Now we know that the big kid in Ferguson, MO, was a thief and a bully. Not reason enough to shoot him, but possibly reason enough to have attempted to detain him in the street.
I didn't vote against the same-sex benefits--I voted against taxpayers paying for benefits for people without a legal paper showing that they have a legal, long-term commitment. As for God being Gay and people being afraid of gay people--you need to grow up, David. I wish I could buy you for what you're worth and sell you for what you think you're worth!
Luckily for most voters in Chattanooga, we don't rely on this newspaper and its slanted information on who we should vote for.
Now the city and Chris Anderson should respect the vote against domestic partner benefits and wait until these same-sex couples have a legal paper--a marriage license--in order to get spousal benefits. That is what a lot of us who voted against the bill felt would really be fair--we don't want to hand out benefits that we tax payers pay for to people without the same commitment that has always been required to qualify as a "spouse" for benefits. So far, Chattanooga's first gay city council member has been a total one-issue politician and a total failure. I'm sure that the voters of his district will take care of showing him the exit during the next election.
People who speak and write of reducing poverty are usually looking to do it with someone else's money. When I read about "free" breakfasts and lunches for Bradley and Hamilton County students this fall, my first reaction is that there is no such thing as a "free" lunch. This is just more of the liberal, socialist movement to redistribute wealth in this country.
At some point, people have to be willing to give up their stance as "victims" and do something to help themselves. They have to understand that most middle-class people have worked hard to get an education, they have worked hard at careers and jobs, and they are tired of paying for free stuff: housing, food stamps, Obama phones, and on and on for people who want to sit somewhere and play the victims.
I grew up in a home where my parents had grade school educations and they both worked hard from my first memories. My father did manual labor: farming, building fences, carpenter's helper, etc. When he ran out of work such as that, he picked cotton for area farmers. My mother cleaned houses, took in ironing, etc. They never sat around waiting for someone to hand them anything. What happened to people who are willing to work at whatever job they can get to take care of themselves and the children they choose to bring into this world?
So, what Cook doesn't say in his article is how much of other people's hard-earned money he wants to put into reducing poverty.
He sounds like a politician here, sitting and dreaming about a world, NOT where people pull themselves up out of poverty, but a world where what middle-class workers have is taken and handed out to others who already are on the government dole.
Neither Wamp nor Chuck deserves our votes!
Bennett is pathetic as usual. I wish we had a third candidate, but that did not work out so well the last time. Wamp sounds like an entitled brat and he needs to grow up and decide whether or not he is even a Republican. Chuck sounds like an angry old man which supports the idea that the GOP is made up of angry, old, white people. I don't mind a congressman who is willing to sit down with Democrats and sincerely negotiate reasonable solutions, but what I really object to is allowing amnesty to illegals in any form before our borders are secure. Obama's policies of executive orders such as the Dream Act is exactly what has caused the huge, overwhelming crisis we have on the border today. He and his actions are why there will not be illegal immigration reform during the rest of his presidency and his actions are the reason that Republicans will take over the U.S. Senate this fall. I hope Bennett is already hard at work on his pathetic cartoons to cover that event!
As a taxpayer, I understand that difficult financial decisions have to be made by our elected representatives. As a retired teacher, I understand that it is difficult to work in a situation where the building is old and funds are limited. As a parent, I understand that each parent has the right, even the responsibility, to advocate for the best possible education for his or her child. What I fail to understand is David Cook's continuing to incite parents to protest the educated decision made by the county commission in spending the available funds. If he is going to insist on a new CSLA, then maybe he should explain how it is to be paid for. The county commission knows that this is not the time to raise taxes and if that is proposed, then a real protest will take place at the court house! I do believe that it is way past time to take away the million dollars that the commissioners split up among themselves--that would be a good starting point for fiscal accountability.
Articles like this leave me scratching my head. I've heard a lot of conversations lately about how the people in the housing projects who have been living off of the taxpayers for generations think they should decide what happens to certain property. Living in a certain area does not give people the right to determine what happens to a property that is owned by the taxpayers. My city property adjoins a large city-owned area and when I've had a complaint about the up-keep of it, I never once thought that I should be able to have a say in how the property is used, who works on it, or how much they get paid. This is another incident like the people in the projects wanting to be able to turn their heat up higher than 75 degrees. Those of us who pay our own way would never consider having our heat above 70 degrees!
As an educated, white woman in my early 60's, I think this was a wonderful exercise. I have lived in a very segregated society because of the situation you describe (everyone goes back to their own neighborhood after 5 p.m.) all of my life.
I have an important question about your racial experiment: Were any black people who live in the downtown housing projects among the group invited to take part? If not, then you probably were only including people with more education and real jobs and it is relatively easy to accept them for friendships.
The things that really divide us racially in Chattanooga and every other major American city are the downtown projects where a culture of dependence and entitlement and criminality dominate the entire lives of a huge segment of the black community.
No favors were done for this group when we essentially separated them from white society and gave them housing, food, cell phones, etc. in exchange for keeping to themselves and allowing us to go about our lives with as little personal contact with them as possible.
So, this is where we are now, Mr. Cook, and none of us have problems getting to know and make friends with the blacks who have an education, a job, and pay taxes and take financial responsibility for their own lives. It is the other, larger group of continual takers and baby makers that we need to talk about.