Indexes
November 2nd, 2009
November 7th, 2009
November 6th, 2009
November 5th, 2009
November 4th, 2009
November 3rd, 2009
November 2nd, 2009
The following stories have received the most reader comments during the last 7 days.
- Bible is entwined with American civic life (135)
- I predict: A conservative tide will rise in 2010 (73)
- David Diskin is first to give an invocation under new city of Lodi policy (70)
- The Treaty of Tripoli hoax (60)
- Universal health care solves big problems (54)
- Here's what my father knew about the assassination of JFK (35)
- Stuck in neutral? Hardly! (35)
- Words from our forefathers (27)
- City of Lodi staff looking into possibility of limiting number of taco trucks (24)
- Majority cannot deprive the minority (23)
ADVERTISEMENT
Will Obama promote American values?
Friday, April 25, 2008 8:54 PM PDT
Is presidential candidate Barack Obama a Christian? We all know that Obama proudly advocates that the Rev. Jeremiah Wright brought him (Obama) to Jesus, but what many people don't realize is that the Jesus, to whom the Rev. Wright brought Obama, is a black Jesus.
Christianity comes from the scriptures of the Holy Bible which makes it quite clear that Jesus Christ was a Jew, not a black man. It makes sense then that Obama's Church and the Rev. Wright promote a black value system, an African ministry and even gave a Lifetime Achievement Award to Louis Farrakhan — widely known for his hate and condemnation of the socalled "evil white man" and especially the Jewish race.
Christians following the words of the Holy Bible don't advocate hate for any race while promoting a ministry of Jesus Christ's love to all people of all races and cultures. Common sense makes it clear that the Jesus, which the Rev. Wright brought Obama to, is not the Jesus Christ of the Holy Bible who was, without dispute, a Jew and the Son of God. According to the Bible, the primary law covenant which Jesus Christ advocates is to "Love your neighbor as yourself." Jesus Christ didn't say to minister only to the black man and condemn the white man, nor did he say to damn America, any nation or any race of people. So yes, maybe the Rev. Wright brought Obama to someone named Jesus, but that Jesus is in opposition to Christ Jesus of the Holy Bible.
Since the Rev. Jeremiah Wright has been Obama's spiritual adviser and mentor, will Barack Obama make a good president? Will Barack Obama promote American values or just black values? Will Obama promote unity among all Americans or just African Americans? If any man attended and supported a church that promoted strictly a "white value system" and only a "caucasian ministry" he and his church would not only be labeled a racist, all would know that the man and his church are racist!
Barack Obama's famous quote: "My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you'll join with me as we try to change it."
Bryan Stamos
Lodi
Reader Feedback
Lodian wrote on May 6, 2008 7:38 PM:
Lodian wrote on May 6, 2008 7:36 PM:
"We're having a serious discussion here.
Go back to your crosswords."
Your wife finished all the crosswords already. "
Leonard wrote on May 6, 2008 5:58 PM:
Man, it is just astounding. Is there any nook or cranny of this Administration that has not been soiled by corruption? "
sam wrote on May 6, 2008 1:14 PM:
Clinton is the town not the Senator.
I stand corrected. Boy, it is all over internet that he IS Hillary's pastor. Weird !
Sorry for spreading the rumors. "
sam wrote on May 6, 2008 12:39 PM:
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/80486/
"
sam wrote on May 6, 2008 12:38 PM:
sam wrote on May 6, 2008 12:37 PM:
But as the former Clinton pastor was sentenced Friday to three years in prison for inappropriately touching a 7-year-old girl at his home last March, Judge Michael L. Dwyer said Procanick sacrificed his honesty the day he testified. "
sam wrote on May 6, 2008 12:35 PM:
But in a phone conversation recorded by Oneida County sheriffs investigators, the Rev. William Procanick is overheard telling the girls mother he was wrong to have caressed the girls body that night. "
rwayne wrote on May 6, 2008 10:18 AM:
Leonard wrote on May 6, 2008 9:31 AM:
Leonard wrote on May 6, 2008 9:26 AM:
" Leonard says he sympathizes with Gadzooks yet he proposes the government
have complete control
Perhaps you also either missed or misunderstood the part of my post where I said that I thought Gadzooks needs would be better served by PRIVATE insurance?
Why do you comment on posts you haven't read? Do you just honestly enjoy making a fool of yourself? "
Brian wrote on May 6, 2008 9:25 AM:
" Brian: You have serious things to discuss with your wife already. "
What, your lies about me?
We're having a serious discussion here.
Go back to your crosswords.
"
Leonard wrote on May 6, 2008 9:23 AM:
Perhaps you should explain to to my wife that my life insurance policy will go right to the governemnt and she won't get a cent of it under your proposal
My dear Marxist friend, perhaps you missed the post in which I specifically said that I did NOT think that life insurance policies, which are paid to the beneficiaries, not the estate, would be taxed?
Or perhaps you simply did not understand what you read. I have heard that the Communist school system wasn't that great. "
Brian wrote on May 6, 2008 9:23 AM:
have complete control.
Liberalism is truly a mental disorder.
Leonard isbound and determined to leave his "Marx" in the world, "
Lodian wrote on May 6, 2008 9:22 AM:
Leonard wrote on May 6, 2008 9:20 AM:
Comrade Dreaded Rear Admiral, could that possibly have been the Soviet Navy in which you served?
:) "
Brian wrote on May 6, 2008 9:19 AM:
" The Dreaded Rear Admiral: How is it more ridiculous to tax the dead once than to tax the living year after year after year? "
L, I agree
with Cogito's assessments of you.
Perhaps you should explain to to my wife that my life insurance policy will go right to the governemnt and she won't get a cent of it under your proposal. "
Leonard wrote on May 6, 2008 8:57 AM:
We would be giving people the bootstraps to pull themselves up by. "
Leonard wrote on May 6, 2008 8:55 AM:
What I am doing is quite different. I am giving all people the tools and the opportunity to make themselves rich.
Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish (and give him a loan to buy a fishing boat) and he will eat for a lifetime. "
Cogito wrote on May 6, 2008 8:52 AM:
Leonard wrote on May 6, 2008 8:39 AM:
Leonard wrote on May 6, 2008 8:38 AM:
" Leonard, your proposal is ridiculous.
Are you also going to deny the survivors
of the dead life insurance policies too?
I don't see why one would. "
Brian wrote on May 6, 2008 8:32 AM:
Are you also going to deny the survivors
of the dead life insurance policies too? "
Leonard wrote on May 6, 2008 7:55 AM:
Its hard to imagine how you will ever be able to sock away enough money to care for someone like that in perpetuity after you are gone.
To me, it seems that situations like yours would be better handled by some sort of insurance. I don't think anything like that exists today but it is exactly the sort of service that might be provided by tomorrows entrepreneurs, if they were given the freedom, the opportunities and the resources to make this a better world. "
Leonard wrote on May 6, 2008 7:40 AM:
" I have an adult disabled son who will never be able to completely care for himself, even though he does have a part time, low wage, no benefit job. If I am not able to will enough money for him to have a paid caregiver, he will end up on the streets or locked up in an institution.
What a crummy system we have. Wouldn't it be great if we could change it?
Sadly, we never will until citizens like you and I start to search for other, better options. "
gadzooks wrote on May 6, 2008 6:43 AM:
Leonard wrote on May 6, 2008 6:28 AM:
But it is nice to think about. "
Leonard wrote on May 6, 2008 6:27 AM:
What better way to do so than to create a world in which your descendants can live as free and prosperous people, a world in which they can actually use the wealth that they create, a world in which they are answer to themselves instead of some multigenerational amalgamation of wealth and power.
I think that would be a real legacy to leave to our children. "
Leonard wrote on May 6, 2008 6:24 AM:
But why build wealth and prosperity if it's going to be someone else's money upon your death?
Ummm.... to eat, to put a roof over your head, to enjoy the fruits of your labors? Why do childless people work? I don't think that the desire to leave an inheritance really figures that largely into the average persons daily motivation.
"
Cogito wrote on May 5, 2008 9:26 PM:
voter wrote on May 5, 2008 9:24 PM:
Cogito wrote on May 5, 2008 9:14 PM:
Leonard wrote on May 5, 2008 6:28 PM:
Leonard wrote on May 5, 2008 6:24 PM:
In your system, that right would need to be severely compromised.
Our property rights are already severely compromised by income tax. You just don't see it that way because you are used to income tax.
Which is worse, for the government to tax you once when you are dead and cannot use the money anyways or for the government to take from you every month funds which you absolutely need to create wealth and prosperity? "
Leonard wrote on May 5, 2008 6:16 PM:
If the strongest argument against my system is the fact that people will inevitably try to evade it, I would say I am doing pretty well. "
Cogito wrote on May 5, 2008 3:20 PM:
Cogito wrote on May 5, 2008 2:52 PM:
Leonard wrote on May 5, 2008 2:46 PM:
Danny H will love it!!! "
Leonard wrote on May 5, 2008 2:18 PM:
In order to succeed, my program would have to be accompanied by some sort of protective tariff system that would defend American owned businesses from overseas monopolies. "
Leonard wrote on May 5, 2008 2:17 PM:
What you would lose in terms of economies of scale would more than be made up for by the increase in competition. "
Cogito wrote on May 5, 2008 1:32 PM:
Leonard wrote on May 5, 2008 12:24 PM:
DOH! "
Leonard wrote on May 5, 2008 12:00 PM:
I have packing that is going to grab something if I don't get working on it.
Every time I move it is twice as hard as the time before.
Where does all this junk come from? "
Cogito wrote on May 5, 2008 11:51 AM:
Leonard wrote on May 5, 2008 11:50 AM:
Leonard wrote on May 5, 2008 11:50 AM:
In Marxist systems, the means of productions are owned by "the people" operating as a collective entity.
The entire point of my system is to put the means of production in the hands of individual entrepreneurs. "
Leonard wrote on May 5, 2008 11:48 AM:
" Leonard, if everything is being bought up by big money, you will create monopolies, not encourage competition.
Part of the benefit of this system is that it would concentrate power in the hands of individuals, not conglomerates (see my previous post). "
Cogito wrote on May 5, 2008 11:47 AM:
Leonard wrote on May 5, 2008 11:47 AM:
There is no "Lenny's Manifesto".
Still, as far as we've gone, I still think my system would be better than the status quo. Keep raising the objections, however, and we will see where it goes. "
Cogito wrote on May 5, 2008 11:46 AM:
Leonard wrote on May 5, 2008 11:45 AM:
Cogito wrote on May 5, 2008 11:41 AM:
Leonard wrote on May 5, 2008 11:41 AM:
Competition is the life blood of capitalism. The break up of monolithic business holdings would inevitably result in increased competition and greater economic health. "
Cogito wrote on May 5, 2008 11:32 AM:
Leonard wrote on May 5, 2008 11:24 AM:
"
Cogito wrote on May 5, 2008 10:59 AM:
Leonard wrote on May 5, 2008 10:58 AM:
I do not suggest that my plan would be perfect or "Utopian" (as you so frequently suggest).
What I do say is simply that my plan would be better than the status quo.
Nothing you have said so far has challenged that assumption. "
Cogito wrote on May 5, 2008 10:50 AM:
Leonard wrote on May 5, 2008 10:46 AM:
It is called Feudalism and it is where this country is heading if something isn't done to change things. "
Leonard wrote on May 5, 2008 10:44 AM:
Those who work hard and enjoy good luck will prosper greatly. Those who are either lazy or unlucky will not. The market will decide everyones fate. "
Leonard wrote on May 5, 2008 10:41 AM:
Leonard wrote on May 5, 2008 10:40 AM:
"in your world, every time a successful business owner died, instead of their children inheriting the business, it would be liquidated or sold to the highest bidder.
The assumption that a florists son will necessarily be a good florist is absurd. If, at the time of their parents death, the children's success had earned them enough capital to purchase the business, they would be free to do so.
Otherwise, the business would go to an individual who had, through their own drive and success, accumulated enough capital to purchase it. "
Cogito wrote on May 5, 2008 10:40 AM:
Leonard wrote on May 5, 2008 10:36 AM:
" Since the Kennedys have only shown a propensity to glom off of Joe Sr.s estate. How would that group of ethically challenged alcoholics ever hope to make a living?
The fortunes of some would inevitably suffer but most would benefit. The Kennedy family is probably used to tragedies by now.
:) "
Cogito wrote on May 5, 2008 10:33 AM:
Cogito wrote on May 5, 2008 10:29 AM:
Leonard wrote on May 5, 2008 10:28 AM:
Inheritance taxes are the ONLY taxes that do not redistribute the wealth of living individuals. As such they are much less socialistic than any of the existing tax programs. "
Leonard wrote on May 5, 2008 10:23 AM:
Dead people can't own anything. An inheritance tax appropriates money from an estate, not a person. "
Cogito wrote on May 5, 2008 10:18 AM:
Cogito wrote on May 5, 2008 10:15 AM:
Leonard wrote on May 5, 2008 5:01 AM:
" What bugs me about Obama is when choosing between tax policies that would raise federal revenues while giving tax cuts, and raising taxes in areas where it has been proven to lower revenue, he would choose to punish people in the name of "fairness".
How is this different than your position on my plan to reduce income taxes across the board while encouraging entrepreneurship?
I believe one of your specific objections to this plan was that it was not fair
:) "
Cogito wrote on May 5, 2008 12:02 AM:
Giovanina wrote on May 4, 2008 11:30 PM:
Lodian wrote on May 4, 2008 11:22 PM:
"Better than 95% of American are against gay marriage."
Where did you get this figure?
"
Lodian wrote on May 4, 2008 11:21 PM:
"I hate to be the bearer of bad news about Obama. But he will sign the Gay Marriage Act of 2009 if he gets elected."
Why should I consider this bad news?
"
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 8:33 PM:
" Eugene, were you ever a Navy SEAL? "
Excuse me, but Euu, a better question for you might be have you even been with a Navy Seal?? "
Leonard wrote on May 4, 2008 8:26 PM:
It looks like he is on a regular rampage tonight. "
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 8:25 PM:
Cogito wrote on May 4, 2008 8:18 PM:
voter wrote on May 4, 2008 8:15 PM:
nextel wrote on May 4, 2008 8:13 PM:
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 8:11 PM:
I love it. "
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 8:09 PM:
fuchsia...
egg shell...
turquoise...
poof... did it work???
"
voter wrote on May 4, 2008 8:09 PM:
voter wrote on May 4, 2008 8:07 PM:
Cogito wrote on May 4, 2008 8:07 PM:
Cogito wrote on May 4, 2008 8:05 PM:
Cogito wrote on May 4, 2008 8:03 PM:
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 8:02 PM:
Eugene wrote on May 4, 2008 8:01 PM:
I left my mark. At least I contributed
to the subject matter.
Have a nice life Lodians. "
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 8:00 PM:
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 8:00 PM:
But I can see pink... OMG, that is one amazing color. "
Eugene wrote on May 4, 2008 7:58 PM:
I'll pray for you.
"
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 7:58 PM:
Cogito wrote on May 4, 2008 7:57 PM:
voter wrote on May 4, 2008 7:56 PM:
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 7:56 PM:
voter wrote on May 4, 2008 7:56 PM:
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 7:54 PM:
Eugene wrote on May 4, 2008 7:53 PM:
" Oh great, a gay basher. "
Voter, you're out of line. 95% of Americans are against gay marriage.
The subject matter is "Will Obama Promote American Values?
95% of Americans don't believe he would be promoting American Values by legalizing gay marriage. Call it gay bashing if you must. "
Cogito wrote on May 4, 2008 7:53 PM:
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 7:51 PM:
I love horses. When we make them believe to run themselves to death is the thing to do, I do not want any part of it. But heck, I am a vegan. Animals are here for us to cherish, not to abuse.
"
Cogito wrote on May 4, 2008 7:51 PM:
Eugene wrote on May 4, 2008 7:48 PM:
voter wrote on May 4, 2008 7:48 PM:
Eugene wrote on May 4, 2008 7:46 PM:
Obama backs the "complete repeal" of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), a law passed in 1996 that gives states the option of not recognizing another state's "gay marriages." It also prohibits the federal government from recognizing "gay marriage." Homosexual activists long have viewed it as a significant legal barrier to nationwide legalization of "gay marriage."
"
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 7:39 PM:
"
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 7:38 PM:
I too suspect a troll. Eu, are you a troll??? "
voter wrote on May 4, 2008 7:37 PM:
voter wrote on May 4, 2008 7:36 PM:
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 7:34 PM:
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 7:33 PM:
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 7:32 PM:
Yeah, I believe that. "
nextel wrote on May 4, 2008 7:31 PM:
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 7:30 PM:
He is ok wth civil unions within the states but says gay marriage as a federal law is not something he would support.
"
voter wrote on May 4, 2008 7:28 PM:
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 7:28 PM:
You are too funny. "
voter wrote on May 4, 2008 7:28 PM:
Eugene wrote on May 4, 2008 7:24 PM:
I stumbled upon this newspaper searching
the web. Does this blogg not have a moderator? I want to talk about Obama.
Unless you are contributing it should be decent of you to take your unrelated conversation elsewhere. "
Cogito wrote on May 4, 2008 7:23 PM:
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 7:21 PM:
"
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 7:20 PM:
I personally, hate horse racing. But I was reminded several times today about Hillary's prediction. Sorry if you saw it as sick... actualy I did too... but that was her prediction. "
Cogito wrote on May 4, 2008 7:20 PM:
Eugene wrote on May 4, 2008 7:19 PM:
I don't know where I heard it first.
I'll post this one. It's revealing. "
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 7:19 PM:
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 7:16 PM:
voter wrote on May 4, 2008 7:11 PM:
voter wrote on May 4, 2008 7:10 PM:
Cogito wrote on May 4, 2008 7:09 PM:
Eugene wrote on May 4, 2008 7:08 PM:
The subject matter on this blogg is "Will Obama Promote American Values"
There's one strike against him. Better than 95% of American are against gay marriage. "
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 6:42 PM:
voter wrote on May 4, 2008 6:41 PM:
voter wrote on May 4, 2008 6:40 PM:
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 6:40 PM:
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 6:39 PM:
Leonard wrote on May 4, 2008 6:38 PM:
So be it.
People say stupid things when they are drunk all the time.
I once told a girl that I was a professional football player after I had a beer or twelve.
What you need to do here is man up, admit your mistake and move on. "
Eugene wrote on May 4, 2008 6:38 PM:
Leonard wrote on May 4, 2008 6:33 PM:
You all just keep on jacking off on this post
One word to describe that Brian fellow.
C-L-A-S-S-Y! "
voter wrote on May 4, 2008 6:21 PM:
Brian wrote on May 4, 2008 6:10 PM:
I know many people in Lodi who have learned things from my post who commend me for going up against a bunch of liberals. Carry on. "
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 5:23 PM:
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 5:23 PM:
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 5:22 PM:
I am so sorry that the philly broke her legs and had put down on the track, but Big Brown won.
Can I chuckle at Hillary's prediction? I know...sick.
"
voter wrote on May 4, 2008 5:17 PM:
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 5:15 PM:
"
nextel wrote on May 4, 2008 4:53 PM:
Leonard wrote on May 4, 2008 4:09 PM:
In a court of law, that would probably be enough to convict.
Brian, do you want to face up to the facts now or should I bring on the two other blog regulars who I know recall your...ahhh... naval indiscretion? "
Lodian wrote on May 4, 2008 1:42 PM:
"I'm not going to feed the troll anymore."
Brian: Is that some kind of personal euphemism? "
sam wrote on May 4, 2008 1:38 PM:
I was on that blog. Wow, a name from the past... "Skilos".
Boy do I miss Skilos. He had a lot of knowledge to share.
"
Lodian wrote on May 4, 2008 1:36 PM:
Brian wrote on May 4, 2008 1:26 PM:
" To whom it may concern, I have been reading these blog's since they started and do remember Brian saying that he was a Navy Seal. I also remember Brian saying that he supported Al Gores view on Global warming, because of a family member in farming that had noted changes in climate. I miss hearing Skilo's diatribes about "anyone who hates Bush policies, hates America." Lucky for us though, we still have the #1 Bush water carrier and fiction writer of these blogs "Brian."
I'm not going to feed the troll anymore. "
Brian wrote on May 4, 2008 1:23 PM:
hate America.
I save my hate for terrorism. So should you. "
Brian wrote on May 4, 2008 1:20 PM:
Frankly, I have many disagreements with Bush too. Am I less inclined to be one of his water carriers? Under some circumstances? maybe. However,Overall I'm a Bush supporter through thick and thin.
If that ruffles your feathers, so be it. "
voter wrote on May 4, 2008 1:20 PM:
My face hurts from laughing. . . "
Lodian wrote on May 4, 2008 1:14 PM:
nextel wrote on May 4, 2008 12:19 PM:
Brian wrote on May 4, 2008 11:52 AM:
Brian wrote on May 4, 2008 11:49 AM:
You know Leonard, under Islamic banking there will be no more tax writeoffs.
And you don't own your house until it's completely payed off. This is just the tip of the iceberg. These facts are on Islamic banking sites. "
Brian wrote on May 4, 2008 11:44 AM:
Perhaps we could discuss how Islamic Banking is spreading like wildfire. You don't support Sharia, yet you are reluctant to talk about. "
Brian wrote on May 4, 2008 11:41 AM:
" Brian wrote on May 4, 2008 8:15 AM:
As far as military service. I never said I was in the military.
Unfortunately for you, I am not the only person here who remembers the night on which you claimed to be a Navy SEAL. Heck, the blog is probably archived if someone wanted to look for it.
In your defense, I will concede that you seemed to be pretty drunk when you made it. That said, claims like that are not a laughing matter.
Leonard, I thought you were through with your cheap shots. "
Leonard wrote on May 4, 2008 11:28 AM:
As far as military service. I never said I was in the military.
Unfortunately for you, I am not the only person here who remembers the night on which you claimed to be a Navy SEAL. Heck, the blog is probably archived if someone wanted to look for it.
In your defense, I will concede that you seemed to be pretty drunk when you made it. That said, claims like that are not a laughing matter. "
Brian wrote on May 4, 2008 10:11 AM:
that Obama is Muslim. However, there is no doubt he has questionable attributes that may lead someone to think he has ties to Islam. "
Brian wrote on May 4, 2008 10:07 AM:
There are no taxes in Islam. "
Brian wrote on May 4, 2008 9:48 AM:
Brian wrote on May 4, 2008 9:46 AM:
-Another exerpt. "
Brian wrote on May 4, 2008 9:42 AM:
Brian wrote on May 4, 2008 9:33 AM:
Here's the article about some of the attributes of Islamic banking. Read it fast before Leonard sites it as poppycock. "
Brian wrote on May 4, 2008 9:30 AM:
debacle.
They say it hasn't affected them. Is this their way of saying our money is safer in their banks? They are honest
when they tell you 3% of your money goes to charities. One of those charities is Jihad. How quaint. "
Brian wrote on May 4, 2008 9:08 AM:
because I want to defend my strong beliefs in certain things. You've even got G74 hurling cheap shots at me, Leonard. "
Brian wrote on May 4, 2008 9:04 AM:
the Islamists don't want complete control over the entire banking system
and I'll keep on telling you Mormons have no intention of wanting complete control over the entire banking system. "
Brian wrote on May 4, 2008 8:58 AM:
It's not just about Hillary wanting the nomination more than him. It's about the future of this country.
"
Brian wrote on May 4, 2008 8:53 AM:
" Brian: I am curious. What, specifically, do you think the effect of Obama attending school in Indonesia will be?
Leonard, I am curious. What specifically, do you think the affect of Romney being a Mormon would have been?
I counter your question with mine as an example of how much we know about Romney
and how little we know about Obama.
Obama hasn't been quite as forthcoming or honest about himself as Romney has.
It seems to me people who want Obama as president shouldn't be so sensitive about what people want to know about him.
"
Brian wrote on May 4, 2008 8:32 AM:
He just continues to take what McCain really said out of context just to advance his prejudices. "
Brian wrote on May 4, 2008 8:27 AM:
THIS is why Al Gore loses all credibility with me. He no longer uses the term Global Warming as much because he know the planet is not warming. The terminology is now Global Climate Change. It seems to me Al Gore is finally coming to his senses and is finally realizing people are getting wise to his spin that humans are responsible. It's all about money. "
Brian wrote on May 4, 2008 8:19 AM:
I feel sorry for you and the rest of the liberals who don't have the courage
to fight for the preservation of America. "
Brian wrote on May 4, 2008 8:15 AM:
Some more of your cheap shots Leonard?
As far as military service. I never said I was in the military. You ran with that lie about me when Skilos was around. And Skilos wasn't even talking about me. REMEMBER? So you labeled me as the "Dreaded Rear Admiral" just to support your own stupid way of questioning my credibility.
"
Gator wrote on May 4, 2008 7:33 AM:
Dogs bark,but the Caravan moves on!! "
Leonard wrote on May 4, 2008 6:54 AM:
Contrast that with G and Cogito who have actually led me to reconsider a couple of issues on which I thought I had made up my mind.
If I was the GOP, I would find some way to gag B. "
Lodian wrote on May 3, 2008 10:25 PM:
"I occasionally wonder whether Brian isn't really a clever liberal working to subtly discredit the Republicans."
It's funny you say that, Leoanrd, as I often thought the same thing about "real facts" and Christians. He always seemed to do more harm than good.
"
Leonard wrote on May 3, 2008 9:07 PM:
Leonard wrote on May 3, 2008 8:45 PM:
Since you seem to consider Sharia banking something to consider
Man, you are just as dishonest as the day is long. Where have I ever, once, suggested that I support Sharia?
You can lie about politics, you can lie about history, heck, you can even lie about your own supposed military service, but please, do not lie about me. "
Leonard wrote on May 3, 2008 8:42 PM:
"
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 7:55 PM:
" Chuckle.... you wonder what, exactly, he is afraid you will expose.
Given Brian's recent impassioned defense of the... ummm... "adult entertainment industry", I suppose it could be anything. "
L, I don't visit those sites nor do I visit cabarets. I am a capitalist though. It is Tim's right to have this
bar. Since you seem to consider Sharia banking something to consider Tim's bar will probably not be here anymore if this banking system becomes reality here.
And then all your little luxuries you enjoy will go away too. "
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 7:49 PM:
" Brian, I sent you an email about the Islamic Bank thing. I think you are operating under at least a couple of misconceptions.
There are no misconceptions. It is you that don't understand how this system
will transform this country into
something you won't like. Talking to you is like talking to a wall. See what I mean? "
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 7:44 PM:
Leonard, if you can't see what will happen to this country if Islamic banking takes over and what effects it is already having in Britain as it slowly becomes more prevalent there I can only pray that you someday will understand before it's too late HERE. "
Leonard wrote on May 3, 2008 6:21 PM:
Given Brian's recent impassioned defense of the... ummm... "adult entertainment industry", I suppose it could be anything. "
voter wrote on May 3, 2008 6:06 PM:
Leonard, I'm prepared for Brian's tirade of name calling to begin. But more often lately, he whines that I marginalize him and attempt to "expose" him. LOL
"
Leonard wrote on May 3, 2008 6:01 PM:
"
Leonard wrote on May 3, 2008 5:52 PM:
" Obama attended the Basuki School in Jakarta, Brian. It is a public school--completely non-religious. The students were from many religious backgrounds and the school policy is to respect all.
This has been pointed out to Brian on at least five separate occasions.
There is absolutely no way that Brian is going to let the truth get in the way of his lies. Its just not in his character.
My guess is that he will respond by calling you some sort of name. "
voter wrote on May 3, 2008 5:44 PM:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/22/obama.madrassa/
I hope you can let go of your ridiculous claims now. "
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 5:17 PM:
" Leonard wrote, 'Ahhh... yes! The strawmen!'
Ahhh... yes! The over-used clever retort offered by lefties with no valid argument. Original!!
G74, there are many clever retorts lefties use. I.E. hatemonger, racist, homophobe. They pride themselves with these retorts to end an argument they cannot win. When I hear these retorts
it's time to walk away. It's like talking to a wall. "
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 5:00 PM:
" Brian: re: "And it doesn't matter to you what questionable character and attributes Obama has."
LOL! Apparently you haven't even bothered to read this very blog, where you would would see, in print, my posts criticizing Obama's credibility on the Wright issue and his "clinging" comments. But go ahead with the personal attacks to think yourself more "credible".
I can't find it. I don't want to take 20 years to realize your post. So, unlike Obama, I admit I was wrong about you. "
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 4:50 PM:
nylodian wrote on May 3, 2008 4:49 PM:
LOL! Apparently you haven't even bothered to read this very blog, where you would would see, in print, my posts criticizing Obama's credibility on the Wright issue and his "clinging" comments. But go ahead with the personal attacks to think yourself more "credible".
"
Leonard wrote on May 3, 2008 3:55 PM:
" nylodian, you're still a whiner. It doesn't matter why I call you a whiner.
Again with the personal insults.
Brian, this kind of name calling is a very poor substitute for actual thought. "
Leonard wrote on May 3, 2008 3:53 PM:
You will believe anything, no matter how absurd or unfounded, as long as it agrees with your preconceived prejudices.
"
Leonard wrote on May 3, 2008 3:52 PM:
" Leonard, I don't know.
That's OK Brian, I knew that you didn't know. In fact, I knew that you don't have a clue about this issue even though you have been harping on it for months now.
The simple fact is that you read it on some right wing nut jobs blog,you didn't bother to check if it was true and you then proceeded to repeat it over and over and over,completely discrediting yourself in the process.
"
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 3:50 PM:
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 3:45 PM:
And it doesn't matter to you what questionable character and attributes Obama has. Don't come crying to me if he gets elected because people like you who voted for him didn't see the writing on the wall about him. "
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 3:39 PM:
a few pages about the left.
I'm sure there probably is some left wing
hacks still printing up bumper stickers
"Bush Lied and People died".
"
nylodian wrote on May 3, 2008 3:38 PM:
So your definition of whining is when someone calls you out on your "facts"? LOL! "
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 3:35 PM:
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 3:30 PM:
It seems to me those in the Obama camp
should expect distortions just as McCain
and Hillary expect it. Stop whining. "
nylodian wrote on May 3, 2008 3:24 PM:
nylodian wrote on May 3, 2008 3:21 PM:
No, it was your buddies at Fox News, who ran this story back in Jan. 2007 based on an unsubstantiated article from Insight Magazine, and then a pundant on Fox blamed it again, without any basis in facts, on the Hillary campaign. CNN and NY Times debunked both allegations.
video.aol.com/video-detail/ cnn-debunks-false-obama-madrassa-smear/2120483161 "
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 11:57 AM:
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 11:52 AM:
Obviously this school taught Islam in some form or another. To say he was not influenced by attending a school
with a predominant Muslim attendance is obsurd. "
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 11:41 AM:
" Have the few bloggers here here that deal in facts ever turned Brian onto Snopes?
I know about snopes. "
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 11:40 AM:
the liberal media is so
afraid to offend Obama they are reluctant to ask him pertinent
questions. It is because of Fox and conservatives that he is being scrutinized. "
nextel wrote on May 3, 2008 11:35 AM:
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 11:26 AM:
This was a rumor Hillary spread about him attending madrassas. Just as we have religious schools here whether they are Catholic, etc. they have religious schools elsewhere. "
Leonard wrote on May 3, 2008 11:20 AM:
" I don't hear any questions posed to Obama about Islamic banking given his
past as an atendee of Islamic schools in Indonesia.
I am just curious. What was the name of the Islamic school that you claim Obama attended?
"
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 11:12 AM:
Islamic banking is already here. Just ask someone in the Dearborn, MI area. "
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 11:09 AM:
past as an atendee of Islamic schools in Indonesia. I would like to hear his thoughts on the Sharia. "
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 11:06 AM:
With all due respect to all the good Muslims, I don't know how Islamic banking can survive in the U.S. if it doesn't take complete control of the
U.S. banking system. It will be a cold day in hell when this happens. "
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 10:54 AM:
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 10:53 AM:
This is scarry stuff. "
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 10:42 AM:
This is scary stuff. "
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 10:40 AM:
You didn't wear out your welcome in Lodi? ARRRR:) Try the Texas wines!!! "
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 10:31 AM:
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 10:29 AM:
inheritance tax. "
Leonard wrote on May 3, 2008 10:16 AM:
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 9:39 AM:
Well Leonard, you did say in so many words that those being born into wealth
should not be allowed to have this wealth for doing nothing. It seems to me
your proposal punishes those in the "Tomb" and the "Womb". ARRRRR! "
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 9:30 AM:
the social security tax deducted from incomes to be invested by the person they could collect a lot more interest than the government gives back to them when they retire then maybe I could consider your proposal, Leonard.
This would be a good start. "
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 9:26 AM:
Brian wrote on May 3, 2008 9:21 AM:
Your proposal for a 100% inheritance tax will not only get more of the rich to hide their money in these banks, the U.S. banks will open banks offshore out of the U.S government's greedy hands. It is already really easy for a U.S citizen to invest money in foreign markets. Your proposal will only encourage more money going elsewhere. "
Leonard wrote on May 3, 2008 9:03 AM:
With the election coming up, there is no way it would pass but at least it would remind all of the parties involved that this problem HAS TO BE FIXED and that both the Republican led Congress and its Democrat led successor have not done a single thing to fix it. "
Leonard wrote on May 3, 2008 9:00 AM:
" Leonard, I agree that the system is broken. What I do not agree is penalizing the elderly.
Would you rather penalize the young who, needy or not, will receive no benefit whatsoever for the money they put into the system?
The time when we could have fixed the system in a way that would have been equitable to all is decades in the past.
Because of that failure of leadership on both sides of the aisles, we now have to make hard decisions that inevitably will end up penalizing someone. "
sam wrote on May 3, 2008 6:06 AM:
I see first hand how one old couple keep working. One volunteers her time while the other still works to make money. They are upset and mad that their benefits may be changed. I agree. You cannot ask someone to pay in all their lives (well heck, they are still paying in in their 90's) and then say "oops, we goofed. You don't get what we promised because you are hard workers." "
Leonard wrote on May 3, 2008 5:28 AM:
Unfortunately, he did not have the political capital to push it through and so, here we are, entering another political cycle with no progress towards reform.
In the meantime, every day the situation gets worse and worse and the system moves steadily towards insolvency. "
Leonard wrote on May 3, 2008 5:22 AM:
I also believe that once someone has paid into the system all their lives, they should not have the rules changed on them once they are elderly
I am jumping in late here and I may have missed something but I will say the following.
This system has been mismanaged by both parties for a generation. As a result, we have come to a time when we have to make some hard choices. The system that comes out of those choices may not be nice or fair but it will be better than total collapse. "
sam wrote on May 3, 2008 1:11 AM:
sam wrote on May 3, 2008 1:08 AM:
I too believe that someone who has paid into the system, should receive medicare benefits. That is and was my point.
I also believe that once someone has paid into the system all their lives, they should not have the rules changed on them once they are elderly. "
Cogito wrote on May 3, 2008 12:32 AM:
Lodian wrote on May 3, 2008 12:07 AM:
There are two different conversations going on here. "
Lodian wrote on May 3, 2008 12:06 AM:
sam wrote on May 2, 2008 9:10 PM:
sam wrote on May 2, 2008 9:08 PM:
Girard, you are the one claiming I making this about the disabled. My point was about the elderly who have played by the rules all their lives. Now because they are hard working and still making money in their 90's, McCain wants to change the rules. "
sam wrote on May 2, 2008 9:08 PM:
If my in laws contribute to medicare for 75 years of their lives, they have the right to collect benefits due to them when they retire NO MATTER HOW MUCH they make. "
girard74 wrote on May 2, 2008 9:05 PM:
girard74 wrote on May 2, 2008 9:05 PM:
Your attacks upon me were without merit; you had no reason, NONE, to treat me in the manner that you did. You were angry? So was I; and I still am.
I've learned that there are no 'friendships' on the blogs; no 'trust'; no respect.
RF had one thing right; integrity is important. He was nuts; but he was right. I'm not going to let anyone attempt to destroy it further. And I don't want to be angry anymore. "
sam wrote on May 2, 2008 9:01 PM:
Good night. "
girard74 wrote on May 2, 2008 8:56 PM:
I've got a new crop of debating wannabes hurling the insults, names, irresponsible claims, etc. - and for what? I guess when they see 'girard74,' it must be open season. After being called a liar and accused of violating peoples' trust, things that normal-thinking bloggers here could not possibly subscribe to about me, I must be a marked man for the brainless.
This just isn't fun anymore. And that's a pity. "
girard74 wrote on May 2, 2008 8:52 PM:
Just WHO is 'EVERYONE?' "
sam wrote on May 2, 2008 8:47 PM:
I do. Why should my in laws in their 90's be deprived of their medicare benifits because they DO STILL work and make money? They have paid in all their lives. Tell me, why should they be deprived??? "
girard74 wrote on May 2, 2008 8:39 PM:
Just WHO is 'EVERYONE?'
In addition to discussing her own disability level, sam wrote, 'In today's world, you can reinvent yourself despite limitations. You can blog, you can get a job.'
Just where did I misunderstand/misconstrue/screw up? "
sam wrote on May 2, 2008 8:33 PM:
Well, most of them are. "
sam wrote on May 2, 2008 8:31 PM:
sam wrote on May 2, 2008 8:31 PM:
"
sam wrote on May 2, 2008 8:30 PM:
I was having a conversation with Cogito about how McCain wants to deprive 90 year olds of their medicare benefits if they make over so much a year. I believe the elderly who have contributed deserve to get their benefits. Lodian, don't you??? "
girard74 wrote on May 2, 2008 8:03 PM:
But you asked another to read what had transpired on this and another blog in order to understand where you stood on this entire debacle.
I did the same thing as well as re-read a number of times to make sure that I didn't royally screw up. I cannot see where I did.
However, if I hurt you, I AM sorry. It was not my intent. "
girard74 wrote on May 2, 2008 7:59 PM:
I used this characterization about you because it was apparent by what you wrote that since 'you' could reinvent yourself, everyone else can as well. If not, then they're just lazy. Any reasonable person would have read what you wrote the same way.
Usually when someone calls me a name (and I care what this person thinks), I immediately ask them to describe just why they think that way about me. That's all you had to do, and I would have responded just like tonight. "
girard74 wrote on May 2, 2008 7:55 PM:
My own children view me as an inspiration to THEM. They see what these maladies have done to me, yet I'm still here; talking with them each night; doing the very best that I can.
I have no intention of giving up, ever. "
Lodian wrote on May 2, 2008 7:54 PM:
girard74 wrote on May 2, 2008 7:47 PM:
girard74 wrote on May 2, 2008 7:46 PM:
girard74 wrote on May 2, 2008 7:46 PM:
girard74 wrote on May 2, 2008 7:45 PM:
girard74 wrote on May 2, 2008 7:45 PM:
sam wrote on May 2, 2008 5:59 PM:
I choose not to post my treatments and my drugs. They are not what defines. I believe EVERY person, even the disabled are valuable to us as a society. No need to respond, girard. I know we do not agree. Peace Out.
"
sam wrote on May 2, 2008 5:58 PM:
sam wrote on May 2, 2008 5:58 PM:
" No sam, there are those who cannot work. To imply that "all" who are deemed disabled are employable goes beyond the pale. My congratulations to you for rising above your misfortunes. However, the disability program is designed for those who cannot work. I find your stand on this somewhat elitist. Not everyone is like you; or perhaps you believe everyone should be? Please tell me you aren't that arrogant. "
"
Lodian wrote on May 2, 2008 5:56 PM:
Brian wrote on May 2, 2008 5:15 PM:
" That's not to mentioned your source who was fired from the Reagan Administration for espionage or the women you were so hot on who turned out to be associated with a scheme to fund terrorism.
You need to actually think about these sources before you uncritically regurgitate their manuscripts
L. i HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT "
sam wrote on May 2, 2008 4:41 PM:
"My friends, I will have an energy policy that we will be talking about, which will eliminate our dependence on oil from the Middle East that will -- that will then prevent us -- that will prevent us from having ever to send our young men and women into conflict again in the Middle East, McCain said.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/24432706#24432706
"
Leonard wrote on May 2, 2008 2:31 PM:
You need to actually think about these sources before you uncritically regurgitate their manuscripts. "
Leonard wrote on May 2, 2008 2:29 PM:
I really don't want to rehash that issue but if you don't think there is something unsavory about that source, there is something very wrong with you. "
Brian wrote on May 2, 2008 1:33 PM:
I suspect Leonard would consider these people in this group of the unsavory variety. Quite the contrary.
I did ponder a liberal meet up group but the first one I looked into overspent their budget printing up "Bush Lied and People Died" bumper stickers. You should see the warehouse they have them in. It's huge. "
Brian wrote on May 2, 2008 12:51 PM:
townhall.com, realclearpolitics.com, or the americanthinker.com unsavory since you lean to the left on most occasions. Is the americanstandard.com unsavory too. "
Brian wrote on May 2, 2008 12:48 PM:
" Brian wrote on May 2, 2008 8:29 AM:
" Yes Leonard is nuts.
Have you ever thought about dropping the personal insults and dealing with the issues at hand?
For the record, I never said that you are a "hate".
What I DID say was that you are an uncritical media consumer who will freely cut and paste without a thought to the source. The result is that you sometimes regurgitate material from some pretty unsavory sources and, in the process, make a complete fool of yourself.
L, it is your opinion the sources are unsavory. "
Lodian wrote on May 2, 2008 12:26 PM:
"Yes Leonard is nuts. He claims that because Jesus never spoke of Homosexuality verbatum he must then condone it.
You are playing with fire, sir."
Are you worried about his salvation, Brian?
"
girard74 wrote on May 2, 2008 8:51 AM:
Leonard and I have had many heated and controversial "conversations" over the past few months; the majority of which were insightful and provocative.
I have, however been the recipient of a few "smear campaigns," but not from him. I've learned to simply ignore those who participate in these types of discourse although it did take some time for me to fully accept the education that was being afforded to me in this regard. "
Leonard wrote on May 2, 2008 8:50 AM:
" Brian: what did Jesus say about married men getting lap dances and visiting prostitutes?
Chuckle... its like a little heterosexual Folsom Street Fair right here in Lodi. "
Leonard wrote on May 2, 2008 8:48 AM:
"For the record, I never said that you are a "hate mongerer". "
Leonard wrote on May 2, 2008 8:47 AM:
I am suddenly leery of Jimmy Dean products right now
Jimmy Dean is an Irish company? Just steer clear of anything that tastes like pork.
:) "
Leonard wrote on May 2, 2008 8:46 AM:
Leonard wrote on May 2, 2008 8:45 AM:
" Yes Leonard is nuts.
Have you ever thought about dropping the personal insults and dealing with the issues at hand?
For the record, I never said that you are a "hate".
What I DID say was that you are an uncritical media consumer who will freely cut and paste without a thought to the source. The result is that you sometimes regurgitate material from some pretty unsavory sources and, in the process, make a complete fool of yourself.
"
girard74 wrote on May 2, 2008 8:38 AM:
I've learned that the discussion of religion outside of the Religion Page on any forum starts uncontrollable and often "violent" rants. Regardless of the religious "slant" of this particular letter-to-the-editor, I've had my fill of that and refuse to engage. "
nylodian wrote on May 2, 2008 8:37 AM:
nylodian wrote on May 2, 2008 8:35 AM:
I am suddenly leery of Jimmy Dean products right now, LOL. "
Brian wrote on May 2, 2008 8:29 AM:
You are playing with fire, sir. "
Brian wrote on May 2, 2008 8:26 AM:
" Brian wrote, 'You keep on dreaming he's pulling your leg.'
I'm really not concerned. Because if he "is" serious about such a proposal two things are certain: 1. he's nuts; and 2. no one either here or anywhere else would ever seriously considered such a proposal.
I'm sticking with my original thought regarding Leonard's humor; he's too bright to believe such nonsense, regardless of how he feels about the "obscenely" wealthy (and where they get their money). "
G Obviuosly you haven't been on the receiving end of some of his smear campaigns. "
girard74 wrote on May 2, 2008 8:11 AM:
I'm really not concerned. Because if he "is" serious about such a proposal two things are certain: 1. he's nuts; and 2. no one either here or anywhere else would ever seriously considered such a proposal.
I'm sticking with my original thought regarding Leonard's humor; he's too bright to believe such nonsense, regardless of how he feels about the "obscenely" wealthy (and where they get their money). "
Brian wrote on May 2, 2008 8:06 AM:
You say Leonard is humorous. I agree.
He is humorous that he would welcome his proposals in a heartbeat.
You keep on dreaming he's pulling your leg. "
Brian wrote on May 2, 2008 8:01 AM:
I don't know how many times I have been raked over the coals for saying something construed as crazy. I'll have to put together some reasonable proposals and see what happens.
Lodian says, Oh Brian. But I've seen what she has done to a blogg by getting a pass when she rants about something insignificant or has personal converstaions with nylodian, voter, that aren't even the topic of the letter.
It seems to me the rules change here by the day. "
nylodian wrote on May 2, 2008 7:57 AM:
nylodian wrote on May 2, 2008 7:45 AM:
nylodian wrote on May 2, 2008 7:42 AM:
girard74 wrote on May 2, 2008 12:08 AM:
For me the most important things in debate are to maintain my dignity and integrity. Everything else is just "talk." I do my very best not to belittle, demean or otherwise impugn anyone's character. While I expect that in return, that isn't always the case. Se la vie! "
Lodian wrote on May 1, 2008 11:10 PM:
Brian wrote on May 1, 2008 10:25 PM:
" Brian, is it really more comfortable for you to just call people names than to actually think about what has been said?
Thew only name I called you was a marxist. I lost count how many times you called me a hatemonger because I disagreed with your position. Even you can't deny marxism has it's positive attributes. It just happens to be you are focusing on it's negative attributes. I've never considered being called a conservative a bad thing. We have faults too. Not as bad as marxist, though. "
Brian wrote on May 1, 2008 10:10 PM:
Leonard Wrote: Brian, if you want to spend the rest of the night calling me names to make you feel better about yourself, feel free.
It would only enable you to rehash your suspicion that I somehow am connected with the Arayan Brotherhood because you think I posted the Black Value System from an Arayan site. GOOD NIGHT LEONARD:) "
Cogito wrote on May 1, 2008 10:01 PM:
Brian wrote on May 1, 2008 10:00 PM:
This is what scares me about liberals.
If they can convince people that their joke is not a joke they will follow through with the joke because that's what the people wanted. There are mountains of liberalisms that started out as jokes that became reality. Liberals just love to profit off of other people's sufferings. "
Brian wrote on May 1, 2008 9:52 PM:
That's why their prices are so low. "
girard74 wrote on May 1, 2008 9:52 PM:
Brian wrote on May 1, 2008 9:50 PM:
" Brian wrote on May 1, 2008 9:35 PM:
Somebody has to pay for that education.
That 100% inheritance tax is where it will come from. They'll be a lot of people out there reluctant to make a lot of money
Given the opportunity to make as much money as they can with a diminished income tax load, why wouldn't people want to do what they can to get rich? "
Leonard, there will be a lot more people hiding their money in offshore banks where the money is immune from
an inheritance tax. "
girard74 wrote on May 1, 2008 9:46 PM:
Cogito wrote on May 1, 2008 9:44 PM:
girard74 wrote on May 1, 2008 9:44 PM:
girard74 wrote on May 1, 2008 9:42 PM:
It is so absurd I'm certain that some legislator will introduce it as a serious idea. Just wait and see. "
Leonard wrote on May 1, 2008 9:42 PM:
You may be changing my mind. I want to open the "Kennedy gun range, swimming,drunk driving, and ski school". You know it would be a huge hit.
C, if you think you can make a living and maybe even a fortune doing that, go right ahead. Sometimes, the best business ideas come straight from the outfield.
That said, I really am off to bed. "
girard74 wrote on May 1, 2008 9:41 PM:
Leonard wrote on May 1, 2008 9:40 PM:
Alternatively, the tuition part could be handled by entities like Sallie Mae and the business loan part could also run by similar entities.
I've got an early day tomorrow, so that's it for me.
If you want to talk about this tomorrow, I'll be glad.
Brian, if you want to spend the rest of the night calling me names to make you feel better about yourself, feel free. "
Cogito wrote on May 1, 2008 9:40 PM:
Brian wrote on May 1, 2008 9:38 PM:
Leonard wrote on May 1, 2008 9:37 PM:
Somebody has to pay for that education.
That 100% inheritance tax is where it will come from. They'll be a lot of people out there reluctant to make a lot of money
Given the opportunity to make as much money as they can with a diminished income tax load, why wouldn't people want to do what they can to get rich? "
girard74 wrote on May 1, 2008 9:37 PM:
Just how much longer are you going to keep this going? I know the answer - as long as it keeps going, huh? "
Leonard wrote on May 1, 2008 9:35 PM:
" What you propose is very similar to what the Bolsheviks did in Russia. Take things away from their owners, and give it to whomever you deem worthy. Very unAmerican.
Man Cogito, you truly are incapable of thinking outside of the box.
The only property that would be redistributed would be that of dead people and, as they say, you can't take it with you anyhow, so they would not be feeling the loss.
In any case, their offspring would have exactly the same chance to make a fortune for themselves as everybody else. "
Brian wrote on May 1, 2008 9:35 PM:
Somebody has to pay for that education.
That 100% inheritance tax is where it will come from. They'll be a lot of people out there reluctant to make a lot of money. Say goodbye to capitalism.
The government will eventually have to provide all the services because no one will want to compete. Sounds like Marxism to me. "
Cogito wrote on May 1, 2008 9:34 PM:
girard74 wrote on May 1, 2008 9:34 PM:
I (and maybe others) do not believe it to be a "reward" for anyone to receive money or other things of value through an inheritence. Luck, perhaps, but not a reward. "
girard74 wrote on May 1, 2008 9:33 PM:
Cogito wrote on May 1, 2008 9:32 PM:
Leonard wrote on May 1, 2008 9:32 PM:
" If by chance you're not kidding, here's what would happen if your proposal were to come to fruition.
G, I have absolutely no expectation that my plan will ever be implemented.
I am not talking about what will happen, I am talking about what would be fair.
So far, none of you have provided any explanation of how it is fair for people to be rewarded for doing nothing. "
Cogito wrote on May 1, 2008 9:30 PM:
Leonard wrote on May 1, 2008 9:30 PM:
girard74 wrote on May 1, 2008 9:30 PM:
Leonard wrote on May 1, 2008 9:29 PM:
" Who will handle the money if not a "governing" body. What small businesses will get the money.
Any individual wanting to start a small business would qualify for a loan. "
girard74 wrote on May 1, 2008 9:28 PM:
While on his/her deathbeds, multiple toilets will be heard flushing for hours on end as the shredded cash is being swallowed up by the sewer systems around the country.
Anyone forced to endure what you suggest would rather their money be destroyed than subjected to such a ludicrous program. "
Brian wrote on May 1, 2008 9:28 PM:
This is the standard liberal philosophy
that people that make a lot of money are bad.
Leonard, looks like your kids won't be inheriting any money from you if you were to strike it rich on some investment if you're proposal somehow becomes reality. "
Leonard wrote on May 1, 2008 9:28 PM:
" Would you disallow parents helping their children to purchase their first home? What about paying their college tuition?
No, while people are alive, they could do whatever they wanted with their money (provided that certain measure were taken to prevent people from evading the system). As for college tuition, there wouldn't be any since all education would be free. "
Cogito wrote on May 1, 2008 9:26 PM:
Leonard wrote on May 1, 2008 9:25 PM:
" Leonard, 100% inheritance tax? It's official, you're a Marxist.
Yeah C, lots of Marxist try to promote small businesses and entrepreneurship while lowering income tax.
Does using labels make you more comfortable with not thinking? "
Cogito wrote on May 1, 2008 9:24 PM:
Leonard wrote on May 1, 2008 9:23 PM:
" Wow, I'm sorry. You stated "no interest." Okay, so who gets the no interest payments?
The payments would go back into the system. "
girard74 wrote on May 1, 2008 9:23 PM:
You're laughing real loud about now, huh? "
Leonard wrote on May 1, 2008 9:23 PM:
I wonder if Leonard will punish all those with too much money.
Perhaps you missed the part where I said the money would be used to reduce the Federal Income tax.
Or, perhaps you are just so poorly educated that you couldn't understand what you read.
My plan would deal with that problem. "
girard74 wrote on May 1, 2008 9:22 PM:
Leonard wrote on May 1, 2008 9:21 PM:
I would rather see bratty trust fund kids get their families fortune than the government.
Wrap your mind around this, C.
The money would be going to education and small business, not the government.
If the government was really a road block, the whole thing could be handled by some non government entity like the Federal Reserve. "
girard74 wrote on May 1, 2008 9:21 PM:
And just "who" would receive the payments (with the small amount of interest) from those who received these business loans? "
Brian wrote on May 1, 2008 9:20 PM:
It was capitalism that they were able to get this wealth. Now they will be punished by an anti-capitalistic system
for being capitalists.
Leonard, are you aware how foolish and selfish your proposal is?
"
Cogito wrote on May 1, 2008 9:19 PM:
Cogito wrote on May 1, 2008 9:16 PM:
girard74 wrote on May 1, 2008 9:15 PM:
I've got a BIG problem with MY money being given to lazy, entitlement-driven people through all of these tax-funded giveaways.
I have no problem with anyone receiving any amount of money from relatives or anyone else who desires to give it to them. "
Cogito wrote on May 1, 2008 9:14 PM:
girard74 wrote on May 1, 2008 9:13 PM:
By the taking of our money through earnings taxes, the government does little to "earn" it; submitting money that has already gone through what may already be multiple tax cycles by tacking on an "obscene" death tax is tantamount to Uncle Sam literally stealing it. "
Brian wrote on May 1, 2008 9:13 PM:
" Brian wrote on May 1, 2008 8:59 PM:
It is just the roll of the dice that some are born into money and some are born into poverty.
Are you arguing that people should be rewarded for doing nothing?
I never thought of being born as doing nothing.
It's God's choice where a soul ends up.
I get the feeling you have contempt for the souls that are born into wealth.
Take it up with God. It's his fault according to you. "
Leonard wrote on May 1, 2008 9:12 PM:
nextel wrote on May 1, 2008 9:12 PM:
leonard wrote on May 1, 2008 9:11 PM:
girard74 wrote on May 1, 2008 9:11 PM:
Leonard wrote on May 1, 2008 9:08 PM:
1) All inheritance is taxed at 100%
2) Part of the revenue is used to provide free education or technical training for anyone who wants it.
3) Part of the revenue is used to provide no interest small business loans to anyone who wants to start a business.
4) Any remaining revenue is used to reduce the federal income tax.
Such a system would restore the moral justification for capitalism by giving every individual an equal opportunity to succeed or fail. "
Brian wrote on May 1, 2008 9:07 PM:
" Leonard, are you suggesting that after a lifetime of hard work and success, The government should get everything, or at least a large percentage, of what you've worked for? That's not liberal, that's Marxist! "
Cogito, the harsh word "Marxism" has been replaced by "Redistribution of Wealth". It's the same but liberals think we aren't wise to this slight of hand they use. "
girard74 wrote on May 1, 2008 9:05 PM:
I'm going to jump in here, if that's okay with you Cog.
By "reward" do you suggest that by permitting people to keep what is inherently theirs should be considered a "reward?"
The idea of penalizing those who have done so well so as to pass down whatever amount they please to their heirs is, in and of itself, immoral. "
Leonard wrote on May 1, 2008 9:02 PM:
It is just the roll of the dice that some are born into money and some are born into poverty.
Are you arguing that people should be rewarded for doing nothing?
"
girard74 wrote on May 1, 2008 9:02 PM:
girard74 wrote on May 1, 2008 9:02 PM:
Actually, I'm not really sure where you stand on the scale from right to left. In that light you're something of a paradox. That is one reason why we often DO agree on many issues. Perhaps you think I'm on the "radical" right? I certainly don't believe what I've revealed about myself here on these blogs defines me as such; but how have you evaluated "my" position, since you asked for my opinion? "
Leonard wrote on May 1, 2008 9:01 PM:
" Leonard, are you suggesting that after a lifetime of hard work and success, The government should get everything, or at least a large percentage, of what you've worked for? That's not liberal, that's Marxist! "
I'm not suggesting anything. I am just saying that the practice of rewarding people who have done nothing other than being born undermines the moral justification for capitalism. "
Brian wrote on May 1, 2008 8:59 PM:
Vast inheritances undermine that justification by offering the highest rewards to those who have done nothing to earn them, other than being born.
Well Leonard, One does not have a choice what they are born into.
It is just the roll of the dice that some are born into money and some are born into poverty.
One could construe from your statement that the innocent souls born into wealth should be punished for this when you know damn well only God knows where they end up.
That said, Should we punish God too? "
Cogito wrote on May 1, 2008 8:48 PM:
Cogito wrote on May 1, 2008 8:28 PM:
Leonard wrote on May 1, 2008 6:02 PM:
I am puzzled by this label since my views on the 2nd Amendment, the Death Penalty and our ongoing commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan do not exactly endear me to the members of that group. "
Leonard wrote on May 1, 2008 5:59 PM:
Vast inheritances undermine that justification by offering the highest rewards to those who have done nothing to earn them, other than being born.
"
Leonard wrote on May 1, 2008 5:57 PM:
Added emphasis on "obscenely," huh Leonard? Why is it that those who are successful and desire to remain that way by earning as much as they possibly can are deemed to be "obscene" or even worse in the eyes of liberals on the far-left of that group
When I refer to the "obscenely wealthy" I am generally referring to people who inherited their fortunes. Admittedly, there were a few entrepreneurs who benefited from the Bush tax giveaways but by and large, those in the top 1% did little or nothing to earn theirmoney. "
girard74 wrote on May 1, 2008 3:04 PM:
Added emphasis on "obscenely," huh Leonard? Why is it that those who are successful and desire to remain that way by earning as much as they possibly can are deemed to be "obscene" or even worse in the eyes of liberals on the far-left of that group? Just what is it about capitalism that is so distasteful?
Even if these people give "obscene" amounts to charity, they're still harshly criticized because they enjoy certain tax benefits from their generosity; thereby negating what could very well be their true intent - a desire to help. "
Leonard wrote on May 1, 2008 10:18 AM:
Leonard wrote on May 1, 2008 9:30 AM:
That is until the GOP started collecting first born children in lieu of tax dollars. Where there's a will there is always a way to screw the poor. "
Leonard wrote on May 1, 2008 8:37 AM:
" the top 1% of taxpayers pay more, and the bottom 50% of taxpayers pay less under Bush than they did under Clinton.
Yes, the obscenely wealthy paid a higher percentage of total taxes in spite of the Bush tax give away because their share of the GNP expanded at an accelerated rate under Bush.
Similarly, middle classes paid a lower percentage because their share of the total GNP shrank. This trend will continue to accelerate as the gulf between rich and poor grows ever wider.
Soon, the middle class will be an endangered species. "
girard74 wrote on May 1, 2008 7:49 AM:
It should be -$.01 (there, that should insure its proper placement). "
girard74 wrote on May 1, 2008 7:47 AM:
I certainly hope that this error caused as little angst as possible. My most humble of all apologies. :-) "
girard74 wrote on May 1, 2008 7:43 AM:
My bank has a definition of "overdrawn" as it pertains to my checking account. If my balance reaches -$.01 the account is determined to be overdrawn.
Now, what if I log onto my banking center only to discover that they charged me the typical $35.00 for being overdrawn only to discover that I really had +$.01 in the bank?
So, I call them about it and they say, "G74, you were close enough to being "overdrawn," that we determined that you "were" overdrawn, therefore we charged you the fee.
Does that make any sense? "
girard74 wrote on May 1, 2008 7:39 AM:
And Leonard, I appreciate your sentiment as well as your generosity.
Keep in mind, however that ALL of us are going to die - not a question of "if," but "when." We try as we might to stave it to the point of dismissing its possibility altogether.
None of us know the hour of our departure; all the taxpayer-paid healthcare in the world cant prevent it. "
Leonard wrote on May 1, 2008 4:53 AM:
Leonard wrote on May 1, 2008 4:52 AM:
"
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 11:19 PM:
Where did this entitlement mentality come from? We've been spoiled and coddled to the point where many of us truly expect that our kids "should" take care of us; and if not them, then the government.
Now just how arrogant is that, really? As I asked earlier, if healthcare now, what logically is to follow? When do we lose complete accountability for our selves? Isn't anyone else embarrassed/ashamed as much as I-am? "
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 11:14 PM:
This is where we as a nation have gone astray. Everyone lives for "today," with little regard for any future events that could literally kill us.
And many who suddenly find themselves in a like situation somehow turn to the government to blame AND to seek a solution. (okay-one more) "
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 11:11 PM:
Then in 2006 I (along with my doctors) discover my Stage IV cancer.
So, what's my point?
By living my life in the manner that I have, I have been provided with health insurance as well as a rather nice SS Disability benefit. If I hadn't done what I've done, I would be dead right now, not boring you with these words. (final-cont...) "
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 11:08 PM:
I learned that as a vet, regardless of how I am injured or sick if I fall within a certain economic area, I am entitled to coverage. I thought - great!
So as I'm going through the process of getting signed up as they're reviewing my medical records from 1980, it's revealed that my back injury was due to an injury sustained way back then. Voila! Even better! (continued further) "
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 11:05 PM:
I didn't mean to suggest that anyone could. By use of the word 'emergency' I thought that would suffice. I was wrong.
However, emergency care is available to all who need it.
Standard health care then should be a right? Who should pay for it? You? Me?
Prior to my realizing that I was eligible for veteran's health benefits and after losing my employee-provided care, I was on my own. And I did it on my own for a number of months. (continued...) "
Cogito wrote on Apr 30, 2008 8:56 PM:
Cogito wrote on Apr 30, 2008 8:52 PM:
voter wrote on Apr 30, 2008 8:36 PM:
Cogito wrote on Apr 30, 2008 8:29 PM:
Cogito wrote on Apr 30, 2008 8:22 PM:
Cogito wrote on Apr 30, 2008 8:17 PM:
Cogito wrote on Apr 30, 2008 8:14 PM:
Cogito wrote on Apr 30, 2008 8:09 PM:
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 8:03 PM:
As a consequence, he appears to be unable to see the forest for the trees. "
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 8:01 PM:
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 7:59 PM:
To hear it be told, this recession was nearly a depression!! It was far worse than anything that's happened since 1929, to hear the moaners and groaner
You are conflating two separate but related issues.
The foreclosure rate is, in fact, the worst since 1929. "
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 7:57 PM:
Health care is not a "right" either in ethical or moral terms. A doctor is charged to "do no harm."
Actually, if you read the full oath, it goes a lot further than that.
I, myself, was surprised. "
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 7:55 PM:
We have our discussions and our arguments, you get in your points, I get in my points and about half the time I think I do pretty well.
Then you have to go and tell me that your doing all of your work while you've got a head full of opiates.
You sure do know how to take away a guys sense of accomplishment.
:)
"
voter wrote on Apr 30, 2008 7:39 PM:
voter wrote on Apr 30, 2008 7:36 PM:
voter wrote on Apr 30, 2008 7:34 PM:
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 7:26 PM:
Ahhh... yes! The over-used clever retort offered by lefties with no valid argument. Original!! "
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 7:25 PM:
Anyone who arrives at an emergency room needing care is never turned away; if they are then laws are being broken. Go after the law-breakers.
For you, me and the rest of the citizenry to be saddled with socialized health care would not only bankrupt the country, but would unfairly penalize the folks who DO take their personal lives seriously and PROVIDE for themselves and their families.
Again, what happened to responsibility, self-determination and one's own pursuit of happiness? "
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 7:20 PM:
Regardless, many of these mortgages are failing because of unscrupulous lenders loaning money to people who had no means to repay or were too ignorant or lazy to read the contract to realize that their interest rates would jump 10 points in as little as two years into the loan.
And this is the administration's fault to hear the loonies on the left. What happened to common sense? "
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 7:17 PM:
All the chatter and enthusiasm about a "recession" that is certain to derail any Republican chance in November now being called into question. So now it's any type of economic downturn that causes the angst and horror among Americans.
To hear it be told, this recession was nearly a depression!! It was far worse than anything that's happened since 1929, to hear the moaners and groaners.
Now, if integrity is to play out, the left will need six more months for a recession to be deemed a reality. Oh, what will they ever do?!?. Who's disingenuous now? "
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 7:15 PM:
And just why do WE believe it is a "right" that we be afforded health care? "
Something about the Hippocratic Oath, I suppose. "
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 7:09 PM:
But what about those who are losing their homes yet have an Escalade or two in the driveway; multiple cell phones; satellite TV in each bedroom; the finest brands of clothing; get most of their meals from BK or McD; etc?
Ahhh... yes! The strawmen!
A favorite subject of conversation amongst the GOP apologist. "
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 7:06 PM:
It is generally accepted that a "recession" exists after two consecutive quarters of economic loss.
What you fail to grasp is the fact that while the economy may be staggering forward and the recipients of Bush's tax cuts may be getting ever richer, times are hard and getting harder for many if not most Americans.
We do not have to meet the technical definition of "recession" for the gulf between the rich and the poor to get even wider, especially at a time when Americans are losing there homes at the highest rate since the last Depression.
"
voter wrote on Apr 30, 2008 5:57 PM:
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:55 PM:
The answer truly lies somewhere in the middle. "
nylodian wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:54 PM:
voter wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:51 PM:
nylodian wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:43 PM:
Cogito wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:43 PM:
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:43 PM:
It doesn't help me pick up the babes, but it's all mine. ;) "
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:41 PM:
We also don't run to the doctor with each sniffle or sneeze. The Internet provides a lot of information for minor (emphasis on minor) self-diagnosis and treatment. And our daughter is well-taken care of on our own dime. Sure, we do without some things, but that's how we make it work. Not everyone can do it, I know.
I'm lucky because I'm a disabled veteran. Yet that's earned; not handed out. "
Cogito wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:40 PM:
Cogito wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:37 PM:
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:36 PM:
How much do they cost now (if they can even be bought)? And what is their projected cost after all the R&D? "
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:34 PM:
Certainly the technology has improved since the 80s. "
nylodian wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:32 PM:
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:31 PM:
A pharmacy opened in Lodi on Cherokee Lane that truly does provide medications for less. What would have cost me $20 for antibiotics at Walgreens or even Wal-Mart cost me $6.50 at this pharmacy.
I'm just saying we've got to learn to make things happen for ourselves, that's all. "
voter wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:29 PM:
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:29 PM:
And then when a glimmer of good news comes to light - that perhaps we really aren't in a recession (and that IS good news), water is dumped on it out of political expediency for one party or the other.
The most frustrating part is that people really BELIEVE what McCain, Clinton and Obama are promising. And they'll quickly forget after November. "
nylodian wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:28 PM:
Cogito wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:26 PM:
voter wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:25 PM:
Two thoughts: This sounds as if you feel that a certain planned amount of needless death and human suffering is somehow acceptable. And, as a nation we are spending more per person for care than even the countries with the best healthcare systems in the world. There are plenty of healthcare dollars if managed better. In Japan, the insurance cost is split 3 ways--50% govt., 25% employer, 25% consumer. Everybody's covered at a lower rate. "
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:25 PM:
Imagine living in the 19th century when living conditions were of such a nature there is no way any of us would survive. I admit that's not fair given that we don't live in those times.
Yet, these were folks with a lot of guts and determination hell-bent on taking care of themselves and their families. We've somehow lost something along the way. "
nylodian wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:22 PM:
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:19 PM:
You're right though, we live in a wonderful society that does provide for the safety and welfare as well as the future of our nation (police, fire departments, education). But certainly that must end somewhere, don't you think?
You might think it silly, but what's next - auto insurance; clothing allowances; meal tickets?
There IS a limit and to provide health care for an entire nation is absolutely impossible to afford/manage. "
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:15 PM:
That level of expectation is obviously impossible to obtain. Yet anything short of that is discarded as being irresponsible toward the planet. It's beginning to be a no-win situation. "
voter wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:14 PM:
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:11 PM:
nylodian wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:09 PM:
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:07 PM:
No doubt. Yet how is this any different from any other generation? There are always "winners" and "losers" in the economy game; and it IS a game.
I wonder how many of these folks who were suckered in with bad mortgages might also have been duped to play the stock market over the Internet? The market is nothing more or less than legalized gambling - how many are losing their shirts now who would not have even thought about dabbling with money they could not afford to risk before? "
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:04 PM:
My words were to convey just how bad off are the majority of Americans? If they (we) can afford these luxuries that we've come to expect, and yet are clamoring for health care benefits to be provided by the government (or anyone else), just how disingenuous is that?
Because the rest of the world has health care (like you, I'd have to study that further); yet how long do they have to wait for that health care?
And just why do WE believe it is a "right" that we be afforded health care? "
voter wrote on Apr 30, 2008 4:01 PM:
voter wrote on Apr 30, 2008 3:58 PM:
You asked,
"And how many of them claim not able to afford their own health care?
Let's look at those stats for a change. Then compare them to the rest of the world. . ."
When Bush took office there were 38 million uninsured Americans--down 4.5 million over the two previous years. Now we have 47 million uninsured Americans. Comparing this to the rest of the first world is easy. Everyone in the rest of the first world is covered. "
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 3:38 PM:
Sure, there are those hurting. Fuel prices are high and some folks are losing their homes. Under ANY economic conditions these things happen.
But what about those who are losing their homes yet have an Escalade or two in the driveway; multiple cell phones; satellite TV in each bedroom; the finest brands of clothing; get most of their meals from BK or McD; etc?
And how many of them claim not able to afford their own health care?
Let's look at those stats for a change. Then compare them to the rest of the world. Disingenous? You bet! "
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 3:06 PM:
Hey, don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that everything is "peachy keen." But for the past couple of months it's been "RECESSION, RECESSION, RECESSION, RECESSION!!!" Now when the numbers reflect that it is NOT a recession by definition, those who can only benefit from it BEING a recession are running for cover; finding other reasons to scare people and force those numbers down for the next quarter. "
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 2:59 PM:
It is generally accepted that a "recession" exists after two consecutive quarters of economic loss.
This is what has been drilled into our heads by both sides of the aisle as well as from many economists.
Since this has not occurred, how then can this be determined to be a recession?
The "bar" hasn't been moved at all. The economy simply hasn't reached the threshold determining it to be in recession. "
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 2:53 PM:
I sure would like it if you could provide me an example of how I attempt to put words into others' mouths. "
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 1:58 PM:
"
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 1:56 PM:
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 1:40 PM:
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 1:34 PM:
Cogito wrote on Apr 30, 2008 1:32 PM:
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 1:27 PM:
" Leonard, it will never get more expensive than the market will bear.
True, but as a commodity become scarcer, the price will increasingly determine the market.
"
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 1:26 PM:
" P.S. Leonard, I'm pretty sure that what happens in 2100 will be irrelevant to me.
Given the fact that you support a President who has run up the biggest deficit in history, I do not find that surprising. "
Cogito wrote on Apr 30, 2008 1:24 PM:
Cogito wrote on Apr 30, 2008 1:21 PM:
Cogito wrote on Apr 30, 2008 1:14 PM:
Cogito wrote on Apr 30, 2008 1:12 PM:
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 1:09 PM:
" Leonard, in 2100 minimum wage will probably be 10,000 dollars an hour
If it is, then gas will be $50,000 a gallon. The point is that, over the long haul, it isn't going to get any cheaper or more abundant. "
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 1:08 PM:
Of course, that doesn't keep them from showing up in the wing nut news on a daily basis. "
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 1:07 PM:
I would really hate to be in their shoes.
Even Lanny Davis is now looking at only the 4% of troubled mortgages and ignoring the 96% that are being paid on time. What a world!! "
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 1:03 PM:
That being said, reports today are that the economy is NOT in a recession. The stock market closed April way up. "
Cogito wrote on Apr 30, 2008 1:01 PM:
Cogito wrote on Apr 30, 2008 12:56 PM:
nylodian wrote on Apr 30, 2008 12:48 PM:
Cogito wrote on Apr 30, 2008 12:46 PM:
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 12:42 PM:
The fact that people will probably be paying $10,000 for a barrel of oil in the year 2100 does not mean that the resource is infinite.
As with any other finite resource, oil will inevitably become more and more expensive as reserves are exhausted. Some day, in the distant future, the last drop of natural occurring petroleum will be used and the user will probably pay a fortune to do so. "
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 12:41 PM:
Now before I get a lecture on Bush, please be advised that I have not claimed that the criminal allegations are not true; yet I cannot in good conscience accept them as truth without further conclusive proof. I still contend that if the proof is there, move ahead against them. Otherwise, wait. "
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 12:38 PM:
" Leonard, not in our lifetimes buddy. When we die, internal combustion from fossil fuels will still rule the day.
Do you realize that, if gas prices rise by the same percentage they have under Bush, by the time the next president completes their second term, gas will cost $10 a gallon? "
Cogito wrote on Apr 30, 2008 12:38 PM:
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 12:33 PM:
To claim that plundering this wilderness area over the course of a decade or more would have a significant effect on global oil prices economically absurd.
"
Cogito wrote on Apr 30, 2008 12:32 PM:
Cogito wrote on Apr 30, 2008 12:30 PM:
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 12:29 PM:
" Leonard, since the fringe groups of the left have defined the finiteness of this commodity
No matter how many wilderness areas you plan to rape in the future, the supply of refined gasoline and oil for this summer (the proposed tax holiday) will remain finite.
"
nylodian wrote on Apr 30, 2008 12:27 PM:
As far as Hillary's rep goes, unfortunately, we've heard it all for decades and are somewhat desensitized to it. Any mud on the shiny new Obama would get more attention in the General Election, IMHO. "
Cogito wrote on Apr 30, 2008 12:23 PM:
nylodian wrote on Apr 30, 2008 12:20 PM:
nylodian wrote on Apr 30, 2008 12:17 PM:
Lodian wrote on Apr 30, 2008 12:09 PM:
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 11:31 AM:
" Wouldn't it be nice if Brian just posted his own words instead of regurgitating the words of some media whore wing nut from the wrong side of the dial?
Before anyone starts running to the moderators, this post was mine, not Ivan's (or, as we call him around here, Grampa Pone).
Dad was futzing with my computer this morning when he came over to pick up Lennyette and he apparently forgot to log off. "
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 11:28 AM:
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 11:23 AM:
Reducing the portion of the price that goes to taxes does not change the final calculation to determine that price load.
Increasing consumption of that finite commodity will, however, inevitably lead to higher prices. "
ccinlodi wrote on Apr 30, 2008 11:21 AM:
Good point, Mr Stamos; I think we saw this while Mitt Romney was active. And I think since your letter was published, all we hear about Obama is how he no longer respects his minister. Since when was religious intolerance an American Value? is it the media inciting readers or readers inciting the media? "
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 11:21 AM:
Such an increase will inevitably result in an even higher price at the pump when the tax goes back into effect. "
Lodian wrote on Apr 30, 2008 10:41 AM:
Lodian wrote on Apr 30, 2008 10:39 AM:
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 9:45 AM:
In the long run this is a good idea. However, any suspension of the tax would have to be temporary and designed to be a quick, short-term "solution" (term used very loosely) for the problems at the pump.
Personally, I cannot afford to upgrade to any type of car, efficient or otherwise; I would suggest there are many more like me than those in a position to enjoy whatever incentives might be afforded.
Find alternative fuels; find more (our) oil in the meantime.
"
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 9:40 AM:
I suspect that whatever savings might conceivably be expected by the consumer will simply be taken up as profits by the oil companies.
I think the money would be much better spent as incentives for consumers to buy more efficient cars. Not only would this reduce our dependence on foreign oil but it would also increase car sales and, in doing so, stimulate the economy. "
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 9:30 AM:
In an atmosphere of "are we in a recession or not," the general consensus would be that we are (although the normal indicators have not yet been reached). As such, any relief provided should be considered if for nothing else to subdue Joe Citizens' concerns. Of course along with this tax rebate that goes out soon, none of these actions will do little if we are actually heading for or actually in a recession.
I would vote "Yea." "
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 9:22 AM:
Yea or Nay? "
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 9:21 AM:
Did Obama really believe that his own support of similar legislation while he was an Illinois legislator would not be discovered? At that time fuel prices were topping $2/gallon and the tax that was ultimately suspended was $.05/gallon. (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hLPqTxd4Fe7e5EymHU-kTUgweRDQD90BPHC01)
When these types of "gaffes" start to add up, the sum could very well "define" just who Obama really is- a typical politician. Or is he just a liar? Or both? "
Ivan Dixon wrote on Apr 30, 2008 9:09 AM:
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 8:36 AM:
Hmm, do you suggest that he might not win the nomination? Or is this your opinion regarding his race to the White House if he does become the nominee?
At any rate, if what you state is true and Obama is indeed "done," this would appear to be the Death Nell for the Democrats this year (as I suggested earlier). Clinton, with her incredibly heavy and extensive baggage, cannot possibly survive what will certainly be a raucous and revealing presidential campaign; her character and negative numbers are near guaranteed to disqualify her right out of the convention gate. "
Cogito wrote on Apr 30, 2008 8:30 AM:
Brian wrote on Apr 30, 2008 7:54 AM:
Those that are raking me over the coals
tend to not agree with any of my comments anyway.
The issue of a former Hamas solicitor who now solicits money for Obama will eventually surface. I am also anxious to hear from Wright about how Obama
REALLY has known the jist of his positions for the last twenty years.
Wright will expose Obama. I can't wait. "
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 7:18 AM:
If the Democrats are turned away again this year, they will have no one to blame but themselves. "
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 7:08 AM:
McCain, despite his age and differences within his own party (which very well may be to his advantage regarding independent voters) has not been saddled with the integrity question.
If he is successful in keeping up with the rigors of a hard-fought campaign between his party's convention and the election, and if nothing now unknown comes to the surface to derail him, it is conceivable that he will indeed win. "
girard74 wrote on Apr 30, 2008 7:00 AM:
And if Obama is a liar, that puts him in infamous company with his current presidential Democrat contender.
But to listen to the Clinton supporters it doesn't seem to matter that she's pathological; these "misstatements" or "forgetfulness" episodes are so easily written off as proof of her "humanness." In the primary this might fly; but in the general election (if she is to make it that far), with all of the "Bush lied" rhetoric put forth about his administration, she could not possibly survive, let alone win. "
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 3:35 AM:
Leonard wrote on Apr 30, 2008 3:31 AM:
" I'm chuckling because Brian is plagiarizing again (I checked).
LOL!!!
He's like a child that cannot learn. Time after time he has been caught playing this trick and in every instance, he has been made to look the fool.
Still, nothing will stop the man from uncritically plagiarizing whatever source happens to be convenient, no matter how disreputable it might be. "
bry wrote on Apr 30, 2008 12:16 AM:
Lodian wrote on Apr 30, 2008 12:08 AM:
Brian: FYI
plagiarize
to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own : use (another's production) without crediting the source
to commit literary theft : present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/plagiarized
"
girard74 wrote on Apr 29, 2008 10:28 PM:
girard74 wrote on Apr 29, 2008 10:22 PM:
This is one of the things that I insist on clear and conclusive evidence before making that determination.
If, in fact this is true (and I do not believe that it is with all that is known at this point), then there would be a very big problem. Not that he is Muslim; but that it would have been so well concealed.
Again my disclaimer - The only thing that makes me even think this is true is his middle name; and that's not conclusive. "
Giovanina wrote on Apr 29, 2008 10:16 PM:
Iran will always be a threat under a muslim sect that believes that the Caliphate needs to be established, and the whole planet under his rule.
If you read The Next War, by Caspar Weinburger, you will see the countries that will continue to be a problem until a democratic government is established. The book was written a long time ago, and is still common reading for policy makers. "
Brian wrote on Apr 29, 2008 10:11 PM:
" In September 2007, McCain stated that he was a Baptist of many years and that he was a 15-year member of the North Phoenix Baptist Church in Phoenix.
This church is three miles from me. It's a huge church. "
Brian wrote on Apr 29, 2008 10:07 PM:
You can deny it all you want but Obama is a Muslim posing as a Christian. "
Giovanina wrote on Apr 29, 2008 10:05 PM:
Stop bashing the Republican candidate, there isn't one. McCain is a Dema-lite. lol.
Girard, I also see the hypocrisy, and the development of conspiracy and delusion that affects these Socialists on this blog. Accusatory without evidence.
They get their talking points from this website. You will see the similarities.
http://answer.pephost.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ANS_homepage "
Brian wrote on Apr 29, 2008 10:05 PM:
" I'm chuckling because Brian is plagiarizing again (I checked). And the Hamas smear was fairly entertaining too. Glad to see you take a wait and see attitude with that. "
Voter,Yes I did copy and paste that from the American Thinker. Do you have some evidence to the contrary that black liberation theology doesn't condone this in some form?
I'm sad you find it entertaining that a former Hamas solicitor is now a solicitor for Obama. Are you also entertained that Obama is this close to penetrating the White House? Cont. "
Cogito wrote on Apr 29, 2008 9:57 PM:
girard74 wrote on Apr 29, 2008 9:57 PM:
Evidently this church does not require the traditional baptism to become a member. However, I would think that if he has been a member of this church for 15 years as he states and there is no evidence to repudiate his claim, how is this an issue for or against him? Certainly 15 years is a long enough period of time for one to become ensconced in whatever denomination they choose to belong.
(http://www.christianpost.com/article/20070917/29334_McCain:_I'm_Baptist,_Not_Episcopalian.htm) "
girard74 wrote on Apr 29, 2008 9:43 PM:
It's hardly hypocrisy. Had no one confronted Obama on the Wright issue, Obama would have never brought it up on his own to denounce it or anything else; and neither would any Democrat for that matter. Why would they? That would only serve to feed political fuel to the opposition-that wouldn't make any sense at all.
As for the religious persons in question, the Democrats have every opportunity to present whatever conflicts they believe exist between them and any candidate, including McCain. Then McCain would be forced to respond. "
voter wrote on Apr 29, 2008 9:22 PM:
Cogito wrote on Apr 29, 2008 9:13 PM:
voter wrote on Apr 29, 2008 9:06 PM:
Brian, did you just copy that post from the American Thinker website or somewhere else? "
Brian wrote on Apr 29, 2008 9:01 PM:
"
Cogito wrote on Apr 29, 2008 8:55 PM:
Brian wrote on Apr 29, 2008 8:47 PM:
" Personally, I would like to see every Republican who has called on Obama to denounce Wright make similar demands on their own leaders to denounce Pat Robertson, Oral Roberts and all the other anti American religious fanatics that the GOP has coddled over the course of the last two decades. "
Leonard wrote on Apr 29, 2008 12:10 PM:
" Perhaps now McCain will repudiate the "Reverend" Hagee in similarly strong terms. "
-Leonard's liberalism inhibits his ability to be a methodical thinker. Let's not forget his contempt for Bush too. "
Brian wrote on Apr 29, 2008 8:35 PM:
I do have to say for myself Obama
is good at keeping his cool under pressure. This is an endearing quality that Howard Dean doesn't have. "
Brian wrote on Apr 29, 2008 8:27 PM:
girard74 wrote on Apr 29, 2008 8:10 PM:
Cogito wrote on Apr 29, 2008 8:07 PM:
Cogito wrote on Apr 29, 2008 8:04 PM:
Brian wrote on Apr 29, 2008 7:50 PM:
girard74 wrote on Apr 29, 2008 7:49 PM:
In this day of the Internet, cable news and instant replays sent to our telephones, there is little chance that what could be gotten away with even ten years ago is no longer the case. Yet there are those who truly believe that the People are as stupid as they would like them to be.
I don't like to talk about Hillary, but in this case it is most appropriate. Her blatant lies, something she cannot stop committing, are her undoing because of technology. "
Brian wrote on Apr 29, 2008 7:44 PM:
G74, is it only you and I that knows the full jist of what McCain said about a hundred years in Iraq? I do suspect that the left loves to take things out of context. "
girard74 wrote on Apr 29, 2008 7:41 PM:
Cogito wrote on Apr 29, 2008 7:18 PM:
girard74 wrote on Apr 29, 2008 7:14 PM:
Leonard, I'm being serious here. Who is ignoring these treasonous things being said by white Republicans? What I mean is yes, the "right" is quick to jump on anyone on the left who fits this description (and as you state, rightly so); my question is where is the "left" when they should be doing the jumping? Is it your contention that the media is in the tank? Or who? "
sam wrote on Apr 29, 2008 6:50 PM:
McCain and his staff actively sought out Hagee's endorsement, he appeared and campaigned with Hagee, he said he was proud to be backed by Hagee. Hagee is, in short, part of McCain's political strategy. Now he tells us he doesn't agree with Hagee about everything.
I agree... "very suspect". "
Leonard wrote on Apr 29, 2008 6:23 PM:
Things that would be condemned (rightly) as treason if they were said by a Black Democrat are ignored or even celebrated when they are said by a White Republican.
"
Marly wrote on Apr 29, 2008 5:39 PM:
Leonard wrote on Apr 29, 2008 4:47 PM:
My Kingdom for an edit button!!!
What I meant to write was:
I mentioned the issue not because I actually expect a single ranking Republican to denounce Pat Robertson but because their refusal to make such denunciation so perfectly illustrates the GOPs self serving HYPOCRISY regarding Obama. "
Leonard wrote on Apr 29, 2008 4:45 PM:
I mentioned the issue not because I actually expect a single ranking Republican to denounce Pat Robertson but because their refusal to make such denunciation so perfectly illustrates the GOPs self serving outrage regarding Obama. "
girard74 wrote on Apr 29, 2008 3:49 PM:
The same would apply if there was any like situation with Republicans' pastor/priests/mentors if there was anything there that would grow legs. Evidently there isnt. "
Leonard wrote on Apr 29, 2008 1:53 PM:
The GOP's courtship of ultra right pastors like Robertson and Dobson has transcended pandering.
You might recall that Bush promised in 2000 to bring these ultra fundamentalist fanatics inside the White House decision making process.
Amazingly, this was one promise that he actually kept.
The result has been a hundred million dollar jackpot both in terms of influence and in terms of actual faith based give aways.
"
girard74 wrote on Apr 29, 2008 1:20 PM:
It was the questionable relationship that existed between Obama and Wright that caused the problems. There has been little, if any evidence (other than anecdotal) that this same type of relationship exists between Republican leaders and their pastors. "
sam wrote on Apr 29, 2008 12:57 PM:
Leonard wrote on Apr 29, 2008 12:12 PM:
Leonard wrote on Apr 29, 2008 12:10 PM:
girard74 wrote on Apr 29, 2008 11:19 AM:
It will be interesting to see how this plays out during the next week or so before North Carolina and Indiana. However, I am satisfied. "
girard74 wrote on Apr 29, 2008 10:00 AM:
Of course then there's the side-effects of taking all these pain medications that I won't bore you with.
On top of that most of my salivary glands were destroyed so I use "artificial saliva," my thyroid was severely damaged; most foods taste like crap and the stuff I DO enjoy is nearly impossible to swallow. Often times I cannot speak and sleep is rare and never restful.
Other than that, I'm dandy!!
But then, that's just me. "
Lodian wrote on Apr 29, 2008 9:53 AM:
Lodian wrote on Apr 29, 2008 9:47 AM:
"G: I am glad to see that your hiatus was short. I really do enjoy your POV (no matter how far off the mark it may be at times). :)"
I agree, Leonard. I enjoy the POV from both of you. It's great reading your posts back and forth. Very educational...can be entertaining too. ;-)
"
girard74 wrote on Apr 29, 2008 9:46 AM:
As a result of the surgery to my neck for cancer and the after-effects of radiation and chemotherapy, my life has turned into something I never thought possible in my worst nightmares.
It has taken a lot of time to come to terms with all of this; yet my faith in God and my kids' support helps tremendously. "
Lodian wrote on Apr 29, 2008 9:41 AM:
Lodian wrote on Apr 29, 2008 9:38 AM:
girard74 wrote on Apr 29, 2008 9:35 AM:
But more than that because of the pain that I deal with daily and the fact that I literally live day-to-day with the knowledge my cancer "will" return at any time, I take refuge in my conversations here. As it helps my pain, it also provides me with a respite while waiting for the results of the monthly battery of tests to determine my status. "
girard74 wrote on Apr 29, 2008 9:21 AM:
This is their further attempts to keep us to the 100-word-limit. "
Lodian wrote on Apr 29, 2008 9:07 AM:
Lodian wrote on Apr 29, 2008 9:04 AM:
Lodian wrote on Apr 29, 2008 8:59 AM:
girard74 wrote on Apr 29, 2008 8:13 AM:
"Blogs" and "debating" have been excellent tools in helping me cope with the pain untouched by these medications. Becoming immersed in a good dispute really does transport me to a level where, at least for a time, my mind pays attention to something else thereby relieving me of some of the discomfort.
There is, however the risk that if conversations go "wrong" that the opposite occurs; the pain is intensified. That's what's happened here. "
nylodian wrote on Apr 29, 2008 8:05 AM:
Peace and hugs! "
WY wrote on Apr 29, 2008 8:02 AM:
girard74 wrote on Apr 29, 2008 8:02 AM:
girard74 wrote on Apr 29, 2008 8:00 AM:
With few exceptions, I have engaged in discourse with many people here that has gotten very involved, complex and vigorous yet at the end we moved on with no harm done. "
girard74 wrote on Apr 29, 2008 7:54 AM:
Yet OTH was correct when she stated that "...from the beginning have developed a certain amount of trust in one another even though we've never met."
This level of "trust," because we haven't ever met is different from our close friends and our families. It is much more fragile; not designed to be unconditional.
As such, I believe that the trust that I have placed here has, in fact been violated. This is something that I must deal with on my own. "
girard74 wrote on Apr 29, 2008 7:49 AM:
Obviously I misunderstood what you wrote. I apologize for my mistake. "
girard74 wrote on Apr 29, 2008 7:47 AM:
Brian wrote on Apr 29, 2008 7:36 AM:
" Brian: So, since youre defending prostitutes on the Bikini Bar blog that must mean I can't chew gum and walk at the same time? Huh? Youre not making any sense Brian. Is this some weird prostitute gum-chewing thing youre into or what? Youll have to explain.
Lodian, you have some proof that all those women at the bar are prostitutes?
Perhaps you should write a letter of apology to all those women.
Perhaps you would prefer the women at this bar that MAY be prostitutes walk the streets and be on welfare?
"
WY wrote on Apr 29, 2008 7:20 AM:
WY wrote on Apr 29, 2008 7:15 AM:
G74... You're a good man.
a game of tether ball anyone??? "
sam wrote on Apr 29, 2008 7:02 AM:
I NEVER SAID that. I said I emailed you stating that Real Facts needed a hug. "
OTH wrote on Apr 29, 2008 5:59 AM:
Again I offer a sincere apology to each and everyone of you.
I hope everything can get back to some semblance of normality.
I will be out of town until the middle of May. PEACE "
OTH wrote on Apr 29, 2008 5:56 AM:
Once agaiin I offer you a sincere apology.
I made a mistake and it snowballed out of control. You have a right to be angry.
Having said that I hope you will choose to accept my apology
"
Leonard wrote on Apr 29, 2008 5:07 AM:
I really do enjoy your POV (no matter how far off the mark it may be at times).
:) "
Leonard wrote on Apr 29, 2008 5:05 AM:
It is as if the cancer that was RF had metastasized. "
girard74 wrote on Apr 29, 2008 12:17 AM:
girard74 wrote on Apr 29, 2008 12:15 AM:
I've stated my side and while I am still confused, I realize there is nothing else that can be done. I have never been one to harangue anyone for the sake of anger.
I'm confident in my own integrity and in how I treat other people. As such, the benefit of any doubt is now given to OTH and sam. I'm finished with it - completely. "
WY wrote on Apr 28, 2008 11:44 PM:
"
WY wrote on Apr 28, 2008 11:32 PM:
Please everyone. Writing and texting will set you up for misunderstandings. This has happened to me four times this past week.
voter... you're cool. Your spirit is good "
girard74 wrote on Apr 28, 2008 11:26 PM:
girard74 wrote on Apr 28, 2008 11:22 PM:
I have always been very careful to couch my words with great care in order to avoid those very things you mention. I always keep the "gloves" on unless forced to remove them by others - and that has been very rare. Even in this instance OTH (on the Wal-Mart blog) criticized my empathy and compassion which caused me to explain that I wasn't attempting to argue that aspect of the case. It was clear I was discussing the legal characteristics. "
girard74 wrote on Apr 28, 2008 10:27 PM:
As sam publically stated that she had sent me a personal e-mail message with reference to OTH, I have also reviewed all of those messages (not with a search engine) and have been unable to find the referenced message. If she would be so kind as to re-send that message to me-perhaps it would jog my memory (yes, I do have a limited short-term memory) and permit me to respond accordingly.
Other than all of this, there's nothing else to do. "
girard74 wrote on Apr 28, 2008 10:22 PM:
Even though subjective, in "debate" terms I have been nothing less than a gentleman. My references to sam being "arrogant" were first posed as a question to her because I didn't actually believe that she was. Later because she was reading something into what I had written, I asked her if she was "clairvoyant."
And aside from the "agreeing to disagree" situation with OTH, I cannot find where I personally offended her. "
girard74 wrote on Apr 28, 2008 10:00 PM:
voter wrote on Apr 28, 2008 9:59 PM:
voter wrote on Apr 28, 2008 9:57 PM:
girard74 wrote on Apr 28, 2008 9:55 PM:
That being said, I don't believe that the pendulum should swing so far the other way as to avoid controversy altogether. Aside from the occasional good-natured conversations and banter, what would be the point of the blogs? "
girard74 wrote on Apr 28, 2008 9:51 PM:
I did take issue with the equating of Cheney to Hitler as well as a few other items, but no where did I accuse anyone of anything.
My comments to Sam were directed to what she "posted," not her character. What she "said" made her appear to be something that perhaps she is not. "
girard74 wrote on Apr 28, 2008 9:47 PM:
With all of the maligning against Wal-Mart in this instance as well as all over, I believe that when they aren't wrong, it should be pointed out. Certainly I cannot understand how anyone would/could take that personally.
This IS how debate works. I even went on to explain my definition of the adage, "agree to disagree" to another who questioned my earlier post. I answered it with logic and without accusations toward anyone. "
girard74 wrote on Apr 28, 2008 9:43 PM:
If, as sam suggests that OTH was having problems, there was no way that I could know that. If by not "agreeing to disagree" put her over the top, I can only claim ignorance to her condition, whatever that might be. "
Lodian wrote on Apr 28, 2008 9:41 PM:
re: Hwy 12
yes...
We drive around it. More gas, more
miles...
but we stay alive! "
Lodian wrote on Apr 28, 2008 9:39 PM:
sam wrote on Apr 28, 2008 9:38 PM:
But until someone invests the money and puts in a 4 lane road with shoulders wide enough to pull off and center barriers, that road will remain a death trap.
We drive around it. More gas, more miles... but feel safer. "
Lodian wrote on Apr 28, 2008 9:34 PM:
sam wrote on Apr 28, 2008 9:34 PM:
"
sam wrote on Apr 28, 2008 9:31 PM:
Lodian wrote on Apr 28, 2008 9:30 PM:
sam wrote on Apr 28, 2008 9:27 PM:
sam wrote on Apr 28, 2008 9:26 PM:
On the Hwy 12 blog, I did offer you a clip board so you could stand by the road on Hwy 12 and actually count the semis passing by used by farmers. "
sam wrote on Apr 28, 2008 9:24 PM:
sam wrote on Apr 28, 2008 9:24 PM:
G is against OTH. He needs to accept the apology and move on. "
Lodian wrote on Apr 28, 2008 9:21 PM:
Lodian wrote on Apr 28, 2008 9:20 PM:
sam wrote on Apr 28, 2008 9:19 PM:
sam wrote on Apr 28, 2008 9:16 PM:
sam wrote on Apr 28, 2008 9:16 PM:
" sam: What? When have I ever "brutally" attacked you? That's a really odd thing to say."
No lodian, you are great in your blogs. It was the highway 12 blog over a year ago. You wanted to ban all trucks on Hwy 12. I said farmers needed the trucks. You said "pickups" I said use semis. You asked me for a count.. an exact count for the semis needed to serve the islands. "
Lodian wrote on Apr 28, 2008 9:09 PM: