OVER THE WEEKEND, one of the TV stations aired a news segment on how authorities had confiscated some black-market tennis shoes that had President Obama’s picture on them.
They were counterfeits of a shoe that Nike had produced.
The newscaster went on a little tirade claiming it was disrespectful to have the president’s image on tennis shoes.
We would have to disagree.
Every day, children are being bombarded with products from musicians, sports figures and celebrities who are less-than-ideal role models.
There was hope that U.S. Olympic gold medalist Michael Phelps might be a positive influence. Unfortunately, that failed when Phelps was photographed smoking from a bong.
Children need more positive role models. So why not the president?
The president has inspired a generation of youth, so why not place his image on things that children think are cool?
The president’s image is currently on plates, coins, shirts, posters, buttons and more, so we fail to see the harm in kids wearing properly licensed Obama-inspired sneakers.
Chris Walker
Editor & Publisher
tbluma (anonymous) says...
I agree Observation only I'll take it one step further.
Conterfeit shoes might be the best place for his picture.
April 29, 2009 at 4:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sundancekid (anonymous) says...
Observation & tbluma - Don't stop there; please continue. Because your statements lack any facts/specifics, they also lack validity.
Personally, I believe President Obama is doing an above average job in the role of Chief of State, especially in 100 short days; fixing the economy, mending international relations, raising awareness and the importance of green-technology/global-warming, civil rights, taking on health insurance companies and their profit schemes, lifting regulations on scientific research (specifically stem-cell), and setting a timeline to pull troops out of Iraq while sending troops to regions of the globe where al-Qaeda is known to hide.
He's delivering upon his campaign promises, one step at a time. Thus, I think it's appropriate that his photo does grace the sneakers mentioned in the editorial.
You two, on the other, should take a step back and look at all of President Obama's accomplishments, including the contagious optimism that radiates from him. Despite the challenges facing this country, the mood of this country has rebounded from the last resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. A breath of fresh air!
April 29, 2009 at 4:58 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
You may as well give it up, Sundance. These people are dyed in the wool Red Republicans and will never get over having lost the election. They don't believe in bi-partisanship. It's their way or put downs and tear-downs.
Yes, President Obama is indeed a breath of fresh air. I am particularly impressed with his ability to communicate ideas and his desire to provide transparency. I like listening to him when he holds press conferences because he talks TO the people, not DOWN to them like Bush used to do.
There is still much to do, but I have a great deal of confidence that he will get the job done despite those who continue to tear him down because they're mad about not winning the last election. They continue to find only the negative. It makes for a weakening of their party.
The American people spoke their minds last November. The polls are still speaking their minds.
April 29, 2009 at 5:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
Chris Walker...sundancekid....create
I agree wholeheartedly that President Obama is a positive role model....and so does at least 62 percent of the people in our country. Of course there is always a few who don't get the picture.
April 29, 2009 at 6:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
tbluma (anonymous) says...
I usually get my dig in and just sit back and watch but I'll say this much more.
It was all well and good while for the last 8 yrs. we listened to everyone poke fun at P Bush, right or wrong. Well now the shoes on the other foot so wear it whether it fits or not.
As to him being a positive role model and doing all the good you people think he's doing, let's just see where we're at 4 yrs. from now.
One thing I will guarentee you is that IF we're better off and you can prove it, I will acknowledge.
April 29, 2009 at 7:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
In 2008, there were people on this board still bitching about Florida in 2000....... so you've got them too. I don't recall any of them believing in bi-partisanship.
Besides..... with a super-majority in the houses........ you don't need it anymore. Funny how for much of the last 8 years, the margin was so slim that hardly anything got passed WITHOUT bipartisanship, and now that we are on the verge of a possibly filibuster-proof majority, we claim anyone that doesn't go along with your super-majority (not that you even need any of them to anyway, now) doesn't believe in bipartisanship. Funny how short the memory of some people are on here. Remember the 50/50 Senate? How often was it deadlocked and Cheney had to cast the deciding vote? At least twice that I can find.
I think I understand how it operates now. It doens't matter who is voted in power, or what the majority is, or how they got there. If you vote against us, then you don't believe in bipartisanship.
We, the People of the United States, believe that EVERY single Senate vote should be 100-0 and EVERY House vote should be 435-0. ANYTIME it deviates from those votes...... then we've just got a bunch of sore losers who don't believe in bipartisanship.
Oh well, this is good reading for a laugh. Some see a freight train heading over a cliff. In the spirit of bipartisanship, everyone needs to jump on board.
April 29, 2009 at 7:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
tbluma (anonymous) says...
One other thing.
And this really pisses me off.
I could overlook a lot of our differences (mine and barry's), but don't you get tired of the wimp going to other countries and telling them how bad we are?
If you don't then ?????????????
April 29, 2009 at 7:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
As for shoes..... who cares. As long as there is no licensing snafu, I think the first Black President of the US is a role model to millions of Americans in his own way, regardless of the job he does as President, or whether you agree with him or not.
Create, I did a little experiment with my 2 upside-down tomato plants. I named one of them the conservative Bush plant, and the other the liberal Obama plant. I have them each some very smelly fertilizer, with the portions based on how far they carried defense of Bush's wiretapping. So they both had a load of s##t on them, the Obama one actually had a little more. Everything else was identical.
My liberal friends came over - the odor from the Bush plant made them throw up, but they thought the Obama plant smelled like very pleasant perfume and couldn't get enough of its wonderful aroma.
My conservative friends thought both plants stunk to high heaven.
(But they did notice the Obama plant seemed a little greener).
While they were arguing, my independent friends & I picked the tomatoes from both and enjoyed them on our salads. They were Yummy!!!!
LOL
April 29, 2009 at 7:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
One other thing.
And this really pisses me off.
I could overlook a lot of our differences (mine and barry's), but don't you get tired of the wimp going to other countries and telling them how bad we are?
If you don't then ?????????????
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
About as much as one puking on people.......
April 29, 2009 at 7:47 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
kansasgirl (anonymous) says...
I was born and raised in Emporia. I am always proud to say I am from the Great State of Kansas. But after reading some of the dialogue on these blogs, I am always surprised and disappointed at how many narrow-minded people there truly are in my hometown. I feel that I was raised by the village of Emporia with a strong sense of people and pride and respect. Very little of this is seen in the rhetoric that is spoken here. But again, we are the land of the free and I respect other opinions My mother and father are both over the age of 70 and have seen many, many things come and go in this country yet they still have the respect of the office that President Obama holds and supports him in his endeavor to try to bring this country back to some sense of stability. I agree with them. What solutions did you see in the last eight years?? Took time to get here and it will take time to get us back. But no, I forget my generation thought we knew better than the one before us and the next generation was taught the y didn't have to wait nor earn what they have, it was just given to them. That's on us.
April 29, 2009 at 8:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
gemini (anonymous) says...
open_eyes...to quote you...
"on the verge of a possibly filibuster-proof majority, we claim anyone that doesn't go along with your super-majority (not that you even need any of them to anyway, now) doesn't believe in bipartisanship"
Don't forget that since we didn't vote for a black president, we are all RACIST. LOLOLOLOLOL
I find it ridiculous to read anywhere that the FIRST BLACK president is a role model and it's groundbreaking, blah blah blah.....how is he any different than other presidents? I thought it WASN'T about color????????
April 29, 2009 at 8:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sundancekid (anonymous) says...
Once again tbluma, you are unable to validate your criticism of President Obama since you are incapable of pointing out specifics of what you don't like about his policies or his style.
April 29, 2009 at 8:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
I just finished scanning over responses to The Cafferty File question "Is the Republican Party irrelevent?" Out of close to 400 responses about one in thirty claimed it might remain relevent by dumping the lunatic fringe...while only one in forty saw it as relevent in its present form. There apparently just isn't that many people around who see narrow-minded exclusionism, anger and resentment as their cup of tea. But the twenty five or so percent of Americans who presently identify with the GOP seem unable to grasp that part of the slipping numbers might have something to do with them.
April 29, 2009 at 8:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sundancekid (anonymous) says...
gemini - You are the one focusing upon race. Again, another contributor to this blog who could benefit from a course in English 101.
Just because someone did not vote for the Obama-Biden ticket, does not mean he/she is racist.
We live in an age where should not even cross our minds to think of one another in terms of race/color.
April 29, 2009 at 8:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
gemini (anonymous) says...
Sundancekid...
Whatever...I can't tell you how many Democrats criticized MY criticism of Obama and called me racist because I refused to vote for him. I guess those were just some left wing nuts, huh....
And it IS about color....read my previous statement. Instead of just being the 44th President, news stations proclaimed he was the first "African American" President. So I ask, what makes him so fabulous and groundbreaking? People were crying election night because he broke barriers. Barriers? COLOR barriers??
Answer that question differently and I'll listen.
April 29, 2009 at 8:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
Gemini.....
His election did break barriers....he was the first African American elected president....just as Hillary Clinton would have broken a barrier of being the first woman elected president had she won. I don't understand what is so bothersome about that. Of course it's wrong to claim that any body that voted against Obama did so because he was black...but it is equally wrong to claim his race was the reason he received all of his votes. I voted for him because I felt he was by far the best choice available that had any reasonable chance of being elected.
April 29, 2009 at 8:59 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
gemini (anonymous) says...
Biscuitboy,..
I'm not claiming color as to why he was elected nor am I saying he shouldn't be President because of it....I'm irritated by those that say it isn't about race when all the headlines focused on it. I know there are many that believed he was the best one for the job but why isn't he just another President? Why is he given a heroic status and heralded as being so great? He hasn't done anything in office to date to deserve such praise.
The answer is because he is "African American."
Good night all. Sorry to have interjected my thoughts....back to the sneaker issue....
April 29, 2009 at 9:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
I like shoes.
April 29, 2009 at 9:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
kansasgirl, what respect for the office have you seen for the last 8 years out of many Americans? And as for what solutions we've seen for 8 years..... this gets so old I even tire of hearing myself repeat it. Bush called on Congress 17 times in 2008 ALONE to reign in Fannie & Freddie before they acted. (A Dem congress at that time). He didn't have a super-majority that could do anything they wanted and claim everyone else was partisan. In addition to the well-documented attempts in years prior. And we all know how those turned out, and who blocked it, and the political affiliation of the aforementioned. Pretty much everyone should know that by now. Do some research.
As for race.... good golly...... of course, none of his election should have anything to do with race, although there are those who voted against him purely because he is black just as those who voted FOR him purely because he is black. But that is NOT the point. Should we not give Jackie Robinson a special place in history, regardless of his stats, but because he was the first black person to break into the major leagues? Colin Powell will be known as the first black Secretary of State, Condi Rice will always be the first black female secretary of state. If I was black, EVEN if I did NOT vote for Obama, he would still be a figure in history to be proud of for being the first person of my ethnicity or race to hold the office of President. Just as Palin or Hillary would have/could have been the first women to hold their respective positions, had they won. As has already been noted.
That is SEPARATE from them being "great", or having done something in office to earn greatness. Had Jackie Robinson been lesser player, he would still be honored for being the first. Regardless of how Obama's presidency eventually turns out, good or bad, I can still see where, especially to black Americans, they are proud that "he made it". I've watched black conservatives who are very anti-Obama declare that they are still proud of his accomplishment and that it is still a noteworthy point in our country's history. Yes, it has to do with race - but that is DIFFERENT from having to do with RACISM.
April 29, 2009 at 9:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
biscuitboy, I got a good laugh out of your Cafferty File post - the line where not that many people around see narrow-minded exclusionism, anger and resentment as their cup of tea.
Where have you been for 8 years? Looks to me like it worked just fine in the last 2 elections..... now the shoe is on the other foot, and suddenly everyone is holier-than-thou. Best laugh I've had all day....... :) (I'd like to know how they faked all the California riots after gay marriage didn't pass. I'm being told here apparently everyone held hands and sat peacefully - that was some darn good special effects on the news is all I can say) :)
April 29, 2009 at 9:47 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
While those are all good points, I still have to say............ I like shoes. Sneakers, dress shoes , boots, all mingling peacefully in my closet........ why can't we? Well not in my closet, that would just be wierd.
What do I know though? I'm just a lunatic on the fringe. That would be a great name for a rock band. The Shoes!
April 29, 2009 at 9:48 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
I can still remember my FIRST car.... my FIRST apartment..... my FIRST kiss........
Sorry I just made a bunch of racist statements :)
April 29, 2009 at 9:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
Forgot to add....... the car was a piece of junk.... I live in much nicer digs now..... and...... I've been kissed much better since (blush) (hope I didn't say anything to get censored - lol) - but I still have fond memories of all of those, and they will always have special places in my heart..... so go ahead and brand me a racist.... after all, the car was red, so obviously me calling it a piece of junk was insensitive to Native Americans....... or would that be communists?
April 29, 2009 at 10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
And now, back to reality with one of my usual favorites, the good old fact check: This one is titiled:
FACT CHECK: Obama disowns deficit he helped shape
http://apnews1.iwon.com//article/2009...
Love is Blind :)
April 30, 2009 at 1:35 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
open_eyes.....
sorry I was in bed asleep....must get up early in the morning to go to work even though I'm almost 70-years-old.....and I am not blaming that on the republicans....lol. In fact, I am real damned happy to have a job.
Yes I was around for the past eight years....and I did see President Bush take a lot of criticism (some deserved...some not deserved). I also was around eight years prior to that and saw President Clinton take a lot of criticism (some deserved....some not deserved). And for the past hundred days I have seen the same thing with President Obama.
It's necessary here to note the obvious. When the President was Republican the Dems criticized....when the President was Democrat...the Repubs criticized. That's politics as it must, and maybe even should be.
The difference is, in my opinion, as the Republicans were in their ascendancy the Dems looked for ways to recapture the all important middleground until they suceeded with the congress four years ago and the presidency last November. They moved to the middle. Now that they are in their ascendancy.....and will almost cetainly start moving back towards the left....the Repubs appear to be throwing the middle out of the boat in an effort to see how far right they can go. Radical, angry, exclusionary people left or right have never had any real lasting success in this country.
The power is always in the middle and it appears to me the Republicans are running away from the middle just as fast as they can. If they continue in that vein, it is ny humble opinion they will become increasingly irrelevant and probably be replaced by a more moderate third party.
Please believe me when I say the worst thing that could happen to the country would be it becoming a one-party nation weather that party is Democrat, Republican, or Mudwump.
April 30, 2009 at 4:38 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
open_eyes
I think the point I'm really trying to make here goes something like this. When the Democrats fell from grace they looked inward...found some problems....tried to correct them....broadened the tent ( Reagan phrase)....and came back like a biting sow.
Now that the Republicans are out of favor they appear to be blaming it all on a hostile media....democratic plots....voter stupidity....the devil.....people of other races....and shoes. maybe they would be better served to look within.
BUt of course, that is just my opinion, which when combined with a couple of bucks will buy you a cup of coffee in some places. And I did not mean to infer that I was placing you or seriously- folks into my lunatic fringe group because I certainly do not believe either of you belong there
April 30, 2009 at 4:57 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
seriouslyfolks
one thought then I'm off to work. I am sure you have repeatedly described yourself as a third-party independent...so how could remarks I made about republicans be dispairiging to you? Just curious....
April 30, 2009 at 6:58 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
biscuitboy
I didn't take any offense by what you said. While I am not a Republican I am a conservative and usually all conservatives get lumped into the "lunatics on the fringe" group by the "tolerant" people of the world.LOL Conservatives are the new whipping boys and most of us have got pretty used to it so the insults don't sting anymore. I seriously wasn't offended. I just felt like joking around a bit. I do that from time to time on these forums. If I can make just one person laugh, it's worth it. Usually that one person is me so ............. mission accomplished I guess.
Anyway back to the topic at hand. Maybe they should put a huge tax on these sneakers to help pay for some of the enormous spending that has happened in the government in the last hundred days or so. That would be a good lesson in economics for all the kids who are inspired by President Obama.
April 30, 2009 at 8:43 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
under_score (anonymous) says...
I think I'll put his picture on the bottom of mine.
April 30, 2009 at 9:32 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
biscuit, you make some excellent points, and for the most part, I do agree with you...... my slight disclaimer is, in my view...... "for a time".... there was also a point where the Dems were "in complete disarray". There was alot of directionless finger-pointing & anger I remember also. But, they got thru that period, regrouped, and came back strong. They were aided in large part by an increasing public dissatisfaction with Iraq. I think that once inflation kicks in, (and I have no doubt that it will given the rate we are printing money) - we will see the same public "aid" swing the pendulum the other direction.
I also see the shift left - BUT - I also see that as things shift left..... everything else "shifts right" by default, even if it doesn't move at all. In other words, what used to be moderate right is now viewed as extreme right. Even if it is the exact same stance it was before. So its worth a think, but I'm not sure that I see much of what is being currently LABELED extreme right as all that extreme. I also have to look at who is doing the "labeling". I DO remember when the Republicans had all the cards, you didn't have to be very far left of center at ALL to be labeled "extreme".
I just wish people would stop and think back a little harder thru history before they post some things. I have seen lack of partisanship throughout history - on some things they come together, on some things they always vote right down the party line. To infer that the current partisanship in Congress is something only the GOP has done and only lately shows a very poor knowledge of history. And approval ratings... Obama's are approximately..... the same as Bush's were at this point. Isn't there ALWAYS optimism in the air when a new administration is sworn in? Yes, I do agree that we're seeing a little more now in some quarters, but that is to be expected given the country's dissatisfaction over the last 4 years. But I've pretty much remembered a new wave of optimism anytime we have a change at the top. And I also can remember the usual wave of pessimism by those replaced. I just wish people could remember that a little more often instead of constantly posting like this is the first time in history anything like this has happened. Except that we have a black president (first time), which I still think it is a noteworthy historical event in its own right, regardless. Yes, that DOES have to do with Race, but not Racism.
April 30, 2009 at 9:34 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
Continued... (Sorry, ran out of room, I am dang long-winded at times :)
But I fervently hope all the Obama fans here don't completely ditch him and start screaming that he's "gone conservative" just because he gave Bush some credit last night. :). I did notice that the only major network he did NOT call on was.... Fox News. Why? Shouldn't a President have to answer all the tough questions? Speaking of Fox, I loved the segment on O'Reilly where he had a conservative (Monica) and a liberal (Combes). Monica had to give 3 things she LIKED about the speech, and Combes had to give 3 things he DIDN'T like. Darn that unfair FoxNews :). (But I think Dennis Miller had it right - we live in a country where someone running for Miss America gets tougher questions than the President - LOL).
Thank you for your well-thought and explained points, and the way you presented them. I also agree that one-party rule would be the worst thing possible for our country.
But isn't that pretty much just about what we have now? Especially if we end up with the filibuster-proof 60 majority in the Senate? If Franken is confirmed (and he most likely will be) - we will see anything that party wants pushed thru. They won't have to work together one single whit. They won't need 1 single vote to cross the aisle. And I guarantee you they'll sit there and push anything they want thru and complain that the GOP "doesn't want to work together". And the GOP will claim they aren't being listened to or given a voice in anything. And for that, they will be labeled as "whiners", who would rather whine than work together. But which party will it be that truly won't care about working together? The party that HAS to, or the party that has absolutely NO need to??????
April 30, 2009 at 9:39 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
under_score (anonymous) says...
You guys are so smart, please tell me what is wrong with the GOP? Tell me what the GOP has done to become so irrelevant?
Please no opinion, just facts.
April 30, 2009 at 9:57 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
That's a good question, under_score, but I'm not sure the answer matters at all. Public opinion is a flaky thing. Look at the meltdown of Fannie & Freddie, which, although not the only thing, is one of the biggest linchpins in this whole financial crisis - look at who defended it, said it was just fine, look at the history of how banks were originally forced to start making bad loans, look at who called for reform repeatedly over the last 5 years, and who ignored them. One would surmise from that with any logic at all that possibly we're calling the wrong party "irrelevant". AT LEAST on that issue. Which, many claim, was the deciding issue in the last election.
So I'm not sure all these "irrelevant" claims make alot of sense, or in some ways really even have any basis whatsoever. Like I said earlier....... "Love is Blind"....... and so is "Blind Hatred".
April 30, 2009 at 10:46 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
And while I'm still on my soapbox (then I better get back to work - LOL) ..... bipartisanship. For those screaming about that, and the GOP whining..... answer some questions for me please.
How long did you complain about Florida? Did you complain at the beginning that you didn't think we should go into Iraq? Did you complain at the beginning about provisions in the Patriot Act? Have you complained since, and if so, did you make sure you waited at least a year or 2 to "give it a chance"? Many of the Dems in Congress at that time "went along" with it (MANY).... that was bi-partisanship, right? Do you now wish they had been a little more partisan and resisted harder? Why? You're still happy they worked together & went along with it, right? (Since you're SO against "partisanship"). Is it only bi-partisanship when a GOP crosses the aisle, or only when a Dem does it, or both? When the Dems complained (and there were many that did) - did you label them "whiners"? We have "whiners" now, 6 years ago all those that disagreed were "un-Patriotic". What label will we throw on the next group that disagrees with us?
I'm just as guilty as everyone at times. But I do stop and look in the mirror at least once in awhile. And I do remember my history.
April 30, 2009 at 11:14 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
The GOP is largely irrelevant at the moment, they were losing ground far before this last Presidential election, and currently I don't see any sign of things getting any better for them. They like to blame Bush here lately but Bush is the least of their problems. This is not something that happend overnight, its been developing for the better part of a decade now, maybe more. They need to stop focusing on the left and start focuusing on what they can do for themselves to make them viable once again. I can tell you this, even if Obama does a subpar job, they try to run Palin or Jindal at him in 2012 they will lose again, mark my words. They run a viable candidate like Ron Paul that actually crosses demographic boundaries and appeals to more people they might have a shot.
April 30, 2009 at 11:36 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
And during a big chunk of that.... we had economic growth, despite getting hammered by 9/11.
"turned a blind eye to the hireing of illegals". Could have fooled me with the raids. But now Obama says NO MORE RAIDS. And Obama has signed legislation giving free health care to all illegal kids. And Pelosi states openly we need to give illegals all the same rights and benefits American citizens have. You've got me confused there as to how it is so much better now.
"debt the world has never seen before"...... you ain't seen nothin' yet :)
"rushed into war".... did Congress or did they not get alot more time to examine the evidence than we got on the now-famous spending bill that nobody was allowed to read?
"Wall Street Bailout" - please, remind me again who controlled Congress for this. And who ASKED and GOT the second half of it, despite the sitting President saying he had no plans to do it.
April 30, 2009 at 12:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sundancekid (anonymous) says...
gemini - Clearly, your conscience is weighing heavily upon you.
April 30, 2009 at 12:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
open-eyes
you are absolutely correct that the history of this country has always been to swing back and forth like a pendulum.....first to the right....then to the left.....back to the right....and so on and so forth. Actually that has been the beauty of the system. All of that swinging back and forth kept things from ever going too far in either direction. You also make an interesting point about the shifting baseline of extremeism.
but weather deserved or not the Republican party at present is perceived by many as being extremely right and going further in that direction...and as we both seem to agree the road back to power has always been through the middle. Take me as an example. I am a near 70-year-old white male working class man. I am heterosexual(despite what one person posting on these boards believes), a veteran of the U.S. Navy, I drive an american made pickup truck and I love my family. If that doesn't sound like a republican demographic I don't know what does.
But despite that...and the great respect I hold for some republican individuals, I could never support that Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannitty, Ann Colteur, wing of the party that now seems to control the show. To paraphrase W.C. Fields...."I would never want to join a club that would have them as members. Well if the party is having trouble attracting my demographic....whom are they attracting?
April 30, 2009 at 12:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
"The GOP has been saying for years that they were fiscal conservatives and accused the Demorats of being "tax and spend liberals"."
This is true, the GOP says one thing and does another when it comes to finances. They say the right thing and do the wrong thing. Why then would one support a party that says the wrong thing AND does the wrong thing(tax and spend like crazy)? Why jump from the frying pan into the fire?
April 30, 2009 at 1:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
Borrowing eventually is going to have to be paid back by tax dollars, right?
April 30, 2009 at 1:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
And I, also, could never support a party that has Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid among its most esteemed leaders. I like to consider myself (at least in my own mind - lol) entirely too sane of a person for that. I can understand your displeasure with the people you've listed above, but I can run thru a list just as easily starting with Keith Olbermann and go right on down the line, each one just as "repulsive" to the other side as what you've listed. So to borrow your phrase...... whom are they attracting? Those for illegal immigration? Those for disrupting church services and stomping on crosses because gay marriage got voted down in a democratic vote? We can both point to plenty of undesirable people carrying a banner on both sides......
And I completely agree that the last several years the GOP has completely said one thing and done another when it comes to finances. Nobody is arguing that point. (But these same people like to point out how Clinton balanced the budget, but they don't like to point out that it happened under a GOP controlled congress....?????). But that's past - yes, the GOP ain't what it used to be, nor is it currently what it has claimed to be. They need to get straightened out - and quick. Because once we give amnesty to 25mill illegals.... the voting is over......
Personally, I would never want to trust the financing & current mortgage crisis to those who not only played a large part in creating it, but resisted reform of it at every step of the way, and continued to claim it was in fine shape even while it was in the midst of accounting scandals, let alone many economists warning of its eminent collapse. Sounds to me like yet another case of a party that "says the wrong thing AND does the wrong thing"......
But views like that don't seem to get much traction these days. The people have spoken. Barney gets re-elected with ease.
April 30, 2009 at 2:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
I assume this is the kindof illegal immigration "change" you are looking for....
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,5...
"Criminal arrests of employers who hired illegal immigrants skyrocketed from 25 in 2002 to 1,103 in 2008."
Wait....you said the Bush admin "turned a blind eye to the hireing of illegals"????
Now supposedly, they are going to focus more on the employers, and this case is about that..... but I'll withhold judgement till I see the actual results.
Interesting thing about this case is...... Fox was pretty much the only news org that was "biased" enough to ALSO report that... while the 28 illegals were detained.... over 150 Americans applied for the jobs.... (which were given back to the illegals). Of course, everyone (I assume) IS aware that Obama anounced a suspension of ICE (Immigration & Custom Enforcement Administration) enforcement activites.....
April 30, 2009 at 2:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sundancekid (anonymous) says...
Nothing says "credible journalism" like FOX News.
April 30, 2009 at 2:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sundancekid (anonymous) says...
http://www.radicalrags.com/t-shirts/p...
April 30, 2009 at 2:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
Good ones! I like it!
But can you back it up? Can you show me some deliberate distortions, lies, untruths, etc? Be prepared - bet I can match you story-for-story with some MSNBC stories and others....
If I take out a full-page ad and call Obama a radical Muslim..... does that make it true?
Instead of ragging on Fox.... why don't you dispute the info? Everyone else put out the same story..... can you prove that over 150 did NOT apply? If it is true.... and other's didn't print it...... isn't their story distorted by "ommission"?
April 30, 2009 at 3:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
At least MSNBC was honest enough to publicly retract their Palin Aftrica story after it got exposed as a hoax. I'll give them that. Lots of people (here incuded) didn't get the memo for a long, long time.... LOL
April 30, 2009 at 3:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sundancekid (anonymous) says...
open eyes - I noticed over the years how bigots use the word "illegals" as an attempt to strip all humanity and empathy from the discussion of immigration and the unfortunate refugees who are risking everything (including their lives) to provide for their families the same opportunities our ancestors dreamt. Did you learn these deceitful and inhumane tactics from Karl Rove, personally?
Classy.
April 30, 2009 at 3:35 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sundancekid (anonymous) says...
I listen to NPR.
April 30, 2009 at 3:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
You can call it whatever you want, Sundancekid, call me a racist, bigot, Satan, the devil.... whatever. Your attempt to lump everyone together into your world view is sad. I call people that break the laws lawbreakers, people that for whatever reason are in a country illegally illegals. And liars liars.
My ancestors came here legally and followed the laws. As did nearly everyone's. And I have no problem with those that do. I've noticed you've told people to back things up with facts...... but you don't. So I guess if I print out a T-Shirt saying "Obama is the Anti-Christ"...... then that makes it a fact...... right? I'm just learning....... from you.....
April 30, 2009 at 4:02 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sundancekid (anonymous) says...
You lack humanity. I feel sorry for you.
April 30, 2009 at 4:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
Ditto. I have more compassion for humanity than you'll ever know. But you lack honesty and objectivity, and that I do not respect.
April 30, 2009 at 4:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
law abidingly challenged
April 30, 2009 at 5:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...
http://tvbythenumbers.com/2009/04/30/...
'Wednesday night’s primetime press conference to mark Barack Obama’s 100th day in office was viewed by 28.8 million people, according Nielsen.
That’s a 29% drop from the president’s last press conference on March 24.
The telecast was watched on 10 TV networks with Fox News drawing the most viewers."
Also:
http://tvbythenumbers.com/2009/04/30/...
This takes a bit of deciphering, but it verifies a report I heard from a conservative source. I opted to go with this link instead, though, for the obvious reasons. It is a hopeful sign of that "road back through the middle," but I'm really hoping it turns into "a doorway in through the middle" for a moderate third party.
Rope/tire swings are so much more fun than single-direction swings.............and playing barefoot in the summer is always more fun than wearing sneakers. It can be more fiscally conservative too ;)
April 30, 2009 at 5:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
Yeah but our grand kids and great grand kids are going to have to pay for it. Thanks kids, I'm goin' to Vegas, on you! Weeee!!!
April 30, 2009 at 5:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
I gotta agree with ya some there, YY4U. And before that the Dems complained about Reagan, etc... etc.... (I remember the "cowboy diplomacy" that was guaranteed to start WWIII - and instead brought down the Berlin Wall). So... you're saying.... you were better off under a Democrat President and a Republican Congress. I've got no problem with that, I think we're all better off when 1 branch doesn't control everything.
As for oil..... what did we have.... basically 1/2 year where oil prices shot skyhigh? And then came back down? I believe, as most of the experts do, that speculators had alot more to do with that than anything. And I agree some laws need to be changed there so speculation cannot artifically inflate prices like that.
But I remember one person that took on oil companies during that period when they were raking it in and gave it to the people. But the press did a fine job of destroying her in the last election. And now everyone is crying that we don't do what she did...... isn't it ironic??? And worth a chuckle and a headshake? One of those "things that make ya go 'hmmm'", as the song says..... LOL
April 30, 2009 at 7 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
gemini (anonymous) says...
sundance...our ancestors came here before there were immigration laws so saying anything about how we are a country of "immigrants" (no, you haven't said it yet, but I feel it coming) is irrelevant. There are laws now that everyone has to follow, therefore if someone is not following our legal process, they are ILLEGALS. it's not a derogatory term...it's a fact.
And no, my conscience is just fine, thanks.
April 30, 2009 at 7:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
As I have stated here before....I believe the country is best served when we have a president from one party.....a small congressional majority from another party....and a four to three Supreme Court with two really independent justices in the middle.
With such a government we could accomplish so much because both sides would have to compromise.....thereby causing real bipartisanship. When one party holds all the marbles you can bet the farm they eventually will begin to abuse the trust the voters have placed in them.
April 30, 2009 at 7:55 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
dang I was hoping "law abidingly challenged" would catch on
April 30, 2009 at 8:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
biscuitboy, I agree with you absolutely 100%. Gosh that feels good!!! LOL
Ok, THIS is why I have a big problem with ILLEGAL immigration.
Three convicted in Fort Dix terror plot are sentenced to life in prison
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009...
(I made sure it wasn't a FOXNews article so nobody could come back with another idiotic reply :)
"The Dukas, ethnic Albanians who were born in Macedonia, have lived ILLEGALLY IN THE US SINCE SLIPPING ACROSS THE BORDER THROUGH MEXICO in 1984. They ran a pizzeria and worked as roofers."
That's all I want. The chance to process people thru the system LEGALLY - to check their backgrounds, make sure they didn't just spend the last 6 months at a terrorist training camp in Pakistan, do they have ties, do they adhere to radical beliefs, etc..... even then we won't catch them all I'm sure, but it sure will help.
And for that I lack humanity. I'll accept whatever you want to accuse me of, those that know me know better than a stranger. But I don't lack common sense or a brain. (Well, that's probably debatable at times, too - LOL). But not in this case.
April 30, 2009 at 8:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
gemini....
I'm sure the native american people...(Indians)....might disagree with your assessment of the free and easy approach out ancestors used in coming here. Oh, I forgot, there were no immigration laws then so it didn't hurt anybody.
I.m not saying that illegal immigration is not a major problem. But to claim that our taking a continent away from it's native people just because we were able to and there were no laws to prevent it was somhow blamless while the illegals coming here now are criminals leaves holes in your logic big enough to drive a Peterbilt through.
April 30, 2009 at 8:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
When people dig up history (literally) like how "we" (not me, I was born in 1974) took this country away from the native people, what exactly are we supposed to do about it now? I mean really.
Technically "we" stole the land, right? Why not use that piece of history to justify theft? I mean we use it to justify law abidingly challenged immigrants less than lawfull behavior, why not other things?
People on here are really trying too hard to justify the breaking of the law. Who's the top guy in law enforcement anyway? I don't think he would approve of such disregaurd of the law of this great if not stolen land.
April 30, 2009 at 10:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
I completely agree with the last 2 posts. What we did to the Native Americans did amount to theft, but what are we, truly, to do about it now? I guess we could all pack up and move back to wherever our ancestors came from, but even then, it was probably land that was fought over, conquered many times, and "stolen" from its original inhabitants, whoever they may have been or how they even claimed to be the original inhabitants. For all I know what we now call Native Americans came across on the Bering Strait thousands of years ago and wiped out the natives before them. We don't know. All we can do is deal with the present with an eye towards the future, if not for ourselves, then for our children. And trying hard to justify breaking laws is not a good place to start.
April 30, 2009 at 10:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
Where did those sneakers go?
May 1, 2009 at 6:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
I was not wanting to infer that there was anything we could or should do about things that had happened in the past.....and as merry as she may be I have no desiere to move back to England which is where my family came here from.
But English common law , which is what our legal system is based on, assumes some definition of right-and wrong in declaring something illegal. So if illegality is based on the asssumption of some inherent wrong.....that act is wrong weather or not a law is in place to prosecute it.
I am not pretending to defend the law abidingly challenged of today. I'm only trying to point out the flawed logic in the assumpton that our forefathers were somehow blameless because they broke no law...even though they did commit a wrong.
It's a strictly academic argument and I apologize for bringing it up...lol
My god man...you were born in 1974....you are but a child....lol
May 1, 2009 at 6:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
bisquitboy
I bet when you were 35 you didn't think of yourself as a child. This "child" is a veteran who has lived in two different countries, not many children can say that.;)
I still like shoes.
May 1, 2009 at 8:46 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
That's why I'm so witty.;)
May 1, 2009 at 9 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
Also, we had 1-party rule (Democrats) from 1977 to 1980.... and out of that we got... the highest unemployment & inflation since the Depression. We also got 1-party rule in 1933, and people can debate until the cows come home about whether it ended or extended the depression, but I'll go along with FDR's own Treasury Secretary admitting after 6 years it was a failure (and the FDR library admitting it was really the war that lifted us out of it). We also had a Dem majority Clinton's first 2 years, and, to quote from an article. "His first 2 years were dismal failures, It was only when Clinton faced Republican majorities in Congress that his presidency took off." Well, that's debatable, but one view.
ANd we also ENDED a civil war and freed the slaves during the first term you mention.... while.... the Democrats split into 2 factions, Southern Dems at that time were pro-slavery..... is that what you preferred? Slavery?
1864: Democrats Vote Against Abolishing Slavery
http://www.sonofthesouth.net/leefound...
And we also had GOP control of all 3 branches under Teddy Roosevelt, you forgot to mention, who is consistently considered one of our greatest presidents.
Don't let your selective memory get the best of you :).
May 1, 2009 at 9:51 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
Yeah but 77-80 was leftover problems from Nixon.;)
May 1, 2009 at 10:45 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
You're right, seriouslyfolks..... and Dems controlled both houses under Nixon (oops). At least Nixon got us OUT of the Vietnam War..... oops.... Dem president (LBJ) got us IN it.....and had a Dem super-majority in both houses...... BIG OOPS again..... somebody forgot to mention that little tidbit above..... dang it makes my head hurt when I try to put all "bad" on 1 party and all "good" on another..... LOL.
May 1, 2009 at 11:37 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
LOL YY4U - there's about the dumbest line I've heard in awhile.
Gosh.... maybe you could now explain to us all the definition of words like "bigot" and "stereotype".......
Never mind. You just gave a PERFECT example. Thx!
May 1, 2009 at noon ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
Simple minded phrase..... you mean like.... "Change"???? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL...... oh my side hurts now......
Gosh I wonder about many demographics that typically vote overwhelmingly Dem...... illegal immigrants... inner city....... I wonder how many of those you could apply the same label you just threw around.......
I generally never hang around country clubs. Too many snobby liberals there for me - LOL.
May 1, 2009 at 12:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
The appearence of a child rest in the eyes of the beholder....and to me Santa Claus looks but a child...lol
Good post YY4U...and the proof of your statement can be seen in some of the post on these boards....Though my statement is not aimed at anyone posting on this thread this morning.
My shoes are worn slick.....does anyone have an old pair to spare.
May 1, 2009 at 12:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
Slick shoes are good for doin' the moon walk! Old school style! ;)
May 1, 2009 at 2:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
LOL YY4U, I'm sure throughout history we can find lots of slogans on both sides that turned out quite ironic. Do you truly believe that all Dems are so much smarter than everyone else? I really thought that YOU were smarter than that......
At least those all have 3 words, so they are obviously MUCH more complicated than "Change", right? LOL.
I'll stick with War On Terror. You may not think we are at war, Obama may not realize it, but regardless of what we think Osama declared war on US in 1994.
The fiscal conservatives in the GOP definitely got pushed to the sidelines sadly. But by who? Isn't spending like there's no tomorrow more of a liberal policy? Pretty much all the people that I know who fit under your latest bigoted and stereotyped label (and probably racial, too) are very fiscally conservative.......???
And the far-left loonies have a good thing going if they were sane enough to realize it, but they're about to run the train right over the cliff. If only a train used slick-sole shoes instead of wheels....
May 1, 2009 at 3:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
I was listening to some talk show the other evening, don't remember who, just flipping stations, and someone was calling in to talk about how all the socialistic countries were so much better off than the US. The host asked them for an example, and they said "China - everyone there gets health care". I nearly drove in the ditch laughing, the host was speechless.
A group of people from my church (you know, "christian conservative religious right crazy nutcackes") have made several trips to China in the last few years. They've donated thousands of dollars, helped build a school, dug ditches, helped put up a clinic (because despite what the caller said, there is none), etc..... you know, the types of things we people who "lack humanity" commonly do, instead of stomping on crosses & calling everyone who doesn't agree with us a bunch of names and intolerant. Of course, they have to do much of this in great secrecy, and hide at times, because the police over there will not allow crazies like this, of course. The Chinese have to meet in secret if they want to read from the Bible. Such an improvement over what we have to put up with, isn't it? Of course, lots of people here seem to prefer that type of society. Come to think of it.... now I wonder if the caller wasn't a poster from here.... hmmm........
Signed: christian conservative religious right crazy nutcake open_eyes (and proud of it! :)
May 1, 2009 at 4 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
I think you meant Left Wing, but I'm with ya. Extremes at each end we can do without. 'Cept maybe I wish I was Extremely Rich and Extremely Good-Looking (sigh)...... :)
I wonder who's picture was on the shoe that got thrown at the India prime minister recently?
May 1, 2009 at 4:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
Somebody mentioned lack of humanity and I was immediately reminded of the Queen of Cold...the femme de nasty....the mother of all rattlesnakes.....Ann Coulter.
Now there is a work of art for you. The closest thing to the milk of human kindness that will ever flow through her viens is embalming fluid. She, and her ilk are who hijacked the republican party.
May 1, 2009 at 4:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
I think she's hot
May 1, 2009 at 4:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
Let's see if I can define myself from the above comments, I'm a lunatic christian conservative religious right crazy nutcacke child on the fringe. That is how the "tolerant" left labels me, that's awesome!
May 1, 2009 at 5:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
And you (we) might also be poor, uneducated, working class people who are easy to influence with simple minded phrases. Who lack humanity.
I'm throwing away my dictionary. It's definition of "tolerance" and "compassion" are obviously misprints. Plus my degree obviously must be a fake. At least I've got my cool sneakers.
May 1, 2009 at 6:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
open_eyes
poor, uneducated, working class people, yes I fergot dees. I would probably have more money if I didn't give to my church to support missions trips like the ones you also apparently support. We sooo lack compassion. LOL I remember after Katrina my best friend from church took a van load of clothes and food down to Louisiana, I wanted to go with him but had to work.:( While the left were blaming Bush for a hurricane we who "lack compassion" were springing into action and not waiting for the government to do everything.
May 1, 2009 at 6:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
I wasn't an actual member of any of the China trips but I was such an intolerant nutcake fringe that I did, yes, directly contribute financially to aid those going. At least I do one good deed a year to clear my conscience so I can go back to being an intolerant yadayadayada conservative the other 364 days - LOL
Here's an idea (tying in with the theme of this editorial) - I know some people at the church who are involved with an organization that takes t-shirts, hats and other apparel that are pre-printed but not used, and donates them to needy people in third-world countries. For instance, say last year, there were thousands of hats, t-shirts, etc. printed up ahead of time proclaiming Arizona Cardinals as Super Bowl Champs. Obviously that didn't happen, so they get boxes and boxes of stuff like this and donate to those who need clothing. Maybe we could donate a bunch of the Obama shoes to them. (I'm not implying that he didn't win the election - just why let them go to waste?)
Probably a bad idea to let the government take care of doing it. Bureaucracy is so slow and inefficient they're probably still trying to give away the "McGovern Wins!" T-shirts.... LOL
May 1, 2009 at 6:48 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
YY4U - you filled out the lapel sticker, not us. Can't blame us for having fun with it. Sticky things are cool!!! Ever play with those little rubbery octopus thingies that you can throw on the wall or ceiling and they stick, then slowly work their way down? Fun! (for us moronic easily influenced with simple phrases types, anyway) ;-)
May 1, 2009 at 6:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
wacky wall walkers! YEAH! They used to give those away at Wendy's in the early eighties. Man I miss the eighties. I was a child then, heck I still am. LOL
May 1, 2009 at 7:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
I'll take any shoes I can get....one of mine just had a blow out...and children might be able to run around barefooted but not us old far-'s
YY4U...Once again you have said in a few words what it would have taken me a chapter to say. Your description of why you are a fiscal conservative and social liberal...and why you vote the way you do fit me to a tee. I however didn't know the sheriff so I registered as a democrat. At that time I was silly enough to believe you registered with the party you were most philosophically in tune with....I have since learned you are suppossed to register with the other party so you can vote for whackos and nut-jobs in the primary there by increasing your party's chance's in the general.
So I guess I'll see you in line at the next republican primary. I just hope I can figure which one is the whacko nut-job.
May 2, 2009 at 6:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
USNretired (anonymous) says...
Man, I hate being a poor conservative Physicist working for the Federal Government! I must really be ignorant. HA HA HA. I just love lefty loony wingnuts when they express opinions as "facts".
May 2, 2009 at 12:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
.....and righto looney whack-jobs who call everything they say fact and everything anybody else says opinion.....HA HA HA HA .
May 2, 2009 at 1 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
USNretired....
Just curious...retired Navy....Physicist....working for the government....did you come out of the Navy Nuclear Power Program. They offered me Nukey Poo school back in 1961 but I declined because I didn't want another eight years of obligated service.
Imagine my chagrin when I later learned most of the people making big bucks running nuclear power plants came out of that program....just goes to show us lefto wingnuts aren't allways right....lol
May 2, 2009 at 1:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
What I meant was that you had filled out labels for all of us........ :)
I learned a long time ago that basically it's all your point of view on any particular subject and how important that particular one is to you weighted against the others, nobody really sticks to what any "party line" preaches anyway, so I just stayed Independent. People don't want anyone bothering anyone else or telling them how to live their lives.... yet they're all for big government basically telling you when you can and can't take a c**p...... and look what happened to fiscal conservatism under the GOP the last few years.
I think you might be on to something, biscuitboy - I remember a story I heard back about the time that McCain suddenly came out of nowhere to become the frontrunner. Supposedly someone working on the Dem campaigns was heading down south to "help with the McCain ticket"....... I think they figured out what Repub was least likely to pose a threat.....
May 2, 2009 at 2:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
"I don't care what other people do with their lives as long as they don't bother ME." (emphasis added) Yeah, this pretty much sums up social liberals. LOL
May 2, 2009 at 5:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
.....you mean like I don't care if you smoke as long as you don't do it around me.....even though I force myself into your space. Or the social conservative alternative....I care about everything you do and forbid you to do it even though it is none of my business. LOL
May 2, 2009 at 6:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
I should have written.....I care about every thing you do and demand that you do it my way, or not at all, even though it is none of my business...Sorry...
May 2, 2009 at 6:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
biscuitboy
I'll forgive you, since you're old and probably forgetful, but I was against the ban and voted NO. Being a conservative and believing in limited government I felt that the pre-ban laws were sufficient.
I have never demanded that anybody do anything my way or not at all. Wasn't it liberals in California that were trying to force all churches to perform same sex marriages even though it was against their beliefs? I guess that's just another example of something that's good when liberals do it but bad when conservatives do it. LOL
May 2, 2009 at 7:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
seriouslyfolks.....what i think is really cool here is that we....you a conservative and me a liberal....are saying the same thing about different things in a different way.
I too voted against the smoking ban because I didn't think some people should be telling other people how they should (or shouldn't} live their lives....
.....I also believe some people should not tell others {women} what to do with their bodies....or tell others who they can or can not marry.
.....and I believe it is wrong to write laws based on one religion and then demand people of different religions (or no religion at all) to live by those laws.
So it appears to me that one liberal and one conservative at least agree in principle about this even if we can't agree on how to apply it. Is it possible that you then are not totally conservative....or that I am not totally liberal....and how we come to feel about this depends on the issue. Or are both libs and conservs just at times real hypocritical.
One other minor point....I didn't think those california liberals were trying to force churches to marry people they didn't want to marry....I thought they were just trying to force the religious right to allow them to marry. There is a difference.
May 3, 2009 at 4:54 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
since no one else is up this time of the day I guess I'll grab the bully-pulpet for a moment.
.....I would never support a law that required a church to marry anyone that church felt it was wrong for it to marry....but I also would never support a law that allowed a church (or group of churches) to be the sole arbiter of who was allowed to get married. This of course assumes the people wanting to marry are old enough and otherwise competent enough to make such choices.
Likewise I would never support a law that forced anyone to be subjected to harm....or to work in a place they believed was dangerous to their health By the same token I would never support a law that made others bear the burden of protecting somebody who chose to place themselves in what they considered dangerous conditions. Places like smoke filled bars and restaurants as an example. To me doing so would be akin to taking a leisurely stroll across a NASCAR track with a race in progress....then blaming the racers for careless driving resulting in your injury. What Up?
For every yin there is a yang....for every up there is a down....for every right we demand for ourselves we must be careful we are not denying equally important rights to others.
Now i don't know if this philosophy is liberal, conservative, or just plain nuts,,,,but it is how I feel about this. And my opinion and two bucks.........well you know.
May 3, 2009 at 6:53 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
"One other minor point....I didn't think those California liberals were trying to force churches to marry people they didn't want to marry....I thought they were just trying to force the religious right to allow them to marry. There is a difference."
I thought the same thing at first but then learned that the original bill would make it illegal for churches to refuse to perform same sex marriages even though they may not believe in it. A new and different bill excluding that part is now somewhere in the works.
May 3, 2009 at 8:42 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
justthefacts (anonymous) says...
to quote a recent song "God is great, beer is good, people are crazy."
May 3, 2009 at 9:39 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
I stand corrected....I didn't know that about the original law and would not have supported it written that way. Like I said.....rights swing both ways....like AC-DC....heh--heh--heh--
May 3, 2009 at 10:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
I like that AC/DC song "who MADE who" lol
May 3, 2009 at 10:14 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...
I've been pondering how to communicate a concept for a day and a half and I think I may actually have clear wording on it now. Tell me if I haven't. Whenever anyone with either conservative or liberal beliefs tries to make the government match them, you get the same result: too much government control. Take the smoking ban. The places in the US that it originated in are socially liberal which has translated into liberal government. Here, we had both sets supporting it and both opposing it. Opposite viewpoints were coming up with the same solution, though, and the government was invited in to take over.
I think it's also important to note that social liberalism and government liberalism are not the same. When I am baking a cake and the directions say to put a liberal portion of grease in the pan, it means "a lot--don't hold back." So then, liberal government equals a lot of government, not holding back. Social liberality, however, means a lot of society, not holding back which, gone too far, is a very bad thing--complete chaos. Liberals do recognize this and allow for government, but then, typically, when they want to ensure no one can hold them back from something, they decide to make a law to protect their inhibition. These are always considered "gray" areas, as they do recognize the need for the protection of life and safety. They recognize the basics in this category identically to the conservatives, but they tend to box in different additional items than the conservatives do.
Social and political conservatism can, on the other hand, be similar to each other, but taken too far, social conservatism can lead to liberal government. Some might say this makes them "right-wing terrorists," but really it simply makes them mistake-making humans, just like the social liberals who also inadvertently make government too liberal (read: plentiful)
"I don't care what other people do with their lives as long as they don't bother ME." and "I care about every thing you do and demand that you do it my way, or not at all, even though it is none of my business." are extreme positions in each camp, but will always result in the same thing. May I suggest that we each choose our own personal level of liberalism or conservatism, but to guard our political stances from those influences as much as we can. We can talk more rationally about these things if we are not paranoid of the legislation the other is going to push next because we can trust that we aren't trying to force our beliefs on each other. There are going to be enough struggles with those "gray" areas that we box into the safety and protection category differently--let's not get so combative with each other on every other point that we force the government to become overbearingly prevalent, stopping all of our social liberalism or conservatism.
May 3, 2009 at 10:56 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
justthefacts (anonymous) says...
It's all about power and who grabs it. It would be nice if people could find the middle of the road but it always seems like the pendulum swings one extreme to the other. Perhaps if more people got involved before things got out of hand that would help.
May 3, 2009 at 11:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
oh4theluvof and just the facts.....
I totally agree with both of you....I think.
The point I have been trying to make with my references to the smoking ban debate is that when you take political parties and ideological labels off the table....people of widely differing beliefs can use different roads to arrive at the same place for the same common good. How much better off might we be as a nation if we could dispense with ideology all together and come together as a brotherhood of man working through our differences towards a common good.
I hesitated to use brotherhood of man because it is one of those socially liberal humanist catch phrases....but I did not use it that way. I mean't it in its broadest application.....that we are all in this together...and we survive together or we die alone.
May 3, 2009 at 1:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
I believe that children are our future
Teach them well and let them wear Obama shoes
Show them all the beauty they possess inside
Give them a sense of pride to make it easier
Let the children's laughter remind us how we used to be
May 3, 2009 at 7:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
If they are Obama sneakers, are they both left feet?
May 3, 2009 at 7:17 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
Not left feet, far left feet. lol ;)
May 3, 2009 at 7:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
dalelinn (Dale Linn) says...
Sundance Kid, Kansas Girl, Biscuitboy, etc.
I'm glad that you have faith in this "Community Organizer" that we now have for a president. I am very glad that he used to give classes on how to force banks to make bad loans that has contributed to the mess that we have now. Howsomever, if you three (and possibly others) believe that BHO is doing anything but prolonging the euphoria before the fall, you must all three have moved from Emporia to lala land (San Francisco) and are chanting munchkinland rhetoric. I would like to say I'm sorry for having disillusioned you, but I'm sure you're happy in the (must be chemical induced) state you are currently in. Have fun.
May 4, 2009 at 7:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
oxen
I assume that by prolonging the euphoria before the fall....you mean he is trying to keep the economy from going totally down the tank. If that's what you mean then yes...I am gald he's trying something.
It sounds to me like you are suggesting that he should just let it go down the toilet. I'm sure that from a republican stratigist point of view that would be wonderful there fore they might have a glimmer of a chance of regaining what they lost for themselves
But since this mess is one that President Obama largely inherited....I don't think the American people are dumb enough to fall for that.
And I managed to answer your post without resorting one time to personal insult...You should try it sometime!
May 4, 2009 at 7:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
tbluma (anonymous) says...
Oxen 10-4
Biscuit boy every president inherits something.
I don't think the American people are dumb, I think they are misinformed and don't do enough research to vote for the right people. I hope barry does this country good, I really do, but I don't think that will happen. As I said in an earlier post if he does I will acknowledge such a feat.
Sundancekid you called me out twice about facts, proof or validity of what I said. OPINION DOESN'T CALL FOR SUCH
When I want to have a war of wits with an unarmed person I will furnish such.
May 4, 2009 at 8:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
"I read a story about how Obama is trying to get rid of the tax incentive for moving jobs overseas. " I heard that too. I also heard on the radio (a local top 40 station) that the idea has been floating around for a while. He'll probably get credit for the idea though and people will eat it up. I hope it happens and works, I'd just like credit to go to the proper people. Like when Bush got blamed for Katrina, I always had my doubts as to whether a potus really had the power to make hurricanes. I have a feeling the answer is somewhere on the zubruter film though.;)
May 4, 2009 at 8:17 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
dalelinn (Dale Linn) says...
Biscuitboy, Sorry, I'm just a realist. Just because one president was an idiot, there's no reason for us to elect another one. You'd think we'd learn sometime. I do have a little trouble trying to figure out how you like what this "bum" is doing? If the dollar is not destroyed, our great grandchildren will be paying our debts. This you like?
May 4, 2009 at 8:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
Interesting article that explains somewhat the tax incentives being talked about:
http://techpolicy.typepad.com/tpp/200...
According to the article, this is how the tax code has been set up since the early 1900s, when the ability to move capital and goods so freely was never considered.
I remember outsourcing started under Clinton, then really gained steam under Bush as the Internet & technology made it more possible. I've wished for a long time someone would do something to balance this out without crippling companies (making them unable to compete globally) - I don't claim to have the answers, but I certainly am behind Obama's efforts to see what he can do. From another article: "Keep in mind also that the U.S. is one of very few countries that even attempts to tax individuals and corporations on their worldwide income (absent the permanent reinvestment provision) - most countries tax income earned only within their borders." Given the US position in world economy, however, I'm not sure this should apply to us in the same way....???
But then again, lots of what goes on in Washington I just can't understand. Never understood why Clinton let Osama go, and I can't understand why Obama basically is doing the same again:
http://www.newsmax.com/timmerman/obam...
or
http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2...
Guess that's why I just have to stick to cheap sneakers with nobody's picture on them.... (trying to stick to the article theme again :-)
May 4, 2009 at 9:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
dalelinn (Dale Linn) says...
open_eyes, It's laudible to be faithful to our president. Even when what he is doing with the economy is the same thing that Bush did? You probably know what I think of Bush. So, our country has spent more than it took in for at least two or three decades. Now spending more to keep us in the life we have known is going to solve anything? I might have just got out of bed this morning, but I haven't been asleep all my life. "When my family overspends, it's time to tighten our belt", is what I have learned over my life. But, since it's public money, just "go ahead and spend more to keep the semblance up as long as we can", that makes sense? Feed that to the masses and the "spaced out" liberals, but don't expect me to buy it. BHO is giving us more of the same, but with even bigger government. I find it hard to get too thrilled about it. I'll leave that to Sundance Kid, Kansas Girl, Biscuitboy, etc. They seem to like it.
May 4, 2009 at 9:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
open_eyes (anonymous) says...
I'm thrilled about very little these days. I simply stated I'm willing to give Obama a chance to see if he can slow down outsourcing in some way. But, given that one of the main people on his "advisory" meeting of leading CEO's to discuss how to keep jobs in the US was the CEO of IBM, probably the biggest outsourcer of tech jobs in the US, I have very little faith. (Especially when only a few days later IBM announced they were "accelerating" their movement of US jobs offshore for 2009).
I think we'd all better enjoy the little rebound our economy is having right now, because I think it isn't going to be long before we are going to tank again. Worse than the last. Sometimes, the best "fix" is the one that hurts the most initially, but doesn't last as long. Kindof the old sharp knife or relationship clean break analogy. We shall see but everything I see tells me this rebound is not going to be all that long-lived. And of course..... I fervently hope I am wrong.......
May 4, 2009 at 10:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
I too are am ready to move on to another topic that we can work back into blaming the repubs, or the dems as the case may be, for everything.
I don't know, or even imply, that everything President Obama is doing is correct....and I too worry about the hugh debt that was run up by Bush and the repubs....and is now being added to by Obama and the dems.
But at least he is trying something. Your solution...correct me if I'm wrong....seems to be tighten our belt....spend nothing...do nothing.....except further cut taxes on the rich...and watch thing go totally down the crapper. And I agree another great depression will protect our children from debt....but it will also leave them with nothing. I'm not as convinced as you are that one is preferable to the other.
The reality is however, as history has shown more than once...if the republicans are successful in hanging all of this on Obama (which I don't believe they will be) Then they can claim bragging rights and once again reclaim their lost power. I believe purposefully triggering a depression just to accomplish that would be to paint the republican party as criminal....and the victims of that crime would be our children.
And though there are a few disenters, most economist and historians that I am familier with claim it was the massive infusion of money by FDR and the dems
that pulled us out of the last depression. one that started incidentally with the republicans that time also.
May 5, 2009 at 3:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
glarson (anonymous) says...
To a forum:
http://www.emporiagazette.com/forums/...
May 5, 2009 at 5:33 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )