published Thursday, January 17th, 2013

Obama exploits tragedy



President Barack Obama, accompanied by Vice President Joe Biden, gestures Wedneday as he talks about proposals to reduce gun violence.
President Barack Obama, accompanied by Vice President Joe Biden, gestures Wedneday as he talks about proposals to reduce gun violence.
Photo by Associated Press /Chattanooga Times Free Press.

There's a difference — a BIG difference — between actually working to fix a problem and simply exploiting tragedy to achieve political ends.

President Barack Obama made it clear on Wednesday which he is more concerned with when he showed his willingness to dance on the fresh graves of dead children for the sake of legacy, popularity and expanding presidential powers.

The president's $500 million anti-gun scheme, along with the 23 executive actions he announced to address gun violence, will do nothing to reduce gun violence. It won't take guns out of the hands of criminals. It may never save even a single life.

It will, however, harass and demonize legal gun owners and embolden his anti-gun activists friends -- and, it appeared on Wednesday, these are the things that really matter to the president.

Obama's decision to wait until the days following a tragic school shooting to announce gun control efforts is pathetic and vile. After all, if he truly thought his anti-gun plan would save lives, wouldn't he have pushed the agenda from the first day he was in office?

The reality is there's no need for stricter gun laws.

There has been a sharp decrease in gun violence over the past 20 years, according to the Department of Justice. Moreover, in the decade from 2000-2009, the DOJ reported that the use of guns in violent crime decreased from a rate of 2.4 per 1,000 to 1.4 per 1,000.

Schools have become much safer, as well. The National Center for Education Statistics found that students are much less likely to be victims of violent crime than they were two decades ago. In 1992, 53 of every 1,000 students were victims of violent crimes. By 2000, that number fell to 14 per 1,000 students.

Mass shootings, which caused the current anti-gun hysteria, are also no more likely today than they ever have been. According to James Allen Fox, a Northeastern University professor who has been studying the subject since the 1980s, "the facts say clearly that [there] has been no increase in mass killings."

This decrease in violence in general, and gun violence and violence in schools in particular, comes despite the fact that, according to Reason magazine, "Over the past 20 years, virtually every state in the country has liberalized gun ownership rules and many states have expanded concealed carry laws that allow more people to carry weapons in more places."

If there's one thing this president has mastered, it's the art of capitalizing on tragedy for political gain.

The fact that he piggybacked on the deaths in Newtown, Conn., to begin his unnecessary war on legal gun owners, expand surveillance on law-abiding citizens and enlarge the federal government by hundreds of millions of dollars proves that.

95
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.
AndrewLohr said...

And an attorney general who gave thousands of assault rifles to known violent criminals is gonna enforce this stuff?

January 17, 2013 at 12:18 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

And the Newtown Police Chief that endorsed this, saying that citizens like Lanza were better armed than his officers? Must have been doing this for political reasons, too, right?

January 17, 2013 at 6:37 a.m.
jesse said...

Wouldn't have mattered how well his officers were armed,by the time they got on the scene it was ALL OVER!

January 17, 2013 at 7:42 a.m.
conservative said...

jesse, you might want to pass that on, repeat it often, maybe, just maybe one of them will get it.

January 17, 2013 at 7:59 a.m.
conservative said...

Surprise! Owebama exploits the Sandy Hook shooting.

His proposal has more ammo for the gun makers than the gun takers in my opinion. The store shelves of guns and ammo are almost empty. Heavy backorders also even on magazines ( not the kind you read Liberals). It is almost as if Owebama has conspired with the gun makers.

The phony "assault" weapons ban is not going to pass. Harry Reid has admitted the same. He is not even going to bring it up now, he has other priorities . "Harry Reid: The Assault Weapons Ban Is Probably Doomed"

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/01/harry-reid-assault-weapons-ban.php#ixzz2IAg2hGJR

January 17, 2013 at 8 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

It is not the actual proposals I was addressing here, Jesse and conservative. It's the notion that Obama is "exploiting tragedy for political gains". You can argue pro and con the specific points, but the charge of this editorial goes too far.

January 17, 2013 at 8:11 a.m.
joneses said...

As you watched/listened to Hussein Obama yesterday when he released his gun control proposals surrounded by children, consider this:

“The receptivity of the masses is very limited, their intelligence is small, but their power of forgetting is enormous. In consequence of these facts, all effective propaganda must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these in slogans until the last member of the public understands what you want him to understand by your slogan.” ― Adolf Hitler

January 17, 2013 at 8:12 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

That you would compare ANY American president to Hitler just shows your lack of both patriotism and sense. It's disgraceful.

January 17, 2013 at 8:16 a.m.
conservative said...

joneses, I feel sorry for JonRoss

January 17, 2013 at 8:26 a.m.
jesse said...

Ike, the ONLY pragmatic proposal that i've seen so far that would have an immediate and forceful effect in preventing this kind of stuff is "armed security " in the schools!

All the rest of this STUFF is jawboning!Item #18 on Obama's list addresses this!

January 17, 2013 at 8:27 a.m.
conservative said...

Great article by Ann Coulter:

"Guns Don't Kill People, the Mentally Ill Do"

"Seung-Hui Cho, who committed the Virginia Tech massacre in 2007, had been diagnosed with severe anxiety disorder as a child and placed under treatment."

"But Virginia Tech was prohibited from being told about Cho's mental health problems because of federal privacy laws."

http://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2013/01/16/guns-dont-kill-people-the-mentally-ill-do-n1491044?utm_source=thdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

January 17, 2013 at 9:09 a.m.
nucanuck said...

The world watches in utter amazement as American culture embraces hand guns and automatic weapons to assist on the road to social and economic hell.

A violent society that cannot envision and pursue a life without weapons and fear will come to a bad end. America has quickly become a country of hate...political, religious, and racial hatred. Add guns to that hatred and you have a country that is dying. Many Americans think that the US is so powerful that world hegemony can and will endure. Many in the rest of the world see a country writhing in her self-inlicted death throes.

America's gun love is part of the stage four cancer that is consuming the country.

January 17, 2013 at 9:11 a.m.
Leaf said...

So you admit there's a problem? That's the first step.

It's ridiculous to call this "exploiting" the tragedy. Unless you also say that W. "exploited" 911 to invade Iraq and create the DHS.

Oh, I guess you could say that, actually.

January 17, 2013 at 9:34 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Ann Coulter is a liar and a fraud. But she does help make conservatives look foolish, so I encourage her to say as much as she can.

January 17, 2013 at 9:39 a.m.
conservative said...

Great article by Ann Coulter:

"Guns Don't Kill People, the Mentally Ill Do"

"The 2011 Tucson, Ariz., shopping mall shooter, Jared Loughner, was so obviously disturbed that if he'd stayed in Pima Community College long enough to make the yearbook, he would have been named "Most Likely to Commit Mass Murder."'

"After Loughner got a tattoo, the artist, Carl Grace, remarked: "That's a weird dude. That's a Columbine candidate."'

"One of Loughner's teachers, Ben McGahee, filed numerous complaints against him, hoping to have him removed from class. "When I turned my back to write on the board," McGahee said, "I would always turn back quickly -- to see if he had a gun."'

http://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2013/01/16/guns-dont-kill-people-the-mentally-ill-do-n1491044?utm_source=thdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

January 17, 2013 at 9:43 a.m.
dao1980 said...

Make sure to blanket the landscape with your posts conny.

I guess since you've accepted that no one cares what you think, your figuring on quantity over quality.. right?

January 17, 2013 at 10:31 a.m.
carlB said...

There appears to be similarities between the paying of taxes and the GUN laws. It is all about finding the "loop holes" to make or keep money. What is the "RATIO" of the "die hard" 2nd Amendment people who will leave "no stone unturned" to make any abortion illegal but want to leave all of the loop holes in the gun laws?

January 17, 2013 at 10:42 a.m.
LibDem said...

Obviously the President should have waited for us to forget Newtown before making his proposals.

(Does anyone else find it odd that we accept living in an armed, fortified environment as "freedom"?)

January 17, 2013 at 12:25 p.m.
NPR said...

He has already won his second term.

What political gain is there to obtain from this????

How would the families of the victims of these shootings in Newtown and Aurora feel if the president did nothing???

answer me!!!

January 17, 2013 at 12:43 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

Excellent comment, nucanuck. So many people in this country have a sick, twisted love affair with their guns that it's outright disgusting. They think that it's perfectly normal to see the world through the barrel of their shotgun or handgun and don't even try to envision a world without their guns, or at least with fewer guns, because to do so would deprive them of the orgasmic pleasure they derive from playing with their toys that go boom and rat-a-tat-tat. But then, America is exceptional. Exceptionally violent, exceptionally greedy, and exceptionally stupid.

As for this comment from the editor: "President Barack Obama made it clear on Wednesday which he is more concerned with when he showed his willingness to dance on the fresh graves of dead children for the sake of legacy, popularity and expanding presidential powers." Mr. Editor, you are heaping undue shame on Obama for trying to come up with a reasonable solution to the problem while all you nitwits can do is keep crying out for MORE GUNS, MORE GUNS, MORE GUNS! You and lunatics like Wayne LaPierre are the ones who are trying to exploit this tragedy, by using it as an excuse to put even more guns into circulation.

Furthermore, in the aftermath of the Virginia Tech shooting Bush called for and made the first major change to U.S. gun laws in more than 10 years, which, among other things, expanded the federal background check database. Did you likewise call him out at the time for “dancing on the fresh graves of dead children?" And what about 9/11? Did you call out Bush at the time for dancing on the graves of those 3000 Americans killed? After all, we all know that he only used it as a pretense to invade Iraq. He not only danced on their graves, he did a dervish and sang hallelujah!

January 17, 2013 at 1:12 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

"How would the families of the victims of these shootings in Newtown and Aurora feel if the president did nothing???" - NPR

"Does anyone else find it odd that we accept living in an armed, fortified environment as "freedom"?" - LibDem

The gun lovers think the only solution is armed guards, armed citizenry, and a complete eradication of gun-free zones. In other words, GUNS FOR EVERYBODY! They would be happier than pigs in slop if they could bring about their utopia of a 21st century Wild West in America.

January 17, 2013 at 1:29 p.m.
conservative said...

Great article by Ann Coulter:

"Guns Don't Kill People, the Mentally Ill Do"

Loughner continued-

"On her first day at school, student Lynda Sorensen emailed her friends about Loughner: “We do have one student in the class who was disruptive today, I’m not certain yet if he was on drugs (as one person surmised) or disturbed. He scares me a bit. The teacher tried to throw him out and he refused to go, so I talked to the teacher afterward. Hopefully he will be out of class very soon, and not come back with an automatic weapon.”"

"The last of several emails Sorensen sent about Loughner said: “We have a mentally unstable person in the class that scares the living cr** out of me. He is one of those whose picture you see on the news, after he has come into class with an automatic weapon. Everyone interviewed would say, Yeah, he was in my math class and he was really weird.""

"That was the summer before Loughner killed six people at the Tucson shopping mall, including a federal judge and a 9 year-old girl, and critically wounded Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, among others."

"Loughner also had run-ins with the law, including one charge for possessing drug paraphernalia — a lethal combination with mental illness. He was eventually asked to leave college on mental health grounds, released on the public without warning."

January 17, 2013 at 1:54 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

I suspect that if we could ship all of the liberals including anyone who voted at any time for Obama to Canada we would be looking at one healthy, vibrant, crime free USA.

nucanuck, are you still in Canada? Can we send all of these losers up to your house?

January 17, 2013 at 1:58 p.m.
Leaf said...

BRP, by "liberal" I assume you mean Blacks and Hispanics?

January 17, 2013 at 2:14 p.m.
chatt_man said...

Poor leaf... why is it when people look thru liberal glasses, all they see is skin color and ethnicity? If it were only Blacks and Hispanics that voted for Obama he wouldn't have won. But, then that wouldn't further their polarizing agenda, would it?

January 17, 2013 at 2:20 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

BRP, as a liberal I am every bit an American as you, and find it offensive that you think I should leave. You are the one that is so paranoid that the government might go rogue, perhaps it is you who should move to another country. That way you can sit smug and watch the US self-destruct, since you seem so sure that it is inevitable.

January 17, 2013 at 2:39 p.m.
conservative said...

Poor, would be one word for that statement by Leaf. Nuts, would be another.

I have never read that connection, definition, or any thing else that equates Liberal with "blacks and Hispanics"

If all/most "Liberals" assume this, no wonder there is so much misunderstanding. That is just nuts.

January 17, 2013 at 2:49 p.m.
nucanuck said...

BRP,

Yes, my 6 member family from Chattanooga now lives in Canada and we hope to have our citizenship this year. We live in a socially tolerant, well educated, multi-cultural environment where people pull together for the common good. Hand guns are opposed by all and violent crime is rare. Somehow Canada has become the well functioning society that Americans now long for.

And yes, Canada welcomes people with skills and talent who can contribute to the needs of the nation. As for political leanings...US liberals would be main-stream and the US right wing would be fringe wingnuts. So yeah, have those apply who would fit in, we would welcome them, but leave your guns south of the border.

January 17, 2013 at 3:13 p.m.
carlB said...

This Gun discussion and the arrogance being shown by the extreme "mixed up" thinking of what the 2nd Amendment is about by the "people" wanting to give reasons and even manufacturing excuses to justify their owning any type of weapon and it's accessories, without any restrictions, has grown to the point of unreasonable thinking. There are other situations/conditions/events occurring which could possibly create the circumstances of having "Anarchy" to occur in the USA which might relate to why the 2nd "Amendmenters' " are so strong for owning guns WITHOUT THE MEANS of being able to trace who has owned the guns. From all of the indications, there are many people who want the US to fall into another great depression preferring to live in a world of "Anarchy" than to live in a balanced "Republic" with laws and a government strong enough to keep the needed balanced conditions.

January 17, 2013 at 3:27 p.m.
carlB said...

Dear President Obama and Vice President Biden,

Please continue to show your leadership for doing the right actions pertaining to the "gun issue" and all of the other issues that have to be addressed to get this Republic back in the proper balance without having to go through another great depression, similar to the one that started in 1929.

We, also have to realize that under the conditions which existed for causing the 2007 deep recession, with our global economy, there were hundreds of thousands of people losing their jobs by 2008 and were continuing through the first months 2009 before the US Government's "stimulus recovery plan" for stabilizing and preventing the further loss of jobs could be put into action even with the declared obstruction of the Republicans. If the Republicans had won the Presidency, complete control of the House, and the Senate in the 2008 election, would their policies and their "principles," as they have been telling us, prevented them from using the US Government and the FEDS for helping stop the increase of workers losing their jobs and then leave all of these unemployed people to "FEND" on their own, just as in the 1929 depression?
Everybody should be aware that the sale of guns and their accessories have been turned into a "big business."

What ARE The True OBJECTIVES of the ANTI OBAMA AND ANTI GOVERNMENT "GROUPS"? We know they want to take away ansd weaken our Government's roles, which would lead the 2007 deep recession continuibng to cause this Republic to fall into another great depression. Would the next phase leaD INTO THE STAGE OF ANARCHY? Then all of the "manly" gun owners could start protecting all of their goods.

January 17, 2013 at 3:46 p.m.
SavartiTN said...

Leaf, lkeithlu, and nucanuck all, of course, make a lot of sense. Unfortunately, there seems to be a lack of common sense in the local population.

January 17, 2013 at 4:07 p.m.
chatt_man said...

Thank goodness SavartiTN didn't throw carlB in there. What a crock o'Sh!t.

January 17, 2013 at 4:11 p.m.
Plato said...

This editorial is not only written in very poor taste, it is meritless on fact. It contains an accusation that the President's initiatives will not reduce gun violence and will "harass and demonize" legal gun owners. Both of these statements are patently false, to be polite.

Many of the changes to the law have been included in gun laws that other countries like Australia have enacted that have had significant effect on reducing gun deaths, and except for inconveniencing target shooters to change magazines more frequently, nothing in these initiates will have any effect whatsoever on law abiding citizens to purchase and own fire arms. It will of course throw a monkey wrench into the ability of criminals, terrorists and the mentally unstable to purchase a fire arm.

According to a survey conducted by conservative pollster Frank Luntz 74% of NRA members approve of mandatory background checks. President Ronald Reagan wrote congress in 1994 asking them to pass a bill to prohibit the sale of assault weapons. Yet the right wing fringe keep crying foul.

The irrational hysteria created by the NRA and perpetuated by lunacy like this editorial is a disservice to the readers and the country.

Some of these folks need to take a few deep breaths and do some soul searching, that is if they have a soul.

January 17, 2013 at 6:25 p.m.
jesse said...

How SMUG and self important do you have to be to use "PLATO" for a moniker!

Think i will start goin by Emanuel Kant! Has a ring to it!

By the way i checked and could not find anything that resembled a soul BUT i'm still lookin!!

January 17, 2013 at 7:10 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

lkeithlu said... "BRP, as a liberal I am every bit an American as you, and find it offensive that you think I should leave."

I don't really think you should leave. I have to admit that I found it fun to imagine what the US would look like if A) All the leftists left or B) all the right wingers left.

I am sure nucanuck would think the US would be a social utopia if the dumb bible thumping, gun toting conservatives left. I was thinking it would all look something like the inner cities with no one to pay for all of the handouts any more.

If the leftist left, all you would have would be hard working people getting along just fine with each other, respecting each others rights and celebrating their community without socialist interference. That sounds like utopia to me.

January 17, 2013 at 7:34 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

BTW. I am happy that you are happy nucanuck, but Canada now ranks higher on the economic freedom scale than the US, and we are losing ground every day Obama stays in office. It was mean of me to suggest that we should ship all the liberals up there and screw up your little situation.

January 17, 2013 at 7:37 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

I think that it would only be utopia if all the people who claim to have a monopoly on patriotism based on some narrow credentials would go form their own country. The US has celebrated the diversity and freedom of its population; a conglomerate of different faiths, backgrounds and political opinions. The one thing that has really pissed me off about the political climate these past 8-12 years is the notion that if I am not a conservative, evangelical, republican I could not possibly be an American. I have no problem with multiple parties, opinions, or beliefs. I DO have a problem with people telling me that I am not a really an American if I am liberal or atheist.

January 17, 2013 at 7:41 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

I have no problem with diversity. I have a problem when that diverse mob decides it is entitled to the fruits of my labor. You can do what ever you want lkeithlu, and I will be happy to let you pursue your happiness. When you start advocating for a situation where I am obligated to participate in your vision we start to have some real problems. You could create any kind of grand social contract you wanted IF IT WAS VOLUNTARY and you would leave those who don't want it alone. That is not how you liberals work though. You feel you have the right to force everyone to participate in your dreams.

January 17, 2013 at 7:52 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Actaully, to be a citizen of this country there are things you must accept. Paying taxes to support police, firefighters, EMS, road maintenance, jails, utilities, military, schools and other government functions. Don't like it, then move or elect politicians to represent your views. Living in any society isn't free. We all benefit from the society's infrastructure so we all pay for it.

Curious to know how many pennies of your tax dollar go for things you don't "approve of". Don't forget that religious organizations benefit from all of these things without paying a penny of tax to support them.

January 17, 2013 at 8:20 p.m.
nucanuck said...

BRP,

Be assured that you are not paying your fair share for what you receive. With taxes only covering about 55% of what the government spends, we are all under taxed.

As to diversity, it seems that we are polarizing by region. The Northeast and West Coast seem to be of similar political minds, with the South and central states in general agreement. Many people may even be gravitating to like minded regions. That regional polarization is a bad omen for America's long term health and could eventually represent the fault lines of a future Balkanization of the US. Could the US become three or more countries?

The Northeast and West have long paid in more taxes than they get back with the red states being mostly recipients. It seems strange that the recipient state populations are the ones most likely to bellyache about the social safety net.

If the political polarization persists as it is, or worse than currently, the more progressive Northeast and West Coast regions would have much to gain by leaving the Union. That would leave the Evangelicals and libertarian/ minimum government crowd with their own like-minded new remainder country. That may sound fanciful, but that could happen.

January 17, 2013 at 8:48 p.m.
moon4kat said...
 Our culture has been hijacked by those who claim we all must have guns to protect ourselves (from what are mostly imaginary fears).   I've lived in small towns and in big cities (Los Angeles, Nashville, and Washington, D.C.), and there has never been a situation that would have been improved by me having a gun.  
 The NRA claims that an “armed society is a polite society.”  We’ve seen no evidence of that.  What we  have seen is highly-stressed (not just clinically mentally unstable) people using assault weapons to commit murder, bullies and racists acting as vigilantes, myriad domestic homicides and suicides that would not have happened without easy access to guns, and children who have killed or maimed themselves and playmates.  Time to stop the madness.
January 18, 2013 at 8:38 a.m.
conservative said...

nucanuck:

you addressed BRP with this:

"Be assured that you are not paying your fair share for what you receive. With taxes only covering about 55% of what the government spends, we are all under taxed"

You don't know if BRP is not paying his fair share for what he receives. That is just presumption on your part.

Now since 47% of American households pay no federal income taxes it is obvious that these are indeed not paying their fair share for what they receive. These truly are under taxed.

Do you support the fair proposal that these 47% should begin paying their fair share?

January 18, 2013 at 10:46 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Income tax is not the only tax, conservative. AND the 47% is misleading, because it includes the retired, military and poor. We all pay taxes: state income tax, tax on gas, purchases, property tax, etc. The comments were not regarding only federal income tax.

January 18, 2013 at 11:35 a.m.
conservative said...

"The comments were not regarding only federal income tax."

Paste the comments of nucanuck that show otherwise or paste NOTHING, just as you have done in the past.

January 18, 2013 at 12:15 p.m.
carlB said...

moon4kat said... Our culture has been hijacked by those who claim we all must have guns to protect ourselves (from what are mostly imaginary fears). I've lived in small towns and in big cities (Los Angeles, Nashville, and Washington, D.C.), and there has never been a situation that would have been improved by me having a gun.
The NRA claims that an “armed society is a polite society.” We’ve seen no evidence of that. What we have seen is highly-stressed (not just clinically mentally unstable) people using assault weapons to commit murder, bullies and racists acting as vigilantes, myriad domestic homicides and suicides that would not have happened without easy access to guns, and children who have killed or maimed themselves and playmates. Time to stop the madness. =================REPLY: lkeithlu, There are other situations/conditions/events occurring which could possibly create the circumstances of having "Anarchy" to occur in the USA which might relate to why the 2nd "Amendmenters' " are so strong for owning guns WITHOUT THE MEANS of being able to trace who has owned the guns. From all of the indications, there are many people who want the US to fall into another GREAT DEPRESSION preferring to live in a world of "Anarchy" than to live in a balanced "Republic" with laws and a government strong enough to keep the needed balanced conditions. What would happen if the US has to go through another great depression, without the Government being strong enough tl prevent Anarchy from occurring?

January 18, 2013 at 12:17 p.m.
SavartiTN said...

So, the NRA didn't exploit this tragedy by planting the fear factor in the general population? Gun sales have tripled since the Newtown shootings. That runs contradictory to what you would think that people would do.

If you really believe that Obama is exploiting this tragedy then you are being led around by the nose by an organization that represents 1.3% of the population yet controls Congress by keeping that scorecard (that nobody should care about). They spend $20 million dollars per year influencing your representatives. They rake in over $100 million/year in membership fees.

These people don't represent me. I am sick of the NRA.

January 18, 2013 at 12:41 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

conservative: No where in any comment made by me and others on this thread was the tax labeled as income tax or federal income tax. The infamous 47% comment that YOU brought up IS about income tax (federal) so you are both ignorant AND a liar.

January 18, 2013 at 1:02 p.m.
conservative said...

Ike:

My comments were addressed to nucanuck and his comment which said nothing about any taxes other than federal and I will say again:

"Paste the comments of nucanuck that show otherwise or paste NOTHING, just as you have done in the past."

January 18, 2013 at 1:13 p.m.
nucanuck said...

con-man,

You have never been able to grasp the simple concept that taxes have to come from where the money is. It may be fairer for a family making $10 million to pay $5 million in tax than for a family making $20 thousand to pay $1,000 in tax. One family could still live quite well while the other may not even be able to eat three meals a day.

You have always spoken up for the "me" society rather than the "we" society.

January 18, 2013 at 1:23 p.m.
conservative said...

nucanuck:

About your "You have never been able to grasp the simple concept that taxes have to come from where the money is."

A thief, a bank robber, by the name of Willie Sutton was asked why he robbed banks and this quote has been attributed to him: "because that's where the money is."

He and those like minded covet what belongs to others. They are never content, they are never satisfied with what they have so they seek ways to rob their fellow man.

You also have the Karl Marx mindset "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" and many in this country are infected with both these evils.

January 18, 2013 at 2:02 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

nucanuck said... “Yes, my 6 member family from Chattanooga now lives in Canada and we hope to have our citizenship this year. We live in a socially tolerant, well educated, multi-cultural environment where people pull together for the common good. Hand guns are opposed by all and violent crime is rare. Somehow Canada has become the well functioning society that Americans now long for. And yes, Canada welcomes people with skills and talent who can contribute to the needs of the nation. As for political leanings...US liberals would be main-stream and the US right wing would be fringe wingnuts. So yeah, have those apply who would fit in, we would welcome them, but leave your guns south of the border.”

So there you have it. The Canadians have been successful at creating the social utopia that liberals have been pursuing forever. Liberals trapped in the United States that want to get away from the Fringe Wingnuts down here can simply pack up and head over the border! Problems Solved!

BTW, nucanuck, Fringe Wingnuts everywhere thank you for being the ground breaker here and finding the path to fulfillment for the lefties. The Fringe Wingnuts also thank you for taking your little tribe of takers up there where your kind is mainstream and fit in so well! SIX? Don’t you feel any shame for breeding like some animal in rut and taking that population up North to consume all of the resources up there? It sounds like the beginning of the End of Canada!

Just kidding :D

January 18, 2013 at 2:19 p.m.
Sailorman said...

All this hysteria about guns!! What is next on the ban list?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/16/donna-lange-breasts-smother-kill-boyfriend-everett-washington_n_2486189.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

You really can't make this stuff up

January 18, 2013 at 2:21 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

SavartiTN said... "So, the NRA didn't exploit this tragedy by planting the fear factor in the general population?"

I do not see it that way. GOVERNMENT planted a healthy fear by killing over 170 million of its own during the 20th century. Some of that has even happened in this country.

It is not the NRA's fault that you cannot remember much past the last football game.

January 18, 2013 at 2:24 p.m.
nucanuck said...

BRP,

FYI: Takers you ask? Between my wife and me, the businesses we created in Chattanooga provided an average of about 50 jobs a year over thirty years. My family of six consists of my wife and me, my daughter and her husband, and my two granddaughters. We all live in one house to save energy and money. My daughter and her husband started their own business and now, in less than four years, they are the leading local business in their field. My fifteen year old granddaughter has given a well recieved Ted Talk, given a speech at the U of Regina, spoken at an international environmental conference in San Francisco, spoken at an international conference of oceanographers, and hired to appear in an IMAX film that will debut later this year, all before the age of 15. My 12 year old granddaughter is a scholar and a fairly accomplished chef for her age.

We are a family of doers, thinkers, and contributers to the common good. We know that wide disparity creates social unrest and we know that when big businesses get so big that they can buy legislators...we have big trouble. We were the backbone of America and we intend to be the same now in Canada. Canada is quite happy to have families like ours.

BRP, have you done much with your life?

January 18, 2013 at 2:53 p.m.
inquiringmind said...

Conservative: How many people are gunned down in Great Britain every year?? The bottom line is no one needs the large magazines? No one needs an assault rifle designed for soldiers who point and shoot not aim. Give me one good utilitarian reason for a citizen to own either. (Of course you may live in Texas worry about secession and another war between the states.)

I am sure Joneses would have expected us to kow-tow to George the Younger regardless of our politics and even Romney had he been elected, so Joneses true colors come out now: America is the greatest country and Joneses is its greatest patriot only as long as America conforms exactly to Joneses' ideal and to heck with everyone who disagrees. Please spare us your polemic.

Hussein Barak Obama, just like Obamacare, I kind of like the way that rings.

You know, it might not be a bad idea if we could get all these folks who are bad-mouthing Obama to move to Texas with their rifles and let them secede. hm...

January 18, 2013 at 2:57 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

conservative, you posted:

Now since 47% of American households pay no federal income taxes it is obvious that these are indeed not paying their fair share for what they receive.

Up until that point no one specified what taxes. We were just discussing taxes. Period. You persist in your dishonesty. But that is your MO.

January 18, 2013 at 3:21 p.m.
MiddleMan said...

Careful nucanuck, don't strain a muscle blowing your own horn there. You seem to be taking a page out of Manti Te'o's playbook and fabricating a bunch of stuff to make yourself look good. I have developed the ability to fly, be invisible, be 13 places at once, and bring logic into the thought processes of the far left and far right. There, even though everything I said is impossible, my statements hold just as much water as yours. This is the internet, bragging about what you supposedly did does nothing but make you look silly, especially since you're a grandfather.

January 18, 2013 at 3:41 p.m.
conservative said...

Ike,

My comment pertained to nucanuck and nucanuck alone, and his comments to BRP. You continue in your dishonesty.

Now, the context of nucanuck's remarks at 8:48 p.m. could only pertain to federal taxes. You constantly call me a liar and I constantly correct you and show you that you are either a liar or constantly wrong. Can you just be wrong that many times unless you are the one who is dishonest or lying?

January 18, 2013 at 3:57 p.m.
timbo said...

Good job Drew.!!!!!!!! Finally a real conservative. You can tell you hit it out of the park by the number of pinko loonies that come out of the woodwork with same crazy, emotional, immature diatribes. Maybe they should turn off the Internet connection at Moccasin Bend. The inmates/patients are getting to upset.

Now, you little libs be sure to take ALL of your Obamameds before bed.

January 18, 2013 at 4 p.m.
MiddleMan said...

Wow, I just saw where nucanuck just said we are all under taxed. Pardon me while I pick my jaw up off of the floor. So glad he (allegedly) moved to Canada. It's mindsets like his that are running this country into the ground. What an impotent, socialist fool. I don't believe for a SECOND that he started any business, not with that mindset.

January 18, 2013 at 4:04 p.m.
nucanuck said...

MiddleMan, I responded with unembellished facts to an uninformed mean-spirited post by BRP. Mine is a family of achievers, not whiners and takers. Believe what you will.

January 18, 2013 at 4:11 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

nucanuck said... "BRP, have you done much with your life?"

Not really. I spend most of my life hunkered around a fire in the mouth of my cave thinking about going out and killing something for dinner.

I do congratulate you on not being the breeder I accused you of being earlier.

January 18, 2013 at 4:14 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Middleman,

According to the deficit (which nucanuck referenced), we are all under taxed.

"It's mindsets like his that are running this country into the ground. What an impotent, socialist fool."

So taxes are socialist? Do you realize that words mean things? Apparently not.

Taxes create revenue i.e. more money. Higher taxes could get us out of debt. Are you unaware of this? Who is the fool?

"I don't believe for a SECOND that he started any business, not with that mindset."

That mindset is highly logical. There is no argument to the contrary.

January 18, 2013 at 4:15 p.m.
Easy123 said...

conservative,

"Now, the context of nucanuck's remarks at 8:48 p.m. could only pertain to federal taxes."

Not necessarily. State, income, sales, SS, etc. taxes all play a part in the deficit.

"You constantly call me a liar and I constantly correct you and show you that you are either a liar or constantly wrong."

Not once have you done any of this.

"Can you just be wrong that many times unless you are the one who is dishonest or lying?"

Well, can you?

January 18, 2013 at 4:19 p.m.
nucanuck said...

Middleman, if the US Congress is not taxing enough to pay for the debts that they have incurred in our names, then yes they have not taxed enough. Should they reduce spending? Of course! In the meantime we have not been taxed enough to cover what WE owe.

Yell and cry all you want, but WE owe the money and haven't yet been taxed for it.

Speaking of fools...

January 18, 2013 at 4:20 p.m.
MiddleMan said...

It's been proven time and time again that raising taxes has, at best, a revenue-neutral effect over the long term. Many times, depending on the specific taxes that are raised, it lowers aggregate revenue. When businesses get taxed out of business and people lose jobs, they have no income to tax, thereby resulting in less revenue for the gov't (which would be wasted anyway). That was what I was getting at when I said that I didn't believe nucanuck started a business. He would be the first small-business owner I have ever met or even heard of that thinks we aren't taxed enough. Small businesses are shutting down left and right because of being over-taxed, and somehow you think raising taxes even higher will get us out of debt?!?!

But for argument's sake, I'll pretend raising taxes will definitely increase revenue. That being the case, do you really think the the solution to us getting out of debt is having even MORE money taken from us and given to the government? The same government that got us in debt in the first place? What is wrong with you? The government is about as good at managing money as a 3 year old. I believe it was Milton Friedman that said "If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there would be a shortage of sand." Truer words have never been spoken.

And no, taxes, by themselves, aren't socialist, but taxing to the point of what nucanuck apparently prefers IS socialist. By you taking what I said and coming to the conclusion that I think taxes are socialist, you demonstrated one of many things that is so very wrong with the extremists on either end of the political spectrum. You take a statement, disregard its actual meaning, and try to mold it into absurdity. You are truly pathetic.

January 18, 2013 at 4:38 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Middleman,

"but taxing to the point of what nucanuck apparently prefers IS socialist."

Nucanuck didn't say he "preferred" any taxes. He made a point regarding the deficit.

"By you taking what I said and coming to the conclusion that I think taxes are socialist, you demonstrated one of many things that is so very wrong with the extremists on either end of the political spectrum."

You called Nucanuck an "impotent, Socialist fool" for making a logical point about taxes and the deficit.

"You take a statement, disregard its actual meaning, and try to mold it into absurdity."

That is the only possible meaning considering what you said here: "taxing to the point of what nucanuck apparently prefers IS socialist.". So you believe taxing to create enough revenue to overcome our debt is socialist. See if you can talk your way out of that.

"You are truly pathetic."

Likewise.

January 18, 2013 at 4:47 p.m.
joneses said...

Gun Violence is Not a Republican Problem, It’s a Democratic Problem January 18, 2013 By Daniel Greenfield   Forget Wal-Mart and skip your local gun show. The murderers of tomorrow will not be found wearing orange vests at your local sporting goods store. They won’t have NRA memberships or trophies on their walls. You won’t find them in America. Look for them in Obamerica. 67% of firearm murders took place in the country’s 50 largest metro areas. The 62 cities in those metro areas have a firearm murder rate of 9.7, more than twice the national average. Among teenagers the firearm murder rate is 14.6 or almost three times the national average. Those are the crowded cities of Obamerica. Those are the places with the most restrictive gun control laws and the highest crime rates. And many of them have been run by Democrats and their political machines for almost as long as they have been broken. Obama won every major city in the election, except for Jacksonville and Salt Lake City. And the higher the death rate, the bigger his victory. He won New Orleans by 80 to 17 where the murder rate is ten times higher than the national average. He won Detroit, where the murder rate of 53 per 100,000 people is the second highest in the country and twice as high as any country in the world, including the Congo and South Africa. He won it 73 to 26. And then he celebrated his victory in Chicago where the murder rate is three times the statewide average. These places aren’t America. They’re Obamerica. In 2006, the 54% of the population living in those 50 metro areas was responsible for 67% of armed killings nationwide. Those are disproportionate numbers especially when you consider that for the people living in most of those cities walking into a store and legally buying a gun is all but impossible.

January 18, 2013 at 4:49 p.m.
joneses said...

Mayors of Obamerican cities blame guns because it’s easier than blaming people and now the President of Obamerica has turned to the same shameless tactic. The NRA counters that people kill people, but that’s exactly why Obamerican leaders would rather talk about the guns. Chicago, the capital of Obamerica, is a city run by gangs and politicians. It has 68,000 gang members, four times the number of police officers. Chicago politicians solicit the support of gang members in their campaigns, accepting laundered contributions from them, hiring their members and tipping them off about upcoming police raids. And their biggest favor to the gang bosses is doing nothing about the epidemic of gang violence. 80% of Chicago’s murders are gang-related. But in 1999 when a bill came up in the Illinois State Senate to charge anyone carrying out a firearm attack on school property as an adult, a law that would have largely affected gang members, the future leader of Obamerica voted present. Had he not voted present, it is doubtful that he would have been reelected in an area where gang leaders wield a great deal of influence. The majority of murders in the cities with the worst homicide rates are gang-related. And while it isn’t always possible to be certain whether a killing was gang-related, the majority of homicide victims in city after city have been found to have criminal records. In 2010, there were 11,078 firearm homicides in the United States and over 2,000 known gang-related killings, over 90% of which are carried out with firearms. Since 1981, Los Angeles alone has had 16,000 gang related homicides. That’s more than twice the number of Americans killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is what Obamerica looks like. It’s a place where life is cheap and illegal guns are as available as illegal drugs. It’s the war that we aren’t talking about, because it’s easier to talk about the inanimate objects being used to fight that war. There are, as John Edwards said, two Americas. America is a country that runs pretty well. And then there’s Obamerica. Not all of Obamerica is broken, but a lot of it is. America does not have a gun violence problem. Obamerica does. And Obamerica has a gun violence problem for the same reason that it has a drug problem and a broken family problem. Democratic leaders and machines, combined with social workers and justice crusaders have run Obamerica into the ground. Obamerican cities used to be the homes of industry and progress. Now they’re places where young Black and Hispanic men kill each other in growing numbers.

January 18, 2013 at 4:51 p.m.
joneses said...

America does not need gun control. It is a mostly law-abiding place. And gun control cannot help Obamerica. Not when its murder rate is driven by gangs who have no trouble obtaining anything; whether it’s legal in the United States or not. This country does not need to have a conversation about how many bullets should go in a clip. It does need to have a conversation about how many parents should go in a family. It needs to talk about the ghettos of Obamerica and have a serious conversation about broken families and generational dependency. Obama has become a role model to millions of people in the black community. If anyone can address these problems, it’s him. But instead of trying to solve the problems of Obamerica, instead of doing something about the high levels of unemployment, the broken families and the glamorization of drug dealing and violent crime, he wimped out and picked a fight with rural America. AIDS prevention was sabotaged by the claim that the disease was a general problem spreading through the population. It wasn’t. Neither is gun violence. Adam Lanza is as much of a poster boy for gun violence, as Ryan White was for AIDS. A better poster boy for gun violence might be Jay-Z, who boasts of having been a drug dealer and claims to have shot his brother at the age of 12. The drug dealer to millionaire rapper is the Horatio Alger story of Obamerica. And Jay-Z can be seen partying with Obama. If Obama really wants to get serious about gun violence, then all he has to do is turn to the man standing next to him. But Obama, like every Chicago politician before him, don’t want to end the violence. The death toll is profitable, not just for rappers writing bad poetry about dealing drugs and shooting rivals, but for the politicians atop that heap who score money and gain power by using the problems of Obamerica as some sort of call to conscience for the rest of the country. That’s what Obama is doing now. Hiding behind Newtown and adorable little kids is the grim specter of Obamerica’s death toll. It’s buried inside the gruesome figures of how many Americans are shot each year issued as an indictment against the entire country in general and gun owners in particular. But those numbers are not an indictment of America. They are an indictment of Democratic mayors and liberal social policy. They are an indictment of Obama. We need to set aside the same old tired social justice rhetoric and have a serious conversation about what is wrong with New Orleans, Detroit and Chicago. And we need to do it before it’s too late.  


January 18, 2013 at 4:51 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Call me Ishmael. Some years ago- never mind how long precisely- having little or no money in my purse, and nothing particular to interest me on shore, I thought I would sail about a little and see the watery part of the world. It is a way I have of driving off the spleen and regulating the circulation. Whenever I find myself growing grim about the mouth; whenever it is a damp, drizzly November in my soul; whenever I find myself involuntarily pausing before coffin warehouses, and bringing up the rear of every funeral I meet; and especially whenever my hypos get such an upper hand of me, that it requires a strong moral principle to prevent me from deliberately stepping into the street, and methodically knocking people's hats off- then, I account it high time to get to sea as soon as I can. This is my substitute for pistol and ball. With a philosophical flourish Cato throws himself upon his sword; I quietly take to the ship. There is nothing surprising in this. If they but knew it, almost all men in their degree, some time or other, cherish very nearly the same feelings towards the ocean with me.

There now is your insular city of the Manhattoes, belted round by wharves as Indian isles by coral reefs- commerce surrounds it with her surf. Right and left, the streets take you waterward. Its extreme downtown is the battery, where that noble mole is washed by waves, and cooled by breezes, which a few hours previous were out of sight of land. Look at the crowds of water-gazers there.

Circumambulate the city of a dreamy Sabbath afternoon. Go from Corlears Hook to Coenties Slip, and from thence, by Whitehall, northward. What do you see?- Posted like silent sentinels all around the town, stand thousands upon thousands of mortal men fixed in ocean reveries. Some leaning against the spiles; some seated upon the pier-heads; some looking over the bulwarks of ships from China; some high aloft in the rigging, as if striving to get a still better seaward peep. But these are all landsmen; of week days pent up in lath and plaster- tied to counters, nailed to benches, clinched to desks. How then is this? Are the green fields gone? What do they here?

But look! here come more crowds, pacing straight for the water, and seemingly bound for a dive. Strange! Nothing will content them but the extremest limit of the land; loitering under the shady lee of yonder warehouses will not suffice. No. They must get just as nigh the water as they possibly can without falling And there they stand- miles of them- leagues. Inlanders all, they come from lanes and alleys, streets avenues- north, east, south, and west. Yet here they all unite. Tell me, does the magnetic virtue of the needles of the compasses of all those ships attract them thither?

January 18, 2013 at 4:54 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Once more. Say you are in the country; in some high land of lakes. Take almost any path you please, and ten to one it carries you down in a dale, and leaves you there by a pool in the stream. There is magic in it. Let the most absent-minded of men be plunged in his deepest reveries- stand that man on his legs, set his feet a-going, and he will infallibly lead you to water, if water there be in all that region. Should you ever be athirst in the great American desert, try this experiment, if your caravan happen to be supplied with a metaphysical professor. Yes, as every one knows, meditation and water are wedded for ever.

But here is an artist. He desires to paint you the dreamiest, shadiest, quietest, most enchanting bit of romantic landscape in all the valley of the Saco. What is the chief element he employs? There stand his trees, each with a hollow trunk, as if a hermit and a crucifix were within; and here sleeps his meadow, and there sleep his cattle; and up from yonder cottage goes a sleepy smoke. Deep into distant woodlands winds a mazy way, reaching to overlapping spurs of mountains bathed in their hill-side blue. But though the picture lies thus tranced, and though this pine-tree shakes down its sighs like leaves upon this shepherd's head, yet all were vain, unless the shepherd's eye were fixed upon the magic stream before him. Go visit the Prairies in June, when for scores on scores of miles you wade knee-deep among Tiger-lilies- what is the one charm wanting?- Water- there is not a drop of water there! Were Niagara but a cataract of sand, would you travel your thousand miles to see it? Why did the poor poet of Tennessee, upon suddenly receiving two handfuls of silver, deliberate whether to buy him a coat, which he sadly needed, or invest his money in a pedestrian trip to Rockaway Beach? Why is almost every robust healthy boy with a robust healthy soul in him, at some time or other crazy to go to sea? Why upon your first voyage as a passenger, did you yourself feel such a mystical vibration, when first told that you and your ship were now out of sight of land? Why did the old Persians hold the sea holy? Why did the Greeks give it a separate deity, and own brother of Jove? Surely all this is not without meaning. And still deeper the meaning of that story of Narcissus, who because he could not grasp the tormenting, mild image he saw in the fountain, plunged into it and was drowned. But that same image, we ourselves see in all rivers and oceans. It is the image of the ungraspable phantom of life; and this is the key to it all.

January 18, 2013 at 4:55 p.m.
Sailorman said...

good grief you guys need to take a break

January 18, 2013 at 5:12 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

lkeithlu said... "Actaully, to be a citizen of this country there are things you must accept. Paying taxes to support police, firefighters, EMS, road maintenance, jails, utilities, military, schools and other government functions. Don't like it, then move or elect politicians to represent your views. Living in any society isn't free. We all benefit from the society's infrastructure so we all pay for it."

lkeithlu, let me first say, that you are my favourite liberal on this forum and I would never want to see you leave the US, or TN, or the Chattanooga area. Having said that, nucanuck says he has found nirvana in Canada. It sounds so good I am thinking about moving up there.

I am perfectly happy to pay for many of the functions of government, but there are many things that are very objectionable to me.

You mentioned the military, I do not think we should be spending the money we are projecting power and pissing people off all over the world. If we cannot generate enough energy on our own to support our own standard of living and have to spend hundreds of billions of dollars every year making other countries serve our energy needs, something is wrong. I am perfectly happy to buy energy on the global market if it helps to lower our costs, but we should be able to support our own energy needs without any outside assistance. I love every member of the military I know, but they have been abused, they have been used not to defend our liberty but to impose our interests on other countries.

Social Security, should be voluntary. I think it was originally sold as voluntary. The government should not be able to compel us to participate in its ponzi schemes.

Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, Any free man should be able to declare himself responsible for his own health care and not be forced to surrender his property to fund any government run system.

Public Schools, this is one of my hot button issues. I cannot begin to tell you how offensive it is that I am presumed to be required to pay my entire adult life into a system to support an education system that I used for 3 years, for one child, before I figured out that it was not serving my child and was destroying his interest in learning. A great teacher exposes a student to several possibilities and challenges them to find their answer. A public school teacher indoctrinates the student to the accepted dogma and shuts down creativity and individualism. Government run public schools are poison for a young person's mind.

January 18, 2013 at 9:06 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Our government is pretty messed up right now. I resent the level of spending and being expected to pay for it. It might be more tolerable if it was optional, but that is not what the likes of BHO wants for us. He wants to force us all into his plan, which many of us find repulsive. That is the real source of division in this country right now. Us Right Wing Nuts would be happy to let you Left Wing Nuts do what ever you want as long as you don't insist on dragging us along. Why is that such a problem?

January 18, 2013 at 9:08 p.m.
nucanuck said...

BRP,

Whether we like it or not the US is one large political unit. We have to live by the decisions of the majority. That creates a minority of nearly half of all Americans who may disagree with that majority. Over the last thirty years we have become less and less willing to accept the will of the majority. That is tearing the US apart. I don't know where this leads, but I fear that the US is now effectively ungovernable.

The government is too large. The population is very divided. The country seems to be fragmenting before our very eyes. We all have our own opinions about what is causing what we can see to be a worsening situation. We need someone or some thing to unite the country, but that seems very unlikely. We have lost control of our country and we cannot agree on what is to be done.

The American era of dominance is ending. To one degree or another, we all know this, but we cannot seem to work together to find our new place in the order of things. We blame everyone but ourselves. That is not going to work and unless we find a magic potion, the US is in for a difficult future.

I love the country of my birth, but I don't hold out much hope that we can put Humpty Dumpty back together again.

This forum is a good example of how extreme our divisions are.

January 18, 2013 at 10:04 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

nucanuck,

Democracy is a stupid form of government. A simple majority should not be able to rule over the minority. Our founders recognised this folly, I am sorry that you do not.

The notion that we have to operate as "one large political unit" is a socialist concept that is absolutely contrary to the concept of individual freedom. 200 or so years ago we were poised to explore the possibilities of individual freedom under limited government but we only gave it about 100 years before progressives hijacked the experiment and corrupted it with socialism. Socialism was everywhere in the world. But for some reason we allowed our government to stray down that path even though we had somehow, magically, become the shining light in the world without socialism.

Now we not only have destroyed the experiment, we have done so with a poorly executed version of socialism and labeled the result as "failed capitalism". The incorrect labels put before the mentally weak are working well in the flawed mechanism of democracy. Rule of Law, good law, as in the Constitution is superior to the self destructive path of democracy. All of this was made inevitable by public education, which aspires to create good domesticated animals rather than a self determinant mind.

January 18, 2013 at 10:17 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

BTW. This caveman has carved the Federalist Papers on the walls of his cave.

January 18, 2013 at 10:38 p.m.
nucanuck said...

BRP,

You seem to be wallowing in long past interpretations of history and hoping/wishing things could be different. Well, it ain't going to happen. Get over it. Deal with the present, not what might have been.

Your hang-up with what you call socialism is how most of the world deals with a densely populated world. The imperfection in the system is failing to balance income and out-go, not in trying to create tolerable conditions for the least among us. We are our brother's keeper whether we like it or not. There is no Champion's Club for the few. Humanity is tied together on a planet with limited resources and we have to figure out how it can work for all. So far we are not doing very well.

You could be part of the solution if you would only look at a bigger canvas.

January 18, 2013 at 11:22 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

I intend to be part of the solution, but I don't agree that recent societal developments have changed human nature and that I have to resign myself to concepts that are OLDER THAN THE AMERICAN EXPERIMENT!

The densely populated world that you want to resign yourself to is THE PROBLEM. If we were not unquestioningly going down the path of continuous growth of both population and economy we could see more clearly.

The concepts of individual liberty and private land ownership are more compatible with sustainable development and societal harmony than this big city, big government, world government crap that we are supposed to swallow. I challenge you to convince me that (self interested) government with its obsession with growth to fund its folly is the sustainable solution.

We have to figure out how to throw off the chains of the government sponsored/corporate economy and begin dealing with our neighbours again.

January 18, 2013 at 11:41 p.m.
raygunz said...

BRP,we can't "begin dealing with our neighbors again" until we learn to not unnecessarily fear our neighbor.

January 19, 2013 at 12:40 a.m.
carlB said...

chatt_man said... Thank goodness SavartiTN didn't throw carlB in there. What a crock o'Sh!t.

=============Reply: chatt_man, SO,you Did not like my analysis of why the 2nd Amendmenters might want to have another great depression to occur for this Republic? Is this the reason why they dislike President Obama? Before he was elected, this country was well on it's way into another great depression and if McCain and Palin had been elected, there is not any doubt that if the Republicans were in control it would have happened. If another great depression did occur, then the "gun lovers" could justify their 2n Amendment rights.

January 19, 2013 at 12:47 a.m.
nucanuck said...

BRP,

When we turn down the rhetoric we may have some overlapping viewpoints.

I certainly agree that large cities are vulnerable and potentially unsustainable. There is no real possibility that the world population can achieve what we would call middle class consumption levels. Resource constraints make it impossible for 7 billion people to live like the developed world presently does.

It now looks like price and availability of energy combined with fresh water scarcity will begin to reduce population over the next few decades. Those constraints should lead toward a relocalization of our social and economic structures. Small countries and countries with small populations should out perform larger, harder to manage countries like China, India, and the US. Just as the old Soviet Union couldn't hold together when their economy collapsed, other large countries may suffer similar fates in the relatively near future.

The world seems headed for an unusually chaotic period as the developed world tries to sort out their excesses of the past. That chaos will no doubt become a cradle for emerging change. What we can be sure of is that we will be forced towards more sustainable models or we will perish.

Over ten years ago I started a checklist of what seemed the most important elements for societal success and what places on earth had high numbers of those elements. Guns weren't on that list. Political boundries weren't as important as regional political cohesiveness with the ability and willingness of people to work together...quite subjective, but important. Early agrarian cultures gave good hints about where to look.

Much of what you seem to long for is probably connected to the values on that list.

January 19, 2013 at 1:21 a.m.
Easy123 said...

BRP,

"A great teacher exposes a student to several possibilities and challenges them to find their answer. A public school teacher indoctrinates the student to the accepted dogma and shuts down creativity and individualism."

Other than art, drama, and literature, which classes "promote creativity and individualism"? Which classes don't have an "accepted dogma"? Which classes have "several possibilities?

There are facts and then there are non-facts. What do "several possibilities" consist of in history class, biology, algebra, geometry, chemistry, physics, etc? There are formulas, equations, laws, theories, and various historic events. Are these classes all just relative? Gaining knowledge and learning facts is indoctrination. It doesn't become a bad thing until you start indoctrinating with lies, falsehoods, misinformation, and non-science. These "possibilities" sound like non-facts to me. But, please, elaborate.

If you didn't want your kid to be indoctrinated then you shouldn't have sent him to school. That's what they do there. That's what you do when you teach your kid something. That's what teaching, in general, is.

What were the public school teachers teaching your child that you were so opposed to or felt like was killing his creativity? I bet I have an idea. What kind of school did you send your child to that didn't "indoctrinate" him? I bet I have an idea.

January 19, 2013 at 4:39 a.m.
carlB said...

There is not any doubt, that there are plenty of issues we Need to "truthfully" talk and to think about, but to prevent our "down fall" into anarchy the correct actions have to be taken together after the discussing and understanding is over about why the voters and our "leaders" are divided on the best ways of solving our economic crisis conditions instead of "making them worse." This is what my concerns are; There appears to be a "group" (of some type) of people who are "doing things" to cause another "great depression" by wanting to take/do away with the roles of our "governments" altogether. If this action is taken, then it definitely will not allow/provide the correct "balance" needed to sustain this Republic. You have probably noticed, the continuation of the Republican party leaders setting up their negative attacks on the Democratic party, getting their points in the record books, in preparing to try their same tactics to win the 2014 and the 2016 elections. We need short-term and long-term "fixes" for "growing out" of this 2007 deep recession instead of having to "grow out" of the effects of another 1929 type of great depression. The voters decided on November 6, 2012 on which direction they wanted this country took/taken and whom they wanted to be the leader for the next four years.

January 19, 2013 at 6:42 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

BRP said: You mentioned the military, I do not think we should be spending the money we are projecting power and pissing people off all over the world. If we cannot generate enough energy on our own to support our own standard of living and have to spend hundreds of billions of dollars every year making other countries serve our energy needs,

I certainly agree with this, and the military makes up a pretty large part of our national spending.

A great teacher exposes a student to several possibilities and challenges them to find their answer. A public school teacher indoctrinates the student to the accepted dogma and shuts down creativity and individualism.

Here I disagree, although there are students who are not well served by the one-size-fits-all structure of a public school. Extra resources are given to help teach the two extremes (gifted and special ed) while the vast majority are not recognized as being a diverse group of many learning styles. As for indoctrination, realize that our curriculum has been almost exclusively based on European culture and point of view-curricula have been expanded to include eastern, minority and female points of view too. (I think I would have found history far more interesting had I been taught this way)

Good teachers inspire students, but even good teachers fail under the circumstances that so many must operate in public schools. As a private school teacher I had the following: small number of students (64 in 4 sections as opposed to 150 in 5 sections) adequate budget (10-20X what most public school classes have) excellent facility, freedom as a professional to choose my own materials, full control over the discipline in my class, students that were correctly placed in my course with at least the minimum IQ to thrive and the math prerequisites for the work (I taught Chemistry and Physics) and full parental and administrative support. It was heaven. You'd be hard pressed to find even ONE of these to be true in a public school, much less all.

January 19, 2013 at 7:32 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

nucanuck, I am sure we do have many shared viewpoints. I agree completely that smaller governments are better and will be more successful. It is a key, critical point. The Founders shared this "archaic" view with us and tried to structure the federal government so it was secondary to the states with great protection for states and citizens from centralised power.

I want to bring back the notion that human nature has not changed since the Constitution was written. The Founders were brought together in a unique circumstance that gave them a very clear picture of how we can expect the human animal and those in government to behave. Many of us seem to think that the advent of big industry and corporatism has changed all of that. It has not, it has only complicated it. If we forget the fundamental truths while we wrestle with technological change we are doomed to failure. The failure will probably be more epic than anything humans have seen in the past.

If we can agree that big governments tend to fail, I would argue that they are doomed to fail, can we agree that it is a worthy common goal to restrain or even reverse the growth of government? If the scale of global corporations threatens the ability of government to deal with them, shouldn't we be breaking up the corporations instead of expanding government?

Faced with an out of control federal government, and recognising how dangerous government has proven it can be to its own citizens, I think it would be absolutely stupid for US citizens to allow themselves to be disarmed in any way. If we have to put defences in schools, so be it. It should be done at the local level. We should accept no federal solutions.

January 19, 2013 at 9:50 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

lkeithlu said... "Good teachers inspire students, but even good teachers fail under the circumstances that so many must operate in public schools."

You said a great deal, but this statement caught my eye. I agree completely. When you leave bureaucrats in charge of mass education directed by more bureaucrats in government we should expect nothing else.

Public schools should be the education system of last resort. We need to begin a discussion about how education should be reconfigured. I would rather start from the home schooling example and talk about ways we can encourage cooperation and resource sharing between home schoolers instead of talking about how to fix government schools.

January 19, 2013 at 10:02 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Unfortunately, homeschooling is not possible unless there is someone at home. That requires a non-working parent with at least some education. The working single parent, the working poor, uneducated parents will be unable to do this. In addition, education is a craft that takes years and mentoring to develop. Each age of child has particular needs that a master teacher understands, and in the high school level where separate subjects are taught it helps enormously if you have a 4 year degree in the subject. Contrary to public belief, teaching is not something that you can just pick up. It requires background education, a long apprenticeship with mentoring, and years of experience to get good at it.

I have seen homeschooling work well, but in a community of college educated parents with at least one parent at home part or full time. I've also seen home school disasters, especially when a family seeks to shield the kids from the big, bad, godless world.

I agree that public schools are not serving all students. But they are serving some students extremely well, those that are bright, supported at home, and self-directed. These kids will get a great education from a public school. I'd like to point out that a diverse student body requires a lot of one-on-one and small group interaction, and our overcrowded schools can't do this. And a big criticism I have of liberals is their move to mainstream Special Ed kids, with conservative blessing because it saves money. Public school teachers cannot teach when there are students that are unable to interact with their peers or refrain from disrupting the class.

Finally, schools should be in the hands of the parents, teachers and administration, not state school boards and Dept of Education. Use an accreditation system like independent schools do. Hire principals and then charge them with meeting these benchmarks. They are not bureaucratic, paperwork, rules imposed from above systems, but based on transparent goals and plans to meet those goals, under the guidance of volunteer "consultants" invited from other schools to give a critical, unbiased view.

January 19, 2013 at 10:52 a.m.
nucanuck said...

BRP,

I would contend that the US federal government, in pursuit of advancing US corporate competitiveness, allowed corporations to grow beyond the point where they could be reigned in. Corporations and industry groups now run the country through the huge money flows to our politicians. Our government has lost its ability to govern.

Smaller government, however, does not insure better government. We only have to look to Nashville to see a poorly educated bunch of yahoos floundering over issues about which they know very little. But yes, small governments, small countries, offer more hope for better connected citizens to have their voices heard. Also small countries aren't as likely to have hegemonic desires of control and conquest beyond their own borders.

Where we differ is on the degree to which we are all in this world together and the level of responsibility we each have to the common good.

Also we disagree sharply on the usefulness of an armed citizenry as protection from government. A government so disposed could crush us like a bug, no matter the quantity of our guns and ammo. Our best defense is in knowledge and political cohesiveness, both of which are in short supply in present day America.

January 19, 2013 at 12:30 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

lkeithlu,

I am sure you can find examples of success and failure in homeschooling. I see much more failure than success from government schools. Maybe I am misnaming a developing education system as homeschooling. I can imagine all kinds of ways to structure an educational system without government involvement. Maybe you are right that a really good professionally trained teacher has the ability to outperform lay teachers, but I have not seen that to be the rule. The products of homeschooling that I know are exceptional individuals.

A big part of the reason that it is so hard to have a parent at home to manage these activities is because government is taking so much of our resources so that they can do it for us. I wish we could find a way to fund education in a way that people who elected to take on the education of their children could keep the money that is confiscated from them for government schools. It goes beyond that, families have to have two wage earners mostly because they have such a high tax burden. That is upside down to me. We cannot take care of our kids, or our ageing parents, or our neighbours because we are too busy working for the government so the government can inefficiently and ineffectively take care of all of them for us. What a mess!

January 19, 2013 at 11:05 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

BRP, the tax burden was much higher in the 50's and 60's when mothers stayed home. It isn't the tax burden, it is the loss of good manufacturing jobs, the shift to service jobs which don't earn enough to keep single income families well in the middle class, and the "gotta have it" mentality combined with easy credit that encouraged families to live beyond their means. WE average more cars, more appliances, bigger homes and greater debt. Taxes are not the problem.

January 20, 2013 at 6:45 a.m.
moon4kat said...

For those complaining that the tax rate is too high in the USA, Vladimir Putin will offer you citizenship in Russia. The tax rate there is only 13%. Members of the Tea Party are welcome to relocate.

January 20, 2013 at 9:56 a.m.
nowfedup said...

How's come the gunnies, NRA and elected who are owned by NRA are not out pickiting and protesting at VW and other plants for not allowing guns in their parking lots.

Seems like a bunch of elected, manly men and NRA would be there if they have any shred of integrity. You children or the gun afraid or hypocrites all?

January 20, 2013 at 12:35 p.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

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