<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for www.JoeCobb.com</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.joecobb.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.joecobb.com</link>
	<description>Judge, Libertarian Party National Judicial Committee</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 06 Oct 2008 19:20:52 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Ranked Choice Voting in the Electoral College by Joe Cobb</title>
		<link>http://www.joecobb.com/blog/2008/04/21/ranked-choice-voting-in-the-electoral-college/#comment-11180</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe Cobb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Sep 2008 15:28:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.joecobb.com/?p=117#comment-11180</guid>
		<description>I am sorry to report that Ranked Choice Voting was rejected in Glendale, Arizona, on September 2, 2008.  This was a statewide primary election day, although it was the general election day in the city of Glendale.  The voter turnout was extremely small, and non-partisans did not participate since they saw no excitement in the mostly uncontested races for Party nominations.  The people who did come to the polls were Democrats and Republicans, and they are traditionalists.  A "new idea" like Ranked Choice Voting was not persuasive to those voters who are already inured and satisfied with Two Parties.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am sorry to report that Ranked Choice Voting was rejected in Glendale, Arizona, on September 2, 2008.  This was a statewide primary election day, although it was the general election day in the city of Glendale.  The voter turnout was extremely small, and non-partisans did not participate since they saw no excitement in the mostly uncontested races for Party nominations.  The people who did come to the polls were Democrats and Republicans, and they are traditionalists.  A &#8220;new idea&#8221; like Ranked Choice Voting was not persuasive to those voters who are already inured and satisfied with Two Parties.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Curriculum Vitae of Joe Cobb by www.JoeCobb.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Stand Up for Human Rights</title>
		<link>http://www.joecobb.com/blog/2006/10/27/curriculum-vitae-of-joe-cobb/#comment-11151</link>
		<dc:creator>www.JoeCobb.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Stand Up for Human Rights</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2008 07:12:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.joecobb.com/2006/10/27/curriculum-vitae-of-joe-cobb/#comment-11151</guid>
		<description>[...] I would appreciate your vote on September 2, 2008, in the Libertarian primary (if you are registered as LBT). On November 4, 2008, I will face off against Ed Pastor and Don Karg, who have done this contest a few times. I used to work for Congress, so I really do know what this job is all about. Look at my Experience and work history. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I would appreciate your vote on September 2, 2008, in the Libertarian primary (if you are registered as LBT). On November 4, 2008, I will face off against Ed Pastor and Don Karg, who have done this contest a few times. I used to work for Congress, so I really do know what this job is all about. Look at my Experience and work history. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Isonomy:  The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights by www.JoeCobb.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Stand Up for Human Rights</title>
		<link>http://www.joecobb.com/universal-declaration-of-human-rights/#comment-11150</link>
		<dc:creator>www.JoeCobb.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Stand Up for Human Rights</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2008 06:59:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.joecobb.com/universal-declaration-of-human-rights/#comment-11150</guid>
		<description>[...] I like to say, &#8220;Stand Up for Human Rights.&#8221; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I like to say, &#8220;Stand Up for Human Rights.&#8221; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Opportunity Costs and a Monetary Constitution by www.JoeCobb.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Should We Abolish the Federal Reserve?</title>
		<link>http://www.joecobb.com/essays/opportunity-costs-and-a-monetary-constitution/#comment-11149</link>
		<dc:creator>www.JoeCobb.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Should We Abolish the Federal Reserve?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Jun 2008 15:58:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.joecobb.com/opportunity-costs-and-a-monetary-constitution/#comment-11149</guid>
		<description>[...] base would simply remain as a frozen, fixed quantity of government liabilities. It would become a &#8220;parallel currency&#8221; (there is extensive literature in economics about parallel currencies) and could operate quite [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] base would simply remain as a frozen, fixed quantity of government liabilities. It would become a &#8220;parallel currency&#8221; (there is extensive literature in economics about parallel currencies) and could operate quite [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Contracts as Good as Gold by Joe Cobb</title>
		<link>http://www.joecobb.com/blog/2008/06/10/contracts-as-good-as-gold/#comment-11141</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe Cobb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2008 23:30:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.joecobb.com/?p=123#comment-11141</guid>
		<description>Today, the only way to protect yourself using a "gold clause" in a contract is carefully to avoid using the word "dollar."  The contract should be written with reference only to grams or troy ounces of gold, with specified fineness (e.g. 0.9999).

The "dollar" was transformed by the Supreme Court in Juilliard v. Greenman, 110 US 421 (1884), into a government trademark for whatever paper or token coin they choose to create.  There is no way anyone can write a contract today using the word "dollar" to mean anything specific.  You have to use instead a specific reference to gold grams or troy ounces.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Today, the only way to protect yourself using a &#8220;gold clause&#8221; in a contract is carefully to avoid using the word &#8220;dollar.&#8221;  The contract should be written with reference only to grams or troy ounces of gold, with specified fineness (e.g. 0.9999).</p>
<p>The &#8220;dollar&#8221; was transformed by the Supreme Court in Juilliard v. Greenman, 110 US 421 (1884), into a government trademark for whatever paper or token coin they choose to create.  There is no way anyone can write a contract today using the word &#8220;dollar&#8221; to mean anything specific.  You have to use instead a specific reference to gold grams or troy ounces.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on &#8220;Fitna,&#8221; a Bold Film against Tyranny by blogger</title>
		<link>http://www.joecobb.com/blog/2008/03/30/fitna/#comment-10593</link>
		<dc:creator>blogger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 May 2008 18:38:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.joecobb.com/blog/2008/03/30/fitna/#comment-10593</guid>
		<description>This is great.  Thanks for posting another link to "Fitna."  Here is a link to commentary about the film by Sam Harris"
&lt;a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-harris/losing-our-spines-to-save_b_100132.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is great.  Thanks for posting another link to &#8220;Fitna.&#8221;  Here is a link to commentary about the film by Sam Harris&#8221;<br />
<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-harris/losing-our-spines-to-save_b_100132.html" rel="nofollow">Losing Our Spines to Save Our Necks</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on MY BOOK  The Income Tax Must Go!   [ table of contents ] by www.JoeCobb.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Kubby for President</title>
		<link>http://www.joecobb.com/the-income-tax-must-go/#comment-9586</link>
		<dc:creator>www.JoeCobb.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Kubby for President</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2008 23:00:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://63.247.68.77/~joecobb/?page_id=3#comment-9586</guid>
		<description>[...] (2) Second, Kubby tells America and the world that we will stop attempting to collect the Federal income tax, until such time as the Congress approves a resolution to repeal the 16th Amendment. The income tax is ruining America and it must go! (See  my book on this site.) [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] (2) Second, Kubby tells America and the world that we will stop attempting to collect the Federal income tax, until such time as the Congress approves a resolution to repeal the 16th Amendment. The income tax is ruining America and it must go! (See  my book on this site.) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Illegal Immigration:  Surely This is a Victimless Crime by rwebaz</title>
		<link>http://www.joecobb.com/blog/2007/05/21/surely-this-is-a-victimless-crime/#comment-7633</link>
		<dc:creator>rwebaz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2008 03:44:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.joecobb.com/blog/2007/05/21/surely-this-is-a-victimless-crime/#comment-7633</guid>
		<description>when the southern border fence is completed, then we can revisit the guest worker program in congress, and not before...too many supporters of the recently failed immigration bill got burned in the senate because it is supposed that the american people do not believe congress is serious about sealing the southern border with mexico. hence...the fence !</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>when the southern border fence is completed, then we can revisit the guest worker program in congress, and not before&#8230;too many supporters of the recently failed immigration bill got burned in the senate because it is supposed that the american people do not believe congress is serious about sealing the southern border with mexico. hence&#8230;the fence !</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Ron Paul / Steve Kubby for President by blogger</title>
		<link>http://www.joecobb.com/blog/2008/02/24/ron-paul-steve-kubby-for-president/#comment-7261</link>
		<dc:creator>blogger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2008 08:29:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.joecobb.com/blog/2008/02/24/ron-paul-steve-kubby-for-president/#comment-7261</guid>
		<description>Very clever, but this proposal does not solve the problem of Entitlements, like Medicare and W.I.C. or even formula grants for education and law enforcement.  There is a large part of the Federal budget that is not driven by appropritions, but the spending is automatic - based on formula "entitlements."

What you might consider would be to establish a "firewall" or formula percentage of the Federal budget that would go for Entitlements.  Let's pick 50 percent.

The tax money would come in, and 50% of it would go immediately out for payment of entitlements.  If the money did not come in, the entitlements would be reduced, shaved down proportionately.  Grandma would not get her full check next month, due to insufficient funds.

Common sense.  Household budget rules are sensible.  Insufficient funds is a common concept.
.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very clever, but this proposal does not solve the problem of Entitlements, like Medicare and W.I.C. or even formula grants for education and law enforcement.  There is a large part of the Federal budget that is not driven by appropritions, but the spending is automatic - based on formula &#8220;entitlements.&#8221;</p>
<p>What you might consider would be to establish a &#8220;firewall&#8221; or formula percentage of the Federal budget that would go for Entitlements.  Let&#8217;s pick 50 percent.</p>
<p>The tax money would come in, and 50% of it would go immediately out for payment of entitlements.  If the money did not come in, the entitlements would be reduced, shaved down proportionately.  Grandma would not get her full check next month, due to insufficient funds.</p>
<p>Common sense.  Household budget rules are sensible.  Insufficient funds is a common concept.<br />
.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Why Do We Need a Government Budget? by www.JoeCobb.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Kubby for President</title>
		<link>http://www.joecobb.com/blog/2007/09/24/why-do-we-need-a-government-budget/#comment-7184</link>
		<dc:creator>www.JoeCobb.com &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Kubby for President</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2008 19:44:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.joecobb.com/blog/2007/09/24/why-do-we-need-a-government-budget/#comment-7184</guid>
		<description>[...] (1) First, Kubby tells America and the world that we will stop &#8220;forecasting&#8221; revenue and expenditure numbers in the government&#8217;s budget. &#8220;Imaginary numbers&#8221; are what have caused the current crisis, as the politicians try to predict the future and pass laws spending money that will never be collected. (See &#8220;Why Do We Need a Government Budget? on this site.) [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] (1) First, Kubby tells America and the world that we will stop &#8220;forecasting&#8221; revenue and expenditure numbers in the government&#8217;s budget. &#8220;Imaginary numbers&#8221; are what have caused the current crisis, as the politicians try to predict the future and pass laws spending money that will never be collected. (See &#8220;Why Do We Need a Government Budget? on this site.) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.288 seconds -->
