published Sunday, February 20th, 2011

Capitol Hill

Follow Clay Bennett on Facebook

about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

175
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
nucanuck said...

Don't ask,don't tell?

February 20, 2011 at 12:40 a.m.
canarysong said...

By the time the speech writers polish it, the PR staff spins it, and the media exaggerates it, the truth is pretty hard to recognize even when it is given.

February 20, 2011 at 12:50 a.m.

“When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.” - P. J. O'Rourke

February 20, 2011 at 12:57 a.m.

Corporate whores were rebuffed by voters in November ...

“Since Jan. 1, 2009, Honeywell, based in Morris Township, New Jersey, has led all corporate PACs in giving $192,000 to the most endangered House Democrats. These are incumbents identified by three nonpartisan publications -- Congressional Quarterly, the Cook Political Report and the Rothenberg Political Report -- as the party’s most vulnerable in the 2010 elections. [“AT&T, Boeing Buck Anti-Incumbent Trend in Giving to Democrats” by Jonathan D. Salant (Bloomberg Business Week, June 10, 2010)] http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-06......

“Honeywell Boosts Campaign Donations, Becomes Top Company Giver” by Jonathan D. Salant and Will Daley (Bloomberg Business Week, December 16, 2010, 2:10 PM EST http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-12...

... But they haven’t gone away.

“Now Republicans Are Getting Corporate Checks: Many companies bet on the Democrats in the midterms and lost. They're retrenching quickly” by Jonathan D. Salant (Bloomberg Business Week, December 29, 2010) http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/con...

“In 2010, corporations helped fill the campaign coffers of senior House Democrats scrambling to fend off a Republican tide in November. Now that Republicans have won a House majority, some companies are pivoting and writing checks from their political action committees to the 63 new Republicans who take House seats on Jan. 5 …

“The bottom line: Corporate PACs are writing checks to freshmen Republicans before they take office, after at first supporting their Democratic rivals.”

February 20, 2011 at 1:02 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Maybe an edited play on a quote by Mark Twain is more appropriate in the Halls of Congress:

"Honesty is the best policy – except when if involves money."

February 20, 2011 at 1:05 a.m.

The public can't yet handle the best policy.

If one of them were to tell us the truth about the price tag of what we think we're entitled to, he or she could never get elected.

We are ___ ___V

February 20, 2011 at 1:15 a.m.
Clara said...

Cash Only!

February 20, 2011 at 1:51 a.m.
fairmon said...

The last congress achieved a record low approval rating and the current one is capable of achieving one even lower.

To be honest and truthful with us would require they know what the truth is.

A truism may be that people will believe only that which they want to hear.

The truth can be inconvenient and scary.

It is normal to reach a conclusion or have an opinion then seek and accept as true those sources supporting it while rejecting opposing views.

The 'toon could say "honesty is the best policy if you don't mind being a one termer".

February 20, 2011 at 5:32 a.m.
hambone said...

Honesty is the best policy = losing in the primary

February 20, 2011 at 6:09 a.m.
fairmon said...

A truth may be that the people in Wisconsin knew and voted for the new governor's platform and his planned agenda. Those affected are exercising their right to protest and dissent. Do those disagreeing assume those voting for and supporting the governor (a majority) have an ulterior motive or lack intelligence?

February 20, 2011 at 6:30 a.m.
EaTn said...

I still like the old joke: "How can you tell if a politician is lying? Watch to see if his mouth moves when he speaks".

February 20, 2011 at 7:03 a.m.
blackwater48 said...

Let me edit Harp's 6:30 post: "A truth may be that the people in Wisconsin (America) knew and voted for the new governor's (president's) platform and his planned agenda. Those affected are exercising their right to protest and dissent. Do those disagreeing assume those voting for and supporting the governor (president) (a majority) have an ulterior motive or lack intelligence?"

February 20, 2011 at 7:39 a.m.
dougmusn said...

"I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts." - Will Rogers

February 20, 2011 at 7:53 a.m.

francis - I mean trburroughs - I mean blackwater48 wrote:

"A truth may be that the people in Wisconsin (America) knew and voted for the new governor's (president's) platform and his planned agenda. Those affected are exercising their right to protest and dissent."

I don't know about Wisconsin, but the president got the free ride of all free rides from the press during his election campaign. The idea that people knew what they were voting is laughable. It didn't even matter if he knew how to use the teleprompter at that point.

February 20, 2011 at 8:08 a.m.
blackwater48 said...

Let me edit WWWTW: "I don't know about Wisconsin (America), but the president (governor) got the free ride of all free rides from the press during his election campaign. The idea that people knew what they were voting is laughable. It didn't even matter if he knew how to use the teleprompter at that point."

February 20, 2011 at 8:17 a.m.
fairmon said...

bw,

What is the message in your edits? I think I may know but prefer not to guess. State the truth as you see it. As you know the truth is what we believe it to be.

February 20, 2011 at 8:40 a.m.
dude_abides said...

bw48 is saying that you are speaking out of both sides of your mouth. What you despise in Obama you don't mind in the governor of Wisconsin, as long as he's on your team.

February 20, 2011 at 8:46 a.m.
AndrewLohr said...

Ha.

"The Kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors"--Jesus in Luke 22:25, with, I take it, a mildly ironical hint that He could find something else to call people who spend 20-30% of our earnings buying votes for themselves.

February 20, 2011 at 8:47 a.m.
dude_abides said...

"The Irony of Jesus - an Essay" by Andrew Lohr. On shelves by Easter.

February 20, 2011 at 8:56 a.m.
LibDem said...

harp3339: We've had a similar situation recently in Chattanooga (though on a much smaller scale). The voters elected a mayor. Dissenters tried to overturn the election with a petition. Were the voters wrong? (Footnote: If I recall correctly, the turnout for the election was less than 20%. 80% decided to delegate the responsibility to the 20%. Is delegation a wise choice in any election?)

February 20, 2011 at 9:19 a.m.
fairmon said...

d_a

No one has ever heard me say I despise Obama. He outlined his platform and agenda and a majority of Americans elected him. If I disagree or dissent regarding some of his proposals how does that amount to my being inconsistent? You may be right but Blackwater is pretty sharp. I am sure he will enlighten me regarding his post.

I would post the same thing as he edited it. I do not think those supporting the president and his agenda have an ulterior motive or lack intelligence. I actually disagree with both parties and have little value for either agenda.

February 20, 2011 at 9:31 a.m.
whatsthefuss said...

bw, I am confused by your comparison. Are you saying Obama is against union members retaining collective bargaining rights among others?? It sure does sound like it in your post!!

The point of the Wisconsin debate that stands out for me is that almost all employees in this country fall under RIGHT TO WORK laws. These are the same people who pay to support the group that enjoys all the benefits they do not. The majority can be fired without reason or cause. The union employee, even after being written up for performance issues or worse, still enjoys paid leave while under investigation and quite often is returned to the same job they showed no respect for all paid for by, you guessed it, YOU AND ME!! If the government employees are to enjoy such rights then perhaps it is time to extend these same rights to all workers. If that is asking to much then let us once and for all level the employment arena for every American. Right To Work Laws for every working American!! We can take one more step. If government workers are to receive health care benefits then all working Americans are to receive the same. Or let both groups subsidize their own health care. Whats good for the goose most certainly must be good for the government worker.

February 20, 2011 at 9:45 a.m.
dude_abides said...

harp, let me edit my own post from 8:46. bw48(or an imposter) is saying(typing) that you(or anyone who has espoused the same views as you) are speaking(typing) out of both sides(corners) of your mouth(fingers). What you(or anyone who has espoused the same views as you) despise(respectfully disagree with) in Obama you(or anyone...) don't mind(adore) in the governor of Wisconsin, as long as he's on your team(fascist-voodoo-child-killers-union).

February 20, 2011 at 10:03 a.m.
Francis said...

wwwtw...is correct.....the liberal media did a masterful of job of hiding or masking from the american people who obama really is . nov. 2nd showed they didn't like being fooled. they thought they voted for a moderate...
should have done their homework..

scott walker ran on his record in milwaukee of cutting out waste and slashing spending......he ran on his record. the people knew and know who he is. there was no media campaign to portray him as something he wasn't.

obama is the consumate liar....and he turns away from "honesty is the best policy"..like dracula from the cross....

dude...you're off.....obama is trying to grow the federal governement and put more of burden on already over taxed citizens...walker is trying to reduce the cost of operating the state government and take the burden off of already over taxed citizens.

obama has no empathy toward the tax payer...walker has plenty....

teachers and state workers in wisconisn... make really good money and have incredible health and security packages at virtually no cost to them.......are rich...at least i see them that way.....and probably to most..

they're not paying for it...the wisconsin tax payers are.....many of whom are underemployed or unemployed....or may lose their jobs and have no guarantee of anything.....

how many employees in the private sector/the real world..and employers...have made sacrifices to keep the company going..reduced pay..giving something up for a while...whatever it takes to keep the company afloat or in the black...

union members, teachers and state employees seem to think they're entitled to everthing no matter what it takes....

walker is trying to balance eleviating the burden on tax payers, keeping the government going, not firing state employees and reducing as little as possible the existing packages that teachers and state employees have been getting.....

and what are democrats, teachers, unions and state employees doing ...throwing a tantrum.. grow up

February 20, 2011 at 11:12 a.m.
blackwater48 said...

Get me re-write: "wwwtw...is correct.....the liberal media did a masterful of job of hiding or masking from the Wisconsin people who Walker really is . tax cuts for his cronies and his attempt to gut the unions showed they didn't like being fooled. they thought they voted for a moderate... should have done their homework.."

February 20, 2011 at 12:53 p.m.

blackwater48: "Get me re-write: ... they didn't like being fooled. they thought they voted for a moderate... should have done their homework.."

Being exposed as Francis and trburroughs is really messing with your ability to be coherent. How did you have time to follow the Wisconsin election if you were posting as three people online?

Saturday Night Live had it about right when they vented Hillary Clinton’s frustration over coverage of Obama in 2008. The toughest questions reporters could come up with were "Are you comfortable? Can we get you anything?" (I couldn’t find the video.)

Here’s a skit with Chris Matthews playing softball with his hero, the intern. http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/presidential_bash_obamamatthews/807121

His own party is mad that he couldn't deliver on his Willy Wonka promises. It's one thing to RUN for president. It's another to ...

February 20, 2011 at 2:31 p.m.

"The more corrupt the state, the more it legislates." – Tacitus

"The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter, taller, richer, and remove the crabgrass on your lawn. The Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it." - P. J. O'Rourke

February 20, 2011 at 2:35 p.m.
blackwater48 said...

Roses are red, Violets are blue, What's wrong with the world, Is what wrong with you too.

February 20, 2011 at 3 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

True or False?

Congressional Republicans are on the side of the American People

[Answer: False]

EVIDENCE - DOCUMENT 1 “THIS isn’t the story of a poor family with a mother who has a dreadful disease that bankrupts them, or with a child who has to go without vital medicines. Unlike many others, my family can afford medical care, with or without insurance.

Instead, this is a story about how broken the market for health insurance is, even for those who are healthy and who are willing and able to pay for it.

Most employees assume that if they lose their job and the health coverage that comes along with it, they’ll be able to purchase insurance somewhere. The members of Congress who want to repeal the provision of last year’s health insurance law that makes it easier for individuals to buy coverage must assume that uninsured people do not want to buy it, or are just too cheap or too poor to do so.

The truth is that individual health insurance is not easy to get.

I found this out the hard way. Six years ago, my company was acquired. Since my husband had retired a few years earlier, we found ourselves without an employer and thus without health insurance.

My husband, teenage daughter and I were all active and healthy, and I naïvely thought getting health insurance would be simple. . .

An insurance broker helped me sort through the options. I settled on a high-deductible plan, and filled out the long application. I diligently listed the various minor complaints for which we had been seen over the years. . .

Then the first letter arrived — denied. . .

Why were we denied? What were these pre-existing conditions that put us into high-risk categories? For me, it was a corn on my toe for which my podiatrist had recommended an in-office procedure. My daughter was denied because she takes regular medication for a common teenage issue. My husband was denied because his ophthalmologist had identified a slow-growing cataract. Basically, if there is any possible procedure in your future, insurers will deny you.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/20/opinion/20Dubinsky.html?src=twrhp

February 20, 2011 at 3:05 p.m.
blackwater48 said...

WWWYT wrote, "Being exposed as Francis and trburroughs is really messing with your ability to be coherent. How did you have time to follow the Wisconsin election if you were posting as three people online?"

Sorry, dude, totally confused by your triade conspiracy. Aren't you in bed - politically speaking - with Francis and Burrows? Seems like you all speak with one hypocritical voice.

Would love to expose your paranoid fantasies more completely, entertaining out of town friends today.

Great job lifting unrelated quotes and weaving them together into one muddle incoherent tapestry.

February 20, 2011 at 3:09 p.m.

“Tomorrow Never Comes” by David Brooks (New York Times, February 17, 2011) http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/18/opinion/18brooks.html?ref=davidbrooks

“… Over the past four years, Obama’s career has been marked by a constant promise: He has continually said he is on the verge of doing something serious about the national debt.

“He started making the promise back when he was in the Senate … During the presidential campaign, he pledged to put away childish things and tackle the tough budget issues.

“During the transition, he said the time to act on the debt is now. ‘What we have done is kicked the can down the road,’ he told The Washington Post. ‘We are now at the end of the road and are not in a position to kick it any further.’ He said he would start a budget initiative in February 2009.

“After the stimulus package passed, he and his aides said it would soon be time to turn to deficit issues. The same promise was made after health care reform. He made the pledge yet again at a press conference this week. Right now is not the time, the president always says, but tomorrow we will get serious. But tomorrow never comes.

“The biggest tease came last year when the president’s debt commission announced its report. That report produced a series of great conversations. But, yet again, words do not translate into action. The message of the president’s 2012 budget is: Not yet. We’ll get serious tomorrow."

February 20, 2011 at 3:25 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

True or False

Congress is on the side of the American People

[Answer: False]

EVIDENCE: DOCUMENT 1 “John Drew believes, quaintly, that we are our brother’s keeper.

President Obama does not seem to believe this quite as strongly. And, of course, many of the Republicans in Congress do not believe it at all.

Mr. Drew is the president of Boston’s antipoverty agency, called Action for Boston Community Development, which everyone calls ABCD. In today’s environment, people who work with the poor can be forgiven if they feel like hunted criminals. Government officials at all levels are homing in on them and disrupting their efforts, sometimes for legitimate budget reasons, sometimes not.

The results are often heartbreaking.

Community action agencies like ABCD are not generally well known but they serve as a lifeline, all across the country, to poor individuals and families who desperately need the assistance provided by food pantries, homeless shelters, workers who visit the homebound elderly, and so forth. They offer summer jobs for young people and try to ward off the eviction of the jobless and their dependents.

More than 20 million people receive some kind of assistance from community action agencies over the course of a year. This winter an elderly man in Boston was found during a routine visit to be suffering in his home from frostbite of the hands and feet. The visit most likely saved his life.

We should keep in mind the current extent of economic suffering in the U.S. as we consider President Obama’s misguided plan to impose a crippling 50 percent reduction in the community service block grants that serve as the crucial foundation for community action agencies. The cuts will undoubtedly doom many of the programs. (The Republicans in the House would eliminate the block grants entirely.)

It’s a measure of where we are as a country that this has not been a bigger news story."

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/20/opinion/20herbert.html

February 20, 2011 at 3:42 p.m.
blackwater48 said...

Oh goody. A game of 'Volley the David Brooks Quotes.' From 8.10.08:

"David Brooks spoke frankly about the presidential and vice presidential candidates Monday afternoon, calling Sarah Palin a "fatal cancer to the Republican party" but describing John McCain and Barack Obama as "the two best candidates we've had in a long time."

"In an interview with The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg at New York's Le Cirque restaurant to unveil that magazine's redesign, Brooks decried Palin's anti-intellectualism and compared her to President Bush in that regard:

"[Sarah Palin] represents a fatal cancer to the Republican party. When I first started in journalism, I worked at the National Review for Bill Buckley. And Buckley famously said he'd rather be ruled by the first 2,000 names in the Boston phone book than by the Harvard faculty. But he didn't think those were the only two options. He thought it was important to have people on the conservative side who celebrated ideas, who celebrated learning. And his whole life was based on that, and that was also true for a lot of the other conservatives in the Reagan era. Reagan had an immense faith in the power of ideas. But there has been a counter, more populist tradition, which is not only to scorn liberal ideas but to scorn ideas entirely. And I'm afraid that Sarah Palin has those prejudices. I think President Bush has those prejudices."

Your serve.

February 20, 2011 at 4:04 p.m.
fairmon said...

Mntlaurel,

You are without a doubt a good hearted caring person but I cringe when I read how you support the federal government being the conduit for and administrator of welfare you lose my support.

The federal government is without a doubt the greatest collection of incompetence and inefficiency in history. Name one federal department you think is efficient, well run and not over staffed and over paid. Granted there are some excellent and productive employees sprinkled through out some departments and agencies but that is not typical.

Welfare should be a heavily regulated state and local issue to prevent abuse by recipients and administrators. I will forego my tirade about those cathedral building member pampering churches while other churches feed and cloth the hungry. I know one that buys the property for a house, buys a lot of the materials and volunteer members essentially build a habitat for humanity house. Just think how much more a dollar would do if the government wasn't grafting so much of it.

$1 -The cost for the government to collect it? -The cost for the government department heads and staff -The cost of administering, distributing, reporting -Accounting cost I have seen figures of 45%, in other words only 55 cents gets to where it is intended. I don't know if these are accurate but suspect they are conservative. Add to that those receiving help that don't need or deserve it.

Have you ever assisted anyone trying to get help and see and hear how they are treated by some administrators? I almost got in serious trouble with some choice words to one I heard talking to an applicant. I don't care what a persons station in life is they should be treated with dignity and respect. I reported her but she is still doing the same job. If I was in charge her unemployed fat ass may be the one needing help. Another example I won't detail is the social security office. That gentleman has no idea how close he came to being seriously injured, not by me but the applicant. He was way off base with his attitude and comments implying the applicant was lying, which he was not and proved he wasn't.

We agree in principle but not in process. I guess the good thing is we can opine away here and it will change nothing.

February 20, 2011 at 5:34 p.m.
fairmon said...

I wonder why the Boston aristocrats don't support the ABCD instead of the federal government? Why should any tax dollars from Chattanooga or Tennessee go to the ABCD when there is such great need for the same right here? When and how will I be expected to pay back the money the government is borrowing on my behalf to fund this ABCD thing?

February 20, 2011 at 5:49 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

True or False

Tea Party & Koch Corporatist Sugar Daddies are on the side of the American People

[Answer: False]

EVIDENCE: DOCUMENT 1 “Scientists have long known that formaldehyde causes cancer in rats, and several major scientific studies have concluded that formaldehyde causes cancer in human beings—including one published last year by the National Cancer Institute, on whose advisory board [David] Koch sits.

The study tracked twenty-five thousand patients for an average of forty years; subjects exposed to higher amounts of formaldehyde had significantly higher rates of leukemia. These results helped lead an expert panel within the National Institutes of Health to conclude that formaldehyde should be categorized as a known carcinogen, and be strictly controlled by the government.

Corporations have resisted regulations on formaldehyde for decades, however, and Koch Industries has been a large funder of members of Congress who have stymied the E.P.A., requiring it to defer new regulations until more studies are completed.

Koch Industries became a major producer of the chemical in 2005, after it bought Georgia-Pacific, the paper and wood-products company, for twenty-one billion dollars. Georgia-Pacific manufactures formaldehyde in its chemical division, and uses it to produce various wood products, such as plywood and laminates. Its annual production capacity for formaldehyde is 2.2 billion pounds. . .

David Koch did not recuse himself from the National Cancer Advisory Board, or divest himself of company stock, while his company was directly lobbying the government to keep formaldehyde on the market. (A board spokesperson said that the issue of formaldehyde had not come up.)

James Huff, an associate director at the National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences, a division of the N.I.H., told me that it was “disgusting” for Koch to be serving on the National Cancer Advisory Board: “It’s just not good for public health. Vested interests should not be on the board.” He went on, “Those boards are very important. They’re very influential as to whether N.C.I. goes into formaldehyde or not. Billions of dollars are involved in formaldehyde.”

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer?currentPage=all

February 20, 2011 at 6:31 p.m.

blackwater48 quoted:

"David Brooks spoke frankly about the presidential and vice presidential candidates Monday afternoon, calling Sarah Palin a "fatal cancer to the Republican party" but describing John McCain and Barack Obama as "the two best candidates we've had in a long time ... Reagan had an immense faith in the power of ideas. But there has been a counter, more populist tradition ... "

As it turns out, he was right about Palin and wrong about McCain. It was probably peer pressure in the case of the latter. After all, McCain was the favorite Republican of everyone at the Times.

Reagan actually appealed to both intellectuals and populists. (intellectuals BTW are not the same as academics) He re-juvenated a movement, a party, and the nation. An amazing president.

February 20, 2011 at 7:22 p.m.

And of course, Brooks was right about Obama.

February 20, 2011 at 7:23 p.m.
Francis said...

mountainlaurel...when congress is democrat majority then they are on the side of the people, when republican they're not...whatever..

when corporations give to republicans its sinister and corrupt..when they give to democrats they have good intentions...

mccain was dead in the water with or without palin.....if not for palin his his campaign had no zing...nothing..zero...he's just democrat party lite.

you may not like her..but to deny her popularity is stupid.

palin is underestimated...so is the tea party......she's not going to run in 2012 anyway all the attacks on her are a waste of time...

if chris christie runs he will kick obama's ass......obama is just not likeable or believable...he and the media could fool america once..but not next time....even with obama's /the democrats corruption machine...christie will win........the only states obama will win are california, new york and massachussets.........he'll win chicago because chicago is the epicenter of corruption........

obama has been attempting to emulate reagan....i saw him in a photo wearing a cowboy hat...and referring to himself as the gipper........that's audacity...that's like bozo the clown thinking he can do hamlet as well as sir laurence olivier

February 20, 2011 at 7:56 p.m.

mountainlaurel cut and pasted:

“John Drew believes, quaintly, that we are our brother’s keeper. President Obama does not seem to believe this quite as strongly. And, of course, many of the Republicans in Congress do not believe it at all."

  1. Opinion columns are not "evidence" for "facts." They are opinions.

  2. A lot hinges on who he (and presumably you) mean by "we." As a compassionate religion, the federal government is a pitiful substitute for local faith-based communities, who do the yeoman’s work in caring for those in need. I work with the poor. I’m not familiar with the program in Boston, but I can tell you that nothing has done more to extend and deepen poverty in the United States than federal programs which mistake the role of the state for the role of the church.

In a fit of sanity (he had one or two), Bill Clinton joined Republican congressional leaders in working to scale back the devastation brought about by the late 20th century statist war on the poor. Bush made further reforms by re-directing federal funding toward local groups, mostly faith-based, who are ALWAYS more effective (by far) at rooting out long-term poverty issues, as well as addressing immediate crises. President Obama promised to continue Bush’s effective faith-based initiative. I haven’t kept up with the Intern on this, but I assume he followed through and that is why the columnist preaching at him.

There’s much more I could - and will - say about this. Since David Brooks is on the thread today, I remember that he said that working in the projects in Chicago (right after college?) and seeing firsthand the way federal welfare programs damage people’s lives is what converted him from being a “progressive” to being a conservative. I’ve seen similar conversions by others who daily reject your columnist’s flawed notion of who is our brother’s keeper.

http://www.centeronfic.org/v2/miniProfil...

Why are your posts always such black and white, partisan campaign bumper stickers? They're very two-dimensional and humorless.

February 20, 2011 at 8 p.m.

And why do you and blackwater need a foil like francis to make your arguments seem rational?

I guess that question answers itself.

February 20, 2011 at 8:05 p.m.

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

February 20, 2011 at 8:08 p.m.
blackwater48 said...

Since honesty is the best policy, Mr. World, how about the complete quote:

"Reagan had an immense faith in the power of ideas. But there has been a counter, more populist tradition, which is not only to scorn liberal ideas but to scorn ideas entirely. And I'm afraid that Sarah Palin has those prejudices."

I like that prophetic phrase: Republicans scorn ideas. Puts into perspective that whole "Party of No!" thing, and also explains why the GOP is trying to solve the budget crisis with arithmetic.

I guess simple minds demand simple answers.

So, all you need to manage complex budgets at the state, federal, and corporate level is 5th grade math? I guess every corporation should fire every CPA involved in their budget process. They'd shave a lot off the bottom line.

It's also hilarious that you would refer to Reagan as if he were a Holy conservative icon. Honestly, in today's GOP, Reagan would not make the Primary field for any local, state, or federal office.

I know. I was a registered conservative back then.

February 20, 2011 at 8:09 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

WWWTW: "Why are your posts always such black and white, partisan campaign bumper stickers? They're very two-dimensional and humorless."

If you're seeking humor, WWWTW, I suspect you've come to the wrong place. There is not much humor in people going hungry, people not having access to healthcare, and people dying from cancer due to formaldehyde exposure - at least from my perspective there isn't.

As to "partisan" bumper stickers, maybe it's because one political party is actually trying to address hunger in America, the healthcare crisis in America, and the regulation of chemicals that cause cancer in humans - and the other political party isn't trying to resolve any of these problems.

February 20, 2011 at 8:30 p.m.
Clara said...

Great artical Mtnlaurel! I just finished reading it.

Total arrogance and unfeeling ignorance.

I wonder how Koch employees feel. I wonder what the Koch's offer is to keep a workforce.

February 20, 2011 at 8:33 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Clara,

Thanks. I thought the New Yorker article was very informative too.

Gives me the shivers to think that creeps like the Koch brothers are slinking around in my country.

February 20, 2011 at 9:07 p.m.
canarysong said...

mountainlaurel, re 6:31pm post;

I always enjoy your posts and have appreciated being introduced to new sources of information. You are a great researcher!

Thank you for bringing up the conflict of interest that happens when those who are heavily invested in a particular industry are allowed to sit on boards that make regulatory decisions regarding that industry. A classic scenario of the fox guarding the chicken coop and it happens more often than you would think.

In my years of advocating for those who have been disabled by chemical poisoning, I have met quite a number of people whose lives have been destroyed by exposure to formaldehyde. Some have been industrial exposures, but a surprisingly large number of them have been damaged either at home or in office workplaces following a major renovation or a move into new construction. Formaldehyde is common in building materials, not only 'engineered' wood products, but both foam and fiberglass insulation, carpeting, paints, adhesives, etc.

Formaldehyde is not only linked to cancer, but it also can cause irreversible lung damage, neurological problems, sensitization, and other chronic health problems. By the time most people are able to pinpoint the source of their illness, irreparable damage has already been done. The most recent example to come to the public's attention was the FEMA fiasco where a number of those living in 'temporary' housing suffered permanent damage from the high formaldehyde levels in the trailers.

As is so often the case, it is the poor who suffer the most. Fake wood (for furniture, subfloors, etc.) is cheaper than real wood; carpeting is cheaper than tile or hardwood; cheap fabrics are treated with formaldehyde to give them a better 'hand'; the poor are more likely to live in trailers and to work in an environment that exposes them to high levels of industrial chemicals. And when they become sick, they are less likely to successfully navigate the health care system to even arrive at an accurate diagnosis, much less to afford proper care.

Yes, my consrevative friends, these are the kind of pathetic leaches that are trying to sponge off of the system.

Since formaldehyde is used in many other types of products as well (toiletries and cosmetics, most paper products, art supplies, furniture, mattresses, on and on.....), the stakes for the industry is high to fight investigation into its health effects and the regulation that might result. And for every month, every year, that such investigation is held back REAL LIVES are affected. Putting someone like Koch in a position where they can block progress on public health issues is nothing less than criminal.

February 20, 2011 at 9:31 p.m.
fairmon said...

I am not a Kock Bros fan but I see no problem with them actively supporting opposing views to those in government.The Cato institute is a diverse group of scholars that may or may not reach conclusions favorable to the Koch's or the government and they have no implementation authority. They are quoted and referred to when agreed with and they are criticized when not agreed with.

The New Yorker, please! The snooty looking gal is a very appropriate logo. A New Yorker or New York Times article conveying an authors opinion is no more research than the opinion articles in the TFP that make reference to those with similar opinions.

This is a long article that consistently says "in ___ opinion" "__ told me" "In an interview with___ __ said" "It was reported that_". It seemed a lot like someone that totally supports Obama is looking for anything that may discredit or cause suspicion of anyone that disagrees with him. I don't recall any statements by the author saying I confirmed the validity of this information in any way.

I was trying to be open minded until the author said there were no conflicts with George Soros contributions and his investments.

February 21, 2011 at 12:09 a.m.
alprova said...

I've enjoyed the exchange very much, and the only thing I can add to all of this, is that Harp...you REALLY need to stop watching Glenn Beck and Fox News so much.

And don't deny watching either, because half of your talking points mimic what can be heard on that station on a daily basis.

George Soros broke silence a couple of days ago, because the rhetoric pointed towards him has gotten soooo out of hand.

The folks over at Fox News has got America believing so many lies that it would take a month to list them all.

It was a great day, the day I decided to stop watching that network forever to stop relying upon it for any sense of truth. The ONLY personality on that network with any dignity left is Shepard Smith.

February 21, 2011 at 4:36 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

I see now that both blackwater and alprova claim they were once "registered conservatives" or republican or something along those lines… once upon a time. Now they clearly seem to have turned liberal.

Is this some kind of a lame attempt to gain credibility as the been-there-done-that conservative who has become enlightened and "seen the light" of liberalism?

If you are young and conservative you do not have a heart.
If you are old and liberal you do not have a brain.

February 21, 2011 at 11:05 a.m.
Francis said...

alprova..you're a leftist mouthpiece...harp has continually shown he's extremely critical of republicans and democrats alike. you libs act as if anyone who does agree with you cannot come to a conclusion on their own without being told what to say by some talk show or columunist. even if he did watch fox and glenn beck..what of it? what should he watch and read? the huffington post, ny times, cnn, salon, newsweek, time, pbs, msnbc, the view or chris mathews?

george soros is a manipulative, slimey anti-american..who openly states he wants america to be just another country. he's a foreigner who has poured millions of dollars into the democrat party. massive influence.

it seems to me you're getting your marching order from soros......soros just likened fox news, murdoch and republicans to nazis......which you seem to agree with.

you're a hypocrite.....you're advocating everyone turn away from a different point of view than yours, but would not tolerate anyone telling you to do the same...

oooooo..poor battered george soros "broke his silence" ..oh, my...guess he had to climb off his hamock, put down his drink and usher away the bikini clad babes on his yaght in the mediteranian... so he could send off an email re- garding how abused he is...poor baby..

what's really creepy..is how anyone who calls them- selves an american, like you, would defend soros and actually agree with him.

but given that you have no problem being called a communist....i'm not surprised.

February 21, 2011 at 11:07 a.m.
canarysong said...

I jumped in on mountainlaurel's mention of formaldehyde as a carcinogen because I hoped that further information might help someone avert a similar tragedy in their own lives. I neglected, however, to offer any practical information on how to actually deal with the most common serious formaldehyde exposures. Please bear with me while I provide it for those who may be interested.

In a tightly-sealed home air cocentrations of formaldehyde from plywood, insulation, carpeting, etc. can become high enough to cause harm. This 'outgassing' is highest in the first 2 years following remodeling or construction and continues at lower levels for 10 years or more. It is particularly important to choose formaldehyde-free and low VOC products when remodeling a nursery. Young children are at a much higher risk of harm from toxics than healthy adults. The elderly, people with chronic health problems such as asthma, and those with lots of allergies may also be at higher risk.

If you are searching for a new home or office space, your nose can be a pretty good 'instrument' for detecting high formaldehyde levels. It has a sharp, nose-stinging odor and often causes a quick onset of asthma-like symptoms and watery eyes; if you notice this, look elsewhere. Test kits are available (order online) to check air concentrations and surfaces.

If you are already in a home that has formaldehyde issues, 'green' building consultants and contractors are available in some areas that may be able to mitigate the situation. Mitigation is sometimes costly and not always possible, but if you're lucky it might just be a simple DIY project (ex.- a new particleboard bookcase is easily sealed with several coats of water-based polyurethane).

When I renovated my home 15 years ago less toxic building materials were few and hard to find, but today a quick google search will turn up dozens of pages of resources, some products are even available now in mainstream home improvement centers. Good books are also available and worth checking out beforehand.

I hope this will help someone.

Now Francis can get back to his name-calling.

February 21, 2011 at 12:12 p.m.
fairmon said...

Alprova,

It appears anyone disagreeing with you must watch Fox news which I do not and find them attempting to affect public opinion as much as the traditional networks. You are not unlike some of those so called journalist. Find an article or source that supports your personal beliefs and refer to it or provide links etc. that supports your views. I prefer the financial news and newsletters. I like going to the S.E.C. web site and looking at the required filings of corporations and the really big investors.

George Soros Makes sizable donations to several activist groups and power broker politicians. Other wealthy individuals do so as well. I don't find fault with that and would do the same if I were among those wealthy enough to benefit from doing so.

Is he guilty of all the rhetoric contributing something subversive to him, probably not. So he broke his silence, do you believe everything he said and the denials. Remember how many others "broke their silence" and were later found guilty (see Enron). Both parties have examples of that happening. Even Charlie Wrangle went public with his plea of it was just an over sight when he failed to report and pay taxes on income. Poor old Charlie sanctioned by his peers, so mistreated. Poor old George, he had to pay a public relations firm so he could "break his silence" and try to deflect some of the criticism. He supports causes you believe in so he is ethical, the Kock Brothers support causes you don't agree with so they have ulterior motives. I don't agree or disagree with either but support their right to do what they do.

I have never seen you post anything that would effectively address the financial crisis or acknowledges that the current rate of debt growth is not sustainable. So, I assume you think those anticipating an implosion of our financial systems are wrong since they say things you don't want to hear. I think psychologist call it the "normalcy factor". If something is different than it used to be or that I want it to be I deny it is a legitimate view.

Do you think it wrong of me to track what the "big money" boys are doing and invest accordingly and profit from it? I hope not then I couldn't help buy you or anyone else buy a house (interest deductions and first time buyers). I couldn't help those that did buy a car (cash for clunkers), I couldn't send my monthly welfare check to those in need and those not in need but gaming the system (section 8 and food stamps). And, by all means I need to provide a cell phone and home winterization including an H&V unit for those that can't afford one. If I don't work, invest and profit how would we give those income refunds that are 3-4X more than was paid in? mmmm Guess I better continue my selfish money grubbing behavior, big brother may need even more from me.

February 21, 2011 at 12:23 p.m.
eel said...

"A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest" Paul Simon

February 21, 2011 at 12:48 p.m.
canarysong said...

Come on Harp, you're a smart and reasonable person. Do you really believe that financial news outlets are unbiased and free of a point of view influenced by their own interests? If any of us thinks that we have found a completely unbiased source of information, we are likely fooling ourselves. The best we can do is look at news from several sources with differing points of view, trying as best we can to avoid those that simply make s**t up. Listening to (or reading) ideas different than our own is healthy and helps us to better understand those that we disagree with. Understanding fosters co-operation and co-operation gets things done.

February 21, 2011 at 12:48 p.m.
fairmon said...

alprova,

For someone who is an avowed non Fox news watcher you seem to have a good sense of what their talking points are and conclude anyone having an opinion of their own that is similar is a Fox watcher. I don't know who Sheperd Smith is but apparently you have watched Fox enough to apply your ratings to each shows host or whatever they are called. I have seen Glen Beck one time, didn't find him entertaining, enlightening or dishonest. I am not familiar with the others but it seems to me if they espouse views opposing yours you conclude they are not speaking the truth.

I don't view the reporters dishonest nor do I view some of your what I consider wacko opinions as dishonesty. I accept that you truly believe your views are correct and valid. You even provide information from other sources or access to information that you probably hope will convince others to reach the same conclusions that you have.

I think it falls under the heading of "freedom"? Thanks for the advice. If I do decide to watch Fox I assure you I will view it with the same skepticism that I have with other news sources that are more interested in ratings and advertising than the truth.

I can't stand Nancy Pelosi and her fake plastic smile but I watch her to see what her current "we have to do this for the American people" agenda may be. I will also watch boo hoo Baehner and his "the American voters have spoken and we will listen" mantra to see what he thinks he heard the voters say.

February 21, 2011 at 1:04 p.m.
fairmon said...

cs,

good post on the exposure issue. I subscribe to some very expensive financial newsletters that have one motive, make money on investments. They have no political agenda and don't judge legislation other than to try to know what impact it is likely to have on an investment and why. In investing I could care less. If it will adversely impact a business I sell the stock short, if it will help them I may buy it if they are already in good financial health.

I avoid those that judge the parties or the legislation. I can do that on my own as I read it at Thomas Library or other sources if I so desire. I reach my own conclusions based on what politicians say and do, not on what some commentator thinks about it.

I wish there were more people posting here in order to get a better feel for the prevailing sentiment. Most have become rather predictable in their views and the numbers so low it is no where near statistically valid.

February 21, 2011 at 1:17 p.m.
canarysong said...

harp3339;

Your complement means a lot to me. Even though on many issues I lean so far left that I sometimes tip over, I occasionally find myself agreeing with you. At the very least, you have helped me learn about some things that I am not all that familiar with. Keep up the good work.

February 21, 2011 at 1:36 p.m.
alprova said...

Francis wrote: "alprova..you're a leftist mouthpiece"


And you're a consistently misinformed troll. So what else is new?


"harp has continually shown he's extremely critical of republicans and democrats alike."


So what? I happen to side with the Democrats. That's my prerogative. I don't happen to like fence sitters. Sue me.


"you libs act as if anyone who does agree with you cannot come to a conclusion on their own without being told what to say by some talk show or columunist."


Look you weasel, you consistently type sentences, charges, conclusions, etc. that are rhetorically issued by conservative talking heads. Are you suggesting that they get their material from YOU? You're brainless and that has been proven many times in this forum.


"george soros is a manipulative, slimey anti-american..who openly states he wants america to be just another country."


It's about time that America recognize their place in the world. We are not the daddy to the rest of the world. We are just another nation.


"he's a foreigner..."


He was BORN on foreign soil. He emigrated to this country in 1956. He's resided in NYC since then.


"who has poured millions of dollars into the democrat party. massive influence."


That's funny. Rupert Murdoch owns an entire world-wide viewed network dedicated to influencing politics in this nation, but because he bats for and contributes to the Republican/Conservative movement in this nation, that's a-okay with everyone who agrees with it.

Who has the ability to be more influential or dangerous?


"it seems to me you're getting your marching order from soros."


That's about as utterly stupid a comment as you have ever made. I'm a CPA and in marketing. I am hardly political outside of casting my own vote. Get real.


you're a hypocrite.....you're advocating everyone turn away from a different point of view than yours, but would not tolerate anyone telling you to do the same...


No Sir. I deal strictly in facts. Learn some sometime.

February 21, 2011 at 2:01 p.m.

On Presidents' Day, while many are signing off on the paranoid left's notion that America is "just another nation," I think it will be helpful to transcend the partisan rancor and pay tribute to one of truly great presidents. He's the one who re-defined the modern presidency. Be they Democrat or Republican, every president who followed him is measured by the standard of his outstanding character and record. And they all fall flat by any comparison.

"Character Above All: Ronald Reagan" by Peggy Noonan http://www.pbs.org/newshour/character/essays/reagan.html

February 21, 2011 at 2:13 p.m.
alprova said...

Harp3339 wrote: "Find an article or source that supports your personal beliefs and refer to it or provide links etc. that supports your views."


I'm a little more careful than that. I tend to gravitate to those who document their positions and who have always been credible. I don't go surfing for confirmation of anything.


"So he broke his silence, do you believe everything he said and the denials."


I never believed it from the start, considering the source from where it emanated to begin with. Glenn Beck and other talking heads, and Fox News, does not know how to or begins to care to stick to any facts whatsoever, and in fact has been proven time and again that they are guilty in making up what they report.


"I have never seen you post anything that would effectively address the financial crisis or acknowledges that the current rate of debt growth is not sustainable."


Then you've missed it. My position is rather simple. At the moment this nation has more pressing problems that must be addressed FIRST, before stifling the economy further by attempting to pay down the credit card bills when the income to do it is not flowing in at the moment to do it.

Your method is very much like people who put two dollars worth of gas in their tank, expecting it to get them somewhere.

February 21, 2011 at 2:24 p.m.
alprova said...

wwwtw wrote: "On Presidents' Day, while many are signing off on the paranoid left's notion that America is "just another nation..."


I sure didn't mean to get your boxers in a bunch, but it's a bout time that the United States discovered that they SHOULD recognize that they are JUST ANOTHER NATION.

If you lived in a cul-de-sac and there were 15 homes in it, and one of the homeowners declared himself to have authority over all the others, popped in your home whenever he felt like it to check to see if you were living according to his standards, how would you feel about that?

Even more to the point, how long would you put up with it? At what point would you decide to take action that would let him know that he has overstepped his boundaries?

9/11 was such an action by many of those in the Middle East. The United States is just another nation, but for some reason, there are those with an extreme nose problem and many of our young men and women have died as a result of it.

It's time for it to stop.

February 21, 2011 at 2:36 p.m.
delmar said...

"there are those with an extreme nose problem and many of our young men and women have died as a result of it.

It's time for it to stop." - alprova

Amen to that!

February 21, 2011 at 2:48 p.m.
blackwater48 said...

The love affair between conservatives today and the presidency of Ronald Reagan is laughable. They ignore the fact that he raised taxes eleven times, saved Social Security, and negotiated with the Soviet Union to reduce nuclear weapons.

That alone should disqualify Reagan as a great president because his record reads like a liberal.

Oh year, he aslo said he could cut taxes, increase military spending, and balance the budget. How did that work out?

But that isn't the biggest blemish on his record. His decision in 1982 to send American troops into Lebanon as part of a multi-national peace keeping force remains arguably the worst foreign policy decision any President ever made.

The result? 241 dead: 220 Marines, 18 Navy, three Army.

His response: cut and run. The day our troops were 'redeployed' to a ship and sent home was the day I stopped calling myself a 'Conservative.'

February 21, 2011 at 2:55 p.m.

alprova wrote: "If you lived in a cul-de-sac .."

So much for bringing us your tired, your poor, and your huddled masses. If you think we are just another nation, then you've never traveled overseas, and your only concept of other nations comes from CSNBC.

According to leftist logic, leadership is sin, balance of power isn't an issue, and every nation should impoverish itself just for the sake of everything being equal. What a spineless way to repay the heroes of the bi-partisan war in Iraq.

America left the culd-de-sac of Europe centuries ago to build a city on a hill. And the good we have accomplished at home and abroad is unparalled. Let freedom ring.

February 21, 2011 at 2:56 p.m.
Clara said...

Based on the article in the New Yorker that mtnlaurel posted, here is something that reinforces the argument that the Koch influence runs rampent.

This anti-the protest movement is still in the minority,hopefully. From CNN....

http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/02/19/wisconsin.budget/index.html?hpt=Sbin

February 21, 2011 at 2:59 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Canarysong,

Thanks for the additional info on formaldehyde.

When it comes to public safety and health related issues like this one, I believe every elected representative in our government has a duty, responsibility, and moral obligation to alert the public - it's our lives so we have a right to know. In the case of formaldehyde, it seems to me the potential dangers involved have been reasonably established, and its use should be regulated.

As to what to do in regard to politicians who ignore public health issues for personal gain through their campaign contributions, I’m not sure. Since their inaction does place the lives and health of the public at risk, I feel we need to do more than just boot them out of office. Perhaps, we need to work on some new criminal laws that deal directly with the gross negligence of our lawmakers.

February 21, 2011 at 3:03 p.m.
fairmon said...

canarysong,

You are welcome and thank you. I visit this forum to see what you, mtnlaurel and a couple others are saying although you do make my head spin at times.

I have even thought about how lively a discussion might be if we were all in a meeting where the two of you were attending. Do you and your partner share the same ideals or do you have some lively debates without getting mad at each other and threatening divorce?

Alprova says he is a CPA and in another post that he can't stand fence straddlers. That makes sense if you don't fit in one of those precisely defined boxes as liberal or conservative he can't balance the books. He doesn't allow people to be selective regarding party agendas. He reminds me of Bush's you are either for us or against us, if you aren't with us we will consider you our enemy. Very good George, you are cowboy of the year, although you didn't do much for our international image. Alprova's attitude is similar. If you have a different view point you have defective information sources. I wonder if he also avoids buffet style meals?

February 21, 2011 at 3:03 p.m.
canarysong said...

wwwtw;

If you think that we have the most just, the most stable, the most compassionate, and the most 'advanced' nation in the western world, then you have never LIVED abroad. It takes more than a visit to another country to truly learn about it. We are special in many ways, but there is much that we can still learn from others. The arrogance of 'exceptionalism' is just that, arrogant.

February 21, 2011 at 3:07 p.m.
Clara said...

As I remember, formaldehyde was used in shampoo and a few other items. Since I haven't used shampoos at all for years, I'm not aware of the contents now. I guess you've really got to read labels. I wonder what other personal care products use it as a bacteriological agent. Don't use many cosmetics anymore. The wrinkles gather up the stuff and it's hard to wash off, so I'm lazy AND ugly.

February 21, 2011 at 3:23 p.m.

canarysong wrote:

"We are special in many ways, but there is much that we can still learn from others. The arrogance of 'exceptionalism' is just that, arrogant."

There's plenty more to learn. Especially from cultures who still respect the elderly, children, and the unborn instead of using them for social experiments.

But we should be done with the pollyanna-ish idea that the rest of the world would be Disneyland if America would only roll over and cower in a corner. Go one up on living overseas, which I have done, and get to know some immigrants.

They provide an powerful (historically accurate) apologetic against the fact-bereft mythology of the left that America is exceptionally responsible for all that is evil in the world.

February 21, 2011 at 3:26 p.m.
canarysong said...

harp;

I, too, fantasize about getting together socially with some of my favorite people on this forum (from the left, right, and center). It would be interesting.

And, no, my husband is also very liberal; the likelihood of domestic violence is lower that way :) I have some ultra-right-wing friends that I admire in many ways, but some of their ideas almost make my head explode. I try to avoid talking politics and religion with them in order to preserve our friendship; they are good people.

We can all exchange heated arguments here and hopefully no one gets seriously hurt. Those of us with an open mind learn something in the process. That is always a good thing!

February 21, 2011 at 3:29 p.m.

“Jobs Office Retrains Itself To Focus On Hiring” by Mhari Saito (NPR, February 21, 2011 from WCPN) http://www.npr.org/2011/02/21/133847531/jobs-office-retrains-itself-to-focus-on-hiring

[Larry Benders is head of Cleveland Ohio’s federally funded jobs office. He knows about jobs because he has worked at Ben and Jerry’s.]

“Last year, Benders decided his office was approaching the problem backward: Instead of focusing on the jobless, the agency needed to be zeroing in on the people doing the hiring.

"So we said, 'Wait a minute, let's go and talk to the employers and say how many welders do you need? And what sort of welders do you need? And what does a successful welder in your organization look like?' " he says. "Then, take that information back and then try to do matches for welders in our system that fit the profile of the specific employer."

“But Benders' budget was slashed by 40 percent, and he had to lay off half his staff. So Benders — who had worked at companies including Ben and Jerry's and Johnson & Johnson — overhauled the office.

“He hired a marketing team, who cold-called 3,000 companies to find jobs. The move paid off.

“Between July and December 2010, Cleveland's jobs office helped nearly 1,500 people get jobs at an average wage of $11.56 an hour. That's about the same number of hires as in the entire previous year, when the agency's staff was twice as large.”

Doh! You mean we should actually consider the job MARKET before we try to help the unemployed find work? Leave it to federal “job creation” programs to waste tax dollars on two years of good intentions.

A little common sense goes a long way. I’m smelling a little supply and demand in the air - a small, courageous step toward common sense, free market principles.

February 21, 2011 at 3:41 p.m.
canarysong said...

wwwtw;

Once again, you are arrogantly making assumptions. I AM an immigrant, as is my husband (from yet another country). Much of my family still lives in Europe, and I have a number of friends that either are immigrants or spent much of their lives working abroad. I do try not to make broad statements about things that I know nothing about.

If people in Germany expressed the same type of nationalism today that is bandied about in the tea party crowd, the entire world would call them Nazis; think about it.

February 21, 2011 at 3:47 p.m.
canarysong said...

Clara,

You're very funny! And I doubt that you are lazy OR ugly. While getting older invariably includes wrinkles and all the rest, it is clear that you are beautiful where it counts the most!

And yes, formaldehyde is common in all those products. To avoid it, buy them in a health food store or make your own, cheaper (but I'M too lazy!).

February 21, 2011 at 3:59 p.m.
mtngrl said...

"...while many are signing off on the paranoid left's notion that America is "just another nation," I think it will be helpful to transcend the partisan rancor..."

Username: whats_wrong_with_the_world | On: February 21, 2011 at 2:13 p.m.

A statement dripping with partisan rancor calling for transcendence of partisan rancor - being a bit blatant with that hypocracy there...

February 21, 2011 at 4:15 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Clara,

Thanks for the CNN update link. I thought the “ pampered” quote by Phillips was particularly shameful, but I suppose when you work for a man who makes millions by peddling poisonous formaldehyde products to an unsuspecting public, there is no limit as to how low you will go.

In real life, the public workers in Wisconsin earn less in total compensation than the private sector workers, but this doesn't seem to matter to these Tea Party cheerleaders for a Koch oligarchy:

“When we compare apples to apples, we find that Wisconsin public employees earn 4.8% less in total compensation than comparable private sector workers. The comparisons—controlling for education, experience, hours of work, organizational size, gender, race, ethnicity, citizenship, and disability—demonstrate that full-time state and local public employees earn lower wages and receive less in total compensation (including all benefits) than comparable private sector employees."

http://www.epi.org/page/-/old/policy/EPI_PolicyMemorandum_173.pdf

February 21, 2011 at 4:17 p.m.

Canarysong wrote:

"I do try not to make broad statements about things that I know nothing about."

and

"If you think that we have the most just, the most stable, the most compassionate, and the most 'advanced' nation in the western world, then you have never LIVED abroad. It takes more than a visit to another country to truly learn about it."

and

"... think about it."

I thought about about it. And I've concluded that patriotism isn't arrogance. Acknowledging America's leadership role in the world is not unrealistic. And saying that America isn't "just another nation" is not the equivalent of Nazism.

I'm very glad you're here, nevertheless.

(I knew that mentioning Reagan's greatness would be red meat for his detractors, and alprova and blackwater didn't disappoint.)

February 21, 2011 at 4:29 p.m.
blackwater48 said...

WWWTW:

Defend cut and run Reagan.

February 21, 2011 at 4:35 p.m.

mtngrl,

Busted. Guilty as charged.

I thought it was obvious that I was being facetious about "partisan rancor." And apologies to mountainlaurel for having fun while people are perishing all over the world. It was very heartless of me.

I am, after all, ___ ___V

February 21, 2011 at 4:37 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Canarysong said: “If people in Germany expressed the same type of nationalism today that is bandied about in the tea party crowd, the entire world would call them Nazis; think about it.”

Yes, the Nazis had Adolph Hitler and the Tea Party has the Kochtopus.

February 21, 2011 at 5:03 p.m.

As someone pointed out a day or two ago, pulling the Nazi card shows the weakness of your argument and the limited usefulness of forums such as this.

February 21, 2011 at 5:38 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

If liberals were merely stupid, the laws of probability would dictate that at least some of their decisions would serve America's interests. - Joe McCarthy

February 21, 2011 at 5:39 p.m.
canarysong said...

wwwtw;

GIANT SIGH.....

Another of your favorite pastimes, putting words in other people's mouths. Or maybe you just don't read very carefully. Please go back and reread my 3:47pm post. I did not equate "saying that 'America isn't just another nation'" with Nazism. I meant exactly what I said, nothing more and nothing less. The "think about it" meant that you might learn something from considering how that nationalism looks to others outside the US. It is one reason that we are not very much liked in many countries around the world.

I'm sorry that you're having some problems with reading comprehension.

February 21, 2011 at 6:13 p.m.
canarysong said...

Wwwtw;

Just in case I'm still overestimating your ability to comprehend an unfamiliar idea, let me spell it out more plainly......

If Germans held rallies (in Germany) using exactly the same 'exceptionalist' rhetoric as the tea party, then there would be an international outcry and everyone, including Americans, would be calling them Nazis. Do you see a double standard here, or do I have to explain it to you yet again?

February 21, 2011 at 6:23 p.m.
canarysong said...

No comments on BRP's stellar offering of a quote from Joe McCarthy!?

blackwater?...... alprova?......

My only response can be what Clara said the other day, "snort!".

February 21, 2011 at 6:58 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Whats_wrong_with_the_world,

Surely, you’re not suggesting that what happened to the people in Germany so many years ago could never happen to the people in another country. Indeed, WWWTW, if this were true, why does the U.S. or any other country for that matter need a military?

I believe the history/actions of Koch Industries and the Koch family strongly suggests these people have a dangerous political agenda – one that does not mesh with the founding principles of this country. In fact, their political agenda appears to be the complete opposite.

February 21, 2011 at 7:04 p.m.
Francis said...

it really is something to behold watching you liberal, democrat party whores volley your insane conspiritorial theories back and forth. linking cnn, the huffington post and every other dumb ass liberal outlet along the way. you march lock step with george soros and call republicans, tea party people, fox news and conservatives nazis.

i can see why the mass tantrum by the spoiled, the greedy and the entitled in wisconsin appeals to you given you're a communists and probably have very few brains cells left from smoking pot.

you have zero empathy...zero, for those who have to subsidize others who make a heck of a lot more than they do, they have no security and just want to keep the money they earn.......those who have no guarantees must keep on working hard to make sure those that do never have to worry.....

you have no conception of what it means to be an american. there would be no america if you two commy, pothead chics were in charge.

you''re eitists of the worst kind.........you're just a couple of control freak hens.

you have the nerve to call tea party people nazis.

ironic how you two , both clearly anti-semetic.. and the democrat party for that matter....toss around the word nazi...

you want to control..you hate independence.

give up the pot

February 21, 2011 at 7:05 p.m.
fairmon said...

cnarysong,

You must have attended a tea party meeting in your county or town to reach your conclusions. I attended two locally and heard nothing that sounded like what you heard. I also attended local RNC and DNC meetings. The difference in the crowds and attitudes did reflect what they thought the governments should do and what the candidates agenda should be.

Keep in mind the tea party is not a nationally organized well oiled machine like the two main stream parties. They don't have a primary selection process. I don't think they are any more effective as a group than they would be individually contacting their representatives and supporting their beliefs. I sure don't endorse all of them but I don't find fault with some as well.

February 21, 2011 at 7:08 p.m.
acerigger said...

A self-proclaimed "patriot" quoting Joe McCarthy??? brp, I knew you were a winger from way-out-there,but your post is hilariously ignorant ! Clean air,clean water,a living wage,a decent education, and the list goes on and on,of liberal ideas that are good for America.

February 21, 2011 at 7:31 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Username: canarysong | On: February 21, 2011 at 6:23 p.m. "Just in case I'm still overestimating your ability to comprehend an unfamiliar idea, let me spell it out more plainly......"

It is unfounded arrogance like that which gets you blessed with quotes from McCarthy. At least in the times of McCarthy communism was still a dirty word. canarysong is a proud communist (even if she doesn’t know it) and believes her thoughts are worthy of my consideration. HA!

It is pretty clear that there is no point in trying to reason with the liberal mind so I won’t waste my time. I would get much more from watching an episode of the Glenn Beck show.

Snort!

February 21, 2011 at 7:36 p.m.

Go Facebook it works !

February 21, 2011 at 7:38 p.m.
whatsthefuss said...

Spring has somewhat sprung, bw is writing poetry, the world is going to "HE" double hockey sticks, and all everyone can do is go on about the same thing they go on about on every post. How about going for a hike, enjoying the weather and stopping the nonsense.

It could very well be some of you may be in the old folks home soon, hoping someone will come and wipe your behind wondering where that nice President Obama's Health Care Reform Is.

February 21, 2011 at 7:40 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Username: acerigger | On: February 21, 2011 at 7:31 p.m. "the list goes on and on,of liberal ideas that are good for America"

You just go on and continue to believe that dufus!

Snort!

February 21, 2011 at 7:41 p.m.
fairmon said...

Mtnlaurel and canarysong,

I know you endorse the 'toon theme that honesty is the best policy, in fact being honest and credible is critical in all we do. With that in mind if you knew how to access my checking account and you were aware of several needy families would you access my account and without my permission give a pretty healthy sum of my money to them? The answer of course is "nooooo way" you would never take money from any of my accounts or cash or assets without my permission. You would take nothing for yourself or for others.

However, you are adamant at insisting the government do that very thing without my permission and without giving me the opportunity to provide help where I choose voluntarily. Help me understand the difference. Why is it bad to steal it yourself for a noble reason but it is not bad for you to encourage someone else to do it. Why do you get behind uncle Sam and point at me and say get some of his, he has plenty, get some of that guy's over there to, these people need it worse than he does.

What would be wrong with federal welfare depending totally on donations. They should be like a non-profit charity that has a limited percent they can spend to administer programs. Where is the creative ingenious out of the box thinking you insist we need?

February 21, 2011 at 7:41 p.m.
Clara said...

This is for Francis...and perhaps a few others.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/21/us/politics/21civility.html?_r=1&hpw

February 21, 2011 at 8:22 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Clara,

In your "CNN Wisconsin Update" post, it mentions a Tim Phillips as being the President of "Americans for Prosperity." This guy has quite a dirty deeds history,which appears to include those robo calls that accused McCain of fathering an illegitimate child. It’s one thing after another:

1) " In 1998, now disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff hired Phillips’ firm to pressure members of Congress to vote against legislation that would have made the U.S. commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands subject to federal wage and worker safety laws.

A federal report “found that Chinese women were subject to forced abortions and that women and children were subject to forced prostitution in the local sex-tourism industry.” Nonetheless, Phillips sent out mailers claiming Chinese workers “are exposed to the teachings of Jesus Christ” while on the islands, and many “are converted to the Christian faith and return to China with Bibles in hand.” The mailers then encouraged the recipients to contact lawmakers and ask them to oppose the Marianas labor reform legislation.

2) . . . [Ralph] Reed and Phillips conspired to generate conservative Christian outrage towards gambling at Indian casinos in a cynical plot to encourage those same tribes to hire Abramoff to lobby on their behalf . . . And while Phillips and Reed postured to be motivated by anti-gambling Christian values, the pair helped launder lobbying money from an Abramoff Internet gambling client called eLottery.

3) The duo “spearheaded” the telemarketing and direct mail efforts for George Bush against John McCain in the 2000 primaries. It is widely believed that Century Strategies executed the mass mailers and robo-calls which accused McCain of fathering an illegitimate with a black woman, using the image of McCain’s adopted daughter from Bangladesh.

4) Phillips’ brass knuckled hits on fellow Republicans almost prevented the only Jewish Congressman in the GOP caucus from ever being elected. Phillips set up a 527 called “The Faith and Family Alliance,” a group supposedly designed to support conservative and Christian causes. But like his other front groups, Phillips used the Family Alliance to simply slime his political opponents with an organization that appeared to represent a grassroots community.

The Richmond Times Dispatch reported that Phillips was hired by State Sen. Stephen Martin to manage his direct mail campaign against State Del. Eric Cantor in the 2000 Republican primary for the Congressional seat being vacated by Rep. Tom Bliley (R-VA). Phillips used his Family Alliance to blast robo-calls and mass mailers claiming Cantor did not represent “Virginia values” and that his opponent was the “the only Christian in the contest.”

http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/05/29/afp-timphillips-astroturf/

February 21, 2011 at 8:55 p.m.
canarysong said...

Whats-the-fuss;

I went for a hike today, but thanks.

harp;

So much for the truce, hey? OK, but I'll have to keep it short; my husband is getting jealous of you guys!

The quick and sadly incomplete version of why I support universal health care, public education, and many other social "well-being" programs......

  1. In most western countries where these programs are strong infant mortality is lower, life expectancy is higher, poverty levels are lower, crime is low, many (not all) economies are stable, and people report higher levels of happiness.

  2. If caring for the needy is left to religious organizations, there is HUGE potential for some people to be discriminated against and left without needed assistance. Do you really think all churches are willing to help gays, Muslims, atheists, or even non-whites for that matter?

  3. I have seen a lot of real suffering, and so much of it seems needless. Good hardworking people for whom things just went horribly wrong. Better access to medical care would have made a world of difference.

  4. And to be completely unscientific and illogical, it simply feels like the right thing to do,.... for us all to realize that we are in this together and to make things work, caring for those who are truly unable to care for themselves, even if it means that those of us who have will have just a little bit less.

I'll be happy to elaborate when I have more time.

I thank you for helping me to see the other side of the argument, but I disagree.

BRP;

You don't understand what communism means. Go spend some time reading about it, preferably in an actual book, and I'll be happy to discuss it with you.

February 21, 2011 at 9:03 p.m.

canarysong wrote:

"I do try not to make broad statements about things that I know nothing about."

I'm not that familiar with the specifics of what the tea party crowd is saying that's so offensive to you. Perhaps you could move beyond your broad statements about them and provide some specific examples. Or is this along the lines of equating American evangelicals with the Muslim brotherhood? Cheap shots, slurs, guilt-by-association, and smears are all you guys have got. Pony up.

February 21, 2011 at 9:34 p.m.

mountianlaurel wrote:

"I believe the history/actions of Koch Industries and the Koch family strongly suggests these people have a dangerous political agenda – one that does not mesh with the founding principles of this country. In fact, their political agenda appears to be the complete opposite."

I can't dignify the first paragraph with a response. But the one quoted here is the same sanctimonious stance you take toward anyone who disagrees with you pronouncements from on high. Your posts are simply a liberal version of francis (with a few links to huffingtonpost added).

Maybe some conservative is posing as you to make liberals look bad. Surely no one can think as simplistically as you do. (except "francis")

February 21, 2011 at 9:42 p.m.
canarysong said...

Wwwtw;

When the h**l did I ever "equate American evangelicals with the Muslim brotherhood"?! This is why I try to ignore you altogether. You constantly put words in other people's mouths. Very low!

I will be happy to list specific tea party quotes, buttons, and signs that I have found very offensive tomorrow (I put some on a post back in January), but right now I have to get back to my evening with my husband or he will be asking me for that divorce that harp mentioned,

Nite, all!

February 21, 2011 at 9:51 p.m.

Canarysong wrote:

"I do try not to make broad statements about things that I know nothing about."

and

“2. If caring for the needy is left to religious organizations, there is HUGE potential for some people to be discriminated against and left without needed assistance. Do you really think all churches are willing to help gays, Muslims, atheists, or even non-whites for that matter?”


Again you single out Christianity as the intolerant religion. I would remind you that no religion has brought together more people from a wider diversity of cultures, socio-economic groups, and so on than has the religion you single out. When it began, Roman emperors were dumbfounded that any group would care for the health and well-being of people who did not identify themselves with the group. Christians started most of the hospitals and schools in this country and they continue those efforts on a MASSIVE scale in many, many parts of the world. Slavery was abolished by English-speaking Christians in English-speaking countries and far beyond. Civil rights for minorities were established by American Christians far more firmly than they have been in Western Europe.

There are plenty of serious problems that still confront us. My point is that popular bigotry against Christians is historically unfounded and is a result of fear and paranoia. I could – and eventually will – go on about the sources and recipients of the bulk of religious persecution worldwide, but this will do for now.

February 21, 2011 at 10:55 p.m.
Clara said...

Fuss,

I think the site I sent to Francis has relevance to you, too.

February 21, 2011 at 11:03 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Whats_wrong_with_the_world said: “I can't dignify the first paragraph with a response. But the one quoted here is the same sanctimonious stance you take toward anyone who disagrees with you pronouncements from on high.”

Seems to me you’re trying to avoid discussing the issue, WWWTW. And the issue, in this case, involves the unscrupulous activities of the Koch brothers. There is nothing sanctimonious about questioning the political motives and ambitions of a couple of dangerous zillionaires who hire sleazy individuals like Tim Phillips to head their so called “grassroots” organizations – including the one that is currently attacking that group of middle class public employees in the State of Wisconsin. Yes, I think it’s wrong and don’t mind saying so. In fact, I'll say it again - IT'S WRONG.

February 21, 2011 at 11:58 p.m.

The defense of alprova's equating American evangelicals with the Muslim brotherhood was under "Toppling Mubarak": Feb. 4-6.

I beg you to call me out if I begin to grouping liberals, Muslims, or atheists with Nazis, Communists, or "those who accept and believe the world should be ruled by Sharia law ... with no qualms about lying, dying and deceiving to accomplish their goal."

There's a glaring double-standard here when it comes to stereo-types and intolerance, guys, and it really needs to stop.

February 22, 2011 at 12:10 a.m.
blackwater48 said...

Mountainlaurel, WWWTW avoids discussing most issues, and I like the way you and Canarysong handled his calibre of political impotence.

I found one of his statements especially puzzling: "Patriotism isn't arrogance." I think it's safe to say most people throughout the world love their country, but it's a reach to go from patriot to world policeman.

I think the term 'provincial' is accurate: a narrow-minded boor; an unsophisticated person.

Knowing that makes it obvious why he would claim there is a 'War on Christianity.'

February 22, 2011 at 12:40 a.m.

I find it interesting when isolationists moralize about Nazi Germany.

February 22, 2011 at 12:44 a.m.
alprova said...

wwwtw wrote: "So much for bringing us your tired, your poor, and your huddled masses. If you think we are just another nation, then you've never traveled overseas, and your only concept of other nations comes from CSNBC."


Whether you like it or not, the United States is a declared nation among roughly 195 others. While I am proud to be an American, that does not translate into my being proud of the way that our leaders stick their Pinocchio noses into the business of that of other nations, despite any right or wrong reason for doing so.

Not since WWII has any official and formal request to assist a nation been made, with just a few minor exceptions.

Kuwait formally requested assistance of the United States. It was given, in the form of driving Saddam Hussein back into Iraq, and then we got out of there.


"According to leftist logic, leadership is sin, balance of power isn't an issue, and every nation should impoverish itself just for the sake of everything being equal. What a spineless way to repay the heroes of the bi-partisan war in Iraq."


Gag me with a spoon, will ya? Who said anything about being equal? Life itself is not equal.

The United States, or more to the point, certain citizens of this nation, are making hoards of money off of death and destruction. Have you personally benefited from one second of waged war in the past 70 years?

We have not made an ally of Iraq. The current leadership of that nation wants us out of there. With rare exception, the average Iraqi wants us out of their nation, and they don't care if we ever come back.


"America left the culd-de-sac of Europe centuries ago to build a city on a hill. And the good we have accomplished at home and abroad is unparalled. Let freedom ring."


Why don't you tell that to the nearly 100,000 innocent and the dead that have been counted in Iraq?

Then you tell that to the 5,000 American men and women slaughtered like sheep in a quest to topple a man from power, causing those from elsewhere to invade a nation to kill Americans for invading Iraq. Saddam never once threated or took one step towards this nation in a threatening manner.

Saddam was an idiot and he was as stupid as they come, but there was little reason to invade that country and it seems that the only people on Earth who deny that simple fact, are some citizens in America.

February 22, 2011 at 12:47 a.m.
alprova said...

Harp3339 wrote: "Alprova says he is a CPA and in another post that he can't stand fence straddlers. That makes sense if you don't fit in one of those precisely defined boxes as liberal or conservative he can't balance the books."


It makes perfect sense when you don't take the statements out of context and compare them as if they were presented that way.

Your ability to make a point is starting to fray at the seams.


"He doesn't allow people to be selective regarding party agendas."


You know, I ignore you for the most part, mainly because you are a flake. Half the time, you present yourself as some sort of a libertarian, and at other times, you hop back and forth over the fence.

I don't like people who are not consistent. You are highly inconsistent, no offense intended. I think you just like to play a devil's advocate for the fun of it.


"If you have a different view point you have defective information sources."


Well , I'll tell you what, big boy...the day that you can discredit my information sources, from now to the end of time, will be the day that I will retire from this forum for good.


"I wonder if he also avoids buffet style meals?"


You betcha. Anytime I'm thinking of wanting a good case of food poisoning however, I think of looking for one.

I'm as picky about my food as I am my sources of information.

February 22, 2011 at 12:59 a.m.
alprova said...

BRP quoted: "If liberals were merely stupid, the laws of probability would dictate that at least some of their decisions would serve America's interests. - Joe McCarthy"


Quoting that pathetic example of a human being merely shows the caliber of humanity that exists in you.

The only difference, thank God in Heaven, is that you can't act upon your desires and hurt anyone.

He did, and may he rot in Hell forever and a day for it.

February 22, 2011 at 1:07 a.m.
alprova said...

BRP wrote: "It is unfounded arrogance like that which gets you blessed with quotes from McCarthy. At least in the times of McCarthy communism was still a dirty word."


That kind of crap worked in his day. No one gives it the time of day any longer. Must really irk you to no end.


"canarysong is a proud communist (even if she doesn’t know it) and believes her thoughts are worthy of my consideration. HA!"


Actually, your consideration is not worth a dime. Your opinions are worth less. And I state that as a budding and accomplished Communist/Socialist.


"It is pretty clear that there is no point in trying to reason with the liberal mind so I won’t waste my time. I would get much more from watching an episode of the Glenn Beck show."


Yeah you would. They make Charmin in the handy-dandy 50 roll size to help you deal with that too.


"Snort!"


Oh...I'm sorry, did I hit you upside your head with that box of Kleenex?

February 22, 2011 at 1:16 a.m.
canarysong said...

wwwtw;

Once again, reading into my words what isn't there.

I was responding to harp, and I know that he is bright enough to notice that I started my sentence by referring to "religious organizations". Get it? INCLUSIVE (that means ALL of them) Churches were the natural choice to use as an example simply because that is what we have the most of here. I really should have prefaced it with "for example", realizing that if you were to read it you would have trouble with the nuance. If he had read into it what you did, he would have been all over me.

Touchy much? If it makes you happy, just substitute 'mosque' for 'churches' and 'Christians' for 'Muslims'. The statement is valid either way.

February 22, 2011 at 1:23 a.m.
canarysong said...

Clara;

Do you see what you started with "snort"?:)

It's almost as good as "POO". Personally, I love POO so much I think we should start a real political party by that name........no, wait......Party Of One......never mind!

Hope you're feeling a little better.

February 22, 2011 at 1:32 a.m.
blackwater48 said...

Canarysong and Clara,

If the military can be an 'Army of One,' certainly there's room in politics for a 'Party of One.'

February 22, 2011 at 1:41 a.m.

Ah. The love fest resumes. Continue the baseless, poorly-reasoned, name-calling rants.

February 22, 2011 at 8:11 a.m.
blackwater48 said...

WWWTW why don't you explain the difference between evangelical christians and the muslim brotherhood?

Outsiders like myself see similarities. I would really like to know how those two groups are different. Knowledge is good. Enlighten us.

You wrote, "There's a glaring double-standard here when it comes to stereo-types and intolerance, guys, and it really needs to stop."

You can help end it.

February 22, 2011 at 9:02 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

indian, your tinfoil hat need adjustment.

February 22, 2011 at 10:19 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Username: alprova | On: February 22, 2011 at 1:16 a.m. "And I state that as a budding and accomplished Communist/Socialist"

At least you have to respect alprova for understanding her own philosophy and admitting to it.

canarysong has not matured to that level yet.

Snort?

February 22, 2011 at 10:57 a.m.
Francis said...

i read two thirds of 8th graders in wisconsin public schools can't read.......

i suggest those teachers throwing a tantrum in madison get back to work and start earning their money.

indian, i think you should take heart in knowing that on nov. 2nd obama and the liberals were stopped cold in the elections. after two years of revealing himself for what he really is the people didn't hestitate to stop his agenda. so far the new republicans look like they're there to fight.

all anyone on this forum has to do is voice concern for the loss of freedom and for the watering down of our constitution and you libs act as if they're crazy........but you can spout off all kinds of communist or facist mumbo jumbo and expect to be respected?

February 22, 2011 at 11:08 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Communism/Socialism has failed everywhere it has been tried, with the only exception being China. What the Marxists don't seem to want to talk about is that the China model would never work if the Chinese citizen made a wage and had a standard of living that came anywhere close to Western standards. As soon as the Chinese develop EXPECTATIONS that house of cards will collapse also.

February 22, 2011 at 11:25 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Sorry, I forgot...

Snort!

February 22, 2011 at 11:27 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

"all anyone on this forum has to do is voice concern for the loss of freedom and for the watering down of our constitution and you libs act as if they're crazy......."

When you and indian start offering evidence for your rants, I'll stop considering you crazy. Deal?

February 22, 2011 at 12:33 p.m.
alprova said...

Indian wrote: "I wish I could talk to Alprova before I give my comment,because Alprova knows it all and is never wrong!"


Do you know why I am almost never wrong? Because I inform myself to the facts and to the truth of anything I wade in on BEFORE I TYPE in a public forum.


"I do know one thing and that is...We had better get Obama out of office as soon as possible!Obama lied and told the American citizens just what they wanted to hear to get in office and now he is doing as he pleases!"


Well Indian, President Obama will be retiring on or about January 20, 2017. Until then, you're just going to have keep popping blood pressure pills from your 55 gallon drum supply.


"Obama took an oral oath on the U.S.Constitution to secure and protect our borders!Yet,Obama has done nothing to up-hold the Constitution,this is grounds for IMPEACHMENT and we should proceed with the charges!"


Ah yes, my little Chatty Cathy doll. Pull your string and say it again, as if it means a thing. You see, if indeed President Obama had so much as committed one act of failing to uphold the Constitution, there are plenty of men and women up there in Washington, much more adept at discerning the laws of our land, who would have been all over him, smiling while they filed impeachment charges against him.

Shut-up about it already. You're making a complete fool of yourself by repeating that stupidity in every single post you dump into this forum.


"We need to follow Egypt's protest and demand Obama be removed from office.Egypt showed the world that numbers count and with numbers you can get anything done.Egypt got rid of their president and we can do the same!"


Knock yourself out.


"On Dec.15,1791 the U.S.Constitution/Bill of Rights was adopted and these are the laws of our country.Each president we have ever had with the exception of Obama,have followed and up-held the laws of the U.S.Constitution/Bill of Rights."


Is that a fact? Please Indian, enlighten me to just ONE example of any act that clearly demonstrates that Presdent Obama has violated his oath of office. ONE!!


"Obama is trying to re-write them both and this is like a SLAP in the faces of our forefathers and troops who have gave and are giving their lives for this country and our freedom!"


[Yawn]...Huh? Did you type something worth reading?

You're still free enough to keep posting your lunacy into this forum, aren't you?


"I can promise you on thing,if we don't stand united,WE WILL LOOSE OUR COUNTRY AND OUR FREEDOM!!!"


Why don't you sign yourself into Moccasin Bend? You'll find some folks there who will be happy to stand united with you on probably just about anything and everything that you hold near and dear.


"Wake up AMERICA before it is to late!!!"


I'm sorry, but it's too late. What will you do?

February 22, 2011 at 1:01 p.m.
Francis said...

mandating citizens to purchase a commodity and punish them if they don't is unconstitutional, .....the appoint ment of czars is unconstitutional, they report to only the president and don't have to answer to congress, it gives the president too much power......the bailouts are unconstitutional, the president can't spend tax payer money without consent of congress (both bush and obama are guilty of it, bush started it)....the ownership of gm by the government is unconstitutional, it's a private company! the granting of civilian trials to enemy combatents/giving them the same rights as u.s citizens....obama's siding with illegal aliens over the state of arizona and it's citizens...

you could go on and on........not too mention things like obama wanting union members to not have private ballots.........that just promotes union thuggery.......obama and the democrats constant pursuit of the "fairness doctrine"....and more control over the internet..........the continual intrussion into our private lives which includes telling us what to eat, not to eat........"we can't just leave it up to the parents"..said michelle obama...

is that good enough for you?

February 22, 2011 at 1:09 p.m.
alprova said...

Francis wrote: "i read two thirds of 8th graders in wisconsin public schools can't read......."


Wait a minute. You can't begin to hold your own with a third grader and you claim to have read something about an eighth grader?


"i suggest those teachers throwing a tantrum in madison get back to work and start earning their money."


I really hate to break this to you Francis, but I doubt that they give two hoots what you suggest that they do.


"indian, i think you should take heart in knowing that on nov. 2nd obama and the liberals were stopped cold in the elections. after two years of revealing himself for what he really is the people didn't hestitate to stop his agenda. so far the new republicans look like they're there to fight."


You just keep thinking that. Feel free to have deep and lengthy conversations with all of your sock puppets over the next two years. You're a sick man.


"all anyone on this forum has to do is voice concern for the loss of freedom and for the watering down of our constitution and you libs act as if they're crazy........but you can spout off all kinds of communist or facist mumbo jumbo and expect to be respected?"


No one I am aware of is asking for you and your sock puppets to respect anyone.

By all means, keep up the good work of exposing just why it is that Conservatives are regarded for their utter lunacy, lack of intelligence, and for the fact that when they get utterly lonely, they create alternative identities in order to have someone to converse with, via a computer keyboard.

It's cute but totally pathetic.

February 22, 2011 at 1:13 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Username: alprova | On: February 22, 2011 at 1:01 p.m. “Do you know why I am almost never wrong? Because I inform myself to the facts…”

You made me smile, alprova! You spout great volumes of information which are for the most part accurate but you draw incorrect conclusions and, overall, completely miss the big picture. Anyone who supports socialist/communist theory with the mountains of evidence showing the hopelessness of social utopia clearly cannot see the forest through the trees.

February 22, 2011 at 1:23 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Francis, I think you have alprova close to a mental break-down!

alprova, take three breaths, count to ten and chug a liter of potato spirits.

February 22, 2011 at 1:27 p.m.
alprova said...

Francis wrote: "mandating citizens to purchase a commodity and punish them if they don't is unconstitutional"


No it's not. Mandated health care coverage was first instituted in 1798.

http://blogs.forbes.com/rickungar/2011/01/17/congress-passes-socialized-medicine-and-mandates-health-insurance-in-1798/


"the appoint ment of czars is unconstitutional, they report to only the president and don't have to answer to congress, it gives the president too much power."


Hey numbnuts, 33 Presidents have appointed czars during their Presidencies. Every President in a row since Reagan was in office has appointed them. Obama simply hired the highest number of advisors coined as "czars."


"the bailouts are unconstitutional, the president can't spend tax payer money without consent of congress (both bush and obama are guilty of it, bush started it)...."


I hate to break it to you, but every dime loaned was indeed approved by Congress. You must have been asleep that day.


"the ownership of gm by the government is unconstitutional, it's a private company!"


At no time has the Government "own" GM. The stock that the Government owned had no value. GM is now a publicly owned entity once again, and repayment of the loans are being paid ahead of schedule. They are also paying interest on all loaned money and the Treasury will be all the richer for it.


"the granting of civilian trials to enemy combatents/giving them the same rights as u.s citizens...."


That one is too silly to even address without laughing out load.


"obama's siding with illegal aliens over the state of arizona and it's citizens..."


I dare offer that there are millions of others in this nation who have no regard for the way you people want to treat other fellow human beings on this planet.

(snipped the rest. Simply too stupid to give you the time of day on...)

February 22, 2011 at 1:37 p.m.
alprova said...

BRP wrote: "Anyone who supports socialist/communist theory with the mountains of evidence showing the hopelessness of social utopia clearly cannot see the forest through the trees."


Do you know why I am hardly bothered by your interpretations?

Because you seriously believe in your heart that I would love nothing more than to see our Government transformed to that of one that is 100% Communist or that would be 100% Socialist.

Your belief in that makes me laugh out loud every time you accuse me of it. I'll have a grin on my face for the rest of the day.

February 22, 2011 at 1:43 p.m.
fairmon said...

Alprova,

Examples of inconsistency on an issue? I am not consistent in agreeing with a conservative view or liberal, it depends on the issue. Of course you and most people are selective about their info. sources, they seek those that support the conclusion or belief they hold.

February 22, 2011 at 1:52 p.m.
canarysong said...

What's going on here? Are we all boycotting Clay's latest cartoon and continuing on our own? Granted, this one is more lively.

Indian wrote;

"Obama is trying to re-write them both and this is like a SLAP in the faces of our forefathers" (referring to the US Constitution & Bill of Rights)

----i doubt you could even name 3 or 4 forefathers without looking it up first; I doubt even more that you know the first thing about the constitution/ Bill of Rights. You have repeatedly demonstrated on your previous posts that you haven't even a basic grasp of how legislation or the democratic process functions and are poorly informed about current events, for example your recent jubilation that the health care bill was repealed (EVERYONE knew that it still had to go through the senate where it had no chance). But at least it did give you a day or two of delusional giddy happiness.

I'm quite certain that you couldn't pass even the most rudimentary test about American history and government. This is not elitist; this is very basic knowledge that is required of every 8th grader before they can pass, and of every immigrant before they can gain citizenship. It is also necessary to effectively participate in the democratic process.

Harp and wwwtw (my apologies to harp for lumping the two of you together!) wanted to know why I have such a poor opinion of tea partiers......................................... ....... ......... .................. .......... ........... ................ ............. ................ .........................

I was giving you a chance there to put it together yourselves. When liberals read 'tea party', they see 'Indian'. It isn't his tin hat that is on too tight, it's his straitjacket! Yes, I know that not all tea party supporters are like this; a couple of my right wing friends have been to the rallies. But nevertheless, this is the type of image that remains.

More to answer your question when I can spare a few minutes....

February 22, 2011 at 2:17 p.m.
alprova said...

Harp3339 wrote: "Of course you and most people are selective about their info. sources, they seek those that support the conclusion or belief they hold."


Again, if I present or refute something, and present it as a statement of fact, I stand ready to back it up with proof, and have done so many times.

Opinions can never be backed up with proof. They're just out there. Opinions are never fact. They are beliefs and not necessarily justifiable at all.

There is a profound difference. Perhaps the problem is, that you don't know that there is a difference.

To put it in a nutshell, you seem to deal more in opinion based beliefs. And while I hold many opinions of my own, I prefer to deal mainly with facts, be they past or present.

February 22, 2011 at 2:19 p.m.
delmar said...

I'm going to help indian on his little dissertation. He got a few things mixed up.

"Bush lied and told the American citizens just what they wanted to hear to get in office and did whatever he pleased!" - Now this statement is correct.

"Bush took an oral oath on the U.S.Constitution to secure and protect our borders, but then BAM, along came 9/11 2001. We should have impeached him!" - There that looks better.

"I can promise you one thing,if we don't stand united,WE WILL LOOSE OUR COUNTRY AND OUR FREEDOM!!! Wake up AMERICA before it is to late!!!" - This he got right - that darn Obama and his Patriot Act! Oops ,, wait, that was Bush, sorry.

February 22, 2011 at 2:25 p.m.

blackwater48 wrote: "Outsiders like myself see similarities. I would really like to know how those two groups are different. Knowledge is good. Enlighten us.”

You and I were and are on the same page with many of the other thoughts posted on that earlier thread. The context of the exchange between harp3339 and alprova was the topic of religion or a certain religion as a threat to democracy. I’ll leave it to harp3339 to defend his statements about Islam and the Muslim Brotherhood. From my admittedly limited knowledge about the Muslim Brotherhood, I maintain that the parallel drawn by alprova is simplistic and unjustified. I think it is an example of the bigotry (narrow-minded prejudices based on stereo-types), which – whether religious and otherwise – is displayed in this forum regularly. He provided no fair, objective, or balanced treatment of the subject. His broad-brushed statements, and many of those that defended it, regarding the alleged threat posed by the majority religion in this country and the world are lacking in evidence.

I acknowledged that his line of reasoning exists across the religious, political, and philosophical landscape. I condemn it in all its forms, and I make no apology for calling attention to an example of it. It’s not being defensive, our “touchy.” It’s issuing a call to provide supporting evidence for such sweeping statements.

You offered the examples of creationists on school boards re-writing textbooks, as well as the desire of evangelicals to gain political influence on par with that of labor unions. If you support an opposing view of those actions, fine. I’m not that interested in either activity. The folks engaged in such efforts are often clumsy and make equally sweeping, uninformed statements to support their efforts. I will say that the ones that I know are not proposing a political enforcement of biblical law. Historically, the Christians who have exerted the most influence in American politics believe that much of that law was fulfilled in Christ and doesn’t apply even to believers, much less to other citizens, in the way suggested by Alprova’s comments. Similar arguments made by Sam Harris (mentioned by canarysong), Christopher Hitchens, and others about the ominous threat posed by religion are also unsubstantiated.

I think most comparisons between religions are misguided and unhelpful. More helpful is to understand each one on its own terms.

Which is not to say that they are all the same. I mentioned recent scholarship that calls attention to the political / foreign policy problems that have arisen from such notions. There is even a western, secular bias implied in using “religion” to lump together into one category traditions that have little in common. The fact that they don’t bursts the bubble of my more liberal friends who think in terms of good guys and bad guys in every tradition.

February 22, 2011 at 2:28 p.m.

I don’t have time to re-hash the earlier discussion in greater detail. I raised the issue again when canarysong implied that religious, specifically Christian, charities pose a threat to fairness in providing compassion toward those in need. There are mountains of evidence to the contrary, which I summarized and will probably provide more details in the future. Her statement reflects stereo-types and prejudices which are all too common of those who hold her political views. And it’s unhelpful, and I dare say hypocritical. That’s all.

I look forward to learning more about the Muslim Brotherhood as events unfold in Egypt and elsewhere. I’m skeptical of anyone’s bold predictions about what is next.

February 22, 2011 at 2:31 p.m.
canarysong said...

BPR;

Just read your 10:57am post.

When you demonstrate that you understand the difference between communism and socialism I will be happy to engage you in a debate; before then it would be a waste of my time.

February 22, 2011 at 2:35 p.m.
canarysong said...

harp;

I wanted to get back to your question from yesterday regarding my opinion of the tea party. I appreciate reading your posts and don't want to leave your question unanswered. Since I don't have the kind of time today that I had yesterday, I would like to refer you to my post of Jan. 11th, 9:04 am. Please look it up if you are interested; my computer skills are a little shaky on the whole cutting/pasting thing. These are based on my memories of news coverage of the tea party rallies at their zenith. No, I have never actually attended one. I'm glad to hear that the ones you attended were different than represented by the signs and interviews that I saw. I'll be happy to address any further questions you may have; I enjoy our exchanges!

wwwtw;

You really don't know how to listen to anyone do you? I did not single out Christianity to criticize, I already explained that I merely used it as one example (of many possible) to make a very valid point. The only way that you can try to gain credibility for your delusional claims is to latch onto a small part of what someone says, twist it into something else, refuse to listen to any attempts to address your paranoid accusations, and then keep repeating them (ad nauseam) hoping that someone will listen. If you pay close attention, you will see that you are usually ignored. Blackwater called you a "boor"; I would add that you are also a 'bore'. I would rather interact with Francis; he is actually more reasonable! My time is valuable, and I'm not going to waste any more of it on you.

I have close friends from a number ofl different religions (and no religion), including several evangelical Christians; not one of them would say that I am disrespectful of their faith. One of the many differences between you and I is that if I took offense at something you said and you explained it, I would listen and take you at your word.

If anyone else is concerned about the claims made by wwwtw (snort!), please refer to my posts of 2-21, 9:03pm and 2-22, 1:23am. I'll be happy to respond to someone else that can actually read.

February 22, 2011 at 3:59 p.m.
Sailorman said...

ML said said to BPR

"When you demonstrate that you understand the difference between communism and socialism I will be happy to engage you in a debate; before then it would be a waste of my time."

Al earlier stated:

"And I state that as a budding and accomplished Communist/Socialist."

Maybe Al will enlighten us all as he implies a firm understanding of both.

February 22, 2011 at 4:09 p.m.
Francis said...

wrong on all counts ***hole...

how many judges have now ruled against the mandate?

only a communist like you would approve of punishment for such a thing.

the mandate is unconstitutional...period.

obama not only has abdicated his duty of protecting the borders, he has chosen sides with illegal aliens, many of whom are criminals.

other presidents have been weak on borders, he has been criminal

wrong on gm as well..obama pulls the strings..that's not constitutional

giving civilian trials to enemy combatants, giving them what citizens have is a slap in the face to citizens, and siding with foreign intruders over citizens devalues u.s. citizenship......

of course you would poo poo the rest given your communist or dictatorial leanings.....it very much is a loss of freedom when your life is being micro- managed by politicians and beurocrats. personal liberty is always under assault with people like you.

explain why i can't hold my own with a 3rd grader, alprova......prove it and explain it?........and don't give the same old crap about not using capitalization and having wierd sentences...i don't care...i don't have time to pump out anal retentive posts like you do.

once again 8th graders in wisconsin public schools can't read......and the teachers our having a tantrum while kids miss schoool......instead of giving them more security they should have less. do the job, or get out.

you're an arrogant ***hole alprova........you're a communist..

......you take advantage of free speech, but long for a system that supresses it ..and supresses freedom........which makes you quite irrelevant and a hypocrite.

by the way, the whole notion that obama is popular around the world...what a joke.....in the last couple of weeks i've seen him ridiculed in posters, verbally denounced and burned in effigy all over the middle east......and the media is trying to downplay it.....maybe they recognize a dictator wannabe like the ones they're rebeling against.

February 22, 2011 at 4:21 p.m.
Francis said...

the dumbest thing i've read on this forum was from you, alprova....referring to the federal goverment and that you trusted them "because they never bounced a check".....that reveals a lot.

February 22, 2011 at 4:35 p.m.
canarysong said...

Delmar, re 2:25pm post;

Loved it! You are a person of few words, but when I see your name on a post I always read it; it is always worthwhile.

February 22, 2011 at 4:39 p.m.
fairmon said...

canarysong,

Like the tea group signs you saw the signs at the Wisconsin protest could be inflammatory to some. I really think the media focuses on a few nuts with a sign which may misrepresent the actual sentiments of those participating. If it isn't controversial or confrontational the media will try to make it that way. It sells ads and print. I have been interviewed by TV stations a few times, some rather lengthy and I know if it airs it will be a few seconds sound bite. It is those "what if" questions or do you think __ is responsible? You cannot answer a what if question with certainty. "What if" means it hasn't happened. I was fortunate that I had been trained to not step on a duck.

Protest frequently take on a mob mentality which is dangerous, people will throw stones without knowing why?Notice how some people on camera are self appointed crowd spokesperson and say "We" are here because, while others say "I" am here because. My position is nobody speaks for me unless I have read and approved every word. A good reason not to be in a mob.

Politics are all local. Local DNC and RNC members may just parrot the national positions. The Tea groups don't have a TPNC so they do vary widely but are normally viewed as radically conservative. The truth about any of the groups lies in how do they behave and do they recognize and deal with reality? I see little evidence of it.

February 22, 2011 at 5:30 p.m.
canarysong said...

Harp;

You are right. I'm sure that reporters will pick out those individuals that represent the most extreme and inflammatory views for their stories. I sincerely hope that what I have seen is atypical, because much of it truly made me ill.

I also have some experience being interviewed by the media, and each time I await the final result with trepidation. I sometimes cringe at the effects when a ten minute interview is chopped to 30 seconds on the local TV news or 3 partial sentences of what I said in print. Radio has worked out a lot better; they generally have more time and are less likely to try to skew toward the sensational.

February 22, 2011 at 5:56 p.m.
canarysong said...

Public radio, that is.......

February 22, 2011 at 5:59 p.m.
Francis said...

you libs on here have completely failed to prove or convince anyone that the health insurance mandate is not a loss of freedom and is not unconstitution al. you're incapable of it because it is what it is. you're forced to buy it and you'll be punished if you don't ....you hate when that's pointed out. sorry it is what is.

looks like democrats in indiana are now going to run away to kentucky or illinois rather than be there when a vote is too be t aken similar to the one in wisconsin. guess this is the new mo of the democrat party..run like a bunch of babies and hide....the democrat party under obama is a classless mess.

February 22, 2011 at 5:59 p.m.
alprova said...

Francis wrote: "wrong on all counts ***hole...

how many judges have now ruled against the mandate?"


That's MISTER ***hole to you.

How many judges that were not bought and paid for by the Republican Party have voted against the mandate? Now that's the REAL question to be answered, don't you think?


"only a communist like you would approve of punishment for such a thing."


Recognizing the importance of self-responsibility now defines me as a Communist? OMG... Drive south across the border without auto insurance and see what happens to you. You'll pay a hefty fine, have your car confiscated, and you WILL go to jail.

Do you actually know what it is you are arguing? Taxing you equal to what it would cost you to insure you and yours is not a punishment. It's making you pay the piper.

Are you actually arguing that people should not have to pay for health care insurance and that the taxpayers should pick up the tab if you or one of your kids winds up in a hospital? Hhhmmmm? You really don't know what it is you are arguing against, do you?


"the mandate is unconstitutional...period."


It is not unconstitutional.


"obama not only has abdicated his duty of protecting the borders, he has chosen sides with illegal aliens, many of whom are criminals. other presidents have been weak on borders, he has been criminal"


No matter how many times you say the above, it no more comes closer to being the truth. Presidents who commit crimes are brought up on charges. If you think he has, why is it that no one has charged him, eh?


"wrong on gm as well..obama pulls the strings..that's not constitutional"


Sorry, that too is just as stupid a comment as it was when you first uttered it.


"giving civilian trials to enemy combatants, giving them what citizens have is a slap in the face to citizens, and siding with foreign intruders over citizens devalues u.s. citizenship......"


Oh please. If a country that is attempting to persuade the world that democracy and the rule of law is the way to go, yet holds people for years in actual dungeons without due process of law, who the heck is going to trust the United States regarding a thing?

Do you actually believe the B.S. you're shoveling?


"explain why i can't hold my own with a 3rd grader, alprova......prove it and explain it?........and don't give the same old crap about not using capitalization and having wierd sentences...i don't care...i don't have time to pump out anal retentive posts like you do."


But you have time to pump out idiotic sentences, and you just love to hold conversations with you sock puppets though. Face it, your entire life revolves around your antics online. That categorically makes you a troll.


"you're an arrogant ***hole alprova........you're a communist.."


Am I supposed to cry now because you called me some mean names?

February 22, 2011 at 8:19 p.m.
alprova said...

Francis wrote: "you libs on here have completely failed to prove or convince anyone that the health insurance mandate is not a loss of freedom and is not unconstitutional."


Okay, so you think you have it all figured out. Let's carry your message of freedom and constitutionality to a logical conclusion.

Now I've perused the Constitution, and nowhere does it state that I must pay for food either. So therefore, I am considering dashing and dining as my modus operandi from now on when my wife and I eat out.

I'll take my plastic bags with me to the grocery store, fill them as I go and simply walk out the front door when I have what I want. Shouldn't I be free to take what I want without paying for it? Constitutionally, I think I'm protected, don't you?

The Constitution doesn't state that I must purchase a car to drive or for gas to power it. I'll just go pick one out, steal it, and I'll fix me up one of those siphon pumps and a long hose and steal all my gas from now on.

Francis, if you hopelessly Republican tools must insist that we use insurance companies to obtain paid health care, then you're leaving us no choice. Nothing in the Constitution states that we have to pay for anything, but most of us know what happens if we don't.

Now normally, you right-wing hacks would welcome anything that would prohibit people in need from pick-pocketing your wallets, but on this one, you do a 180 degree turn. Why is that?

Could it be that you secretly want free health care? Freedom? That's your argument? You fail at every turn to see the utter hypocrisy in your position, which isn't very clear at the moment. You don't know what you want.

February 22, 2011 at 8:39 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Username: alprova | On: February 22, 2011 at 1:43 p.m. “ you seriously believe in your heart that I would love nothing more than to see our Government transformed to that of one that is 100% Communist or that would be 100% Socialist.”

I am sure that all progressives are searching for ways to modify the plan so that the next time, finally, it will not end in utter disaster! Every new chapter in history will bring a novel version of social nirvana for the world to watch fall.

What you fail to realize is that progressivism, or whatever you want to call your morphed version of Marxism is called, has a foundation that is based on the perversion of natural law and cannot survive as a consequence. Any government based on central control and legalized theft is by definition morally corrupt and will eventually become something so vile that the citizens will be forced to reject it.

Communism Lite is still rotten at it’s core.

February 22, 2011 at 9:08 p.m.
Francis said...

alprova...you, clara,canarybrain and mountainlaurel are conspiracy nuts....

"bought and paid for by the republican party"........no, the mandate is clearly unconstitutional.....that a 3rd grader would know.....

it's simply this.....you buy it or you'll be punished. you can dance around it all you want...but it is what it is. you're not capable of turning it into some- thing it's not...and your incapable of putting a positive spin on it because it's completely negative and an obvious overreach by an authoritarian.

it's just like most of what you statists' vision is, a depressing whittling away of our personal liberties and god given freedom.

you and most statists/liberals are busy bodies, nosey, control freaks. you act as if you're comp- assionate.......but you're really about control. ramming your vision down everyone's throat.

whenever your confronted with a grown-up, like scott walker, you stamp your feet, throw a tantrum and run and hide...literally.

you must be confused....the judge in arizona who took orders from obama is bought and paid for.

oh, alprova...you sad, sad, sad, pathetic statist ***wipe......are my sentences not up to snuff for you.....does my lack of capitalization, correct punctuation and use of .......all those .................dots...............bother you?

ahhh, tough crap.....you get my drift....deal with it.

and by the way............happy george washington's birthday to you............if not for his efforts in setting a great precedent for future presidents, we would have been saddled with a long line of bullies, authoritarians, monarch wannabe's and dictatorial types...........like obama......we'll get back on track on the next one....i suggest scott walker,

February 22, 2011 at 9:23 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Username: canarysong | On: February 22, 2011 at 2:35 p.m. “When you demonstrate that you understand the difference between communism and socialism I will be happy to engage you in a debate; before then it would be a waste of my time.”

Please canarysong! I understand the difference between them and I try to keep up with the latest hip redefinition that the social engineers have dreamed up. Marxism, Socialism, Liberalism, Progressivism all use a perverse idea you call Social Justice to justify theft from and slavery of the producers. You have this naïve notion that your redistribution schemes will result in improvement in the lives of the majority of citizens.

What you fail to realize is that life’s challenges are the only things that make it worth getting up in the morning. It has something to do with how the human mind is wired. Your attempts to make life secure will temporarily take a significant measure of the challenge out of life. The bland existence that will result will leave people with an eroded sense of purpose and responsibility that will adversely affect their sense of accomplishment and well-being. Many will react by taking rather than producing. This effect is bigger than you realize and takes away a big part of the engine that you thought you would be able to suck from.

Also, the wealth envy thing dooms your vision. Society cannot afford to give everyone the level of wealth that your evil rich enjoy. That will not stop you from promising it though! The promises of access to healthcare, work, food, clothing, retirement based on some right that does not exist will eventually bankrupt the experiment, once again. The politicians gain power from these promises and do not give a rat’s ass that a year, or a decade or a century after they “grant” your “rights” that the train wreck will finally happen.

I dare venture that as you refine your vision and increase the size of the experiment (world government) that the size of the train wreck will just get bigger and bigger. Like the looming global financial collapse. Boy is this one going to be a doozy! Stupid politicos in bed with big banks and business will be outmaneuvered every time. That you progressives would trust your future to them just astounds me!

February 22, 2011 at 9:35 p.m.

canarysong wrote:

"The quick and sadly incomplete version of why I support universal health care, public education, and many other social "well-being" programs......

"1. In most western countries where these programs are strong infant mortality is lower, life expectancy is higher, poverty levels are lower, crime is low, many (not all) economies are stable, and people report higher levels of happiness.

"2. If caring for the needy is left to religious organizations, there is HUGE potential for some people to be discriminated against and left without needed assistance. Do you really think all churches are willing to help gays, Muslims, atheists, or even non-whites for that matter?

"3. I have seen a lot of real suffering, and so much of it seems needless. Good hardworking people for whom things just went horribly wrong. Better access to medical care would have made a world of difference.

"4. And to be completely unscientific and illogical, it simply feels like the right thing to do,.... for us all to realize that we are in this together and to make things work, caring for those who are truly unable to care for themselves, even if it means that those of us who have will have just a little bit less.

"I'll be happy to elaborate when I have more time.


“Equal Treatment – The Faith-Based Initiative: An Introduction” (The Center for Public Justice) http://www.cpjustice.org/content/equal-treatment-0

“A Nation of Givers” by Arthur C. Brooks (Journal of the American Enterprise Institute, March/April 2008) http://www.american.com/archive/2008/march-april-magazine-contents/a-nation-of-givers

"As an atheist, I truly believe Africa needs God: Missionaries, not aid money, are the solution to Africa's biggest problem - the crushing passivity of the people's mindset" by Matthew Parris (The London Times, December 27, 2008) http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/matthew_parris/article5400568.ece

February 22, 2011 at 9:45 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

“Stupid politicos in bed with big banks and business will be outmaneuvered every time”

Let me correct myself in advance. Every time would not be true, but in our current state of globalized industry, banking and politics, the politicians are going to be completely outmaneuvered by those they claim to regulate. The politicos may rein hell on them in the end, but not until after they have been completely bamboozled.

February 22, 2011 at 9:46 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Whats_wrong_with_the_world said: "Your posts are simply a liberal version of francis (with a few links to huffingtonpost added)."

Hmmmm . . . Speaking of HuffPost , it appears that Wisconsin’s Governor has been less than honest about the status of the pension fund for Wisconsin’s public employees:

WASHINGTON -- While Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) has painted a dire picture of his state's pension obligations, Wisconsin's pension fund for public employees is among the nation's strongest, according to a report by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center.

The Pew report, issued last year, concluded that Wisconsin is a "national leader in managing its long-term liabilities for both pension and retiree health care." Walker has cited the fund's lack of sustainability as grounds for his plan to revoke collective bargaining rights for state employees. . .

. . . Wisconsin pension fund is simply not in fiscal trouble. Its managers weren't burned by subprime mortgage assets or mortgage-backed securities as the housing bubble collapsed. The fund also relies on an automated dividend system, which pays out benefits in years the system is making gains while restricting payouts in years when it takes losses. And while the pension fund had a rough year during 2008 due to stock market losses, it remains robust, both in terms of fundamental financial stability and in comparison to other state pension programs.

According to the Pew study, Wisconsin had about $77 billion in total pension liabilities in 2008. But according to that same Pew study, those liabilities were 99.67 percent "funded," giving Wisconsin one of the four-highest of such ratios in the nation. Other states had funding ratios as low as 54 percent. For comparison, expert analysts and the Government Accountability Office consider an 80 percent level to be a good benchmark for pension fund stability, while Fitch Ratings considers 70 percent adequate. . .

According to the Wisconsin pension fund's own 2010 annual report, the system had $69.1 billion in total assets at June 30, 2010, while paying out $3.7 billion in benefits over the course of the previous year. The value of those assets has since risen. According to Dave Stella, secretary of the Wisconsin Department of Employee Trust Funds, the retirement system's assets were worth $79.8 billion at the end of last month. The most recent solvency test for the fund was conducted for the fund's operations at Dec. 31, 2009. At the time, the funding ratio was 99.8 percent. The next solvency test is scheduled for June of this year.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/22/wisconsin-pension-fund-among-healthiest-us_n_826709.html

February 22, 2011 at 10:56 p.m.

Orwellian


"Make Everybody Hurt" By DAVID BROOKS (New York Times, February 21, 2011)

“Over the past few weeks we’ve begun to see the new contours of American politics. The budget cutters have taken control of the agenda, while government’s defenders are waging tactical retreats. Given the scope of the fiscal problems, it could be like this for the next 10 or 20 years.

“No place is hotter than Wisconsin. The leaders there have done everything possible to maximize conflict. Gov. Scott Walker, a Republican, demanded cuts only from people in the other party. The public sector unions and their allies immediately flew into a rage, comparing Walker to Hitler, Mussolini and Mubarak.

“Walker’s critics are amusingly Orwellian. They liken the crowd in Madison to the ones in Tunisia and claim to be fighting for democracy. Whatever you might say about Walker, he and the Republican majorities in Wisconsin were elected, and they are doing exactly what they told voters they would do. It’s the Democratic minority that is thwarting the majority will by fleeing to Illinois. It’s the left that has suddenly embraced extralegal obstructionism.

“Still, let’s try to put aside the hyperventilation. Everybody now seems to agree that Governor Walker was right to ask state workers to pay more for their benefits. Even if he gets everything he asks for, Wisconsin state workers would still be contributing less to their benefits than the average state worker nationwide and would be contributing far, far less than private sector workers.

“The more difficult question is whether Walker was right to try to water down Wisconsin’s collective bargaining agreements. Even if you acknowledge the importance of unions in representing middle-class interests, there are strong arguments on Walker’s side. In Wisconsin and elsewhere, state-union relations are structurally out of whack.

“That’s because public sector unions and private sector unions are very different creatures. Private sector unions push against the interests of shareholders and management; public sector unions push against the interests of taxpayers. Private sector union members know that their employers could go out of business, so they have an incentive to mitigate their demands; public sector union members work for state monopolies and have no such interest.

“Private sector unions confront managers who have an incentive to push back against their demands. Public sector unions face managers who have an incentive to give into them for the sake of their own survival. Most important, public sector unions help choose those they negotiate with. Through gigantic campaign contributions and overall clout, they have enormous influence over who gets elected to bargain with them, especially in state and local races."

February 22, 2011 at 11:30 p.m.

"Make Everybody Hurt" By DAVID BROOKS (New York Times, February 21, 2011) http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/22/opinion/22brooks.html?_r=1&ref=general&src=me&pagewanted=print

(continued) “... As a result of these imbalanced incentive structures, states with public sector unions tend to run into fiscal crises. They tend to have workplaces where personnel decisions are made on the basis of seniority, not merit. There is little relationship between excellence and reward, which leads to resentment among taxpayers who don’t have that luxury …

“Getting state and federal budgets under control will take decades. It will require varied, multipronged approaches, supported by broad and shifting coalitions. It’s really important that we establish an unwritten austerity constitution: a set of practices that will help us cut effectively now and in the future.

“The foundation of this unwritten constitution has to be this principle: make everybody hurt. The cuts have to be spread more or less equitably among as many groups as possible. There will never be public acceptance if large sectors of society are excluded. Governor Walker’s program fails that test. It spares traditional Republican groups (even cops and firefighters). It is thus as unsustainable as the current tide of red ink.

“Moreover, the constitution must emphasize transparent evaluation. Over the past weeks, Governor Walker increased expenditures to pump up small business job creation and cut them on teacher benefits. That might be the right choice, but if voters are going to go along with choices such as these, there is going to have to be a credible evaluation process to explain why some things are cut and some things aren’t.

“So I’d invite Governor Walker and the debt fighters everywhere to think of themselves as founding fathers of austerity. They are not only balancing budgets, they are setting precedent for a process that will last decades. By their example, they have to create habits that diverse majorities can respect and embrace. The process has to be balanced. It has to make everybody hurt.”

February 22, 2011 at 11:35 p.m.
blackwater48 said...

BRP, I just read your 9:35 (p.m. 2/22/11) where you attempt to lecture Canarysong on politics: If you insist on stealing Glenn Beck's material at least give him credit. 'Social Justice' is a classic.

Wages for working people have remained stagnant over the past 10 years while the rich have been getting incredibly richer. That is not a good formula for a healthy economy.

70% of the U.S. economy is consumer driven. Getting more money into the hands of more people will help kick start the engine but the Corporate Party is dead set against that.

You can see it played out on a smaller stage in Wisconsin. A Corporate Governor puts through a multi-million dollar tax cut for the rich and then announces that he's paying for it by cutting the pay of nurses and teachers and gutting their right to bargain collectively.

Congressional Corporatists got their extended tax cuts for the rich during the last lame duck session and now want to fire federal workes to pay for it. They want to slash the SEC because Wall Street is so good at policing itself (what could go wrong?), the IRS because fewer agents mean fewer audits, and the USDA because detecting e-coli before meat arrives at your house for dinner is another example of big government overreach.

Then you sniff, "Also, the wealth envy thing dooms your vision." First, nobody wants to take away your spare airplane, your third vacation home, or one of your yachts.

While average couples work two jobs or more to raise kids and keep a roof over their heads, they find it all but impossible to get ahead. There is real pain out here being felt by real Americans who are just as patriotic as rich folks. Your cavalier attitude is a real kick in the gut to people who work hard and try to play by the rules.

People want the Corporate Party to stop stacking the deck. The working class didn't cause our economic crisis.

Why do they have to pay for?

February 23, 2011 at 1:26 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Whats_Wrong_With_The_World chanted: . . . David Brooks. . . David Brooks!!!!

Needless to say, Brook’s column has brought forth some chuckles among economists:

“Let's all have a hearty round of laughter at David Brooks' expense. He doesn't know that employer side payments for benefits like pensions and health care come out of workers' wages. In his column today, he tells his readers that public employees in Wisconsin should have to pay for these benefits just like private sector. Apparently he doesn't know that they already do. . .

Of course the bigger mistake in Brooks' column is the assertion that we are looking at a decade of austerity. This may prove true, but this is a policy choice. We had unbelievably incompetent economic policy in the last decade. The Fed and the Bush administration allowed (arguably encouraged) the growth of an $8 trillion housing bubble. It was fully predictable that it would collapse and lead to a serious recession.”

http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/david-brooks-on-wisconsin-flaunting-ignoranc-of-economics [“David Brooks on Wisconsin: Flaunting Ignorance of Economics” - Dean Baker]

February 23, 2011 at 9:08 a.m.
delmar said...

I got to hand it to you Francis, for a high school junior you use some big words. Good for you! You must be, like, captain or at the LEAST co-captain of your debate team.

This is too easy - indian, you wrote - "I don't think there is a cure for all of the people that Bush brain-washed,but you could pray for us and maybe one day we will get well enough to understand how stupid we were to have voted for him twice.You would think we would have learned the first time,but some people never learn!

canarysong, thanks for making my day, no,, my week, no,, my month ;)

February 23, 2011 at 9:30 a.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.