Thinblueline's comment history

Thinblueline said...

Hi Ho! Hi Ho! It's off to work I go......In this economy there is such a thing as a "holiday weekend" for the working man and woman? Maybe for the very well to-do that can afford gas prices that have over doubled in the last 4 years or the 49% that pay no income taxes and get subsidised rent, free food, free health care, oh yeah, and some extra cash "just to make it through". I'm sure being rich is great, at least they or someone in their family, worked for it. I'm sure being poor is hard, but I tell you, being the "working poor" is REALLY hard. Make to much to get assistance. I easily qualify for disability but can't live on less than $1000 a month for 6 months to qualify. Even though I am disabled and almost crippled, I trundle off to work everyday. I pay my taxes, and watch the money go to perfectly healthy individuals who would not work in an air-conditioned office counting paper clips for $20 an hour. So, NO! I'M NOT GOING ANYWHERE ON LABOR DAY! Maybe in 4 years.

August 31, 2012 at 7:52 a.m.
Thinblueline said...

Changing the city flag is as useful as rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Jobless rate in the Chattanooga area up.....again in July, every politician from the local dogcatcher to the President telling us, "we'll just have to tighten or belts a little", and the Mayor wants to spend money on a new city flag. From what I read, it flys on, what, one flag pole in the entire city? The flag stand just outside the Mayors' office? How much money is this going to cost? Another $500,000 for a "feasibility and impact" study, another trip by the mayor and his entourage to a foriegn country to "gain knowledge" of the subject, and then "set-up and production costs" to a flag company? Who owns the flag company? Probably a friend of family member of one of the political cronies that populate city hall like cockroaches in public housing. (By the way that is not a dig at the people who must live in public housing, but at the way our "government" cares for and "serves" the public.) We need a new city flag like a goose needs a laxative.

August 24, 2012 at 7:55 a.m.
Thinblueline said...

I may have misunderstood the question. Yes I am for strict ANIMAL abuse laws and punishment. But, I am not for singling out horses or horse abusers for "special" punishment. An animal is an animal. There is no more devoted companion than a loving dog. Most of us humans could learn something from dogs or other mere "pets" about selfless love, carring, compasion, and devout service.

I am retired law enforcement and every K-9 I have known is another police officer, nothing less. My wife is disabled and her service dog is a member of our family;, sleeps in the bed with us. Yes, the people who abuse these majestic, beautiful animals should be punished and punished severly. But, lets not single out one animal over another or one abuser over another. Pass adequate laws, enforce the laws, and demand adequate punishment for ALL abusers, not just one species because of media hype or what is politically correct at this moment.

August 19, 2012 at 3:25 p.m.
Thinblueline said...

The idea of using a consultant is to have an unbiased person with no personal agenda to find a CEO. The unfortunate truth is that many times the match does not work. Then the board of directors yell at the top of their collective voices how they are not responsible and how, had it been their choice, this person would not have been hired. The consultant already has been paid their half-million dollars or more and say, "It's your baby now, you rock it". The overall result: $500,000 gone, no one is held accountable for the debacle, and the consultant laughs all the way to the bank. Using a consultant for outside "talent"? Anyone remember Jimmy Dodson and what a great job he did for CPD? CPD is still recovering from this great outside choice.

August 4, 2012 at 10:47 a.m.
Thinblueline said...

Where does government intervention/invasion stop? First it will be no smoking in government sponsored public housing. Second it will be no smoking in government subsidised housing. Then, if you have a government backed loan on your house you can not smoke. What about a Habitat for Humanity built house using government funds? Where does the intrusivness stop. 1) Someone have the guts to just stand up and outlaw smoking. Turn one-fifth of the population into instant criminals.....All in the name of public health. 2) After the smoking ban in public housing, then lets ban "junk" foods, or "super-sized" drinks, or saturated fats. Lets have a body-mass indexs to qualify for public housing. How about instead of food stamps, the government sends the receiptiants of public aid the food the government nutritionalist "thinks" you need? How about monthly blood tests to check if you have been cheating? How about monthly weigh-ins to see if you still qualify for housing. How about daily, mandatory work-outs and physical fitness in the public housing to qualify? 3) Narcotics are illegal. Murder and domestic violence are illegal. We know how easy it is and what a wonderful job we are doing keeping THOSE elements out of public housing. Now we are supposed to be the "smoking" police? What next a "Smoking Czar" with a "Smoking Task-Force"? What, a $500,000 study to see how best to "combat" smoking the the public housing sector? 4) This is supposed to be their HOME. Even if it is publicly supported. We don't want the government in our home to tell us if we can or can not use birth control, whether or not we can be gay or lesbian; why can the government tell people in sanctity of their own HOME whether of not they can smoke.

July 7, 2012 at 5:12 p.m.
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.