    Where in the Constitution does the federal government have the power to set election laws? Other than the 26 amendment regarding age and the 24th regarding pole taxes the 19th regarding sex and the the 15th regarding race, I see nothing in the Constitution that gives Congress the power to set voting/registration rules.

    Responses (2) +
  • June 5, 2013 at 9:14am

    Could someone explain what taxes these groups are trying to get exemption from? Revenue ( donations) aren’t taxable, profit is and I assume this entities are running close to break even. Does qualifying make the donation deductible? If so, how are the donors anonymous?

    No doubt the IRS (and White House) folks behind these should go to jail.

  • May 6, 2013 at 9:54am

    Encicom- you keep talking of the danger of having an “arsenal” in a kid’s room. Please tell us exactly what is dangerous about keeping a gun LOCKED IN A SAFE in a child’s room? How it is any different than keeping a gun in a locked safe in any other room? Do you lock your kids in their room so that can’t get into any other room? In fact, what is dangerous about keeping a gun in a LOCKED SAFE anywhere?