Recent Comments:



----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  • "But, a rose is a rose. Or when it quacks like a duck, it is a duck. -------------------------- Actually, I don't think you are correct. A treaty is only a treaty if 2/3 of the Senate approves it. That is the very definition of what makes it a treaty. Saying a President's only avenue of approach in his official capacity is to try for a treaty and if the vote fails, the President can do nothing further on the subject is just false. First, the President never has to try for a treaty in the first place. And what idiot would try for a treaty already knowing it couldn't pass? Presidents are a little too smart for that. Secondly, a President can take other action, one of the other actions being an executive agreement. Presidents have always taken other actions short of treaties. There is a long precedence of Presidents taking other action. So there would be no constitutional limitation or historical precedent preventing this President from undertaking the same powers his predecessors have undertaken. See this statistic: "A 2009 study published by the University of Michigan found that 52.9% of international agreements were executive agreements from 1839 until 1889, but from 1939 until 1989 the ratio had risen to 94.3%." So if this President enters into an executive agreement with Iran, he is in the company of approximately 90% of recent international agreements entered into by U.S. presidents. Do you see something unusual or unseemly in this President doing what has been done by Presidents approximately 90% of the time before him? The 90 percentile is pretty strong company, wouldn't you agree? And, If I understand it correctly, if the President does enter into an executive agreement with Iran, his powers in that executive agreement will be greatly limited--much more limited than if the President had achieved a treaty. (Makes sense, right?) For example, the President will not be able to unilaterally eliminate existing sanctions on Iran. Eliminating existing sanctions would take Congressional approval. So his executive power here is extremely limited, don't you agree? For a second example, the President cannot limit the next President's power to reverse his executive agreement so his authority here only extends out 1 year. Not much is going to happen in the next year on this topic, don't you agree? I think once you think about it, you will quickly see that this President's proposed agreement without the authority to lift economic sanctions and without the authority to bind the country beyond next November isn't all that powerful or scary or unprecedented. In fact, it's pretty much the power the people of the United Stated intend to and should trust with their President, don't you agree?"

    abigchocoholic commented in:
    Corker’s bill turns the Constitution upside down on 2015-08-27 22:34:11
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  • "This is a hard one. One, because it is only a "treaty" if they call it a treaty - or it is specified in the language of it. I have not read ALL of the language so I do not know if it is a treaty or not - they call it a "long-term Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action" (or JCPOA because words confuse politicians too easily). I do know that no one is calling it a "non-binding agreement" - which is usually what "non" treaties are called, so I am suspicious. Some parts that I did read, read like a child's wish-list: Iran and E3/EU+3 will take the following voluntary measures..." Whenever someone says, "you WILL volunteer" - you know it's a crock of shit. Also, there is no case law for this - which is probably why the administration is so flamboyantly circumventing the Constitution (yet again). The Executive Branch does need to conduct foreign policy (trust me, I would LOVE to dismantle the State Department) and needs to be able to conduct agreements; that said, is an agreement a treaty? As I said earlier, only if they say it is. It is a slippery slope, and anyone who quickly dismisses this exercise in legalese is likely a fool. Finally, whenever "comprehensive" is mentioned by a bureaucrat or politician, look out, it's a LOT more than what you think it is. Or what they've sold it to you as."

    r0y commented in:
    Corker’s bill turns the Constitution upside down on 2015-08-27 18:40:30
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  • "Wrong, wrong, wrong. Unfortunately people now have to take these actions and threaten litigation. Once people lived normally. Then, big ag comes in, takes all the water, makes a ton of money and then leaves. Do they care if the ground goes dry? No. Their pockets are lined. This has nothing to do with 'a guy' wanting to build a house. Etc. If you really believe that, you're kidding yourself. There is now a huge problem where there was not before. Though, still the one main factor remains and grows every singe day: overpopulation. Big ag wouldn't be able to reap the enormous profits if there were simply not.as.many people. You wouldn't have the need to plant 100,000 acres. But now you do, and they are 'helping to feed a growing population. That's what this is about. It is a last chance to try to protect our natural resources before yet again, they are gone."

    65buick commented in:
    Environmental group threatens SLO County over water use on 2015-08-27 18:34:58
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  • "Good opinion piece Matt. I'm sure you know what you opine, unfortunately for us, the progressive cult in this country today don't give a hoot about our Constitution. Especially the current potus whom I can only imagine uses it as a mat to wipe his feet with prior to entering the oval office."

    ToHellinaHandBasket commented in:
    Corker’s bill turns the Constitution upside down on 2015-08-27 18:28:55
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  • "Perhaps I could refer you to my reply comments to mkaney. In addition, you introduced an interesting twist, namely attempting to create reality by redefining words. It points out interesting characteristic about the liberal mind. They have a God complex. They remember something about the Biblical creation event where God spoke... and the physical world came to be, However, your trying to call a treaty something other than a treaty won't change it. The problem in this instance is that Obama is in fact trying to make a treaty between the US and Iran, but since he knows the Senate would not approve it, he had Corker carry his jug of water by calling it something other than a treaty. But, a rose is a rose. Or when it quacks like a duck, it is a duck. Of course the president has the constitutional authority to conduct foreign policy. But that same constitution prohibits him from doing exactly what he is attempting to do with Iran right now. Even you agree that the Senate needs to approve all treaties by 2/3 majority. Period. You cannot escape that just by trying to redefine the action. You're not God. Now then, you tell me why the current Iran deal is not a treaty between the US and Iran. You too are blinded by your ignorance. I was a founding member of a local community services district established under LAFCO and was elected to it. I also served as its treasurer. I have been elected in county wide elections to the Republican Central Committee. I was the Republican nominee in the Congressional general election in 2008, where the Democrat registration favored Republicans by a huge margin and I received over 80,000 votes - which is more than the more recent candidates have received. At least I have the guts to run and have the guts to vocalize my principles. What positive item - even one- have you introduced to SLO residents other than trying to be smug, sarcastic and negative? I await your response to this question as well as to the challenge to tell everyone why the Iran deal is not a treaty. Finally, how about my running for Congress again? What do you think? Maybe you could help me win for the people and the Constitution."

    Matt K commented in:
    Corker’s bill turns the Constitution upside down on 2015-08-27 17:38:32
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  • "Regrettably, your reference to sanctions is totally off mark. When US places sanctions against a foreign country the US does not ask it for agreement to do so. Do you really think Iran would have entered into a treaty with us in order for us to impose sanctions on Iran? Please do think about what you wrote. Sanctions by the US are one sided, executed by the US. The Iran issue is a treaty between the US and Iran. Treaties need to be ratified by the Senate with a 2/3 majority. Secondly, how is it that I am the typical Republican/Democrat if I am publicly taking the Republican leadership to task for violating the Constitution? On the other hand, Democrats are lining up in a single file behind Obama on Corker's Iran deal. What part of the letter lacks philosophical consistency? Kindly point it out to me, as I must have forgotten all of my college major subject, which in fact was philosophy. I followed that with two years of graduate studies in Europe in philosophy and political science. What part of my letter lacks integrity? With what I learned about you by reading your blurb, it does not surprise me that what I was saying did not even make any sense to you. On one item I must congratulate you. That is your not supporting Obama, the president who rules without consideration of our Constitution. How are my comments seriously clueless? Whom am I manipulating by insisting on Obama's need to follow the Constitution? Next time, think first, please. Don't attack the messenger but try to challenge the ideas and concepts being put forth. Incidentally, in classical philosophical terms, your comments are called "argumentum ad hominem". You might take that to heart if not to your mind."

    Matt K commented in:
    Corker’s bill turns the Constitution upside down on 2015-08-27 17:06:12
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  • "Why hasn't the daycare provider been arrested as an accomplice? Hard to believe that she would be so irresponsible as to let a 10 year old out of her site while her husband did his evil deeds and then not have the sense to realize something was extremely wrong with the child afterward. She knew. String them both up side by side so they can enter hell together."

    achillesheal commented in:
    Husband of Lompoc daycare provider arrested for sexual molestation on 2015-08-27 16:38:43
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  • "I agree with you completely. The Superintendent has in the last few years hired principles of their schools who will just show up, coddle parents, lie at every opportunity and she continues to refer to the students as "Her Babies", It is a pathetic setup that they have at the Arch Diocese of Southern Monterey. I know that not only did this incident take place on the bus, but they conveniently left out that these same boys were spraying and splashing semen that they collected in a baggie on the girls on the bus. WHY WHY WHY wouldn't Parents be informed of bodily fluids being flung around the bus on other students? Oh...that's right....Ms. Radecke (the Superintendent) cares so deeply about "Her Babies" that we parents don't have the right to know! They also rolled out COMMON CORE in our schools without even a second thought about letting the parents know. It SICKENS me that her lack of leadership will bring down the Catholic Schools system in this area because rather than address issues head on, a good old sweep under the rug is more her style. And.....my kids ARE NOT "HER BABIES!!" Good thing my daughter or son wasnt on this bus with semen flying or there would have been a lawsuit the next day. DISGUSTING."

    AG-Gal commented in:
    Mission Prep bedeviled by lawsuit, Reagan trip sexual misconduct on 2015-08-27 16:06:52
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  • "You’re correct that treaties require a 2/3 ratification by the Senate. As a result, they have a special legal status. This is just an executive agreement. ------------------ What's the difference? Isn't the difference that a treaty is binding on the U.S., whereas an executive agreement by Obama for example can be reversed with no consequences? I'll do a little research on it."

    abigchocoholic commented in:
    Corker’s bill turns the Constitution upside down on 2015-08-27 16:01:59
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  • "Unless you can directly connect CalPoly to Collins' "attacking the messenger" style of dealing with major screw-ups which occurred DECADES after Collins' attended CPSU, please retract your attempted guilt-by-association post. If anything, it is far more likely that Collins' being in a position of power in SLO County is associated to his "attacking the messenger" brand of handling conflict. After all, Hill and Gibson's MO for handling their own scandals is to viciously attack the messenger."

    MaryMalone commented in:
    SLO County goofs, then threatens the messenger on 2015-08-27 15:42:47
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  • "I appreciate the thought you put into this. Regardless of agreement or disagreement the bottom line is we do need to wake up because of the many unintended consequences we unknowning support. The truth is that we uninformed voters are constantly being sold a bill of bads."

    Jorge Estrada commented in:
    Corker’s bill turns the Constitution upside down on 2015-08-27 14:36:06
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  • "I bet you weren't insisting that the bills putting sanctions on Iran were treaties, were you? The only person who has been played like a fool here is you, as we've seen time and time again. You are a typical Republican / Democrat.. no regard whatsoever for philosophical consistency or integrity.. just make up whatever you want for the sake of expediency. This one is really laughable though. I don't support Obama, but what you are saying here doesn't even make sense.. You are either seriously clueless, or seriously manipulative."

    mkaney commented in:
    Corker’s bill turns the Constitution upside down on 2015-08-27 13:28:22
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  • "Just another fornication move on the small guy you owns a piece of property and wants to build a home on it. They will financially impact their projects with study after study until it becomes not financially feasible to continue. Why not eliminate the restraints on the residential users and address those with the big straws in the acquifer? Easy answer $$$$ And once again the government is putting forth a 1 shoe fits all policy. Example is that it's been reported that the wells in the Atascadero Mutual Water system have actually gone up. But at the same time many are being mandated to limit water use beyond reasonable expectations for the water that is available. Consequently many are losing thousand of dollars worth of mature landscaping just to make some politician happy. Of course we all need to conserve our water but let's do it in a reasonable manner."

    Mr. Holly commented in:
    Environmental group threatens SLO County over water use on 2015-08-27 13:18:32
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  • "It's not a treaty. You're correct that treaties require a 2/3 ratification by the Senate. As a result, they have a special legal status. This is just an executive agreement. The President has the constitutional authority to conduct foreign policy, as I'm sure you would have argued 10 years ago. The rest of this article is garbage talking points that don't change the fact that your central thesis is trash. This is why you are 0 for 50 in elections."

    pandayho commented in:
    Corker’s bill turns the Constitution upside down on 2015-08-27 12:41:06
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  • "We need a good rain dancer and nothing else. We already pay for a district that is compliant to the SGMA requirements so I ask why pay for a new layer that can't make rain clouds or dance. The truth is that the only water that a new district can create is the spit from flapping lips that say give me your money. I say if they want your private water rights, they should make a purchase offer like any other country where private property rights are constitutional. Remember that if you buy land with no water it is cheap and so are the taxes but if you buy land blessed with water it is expensive and the property taxes are too! This whole discussion has become a public harrassment and the more Gov supporters are, yes, wanting what they have not bought. Civil rights come in may shapes and colors which include color of title."

    Jorge Estrada commented in:
    South County likely to get Diablo desal water on 2015-08-27 10:11:40
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  • "r0y: "Well, bob, what happens with the loan? It magically does not get paid back?" When you are gutting a company by over-leveraging with excessive loan packages, having picked out the "good" parts and sold them off, yeah, they sometimes do let those now-dying companies go bankrupt, and sometimes the loans "magically do not get paid back". Capitalism can be a very useful system, a lot of great things have become reality due to someone seeing a need and filling it, or even inventing something totally new and then creating a demand for it, and investors lining up to willingly risk their capital. But capitalism is far from perfect; anyone who has ever had to deal with their bank charging excessive fees, dealt with a mortgage company that has misplaced loan documents and all sorts of other dealings with companies that behave in a less than forthright manner can tell you (if you don't already know) that without any regulation governing how companies have to follow the law, there would be massive monopolies that would sell you contaminated goods, mislabeled items, unsafe products and charge you with all sorts of hidden fees. If you cannot see that a well-regulated market is what keeps our society "safe", then your blinders to libertarian ideals are cinched on a little too tight. I do not advocate any sort of over-throw of capitalism, and the examples you have furnished as sort of an alternative to capitalism are a real stretch to try and bolster your argument. Russia is dealing with the leftover corruption of their years of a totalitarian state that was erroneously labeled as "socialism"; China has the same problem, except they called themselves "communists", but were (and by all accounts still are) another example of a corrupt totalitarian structure. If you want to see what I would have America strive to emulate, check out the very regulated, very well run countries in the Scandinavia area of northern Europe; most of those countries operate in a manner described as "Socialist Democratic", which means that private industry still operates without the government telling them what to do, it does keep close tabs on how they do it, ensuring that the citizens are not taken advantage of, and that the companies do follow the laws. Capitalism done better."

    bobfromsanluis commented in:
    Union files grievances against Haggen, Vons, Albertsons on 2015-08-27 09:44:04
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  • "Maybe DA Karen Gray had some experience with criminals that committed violent felonies, and even murder and used the mentally ill route to avoid prison and spend a few years in a treatment facility and then walk our free and clear, we have all seen this happen too often. This might explain her some of her actions."

    kayaknut commented in:
    Why throw the book at the disabled? on 2015-08-27 08:48:33
----------------------------------------------------------------------------