Why Florida Monopolizes America’s Saddest Cities

[Gonzo]

But Bobby is holding little Jeffy down and beating the crap out of him so he can't even try to clean up the milk. Little Bobby is stubborn and if he holds Jeffy down long enough he thinks mommy may kick him out of the house. Mommy needs to punish Bobby for his bad behavior.

As a parent, this little scenario kind of resonates, punishing doesn't always yield the results that are expected. Sure, mommy can punish Bobby, but that just makes Bobby resent her and further stymies any kind of harmony. If Jeffy were a truly good son, he would clean up the mess properly, as mommy asked. Then Jeffey would have a reason to be able to request a family meeting to discuss Bobby's carelessness and ways that future problems can be avoided.

[NotNow]

StephenDare,

I have formal and professional education and training in Constitutional law.  I have completed several undergraduate classes on the subject before obtaining my B.S. degree.  I have completed a graduate class on the subject.  I have completed more professional training classes on the subject that I can list here.  I stay updated on current cases and I am familiar with the founding documents and the history of our Constitution.  My entire adult professional life experience has been spent supporting and/or defending the Constitution. 

None of this stuff is required to speak on the subject.  I say all of this just to lay the groundwork as I ask you why, when I implore readers to "read the Constitution", you have the desire...and the gall to tell me that  I don't "understand" the Constitution or democracy.  Your follow on response to Gonzo illustrates a lack of knowledge of the history and functioning of our Federal government on your part.  Your problem, along with many of the posters here, is that you mistake your political "opinion" for actual facts.  Thus the partisan rants as seen on this thread.  The truth is that both political parties are not doing what is right and LAWFUL.

With all of that said, I implore those of you that actually are searching for truth, to sit down and read and understand the Constitution.  It is not a difficult document to understand.  The creators of this amazing document expounded on their thoughts in The Federalist Papers and in many letters and writings.  Please, research this information FOR YOURSELF.

[NotNow]

StephenDare,

My professional background is military and criminal justice.  That includes quite a bit of study of Constitutional law.  Your OPINION of my views are just that, your opinion.  I prefer to ask people to read for themselves, as the truth is self evident.  When I make a statement of opinion, I quote the sources of that opinion.  If you feel differently, then I will tell you the same thing that I have told you for years...provide an argument and the documentation to back it up.  By the way, youtube videos DO NOT constitute documentation. 

My statements on individual liberties, the use of deadly force (by Police or citizens) and capital punishment are based on national best practices as published and used throughout the US.  Not to mention decades of experience.   

The truth is that bizarre, extreme, radical and out of touch are just terms that you use when you haven't the facts.    Perhaps spending a bit more time providing and explaining your own views rather than flaming others would be more useful to all of us.

I'll stand by my education, training, experience and study of our Federal government versus the name calling, demonizing, flaming and editorializing I see from you.

When you see me pontificating on how to run a cafe, then I'll pay much more heed to your advice, thanks.

[FayeforCure]

Interesting to note that expense of living or state taxes doesn't make for "unhappy" living. Honollulu boasts #1 happiest. And CA doesn't do too poorly either..............so what Republicans consider "business friendly" makes for unhappy people, whereas better public services, including better transit, make for happier lives:

Men’s Health explains:


…..we aren’t shrinks, so our diagnosis is more statistical than psychological. We calculated suicide rates (CDC) and unemployment rates (Bureau of Labor Statistics, as of June 2011). Then we tapped SimplyMap for the percentage of households that use antidepressants as well as the number of people who report feeling the blues all or most of the time.

Incidentally, nothing in the Bay Area made the saddest 10. In fact , no CA city makes the list until #15, when Sacramento takes its dubious honors. Oakland’s on the list, but not until #39th. San Francisco shows up as the 80th saddest of the 100 top “frown towns.”

http://blog.sfgate.com/ontheblock/2011/12/01/americas-saddest-cities/#1972-5

[NotNow]

StephenDare,

My professional background is military and criminal justice.  That includes quite a bit of study of Constitutional law.  Your OPINION of my views are just that, your opinion.  I prefer to ask people to read for themselves, as the truth is self evident.  When I make a statement of opinion, I quote the sources of that opinion.  If you feel differently, then I will tell you the same thing that I have told you for years...provide an argument and the documentation to back it up.  By the way, youtube videos DO NOT constitute documentation. 

My statements on individual liberties, the use of deadly force (by Police or citizens) and capital punishment are based on national best practices as published and used throughout the US.  Not to mention decades of experience.   

The truth is that bizarre, extreme, radical and out of touch are just terms that you use when you haven't the facts.    Perhaps spending a bit more time providing and explaining your own views rather than flaming others would be more useful to all of us.

I'll stand by my education, training, experience and study of our Federal government versus the name calling, demonizing, flaming and editorializing I see from you.

When you see me pontificating on how to run a cafe, then I'll pay much more heed to your advice, thanks.

The advice was actually yours, notnow.

The fact that you can actually engage in a conversation on this issue and then disavow your own advice is pretty revealing, I think.

A lot about this conversation is pretty revealing, isn't it?  This is an excellent example of why I encourage others to read for themselves and not rely on the opinions of other posters or silly web sites.

[NotNow]

Interesting to note that expense of living or state taxes doesn't make for "unhappy" living. Honollulu boasts #1 happiest. And CA doesn't do too poorly either..............so what Republicans consider "business friendly" makes for unhappy people, whereas better public services, including better transit, make for happier lives:

Men’s Health explains:


…..we aren’t shrinks, so our diagnosis is more statistical than psychological. We calculated suicide rates (CDC) and unemployment rates (Bureau of Labor Statistics, as of June 2011). Then we tapped SimplyMap for the percentage of households that use antidepressants as well as the number of people who report feeling the blues all or most of the time.

Incidentally, nothing in the Bay Area made the saddest 10. In fact , no CA city makes the list until #15, when Sacramento takes its dubious honors. Oakland’s on the list, but not until #39th. San Francisco shows up as the 80th saddest of the 100 top “frown towns.”

http://blog.sfgate.com/ontheblock/2011/12/01/americas-saddest-cities/#1972-5

Faye,  my advice is to not rely to heavily on magazine "rankings" of purely subjective subjects. 

[FayeforCure]

Interesting to note that expense of living or state taxes doesn't make for "unhappy" living. Honollulu boasts #1 happiest. And CA doesn't do too poorly either..............so what Republicans consider "business friendly" makes for unhappy people, whereas better public services, including better transit, make for happier lives:

Men’s Health explains:


…..we aren’t shrinks, so our diagnosis is more statistical than psychological. We calculated suicide rates (CDC) and unemployment rates (Bureau of Labor Statistics, as of June 2011). Then we tapped SimplyMap for the percentage of households that use antidepressants as well as the number of people who report feeling the blues all or most of the time.

Incidentally, nothing in the Bay Area made the saddest 10. In fact , no CA city makes the list until #15, when Sacramento takes its dubious honors. Oakland’s on the list, but not until #39th. San Francisco shows up as the 80th saddest of the 100 top “frown towns.”

http://blog.sfgate.com/ontheblock/2011/12/01/americas-saddest-cities/#1972-5

Faye,  my advice is to not rely to heavily on magazine "rankings" of purely subjective subjects.

I do think that high suicide rates, high unemployment and high anti-depressant usage are quite good indicators fot "unhappiness," especially if the data is compiled by such reputable independent agencies as the CDC and the US labor Department.

Too bad reality is so hard to accept for the hard-core Republican.

[NotNow]

So that wouldn't have anything to do with local demographics or local industries then, would it?  To take such statistics and make such conclusions has no basis in science.  "Sad" is a subjective term in itself.  I am sorry that you can't see that.   I don't believe it has anything to do with your political views, it is just an....uninformed thing to believe.  As is your discriminitory view towards those that don't agree with your politics. 

[FayeforCure]

So that wouldn't have anything to do with local demographics or local industries then, would it?  To take such statistics and make such conclusions has no basis in science.  "Sad" is a subjective term in itself.  I am sorry that you can't see that.   I don't believe it has anything to do with your political views, it is just an....uninformed thing to believe.  As is your discriminitory view towards those that don't agree with your politics.

A statement was made about the unhappiest/saddest cities based on irrefutable evidence.

Nowhere was said why these people were unhappy, nor was that the intend of the listings. If you believe it was due to local demographics or local industries, that is your prerogative.

I just noted that poor public services such as public education and transit were factors in many of those saddest cities (that was also noted in the original article), which is typical of Republican rule as it isn't a champion of the public good.

[NotNow]

I think your ideas and feelings are quite clear.  Thanks for the posts.

[NotNow]

StephenDare,

My professional background is military and criminal justice.  That includes quite a bit of study of Constitutional law.  Your OPINION of my views are just that, your opinion.  I prefer to ask people to read for themselves, as the truth is self evident.  When I make a statement of opinion, I quote the sources of that opinion.  If you feel differently, then I will tell you the same thing that I have told you for years...provide an argument and the documentation to back it up.  By the way, youtube videos DO NOT constitute documentation. 

My statements on individual liberties, the use of deadly force (by Police or citizens) and capital punishment are based on national best practices as published and used throughout the US.  Not to mention decades of experience.   

The truth is that bizarre, extreme, radical and out of touch are just terms that you use when you haven't the facts.    Perhaps spending a bit more time providing and explaining your own views rather than flaming others would be more useful to all of us.

I'll stand by my education, training, experience and study of our Federal government versus the name calling, demonizing, flaming and editorializing I see from you.

When you see me pontificating on how to run a cafe, then I'll pay much more heed to your advice, thanks.

The advice was actually yours, notnow.

The fact that you can actually engage in a conversation on this issue and then disavow your own advice is pretty revealing, I think.

A lot about this conversation is pretty revealing, isn't it?  This is an excellent example of why I encourage others to read for themselves and not rely on the opinions of other posters or silly web sites.

except of course when anyone is reading your own posts for themselves.  Then they simply cannot possibly understand what is truly meant, right?

Your posts on this subject tend to be ridiculous, for this reason.

The Constitution is self explanatory, -----except when it disagrees with you, and then it needs to be interpreted through the lens of contradictory arguments in the Federalist Papers (which also disagree with you, incidentally) and therefore people just need to read the document and they will understand the plain english.

When people try and apply the same technique to your own writing, then of course they are simply wrong whenever your logical inconsistencies are pointed out.

Which is it?  You can understand everything just by reading it, devoid of context, or you can't rely on the plain language unless you are already an expert in the field being discussed?

You argue both points of view all the time, you know.

Another post that contains nothing but your opinion StephenDare!.  It still amazes me that you continuously mistake that opinion for fact.  I do not intend to enter into a "your wrong!, No, your wrong!" back and forth with you.  I simply asked for readers to read the documents for themselves and you have decided to attack me.  That is usual for this forum.  It serves no purpose other than whatever joy it seems to bring to your ego.  I repeat my suggestion to you to use these pages to state your ideas and back them up with facts and abandon the personal attacks which you seem so fond of. 

[NotNow]

Start another thread if you want to discuss another subject.  Attribute it to yourself.   Give your answer first and back up that answer with facts or references or both.  That is how it is done.

[NotNow]

You really don't know how to debate, do you?

[NotNow]

And the point that you are stating clearly and proving it with facts is?