published Sunday, October 9th, 2011

The Monument

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 ...

123
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.
onetinsoldier said...

Please note all screws were turning right on their way in. Left on their way out.

October 9, 2011 at 12:09 a.m.
lumpy said...

What's your point, Onetinsoldier? Are you saying the left doesn't screw anyone?

October 9, 2011 at 12:12 a.m.
lumpy said...

Obama is the status quo. Just another corrupt politician who hands out favors and rewards in exchange for big sums of money.

October 9, 2011 at 12:16 a.m.
AndrewLohr said...

Big government is the status quo. They tell us which light bulbs to choose, which commode tanks, which cars...instead of letting us use our own heads. So bright as our President may be (couple cartoons back), less brainpower works under big government than under freedom. Jesus is libertarian.

October 9, 2011 at 12:35 a.m.
memphisexile said...

That is funny, I don't remember the Libertarian party being mentioned in the bible....

October 9, 2011 at 12:48 a.m.

Or less brainpower wasted on tasks like checking to see for sure that the lightbulb is using the amount of power it claims, that the toilet is flushing properly, that the car being driven is safe and reliable...and more brainpower free for other things. Like contemplating Jesus.

But there is a status quo in government, that's for sure. We won't be electing anybody who will really do anything, because fixing a problem would be acting against the entrenched interests and their profits.

Memphisexile, I believe it's in the Gospel of Saint Ayn Rand. Obviously the publishers of your bible left it out. Must be part of the liberal conspiracy. Using Time Machines. They also went back and got rid of all the Dinosaurs, but only after raising them for millions of years in the future, so they'd be really old when they buried them under the ground just a few thousand years ago.

October 9, 2011 at 12:50 a.m.
AndrewLohr said...

Proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof--Leviticus.

Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free. If the son therefore shall make you free ye shall be free indeed. Don't fret if you're a slave, but prefer freedom if you can get it. Stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free--New Testament.

Obviously God prefers freedom, and big government reduces freedom (often enough on behalf of big business, e.g. in the bank bailouts.) Not necessarily Libertarian Party, but adjective libertarian. Which is not the status quo.

October 9, 2011 at 1 a.m.
Rickaroo said...

Me, pretending to be one of the libertarian/teabagging/bible-thumping/Bennett-bashing bunch of bozos:

Typical Bennett! How boring and predictable. There he goes with his liberal garbage again. the TFP seriously needs to give him his walking papers.

Or... Notice that everyone is loafing in the park. What lazy bums! They deserve to be screwed! If they were working 3 minimum wage jobs they might be among the top 1% one day and then they could do the screwing. Damn socialist marxist commie pigs.

Or... abortion is genocide and any woman who even considers abortion is a murderer in her heart. The Bible says...blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.

(I know this cartoon has nothing to do with abortion or the Bible but some of the clowns who post on here can't help working it into every discussion and quoting from their holy book of myths and fairy tales, regardless).

Actually this is a good one, Clay. Spot on. The motto that's sealed in the hearts and minds of every complacent conservative - the STATUS QUO. If it ain't broke for them personally, no need to fix it. As long as they've got theirs (for now), they're more than happy to let the screwing continue.

October 9, 2011 at 1:07 a.m.

Hmm, you might want to talk to the people who keep telling me that God demands my obedience then.

October 9, 2011 at 1:10 a.m.

wwhy missHippy aint so happy wit her bulbous no mor! ya sown likey dos biter libralls miss-dos hippycrits dat cal consurvatifs lotts uf naymes den say yur cumpash-enut an awl-Rite! Da ownly pipples skrewin ther livs ur dos pipples demselfs yall need ta git groand up an stopp blaymin reech mens why i see reech an por wimmin skrewin pipples too! reech libralls skrewin us por foks awl da tim! yall needi un stachoo fur dat won now!

ya don likey da bible an awl yous an mrReckapoo git yur butts ovur at dat ole soshilist contrie wit mrAsstriun en a la Bama-git ovur ta albayneea ur greese or sumsech! hav un hippy boolb day yall!

October 9, 2011 at 3:25 a.m.
ricardo said...

Teddy Roosevelt is the status quo?

October 9, 2011 at 4:28 a.m.
Dumbledore403 said...

Actually some of you did get the idea...rightie tightie...leftie loosie... But Andrew Scripture teaches to have mercy to your fellow man...to love your neighbors as yourself..and I am not seeing much love or much mercy from those calling themselves Republican presidential candidates including the one you support

October 9, 2011 at 6:31 a.m.
MTJohn said...

AndrewLohr said...Proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof--Leviticus.Obviously God prefers freedom, and big government reduces freedom (often enough on behalf of big business, e.g. in the bank bailouts.) Not necessarily Libertarian Party, but adjective libertarian. Which is not the status quo.

Andrew - I agree that big government is contrary to the kind of liberty that God proclaims. The liberty that the Libertarian Party proclaims also is contrary to the kind of liberty that God proclaims. Yet, you insist on trying to remake Jesus in the image of Ayn Rand. It doesn't compute - especially on a Sunday morning.

October 9, 2011 at 6:53 a.m.
fairmon said...

Why did all those people screw themselves? Maxing out every credit card they could get and eating the seed corn will do irreparable damage.

October 9, 2011 at 7:09 a.m.
fairmon said...

None of them seem aware or concerned about their screwing symbolized by the statue they are ignoring which should be Obama and his incompetent cabinet.

October 9, 2011 at 7:23 a.m.
fairmon said...

To remove the screw broaden the tax base, eliminate all loop holes including deductions, reductions, credits, subsidies and other tools of manipulation. Leave the rates for the wealthy as they are and reduce the lower rates. Use a bottoms up zero base budgeting process instead of the process of the current budget plus one time items and a percentage increase overall. Isn't it amazing how each department spends a higher percentage of their budget in the 4th quarter than any other? Is it the use it or lose it effect?

October 9, 2011 at 8:19 a.m.
fairmon said...

Taxing capital gains as ordinary income sounds fair and easy but it isn't that simple. Say you invest $50,000 dollars and hold it for 25 years and sell it for $100,000. How much have you gained? Inflation considered the value has not increased. Invest $50,000 and sell 12.5 months later for $100,000 and it is a real gain. However, if in prior years you had losses of $60,000 you can only reduce the gain by $3,000. You would have to have gains of $3,000 or more for 20 years to recover the $60,000 loss. It is never as simple and as fair as it may appear.

October 9, 2011 at 8:31 a.m.
rolando said...

Those are a series of rings, not threads on those "screws". Turning them produces no in or out movement, regardless of which way they are turned.

Which is exactly how our socialist government likes it; screwed no matter which way we turn...

“To be a socialist is to submit the I to the thou; socialism is sacrificing the individual to the whole.” -- J. Goebbels

Why need we trouble to socialize banks and factories? We socialize human beings.” -- A. Hitler

Incidentally, those two quotes were not used in support of socialism [quite the opposite] but to draw parallels to what our government has become.

October 9, 2011 at 8:39 a.m.
rolando said...

Good cartoon, Clay. Well thought out, well drawn. Nice. Food for thought. Quite non-partisan since the term, "Status Quo" covers it all.

October 9, 2011 at 8:41 a.m.
fairmon said...

Hedge funds are investment vehicles for the wealthy. The fund manager gets a healthy cut of the invested money and gets around 20% of the profits from the millions invested on behalf of the wealthy clients. The fund managers income is taxed at the capital gains rate instead of earned income. The investors money is at risk and some have lost 100% while the fund managers risk is to no longer have a fund to manage. Why does congress allow this?

October 9, 2011 at 8:42 a.m.
rolando said...

Because they are the "fund managers", perhaps?

October 9, 2011 at 8:52 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Ricardo said: “Teddy Roosevelt is the status quo?

I’m thinking more along the lines of something Teddy Roosevelt once said:

“Speak softly and carry a big screwdriver.”

It pretty much sums up U.S. domestic policies in a amazingly clever way.

October 9, 2011 at 9:20 a.m.
hambone said...

The people vote!

Cooperations elect!!!

October 9, 2011 at 9:58 a.m.
acerigger said...

At Tomdispatch.com, Andy Kroll outlines the reasons for the outrage sparking these protests– centered on the “lost decade” of the Bush era, during which everyone got poorer except the very rich:

  1. “In 2010, the average middle-class family took home $49,445, a drop of $3,719 or 7%, in yearly earnings from 10 years earlier.”

  2. “poor families watched their income shrivel by 12%, falling from $13,538 to $11,904.”

  3. The US now counts “more than 46 million men, women, and children among this country’s poor. In other words, 15.1% of all Americans are now living in officially defined poverty, the most since 1993″

  4. African-Americans and Latinos were hit especially hard, with their middle classes virtually wiped out, as many homeowners lost their most important asset:

    “Between 2005 and 2009, the household wealth of a typical black family dropped off a cliff, plunging by a whopping 53%; for a typical Hispanic family, it was even worse, at 66%. For white middle-class households, losses on average totaled “only” 16%.”

BUT

  1. “the top 1% of earners enjoyed 65% of all income growth in America for much of the decade”

It could make a person angry.

October 9, 2011 at 10:01 a.m.
potcat said...

We are Literally SCREWED!!!

October 9, 2011 at 10:02 a.m.
hotdiggity said...

Andrew, gotta love your statement and rant regarding the status quo.."Obviously God prefers freedom, and big government reduces freedom".

Its notable that you reference a passage that basically tells slaves to accept their lot and hope to one day not be shackled by someone owning them. So if God "prefers freedom" why is their no denunciation of slavery by God in the Bible?

Strange that you do not reference the teachings of Jesus regarding the obligations to help the poor, needy, and downtrodden.

Here is just one of many by Jesus for your Libertarian consideration.

"For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’

Then the righteous will answer him, saying, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?'

And the King will answer them, 'Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.'" (Matthew 25.35-40

October 9, 2011 at 10:06 a.m.
potcat said...

Strangers unaware,,,,

October 9, 2011 at 10:35 a.m.
onetinsoldier said...

Those screws were imported from China, distributed by walmart and inserted by repugnants when jesus wasn't looking.

October 9, 2011 at 11:21 a.m.
fairmon said...

Rolando....

I suspect since most members of congress are very wealthy they probably have investments in a hedge fund. It is naive to think either party gives a whit about the plight of the average American. They talk like they do so they can keep growing their wealth and power, they will even commit to supporting us, if we will go along with them and parrot their talking points. Obama is a master manipulator and opportunist. Both parties are cozy with and show favor to the wealthy but the democrats do a better job of pandering to the poor and influential.

October 9, 2011 at 11:43 a.m.
rolando said...

What makes you think He wasn't looking, onetin?

We have Free Will, after all. If we want to become the government's slave under socialism -- or accept it as our liege lord and bow down -- He allows it. Doesn't mean He doesn't care...

October 9, 2011 at 11:48 a.m.
fairmon said...

Those countries importing to the U.S. support tax cuts and stimulus money to the middle class and poor. They will buy their imported products and help the importing countries economy. China will even loan us the money to keep doing what we are doing. Where do you think the screws our leaders inserted come from? Which party did it? We have evolved from the worlds largest creditor to the worlds largest debtor under the leadership and congressional control of both parties. When disoriented and under water swimming hard you may be going deeper.

Keep buying those imports, don't even look for an American made alternative. Criticize and bad mouth those terrible American producers at every opportunity.

October 9, 2011 at 11:52 a.m.
rolando said...

Here is another quote on that topic, harp. Yet another parallel -- they are stacking up...

“[T]he people about us are unaware of what is really happening to them. They gaze fascinated at one or two familiar superficialities, such as possessions and income and rank and other outworn conceptions. As long as these are kept intact, they are quite satisfied. But in the meantime they have entered a new relation; a powerful social force has caught them up. They themselves are changed. What are ownership and income to that? -- A. Hitler

October 9, 2011 at 11:59 a.m.
onetinsoldier said...

He wasn't looking because he has been dead for over 2000 years. FREE WILL??? Dogmatic doodoo.

Christians have as much free will as pavlovs puppy.

October 9, 2011 at 12:12 p.m.
Rufus_T_Firefly said...

One thing is certain. Republicans and all their associated flavors will make life much better for a small number of Americans.

Republican austerity measures have contributed directly to the increase in unemployment, with a loss of more than a million public sector jobs.

Republicans believe in Job Cremation and not Job creation.

The private sector simply can't create enough jobs to accommodate almost 20 million unemployed Americans.

Republicans will continue their austerity contract on America. If you haven't figured out what "AUSTERITY" will do to job creation, then you simply aren't paying attention.

Almost half million jobs have been lost this year alone due to Republican Austerity measures.

October 9, 2011 at 12:21 p.m.
lumpy said...

What would be preferable, Mountainlaurel and Happy, the gospel according to Karl Marx? Big Government and things like the Environmental movement are religions.

I think you Democrats, leftists and liberals got your man in place and he's proven to be a disaster. No one screws tax payers over like a chicago bred politican. That's all Obama is. He's a job killer and pretty damn proud of it.

October 9, 2011 at 12:36 p.m.
rick1 said...

Hotdiggity – some powerful bible verses you used. However, these verses are in regard to my responsibilities as a Christian, not as a U.S. citizen. Also, I believe that Jesus was referring to people that were truly needy and poor. Those that He was referring to were in a quite different situation than what are considered poor and needy in the U.S. today. African American economist Walter Williams said, “No human should be coerced by the state to bear the medical expense, or any other expense, for his fellow man. In other words, the forcible use of one person to serve the purposes of another is morally offensive. Charity is reaching into one's own pockets to assist his fellow man in need. Reaching into someone else's pocket to assist one's fellow man hardly qualifies as charity. When done privately, we deem it theft, and the individual risks jail time."

October 9, 2011 at 12:48 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Hotdiggity said: “Its notable that you reference a passage that basically tells slaves to accept their lot and hope to one day not be shackled by someone owning them.

Believe today’s NYT editorial touches on your point, Hotdiggity:

As the Occupy Wall Street protests spread from Lower Manhattan to Washington and other cities, the chattering classes keep complaining that the marchers lack a clear message and specific policy prescriptions. The message — and the solutions — should be obvious to anyone who has been paying attention . . .

At this point, protest is the message: income inequality is grinding down that middle class, increasing the ranks of the poor, and threatening to create a permanent underclass of able, willing but jobless people. On one level, the protesters, most of them young, are giving voice to a generation of lost opportunity. . .

The protests, though, are more than a youth uprising . . They are exactly right when they say that the financial sector, with regulators and elected officials in collusion, inflated and profited from a credit bubble that burst, costing millions of Americans their jobs, incomes, savings and home equity. . .

The initial outrage has been compounded by bailouts and by elected officials’ hunger for campaign cash from Wall Street, a toxic combination that has reaffirmed the economic and political power of banks and bankers, while ordinary Americans suffer.

Extreme inequality is the hallmark of a dysfunctional economy, dominated by a financial sector that is driven as much by speculation, gouging and government backing as by productive investment. When the protesters say they represent 99 percent of Americans, they are referring to the concentration of income in today’s deeply unequal society. . .

Income gains at the top would not be as worrisome as they are if the middle class and the poor were also gaining. But working-age households saw their real income decline in the first decade of this century. The recession and its aftermath have only accelerated the decline.

Research shows that such extreme inequality correlates to a host of ills, including lower levels of educational attainment, poorer health and less public investment. It also skews political power, because policy almost invariably reflects the views of upper-income Americans versus those of lower-income Americans.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/09/opinion/sunday/protesters-against-wall-street.html?_r=1

October 9, 2011 at 12:49 p.m.
timbo said...

Ricaroo.....You described the republican blather pretty well . It was pretty predictable as you say it . Conversely you're response and those of your partners in crime , were just as predictable. It is the same , childish, jealous, socialist , claptrap .
Actually Bennett cartoon could be taken 1 of 2 ways . to me the status quo are the liberals . Spending to perpetuate the current welfare state has been supported by both parties, especially the democrats. The people being screwed are all of us taxpayers by the big spending government. Now, continue by predictably calling a name and saying we are all stupid .

October 9, 2011 at 12:53 p.m.
potcat said...

Lumppy......Do you really want to go there, your Man Bush,your Man,you are one of them Repubtards thats really a turn off...**BUSH BUSH BUSH.

HOw dare you.Nothing you say is worthwhile, Bush is your contribition to the World and Normal American People should read your post with George W. Bush in mind always.

October 9, 2011 at 1:06 p.m.
NoMyth said...

Unless we ban (or tax) high frequency/volume stock trades, the average American will continue to get screwed...your 401k and other stocks will go no where. Buy and hold is dead, market volatility-- that only a computer can solve and profit from--is thriving. Please wake up America!

October 9, 2011 at 1:31 p.m.

Lumpy, what I'd prefer is that whether the words are from the writers of the Bible or from Marx, or from Muhammad, or even from L. Ron Hubbard, is that the people using them represent them truly and honestly and not just to mean whatever they want them to mean at the time.

But I think you alleged "conservatives" would be shocked to realize that if you got your "man" in place, that things would have turned out much the same. How do we know? Because McCain is just as much of a sell-out of a politician as anybody you can name.

rick1, the problem with selective charity is that it is too easy to withhold from another for no just cause at all. For the rest, you are receiving benefits yourself when you are taxed, so no, it's not theft. If you truly disagree with what the government does, you have the same avenues as the rest of us to change it.

October 9, 2011 at 1:33 p.m.
carlB said...

The "wanta be" Status Quo of the Republicans is what or whomever wrote the speech for Senator Corker to say, about President Obama, in his appearance Friday before the Bradley Republicans as reported in the TFP today. It was another one of those "dumbing down" speeches trying to get the voters to believe that it is only the Republicans who know what to do for making the USA a great country. The tactics of the Republicans are to keep dwelling constantly on their actions and policies of their "status quo" for making this country great. Their "Status Quo" is only to keep the criticizing of President Obama without having to do what is good for the country.

October 9, 2011 at 1:50 p.m.
lumpy said...

'My man Bush", potcat?? Who said he's my man? G.W.Bush was no conservative. His second term was a monument to bad stewardship of tax payer dollars. Obama, amazingly, decided to take bad stewardship to a whole new level never seen before.

McCain, Happy, was not at all what I wanted, he is the same old thing. But the new thing, Obama, is more of the same old thing on steriods.

As a conservative I want accountability. Solyndra is not the first example of corruption and out and out waste of tax payer dollars, but it's one the the worst and latest. Obamacare, the Stimulus and Solyndra are three good reasons to kick Obama out of office. That sort of crap goes on with both Republicans and Democrats, yet Obama has managed to be in a league of his own.

I find many of you lefists, liberals, Democrats, socialists, marxists and collectivists to be not honest about what you want on here. The Occupy horde that's stinkin' up the streets in various cities would be perfectly fine if Obama became a dictator and ordered the military to take people's money and belongings at gunpoint. Roseann Barr, the disgusting pig of a celebrity/comedian, said that the wealthy and bankers should be beheaded if they don't cough up their money. She says what all of you really think.

You're a scary bunch.

Obama is an irresponsible and dangerous man because he wants chaos and violence in the streets because he thinks it will help him. He'd love to cancel the elections. The Democrat governor of N.C. even stated that congressional elections should be canceled so that our economy can be dealt with.

Such disrespect displayed for our constitution by Democrats over the last 3 years. Obama truly does believe, as others have pointed out on here, that the Constitution is too much about what the fed. government can't do to us. That is one scary man.

October 9, 2011 at 2:07 p.m.
MTJohn said...

rick1 said...Hotdiggity – some powerful bible verses you used. However, these verses are in regard to my responsibilities as a Christian, not as a U.S. citizen.

So, Rick, which takes precedent?

October 9, 2011 at 2:12 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Lumpy said: “What would be preferable. . . the gospel according to Karl Marx?

I really hate to be the one to break the bad news to you, Lumpy, but there are a great number of people who have noted that the Marxist philosophy of cultural hegemony is already being applied politically in the U.S. by several radical right-wing and conservative organizations.

Lumpy said: “things like the Environmental movement are religions.”

Well, Lumpy, I certainly can understand why some religious people are concerned about environmental issues. Lets face it, things like acid rain, cancer causing air pollutants, and poisoned groundwater are having a destructive impact on both the planet and the health of the human species. Indeed, how could any good Christian feel proud of destroying something God had created and given to mankind? It's not like we're dumb and don't know any better.

October 9, 2011 at 2:15 p.m.
lumpy said...

Carl, and you think Obama writes his own speeches and does not have handlers? Obama is a front man for people like Soros and a whole bunch of others. Obama has earned every bit of that criticism. His job is to just open his considerable mouth and suck in cash like a vacuum cleaner. He is the status quo.

Obama's vision of this country is not an American vision, it's socialist or marxist, and it sucks. But it seems that he'll sell himself out to the hightest bidder. He's no good, as my grandfather would say.

October 9, 2011 at 2:16 p.m.
potcat said...

Replace Obamas name with Bush lump and you will have thr real TRUTH!!!

October 9, 2011 at 2:31 p.m.
patriot1 said...

Are the folks wandering around in the park a part of the "Occupy" protest? Flea-baggers maybe? The "Flea" party?

October 9, 2011 at 2:41 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Lumpy said: "you think Obama writes his own speeches and does not have handlers? Obama is a front man for people like Soros and a whole bunch of others. etc., etc., etc."

If you must, rant on to your heart’s content, Lumpy. But the Republican presidential debates have made some things very clear, and nothing they’ve said appeals to me. The bottom line is as Jonathan Zasloff at the Reality Base Community so aptly put it a few weeks ago:

“The Democrats want to preserve Medicare, and the Republicans want to end it. The Democrats want to protect the environment, and the Republicans want to destroy it. The Democrats want to rebuild schools, and the Republicans don’t. The Republicans, in turn, want to give very large tax cuts to people making more than $250,000 a year, and the Democrats don’t. The Republicans want to empower Wall Street and let the banks do anything they want, and the Democrats don’t.”

http://www.samefacts.com/2011/10/clash-of-civilizations/eric-cantor-tells-the-truth/

October 9, 2011 at 3:04 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

timbo....You have used the terms "childish" and "immature" to describe liberals so many times I've lost count. Yet you accuse me of name-calling because I use (one time) a quote from J.S. Mill that refers to conservatives as being stupid? You have just given further evidence of your own, well, stupidity (!) if you don't see the illogicality and hyocricy of that. You can speak as derisively of me and every other liberal as much as you want and it won't hurt my feelings, 'nary a smidgen, but don't accuse me of doing something that you do on a regular basis and pretend that you don't. Don't even dare to pretend that you are somehow above the name-calling. Good god 'a mighty, man, you spew the epithets as fast and loose as anyone here.

October 9, 2011 at 4:03 p.m.
carlB said...

lumpy, I don't really care who wrote Corker's speech. The point is this is their tactic to mislead the voters especially after the fiasco of the Bush W. administration's eight years.

Corker's "preaching to his captive audience, are wanting back in power to continue their power against the working people. Now are wanting to keep trying to destroy the balance of what made this country great with the growth of our middle class workers and families after the 1929 great depression. Corkers listeners accept what he is saying as the truth but they should know that he is switching the actual truth of the conditions/situations that were present before President Obama was elected in November 2008. The Republicans appear to have different opinions than the Democrats, as to what makes this country great. How can Corker think the voters believe what he is saying after the 2007 deep recession which put this country on the verge of another great depression which should end the argument as to what Obama and his administration needed to do. Apparently the Republicans who are against President Obama want the voters to go along with their opinions of what makes this country great is when there is a "forced" wide gap between the "have's and the have not's" without the middle class tax base.

Now that President Obama is the President, what are the objectives of the Republicans for continuing to indicate that Obama "is misguided on what makes country great"? Are they insinuating or injecting the "dumb factor" to influence the extreme voters view?

October 9, 2011 at 4:05 p.m.
onetinsoldier said...

The repugnant party even screws dogs?? Thats pretty distasteful Clay. But true.

October 9, 2011 at 4:25 p.m.

Lumpy, you're the one that scares me, because you are so dogmatic in your opposition that you are would probably blame Obama for your milk turning sour a day early.

Want to know about honesty though? Republicans don't want to fix anything, because if they did things right, they wouldn't have anything to campaign on. Several Republican leaders have also said they don't want the economy to be fixed, because that would make it easier for Obama to be re-elected. And their priority is to make Obama a one-term president.

Not to serve the country. Not to do things right. Just to get another Republican in the White House. And no, it won't be any different, you will get a new McCain, a new Bush, a new Reagan, even a Dole.

To go along with this, they'll make statements that aren't intended to be factual. They'll claim responsibility for some things, while blaming somebody else for anything that didn't go right. Or they'll make references to people claiming they were injured by something, yet those individuals cannot be found or questioned by anybody else, and when questioned themselves, they'll say they're no experts, it's just something they claim to have heard. How is that level of either gullibility or dishonesty acceptable in a Presidential candidate?

Watch it happen. It's been in the debates already. Along with crowds cheering executions and booing soldiers for being homosexual.

As for Solyndra...what corruption? Do you know that they've not been charged with fraud, that they actually DID build the factory they intended to build. You can go see it, they spent the money properly, on what they loaned the money for. They did not scam anybody. What really happened was that China subsidized their own industries so the trivial amount of money from the overall fund (500 million out of 40 billion) that went to Solyndra was drowned in a sea of cheap polysilicon panels fed by billions more from China's government.

And it's hardly one of the worst examples of anything. 500 million dollars? There's over 30 billion in wasted money from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. It might be as high has 100 billion.

And that's just the outright wasted spending, that the wars themselves were an utter waste makes the trillions spent even more of a lost investment.

But the Green energy program? 40 billion. 0.5 billion lost. That's not bad at all. At least it was wasted in America. There's a nice factory, you can go see it, if you have a product, maybe you can make it in that factory! Then you'll save the governments money!

October 9, 2011 at 4:33 p.m.
carlB said...

potcat said... Replace Obamas name with Bush lump and you will have thr real TRUTH!!! October 9, 2011 at 2:31 p.m.


Reply to potcat: potcat, it would appear that you want to say that Obama's objective are the same as Bush W.'s administration? Another truer way of looking at what has happened during the Bush W. eight years is that they came into office with the intent of destroying the "rest" of FDR's New Deal policies by weakening our economy and our government to the point where it could not operate. The Republicans did such a good job of taking the control of the government away from the private sectors financial systems that another great depression nearly occurred. If Bush and Paulson had not gotten the unfunded $700 Billion dollars, with the help of the FED Reserve there would have been another great depression. Did this condition make the USA a great country?

October 9, 2011 at 4:43 p.m.

To go along with this, they'll make statements that aren't intended to be factual. They'll claim responsibility for some things, while blaming somebody else for anything that didn't go right. Or they'll make references to people claiming they were injured by something, yet those individuals cannot be found or questioned by anybody else, and when questioned themselves, they'll say they're no experts, it's just something they claim to have heard. How is that level of either gullibility or dishonesty acceptable in a Presidential candidate? (hiippyboolbs)

why miss yous jes deescibbed yusef an yur owhn wurds up ther reel gud! ifn yous wernt so hippykriteecull n awl yous wud go looky fur da trooth a lott mor! dos greeni n greedi kompanees yous wuz tokin abowt up thar shor wor takin a lott mor $$$ dan yous sed. BULLyuns uf $$$ miss!! An wee no thet bothem dem partees tookin owhr $$$ fur yers! wee aint part-ee-zan likey yous miss yud butter smertin up an doo sum mor stud-yin afur yous tok ta wee foks! hee hee hic

October 9, 2011 at 5 p.m.
potcat said...

CarlB, i agree with every thing you said and know "THE TRUTH is there" Obama on the other hand has followed the Bush plan to a tee. I can't forget the Man that Promised , what i and most other people believed, i am very weary of Obama,i believe he is bought and sold and its not to the advantage for regular people.

             **SCREWED is what we are unless People take over MANUFACTORING and make their own GOODS.
October 9, 2011 at 6 p.m.
potcat said...

What the hell happened, did every body lose interest. ThaTS THE PROBLEM.

LETS DISCUSS THE REAL ISSUES, penny anti is not cutting it!!!!

October 9, 2011 at 7:54 p.m.
potcat said...
```Pussies~```
October 9, 2011 at 7:56 p.m.
lumpy said...

For gosh sakes, you've got to kidding me! Continuing to push to give loans to a company that's going bankrupt and has defaulted is ok?

You Democrats have a thing about giving loans to people who have no chance to pay them back. Whether it's the sub prime mortgage fiasco, which was a Democratic Party initiated mess, or Soylyndra. Obama knew about it and yet he's ok with continuing to dump tax payer money down the drain.

That's corruption and bad stewardship of tax payer money. What, did someone promise him a mansion when he loses in 2012 in exchange for giving a few hundred million more to a loser company?

Sorry, Mountainlaurel, but the Democrat Party is where marxists live and thrive.

You Democrats need to let go of Obama and just chalk it up to experience. Herman Cain is correct, take the protests to the White House. Obama's has good friends on Wall Street and in large corporations. Get real.

October 9, 2011 at 7:58 p.m.
fairmon said...

hwtnb..

The Solyndra and guns to cartels investigations are not complete so conclusions may be early. One unanswered question is why the advice of cabinet members and advisers that the loan to Solyndra was too risky and should not be made was ignored?

Any bumbling idiot of a manager should be able to reduce spending 1% plus inflation each year for 4 years. Corporations have made as much as 5-20% annual reductions through restructuring, mechanization, improved efficiency etc. keeping product prices and inflation down. The government budget is current plus an average increase of 8% per year. That is ridiculous and unnecessary.

A 1 cent reduction out of each dollar per year for 4 years then freeze the annual budget at that level for 4 years and the budget will be balanced. Make the necessary social security and medicare adjustments and begin reducing the debt. It is elementary math.

October 9, 2011 at 8:04 p.m.
rick1 said...

MTJohn: So, Rick, which takes precedent?

Excellent question. I would say that neither take precedent because Jesus said to render the things to Caesar that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.

October 9, 2011 at 8:06 p.m.
potcat said...

Mt.john, are you asking rick1,damn Man you are actually asking this MORON a question, Jesus words are clear and no wiggle room, thats whaT I LOVE ABOUT jESUS.

October 9, 2011 at 8:23 p.m.
MTJohn said...

Rick - I disagree. It seems to me that, if a person professes to be Christian, that person is a Christian 24/7 and that the tenets of Christianity ought to inform what it means to be a responsible citizen.

And, as a footnote, if we are to render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, Christians have good reason to pay their taxes with a smile. ;)

October 9, 2011 at 8:26 p.m.

Lumpy: Who is pushing further loans to Solyndra? There's plenty of other companies out there, and yes, they are working just fine with the money they got. I just figured you'd want to buy that perfectly useful building and put it to work. It's an asset, that demonstrates that...they weren't scamming. They built what they said they would. They just lost out to foreign action that lead to their product being priced out of the market. Still a good factory.

And the subprime mortgage crisis can be blamed on the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act. Done by...Republicans. Who then proceeded to dump more taxpayer money on the very people who caused it.

Harp: If you want everybody to wait before speaking on Solyndra, ok, then start demanding the same of the people who are using it to condemn the President. But really, so an investment had risk? That's something any investor will know, which is why the government diversified its investments anyway! And yes, they did require Solyndra to file paperwork to get the loan, and there's probably receipts for building their factory. If you want to file a FOIA request and get them, and put them on the Internet for all to read, more power to you.

I disagree with you about reducing spending, for several reasons. First, I'll point out that the US does not have one manager with singular authority. It's got several hundred. Each with different priorities and needs. That makes it very difficult to get things done. And that's just the elected members of Congress. There's plenty more people involved. Second, I'll point out that you can't just wave number figures around, declare that you'll make cuts. and say it'll solve everything. Because you know what cutting spending may do? Cause harm. Sometimes more expensively. Just look at any number of bridges and roads that are falling apart. Cut spending there, and you easily end up with worse problems. Much like a person I know who decided he would save money by not paying to have his roof fixed. Then the roof caved in. Whups! Or like how Rick Perry cut spending on volunteer fire departments. Prayers may be cheaper but they're not very effective.

It's simple when to work with big picture numbers and broad strokes, but the reality is...you will make decisions, decisions that may be more costly to the people of the United States than you realize.

Elementary math isn't going to help. It just means you're wanting us to believe it's easy. It's not. It's like when Herman Cain declared he'd never sign a law longer than 3 pages. Great for getting attention and sounding bold, not so good in reality. Especially since he didn't specify a page or font size.

October 9, 2011 at 8:28 p.m.
potcat said...

yOU CAN'T STADDLE THE FENCE, CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS, I CAN'T PRINT WHAT I THINK ABOUT THAT.LETS JUST SAY I DON'T GO BY THE rules, I AM me AND I for once like myself and other people feel the same, i'm for them, not against my people.

October 9, 2011 at 8:44 p.m.
carlB said...

potcat said... CarlB, i agree with every thing you said and know "THE TRUTH is there" Obama on the other hand has followed the Bush plan to a tee.


Reply to potcat: You might disagree with me on these points; I have to disagree with your statement, "followed the Bush plan to a tee." You are not clear as to which plan(s)you are talking about. There were many different unfinished conditions/situations left by the last administration that had to be dealt with. There are the wars that Bush W. entered this country into; There is the more than doubling of the National Debt, the US waa in the 2007 deep recession with jobs being lost, our manufacturing jobs have been decreasing for many years and our trade deficit has been about $600 billion dollars per year.
What were the objectives of President Obama's spending the stimulus money and even Bush W's $700 billion dollars of unfunded borrowed money? Presiden Obama did keep his promise to include in his budget all of the Bush W's unfunded spending to his budget. If you are familiar with the items that were not funded by Bush w. then it was over a Trillion dollars. Do you think Obama's spending polices have prevented the US from another great depression?

October 9, 2011 at 8:44 p.m.
rick1 said...

hwnb: Both the Democracts and Republicans are to blame for the housing crisis and it started before the repeal of the Glass-Steagall act.

Here is a very informative article which shows how both are to blame.

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/02/06/the-true-origins-of-this-finan

October 9, 2011 at 8:48 p.m.
rolando said...

Hey, the burst housing bubble was no one's fault, OK? S--t happens. Problem with ignoring it, we won't know what not to repeat...but who looks at history anyway, right? That stuff's written by dead white guys.

sarcasm OFF

October 9, 2011 at 8:58 p.m.
rick1 said...

MTJohn, by obeying Jesus’ command of “rendering to Caesar”, I don’t see how that would not be being a Christian 24/7. If we go back to hotdiggity’s original post that I commented on, he/she threw out some verses about giving to the poor. That is my personal obligation as a Christian. I don’t think it should be the law of the earthly government because I understand that not everyone is a Christian. I don’t see how forcibly taking something from a person that earns it and give to someone who hasn’t earned it is morally justified. This goes against the freewill that God gave us to CHOOSE to do what He wants us to do. He wants us to make a choice and not be forced to obey Him. As far as paying taxes with a smile, He doesn’t say we have to like it, but we need to do it. Whether or not I agree with it or not doesn’t matter.

October 9, 2011 at 9:20 p.m.
carlB said...

rick1 said... hwnb: Both the Democracts and Republicans are to blame for the housing crisis and it started before the repeal of the Glass-Steagall act. Here is a very informative article which shows how both are to blame. http://spectator.org/archives/2009/02/06/the-true-origins-of-this-finan


rick1, thanks for the site. Yes, the actions of our elected "law makers" in both houses make it impossible to forgive them for accepting the lobbist money, favoring the private financial systems and the global corporations in all of the free trade agreements.

October 9, 2011 at 9:21 p.m.

rick1: Well, I'm reluctant to call it a housing crisis, since I can find plenty of empty houses waiting for occupants, I do not feel the name is appropriate, but I was addressing that one particular aspect of the overall problem, the subprime mortgage crisis, which I do blame Republicans for, since they repealed the Glass-Steagall act

Still, if you want to hold them both accountable for the whole mess, fair enough, though I wouldn't call your article particularly informative. It's just way too short for that.

In terms of taxes, and government spending, it's not always about whether or not you earned something beforehand. Has any school child earned an education? No. They deserve it, and the principle is that the investment will, on the whole, earn something for everybody. And since much welfare goes to children, well...you should at least sort it out. Not to mention the disabled, and the elderly. And the veterans. It's easy to say that people receiving welfare haven't earned it...but is that the truth? But hey, your freewill is just fine, you are free to change the government's actions, to protest them, or to leave its jurisdiction. The rest of us are free not to listen to your protests, or to not help you if you leave.

carlb: Well, if you want to fire them all, I'd not be averse to that. Just do a better job on the retirements than they did with Paul Page.

October 9, 2011 at 9:38 p.m.
MTJohn said...

MTJohn, by obeying Jesus’ command of “rendering to Caesar”, I don’t see how that would not be being a Christian 24/7.

Why not?

MTJohn, If we go back to hotdiggity’s original post that I commented on, he/she threw out some verses about giving to the poor. That is my personal obligation as a Christian. I don’t think it should be the law of the earthly government because I understand that not everyone is a Christian.

I agree that it is your obligation as a Christian (with the understanding that "obligations" are our response of thanksgiving for what God has done for us - not our way to earn God's favor). But, I'd also suggest that our understanding of our calling to be God's people 24/7 ought to inform our personal understanding of what it means to live in a civil society and our personal understanding of the appropriate role of government - please note that I'm suggesting that Scripture ought to inform the choices that we make as individual citizens, not define our government. And, as I have posted a few times previously, I can't get from the prophet, Amos, to agreeing with the Tea Party, Libertarian or conservative Republican perspectives. Amos spoke out strongly about the failure of the wealthy to care for those less fortunate. Admittedly he was speaking to a society that was governed as a theocracy (and I'm not advocating that we become a theocracy), but we was talking about society's obligations, not just individual responsibility.

rick1 said...I don’t see how forcibly taking something from a person that earns it and give to someone who hasn’t earned it is morally justified.

I'd suggest that obedience to our obligation to the poor requires us to understand the circumstances that contribute to the cycle of poverty in this country before casting aspersions on those who receive public assistance.

rick1 said...This goes against the freewill that God gave us to CHOOSE to do what He wants us to do. He wants us to make a choice and not be forced to obey Him.

I agree that the choice is ours and that it is an exercise of our free will. I disagree that public assistance is the equivalent of "forced charity".

October 9, 2011 at 10:24 p.m.
fairmon said...

MTJohn said....

I disagree that public assistance is the equivalent of "forced charity".

Why does it have to be by the federal government that borrows forty two cents of every dollar spent which taxing the rich at 70% or more wouldn't reduce significantly and certainly not sufficiently? Why are donations up to 20% of taxes due to qualified charities per the governments criteria not 100% deductible which eliminates the need for the inefficient government hierarchy's administering welfare programs.

Why are all religious organizations exempt from taxes as though they were a non-profit charity when some have significant investment income and use that plus donations to build cathedrals, member recreation centers and other self serving activities?

We have always done it that way is not a good reason for continuing to do anything.

October 10, 2011 at 3:06 a.m.
fairmon said...

Why up at this hour? Working. European markets are up, futures indicate the U.S. markets may be up today. Those criticizing investment profits should be pleased to know hedge funds are losing an average of 5.5% this year, some larger ones have lost 40% and having the worst year since 2008 with only a hand full showing a profit. Serves them right, I don't like the way they have an artificial effect on the markets. I am still wondering why the administration baled out the banks when they insinuate banks don't have a right to make a profit? As a nickel and dime investor compared to most I love it when Obama bashes a business I have sold short the stock, like Bank of America which has continued to go down. Not liking what he does and says is different than using his economic ignorance to make a small profit.

Wages are not keeping up with inflation. Job growth is not keeping up with population growth and job market entry numbers yet politicians are telling us a temporary tax cut followed in a few months by a tax increase will solve the problem? If you believe that I have a bridge to sell you to go along with your ocean front property in Arizona. U6 a fed unemployment data point not highly publicized is up to 16.5% in September.

October 10, 2011 at 3:43 a.m.
MTJohn said...

harp3339 said...Why does it have to be by the federal government... Why are all religious organizations exempt from taxes as though they were a non-profit charity...

It has to be the federal government because, in our country, the government is "we the people". Concern for the disenfranchised is an obligation shared by all of us because we consider ours to be a civilized society. I am a Christian but we do not need to rely on Christian values to conclude that we all share a duty to care for the poor. As a Christian, I do get frustrated when other folks, who also profess to be Christian and claim to be "values voters", characterize welfare as forced charity.

If you are advocating welfare reform, I agree. The focus of reform ought to be developing a program that focuses on breaking the cycle of poverty, not reducing the amount of money that we spend supporting the disenfranchised.

If you are advocating tax reform, I also agree. The focus of tax reform ought to be ensuring that everyone pays a fair share. As I have previously noted, my definition of "fair" is a system in which tax rates are proportional to benefits received from public services, with the recognition that all public services, at least indirectly, function to promote the free-market economy.

October 10, 2011 at 6:52 a.m.
fairmon said...

MTJohn responded....

It has to be the federal government because, in our country, the government is "we the people.

We agree the truly disenfranchised need supporting but the process being a bloated inefficent federal government we will never agree on.

October 10, 2011 at 8:20 a.m.

Problem: "Status Quo"

Solution: "Change"

MO: "Yes We Can."

That is sort of like saying that attacks against churches in Egypt, Iraq, et al are due to "religion" or "religious violence."

What's wrong with the world are cartoonish slogans.

October 10, 2011 at 8:26 a.m.
MTJohn said...

harp3339 said...We agree the truly disenfranchised need supporting but the process being a bloated inefficent federal government we will never agree on.

I agreed that reform in both our social services programs and our tax structure would be appropriate. So, what is the basis for your conclusion that I also advocate for a bloated and inefficient government?

October 10, 2011 at 8:53 a.m.
prairiedog said...

All of the people who have depended upon everybody else to make the money and know how to do the hard things finally figured out that letting someone else be in charge, so you don't have to, is how common people get screwed. You know that time back in school when you asked, "When will I ever use this in real life?" Guess what. Today is the day. Most of you didn't take the trouble to learn the math and study the history and make yourselves capable of innovation and leadership. When you left it to the "smart guys" to do the heavy lifting you allowed the crooks to take over. It's your fault for being lazy and settling for what was easy. By the way, the government is even worse because anyone willing to work for a government salary has either already tried and failed to do better, or settled for the minimum level of "professional" job available. The evil genius is a real thing, not a cartoon character, and you all let them take over and ruin the economy on the right wing side through predatory business and banking practices, and ruin the productive manufacturing sector of the economy on the left wing side through environmentalism. Workers are going to have to figure out how to own the companies that employ them, and the silent majority is going to have to stop tolerating the law breakers all around us. That's how this country rose to be the great place it is, except that the past twenty years have seen our wealth squandered on the idea that everybody can be wealthy and comfortable without really having to get an education, work, save, pay their bills and live responsibly. The cartoon is correct as far as it goes, but the reality is that all those people with the screws through their bellies lined up to help hold them in place so the special interests could turn the handle. When we insist on including everyone by saying, "Come on in," instead of, "you're welcome when you can pay for the ticket," that's where society gets watered down to what we have today. When we replace excellence with universal inclusion, the only way to get ahead is to victimize people and break the law. That's how they did it. You let them. Happy now?

October 10, 2011 at 9:40 a.m.

"whats_wrong_with_the_world said... Problem: "Status Quo""

The real "wrongness of the world" is your stupidity in citing Obama, as opposed to the real culprits, the uber-wealthy. Your ignorance of the system legitimizes the false dicotomy of right vs. left, when in actuality, both parties favor only the super rich, in part b/c they are one of them. They, not just Obama and his policies, are the status quo.

October 10, 2011 at 9:41 a.m.

"The cartoon is correct as far as it goes, but the reality is that all those people with the screws through their bellies lined up to help hold them in place so the special interests could turn the handle."

Aside from your apparent anger at those who are getting screwed, Prairiedog, you are talking about Plato's Republic, which is correct. But what you dont get is that the people have had no choice as they have been in the dark concerning these events, see Alan Greenspan's esoteric discussions on the Fed before the repeal of the Glass-Stegel Act, who is viewed as a bad economist, helped destroy the world with conscious manipulation at best and lies at worst, along with others in power.

The real culprits are those who have genuine power who have remained silent, which appears to include you since your comment deigns a response to us lowly, guilty serfs. So, when the rich get eaten, you will be on the menu.

Blame is a poor substitute for cowardice.

October 10, 2011 at 9:50 a.m.

I'm just sad at the idea that the government doesn't attract the best and the brightest anymore.

Of course, I won't deny that the self-proclaimed best are trying to run for office on rather inflated claims.

October 10, 2011 at 9:58 a.m.
carlB said...

"$584 million worth of bonds to refinance higher interest debt from the past and to pay for capital projects by the state."

How much money will it take to get more "private" manufacturing plants back in the USA? "$584 million" dollars seems to be just a "drop in the bucket" when billions and trillions of dollars are the normal terms used. Here is proof that the cities,counties,the states, and the federal tax payers are "bearing" the cost just to maintain the employment in our areas. If the local "citizen" people are not hired in these new manufacturing jobs, it will not help decrease our unemployment rate. How many of you remember what this area was like during the 1929 great depression before FDR and TVA? What would this ara be like today if there was not the available electric power for industrial use?

State prepares biggest debt sale

Tennessee will hold the largest bond sale in state history next week to pay for capital and infrastructure projects including Volkswagen, Amazon, Wacker and the UTC library. Tennessee Comptroller Justin Wilson said the state will sell an estimated $584 million worth of bonds to refinance higher interest debt from the past and to pay for capital projects by the state.

"I'm pleased that these bonds will be used to pay for a variety of needs our citizens have, including economic development projects that will create badly needed jobs," Wilson said.

October 10, 2011 at 11:15 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

I personally hate Bennett's work. He is a simple minded socialist who is advocating for the destruction of the principles this country was founded on. He is too dumb to realize that encroaching socialism is what is wrong with this country today. That goes for his supporters too.

I hold the TFP responsible for allowing Bennett to dominate the on-line version of their editorial page. They will never see another dime of my subscription money until they rectify this freak show.

Why do I come back to check on this page? It is kind of like seeing someone coming up the sidewalk with some huge facial defect, like a wart the size of a tennis ball hanging on the left side of the nose. You can’t help staring at it. Bennett is that wart on the face of Chattanooga.

October 10, 2011 at 11:19 a.m.
carlB said...

BigRidgePatriot, What a surprise? It appears that your narrow minded true opinions are continuing to come out. You are wanting to keep the area people "dumbed down" by limiting what information is available to them so that they can have "fair and balanced" information for developing their own opinions and judgment on whom they want to vote for. You should have appreciated the "status quo" drawing. just pretend that is you with the "screw driver." With all of this anti Obama talk occurring,how can we not ask; What would the conditions be if McCain and Palin had been elected? It is hard to understand what the Bush administration's thinking was when they more than doubled the National Debt during their eight years without increasing the necessary revenue for their spending. Yet, with the fraud occurring in the private sector financial systems and our US consumers causing a trade deficit of our present $600 billion dollars per year, buying the imported manufactured goods of the private global corporate monopolies. This Republic was and is still in an imbalance of revenue with the amount of spending. It is the manufacturing jobs that are needed here. Before the election of President Obama, this Republic was in the 2007 deep recession, which created a panic within the Republican leadership in September, 2008. They had to admit the US was in a deep recession and did not want another "great depression" occurring again while they were in office. What did the Republicans do? They borrowed $700 billion dollars of unfunded money, to prevent a "world wide financial depression" and with the help of the FED's putting some money into the pot; it temporarily prevented another great depression from occurring. Yet, apparently their concern about preventing another great depression while the Republicans were in control, ended as soon Obama was in office.

October 10, 2011 at 12:08 p.m.

You're an idiot bigridge. The government is the socialist, as they have bailed out the banks.

Private profit, public loss is the mantra of government, you dumb a**. Go watch your stupid fox news, and learn the most basic principle we have in this country, the corporations own it, and they love corporate welfare (i.e. socialism), while the poor suckers must beg for a just over broke (JOB).

Let me guess, you are a white, christian, retired man. Get a clue or get the #$@# out of the way.

October 10, 2011 at 12:10 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

carlB said... "You are wanting to keep the area people "dumbed down" by limiting what information"

The limited perspective comes from The Wart. Apparently his followers are so stupid they need to have his narrow perspective reinforced daily or their minds might wander in more rational directions.

October 10, 2011 at 12:32 p.m.

And pray tell, what is the "rational direction" of which you speak?

Please explain.

October 10, 2011 at 1:53 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

BigRidgePatriot said: “He is a simple minded socialist who is advocating for the destruction of the principles this country was founded on. He is too dumb to realize that encroaching socialism is what is wrong with this country today.”

Since the richest 20 percent of the U.S. population control 84 percent of the wealth in this country, it’s rather obvious that our problem is not “encroaching socialism,” BigRidgePatriot.

Indeed, instead of ranting on and on about Bennett everyday, you might try to figure out how it can to be that 400 of the richest Americans have a higher net worth than the full bottom 50 percent of U.S. households - if you're really interested in our founding principles.

October 10, 2011 at 2:14 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

mountainlaurel said... "Indeed, instead of ranting on and on about Bennett everyday, you might try to figure out how it can to be that 400 of the richest Americans have a higher net worth than the full bottom 50 percent of U.S. households - if you're really interested in our founding principles"

Maybe you should try to figure out why you support policies that have created a lazy dependent class that would rather collect a check than go out and make a living for themselves.

Maybe you should look into how government intervention in the free market has served to concentrate wealth and has made it harder for citizens to make the move from wage earner to small businessman.

Maybe you should have more faith in individuals to control their own destiny rather than advocating to give up freedom and prosperity for social promises.

October 10, 2011 at 2:33 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

audentisfortunaiuvat said... "And pray tell, what is the "rational direction" of which you speak?"

What is more rational than socialism, communism, Marxism or fascism? Do I really have to answer that question? Am I addressing a Chinese communist or Socialist party member, or a product of Woodrow Wilson’s education system? If you understood the brilliance of our founding fathers you would not have to ask that question.

October 10, 2011 at 2:40 p.m.

bigridge, you must have an IQ less than a warthog. Read "An economic interpretation of the Constitution of the United states" By James Beard.

Since you probably do not read, I will summarize it: the constitution does not guarantee any economic rights for its citizens. So, when the constitution was enacted, the landowning, slave-owners bought up all the votes, got themselves elected, and continued the process of class warfare to this day.

Thus, "government intervention in the free market" did not concentrate wealth, since it had been concentrated deliberately by James Madison when he wrote it! dumba$$!

Look up the debates on the constitutional convention, and start reading for once in your pathetic life.

October 10, 2011 at 2:44 p.m.

You are addressing a professor. And pray tell what are you?

Oh yea, and can you define fascism for me? We are having a competency test.

October 10, 2011 at 2:48 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

audentisfortunaiuvat said... "Since you probably do not read"

Since you have already demonstrated that your mind is closed that you and are willing to make wild assumptions without any basis it is clear that engaging in a discussion with you would be an utter waste of time.

Cain gets it. Why can’t you?

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/cain-why-dont-you-move-demonstrations-white-house

October 10, 2011 at 2:48 p.m.
dude_abides said...

Wow! I feel rejuvenated! I want guns and Jamaican souse and all the money and a huge gas-hog vehicle and to be right all the time! I now realize God wanted my forebears to kill and marginalize all the indigenous people of this land, so that I could then establish a cutoff point at which anyone trying to get into this country would be committing a crime! I am the wind beneath my own wings! I do, however, wish they would put sleeves on the flag... and perhaps buttons... and a flap in the back.

October 10, 2011 at 2:49 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

audentisfortunaiuvat said... "You are addressing a professor."

Is that supposed to impress me? A professor of what? We already know your political leanings are Democrat/Socialist, would you care to refine our understanding?

October 10, 2011 at 2:51 p.m.

Your intolerance and stupidity is what makes this town a podunk idiot filled slop house.

And in fact, you wont explain it b/c you cant, and this is for the simple reason that you are not fit for society, and if you were around in earlier days, they would have left you due to your lack of reason, explanation, or ability to think.

October 10, 2011 at 2:52 p.m.

What is your profession? Troll?

Patsy for littlefield? patsy for the status quo?

patsy for idiocy? Certainly.

October 10, 2011 at 2:53 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

dude_abides said... "I now realize God wanted my forebears to kill and marginalize all the indigenous people of this land"

See how the mind of a leftist works?

By the way, dude, Jackson was not one of the founders and I abhor what he did to Native Americans.

October 10, 2011 at 2:56 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

audentisfortunaiuvat said... "What is your profession? Troll? Patsy for littlefield? patsy for the status quo? patsy for idiocy? Certainly."

Am I to believe this is typical of the debate skills of a modern "professor"?

October 10, 2011 at 2:57 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

dude_abides said... "Wow! I feel rejuvenated! I want guns and Jamaican souse"

What is this obsession with souse dude?

October 10, 2011 at 3 p.m.
acerigger said...

Not to pile on,but I couldn't help but think of BRP when I read this; "It seems as if these people feel that they are Biblical prophets that have the celestial mission of saving the nation at any cost.This implies a one-dimensional, simplistic, quasi religious vision of a complex socio-political reality; a vision that, among other things, does not accept the opposition as another segment of political society but it characterizes it as being the enemy. This demonization of the Left, Democrats, unions, academics, immigrants, feminists, environmentalists, progressives, Keynesians, pacifists, makes impossible any political dialogue and leads to a vitriolic, insulting attack to dehumanize the 'enemy' of this ultraconservative Utopia that, in the last instance, is a White and Anglo-Saxon America.N.Fantini

October 10, 2011 at 3:03 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

audentisfortunaiuvat said... "Your intolerance and stupidity is what makes this town a podunk idiot filled slop house. And in fact, you wont explain it b/c you cant, and this is for the simple reason that you are not fit for society, and if you were around in earlier days, they would have left you due to your lack of reason, explanation, or ability to think."

WOW! I missed that! Is that what you really think of Chattanooga?

Since you think I am not fit for society would you like to see me sent to a reeducation camp? Maybe you think it would be more practical to just terminate the problem that is my existence?

October 10, 2011 at 3:05 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

acerigger said... "Not to pile on,but I couldn't help but think of BRP"

Which reminds me of the other reason I come back to this page, beyond staring at the tennis ball sized Wart on the face of Chattanooga...

It is the love and tolerance I feel radiating from Clay Bennett and his supporters. They have such open minds and are so willing to engage in stimulating political discourse... Gag!

October 10, 2011 at 3:09 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

BigRidgePatriot said: “Maybe you should look into how government intervention in the free market has served to concentrate wealth and has made it harder for citizens to make the move from wage earner to small businessman.”

Please, BRP. Our government is made up elected representatives so the only question that needs to be answered is who rigged the system in a way that has led to such concentrated wealth? Indeed, who established these preferential tax laws, policies, and accounting loopholes that are designed to benefit rich taxpayers and corporations?

Of course, the answer is obvious. It’s our corrupt and self-serving politicians who get big bucks to accommodate America’s financial-industry oligarchs. Indeed, America’s oligarchs want it all. . . And as NYT's Krugman says, they get testy when we don't see things their way:

“Last year, you may recall, a number of financial-industry barons went wild over very mild criticism from President Obama. They denounced Mr. Obama as being almost a socialist for endorsing the so-called Volcker rule, which would simply prohibit banks backed by federal guarantees from engaging in risky speculation. And as for their reaction to proposals to close a loophole that lets some of them pay remarkably low taxes — well, Stephen Schwarzman, chairman of the Blackstone Group, compared it to Hitler’s invasion of Poland.

And then there’s the campaign of character assassination against Elizabeth Warren, the financial reformer now running for the Senate in Massachusetts. Not long ago a YouTube video of Ms. Warren making an eloquent, down-to-earth case for taxes on the rich went viral. Nothing about what she said was radical — it was no more than a modern riff on Oliver Wendell Holmes’s famous dictum that “Taxes are what we pay for civilized society.” . . .

What’s going on here? The answer, surely, is that Wall Street’s Masters of the Universe realize, deep down, how morally indefensible their position is. They’re not John Galt; they’re not even Steve Jobs. They’re people who got rich by peddling complex financial schemes that, far from delivering clear benefits to the American people, helped push us into a crisis whose aftereffects continue to blight the lives of tens of millions of their fellow citizens.

Yet they have paid no price. Their institutions were bailed out by taxpayers, with few strings attached. They continue to benefit from explicit and implicit federal guarantees — basically, they’re still in a game of heads they win, tails taxpayers lose. And they benefit from tax loopholes that in many cases have people with multimillion-dollar incomes paying lower rates than middle-class families.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/10/opinion/panic-of-the-plutocrats.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

October 10, 2011 at 3:53 p.m.

You all are missing the point: BOTH PARTIES ARE FOR THE ULTRA-RICH.

And fascism bgrdg is defined as the government controlled by the corporations.

No, you need no reeducation, or termination, since you have never been educated, nor have given a reason for your existence except to support the ultra-wealthy, which you undoubtably, as viewed through your lack of basic human knowledge, do not understand.

And in fact I used to be a staunch Republican, (Rn Paul style), but now I see myself as part of the majority of this country getting screwed over, and I bet you are too, so let the pride and ignorance go. Are you not upset at the system?

October 10, 2011 at 4:17 p.m.
joecrash1 said...

That monument should have been a big blue rhino holding the screwdriver!

October 10, 2011 at 4:19 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

mountainlaurel said... “Yet they have paid no price. Their institutions were bailed out by taxpayers, with few strings attached. They continue to benefit from explicit and implicit federal guarantees — basically, they’re still in a game of heads they win, tails taxpayers lose.”

mountainlaurel, I agree with pretty much everything you say. I think the difference is that I hold the government responsible for colluding with the big banks and creating the environment that allows the banking industry to misbehave. Instead of responsibly regulating the banks the government has gotten into the habit of manipulating the banks to achieve political objectives. I think you have to agree that Obama has done nothing to improve this situation and has instead made it worse. A government that respected a more limited role would not be monetizing debt, promoting issuance of substandard mortgages and bailing out big banks. They would be prosecuting individuals for hiding toxic mortgages and misrepresentation and busting up banks that are “too big to fail”. They would be strong advocates of auditing the Fed. After the government has spent decades building a financial house of cards it is nearly impossible for the politicians to stand up and do anything about it. No one wants the house to fall on their watch. Even though both parties are completely culpable, the winner would be the one who successfully blames the other in the eyes of the public. What a mess.

So, I actually do not support the status quo, but I think Bennett has portrayed the screw driver as a monopoly character and is implying big business / big banking is the problem. As I said before, big government facilitated the problems you seem to be assigning purely to the private sector. Government has a legitimate role stopping these things, not colluding in it. I think the Democrats are hold slightly more guilt than the Republicans. Democrats get away with pointing the fingers at Republicans by distorting opposition to irresponsible or overreaching regulation as opposition to all regulation.

October 10, 2011 at 4:23 p.m.
timbo said...

Ricaroo... Childish and immature is not name-calling. It is not an attack on your sanity or intelligence. As I recall, you started in this string by using the term "tea bagger." I don't think you were using that as a term of endearment. Here is your first post:

"Me, pretending to be one of the libertarian/teabagging/bible-thumping/Bennett-bashing bunch of bozos:" Nah, that wasn't name calling was it? Any one that is close to being an adult would call that childish and immature.

I think your views are childish because they make no sense. You attack religion but you hold your views religiously. By that I mean, on faith, emotion, and belief that although liberal/socialist philosophy hasn't worked any where at any time, you continue to want to recycle it over and over again like a kid playing a Barney video.

Teabagger is meant by you as an insult, yet you and the rest of your bunch keep using it over and over and over. When someone nails you for these immature views you squeal like a spoiled little kid.

October 10, 2011 at 5:10 p.m.
rolando said...

Well said, timbo. Touche.

October 10, 2011 at 5:30 p.m.
dude_abides said...

G'night timbo, see you tomorrow.

October 10, 2011 at 6:52 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

BigRidgePatriot said: “I think the difference is that I hold the government responsible for colluding with the big banks and creating the environment that allows the banking industry to misbehave.”

Nice try, BRP. An individual concerned about the status quo and the need to make reforms in the financial industry wouldn’t be complaining that the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill was “irresponsible and overreaching.” Indeed, it would be the opposite.

BigRidgePatriot said: “I think the Democrats are hold slightly more guilt than the Republicans. Democrats get away with pointing the fingers at Republicans by distorting opposition, to irresponsible or overreaching regulation as opposition to all regulation.”

You’re shameless at times, BRP. The Republicans made it very clear some time ago that they prefer corruption and the previous status quo when it comes to the banks, Wall Street, and financial industry. We need to keep pointing our fingers at them until they reform:

“Republicans are taking aim at the "unintended consequences" of the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill, including the rule that limits bank's abilities to make trades with their own money.

The House Financial Services Committee plans to overhaul any rules in the bill that may seek to regulate proprietary trading and derivatives, according to a draft plan obtained by Bloomberg News. House Republicans almost unanimously opposed the law last year, and their plans to limit controls on Wall Street may spring from lobbying efforts by firms like JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America, Bloomberg reports.

They also plan to take aim at the Volcker rule. Conceived by former Fed chairman Paul Volcker, it limits (but does not ban) banks' ability to make trades with their own money.

Congressman Barney Frank, (D-MA), a co-creator of the the landmark financial reform legislation which passed last year, said last week that the regulators were already underfunded, and that "Republicans are attempting to cripple regulation by failing to fund it," the Boston Globe reported.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/02/republicans-attack-financial-reform_n_817347.html

October 10, 2011 at 6:52 p.m.
dude_abides said...

BRP, did I specify founders? Think not. See how the radical right brain doesn't work?
I'm, like, 99% (oops) sure that you let us all know, a few months ago, that you were going to enjoy a big pot of Jamaican souse, and I've just not been able to get past what that must consist of. Does it bubble and squeak when it's simmering?

October 10, 2011 at 7:05 p.m.
fairmon said...

mntl...

Have you read the Franks/Dodd bill? I don't know who they had do it for them but it will not be effective. It will hurt small well run regional banks that didn't participate in any poor business practices. It will result in the big getting bigger. It may reign in Freddie and Fannie with Barney Franks scared to death someone will attack his connections with them. One healthy financially sound bank in Texas that makes loans to small businesses announced it is closing all locations, saying it just isn't worth it. You can expect others to follow.

It seems the talent to develop legislation that is effective and manageable is no longer available. Congress waits on a crisis and rushes something through with a "we will fix it later" attitude. The AHCA, which I am guessing you haven't read, is a catastrophe with good intentions. No need to debate that bill any further, just remember how those NY Times articles praised it and you defended it when the unnecessary and unfair cost start. You attack republicans but and so do I but how in the hell can you defend democrats that seem to be in a dream world? If you think the democrats give a rip about you or anyone else you are sadly mistaken. Retaining position and power is their only criteria.

October 10, 2011 at 8:50 p.m.
ArnoldZiffel said...

The difference between the Occupy bunch and the Tea Party is very SHOCKING! The Tea Party events are packed with tax paying citizens who believe in the Constitution. Judging by the Occupy bunch, BO's loyal supporters consist of big, fat welfare mommas yelling, "I want mines", pimply, marxist college students, drug addicts, anarchists, criminals, lazy asses, and the jealous and envious crowd throwing a tantrum!! Way to go BO!!

October 10, 2011 at 10:11 p.m.

"My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday." - G.K. Chesterton

"Most modern freedom is at root fear. It is not so much that we are too bold to endure rules; it is rather that we are too timid to endure responsibilities." - G.K. Chesterton

October 10, 2011 at 10:47 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Harp3339 said: “Have you read the Franks/Dodd bill? It will hurt small well-run regional banks that didn't participate in any poor business practices.”

Have you read the bill, Harp3339? I’m asking because your statement strongly suggests that you haven’t read it. Indeed, U.S. Deputy Secretary of the Treasury, Neal Wolin, points out that lawmakers took great care to protect and strengthen community banks:

“Opponents of financial reform have been trying to argue that the Dodd-Frank Act is bad for consumers and bad for small businesses because it hurts small banks. In fact, the lawmakers who drafted the Dodd-Frank Act took great care to protect and strengthen the country’s rich network of community banks . . .

The legislation does . . . contain several important provisions that put community banks on more equal footing with their competitors and strengthen their important role in our financial system.

First, the Dodd-Frank Act raises deposit insurance protection to $250,000, providing greater protection for one of community banks’ core sources of funding.

Second, Dodd-Frank ensures that the cost of deposit insurance is born by the institutions that engage in the riskiest activities and that, consequently, benefit the most from its protection. Dodd-Frank does this by requiring insurance premiums to be based on total liabilities, which are a more accurate reflection of risk than deposits alone. As a result, the premium burden will shift away from smaller institutions to larger, riskier banks.

Third, Dodd-Frank provides that large financial institutions will be subject to heightened prudential standards, including requirements to hold more capital and maintain larger liquidity buffers. . . . Community banks, which do not pose the same type of risks to the system as large firms, will not be subject to these obligations.

Fourth, Dodd-Frank levels the playing field between small banks and nonbank financial service providers, such as payday lenders and independent mortgage brokers. . .

Fifth, Dodd-Frank works to protect small banks from excessive supervisory burdens. The regulator responsible for monitoring the safety and soundness of community banks will also bear responsibility for enforcing rules promulgated by the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. This will allow small banks to avoid multiple exams.

http://www.treasury.gov/connect/blog/Pages/Financial-Reform-Protects-and-Strengthens-Community-Banks.aspx

October 10, 2011 at 11:22 p.m.
fairmon said...

mntl...

I never bought and still don't buy the "too big to fail" position taken by the administration and congress. Why would they not quit insuring those that did not keep their financial house in order? The Volcker rule would have been better than the fiction written by Dodd/Franks. As wonderful as the dems are I think you will find they agreed to allow bankers to also be brokers which is a conflict of interest. Why did the democrats not close the loop holes enjoyed by banks when they had control of both houses and the administration? Why did they not pass a budget timely when they had control and it was due? Why is there no mention of Barney Franks and the black caucus attack of secretary Snow (Some, "go to hell tea party" Waters-D CA. for one calling him a racist) when he tried to get congress to strengthen regulation of the financial industry. I was watching the hearings and know this is a fact although some here try to deny it. Why is there no mention of the pressure exerted by some in congress to make higher risk loans to enable more people to own homes, to have the American dream they called it. They must think every American is dreaming of the day they can go in debt up to their eye balls to own a house. How did congress with over sight responsibility of Fannie and Freddie allow them to essentially go bankrupt buying the bad loans which is one issue secretary Snow was addressing? Barney spit, sputtered and got all emotional, saying they were in sound financial shape. I can't deny the republicans are rotten but you need to tell me again how wonderful the democrats are.

How did not letting them fail help those that took out loans they could not afford to pay? They still lost and some are still losing their house. until the law of supply and demand re balances the inventories and prices all congress or the president are doing is chasing smoke and relocating the problem, not fixing it. Those individuals that participated Buyers and lenders) in manipulating appraisals and over stating incomes to get loans should be prosecuted and penalized. There has to be a level of personal responsibility without ignorance being an excuse for lying and providing false information.

And, by the way, home loan interest should not be deductible. In fact there should be zero deductions for anyone for anything. I am not interested in helping you or anyone else buy a house.

October 11, 2011 at 12:03 a.m.
fairmon said...

mntl posted....

U.S. Deputy Secretary of the Treasury, Neal Wolin, points out that lawmakers took great care to protect and strengthen community banks: and Have you read the bill, Harp3339?

Yes I have and admit it is not an easy read and I don't profess to totally understand it. However, interviews with regional banks managers and the closing of some due to the frustration of dealing with it and regulators insisting they change their operations don't agree with Mr. Wolin. I am inclined to accept the victims side of the story until they are proven wrong. It is logical to conclude that increasing depositor insurance to $250,000 from $100,000 and adding a significant number of regulators would result in more stringent controls, reports and monitoring. Another case of "I am from the government and I am here to help you" :)...bend over.

October 11, 2011 at 6:47 a.m.

wowsi mrpririedog yall sed it soo gud! an mr riky1 too! an mr Lumpi i dont no howl hee kan keap hisn saneetee her- Trooth herts dont it trroth on dos Liftists jes hertsss!

October 11, 2011 at 8:37 p.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.