RedScare

Just responding in kind, TJ. I very much support the right of C&W listeners to express their displeasure over the Chick's remarks, just as much as I support her right to make them, whereever she is. The death threats that were made though, are not protected speech, and were completely out of line. THOSE rednecks, which were clearly not the majority, earned my scorn and contempt. As for me, I very much bring up issues that affect my clients. That includes educating them as to which politicians or parties vote against their interests. So, of course, I tell criminal clients which judges are jerks, and I tell bankruptcy clients which party just screwed them. And, of course, I told them that Bush was in on it. I doubt I ever said that I was ashamed that Bush was from Texas (unless I knew it would be well received), but I made it clear to all clients what effect certain parties have on their particular problem. This is wholly different than what the Chicks did. My statements are related to the work I was doing for the clients. There's was not. I also did not ask or tell the client who to vote for. I only informed them of bills pending or passed that affected them, and told them who was responsible. It was up to them whether the stand on bankruptcy reform is enough to change their vote. I doubt it was. Now, I really need that drink.

Oh, yeah. Yes, politics often comes up in my dealings with my clients. I do not sugarcoat my views on which politicians I think help or hurt the court system. Interestingly, when I handled Bankruptcy, I represented more Republicans than Democrats. It was extremely interesting to hear them go off on "Washington" for the gutting of the bankruptcy code. While I named names, they usually kept quiet. But, I never lost a client over it. There. Now, if you would explain to me why I should believe a group of people who would beat a musician to death for exercising her free speech rights, is intelligent...or even how that is patriotic...I would appreciate it. Meanwhile, I'll be going to have that Jon and Coke for ya.

Nichespeak for, "Damn, he just cold busted my butt". As for your second request.....umm...No. As a student of economics, you already know tax rates have no real effect on economic expansion. I'm not going to waste my time showing you. It is 2:30 on Friday, and I have to go expand the economy at my local pub. Toodles.

Elyse? Elyse Lanier? Is that you?

The top tax rate prior to the Great Depression was 25%. In 1932, it was raised to 63%. It was raised again in 1936 to 79%. In 1945, to pay for WWII, it was raised to 91%. It stayed at at least 88% until 1963, when it was lowered to 70%. http://www.hyperhistory.com/online_n2/conn...depression.html The period from 1946 to 1963 is considered the greatest expansion of the economy in US history. However, even during the war, top tax rates were between 79% and 91%.

Meandering stream! Them's fightin' words, podnuh! That is the (in)famous Buffalo Bayou. And, yes, they are trying like hell to make it recreational. I'm not ready to call it a successful effort, yet.

You are right. There is only so much that the City can or should do. And, while the City (or developers) usually get the blame for these moves, it is in fact, US that are to blame. Not too long ago, homes were purchased to live in. Neighborhoods were appreciated. A trend began to treat homes as one would their stock portfolio, and the home became just another place to invest, especially when the stock bubble burst in 2000. It is the buyer that dictates what the developer builds. And, the fact is, the buyers want huge homes, or more affordable rowhouses and condos. What the Heights Association and Save the Bungalows are fighting is not the City and developers, but their future neighbors. On my street, I have mentioned the number of bungalows that have been replaced with 3,500 sf and larger homes. What I did not say, but inferred, is that only ONE has been renovated since I moved here 2 and a half years ago, two, if you include my piecemeal effort...and, this is on a street that has a prevailing lot line restriction. There IS value in these old homes, but it is not necessarily a monetary value. But, as long as we as a society place the monetary value so much higher than these other values, I do not believe the trend will...or can be...stopped.

I just figured out what you meant. I don't mean the creek, but the rail line.

There is no need to provide a study, since we agree on the government spending spurring the economy. That spending does not have to be only on government employees, though that will increase consumer spending, achieving the same result. Government contracts with private companies also spur the economy. By the way, in a recessed economy, efficiency is not the ultimate goal. Forcing more dollars into the economy is the goal. Since efficient private companies will reduce spending during a recession, government, which is not as concerned with profit and risk, spends more. This spurs industry to produce again.

Actually, I think the term nmainguy is looking for is "setback", the distance from the property line that a building must be. A "lot line" is the perimeter of the lot. A "lot size" is merely the area within the perimeter. The Previling Lot Line Ordinance prevents subdividing lots. I agree with nmain, in that preserving setbacks will do more to preserve Heights character than lot line restrictions. Obviously, architectural detailing is important, but almost impossible to dictate by ordinance.

You are half right. Recessions are best thwarted by increasing government spending. After all, all of that government money is going into the economy. But tax rates have been shown to have no effect on economic activity. The only difference between "tax and spend" and "No tax and spend" is that the deficit grows, and someone down the line must pay it. Serious economists agree tax rates have no effect. Politicians and journalists perpetuate the myth. Every roar in the economy was started or accompanied by an increase in government spending. The same cannot be said for tax cuts.

Is the Blue Line that curvy line on the right hand side of the drawing?

Nowhere in my post did I advocate a specific plan. Rather than just say it won't work, I am suggesting an honest and sincere advocacy for educating our children. If that takes money, so be it. If it is cheaper to build more prisons, then I am sure fiscal conservatives like yourself will point that out. I also did not advocate bilingual education over English immersion, or any other version of teaching. I actually advocate teaching the BEST way, which may include both versions of teaching English. As for your sweeping, unsupported statement about welfare, I invite you to actually look up what has been happening to welfare in the last 10 years (Hint: You can find it on the president's website).

While minorities may feel the sting of some Republican policies, I do not see it as institutional racism, as in the past. What is far more widespread is an economic bias, resulting in more classism than racism. It is in this form that Blacks and Hispanics may feel the boot to the neck. But, it is wise to call it what it is. The Republican majority used its clout to enhance the power and wealth of its benefactors, the rich and powerful. Rich and powerful Blacks, if they exist, were more than welcome to join the feeding frenzy. I would hope to see Black and Hispanic leaders push for two things. One, which has been stated on this forum, though less than politely, they should strongly advocate education and self-reliance above skin color. While pushing political leaders to improve access to education, they should be pushing the Black and Hispanic communities to elevate education of their children to top priority. Second, while recognizing that minorities comprise a disproportionate share of the poor, leaders should advocate for improvements for ALL economically disadvantaged people, not just the portion that looks like them. It is in the interest of all US citizens to have an educated populace. And nothing will raise the economic fortunes of poor communities faster. Hopefully, the new majority will use their newfound clout to do just that.

So, you choose your political views based on how much money is in it for you? It is pretty clear why you support Republicans. Besides, I think the Dixie Chicks alienated their base the moment they exhibited any intelligence.

Except for wendyps.

Please don't cut off my Johnson.

You know, I was all set to believe that I was to blame for parrot's crying and wailing until I reread the thread. Everyone was posting along nicely until parrot INSULTED ME! Go look at post #45 for yourself. You injected yourself into the debate, replete with CAPS and all. Then you start crying like a baby when I and several others debate circles around you. Now, I know that when I post on a thread, I subject myself to rebuttal. If I get incendiary, I might get burned. Those are the rules. I accept them. You apparently do not. Sorry, parrot, you get no sympathy from me. As MY grandma used to say, "If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen!"

Ironic? I think not.

Well, at least he caught the local flavor. Speaking of Houston sightings, there is a New York Stock Exchange commercial that discusses all of the various companies on the exchange. As they talk, a caricature of a light rail train winds across the screen with 'Siemens' across the top of the train. The train is METRO's light rail train, even though it does not say Houston on it. EDIT: Well, looky here! They have the ad on their website. http://www.nyse.com/Frameset.html?nyseref=...10262006ontrack

Did TJ just admit on this forum that his wife doesn't give him any secular?

That is what I did. When I saw the rusty flue and fire escape on the right side, I knew it was pretty old. The window pattern reminded me of the Central Square layout, so I googled some pics. It looked similar, but not like the front, so I guessed it may be a rear view.

I am admitting nothing.

Central Square?

WHAT! No cell phone store? What the hell is the matter with these people?