snow (anonymous) says...

I absolutely LOVE anonymous posting (and not just my own, but everybody's)! In a place like the one where we live, you rarely feel free to say what you really think (it's just not polite) ... sometimes it is good to get some ideas out there that might otherwise remain stifled by a bitten tongue. It's free speech of a sort that we don't get much of around here.
The free flow outweighs the cowardice!

November 4, 2010 at 10:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

DeniseDorcey (anonymous) says...

My moral compass is that I should not say things, especially negative things, unless I am willing to but my name behind it. I do consider it cowardice.

It's kind of one of those Golden Rule things that some of us were taught and retained while growing up.

November 4, 2010 at 11:02 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

root444 (anonymous) says...

i agree snow. i am self employed and absolutely depend on people doing business with me and without them my business simply doesnt exist. posting anonymous comments makes it where i can share my views without making someone angry with me and taking a chance whether they will do business with me or not based on those views. unfortunately there are SOME people who might hold it personally against me for my ideas on politics, religion, fairgrounds etc.. however i dont believe its right to hide behind being anonymous to make personal attacks on people. if thats the case then i believe that is cowardly

November 4, 2010 at 11:14 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Like I said what a hoot !

I didn't see a signature on the cartoon was it drawn by "anonymous"?

Please tell me it wasn't plagiarized.

November 4, 2010 at 11:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Looking good p-man ! :>)

November 4, 2010 at 11:22 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

genxer (anonymous) says...

It has a sig on it Steve. Running vertically between the first and second box. Looks like Paul or Raul Michaels? BB might know since he has a hard copy...bb?

November 4, 2010 at 11:23 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Steve

Chris told me it was done by his brother or his brother in law or something like that. I have already run the gantlet of personal emotions about it ranging from initial anger, to amusement, to eventually getting a copy so I can frame it. Those comments were made on the Too loud thread if anybody wants to read them....but I don't plan to repeat them here.

It really is a funny cartoon and I'm glad to be a part of it.

November 4, 2010 at 11:32 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

It is the 1st thread to make me smile in over a month. Thanks to the gazette and the person who drew it.

November 4, 2010 at 11:35 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

booker5m (anonymous) says...

I really like the cartoon. One of the best I have seen from the paper. Being anonymous gives someone a mystery about them kinda like Batman or Superman and when you find out who they are its a downer.
If the person is making comments that make sense its good but when they hide behind just to make slanderest remarks like a troll the paper should ban the person.

November 4, 2010 at 11:42 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I agree about banning the ones that make slanderous unfounded attacks on people. Otherwise the forum is for exchange of ideas whether signed or not. I do occasionally sign mine with my real name when I feel the content demands my taking personal responsibility for it....but other than during my initial angry outburst this morning, I usually don't hold others to an ideal I have placed on myself.

November 4, 2010 at 12:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

TexasGirl (anonymous) says...

BB, I think you should take it as a great compliment. I enjoy reading your posts, even when I don't agree with them. You do not lean extremely to the left or right, and it is obvious you put a lot of intelligent thought and reason into your posts, which is a refreshing change from many others on here.

November 4, 2010 at 12:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

I resemble that remark, TexasGirl. :-)

Seriously R. Folks

November 4, 2010 at 12:45 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

neighbor (anonymous) says...

Oh the only reason they used you in the cartoon bisquit is because they are left wing liberals too

Just kidding....................you just got them tighty whiteys untwisted.

November 4, 2010 at 12:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

lovemylittletown (anonymous) says...

I don't post on here very often but do like to once in awhile. I do like being able to do it "anonymously" though. I wrote a letter to the Gazette one time in The People Speaks column and recieved two rather hateful and nasty letters to my HOME. Sorry.....just don't trust being able to speak my mind without recourse...not with a family at home.

November 4, 2010 at 12:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

TexasGirl

I came to feel more that way especially after talking to Chris. I try to be fair and reasonable......sometimes I fail dramatically......but it is not for lack of trying. But thanks for your kind words.

One thing that brings me great amusement at times, biscuitboy in reality is my eleven-year-old Fox Terrier. He goes through life with no idea how well known he has become.

November 4, 2010 at 1:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

scarlett01_98 (anonymous) says...

great cartoon! i can see why bb was initially angry. however i'm feeling SO left out. no southern woman in the pic. it was the best giggle i've had in a while tho. smiles to chris. : )
i do like reading bb's posts. his posts are truly enjoyable!

November 4, 2010 at 1:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

TexasGirl,

I don' t resemble that remark, because you see I am the local
" Crank in Chief " !

And I may or may not be depicted in the cartoon ! Doesn' t really matter to me !

Steve and maybe a few others know who I am, and Steve knows my real name ! Perhaps one day I will reveal my secret identy to the forum !

In fact I did reveal my real name at the public meeting on the Somalian issue, personally in front of the distinguished panel and crowd that attended ! I stepped up to the mic in front of everyone and introduced my self, by name and said that I was known as " Methusla " on the Gazette Forum !

November 4, 2010 at 1:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

doubt_it (anonymous) says...

I also do not post on here very often, but I read all the forums several times each day. Everyone has given me insight and thoughts on different topics and most are very well thought and presented. I have seen where some posters actually do research to back up the claims they make. Sometimes these posts have actually made me sway a decision or thought process. Sometimes I don't see things the way all you do, but occasionally I can be "shown the light". I like being able to post anonymously so that it does not reflect on my family or my business. Keep up the posts. I love reading them. Biscuitboy, Seriouslyfolks, Neighbor, Steve and Methusla, I think you guys are great.

November 4, 2010 at 1:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

HillsReader (anonymous) says...

Great cartoon. Now, if we only had a user blog section. I know you already have the software to do it Gazette!

November 4, 2010 at 2:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

HenryVIII (anonymous) says...

HillsReader,
You could use the User Forums as a "blog"...
http://www.emporiagazette.com/discuss...
Just scroll to the bottom and start a new discussion called "HillsReader's Bodacious Blog". Others will be able to post to it too, but it'll be just like your Facebook wall.
'enry

November 4, 2010 at 2:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

scarlett01_98 (anonymous) says...

seriously r folks, i took the rabbit to be a playboy bunny. just my thought.

November 4, 2010 at 2:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Local_Hispanic (Vic Rodriguez) says...

I enjoy reading the posts, because it tends to take my blood plessure for a roller coaster ride. Ha Ha Ha!

Thanks for the rides Emporia Gazette!

November 4, 2010 at 2:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

neighbor (anonymous) says...

Thanks for the compliment doubt_it. I have been considering backing out of here and discontinuing posting as often. I like being anon on here for the same reasons others have stated, more details are discussed when people can talk openly about subjects without the fear of it coming back to haunt you. When I first posted, it was to reply to a daily every thread type of poster that seemed to think he ran the show on here. He often told people how they should think, what they could post, etc. He would start a argument or debate on nearly every subject. I decided he needed put in his place so I signed up to post a reply. Funny thing, when confronted with facts, and by someone who didn't back down from his sharp and snide comments, he left or took another name. I don't even remember what the name was he used back then. I was told about the Gazette "blogs" by a co-worker who often reads them at work. I came in one night and he was laughing hysterically at one of the posts, someone was giving another poster a hard time. Since then, he has made comments about some of my posts and some of the others on here that made me smile, if he only knew :)

November 4, 2010 at 2:45 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

uranidiot (anonymous) says...

I guess its time to let the cat out of the bag and stop being anonymous. My real name is Dan Boscoe Cooper. Hope that clears a few things up.

November 4, 2010 at 3 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

TexasGirl (anonymous) says...

Methusla, I doubt you are represented in the cartoon; if you were, your character would be a 969-year-old guy and I don't see one of those ;)

I can see both sides of this issue. I'm not ashamed of anything I post, and if the Gazette changes the policy and requires real names, I will comply. However, by remaining anonymous, I can be assured that nothing I say can have repercussions on my friends, family, or co-workers. So I prefer to keep it this way.

November 4, 2010 at 3:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

AverageCitizen2 (anonymous) says...

Well...even a harmless post can upset someone greatly. Biscuit got pretty upset with me today because I told him to check out the cartoon...granted...he couldn't see the cartoon so he thought I was making fun of him...but for a while there...he was really pissed. Now, imagine if someone were to track you down over a miscommunication or a misunderstanding over a post made on the Gazette forum. Not the way you want to make the paper. Anonymity is a good thing...at least on here it is.

November 4, 2010 at 3:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

uranidiot

I googeld your "real name" just to make sure it was who I thought it was. I'm so glad to hear you were not hurt when you jumped. If you need help spending that money just let me know.

But here is the really great part. The top item listed under Dan Boscoe Cooper. just moments ago, was Emporia Gazette, Emporia, Kansas......D. Cooper...."I hope that clears a few things up." That is really amazing!

November 4, 2010 at 4:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Dan.......aka uranidiot.

You might want to get a hold of your attorney. The FBI is probably on the way to your house as we speak.....lol :-)

November 4, 2010 at 4:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

DeniseDorcey, in an ideal world, yes, your moral compass would apply. But in many countries people disappear forever if they dare say negative things against the government. Maybe that doesn't happen here, but as many people here have already said, they have seen repercussions. Even if you say something that the vast majority of people will agree is morally correct there are always a few loose wingnuts around. Here I feel pretty safe saying violent drug lords should be put in prison or executed if they have slain many innocent people - and many or most would agree I have said nothing morally wrong or reprehensible but I don't think I'd sign my name to that statement if I lived very close to a certain border these days. And I don't consider that cowardice. I say we all deserve the right to speak anonymously, and we all deserve the right to sign our name if/when we desire. A government that forces us to sign is what I fear most.

November 4, 2010 at 4:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

DeniseDorcey (anonymous) says...

I didn't mention living in another country nor did I mention anything about government control.

What I did say is this is MY moral compass. I guess the rest of you have your own or lack of one.

November 4, 2010 at 4:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Back in the Tyson/Somalian days I had alot of inside info from folks at Tyson as to what was really going on (hint - not what the "official" press said) - but I wasn't about to put my name and henceforth have folks put 2 and 2 together as to who I knew and get people fired. But to stand by and be silent when things that were not correct were happening, and let the public be lied to I think would have been truly the "cowardice" act...... It's one of those "Golden Rule" things I was taught growing up, too. You don't look the other way while your neighbor is getting robbed & raped. And if the only way you can bring attention to it without suffering the same consequence is anonymously, then so be it.

November 4, 2010 at 4:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

DeniseDorcey (anonymous) says...

That's your opinion, not mine.

I believe you say what you say and should be willing to put your name behind it or it's not worth being said, nor is it valid. JMHO

November 4, 2010 at 5 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

So..... nobody in Iran who is against the oppression of their government has a valid complaint you are saying? I'd really like to hear what they should do there, those that are working to bring democracy to their country and get rid of little Hitler II. Or in any other situation I described.

I respect your opinion. I just know that it isn't always as easy and clearcut everywhere else in the world to right wrongs as it is here. And even here it isn't always so cut and dried.

November 4, 2010 at 5:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

Cris, many people in the past had other names when they wrote, SILENCE DOGWOOD was used by one of the greatest men of all times, thankyou for providing this outlet to post.

November 4, 2010 at 5:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

DeniseDorcey (anonymous) says...

I didn't say it was easy, anywhere in the world or at any time! Having a moral compass usually isn't. We all fall short of it often; I know I do. But being willing to stand behind your name in what you say and what you do is a part of my guideline. Helping those in need is also.

Pull out your Bible, if you have one and give it a read. Christ and the disciples certainly put themselves out there and were willing to lose their lives for it.

I'm certainly not comparing myself to a disciple or any saint, but they are certainly a role models to work toward.

Hey, I respect your opinion also. I just don't agree with it.

November 4, 2010 at 5:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

Sosrry Denise, I'm with open_eyes on this. To explain...

Back during the Somalian crisis, I was one of two posters who arranged the big meeting at White Auditorium. Prior to that night, we also arranged a meeting with Bobby Agler and it was attended by some of the public. My real name and picture appeared on the front page at that meeting with Agler. At the big meeting, when I got up to speak, I identified myself with my real name as well as "create."

For putting my name behind my opinion as you call it, I received many hate phone calls, hate mail, and threats too. Of course, not a one was signed with a legitimate name. Was it worth it? Do I have a right to endanger the lives of my grandchildren all over a flipping disagreement of a local situation? Would you?

Valid?

Don't be so naive. When a friend of mine tried to introduce unionization to IBP back during the late 70's, in return he received broken ribs and a concussion from beefer messengers.

Not valid?

That's your opinion, not mine.

November 4, 2010 at 5:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

DeniseDorcey (anonymous) says...

Sail, it was Silence Dogood and yes, Ben Franklin was a great man.

Had I been living at that time though, I would have probably disagreed with the young Ben, too, for hiding behind a pseudonym.

November 4, 2010 at 5:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I, as is often the case, am stuck in the middle on this issue. I used to have some neighbors that loved nothing more than to try to drink all the beer in the world every weekend night. Then they would spend the rest of the night yelling, cursing, fighting each other and anybody else unlucky enough to come by, and pissing in my yard. I learned the hard way however that when you called the police, unless you specifically requested anonymity, the first thing they would do was come to your house to see if you wanted to file a complaint. Anonymity there is good.

In a relatively civil exchange of ideas I usually will only use my name when I feel I must take personal responsibility for what I am saying. That usually occurs when I feel it necessary to call somebody out as an individual for what I perceive to be misconduct. An example was two days ago when I called out a poster for what I believed to be spreading malicious unfounded rumors about a candidate two days before the election (the candidate was a Republican open_eyes :-).

But anonymity should never be allowed to hide the cowardice of such unfounded attacks. The people making them should be banned post haste. JMO

November 4, 2010 at 5:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

DeniseDorcey (anonymous) says...

Yes, Create, it is my opinion. It's also my opinion I'm not naive.

A lot of hate is spread by those who hide in the shadows; you experienced that yourself. How did it feel?

Taking a public position on issues that are meaningful to yourself is a moral obligation. I still say a person should be willing to stand behind their name if they are spreading information; whatever the consequences.

I choose to not live in fear of what MIGHT happen.

November 4, 2010 at 5:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

DeniseDorsey....

A momentary digression. I came to your civil discourse meeting the other night.......waited for half and hour and left when nobody showed up. Was I in the wrong place or is there that little interest in civil discourse? :-)

November 4, 2010 at 6:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

fuggetabodit (anonymous) says...

So, did anyone else notice the rather, uh, slimmed-down version of "Gwen" in the cartoon? Not at all surprised the cartoonist is connected with Chris! I think the cartoon is silly, unprofessional, and unfortunately represents the currently similar unprofessional mindset of the Gazette these days.

November 4, 2010 at 6:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

DeniseDorcey (anonymous) says...

Unfortunately, I was home sick with the crud that is going around (sore throat, body aches, low grade fever, etc). It's contagious as my daughter has it now and it's no fun, so be glad I wasn't there.

I do know the person leading the meeting was at some meeting room in the library at 6 PM and waited for 30 minutes or so for people to show. I know this because I called her to say I was too ill to attend and spoke to her while she was there. I wonder if you guys were in different areas of the library? That is something we need to work on; maybe putting up a sign to direct people...

Whatever the case, we're looking to try again after the first of the year. There is too much stuff going on for most folks between now and the end of the year so we thought it best to hold on this.

I'm happy to hear you are interested. I am shy in not wanting to post my email here but maybe you could contact me via the Gazette if you want more info?

By the way, my DORCEY is spelled with a C (cents sign) not S (dollars sign). We're the poor Dorcey's in town!

November 4, 2010 at 6:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I am not ashamed of what I say...only sometimes of the way I say it. I continue to post under biscuitboy because to change now would be to separate me from all things...good and bad....that biscuitboy has said during my almost two year tenure here. And I don't want to be separated from biscuitboy because overall I feel he is nothing to be ashamed of. But because I don't believe biscuitboy needs to be ashamed of anything except his occasional temper tantrums, I also have no qualms about attaching my name to his on occasion. Truth be known, he probably has more reasons to not want his name attached to mine...:-)

But again this is a standard I apply to myself. I believe it is an individual choice that should be left up to the individual...JMO

Preston Monroe...aka biscuitboy

November 4, 2010 at 6:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

DeniseDorcey (anonymous) says...

Hey, I'm all about choice.

One of my best friends posts on here using a pseudonym and I respect her!

I agree with you that especially when a person is spouting poisonous vitriol they should put their name behind it. I just chose to do it all the time with myself to keep me honest and from saying those kind of things.

Believe me, I wanted to post some nasty stuff Tuesday night and yesterday morning but chose not to because I didn't want to regret it later. I wasn't that important to me. That's just me.

I think, though I haven't been put in that position yet, I would put my name out there even if it was connected to something that could put me in danger. Somebody did make a good point about putting one's family in danger and that is tough, but I think if it's something REALLY important (think MLK and civil rights), then the risks for all is worth. Again, just my opinion and I'm not holding anyone else to my standard but a name behind someone's thought does have meaning to me.

Besides, I like it that you use your puppy dog's name, Preston. I had been wondering what it meant. I thought it was something connected with WWI!!!

November 4, 2010 at 6:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

fuggetabodit

Am fascinated by your user name...it is such a New York--New Jersey expression. Did you used to live there maybe?

November 4, 2010 at 6:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Denise

WW1....no I am not quite that old. Early Nam era but I never served in country....lol :-)

November 4, 2010 at 6:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

DeniseDorcey (anonymous) says...

Biscuitboy,

Actually, I thought you were possibly a history prof. with a particular interest in that era. I was making a connection to doughboy and biscuitboy. I've got two history buffs in the house, what can I say!

It's been nice chatting but I should get on with the dirty laundry I've been trying to ignore. No time to clean this weekend. Fall Festival!!!!!

November 4, 2010 at 6:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

I totally agree with many points - especially someone attacking someone or something personally needs to not do so behind the curtain of anonimity.

However, I would not put friends or family members jobs in danger just to put my name behind everything. Many things were told me on the condition of anonymity, they wanted things to be known but did not want to lose their job in the process, and MY sense of moral upbringing told me to respect that, as people would probably be able to connect dots.

And I HAVE read the Bible......and I also know the disciples in those days also had "safe houses" where they could meet, and spread the word "under the radar" of hostile governments. My church does quite a bit of mission work in China and it is much the same there. They meet in secret, take different paths in case they are followed, etc. If they are caught, they do not deny it, but they don't openly make themselves easy targets, or the entire org would die and fail.. There's a time to be a martyr...... and a time to live to fight another day.

November 4, 2010 at 7:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

Sorry you missed the meeting, Denise. I had been there since before 6, but it was in the little meeting room of the Civic Auditorium, not the library. Again, sorry.

Not interested in going to meetings again, not after all the hate mail. If I was alone and not connected to family, maybe I'd think differently. But I don't have the right to jeopardize my kids or grandkids, especially now that I have teen grandchildren driving. No telling who would follow them away from my house some night just to get back at me.

November 4, 2010 at 7:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

I agree create. I truly DO wish, like Denise says, that we could all be open and sign our name to everything. In an ideal world, yes, it would be the principle to live by. But we live in far from an ideal world, and I will not jeopardize others. I may place my own principles ahead of my own safety, but I have no right to place mine above the safety, well-being, or job security, of others. Because to do that, in my opinion, would be to have, in reality, no principles at all......

November 4, 2010 at 8:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

I have taken a pretty bold stand against a particular injustice and there would certainly be consequence for doing so if I were to sign my name to my posts. I have a family and some stuff to think about. It isn't a question of if but a question of when and how often I would be burgled.

November 4, 2010 at 8:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

REWBA (anonymous) says...

I am in awe of this love hate relationship that the Emporia Gazette seems to have with it's online community.

Advertisers want to be assured of product exposure. The number of subscribers a paper has helps to assure a prospective advertiser that their product or message will be seen. How about an online news outlet? How do they convince advertisers to pay for a spot online? The number of hits a sight gets used to help but because a computer can be programed to "hit" your sight repeatedly giving your sight a false popularity, advertisers want to see the number of people who are signed up to your sight and the number of posts your sight averages. A sight with a high number of posters is attractive to advertisers because it assures them that their message will be seen.

The anonymous bloggers work hard at making the EG attractive to advertisers and the EG depicts us as protesting clowns.

BTW biscuitboy, I'm jealous!

November 4, 2010 at 8:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

DeniseDorcey (anonymous) says...

Create,

You're thinking of a different meeting. I'm not sure what.

The meeting about civil discourse was to meet at the library last week but unfortunately, no one but the person leading the meeting showed up at the correct place.

Regarding all the other stuff, well, you have your opinion and I have mine. Let's leave it at that.

I do find it interesting that you and open eyes seem to tag team against me every time I post, which isn't often. Have I ticked you guys off in real life and you know who I am but I don't know who you are?

Denise Dorcey

November 4, 2010 at 10:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

I can't speak for create but I think you have a touch of paranoia there, Denise. The fact that you think I am against you on nearly every post might be because we often disagree because we have quite different beliefs or ideologies. There are quite a few people on here who regularly find themselves on opposite sides of the fence. If you haven't noticed..... create & I often disagree as well, biscuitboy included in those I often "butt heads" with. I don't know you from Adam (as I've stated on here before, I don't even LIVE in Emporia anymore but grew up here and am back to visit family/friends often) but your post suggests a perfect reason to remain anonymous. You disagree with someone often, because you may have polar opposite ideologies on many things, (duh - what would a person expect?) but we do it in an open forum & as I, biscuitboy, create, REWBA to name a few & others have often found, after sharing/contrasting/arguing alot of facts & ideas we often end up close to the same place. And whether we arrive at some closer junction or not, personally, I feel I am the better informed and knowledgable for it, and even those who just follow without joining the discussion included, which is often why I am here. And we do it without getting paranoid. Which are the ones I worry about the most. Not those who may get their feathers ruffled from time to time on a blog, but those view it as something personal. You have pretty much just validated my point.

November 5, 2010 at 12:06 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

koalemos (anonymous) says...

Denise Dorcey

I don't have a clue who you are. If we have met before it wasn't memorable enough to recall. I have read your postings on this story and have to say that your words sounded quite self centered and mean. You called 99.9% of the bloggers on these strings "cowards" with a click of your mouse. What did you write about spouting poisonous vitriol? Yes, you did post your real name but even if you are who you say you are, what stops you from logging out and logging back in under an assumed name so you can spout "poisonous vitriol" only to log back in as DeniseDorcey (anonymous) and post scornful words to the evil troll so that the society you respect will read your words and see that you love high horses too?

Every user name you see on these strings have created an account just like you did. The Emporia Gazette has our email addresses and our URL is branded on every post we submit. Our comments are saved and stored in at least four electronic devises as it is routed across the globe to the servers at the Emporia Gazette. Logging in as an anonymous user won't keep authorized people from finding us. It just keeps snoopy weird stalker type strangers away. I guess that anyone in the world could use a search engine to try to discover who koalemos is but all they will find are some stories about some ancient god of foolishness and some links to the Emporia Gazette stories that koalemos has posted comments on. I'm not a coward though. I have a shiny medal to prove it. I will even post my email if you really want to send some hate mail. It's biscuitboyinemporia@live.com

November 5, 2010 at 1:05 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

Contrary to what you may believe, Denise, I don't know who you are. Even if I did, we would still likely disagree because I battle ideas not people. That is the value of anonymity. Your identity, what you do or who you know matters not to me.

If you have been reading this forum for long, you should know that open_eyes and I often disagree, sometimes quite vehemently. Not once, in all our discourse, has he ever asked for my identity nor accused me of cowardice for not having stated my name. I respect him for that.

What good would come from your knowing who I am? Would you look me up in the phone book? Drive by my house? Check tax records? Employment? Voter registration? Ask others about me? All for what? Just to be snoopy?

Gwen knows who I am and that's all that counts. And even though she knows who I am, she still deletes my comments once in awhile. She is deleting my ideas, not my identity. That is the height of integrity.

November 5, 2010 at 4:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Thank you very much koalemos for your kind suggestions ROFLMAO.

I agree that create, open_eyes, methusla, seriouslyfolks (who knows where I live) tbluma, neighbor, genxer, and many more and I have had heated exchanges. But I have never felt a moment of threat from any of them and have come to respect, and in some cases even like, what I believe them to be. Since clues to my identity are not hard to come by, I have been approached on the street by several people asking if I might not be biscuitboy. My initial response is--"Who wants to know" followed be a laugh and a pleasant conversation.

That is again not to say I don't recognize the potential for danger and I respect the view of others to protect their anonymity.

But for me, I live alone, I am retired so I have no business relationships to be concerned about, and the shame I feel is for mistakes made in my life....not for the opinions I express here.

And now to more spirited debate.

November 5, 2010 at 5:27 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

koalemos

You are good at that....does that actually work....more importantly can I use it.

November 5, 2010 at 5:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

DeniseDorcey (anonymous) says...

A couple of you accused me of not being who I am or logging in under another name. I don't roll that way, My name is Denise Dorcey and I live in Emporia. No, I'm not in the phone book as we use only cell phones to save money.

A couple of you also suggested I'm paranoid because I asked whether your often disagreements with my occasional posts stem from real life experience. I'm just attempting to discover the negatives I may be putting out in the world. Why would you find that so troublesome?

Another said my suggesting people who hide behind anonymous names to spout poisonous vitriol are cowards. Maybe my suggesting that is negative and too harsh a term, but my name is behind it. Where's all of yours when you were trying to tear me down?

That's all I'm saying. If you're willing to say it ANYWHERE you should be willing to put your name behind it.

I don't regret my putting my name out there on this thread. I don't feel angry or down with any of you or myself for the conversations here. I just stated (and restated my opinion here). I have stated the same opinion publicly with Steve Corbin and others here in Emporia.

It's my opinion, that's all! I truly do hope you all have a nice day. I plan to!

November 5, 2010 at 7:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

I CAN SEE BOTH SIDES CLEARLY, NOW.

As an old business owner I know what you say and do can influence your livelihood. I have just gotten to the point in life that it doesn't mean that much to me if I say something on here to upset the occasional person.

However I do have a few employees to think about who could suffer from loss of business and the corresponding tip income it provides to them, so I can see the positive side of posting anonymously, and I have tried to temper my comments recently. (really I have)

On the other hand when some anonymous nimrod jumps on here and posts unfounded rumors and innuendo it IS the height of cowardice.

In a small town like Emporia everyone knows everyone and some think they know everything about everyone else's lives." We heard it in the coffee shop, so it's a fact."

Compared to most other blog rolls, the comments on this sight are pretty tame.

State your comments and thoughts on here, with or without your names.

BUT BEFORE YOU HIT THE "POST COMMENT" BUTTON, please pause a moment and think to yourself,

"Am I posting this to add to the debate or to be hurtful and hateful?"

There are way too many glass houses in our town, for all the rocks being tossed around. JMO

November 5, 2010 at 8:10 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Excellent Steve....Excellent

I have written a number of post that I had the good sense to hit the delete button before I did the post comment one. Sadly....I have also made a number of post that I wished later I could take back. Over time, I have tried to become more sensitive about what I am saying but I still have spectacular failures.

Our little forum here is mild compared to most...and I am glad. But the one thing I have no tolerance for is the kind of thing that was done by two specific poster about one candidate for office recently. They both should have had their privileges pulled. I would love to name them by name, and I know the real name of one, but I will not do so. You know the ones I am talking about Steve. For those of you who don't know it is because their comments were so far out of line that the entire thread was pulled almost immediately by the Gazette.

November 5, 2010 at 8:25 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

True biscuitboy,

i have slipped up in the past and posted some pretty nasty things but I am trying to watch it now. And who knows I may slip up in the future, we are human after all.

November 5, 2010 at 8:36 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

If you look it up, Paranoia is defined as typically including persecutory beliefs concerning a perceived threat towards oneself; delusions and the projection of personal conflicts, which are ascribed to the supposed hostility of others.

I have had people disagree with me much more vehemently than what I've seen disagreeing with you on here, Denise - and not once has it crossed my mind that they were trying to "tear me down", or that it was personal in any way. THAT is what is meant by paranoia. The definition fits.

I, too, try to watch what I post more closely than I did when I first started here. And I don't even know who some of the people are here who have been "outed" - as I've never been to those mtngs. Nor do I care. As create & biscuitboy said, it is about IDEAS, not the person. And, like Steve, I don't live in a bubble world, where my actions & sayings would only affect me. As you referred to it, my "moral compass" tells me that THEY matter too...... not just ME.

November 5, 2010 at 8:52 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

uranidiot (anonymous) says...

biscuitboy

I would love to print the name that is on my birth certificate but I have a feeling that some of the things I post would rub people I work with the wrong way. Also public opinion can lose a job like mine pretty fast. So to keep the fridge full and the lights on I hide my name.

November 5, 2010 at 8:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

uranidiot

I hope you didn't have any visits from the FBI yesterday. I couldn't believe how quickly your comment...made in jest.....ended up listed on google referenced to a man that hijacked an airplane and baled out over Oregon decades ago......:-) That in itself should be a clue to some people that you can't take everything you find on the Internet as factual and true.

I have no problem with people remaining anonymous. My problem yesterday, addressed to two specific posters was a misunderstanding and over-reaction on my part to something that I didn't understand..

November 5, 2010 at 9:12 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

My moral compass is that I should be against burglary, I do consider it cowardice.

It's kind of one of those Golden Rule things that some of us were taught and retained while growing up.

$eriously R. Folk$

November 5, 2010 at 9:20 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

I too am jealous of biscuitboy that he's the only one that got named in the cartoon......!

Wait! A couple of the caricatures have their eyes_open! Could that be a sly reference to me? LOL :-)

I assumed it was just a Halloween theme......

November 5, 2010 at 9:27 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Captain_Cheddar (anonymous) says...

I have two different monicers, one is this, the other is the one that I have already been "outed" by Gazette staff. So I just moved to a new name, and continued to riff.
I think that nome de plum's are wonderful, I never would have been a published author if not for them. As for cowardice, it's not cowardice, it's fun, clean fun. Alot of the people here are public figures and if they "came out" they could face ramifications at work, church or just out in the community. I applaud my fellow posters on their wonderful work in being entertaining and insightful, frankly I don't care who any of them are, I'm just glad they are here.

Captain Cheddar

"Captain Cheddar leader of intergalactic dairy alliance. Fighting bad Guda and curd galaxy wide he defends the defenseless. Cheddar...Cheese he's good."

November 5, 2010 at 10:47 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

I also stand against burglary !

November 5, 2010 at 11:04 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

koalemos (anonymous) says...

Ha Ha Ha. Yes biscuitboy, (and anyone else you wants to help fill it up) it is a real email account. REWBA will stop by sometime and give you the password to it.

DeniseDorcey, I never had a golden rule. My family was poor so all I ever got was a green switch off a mulberry tree and the only thing my mother ever taught me was not to $#!+ on myself. My coworkers taught me to pass the blame and my supervisors taught me to take credit for other peoples accomplishments. My neighbors taught me to borrow without shame and society taught me to never make eye contact. As a result, my moral compass just spins around in circles so I had to steal a compass from the Army to get back on track. Well, I didn't actually steal it, I just borrowed it a couple decades ago and haven't returned it yet.

November 5, 2010 at 11:08 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

koalemos....lmao.....and so true about coworkers, supervisors, neighbors and society. I would of course want to add wives who taught me when the going gets rough...pack up and move out. Oh well.....

November 5, 2010 at 11:23 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

ROFLMAO you two. Absolutely my best laugh in many days. When I broke out laughing a minute ago, Thomas Justagato, napping quietly at my feet, jumped up, scrambled across the room, slipped on a throw rug and went tumbling into the next room. He is now staring angrily at me from a safe distance.

Pack up and move out....LOL biscuit. I used to have a boyfriend like that. 3 times he did that until I learned the rule -- get out and STAY OUT!

November 5, 2010 at 11:59 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Oh......poor Thomas!!!!

Good rule about staying out. My life got so much simpler when Mother Nature took care of the strong human motivator that causes members of the opposite sex to want to share sleeping quarters. Past my prime and the living is easy. :-)

Hey guys for a discussion of another aspect of the forum you might take a look at the odds and ends thread.

November 5, 2010 at 12:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Burglary bad.......Baseball good!

November 5, 2010 at 12:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

LOL you guys.... :)

Little has anyone on here suspected that my moniker actually stands for

Old Persnickety Egotistical Nerd _(that)_ Everyone Yearns to Exile Soon

:-)

November 5, 2010 at 12:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

Oh, man ! Lets not start discussing " Burglary " again, most of you already know what my experience is with the " Burglary " subject and how I feel about " Burglary " ! Especially, the kind of " Burglary " that happened to me !!!!

November 5, 2010 at 12:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

b3bill (anonymous) says...

I guess The Gazette believes it is acceptable to post something without an employee's real name on it. Who at The Gazette is the author of this one line article?

November 5, 2010 at 12:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

I have a moral compass but it must be broke. It often leads my feet where they don't want to go(usually into my mouth). This being the case I have to daily rely on grace.

November 5, 2010 at 12:43 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

uranidiot (anonymous) says...

I had a moral once, tasted a little like chicken.

November 5, 2010 at 12:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

AverageCitizen2 (anonymous) says...

The Woman Marine Pilot

The teacher gave her fifth grade class an assignment: Get their parents to tell them a story with a
moral at the end of it.

The next day, the kids came back and, one by one, began to tell their stories.

There were all the regular types of stuff: spilled milk and pennies saved. But then the teacher
realized, much to her dismay, that only Janie was left.

“Janie, do you have a story to share?' '

'Yes ma'am My daddy told me a story about my Mommy. She was a Marine pilot in Desert Storm, and her plane got hit. She had to bail out over enemy territory, and all
she had was a flask of whiskey, a pistol, and a survival knife.
She drank the whiskey on the way down so the bottle wouldn't
break, and then her parachute landed her right in the middle of 20 Iraqi troops. She shot 15 of them with the pistol, until she ran out of
bullets, killed four more with the knife, till the blade broke, and then she killed the last Iraqi with her bare hands."

''Good Heavens," said the horrified teacher. "What did your Daddy tell you was the moral to this horrible story?"

"Stay the Hell away from Mommy when she's been drinking."

November 5, 2010 at 1:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

doubt_it (anonymous) says...

LOL !!! that is one heck of a moral. I had scruples once, too, but with the right medication, they went away.

November 5, 2010 at 1:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

MisterO (anonymous) says...

The oh-so-judgmental Ms Dorcey says, "My moral compass is that I should not say things, especially negative things, unless I am willing to but my name behind it. I do consider it cowardice."

I'm trying not to be as insulting and pompous as the above named poster, but pray tell Miss Moral Compass....Does your unwavering moral compass apply to children too? We (even in school) tell our children never to reveal personally identifying information over the internet for SAFETY reasons.

How does your moral compass apply to that? Will you say, 'Of course children shouldn't use their real names'? But then maybe YOUR moral compass is broken. Are your morals selective? Do they only apply to adults? I thought we are supposed to tech our children morals. No?

I think you are just trying to stir up trouble. Like so many others who love to look down their noses at people and loudly proclaim your "moral superiority" to those who dare to think differently than you, I think you are a fraud.

November 5, 2010 at 1:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Man I guess....sounds like a wise moral to me....LOL

November 5, 2010 at 1:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

My last post was in reference to AverageCitizen 2's post.....not the one that came right before mine. Just didn't want any misunderstandings.

November 5, 2010 at 1:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

scarlett01_98 (anonymous) says...

thank you all for the good chuckle. it felt good! i'm not a coward, however i will remain behind the curtain, for now. ; )

November 5, 2010 at 1:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

It seems, from the cartoon, that the posters are (perceived) to be against a perceived agenda by the "fair and non-partisan" reporting of the news? I did notice the drawing did not include the statue/shrine to Keith Olbermann that I more than once jokingly referred to as the deity a certain ex-Gazette writer worshipped. But maybe its been removed now that Keith has been suspended indefinitely without pay by NBC for making donations to 3 democrats in violation of NBC's ethics policy:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_16...

Or maybe we sometimes get the feeling the types of conversations that took place at a CBS affiliate in Alaska can be overheard at other "news" outlets?

http://keyboardmilitia.com/2010/10/31...

I apologize for the right-wing slant of the above article, but gee......... it seems you just can't find any left-wing outlets carrying the story.............. no surprise......

But they got fired.......

http://www.mediaite.com/online/alaska...

Free speech. It's not just for you & those you agree with. :-)

November 5, 2010 at 2:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

A further clarification per claims made in the Olbermann article:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/08/18/...

November 5, 2010 at 2:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

As soon as I saw that Olbermann article, open_eyes, I thought of you. Immediately. True. I remember how you and I had wrangled about him vs. O'Reilly once. I don't know what the moral is there, but at least I thought of you. Notice I didn't say you were right, just that I thought of you.

Good post, Mr. O.

November 5, 2010 at 2:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

LOL, create, I thought you would :-)

Nobody's really "right" in a case like this, I just thought of it remembering (as I said) how I used to jest about the shrine in the Gazette office. Ah well, that particular writer is no longer there, so maybe I should let it rest. The only moral of that story I see is that if/when you sign on the dotted line for a company & agree to abide by certain rules, you should do that - or face the consequences.

Agreed, good post, Mr. O.

November 5, 2010 at 3:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

uranidiot (anonymous) says...

I wonder how much money switches hands at Fox, CBS, and ABC. Money from Lobbies, Parties, and individual politicks to make sure that there agenda's are seen in a fair light.

November 5, 2010 at 3:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Probably more than we will ever know..... As was noted in the later article, for the last 7 years the donations to each side from Fox's parent corp were reasonably close, and the PAC at Newscorp actually donated more to Dems this year than Repubs. It's all about who's favors can we buy this year, this election.

November 5, 2010 at 3:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

uranidiot.....You can bet that none of them are without sin.

I'm not defending Olbermann's violation of his contract agreement, but on an ethical level I see little difference between him donating to Democrats and Rupert Murdock donating to Republicans. Granted Olbermann is an on-air personality for a news organization....but Murdock owns one. And Murdock reportedly gave over a million bucks.

November 5, 2010 at 3:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Well, I'm not defending Murdoch either, but, JMO, I tend to agree with, as they said, "There is a strict wall between business and editorial and the corporate office does not consult with our newsgathering organizations". I mean, Fox has programs that regularly take potshots at conservatives (Family Guy, Glee, etc....) and even at Fox News itself. These days large corporations have so many arms and branches if you want to ban any business from political action that has any ties with any news outlet of any kind, you're pretty much going to have to ban them all (not saying I'm for or against that). But in a "news" or media outlet itself, and its reporters or commentators..... well, I can honestly see both sides of the story. Like I said, it comes down to, obviously he knew the rule when he signed on the dotted line..... and willfully broke it.

November 5, 2010 at 3:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Looks like their all doing it anyway - why was Olbermann singled out? Also appears all Murdoch did was level the playing field.....

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opi...

Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters

"Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democratic candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.

The Democratic total of $1,020,816 was given by 1,160 employees of the three major broadcast television networks, with an average contribution of $880.

By contrast, only 193 of the employees contributed to Republican candidates and campaign committees, for a total of $142,863. The average Republican contribution was $744.

Disclosure of the heavily Democratic contributions by influential employees of the three major broadcast networks follows on the heels of controversy last week when it was learned that media baron Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. contributed $1 million to the Republican Governors Association....."

November 5, 2010 at 3:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

The total donation made by the PAC at Newscorp to Democrats this year was less than a tenth of the million dollar donation made by Newscorp (Murdock) to the Republicans. So Newscorps apparently believes a lot more favors can be bought from the Republicans this year than from the Democrats.

November 5, 2010 at 3:43 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

uranidiot (anonymous) says...

PROPAGANDA
What lies behind us and lies before us are small matters compared to what lies right to our faces.
- Poster on www.despair.com

November 5, 2010 at 3:45 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

More.... from msnbc itself....

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19113485/

MSNBC.com identified 143 journalists who made political contributions from 2004 through the start of the 2008 campaign, according to the public records of the Federal Election Commission. Most of the newsroom checkbooks leaned to the left: 125 journalists gave to Democrats and liberal causes. Only 16 gave to Republicans. Two gave to both parties......

Traditionally, many news organizations have applied the rules to only political reporters and editors. The ethic was summed up by Abe Rosenthal, the former New York Times editor, who is reported to have said, "I don't care if you sleep with elephants as long as you don't cover the circus."

But with polls showing the public losing faith in the ability of journalists to give the news straight up, some major newspapers and TV networks are clamping down. They now prohibit all political activity — aside from voting — no matter whether the journalist covers baseball or proofreads the obituaries. The Times in 2003 banned all donations, with editors scouring the FEC records regularly to watch for in-house donors. In 2005, The Chicago Tribune made its policy absolute. CBS did the same last fall.......

What changed? First came the conservative outcry labeling the mainstream media as carrying a liberal bias. The growth of talk radio and cable slugfests gave voice to that claim. The Iraq war fueled distrust of the press from both sides. Finally, it became easier for the blogging public to look up the donors.

As the policy at the Times puts it: "Given the ease of Internet access to public records of campaign contributors, any political giving by a Times staff member would carry a great risk of feeding a false impression that the paper is taking sides."

But news organizations don't agree on where to draw the ethical line.

Giving to candidates is allowed at Fox, Forbes, Time, The New Yorker, Reuters — and at Bloomberg News, whose editor in chief, Matthew Winkler, set the tone by giving to Al Gore in 2000. Bloomberg has nine campaign donors on the list; they're allowed to donate unless they cover politics directly.

Donations and other political activity are strictly forbidden at The Washington Post, ABC, CBS, CNN and NPR.

Politicking is discouraged, but there is some wiggle room, at Dow Jones, Newsweek and U.S. News & World Report.

NBC, MSNBC and MSNBC.com say they don't discourage or encourage campaign contributions, but they require employees to report any potential conflicts of interest in advance and receive permission of the senior editor. (MSNBC.com is a joint venture of NBC Universal and Microsoft; its employees are required to adhere to NBC News policies regarding political contributions.)...

The pattern of donations, with nearly nine out of 10 giving to Democratic candidates and causes, appears to confirm a leftward tilt in newsrooms — at least among the donors....

November 5, 2010 at 3:47 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

But the million dollar plus figure from 2008 was from PAC's averaging less than 900-dollars per contributior and spread over three organiazations. Murdock must think there is a lot for sale this year from the Repubs. to ante up one million dollars from FOX (Newscorp) alone.

November 5, 2010 at 3:48 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

uranidiot (anonymous) says...

If you read the article on the Huffingtonpost it says that he was suspended for not getting permission to give contributions. If I'm reading between the lines correctly, it looks to me, this was a kind of warning that they want you to only donate to those that will benefit the news station the most.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11...

November 5, 2010 at 3:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

True, biscuitboy, obviously THIS year, Murdoch believes more favors can be bought from the GOP. In the past, NewsCorp has been more even.

And, obviously, the over $1 million given to Democrats by the other news orgs, means they think more favors can be bought from the Dems.....

November 5, 2010 at 3:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

So lets look at the parent companies of ALL of them.....

General Electric, which owns NBC, has also made substantial political contributions in the 2010 election cycle. For example, GE donated $688,900 to Democrats through its PAC this election cycle compared to $410,100 to Republicans. The company has also given $75,500 to Democratic-affiliated leadership PACs and $74,500 to Republican-affiliated leadership PACs.

Meanwhile, GE has donated $237,000 to the Democratic Governors Association and $205,000 to the Republican Governors Association.

The PAC of Time Warner, the parent company of CNN has given $70,500 to Democratic candidates in the 2010 election cycle compared with $41,500 to Republicans. Time Warner also donated $5,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

The political action committee for Viacom, the parent company of CBS, has contributed $108,700 to Democratic candidates this election cycle and $64,000 to Republicans, according to CQ Moneyline. The PAC has also contributed $22,000 to Democratic-affiliated leadership PACs and $21,500 Republican-affiliated leadership PACs. Viacom also donated $4,000 to the Pennsylvania Democratic Party last April.

And Disney, the parent company of ABC, has given $110,500 to Democratic candidates and $95,000 to Republicans through its PAC. It has also donated $16,000 to Democratic-affiliated leadership PACs and $20,000 to Republican-affiliated committees. Disney has also given $11,000 to Democratic Party PACs and $20,000 to Republican Party PACs.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/...

November 5, 2010 at 3:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

It will be interesting to see what, if anything, Rachel Maddow has to say about Olbermann. Wolf Blitzer just gave it about 25 seconds. He's spending a lot of time on the Pelosi issue.

November 5, 2010 at 4:02 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Yes open_eyes it is obvious the spin machine has been working over time digging up all of these facts and figures about Democratic contributions from news organizations and their parent companies since Murdock's record breaking contribution. But of all the figures you quoted above no individual line item surpassed 25 percent of the Newscorp (Fox) contribution.....except for General Electric which has holdings and interests far surpassing its ownership of NBC. Therefore all of its 600-thousand dollar plus donation can not really be earmarked as from NBC.

November 5, 2010 at 4:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Sorry.... didn't mean to hijack the thread. (Sortof - it sortof does apply to media bias & what the cartoon signs are saying).

Uhm....where were we? Oh yeah - we had a Golden Rule at my house growing up. It was used only when I really deserved it. Which looking back now I can say was less than I really did deserve......"Spare the Golden Rule, spoil the child"......... ;-)

November 5, 2010 at 4:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

booker5m (anonymous) says...

Its going to get way more nasty before its over LOL

November 5, 2010 at 4:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

The Democratic total of $1,020,816 in 2008 - 88% of the contributions - I would say is pretty much in the neighborhood of what Murdoch gave this year. Also, the difference given to the 2 sides above in the recent article favors the Dems by roughly 1/2 million. Again.... it appears to me all he did was level the playing field somewhat...... (And just like GE, NewsCorp also has holdings far surpassing just Fox).....

November 5, 2010 at 4:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Another area of great interest for GE and probably of more importance to it than buying influence for or from NBC is alternative energy development. As an example, GE makes virtually all of the diesel-electric locomotives pulling the nation's trains and is highly embedded in other traditional energy applications Since the push for so-called green energy is coming more fro the left than the right it would make since that this is driving much of General Electrics contribution and that has nothing to do with NBC News.

November 5, 2010 at 4:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

I've echoe'd the same sentiment many times - GE is positioned to make a killing if cap & trade passes. They don't really care about the environment - just the $$. But they need a mouthpiece to help push the agenda.

November 5, 2010 at 4:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

booker5m

Yes......before it is over, this election cycle will look like a Sunday School picnic. What is just now starting is a war for the hearts and minds of this country....and before it is over I really fear blood will flow. I only hope I am dead before that happens.

November 5, 2010 at 4:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Every time I think it just can't get any uglier....... it does :(. I think the election ads this year hit all-time lows......

November 5, 2010 at 4:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

You are tight about Newscorps having other holding but I believe most if not all of them are news organizations up to and including the Wall Street Journal. I am not certain of this, but I believe NBC is the only significant news holding in GE's portfolio

November 5, 2010 at 4:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I agree on the elections ads.......we soared to new depths this time... :-(

November 5, 2010 at 4:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

True - many if not most of them are new orgs.

GE owns more than you think in media though:

GE owns CNBC, MSNBC, Bravo, Mun2TV, Sci-Fi channel, Trio, and USA network.
Also Universal Pictures, Universal Studios, and 1/3 interest in Paxson Communications.

NewsCorp also has quite a bit of sports ownership: Los Angeles Dodgers, National Rugby League, (partial owners) of New York Rangers and New York Knicks, Los Angeles Kings and Los Angeles Lakers.

Full listing of who owns what in media is here:

http://www.thinkandask.com/news/media...

November 5, 2010 at 4:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

The think I liked about the most disgusting ads this time, though, was that in many cases, it worked against those putting out the ad. Think they learned anything? Doubt it..... :(

November 5, 2010 at 4:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

I really don't think blood will flow this next election anymore than it has any other (and there have been scuffles at various points in history), including this one. JMO. Just like I didn't see the predicted rioting after Obama won, either. Instead, I saw approval ratings in the 70's. Gosh, has it been 2 years already?

November 5, 2010 at 5:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I stand corrected on the extent of GE's media holdings....Sorry about that.

No, I don't think it (the blood) will happen that quickly either. What I do think is that we are heading in that direction.and if we can't move the country away from this ideological split...and back towards a country that tries to include everybody in its ideology......it is inevitable that it will happen sometime in the future.

The vast majority of the people in this country are moderates but you wouldn't know that listening to the ideological posturing that passes for political dialogue these days. Despite rhetoric heard from the winners of each election cycle about having the mandate of the American people....most Americans don't like the far right or left any better than the other. You can see that right here on this forum where most posters are moderate left or right with few on the extreme ends. The American people have been split almost fifty-fifty on abortion for years...and are split about 50-50 on HCR right now. But you would never know that by listening to either of the political machines.

That is why the fickle finger of fate switches back and forth so quickly for the parties. Two years ago, it was all the Democrats. This year it is all the Republicans (and their Tea Party brethren). Unless both parties start listening more to that middle......in two to four years it will flop back again. And eventually the distrust and hatred on both sides will have grown to the point that the blood will flow. Just call that ole biscuitboys prophecy.

November 5, 2010 at 5:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

"The exit polls found that 47 percent of voters said Congress should leave the law [health care reform] as it is or expand it, and that 48 percent said Congress should repeal it. Not exactly a ringing mandate for repeal.

Voters were also divided on questions of taxing and spending. When people were asked what the highest priority of the next Congress should be, 37 percent said “spending to create jobs,” which was only slightly behind the 39 percent who said “reducing the budget deficit.” And only four in 10 voters said they wanted Congress to extend the Bush-era tax cuts for everyone, including families who earn more than a quarter of a million dollars a year, as the Republicans want to do."

This information came from a New York Times article parsing the mid-term election and if it really was a sweeping mandate for conservatives.

November 5, 2010 at 6:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

There's an excellent example of how slight changes in wording can spin the meaning of things alot. Of the 47 percent that you say want to leave it as is or expand it - 16% of voters want to leave HCR as is. Of the remaining 31%, it seems half the articles I see say that segment want it expanded, while half claim they want to see it changed in some way."

"Changed in some way" - which does not necessarily mean expanded. In other words, like me. I, like most people know we MUST do something about rising health care costs. I think the current bill went too far in many directions and not enough or at all in others. So I would be in that 31% - but certainly not to"expand it". But to make some major changes & rollbacks.

Oh, but only if they actually read it first this time before they pass any changes ;-)

As for bloodshed, I really don't foresee it. There have always been and always will be some fringe wingnuts out there - we've had 2 presidents shot in the last half-century - 1 Democrat, 1 Republican. But I don't see widespread bloodshed breaking out. The country would have to be pushed far, far beyond most people's limits in 1 direction or another for that to happen. And look at the reaction after just 2 years of the attempt. Elections every 2 years I can't see Middle Americans (ideologically) letting it happen. I just don't see it happening barring bizarre unforeseen circumstances. JMO (and hope).

And for the record....as I've often stated, I'm for keeping the Bush tax cuts - except at the very top end. And I mean the VERY top end, not businesses in the sub-$million range or so.....

November 5, 2010 at 11:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Looks like closer examination of the exit polls say about 10% want it narrowed in scope but not repealed entirely. 48+47=95, so I'm guessing 5% had no opinion, so most likely that 10% came out of the 31% wanting it "changed". At the very least 5% if you do the math. So only 16% want it left as is, and only between 21 & 26% want it expanded.

November 5, 2010 at 11:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

REWBA (anonymous) says...

OK now, back to a subject I want to talk about! Responsible bat ownership.

People own bats for several reasons-for hunting, for target practice or other sports, and/or for self defense. But no matter why you own a bat, bat ownership is a serious and full-time responsibility. The decision to own a bat should be made carefully and with an understanding of how the decision could affect your own well-being and that of your family and community. Should you decide to become a bat owner, protect yourself and those you love.

Baseball bats kill and maim more people each year than sharks. Meanwhile, here in the United States, irresponsible Bat manufacturers are still promoting new lines of "Assault" Bats "intended to hit a baseball faster and harder than the traditional wooden bat" with full knowledge of their propensity to cause serious injury or death. We Must Stop Bat Violence! Responsible bat ownership means learning and practicing behaviors that will help prevent needless injury, death and theft.

As many as half of bat deaths and injuries and much bat theft can be prevented by practicing safe bat ownership and storage. A bat safe or lock box provides the additional advantage of keeping bats out of sight. To be effective they must be made of sturdy, hard to penetrate materials such as heavy gauge steal and have a strong locking mechanism.

The following are some tips to safe bat stewardship:
Record the serial number of your bat.
Check with your local police department to learn the laws about carrying or transporting bats outside of your home.
Take a bat safety course and learn how to use and care for your bat. Through a good safety course you will learn the parts of the bat, the safety features, how to safely care for a bat, and how to safely handle, aim and swing a bat.
Practice safe bat storage.
Do not allow children or teens to handle or use a bat without parental or professional supervision.
Know your bat's standard safety features and use them!
Always handle your bat as if it were lethal.
Uncase your bat only when you are ready to swing it.
Clean and inspect the bat regularly and carefully.
Check your bat twice before you clean it to be sure it is locked.
When cleaning your bat, never leave the area. It should be in your view at all times.
Do not try to fix a bat yourself if it breaks.
Dispose of balls properly. Contact your local police for assistance in disposing of balls - DO NOT THROW THEM in the trash.
Never show off with your bat or talk about it at a party.

Additional bat safety tips are available at: americansforbatsafety@safebatting.com Thank you and be safe batting.

November 6, 2010 at 12:32 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

REWBA (anonymous) says...

If you enjoyed the previous post, have differing opinions or just want to argue, go back to the top of this page and click on one of the advertisement links before responding. Thank you for your support!

November 6, 2010 at 12:56 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

But open_eyes....wanting it narrowed in scope still does not mean they want it repealed....so spin it as you will......you still only have less than half of the voters.....48 percent......wanting it repealed. So after all the mental gymnastics and number crunching we still remain with less than half the people polled wanting it repealed.

November 6, 2010 at 12:57 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

REWBA

I am shocked. I had no idea that bats caused so much death and misery each year. Especially not hear in the USA.....some third world backwater maybe....but here.?

I thought all they did was hang around upside down in caves all day and eat insects at night. And they are so tiny to be causing all this trouble....Go figure!!!! :-)

November 6, 2010 at 1:04 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

REWBA (anonymous) says...

Hey biscuitboy! I figured you would be asleep at this late hour.

I like the idea that on 1 January 2011, My three sons will be covered under the family health insurance policy that I've paid family premiums on for the past twenty some years. It will give me a little peace of mind for a couple more years. I'm sure my insurance company doesn't like it since they spent hundreds of millions of dollars fighting it in the first place. I do believe HCR could use some changes though. I would like to see a single payer system available to all Americans.

November 6, 2010 at 1:11 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

open_eyes

I certainly hope you are right about the bloodshed....and of all the things good and bad that I have been known for prophecy was not one of them. Pretty much throughout our history the country has swung back and forth between moving left and moving right like a pendulum. What has changed is the speed with which these changes occur, Prior to the information age each swing sometimes took decades to complete its cycle. Now it can happen every two to four years. It is that rapid bending back and forth that breaks the spoon......not a bend every once in a while.

November 6, 2010 at 1:15 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

REWBA

I just got up to take a leak...then I made the mistake of checking new comments and my alter-ego open_eyes spurred me to action. The forum would be less fun for me if he and I couldn't argue with each other. And the amazing thing is we often end up fairly close together.

I am in full agreement on the need for changes in HCR....and in full agreement on your suggested change. It should have been single payer from the start, then it would not have been so long and would have probably been better read.. I have often thought that some of the best and most logical comments made are the ones made in the fewest words. But that would take all the fun out of open_eyes and my debates.

November 6, 2010 at 1:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

REWBA (anonymous) says...

Poor people need to stop and think for a minute about why they are so angry. It is easy to blame government but that would be ignoring the little man behind the curtain.

I was helping a stone mason a couple years ago. He was working on a wine cellar in a multimillion dollar stone mansion just north of Mattfield Green. It was being built for an insurance company executive Each and every wine bottle was to have it's own stone arch finely detailed with a little keystone on top. Talk about attention to detail. As I set each tiny stone, I couldn't help but think about all the medical bills that were denied by my insurance company. I couldn't help but to ask myself why this jerk could afford to treat glass wine bottles better than his company treated human beings.

November 6, 2010 at 1:40 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I helped sheet rock and paint a million dollars plus weekend retreat right out side of Bazaar a few years ago. All the contractors on that job were hired by the hour so we could do things over and over again until they liked the results. It was being built by a Kansas City banker and his film making wife.

The astronomically high incomes at the upper end of the scale contribute every bit as much to the inability of poor working people to get by today as high union wages. But conservatives want to kill off the unions and give the rich more tax breaks.....and working people continue to buy the hype that somehow this helps them

November 6, 2010 at 2:08 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

While those high dollar fat-cats are building their mansions and buying every luxury imaginable, they are also spending on the lobbyists who pressure congress for more tax breaks. Of course, in building their new homes, they are providing employment for the contractor and crew. Ah yes, modern noblesse oblige.

Good point about the treatment of wine bottles, REWBA.

I don't fault people for coming up in the world. After all, upward mobility is what it's all about in a society like ours, and we'd all like to be living on easy road, but unfortunately, as you both have stated, the real cost is to the little guy who continues to struggle every step of the way. And some of those little guys are the ones who vote party, party, party. Suicide by vote.

This is why I get so upset about how many kids today squander their education opportunities. They too could practice upward mobility, but instead they are unruly and lazy. Kids pay for all that fooling around with their futures. And my tax dollars!

November 6, 2010 at 7:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I don't begrudge people working hard to get ahead either create....my problem is how far ahead they get. But even that would be less damaging for the rest of us if the rest of us were smart enough to understand the effect that 60 to 70 million dollar pay check has on our ability to make ends meet.

We all wring our hands and gnash our teeth about 25 to 35 dollar and hour union wages (and I agree that is also part of the problem), without ever stopping to consider what those 60 to 70 million dollar per year top level executive pay allowances has on the price of that same problem. Like REWBA pointed out, the very fact that this clown can spend the money to build tiny stone arches to store his several thousand dollar a bottle wine collection in is a big part of the reason why the working man can't make ends meet.

But then we are supposed to give him even more money to waste on himself and his wine bottles by cutting his taxes and repealing HCR. Of course at the same time we are unable to pay our health insurance premiums and eat in the same week and we blame all of that on the government and HCR.

And who is telling us it is all the fault of the government and HCR.......this overstuffed clown building little golden arches to cradle his precious wine......He and the Koch Brothers and their ilk that donated untold millions of dollars this election cycle to get conservatives back in power. I wonder why they did that?........NOT!

November 6, 2010 at 8:29 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

create

For a very interesting take on what is wrong with education today, check out uranidiots post on the school districts to sue for more funding thread. I gave him an A+ on it....:-)

November 6, 2010 at 8:32 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

My moral compass is that bat ownership should be done responsibly. If not you might as well just own a cow or dice.

It's kind of one of those Golden Rule things that some of us were taught and retained while growing up.

November 6, 2010 at 8:53 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

True.... narrowed in scope does not mean repealed. But you keep glossing over the fact that "narrowed in scope" is pretty much the EXACT opposite of "expanded"..... and you are lumping the 2 together. Now who is spinning? :-)

48% wanting repealed + 10% wanting it narrowed in scope..... comes to 58% wanting it either rolled back completely or somewhat.

But don't worry, biscuitboy, they knew what they were doing. As it stands it will force us to single-payer sooner or later. That's why they caved on it so easily. It's happening in Mass, and if you dig a little, you'll see they know that and that's why they let it drop. Just be patient and you'll get your way. If we can't convince those that elected us we know better then we'll just pull a slick end-run around them (Washington mindset).

REWBA, great take on bats (as a softball player, I concur). But I think your post would be more at place in the "Right To Bear Arms (or Bats)" thread..... :-)

BTW - what Murdoch donates isn't even a drop in the bucket compared to what Soros spreads around to media outlets & politicians......

November 6, 2010 at 9:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

I agree & as I've often complained - that change in the last 30 years from the top making 30-40 times the worker income to 400 times has got to stop and get pulled back. Hence my support for higher taxes at that very top end.

(PS - a business owner making $500,000/year and paying his employees $50,000/year - while I don't have any sympathy for him, is not a multiple of 400. Or even 30/40. It's 10. Just to put my belief in taxing the VERY top harder into perspective).

November 6, 2010 at 9:25 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

"I don't begrudge people working hard to get ahead either create....my problem is how far ahead they get."

Very well put, biscuitboy. As I've opined before, there comes a point where even their standard of living sees little or no improvement, and it just turns into plain unadulterated greed.

November 6, 2010 at 9:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

open_eyes

Lumping wanting it narrowed in scope with wanting it expanded is little different than lumping wanting it narrowed in scope and wanting it repealed. This is especially true since we have no real data on just how much they want the scope narrowed. Some of those ten percent may well want a significant narrowing while others just want it tweaked a little. Since neither of us know that we are both playing our own game of spin. But then when don't we?....:-)

November 6, 2010 at 9:34 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Yes open_eyes....taxation of the very rich is one area where we don't spin each other but stand in substantial agreement.

November 6, 2010 at 9:38 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

You're absolutely right. Wanting it repealed (completely pulled back) and narrowed in scope (partially pulled back - regardless of the degree) is COMPLETELY different than putting two exact opposites together (wanting it narrowed & wanting it expanded). Basically one set thinks it has gone too far (whatever the various degrees - a little too far or way too far) and the other thinks it hasn't gone far enough (whatever the degree). Either way you look at it/spin it........ the majority (over 50%) think it has gone too far.

November 6, 2010 at 9:39 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

But still less than half want it repealed......and repeal after all is the proclaimed goal of the new conservative majority. Around and around we go....

November 6, 2010 at 9:58 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

Could it be that the ones who think that the HRC bill went too far are the " Insurance Companys' & The Health Care Industry " and " Their Political Friends ", $$$$$, ( wink, wink ) ! HMMMMMMMMMMMM !

November 6, 2010 at 11:25 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

REWBA (anonymous) says...

I like cartoons. They can be funny and or amusing but they can also teach lessons. This one teaches us that we should let people finish their thought before interrupting with poisonous vitriol. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVK8Ft...

November 6, 2010 at 1:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

The people who think that hrc went too far are the same ones of us that were against the smoking ban. The smoking ban was the government telling us we don't have the choice to smoke in a bar or not because smoking is unhealthy and now hrc is the government telling us we must have insurance for our health. The government is telling restaurants that they can't put toys in kids meals and telling them what kind of food they can serve because supposedly that is what is making kids fat(which is unhealthy). The government is taxing more and more things to force people to be more healthy. Unhealthiness is the great new "sin" and the government is trying to stop it and they will trample on peoples rights to do so. Hey government "you can't legislate morality"!
lol

This is very much a liberal agenda. Look at where the war is being raged against McDonalds, it's in San Fransisco. Not exactly the "Bible belt". The liberals have done a good job of convincing people that they are the cool ones that want to let everyone have their personal liberty and do whatever they want like a cool uncle that lets the kids drink beer. But as much as they say that "you can't legislate morality" they sure try hard to do just that. It's only certain peoples morality they don't want legislated, they are all for legislating their own. If everyone doesn't agree with it they say "Oh you must just not understand what I'm saying. Let me try to explain it to you one more time." like Obama did with hrc. As we saw in this last election people are getting tired of the arrogance of liberals and their elitist attitudes.

November 6, 2010 at 2:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Now REWBA....that was really funny but I am so sorry that I have hopped on to your bandwagon.....

seriouslyfolks......I am also gong to hop onto your bandwagon for the most part.anyway. I agree with your first paragraph almost completely....I too was strongly opposed to the smoking ban...against banning toys in Happy Meals......against government taxation to force health consciousness....and you can't legislate morality is one of my mantra's But I am relative safe in saying that you probably consider me a liberal.....(and possibly one of low moral character also)....but I disagree on the HCR statement believing the government does have the right to force people to have health insurance until and unless the people that chose to not have it are left totally on their own without any help from the government in any form when they suffer a catastrophic illness. And that includes government write-offs to health care providers for people that can't pay their bills because of their refusal.

Trying to legislate morality and telling people they must take personal responsibility for their refusal to have health insurance are two different things in my opinion.....and taking personal responsibility for your actions is a conservative hall mark. I presume I still have a right to an opinion .......and that last comment was in no way aimed at you seriously.....

November 6, 2010 at 2:58 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

I don't think your moral character is low it's just different than my own. My moral character is lower than I would like it to be.

I agree that people should be left on their own if they can get insurance but choose not to. If they don't have insurance(by choice) and something happens to them everyone shouldn't have to pay. Let them seek help from a charity. The government is not a charity. A charity is an organization that collects from people who give to it from their heart because they believe in the cause of that charity. The government takes resources from people whether they want to give or not, they do it by force. It seems to me that pretty much all government programs are moral issues that have been legislated. That is why I call foul when people tell me that "you can't legislate morality" because what they are really saying is "you can't legislate morality but I can". They say that since my feelings about things come from my religious beliefs they have no place in our government because of "separation of church and state" even though we have a representative government that is supposed to represent it's citizens. I am a citizen(and a veteran) but some want me excluded. I call foul! They say that my beliefs don't count anymore but it is society as a whole that now determines "right and wrong" after all that is how democracy works. Right? Lets examine if that is how it actually works shall we. Let's look at Prop 8 in California. How did that turn out? People voted to keep legal marriage between a man and a woman only. The people(society) spoke and it's a done deal right? Of course it is since society determined "right and wrong" in a democratic way right? That's why we don't hear about people still fighting for gay marriage, because society has determined that through the democratic process. That isn't the case really is it? We keep having people saying that is wrong that gay marriage is "illegal" and they want to right that wrong with legislation. Legislating morality, you see? People that say you can't legislate morality mean that "YOU can't legislate morality but I can" and they try to keep certain peoples beliefs about morality out of the mix by crying "separation of church and state". I cry foul!

November 6, 2010 at 3:35 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Agreed, methusla - just as alot of the people who don't think it went far enough have connections to businesses that stand to gain alot ($$$$$$$$) by expanding HRC (wink, wink). Just as lots of people who are all for cap and trade don't care one whit about the planet - only the $$$$ they stand to gain (wink, wink).

And still.... over half want at least parts of it repealed. I remember 2008 - Obama won with, what, 54% or so? Now of that 54%, I'm sure they weren't all hardcore believers in the total agenda (for those who even knew at the time what it was). Probably a good chunk of people were, some of those still don't think he's went far enough (the communists, socialists among them) - some probably agreed with very little of what his agenda was they just didn't like Palin/McCain, some just hated the last admin & wanted change, some may have only agreed with 1 or 2 items on his platform but they were items that meant alot to him. After the election, I heard words like "landslide", "overwhelming majority", "trouncing", "the people have spoken clearly", "a clear mandate", "decisive victory", and so on. It has given me no end of chuckles today to see how 54% then (regardless of the breakdown of that "landslide") contrasts with 53 to 58% now being "spin" or playing with numbers (Still can't figure out how wanting it expanded fits in the same category of wanting it narrowed - but that's my mind - being in computers, I'm trained to think logically). I guess the adjectives all change based on which side you support. I've been chuckling inside about it all day - thx ;-)

November 6, 2010 at 3:38 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Seriouslyrfolks - good points! But if you use one of REWBA's newfangled high-powered bats people had better duck when you cry foul! (Or is it "fore"?) LOL

November 6, 2010 at 3:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

"I'm sure they weren't all hardcore believers in the total agenda (for those who even knew at the time what it was)."

Some of them thought they wouldn't have to pay their bills anymore. :-)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1FCmf...

November 6, 2010 at 4:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

seriously

My low moral character remark was a reference to another thread and had no place in that post. I apologize for putting it there.

Other than that I find it amazing that we seem to agree on so many points and disagree on the total.

open_eyes

Of course wanting it expanded and wanting it cut back are not the same thing. But neither is wanting it cut back but not repealed and wanting it repealed.

Your trying to force the two into the same thing just so you can get over the magical fifty percent number doesn't sound like computer logic to me......but then I am not in computers.

November 6, 2010 at 4:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

REWBA (anonymous) says...

I believe that purchasing a product offered by a private individual should never be mandated by government. But when the private individual selling his product manipulates the market forces and fixes prices to the point that an individual either has to purchase his product, go bankrupt or die, it is time to call foul. We try to pass laws to prevent evil greed from destroying life as we know it but evil greed buys our lawmakers and so our laws are used against us. When our courts find greed guilty and attempt to provide relief, greed appeals and purchases Beck, Rush and other mouthpieces for greed to rile up the right wing nuts to scream foul loud enough for greed to convince greedy politicians to make what they did legal and backdate it in the name of freedom.

American's spend 3 trillion dollars each year for health care. That comes out to around 800 dollars every month for every man woman and child in the United States. That's three times what two wars lasting nine years have cost.

I say health care is something that everyone will need at one point in their lives and believe that it should be there for us like the police or fire department. No frills of course. If you want breast enlargement, liposuction, a face lift or nose reduction that's on you. But if you need a broken bone welded or an open wound glued up you shouldn't have to decide between a real doctor or that guy down the street with a welder and some crazy glue...Not to say I wouldn't help but I can't give you anything for pain except some whiskey or some wacky weed. Thrust me, go to the doctor. My chainsaw needs sharpening really bad.

November 6, 2010 at 5:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

"but then I am not in computers"

Tron

November 6, 2010 at 5:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

;-)

November 6, 2010 at 5:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Biscuitboy, my simple point was, repeatedly, however you want to slice it, that over 50% of the people want HCR scaled back to some degree. The overwhelming majority of those completely, others not so much. But they want it scaled back - they think its gone too far. It's a simple point with simple math.

Now, now, seriouslyrfolks, remember what we've been told - the only uninformed idiot voters.... those who should be required to take a test on the issues to be able to vote....... are at Tea Party rallies........ right? ;-)

November 6, 2010 at 5:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

open_eyes says....

(Still can't figure out how wanting it expanded fits in the same category of wanting it narrowed - but that's my mind - being in computers,

Oh, I see, he's just putting his mind in his computer.....I was trying to get my entire body in there and it just wouldn't fit......:-)

November 6, 2010 at 5:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_m_Pnc...

November 6, 2010 at 5:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Depends on the year, biscuitboy. 50 years ago computers took entire floors.....

Nowadays.....aw, heck, everything I know fits on a thumb drive ;-)

November 6, 2010 at 5:58 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Honestly open_eyes, when I think about it, what these things are capable of....the knowledge they have made available to anybody with the desire to seek it out....is almost beyond comprehension.

Unfortunately, so much of that capability is wasted pandering to the lowest common denominator of the human condition. But at best....the sum total of human knowledge is also there at the click of a mouse. I stand in awe.

November 6, 2010 at 6:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

"Unfortunately, so much of that capability is wasted pandering to the lowest common denominator of the human condition."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIyixC...

November 6, 2010 at 7:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

And I thought he was referring to porn..... the true main use of the internet.....!!!! (Or so I read)

November 6, 2010 at 7:59 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Actually I should have used the plural form denominators......because I was thinking of several things. Porn, rip offs, disseminating false information, lies and personal attacks, and of course the annoying orange and seriouslyfolks little skunks.

The little skunks are kinda cute however.....:-)

November 6, 2010 at 9:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Uhm...... badgers?

November 6, 2010 at 9:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

REWBA (anonymous) says...

You forgot recipes, crochet patterns, poems, self help projects, pottery tips, travel directions, horoscopes, garden tips, word definitions, live chat, international communications, and a way to sell your junk. The inter network of computers is much more than skunks, badgers, frogs, aliens and porno. Yes, they are all fun but it all started as a device to introduce efficiency to military payroll.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Us-TVg...

November 6, 2010 at 11:38 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Oh....they are badgers. I hope I didn't give the little guys an identity crises.....

November 7, 2010 at 12:27 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

open_eyes

Here is some more interesting information on the distribution of wealth in this country pulled from a New York Times article...

"The richest 1 percent of Americans now take home almost 24 percent of income, up from almost 9 percent in 1976. As Timothy Noah of Slate noted in an excellent series on inequality, the United States now arguably has a more unequal distribution of wealth than traditional banana republics like Nicaragua, Venezuela and Guyana."

This excessively unequal distribution of wealth is arguably just as much to blame for the economic woes facing this country now as high union wages and government taxation yet it receives none of the blame Why?....Because the Koch brothers and their brethren spent who knows how much money in the recent election to head off any attempt to raise their taxes or limit the excess. I wonder when they will think they have enough....at 90-percent......maybe 95-percent.

The other day when I was talking about blood this was one area of my primary concern. The Russian Revolution that brought the communist to power was primarily successful because of the decadent wealth of the aristocracy compared to the stifling poverty of the masses. The aristocracy of course held all the power including control of the military....but the military was made up of peasants. Couple this with the fact that their were millions of poor, and a handful of aristocrats and communism was borne in a bloody revolution that left very few aristocrats still alive. The revenge went beyond the aristocrats to eventually include the people that actually ran the country like the managers and bureaucrats and the Gulag Archipelago was born.

Of course killing off all the people that actually knew how to do anything later proved to be a big mistake....but by then it was too late.

November 7, 2010 at 5:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

open_eyes

I've been up reading this morning....:-)

I know you are no fan of the Huffington Post but there is a real interesting write-up there today by Peggy Noonan, conservative columnist and former Reagan speechwriter wherein she rips Sara Palin a new one for comparing her career to that of the gipper. Check it out if you want to.....

November 7, 2010 at 6:10 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Here's the link....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/ba...

November 7, 2010 at 6:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Wrong link.....try this one

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11...

November 7, 2010 at 6:22 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

That's the right one...the second one.

November 7, 2010 at 6:24 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

Here's one re: Sarah Palin I found after hearing about it on a morning news show. As a language lover, I found it quite amusing. "The Wild Wordsmith of Wasilla"

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/...

November 7, 2010 at 9:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Gee.... slams at Palin.... what else is new? Like the article says - "It's also worth noting that Noonan has never shied away from writing confrontational columns about the former Alaska Governor".....

Well, looks like we're on another Palin bashing crusade. I've tired of digging up links everytime Obama tells another lie or Biden or Pelosi says something dumber than a 5th grader.

But here goes: Biden said (now that the GOP won the election) we're going to have Asian gang wars for the next 2 years. (Geesh.... how did this person get to be VP?) The Tong Wars were feuds among rival Asian gangs in U.S. cities over the opium trade in the mid-1800s and early 1900s.

“Tong Wars?” Barney Frank said. “This is a huge disappointment. I thought he said ‘tongue wars.’”

LOL

And Obama claimed yesterday India doesn't take jobs from the US. Yeah, he's got a good handle on the economy.....

Anyway, I agree on the riches thing. For all those who think taxing the very top is going to kill jobs & the economy.....

Since for 50 years or more taxes HAVE been higher on the very top..... what did our economy do then? Have we just languished in a 50-year long recession? Now I agree, there's a limit - FDR found that out when he raised them WAY too far and caused the "depression within the depression" - but is anyone making over $5 mil a year going to suffer & close up shop if they pay an extra 5 or 10%?

Gates has been in the headlines recently for getting together a bunch of the worlds richest billionaires and getting them all to give away 1/2 of their wealth.

Well, obviously, that will plunge the entire world (since they are not all Americans) into a deep, deep depression according to hard-core Republicans. HALF their wealth! We're told that taxing them even at 40 to 45% is going to kill jobs and lengthen the recession....... or plunge us into a depression - so if they lose 1/2 their wealth (whether it is thru taxes or just given away) - obviously the world will enter a dark age of a long, extended depression, until alot of poor folks come along and pool all their money together to give those billionaires and replace all that wealth so they can jump-start the economy again....... right?

November 7, 2010 at 9:37 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Now I'm no fan of government waste & inefficiency - and I've said if they want to give it directly to charities, build hospitals, etc instead of the Gov, that's fine with me. But the point is - they will lose 1/2 of their money (much more than Buffet's current 17% he paid in taxes). So what's the difference? We're constantly told the rich can't stand hits like that without closing up shop, killing jobs, etc........... So I think the Republicans should all get together and start a grass-roots movement - call it the "Sea Party" (Stop Excessive Altruism) - and keep those billionaires from giving away 1/2 of their wealth, thus throwing our economy into a tailspin with rising unemployment, extended depression, etc........

However, don't get me wrong - I'm all for Taxed Enough Already for most Americans - anyone making less than 7 figures, actually. Not sure EXACTLY where that bar belongs, but higher than most assume.

But you can't tell me raising taxes on the super-rich another 5-10% when they're paying at the most 35% (and most, like Buffet, HALF that) is going to be a disaster and then tell me them giving away HALF is NOT going to cause a disaster. Heck, that's even more. We're talking about taxing just a percentage of their YEARLY INCOME, not all their existing assets. They're talking about giving away 1/2 of everything they own. So if Gates is worth $50 billion....... and his yearly income is, just pick a figure for illustrative purposes, say, $5 billion - people are telling me taking $2 billion of that in taxes is going to tank the economy, but him giving away $25 billion isn't. Yeah, right.

Like I said before...... simple point, simple math. And you don't even need a large computer to crawl inside of to figure it out ;-)

November 7, 2010 at 9:41 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Sorry about the Palin link open_eyes...didn't mean to get your drawers bunched up. I just thought the fact that Noonan is a conservative columnist made it interesting. And if you had read the link you would have seen that it made it very clear that Noonan had been no fan of Palin's in the past.

I should also make it very clear that I in no way meant to imply that the US distribution of wealth split is in any way close to that which existed in Russia prior to the revolution. The ratio there was actually close to 90--10.

I am also not implying I think the wealth should be taken from the rich and redistributed except to the extent that I think their tax burden should be more in line with their ability to pay without suffering hardship....which is what happens often when the tax burden on the lessor mortals rises all the time.

November 7, 2010 at 10:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

After reading your link, create..... I think Palin is alot smarter than the author of the article. Some of the things he said.... geesh..... nitwit comes to mind....
But then again I think that is a requirement to work at the NY Times. :-)

November 7, 2010 at 10:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

After re-reading your post I see where you did read the link.....Again didn't mean to get you all stirred up and I do sometimes forget that you are Palin fan.

November 7, 2010 at 10:13 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Oh, no, that's fine, biscuitboy (and create). Much of the country is quite used to every time she sneezes it being further proof she's an idiot. It just makes me yawn anymore.

Agree with your last 2 paragraphs completely. I don't think we'll ever get to the 90/10 split, and hence the bloodshed, but you said it quite well in your last paragraph.

And I'd really like to know what the hard-core Republicans think, and explain, how raising taxes some on their yearly income will be Armageddon to the economy but them giving away half their wealth will not. Or maybe you think that will. Sea Party?

Biscuitboy, do you think my latest rant here will finally keep you from ever again labeling me a Republican? LOL :-)

November 7, 2010 at 10:15 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

I'm not necessarily a huge Palin "fan", biscuitboy - I've said before I don't think she has the necessary experience to be president (but then again neither did Obama). I just am able to see that she is targeted and pinpointed unfairly, way beyond what most put up with. And alot of sheeple out there gobble up every negative thing without question. Do some digging sometime into all the accusations levelled at her while governor - you'll see it pretty much all came from 2 people, with an agenda, an orchestrated effort that had little or no basis. If you throw enough frivilous mud against the wall, none of it even has to stick - but you'll eventually break them, similar to how the arms race broke the USSR. And it continues to this day. Alot of very powerful people have a vested interest in seeing her NOT succeed....at anything. Because she represents a threat to their power base. And when it comes to that.... can't say I am against her in that respect. Sick of the entrenched fat cats myself.

November 7, 2010 at 10:23 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

Whew...I only meant to call attention to her language snafus. Holy macaroni.

Maybe she does that on purpose. After all, if no one can figure out what she is talking about, and they vote for her anyway, then she is the consummate politician. That may be her method. Quien sabe.

November 7, 2010 at 10:24 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

LOL open_eyes. I'll tell you what I told my doctor recently when she told me I had pneumonia.....Now you have gotten my attention. :-) I have accepted that you are a conservative independent, not a card carrying Republican.

I too would love to hear some feedback from the people on these boards that I know are so opposed to raising taxes on the rich. I wish they would join in the discussion and give us the benefit of their thinking. They either don't choose to or we are talking to ourselves......:-(

November 7, 2010 at 10:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Sorry, create, I didn't mean to come across so abrasive. I understand as a teacher & language lover, you are more aware of things like that, I didn't mean to come back so rash.

But, that is a point I often see - I remember how in the last election, it was argued often how good a speaker Obama was, how glib, how polished, compared to some who don't have quite the gift of gab (or the gift of deception). I said at that time the product matters more to me than the wrapping or the delivery.

So once again, someone who was as close to the heartbeat of Fannie & Freddie during the last decade as anyone, our old pal Barney, who claimed nothing was wrong with them all along as they melted down & took the economy with them............. once again got re-elected. WHY!!!!!??????

Probably because he is more polished when he speaks, I guess. That's what gripes me - so many people look more at how someone speaks than what they do. Alot of people didn't have a clue what exactly Obama stood for during much of the campaign as well. He was just better at double-speaking around it. Ever notice his answers at press conferences? Make sure you talk for 17 minutes per question, so that you'll only have time to take 2 or 3 total. So you won't have to really say anything. That apparently is HIS method as well.....

November 7, 2010 at 10:36 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Without a doubt there are a lot of entrenched powerful people in the Republican party that fear somebody like Palin just as much or more than liberal Democrats fear her. But I think, truth be known, there is a lot more Republican fear of the Tea Party conservative movement as a whole than the party wants to let on.

November 7, 2010 at 10:40 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Following last week's election John Boehner practically groveled at their feet....but John himself is an old-guard entrenched politician of the type the new breed has so much disdain for.

November 7, 2010 at 10:44 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

I agree - the GOP I think fears the Tea Party more than they want to admit. They fear losing power........... if the same type of counter-movement started on the Democratic side, we'd see the same reaction.

But I honestly can't understand for the life of me, why Barney gets re-elected. The man stood right up and lied outright (or was grossly ignorant) about things that have had a major negative impact on our economy. And he keeps getting re-elected. WHY? Can ANYONE explain to me how gross negligence on the job as he has displayed constantly gets him re-elected? But that's not news.... what's news is everytime someone who's not even running for any office mis-pronounces a word........... yeah, not only is my faith in our government at an all time low, but in many of those casting votes to keep them there....... :(

November 7, 2010 at 10:45 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

I think Boehner grovels when it suits his aims to do so..... no big fan of his either. I'm pretty much sick of about anyone who's been in office more than 2 or 3 terms....... along with those in for only 1 term, those who just got elected, and those who ran but lost - LOL

I'd better quit posting for today - I'm starting to depress myself :-)

November 7, 2010 at 10:47 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

If we all would remember that when the "Bush" tax cuts were enacted, it was with an expiration date or sunset if you will. If they had worked these past years we wouldn't be discussing it. I think our economy speaks volumes about how things are done in Washington D.C. It is time we bite the bullet. Let the taxes go back to the levels they were before, (FOR EVERYONE). Cut the federal spending levels to 2000 levels.

Maybe if we all had to really pay for government spending, including 2 wars, expanded and overpaid federal work force, and programs that don't work we will finally hold politicians accountable and taxes will go down permanently.

Our kids and their kids will be living a third world lifestyle if we don't do it now.

November 7, 2010 at noon ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

" If they had worked these past years we wouldn't be discussing it." Exactly Steve but we are still discussing it precisely because they haven't worked. So why are we still acting like we think they are going to now. But just cutting spending alone will not necessitate job growth (in fact will do exactly the opposite at least in the short term) unless the people with the money to create jobs will spend it on job creation. But we are still discussing it because the Koch bothers et al put millions on the table to keep the illusion alive.

Why should the rich put money back into low fluidity, weak return, job creation investments when they can get more return, more fluidity , and do so much quicker investing that same money in hedge funds and other Bernie Madoff type schemes. And that is why trickle down is called voodoo economics.

The only way you can garuntee trickle down is to make job creation mandatory to receive their precious tax breaks.

November 7, 2010 at 12:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

Why should the rich invest in anything, except in hiding secret, unclaimed income, in secret " Swiss " numbered bank accounts and " Dummy " offshore " Caribbean Shell Corporations and then laughing at the rest of the middleclass and poor working taxpayers who are left to foot the massive bills/debt that they create through the buying of Government, i.e. Congressmen/women and their underlings ?

November 7, 2010 at 3:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Exactly methusla.

Why should they invest anything in America as long as the American people are content in electing leaders that will give them everything they want and expect nothing in return.

November 7, 2010 at 4:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Well I think there are very few absolutes in politics & economics. There is a time to raise taxes & a time to lower them. There are times when trickle down economics is prudent & works and a time when it doesn't. There are times in our country's history where we raised taxes too high and it stifled things, and there are times when we dropped it down too low and it didn't help. After 9/11 & the dot-com bust, I didn't have a problem with lowering all taxes. But, as Steve said, they had an expiration date - with the expectation that the economy would be fine or doing ok and the tax cuts could expire. Now the economy is NOT doing well - and those hardest hit are in the middle. I say let the tax cuts expire at the top end, and extend them for the middle & lower. IF and WHEN the economy comes back, at the tax cut expiration time, they can decide what needs to be done then - as they say in the military, "based on the conditions on the ground at that time"......

November 7, 2010 at 4:17 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Per your 4:15 post, biscuitboy, one has to look no further than California. They are flat broke, they all know it, and their only answer it to continue to elect the same people that spend like there's no tomorrow. Governement is easy to expand, and nearly impossible to shrink...

November 7, 2010 at 4:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

REWBA (anonymous) says...

What do you want to bet that the republican controlled house votes to extent the Bush tax break for billionaires?

November 7, 2010 at 5:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

REWBA,

The Repubs, will not extend the tax cuts for the rich, but will try and make the tax cuts for the rich " Permanent " and that was one of their main points of their midterm election " Push " to gain control of Congress .

And if you go to the following sight you will see exactly who supplied the bulk of the money for the Repubs campaign war chest !

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39995283/...

November 7, 2010 at 9:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

REWBA (anonymous) says...

I wouldn't doubt it. On 1 January 2011 family health insurance is required to insure children up to age 26. I'm scheduling physicals and eye exams for my college students before the new house takes office because they are likely to renege on that. I would also be willing to bet that if congress repeals HCR my insurance rate won't go back down again either.

November 7, 2010 at 9:38 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

open_eyes

To everything there is a season.......and that is as true in politics and economics as it is in anything else. What makes trickle down voodoo economics is the assumption that the tax-cuts will automatically be used the way you intended.

But, as you say, one need look no further than the Bush tax cuts for proof that doesn't always happen. So the only way tax cuts to the wealthy should be used to stimulate trickle down job creation is to apply them through tax credits given after the jobs have been created. This also needs to be coupled with a trickle up tax increase when those same jobs are shipped off shore.

But this is the type of carrot and stick incentive our rich friends in Wichita are trying to avoid to the tune of the millions they spent last election to buy votes from politicians that will continue to push uncontrolled tax breaks for their billions.

November 8, 2010 at 4:58 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I'm a firm believer you are never to old to learn and I have learned something from my Republican friends.

So as you start getting tired of my constant references to the Koch brothers and out of control, unaccountable campaign spending....just remember....I am just sticking to the talking points.....lol :-)

November 8, 2010 at 5:03 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Oh.....and to bring all of this back to topic, this discussion is being used as proof that it would have never occurred had the participants that wish to remain anonymous had not been able to do so.

That may be a stretch but it is the best I could come up with.....:-)

November 8, 2010 at 5:10 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

"...what's news is everytime someone who's not even running for any office mis-pronounces a word..."

What, Sarah again? If she's not going to run next time, why is she always wriggling her way into the news again and again? You can mark my word, open_eyes, like I'm marking yours above...Sarah Palin, with all her bits and pieces of misinformation and language snafus and mama grizzly BS, will run. She seems to have this false sense of confidence that she'll be president one day. She doesn't hear any of the things people say about her. Even Republicans only tolerate her and talk behind her back. One thing for sure, she is definitely an attention- getter.

Would she have survived a 60-Minutes interview similar to Obama's last night? Can she survive running against Jeb Bush for nomination? Just a thought.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/10...

November 8, 2010 at 7:32 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

"What makes trickle down voodoo economics is the assumption that the tax-cuts will automatically be used the way you intended. "

This is the exact problem I have with high taxes(or any taxes for that matter). As much as you true believers in the infallibility of government(the democrats anyway) as your protector, provider, healer, and savior don't want to admit it, your lords and ladies waste more money by spending it(tax dollars) on "stuff" it was never intended for, all the while producing nothing.

I say keep all the tax cuts just shift the ones for the (evil) rich to tax breaks for American companies on American soil to upgrade equipment ,buildings, trucks, etc. Things that help businesses in this country provide GOOD jobs for the average folks. Enough of this idiotic idea that people can survive on service industry and "small" business jobs, they just don't pay the bills.
Even if this were to happen and the tax breaks went directly to American companies on American soil to provide GOOD jobs for America's average folks the dems would spin it and convince people that it was a tax cut for the "evil" rich.

November 8, 2010 at 7:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

create

I don't always agree with Daily Kos but I love the way they say things. Its in your face Rush Baby type of rhetoric is sometimes way to rare on the progressive side.

I had thought that the unpopularity of the George W presidency there at the end would pretty much destroy Jeb's position as heir apparent....but as everyone knows I am wrong at least as often as I am right. And Daily Kos may be right on this one. Like they said.....the well oiled machinery, and the access to money, is already in place. As the old Chinese curse warns.....I fear we live in interesting times.

November 8, 2010 at 8:10 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

seriouslyfolks

"I say keep all the tax cuts just shift the ones for the (evil) rich to tax breaks for American companies on American soil to upgrade equipment ,buildings, trucks, etc. Things that help businesses in this country provide GOOD jobs for the average folks. Enough of this idiotic idea that people can survive on service industry and "small" business jobs, they just don't pay the bills."

I agree, in fact, wasn't that pretty much what I just said except I said to do it with tax credits?

November 8, 2010 at 8:17 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

seriously.....

"I think their tax burden should be more in line with their ability to pay without suffering hardship....which is what happens often when the tax burden on the lessor mortals rises all the time."

November 7, 2010 at 10:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

You may not have meant to include me in your description of you Democrats. But just wanted to point out on this issue any way, what I am saying is much more in line with what you are saying than it is with what you describe as Democratic thinking.

November 8, 2010 at 8:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

"This is the exact problem I have with high taxes(or any taxes for that matter)."

This mindset is part of the problem, especially that part in parentheses.

How do you propose to pay for goods and services like schools and fire departments and police to name just three? Oh yeah, and social security and the military? Will you rich guys support things like SRS through your own charity drives?

Why should some business in Ohio or Michigan be taxed enough to pay for Emporia schools?

November 8, 2010 at 8:51 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

I think you misunderstood me slightly, biscuitboy. I didn't say the Bush tax cuts didn't help. Our economy DID turn around - not saying it was all due to tax breaks, but we did rebound. All I was saying was that had our economy still been going good, I think we should have gone ahead and let the tax cuts expire - at least at the top end. But 10 years is a long time - perhaps the cuts should have had a shorter expiration date....?

The problem with high taxes is that our government (which is wasteful & inefficient to begin with) - just takes it as an opportunity for more of the above. I think government spending needs to be cut, and taxes with them. But the current load belongs more on the very wealthy than the rest. For a variety of reasons I have already detailed.

When you talk of "well-oiled machines"..... look at the Dem ground game in Nevada. How all the polls with a 3% margin of error went from a projection of the Repub 3% ahead to losing by 5% shows what is really "well-oiled"..... ;-)

This country survived just fine when the top made 30-40x the worker. The only thing I see happening now that it is 300-400x, isn't that more jobs are created, but only that more politicians are bought & controlled.

November 8, 2010 at 9:06 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

What? Obama finally had a "tough" interview? By my count, that's his what........ first one in 3 years? :-)

November 8, 2010 at 9:08 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

create

I don't have a problem with taxes, I have a problem with fraud, waste, and abuse of tax dollars. Perhaps I should have been more clear on that point since it was my point. You true believers always take comments like mine and assume I am for no government when in reality I am for efficient government. There is too much fraud, waste, and abuse in and of the government and nothing is being done about it because rather than cleaning their own house they are too busy blaming all the problems on evil capitalism.

November 8, 2010 at 9:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Well, I've been wrong before, but I don't think she'll run in 2012. JMO. But if we're comparing what someone could "survive"...... had Obama faced the same scrutiny & treatment from most of the press.... he wouldn't be Prez right now. Just an also-ran. Well, he did face some scrutiny.... but only 1 network that dared to not "get shivers up & down their leg" everytime the sun rose in the east with his face on it :-). Had the tables been turned..... it would have been a bloodbath.

November 8, 2010 at 9:15 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

That's the dilemma, seriouslyrfolks. On the one hand, we have fraud, waste, & abuse of tax dollars by the gov. On the other extreme, we have fraud, waste, & abuse of power & wealth by the super-wealthy who know no end to greed. Once too much power goes to the government, they become the exact same thing they are trying to curb. Once too much power goes to the super-wealthy, they buy politicians to do the same. It's a constant struggle finding a middle ground........

November 8, 2010 at 9:18 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

And when you're talking about how the insurance companies lobbied hard, and who financed the Repubs, etc........ don't forget......the Pharma companies (which are biggest of all in Health Care) - cut a sweet deal with Obama behind doors also.......

November 8, 2010 at 9:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

Obama not only wasn't scrutinized but he greatly benefited from the scrutiny that was given his opponent. Many Obama voters believed that McCain was literally the same person as George W. Bush.

You are exactly right(per your 9:18 post) open_eyes, as usual. I'm begining to think you are the Quizat Haderach! ;-)
It amazes me that people think that run away business is bad but somehow runaway government is ok and even good. I guess my faith is just too weak to believe wholeheartedly in the government as some do.

November 8, 2010 at 9:30 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

Oh come on, open_eyes. He's had many good interviews before. Wow! Never give the man an even break. But whatever you do, support that ninny Sarah. Let's see, how many good interviews has she had? Ummmmm.....

Oh good grief, look at me making a stupid mistake here, comparing Barak Obama to Sarah Palin. That's like comparing a loaf of freshly baked bread to a puddle of vomit.

November 8, 2010 at 9:37 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

open_eyes....

I may have misrepresented your position. If I did it was unintentional. But we both agree that for whatever the reasons (and they are many and complex) the Bush tax cuts did not accomplish the goal they were meant to accomplish.

seriouslyfolks

Only a fool would deny that there was waste, fraud, and greed perpetrated each day in government. Only the same fool would be unable to recognize that nothing ever gets done about it. But nothing ever gets done about it because only about half of the people think the evil old Democrats always blame the benevolent capitalist....the other half think nothing ever gets done because the evil old capitalist (read Republicans) always blame the benevolent Democrats.

And the truth is they are both half right.

November 8, 2010 at 9:38 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

seriously,
You're the one who made the parenthetical comment, "or any taxes for that matter."

I was just trying to keep you honest about who is going to pay for schools etc. You don't want to pay taxes but as soon as those services are taken away or downsized, you ultra-vote-party-only conservatives are the first to yell.

November 8, 2010 at 9:42 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

" Had the tables been turned..... it would have been a bloodbath."

Only if the Republicans had different names on their ticket. I believed at the time, and I still believe today, that Republicans ran the weak ineffectual ticket they had precisely because they knew they would be better served to be in the position of spoiler for two years than to be responsible for actually accomplishing something.

Had they actually won in 08, and had to deliver the miracle they demanded from the Democrats in two short years, the blood bath in 2010 would have occurred any way......just the other way around.

Nobody....and especially not the 08 Republican ticket, could have started where we were then and done what the Repubs demand Obama do in two years....JMO

November 8, 2010 at 9:53 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

I would like someone, anyone, to explain to me, exactly how the " Economy " of any Country, Government and its people can or will improve when there is high unemployment ( 9.6% to 10%) , most tax cuts are given to the " Weathy ", based on the idea that their economic good fortune, (Graft ) will " Trickle " down to the working middle class and poor working class, who are the major supporters of whatever " economy " there is or may be left !

Exactly what has these supposed " Economy Saving, Job Creating, Trickle Down Economic "measures accomplished ... Except to make the " Wealthy, Wealthier ... Shifted the tax burden from the " Wealthier Wealthy Class " to the working Middle Class and the working Lower Class taxpayers ?

Moreover, has this Job/Economy/Country- Saving, strategy worked and will it ever work ?

I believe the answer is a most emphatic " NO " !

But there is a Political Party that believes that it will and they are going to do everything in their power to return to the " Trickle Down Economics " that started this whole mess in the first place and that scares the hell out of me !

I have and have had my own set of ideas on how to straighten this mess out, but the Wealthy or the major political partys would not like them nor support them . And therefore, that is the problem . The politicians, whealthy and political partys believe that they are the only ones capabil of making decisions that will benefit everyone . But in reality the only ones that their decisions benefit, are thenselves and themselves, only !

JMO

November 8, 2010 at 9:57 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

create....lol

It amazes me how loud the conservatives yell about blind democratic loyalty to party.....when no other political persuasion except maybe the Soviet-style communist demand loyalty to litmus test more than the conservatives.

Hell, one of the big problems the liberals face is they can't stop fighting among themselves long enough to fight the conservatives. That is not a problem we have seen to any degree from the conservatives. Of course with the Tea Party now....that may be about to change. We are already seeing more instances of Reagan Republicans making open criticisms of Tea Party conservatives and vice-versa.

November 8, 2010 at 10:06 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

create

I never ever ever ever ever said I don't want to pay taxes. I said my problem with paying taxes is that they often don't go to what they are said to be going for. I remember when they were campaigning to get the local sales tax extended even though it wasn't expiring yet and they said it was going to keep property taxes down and to bring business to town. I was on the fence about it right up to the point that I voted not to extend it. On here I asked what it would go for and was told the two things I mentioned above. I said I didn't know if I could trust that it would go to those things and I was told that "by law" it had to only go to those two things. I like the idea of bringing businesses(industry) to town and keeping property taxes down. Well, when I went to vote I read the ballot very carefully and it said that the tax could go into general funds which means it can be spent on pretty much anything and that is why I voted NO. Well, property taxes went up and they did some work on South Commercial(which I guess could be considered helping to bring business to town but imo it's a stretch). I was told one thing and reality is another, this is only a small local example and I think it probably happens in higher levels of government on bigger scales than this.

I remember when You said you would never vote for a Republican because of their "lunatic fringe". I pointed out several other parties and you had reason to not like any of them. That only leaves one party, create. So basically you only vote for one party.

November 8, 2010 at 10:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

And I steadfastly affirm my belief that it is anonymity that spurs vigorous debate on the forum!!!

November 8, 2010 at 10:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

What is wrong with voting for no party.....just the individual you belief to be best for the job. Yesterday I openly confessed to (among other things) a misguided belief that open_eyes was a Republican. I did that because he supported many Republicans....he often defended Republicans....and by his own admission voted more often Republican as anything else. But I finally came to realize that he did on some issues break free of the Republican mold.....and support ideas more frequently considered progressive. Ideas like asking the rich to bear more of the tax burden because they are able to carry more of the weight. I now think of him as a conservative independent.

I too vote most often (but not exclusively) Democrat..... I support them more regularly......and generally argue their case on the Forum. But I don't always support their views. I am strongly right to bear arms for one....and strongly opposed to the liberal police state approach to health. That however doesn't mean I don't think the government has any place taking measures to insure some level of health care to all of it's citizen. And conservative open_eyes and I are very close together on our ideas about taxing the rich.

So why is it so easy for me to recognize open_eyes independence from strict party loyalty.....and so difficult for some of you to give me the same credit.

And I do think the cartoon would have been even better if it would have portrayed me as the real biscuitboy the dog.

November 8, 2010 at 10:29 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Not quite, biscuitboy. I DO think the Bush tax cuts accomplished part of their aim. And said so. But I think they should have had a shorter expriation date, or at least the tax cuts on the very wealthy. JMO.
And the "bloodbath" I was referring to was not the economy since 2008. I was referring to how Obama would have been villified and destroyed by the press. (Of course, they would have all been racists then).

If you think that I'm making it all up in my mind about Obama getting "soft" interviews........

Even SNL did a skit lampooning interviews where the reporters just handed Obama a pillow. Remember that one?

Comparing Palin to a puddle of vomit. That pretty much says it all, doesn't it? I don't think that of anyone on either side. A perfect example of how some folks are true believers of what they are told. No further comment needed.

November 8, 2010 at 10:37 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Biscuit - 10:29 post - well said. I think you nailed me pretty accurately :-)

DeniseDorcey....... are you watching? See how we disagree but don't feel anyone is personally stalking me in the streets?

November 8, 2010 at 10:40 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

How true open_eyes. Saturday I had the most venomous and anger filled confrontation with a poster that I have had to date. Despite that, I have no intention of tying to locate him or even continue the verbal fight. I assume (and believe) he will react in the same way. That is a part of impassioned debate.

November 8, 2010 at 10:56 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

Hey seriously, I have always voted for Jerry Moran because he has done many good things to accommodate veterans in Kansas. I voted for him to be senator too just recently.

Two, I voted for George Bush when he ran the second time because I did not want to switch presidents in the middle of a war. Of course I've since changed my views, but the vote was already cast. So, don't accuse me of voting any straight ticket, bud.

Yes, Denise Dorsey, notice I did not accuse any of my fellow forum fanatics of cowardice because they are not posting their real names. I give them the right to argue with me under anonymous names, and I am all too willing to conduct argument with them under the same guise.

open_eyes, the writer in me searches for slap-in-the-face comparisions like the one I made. I originally thought of "a hive of bees to a fence post" but it was too mild.

November 8, 2010 at 12:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

Gonna go watch CNN now. A town in Missouri has figured out how to keep Fred Phelps and his ugly bunch away from their soldiers' funerals.

November 8, 2010 at 1:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

create

You are the one that said you wouldn't vote for a republican because of the right wingers.
I guess you misspoke.
I remember it clearly because I responded by saying that the left wing liberals is the reason I won't vote for democrats. neighbor(one of your allies against me) actually some what agreed with me or at least got the point I was trying to make.

November 8, 2010 at 1:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

The pile of vomit or fence post you refer to is a supporter of many if not all of the same things you are arguing for in the education thread. Guess even a fence post is in the right place once in awhile. And watch out for a hive of bees. They've been known to sting...... ;-)

November 8, 2010 at 1:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

seriously

The part I don't understand is why it appears to be okay for you to not vote for Democrats for the exact same reason you criticized her for saying she would not vote for Republicans. I fail to see the difference.

Also we all say things at times we might say differently at a different time. Perhaps because a different interpretation works better to make our point...or maybe even (heaven forbid) we actually listened to what the other person was saying and changed our mind. I personally am not ashamed that I change my mind when confronted with information that causes me to so.

You yourself just this morning made the statement that certainly read to me like you were opposed to all taxes.....within minutes you clarified that statement....and that was fine with me.

I'm just saying nobody but a blind unthinking fool would never adjust their feelings about something or never say something they later on wished they hadn't. I do it a lot...and so do most on here.

I am not trying to be critical but I do believe what is good for the goose should also be good for the gander

November 8, 2010 at 1:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

people can vote however they want but create(your ally against me) said "you ultra-vote-party-only conservatives" when she has said in the past that she wouldn't vote for any repubs because of rightwingers and in the past she has also said she wouldn't vote for any of the 3rd party for various reasons which leaves only one party. Now taking all that into account wouldn't it be safe to assume that she only votes for one party, the democrat party. I already said that she may have mispoke when she said she wouldn't vote for a republican, didn't I?

I have changed my mind on thing or at least adjusted my feelings on them. Remember the immigration reform? At first I was against reform because I felt that simple enforcement would work but because of points that many people were making I am now for reform. I am still for enforcement but feel that it would be "good" if there was reform to allow more people in legally.

You and your allies can try to paint me as a rigid imbecile who is wrong about everything but if you truly look back at my positions on things you would see that your picture of me is inaccurate.

November 8, 2010 at 2:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

BTW, seriously, sorry for the late thank you for the Kwisatz Haderach kudo :-). But I was curious - which one? Paul or Duncan? (I was kinda hoping Duncan, since he got all the babes ;-)

November 8, 2010 at 2:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Come on seriouslyfolks....take a deep breath. Asking question about the post of somebody does not sound to me like trying to paint them as a complete imbecile unless the second person actually calls you that....which I never said anything close to that.

Secondly I don't see where I accused you of never being able to change your mind. It was a generic statement addressed to whomever it might fit. Had I intended it to mean you I would have said so.

Lastly create is my ally against you in the very same way as open_eyes, genxer, and virtually every other conservative on these boards have allied with you against me at one time or another.

And that was exactly the point I was trying to make. Whether they are your allies or my allies they are still allies. In fact, there have been times that you and I allied against crackinsack and others.

Quit taking everything so personal...please!

November 8, 2010 at 2:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

open_eyes

It is just beginning to look like the Republican/Tea Party coalition maybe starting to cannibalize its self in much the same way the splintered Democratic coalition often does.

November 8, 2010 at 4:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

It's been looking that way for awhile now IMO. Not just beginning.

November 8, 2010 at 5:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

I meant to add, the Tea Party causing consternation & some "shaking up" of the GOP I view as a good thing. I think the Repub party has needed that for some time now. Not that it's good FOR the GOP...... just that it's good. Send a reminder to those entrenched fatcats that it is the PEOPLE they are supposed to be beholdened to - and if they don't get the signal, and soon.... they're history :-)

November 8, 2010 at 6:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Well the more I see and hear the more I think the GOP machine is starting to gear up for Jeb Bush. In fact George W is being much more openly critical now of Sara and the affect of the tea party candidates on the failure to take the Senate seats they thought they could get. And I see a lot of moderate independents and even moderate democrats lining up behind Jeb Bush rather than some far right alternative on the ballot for 2012. JMO

In fact I could possibly see myself in that position.....and that feeling could grow rapidly as I became convinced that Obama was dead meat.

November 8, 2010 at 7:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

I agree with you open_eyes on the Tea Party doing some good by ruffling the feathers of the GOP. And yes, they forgot as did the Dems, that the ordinary people are the ones to please.

Yes, biscuit, I see Jeb Bush as the next nomination for the GOP.

I missed George Bush's interview on TV last night. Dang! Gonna see if I can find it on the Net.

November 9, 2010 at 7:02 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

What I want to read is his memoirs that were just published. Wonder how long before the library gets a copy?

November 9, 2010 at 7:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

genxer (anonymous) says...

I'm already seeing and hearing some things that the republicans are trying to do and it is really ticking me off. I hope McConnell gets booted from office next, from the sound of it he's planning on going ahead with business as usual. I guess he didn't get the memo that the American people are tired of the same old crap out of Washington.

It would be stupid for Jeb Bush to run this soon. There are still a lot of crazies out there with an irrational hatred of GW that would hold that against Jeb. Not that I don't think he'd make a good president. I would love for someone like Gov. Christie from New Jersey to run in the next election.

I also think it would be funny if Sarah Palin got elected President next, just to see the left wingnuts go crazy-er. But that probably wouldn't be the best for the country. I think we can see from our current president that it's probably a good thing to have some experience before becoming president. Yes, Sarah Palin had more experience than Obama, but not much, or at least probably not enough.

bb, I'll see if I can get you a copy. Would you like it signed? :-D

November 9, 2010 at 8:44 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Of course I would genxer. Who wouldn't want a copy of a presidential memoir signed by the President.....or did you mean signed by you?.....:-)

November 9, 2010 at 8:53 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Up until recently I would have agreed with you about the foolishness of a Jeb Bush ticket this soon....and have written as much on these boards not too long ago. But as my opinion of George W has improved in the wake of the ultra-conservative rise in the conservative world, I think many people (people like me even) would welcome a Jeb Bush ticket if the alternative was a ticket headed up by Palin or some of the other far right sweethearts.

And that is precisely why I remain registered as a Republican so I can have some say in the matter.

November 9, 2010 at 9:07 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

genxer (anonymous) says...

bb, I'm sure people like you WOULD welcome another Bush ticket this soon. However, I doubt you'd be checking his name off on the ballot. We conservatives are beginning to figure out that when the left begs for the right to moderate their views they are only tee-ing us up for a kick in the you know where.

In short, we are tired of being the Charlie Brown's to your Lucy. :-)

November 9, 2010 at 10:21 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

genxer (anonymous) says...

Case in point. Election 2008 offered up a left wing Democrat and a left wing Republican (who was a media favorite until he won the primary). You don't get any more moderate than McCain.

Had the Republicans offered up someone conservative who actually wanted to win the election they probably would have won. As it were, McCain got beat like a one-legged man in an arse-kicking contest.

November 9, 2010 at 10:27 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

If his name was on a primary ballot running against the likes of Sara you can bet your bippy I would be checking his name off.

In a general election.....Never say never.

I have often thought the same thing in reverse. When the right starts making dire predictions about how badly the left is shooting itself in the foot......It usually means the left has them worried. :-)

And as long as you keep reading me as a left wing nut, you are only listening to the hype...not the real message. I, like most people, make a lot of statements to make a point or to goad something out of the other. But the trick is to look past the sound bites and look at the whole of what is being said. And that goes for right and left combined. But then I do admit that I get as swayed by the hype as anyone, which usually prompts my hype in return. What!!!....so nobody is perfect....:-)

November 9, 2010 at 10:41 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I'm surprised McCain has ever held still on any position long enough for you to describe him as anything except opportunist.

His war record aside (which I truly respect), he is all over the chart on practically everything depending on what he thinks will play best, At least Obama had a position and I think that is what cost McCain the election

November 9, 2010 at 10:46 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

I think genxer made some good points. Boths sides support the candidate on the other side of the aisle they think will be the easiest to defeat.....

November 9, 2010 at 2:17 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I agree open_eyes and that's why we call it the Game of Politics. But I have no power or influence on the national political scene, so my setting here playing the game would be an exercise in futility.

So despite the beliefs of some more rigid in their loyalty to ideological purity.......when I say I would vote for Jeb Bush over a number of possible players from either camp......that is exactly what I mean. You are a conservative independent....you should be able to understand and accept that. You want me to accept it about you....and I do. So what is the diff.

November 9, 2010 at 3:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

open_eyes

I realize you are not the one who questioned my sincerity. But you are much closer to being true to conservative principles than I am being true to liberal ones. What I actually am is a pragmatist. I always support what looks best to me at the time......and am always willing to look at something new depending on changing conditions on the ground.

So I guess I always wonder how you manage to be revered as an independent thinker while I am usually reviled as a radical left wing-nut. I am jealous....:-)

November 9, 2010 at 4:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Actually, no, I wasn't questioning your sincerity, even though re-reading it is obvious that was the direction of my post. Personally, I do believe you - but I think on the larger stage there are many who are not as honest. I remember during 2008 a story about someone who knew a very liberal "operative", (someone very active in campaigns - on staff) - who told them they were headed down to a certain state to "work on McCain's campaign" during the party primaries..... this was about the same time that McCain suddenly went from about 3rd or 4th place to suddenly rocketing to the forefront of the GOP candidates. They didn't understand at the time what they meant or thought they just misunderstood them. I'm just saying I think it happens - both directions. Not that anyone personally here would do that. Well, some I think would - but I truly don't think that of you. But I wouldn't put it past alot of hardcore-either-side folks out there. Especially those who bus in loads of drunks giving them free food, cigarettes, etc, to vote a certain way, or those who work hard to have military votes discounted. Especially ACORN folks like these....

http://dailycaller.com/2010/06/10/aco...

November 9, 2010 at 6:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Forgot to say at the beginning I apologize for it reading as if I was questioning your sincerity..... not my intent, sorry. :-)

November 9, 2010 at 6:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

Here is my 2 cents worth on the 2012 election,the economy will be in the tank, the $ will be 3rd world currency status,we will be fed up with TSA agents groping us at the airline gates,we will understand that Ross P. was correct about that giant sucking sound he warned us about if congress passed nafta, the demms will put up Hillary, the repus will put up Perry, and the TEA PARTY will put up Ron Paul. .... and who will be best for America I hope gets ellected.

November 10, 2010 at 1:03 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

I know my2 cents and $3 dollars will buy me a cup of jo in 2012. HAPPY VETERANS DAY

November 10, 2010 at 1:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

This has been a great discussion about interesting material. And we for once have gotten some input from others than open_eyes and myself. Even better the input has been civil and intelligent.

The thread is now on its way to 300 comments (a ways to go) and I wonder just how long the Gazette will allow it to continue off-topic as it is. I thank them for letting it go this long.

But Chris, now you can never say the cartoon didn't generate any discussion....:-)

November 10, 2010 at 3:40 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Well, if the cartoon is just about anonymous posters voicing their opinions/concersn....... then everything here is on-topic! LOL :-).

Personally, I don't see Jeb Bush running in 2012. JMO.

November 10, 2010 at 8:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Well I certainly don't know. What I am basing it on is the number of people like Karl Rove, that are tried and tested soldiers in the Bush machine, that are now openly breaking with the far right movement and steering back towards the middle. Considering the ironclad devotion to loyalty that is normally a part of conservative thinking....I wonder why else would they be doing it now?

Even George W's breaking his silence now and saying openly critical things about people like Palin makes me ask....Why now?

November 10, 2010 at 8:41 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

open_eyes....Earlier you had said, "I think genxer made some good points. Boths sides support the candidate on the other side of the aisle they think will be the easiest to defeat....."

In the Game of Politics I have no doubt you are correct....but that is not why I as an individual does it. When I say I would vote for Bush in a primary over any other likely candidate I see out there on the horizon, it is because I see him as the one I would prefer having as my President if a progressive candidate that I might actually be supporting was to lose.

So it is not an attempt to manipulate an outcome (which would be pretty arrogant of me in the first place), but instead is an attempt to cover my butt and have an acceptable, good, alternative if my first choice should fail. Like I said....just color me pragmatist.

November 10, 2010 at 9:38 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

The only criticism I can find of Bush toward Palin is that he didn't think she was qualified to be president and McCain was wrong to add her to the ticket. Which I agree, I've said many times I didn't think she had the experience to be prez. VP is a different matter, but generally I don't want someone in the VP position I wouldn't think was qualified to be prez, but to a lesser extent. But I felt the same way about Obama. So when those who supported him for prez say Palin is underqualified it kindof rings hollow to me........

November 10, 2010 at 10:08 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Originally I wrote it was akin to the pot calling the kettle black.... then changed it because it dawned on me it might be interpreted as racist. But in my heart I know it had nothing to do with race in any way, just a common phrase in common use. And I'm tired of everthing being twisted into race. So here it is. To the PC correct crowd who cry racist at every turn....... shove it :-)

November 10, 2010 at 10:12 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

That is the criticism I was talking about. I was in error adding the phrase "people like Palin". I did so only to try and head off complaints that I was Palin bashing. I guess it would have been better if I had just said he was being openly critical of her qualifications to be president. It was Rove and others who criticized her for causing the failure if the conservative to take control of the Senate. Whether that criticism is justified or not is irrelevant in determining if the moderate Republicans are mounting a challenge to the Right Wing.

As to reviving the earlier comment about the genxer post. I mentioned it only as a way of introduction to the statement I wanted to make about why I would vote for Jeb Bush in a Republican primary. It was in no way intended to reopen old wounds....if you took it that way I am sorry. Are maybe we are just a little touchy this morning.

November 10, 2010 at 11:56 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I am reasonably sure that you supported the McCain--Palin ticket in 08 despite your misgivings about her qualifications. So your criticising those who supported Obama despite their misgivings about his qualifications also rings a little hollow.

My top choice was Clinton and I think time is proving me right, but I went ahead and voted for Obama because I felt it was the best choice between the two. I still feel that way. But that is not to say that my support for Obama is guaranteed for 2012. It will be if the wing-nuts still head the Repblican ticket....if not, as you say.....it will depend on conditions on the ground at the time.

November 10, 2010 at 12:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

No, I wasn't being touchy this morning - LOL - I just didn't want you to misinterpret what I said as a slight at what you said. Sorry, I didn't catch "poeple like Palin" - thought it read just Palin - I my memory wasn't jogged about any criticism Bush had levelled her way other than what was stated.

Yes, I did vote McCain/Palin in 2008 - despite my misgivings. One of my favorite quotes at that time was as follows: "Normally I vote for the person I agree with 60% of the time over the person I agree with 40% of the time. Sadly enough.... this time I'm voting for the person I agree with 40% of the time over the person I agree with 20% of the time".

Had Clinton won, my decision may have went the same way, but it would have been much closer/tougher. Had several other GOP folks won besides McCain, my decision would have been easier. As you say, conditions on the ground at that time. One thing that was in Palin's "favor" about her qualifications was that she was only running for VP - not Prez. Biden hasn't really done anything to set the world on fire (as long as Obama doesn't let him play with any matches - LOL) - and I didn't see Palin being much other than the figurehead that the VP usually is. So if 2 people are equally "un"qualified - and one is running for Prez, the other VP - then I'm gonna look harder at the prez than the VP. Yeah, folks tried to trump up a lot of stories about how McCain was a death's door and probably wouldn't survive the year.... but remember.... at the Congressional level, they have a whole different health care package than we have...... or what they just recently shoved down our throats ;-)

November 10, 2010 at 1:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

And here's where our tax money is going...

"The 3 richest counties in America all now center around Washington D.C. Six of the top 10 wealthiest communities in America now revolve around Washington D.C. "

So our tax dollars are going to go towards paying the plum pensions for the gov workers making twice+ what we do to begin with....nice....

http://www.forexhound.com/article/Sto...

From another article on the same:

Between 2004 and last year, earnings increased by an average of nearly $1,200 for people with incomes in the top 10 percent, compared with $17 for those in the bottom 10 percent.

Another reason I do not agree with a flat tax rate.

November 10, 2010 at 1:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Normally I would have agreed with your assessment of the V-P as a figurehead. But when the real head is McCain"s age, and with his health problems, I thought the choice of Palin as a running mate was misguided indeed.

So you were trying to keep me from feeling you had slighted me....and I felt you thought I had slighted you.....LOLLOL. That is really funny :-)

November 10, 2010 at 1:35 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Well, either way, it was all very slight! LOL

Yeah, I can kindof see where it would weigh slightly heavier in the decision than say, someone younger like Obama or Bush in 2000. But I didn't really see that happening - not when we've got old goats in Congress into their 80's and 90's who probably don't remember their own names who keep getting re-elected time after time. And, as I said - folks who wouldn't ever consider going on the same health plan they forced on us. Also I never make the (initial) assumption that anyone elected is going to be there for 8 years. But ya know.... for the Palin-haters, he may have done them a favor. She would have stayed her term in Alaska (since nobody would be up there throwing dozens of frivolous lawsuits & claims against the wall) - served out her term, gained more needed experience.... and possibly emerged as a bonafide player by now.....???? Instead of being thrust in the spotlight and under the glare prematurely....... who knows???? Idle speculation..... Of course, Tina Fey's career would have suffered in the meantime...... lol :-)

November 10, 2010 at 1:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I am not opposed to trying to get some control over some government spending. But don't people realize that just cutting government spending alone.....without real concrete incentives to tie tax cuts for the rich directly to job creation will just make things worse.

First it will eliminate many of those over-paid government employees and their jobs. Sure that will reduce government spending immediately. But it will also eliminate the purchasing power of those paychecks and the tax collected on those paychecks. In addition it will eliminate the jobs of many people that work for companies that provide goods and service to the government as well.....and then trickle on down to the jobs of those that provided goods and services to the companies that provided goods and service to the government. And all of this comes with a corresponding loss of business from the paychecks of all these eliminated jobs, and the additional loss of tax collections.

Without something or somebody then to spur job expansion elsewhere (read the well-oiled rich), just what have we gained by all these spending cuts except even more unemployment and fewer people paying the bills. And with more unemployment and fewer people paying the bills what motivation will the chosen ones have to invest in job creation to produce things very few people will be able to buy. It quickly becomes a chicken or egg situation.

November 10, 2010 at 1:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

I think the goal is that many of these government jobs would be in the private sector instead - with increased efficiency and less waste then what the bureacracy usually brings along.

I think the current (unsaid) goal of many in power is this: They want to raise taxes. There is too much opposition to just doing it out of the blue......... so spend the country into bankruptcy, until we have no other option than to do just that. Kindof like how they removed the public option from HCR - but they'll end up driving most insurance companies out of business, so that will be the only option.
Or maybe it's just National Conspiracy Theory Day ;-)

November 10, 2010 at 2:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I wonder just what government agencies and their jobs would be picked up by the private sector. Maybe food safety inspections by the meat packing business....or the DOT might be run by the airlines and the railroads, the banking and insurance by....who else.. But as far as the Health, Education , and Welfare jobs. I don't see anybody lining up to take them over. But I forgot....they are not really important anyway.

November 10, 2010 at 2:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Nothing under the sun is so unimportant that it shouldn't be done by the government instead - LOL. Once again.... the trick is to where to balance government oversight & government control/takeover.

Just like higher taxes on the very rich in the past didn't tank the country.... neither did smaller government in the past.

But the combination of the opposite of the 2 sure seem to be tanking us now...... we'll be the new Greece soon enough.... :(

November 10, 2010 at 2:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Oh I hear what you are saying and even agree to a point. But I hear so many demands to cut government spending and slash government payroll but what I don't hear are many real proposals about where and how.

The proposals I do hear coming from the newly empowered right however are pretty universally bunched under the heading of H-E-W....the very things that the private sector has no interest in at all. That is with the exception of the insurance companies wanting to dismantle HCR. That says a lot to me about the ....real desire behind the call for government cuts......the disenfranchisement of the ones who need government the most to protect them,,,,,the young, the old, and the disadvantaged.

November 10, 2010 at 3:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

genxer (anonymous) says...

I've put a lot of thought into this and I've decided to "come out" as some would say and introduce myself. My real name is Michael H. Hunt. I think I've gotten to know all of you well enough that you can simply call me Mike.

-Mike Hunt

November 10, 2010 at 3:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Well here's what they are proposing as of now.......

http://apnews1.iwon.com//article/2010...

Welcome, Mike :-)

November 10, 2010 at 3:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

genxer (anonymous) says...

Thanks for the welcome open eyes. It feels really good to be out in the fresh air where everyone can see me. So to speak.

November 10, 2010 at 4:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Yes, I want to second that welcome...glad you felt that you could.

--Preston Monroe

Yes open_eyes. I was just reading that same info on another site. Haven't really had time to parse it yet as to how I feel about the particulars...but it does nothing to ease my worried mind....:-(

November 10, 2010 at 4:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Well I'm already nervous about taking away mortgage interest deductions. I know often people move from renting to buying a house figuring in the tax break to make it possible for them to swing ownership as opposed to renting........

November 10, 2010 at 4:38 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

The version I read also had recommendations for the elimination of many farm subsidies and direct payments and a call for a 100-billion dollar cut in illustrative defense spending.

There were many other proposals there, but also a recognition from the chairmen that they might have to go into the witness-protection program before much of this would ever be past. And therein lies the rub. But to my eye there were some good ideas like the elimination of all earmarks...bad ones for additional tax breaks for the rich, and others that deserved a look. But then when you start looking at whose ox is getting gored is where the trouble begins.

It's easier to gore the HEW type ox than the earmarks, farm subsidies and defense ones. The HEW beneficiaries are far less able to resist.

November 10, 2010 at 4:48 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

I'm definitely with you on the mortgage interest deductions, open_eyes. There's a very good tax break for most homeowners. Not long ago, I convinced a friend of mine to buy instead of renting because she'd build up an equity. But my real selling point was the deductible mortgage interest.

In addition, the tax break homeowners receive is rarely tucked away and forgotten; instead many homeowners use the savings to plow back into the house or take a vacation or educate junior. That means sales taxes for the community with an increase of purchasing power to buy anything from bolts to books.

I don't think these bureaucrats are taking the full effect of tax savings on the general public, in particular, middle income people.

I didn't notice any pay cuts for the feds in this list of proposals, or a cut in medical benefits for congressional members.

If this all passes, I see a revolution coming, especially by the growing population of seniors.

November 10, 2010 at 8:35 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Exactly right, create - look at what the housing bubble bursting did to our economy the last few years....... and there's no doubt taking away that tax credit would kick the housing market (what's left of it) in the teeth again, and drag the economy down even further with it.

Yes, and no tax cuts or rollback of any benefits or pensions for any of the feds. And no higher taxes on the very rich. Imagine that. However they did propose a three-year freeze in the pay of most federal employees and a 10 percent cut in the federal work force. So we've spent the last few years growing the federal workforce, now we're doing to cut it....... and of course, they already earn about twice what their private counterparts do:

http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy...

But, that's the problem when you have to cut spending - everyone likes to play the sympathy card against those mean-spirited people who resist increased spending..... but when it comes time to pay the piper...... well, look at California. They are flat broke in every way imaginable. And their response last week? 99% of the incumbents that ran were re-elected, at both the state and national level. This despite the polls showing between 9 and 12% approval of the California legislature. Well, they can keep spending & giving all their entitlements - after all, the rest of us will pay for it. We're just not enlightened enough to know what's best for us like they are.

November 10, 2010 at 11:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

While the mortgage deduction is nice, at current rates it doesn't add up to all that on a yearly bases. Of course over 20-30 years it adds up.

I did hear there was a recommended 10% cut in federal work force and federal wages..

For the polls to come out already and say some items on reductions are a "non-starter" is plain politics. i want my grandchildren to grow up in a country at least as great as the one I did. If we don't demand that our elected officials stop their credit card spending the quality of life for future Americans is looking bleak.

November 11, 2010 at 5:17 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

genexer,

i was in a club last night and heard your "real" name paged for a phone call.

Cell batteries dead?

November 11, 2010 at 5:20 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

But with all this spending, I think it's just a matter of time before we have a round of inflation. Then the rates are going to rise, and that mortgage deduction is going to go back to adding up on a yearly basis.

November 11, 2010 at 8:05 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

chrissylynn_2 (anonymous) says...

money, money, money, jobs, jobs, jobs. I think that if everything in the store did not say, made in somewhere other than the USA, it would help the economy. with that thought I would like to add I hated economics in college, didn't get it, probably because of thoughts like this, I also know nothing about importing and exporting. It seems to me its all talk of tax cuts a tax increases and price increases, like the country is trying to squeeze more out than was put in. Like i said I'm an economic dummy, so help me understand why providing more for ourselves from what we have wont work is it all about the resources and where they lie?
could we not import resources and then provide the product production here in the USA?

November 11, 2010 at 8:30 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

Government and the people that " Really Run Government " are the biggest debt liability that the working U.S. taxpayer has ! And it should not be !

November 11, 2010 at 8:32 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

"We'll both be in a witness protection program when this is all over, so look us up," Simpson quipped to reporters. Bowles said: "We're not asking anybody to vote for this plan. This is a starting point."

First of all, how do you look someone up if they are in a witness protection program? That would kinda defeat the purpose wouldn't it? These guys need to work on their jokes a little more or better yet give them up all together.

Seriously though, this is just a starting point and it will probably be whittled down to basically nothing and the money being spent to do this will just be more wasteful spending. I hope this isn't the case but it seems to always turn out that way.

"The Social Security proposal would ....... reducing annual increases." Yes.

"The plan would also raise the regular Social Security retirement age" Yes.

"Better-off beneficiaries would receive smaller Social Security payments than those in lower earning brackets" Pay more in, get less out? I don't know about that.

"Increasing the gas tax by 15 cents a gallon" That's a real kick in the tenders. It will probably happen though.

"A three-year freeze in the pay of most federal employees and a 10 percent cut in the federal work force" Yes and no. Freeze pay but do it for 5 -10 years. I hate to see any workforce get cut right now.

"Eliminating all congressional pet projects, known as earmarks" DUH!! Of course!! Yes!!

"Their plan also calls for a major overhaul of both the individual income tax and the corporate tax systems with the idea of lowering overall tax rates, simplifying the Tax Code and broadening the taxpayer base" This could be good or bad depending on how it's done.

"For individuals and families, the proposal would eliminate a host of popular tax credits and deductions" Bad timing on this, people need all the help they can get right now.

"The deduction that companies take for providing health insurance to their employees would be eliminated" That's ok they'll(the companies) just reduce the workforce to make up that money. Not good.

"the corporate income tax rate would be reduced from 35 percent to 26 percent, and the U.S. would stop taxing overseas profits of U.S.-based multinational corporations" From what I've read this will help us compete globally since no other country in the world taxes overseas profit.

November 11, 2010 at 9:06 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

So if we stop taxing overseas profit... but tax it at home..... then all the companies will just move overseas.

November 11, 2010 at 9:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

Overseas profits don't have to be produced overseas. Produce it here sell it overseas, that is how other countries do it, from what I've read. We need to make it easier and more profitable for production in this country and easier and more profitable to sell globally. If the companies know that they aren't going to have to pay taxes on overseas sales the price can come down making our products more attractive to prospective buyers because of that lower cost. I agree that if the companies had to move production else where to benefit from the tax break it would be disastrous but I don't think that is the case.

November 11, 2010 at 9:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

True. I wonder what they are going to do about jobs moving overseas? I remember alot of talk & promises from a certain candidate about doing something regarding the outsourcing of American jobs overseas. I see know that same former candidate is over in India saying India doesn't take American jobs. So at this point I really am confused as to what country he is prez of, because I don't think he really understands what goes on in this one.

A funny: Last night I was watching Southpark. The Goth kids were complaining - BP drilling had released some evil monster from another dimension, they were complaining they had been praying to him and going to all the cult meetings with the promise things would change.

"I thought than when Cthulhu would rise, all would be darkness and pain. I thought at least, school would get canceled!"

(Then Mysterio asks them if they can pray to their god to stop destroying the earth)

"Not our god! he promised everything would change if we worshiped him but we’re still sitting here smoking cigarettes like before. It’s like Obama all over again!”

LOL

November 11, 2010 at 9:29 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

Tsk, tsk, tsk. Sneaking in a littly Obama-bashing I see. But yes, funny nonetheless. Gotta laugh at satire.

The big problem with selling stuff overseas is the entire racket of copy-catting American designs. No sooner as it hits the market, somebody in China rips it off and starts producing it for practically nothing. They're like a nest of insects -- you kill a few but the majority just goes underground...etc...

November 11, 2010 at 11:34 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Since alot of people claim they get their news from Comedy Central I figured South Park was as legit as any..... lol

Well I'm firmly behind him on this. Let's see if anything gets done. Looks like even some Dems aren't on board with it though. If he blames it all on the Repubs...... well all I can say is he had 2 full years.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2...

November 11, 2010 at 2:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

Lurked awhile, guess who is back..

Open_eyes

In all seriousness I have read and listened to your arguments for awhile now. I fail to see how you can continue to make the argument that one sided is as balanced as the other. Mind you I take no sides, take that for what you will...

I leave you with this, which contradicts some of the statements you made earlier:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101111/a...

Mind you said tax cuts were passed with "reconciliation" that dirty word that used to pass health care.....

November 11, 2010 at 11:38 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Hi goodoleboy, welcome back.

So what exactly do you mean by my argument that "one sided is as balanced as the other"?

As for the polls in the link you cited, earlier we were talking about the numbers on the exit polls on election day. I'm not surprised the numbers have changed anymore than I'm not surprised Obama's approval rating isn't the same as it was last week. Your own link stated "....preference for cutting everyone's taxes was a turnabout from September, when most in an AP-GfK poll favored...." see..... numbers constantly change.

But again, even from your own link, "Fifty-eight percent would rather make even more changes in the health care system or leave the measure alone.". Which I don't see disagrees much at all from the earlier numbers. "Make more changes" could be either expand or pare back, it doesn't say. I suspect they are once again doing some lumping together of number that don't belong in the same bucket. If you go back to the earlier poll.... 48% want it repealed completely. which only leave 52% total that want to see any part of it continue (whether as is, expanded, or curbed). So if the number is now 58%, either the numbers have changed in the last week, or once again, they are grouping curbed back in with expanded. Sorry, but I fail to see your point in this as to how it contradicts? Other than the fact that I'm sure numbers 2 weeks from now will contradict the numbers now, and so on, and so on........ even Bush's approval ratings aren't what they were when he left office, nor what they were after 9/11 ;-)

November 12, 2010 at 8:52 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

My point is that most people have not even educated themselves enough to know exactly what HCR is and what it does. They get the opinions of "Fair and Balanced" folk. My estimation is that in 5 years or so people will look back and say it was a good thing. I am not saying it is perfect, no bill ever has been, but it was better than doing nothing. Hence, polls on what people want and think will continue to fluctuate and be nothing more than something to argue about. There is no definitive answer, just partisan rhetoric.

I see you often make the case that one side is as bad as the other. Recently I just don't agree. It almost seems to me like democrats as a whole have moved in the moderate or even right center sector and the right has gone off the map. There are a few exceptions but I am generalizing here. I still maintain that Obama was more of centrist than people realize, his biggest weakness thus far that I have seen is his lack of the ability to grow a pair, too much accommodation for both sides.

I don't know where the conservatives are going from here, the Tea Party element has forced many of them to be very extreme and in the end that will cost them the independents which decide elections. The success they have now will be short lived with the agenda I see mentioned, which is really too bad when we have people like Pelosi and Reid around still.

November 12, 2010 at 9:46 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

"democrats as a whole have moved in the moderate or even right center"

That is hilarious! ROFL

November 12, 2010 at 10:11 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

Welcome back, goodoleboy. Hope you are well.

You make a good point about people not educating themselves about HCR, and I like your 5-year estimation.

I found this interview with Beri Fox, CEO of Marble King pretty interesting on Stephen Colbert last night. You will both find it interesting what she had to say about HCR and other small business considerations. Here's the link. If you are impatient, she appears at about 6 minutes ten seconds in.

http://www.colbertnation.com/full-epi...

November 12, 2010 at 10:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

Because what has been passed is so overwhelmingly liberal right? You do realize that a great deal of HCR is very similar to a republican proposal from one Bob Dole in the 90's? Hilarious is the fact that in your hurry to quantify a group as either conservative or liberal you fail to investigate whether what I said makes any sense at all.

November 12, 2010 at 10:25 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

Thanks for the link Create=) Interesting stuff.

November 12, 2010 at 10:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Everyone agrees we need to do something with health care. I myself said that it needs to be reworked - some parts pared back, some parts re-done differently. And yes, for those who scream about it being overwhelmingly liberal, they forget it is very similar to what Republican Mitt Romney passed in Mass. But it isn't working as well there as it has often been trumped up to be, either.

http://dailycaller.com/2010/01/10/mas...

This is supposed to cut the deficit, right? It "failed to accurately anticipate the true cost of the program". Which is the same story pretty much everywhere this type of health care is implemented. Why should we suddenly believe the CBO figures now? (Which change every week it seems).

No, at any given time, one side is usually NOT as bad as the other. We saw plenty of that for 8 years prior. But, it all seems to even out over time. After all, on both sides, people are the same human beings.

I agree, seriouslyrfolks - that is one of the most hilarious things I have read on here in a long time. Even funnier than the possum :-) I'm not sure I've seen alot of "accomodation" of both sides with the super-majority lately. Pretty much every single proposal from the other side was completely thrown out and ignored during the whole HCR debate - I'm confused as to who it was he was "accomodating on this issue"? Anyone know?

November 12, 2010 at 10:46 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Could you also please point out some examples of my "Hilarious is the fact that in your hurry to quantify a group as either conservative or liberal you fail to investigate whether what I said makes any sense at all. "? Start at the top of this thread and do a search for the word "liberal"...... the only time I used it was in a copy of an article from....... MSNBC....... and referring to campaign "tricks" by a certain operative. And I've agreed with several so-called "liberal" ideas.
Have you ever read anything I've written NOT thru a pre-defined prism?

November 12, 2010 at 10:54 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Spin and non-spin: If 48% of people want HCR completely thown out..... and 31% of them want it either left as is or expanded, and the remaining 21% are categorized as "wanting it changed to some degree"........ then the math is simple.

You CAN say: A majority of folks think it has gone too far.

You CAN say: A majority of folks do NOT want it completely thrown out.

You CAN say: A majority of folks either want it to stay as is or with changes.

You can spin it different ways to fit your own outlook, and everyone of these is absolutely true. However,

You CANNOT say: A majority of folks want it to stay as is or expanded even further.

Do the math.

November 12, 2010 at 11 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

"Could you also please point out some examples of my 'Hilarious is the fact that in your hurry to quantify a group as either conservative or liberal you fail to investigate whether what I said makes any sense at all. '?"

I think he was talking to me with that one.

November 12, 2010 at 12:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Sorry seriouslyr & goodole, thought that was directed at me along with the previous post. What I get for speed-reading :-)

I still saw little or no attempt to reach out in any way across the aisle on HCR. Basically all I heard was along the lines of we have a super-majority and we don't need you, and "we won". We heard it on the budget, too. Of course, the Republicans do the exact same thing if/when they have a majority, too. Except they haven't had a super-majority since....??? (Meaning 60+ in the Senate). But if they did I don't doubt for one second they would behave the same way. And then label the Dems as the Party of No, and so on. Same words, different tune.

It's getting harder and harder for my disgust for both parties penchant for politics-as-usual to not show thru these days... :(

November 12, 2010 at 1:48 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

open_eyes, did you get a chance to hear Beri Fox with regard to small businesses and HCR on that link I posted to Stephen Colbert? She said she was "required" to attend a workshop on it as were all business owners, and that this new HCR was going to work for her company. I don't know how many employees she has.

November 12, 2010 at 2:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

open-eyes

Yeah the only reason that the liberal dems couldn't push through everything they wanted with hrc was because of the blue dog dems and the rest of the dems painted the blue dogs as traitors to the cause that is why I say that it's hillarious to say that the dems are center right. There are moderates in the dem party but to say that the party as a whole is center right is just ..... um .... not true. There are moderates in the repub party also but it seems that people can paint that whole party as a bunch of right wing nuts but they say you can't paint the dems as a bunch of libs because of the left wing nuts in their party. I know I often painte the dem party as all liberal but I only do it for effect, in reality I acknowledge and appreciate the blue dogs. They are the anchor that keeps that party from going off into left field.

November 12, 2010 at 2:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

It makes absolutely no difference at all which " Political Party " you are loyal to, support or believe is right !

As long as there is " BIG MONEY " backing all political partys and controlling the " Political Partys " agenda as well as the the " Candidates " of the political partys, you, me, we the " Little People " will always be on the " Short End Of The Stick " and be required to bear the burden of " Paying " for whatever mess is caused by " Big Money ", " Greedy/Corrupt Political Partys' and their " Greedy, Bought and Sponsered " Politicans/Candidates !

Political Partys' and their Candidates/Politicans will and have always made promises to " The People " only to get elected and in power . However the only promises they will keep or try to keep, are the promises made to the " Big Money " backers of the " Party " and the " Campaign " for the " Rule " of the Nation and its people !

And the idea of working together in unison/together to affect a benificial and good life for " All The People " , will never become a reality, until and when all " Outside " influence, Greed and Graft is completely gone from all Political Partys, Politicians and Governments !

The current system of Government that is prevailent in the U.S. is much like an " oligarchy " form of government and this even includes not only the Federal Government, but State, County and Local governments as well !

oligarchy [Gr.,=rule by the few], rule by a few members of a community or group. When referring to governments, the classical definition of oligarchy, as given for example by Aristotle, is of government by a few, usually the rich, for their own advantage. It is compared with both aristocracy , which is defined as government by a few chosen for their virtue and ruling for the general good, and various forms of democracy , or rule by the people. In practice, however, almost all governments, whatever their form, are run by a small minority of members. From this perspective, the major distinction between oligarchy and democracy is that in the latter, the elites compete with each other, gaining power by winning public support. The extent and type of barriers impeding those who attempt to join this ruling group is also significant.

http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/oli...

November 12, 2010 at 2:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Create - no, I didn't get a chance to listen to it - I jump back & forth at work when I have time, I can read, but listening to audio is difficult. I will try to later tonight. I do know that I just signed up for my yearly health care enrollment options, and it was quite a bit higher, and was stated as being so because of new laws. But I work for a larger company so it may be different.

I agree, seriouslyrfolks. But then again, these are the same people that try to paint the Tea Party as all racists because of a small # of idiots who show up at their rallies, but disregard 10 times that amount of equally disgraceful protestors at anti-Bush rallies as being anything other than patriotic. It all depends on your point of view: on a scale of 0 to 10, (0 extreme far right, 10 extreme far left) the 1's & 2's and 8's & 9's see almost everything as being to either their left or right.

November 12, 2010 at 3:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

Open eyes,

I saw almost nothing of substance offered during HCR with the exception of Tort reform. There was very little, the GOP made their gains by opposing everything, and from the comments being made by McConnell and others about making their top priority getting Obama out, it leads me to believe they will continue to do nothing but play politics instead of try to get something done.

November 12, 2010 at 5:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

This was back in March:

http://healthcareforpafamilies.com/Ne...

"House Republican Policy Committee’s Health Care Task Force, chaired by Reps. Bryan Cutler (R-Lancaster) and Kathy Watson (R-Bucks), introduced a package of legislation that makes health care more affordable and accessible for all Pennsylvanians, helps to cover more of the uninsured and does not raise taxes.

After Obama asked for ideas on health care reform last year, the task force sent a letter to his administration outlining its proposals in September. To this date, this letter has been ignored and unanswered. In addition, Obama claimed he wanted to hold a bi-partisan summit to discuss health care reform. Representatives from more than 30 states signed onto a letter asking Obama to join this summit, including Rep. Matthew Baker (R-Bradford/Tioga), Republican chairman of the House Health and Human Services Committee. Once again, Pennsylvania and countless other states were ignored and shut out of the process. To view both letters, visit www.HealthCareForPaFamilies.com. "

I fail to see much reaching out across the aisle in that. Or perhaps you were listening to Dem Representative Holland from MD, who told Talk Radio News Service back in 2009 on July 31 “There is no Republican health care plan out there.”

In May, Republicans in the House and the Senate formed a bicameral coalition to produce the130-page “Patients Choice Act of 2009.”

In June, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) introduced the “Health Care Freedom Plan,” a 41-page proposal.

And in July, the Republican Study Committee, under the leadership of Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.), unveiled the “Empowering Patients First Act,” a 130-page plan.

"The three Republican bills total almost 400 pages and have been on the table since May and June."

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/5...

And of course, tort reform was never an option, what with lawyers overwhelmingly supporting Dems, as I showed links to earlier.

You may not think those were anything of substance but that is your opinion. I disagree with you there, but I do agree with you on "playing politics".

From http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo....

"House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) today was adamant that some of the more popular parts of health care reform that the Democrats have been touting were actually Republican ideas, despite repeatedly saying in the past that no Republican ideas had been incorporated into the plan."

Another reason I'm not too hyped up about Boehner being majority leader.....

November 12, 2010 at 5:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

So we did see plenty of proposals from Repubs, most if not all never made it out of Dem-controlled committees. They just said "No" - and then called the GOP the party of no. Sounds to me like there was alot of no-no'ing going on..... both sides.... lol

But, now it seems, the Republicans are quick to jump on anything they see as most people liking in HCR and claim they had a hand in it, and disavow any links to anything folks don't like. Just watch - if HCR gains more traction in its current form, they will claim more and more of it was done with their input. If it goes the opposite way, they'll claim more and more that they were shut out of the process.

Typical politicians.

November 12, 2010 at 5:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Some GOP proposals outlined in greater detail in bullet items towards the bottom:

http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/201...

November 12, 2010 at 5:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

I'm familiar with a few of the proposals you mentioned, there was not a whole lot outlined on how they were going to accomplish things, some of the differences were ideological where the democrats just thought they had the better way, so they made the call.

What I get sick of is the disinformation and outright lies that are told about HCR and misinform people. Sad thing is that some of liars got elected because people settle for the talking heads' opinions.

November 12, 2010 at 6:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

They weren't as detailed because they were never given a chance to get out of committee. Even if they had, they certainly wouldn't have been a 2000+ page monstrosity. I'm more in favor of smaller bills that people actually read than huge detailed ones that nobody really knows the details of. What good are details if the people who vote on them don't even know what most of them are?

As far as the misinformation, that pretty much happens both directions every election, unfortunately. Some elections more one way than the other. But there were also lies told in favor about HCR I believe also. All the theory - all the estimates - I'll rely more on how it is working in Mass & other places than all the theoretical projections. And, as linked above..... not what the forecast was. And nothing in the current bill gives me any reason to believe this one will turn out any differently in its present form.

November 12, 2010 at 6:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Everytime someone mentions liars getting elected I think of Barney Frank ;-)

November 12, 2010 at 6:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

Notice I never mentioned parties when talking about liars? You always seem to end your posts bashing someone on the left, not that there are not plenty of liars there, but there are also plenty on the right. Just an observation.

Comparing the HCR that just passed to Massachusetts is somewhat naive, there are differences, but they are not clones of each other. I tend to think this reform will work out in the long run, change is always painful. But then again I am from the school where I believe profits should never be tied to Healthcare. Greed was the whole reason we even had to address the issue.

November 12, 2010 at 8:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

goodoleboy, please go back and read how my posts from yesterday at 5:49 and 5:54 ended.

Apology accepted.

November 13, 2010 at 11:43 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Apparently you don't read things close enough. Just an observation, as you say.

November 13, 2010 at 11:44 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

goodoleboy

Welcome back.....

November 13, 2010 at 11:52 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

A pox on all of their houses!

November 13, 2010 at 11:54 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I agree with the assessment made by goodoleboy and open_eyes that Obama is much more centrist than far-left. His big failure in my opinion is a lack of......well.....you know what I mean!

November 13, 2010 at 11:58 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Of course there are differences. They are not exact clones of each other. But they are very similar, and it is somewhat naive to think one shouldn't be able to look at the other's similarities and not be able to draw comparisons.

From the White House itself: (Washington Examiner):

"WH says Obamacare is just like Mass. health plan; Mass. Former Dem Treasurer says it will "wipe out the American economy"

"This weekend, David Axelrod, the president's top political advisor went on television and defended Democrats health care reform efforts by favorably comparing it to the state health care plan in Massachusetts:

"Senator [Scott] Brown [R-Mass.] comes from a state that has a healthcare plan that's similar to the one we're trying to enact here," Axelrod said on ABC's "This Week". "We're just trying to give the rest of America the same opportunities that the people of Massachusetts have."

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opi...

Newsweek: "Massachusetts Offers Preview of Obamacare"

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/07/19/ma...

"ObamaCare: A National Version of RomneyCare"

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/obamacar...

NY Post: Massachusetts Mess Previews ObamaCare Woes

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/...

November 13, 2010 at 12:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Actually, biscuitboy, I never said or agreed Obama was much more centrist than far-left. Never really said anything about where Obama stood on that spectrum. I disagreed with the statement that Democrats as a whole have moved right-center. I think one of his big failures is that he is out of touch with much of mainstream America, not that he doesn't have the kahonas. Actually, quite the opposite. I think he has big enough ones to thumb his nose at much of mainstream America. He isn't as far left as the extreme fringe would like.... but then again, nothing short of Chavez, Castro or Mao would satisfy alot of those folks.

November 13, 2010 at 12:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Sorry open_eyes....I guess when you spoke of Democrats as a whole I erroneously though you were including the president. I'm sorry....I think....:-)

But when you consider the number of Bush era policies that he has kept in place carte blanc....as well as passage of a HCR law based very much on a Republican model......it tells me he is either lacking in something....or he is pretty centrist. That is unless you are classifying Bush-2 as also being out of touch with the mainstream of America on the same issues.

November 13, 2010 at 12:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I can't seem to go back now and locate the statement that caused me to think you said most democrats weren't radical left. so I guess I will just have to be sorry. But I stand by my second paragraph about all the Bush era programs Obama has let stand as proof that he is either more centrist than given credit for.......or Bush was more left than the Republicans want to admit.

November 13, 2010 at 1:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

That's ok, biscuitboy, it wasn't a slam, just setting the record straight :-)

I think Bush-2 and the Republicans as a whole have been out of touch with their base for quite some time. Fiscal conservatives (under Bush-2) my a$$.....

And yes, I have stated here, and stand by, (just as the WH does), that the current HCR is modeled very closely (not exactly, goodoleboy) on the Mass model, which was signed by Repub gov Romney. Much of it was proposed and pushed by Romney - (his "baby") - but it is worth noting that the House & Senate in Mass are both usually about 90% Dems, and their current bill was a compromise, as outlined here:

http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/...

Many of the Bush-era programs he has kept in place have to do with the war, Patriot Act, etc. In those instances, separate from most other, yes, I would definitely agree he has either kept most Bush era things in place, and in some cases, expanded them. I think probably right about the time of Obama's first high-level security breifing after taking office is when he realized on those issues he had to move to the right.

My general sense is that most people on the left count the war/security related issues in when saying Obama is more of a centrist, and most people on the right don't factor that in. So I think there's some truth to be had from both points of view - war/security issues, I think he has stayed much of course in many areas, which makes him farther right. Most issues OUTSIDE of that, however, I don't see him as a centrist. I think therein lies the difference in perceptions of him.

November 13, 2010 at 1:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

No the similarities are not just about the security/war issues.

5. They love to spend. Bush passed a $3 trillion budget for 2009. Obama posted a $3.5 trillion budget in 2010. Bush doubled the debt to almost $6 trillion and Obama’s plans would leave us with an IOU of an additional $8.5 trillion by 2020.

4. They shop at the same stores. Contrary to popular belief, defense and homeland security spending only made up about 40 percent of Bush’s new spending. He increased spending across most non-defense categories – like education, Medicare, Medicaid, income security and regional development – by four to six times the rate of inflation. In Obama’s first half year in office, as he demanded a departure from the “investment deficit” years under Bush, these budgets rose another 70 percent or 40 times the rate of inflation.

3. They dabble with stimulants. In 2001 and 2008, Bush spent billions on rebates to stimulate consumer spending. In 2009, Obama upped the ante with his $862 billion stimulus package.

2. They give sweetheart deals to failing corporations. Obama carried out Bush’s unpopular $700 billion bailout for failing corporations. Together, the presidents have bailed out over 600 businesses since Spring 2008.

1. They enjoy regulating in their free time. Once again contrary to popular belief, President Bush was the biggest regulator since Richard Nixon. Under his leadership in 2007, the number of pages of regulation added to the Federal Register reached an all-time high of 78,090 – a 21 percent increase from Bush’s first year. And spending on regulatory activities rose to $42 billion in 2009 – a 62 percent increase. Since taking office, Obama has proposed a large and sweeping increase in regulation that many worry could lead to another financial crisis in the future.

And that is just a few mind you.... Just food for thought.

November 13, 2010 at 3:35 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

But pretty much EVERY single thing you have named is what made Bush a leftist prez - or a RHINO (Republican in Name Only) - not making Obama a right-center prez. Alot of things Bush did were quite different from what the Republican party is supposed to stand for.

Pretty much everything you have listed makes them both left of center. One reason the Tea Party has risen. Repubs don't know their own base anymore. Of course..... getting back to what they are supposed to originally support, now makes them far-right radicals. Shows you how much the GOP shifted left during Bush's terms. And just like the difficulty with shrinking government after you've let it bloat..... people are finding out that returning the GOP closer to what it should have been all along now makes them the "radical fringe"......
I don't support every single thing most of the Tea Party does, but they ARE trying to return the GOP to its roots - and if the GOP won't come back, then they'll become it themselves, and our current GOP can go ahead and behave like they did under Bush - unrecognizable as classic Republicans in many ways.

November 13, 2010 at 4:45 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

If the centrist RHINO's and the Blue Dog centrist Democrats would ever wake up and realize they have more in common than in what keeps them apart, they could form a moderate center third party that would take this country back away from the fringe.

Don't forget that most of those independent swing voters that are flopping back and forth every two years now are also centrist. That's why they keep flopping back and forth.....trying to keep pulling the lunatic fringes (left and right) back to the middle.

November 14, 2010 at 5:56 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

Your opinion, but I'm confused. the Tea Party has stated that it is not the GOP, yet your claiming it's purpose it to reform the GOP? From what I have read some of their fundamental principles are mutually exclusive. I've yet to see a "moderate" Tea Party candidate.

November 14, 2010 at 6:02 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

Instead of arguing about whether you or anyone is a Conservative, Liberal or even a Tea Partier ..... go to the follwing link, read the Info and then make up your own minds as to whether you are a Conservative, Liberal, etc..

I have decided that I am basically a " Moderate " .

http://www.balancedpolitics.org/ideol...

November 14, 2010 at 8:12 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

If you take a look at the link I previously posted, I think most of can and will decide which ideologys you agree with and don' t agree with and you will have a better understanding of exactly where you stand on the idea of whether you are a Conservative ( Repub ), a Liberal ( Dem ) or whether you agree with some of the Conservative ideas and some of the Liberal ideas and therefore are a middle of the road " Moderate " !

Having a Government that is based on only one dominate ideology ( Party View ) and cannot compromise or work with another ideology ( Party View ) for the good of all peoples, can not and will not long endure, survive nor have the support of the " ALL OF THE PEOPLE " !

November 14, 2010 at 8:36 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

Also, since the " Tea Party " basically helped the Republican Conservative Party in the recent election, I believe that the Tea Party can be placed, solidly into the Republican Conservative Party catagory !

In two years, if the Republican Conservative Party can not deliver on promises made to the Tea Party, which I believe is nothing more than a " Splinter, radical political faction " , this radical splinter faction will again switch sides and then who know whom they will decide to back ! I think that even they have no idea of what they want ! That is not necessarily a bad thing, but neither is it a good thing ! Indecision or bad decisions, breeds Chaos !

November 14, 2010 at 8:46 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

methusla

Your link is a handy summation of the relative positions of the two sides now. But I thought the best description of the differences between the two came in the first paragraph of the opening....

"The original definition of a liberal was someone who advocated change, new philosophies, and new ideas. A conservative was someone who avoided change, instead preferring to stick to the tried and true."

Using that old definition I would certainly describe my self as a liberal. I believe the world is a dynamic place and how we feel about and approach things very much has to adapt to new conditions on the ground. I have often said one of my big frustrations with conservative thought is always trying to apply 19th and 20th century solutions to 21st century problems. Like goodoleboy said in a recent post....."Trickle down trickles out in a global economy."

Using the continuum scale provided though, I would fit more into a left centrist slot. Why? Because I could support to some degree or another positions on both sides of the scale. But I could not support any left or right position carte blanc with out some qualifications.

Interesting exercise though.....

November 14, 2010 at 8:58 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

Also 10 or more years of bad decisions and screw ups can not be undone or fixed in just 2 years. And expecting so, is not only unreasonable, but idiotic as well !

Therefore I believe the Tea Party will be in for a big surprise in the lack of results expected in the next 2 years !

The only thing that will not be a surprise will be the worsening of the current situation, as come January 1, 2011, Congress, instead of coming and working together will grow even further apart and the the " common people " will suffer even more for it .

I see, a tremendous battle brewing over HCR and permanent tax cuts for the wealthy and this battle will get pretty nasty before it is all over !

I also foresee a concerted effort to completely destroy or eliminate Social Security and Medicare by the Conservative Republican Party !

Again this is JMO

November 14, 2010 at 8:59 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

biscuit

I was hoping the link would be of some help to all on these threads !

I, after seeing this link, classified myself as a moderate, as I agree with some of the Liberal views and some of the Conservative views.
And that is why I do not vote strictly on a Party line ! I have even been known to vote Reform Party or Independent Party, if I think that particular candidate has some good ideas or views !

November 14, 2010 at 9:07 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I agree methusla....

The only hope for Social Security and Medicare might lie in the dedication the elderly and near-elderly have to getting out and voting. Once they become convinced of the threat the ones on Social Security already and that hugh mass of baby boomers just coming on board will be a powerful force to reckon with.

Of course the economic impact of the baby boomers has been largely covered by the two point five trillion dollar trust fund Social Security holds in a vault right now. Problem is that money has been borrowed by Congress to cover it's lavish spending habits and wars elsewhere....and covered by treasury notes.

Of course now those notes are starting to become due and Congress doesn't want to have to pay them back. So to justify their attempt to renege on the good faith and credit of the United States of America, Congress is demonizing Social Security and blaming it for the problem.

If that money was paid back it would cover most of the cost of the baby boom which would be largely over by 2035 at which time Social Security....in a relatively normal economic environment....would remain solvent. Even in the present sluggish economy the trust fund increased by 122 billion dollars in 2009....aided in part by 118-billion dollars in interest alone on the trust fund. Of course that interest is owed by the government and it doesn't want to cut spending elsewhere to pay it.......so it would rather cut the legs out from under the young, the elderly, and the disadvantaged.

November 14, 2010 at 9:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

The Tea Party is in a large part made up of people dissatisfied with the direction the GOP has taken lately - in the words of the writer of the article "Confessions of a Tea Party Consultant", "Bush mangled the GOP brand into a grotesque form that conservatives haven’t recognized in five years." In addition to people just dissatisfied with present government from other angles, period. But that is its majority makeup I don't' think anyone would argue.

Whichever way it goes.... whether they succeed in bringing GOP candidates back to the core principles of smaller government & fiscal responsibility, or remain a 3rd party that shares some aims with the current GOP & some difference.... remains to be seen. We have some Republicans standing up for fiscal conservatism (something they've gotten far, far away from recently) and being backed by the Tea Party, and some who don't, and run opposed by the Tea Party. It will be interesting to watch.....

I've seen that link before, methusla - and though my ideologies weigh more heavily on the conservative side, I'm not above crossing the fence on several of those issues, nor finding a middle ground with some I'm not completely satisfied with either point. I also think it is not all that common to find a candidate who toes that same line completely from top to bottom. If they all did we wouldn't have primaries. I refused to be tied to any one ideology, nor do I always follow any one point all of the time. As biscuitboy & I have both said, sometimes my point of view depends on "conditions on the ground at that time".

November 14, 2010 at 10:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

The reason I say they are trying to reform the GOP is that they HAVE backed some GOP candidates, while opposing others. If most or all of the GOP candidates would get back to supporting the TP's main points (fiscal responsibility, lower taxes, smaller governement, reducing the debt) then I doubt we'd see much difference between the 2 ("reform"). If not, then they will remain separate.

Everybody likes to spend, spend, spend, use "sympathy" lines to justify more spend, spend, spend. But when it comes time to pay the piper everyone wants to point the finger at someone else. Or, as we're seeing in California, Greece, UK, & everywhere else the big "social" experiments are beginning to go broke...... riot.

November 14, 2010 at 10:22 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

tbluma (anonymous) says...

bisquit
Your 8:58 AM post, second paragraph, description of liberal/conservative is most agreeable with me.
Here's why
Tried and true
Give kids in school a whipping, make them behave, make them learn the English language.
Liberal
They have ADD, they're poor immigrants and we need to teach in their language.
Which worked better?
Tried and true
Everyone should earn their own way and pay their fair share.
Liberal
We need to help all of the poor, helpless, lazy people no matter what.
Where has that got us?
Tried and true
Donate to SS and have money to retire.
Liberal
Let's use this SS for everything else while we're at it.
Where's that got us?
I would point out that both parties are guilty of the liberal point of view. That is why I prefer the monikeer of Conservative over Rep., Dem., or Ind.

November 14, 2010 at 10:30 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I would be more receptive to cuts in the so-called "sympathy" areas when I see some significant cuts in other areas that you yourself would not bet on being cut at the same time. What I get tired of is the ease with which "sympathy" falls under the axe...compared to those tax breaks and benefits more near and dear to the hearts of people with more ability to pay.

November 14, 2010 at 10:35 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

I also think that the definition & positions listed in the article are a little narrow, and represent extreme ends overall. "A liberal was someone who advocated change, new philosophies, and new ideas. A conservative was someone who avoided change, instead preferring to stick to the tried and true."

But that isn't completely true. Liberals espouse ideas that have stood the test of time in many cases, and conservatives embrace new ideas often. I mean, many liberal ideas have been tried or are in place already in places. What's new about that? Many conservative principles HAD to at one time.... have been new. So that statement is a very broad generalization that has some truth to it, yes, but cannot be used to paint an absolute picture. That's the problem with our government these days. Everyone wants absolutes, no compromise, etc. If the Repubs keep control of the House & take the Senate in 2012 I may find myself voting for a Dem pres just to keep the power balanced. As I read somewhere once, this country functions best when we have a balance of power because (and I paraphrase, can't remember the exact words) "while they spend all their time in Washington bickering with each other the rest of the country can get along with our business & move ahead with our lives better...... lol ;-)

November 14, 2010 at 10:36 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

I'll agree with that - I think the sympathy needs to be paid for with those most able to pay it. I totally agree we always want to cut "sympathy" spending but not on those who it won't affect.

BUT.........the only danger is..... there is no end to sympathy........ and this train tends to get a full head of steam with the conductor asleep at the brake. As always... a balancing act.

November 14, 2010 at 10:39 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

tbluma

"Liberal
We need to help all of the poor, helpless, lazy people no matter what."

I don't know what liberal you are getting that from but not from this one. I certainly do believe we as a society have an obligation to take care of the young, the elderly, and the disadvantaged. But by disadvantaged I mean those with mental or physical infirmities. I do not now, or have I ever, advocated that we have an obligation to help the poor helpless lazy people no matter what.

"Liberal
Let's use this SS for everything else while we're at it."

This tapping into the Social Security trust fund has been going on for most of the past thirty years and encompasses both sides of the aisle. It is certainly not just a Liberal failing.

November 14, 2010 at 10:51 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

That's the problem - at both ends, biscuitboy & tbluma. I too believe we have an obligation to assist the young, elderly, disadvantaged, but not the lazy moochers.

Problem is..... left to their own devices, unchecked... the Dem party will inevitable keep playing the sympathy card and extend it to cover all the lazy bums as well.... because the rich can afford it, and kill personal responsibility & incentive.

Problem is..... left to their own devices, unchecked... the Rep party will inevitable give the very wealthy a free pass, (and the wealthier you get, the more of a pass you will get), and let more and more of the wealth concentrate in the hands of a few, and increase the divide between the rich and poor.

That's why we need balance, moderates, folks who don't 100% ascribe to every item of either side of methusla's link.

November 14, 2010 at 11:01 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

I posted a link some time ago about the SS tapping. It definitely cuts across party lines. They all do it.

Gotta get out & get something accomplished today besides blogging. Watch out for possums!

November 14, 2010 at 11:03 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

Perhaps this link on Consertative and Liberal, may be a better link to decide whether you are liberal, Conservative or LiberalConservative or ConservativeLiberal or you just plain don' t know !

http://www.studentnewsdaily.com/other...

However I still hold the view that I, myself am a middle of the road " Moderate " !

November 14, 2010 at 11:04 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

Here's a link to text whether you are a Conservative or a Liberal !

http://gotoquiz.com/conservative_or_l...

November 14, 2010 at 11:06 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

open_eyes

Agree totally with your 11:01!

November 14, 2010 at 11:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

tbluma (anonymous) says...

Bisquit
I think you gave a dood descrition of the 2.
I was not calling you a liberal. I was merely pointing out what I thought were good examples of the two differnt concepts.
And yes it is a failing of the liberal.
However my last 2 sentences pointed out that it was a party failing not a conservative one.

November 14, 2010 at 11:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

Another question/survey site that may tell you what you are !

http://www.blogthings.com/howliberalo...

November 14, 2010 at 11:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

tbluma (anonymous) says...

Meth
I agree with your links description also.
By the way I scored a 100% on the test and I'm proud of it.

November 14, 2010 at 11:21 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

Most of these question and answer sites, have very carefully chosen questions and answers and may be somewhat biased in their own right !

So go to the sites if you wish, take the quiz if you wish, but do so with a grain of salt ! As the outcome may not be exactly what you expect !

biscuit, open_eyes I agree with your assessment that S.S. has been " Robbed " and " Sacked " by both Conservatives, Liberals, Politicians and so called " Special Intrest Individuals and Groups " for decades !

And instead of fixing the problem they created, their solution is to either destroy it or put it into the hands of the Robber Barons that decimated and robbed S.S. in the first place !

November 14, 2010 at 11:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

tbluma

Congratulations, you are now a bonafide Conservative Republican, which by the way, I don' t think anyone had any question about where your Political loyalties were !

I commend you on your staunch loyalty to your Party and beliefs . However I do not entireley agree with all of your beliefs or loyalties, but that does not make me a bonafide, tried and true Liberal Democrat either !

As I have said before I believe I am a middle of the road American Moderate !

November 14, 2010 at 11:33 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

If the Political Partys involved in government cannot work together, in unison and agree on what to do that would be best for the Nation and all of the Nations' peoples, then none of the Political Partys' or ideologys are going to govern fairly or benefit all of the people of the Nation.

I' ve said it before and I say it again. If the outside " Big Money " influence is not removed from Government, Political Partys, Politics in General and Politicians, the governing of this Nation will inevitably continue as it has for the last 10 decades or more !

November 14, 2010 at 11:41 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

tbluma (anonymous) says...

Meth
I agree that I am a conservative.
However they are no longer staunch party beliefs because I no longer consider the Reps. as always being conservative. Yes I usually vote republican, but not always.
On your second link I only scored 80%, but alas none of us are perfect. LOL

November 14, 2010 at 11:48 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I scored 38% or moderately liberal on the first quiz.....and 60 percent liberal (about the same split) on the second.

I was fifty--fifty conservative/liberal on the social and personal responsibility categories.

25--75 conservative/liberal on fiscal

0--100 conservative liberal on ethics

75--25 conservative/liberal on defense and crime.

It was fun to take but as methusla said some of the questions were presented in such a way that I could not really agree with either answer.

November 14, 2010 at 12:47 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

I didn't care for either answer on some of those so had to choose the lesser of two evils. At any rate, I came out as 55% conservative. open_eyes will love to hear that. My father would be very upset may he rest in peace. I'll never forget what he told me when I announced we got orders to Kansas. "Kansas? This doesn't mean you vote Republican you know."

Anyway, my conservative side is coming unglued this morning as I listen to Charlie Rangel groveling and excuse making. After having two apartments in Harlem, both of which he gets at a discount, I can't believe he has the gall to ask for a discount on the forensic accounting that must take place on his audit.

The Ethics Committee is continuing with this case. Good for them.

Discounts indeed! Imagine the gall. How many of us get discounts for our housing?

November 15, 2010 at 9:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I had the same problem with several of the questions create especially in the ethics category...so I opted on the liberal side. Hence my 0/100 rating in that category. I'm left of center but not that far left on anything.

November 15, 2010 at 10:24 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

On another note, I'm surprised open_eyes had nothing to say on the Corner House thread.

November 15, 2010 at 11:36 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

REWBA (anonymous) says...

Charlie Rangel is an attorney complaining that he needs a lawyer. Too funny!

November 15, 2010 at 11:45 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Sorry, create - I don't follow every thread here. Some I don't read at all. Can't remember what the Corner House was about? I also haven't had time to take the test....hopefully later....

I'm not surprised at any score anyone would get on the test. Sometimes.... people identify themselves as one side or the other, even if they might score higher on the opposite side, because they care most about a small number of issues that lie on one side or the other. For example, if someone was anti-abortion, but liberal in most other categories, if abortion was the most important issue to them they might vote conservative based on that alone (maybe a poor example, but just one I picked off the top of my head for illustrative purposes).

November 15, 2010 at 12:02 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Well on methusla's most recent link, I scored 65% conservative, 35% liberal, which did not surprise me. But, like others here.... I didn't always like the choices given.

November 15, 2010 at 12:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

I found the Corner House thread & read it.... don't know anything about it.... but I totally agree with all your questions, create. Keep on asking! :-)

November 15, 2010 at 12:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

REWBA (anonymous) says...

My first score leaned to the right. 55/45 so I kept retaking the test until I became a liberal again.

November 15, 2010 at 12:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

So.... you had to throw out some of your time-honored tested & true beliefs, and subscribe to some hare-brained ideas - just because they were new? (Just kidding ;-)

But remember...... the majority of new ideas...... flop

But remember..... every time-honored tested & true belief.... was new at one time.

November 15, 2010 at 12:47 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

Conserv or lib, how do you feel about the new tsa airport scanners,and patdowns??

November 16, 2010 at 8:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

REWBA (anonymous) says...

O.K. Sail...I'll bite :-)

TSA is just another one of those control freak hair brained government agencies that once created, will never go away. Why can't they just conduct cavity searches on all islamic criminals and leave U.S. Citizens alone?

The islamic criminals who hijacked airplanes and crashed them into buildings on 9/11 went through security and were allowed to carry box cutters on board. They were all in the U.S. legally and many were being investigated by one government agency or another because they wanted to learn to fly a commercial plane but didn't care to learn how to land it. Other money sucking government agencies had provided warnings about Al Queda's plans to hijack aircraft yet nobody cashing government paychecks cared enough to warn the major airlines.

The 9/11 commission report concluded that failure of government agencies to share information was the main malfunction so the republican legislature and the republican executive created an entirely new "super government agency" complete with it's own cabinet seat to provide "homeland security". The republican courts blessed the agency and their laws as being A OK.

Homeland security gets 56 billion dollar to spend each year so they have to buy expensive electronic devices. If they don't spend it, they have to give it back. Of course they are going to spend it. This year it's a full body x-ray, next year everyone who wants to fly will undergo an endoscopic examination of the colon and the distal part of the small bowel with a CCD camera or a fiber optic camera on a flexible tube. They hope to be able to provide bypass surgery to all travelers by 2013 to ensure that potential terrorists don't try packing their arteries with explosives...afterall, we have got to stay ahead of those cave dwellers who want to do us harm.

November 16, 2010 at 9:58 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I really like that one REWBA.....One of your finset efforts to date.

November 17, 2010 at 6:26 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

Our airline industry jobs are in peril, our international tourism in AMERICA will be gone.Children are being molested in front of parents. If you think this will let you fly safer do nothing ,and keep grazing.If you are saying WHAT is happening to the country then speak out, Congress Morans phone # 202-225-2715 ....,.

November 17, 2010 at 7:27 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash9p.htm

November 17, 2010 at 7:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

marko (anonymous) says...

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/11/11/...

November 17, 2010 at 8:40 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Here's one for the unmitigated gall category. It appears Congressman elect Andy Harris (R-Md) went ballistic when told he would have a 28 day waiting period before his congressional health care program kicked in. He reportedly asked what he was supposed to do in the interim and offered to pay to have the coverage start early.

Where the gall comes in is that he ran for his position largely on a stand to work to repeal Obamacare.

November 17, 2010 at 9:34 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

Gee wiz Wally, remember when we used to fly way back,mom made us dress up and put a tie on, and all that stuff. Now when we fly those mean people at the airport want to see us undressed or put their hands down our pants.I dont know Wally , it just does not seem right.Do ya think mom will be upset.

November 17, 2010 at 9:41 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Given the choice between a hand down my pants and a bomb down my throat....I think I would take the hand. I guess I would have to decide other choices on a case by case basis.....:-)

November 17, 2010 at 10:01 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

Biscuitboy,when will you draw a line in the sand and say enough,millions of us are at that point now, please step over the line and join us.What have we become ,can you imagine our grandparents putting up with this abuse .

November 17, 2010 at 11:02 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

sail

I'm not as against you as it may appear.
I was opposed to much of the Patriot Act...and still am. I believe we have gone way over the line in doing away with individual freedoms in a misguided attempt to insure group security...and I agree wholeheartedly that these new procedures are an unnecessary invasion of privacy.

But I also recall the outrage and indignation following 9/11, and the demands for tighter security everywhere and personal freedoms be damned. Now we are hearing the same outrage and indignation that it has gone to far. My question is what pushed us over that line and why is it being raised at this time? I also wonder how many nano-seconds it would take for the pendulum to swing back the other way the next time something happens?

November 17, 2010 at 11:33 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

Agree with you on the patriot act,what a name for a bill giving up so much of our liberty.

November 17, 2010 at 12:02 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

I think the new airport scanning is all a part of HCR. They should have doctors monitoring the scans so they can pinpoint tumors and such. Kill 2 birds with 1 stone to lower health care costs..... ;-)

November 17, 2010 at 1:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

scarlett01_98 (anonymous) says...

hey open eyes that works for me. but every time i need a ct or a mri do i have to go all the way to kci? the price of gas, kind of offsets the price of a mri, with and without contrast! jmo : )

November 17, 2010 at 1:51 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Yeah, one of the "hidden" costs of HCR. If you want a ct or mri you have to buy a ticket to Miami - LOL.

It was probably in the bill, just buried on page 1,836 that nobody read ;-)

November 17, 2010 at 2:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

scarlett01_98 (anonymous) says...

wow, ok! 1836 pages to read. is that all? LOL

November 17, 2010 at 2:43 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

scarlett01_98 (anonymous) says...

umm the last time i was on a jet, the attendants were rude and came close to refusing to give me my cane or wheelchair to get off the plane. they didn't help me get thru the threshold either. i hope to NEVER fly american airlines again. however miami would be nice. : )

November 17, 2010 at 2:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

scarlett01_98 (anonymous) says...

as for security, i've had a couple of pat downs in the airport. it's not that bad. its either that or chancing blowing up in flight. time to wo/man up and deal with it. in my opinion only.

November 17, 2010 at 3:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

Scarlett, well again at what point do you say enough, this additional screening will not stop terror in the skies.Please dont be so willing to give up your freedoms in the name of protection.

November 17, 2010 at 3:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

If you give up all your freedoms in order to protect your freedoms you still end up with no freedoms. The only difference is then the enemy didn't take your freedoms.....you did.

November 17, 2010 at 3:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

I have a choice. 1) have either myself or my loved ones die in a horrible plane crash/explosion/plane ran into a building, or 2) put up with some added security/patdowns.

I choose #2.

I don't see that I lost that much freedom. Loss of freedom would have been I didn't even get to take the flight - my freedom to travel was restricted.

I still have yet to see where the Patriot Act has actually affected me noticeably one bit in my daily life. I really haven't noticed anything I've given up there, either.

I always get confused when folks who want government to control more and more of our life complain that they lose freedoms. And on the other hand. folks who want less government intrusion don't mind it in certain areas. I guess it all depends on what/where governerment is intruding......

November 17, 2010 at 3:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Yea buddy, as with most things, it just depends on which side of the fence you are on when you look.....:-)

November 17, 2010 at 3:47 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I agree that on a day to day basis, with the exception of airport security, I notice virtually no impact of the loss of any of these freedoms on my daily life. But then again I am a blue eyed white boy with a very Anglo-Saxon name. If I was a dark complected bearded middle eastern looking man named Mohamed (no matter how law-abiding I might be) my guess is my view would be quite different.

November 17, 2010 at 3:55 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

I assume you are referring to my last paragraph, and I agree. It all depends on which side of the fence you are looking from/to.

But does anyone have any specific instances of where the Patriot Act itself has affected them or restricted their freedoms? I don't mean added security at airports, work, etc - I mean as a result of the PA itself? It hasn't really cut down on my overseas phone calls to known Al-Qaeda operatives..... because I never make any. And if it has affected you in that way.... you do NOT have my sympathy ;-)

November 17, 2010 at 3:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

scarlett01_98 (anonymous) says...

sail, believe me, after several months in hospitals, the pat down at the airport was nuttin'. my father was a pilot. personal liberties end when you walk down that corridor to get on an airplane. like i said just wo/man up and deal with it.

November 17, 2010 at 4 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

scarlett01_98 (anonymous) says...

from a different thread, i still haven't heard from my son yet. so no news is good news??

November 17, 2010 at 4:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

If I lived in say in a majority Muslim country, and some blue-eyed white boys with very Anglo-Saxon names declared war on the country, were responsible for numerous attacks both there and on Muslims around the world, had destroyed their tallest buildings and killed 3,000 in the process.... even if I was a very law-abiding citizen that had nothing to do with those other blue-eyed white idiots...... I would hopefully understand that curcumstances aren't always ideal...and the world is what it is.

I would also probably work to get many of my fellow blue-eyed white Anglo-named friends to be more proactive & speak out more against those idiots, instead of just remaining silent and letting them hide among us, or going to a place of "worship" weekly and letting them spout their hate and filth without opposing them. Because THEY are the ones taking away MY freedoms.... not the gov. If it wasn't for them, the gov wouldn't have to intervene.

November 17, 2010 at 4:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

scarlett.....I'll keep my fingers crossed for you until he comes home.....I promise. Symbolically of course. It's hard enough for me to type with my fingers uncrossed......:-)

open_eyes

No, no problems with the Patriot Act itself and I don't expect any. My problem there is one of those slippery slope arguments where once you put the machinery in place to deprive suspect groups of their rights....how much easier will it be in the future for someone to declare you a suspect group. Of course that always sounds far-fetched to people when you raise that argument now. Just as it probably did to many that ended up burnt at the stake during witch hunts that never thought it would happen to them when their neighbor was the target.

But government apparatus put in place to deal with specific threats rarely ever goes away once the original threat is removed....It just starts looking for new threats. And some day, it may start looking at you.

That anyway is where my concern lies.

November 17, 2010 at 4:35 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

sail asks, "can you imagine our grandparents putting up with this abuse?"

Abuse? Abuse? What abuse? You must live a real cushy life.

I don't know about yours, but my parents and grandparents put up with huge food shortages during WW II -- meat, sugar, coffee, milk to name only a few. Forget ever finding a tire. Shortages of leather for civilian shoes meant shoes were in short supply too.

My parents and grandparents grew Victory gardens, my grandfather traded tires for canned milk so I could have some milk in my bottles.

Tell me sail, how many pairs of shoes do you have right now? Do you think you could make do with only one shabby pair that didn't fit properly?

And that's only World War II. Where I come from, there were nightly blackouts for YEARS!!!!!!!

I haven't even begun on the years of the Great Depression.

Abuse? Good grief! Americans are supposed to be able to buck up and do what is necessary to get by or to make do or to tolerate.

Some of us are so spoiled!

November 17, 2010 at 4:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Biscuitboy, I DO understand what you mean by the slippery slope - I, too, see it happening in many areas - from the "other side of the fence", as you would say. And...as you say.... government is easy to expand, hard to shrink.

Problem is, we cannot (at least I don't advocate) just doing nothing. As always..... it will be a constant struggle....to balance... keep things in check..... that's what our democracy is pretty much all about.

Good one, create! I even feel spoiled today, just looking back/comparing to how I grew up.... (sigh).... and I still think of them as the "good old days"... :-)

November 17, 2010 at 4:47 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

And I think that constant struggle to balance is exactly what we are talking about here. Many feel that being exposed to full body searches and revealing electronic scans to board an airplane some how upsets that balance between the need for security and invasion of our very personal privacy.

I know I for one do not have enough to be proud of to want it displayed to the world.

November 17, 2010 at 5:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

marko (anonymous) says...

fly naked/ no luggage...

November 17, 2010 at 5:48 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

Create, compared to our grandparents I agree, we are spoiled ,we are mostly concerned with material things .But most of all we are spineless when it comes to standing up to wrongs.

November 17, 2010 at 6:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

Are you upset http://sharpelbowsstl.blogspot.com/20...

November 17, 2010 at 6:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

scarlett01_98 (anonymous) says...

well, 3 hours without electricty. no fun when you are disabled. finally got to eat....
open eyes is right on on point.
sail if you didn't know, my son is in a war zone defending your right to post on blogs.
marko, do you think we could? lmao
bb, uncross your fingers! lmao
when i hear from him i will let you all know.

November 17, 2010 at 6:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2...

November 17, 2010 at 6:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

True, sail. "he has no business being anywhere in government"..... unfortunately I'm seeing alot of that these days.... :(

scarlett..... hoping/praying for the best for you & your family....

November 17, 2010 at 7 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

scarlett: I often think of our troops.Please know we all pray for the day of the safe return home of our brave men and women.

November 17, 2010 at 7:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

Thinking good thoughts for you Scarlett. May you be blessed with good news soon.

Re body scans and searches. I've watched a lot of those personal searches on TV in the past couple of days. Are they really checking? I've got a pair of double D cups and somehow, I wonder, how are they going to check what's UNDER those girls?

Stop laughing! It's true!

Stop laughing I say!

November 17, 2010 at 7:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

scarlett01_98 (anonymous) says...

ohhh lawddd, the laughing from creates post, and my body now needs to catch up 3 hours being without a bathroom....
thanks everyone for the thoughts and prayers.
this truly is a great relief.... :-D

November 17, 2010 at 7:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

scarlett01_98 (anonymous) says...

oh and as for muslims being exempt from any kind of search. no search, no fly!!!! they can drive.

November 17, 2010 at 7:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Create....... ROFLMAO..... :-)

November 17, 2010 at 8:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Well at least create's problem is different than mine......LMAO

November 17, 2010 at 8:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

Well, create, perhaps they would have to have you stand on your head and let the girls go the other direction to search under them !!!!!!

Sorry, bout that create, my bad !!!!

November 17, 2010 at 9:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

I wouldn' t have a problem, as long as they bought me dinner first !
No dinner, no touchy, feely !

November 17, 2010 at 9:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Uhm....... I'm going to tread very carefully here..... and just say..... this might be the first time the Gazette pulls a thread here...... because of everyone getting along TOO well...... LOL ;-)

November 17, 2010 at 10:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

REWBA (anonymous) says...

I am sure that pedophiles and other perverted people have realized that the federal government will pay them 45 - 90 thousand dollars per year for the legal authority to feel up 13 year old daughters in front of their family members and there is absolutely nothing that anyone can do about it...Don't like it?...It's the LAW! Your son is next!!! Then your ugly wife. Happy 9/11!!!

November 17, 2010 at 11:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

It took about 390 posts to get some good laughs, and boy was it worth it.

i am picturing create, biscuit, methusla and marko at the airport security line and it would make another great cartoon from the Gazette.

November 18, 2010 at 6:01 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Yea.....with the security agents all pushing and shoving the other ones up front saying this one 's yours.....No....he's yours......

November 18, 2010 at 7:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

And these girls are genuine too. No "junk" here.

November 18, 2010 at 8:43 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

Oh man ! Now I can picture this airport security scenario in my mind now also, HA, HA, HA, HA , man what a site !

Boy, I wish I had some artistic ability, what a " Rockwell " or " Andy Capp " type picture my vision would make !

November 18, 2010 at 10:25 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

cogressman speaks out on c-span about tsahttp://paul.house.gov/

November 18, 2010 at 4:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

http://paul.house.gov/

November 18, 2010 at 4:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

marko (anonymous) says...

Here's your cartoon: http://www.npr.org/2010/11/17/1313932...

November 18, 2010 at 5:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

scarlett01_98 (anonymous) says...

ROFLMAO!! it feels good to laugh, waiting for that cartoon to hit the paper.

November 18, 2010 at 6:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

marko,

Thats a good toon. The one I envisioned, had you, marko, standing in the " feely " line, at the airport, "au naturale ", proving to everyone you have absolutely nothing to hide " biscuitboy " snarling and yapping at a security guard with his master at his side, trying to restrain biscuitboy from doing his own form of " pat or snap down " me, methusla standing there, in my " Dinner Tucks ", saying " No Dinner , no touchy/ feely " and create standing in line with her " DD girls " and a male security guard, with wide Zombie like eyes, drooling, while looking at create and the " DD girls" and muttering something like, " BOY OH BOY " , I get to " pat her and the DD girls down " !

November 18, 2010 at 10:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Well early results on the Gazette Poll show 56 percent in full favor of the pat downs. And I am certain a pat down in a airport security line is not going to kill anyone.

My problem is when added to the slowly growing list of invasions on our personal privacy that have been going on pretty much since the beginning of the technological age (right down to and including cookies on these things we are all using, and the ever present video-surveillance cameras), and when you add them all together we know longer have any privacy. And now our private parts aren't even private anymore. Hell. we just as well dispense with what ever is left of modesty and all run about naked. We have no secrets left anyway.

Any decent hacker can already find out everything he wants to know about you in an instant.

November 19, 2010 at 4:12 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Here's the link to the above referenced article......

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/18/opi...

I did misquote some data from the article. It 's the top one percent of taxpayers that will realize an additional 370-thousand dollars a year in income if the tax cuts are continued to them.

November 19, 2010 at 8:42 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Sorry....My last post belonged on another thread.....Duh.....

November 19, 2010 at 8:48 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

Good one, methusla. I can see all that too. You've got this bunch pegged!

I also see Steve in that picture, trying to calm everybody down.

November 19, 2010 at 9:08 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-N5ad...

November 19, 2010 at 10:11 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

"Quantitative easing" explained....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTUY16...

November 19, 2010 at 1:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

The jigs up for Mr. B.....great u -tube, it has opened a lot of eyes.

November 19, 2010 at 1:51 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

scarlett01_98 (anonymous) says...

guess who's at it again.
now its small children instead of soldiers. i hope they get their tires slashed again.

Kan. Church Plans To Picket Child Funerals
Westboro Baptist Church Cheers Child Deaths

November 19, 2010 at 3:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

scarlett01_98 (anonymous) says...

chris, sorry. i didn't know about your policy. i will abide by them in the future. : )

November 19, 2010 at 4:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

At least MNSBC is being fair on this one - Scarborough is getting the same suspension as Olbermann for donating to GOP candidates.

November 19, 2010 at 4:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

could not resist this song about the tsa.

November 22, 2010 at 10:32 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9a8jGV...

November 22, 2010 at 10:33 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

Terrific, sail!

November 22, 2010 at 10:44 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

sail, I just sent that one to my daughter who flies 3-4 times a week.

November 22, 2010 at 10:47 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

"At least MNSBC is being fair on this one - Scarborough is getting the same suspension as Olbermann for donating to GOP candidates."

Lets See if Fox News is "Fair and Balanced" when the Republican presidential nominees are announced. I'll wager $1000 that the candidate is one of their commentators. Which is why they will lose.

November 22, 2010 at 11:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Yes, I wouldn't be surprised at all if Huckabee runs again.

Unless you're referring to former VP nominee Geraldine Ferrarro (Fox news contributor/commentator) - but she's a Democrat, so I doubt she will run for the Republican nominee ;-)

November 23, 2010 at 6:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Nominee"S" - anyone can run. But personally, I don't think any of the main 3 commentators in the mix (Palin, Huckabee, Gingrich) will be THE Republican nominee in 2012. But I don't have $1,000 to spare at the moment. But then again, I remember alot of bets about how wonderful things were going to be 2 years into this administration..... ;-)

November 23, 2010 at 11:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Well the fickle finger of fate these days wags back and forth like the tail on a dog. So the Repubs may not have much more time than that to show us how wonderful they can make the world. But I'll bet we soon start hearing from them how they are going to have to be given more time to clean up this mess. It just can't be done in two short years.

open_eyes

I'll remind you of that in two years. If I am wrong you can remind me. We'll call it a cashless bet.......:-)

November 24, 2010 at 4:44 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

I don't think anybody thought things would be wonderful in 2 years, at least anyone with any sense. In fact I think on the whole things have gone about as good as they can considering the pit we are in. Will be curious to see when pundits at Fox News start laying blame and pointing the approval ratings for this upcoming Congress. They wanted to try and hold all the Dems accountable at 6 months for things he had no hand in, Fair and Balanced seems to have taken on a different meaning.

November 24, 2010 at 5:44 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

You're right open_eyes. I can't believe the number of impatient people who actually believed everything would turn completely around in such a short time. No matter who got into office, Obama or McCain, we couldn't possibly be cured in two years.

Yeah, I can't wait to see fingers point after the upcoming Congress either. The newbies won't be much in a spot to do the sweeping changes they promised while campaigning anyway.

We need to keep an eye on this Korean situation. Man oh man, we don't need another front, but you never know. Is China rattling her sabre by supporting North Korea? I believe so. That alone is very troubling. Our Thanksgiving present? There is no rest for the weary.

November 24, 2010 at 7:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

Sorry, that was an answer to goodoleboy. I'd better get to my baking and quit posting.

November 24, 2010 at 7:10 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

Several decades of broken government and policies cannot be fixed in 2 years or 10 years. It will take decades of dedication, backbone and perseverance to fix what it took decades to " break ", if it can be fixed at all !

November 24, 2010 at 8:38 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

No, biscuitboy, you will have nothing to remind me PERSONALLY of in 2 years. I've said quite often I don't expect much of anything anymore from either party :(

Goodoleboy, Fair and Balanced isn't what it used to mean, I'll give you that. But part of that is that at least you do get to hear from both sides. The host may be biased but at least they'll have some guests on who disagree, I see liberal commentators/contributors regularly on FN. MNSBC is just a cheering squad for one side.

Now, now, methusla. You just admitted it took decades to "break". According to the same folks who are saying there was no way anybody could come in and fix things in 6 months or 2 years..... Bush broke everything all by himself, in 6 short years or less. ;-) Anyone want to bet the housing bubble that the several previous administrations all had a hand in would have burst & tanked the economy eventually no matter who was in office?

Happy Thanksgiving, everyone!

November 24, 2010 at 10:13 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

At least MSNBC has Morning Joe with a moderate Republican as a host. Correct me if I am wrong, but does FOX have any show with a progressive (moderate or otherwise) in the drivers seat? I have also seen right wingers on Hardball. But I have no idea why they go on their anymore than I understand why a liberal would ever go on FOX. Unless maybe they just enjoy the abuse.

November 24, 2010 at 10:38 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

open_eyes

The main things that I lay squarely in the lap of the Bush administration is the unneeded tax cuts for the Rich and Wealthy, the carrying through/out of uneeded " Tarp/Bailout " of those who suceeded in creating their own sinkhole and for getting the U.S. more deeply involved in/taking over a ridiculous costly war, in Afghanistan, that bankrupt Russia and is bankrupting the U.S. as well as declaring and involving the U.S. in a 7 year long war in Iraq, that has also succeeded in further increasing the national debt and moved the U.S. even closer to bankruptcy and what has the Iraq and Afghanistan wars succeeded in accomplishing ?

Absolutely nothing, except making some of the rich and wealthy, richer and wealthier and costing lives, needlessly

November 24, 2010 at 10:38 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Thirty years ago, as I planned to buy a new house in Arkansas, I was bothered by reports from some of the naysayers claiming that hosing prices were about to adjust downward. I bought anyway and made a lot of money on that house. But they were half right in their predictions. They did adjust downward...just 25 years later than predicted. It appears some future buyer of that house probably lost their a#$.

It's a law of nature....what goes up will eventually come down. That's why I shudder whenever I hear people gleefully
clamoring to invest their retirement future in the stock market. Wall Street knows this law of nature all too well, as it gleefully awaits the new larder. But smart Wall Street insiders also know there is money to made. Whether the market goes up or down is irrelevant to them.....just a irrelevant as the certainty that eventually that bubble bursting will wipe out the retirement security for who knows how many people. But since when has Wall Street ever been worried about things like that. They know the government will again be forced to step in an pick up the tab leaving them free to award themselves a new round of well-deserved bonuses.

November 24, 2010 at 12:45 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

sail (anonymous) says...

Happy Thanksgiving....lets give thanks for our blessings.

November 25, 2010 at 7:57 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

If those Wall Street bankers were so smart, why aren't they investing their own money heavily in the stock market? Of course not! Instead, they want BUYERS to invest so that they can make their big bucks on commissions. That's the way it works. They get paid in real money, not stocks.

OIl is at $84 a barrel yesterday. I wonder if that has anything to do with the Thanksgiving driving. Hmmmm....

Over the river and through the woods....

November 25, 2010 at 8:22 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

You're right, sail. We are blessed. We only need pause to consider them for there are many right here on the Plains of Kansas.

I am thankful for good medical care for ourselves and our children, just a short pony ride away. We don't have to wait out on a dusty plain somewhere hoping for a passing caravan to give us a ride to some antiquated facility where there may or may not be medicine.

November 25, 2010 at 8:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

Then there's this I found just this morning when I opened up my MSN news. It's probably all over TV news but I haven't turned it on yet.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40389899/...

We are not secure. I wondered when they would start picking on little out of the way places where everyone thinks it is so safe.

November 27, 2010 at 7:12 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

But as any expert will tell you, anybody with enough dedication, and a willingness to die, can accomplish about anything. Our trick is to do as effective a job as is possible to defend against such acts without giving up the very free way of life we are trying to protect. In this case everything worked for the best......oh that it should work so well the next time!

November 27, 2010 at 7:29 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

You're right, biscuit. And as I said on another thread, were it not for the Patriot Act that allowed law enforcement to intercept his e-mails and phone calls to begin with, this would not have worked.

November 27, 2010 at 8:29 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

So, let me get this straight in my mind and thinking !

Almost all of you, as U.S. citizens believe and think that you, as a citizen of the U.S. are " Free ", as in free to live your life as you/we wish, pretty much do as you/ we wish or see fit to do with our lives and live our lives as we wish ! Am I correct in that assumption ?

And an even more rellivant question would be, " Exactly what would your personal idea of " Freedom " be and exactly how much or how many of these " Freedoms " can or will you be willing to give up to be absolutely " Secure " your " Freedom/Freedoms " ?

And before you think about your Freedoms or answer the above questions, I ask that you ponder the fact that there are those who are dictating to you/us each and every day, how, when, where we/you can live our lives, what we do, how we do it and scrutinize our action, adopt and pass laws that take away a Freedom, because they do not like what we do or how we live and these people are also U.S. citizens, only difference is, they consider themselves the " Ruling Class " ! So, are you/we really and truly " FREE " !

Just some food for thought !

November 27, 2010 at 8:32 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

True, biscuitboy, I don't think Fox has any hard left folks as hosts - I miss Combes on Hannity & Combes, I quit watching it much after they changed the format. But Bob Beckel is on there almost regularly enough to be called a co-host - lol.

GASP........ did I just hear someone say..... in a roundabout way...... they are "thankful" for the Patriot Act??? ;-)

Well, I wasn't necessarily against tax cuts across the board - for a short time, after 9/11. But I think the expiration date on them ran way too long. TARP is squarly 50% Obama's baby as well. Wars are definitely in Bush's lap.
But...... I watched a special on PBS the other night about Afghanistan. They talked to folks there who's lives were destroyed by the Taliban, before 9/11. Entire villages with all the menfolk killed. They cut the breasts of off some women. One woman watched them cut her baby's nose, ears, and fingers off and stuff them in her baby's mouth. I watched them list that and a long list of atrocities, and how they have hope again, (when the US kicks the Taliban out of an area) - and I was thinking about empgazidiot and how nothing the US ever does is noble in his eyes. (Of course, lawyers could have stopped all the massacres in their tracks according to him). Yep..... somewhere, some arms company is making money off of Afghanistan. And some oil company is making money from Iraq. But companies make money supplying cars, uniforms, ammo to fireman & police. Companies make money making medical equipment. Someone makes money from textbooks & building schools. So I guess we shouldn't have police, fireman, doctors, teachers, etc.... because someone, somewhere, will make money off of the endeavor. Well........ I'm thankful someone does ;-)

November 28, 2010 at 5:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Yes we do tend to forget the atrocities committed by the Taliban even before the world ever heard 9/11. To this day, I cannot see a Toyota Tacoma pickup with out thinking of their use to haul all of those afghan women into that soccer stadium for execution. But to me the Taliban is a perfect example of the dangers inherent in any system that is allowed to flourish with out appropriate checks and balances. Checks and balances keep such excesses from occurring.....There were none on the Taliban.

But you really can't use Taliban excesses to justify the war in Afghanistan since we had tolerated those excess with little more than an occasional formal protest before the Taliban refused to deliver Bin Laden to us after the 9/11 attack. Only then did the excesses become grounds for going to war.

November 28, 2010 at 6:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

Yes, open_eyes, it was I who said I supported the Patriot Act. See? I'm not all that beastly after all. I'm from Hawaii remember, and hula dancers sway one way and then the other. Left, right, left, right. But never far right or far left. After all, that wouldn't be much of a dance now would it?

:)

I saw that special on Afghanistan and I agree with you with regard to the value of U.S. presence for the common people. But how long would we have to stay? I think it was on 60 Minutes last night where I heard someone state that it would take another one-hundred years for the Afghans to change from the culture of cheating that goes on now. I didn't get to see the entire interview and should go look to see if I can find it now. If I find it, I'll post a link.

November 29, 2010 at 8:20 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

I found it. This is a superb interview and a must watch. You know what it reminds me of? My father used to call this the "Okay Joe" commitment. "Okay Joe, you plenty good right." Yeah, plenty money, plenty good right. I believe South Pacific had that covered too with the character of Bloody Mary.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?i...

November 29, 2010 at 8:43 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

biscuitboy - I didn't mean to use that to justify the war - or "justify" any war, sorry I wasn't clear on my point. The point I was trying to clarify was that I do believe that America is, by and large, a much more noble nation in its aims than empgazidiot believes. I was watching the special and thinking about all the feeble-minded trash he/she usually posts here.

LOL create, good analogy ;-). And I had caught part of that segment with AC as well. Thx for posting.

I do agree.... we can't police the entire world, and who knows how long it would take to make any lasting changes there. But, we try. Which I think is better than not trying in many cases. And certainly better than sending in a horde of lawyers. If the Afghanistan women thought life was miserable before, just wait till empgaznut sends in his lawyers. They'll be begging for the Taliban to come back.

November 29, 2010 at 11:04 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

open_eyes

For all of our faults and failures we remain one of the most noble nations on earth.....at least in my opinion. And even more so our people than always our government. I know my concern and compassion for the suffering of the people under Taliban rule was genuine and devoid of political consideration.

I think I did realize what your point was.....just wanted to make sure.

November 29, 2010 at 11:33 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

The Anderson Cooper piece was excellent. Thanks for the link create.

November 29, 2010 at 11:35 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

I suppose I might as well clarify my statement about being thankful someone makes money off of "it" (police, hospitals, etc).

Company A develops a new machine that vastly improves detection of illnesses, or safety of law enforcement. Company B, in competition with them, improves the gadgets. Company C takes Company B's improvements and develops a manufacturing method that lowers the cost to the consumer (us). And so on....... competition - we benefit. If it's all just government-controlled..... no competition.....I see much more waste and inefficiency, or no reason to improve. We need a healthy mix of freedom with government oversight, etc....

I've been around this globe somewhat. I KNOW we are one of the most noble nations on earth. Empgaznut thinks, apparently, we are one of the least.

November 29, 2010 at 12:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

I agree on the Company A, B, C explanation, open_eyes, and can't help but remember the $600 toilet seats and hammers from the 70's when the government kept using the same suppliers and paying the bills until someone blew the whistle.

November 29, 2010 at 12:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

True, create. Every system is exploited wherever possible by someone. Which is why I mentioned, we almost always need some government regs/oversight

But, you gave a perfect example of government control/waste with no competition. What if someone else had been allowed to compete/bid on supplying those parts? Company B says $300 for toilet seats. Company C says $20. And so on.....

November 29, 2010 at 1:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

scarlett01_98 (anonymous) says...

just wanted to let everyone know. my son called me from afg, thursday morning. yes he's ok. yes he was on the base that was bombed a few weeks back. yes he was on duty. yes he was one of the firefighters that put out the fire while dodging everything else. he probably was in the video of the bombing. hope everyone's thanksgiving was as good as mine! : )
ok we can get back on topic now.....

November 29, 2010 at 1:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

So happy to hear the good news, scarlett01!!!! Thx for keeping us informed. ;-)

November 29, 2010 at 2:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

I didn't know there was a topic on this thread. Thought this was our own free-form "Fill in the caption to the cartoon above and you might win a prize" forum......... ;-)

November 29, 2010 at 2:17 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

scarlett01_98 (anonymous) says...

thanks open eyes! i thought the current topic was gov't toilet seats.... LOL

November 29, 2010 at 2:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

open_eyes (anonymous) says...

Actually, you're pretty close, scarlett01. The current topic is what government usually flushes DOWN the toilet seats........ our money........ ;-)

November 29, 2010 at 2:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

scarlett01

That is great news about your son....can I uncross my fingers now?.....:-)

November 29, 2010 at 2:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

scarlett01_98 (anonymous) says...

bb, you are so funny. of course! question is.... how did you type with them crossed? : )

November 29, 2010 at 2:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

scarlett01_98 (anonymous) says...

better question? did you have a good birthday?

November 29, 2010 at 2:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

scarlett01_98 (anonymous) says...

well open eyes, i'm staying far far away from federal gov't and money issues..... to touchy for this house.....

November 29, 2010 at 3:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

scarlett01_98 (anonymous) says...

it has something to do with hubby's job. hint hint ; )

November 29, 2010 at 3:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

I bought a small pair of scissors today and noticed for the first time a "Made in PRC" label on this product. I had to stop and think for a moment until I realized PRC means People's Republic of China. I wonder why it doesn't simply say, "Made in China"? Is something up?

November 30, 2010 at 5:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

scarlett

I type with great difficulty whether my fingers are crossed, uncrossed. or stuck up my nose.....:-)

My birthday left much to be desired as my lungs took the opportunity to remind me in no uncertain terms of how little is left of my life. But with a little luck maybe I will still have a chance at a better one next year. Here's hoping. Thanks for asking anyway.......

You seem like a very honest and sincere person scarlett....there are far to few of you left in this world.

November 30, 2010 at 5:47 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )