published Thursday, March 22nd, 2012

The Hitchhiker

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 ...

382
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.
John_Proctor said...

Ah yes, 1953, when minorities and women knew their places, but I think Clay made a mistake. He meant 1863.

March 22, 2012 at 12:08 a.m.
hambone said...

Obviously not one of the JOB CREATERS !

March 22, 2012 at 12:51 a.m.
onetinsoldier said...

1953

The unemployment rate was 2.5%

The top tax rate was 92%

The annual deficit was 1.7%

Sounds like a plan to me.

March 22, 2012 at 12:56 a.m.
blackwater48 said...

WHO WILL HE BE IN NOVEMBER?

Have you ever noticed how each republican candidate has had to not only apologize for any half way reasonable position he may have even accidently held in the past, but thoroughly refute it NOW and promise to never, EVER, think that way again?

Once upon a time, for instance, Romney called himself a progressive who would defend Roe v. Woe, Planned Parenthood, and gay rights. Now? Not so much.

One senior aide spilled the beans when he was asked about how pressure from conservative candidates in Romney's caustic primary fight might turn off more moderate voters in November.

"Well," Eric Fehmstrom, Senior Aide to the campaign said, " I think you hit a reset button for the Fall campaign and everything changes. It’s almost like a Etch A Sketch, you can kind of shake it up and we start all over again.

March 22, 2012 at 1:07 a.m.

1953? So he's an Eisenhower Republican?

That would be for Civil Rights, against Defense spending, Pro-Infrastructure investment, and expanded Social Security?

Or would he be looking to be more like Joe McCarthy?

March 22, 2012 at 1:33 a.m.
shifarobe said...

How about Obutthead holding up a sign reading 1917?? One time Obutthead called himself a communist, then when he ran in 2008 he and the media would have you believe he was Mr. Moderate or Mr. Free Enterprise. One time Obutthead thought the Constitution is not worth lining his bird cage with, then he swears to defend it. He is the ULTIMATE flip flopper.

March 22, 2012 at 1:55 a.m.

Such language reflects your own poor attitude, nobody else's.

March 22, 2012 at 2:07 a.m.
alprova said...

I'm not sure what the subject of today's cartoon is, but there is a coincidental similarity between the 1952 Democratic race for the nomination and this year's Republican nomination.

Primary elections were very limited back then. Only 16 states held primary elections. Harry Truman, after losing the 1952 New Hampshire primary, and facing some very low job approval numbers, dropped his bid for re-election. Senator Estes Kefauver of Tennessee, who won the New Hampshire primary, Senator Richard Russell, Jr. of Georgia, Senator Hubert Humphrey of Minnesota, and Former Secretary of Commerce W. Averell Harriman of New York were the remaining top tier candidates running for the Democratic nomination.

Kefauver won primary elections in 13 states. He drew the highest number of delegates awarded during the primaries. Humphrey won his home state of Minnesota, Harriman won West Virginia, and Russell won Florida.

Independent voters overwhelmingly supported Kefauver with their votes, but when it came to selecting the nominee at the Democratic Convention, party leaders refused to support Kefauver. Illinois Governor Adlai Stevenson was drafted into the race reluctantly, refusing the nomination vote twice, but then after the third ballot vote, eventually decided to accept the nomination.

Of course, he was defeated by Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich are pinning their hopes on a brokered convention in Tampa later this year. Each hopes to convince party leaders to throw Mitt Romney aside and to nominate himself. For that reason, both men are likely going to stay in the race to the bitter end.

Sarah Palin may be hoping to receive a phone call telling her to be in Tampa. A Governor who was not running for nomination ultimately received it in 1952. It could happen again.

Of course, if that were to happen, there would be no need to buy any commercial time to thrash her. The movie "Game Change" would only need to be aired a few times a week on HBO.

It's going to be an interesting year, that's for sure.

March 22, 2012 at 3:18 a.m.
shifarobe said...

I read asians are the fasted growing group in America now. Bad news for the left.

March 22, 2012 at 3:53 a.m.
shifarobe said...

The left can have illegal aliens and gangsta types with their pants hangin' and their undies showing. The left can also have the lazy street crappers also known as the OWS bunch.

March 22, 2012 at 3:57 a.m.
sage1 said...

They already have all of those shifarobe. They love their Obamabucks. FREEEEE MONEY!!!

I'm bored with this....Think I'll go over to Breitbart.com and read some more on the Vetting of Obama....Well? No one else will do it! hahaha. Expecially the Obama owned Media.

March 22, 2012 at 4:17 a.m.
shifarobe said...

Yup, Sage. I'll check that out myself. This was our founders worst nightmare, a press that is in bed with a tyrant and doesn't have the b**ls to stand up to a him.

March 22, 2012 at 4:48 a.m.
shifarobe said...

Cowards. OBUTTHEAD slides into office on a slimy carpet of lies and cover ups. It was so freakin' important to them to get a half white-half black lefty in there that they practically wet themselves lying for him.

March 22, 2012 at 4:51 a.m.
shifarobe said...

What a crappy president. THE GREAT DIVIDER!!! IN THIS CORNER WE HAVE OBUTTHEAD AND HIS GANG OF ILLEGAL ALIENS, GANGSTAS, LEECHES, AND ALL THOSE WHO WANT GUARANTEES, IN THE OTHER CORNER WE HAVE THOSE WHO LOVE FREEDOM ,JUST WANT OPPORTUNITIES AND RESPECT THE CONSTITUTION!

Obutthead, the choice of those who crap and pee in the streets! He's got their vote sewn up!LOL

March 22, 2012 at 4:58 a.m.
shifarobe said...

OBUTTHEAD's gang taken ova da streetz. WATCH WHERE YOU STEP!! LOL

March 22, 2012 at 5:01 a.m.
joneses said...

I have heard this fool you liberals worship as president dictator say he wants to move the country forward. Forward to what? Socialism? Communism? Are you disgusting liberals so stupid you think more people depending on government is moving the country forward? If one depends on the government for their livelihood there is a good chance they will remain in poverty all their lives. Moving forward to obutthead is destroying this great country. Maybe that is how he is planning to stop the illegal aliens from coming to America. Make it where there is noting for them to come to. His plan is working.

March 22, 2012 at 5:02 a.m.
shifarobe said...

MEchelle says to B.hussein: LISTEN BARACK, MALIA IS GOING TO MEXICO AND THAT'S THAT! AIN'T NO WAY SHE'S GOING TO MISS OUT ON SPRING BREAK. I DON'T GIVE A DAMN HOW MANY VIOLENT DRUG GANGS THERE ARE. Barack says: OK, OK ,OK AS LONG AS I GET TO WATCH ALL THE NCAA TOURNAMENT GAMES I WANT. PASS THE CHIPS. MAN! I NEED A VACATION!

March 22, 2012 at 5:10 a.m.
joneses said...

Republicans are not racist and they are not against women. How would they benefit being against women and being racist? They would not. This is just another liberal lie to take the focus off of the failed liberal policies. The liberals have shown time and time again their racism by just using blacks as pawns to get elected and failing on all their promises to the blacks.

March 22, 2012 at 5:12 a.m.
shifarobe said...

His plan is working Joneses. Get as many jealous and envious leeches in here, along with all the ones already here and promise them anything. What a sucky president!

March 22, 2012 at 5:12 a.m.
EaTn said...

I see the sheets have been pressed for another busy day.

March 22, 2012 at 7:04 a.m.
DocCutty said...

Really, Joneses? See the post just above yours.

March 22, 2012 at 7:37 a.m.
dude_abides said...

joneses/shifarobe... hope you're getting some sleep, now. Looks like you two had an exhausting night of research. When I read your posts, I can't help but picture Lee Harvey Oswald.

March 22, 2012 at 7:45 a.m.
WHS1970 said...

I think they are spooning right about now.

March 22, 2012 at 8:03 a.m.
joneses said...

Dude,

That is a stupid post. I have no issues with this foolish president's color. I do not care. My issue is he has proven time and time again to be a failure and wants to continue implementing his socialist/marxist/communist agenda. if there are racist here it is you and the rest of you pathetic liberals and your pathetic low opinion of blacks by promoting to them that if it were not for government they could not make it on their own. That is as racist as you can get and you all should be ashamed of yourself for looking at the black population as helpless victims.

March 22, 2012 at 8:29 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Keep trying Bennett. One day you might actually dream up a good cartoon on this subject. Until then, all I have for you is a yawn.

March 22, 2012 at 8:35 a.m.
joneses said...

This foolish president is going to Cushing, OK to promote him supporting the Keystone Pipeline from Oklahoma to the gulf. He will speak at a private photo opportunity meaning the public is not invited. He is probably afraid of the public shouting him down for his failed energy policy or lack thereof. Someone needs to tell this moron that the Keystone pipeline is intended to transport oil from Canada to the gulf so basically this moron is promoting a pipeline to no where. This pathetic, follish president is lying again to have it both ways. He is that much of a failure. The liberals are stupid enough to believe this crap but us intelligent people will never fall for this fools lies.

March 22, 2012 at 8:39 a.m.
davisss13 said...

The Republican party wants 1953 when it comes to women and 1853 when it comes to workers, worker rights and unions.

They are the women hating wealthy robber barons.

ps: the rightwingers posts are even more extreme the closer the election gets.

March 22, 2012 at 8:58 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

alprova: Clearly in love with the site of his own keystrokes. Brevity man!

March 22, 2012 at 9:04 a.m.
miraweb said...

Romney would have have liked 1953. Neither Etch-A-Sketch or video tape would have been a hazard to his campaign.

March 22, 2012 at 9:11 a.m.
chet123 said...

ONETINSOLD...YOU SAID TOP TAX RATE WAS 92%.....WHY WOULD THAT BE GOOD TO YOU WHEN YOU ADVOCATED PROTECTING THE RICH AND GREEDY

March 22, 2012 at 9:18 a.m.
davisss13 said...

Jack_Dennis said... alprova: Clearly in love with the site of his own keystrokes. Brevity man!

I appreciate his attempt to carefully introduce evidence, proof and set the Republicans right. At least he cares for truth and doesn't lie every GD day about stuff we all know.

March 22, 2012 at 9:21 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

davisss: You poor dolt.

March 22, 2012 at 9:27 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Blackwater48, 1:07am.....If the press covered Biden the way they do Eric Stenstrohm, they would have daily "etch a sketch" moments.

March 22, 2012 at 9:35 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

"Obama backs 'half-a-pipeline' !! Bwahahahahaha

March 22, 2012 at 9:40 a.m.
chet123 said...

JACK (THE QUACK)DENNIS....HA HA...STILL TRYING TO SELL THAT REPUBLICAN SNAKE-OIL??? HA HA HA

March 22, 2012 at 9:41 a.m.
davisss13 said...

Poor dolt? I pity y'all.

Are you a wingnut? (shakes head) How can anyone be that blind? Look at your party. It's changed 180 degrees since at least 9/11. You claim to be small government yet you expanded both the scope and the size of the federal government beyond anything ever seen, with warrant-less wiretaps, surveillance across the board and even domestic satellite surveillance with an eye in the sky.

You call yourselves fiscal conservatives yet you passed a tax cut to the rich in a time of war when everyone else is struggling.

Even Ronald Reagan knew better than that. Of course he would never pass the current GOP litmus tests. He would be shouted down as a socialist, a liberal and a traitor.

I have no idea how you can justify your current positions compared to those of the past.

I used to vote GOP back in the day. Of course Illinois Republicans are not the war mongering, fire-breathing evangelicals from the south.

March 22, 2012 at 9:43 a.m.
fairmon said...

Alprova may be right about the message this cartoon attempts to convey, I don't have a clue. I understand a lot of people did hitch hike, ride the bus etc. but gas was cheap and there was no shortage. At that time America was the world's largest lender with people clamoring that America should demand payment of those debts. America has evolved to being the world's largest debtor.

Oil and gas prices are a terrible tax on American workers. Oil derivatives are used in most manufactured products while also affecting the cost of all goods and services including food. The impact of high oil and gas prices on the economy is gradual so the resulting inflation and impact on the economy is likely to be seen in the summer months. It takes 3 or more years to get a drilling permit on federal land. Drill, drill, drill is not a short term solution to high gas prices. Oil companies pay nonrefundable rent (royalties) on land the government allows them to pursue a permit on. If oil is discovered they pay a royalty per barrel. Why not sign the lease and collect the royalty money to gain the revenue? There may be no oil to discover and if all regulations are not met there will be no drilling permit. A discovery means jobs, oil and more revenue to the government.

March 22, 2012 at 9:45 a.m.
chet123 said...

I AGREE TOP 1% SHOULD BE PAYING IN THE 90% OF INCOME IN TAX....THEY WORKING CLASS EARN IT FOR THEM.......HA HA HA....AND MOST OF IT THEY WASTE TRYING TO BUY THE POLITICIAN HA HA HA....SPENDING BILLIONS ON SUPER PACK....THEY HAVE MORE MONEY THAN THEY CAN SPEND....THEY USE IT TO UNDERMIND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE

March 22, 2012 at 9:45 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Davisss13 said: "The Republican party wants 1953 when it comes to women and 1853 when it comes to workers, worker rights and unions. They are the women hating wealthy robber barons."

Indeed, the current batch of crazed Republican lawmakers appear to be ready to start a war with anybody and everybody, including Iran. Interestingly, I read in Wikipedia that 1953 was the year of a major coup d’etat in Iran:

“The 1953 Iranian coup d'état was the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh. . . The coup saw the transition of Mohammad-Rezā Shāh Pahlavi from a constitutional monarch to an authoritarian one who relied heavily on United States support to hold on to power. . .

“In 1951, Iran's oil industry was nationalized with near-unanimous support of Iran's parliament in a bill introduced by Mossadegh who led the nationalist parliamentarian faction. Iran's oil had been controlled by the British-owned Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC).

Popular discontent with the AIOC began in the late 1940s, a large segment of Iran's public and a number of politicians saw the company as exploitative and a vestige of British imperialism. Despite Mosaddegh's popular support, Britain was unwilling to negotiate its single most valuable foreign asset, and instigated a worldwide boycott of Iranian oil to pressure Iran economically. . .

With a change to more conservative governments in both Britain and the United States, Churchill and the U.S. Eisenhower administration decided to overthrow Iran's government though the predecessor U.S. Truman administration had opposed a coup. . .

The coup is widely believed to have significantly contributed to anti-American sentiment in Iran and the Middle East. The 1979 Iranian Revolution deposed the Shah and replaced the pro-Western royal dictatorship with the largely anti-Western Islamic Republic of Iran.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27état

March 22, 2012 at 9:50 a.m.
chet123 said...

I CANT BELEIVE ALMOST 40 YEARS AFTER THE OIL EMBARGO WHEN GAS PRICES SPIKED TO A RECORD HIGH WITH ALL INDICATION THAT OIL AND GAS PRICES WOULD NEVER AGAIN COINCIDE WITH THE WORKING CLASS INCOME,WHY DIDNT AMERICAN SEEL ALTERNATIVE FUEL OR ENGINEER A VIHICLE THAT COULD RUN ON BATTERIES.....MOST FACTORIES HAVE LIFT TRUCKS THAT RUNS 24HOURS 7 DAYS A WEEK ON BATTERIES....NOONE WILL EVER CONVINCE ME AMERICA HAVE TO RELY ONLY ON GAS...PERSONALLY I THINK THE POLITICAIN ALLOW WITH OIL COMPANY AND INVESTOR DO NOT WANT TO SEE AN ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCE.....THEIR TOO MUCH MONEY INVOLVE....TOO MANY PEOPLE GETTING DIRTY RICH

March 22, 2012 at 10:02 a.m.

Because morals and family values are so "1953"?

March 22, 2012 at 10:11 a.m.

Another day another Claydoh! drawing of an angry middle-aged white male.

March 22, 2012 at 10:27 a.m.
chet123 said...

DID YOU SAY MORALES AND FAMILY VALUE????HA HA HA HA HA HA

March 22, 2012 at 10:33 a.m.
chet123 said...

ASK THE FAMILY OF EMMIT TILL ABOUT MORALES AND FAMILY VALUE IN 1953 HA HA HA

March 22, 2012 at 10:34 a.m.
shifarobe said...

Lee Harvey Oswald? No, Dude, the only people that have indicated a desire to wish a president dead are Democrats who thought it was funny to write books and make movies about killing Bush? Remember that, you loser?
Obutthead is as creepy a politician as there is, and a dumb one to boot. He just happens to be a dumb, black president, just like Carter was a dumb president. A moron like you can keep trying to stick racist labels on those like me who think Obutthead needs to go, but it AIN'T gonna work. When I read your "posts" I see a dumb, goose stepping, robot, similar to those around the world who kiss up to dictators because they promise them a whole bunch of junk. Retard.

March 22, 2012 at 10:35 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

davisss: Nice regional bigotry, pal.

March 22, 2012 at 10:37 a.m.
chet123 said...

DO YOU KNOW WHAT FUNNY ABOUT REPUBLICANS....WHEN YOU PIN THEM DOWN ON AN ISSUE....THEY NEVER SAY I WAS WRONG....NOOOOO!...THEY JUST GO ON TO ANOTHER ISSUE....THEY DONT ACKNOWLEDGE THEY WAS WRONG JUST PRETEND THE CONVERSATION DIDNT TAKE PLACE HA HA HA HA HA

I SEE WHY EVERY COUNTRY IN THE WORLD ARE MAD AT THE U.S....WE GOT TO THROW THESE CLOWNS OVER BOARD.....THEY HURT THE WHOLE NATION.

March 22, 2012 at 10:40 a.m.
chet123 said...

SHIFTAROBE....FORGOT YOUR MAN WAS A ACTOR....RONALD REAGON.....THE OLD PRUNE....HIS OWN CHILDREN DONT AGREE WITH HIM HA HA HA....OH YEAH....DIDNT RAGON GRADUATE FROM A LITTLE COLLEGE BY THE SIZE OF TENNESSEE TEMPLE....OH YEAH....EUREKA COLLEGE....THE TINY COLLEGE IN ILL.....OH YEAH....DID YOU KNOW YOUR HERO RONALD REAGON HAD ALZHEIMER WHILE HE WAS IN THE WHITE HOUSE.....

HEY SHIFTAROBE....WHAT DOES THAT SAY ABOUT THE REPUBLICAN PARTY...HA HA HA HA

March 22, 2012 at 10:48 a.m.
chet123 said...

REAGON WAS AN OLD PRUNE....THAT WAS CRAZY AS A SH*T HOUSE RAT...HA HA HA

March 22, 2012 at 10:51 a.m.
chet123 said...

THEN AGAIN...WHAT SOUND MINDED MAN WOULD VOTE REPUBLICAN ..Hmmmmm??

March 22, 2012 at 10:56 a.m.
onetinsoldier said...

Chet123, I'd like to know where you got your smoke dude.

You obviously shoot from the hip and have never read any of my posts. It always helps to know what you are saying before before you say it. I am a Democratic Socialist and I don't think you can get left of me. But please try.

March 22, 2012 at 11:01 a.m.
chet123 said...

ONETINSOLDIER....I CHECKED OUT YOUR PASSED COMMENT....ONE THING FOR CERTAIN ...YOU ARE NOT A HYPOCRITE.....AND YOU DEFINITELY NOT SOUTHERN BAPTIST HA HA HA HA HA....YOU ARE OK!

I LOVE TO HAVE FUN WITH THESE REPUBLICANS(HATERS)....WISH THEY WOULD GO AWAY AND LEAVE THE REST OF US ALONG........

THEY DONT CONTRIBUTE TO THIS NATION TO MAKE IT GREAT...THEY TAKE AWAY ....ONLY BLOOD SUCKERS....COWARDS.....AND FIRST CLASS BUTT KISSERS OF THE RICH&GREEDY......THESE FOOLS WILL TAKE A BULLET FOR THE RICH&GREEDY....

ONE IN PARTICULAR NAME JONESES.....IF THERE WAS A TEAM FOR BUTT KISSER...HE WOULD BE A ALL-STAR BUTT KISSER OF THE RICH AND GREEDY......BET HE DONT HAVE A LOVE LIFE...THIS MAGGOT IS PURE SLIME

March 22, 2012 at 11:17 a.m.
chet123 said...

ONETINSOLDIER....THE BIG OIL COMPANY SHOULD BE NATIONALIZED.....YES NATIONALIZE ALL OIL....THIS WOULD ELIMINATE THE GREED.......THATS THE SHORT TERM SOLUTION.....JUST TAKE THE DARN THING FOR SECURITY PURPOSES.....OIL COMPANY ARE EXPLOITED THE AMERICA PEOPLE....NATIONALIZE!

March 22, 2012 at 11:21 a.m.
MTJohn said...

nooga said...

shifarobe said...

Lee Harvey Oswald? No, Dude,

Yes, shifforbrains, I don't know how you can see anything with your head so far up your a$$.

He has a prescription glass navel.

March 22, 2012 at 11:26 a.m.
davisss13 said...

Jack_Dennis said... davisss: Nice regional bigotry, pal.

I don't much care for radical 'south shall rise again' morons, that's for sure. I'm sure there are decent southerners out there, I've met them. But they aren't as loud as the others.

The truth is the GOPers from Illinois are... er, used to be more moderate than the fire-breathing culture warriors from the south, at least before 9/11.

March 22, 2012 at 11:39 a.m.

I think I'll pass on the actual morals and values of the 1950s.

The idealized version many people remember, or take from entertainment, fails to include things like:

Adultery being hushed up. Men abusing their wives. Women being forced into places if they got pregnant outside of marriage. Segregation still being the law of the land at the start. The Hollywood blacklist. The Communist witchhunts and HUAC.

Now we're not perfect today, you can see many fine examples of the deplorable morality practiced today just reading these comments, but I won't go back to those times.

shifarobe: Really, the only persons to wish a president dead are the Democrats. Does that mean Oscar Ramiro Ortega-Hernandez is a Democrat? The leader of the University of Texas College GOP is a Democrat? Kansas Speaker of the House Mike O'Neal is a Democrat? The people selling the T-shirts that say "Pray for Obama, Psalm 109:8" are Democrats? Reverend Wiley Drake is a Democrat?

March 22, 2012 at 11:48 a.m.
chet123 said...

ONE THING I DONT UNDERSTAND IS WHY ARE REPUBLICAN MEN SUCH COWARDS......USUALLY THEY ARE ALL CLUSTER IN A ROOM SHOOTING OFF AT THE MOUTH WITH THEIR HATE TALK BUT WHEN I ENTER THE ROOM TO FIGHT BACK THESE CHICKEN-HAWKS SCATTERS LIKE RATS.....I HAVE OBSERVED THIS BEHAVIOR THROUGH THE YEARS.....WHY CANT THEY FACE A MAN...INSTEAD THEY OPERATE BEHIND THE BACK.....THIS IS REALLY SICK BEHAVIORS.....SEE WHY THEIR WOMEN ABORTED THEIR REPUBLICAN SEED

March 22, 2012 at 11:55 a.m.
chet123 said...

I WILL WAIT THEM OUT THIS TIME

March 22, 2012 at 11:57 a.m.
davisss13 said...

happywithnewbulbs said... I think I'll pass on the actual morals and values of the 1950s.

The idealized version many people remember, or take from entertainment, fails to include things like:

Adultery being hushed up. Men abusing their wives. Women being forced into places if they got pregnant outside of marriage. Segregation still being the law of the land at the start. The Hollywood blacklist. The Communist witchhunts and HUAC. Now we're not perfect today, you can see many fine examples of the deplorable morality practiced today just reading these comments, but I won't go back to those times.

You shouldn't have to. The Republican party wants to undo all the advances that We the People have made in the last 150 years. They are attacking and dismantling US tradition and legal precedent when it comes to human rights, civil rights and worker rights. They have intentionally forgotten/erased all the lessons of the past to practice their situational morals, ethics and patriotism.

March 22, 2012 at 12:11 p.m.
joneses said...

daviss

You are a liar. That is not what the Republicans want to accomplish. The Republicans are against the socialism of America. The Unions and you pathetic liberals are the ones that want more union and government intervention in everyones lives therefore reducing our freedoms. You are a liar.

March 22, 2012 at 1:26 p.m.
hambone said...

shifarube your childish drivil only serves to belittle yourself.

Thrid grade was just as hard the third time ,wasn't it !

March 22, 2012 at 1:30 p.m.
joneses said...

Did you hear what this pathetic fool that is president said today. He is asking for a fast track approach to the Keystone Pipeline from Oklahoma to Texas. Uhhh, the whole point of the pipeline was to get oil from Canada to Texas. This pipeline he is claiming success for is already being built despise his attempts to stop it. This is how pathetic of a liar he actually is.

March 22, 2012 at 1:34 p.m.
shifarobe said...

Exactly, Joneses, exactly! He's damn good at taking credit for thing he doesn't deserve credit for. Hey, the truth hurts doesn't? You think B.Hussein is off limits because he's "black". NOPE! Nothing racist about anything I posted. Not a thing. I thought my little skit with Obutthead and Mechelle is pretty accurate. If Bush can be attacked, so can OButthead. Can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen. I thought Bush stunk up the joint, in case you're thinking I'm a fan of Bush. That dope handed OBUTTHEAD the presidency on silver platter. Don't you libertards get it??? The more you attack critics of OBUTTHEAD as being racist, the worse off OBUTTHEAD WILL BE. You want selective censorship. You should go live in China.

March 22, 2012 at 1:55 p.m.
shifarobe said...

The Democratic Party used to be worth something, now it's just the party of skanky hoes who want free protection so they can get banged until they drop, leeches who like crapping and peeing in the streets, union bullies, homos who want people punished for not kissing their diseased derrieres, welfare queens, femanazis, illegal aliens and just a whhhhhhole bunch of freaks who hate this country and want FREE STUFF for life. LOL TRUTH HURTS, TRUTH HURTS. OBUTTHEAD is the pied piper of street poopers, he gets no respect for me. ZERO.

March 22, 2012 at 2:06 p.m.
fairmon said...

chet123 said... ONETINSOLDIER....THE BIG OIL COMPANY SHOULD BE NATIONALIZED.....YES NATIONALIZE ALL OIL....THIS WOULD ELIMINATE THE GREED.......THATS THE SHORT TERM SOLUTION.....JUST TAKE THE DARN THING FOR SECURITY PURPOSES.....OIL COMPANY ARE EXPLOITED THE AMERICA PEOPLE....NATIONALIZE!

Brilliant, you sound like Maxine Waters from the great granola state of California. You won't hear Obama propose nationalizing oil companies. Chavez in Venezuela did that and lost revenue. They have had to bring the Iranians in and pay them to operate them. Their government is still not realizing the revenue it did before nationalizing. Notice how quiet Chavez has been recently?

Would those owned by foreign companies be included? Who would manage and operate them for the U.S. government? Would employees get the same salaries, benefits including pensions and health care that current government employees get? Who would train those replacing current employees?

Why not understand how and why every service station has very close to the same price per gallon and assure there is no price fixing at the pump. Competition is a good leveler of the playing field and the best price control available. What is the role of the department of energy now compared to when Jimmy Carter established that department to make America energy independent? The DOE has grown exponentially in size and cost with zero progress toward the initial scope of their purpose. Congress rather have the current relationship than to own and operate large oil companies. Who would be liable if there was a spill or other environmental event? If the answer to that is the government that means tax payers.

March 22, 2012 at 2:14 p.m.

I'm not sure what this cartoon is saying. Anyway, I will say that Shifarobe is pretty much right about the gross double standard we're seeing. I wouldn't put it the way he does, though. To each his own.

Look at the attempt by liberals to silence free speech these days, and stick that nasty label of racist on anyone who has biting criticism of Obama. It's getting worse as we get closer to the election. I think it's because Obama has no where to hide now. He has a record, and it's not very good.

He can't lie his way into office this time. Not in the age of information.

March 22, 2012 at 2:23 p.m.
joneses said...

Chet is a perfect example of the liberal agenda. Nationalize health care, nationalize petroleum companies, nationalize automotive companies, nationalize the food industry, hell we might as well nationalize the whole country into total communism then we can all live in poverty like communist Russia. Of course with the exception of the ruling "class" which will not include you Chet. pay attention to what Chet is saying. He is saying that government should control everything. That is the liberal agenda people.

March 22, 2012 at 3:32 p.m.

Nooga,

I disagree with you. His true colors are not looking so hot these days. Many of you on here have a distorted view of things. Republicans may be the worst thing on earth to you, yet many polls don't show that.

Obama's true colors are not what he showed when he ran in 2008. That's a huge problem for him. In my humble opinion. People don't like being decieved.

Now he's friendly toward oil? Come on, I don't buy it.

March 22, 2012 at 3:34 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

If you've been pondering on the question of the day, Mark Kleiman has the answer:

Q. What’s the difference between Mitt Romney and an Etch-a-Sketch?

A. You don’t have to shake Mitt Romney.

http://www.samefacts.com/2012/03/watching-conservatives/mitt-romney/riddle-me-this-3/

March 22, 2012 at 3:55 p.m.
chet123 said...

HATE TO BREAK YOUR HEART HARP3339....BUT YEP....HARP3339 VENEZUELA PAYING ABOUT 40CENT A GALLON(93OCTANE)...CHAVEZ RAN OFF ALL THE RICH GREEDY BAST**R LIKE YOU....PEOPLE WHO WAS BLOOD SUCKING THE WORKING CLASS PEOPLE LIKE YOU.HA HA HA

IT MAKE YOU FEEL POWERLESS DONT IT HA HA HA

ALL THAT BIG TALK GONE,GONE,GONE......WHINEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE! FEEL LIKE CRYING.....HARP, PEOPLE LIKE YOURSELF DO A LOT A BIG TALK...BUT YOU NEVER LOOK INWARD......YOU TALK ABOUT REDISTRIBUTION....BUT YOU NEVER SEE YOURSELF OF REDISTRIBUTING FROM WORKING CLASS PEOPLE TO YOUR OWN FAT POCKETS.....YOU CANT SEE YOURSELF FEEDING AT THE HOG TROUGH....BUYING THE POLITICIANS AND MAKING UNJUST LAWS AND CALL IT CAPITALISM HA HA HA

THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR SHOULD START DRILLING FOR THE SECURITY OF THE NATION.....THIS IS WHY CHINA IS OUT PACING AMERICA....AMERICA HAVE DEAD WEIGHT CALLED THE RICH AND GREEDY.....

I FAULT PRESIDENT OBAMA FOR BEING A NICE GUY....I FAVORED HILLARY.....OBAMA DONT KNOW HE WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO WORK WITH PEOPLE THAT THINK THEY ARE "GOD"....A GREEDY GOD AT THAT.....HE IS TOO NICE...I WOULD RUN YOU OUT OF THE COUNTRY

I WOULD EXECUTIVE ORDER AND RUN THE GREEDY MAGGOTS OUT OF THE COUNTRY IN A NEW YORK MINUTE....NO OTHER COUNTRY WANT THEM TO LATCH ON AND SUCK THEIR BLOOD....

SORRY TO HURT YOUR FEELING....BUT THATS WHAT IT COMING TO...AND I'M NOT THE ONLY ONE TALIKG ABOUT IT

March 22, 2012 at 4 p.m.
miraweb said...

Good piece in the Wall Street Journal about Karl Rove's sugar daddy, H.C. Simmons. I have always been amused when men with really deep pockets get a chip on their shoulder.

I saw one *sshole spend a ton on a billboard across the street from his old office. He did it just to post messages for the chairman who ousted him as CEO of a big tech firm.

Turns out Simmons is willing to toss away cash at the GOP because he is still sore that he got caught breaking the law on pension funds investments.Being rich doesn't mean you can't act like an 8 year old.

I'm sure Rove is laughing all the way to the bank.

WSJ

March 22, 2012 at 4:02 p.m.
chet123 said...

JONESES....YOU BEEN BRAIN-WASHED....THIS COUNTRY WONT SURVIVE UNDER PURE CAPITALISM....LOOK WHAT YOUR MODEL HAVE DONE....BOUGHT THE POLITICIAN AND JUDGES....THERES NO TRUST.....IT TAKE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO RUN FOR A U.S.CONGRESS SEAT THAT PAIDS 131,000. THE POLITICIAN ARE INDEBTED TO THE RICH AND GREEDY....THE SUPREME COURT AND FEDERAL JUDGES ARE APPOINTED BY CONGRESS WHO OWE THE RICH AND GREEDY..SO CONGRESS HAVE TO APPOINT THE RICH AND GREEDY CHOICE INTO JUDGESHIP....EVENTHOUGH THE WORKING CLASS FIGHT THE WARS...ITS THE WORKING CLASS SON &DAUGHTERS THAT SPILL THEIR BLOOD ON FORIGN SOIL...THE RICH AND GREEDY BENEFITS AND PROFITS OFF THEIR BLOOD...ARE YOU STUPID ENOUGH TO THINK THIS WILL CONTINUE???HA HA HA..AM I SCARING YOU HARP????? HA HA HA.....YOU THINK YOU ARE MAD!..BUDDY IF THIS THING DONT TURN AROUND SOON...ITS GOING TO GO OFF LIKE A IT DID 150 YEARS AGO.....

March 22, 2012 at 4:12 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Miraweb said: "Good piece in the Wall Street Journal about Karl Rove's sugar daddy, H.C. Simmons. . . Turns out Simmons is willing to toss away cash at the GOP because he is still sore that he got caught breaking the law on pension funds investments.Being rich doesn't mean you can't act like an 8 year old."

Speaking of children, money, and Republicans, I note that the Republicans are attemting to cut the U.S. social safety net, which includes food stamps. Last year, food stamps reduced the number of children living in extreme poverty by half:

The House Republican’s 2013 budget authored by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) would cut the social safety net to ribbons while handing trillions of dollars in tax breaks to the rich and corporations. And one of the bigger casualties — in addition to high-profile Ryan targets like Medicaid and Medicare — would be the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), known as food stamps. . .

Republicans, including Ryan himself, have been attacking the food stamp program by falsely claiming that it is “rife with fraud.” But in addition to having an incredibly low rate of payment error (at 1 percent), SNAP is a vital poverty fighting tool. Last year, food stamps reduced the number of children living in extreme poverty by half. Overall, more than 5 million people were lifted out of poverty by food stamps in 2010.”

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/03/22/450050/house-republican-budget-could-cut-off-food-assistance-for-millions-of-low-income-americans/

March 22, 2012 at 4:14 p.m.
chet123 said...

I HOPE IT DONT....BUT I'M NOT OPTIMISTIC

March 22, 2012 at 4:14 p.m.
chet123 said...

ITS NOT ENOUGH TO RAISE OIL THROUGH SPECULATIVE TRADING AND FUTURE MARKET...BUT REPUBLICAN ARE WILLING TO CUT SAFTY NET OF THE POOR....WORKING CLASS AND POOR LEAVING NO DISPOSABLE INCOME....THE RICH&GREEDY REALLY THINK THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH IT HA HA HA....MAYBE...JUST MAYBE...JUST MAYBE THEY HAVE OVER PLAYED THEIR HANDS....Hmmm?

March 22, 2012 at 4:24 p.m.
chet123 said...

JONESES I WILL BE BACK ON HERE TONITE...WOULD LOVE TO HAVE A ONE ON ONE WITH YOU.....DONT HIDE LIKE A LITTLE GIRL....YOU LOVE TO SHOOT OFF AT THE MOUTH WHEN YOU ARE ALONE WITH YOU RED NECK BUDDIES....LET ME KNOW.....HOW ABOUT 8:30PM....WILL LOOK FOR YOU

March 22, 2012 at 4:36 p.m.
fairmon said...

chet123 said... HATE TO BREAK YOUR HEART HARP3339....BUT YEP....HARP3339 VENEZUELA PAYING ABOUT 40CENT A GALLON(93OCTANE

That doesn't help much when you don't have 40 cents which is true for most Venezuelans, in fact most have no car. More revenue and profits are made selling to American consumers than total revenue in their own country. I noticed your reading skills are still equal to your writing. Is that why you ignored the questions about what would happen once nationalized? Better stick with your "democrats good all others bad" mentality without venturing away from the play book and trying to have an original thought.

Do you really think a dictator with only one political agenda is good? You would be a real tyrant that either killed or run out of the country anyone not pledging allegiance to the democratic party. I kinda like being registered as an independent that avoids all primaries and selecting the candidate I prefer. So, I couldn't survive your type government. Obama in all his glaring ignorance would be my choice over a couple trying to be the republican candidate while if the others win I probably won't care enough to vote. I did prefer Hilary over Obama's inexperienced two faced pie in the sky promises he could not keep. But, He will have 4 years of very expensive on the job training before the next election.

March 22, 2012 at 4:39 p.m.
DocCutty said...

Chet,

Release the cap-lock key. Inside voices, inside voices....

March 22, 2012 at 4:40 p.m.
MTJohn said...

blondebutnotdumb said...I'm not sure what this cartoon is saying.

It's really pretty simple, Blondie. The hitchhiker is a centrist Republican - someone whom you would probably call a RINO - and he would like the party back that the neo-cons and teabaggers stole from him.

blondebutnotdumb said...He can't lie his way into office this time. Not in the age of information.

Were you talking about Mitt Romney?

March 22, 2012 at 4:48 p.m.
fairmon said...

mountainlaurel summmarized with....

Overall, more than 5 million people were lifted out of poverty by food stamps in 2010.

That is good but would it not be better to lift them up with jobs within their capability leaving more for those that are disabled and truly not capable but in need of more assistance than provided? It is not as difficult as some would have us believe. The government is too big and cumbersome and too embroiled in social and morals agendas to provide the leadership necessary.

March 22, 2012 at 4:48 p.m.

harp3339, if Chet is like Maxine Walters, does that make Joneses and shifarobe like Michelle Bachmann?

But speaking of the Department of Energy, where do you get your claims from on it? Their 2009 budget was about 25 billion dollars. Obama is requesting around 30 billion now. Their 1980 budget was about 7 billion.

4-5 times? Hardly what I'd call an exponential increase. And that's not even factoring inflation into it. Just the federal budget has gone up from 600 billion to 3.5 trillion.

Check the tables here, tell me exactly where you find that exponential increase? The stimulus year is the only large increase, but that was across the board, wasn't it?

http://www.cfo.doe.gov/crorg/cf30.htm

Maybe you have a different meaning of "exponential increase" than I do. Is that the problem? What specifically did you mean to say then?

But you would also want to consider that much of their budget is for nuclear weapon security, not energy investment programs. So cut that figure by at least a third, and maybe closer to half.

And don't even think to blame a lack of accomplishment on it either. They've done many things, you just don't notice because they're not coming to your house and fixing it, or building a major electric plant. Who is responsible for that? Congress. If Congress authorized them to do things, they'd do it. But they're stuck doing research and making reports, while people like you scream to the skies about how they're not doing anything. Well, maybe you should start reading, and follow their advice instead. Either that, or give them the authority to act and to fix things. They made some very nice cars once, would have been fuel-efficient, comfortable, and affordable, but Reagan had them put in a garage.

Thanks Reagan. I sure appreciate Morning in America.

And yes, the actual relative outlays HAVE gone down.

http://www.aps.org/policy/reports/popa-reports/energy/doe.cfm

I'm afraid you've demonstrated once again, you only repeat what you think is true, but don't do much checking on it.

The problem isn't the size of the government, though I will concur with you about the being embroiled in too many agendas. Let the Department of Energy act cleanly and clearly, and I think you'll see a different picture emerge.

blondebutnotdumb, if the truth is coming out, why are so many of the Republicans insisting on lying to us?

March 22, 2012 at 5:39 p.m.

Nobody is running against Ronald Reagan. This coming election is about Obama, yet Democrats keep trying to make it about everything else. Does he deserve four more years or not? That's the question. It's not about Rush Limbaugh, Ronald Reagan, Michelle Bachman or G.W. Bush.

March 22, 2012 at 5:54 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Harp3339 said: “That is good but would it not be better to lift them up with jobs within their capability leaving more for those that are disabled and truly not capable but in need of more assistance than provided?”

You seem to be assuming that everyone receiving food stamps assistance is not working, Harp3339. You also appear to have forgotten that the richest 20 percent of working families in the U.S. are taking home approximately 47 percent of all income and many are earning 10 times that of the low-income working families mentioned in this report.

“New data from the U.S. census Bureau show that in 2009, there were more than 10 million low-income working families in the United States. Between 2007 and 2009, the share of working families who are low-income—earning less than 200 percent of the official poverty threshold—increased from 28 percent to 30 percent. This now means that nearly 1 in 3 working families in the United States, despite their hard work, are struggling to meet basic needs. The plight of these families now challenges a fundamental assumption that in america, work pays.”

http://www.workingpoorfamilies.org/pdfs/policybrief-winter2011.pdf

March 22, 2012 at 6:25 p.m.

bbnd, You're in error, this is not an election to reject Obama, as that implies that the other choice isn't important.

But the alternative you're offering does matter, and that means they do get called to account for who they are.

Which is not an improvement. BTW, Michelle Bachmann WAS one of the people running for the job, so she WAS to be questioned. And she was found lacking. Just like some others.

But hey, if you don't want Harp3339 to bring up the history of the Department of Energy, tell that to Harp3339. I just expect any complaints to be FACTUAL. The same with Rush Limbaugh and his lies about Sandra Fluke.

Now it's the lies you seem to want us to ignore. You did say the truth would come out. Don't you support the truth?

Or is any lie acceptable, as long as you defeat Obama? That explains the lack of repudiation of the Birther movement.

March 22, 2012 at 6:26 p.m.

I guess this will be the first election in history in which the incumbent and his record is not an issue then. Amazing how Obama fanatics view this.

It's about deciding if he deserves another four years.

His record does matter and what's happened under his watch matters as well. To deny that is just absolutely ridiculous!

The mid-term elections mattered as well, many of you on here believe they didn't matter either. What does matter then?

It seems that you're just playing along with the strategy which is to push the idea that he hasn't been there for the last 3 plus years. Give me a break.

Democrats had complete control over the government for his first two years. What do you want?

All of the very, very long analysis and defense of Obama on here is all well and good, I'm sure it's fun for you on sites like this, but the average American will only care about if they're better off than they were four years ago. For millions it's a big fat NO. Whether it's his fault or not, that seems to me to be the burden of being an incumbent.

Incumbents are always hard to beat just because they've been there, but to push the idea that it's not about giving him four more years is nutty.

Sorry for the long post.

March 22, 2012 at 6:50 p.m.
dude_abides said...

joneses, I'm actually heartened by the fact that you confuse Lee Harvey Oswald with James Earl Ray (this must be the case, as you defended yourself against a phantom racist charge). This means you probably don't have a poster of him in the mountain bunker you share with sirhanarobe.

March 22, 2012 at 6:59 p.m.
dude_abides said...

Etchasketchialism! Mitt Romney, the Re-Re-Renaissance Man!

March 22, 2012 at 7:13 p.m.

blondebutnotdumb, no, we're not the fanatics. You are, because you're only focused so much on Obama that you give not one thought to what is being offered instead.

I don't need to hear more and more claims about how bad Obama is if you're not going to say something better as an alternative. Mostly because the Republican side can't admit any positive thing about Obama, but are instead trying to do everything they can to discredit him.

That says a lot more about them than it does about Obama. They're more interested in tearing down than building up.

So no, it's not entirely about Obama's record as you'd like it to be, because that would let you try to deceive us about it without even having to offer anything different.

But no, it's not a recall referendum. It's an election, and that means I'm going to demand something better than "The other guy sucks!" which you seem to want them to run on.

Pardon me for having higher expectations.

BTW, complete control over the government? Hardly. There was a substantial body of conservative Democrats who were just as obstructionist as the Republicans, and yes, they had to be pandered to as well.

Democrats didn't act in complete lock-step or with disregard for other points of view. There was dissension and disagreement there, and plenty of opportunity was given to offer alternatives.

Instead we got lies about Death Panels. Thanks for that, yet another example of the truth being buried.

March 22, 2012 at 7:20 p.m.
chet123 said...

HARP3339....YOU ARE TOO CONCERN ABOUT GRAMMAR AND WRITING SKILLS....IS THAT A DIVERTION WHEN YOU CANT DEFEND YOUR AGUMENT..Hmmmm?...TO COWARD TO STICK TO ISSUES..Hmmmm??? MAYBE YOU REALLY ARE INFERIOR!....MAYBE YOU NEED TO BE CONCERN ABOUT YOUR THINKING PROCESS OR YOUR PSEUDO INTELLIGENCE.....YOU HAVE MORE BRAZEN NERVE THAN BRAIN GOMER PYLES...

YOU FOCUS ON THE PEOPLE IN VENEZUELA...SAID THEY DONT HAVE 40CENT....MAYBE THEY DO AND MAYBE THEY DONT...BUT ONE THING I KNOW THEY DONT HAVE A CUSTER OF RICH AND GREEDY BAST** BLOOD SUCKING THEM......SO LET SAY THEY BROKE EVEN.....NOONE WINS....BUT I WILL GIVE THEM CREDIT...THEY HAVE DIGNITY!!!! DIGNITY THE RICH AND GREEDY ARE TRYING TO TAKE FROM THE MIDDLE-CLASS....AND YOU ARE A DEFENDER OF THE RICH AND GREEDY....I'M ASSURED YOU ARE NOT A BILLIONAIRE....NOT IN THIS AREA..APPALANCIA PIG FARMING IS IN YOUR BACKGROUND HA HA..NBA PLAYERS WITH NO DEGREES HAVE MORE THAN YOU....YOU ARE JUST A FOOT-STOOL FOR GREEDY PEOPLE.

YOU GO ON TO SAY A DICTATOR WITH ONE POLITICAL AGENDA! HA HA HA HA....IF YOU RIGHT-WING NUT HAVE IT YOUR WAY...AMERICA WILL ONLY HAVE ONE PARTY(YOU ARE TRYING TO UNDERMIND THE VOTING PROCESS AS WE TALK WITH YOUR VOTER SUPRESSION SCHEME)...REMEMBER WHAT I SAID...LOOK INWARD...LOOK INWARD....HARP YOU GOT TO BE SOUTHERN BAPTIST.....YOUR TYPE THINKING IS TAUGHT....IS THIS WHAT YOUR PAPA AND MAMMY TAUGHT YOU...Hmmmm? MAYBE THEY WERE SOUTHERN BAPTIST TOO

March 22, 2012 at 7:21 p.m.
miraweb said...

The GOP wanted to feed the media and hold the national attention with a raft of debates and unlimited funding sources to pay for ads.

Not a bad strategy, but there really isn't any candidate who will look good after that much high octane attention.

If the GOP is ready to move on to an old fashioned national strategy, you've got to figure out how to put all the clowns back in the clown car.

March 22, 2012 at 7:22 p.m.
chet123 said...

MOUNTAINL....HARP3339 IS A SELFFISH OLD MAN....HE LIVES A MISABLE LIFE....WHETHER THE POOR IS LIFT UP OR NOT...ITS NOT IN THIS BOZO POWER....HES A NOBODY.....DONT TALK TO THIS CLOWN LIKE HES "GOD"

JUST A EAST TENNESSEE MIDDLE-CLASS RICH AND GREEDY BUTT KISSER

March 22, 2012 at 7:25 p.m.
chet123 said...

BLONDEBUTNOTDUMB....I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU!ARE YOU REALLY NOT DUMB???? YOU PROCLAIM TO BE A CONSERVATIVE..HA HA HA HA.....I WOULD BE ASHAME IF I WAS YOU....YOU BENEFIT MORE THAN ANY GROUP IN THE LIBERAL MOVEMENT.....ORIGINAL CONSTITUTION WAS NOT KIND TO YOU...YOU DIDNT HAVE AS MUCH RIGHTS AS BLACK....YOU WERE NOT EQUAL...YOU COULDNT VOTE...COULD GO TO COLLEGE...THE MEN KEPT YOU PREGNANT AND BARE-FOOTED....THEY COULD ELIMINATE YOU AND THE "ALL MALE JURY" WOULD NOT CONVICT THE HUSBAND....AND I COULD GO ON AND ON....DID YOU KNOW THE BLACK FEMALE HAD MORE RIGHT THAN YOU...IN AMERICAN THE FIRST SELF-EARN MILLIONAIRE WOMAN WAS A BLACK WOMAN...

YOU HAD TO RECEIVE WHAT HUSBAND LEFT YOU....THE BIG BAD LIBERAL TOOK THE YOKE OFF OF YOU....AND YOU'RE ANGRY ABOUT IT HA HA HA...AND YOU CALL YOURSELF BLONDEBUTNOTDUMB HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HAHA HA HA HA HA!

March 22, 2012 at 7:44 p.m.
chet123 said...

ITS FUNNY THAT COWARD HARP339 SHOW UP AFTER I LEAVE....HE'S IN HIDING MODE HA HA HA...NOT AS SMART AS YOU THOUGHT YOU WERE ARE YOU HARP3339...HA HA HA HA

March 22, 2012 at 7:47 p.m.
mymy said...

My My, who woke up the brainwashed socialist man-child today.

March 22, 2012 at 8:07 p.m.
BobMKE said...

Is anyone going on a cruise which will pass by Cuba? Please take CHET with you and throw him overboard near Cuba. Later when he works himself back to the USA he'll be a little more humble. CHET, humble yourself or God will do it for you.

March 22, 2012 at 8:08 p.m.
miraweb said...

Don't feed the troll. At least the all caps makes skipping past quick and easy.

March 22, 2012 at 8:09 p.m.
fairmon said...

chet123 said... HARP3339....YOU ARE TOO CONCERN ABOUT GRAMMAR AND WRITING SKILLS....IS THAT A DIVERTION WHEN YOU CANT DEFEND YOUR AGUMENT..Hmmmm?...TO COWARD TO STICK TO ISSUES..Hmmmm??? MAYBE YOU REALLY ARE INFERIOR!....MAYBE YOU NEED TO BE CONCERN ABOUT YOUR THINKING PROCESS OR YOUR PSEUDO INTELLIGENCE.....YOU HAVE MORE BRAZEN NERVE THAN BRAIN GOMER PYLES...

You rattle like a tin can full of rocks. WHAT ARGUMENT DID I PRESENT? I DIDN'T PRESENT AN ARGUMENT I ASK YOU SOME QUESTIONS THAT WERE IGNORED. CAN YOU DEFINE PSUEDO INTELLIGENCE FOR ME? YOU FOCUS ON THE PEOPLE IN VENEZUELA...SAID THEY DONT HAVE 40CENT....MAYBE THEY DO AND MAYBE THEY DONT...BUT ONE THING I KNOW THEY DONT HAVE A CUSTER OF RICH AND GREEDY BAST** BLOOD SUCKING THEM......SO LET SAY THEY BROKE EVEN.....NOONE WINS....BUT I WILL GIVE THEM CREDIT...THEY HAVE DIGNITY!!!!

123.... Again you talk from a hollow head. They are all equally impoverished with no dignity and serve only Chavez so he will provide for them (welfare from the government). I just realized why you think they have a good deal, they are like you want America to be. Everything to the government who then distributes it regardless of contribution or no contribution.

DIGNITY THE RICH AND GREEDY ARE TRYING TO TAKE FROM THE MIDDLE-CLASS....AND YOU ARE A DEFENDER OF THE RICH AND GREEDY....I'M ASSURED YOU ARE NOT A BILLIONAIRE....

Go back and find where I have defended those considered rich. I really don't care if they are rich or not as long as they or the politicians don't "F" with me. They don't owe me anything and I don't owe them anything. Apparently you think those that you consider rich owe you something. Who is more rich and greedy than the governments? Who is mistreating or cheating me? Do you think anyone with more income than you is rich and greedy? What criteria do you use to classify someone as rich? Are all rich people also greedy in your book?

March 22, 2012 at 8:13 p.m.
fairmon said...

mountainlaurel said... Harp3339 said: “That is good but would it not be better to lift them up with jobs within their capability leaving more for those that are disabled and truly not capable but in need of more assistance than provided?”

You seem to be assuming that everyone receiving food stamps assistance is not working, Harp3339. You also appear to have forgotten that the richest 20 percent of working families in the U.S. are taking home approximately 47 percent of all income and many are earning 10 times that of the low-income working families mentioned in this report.

You can assume all you want but you are wrong, I am well aware some are working but in jobs less than their qualifications or working part time and need help. Would it help if those you consider over paid had a pay cut? Do you care to take a stab at what percent of all income taxes paid those 20% pay? I really don't care if their taxes go to 80% of their income but unless you and the rest of us take a similar hit on our tax rate it would hardly be noticeable.

March 22, 2012 at 8:28 p.m.
chet123 said...

LOOK A HERE, LOOK A HERE, HEY HARP339..ARE YOU A PAGANIST....YOU MUST BE....LET ME RESPOND TO YOUR HOLLOW EAST MOUNTAIN HILLBILLY AIR-HEADED COMMENT...YOU SAID EQUALLY IMPOVERISH..HA HA HA....THATS MY POINT...DO YOU THINK YOU GOING TO FEED FROM THE TROUGH AND OTHER AMERICAN GOING TO ALLOW YOU TO IMPOVERISH THEM..... AND WHY ARE YOU SO UPSET ABOUT HOGO CHAVEZ....MAYBE BECAUSE HE RAN THE BIG AMERICA OIL CORPORATION OUT OF VENEZUELA. HA HA HA...DID IT HURT YOUR STOCK????Hmmmm HA HA HA

IF YOU ARE SO ANTI-GOVERNMENT THEN LEAVE THE COUNTRY....SEE WHAT COUNTRY WILL PUT UP WITH BLOOD SUCKERS.....AND YOU HAVE THE NERVE TO MENTION THE WORD CONTRIBUTION.....CONTRIBUTION!!! THE WORKING CLASS BUILT THIS COUNTRY...THE WORKING CLASS DIED IN WARS FIGHTING FOR THIS COUNTRY HARP....RICH AND GREEDY SERVE NO PURPOSE...NONE AT ALL.

YOU DEFEND THE RICH AND GREEDY WITH YOUR WORDS EVERYDAY HARP....DONT TRY TO BACK-PEDDLE! I READ YOUR POSTING EVERYDAY...YOU WANT TO THROW THE ROCK THEN HIDE YOUR HAND!! AND I WILL CALL YOU OUT ON IT...THIS THE PROBLEM WITH YOU....YOU SHOOT OFF AT THE MOUTH THEN GET MAD WHEN I CALL YOU OUT....THIS IS A DIALOGUE NOT A MONOLOGUE.....AND STOP BEING SO THIN-SKINNED.

WELL THIS IS WHERE I CHALLENGE YOU INTELLIGENCE...I NEVER, NEVER,NEVER, SAID RICH...SO DONT MIS-QUOTE ME...I SAID RICH AND GREEDY....I RESPECTED HENRY FORD....GEORGE WESTINGHOUSE...BUT HATE WALL-STREET HEDGE-FUND MANAGER OR ENRON CEO(GEORGE W.BUDDY) OR KOCH BROTHERS THEY ARE PARASITES...AND MANY OTHER BLOOD SUCKER LIKE THEM.....THE RICH AND GREEDY THAT PUSH FOR NAFTA...SENDING OUR JOBS OVER SEAS....OHHHHH THE INVESTORS DID WELL PROFITING FROM SLAVE LABOR.....THIS IS WHAT YOU CALL FREE-MARKET???? HA HA HA....YOU ARE NOT AS SMART AS YOU THINK HARP.....JUST LISTENING TO YOU LET ME KNOW YOU ARE A PAGANIST....HIDING IN A SOUTHERN BAPTIST CHURCH

March 22, 2012 at 8:45 p.m.

harp3339, why cut their paywhen we could just reduce the amount of overtime, and put others to work? It could eliminate a lot of unemployment.

http://www.alternet.org/visions/154518/why_we_have_to_go_back_to_a_40-hour_work_week_to_keep_our_sanity/?page=entire

Also a better question than how much that 20% pays is how much benefit they get. I know the Heritage foundation doesn't like to talk about that, but government spending actually does benefit people.

March 22, 2012 at 8:45 p.m.

Dude, that's absurd. I'm not fanatical about any of the candidates. Some I'd like to see run won't. Oh, I could not disagree more. You can call it what you want, the fact is Obama is very much the focus whether you like it or not. To think he will not enter into anyone's mind on election day is just ridiculous. In a way it is a referendum, it always is with incumbents. Obama doesn't get a special pass. Regarding your tearing down comment, Obama seems to believe what we had is just no good, and he can do it better. That will come into play to on election day. I Think I've made my point enough.

March 22, 2012 at 9:13 p.m.
moonpie said...

Love the cartoon.

Republicans have spoken frequently about the erosion of values in America. GOP-ers around me talk about life in the 50s with great fondness.

In the 1950s, things were thought to be "simple".

Jobs were plentiful. They paid a living wage.

Pensions were fairly common.

Talk about lack of industry regulations!

Cigarettes apparently were good for you. (How did we go so wrong?)

Prayer was still in schools.

Abortion was illegal.

Gender was simple. If you were a man, you liked women and visa versa. The closet was still a big place and there was little public demand for equality for homosexuals.

The oral contraceptive pill was not on the market and certainly no one thought they should be free.

We were still the good guys after saving the world from Germany and Japan.

Reporters didn't delve into people's personal business with the same abandon they do today.

This was the pre-hippie era. Sure you had beatniks, but they were small in number.

We liked Ike.

Kids had manners.

More people believed in God.

Looking back, with all the problems we have today, maybe the 1950s does look more simple. Was it? I don't know.

Sounds a lot like wishful thinking to me.

But even then conservatives were complaining about the erosion of our values -- all those hip gyrations, rock and roll, chewing bubble gum -- they predicted what that would lead to.... and they were right.

Not all "progress" has been good. Some of our change has been painful.

But for all our problems, I'll keep today and hope for an even better tomorrow. And I don't mind bringing the best of the past to the future.

March 22, 2012 at 9:14 p.m.
chet123 said...

I KNEW HARP WOULD RUN OFF....CANT TAKE THE HEAT.....HARP YOU GET THROWED SOFT BALL BY ME.....I'M REALLY MODERATE....BUT THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE REALLY MAD...AND THEY DONT HAVE A VOICE OR WAY TO OUTLET......BUT THIS COUNTRY IS SHARPLY DIVIDED....AND SOMETHING GOING TO GIVE!!! I HOPE NOT....BUT WITH THE ATITUDE OF THE REPUBLICAN AND THE RICH AND GREEDY..I THINK VERY SOON....

March 22, 2012 at 9:16 p.m.
chet123 said...

DUMBBUTNOTBLONDE....MAYBE YOU'RE LIVING IN A VACUUM....ALL YOUR FRIEND,RELATIVES,MAMA,DADDY,UNCLE PETE,AUNT MOLLY,COUSIN GOMER,AND YOUR SOUTHERN BAPTIST CHURCH HAVE THE SAME VIEW..IF A GIRL CANT BELEIVE HER PREACHER MAN WHO CAN SHE BELEIVE(HE LIED TO YOU).....BUT THERE IS A BIG WORLD OUT THERE WHO DONT SHARE YOUR VEIWS,YOUR VALUES OR YOUR NARROW BELIEF....SO DONT BE SHOCKED ON ELECTION DAY....REMEMBER WHITE AMERICAN PUT OBAMA IN THE PRESIDENT SEAT....THEY WERE READY FOR A CHANGE...THEY COULDNT TRUST THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.

PEOPLE LIKE YOU WAS CAUGHT FLAT-FOOTED,UNPREPARED...IT BLEW YOU AWAY....YOU HAVENT HAD A GOOD NITE SLEEP SINCE HE BEEN IN OFFICE HA HA HA...YOU ARE OBSESSED,CONFUSED AND DELUSIONAL...HA HA HA...LISTEN TO ME VERY CAREFULLY.....GET OVER IT!.....HE WILL BE RE-ELECTED DESPITE THE REPUBLICAN LITTLE SCHEME TO SUPPRESS VOTERS(AND YOU AGREED WITH THEM).....YOU WILL BE SHOCKED AGAIN.....BUT YOU WILL SURVIVE HA HA HA HA....

March 22, 2012 at 9:38 p.m.

Blondebutnotdumb, being an anti-Obama fanatic is still a fanatic. And the way you are so oblivious to the lack of an effective alternative being offered is a clear demonstration of that fanaticism. You can't see how ineffective it is, especially combined with your obvious hyperbole.

Every criticism you have of Obama is like that, hot air, not substance. You're convincing me more and more to vote for Obama the more you duck the issue of providing a counter-proposal and instead try to attack his record with grandiose claims.

I don't need to hear your reasons for hating Obama. This isn't a recall petition. I need to hear some better ideas.

And really, this doesn't apply to just Obama, but any political campaign. Going negative is a key indicator to me of who not to vote for...the person going negative. I'm so glad we only got a little of that for the primary. I dread the fall.

Mitt Romney can't run on his plan to be like an Etch-a-Sketch, and there's no way Obama will waste dollars here.

That's also why I refuse to offer persuasion to you about Obama. Not worth trying with a fanatic.

March 22, 2012 at 9:46 p.m.
chet123 said...

HARP HAVE TURNED-OFF HIS COMPUTER AND WENT TO BED....HE THINKING ABOUT WHAT TO SAY HA HA HA HA...HES LOOKING FOR A REBUTTAL.....HARP WILL BE WATCHING FOX TV TONITE.....THATS OK WITH ME....MAYBE THE AUNTIE TOM(MICHELLE MALKINS) CAN HELP HIM OUT HA HA HA HA

March 22, 2012 at 9:48 p.m.
mymy said...

Paul Harvey’s ‘If I Were The Devil’ Speech In 1965 Is Spot On Today

March 22, 2012 at 9:55 p.m.
chet123 said...

DID HE SAY PAUL HARVEY...HA HA HA HA HA HA HA...I REMEMBER WHEN PAUL HARVEY WAS JUSTISFYING SEGREGATION...HA HA HA HA...THE UNTRA CONSERVATIVE PAUL HARVEY.....I SEE WHY YOU REPUBLICAN CONSERVATIVE HEAD IS MESSED-UP...HA HA HA..HEY MYMY...YOU WERE LIED TO...LISTEN CLOSELY...YOU WERE LIED TO....REALLY AMAZING.....CHILDISH AND JUVENILE THINKING OF MYMYHA HA HA...REALLY AMAZING.....MYMY IF YOU WANT TO KEEP YOUR WIFE ...BEHAVE LIKE A MAN....A WOMAN RESPECT A MAN....BEHAVE LIKE A MAN MY FRIEND....HA HA...PAUL HARVEY...REALLY AMAZING...AND YOU THOUGHT YOU WERE DURING SOMETHING SMART!!!YOU DONT HAVE SENSE ENOUGH TO KNOW PAUL HARVEY WAS A BIGOT....AMAZING...REALLY AMAZING.....

March 22, 2012 at 10:07 p.m.
chet123 said...

COME OUT COME OUT WHERE EVER YOU ARE....THE TRUTH HURT DOESNT IT...HIDING FROM THE TRUTH.....FOR YOU REPUBLICAN THE SAD THING IS THAT MOST OF YOU WERE BROUGHT UP BELEIVING LIES...I REVEAL THE TRUTH THAT YOU CANT DISPUTE SO YOU RUN OFF AND HIDE....HA HA HA...REPUBLICAN WILL NEVER GOVERN THE PEOPLE IN PEACE....THEY CANT GOVERN...THEY JUST SHOOT OFF AT THE MOUTH...AND HATE....OHHHHHH..THEY ARE HATERS HA HA...BIG,BIG TIME HATERS..HA HA HA!

March 22, 2012 at 10:13 p.m.
mymy said...

Hoping I would have an excuse to post this version:

March 22, 2012 at 10:13 p.m.

Paul Harvey also suggested engaging in biological and even nuclear warfare in Afghanistan. Because you know, being too civil was a threat to our nation-state, and genocide was for the betterment of America.

If that's the alternative being offered to Obama, I think I'll pass.

March 22, 2012 at 10:14 p.m.
chet123 said...

MYMY....THIS IS WHY YOU ARE SO CRAZY....RIGHT-WING REPUBLICAN HATE LINK.....THEY HAVE GOTTEN TO YOUR LITTLE PEA-BRAIN...HA HA HA.....NOTICE YOU ARE SILENCE HA HA HA...NOTHING IN YOUR HEAD BUT HATE HA HA HA......THIS STUFF IS LIKE CRACK TO YOU....YOU GOT TO HAVE A DAILY DOSE....YOU ARE ADDICTED TO IGNORANCE...HA HA HA...GLAD THE WHOLE WORLD CAN SEE THIS POSTING HA HA HA HA......

March 22, 2012 at 10:18 p.m.
chet123 said...

WHAT FEW BRAIN CELLS YOU HAVE LEFT...FOX TV WILL GET THEM HA HA HA!

HAPPYWITHNEWBULB...THIS IS HOW THEY BEHAVE WHEN I CHALLENGE THESE COOTS.....THEY RUN LIKE A RABBIT.....MOST OF THE TIME THEY WAIT ME OUT....EVEN IF IT 12:00MIDNITE..THEN THEY SHOW UP SHOOTING-OF AT THE MOUTH TO EACH OTHERS...REALLY STRANGE!!!DONT KNOW HOW THEIR WIFE LIVE WITH THEM..THESE ARE COWARDICE MEN...THEY STRIVE ON CONTROL...AND WHEN THEY ARE EXPOSED THEY RUN OFF......THEY TRY TO CONTROL THE FEMALE AND OTHERS THAT ARE DIFFERENT FROM THEM......THE PERFECT WORLD IN THEIR MIND WOULD BE A WORLD WHERE EVERYONE IS A CLONE OF THEM....THIS IS BECAUSE THEY ARE INSECURED PEOPLE...VERY INSECURED

March 22, 2012 at 10:27 p.m.
chet123 said...

HA HA HA...BOOOOOOO! BOOOOOOO! THIS NUT GOT THE PRESIDENT LOOKING LIKE A BOOGIEMAN...HA HA HA HA BOOOOO! BOOOOO! HA HA HA HA....I WILL GIVE HIM WHAT HE WANT...BOOOOOO! BOOOOOO! BOOOOOO!

THIS NUT WOULD LOVE THE MOVIE"BIRTH OF A NATION" HA HA HA HA HA HA...PORTRAYING THE BLACK MAN OR A BLACK PRESIDENT AS A BOOGIEMAN HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA BOOOOO! BOOOOO! HA HA HA HA...THIS TELL YOU WHAT THE REPUBLICAN AND THE SOUTHERN BAPTIST CHURCH IS ABOUT.....WHAT A SHAME!

March 22, 2012 at 10:41 p.m.

Well, Chet123, I wouldn't mind Harp3339 offering me some explanation for the Department of Energy costing exponentially more.

Control? Not an entirely bad thing, but you have to be honest about it, and work to avoid abusing it. That is something conservatives can never quite manage. They don't even realize how their demands for "freedoms" are really efforts to control others. Or they do, but won't acknowledge it.

March 22, 2012 at 10:49 p.m.
moonpie said...

Chet, You are an idiot. Funny, but an idiot. Every party has their share.

It's not that you never have a valid point but your ramblings obscure them.

Best wishes.

Moonpie

March 22, 2012 at 10:51 p.m.

I just assumed that somebody threw the guy known as Francis through a mirror.

March 22, 2012 at 11:10 p.m.
miraweb said...

Certainly "a" Francis, if not "the" Francis.

'night all.

March 22, 2012 at 11:17 p.m.
fairmon said...

happywithnewbulbs said... harp3339, why cut their paywhen we could just reduce the amount of overtime, and put others to work? It could eliminate a lot of unemployment.

Few, if any, in the 20% paying over 80% of all income taxes paid are paid an hourly wage. They are not paid over time for hours over 40. I really don't care if they pay more taxes than they pay now or not. It won't help enough to be noticeable.

bulbs said.... Also a better question than how much that 20% pays is how much benefit they get. I know the Heritage foundation doesn't like to talk about that, but government spending actually does benefit people

Yes some federal government spending benefits everyone but not proportionally. A lot of govenment spending benefits those paying little to no income tax as much or more than those paying a lot of income tax. Which, is also OK but some comments reveal more envy than anything. Tax them more if that makes someone feel better but it will take a lot more than that to address the deficit and debt problems this country is facing.

March 23, 2012 at 3:35 a.m.
joneses said...

happywithbeinganidiot

You continue to prove what you accuse the Republicans of is what you and your pathetic comunist liberals are. This is a liberal tactic that people with any intelligence can see through. Did you learn this tactic from moveon.org or some other talking head site? The concept of accusing those who you are against of your own agenda is as old as the hills. Anyone with intelligence can see right through your disgusting liberal propaganda or a better term would be lies. You are a pathetic liar. Republicans are not forcing anyone to buy anything, dummycrats are, Republicans are not forcing religions to supply something that is against their religious beliefs, dummycrats are, Republicans are not raising the price of gas to control how much gas people use, dummycrats are, Republicans are not forcing people into poverty to depend solely on the support of the government for their livelihood, dummycrats are, Republicans are not trying to control industries through overzealous environmental regulations, dummycrats are, Republicans are not against firearms for personal protections, dummycrats are, Republicans are not promoting hatred among the citizens of America, this pathetic president is and you dummycrats promote all his hate speech. You continue to amaze me with your pathetic lies. You are nothing but a POS.

March 23, 2012 at 6:24 a.m.
joneses said...

chet,

Why would I want to discuss anything one on one with a lying POS, chicken%$#@ like you? You are nothing but a spineless jellyfish. Your wife has really got to be sick or uglier than hell just to marry a POS like you. I bet you met here on a side walk off 23rd street. You are lucky you did not get arrested meeting her. The capital letter thing is just as annoying as you and your post and makes them unreadable and is just another sign of your stupidity. People on here have requested you stop using capital letters but you are such a moron you cannot comprehend the fact no one completely reads your post because of your use of capital letters. You use these capital letters because of some lie you are telling yourself. It is just more proof that everything you say and believe is a lie. You must live one pathetic life.

March 23, 2012 at 6:38 a.m.
joneses said...

A good friend of mine told me he is going to lay someone off at is company today to offset the higher gas prices Obama is making us pay at the pump that is affecting his profits. You know who he is going to lay off? He said he is going to lay off the guy that is continually pissing and moaning about everyone that makes more money than him and has it better than him. My friend told me he overheard him once complaining it was not fair that my friend has a nicer house and car than he and the workers at my company. What my friend really likes about getting rid of his sorry ass is he sports an Obama sticker on his car. My friend also has instructed the person that hired him to stop hiring people that do not appreciate an opportunity to succeed in life. I told my friend this failure of a person and employee will most likely end up at the court house with all the other looters/losers like Chet who do not understand nothing is free as long as someone has to pay for it.

March 23, 2012 at 6:48 a.m.
shoe_chucker said...

hey jones here are some variations on your favorite words. your overuse of pathetic and disgusting are more tiresome than chets all caps. think outside the FOX. i think you forgot to cut eye holes in your white sheet before you pulled it over your head.

Main Entry:
disgust  [dis-guhst, dih-skuhst] Show IPA Part of Speech: verb Definition: cause aversion; repel Synonyms: abominate, be repulsive, bother, cloy on, disenchant, displease, disturb, fill with loathing, gross out, insult, irk, make one sick, nauseate, offend, offend morals of, outrage, pall, pique, put off, reluct, repulse, revolt, scandalize, shock, sicken, surfeit, turn off, turn one's stomach, upset Antonyms: admire, appeal, desire, esteem, like, love, respect, revere

Main Entry:
pathetic  [puh-thet-ik] Show IPA Part of Speech: adjective Definition: sad, affecting Synonyms: commiserable, deplorable, distressing, feeble, heartbreaking, heartrending, inadequate, lamentable, meager, melting, miserable, moving, paltry, petty, piteous, pitiable, pitiful, plaintive, poignant, poor, puny, rueful, sorry, tender, touching, useless, woeful, worthless, wretched Antonyms: cheerful, happy, useful, worthwhile = informal/non-formal usage

http://thesaurus.com/

March 23, 2012 at 7:14 a.m.
ibshame said...

"joneses said... A good friend of mine told me he is going to lay someone off at is company today to offset the higher gas prices Obama is making us pay at the pump that is affecting his profits........ What my friend really likes about getting rid of his sorry ass is he sports an Obama sticker on his car."

So your so-called friend is going to lay someone off to offset the price of gasoline that he blames Obama for and then chooses the person who has an Obama sticker on his car. I wonder if this so-called friend of yours is man enough to tell this employee it makes him happy to lay him off mainly because he has an Obama sticker on his car? No, he's not going to do that because he's a coward. He knows he would face a lawsuit that might very well put him out of business if he were to make a statement like that to the employee. He's a low-life gutless coward and anyone who thinks what he's doing is somehow vindication against Obama is also a gutless coward.

March 23, 2012 at 7:35 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Whoooeee-Francis is particularly nasty this morning. Someone pee in your cornflakes?

March 23, 2012 at 8:22 a.m.
BluesHarp said...

You know those over-the-top photos of uber-tasteless folks shopping at WalMart, Clay?

I think I now know how they spend their time at home...

March 23, 2012 at 8:34 a.m.
BluesHarp said...

Oh, and your "Hitch-Hiker" is dead-on graphic satire. Kudos! Nostalgia is a disease, when it comes to governance, and the "conservatives" have little else to sell, while they divert even more of our treasury to their elite 1% rich paymasters. As these Aristo-Plutocrats actually OWN corporate media, it's a calf-rope, since they so limit issues & debate to the knuckle-dragger-numbskullery and partisan vitriol the cretin-rabble crave. Hard to believe the old WWII warriors we are losing by the tens of thousands daily have been duped by the same 1930's fascist media techniques that created the monster they fought in 1940's Germany. Rove is the best Svengali there has ever been, and Fox provides him with a Mighty Wurlitzer to pump this democracy-destroying poison into what used to be OUR airwaves, 24-7. The result can be read above. Excuse me, as I feel like I need another shower after that trip into virtual American WalMart Hell-House...

March 23, 2012 at 9:03 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Some real bozos on here

March 23, 2012 at 9:13 a.m.
rolando said...

moonpie -- Haven't seen your login for a while. Welcome back.

Great post up there.

Having lived through those days, everything you said was accurate. [The tough year was 1958 when the economy tanked.] Gas during the annual price wars was as low as 18.9 cents a gallon...I even bought $.50 worth one time just to get home -- it took most of the 2.5 gallons I bought. Minimum wage [in Calif] was $1.25 so I could buy about 6 gallons for 1 hours work; today, I would work about 3 hours for that same 6 gallons. One thing much better today -- cars run forever with minimal care.

Then we entered the 60s and we began learning what "tanked" really meant when a nation's mores began its long, long fall -- until we reach today. I think Nov will determine if the fall continues or not. But, in any case, it has been a great trip and I wouldn't have missed it for anything. Pity what we have done to our children, though.

March 23, 2012 at 9:41 a.m.
rolando said...

lkeithlu -- Your PMS is showing.

Reminds me of the old joke --

Woman on trial for killing her husband.

Judge asked her why she did it.

Her answer was that she was flowing heavy, her hair was a mess, and he said the wrong thing...so she shot him.

The judge understood perfectly, rapped her gavel and dismissed the case.

[Chauvinistic perhaps, but only if stating a fact can be considered as such.]

March 23, 2012 at 9:48 a.m.
joneses said...

ibshame,

It is his company he started with his money and no help from the government so he can lay off anyone he wants anytime he wants. A coward? Are you that stupid? Of course he would not tell this foolish liberal employee he chose him because supports a fool for president. Protecting his business from a lawsuit is not being a coward, it is good business. A lawsuit would ruin his company and all of his employees would be laid off. So he is actually saving jobs by not telling this worthlessPOS liberal employee why he is laying him off. It is his responsibility to purge his company of any negative employees who have a bad attitude and does not promote a healthy work environment. You would not understand that because you are to chicken%$#@ to take the risk and start your own company and it is obvious you have not a clue how business works. LOL

March 23, 2012 at 9:55 a.m.
rolando said...

Speaking of the media [which no one was] this just in:

-- President Obama and the media have lambasted Rush Limbaugh for supposedly insulting a “private citizen” in the Sandra Fluke affair. Obama said, “We want to send a message to all our young people being part of a democracy involves argument and disagreements and debate. We want you to be engaged. And there's a way to do it that doesn't involve you being demeaned and insulted. Particularly when you're a private citizen.”

-- The leftist media parroted Obama’s remarks. David Brock, the founder of Media Matters, led the way, explaining, “Unlike his attacks on NOW or Fox, Fluke is a private citizen.”

-- Not really. According to the Supreme Court in Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. (1974), public figures include those who “have thrust themselves into the forefront of particular public controversies in order to influence the resolution of the issues involved … they invite attention and comment.”

-- This, of course, is precisely what Fluke did.

-- But even if liberals ignore the legal definition of who constitutes a private citizen and maintain that Fluke was, indeed, a private citizen, on what basis are Rush’s remarks condemned while Bill Maher’s vitriolic invective about Sarah Palin is dismissed? Palin was just as much a private citizen as Fluke; she was no longer governor of Alaska.

-- But, liberals claim, Palin was involved in politics and may want to run for office in the future. Ladies and gentlemen, please meet the new possible candidate for public office, Sandra Fluke:

"Numerous American women have actually written to me in the last few weeks saying that I should run for office, and maybe someday I will."

--Sandra Fluke. Private citizen. Yeah, right.

March 23, 2012 at 9:56 a.m.
joneses said...

shoe chucker

You are correct I could use other words to describe disgusting pathetic liberals but disgusting and pathetic seem to be the perfect fit unlike chet's moronic capital letters. I can see how redundancy can be annoying as I hear this disgusting president keep saying the same thing over and over again promoting class warfare, hate, his attack on big businesses, and continuing to blame everyone else and thing on his failures.

March 23, 2012 at 10:03 a.m.
miraweb said...

The GOP gained so many votes by stumbling its way into women's lives last time, I'm sure they will thank you for bringing that up again.

But if you must:

Rolly writes:

Palin was just as much a private citizen as Fluke; she was no longer governor of Alaska

After you have a TV show, write a book, and buy a bus you it's really hard to say you are just a poor little soccer mom from Wasilla.

Even if it is largely true.

I'm thinking about running for dog catcher some day. Does that make me a celebrity?

March 23, 2012 at 10:06 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Your chauvinism is noted rolando, though not surprising. Having clawed my way up though a male-dominated field in a male dominated institution, sexism is familiar and easily handled. You belong to another era; perhaps 1953?

March 23, 2012 at 10:27 a.m.
ibshame said...

"joneses said... ibshame,

It is his company he started with his money and no help from the government so he can lay off anyone he wants anytime he wants. A coward? Are you that stupid? Of course he would not tell this foolish liberal employee he chose him because supports a fool for president. Protecting his business from a lawsuit is not being a coward, it is good business. A lawsuit would ruin his company and all of his employees would be laid off. So he is actually saving jobs by not telling this worthlessPOS liberal employee why he is laying him off. It is his responsibility to purge his company of any negative employees who have a bad attitude and does not promote a healthy work environment...."

He's still a gutless coward any way you cut it. And anyone who applauds his ethics is also a gutless coward. His company should be ruined if the only reason he wants to fire someone is because they support the President of the United States. He's a pathetic excuse for a human being and a LOSER.

March 23, 2012 at 10:33 a.m.
mymy said...

Some other words to describe disgusting pathetic liberals:

Wasserman Schultz: 'Natural Home' For Minorities Is Democratic Party

Wasserman and the DEMS are correct. The Dem Party has become the party of the "MINORITY" in America. That minority includes: (1) Communists (2) Socialists (3) Marxists (4) Anarchists (5) Historical Revisionists (6) Anti-Constitutionalists (7) Racists (8) Gay wrongs advocates (9) Marriage Revisionists (10) Pro Jew and Christian Basher's (11) Pro Baby Killers (12) Vote Fraud Advocates (13) Flag Burners (14) Pro Illegal Alien Invaders of America (15) Deniers of States Rights (16) Anti-Free Enterprise / Capitalism Advocates (17) Redistribution of Wealth Advocates (18) The Perpetually / Purposefully Non-Workers (19) Union Thugs (20) Black Panther Voter Intimidators (21) "Centralized Decisions By Elite" Advocates (22) Actors who actually think the 80%ers care about their politics (23) Pornographers (24) Those who will vote Democrat regardless of who the candidate is

. . . the 80% of America loving Americans are being ruled by the 20% evil minority in America and that must change in 2012.

March 23, 2012 at 10:35 a.m.
davisss13 said...

mymy, what a list. I encourage you and every other wingnut to scream this as loud and often as possible.

March 23, 2012 at 10:52 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Harp3339 said: “You can assume all you want but you are wrong, I am well aware some are working but in jobs less than their qualifications or working part time and need help."

I’m not a mind reader, Harp3339. There was nothing in your original question that acknowledged the fact that many food stamp recipients have jobs but belong to what has become America's working poor. Indeed, if you recognize the issues involving America’s working poor, why did you emphasize “them” VS the “truly not capable" in your original question?”

Harp3339 said: Would it help if those you consider over paid had a pay cut?

I didn’t address the subject of pay cuts in my post and I believe you’ve made a rather giant leap here, Harp3339. But I suspect you this already.

Harp3339 said: “Do you care to take a stab at what percent of all income taxes paid those 20% pay?”

Everyone with income pays income taxes and the amount of taxes to be paid is in accordance to the U.S. tax code, Harp3339. Why do you consider this relevant? Since the richest 20 percent of working families in the U.S. are taking home approximately 47 percent of all income in the U.S., it’s logical to assume that the percent total will reflect this.

March 23, 2012 at 10:52 a.m.
mymy said...

The left is big on free speech, but only if you support their crazy ideas. Otherwise, they do not allow you to speak.

March 23, 2012 at 10:55 a.m.
jesse said...

IF i was lookin for a hive of idiots the FIRST place i would look is "the tfp. forum"! IF you folks EVER git over tellin each other how "ignorant "you all are and start thinking about REAL solutions to the probs.we face today ,then we might start to solve some of the prob's. we face!

March 23, 2012 at 11:05 a.m.
mymy said...

The left refuses to listen. It is my way or the highway.

March 23, 2012 at 11:07 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

The left is big on free speech, but only if you support their crazy ideas. Otherwise, they do not allow you to speak.

Kinda like the "Don't Say Gay" bill.

March 23, 2012 at 11:12 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Happywithnewbulbs said: "Control? Not an entirely bad thing, but you have to be honest about it, and work to avoid abusing it. That is something conservatives can never quite manage."

Well, it’s obvious that this Greenwell Springs Baptist Church pastor is one of those who haven’t managed it – talk about control issues. Clearly, Preacher Terry has them:

“Greenwell Springs Baptist Church pastor Dennis Terry introduced presidential candidate Rick Santorum and Family Research Council president Tony Perkins tonight in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, with a rousing speech . . . Terry said that America "was founded as a Christian nation" and those that disagree with him should "get out! We don't worship Buddha, we don't worship Mohammad, we don't worship Allah!" Terry, who has a long history of attacks against the gay community, went on to criticize marriage equality for gays and lesbians, and said that the economy can only recover when we "put God back" in government.”

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/pastor-dennis-terry-introduces-rick-santorum-tells-liberals-and-non-christians-get-out

March 23, 2012 at 11:18 a.m.
chet123 said...

i listen to you mymy....thats how i know you are a fool

March 23, 2012 at 11:19 a.m.
chet123 said...

my fellow democrats...i see you are kicking butt this morning....i will be back in 30min.

March 23, 2012 at 11:21 a.m.
joneses said...

ibshame

So you think it is wrong to fire someone because they support a stupid, disgusting, pathetic, self serving, liar, hypocritical, narcissist POS like Obama? To me that tells much about the employees character and judgement and that he is incompetent and cannot be trusted to make decisions that are important to the company. It is the same as a criminal background check. I would not hire a person who has just been released from jail for stealing from a previous employer. Should the ex convict be able to sue the employer because the employer has no trust in his integrity? I think about people the way they train me to think about them. If you throw a baseball then I will think of you as a person who throws a baseball. If you support this fool you call a president then I will think of you as an idiotic, incompetent, pathetic, disgusting fool.

March 23, 2012 at 11:31 a.m.

harp3339, just because you're not paid an hourly wage doesn't mean you don't work extra hours that could be somebody else's work and all of you could be MORE productive, not less. You're focusing too much on the details, and ignoring the principles. Why is that?

Did you even read the link I gave you? At a certain point, two people working forty hours is more than double the productivity of one person working eighty.

So why leave one person idle, when you don't even get more productivity out of it?

The details of pay are almost irrelevant, they can be worked out any number of ways.

And your comments reveal resentment for the poor. You think they're sitting on their duffs doing nothing. That upsets you. You envy them. You think they're getting a disproportionate benefit.

But the benefits of government services are disproportionate...to the rich, who actually get far more benefit than you realize, even if they're not handed the checks for food or given housing. You can obsess over welfare till your eyes bleed, but you're still completely ignoring the numerous other things the government is spending on that goes directly to the rich.

Or even the benefit the rich get from the poor not starving, which avoids them deciding "Hey, I need to eat, no food is out there, nobody will let me work to earn my way, so...I guess I won't sit here and starve to death, but will go out and take it!"

Because people will. And it's not immoral to do that.

And if you want to eliminate the deficit, as I've said, it could easily be done. The current deficit is about 1/10 of current GDP. Given that taxes are nowhere near 100% of GDP, but closer to a quarter, it would be easily correctable.

And you should watch this Jon Stewart video:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-august-18-2011/world-of-class-warfare---the-poor-s-free-ride-is-over

March 23, 2012 at 11:31 a.m.

joneses, let's see you complain about the other side being controlling, then a few posts down, you revel in your "friend" who is going to fire somebody who votes in a way you disagree with?

Man, you must be paid to be so hypocritical.

BTW, here's what Republicans are trying to do:

Republicans are trying to control who people marry, and who they sleep with.

Republicans are trying to give a church control what medicine you can get in your insurance.

Republicans are trying to give industries the ability to poison the air.

Republicans are against putting murderers in jail, and want to give them medals for killing the right people.

And if you're not full of hate why are your posts so full of derision and insults? Have you no awareness of your own hate speech?

Here, let me challenge you, go to 10 ministers in town, with a copy of your post to me, ask each of them if it's hostile or full of hate. See what response you get.

March 23, 2012 at 11:36 a.m.

mymy, can you tell us how open and inclusive joneses is being? On a scale of 1 to 100. Heck, tell us how open and inclusive you are, with your choice of language like "disgusting pathetic liberals" or "brainwashed socialist man-child today."

I don't think you can make me feel bad for not listening to you when that's what you have to offer.

March 23, 2012 at 11:40 a.m.
ibshame said...

"joneses said... ibshame

So you think it is wrong to fire someone because they support a stupid, disgusting, pathetic, self serving, liar, hypocritical, narcissist POS like Obama? To me that tells much about the employees character and judgement and that he is incompetent and cannot be trusted to make decisions that are important to the company."

How soon people like you want to forget the administration of George W. Bush when he was beating the drums for war in Iraq. I have no doubt you were one of those "flag-waving patriots" eager to support him and his decisions to invade Iraq even though there was absolutely NO CONNECTION whatsoever between Iraq and the 9/11 disaster. Yet anyone who dared to question the reasons for invading this country was called UNPATRIOTIC, UNAMERICAN, TRAITORS, SUPPORTERS OF BIN LADEN and the list goes on and on.

A decorated war veteran was portrayed as a supporter of Osama Bin Laden because he questioned the legality of Bush's invasion of Iraq. He lost his seat in the U.S. Senate as a result of this cowardly portrayal of him. How many people do you think should have lost their jobs when they supported the stupid, disgusting, pathetic, self-serving, liar, hypocritical, narcissist POS like Bush? To me that tells much about their character and judgement because he proved to be incompetent and could not be trusted to make decisions important to the COUNTRY. Now these same people want to turn the clock back and elect the same type of pathetic, self-serving liar in the form of Mitt Romney. Talk about character and judgement?

Rick Santorum made a statement earlier today that the country might as well keep Barack Obama as President if they are considering voting for Mitt Romney as President. This bunch really knows how to provide sound bytes for Nov. LOL

March 23, 2012 at 12:05 p.m.
chet123 said...

i'm back.....look like the democrats are holding their ground.....no need for me ha ha ha

March 23, 2012 at 12:12 p.m.
mymy said...

Do some reading to understand how many have become brainwashed over a long period of time:

The Crisis we see in America today is no accident and it has not come about naturally!

"The strategy of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis. The "Cloward-Piven Strategy" seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse."

And

Alinsky’s 1989 book: Rules for Radicals

March 23, 2012 at 12:17 p.m.

mymy, don't forget you've been brainwashed. The current fiscal crisis of the US government is no accident, it's a deliberate attempt to starve the beast, combined with a massive and hidden outsourcing of as much work as possible so the corporations can quickly move to fill the void once the government has been collapsed and supplanted, while the provocation of racial division is an intention result of the Southern Strategy.

Read the Cold Cash War by Robert Asprin and Free Market Missionaries by Sharon Beder.

March 23, 2012 at 12:23 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Harp3339 said: "Which, is also OK but some comments reveal more envy than anything."

I haven't read any comments suggestive of envy, Harp3339. Perhaps, you've been listening too much to presidential candidate Mitt Romney who has told us that America is envious of his wealth. Personally, I believe that problems have to be identified before they can be resolved, and in this case the problem involves the great numbers of Americans who are not making livable wages. As this article suggests, a livable wage is the critical issue:

“What does it mean to be poor?

If it means living at or below the poverty line, then 15 percent of Americans -- some 46 million people -- qualify. But if it means living with a decent income and hardly any savings -- so that one piece of bad luck, one major financial blow, could land you in serious, lasting trouble -- then it's a much larger number. In fact, it's almost half the country.

"The resources that people have -- they are using up those resources," said Jennifer Brooks, director of state and local policy at the Corporation for Enterprise Development, a Washington, D.C., advocacy group. "They're living off their savings. They're at the end of their rope."

The group issued a report today examining so-called liquid asset poverty households -- the people who aren't living below the poverty line, but don't have enough money saved to weather a significant emergency.

According to the report, 43 percent of households in America -- some 127.5 million people -- are liquid-asset poor. If one of these households experiences a sudden loss of income, caused, for example, by a layoff or a medical emergency, it will fall below the poverty line within three months. People in these households simply don't have enough cash to make it for very long in a crisis.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/31/working-poor-liquid-asset-poverty_n_1243152.html

March 23, 2012 at 12:29 p.m.
mymy said...

According to Alinsky, the main job of the organizer is to bait an opponent into reacting. “The enemy properly goaded and guided in his reaction will be your major strength.”

The O just did it re birth control and the Repubs fell for it! Shame on them.

http://vcn.bc.ca/citizens-handbook/rules.html

March 23, 2012 at 12:33 p.m.
joneses said...

ibshame

So you are blaming President Bush? You are a real POS. Congress, dummycrats and Republicans voted for the war in Iraq based on Bill Clinton's CIA intelligence and you blame it on President Bush? Did you know that Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Nancy, "bitch" Pelosi, John Kerry, Al Gore, and other pathetic dummycrats all agreed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction? Did you know we are still at war in Iraq and Afghanistan because this fool you support as president has not the balls to pull our troops out? You are really proving yourself to be the POS you are by blaming President Bush for all the dummycrats and this presidents failures. It is sad you cannot come up with anything this POS president Hussien you idolize as your messiah has accomplished. All people like you and Hussien Obama want to do is destroy America. You are a fool.

March 23, 2012 at 12:39 p.m.
fairmon said...

mountainlaurel quoted from an article....

The group issued a report today examining so-called liquid asset poverty households -- the people who aren't living below the poverty line, but don't have enough money saved to weather a significant emergency.

According to the report, 43 percent of households in America -- some 127.5 million people -- are liquid-asset poor. If one of these households experiences a sudden loss of income, caused, for example, by a layoff or a medical emergency, it will fall below the poverty line within three months. People in these households simply don't have enough cash to make it for very long in a crisis.”

THEREFORE what? Are they worse off than a country that has no cash reserves. A country that can't meet it's obligations and commitments without going further and further in debt. A country that has no qualms about passing a debt that cannot be paid on to future generations?

March 23, 2012 at 12:50 p.m.
fairmon said...

mountainlaurel said... Everyone with income pays income taxes and the amount of taxes to be paid is in accordance to the U.S. tax code, Harp3339.

47% pay no income tax with something getting a refund in excess of the amount paid, in some cases up to $5,000+.

ml continued with.... Why do you consider this relevant? Since the richest 20 percent of working families in the U.S. are taking home approximately 47 percent of all income in the U.S., it’s logical to assume that the percent total will reflect this.

I think the IRS will confirm that the top 20% pay around 80%, not 47%, of all taxes paid on income. In my opinion everyone should pay some tax on income as long as taxes on income is the process used instead of taxing money spent. That is not to say people with lower incomes don't need and should not receive assistance. In my opinion welfare should be identified as such without hiding it in an already complicated and unfair tax code.

March 23, 2012 at 1:08 p.m.
DocCutty said...

joneses (and others),

You kiss your mother with that mouth? "Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited," just as a reminder. Sheesh.

March 23, 2012 at 1:22 p.m.

harp3339, your desire to get the proportions "right" reflects a failed understanding of percentages. The percent of IRS taxes on income is a share of the total income, not 100% of it, so trying to allocate it evenly across income distribution is a mistaken belief. You see that some group is paying 80% of the taxes, and you're thinking "They must be paying some high percentage of their income" and finding that outrageous, but what's the actual number? You don't know that, you're just going by what you feel about the numbers.

That is not logical. You're going by your intuition or gut feeling, not logic.

If you wanted to use logic, you'd concern yourself about essential spending versus disposable, and the benefits received, but you're not even thinking of those. Just your emotional reaction to some irrelevant percentages while you ignore people's actual status.

However, if you want to be concerned about welfare in the tax code, why not tell us what you think about tax expenditures?

http://baselinescenario.com/2011/01/05/who-benefits-from-tax-expenditures/

DocCutty, you'd think so, but obviously they don't care enough to listen to those rules that curb their free speech.

March 23, 2012 at 1:22 p.m.
mymy said...

DocCutty said...

joneses (and others),

You kiss your mother with that mouth? "Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited," just as a reminder. Sheesh.

mymy said...

The left is big on free speech, but only if you support their crazy ideas. Otherwise, they do not allow you to speak.

March 23, 2012 at 1:32 p.m.
mtngrl said...

mymy, you don't seem to realize free speech includes the right to call others out on what they say. How exactly are you not allowed to speak?

March 23, 2012 at 1:38 p.m.

mymy, why is that the right tries to bash the left so hard that they can't even own up to the concept of decorum and respect for others?

Is actually being responsible with your words too much for the right wing?

March 23, 2012 at 1:38 p.m.
ibshame said...

"joneses said... ibshame

So you are blaming President Bush? You are a real POS. Congress, dummycrats and Republicans voted for the war in Iraq based on Bill Clinton's CIA intelligence and you blame it on President Bush? Did you know that Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Nancy, "bitch" Pelosi, John Kerry, Al Gore, and other pathetic dummycrats all agreed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction?"

George W. Bush was the COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF of the United States. It was up to him to make the final decision to invade Iraq as the Commander-in-Chief. The buck stopped with him. Not only did he make that decision to invade Iraq but he also gave the ok to charge the American people for the war without ever explaining how much it would increase the deficit.

As for the rest, they voted on the intelligence that was provided by then PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES - GEORGE W. BUSH. Bill Clinton was no longer in the White House and had not been in the White House since the day George W.Bush was sworn in as President in Jan. 2001.

Bush invaded Iraq in March, 2003 based on INTELLIGENCE that he claimed to have been provided to him by the CIA. Al Gore NEVER voted to invade Iraq and was against the invasion from the start. As for John Kerry, Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi it was not long before they realized they had been bamboozled by Bush when he uttered the following words in his State of the Union address to Congress. Words which turned out to be NOTHING MORE THAN A BIG FAT LIE: "The British government has learned Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." Bush had been warned prior to making that statement it was untrue but it didn't stop him from making it. I have to wonder if Joe Wilson of South Carolina had been sitting in the audience knowing Bush was lying would he have hollered out "You Lie" as he did to President Obama? Highly unlikely.

What I hold against Barack Obama when it comes to Iraq is the fact he didn't prosecute those who falsely took this country to war. A war that cost the lives of over 4000 U.S. soldiers. Thousands of Iraqi Civilian lives and the maiming for life of hundreds of thousands of U.S. soldiers. All based on the lies of then President George W.Bush and his neo-con cronies and the blind alligiance of sheeple like yourself and his followers the real POS of this country.

March 23, 2012 at 1:46 p.m.
mymy said...

Maybe it is time for everyone to get off this site and do something more productive or interesting. Such as:

http://www.ustream.tv/decoraheagles

March 23, 2012 at 1:48 p.m.

ibshame: Joe Wilson was elected to Congress in 2001. I can't confirm he was sitting in the audience during that speech, but I can't imagine why he wouldn't have been there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Wilson_(U.S._politician)

I did notice a few examples of him declaring something was a lie, or false, which turned out to be actually true, and they did date from that time period.

Huh.

March 23, 2012 at 2:26 p.m.
acerigger said...

tu_quoque said... "Not necessarily however I am starting to wonder about ol' Warren. These men strictly operate on the concept of self interest and they are getting well compensated by The Obozo for their efforts."

Can you provide any facts to back up that statement? Maybe a link?

March 23, 2012 at 3:07 p.m.
joneses said...

The foolish Hussien Obama is telling more lies today as always. He is saying he wants to stop subsidies to oil companies. What he does not tell you the oil companies do not get subsidies from the government. They pay the same corporate taxes on earnings as Government Motors (GM) and any other corporation. Another lie is he wants to put a fast track on the pipeline from Cushing, OK to Texas. This pipeline does not need his approval and was being built anyway. The only pipeline that needs this fools approval are the ones that cross US borders like the keystone pipeline from Canada. Anyone who believes anything that comes out of this fools mouth is a bigger fool than he is. Obama lies and freedom dies.

March 23, 2012 at 3:20 p.m.
mymy said...

joneses: It is just the Liar-in-Chief on another comedy tour. 4 days this time and I bet a Spring vacation is soon to follow.

March 23, 2012 at 3:40 p.m.
joneses said...

happywithbeingafool

You are correct I hate you foolish liberals and what you want to do this country. You never talk about anything this fool of a president has accomplished. Some dummycrats would did not even put on their campaign signs two years ago that they were dummycrats because of them voting for the communist obamacare. That is how low you actually go. You think Republicans want to regulate who one can marry? As far as I am concerned you can marry your dog if that is what you want to have sex with. I do not care.

Republicans are trying to control who people marry, and who they sleep with?

You can have sex with anyone or anything you want as far as I am concerned and you probably do.

Republicans are trying to give a church control what medicine you can get in your insurance?

Lie. This is what the Catholic Church wanted if anything. Obama dictating to the Catholic Church is not about birth control stupid. It is about Obama dictating to churches fool.

Republicans are trying to give industries the ability to poison the air?

The biggest lie yet. Tell me one piece of legislation the Republicans have proposed that would allow industry to pollute the air. You can't liar. Republicans believe in responsible environmental regulation. What good would it do for Republicans wanting air pollution?

Republicans are against putting murderers in jail, and want to give them medals for killing the right people?

Where did you get this from happywithbeingstupid? You liberals are the ones that are killing babies. Could you please name the Republican that wants to give a murderer a medal?

Please keep posting. The more you post the healthier it is for the Republican party.

You and all you liberal fools are lying sacks of s%$t.

March 23, 2012 at 3:43 p.m.
rolando said...

lkeithlu -- Well, the post was more gender-specific than either chauvinistic or sexist...men, after all, do not menstruate and do not suffer PMS [directly, anyway. What man has not suffered from "second-hand smoke"?]

Actually, I thought the remark you made was a bit beneath you...but everyone has a bad day on occasion.

March 23, 2012 at 3:44 p.m.
miraweb said...

Actually, Boehner said the same thing about the oil company subsidies about a year ago. Here is the IRS page on the special "Oil Depletion Allowance" (one of the eight tax breaks oil companies get that are being reviewed.

ABC News

March 23, 2012 at 3:47 p.m.

tq: I'm quite aware that I don't fill my posts full of badly written name-calling and insults.

joneses: I could talk about what the President does, but why bother? If President Obama put out a burning house, you'd oppose him for stopping your urban renewal.

Nice to see you repudiate the position of the Republican party. When can we see you voting to repeal the Defense of Marriage act?

But yes, the Catholic Church does want to dictate to you what medicines you get, good for you for noticing that. Now see which party voted for the Blunt Amendment...actually, just see which party proposed it.

And yes, I can provide you an example of Republican-proposed legislation allowing air pollution by dis-empowering the EPA. Rand Paul did it, when he wanted to suspend a rule to prevent cross-state air pollution from power plants. Then there's the attempts to prevent the EPA from requiring the reporting of pollutant releases. Then there's the Latta Amemdment, which was to require the EPA to consider industry-costs over health-risks in making rules. So let's see, how much it'll cost a factory to not pollute matters more than the health of a person? Then there's was the Griffith proposal to prevent the EPA from regulating incinerators. And then there's the Republican who apologized to BP because Obama said he'd make sure they cleaned up their mess in the Gulf. I could go on, but I doubt you'll admit any of these is actually anti-Environmental, let alone air pollution.

And I saw that proposal to give Zimmerman and Bales a hero's welcome on one of those pro-Republican conservative blog/discussion sites.

March 23, 2012 at 4:36 p.m.

tq: Actually, if you looked at that link, you'd see the benefit of increased productivity can show up even compared to 45-50 hours. I just picked 80 for 1, versus 40 with 2 because it was easier to express. I could have said 8 people working at 45 hours a week is less productive than 9 people at 40, but it just didn't flow as well.

But while you are correct a sharp business owner would notice it, not everybody is that sharp, and no, there's not always that free and open competitive market going on, and sometimes there are other factors that cover for the increased. The free market does have a number of frictions that add to the complexity.

Besides, you're ignoring the costs of that overtime, which the business owner doesn't necessarily have to pay, but puts on the worker. If you want to decrease the burden on the employer for providing for the workers, let's take away employer-based health insurance and go to a public-option.

There goes most of the burden.

March 23, 2012 at 4:43 p.m.
shifarobe said...

Get a load of OBUTTHEAD sticking his long fingers into the shooting in Florida. He says if he had a son he would look like the victim. What the crap does that mean. Look at that dumb cretin Al Sharpton, the guy who's been to the White House more than anyone to visit OBUTTHEAD, trying to capitalize on it. Trying to pit hispanics against blacks??? The shooter is hispanic. Like I said, OBUTTHEAD and his supporters are dividers. This is another distraction from that ass scratcher in chief.

March 23, 2012 at 4:46 p.m.
chet123 said...

OH LISTEN TO THESE BIG BAD REPUBLICAN HA HA HA

March 23, 2012 at 4:50 p.m.
mtngrl said...

Every time shifarobe/joneses posts I cannot help but picture Mayella Ewell. Powhitetrash blaming a black man for all of thier troubles, when they know deep down it was their own daddy's fault all along

March 23, 2012 at 4:51 p.m.
fairmon said...

happywithnewbulbs said... harp3339, your desire to get the proportions "right" reflects a failed understanding of percentages. The percent of IRS taxes on income is a share of the total income, not 100% of it, so trying to allocate it evenly across income distribution is a mistaken belief. You see that some group is paying 80% of the taxes, and you're thinking "They must be paying some high percentage of their income" and finding that outrageous, but what's the actual number? You don't know that, you're just going by what you feel about the numbers.

I assure you I am well aware of the percent paid on AGI as income tax. I am well aware of the discrimation against those preferring to remain unmarried without children. I see no justification for any deductions, credits etc. and other tools of manipulation in a very convoluted tax system.

March 23, 2012 at 4:53 p.m.
joneses said...

You know what happywithbeingaliar. You continue to spout off lies to move your communist agenda forward. You dummycrats are not for clean air you are for controlling industry through environmental regulation. Your whole agenda is about total control of all aspects of the country and everyones lives by taking away freedoms. Hussien Obama is hell bent on destroying this country and putting more people on the government payroll to keep them dependent on government. That is the only way you communist bastards can control this country by buying the peoples freedom with lies about how they cannot make it on their own and need to depend on the government. You and all your communist fools on this forum have got your orders from the DNC to totally obliterate this and all chat rooms to spread your propaganda. It is a tactic and we Americans know what you are doing. You continually lie and only the fools believe you. You have not persuaded anyone to vote for this communist bastard president. All you fools are doing is lying to each other. Please keep exposing you for who your are you communist POS.

March 23, 2012 at 4:54 p.m.
chet123 said...

TUQUOQUE.....DONT WORRY ABOUT NOOGA....I THINK NOOGA IS FED UP WITH YOUR IDIOT RIGHT-WING NUTTY BUDDIES....

HEY SHIFTAROBE....WANT TO BLOW OFF SOME STEAM COME THIS WAY YOU IMBECILE

March 23, 2012 at 4:59 p.m.
joneses said...

nooga,

You were never a marine you wimp. You do not have the balls God gave a jackass. No true Marine would ever support these communist you so adore. You are a pathetic excuse for a man. What size dress do you wear? Did you also meet your wife on 23rd street and was as lucky as chet in the fact you did not get arrested when you met her? LOL

March 23, 2012 at 4:59 p.m.

TQ: Try reading that again. Note the lack of the safety net implicit in my statement.

I don't expect people to starve to death without action, nor do I consider it immoral. And yes, people will take risks of death over certain starvation. This is something they'll teach you in survival school too.

Adding in the safety net, well, great, then there's no driving force of starvation.

But no, Conservatives want to eliminate the safety net, and express a great deal of resentment and hatred towards those who use it. You can see it here, the number of people who endlessly lament the number of people in the "47% who pay no income taxes" which they find grossly upsetting, since they clearly believe that 47% is all healthy working people who just need to get off their ass and get a job. Not once has a single conservative here (especially not "conservative" ) answered me when I asked them if they've looked at the actual people in that group, and factored out those on social security retirement, the disabled, and the children. Instead it's just continual outrage at "THEY DON'T PAY INCOME TAXES!" and demanding that they be put to work.

That's what you've shown. Not merely "many" but a complete indifference to the ones who don't fit that criteria. Not one word of recognition of them.

Are you finally going to do it? Will you be the first to admit it?

And then will you take them to task when they don't?

And yes, I do want people to work if possible, but I know that involves several elements, ranging from education to resources. I believe that people besides the "very poor" need support, even if Mitt Romney doesn't.

March 23, 2012 at 5:02 p.m.
chet123 said...

CHET IS IN THE HOUSE...THE CHAMP IS HERE!...THE CHAMP IS HERE!...THE CHAMP IS HERE!....WHERE ARE THE HATERS!!!!WHERE ARE THE HATERS!!!...

HEY JONESES....YOU RIGHT-WING BUTT KISSER OF THE RICH AND GREEDY....

March 23, 2012 at 5:04 p.m.

harp3339: If you are aware of the actual percentage of income paid, why are you so focused on something that's completely irrelevant to it? All you mention is the total paid, but that's got little to do with the actual fairness of it.

If you want to change the tax system to eliminate what you perceive as inequities, though, you'll have to consider them separate from your concerns about percentages. They do have individual reasons and purposes, and have to be taken separately.

For example, in the US children are considered to be beneficial to human society, but they are recognized as costly, which warrants a deduction, since they're being encouraged. Of course, in other places, they might impose a penalty for having children. Same with marriage, it's believed to be a net-gain for society. Don't like it? Well, you'll have to persuade everybody why you don't want the tax system fostering that.

However, it'd help if you recognized where most of the tax expenditures go.

joneses: has TQ ever asked you about your self-awareness? Have you ever taken your posts to a neutral party to examine them? I wonder who sets your marching orders. I'm torn between Karl Rove's PAC and Obama's PAC employing you as a false-flag operation.

March 23, 2012 at 5:11 p.m.

tq: Sorry, but reported posts aren't publicly displayed, and I see no reason to inform you of the ones I quietly report.

For the rest? Your attempt at equivalency fails, there's a clear difference in behavior. There may be those you'd consider my "allies" (though I do not) who are rude, but there is a clear gap in the civility level. The legion of Conservative trolls on this site has a severe problem with caustic language and hostile attitudes, to the point where I think they're as likely to be false-flag operators as they are genuine.

I really can't decide.

And no, TQ, the Catholic Church does not want you to purchase birth control pills, they would ban them by law if they had a chance. They consider them sinful and criminal. Have you not noticed their level of opposition? Even without the power to write the laws, they would not just express disapproval, but seek to exert influence over you, by firing you, refusing to do business with you, and otherwise making you do what they want.

So yes, they would be trying to control you.

Pardon me for requiring something better than a religious belief set by a tiny group of celibate old men to decide what happens.

And yes, by choosing to hire workers, they are subjecting themselves to ALL of our laws. Would you be so hands off if they claimed their religious beliefs banned blood transfusions? Or perhaps not using safety glasses? Noise restrictions? Fire Codes?

I doubt it, but if you were, you'd still be mistaken.

March 23, 2012 at 5:16 p.m.
chet123 said...

HAPPYWITHNEWBULB....YOU ARE SO CORRECT....BUT REPUBLICAN ARE SO FILL WITH HATE THAT THEY ACTUALLY ARE TONE DEAF TO THE TRUTH AND REASON.....WE WILL JUST HAVE TO LET IT RUN ITS COURSE....THEN THESE FOOL WILL SWEAR GOD ALMIGHTY THEY HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH REMOVING THE SAFTY NET...

REPUBLICAN RIGHT-WING NUTS ARE MOTIVATED BY HATE.....THEY ARE WEAK ON ISSUES BECAUSE THEY GET THEIR INFORMATION FROM HATE-LINKS AND FOX TV

WE LOST OUR MANUFACTURING BASE...LISTENING TO THE REPUBLICAN AS THEY PUSH FOR "NAFTA" ....A GREAT AMOUNT OF OUR GOOD PAYING JOBS WENT OVERSEAS

THEN IT WAS RONALD REAGON VOO DOO ECONOMIC..ALSO CALLED TRICKLE DOWN THEORY......ADJUST TAXES AND ECONOMY SO THE 1% BECOME SUPER,SUPER RICH AND THE MONEY WILL TRICLKE DOWN ON THE MIDDLE-CLASS....WHAT A JOKE!

THEN IT WAS KILL THE UNION MOVEMENT....THE UNION GAVE BIRTH TO THE MIDDLE-CLASS IN AMERICA.....THERES A CORELATION BETWEEN THE SHINKING UNION AND THE SHINKING MIDDLE-CLASS

THE TRUTH IS...THE REPUBLICAN CANT GOVERN....

March 23, 2012 at 5:30 p.m.
shifarobe said...

Sorry folks, and I mean the liberals on here, not a racist bone in my body. OBUTTHEAD and Sharpton deserve all the criticism they get. UNLESS, UNLESS a black person is a liberal Democrat you folks can't take it. I would vote for Condoleezza Rice or Alan West any day. You Democrats are the racists. OBUTTHEAD and his buddy Sharpton want crisis, want chaos and want racial divide. OBUTTHEAD and Sharpton are both donkeys. OBUTTHEAD is the pied piper of horse's asses (like Sharpton), class envy losers who crap and pee in the street until they get their way, hoes who want free protection, illegal aliens and welfare mamas.

March 23, 2012 at 5:36 p.m.
chet123 said...

SHIFTAROBE....I LOVE YOUR HIGH VOCABULARY.....OBAMA,OBAMA,OBAMA, SHAPTON,SHAPTON, YELLLLLLL! THE BOOGIEMAN MAMA....THE BOOGIEMAN MAMA!...THIS TYPE OF BEHAVIOR IS TAUGHT AND LEARN BEHAVIOR....YOU WERE TAUGHT BY YOUR PAPPY TO HATE LIKE THIS.....I'M SURE YOU ARE SOUTHERN BAPTIST..THEY ALSO TEACH BIGOTRY....I USE TO SLEEP WITH THE WIVES OF RED NECK MEN LIKE YOU.....YOU ARE INSECURED!!!!!....HOW IS YOUR MARRIED...OR HAVE SHE ALREADY LEFT YOU ??? HA HA HA HA

SO LET IT ALL OUT SHIFTAROBE....YOU WILL FEEL BETTER!!!...ITS FUNNY TO ME...I LL BE GENTLE TO HER HA HA HA

March 23, 2012 at 5:47 p.m.

tu_quoque: Or maybe I just don't want to pass on traffic to such a site. If you don't believe such sentiments exist, why don't you go find a few, and see what they have to say from your proposing the idea.

You can't just troll here, can you?

March 23, 2012 at 5:49 p.m.
jesse said...

since i found this place i don't read the funny papers anymore!!lol

garfield and mallard fillmore ain't got nuttin on some of the folks that spend all their time here!

March 23, 2012 at 5:53 p.m.
shifarobe said...

I would say liberals and Democrats are the racists and the ones who love DIVISION. YOU SUCK. GIVE EVERYONE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY, NOT MATTER WHAT COLOR. YOU LIBERALS WANT GUARANTEES AND FREE STUFF. YOU ARE THE MOST BORING PEOPLE ON EARTH.

March 23, 2012 at 5:56 p.m.

tu_quoque: Redundancy is also helpful, I've found that having more people capable of doing a job is better in case of emergency than less, even if it costs more for the training, the benefit of not being bound to a few people is greater.

But the tax benefits don't make up for the higher costs of health care in this country. So no, I said that if you're concerned about the benefits packages, it'd be better to remove the biggest burden upon employers, and offer a way out that would benefit us all.

As a tax payer, I'd rather pay less money to get better health care, and that could be done if the system wasn't set up the way it is in the US. As an employer, I'd be a lot happier not having to manage the health care needs of the workers when somebody else can do it more efficiently than me. That 30% doesn't cover it. But even if it did, the increase health care performance would be worth it.

Now yeah, in the short-run, having fewer paper-pushers would put people out of work, but if we're really wanting people working, I'd prefer re-directing it to actual health care provision.

March 23, 2012 at 5:59 p.m.
chet123 said...

WHERE IS SHIFTAROBE...HA HA HA HA HA....

FOLKS I PERFER TALKING ISSUES BUT THERE A FEW RIGHT-WING HATERS IN HERE THAT WOULD RATHER BE PERSONAL.....I DONT HAVE TO CALL THEIR NAMES...YOU KNOW!....SO I WILL BE SHOOTING FROM THE HIP SINCE THESE MORONS DISREPECT DIALOGUING IN A CIVIL MATTER.

March 23, 2012 at 5:59 p.m.

shifarobe, if you can't guarantee the opportunities are equal, how can we be sure of them being equal?

Believe it or not, opportunity doesn't knock on every door, so it's not just a matter of being there to answer.

(Of course, opportunity is really about knocking on doors, but that's a problem with the metaphor itself, I could rewrite my sentiment to compensate for that reversal if it were desired.)

March 23, 2012 at 6:07 p.m.
mymy said...

The Hitchhiker: Obama 2013 with no Air Force One!

March 23, 2012 at 6:09 p.m.

Why, is Congress going to go on such an austerity streak that they stop funding the Air Force since it's not mentioned in the Constitution?

March 23, 2012 at 6:11 p.m.
dude_abides said...

rolando... you are a truly disgusting individual. From what I can tell, you're old enough (and then some) to have daughters and granddaughters and nieces, and you make posts like that? I was thoroughly put off (once upon a time) by the way Saudis treated their wives and daughters, and noted the difference between their backward, third world society and our progressive country. Your post helps me correct that. The women in your life must be either long suffering or stupid. You should gather your ear hair and your hemorrhoids and your crooked yellow teeth and your impotence and your bad breath and your flabby man-breasts and jump from the roof of The Pinnacle.

March 23, 2012 at 6:13 p.m.
chet123 said...

SHIFAROBE....YOU ARE AN UNEDUCATED COWBOY BOOT WEARING TRAILER-TRASH....SO YOU THINK YOU ARE THE VICTIM....DUMB BUTT....I AGREE...YOU ARE A VICTIM....A VICTIM TO THE RICH AND GREEDY WHO DONT GIVE A HOOT ABOUT YOU COWBOY.....YOU DONT EVEN HAVE A DOG IN THE FIGHT....YOU ARE MIXED-UP IN THE HEAD BUDDY...

YOU VOTING WITH THE KOCH BROTHERS, THE BUSHES,THE RICH AND GREEDY WHO GETING DIRTY RICH WITH THIS HIGH GAS PRICES BECAUSE THEY ARE INVESTORS....YOU HAVE NOTHING HOMEY.....LET ME SAY THIS AGAIN TO YOU SINCE YOUR DUMB BUTT IS TONE-DEAF...YOU HAVE NOTHING...NOTHING.....YOU ARE A BLUE COLLAR REPUBLICAN....A BLUE COLLAR REPUBLICAN HA HA HA HA HA HA HA...FOOL DONT YOU KNOW YOU PAY THE SAME PRICE FOR GAS AS I DO......DO YOU THINK THEY HAVE A SPECIAL GAS PUMP THAT SAY "BLUE COLLAR REPUBLICAN"....HA HA HA HA..OR A GAS PUMP THAT SAY "SHIFAROBE PUMP HERE"..REALLY AMAZING,REALLY AMAZING!!!

March 23, 2012 at 6:13 p.m.
hambone said...

Childish insults and name calling is all I see on this forum anymore.

It's a shame that so many live such miserable little lives!

March 23, 2012 at 6:20 p.m.

tu_quoque: Private insurance companies already ration care. So do providers. Medicare and Medicaid actually have higher payment levels to actual healthcare versus non-healthcare, so they're doing just fine. Don't confuse how much they spend with being a problem, they do cover the most expensive populations so of course it is going to be costly as a whole. But it's been quite effective when you see the actual results.

And that's without a national system, as implemented elsewhere, which accomplishes a lot more. Including making more health care actually available to un-served populations.

Keep missing the point though, with your free beer and snacks remarks. I could arrange my own security, or I could pay for the police with my taxes. I know which I find to be the most cost-effective.

But no, they can't give Air Force one back to the Army, no Air Planes at all can be funded, as they aren't in the Constitution.

Not surprised you don't want to actually look for the people who endorse what Robert Bales and George Zimmerman did (or criticize them as not killing enough), but I know they're out there.

I just don't want to encourage you to bring them here.

hambone: Of course the TFP could resolve this, by just giving up the pretense of a discussion forum.

March 23, 2012 at 6:21 p.m.
fairmon said...

bulbs said.... For example, in the US children are considered to be beneficial to human society, but they are recognized as costly, which warrants a deduction, since they're being encouraged.

Beneficial and encouraged in a country with a growing population where decent jobs are not available for about 20%, why? Those unable to support a child without financial help from their neighbor should effectively utilize the free birth control now available. Neighbors w/o kids are already helping pay for the kids education, their health care until age 26 etc.

bulb said... However, it'd help if you recognized where most of the tax expenditures go.

Ample essential government functions including defense do exist but encouraging child birth and other discriminatory policies are not among them. Enlighten me on where the money goes unless you are referring to the deductions and other favor showing in the tax system and calling it spending. I can't spend something I never had and neither can the government. I agree the tax code is totally unfair to those with lower incomes.

bulb said...

Well, you'll have to persuade everybody why you don't want the tax system fostering that.

You would not believe how hard I am working on that and gaining traction. Keep in mind the number joining the geriatric crowd that have no children is growing. They are members of the selfish generation that got us to where we are. Many have the same opinion but like you still want to retain some of the selfishness and pretending to be moral in the system. The persuasive argument for a lot of them is removing the incentive for gay marriages. I don't say this to them but I don't care if gays marry, they can't proliferate which is a good thing.

March 23, 2012 at 6:38 p.m.
chet123 said...

WHAT HAPPEN TO THE REPUBLICAN.....I GUESS HATE IS THE ONLY THING THEY KNOW

March 23, 2012 at 6:46 p.m.
joneses said...

If Obama thinks that the socialism of America's health care system with the passing of Obamacare is so great why is he not using it's passing as a success in his reelection campaign?

March 23, 2012 at 6:51 p.m.
joneses said...

If Obama thinks that spending 5.5 trillion dollars in his 3.5 years as president is a good idea then why is he not using what he spent it on in his quest for reelection?

March 23, 2012 at 6:56 p.m.

harp3339, First, I was talking about tax expenditures, not government spending. They're not the same thing. It's a specific term with a specific meaning. I could understand you being confused about it if you'd asked earlier, but this far in the discussion? Bit late for that. Still, I gave you a link already on tax expenditures, you can read it and enlighten yourself. Did you miss the link?

See it again: http://baselinescenario.com/2011/01/05/who-benefits-from-tax-expenditures/

But no, this country isn't offering free birth control on the wide scale you claim, even the proposal by Obama does not include "free" birth control, but rather requires insurance to cover it. They can still make their charges based on it, they just have to apply it based on their customers as a whole population, not to the individual on a service provided basis. Fortunately it is indeed cheaper to not have a baby than it is to pay for one, so it'll probably be a cost-savings in the end. And I've never noticed anybody claim that the insurance companies shouldn't cover pregnancy. Maybe you would, but you'd be alone with that claim.

As for your sentiments concerning having children and population growth, if your attempts are as bad as they are here, you may be working hard, but you're not working effectively. And actually, gays can reproduce. Haven't you seen the commercials for the surrogate mothers program?

I don't concur with your sentiments, I think your premises are mistaken and flawed, but even that aside, you seem to be missing a lot in the details.

But here's how neighbors benefit from children being born. Increase in economic activity. Having somebody younger around to do the work. Knowing that the human race will continue. We're not actually close to over-population as a whole, but even if we were, the reasons to have a child are still worth encouraging.

That said, I certainly agree with letting people have a choice about reproduction, and not forcing it upon anybody. My preferred solution would be to have all pregnancies be a result of a conscious and deliberate choice made by informed persons, without the accidents or the unsavory manipulation with them.

March 23, 2012 at 7 p.m.

joneses, Obama hasn't started his re-election campaign to any significant degree. I think he's going to wait till later to ramp it up. He's luckier than Mitt Romney, not having to spend 100 million dollars getting people to dislike the other guy more than him.

Still, if you want to sign up on his website, I'm sure they can e-mail you what you want to see.

March 23, 2012 at 7:02 p.m.
joneses said...

happywithbeingafool

I do not anticipate Hussien Obama running on his socialism of our health care system. Do you know why? Because very few of the Democrats that supported it in the House and Senate were reelected during the mid terms. Hussien Obama's campaign will not consist of anything he has accomplished because everything he has accomplished has failed. If I was going to vote for a POS I would vote for you.

March 23, 2012 at 7:07 p.m.
joneses said...

Today

ABOARD THE PAPAL PLANE (Reuters) - Pope Benedict said on Friday communism no longer works in Cuba and that the Roman Catholic Church was ready to help the island find new ways of moving forward without "trauma."

I would bet you liberals hate hearing this. Communism has never worked so why do you want it here in America?

March 23, 2012 at 7:09 p.m.
joneses said...

Obamacare is not going to help you. This is a subject that one could write an entire book on, not because of it’s 1900 (plus) pages, but because it is un sustainable, irresponsible and unconstitutional. First off, WELCOME TO SOCIALIST AMERICA! This bill HR 3962, is redistribution of wealth on a scale not yet seen in America and will not be dwarfed by any other proposed legislation except for Cap and Trade. Bottom line The Government can now Legally tell you what you have to buy. In this case it’s Health insurance. With the passage of this bill, they also destroy the incentives and rewards system of a capitalist economic system by controlling the entire medical field. The government now decides what the salary will be for a doctor, surgeon, physician assistant and other medical professionals. They also dictate where anyone who would choose to go into the medical field will live and practice.

March 23, 2012 at 7:13 p.m.
joneses said...

President Obama appointed yet another “czar” with massive government power, answering only to him. Even before this latest appointment, the top-ranking Democrat in the Senate wrote President Obama a letter saying that these czars are unconstitutional. President Obama’s “czar strategy” is an unprecedented power grab centralizing authority in the White House, outside congressional oversight and in violation of the Constitution.”

March 23, 2012 at 7:15 p.m.
joneses said...

The Ayers/Obama educational philosophy, called for downplaying achievement and scholarship in return for hatred of America, it's wealthy citizens and its institutions.   Ayres and the Obama that embraced his philosophy, call for teachers to be “community organizers” dedicated to provoking resistance to what they consider to be American racism and oppression.

"I'm a radical, Leftist, small 'c' communist," Mr. Ayers said in an interview in Ron Chepesiuk's, "Sixties Radicals," at about the same time Mr. Ayers was forming CAC.  In 2006, Ayers was in Venezuela praising communist dictator Hugo Chavez, saying, "We share the belief that education is the motor-force of revolution."  Barack Hussein Obama does, also.   

March 23, 2012 at 7:17 p.m.
mymy said...

joneses, they just don't get it.

March 23, 2012 at 7:20 p.m.
joneses said...

Beginning in his teenage years, Obama sought out a black father substitute.  In some way, this would compensate for being deserted by a left wing, Black, Kenyan, womanizing, alcoholic father. Gravitating towards the hard left, he turned to Black radicals who were equally alienated from white society. During his teenage Hawaii years, Obama became close with the poet Frank Marshall Davis, a hard core Communist Party member, hater of America and Christianity.  Davis was one of the many "father figures" the emotionally fragile Obama sought out as a substitute for the father that deserted him. It was Davis who crystallized Barack Hussein Obama's racist, anti-American views.  His motto was "never trust white people." In later years, this mantle would be taken up by Chicago's anti-American racist Preacher Jeremiah Wright.  This father figure/mentor relationship publicly lasted for twenty years, until 2008 when voters were confronted with movies of Wright's racism and anti-American ravings in its vilest form.  Obama publicly pulled away, at least until the Presidential elections were over. But Black or White, Obama always gravitated to people who wanted to remake America into a more collectivist image.  He would reinvent his deceased Marxist father's reputation, by transforming America into the Socialist state he would want.  When Obama claims that he wants to "change America as we know it," he really means what he says.

March 23, 2012 at 7:22 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

rolando posted: Actually, I thought the remark you made was a bit beneath you...but everyone has a bad day on occasion

nope, I meant it. And it was far less offensive than what shif, joneses/francis and others say here daily.

March 23, 2012 at 7:23 p.m.
joneses said...

Does America Have its first Marxist President?  You bet it does and Here’s the Verification:  9 June 2009 © www.BarackObamaWebPage.com   Founded in 1992, the New Party is a Marxist political coalition whose objective is to endorse and elect leftist public officials - most often Democrats. The New Party’s immediate objective is to turn the Democrat Party hard left, in an attempt to create a new Marxist party. Most New Party members come from the Democratic Socialists of America, the hard left organization ACORN and an assortment of Maoists, Trotskyites, and Communist Party USA members.  It was very active in Chicago, with membership including none other than BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA. Since his ascent to prominence, there have been attempts at “scrubbing” New Party references of Obama having been a member or their even having provided support in his early elections.  But thanks to a concerned reader of www.BarackObamaWebPage.com, we have obtained archival material proving that Barack Hussein Obama is the first Marxist Socialist President of the United States. The adoring mainstream press has worked feverishly to cover up Obama's dedication to Marxist ideology going back to his teenage years.  But substantiation of New Party membership can be seen by the following documents in pdf format.  So you don't have to read documents in their entirety unless interested, we have yellow highlighted the name of Barack Obama for convenient recognition.

March 23, 2012 at 7:24 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

One shovel ready job the bama does not want to fund.

I guess only blue states get stimulus money.

March 23, 2012 at 7:26 p.m.
joneses said...

mymy

They get it. Happywithbeingafool, chet and others on here want this country to become a Marxist country. They get it, this is what they want. For some reason they think that the marxist ruling class is going to make them wealthy by confiscating all wealth and retirement accounts for redistribution. What they do not understand is the people doing the redistributing are the ones who will be the wealthy ruling class. And this ruling class will continue to blame it on others that had nothing to do with their state of misery and poverty. It is that or they are just plane stupid.

March 23, 2012 at 7:32 p.m.

joneses, you are in error again It's the Democrats who opposed it who had the higher loss-rate. 34 Democrats voted against it. 4 didn't run for re-election. 17 of those who did lost, 13 won. So that's a 56% loss rate.

Now for those who voted for it(219), since the Democrats lost 63 house seats in 2010, and 17 are gone from the oppose group, that means no more than 46 were lost from the pro group. Even without considering retirements, that's still only around 22% loss rate.

That's just the House, mind you. And it's really not a fair contest, since the electoral districts are shaped and distorted, but still, your argument hardly holds water. In the Senate, there were no Democrats who opposed the act, so obviously none of them could be re-elected. But of the six seats that changed hands, in three of them the Democratic incumbent retired, and only three were replaced, and 10 won re-election, and 3 more stayed Democratic.

So let's see, winning 13, losing 6. Still better odds. Of which 3 of them were retired incumbents, snd one of those who lost was Arlen Specter. So...I wouldn't even count that one.

But I know the actual facts won't change your mind, you already decided what happened, and if we don't buy into your version of reality, that's our problem. Because we're stupid, like planes. Which is strange, I've noticed planes are pretty smart, with all the computers they have in them.

However, did you know that the government was already setting how much they'd pay doctors? Yeah, when it employs them! It even pays for them to go to school, then expects them to work for them after!

It's like they don't want to go to the free market of health care. Even the members of Congress use it! Have you seen the office of the House Physician? All paid for at GOVERNMENT RATES!

BigRidgePatriot: It's actually the Tea Party caucus holding up the Transportation bill. Boehner just can't seem to get it passed.

March 23, 2012 at 7:38 p.m.
joneses said...

Happywithbeingafool

You are proving you being a liar again. Only a fool would believe you. Not one Democrat that ran for reelection ran on their voting for the passage of the socialism of of the Amerian health care system with the passage of Obamcare.

March 23, 2012 at 7:44 p.m.
joneses said...

The Obama administration has frustrated allies around the globe: Israel, Saudi Arabia, Colombia, Britain (despite the warm words to Mr. Cameron) to name but four. But its "outreach" to those who would seek to undermine American interests -- Iran, Venezuela, North Korea -- has yielded nothing. Moreover, the administration's support for the Arab Spring has won it no new friends, lost a key ally in Hosni Mubarak, and produced an uncertain outcome by leading from behind in Libya. In addition, even as it has berated Bahrain for its supposedly insufficient responsiveness to an intransigent opposition backed by Iran, it has done precious little to thwart the far greater brutality of Syria's Assad.

Finally, the "pivot" toward Asia, which has European and Middle Eastern allies deeply concerned, is in fact no pivot at all. It consists of a minor increase in American forces in Asia, but a meaningful decrease of forces in Europe and an uncertain posture in the Middle East. Indeed, the administration's defense cuts, which it portrays as a solution to the country's fiscal crisis while entitlements remain untouched, has reinforced a growing impression worldwide that America is a declining power.

The president surely deserves credit for authorizing the killing of Bin Laden. But one good move in nearly four years of setbacks is hardly a record to be proud of.

March 23, 2012 at 7:45 p.m.

joneses, who said what they ran on? Your statement was "Because very few of the Democrats that supported it in the House and Senate were reelected during the mid terms" which is factually untrue.

In the house: 219 minus 46 is 173. Now 173 may be very few in some circumstances, but I would not call 173 out of 219 to be very few. And that's not even considering the retirements.

Why do you? Do you want to throw in the Senate? That's another 13 who won, and 6 who lost.

Again, not what I'd consider very few.

But apparently you prefer to ignore the words you said and how they're not actually true.

How do you get so oblivious? Is it a learned effort, or do you use some method to assist you to such heights of denial?

Or are you just being paid to so poorly represent the conservative view that you're actually discrediting it?

Your foreign policy analysis is also lacking. You should follow Ron Paul's instead of the Neo-con war-mongering. I would bother to point out your errors, but I think you can just check out Ron Paul's website instead.

March 23, 2012 at 7:56 p.m.
joneses said...

Former Democratic congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper, a Catholic from Erie, Pennsylvania, cast a crucial vote in favor of Obamacare in 2010. She lost her seat that November in part because of her controversial support of Obamacare. But Dahlkemper said recently that she would have never voted for the health care bill had she known that the Department of Health and Human Services would require all private insurers, including Catholic charities and hospitals, to provide free coverage of contraception, sterilization procedures, and the "week-after" pill "ella" that can induce early abortions.

March 23, 2012 at 8:02 p.m.
joneses said...

n a stunning about-face, West Virginia Governor and Senate hopeful Joe Manchin publicly rebuked President Obama’s health care overhaul bill, the heretofore signature legislation of the Democratic Party. Speaking to Chris Wallace on Fox News, Manchin, who tried to overtake his Republican opponent in the race to win the late Robert Byrd’s Senate seat, claimed that he would not have voted for the bill given what he knows now. Clearly a maneuver to assuage restive West Virginia voters, Manchin’s statements only seem to confirm what many have suggested — that, above all other factors, ObamaCare weighs heavily on voters’ minds, and even heavier around the necks of Democratic candidates. It’s not news that Democrats have run away from ObamaCare.

March 23, 2012 at 8:07 p.m.
joneses said...

Since Obama is for the killing of babies by abortion why does he not talk about his accomplishments in the killing of these babies? Obama could say, "Through my attempts to deprive life to millions of children I have been very successful in supporting legislation that promotes the killing of innocent babies." Since this is what he is for why does he not talk about this accomplishment?

March 23, 2012 at 8:18 p.m.

joneses, again, you stated "Because very few of the Democrats that supported it in the House and Senate were reelected during the mid terms" so providing an individual example of somebody losing only proves that...somebody lost. Given that she was in a district that had not had a Democratic representative since 1976, and only one in a landslide year by 2 percent, I'd consider her a likely loss regardless of how she had voted on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

But still, your original statement, not true. 173 Democrats who voted for the Act? Re-elected. Which hardly supports your claim. Try owning up to it, rather than coming up with other statements.

Also, you got your sentence wrong about Manchin. He never voted on the act himself, it was Byrd who voted Yea for it. Manchin certainly ran an anti-Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act campaign, but at least try to avoid the sloppy mistakes.

Or stick to the reality you seem to prefer. It's certainly a strange one you've fabricated.

March 23, 2012 at 8:19 p.m.

tq: No, I'm not in favor of driving traffic to those sites

But ok, try it:

http://www.topix.com/forum/afam/T7IU45DU36H29LV1C

Do me a favor, use an ad-blocker before you go there.

But you have a absurd idea of balancing the budget. It's like you want to take all the meat from the bone. I don't know why you didn't suggest taking 50% of what the poor have, that's 700 BILLION DOLLARS! Huge amount there. Heck, why not take all of it, like you're planning to do for the billionaires! That's 1.4 trillion dollars!

Oh wait, you're just preferring your preposterous suggestions to avoid having to deal with the reality of a sensible balancing of the budget.

If all you want is hyperbole, stick to stand-up.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-august-18-2011/world-of-class-warfare---the-poor-s-free-ride-is-over

March 23, 2012 at 8:21 p.m.
joneses said...

happywithbeinganfoolishliar

When you stated the lie that Republicans want air pollution you lost all credibility. You are a liar of the worst kind and nothing you say can be believed

March 23, 2012 at 8:37 p.m.
joneses said...

It is time for those who voted for Barack Obama to admit they were deceived and made the wrong choice.

President Obama’s stimulus package, Obamacare, the Dodd-Frank finance bill, restricting exploration and drilling for oil and natural gas, and taking away freedom of choice, including religious beliefs, have all had negative impacts on our economy and citizens. His diplomacy and desire to be kind to our enemies and abandon our allies is troubling.

But these and other misguided policies pale in comparison to his failure to support the military, his failed policies for defense and national security, and his total lack of support for our allies. Our enemies are more threatening than ever, Mr. Obama does not heed the advice of our military leaders and he is downsizing and impairing our military capacity. That means the nation will be less able to defend against or pre-empt enemy attacks. After three years, Mr. Obama still wants talks with Iran and North Korea, neither of which have abandoned plans for nuclear weapons. Mr. Obama believes he can use the talks to buy time.

He has not stood up to China or Russia, which continue to protect Iran and North Korea from sanctions. At the same time, these countries are taking over countries and territory from people who fought for freedom. The inadvertent burning of Korans desecrated by Muslim prisoners in Afghanistan was followed by a quick Obama apology. He has not responded to the killing of six American soldiers with a statement saying we will hold the Afghan government responsible for their military and civilians killing these and other Americans serving in Afghanistan. Under no circumstances should he allow our military to be tried by Afghanistan or the United Nations.

March 23, 2012 at 8:38 p.m.
joneses said...

Barack Obama's approval ratings for 3/22/2012: • Strongly Approve: 26% • Strongly Disapprove: 40%

March 23, 2012 at 8:41 p.m.

You lost credibility when you didn't even bother to deny Rand Paul's attempt to do so.

Well, actually, you lost credibility a long time before that, but on that subject in particular, your failure to acknowledge the amendment was telling.

PS, you forgot Congress's approval ratings:

Congressional Job Approval Polling Data Poll Date Approve Disapprove Spread

RCP Average 2/6 - 3/11 11.8 81.5 -69.7

Gallup 3/8 - 3/11 12 82 -70

Politico/GWU/Battleground 2/19 - 2/22 12 83 -71

CBS News/NY Times 2/8 - 2/13 10 82 -72

FOX News 2/6 - 2/9 13 79 -66

I doubt it's gotten better since then, Rasmussen's poll this week has them at 10% very good or excellent, 63% at poor job rating.

March 23, 2012 at 8:42 p.m.
joneses said...

happywithbeingafoolishliar

Well, actually, you lost credibility when you were born liar. Type in your search engine "liberal lies". It is all the lies you post on here. Is that where you get your lies?

March 23, 2012 at 8:47 p.m.
shifarobe said...

Watch OBOOB milk the murder of the black teen in Florida for all he can. YEAH, YEAH, LET'S GO ON THE ATTACK! How pathetic! Listen to Jesse Jackass cry about how blacks are under attack. What utter frauds! This murder of a black teenager by a hispanic man is being used to divert attention from high gas, low poll numbers, bad, bad money management. Who's attacking blacks? Hispanics? What a load of crap. What a demagogue. A couple of weekends ago there were 16 people shot in Chicago. Why is Obama running with this? What a pathetic soul OBOOB IS, just pathetic. Jesse Jackass, Al Sharpton, Louis Farakan are nothing but opportunists!

March 23, 2012 at 8:48 p.m.
joneses said...

One Of The Top Liberal Lies: “Tax Cuts For The Rich”

Most of those making higher incomes and paying the top marginal income tax rate are not wealthy. Most people consider someone wealthy if they have a net worth of several million dollars or more. So most of those paying these upper marginal rates are not wealthy, but they may be trying to become wealthy.

Again, like their old Bolshevik brethren, liberals try to make the public envy and even hate the wealthy. But capitalism depends upon the wealthy. Much of the investment that drives the growth of our economy comes from the wealthy. We do ourselves a great disfavor by demonizing the wealthy. We damage our economy when we penalize the successful. We suppress our economy when we overtax those who invest. And many who would invest in growth will not do so if they are taxed too heavily, or if government makes the risks unacceptable. Many small business are impacted by high upper marginal income tax rates. To say that cuts in the upper income tax rates don’t spur the economy and spur employment is silly left-wingnut “voodoo economics”.

The next time you hear a liberal use the phrase “tax cuts for the rich” remember they are either knowingly being dishonest, and they have been misled by the prevailing liberal dogma. Income taxes are not based upon wealth, they are based upon income.

March 23, 2012 at 8:53 p.m.
stanleyyelnats said...

Let's all hope they get a ride and stay there.

... More ...

March 23, 2012 at 8:54 p.m.

joneses: Only if you promise to check the results of "conservative lies" and not re-tweet everything from Rush Limbaugh in the hopes of getting an iPad.

BTW, the spending that builds the wealth of the wealthy? Guess where it comes from...the not wealthy, who still need various things. If Henry Ford had only wanted to sell cars to the rich, he'd have a lot fewer customers.

Not that people's opinions of being wealthy matter, Mitt Romney has already said he doesn't consider himself to be wealthy, he only has a few homes in different states and a couple of cars. He hardly has enough money to have his own Island Fortress.

shifarobe: Let me know if the police didn't arrest any of the murderers in Chicago, or even check them for being intoxicated, or take their weapon for ballistics tests. Please, do produce an investigative report.

March 23, 2012 at 8:55 p.m.
stanleyyelnats said...

4 more years.

Enjoy!

March 23, 2012 at 8:58 p.m.
joneses said...

shifarobe

Obama and these other pathetic anti-Americans never say anything about the enormous amount of innocent black children being killed by black gang members. It is sickening that they promote black on black crime. They are showing their true colors by promoting a lynch mob mentality. I guess they would rather the police blow the case they are building against this idiot Zimmerman so his sleazy Democrat attorney can get him off on a technicality. And Obama, supposedly a constitutional lawyer, is promoting this behavior. Obama is a real fool.

March 23, 2012 at 9 p.m.
joneses said...

If Obama is reelected I hope all you pathetic liberals get what you deserve. Complete government control of everything you do. But of course if one cannot think on his own then he might just need to be controlled by the government.

March 23, 2012 at 9:02 p.m.

joneses, in what fantasy universe were the Sanford police trying to build a case against Zimmerman? They didn't even bother to check and see if he was intoxicated, or take his gun into custody. Were they building evidence by editing the 911 calls they released? By not even trying to identify the boy he shot?

But I'll take the government having control over Romney's pet Corporations, or Santorum's Churches. Not that it's going to happen, mind you, but I fear your fantasy is too deeply entrenched to recognized that.

March 23, 2012 at 9:07 p.m.
alprova said...

Someone wrote: "Childish insults and name calling is all I see on this forum anymore."

Between the trolls, the hopelessly misinformed, the eternally ignorant, and people with no manners or respect whatsoever for anyone, they have totally ruined what once was a good place to debate topical issues.

And because it all of this has become so out of control, as this very thread illustrates, I am withdrawing my future participation.

March 23, 2012 at 9:17 p.m.

Well, this will be a less factual place without you alprova.

But I can't say I find your decision to be the wrong one.

March 23, 2012 at 9:19 p.m.
dude_abides said...

joneses... we are taking over! I'm gonna call the White House and have them put a drone on your a$$. What's yours is mine. Your assets are my assets, and my debt is your debt. I'm gonna pull some liberal strings and get steak and eggs for African American kids' school breakfast. There's a new textbook I'm gonna try to get used in elementary schools called "Whitey, Whitey, So Uptighty." Hopefully, we can get the 2012 Church Integration Bill signed into law. If I have my way, we'll have a Government Beer Vouchers law "drafted" by Juneteenth. We're gonna turn Fox News into a Hispanic home improvement channel. It would be nice if we had a Transgender Appreciation Day national holiday.

March 23, 2012 at 9:22 p.m.
BobMKE said...

It has been two years since Oblameacare has been passed. Now watch this weekend news shows and watch and listen to the sock puppets OB will send in to talk up the highlight of his administration. If his highlight somehow gets past the Supreme Court it will take up 1/6 of our government expenses. Now can anyone post a some what recent news story, a TV clip of Oblamea talking up Oblameacare? I doubt it because he is not stupid enough to do that while he is running for a second term. Using common sense, what does that tell you?

March 23, 2012 at 9:25 p.m.
dude_abides said...

Don't do it, alprova. Just skip over the junk (mine included).

March 23, 2012 at 9:27 p.m.

BobMKE: Guess you've not been to their website?

http://www.barackobama.com/i-like-obamacare/splash?

March 23, 2012 at 9:34 p.m.
joneses said...

Obama to Cut Healthcare for Military Families

Just a couple years ago Nanci Pelosi made the famous statement regarding Obamacare, “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.” Well, we have been finding out more and more about it, and America doesn’t like it. Now President Obama has been attempting to cut the budget, so he’s gone at the pentagon and military with a chainsaw. As part of the $487 billion cut in Pentagon spending, Obama is proposing that military families and retirees pay dramatically more for their healthcare. This proposed increase of payment for their healthcare isn’t a practical or modest increase like what the governors across the country have done to balance their state budgets. The proposal calls for 30 percent to 78 percent increase in annual premiums for the first year. After the first year of increases, the plan will put in place more increases over a five-year period that range from 94 percent to 345 percent. If a Active military family is paying $460 a year right now, then after the plans are in place that family would pay $2048 a year.

March 23, 2012 at 10 p.m.
joneses said...

happywithbeingaliar

You have not a clue what the Sanford police are doing dumb ass. We do know that the race baiting pimp Al Sharpton is there to screw things up for the family of this innocent child that was shot. Happywithbeingafool, you are a liar and a fool. You have no credibility. Your parents really did a number on you. I would say if there is a reason abortion should be legal it would be you.

March 23, 2012 at 10:03 p.m.
joneses said...

The majority of present-day Democrats don't know what they are. They don't understand the issues, can't even identify the major politicians that shape our government (see video below), and have no cohesive philosophy.

So many Democrats, principally the self-professed ultra liberal ones, don't even understand the definition of the terms they are dealing with. For example, if someone is touting a new government program, all they have to do to lure the clueless, hapless Liberal is to present the idea as being the fulfillment of social justice, that it is a program of generosity. Libs eat this stuff up, but they don't realize what is being put before them is pure Socialism.

Soviet dictator Khrushchev once observed: "We can't expect the American people to jump from Capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving them small doses of Socialism, until they awaken one day to find that they have Communism."

"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." - Norman Thomas

March 23, 2012 at 10:23 p.m.

joneses: Sorry, no, but the facts don't support your claim about Tricare. For example, that fee? Would be based on actual retirement income, so no, not all families would be paying that rate. Just the ones who could afford it, so that the Tricare program could remain more solvent on its own. Obama isn't behind this idea, the Chiefs of Staff are. However, if you'd rather pay the steadily increasing costs for Tricare out of General Tax revenue, you're certainly welcome to make that argument. But don't ignore the fact that military health care spending has grown considerably over the years, especially since a lot went to war.

BTW, Paul Ryan's budget plan will do the same things, and it won't balance the budget till 2040. If then. It's not like the Republican party isn't trying to repudiate their commitment to the Budget Control Act. They were all for cutting spending in theory, but when it comes down to reality, they're running away from it.

But everything I said about the Sanford police was true, if they were trying to build a case against George Zimmerman, they were completely failing. Which is why the city council voted no confidence in the police chief, why he resigned for the duration, and why the governor of Florida appointed a special prosecutor to handle the case.

However in your fantasy-world, all of that can't possibly mean anything, they must have been trying to build a case against the man, not at all a possibility that they were hoping it would go away.

The man who defended the graveyard from vandals in Chattanooga got arrested quicker. So did the EMT rushing his wife to the ER. And they didn't kill anybody, they even had the charges dismissed. It's sad, Tennessee has apparently managed better than Florida.

March 23, 2012 at 10:24 p.m.
stanleyyelnats said...

joneses:

4 more years.

Enjoy dude! I know I will.

March 23, 2012 at 10:40 p.m.

TQ...so are you disputing the content of the site does express such support for Bales and Zimmerman? I notice how you didn't bother to comment on the actual words expressed there, just trying to prove I was mistaken about the site?

Why is that? Trying to avoid acknowledging that those sentiments do in fact exist?? Here, I'll tell you this: I guess I was wrong about that site. My mistake then.

Now what do you think about those sentiments? Think that's the only person expressing that on the web? Or might there be others? I bet you could find some even in Chattanooga if you tried asking around.

BTW, I don't consider a janitor or a secretary to be a religious employee, neither should the Catholic Church. Your reference to Hosanna-Tabor left detail that out. Non-religious employees are the ones subject to this provision of the law, not the religious ones. Didn't mention that, did you? Why? I guess you didn't think anybody would double-check your own BS. Actually, I almost didn't, since I missed your post in the noise. My bad.

Now who is showing a lack of self-awareness and exposing their own hypocrisy? Ah, you. You're only calling out those you disagree with, but never yourself.

Guess you live up to your name once again.

Oh well, if you want to see a church filing a lawsuit over noise restrictions, check for a lawsuit in Phoenix. How dare the neighbors complain about the bells! How dare they!

The Blunt Amendment set a bad precedent, and would have been very expansive in its scope. I'm glad it didn't pass. If I want a church to decide my medical policies, I'll ask them. Until them, I'll rely on more objective measures.

Don't let them have the power to control me.

March 23, 2012 at 11:59 p.m.
joneses said...

The majority of present-day Democrats don't know what they are. They don't understand the issues, can't even identify the major politicians that shape our government (see video below), and have no cohesive philosophy.

So many Democrats, principally the self-professed ultra liberal ones, don't even understand the definition of the terms they are dealing with. For example, if someone is touting a new government program, all they have to do to lure the clueless, hapless Liberal is to present the idea as being the fulfillment of social justice, that it is a program of generosity. Libs eat this stuff up, but they don't realize what is being put before them is pure Socialism.

Soviet dictator Khrushchev once observed: "We can't expect the American people to jump from Capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving them small doses of Socialism, until they awaken one day to find that they have Communism."

"

March 24, 2012 at 5:12 a.m.
joneses said...

Last week the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office announced that the obamacare law will now cost American taxpayers $1.76 trillion over 10 years (2013 -2022), or around $12,753 per person. This is nearly double the amount that President Obama had originally told us this bill would cost and the law hasn’t even been implemented yet. Obamacare is starting out as another failure by Hussien Obama.

March 24, 2012 at 6:10 a.m.
chet123 said...

I SEE JONESES WAIT UNTIL ALL THE DEMOCRATS ARE GONE TO RESURFACE HIS COWARD BIGOTRY 1950 JIM CROW BUTT

WISH THIS DUDE WOULD LET ME KNOW WHEN HE WILL RETURN ON HERE....I JUST WOULD LOVE TO DIALOGUE WITH THIS HATER

SEE THE STILL CRYING ABOUT OBAMA.....GET OVER IT!.....NEVER SAY ANYTHING ABOUT REPUBLICAN FAILURE TO GOVERN......

HEY JONESES....PLEASE STOP HIDING FROM ME....STAND UP LIKE A MAN....PROMISE I WILL BE GENTLE HA HA HA

March 24, 2012 at 7:19 a.m.
fairmon said...

happywithnewbulbs said... harp3339, First, I was talking about tax expenditures, not government spending. They're not the same thing. It's a specific term with a specific meaning. I could understand you being confused about it if you'd asked earlier, but this far in the discussion? Bit late for that. Still, I gave you a link already on tax expenditures, you can read it and enlighten yourself. Did you miss the link?

I read the article and like others fail to accept favor showing and manipulation using the tax code as expenditures. I don't find it enlightening but repeating something most reasonably intelligent people already know. The OMB and legislatures don't refer to deductions, credits and other tax reducing favor showing in the tax codes as spending. You jumped to a conclusion without reading the initial response. Ample essential government functions including defense do exist but encouraging child birth and other discriminatory policies are not among them. Enlighten me on where the money goes unless you are referring to the deductions and other favor showing in the tax system and calling it spending. I can't spend something I never had and neither can the government. I agree the tax code is totally unfair to those with lower incomes.

March 24, 2012 at 7:54 a.m.
davisss13 said...

Degenerates like joneses have completely poisoned every single forum I've visited. If you can't own it you destroy it.

Mission accomplished.

March 24, 2012 at 8:31 a.m.
mymy said...

CABLE NEWS RACE THURS., MARCH 23, 2012

FOXNEWS O'REILLY 2,733,000 FOXNEWS HANNITY 2,079,000 FOXNEWS GRETA 1,905,000 FOXNEWS SHEP 1,616,000 FOXNEWS BAIER 1.601,000 FOXNEWS FIVE 1,499,000 MSNBC MADDOW 988,000 CMDY DAILY SHOW 879,000 MSNBC SCHULTZ 865,000 MSNBC O'DONNELL 818,000 MSNBC SHARPTON 817,000 MSNBC HARDBALL 791,000 CNN COOPER 738,000 CNN PIERS 703,000 C

March 24, 2012 at 8:38 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Chet: Seek professional help. Seriously.

March 24, 2012 at 8:41 a.m.
dude_abides said...

CABLE NEWS VIEWER IQ's THURS., MARCH 23, 2012

FOXNEWS O'REILLY 68 FOXNEWS HANNITY 61 FOXNEWS GRETA 72 FOXNEWS SHEP eleventy three FOXNEWS BAIER 49 FOXNEWS FIVE 5

March 24, 2012 at 9:57 a.m.

tu_quoque: Gee, I only said I was wrong when you showed me. My word, what a concept.

What would it take to show you that you're wrong?

The Supreme Court's statement in the Hosanna-Tabor Case, perhaps, where they described the teacher:

Petitioner Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School is a member congregation of the Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod. The Synod classifies its school teachers into two categories: “called” and “lay.” “Called” teachers are regarded as having been called to their vocation by God. To be eligible to be considered “called,” a teacher must complete certain academic requirements, including a course of theological study. Once called, a teacher receives the formal title “Minister of Religion, Commissioned.” “Lay” teachers, by contrast, are not required to be trained by the Synod or even to be Lutheran. Although lay and called teachers at Hosanna-Tabor generally performed the same duties, lay teachers were hired only when called teachers were unavailable.

After respondent Cheryl Perich completed the required training, Hosanna-Tabor asked her to become a called teacher. Perich accepted the call and was designated a commissioned minister. In addition to teaching secular subjects, Perich taught a religion class, led her students in daily prayer and devotional exercises, and took her students to a weekly school-wide chapel service. Perich led the chapel service herself about twice a year.

Uh-oh.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-553.pdf

Let me know when your admission is forthcoming.

harp3339: It's not the tax codes, it was what YOU were saying.

See "Enlighten me on where the money goes unless you are referring to the deductions and other favor showing in the tax system and calling it spending."

No, it's being called TAX expenditures. That's the point of the phrase, it's not calling it spending.

March 24, 2012 at 10:39 a.m.

joneses: Of course, the initial CBO estimate was for a different span of years, and your estimates of "double" are way off.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/mar/21/ted-cruz/ted-cruz-says-health-reforms-price-tag-has-doubled/

Keep trying those false statements.

March 24, 2012 at 10:44 a.m.
mymy said...

Hey Dude: You sound like Ben Bernanke denying we have serious inflation because of his own wrong agenda/politics.

March 24, 2012 at 10:44 a.m.
limric said...

A good cartoon Clay. Unfortunately it has elicited some of the most Loathsome and detestable commentary I’ve ever seen on this forum. My only contention with the cartoon is that Republicans don’t really want to take America back to 1953, they want to return to the days of the George W. Bush; Where every day was full of sunshine and flowers.

Today’s GOP care nothing about employment and will stop at nothing to balance the federal budget on the backs of the middle class, the low-income and Social Security retirees while simultaneously destroying organized labor. They have done everything in their power to make sure that the average working stiff gets NOTHING in decent pay, benefits and health care. They do not have one ‘progressive’ (the word is not the exclusive property of Democrats) idea for the future NONE!!

The current crop of (with the possible exception of ‘he who shall not be named') Republican candidates are by any definition cretins and autocrat wanna be’s.

You can deride, disparage, discredit, demean, denounce and disrespect Obama all you want. The truth of the matter is your choices come November are going to be, Obama or Obamney. And to this effect, the Democratic machine will crush Obamney. Obama will get a second term. You may not like it, but it’s a done deal.

We are riding shotgun down the avalanche of idiocracy.

March 24, 2012 at 11:19 a.m.
dude_abides said...

"Etch A Sketch sales up over 1,500% after Romney campaign gaffe." Hey, that ought to create a few jobs!

Santorum agrees Obama would be better than "Etch a Sketch" Romney, then says he didn't meant it! How did it come out of his mouth, then? Is he "shaking the drawing board?"

If the republicans fielded a serious candidate we might have a race, but this crew needs a soundtrack. Remember the wacky tom tom sounds Fred Flintstone's feet would make when he drove his car? That should be playing in the background during every speech and appearance.

I get a dry mouthed, panicky feeling when I envision one of these klutzes getting in. Call it clusterphobia

March 24, 2012 at 11:27 a.m.
limric said...

dude_abides,

The GOP does have one serious candidate. Unfortunately ‘he who shall not be named' has been marginalized because he scares the crap out of the established criminals embedded in the halls of power. The last President that challenged the status quo was JFK, and that didn't turn out so well.

Even if a Republican was elected (which won't happen), his first day in the oval office would consist of a dressing down by the MIC, Wall Street, the FED and big oil. "You will do what we tell you...or else!" If you have any doubts about that, just look at Clinton, G.W. or Obama.

March 24, 2012 at 11:48 a.m.
mymy said...

Anybody who can watch everytime this overexposed Liar-n-Chief, Dictator-want-to-be is speaking, you would see the real Etch a Sketcher.

March 24, 2012 at 11:57 a.m.
shoe_chucker said...

something's going on here but you don't know what it is. do you mr. jones?

bob dylan

March 24, 2012 at 12:14 p.m.
shoe_chucker said...

jones if you are going to copy and paste all that right wing drivel you could at least include a link or credit the author. couldn't he tq?

March 24, 2012 at 12:18 p.m.

mymy: And the link I posted shows why that analysis was flawed, the same as when Cruz said it. Gross costs are different from Net Costs.

Just because somebody else is posting the same lie, doesn't mean the refutation is less appropriate.

March 24, 2012 at 12:20 p.m.

shoe_chucker: I'd rather see joneses pay stub from whichever SuperPac is funding the rants.

March 24, 2012 at 12:29 p.m.

Actually, twisting the calls for justice to rectify the tragic death of a young man into a fabricated claim about advancing "a radical socialist society" is what's disgusting.

Not at all surprising, it's not like you haven't made the same attacks on the First Lady's attempts to encourage kids to eat healthy. Weren't so upset about it when Barbara Bush did it.

March 24, 2012 at 1:19 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Harp3339 said: “I think the IRS will confirm that the top 20% pay around 80%, not 47%, of all taxes paid on income.”

I believe you misunderstood what I was saying, Harp3339. My point was simply that if the wealthiest 20% are taking home the greatest amount of income then logically the same group will be paying the greatest amount in taxes. Is this not correct?

Harp3339 said: “47% pay no income tax with something getting a refund in excess of the amount paid, in some cases up to $5,000+.”

How silly of me to fail to point out that the poor and the unemployed may not have to pay income taxes – and then there is that category of millionaires that manage to bring their taxable income down from millions to zero.

Of course, with the poor and unemployed we know it’s because they either didn’t have any income or the amount of the income they earned didn’t meet the taxable income threshold.

As for those millionaires that manage to avoid paying any income tax, I suspect much of it is due to tax tricks. Of course, some do have losses and others are paying taxes to foreign governments reflecting their overseas investment profits.

Ultimately, I think there is a need to revise our tax code. I’m particulary unsettled that a millionaire like Mitt Romney whose income is derived mostly from dividends and capital gains pays a 15% tax rate while someone whose income is derived from wages and salaries will be paying a 35% tax rate:

“Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's tax returns reveal a sophisticated low-tax investment strategy that includes offshore funds and a now-shuttered Swiss bank account . . .

The documents underscore how Romney, the wealthiest candidate to seek the presidency in recent history, has benefited from a tax code that lets investors pay taxes at a much lower rate than people who earn wages or salaries. . .

"Traditionally, Republicans say invest in America and buy American," said Steven Bank, a vice dean of the UCLA School of Law who studies business taxation. "It doesn't bother me in theory, but it suggests something about his view of the tax code or his diversification or his confidence in the U.S. If the president doesn't have confidence in the U.S., how can everybody else?"

. . . In 2010, the Romneys earned $12.6 million in capital gains, which is taxed at 15%. That helped Romney pay a much lower rate than his political rivals: President Obama paid an effective tax rate of 26.3% in 2010, while former House Speaker Newt Gingrich paid a rate of 31.7%.

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jan/24/nation/la-na-romney-tax-20120125

March 24, 2012 at 1:32 p.m.
shifarobe said...

Glad to see Alprova leave. SEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEYA Lefty!! Here's the way it is, Democrats are desperate, DESPERATE for chaos, violence, anger, rage so OBOOB can declare marshal law and postpone the election like some cheap ass bannana republic. Jesse, the JACKASS, Jackson, Al, the horses the ass, Sharpton and Louis Fartacon, all with the blessing of OBOOB, are trying to stir up chaos to profit from it. I'll tell you what's "loathsome", Limric, it's OBOOBS ATTEMPT to profit politically from the shooting of a black teenager. When has that squatter in chief ever, ever spoken out about the never ending black on black violence in his adopted home town of Chicago???????? HUH????...you Democrats are the race baters and the racists.

March 24, 2012 at 1:38 p.m.
shifarobe said...

OBOOB is in PHENOMENAL position to help stop black on black violence, what does he do instead??? ZERO! He's disgusting!!! He's just a squatter. He's in it for the money.

March 24, 2012 at 1:50 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Indeed, the Republican-Romney budget scheme is Robin Hood in reverse - on steroids:

“There’s nothing good about the House Republican-Mitt Romney budget plan. But perhaps its worst feature is the way it targets the many millions of working and unemployed poor who rely on the federal-state Medicaid program for medical care.

It does this by proposing huge reductions in Medicaid spending, and, most significantly, putting the program in the hands of the states, whose governments, strapped for money, are increasingly run by conservatives.

The plan was conceived by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., and is backed by Romney, who is favored to win the Republican presidential nomination after his victory Tuesday in the Illinois primary. . .

The Ryan-Romney plan would cut taxes to the affluent and corporations, increase arms spending and cut expenditures for almost everything else, including environmental programs, child care, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, aid to college students and funding for transportation, which includes air traffic control. Medicare would be cut, the health care reform law repealed. If you think the health reform law is too kind to insurance companies, you’ll be amazed at the way Ryan-Romney lets big insurance really run things.

“In essence, this budget is Robin Hood in reverse—on steroids,” said Robert Greenstein, president of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. “It would likely produce the largest redistribution of income from the bottom to the top in modern U.S. history and likely increase poverty and inequality more than any other budget in recent times and possibly in the nation’s history.”

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_quiet_revolution_in_americas_statehouses_20120322/

March 24, 2012 at 1:58 p.m.

JonRoss, why is there a need to call for justice there? Are you claiming that the Police in Kansas City wouldn't arrest the people who set that white boy on fire, but would accept a story of self-defense on its face? That they are trying to bury the crime instead of acting on it?

Do you have any evidence to support that allegation, and to show why the conduct of the police in that case should be criticized?

Or are you just complaining about it since it lets you claim there's some anti-white racism, while being totally oblivious to the completely different characters of the investigations?

Did you think we're completely unable to recognize the transparency of your actions?

March 24, 2012 at 2:05 p.m.
miraweb said...

I hear what you are saying, Alprova. I'm also going to hold posting until the mud-wrestling stops. It's a pity what three or four munchkins thinking they must show the world how manly they are can do to a good forum.

Back when things calm down. Keep up the great work, Clay!

March 24, 2012 at 2:15 p.m.
fairmon said...

“Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's tax returns reveal a sophisticated low-tax investment strategy that includes offshore funds and a now-shuttered Swiss bank account . . . mountainlaurel said....

The documents underscore how Romney, the wealthiest candidate to seek the presidency in recent history, has benefited from a tax code that lets investors pay taxes at a much lower rate than people who earn wages or salaries. . .

There is no reason for us to debate this again. You don't and don't want to understand why capital gains are taxed at a lower rate. Hedge fund managers are, in my opinion incorrectly, allowed to report their profits as capital gains although they may have none of their personal wealth at risk.

Would you also advocate that non-taxable municipal bonds which many wealthy people, including Romney, invest in be taxed? Do you know what municipal bonds are and why interest and capital gains from them are not taxable. It is a safe way to earn a non-taxable essentially no risk or low risk 8-10% per year. Increasing taxes on long term capital gains is not likely to increase tax revenue since many will move their investments to municipal bonds.

Chatt state offers some really good investment seminars that would help anyone that so much as owns a mutual fund in a 401-k understand the risk and ramifications of investing and the importance of the markets to the economy. The dumbest rhetoric lately is that oil speculators cause higher prices. Obama only said it once after which someone must have explained how investing in any commodities futures had no impact on the future price.

March 24, 2012 at 2:37 p.m.
fairmon said...

bulbs sadi....

No, it's being called TAX expenditures. That's the point of the phrase, it's not calling it spending.

Check the dictionary to find the two words are both nouns with the same meaning. Actually it is some goof ball journalist using semantics trying to point out the flaws in the tax codes that favor those with above average incomes that itemize deductions. He tries to say the deductions are comparable to other essential government services which is a rediculous analogy.

No one, not even the government, can spend money they don't have unless they have arranged to borrow money to pay for a purchase later. The federal government is like an individual that maxes out one credit card then gets another one while paying interest only on the maxed card amount.

March 24, 2012 at 2:52 p.m.

harp3339, again, the phrase is "tax expenditure" which has a very specific meaning, and you're not paying attention to it, but instead trying to distract from the issue by making an appeal to pedantry.

If you wanted to suggest calling it something else to satisfy your nitpicking, you should have done so from the start, but I haven't heard you suggest any alternative expression, just your concerning yourself too much with etymology and trying to avoid the issue.

Whatever you want to call it, who is getting the most benefit from the practice?

March 24, 2012 at 3:04 p.m.

Harp3339: Also, do check out the phrase "tax expenditure" as it IS in the dictionary:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tax+expenditure

tax expenditure 

noun

any reduction in government revenue through preferential tax treatment, as deductions or credits.

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/tax-expenditure.html

Revenue a government foregoes through the provisions of tax laws that allow (1) deductions, exclusions, or exemptions from the taxpayers' taxable expenditure, income, or investment, (2) deferral of tax liability, or (3) preferential tax rates.

Believe it or not, the phrase has an established meaning.

JonRoss: Gee, still can't tell the difference between a crime being swept under a rug, and one where no such thing has happened?

Guess you're still a little far from reality.

March 24, 2012 at 3:24 p.m.
acerigger said...

This 1 toon,already over 380+ comments!

Way to go Clay!Keep it up!

March 24, 2012 at 3:30 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Harp3339 said: “There is no reason for us to debate this again. You don't and don't want to understand why capital gains are taxed at a lower rate. Hedge fund managers are, in my opinion incorrectly, allowed to report their profits as capital gains although they may have none of their personal wealth at risk.”

Since there isn't any rational reason to justify a special tax rate that allows the wealthiest people in the U.S. to pay a tax rate of 15% as opposed to someone like a law enforcement officer who pays a higher 25% tax rate, there is good cause to debate this issue, Harp3339. It’s not like this lower tax rate for investment earnings has always been the case. At one time, capital gains and regular income were taxed the same. The big cut occurred under President G.W. Bush. Even during President Reagan's era the tax rate for capital gains was 28%.

March 24, 2012 at 4:22 p.m.
MickeyRat said...

JonRoss,

You and Joneses are crazy - textbook crazy. And tu_quoque is just a seething excommunicated nun.

March 24, 2012 at 5:30 p.m.
dude_abides said...

joneses is actually a liberal plant who posts ridiculous statements to make the right look stupid, and JonRoss foolishly me too's his way through the day.

March 24, 2012 at 5:47 p.m.
fairmon said...

There should be no capitail gains taxes on investment of money at risk of a total loss that has already been taxed. I won't attmept to explain that statement to you since I am not sure you realize how capital gains occur.

Would you be willing to pay regular income tax on all gains realized if you sell your house? You buy a house and live in it for years then sell it for a gain of $100,000. I decide to put an amount equal to the cost of your house in stocks and rent instead of buying a house. I sell my stocks when you sell your house and realize a $50,000 gain. Why should you be exempt from paying capital gains and I am not. In addition you had insurance to protect you against a catastrophic loss, I didn't.

What do you think about those GM stock holders that lost 100% of their investment but can only show a $3,000 loss per year on their taxes until they have an equal gain or over time exhaust their loss claim. I guess your attitude is tough luck, so your mutual fund got zapped, sorry.

I am sorry it just doesn't feel right to you but that doesn't mean it is not right. Why not go after all the deductions, credits etc. in the rediculously complex tax codes? I have no respect for those that insist on some paying more while they take advantage of their neighbors that have no deductions by claiming intererest on a home loan, credit for energy appliances, kids, kids tuition etc. etc. then clamor for tax codes that tax those with higher incomes pay more. The neighbor can't afford all those deductible items since they could get no loan to buy a home so they rent, have no kids etc., can't deduct health care premiums like you since they have no health care. Shame on you for taking advantage of people like that through a tax code you benefit from while they have an income equal to yours. At least you advocate those making more than you pay and share it, including with you. Does that soothe your greedy conscience?

March 24, 2012 at 7:55 p.m.

Wow! Over 400 comments. I'm not sure what the topic is on here anymore. I will say that it is embarrassing how the Democrats have jumped on the Trayvon Martin shooting in an attempt to help Obama somehow.

Obama saying if he had son he would look like Trayvon is really wierd. I thought it was a cheap attempt to gain from it.

Just really, really embarrassing.

Somebody made a comment about black on black crime. That is a good point. President Obama and his wife are in a fantastic position to tackle the issue. Michelle Obama could have taken that on instead of criticizing the lunches parents pack for their kids for school.

March 24, 2012 at 7:56 p.m.
una61 said...

I was a teenager in 1953 in Alabama. It was certainly a different way of life, but I'm not going to describe it and then have it become Troll bait.

March 24, 2012 at 8:04 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Harp3339 said: "There should be no capital gains taxes on investment of money at risk of a total loss that has already been taxed. I won't attempt to explain that statement to you since I am not sure you realize how capital gains occur."

Please, Harp3339. I believe you're purposefully trying to muddle the facts. When the long-term rate for capital gains tax was cut in 2003 it was suppose to lead to more capital investment, which would boost the U.S. economy and create jobs, But this obviously didn’t happen. The only thing it has done is to increase the incentive for people to game the system and to provide a way for wealthy millionaires to avoid paying their fair share of their income taxes.

March 24, 2012 at 10:49 p.m.
stanleyyelnats said...

Progress into the future or stay stuck in the past. Your choice.

Make it a good one.

Click

April 1, 2012 at 2:52 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