Comments on: Republic asks a bunch of conservatives what’s wrong with the state; gets a bunch of conservative answers.

By: Konfusing Kancer

Konfusing Kancer — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 09:07:06 +0000

@Donna: According to this site here…

Arizona’s First Things First initiative plans to spend $91 million in its first full year on various projects to improve health and education programs for children younger than age five.

Are you avoiding my question or not?

By: Donna

Donna — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 06:52:44 +0000

I think you are still under the impression that a cigarette tax passed in 2006 funds the schools, despite my having shown you the section of the AZ Constitution, enshrined back in 1910, that fully explicates how the schools are to be funded. Sale of federal trust lands and taxation. It’s not that hard to figure out, Kancer. They didn’t say you had to agree with the method of taxation. They said we could tax people in Arizona to pay for the schools.

By: Konfusing Kancer

Konfusing Kancer — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 06:35:28 +0000

@Donna: I am not asking you just about schools. I am asking you about using “regressive and self-defeating” taxes to do things such as help fund education. I want to know if you think that is a good idea. My above questions seem to be pretty clear.

Who’s laughing? According to some of my readers, you are the one being laughed at.

Donna said: “You have yet to make a coherent point or ask a direct question, Kancer.” OK, and then I said in an earlier post but you missed because you were too busy calling me names.

“If I am totally off in left field, then what exactly is your blog post about? What do you want out of it? What is your goal?”

Can you see it now? I gave you the opportunity to lay it out and instead you called me names, huh?

By: Donna

Donna — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 06:00:56 +0000

Here’s something for you to chew on, Konfusing Kancer, as you ponder your next missive to me. From the Arizona Constitution:

10. Source of revenue for maintenance of state educational institutions

Section 10. The revenue for the maintenance of the respective state educational institutions shall be derived from the investment of the proceeds of the sale, and from the rental of such lands as have been set aside by the enabling act approved June 20, 1910, or other legislative enactment of the United States, for the use and benefit of the respective state educational institutions. In addition to such income the legislature shall make such appropriations, to be met by taxation, as shall insure the proper maintenance of all state educational institutions, and shall make such special appropriations as shall provide for their development and improvement.

Does that clear it up for you a bit?

By: Donna

Donna — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 05:47:21 +0000

You have yet to make a coherent point or ask a direct question, Kancer. Do either of those things and you will get the debate you seek. Unless and until you do, I and my commenters will laugh at you.

By: Konfusing Kancer

Konfusing Kancer — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 05:41:40 +0000

@Donna: Enough with the name calling and personal attacks – they do not work with me. Debate the subject not the debater, please.

I came here to debate something in your blog and you refuse.

By: Donna

Donna — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 17:23:18 +0000

Actually, you’re right, it doesn’t make you a sheep. That would be an insult to sheep.

By: Konfusing Kancer

Konfusing Kancer — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 09:23:39 +0000

@Donna: How does me asking you questions about something you wrote make me a sheep?

By: Donna

Donna — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 08:29:20 +0000

Stay out there with the sheep, Kancer.

By: Konfusing Kancer

Konfusing Kancer — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 08:13:57 +0000

@Donna: Well, well, well… so it appears that we are mad/upset at something in which we do not understand.

It appears that you are mad that schools are potentially de-funded. However, my question all along has been, have they ever been funded if it was never based on a permanent source? And furthermore, it was funded on a source of taxation that you yourself call “regressive and self-defeating.”

But all you can do is to tell me to go talk to someone else. Why? This is your blog and I am discoursing with you. Do you only want your cheerleaders to come here?

If I am totally off in left field, then what exactly is your blog post about? What do you want out of it? What is your goal?

Lastly, there are a few other blog posts of mine that you have been conveniently ignoring.