jmaccauley's comment history

jmaccauley said...

First, the President apologizes to every nation that we have ever had contact with, both friendly and less so. That was followed up with the dismantling of the missile shield program designed to protect us and our allies (however few we have left) from attack. Now we tell the world that we will never use the nukes we have, regardless of what our enemies may do to us. In a perfect world our enemies would realize that we are a peaceful nation.

Unfortunately, the enemies of freedom and democracy have been probing our country for weaknesses for 50 years. They occasionally find political will faultering but always know that militarily we are superior. That is the only deterrant we possess. Who honestly believes that our enemies will not exploit our final defense? No wonder No. Korea and Iran laugh when we threaten them with "serious" sanctions.

April 7, 2010 at 4:11 p.m.
jmaccauley said...

It's fair to say that insurance reform (and medical malpractice reform) is necessary. However, when the insurance company makes a profit, I can see it. A single payer system will put money in someones pocket, but we'll never know whos. By the way, the drug companies have already worked out their deal with Congress (exclusive prescription delivery to government health plans) and AARP would be thrilled to have Medicare part B customers lose their coverage and be picked up by the "advantage plan" that they are promoting. Seriously, the debate was never meant to fix anything for the un or under insured. They already have the ability to get treatment by walking into a hospital and claiming their indigence. Heck, they can get arrested and hip and knee replacements at the taxpayers expense.

October 2, 2009 at 3:47 p.m.
jmaccauley said...

alprova, does that mean that you will be watching Beck and Hannity to see if you're correct? We all know that Chappaquiddick cost Kennedy any shot at being President and I seriously doubt that a news pundit from either side would be that hateful. OK, maybe Olberman when he vilifies Bush and Cheney, but other than that...OK maybe Chris Matthews, but I doubt any others. Seriously, no one is going to take a cheap shot at the dead.

There is nothing wrong with taking sides and presenting facts. If you hear them and doubt their authenticity, research them and make the appropriate corrections.

August 26, 2009 at 10:45 a.m.
jmaccauley said...

Contract soldiers, or mercenaries, are not new to American war figting. They have been used since the Revolutionary War. They are perceived to be a bunch a yahoos plucked from the streets and told to kill. The truth is that they are nearly all former military trained, experienced soldiers who do a job without the political constraints of those like Sens. Feinstein, Boxer and other liberal officials who do not understand how to keep our country safe. They still see American soldiers as a low level labor force who should be building schools and roads rather than killing or capturing the enemy. Could you imagine the reaction if someone in Congress were to suggest that our military get pay raises to equal what a private contractor makes? And, by the way, who actually approves those salaries anyway? Those same hand wringing liberal politicians.

August 26, 2009 at 8:07 a.m.
jmaccauley said...

Funny thing about the those who criticize Beck. Who else on the cable or (god forbid) mainstream media asks those questions and actually provides the research to follow up? Obviously, the outrageous antics are to keep it intersting (and the huge ratings attest to that). If you think he's making stuff up then you're exactly who the Liberals need on their side. Don't ask questions, just go along because "Change is Good and we trust Obama!"

August 25, 2009 at 4:01 p.m.
jmaccauley said...

Do the advertisers actually think that members of this group and actually watch Beck anyway?

August 24, 2009 at 11:57 a.m.
jmaccauley said...

By the way, just for fun, check their website ( see who is really behind these protests.

August 24, 2009 at 9:37 a.m.
jmaccauley said...

It actually means that the only time you can give an opinion about race is if you're pointing out a profiling argument, or claiming to be a victim. These advertisers have been threatened and intimidated by some of these groups. Many of them are run by Obama staffers and supporters. Controversial programming doesn't prevent these companies from making a profit, but threats usually work.

August 24, 2009 at 9:33 a.m.
jmaccauley said...

Perhaps it's the non-compliance and aggressive acts from some of these "victims of brutality" that creates these unfortunate endings. If some of these family members and community leaders would show some of the same outrage at their wayward children, some could actually become responsible citizens rather than have confrontations with the police.

Blaming every incident on racism is convenient, but doesn't fly.

August 19, 2009 at 7:46 a.m.
jmaccauley said...

Fear is much more powerful than trust. Considering that Congress was more than willing to push through this plan while the majority had admitted that they had not even read the bill, of course there will be myths and misinformation. When these politicians are cornered and asked specific questions, they tend to fall back on the "change is necessary" line. Of course changes are needed, but shouldn't the contents of this plan be made public (and clear) before forcing it on anyone? Perhaps there would be less fear if we knew the facts, not the rhetoric. Obama has admitted that even he does not know what will be in the final bill, but it must be passed immediately. Trust or fear?

August 12, 2009 at 9:56 a.m.

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.