Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 8910111213 LastLast
Results 201 to 220 of 255
  1. #201
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,920

    Default

    Well...if working for the federal government at some point in your life is a source for ridicule I would love to hear more about that. I worked as a civilian firefighter on an Air National Guard base for 7 years before I landed my municipal fire department job. I feel no shame or reason for not talking about that job with as much pride as I do my current fire fighting job.

    What the flying H3LL happened to a discussion on candidate endorsements? Now references to location, and job status as well as career versus volly have come in.

    I don't give a flying crap who any of you vote for. I am however disappointed in MY UNION for endorsing a candidate that I, at least at this point anyways, don't support. I don't want any of my money supporting a candidate that I don't support, hence my non-contribution to the FIRE Pac.

    FyredUp


  2. #202
    Member Engine2WhgFire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    50

    Default

    I have made my last comment on these political threads. Everybody support who you will and we will count the votes in November and life will go on as it always does.
    2 of our brothers fell in the line of duty today in Pittsburgh. Thats about 50 miles from us here in Wheeling. That makes all this bickering seem kinda lame. So for now, I will not worry about politics or the election some months away. I will go to work and try my best to be there for my brothers as we continue our mission in life. Peace.
    http://wheelingfire.com

    Burnie Yoho (member)
    IAFF Local #12
    "Wheeling Firefighters"
    Wheeling, WV. 26003

  3. #203
    MembersZone Subscriber E229Lt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Posts
    2,987

    Default

    hence my non-contribution to the FIRE Pac
    You don't contribute? Sit down.

  4. #204
    Forum Member Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,672

    Default

    Where can you buy IAFF Logo merchandise?
    Engine2WhgFire, right from the JohnKerry website, follow the firefighters link and you can purchase FF's for Kerry shirts, hats, pins, stickers, etc. most of which have the IAFF logo. Nothing requires/asks about union affiliation. Kind of surprised me.


    E229Lt, I'm not looking to start any trouble/problems here. I simply saw some people unhappy about the IAFF choice and became curious about it. I'm not a Union FF, so you are correct, I have no say in what/how the Union chooses to support candidates. I have no problem with the Union doing that and it's not up to me to agree/disagree with how they do it. I'm just looking to learn a little more about it.

    Thanks to all of you Union members for answering my questions and helping educate me.
    "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

  5. #205
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,920

    Default

    E229Lt...

    Nope, not gonna sit down and neither am I gonna keep quiet. It is possible to be a good Union member and still not agree with or support everything the Union does.

    Irregardless of whether or not I support FIREPac or not does not deny me the right to express my views. I would be much more likely to support FIREPac if I had some control over where my money went. I donate on my own to politicians I support.

    I may eventually end up supporting Kerry but the decision will be mine as well as the decision to donate or not.

    FyredUp

  6. #206
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    57

    Default

    In some of the prior posts, some person(s) are claiming that fire protection is not a function of the federal government. They claim that it is the sole responsibility of the local government.

    Does this same person(s) support the federal government providing monies to local law enforcement agencies? I bet they do. In fact, if their representative or senators were to not support the local police with federal dollars, their opposition in the next election would say that they are soft on crime. Then this same person(s) would not vote for the incumbent because of this. I am quite sure that if the incumbent federal politician who represents them only provided funding for the FBI and the ATF, that this same person(s) who claim that the IAFF is only a special interest group would be outraged over this cut in the law enforcement budget. And if you think that the fire service programs cost alot, you should see what all of the programs cost which support the different law enforcement "special interests".

    I guess the same holds true for education. I guess you don't believe that you should be providing tax dollars for kids that don't even live in your state. Their not teachers, their "special interest educators", right? With the premise you provide, I guess that the schools should just be funded by the local jurisdictions. But if you have kids and one of your "local" federal politicians stated that he/she was going to cut all funding from the federal government for the local schools and make it solely a local responsibility, these same "local" only government responsibility advocates would be up in arms and would do everything they could to make sure that that politician is voted out of office.

    And how about all of those pork projects your politicians bring back to your area. I bet that if they didn't bring home the bacon that you would not support them.

    What you may not realize is that you do support these causes and the politicians who support them. Why do you think incumbents in Congress are so hard to beat?

    You talk about supporting candidates on more than just fire service issues. Would you support a candidate who was against federal funding of education? I doubt it. Would you support a candidate who was not supportive of law enforcement? I doubt that also.

    Answer this question for me (this is for those local only advocates). After 9/11, the families of the FDNY members killed in the line of duty received a death benefit from the federal government. Are you supportive of this program or do you think that this is an improper expenditure of your tax dollars due to this being solely a local issue?

  7. #207
    District Chief distchief60b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    6,413

    Default

    First I have to say that I am NOT a Kerry supporter and I will NOT vote for him. In his campaign for the nomination, it seemed to me as if he swayed his stance on issues to meet the needs of the audience which means to me he does not know what he wants or believes in or what he supports.

    I will have to agree with E40FDNYL35 and my distinguished brother (e229lt) on the need to reopen fire stations and the lack of personnel and equipment not only in the FDNY but across the US. And I see both sides of their debate also.

    Someone mentioned Bush's name and lack of sufficient radio systems in the first bombing of the WTC and then tied it back to the 09-11-01 attacks. How is this relevant to GWB in the 2004 election and how was it his fault?

    I know Kerry is a co-sponsor of the SAFER Act,,,,,but hmmmm..I can not help to wonder if you looked through the muddy waters if you would see his name on this bill if it was not an election year and in an effort to "buy votes" from the IAFF and other fire communities. Sure he supports it...but if he is elected,.......will he fund it???

    I am sorry...and I mean no disrespect to the IAFF and it's goals at all....but I do not trust Kerry one bit!

    But....the one thing that has been discussed here that can be done only by all of us is this....VOTE....and Vote for who you want. Unfortunately the public popularity vote does not elect the President. I guess that is one part of American History Class, I never grasped... Can not seem to understand how one can win the popularity vote and lose the electoral vote. Never really understood that who concept.
    09-11 .. 343 "All Gave Some..Some Gave ALL" God Bless..R.I.P.
    ------------------------------
    IACOJ Minister of Southern Comfort
    "Purple Hydrant" Recipient (3 Times)
    BMI Investigator
    ------------------------------
    The comments, opinions, and positions expressed here are mine. They are expressed respectfully, in the spirit of safety and progress. They do not reflect the opinions or positions of my employer or my department.

  8. #208
    MembersZone Subscriber E229Lt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Posts
    2,987

    Default

    After 9/11, the families of the FDNY members killed in the line of duty received a death benefit from the federal government. Are you supportive of this program or do you think that this is an improper expenditure of your tax dollars due to this being solely a local issue?
    If you are talking about the PSOB, it is in place to compensate for the loss of life of a firefighter (et al) after that member has been shown to have been in compliance with all "Federal" PPE standards and still lost his life. PSOB payments can and have been lost when investigations found members did not properly follow mandated practices or use full protections.

    To answer your question: YES, the PSOB should be in place and further, any program, mandate or minimum requirements set by the "Federal" government should be tied to supplemental funding from the same in order to allow municipalities to enact these standards immediately. Not after a grace period. Such grace periods only allow members to operate in, what the government has concluded is, an unsafe manner.

    How many out there waited out the five year (more or less) grace periods for the following:

    Bunker Gear
    Positive Pressure SCBA
    Compliant Helmets

    During that time you were fighting fires in substandard equipment at an increased risk to your safety. Funding for immediate compliance is not a part of the standards package. Today, we are being given a huge punch list of items to prepare for the next attack. We cannot afford it right now so ask the terrorists to hold off five years or so and we will slowly implement the recommendations of our standards writers in DC.

  9. #209
    Forum Member DaSharkie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Posts
    4,713

    Default

    ***************WARNING THIS WILL BE A LOOOOOONG POST*****************

    DCFDL36,

    You won't be happy with this but I will be in disagreement with every one of your points. I know this is unpopular, but this is how I feel and I make no apologies for it. Let me make it clear on this as well, I do not vote for any incumbent who has been in any office for more than 10 years. I can't do it because you have become part of the governmental problem that has forgotten about who you serve and who you are in office to represent. Ted Kennedy has been in the senate for over 40 years - I haven't seen much of an improvement in all of the causes that he has been ranting about since then. Kerry has been in the senate for 20 years (in November) and I have not seen a whole lot of improvement in the causes he espouses. The same is said of my state senators and representatives. Nothing has improved becasue they wish to stay in power so they fight vocally but never accomplish the goal of curing a problem or injustice. And we, as the electorate, tolerate it. We are to blame as much as them.

    That being said, here is my logic - AGAIN:

    Does this same person(s) support the federal government providing monies to local law enforcement agencies? I bet they do.
    NOPE. It is not a federal government responsibilty to provide for my community's safety. Take the hundreds of millions of dollars spent on this program, cut federal taxes, increase local taxes and allocate the money at the local level. In addition, many - dare I say most - communities actually did not see a rise in the number of police officers on their rosters because as the officers were hired and trained, they simply slid into the open positions of retirements and vacancies, saving the community money in the long run becasue tehy don't have to pay for additional manpower. I believe that the same is going to happen with the SAFER Act.

    In fact, if their representative or senators were to not support the local police with federal dollars, their opposition in the next election would say that they are soft on crime.
    No I wouldn't, provided that they state that the money is better spent at the local level from local taxes.

    I am quite sure that if the incumbent federal politician who represents them only provided funding for the FBI and the ATF, that this same person(s) who claim that the IAFF is only a special interest group would be outraged over this cut in the law enforcement budget.
    Not at all. It is the federal government's constitutional obligation to enforce laws at the federal level, not the state level. This may be a popular concept, but MY interpretation of the constitution does not put it in the federal government's purview.

    that this same person(s) who claim that the IAFF is only a special interest group would be outraged over this cut in the law enforcement budget. And if you think that the fire service programs cost alot, you should see what all of the programs cost which support the different law enforcement "special interests".
    I, personally, have never said that the IAFF is a special interest only group. Under the new federal clean elections act (which I disagree with by the way - but that is a whole other post) the FIRE PAC is a special interest. The IAFF does a lot of good work, but I disagree with much of its work as well. As for the costs to local police support programs, again, reduce the federal tax burden and increase it at the local/county/state levels where more control is exercised by the voters and a reduction of pork barrel spending will be seen.

    I guess you don't believe that you should be providing tax dollars for kids that don't even live in your state.
    Correct. The federal government should set minimum educational standards (that should actually be quite high) and the state and local governemnts should implement programs and expenditures to achieve these goals. There was a study about 4 or 5 years ago that stated that the amount of money expended from the department of education was 48 cents of every dollar given to them by the federal budget. See what I mean about more and tighter control implemented at the local level?

    I understand that there are poorer states / municipalities, but each state can ensure that there are enough funds to pay for it by taxes raised with proper taxing and budgetary restraints.





    not teachers, their "special interest educators", right?
    Nope, they are teachers. My problem comes from the teachers union that fights educational improvements all the way. They fight vouchers for kids to get out of failing public schools to improve their chances of success in life. They are fighting more charter schools to try and change the outcome of inner city kids. The UNION has forgotten that they are public servants are to do what is beast for the children. As for No child left behind, I agree, Bush should have called for more funding of it in his own budget, BUT congress also chose NOT to fund it appropriately but had no problem with local pork barrel funding. Remember civics class, "Congress controls the purse strings," so if it isn't funded, it is as much congress's fault as the chief executive. They passed the law, he signed the law, so they BOTH have an obligation to fund it. Neither one gets a pass.

    But if you have kids and one of your "local" federal politicians stated that he/she was going to cut all funding from the federal government for the local schools and make it solely a local responsibility, these same "local" only government responsibility advocates would be up in arms and would do everything they could to make sure that that politician is voted out of office.
    Not true, providing the money to pay for it was cut out of the federal taxes and increased appropriately at the local/county/state level.

    And how about all of those pork projects your politicians bring back to your area. I bet that if they didn't bring home the bacon that you would not support them.
    Federal money should not be going into PRIVATE health care systems and facilites. Especially to be named after some senator - go to West Virginia and see how many things are named after Robert Byrd and you will understand my point. Here in Mass. my roads and bridges are in a tremendous state of repair beacuse of improper federal oversight at the Big Dig in Boston - started at 2.2 Billion, now costing $15 Billion. This road benefits only commuters from North and South of Boston, so why should Washington DC be paying for it? Other than the interstate commerce aspect of it, there is no reason for it.

    Would you support a candidate who was against federal funding of education? I doubt it.
    I would support them if they called for that decrease in federal tax dollars, but increase in local funds.

    I have to go on a run now, I'll come back and finish.
    "Too many people spend money they haven't earned, to buy things they don't want, to impress people they don't like." Will Rogers

    The borrower is slave to the lender. Proverbs 22:7 - Debt free since 10/5/2009.

    "No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session." - New York Judge Gideon Tucker

    "As Americans we must always remember that we all have a common enemy, an enemy that is dangerous, powerful and relentless. I refer, of course, to the federal government." - Dave Barry

    www.daveramsey.com www.clarkhoward.com www.heritage.org

  10. #210
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    355

    Thumbs up

    From another local advocate, I'll spare you another long post and say ditto to Da Sharkie to this point.

  11. #211
    Forum Member DaSharkie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Posts
    4,713

    Default

    Alrighty then, I am back.

    Now.........

    Would you support a candidate who was not supportive of law enforcement? I doubt that also.
    Just because I am against federal funds going to a local fire department or police department does not mean that I am against a department having APPROPRIATE equipment and staffing. I just don't think that if I live in Massachusetts I should be paying for a police officer's salary in Fairfax County, Virginia for instance.

    Here is where I aill get myself in trouble.....

    QUOTE]Answer this question for me (this is for those local only advocates). After 9/11, the families of the FDNY members killed in the line of duty received a death benefit from the federal government. Are you supportive of this program or do you think that this is an improper expenditure of your tax dollars due to this being solely a local issue?[/QUOTE]

    I am not in total favor of this. If I die, I die. I am worth considerably more dead than alive becasue I have life insurance, I pay extra money every year to ensure that my wife will be able to survive any problem within several years after I am dead. A nurse doesn't get a payment from the federal government if she dies becasue of Hepatitis from a needle stick of a patient. A Paramedic can, while firefighters get the benefit of the doubt under presumtive laws. This is not right. Many communities (I know not all of them) have a plan to pay for the salary of the servant for the rest of the spouses life so long as they do not remarry. I have no problem with this and believe it is a great thing. In Massachusetts you get an addition $150,000 on top of the $250,000+ federal survivor benefits. Again, a state taking the initiative to provide for public servants, this is a benefit of the job that I agree with, however I do not necessarily believe it is a federal government obligation. Just my point of view and I am a laid off Union firefighter so this is not a vollie vs. career thing.

    On a different point:

    I am not against the ideas behind the programs that have been made, I just feel that if the federal tax burden is reduced then the money raised can be shifted to other forms of local, county, and state tax collections that can be spent in a more judicious manner. I do not see why the federal government should be putting a brand new brush fire truck in the station under the FIRE Act, when the local government should be ensuring that the equipment should be provided. I understand that they are not doing so, however I feel that it is a failure of the local agency to make the need aware to the people, legislative bodies, mayors, town managers, etc.

    I have no problem paying taxes, I just the believe that the tax structure should be inverted from what it is now where the majority of the taxes go to the most local jurisdiction and it lessens as it climbs from city/town, to county, to state, and to federal coughers.

    Again, as I recall my civics class and history class, I believe the founding fathers wished for the federal government to be minimally invasive into the individual's lives and the operation of the individual states. I do not feel that the federal government is the cure to the evils of the world and they definitely do not have my well being or interests at heart. I still stick the sarcastic phrase of - "Don't worry sir, we're from the government and we are here to help you." No thanks, I can take care of myself.

    Like I said, these are my personal opinions and feelings and I make no apologies for how I feel.
    "Too many people spend money they haven't earned, to buy things they don't want, to impress people they don't like." Will Rogers

    The borrower is slave to the lender. Proverbs 22:7 - Debt free since 10/5/2009.

    "No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session." - New York Judge Gideon Tucker

    "As Americans we must always remember that we all have a common enemy, an enemy that is dangerous, powerful and relentless. I refer, of course, to the federal government." - Dave Barry

    www.daveramsey.com www.clarkhoward.com www.heritage.org

  12. #212
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    10

    Thumbs up

    Amen brother.....

    DaSharkie for President!!!

  13. #213
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    57

    Default

    DaSharkie

    I like your reply to my post. You make a lot of good points. I only wish that it could be true that federal taxes could be lowered and local and state taxes raised to properly fund local responsibilities. That would be a better system because the taxpayers would have more local control, and because the big federal beauacracies would be reduced. Your point regarding the 48 cent per dollar issue with the federal education funding is a good example of a big beauacracy gone bad.

    But, until there is a major revolution in people's thinking and actions, that is not the system which are dealing with. Thus, that is why the IAFF must be active and successful in getting the federal government to support fire service issues.

    I agree with your concepts of how things should be, and I wish that were true. Unfortunately, that is not the reality which we face. Until we can change things for the better, we must deal with the situation at hand and make the best out of the reality which we face.

  14. #214
    Forum Member DaSharkie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Posts
    4,713

    Default

    Thanks DC.

    I forgot to add to my post that I know inverting the tax structure in this country is highly unlikely but my only attempt in this is to give my logic behind my beliefs. I just wish that there was a way to do it.

    Thus, that is why the IAFF must be active and successful in getting the federal government to support fire service issues.
    I agree with you there, that is their job, to represent the needs of their membership, I just think it could be better managed at the state level. Much more expensive for the union since you have 50 battles to fight, but much more effective use of tax dollars.
    "Too many people spend money they haven't earned, to buy things they don't want, to impress people they don't like." Will Rogers

    The borrower is slave to the lender. Proverbs 22:7 - Debt free since 10/5/2009.

    "No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session." - New York Judge Gideon Tucker

    "As Americans we must always remember that we all have a common enemy, an enemy that is dangerous, powerful and relentless. I refer, of course, to the federal government." - Dave Barry

    www.daveramsey.com www.clarkhoward.com www.heritage.org

  15. #215
    MembersZone Subscriber E229Lt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Posts
    2,987

    Default From the opinions column NY Daily News

    Brooklyn: I work one block from Ground Zero. I'm not a 9/11 widow, not a member of any union, and I did not lose anyone personally in the 9/11 attack. However, I think it is in bad taste for President Bush to use those attacks as a platform to run for reelection, especially considering that Texas and Florida are receiving more money for homeland security than New York.

    Delia J. Vitale

  16. #216
    the 4-1-4 Jasper 45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    ...A great place, on a Great Lake
    Posts
    2,784

    Default

    Without trying to sound argumentative here, and with not knowing actual dollar figures (there were none used in that opinion piece). I do believe that the President is from Texas, and I do believe his brother is Governor of Florida. I do believe that that could qualify those places as prime targets for an assault by terrorists. And with no disrespect intended for any person's even remotely connected to September, 2001's attacks there are alot of places to be considered for attacks as well. And while I do agree that we will be on the frontline to restore order and provide aid following an attack, the real way to stop thses savages is to kill them before they are able to complete their missions.

  17. #217
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Conshohocken, PA
    Posts
    391

    Default DaSharkie for President

    Please chalk me up for one who believes that the constitution has been too liberaly used to fund local and state responsibilities.

    It is important to remember that the President cannot legally by the constitution SPEND tax dollars. That is a right given only to the House of Representatives in our Constitution.

    If President Bush said that he was going to send you tax money, and you believed it, you need to check the US Constitution. He can't and neither can John Kerry if he is elected to the Office of President. There are Constitutional scholars who would also make a good legal arguement that Sen. Kerry can't even do that as a member of the Senate as well.

    Certainly any President PROPOSES a budget to the legislative branch of our government, and they approve or disapprove of that budget. And as DaSharkie states...nobody gets a free pass on this one.

    But we are all adults here. Do you really believe everything that you hear from a politician? Serving in public office as a public servant is just that. You serve the public. I agree that anyone serving in such a post for 10, 20 or 30 years is not healthy and reduces the chances that the public is indeed served by that office holder. One suggestion; term limits.

    In this whole thread, I can agree with a few things:
    1. Regardless of the position that one Union member takes on PAC money, fire service issues are being discussed as part of the national election.
    2. My money is my money, and it shouldn't be taken from me to be given to others for any number of reasons, including fire service issues. Those rights not specifically provided for in the US Constitution to the Federal Government are reserved to the states. Education, public safety and many other projects, funded by the federal government on the guise of "the general welfare" could be better administered at the local level.
    3. My financial well being and that of my family is my responsibility.

  18. #218
    Forum Member DaSharkie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Posts
    4,713

    Default I'm running!

    My fellow, posters, ladies and gentlemen, distinguished attendees:

    After much forthought and at the encouragement of my friends, family, and acquaintances I am taking this opportunity to announce my candidacy for the Presidency of the United States.

    I will now list my priorities:

    1) I wish to send to congress a proposal to reduce the federal income taxes in order to end federal government programs that have no business being in existance. This is not, I repeat NOT a tax cut. This is a simple redistribution of tax dollars that will now be collected at the state, county, and local levels.

    2) I will propose that congress vote on an ammendment to the Constitution of this great land that they can serve no more than 3 terms in office. Any combination of representative or Senator is applicable, but only 3 terms will be allowed. I wish to challenge them to their commitment to the citizen representative, as this country was founded upon.

    3) We will enforce federal firearms laws, instead of passing new laws that tell our police officers to do the same thing they have already been doing.

    4) We will withdraw our military troops from Kosovo, the Sinai peninsula, and from those countries who democratically vote that they wish us not to be there, this includes Germany, France, Spain, Italy, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, and others.

    5) Women will now be required to enrol under selective service. If you want equal rights, you will get everything that is equal to men. This includes combat roles in the specialties of combat arms.

    6) Troops relocated from Europe will be placed on the US / Mexico border to stop ILLEGAL immigration. We wish for all wishing to come to our beloved land to come here legally and assimilate to allow us to continue to be the greatest country in the World. In addition, all cargo containers entering the country will be searched for drugs, explosives, and contraband.

    7) No bill passed through Congress will have a rider bill or ammendment attached to it. Each bill must be voted on individually.

    8) NAFTA will be reviewed and rectified. Congress should assess itself for the evacuation of manufacturing jobs since they voted for this bill and now criticize its well known and anticipated affects. I expect responsibility from elected officials.

    These are part of my stances and more are to follow. I challenge both Mr. Kerry and Mr. Bush to a debate, every week from now until election day to be accountable to the voters and answer their individual questions, unrehearsed, and face those whom they may lead as a potential President. We owe them this much.

    Thank you again. May God bless you all and may God continue to bless the United States of America.

    Da Sharkie.

    P.S. If my use fo the word God offends you, tough nookies this is how I feel and I cannot please everyone without ticking off someone so deal with it. I am a refreshing dose of politics. I will not shmooze you, I will tell you what I think, and I will not, I repeat NOT compromise my principles.
    "Too many people spend money they haven't earned, to buy things they don't want, to impress people they don't like." Will Rogers

    The borrower is slave to the lender. Proverbs 22:7 - Debt free since 10/5/2009.

    "No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session." - New York Judge Gideon Tucker

    "As Americans we must always remember that we all have a common enemy, an enemy that is dangerous, powerful and relentless. I refer, of course, to the federal government." - Dave Barry

    www.daveramsey.com www.clarkhoward.com www.heritage.org

  19. #219
    Forum Member Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,672

    Default

    DaSharkie - add #9 - English will be the official language, learn it and use it or leave. All signs, directions, etc. will be in English only. Spanish will not be a language that is mandatorily(sp?) taught in schools.


    You got my vote.
    "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

  20. #220
    FIREMAN 1st GRADE E40FDNYL35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1999
    Location
    Malingering
    Posts
    3,641

    Default Re: DaSharkie for President

    Originally posted by glowpop

    In this whole thread, I can agree with a few things:

    2. My money is my money, and it shouldn't be taken from me to be given to others for any number of reasons, including fire service issues. Those rights not specifically provided for in the US Constitution to the Federal Government are reserved to the states. Education, public safety and many other projects, funded by the federal government on the guise of "the general welfare" could be better administered at the local level.
    glowpop are you talking about tax money or FirePac money???
    ALL GAVE SOME BUT SOME GAVE ALL
    NEVER FORGET 9-11-01
    343
    CAPT. Frank Callahan Ladder 35 *
    LT. John Ginley Engine 40
    FF. Bruce Gary Engine 40
    FF. Jimmy Giberson Ladder 35
    FF. Michael Otten Ladder 35 *
    FF. Steve Mercado Engine 40 *
    FF. Kevin Bracken Engine 40 *
    FF. Vincent Morello Ladder 35
    FF. Michael Roberts Ladder 35 *
    FF. Michael Lynch Engine 40
    FF. Michael Dauria Engine 40

    Charleston 9
    "If my job was easy a cop would be doing it."
    *******************CLICK HERE*****************

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts