default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
Logout|My Dashboard

Charismatic does not mean good

Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Saturday, February 16, 2013 12:00 am

I am astounded that more people do not recognize Barack Obama for who he really is. Sure, he is charismatic, but many tyrants have been wildly popular while they enslaved their populace.

Fidel Castro was the "savior" of Cuba. The liberal media in this country loved Castro. Hugo Chavez, if he is still alive, has a huge following in Venezuela. Adolph Hitler was loved in Austria while he ravaged the country.

Are we really that blind? I guess so. We re-elected Obama knowing he intends to destroy the country. We are shortsighted as well as selfish. Why can't the Tea Parties regain their momentum? 2014 may be our last chance!

Jerry Osgood


Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don’t pretend you’re someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don’t threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don’t insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the ‘Report’ link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.
  • 9 Don’t be a troll.
  • 10 Don’t reveal personal information about other commenters. You may reveal your own personal information, but we advise you not to do so.
  • 11 We reserve the right, at our discretion, to monitor, delete or choose not to post any comment. This may include removing or monitoring posts that we believe violate the spirit or letter of these rules, or that we otherwise determine at our discretion needs to be monitored, not posted, or deleted.

Welcome to the discussion.


  • Andrew Liebich posted at 8:51 am on Wed, Mar 6, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    Good grief! [rolleyes]

  • Eric Barrow posted at 7:41 am on Mon, Mar 4, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    My understanding of the situations is based on facts in front of me I am not sure what you are basing your understanding of the situation on but I do agree that claiming to know about my situation than I do is ignorant.

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 10:32 pm on Sat, Mar 2, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    I understand completely. Your ignorance is willfull.[sleeping]

  • Eric Barrow posted at 9:29 am on Fri, Mar 1, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    I don't know how I can be any clearer. Once again it doesn't appear that any of the federal taxes you mention will affect me most of them will not affect most Americans. Ending the Bush era tax cuts on the wealthy but not the middle class was what Obama campaigned on and that's what he delivered. You may not like it but that is transparency. As far as California is concerned I think the Guv and the good people of California were responsible for those not the President. You may be awake but you are blinded by your hatred.

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 12:12 am on Fri, Mar 1, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    Marginal tax rates rises from 25% | 28% | 33% | 35% to 28% | 31% | 36% | and 39.6% respectively.

    Top 15% rate on long-term capital gains rises to 20%.

    Dividends will again be taxed at ordinary income tax rates – 39.6% for top earners.

    Limits on Itemized Deductions and the Personal Exemptions Phase out will add an additional 1.2% to the top rate.

    Death tax rate increases from 35% to 55%, with the exemption falling to $1 million from $5 million.

    Child care deduction limit of $3,000 reverts to $2,400

    Child credit decreases from $1,000 per child to $500 per child

    Low 10% tax bracket for low income Americans expires and taxable income previously subject to the 10% rate will be taxed at 15%

    The marriage penalty equalization ends – the deduction decreases from 200% of the deduction for singles to 167%; and the 15% tax bracket reflects the reduced levels.

    Reduction of the earned income tax credit and refunds

    American Opportunity college education credit expires

    Refundable adoption credit and a lower deduction

    Reduction for student loan interest ends

    Education IRA limit drops from $2,000 to $500

    Other tax policies that will expire include the Temporary Payroll Tax Cut Continuation Act of 2011, which temporarily extended the reduced social security tax withholding rate of 4.2% (down from 6.2%) of wages paid, is set to expire in February 2012.

    And, the elimination of “tax extenders” – temporary tax breaks such as exclusion of mortgage debt forgiveness, the biofuel credit and 9 others – are set to expire at the end of 2012.

    In addition to the expiration of these tax provisions, several new taxes that are part of Obamacare totaling approximately $22.8 billion are scheduled to begin in 2013. These taxes include:
    ■Expands the Medicare tax for incomes over $200,000 ($250,000 for joint filers) and applies the new 3.8% tax to investment income.
    ■Places a 2.3% excise tax on manufacturers of medical devices
    ■Medical Deductions are reduced by increasing the floor on medical deductions from 7.5% to 10% of adjusted gross income.
    ■Limits to flexible spending arrangements
    ■Eliminates deduction for expenses that can be allocated to Medicare Part D

    The cost of these tax increases to U.S. taxpayers will be significant. According to an analysis conducted by the Heritage Foundation, the average U.S. taxpayer will see an annual tax increase between $1,929 for residents in West Virginia to $5,161 for taxpayers in Connecticut. [7] In California, tax filers with an adjusted gross income of approximately $71,000 will see a tax increase of approximately $3,525 per year without a proportional increase in income.

    Moreover, lower income families will also be hit hard by the expiration of tax policies such as the lower 10% tax bracket, the reduced earned income tax credit and the reduction of the child credit. These families may, on average expect to see a tax increase of $1,200 per year.

    California Tax Increases:

    In addition to the looming federal tax increases, the centerpiece of Governor Jerry Brown’s budget proposal is a seven-year $47 billion “temporary” tax increase. These new taxes are embodied in the Schools and Local Public Safety Protection Act of 2012 ballot initiative that requires the approval of California voters in November 2012.[8]

    According to California’s Legislative Analyst’s Office, revenue estimates for the initiative vary widely – from $6.8 billion to $9 billion for 2012-13 and from $5.4 billion to $7.6 billion, on average, in each of the following five fiscal years, with lesser amounts in 2018-19.[9] Additional revenues generated by this tax increase would be considered General Fund revenues for the purpose of calculating General Fund Proposition 98 obligations.

    To achieve these revenues, personal income tax rates will be increased for seven years and the state’s sales and use tax rate will be increased for four years.

    Specifically, the personal income tax portion of the proposal will add three new personal income tax brackets with rates above 9.3 percent. These new rates will be effective for seven years beginning January 1, 2012 through the end of the 2018 tax year for both single and joint taxpayers.

    Under current law, the maximum marginal personal income tax rate is 9.3 percent. It applies to taxable income in excess of $48,209 for individuals; $65,376 for heads of household; and $96,058 for joint filers. For those filers with taxable incomes over $1 million, an additional 1 percent rate for mental health services applies, bringing their rate to 10.3 percent.[10]

    According to the Tax Foundation’s 2012 State Business Tax Climate Index, which gauges how states’ tax systems compare, California’s tax climate ranks near the bottom – 48 out of all 50 states, behind only New York and New Jersey. The Tax Foundation uses five different categories of taxes – Corporate Tax, Individual Income Tax, Sales Tax, Property Tax and Unemployment Insurance Tax – to evaluate and compare states’ relative tax climates.

    Moreover, under the Tax Climate Index, California’s current personal income tax rates are already ranked as the worst in the nation. While California’s 9.3 percent tax rate is only the fifth highest in the nation behind Hawaii (10% for income over $175,000), Oregon (10.8% for income over $125,000), Rhode Island (9.9% for income over $372,950), and Vermont (9.4% for income over $372,950), it is ranked the worst in the nation because California’s rate applies to taxable incomes as low as $48,209 for individual filers.

    The Governor’s tax proposal, would add three new tax brackets:
    ■A 10.3 percent tax rate on incomes between $250,000 and $300,000 for individuals; $340,000 and $408,000 for heads of household; and $500,000 and $600,000 for joint filers.
    ■An 11.3 percent tax rate on incomes between $300,000 and $500,000 for individuals; $408,000 and $680,000 for heads of household; and $600,000 and $1 million for joint filers.
    ■A 12.3 percent tax rate on incomes in excess of $500,000 for individuals; $680,000 for heads of household; and $1 million for joint filers.

    These tax rates would affect roughly 1 percent of California’s personal income tax filers due to the high income threshold. Taxpayers with taxable incomes over $1 million would still pay the additional 1 percent mental health tax.

    In addition, Governor Brown’s proposal increases the state’s sales and use tax rate by 0.25 percent, bringing the state’s base rate to 7.5 percent from 7.25 percent and make the state’s overall SUT to approximately 8.4%. This higher rate would remain in effect for four years, from January 1, 2013 through December 2016.

    Next year, should Governor Brown’s tax proposal be implemented, California would undoubtedly challenge New York and New Jersey for having the worst tax climate in the nation.


    Perhaps Winston Churchill said it best, “We contend that for a nation to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.”

    Simply put, taxes are a poor substitute for doing the heavy lifting of re-thinking, reorganizing, and re-prioritizing government. No state better illustrates the failure of tax increases than the one time Golden State. However until the current Administration at both the federal and state levels of governance realize this, California families may wish to start preparing for the coming tax tsunami.

    For more information on this report or other tax related issues, contact Scott Chavez, Senate Republican Office of Policy at 916/651-1501.

    P.S. WAKE-UP!!! [sleeping]

  • Eric Barrow posted at 8:57 am on Thu, Feb 28, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    I have already stated that payroll tax holiday ended this was scheduled to happen when it was implemented and I would not consider it an increase, my income tax has not increased, I am not fortunate enough to have to worry about capital gains and I have insurance so a penalty will not affect me. Like I said my taxes have not increased.

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 12:22 am on Thu, Feb 28, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    President Pinnocchio said, "Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes."

    What part of you have been lied to don't you understand Eric?

    Income, payroll and capital gains taxes have ALL increased not to mention the fact that the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the individual mandate portion of Obamacare by declaring it a “tax.”

  • Eric Barrow posted at 12:48 pm on Wed, Feb 27, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    I've read The 20 new taxes posted in an article by the Americans for Tax Reform I believe that is one of Grover's organization and none of those taxes affect me so I would ask you if the fact that you don't know what you are talking about due to willful ignorance?

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 11:51 am on Wed, Feb 27, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    Is the fact that you are unaware your taxes have increased due to your ignorance or naivety?

  • Eric Barrow posted at 8:09 am on Wed, Feb 27, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    No, well I did vote to raise my sales tax in Cali and the payroll tax holiday ended but that is not really an increase. So on the federal level no. Naive: having or showing a lack of experience, judgment, or information; credulous: She's so naive she believes everything she reads. He has a very naive attitude toward politics.

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 7:47 am on Wed, Feb 27, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    Wilful ignorance is the state and practice of ignoring any evidence that appears to contradict one's preconceived notions. This differs from the standard definition of "ignorance" - which just means that one is unaware of something - in that wilfully ignorant people are fully aware of facts, resources and sources, but refuse to acknowledge them.

    For example, in the video I provided president Pinnocchio said our taxes would not increase. He specifically said, "Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes."

    Have your taxes increased Mr. Barrow?[sleeping]

  • Eric Barrow posted at 7:03 am on Wed, Feb 27, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    Maybe if you actually presented some evidence instead of you tube videos someone would feel the need to refute it but when you offer crap as fact it really needs no refutation.

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 6:36 am on Wed, Feb 27, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    Whether you believe Osama bin Laden died in December of 2001 (as 9 heads of state have claimed) or you believe he died in 2012 it really doesn't change the fact that the Obama campaign accepted a campaign donation from a DEAD GUY!

  • Joanne Bobin posted at 12:44 pm on Tue, Feb 26, 2013.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    I thought Mr. Leebick previously claimed that Osama bin Laden had been killed in 2000, couldn't possibly have survived his kidney disease while living in the caves of Afghanistan and so many other claims.

    Now he has contributed to Obama's campaign?

    Time to get your conspiracies straight, Mr. Leebick.

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 4:29 pm on Mon, Feb 25, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    Where the cult of personality becomes more dangerous, is when citizens exhibit a blind loyalty to their icon, a condition which is similar to celebrity worship.

    I'll demonstrate...

    QUESTION: Has president Pinnocchio's administration been transparent?

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 4:20 pm on Mon, Feb 25, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    The sheepishly ignorant who frequent this forum NEVER "refute" ANY EVIDENCE presented. Unfortunately, this has been and continues to be the exercise.

  • Eric Barrow posted at 3:08 pm on Mon, Feb 25, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    Your video is 14 minutes of 4 to 5 second clips all thrown together to try and prove some obscure point very little of what’s in it is actually Obama speaking and yet it is titled Obama in his own words I believe I had already seen most of those speeches and found nothing offensive in them it is only when they are chopped up and paired with chopped up bits of speeches by others that a conspiracy appears I could take a speech by anybody chop it up rearrange it and some other sound bites and come up with anything. It is not the speakers who are distorting things it is the creator of the video.

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 12:15 pm on Mon, Feb 25, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    No mrb...I don't believe that every liberal is on the government teat...I believe that those who had something to gain or lose voted for him...like you and many of my friends, constituents and adversaries. BO received money from many of the same people that gave to Romney: banks, businesses, buffets, soroses, unions and others (some without their blessings). In a debate you cede the obvious...don't blame shortcomings on ignorance and you test the credibility of the person and their evidence. So far I have seen little from most of those on the left who post here. When someone on the right does offer evidence the person is attacked...while nothing is presented to refute their evidence except the refuters opinion. I have always cited my sources and backed them with evidence...however lately it seems to be hardly worth it. I have offered to debate in any of the dozens of formats but no one has taken me up on the offer. Why is that?

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 11:53 am on Mon, Feb 25, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    You asked Mr. Maple how president Pinnocchio was able to "raise 725 million dollars"...

    I merely provided evidence of one way he was able to do so.

    Illegal campaign contributions from a dead guy. [sleeping]

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 11:48 am on Mon, Feb 25, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    Nobody in the video I provided has “distorted” anything.
    Dumbfounded by this reality you choose to make the idiotic statement that president Pinnocchio's words have been "distorted" by a "Fox montage" and then substantiate your position with NOTHING.

    Your view of reality is obviously "distorted."

    For example, the video begins with President Pinnocchio stating, “Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of my presidency.”

    The video clearly demonstrates this hasn't been the case and cites Politico, the New York Times and the Associated Press.

  • Eric Barrow posted at 9:52 am on Mon, Feb 25, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    Actually Andrew that was me I started a secret society that hides the fact that Osama has not been killed but resides in a mountain retreat in Colorado. We secretly accept donations from communist liberal socialists who are bent on destroying America so Mother Russia and the Spanish can once again practice imperialism. We plan to announce the end to democratic elections and anoint Obama King Master Poobah of the world. Cheers.

  • Eric Barrow posted at 9:46 am on Mon, Feb 25, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    Andrew there was nothing in his own words that I hadn't heard before it was only the Fox montage that distorted those words I'm surprised (although less so all the time) that you can't figure that out.

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 8:46 am on Mon, Feb 25, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    Osama bin Laden was able to donate to Obama's campaign. [sleeping]


  • Andrew Liebich posted at 8:37 am on Mon, Feb 25, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    You still haven't answered my question. [sleeping]

    How are you able to ignore Obama's own words?

  • Eric Barrow posted at 8:21 am on Mon, Feb 25, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    mrm: You really believe that all liberals are on the government teat don't you this is what comes from too much right wing radio and Fox news. Do you really believe that a bunch of welfare recipients were able to raise 725 million dollars for Obama’s re-election?

  • Eric Barrow posted at 8:15 am on Mon, Feb 25, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    That's it Andrew that's what you bring silly you tube videos, emiticons and internet slang that's brilliant talk to you later.

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 8:02 am on Mon, Feb 25, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    I asked how you are able to ignore President Pinnocchio's own words.

    How do President Pinnocchio's own words morph into "you will believe anything"? [lol][lol][lol] ROFLMAO

  • Eric Barrow posted at 7:11 am on Mon, Feb 25, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    Andrew I watched your video already and it is official the last time I will waste my time following any leads provided by you. Snippets of Obama followed by a montage of Obama haters mostly from Fox news with the occasional power point addition or voice over by the video's creator ridiculous, you will believe anything.

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 4:57 am on Mon, Feb 25, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    mrb: "you people " ...does that include the minority of millions who did not vote for the empty suit? I believe in spreading the wealth...it is called a pay raise. Did you get a government pay raise or cut? Look for more...soon!
    Do you even pay taxes? Do you even have a job? Are you French??

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 10:53 pm on Sun, Feb 24, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999


  • Ed Ojeda posted at 9:48 pm on Sun, Feb 24, 2013.

    Capteo Posts: 20

    How can I debate someone who can't even use proper grammar; it's "I USED to judge debates, not I use to judge debates". Guess we all know why you don't anymore. Socrates would have sent you to the back of the line. Regarding the POTUS, a Pew Poll Center poll taken earlier this month revealed that "just 22% of Americans consider themselves Republicans(nearly a record low)," and "on the legislation rated most urgent-cutting the budget deficit-even a majority of Republican voters endorse Obama's approach of seeking tax hikes as well as spending cuts." So where are your factoids, reference, or factbones(as you like to call them) regarding how Romney would have magically fixed everything by now? And by the way, if you haven't realized it yet, this IS a public forum.

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 9:47 pm on Sun, Feb 24, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    I'm still waiting for one of President Pinnocchio's followers to explain how they are able to ignore the following...


  • Eric Barrow posted at 5:39 pm on Sun, Feb 24, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    mrm you assume that because a person won't answer you questions that you must be right this type of egotistical reasoning is why it was such a shock to the right that Obama won a second term and it appears it will also be the reason that the right will continue to lose ground in the next midterms. I owe you no explanations and I'm perfectly comfortable with your disdain as a matter of fact if you ever spoke favorable of any of my comments I would have to seriously question my statements. You people believe you are mainstream Americans and the truth is you are becoming increasingly extreme and as such more and more irrelevant but keep on keepin on.

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 3:52 pm on Sun, Feb 24, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    mro: You have quickly attained the same status of mrb. There is an old saying: put up or shut up and I might add...do so before you lips get blisters.

    As I said previous: Feb 19, 2012: Mr Ojeda: Choose your poison and topic. But just so you know I use to judge debates and am quite good at it. Let's say Maieutic first. Or maybe you would prefer a public forum debate?

    You should credit your source on the definition of a tyrant Mr O...wikipedia...you should also give a complete definition...the Greek version...which would fit well with Mr Osgood's premise of BO's abilities. Your "facts" are not proof and do not win the debate...try again. Round one goes to me.

  • Ed Ojeda posted at 11:08 am on Sun, Feb 24, 2013.

    Capteo Posts: 20

    Thank you for single handedly saving us from the evil world, Mr. M. I guess you have super far right(in La la land) powers that allow you to do this during your exploits on weekends. Are you the only one or are their others? Do you trade notes with Rush, Hannity or maybe even Lindsey Graham?(in La La Land) Mr. M writes "don't attack the messenger", but feels free to do it himself. That, my friends is called hypocrisy.

  • Mike Adams posted at 10:30 am on Sun, Feb 24, 2013.

    Mike Adams Posts: 1574

    Nice rebut Eric. liebich should be careful manipulating fractions.

    I can only guess what website he found this stolen, pathetic attempt to prove to his lone supporter here he's not a fraud.

  • Joanne Bobin posted at 9:17 am on Sun, Feb 24, 2013.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    Mr. Barrow wrote in response to Mr. Maple: "I am glad to hear you did not rat me out that would be beneath even you."

    The most likely culprit would be Andrew Leebick - one who loves to report comments, but feels free to insult as much as he likes in his capacity of conspiracy theorist and Internet Troll, for example:


    "You inhabit Planet Pop Tart,"

    "You are pathetic,"

    "You Obamanoids,"

    "You braindead zombies,"

    "you are an intellectually challenged dope for whom there is no hope."

    "Your capacity for self-delusion and ignorance truly is remarkable."

    "continues to choose willfull ignorance over critical thinking due to his own intellectual laziness...."

    "It's not my fault that brain-dead Obama zombies have poor comprehension skills."

    "If you really want to watch a libtard struggle..."

    It is about time this poster was banned from this site.

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 12:15 am on Sun, Feb 24, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    Thanks Stan. Socrates said it best: When the debate is won the loser will turn to slander.

  • stan taves posted at 11:07 pm on Sat, Feb 23, 2013.

    Stan Taves Posts: 320

    Patrick, your deserve respect; and you get plenty of it from those of us who actually understand what it takes to make the real world function. These people on the left are clinging to an ideology that must steal from the truth in an effort to sustain that which will die no matter how hard they try pound life back into their insanity. It is what is; prepare for the worst.

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 2:52 am on Sat, Feb 23, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    mrb: Most people apologize for their mistakes. Most. Again you come to work with no tools, no intention, no ideas and clueless...a virgin voter. I work weekends to keep jobs for 22 other families...you? You, like the grasshopper, play...while others pay your liberals bills.

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 2:38 am on Sat, Feb 23, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    Typical liberal response...mro. All blow and no go. You were given the opportunity to present any debatable argument and you chose not to. You chose instead to attack the messenger. Show some factbone. BO does not represent ALL Americans...only the liberals and their conjunctivitis. Again...pick your subject...you can wait until 8am when BO lets you get up...I go to work at 5am and quit at 9pm...someone has to pay for his failed experiments.

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 2:20 am on Sat, Feb 23, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    mro: It is 2am...where is your president? In bed. Where was your president at 2am when Benghazi went down? In bed...He didn't answer the call of the nation. Why? I did...so did my entire family.

  • Ed Ojeda posted at 12:22 pm on Fri, Feb 22, 2013.

    Capteo Posts: 20

    Mr. B,
    You are right on on everything you say regarding the current state of political affairs, so keep up the good fight, the far right wing-nuts continue to try to pigeon-hole us as liberals, socialists, and lefties but fail to realize that we are just hard-working, red-blooded, tax-paying Americans who are tired of all the drivel coming out of "political commentators", such as Hannity, Rush, Alex Jones, FOX News, and their misinformed cronies. They complain about the "mainstream media", as if having a government-controlled media like Russia would be much better. If they think so they should emigrate there. I've noticed some here think they reign over these opinion pages, seeing as they've written thousands of times and even at 2:00am. They provide light entertainment at best, and dull boredom at worst. President Obama won and the vast majority of Americans are happy because of it, and voted him in because, although they might not agree with everything he does, they believe he has the good judgment to do the right thing for ALL Americans.

  • Eric Barrow posted at 8:42 am on Fri, Feb 22, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    I am glad to hear you did not rat me out that would be beneath even you. I believe I am clear in my convictions and where I work or who my family is has no place on this forum unless my area of expertise can contribute to the discussion as far as citing sources it is customary to cite them weather they are asked for or not and unless your Grandmother has incite into a topic at hand her quaint euphemism are uncalled for With that being said I will give you the last word and will check back on Mon. for I almost always have something better to do on the weekend then spending time here. I'm sure we will debate further another day because I find you are either spiteful, mean spirited or misinformed and sometimes all three, on almost every topic put forward on this forum, good day. Oh and one more thing you nor you family fought for anything for me I did not request it, if you fought you fought for you own reasons please leave any perceived benefit to me out of your praise for yourself.

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 8:48 pm on Thu, Feb 21, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    mrb: Assume nothing...it will make an a-- of you not me. I turn/ed no one in...I'm much tougher than that. My family fought for your free speech...I hope you enjoy it. And am glad you use it. Cowardice of one's convictions is a fool's pathway to credibility. I find your unwillingness to evolve yourself stingy. Mystery of the human is mystery of the mind and a magnet for misgivings and misunderstanding. I cite my sources each time a source is used...from my grandmother to oil sources to statistical references to scholars to the "news" media. mrb...you are stonewalling AND obfuscating as well as making a spectacle of yourself. Pick any statement and I will give you my sources of information. Otherwise your charge is flat.

  • Eric Barrow posted at 3:14 pm on Thu, Feb 21, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    I will assume, because you didn't deny it, that you did report me so I will also assume that you were offended and it appears you are the one that cried foul. Part of the reason us liberals have had so much success lately is that you like to lump us all together. Some liberals may like to be transparent but not I this is an opinion page and that is what you will get from me “who I am” none of your business “what I believe in” evident from my comments, “where I get my info” unlike you I generally site my material. Like I said before maybe you could learn a lesson and stick to the facts instead of boring us with tales from the past. Now if you are going to dish it out please learn to take it.

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 2:37 pm on Thu, Feb 21, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    mrbby: No you did not offend me. Point to my shortcomings all you want...but back them with proof...not conjecture. Your coaggulation of information is but consistent with mud. I am just trying to clarify who you are, what you believe in and where you got your information. After all aren't you liberals supposed to be the most transparent in history...according to your man BO? Grab some gumption...spill your guts here so we might know your abilities and faults as well. Exactly...no body likes a whiner...a person who will not put forth an effort yet cries foul at the loss... seems more to be not me...but thee.

  • Eric Barrow posted at 12:51 pm on Thu, Feb 21, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    mrm have you been reporting my comments, did I offend you? mabey if you are uncomfortable with people pointing out your shortcomings you should refrain from insulting others. Nobody likes a whiner.

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 11:59 am on Thu, Feb 21, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    " There are none so blind...as those who will not see". John Heywood 1546.
    Besides they are hungry and their cell phones need to be upgraded.

  • Eric Barrow posted at 10:18 am on Thu, Feb 21, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    Lucky for us we are going to get the opportunity to see as Obama, with his win of a second term, seems emboldened to push his agenda forward. After four years of taking on the chin by the Grand Old Problem, with the right being only concerned with making him a one term Pres. and being unable to even achieve that, I think he is less willing to compromise.
    This is excellent news as housing continues to gain momentum stocks doing well and other economic indicators show steady but moderate growth over the next year. I am curious what indicators or facts you use to support your doom and gloom prospects for the US economy or do you just base you views on tired right wing ideology. Cause it looks to me like you guys are just wrong about everything. Wrong about the Middle East falling in line with the removal of Saddam, wrong about tax breaks for the rich helping this economy, wrong about us becoming socialist, wrong about Obama’s second term, wrong that the stimulus would not end the recession and ultimately stop a depression. I’m amazed that the right can be so wrong about so much so often and still cling to their views. O well we are almost to the point where we will not need any support from the right to move forward and they show no signs of changing I mean did you see who they have lined up for CPAC. It appears the right is prepared to go down with the ship.

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 9:19 am on Thu, Feb 21, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    I understand President Pinnocchio's followers, what I don't understand is how they are able to ignore the following...


  • Patrick W Maple posted at 8:20 am on Thu, Feb 21, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    OMT: I forgot one big faction...the "media" ...you know the ones who carry the ball for the liar in chief...it is called aiding and abeting. OR the ask questions like: "Gee mr pres, how was it to play golf with a philanderer?"

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 8:17 am on Thu, Feb 21, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    I still don't know why they don't just redact the parts they don't like...or maybe disagree with.

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 8:16 am on Thu, Feb 21, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    Mr Liebich: Apparently the LNS didn't like what I said, thus the deleted comment. I started the response by defining the many groups that had reason to vote for BO. The virgin voters...those barely wet behind the ears.The elderly...who can't afford to have the benefits paid for cut again. The Believers, Followers, those who saw Christmas every month, those who don't want to work, the reverse racists, the local examples and much more. The crux of the response came down to one old saying: Don't bite the hand that feeds you".

  • stan taves posted at 7:15 am on Thu, Feb 21, 2013.

    Stan Taves Posts: 320

    You can't be serious, Eric. The shelf-life for Keynesian economics expired long ago. They poured $61/2 trillion into this economy and after 4+ years the needle on unemployment hasn't moved. While it is true that Obama is in part responsible for the failure of the economy, the ugly truth is that the Keynesian juice has lost it's stimulative power. Of course, the Keynesian's continue to say that Bernanke didn't throw enough money at the problem; but those are the same idiots who didn't recognize that throwing money at the housing sector -- giving unqualified borrowers sub-prime loans -- would create a housing bubble and subsequent crash that we have yet to recover from. So now what? more income taxes from the "rich"? Please, that wouldn't solve the problem if you took 100%. Here's what is coming if the crazed left isn't stopped: Federal property taxes, Eric. And how will wealth react to Obama's totalitarian agenda? It will disappear from the US at a faster rate than what we are already experiencing -- not good. You see, Eric, there are still safe zones left in the world for wealth's escape; and there is nothing that the Obama can do about that -- not yet, anyway.

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 4:00 am on Thu, Feb 21, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    mrb: Are you afraid of you? Exposure to the light of day? Communists? Stand up! Speak out! Tell the world who you are! Be proud! Or are you just a small man with a squeak of a voice, a whisp of a will and a notebook of knowledge? I thought so.

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 7:29 pm on Wed, Feb 20, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    Mr. Maple,
    just curious... Why do you think Obama supporters fail so miserably to acknowledge President Pinnocchio's lies?

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 7:06 pm on Wed, Feb 20, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    Believing that there were no Tea Party protests until 2009 when they in fact began in December of 2007 isn't "rational" it's moronic! [sleeping]

  • Eric Barrow posted at 5:48 pm on Wed, Feb 20, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    Careful mrm your McCarthyism is starting to show.

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 4:21 pm on Wed, Feb 20, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    So...you don't have a job, don't work hard, don't want to make more money? Do you have a family? Do you have a charity you would like to help? Maybe a friend that you could help? You don't want to be happier? Do you just want to be left alone? These are simple questions yet you can't or won't answer them. What are you hiding?

  • Eric Barrow posted at 3:06 pm on Wed, Feb 20, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    mrm the last thing I need is economic advice from a conservative that's like getting public speaking advice from Marco Rubio.

  • Eric Barrow posted at 2:59 pm on Wed, Feb 20, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    Stan I don’t believe "that the only failure of liberalism is the result of those mean republicans" I believe that liberalism is a resounding success in spite of those narrow minded backwards conservatives. It appears obvious to anyone with a brain that the application of Keynesian economics has worked and Reagan’s economic policies still clung to by an ever dwindling conservative party have repeatedly failed.

  • Joanne Bobin posted at 2:40 pm on Wed, Feb 20, 2013.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    Not oblivious, Mr. Liebich. Rational. I don't make crackpot connections between issues where none exist like you apparently do.

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 1:00 pm on Wed, Feb 20, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    mrb: Do you have a job? Do you think you work hard? Would you like a pay-raise? Answer these three simple questions and I will tell you how to get paid more for what you currently do and without having to work any harder. Would that make you happy? Just answer the questions.

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 11:51 am on Wed, Feb 20, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    You are oblivious. [sleeping]

  • Joanne Bobin posted at 11:29 am on Wed, Feb 20, 2013.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    Re-writing history seems to be the ONLY strong suit of the cons in this forum.

    Selective memory - especially the claim that Nixon "ended Viet Nam (sic)" and "Reagan ended the Cold War."


  • Joanne Bobin posted at 11:26 am on Wed, Feb 20, 2013.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    FYI, Mr. Liebich, your first reference has nothing to do with the TEA Party that was formed in 2009 in outrage of a black, socialist/communist/Marxist/Kenyan.

    Nice try though.

    The others are dated references to the "popularity" of the TEA Party.

    The REAL people have already left the TEA Party. The name remains because the billionaires that funded it are still trying desperately to hang in there, pushing their obstructionist agenda.

  • stan taves posted at 9:08 am on Wed, Feb 20, 2013.

    Stan Taves Posts: 320

    Wrong again, Eric. Obama got fewer votes in 2012 than he did in 'o8; And Romney got fewer votes than McCain did in '08. Now think about it, Eric; Did Romney lose because of our love for Obama? Of course not. Romney lost because he was "leftist lite". In other words, the conservatives didn't show-up. The fact is that this country isn't ready for the medicine it must swallow -- less federal intrusion and more fiscal responsibility. You lefties are clearly ready for more centralized control; you believe that the only failure of liberalism is the result of those mean republicans who have underfunded your pathetic pipedreams. It doesn't matter that 80+ years of "progressive" folly have yielded nothing but more pain and misery for those who you pretend to help; it only matters that the journey to Stupidville continue. It's funny though; most people eventually awaken from their nightmares, but you hardcore lefties just toss-and-turn forever.

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 7:57 am on Wed, Feb 20, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999




    Wall Street Journal:

  • Eric Barrow posted at 7:22 am on Wed, Feb 20, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    I think we are seeing the five stages of grief from the right, grief over Obama’s re-election and the death of the republican party. Denial took place when most major polls, during the campaign, showed Obama leading and the right declared the polls to be slanted, not a fair representation. Anger was demonstrated on election night by the henchman of the right Rove. When have now entered the bargaining stage where the right is trying to find any reason they can for Obama’s re-election and the demise of the right. Perhaps it was not our fault they cry perhaps if we can clean up this voter fraud we can regain power. How long will the right refuse to see their own hand in their downfall? I’m sure over the next four years we will see the right sink into depression and finally, when Hillary is sworn in, acceptance that they truly are irrelevant.

  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 4:51 am on Wed, Feb 20, 2013.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2370

    It wouldn't be a theory if those six votes were cast for Romney and he would have won. One woman - six votes. Extrapolate that by the number of probable fraudulent votes how many might that actually be nation wide?

    While people are clamoring for tighter gun control laws that actually include confiscating what are now legal weapons from law-abiding citizens, we should at the same time start requiring ID's prior to casting votes. But no, that would be disenfranchisement at its worst; the poor and downtrodden can't obtain an ID card.

    It's been near twelve years since the attacks of 9/11 and just how porous do our borders remain? Another group of terrorists have probably crossed over already and are waiting anxiously to be pardoned.

    We're a nation begging for destruction from within. Six votes from one woman; Second Amendment being tossed out of nothing but fear; and borders advertising an open season on terror. And we think we're safe? We're stupid.

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 12:02 am on Wed, Feb 20, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    Meanwhile... President Pinnocchio is flying Air Force One to Florida at a cost of about $180,000 per hour to play golf with Tiger.

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 11:41 pm on Tue, Feb 19, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    Jerome, Voter fraud "doesn't exist" [lol]It's a "conspiracy theory" [lol]

  • Mike Adams posted at 6:57 pm on Tue, Feb 19, 2013.

    Mike Adams Posts: 1574

    Joanne: I thought it was understood by all: it's racial and as a bonus, he's a "socialist, leftist, communist,born in Kenya, community organizer". And a democrat. This is a dream President.

    To watch the cons here try and re-write history here to ease their collective guilt over their narrow political planks is quite fun.

    Who would they blame if Romney had actually won and we began our slide into unemployment, high gas prices, unemployment, kicking old people off of social security and young children off of free lunches at school?

    I am saddened to see that Jerome might be falling in with the conspiracy theorists though. Jerome!!! Don't do it. You don't need mystery and intrigue. You could use better facts but please don't find them on weird websites that assign every event to a vast unseen government plot!

  • Joanne Bobin posted at 5:10 pm on Tue, Feb 19, 2013.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    Mr. Liebich wrote: "Equally as pathetic.

    Tea Party protests of TARP and the Wall Street Bailout took place while Bush was "raping the Constitution."

    WRONG! There were no TEA Party protests until 2009, long after Bush left office.

    Yes, they may have protested Bush's TARP, but where were they when the TARP was signed? NOWHERE!

    No protests until a black socialist took office and continued to administer the TARP program. No racial implications at all, right Mr. Liebich?

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 5:01 pm on Tue, Feb 19, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    Marty...did you have to take away ALL of my fun?

  • Joanne Bobin posted at 4:58 pm on Tue, Feb 19, 2013.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    HA HA - wow - a whole SIX votes threw the election?

    In the words of a certain poster, "Really, FOX News?"

    I suppose one can only hope, eh, Mr. Kinderman? Unfortunately you must realize, the American public did not want Willard Mitt Romney no matter how bad he AND his wife felt they deserved the White House. To quote the devastated Ann, "It is OUR turn now!"

    And from what I read and see, poor Ann Romney is physically ill over the whole loss and has had to resort to buying her family meals at Costco to save money. Imagine a woman of her means bragging that she can feed all 30+ of her family pre-cooked rotisserie chicken, spinach salad and frozen desserts from Costco for only $137.50!

    The only remarkable thing from this revelation is, WHY, with FIVE sons and FIVE daughters-in-law, does poor Ann get stuck with the entire meal for 30+ people?


  • Eric Barrow posted at 3:53 pm on Tue, Feb 19, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    Of course Powell was sincere when he addressed the UN the administration lied to him or at best cherry picked info that suited there desire to deceive the country and do you believe that those weapons are still buried in the desert like Ed, laughable. Conservative are remarkable adept at ignoring facts when the don't serve there worldview of Conservative good Liberal bad.

  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 3:26 pm on Tue, Feb 19, 2013.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2370

    Mr. Osgood seems to think we "re-elected Obama." Given what's now being unveiled about this past election, I wonder how close the 2012 election really was. (http://tinyurl.com/b3qcdsu)

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 1:07 pm on Tue, Feb 19, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    If oil is not a local commodity then why do the liberals even complain about the cost of fuel at the pump? I complain because I know that it IS a local (domestic) commodity just like milk, eggs and butter. When GW Bush left office a barrel of oil was around $42...today it is nearly $100 per barrell (almost a 150% difference)...liberals think that is GW Bush's fault. If as you say we are producing more and using less, then WHY is gas now nearly $4.00 a gallon? When oil was $145 per barrel gas was selling at $2.50 per gallon...WHY is that? By the end of '08 gas was at $1.60 per gallon and crude was still at $40 per barrell...why was that? Gas and crude have since maintained a steady climb in costs despite BO claiming that we are "drilling everywhere" to today's new peak of nearly $4 per gallon.. Maybe it is because there are 40 milllion people sitting home because they are unemployed or underemployed and the demand has dropped dramatically?...Nah. Besides Jerry's BS Bullet Train between Bakersfield and Fresno is going to save us???

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 12:38 pm on Tue, Feb 19, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    Mr Ojeda: Choose your poison and topic. But just so you know I use to judge debates and am quite good at it. Let's say Maieutic first. Or maybe you would prefer a public forum debate?

    You should credit your source on the definition of a tyrant Mr O...wikipedia...you should also give a complete definition...the Greek version...which would fit well with Mr Osgood's premise of BO's abilities. Your "facts" are not proof and do not win the debate...try again. Round one goes to me.

  • Eric Barrow posted at 9:52 am on Tue, Feb 19, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    While I agree 1/6 of Americans are idiots I think we are talking about a different group of people. The group I'm talking about are idiots and their losers.

  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 9:41 am on Tue, Feb 19, 2013.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2370

    Did "everyone" who knew that Hussein was being "efectivly" (sic) controlled include Colin Powell? Or was he just faking it when assuring the U.N. that Hussein did indeed possess WMD's and was a very real threat that needed taking out? Oh sure, he expressed his "doubts" after the fact, but I recall how absolutely certain he was when presenting the case. It really is sad (pathetic) that he would make such an about face after being so actively involved in sending thousands of Americans to war based upon his assurances of the threat of Iraq.

    Of course the truth of the matter is there were WMD's in existence and it was good that we took the action that we did. General Powell lost a lot of credibility because of his actions; I'm still at a loss as to why he "changed his mind."

  • Eric Barrow posted at 8:55 am on Tue, Feb 19, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    Nixon? now there is a real criminal for you and yes the Bushs did get Hussein and it only cost them 5,000 US lives along with 100,000 Iraqi civilians of course in hindsite everyone knows that Saddam was efectivly being controlled and there was no reason for that invasion or the loss of life it caused. Bush along with Cheney and Rumesfeld went out of there way to decieve the American people and sell that war. You got a funny way of picking your heroes.

  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 8:28 am on Tue, Feb 19, 2013.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2370

    Mr. Ojeda, Conservatives haven't changed "whatever us guys call each other these days," that's what Democrats have done by attempting to shed the liberal moniker in favor of the less caustic "progressive" label.

    And as far as "debate" is concerned, it's usually liberals aka progressives that resort to sophomoric name-calling and other negative forms of arguing. In the past I enjoyed a good spirited debate, but not so much anymore. But since you at least appear to be a newcomer to this forum, I'm certainly willing to give you the benefit of the doubt.

  • Ed Ojeda posted at 8:09 am on Tue, Feb 19, 2013.

    Capteo Posts: 20

    Mr. Maple, don't think you'd recognize a proper debate if it hit you square in the noggin.
    Mr. Osgood, the definition of a tyrant is "a ruler of a cruel and oppressive character who is an absolute ruler unrestrained by law or constitution". The last time I checked the U.S. is still a democracy, even though the powerful 1 percenters still think they can rig elections. The POTUS won the majority of the popular vote and the electoral college by an overwhelming 332 vs 206. I doubt the Republican party as we know it will ever win another presidential election if they continue to follow a path led by the Tea Party Talibanis.

  • Brian Dockter posted at 7:20 am on Tue, Feb 19, 2013.

    Brian Dockter Posts: 2866

    Good letter Mr. Osgood. And thanks again for your words of wisdom Mr. Kinderman.
    I can always count on you to reinforce my belief that Ms. Bobin is so far out in left field there is almost no hope for her.

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 2:16 am on Tue, Feb 19, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    China's demand did not rise 63% in one month. And you say we are using 12% less so that equates to a drop of nearly $3 per gallon of gas? It was calling the speculators bluff that caused the drop. Here is a question in logic...if China was demanding and using more then WHY did the price drop? Hmmmm...next "debate" come prepared with more than postulations.

  • Ed Ojeda posted at 11:25 pm on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    Capteo Posts: 20

    Fact 1: Oil is a global commodity, not a U.S. commodity, therefore the price is subject to the laws of supply and demand from the global standpoint. Although the U.S. is using 12% less oil than we were 5 years ago and producing more, the Chinese demand keeps increasing due to their ever increasing economy, thus the high oil prices.

    Fact 2: In late 2008, oil demand dropped drastically due to falling global demand, not because of anything "W" did.

    I am more than willing to debate any right wingers, conservatives, or whatever you guys call each other these days, but come on, lets keep it civil and provide some real facts, not toxic vitriol.

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 11:25 pm on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    1/3 of Americans actually voted and of that 1/3 only 1/2 voted for your beloved President Obama. Yes, it's safe to assume at least 1/6th of Americans are idiots.

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 11:18 pm on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    Equally as pathetic.

    Tea Party protests of TARP and the Wall Street Bailout took place while Bush was "raping the Constitution" .

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 10:50 pm on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    I believe you just violated rules 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8. Pathetic. [rolleyes]

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 10:00 pm on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    mrb: Your argument of BO's accomplishments is like cotton candy. Fluffing your man's mole hill into a mountain does not make the feature substantive or true. As far as fostering anything...your splinters bring nothing but deceit, conceit and pain to a population that defeated some/most of the worst despots and murderers history has seen. Wasn't it: Reagan who ended the cold war and freed the German people? Nixon who stopped Viet Nam? Eisenhower who won WWII? Bush 1 and 2 who beat Hussein? Who freed the slaves and who killed the Native Americans? mrb: Finish school before trying to school me or the educated like JK and others.

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 9:36 pm on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    Mr Capteo: The President DOES control the price of oil...when GW Bush opened the oil fields and coastal waters to exploration and drilling the price of fuel dropped to $1.74 by late November of 2008. Nearly THREE DOLLARS in one month!! Take some of your own advice and quit spewing the sewage liberals call "the truth"...you idiots can't handle the truth! Energy independent because of franking..not BO or his policies. Solar will prove to be a bust... wind may last by benefit of all the liberal hot air.

  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 5:53 pm on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2370

    When one uses the phrase, "considering the source" it doesn't necessarily indicate a personal knowledge of who someone might be, but rather the reputation of the source in question based upon what they've contributed here. As a matter of fact, there are only three or perhaps four individuals whom I know personally that contribute to this comment forum. Naturally I'll never reveal those relationships here as I believe it would be best not to.

    If someone believes me to hold a lower regard for them than they’d like, they're probably correct in that assumption. Those with whom I hold a higher level of respect are usually quite aware of how I feel about them. To be sure there should be no doubt either way.

    I am flattered however that there are some who actually care about my opinion of their contributions to this forum.

    But golly gee oh heck folks - don't you think we've gotten just a tad off topic? Let's try to get back on track, okay?

  • Joanne Bobin posted at 5:03 pm on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    Mr. Liebich wrote:

    "We know where your TEA Party hatred comes from but where does your hatred of Constitutionalism come from?"

    Just where DOES my "hatred" of the TEA Party come from (sic)?

    I've never SAID I hated the TEA Party, Mr. Liebich.

    FYI, the TEA Party has no idea what "Constitutionalism" is or means. They are robots that are at the command of their billionaire puppet masters. They are poor fools who think they are protesting against the "fundamental transformation" of the United States. They repeat the phrases they are instructed to repeat. They have no idea what government is all about.

    The TEA Party, whose members claim to be "older, well-educated" Americans have just WOKEN UP from their 55 PLUS years of "who gives a darn" attitudes as soon as a black man took office. Where were they when George W. Bush was raping the Constitution?

    What a farce!

  • Ed Ojeda posted at 4:20 pm on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    Capteo Posts: 20

    I love it when extreme right wingers show their total lack of knowledge and pull numbers out of the blue or from something they heard on "alternative media". First of all, the price of gas is dependent on the price of oil, which is primarily controlled by oil futures contracts, traded on the commodities futures exchange, not by President Obama. The all time price of gas reached $4.60/gal in June 2008, during the Bush administration, and again not controlled by President Bush either. We are on course to become energy independent in less than a decade because of the POTUS's energy policies. We spent $711 Billion in fiscal year 2012 on defense spending, more than the next 15 countries combined and 8 times more than the next country(China $90 Billion). We can probably destroy the world 1000 times over with what we have in our military arsenal, so the fact that the president wants to cut defence spending by a few billion makes financial and practical sense. His choices for Secretaries of Defense and State are right on, and much better choices than Bush's choice of Rumsfeld and Cheney, who should be locked up for getting us into Iraq on boldfaced lies(never found WMD). The president's policies and statements are right on for the current economic, military, and world situations.

  • Ed Walters posted at 3:58 pm on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    the old dog Posts: 641

    John Lucas The only reason President Bush went to war was to remove the " Butcher of Bagdad" other wise know as Saddam Hussen. He was using nerve gas on his own people, other wise know as the Kurds. I believe he had nerve and mustard gas stockpiled and would have used it, Saddam allowed inspectors in the country to look for poison gas and were allowed to look only where the gas was not to be found, finally the inspectors with told to remove themselves from the country. The gas is most likely buried in the desert or another country where it will never be found. Every post written today comes from information found on the inter-net, newspaper or TV. All midia`s have their way of presenting their version of what happened that day, the left, the right are miles apart. One thing for certain, Saddam Hussen is dead, he was tried by his own people, found guilty and was hung. Can`t argue with that. Since there is no real evidence that Osama Ben Laden is swimming with the fishes, where`s the proof, a possable conspiracy. The death of JFK was a conspiracy which has finally come out. The single bullet theory, no way.

  • Eric Barrow posted at 3:30 pm on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    It most baffle the right that these people they think are so incompetent continue to win elections, fix economies, end wars, foster acceptance and remain popular with the American people. Either most of the people are idiots, I mean you have to think that the majority of the people in the greatest country ever are fools ( which makes little sense) or opinions like Patrick are wrong. Either way I think Patrick is going to remain unhappy for a long time.

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 2:11 pm on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    BO is the worst president to ever hold office...and he is running away with the status.

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 2:11 pm on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    Mr Ojeda: You are correct...BO stopped the economy...he killed millions of jobs. Raised the gas prices to record long-term levels (today in CA $4.00 per gallon avg.) Blew over $6 Trillion on pie-in-sky untested energy and other schemes/dreams.
    Paid off all of his cronies in the first term with a lot of the above mentioned funding.
    Has diminished our national position in the world to the point people laugh at his and Clinton's leadership (Benghazi, Syria, Egypt as a few examples)(then comes Russia, China, Canada and Mexico...Fast not Furious).
    Has de-moralized our troops and is readying to defund much of it because of his idiotic sequestration deal.
    Lastly...at least for now...appointed more crooks and criminals as well as idiots like Kerry, Hagel, Clinton, Lew, Holder, Kagan, Rice, Jarrett, Axelrod and just to round out the ringers....the appointees to the NLRB which were recently ruled to be unconstitutional appointments...trancparency anyone???

  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 12:27 pm on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2370

    "You are a much smarter man than this."

    Mr. Maple, I'm afraid you're assuming facts not necessarily in evidence.

  • Ed Ojeda posted at 12:25 pm on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    Capteo Posts: 20

    Let's see, President Obama inherited Republican G. W. Bush's mess, helped stop the nosediving economy from becoming the 2nd Great Depression, he got Osama Bin Laden, he wants to make sure more Americans have affordable healthcare and our economy is on the mend. He wants to save and strengthen the Middle Class and improve education. He also wants to prevent more Sandy Hook massacres from happening. He knows that you can't export democracy at the end of a barrel. President George W. Bush, probably the worst American president in history, never had posters with his likeness being compared to Hitler. Yet you have the Tea Party Talibani's, FOX News, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and every far right wing-nut critizing his every move. Combine this with his receiving Secret Service protection so early(due to death threats) and it is obvious that the answer is racism. Some people just cannot accept an African-American president. This includes the majority of the Republican Party, which due to changing demographics, will slowly die away....if it doesn't change to be more inclusive.

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 12:12 pm on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    JK: OMT...as far as Viet Nam (JFK and LBJ's war)...54,000 is just the tip of the iceberg...look at the number of premature deaths of those veterans...and the destruction in that country (that still goes on).

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 12:07 pm on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    The instances/meanings of the term charisma or charismatic is in both senses a religious ideal or term spoken of in both the Hebrew (and Greek defined) Bible as well as Christian Bible all referring to someone as having a higher being religiously. “Ancient Greeks applied personality charisma to their gods; for example, attributing charm, beauty, nature, human creativity or fertility to goddesses they called Charites.”

    BO does not meet that pinnacle. Nor does he meet the tyrannical or despot place in the world such as a Pinochet, Mussolini, Stalin, Caligula, Khan, Pol Pot, Papa Doc and many others. Nor does he meet the leadership ability and reverance of a Maggie Thatcher, Eisenhower, Churchill, Lincoln, Washington Lech Walesa, Mandela, King, or charisma of a Ghandi, Eleanor Roosevelt or Ronald Reagan in neither definition. One must show grace, compassion and genuineness as well as knowledge of his fellow man and MUST AT ALL TIMES SPEAK THE TRUTH. BO misses the mark on all counts. He knows no one and lifts no one without stomping on some one. He in essence is a no-nothing who professes to be right about all. He is but an empty suit…except for the millions he has stuffed into his pockets during his terms.

    Mr Osgood is correct in that many people were blinded by the promise of free government stuff and that it was okay to steal from the "rich" and the jobs they created and the people hated. And still do...they are just going to: "ride the pony until the quarter's time runs out”...THEIR quarter is running down.

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 11:46 am on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    JK: "if Option Numbers One through Three still don’t bring about satisfaction, take the Lodi News-Sentinel to court and sue them for actual damages (huh?) and for all that pain and suffering due to being forced to read all those oh-so-horrible letters to the editor." Exactly.

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 11:40 am on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    JK...the free flow of ideas is a great point...unfortunately many here have no solutions, no ideas, no fortitude to find solutions nor do their brains work in a manner to be inquisitive and helpful. This is generally what I found on most of the school boards I served on...

  • Patrick W Maple posted at 11:37 am on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    Pat Maple Posts: 1805

    Mr Chaney: PLEASE! Stop using the term t--ba--er...it is disgusting and vile...children often ask what this means...if you have children or grandchildren, ecxplain it to them. What do you think their reaction will be? This is a caustic term...and is beneath you. You are a much smarter man than this.

  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 11:07 am on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2370

    What? Another war that was in the wrong country at the wrong time based upon lies and other deceptions? Hmm, let's see - Kennedy (D) and Johnson (D) - Vietnam. Wow! That was terribly hard to answer. But rather than 5,000 killed, if memory serves me well at all I do believe there were in excess of 58,000 killed over there. In addition, there was the problem with POW's and MIA's that still hasn't been fully reconciled.

    As for the "purpose" of the Iraq war, Congress, the Nation and Colin Powell were convinced that there were MWD's in play at the time. I withheld my own personal judgment of all that upon Mr. Powell's stepping forward to clear things up. Thankfully I haven't been holding my breath. Even though Powell jumped ship and has aligned himself behind the Democrats since then, I have yet to read about him repudiating himself regarding what he presented to the U.N. prior to us actually moving forward in 2003.

    But I believe we're getting just a tad off topic. So as far as I'm concerned until Powell does present additional proof (not just after-the-fact “doubts”) that he knew there were no WMD's at the time he earnestly recommended that we go to war, I'll consider the matter closed.

  • Doug Chaney posted at 8:08 am on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    advocate Posts: 502

    And, Jerome, can you name another president besides Junior Bush who has led us into a massive war in the wrong country that not only cost the lives of over 5000 of our own troops and some american mercenaries but the countless lives of hundreds of thousands of innocent men women and children civilians, all with the purpose of a president who was merely looking to get revenge upon Saddam for threatening to have his daddy exterminated? What other reason was there to go to war in Iraq? Those trumped up security documents should have landed all of those conspirators in military brigs to begin their sentencing, in my opinion.

  • John Lucas posted at 8:04 am on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    John Lucas Posts: 2730

    Oh Jerome there you go with the 5 year old child defense that some on the other side do it o it is ok for me to do it as if that matters or the point. Mr. Osgood lives in LA LA land. I would not compare George Bush to Hitler but you have to admit he invaded a country for no apparent reason and absolutely loved to to torture people. In a very Christian like way of course. [smile]

  • Doug Chaney posted at 8:01 am on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    advocate Posts: 502

    Mr. Osgood, the teabaggers' new rating is 21%, down from 41% not too long ago.

  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 7:34 am on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2370

    Let's try not to be too disingenuous. After all, those on the left never hesitated to draw parallels between George W. Bush and Hitler at every turn during his administration. Politics is a rough sport. It's a win at all costs kind of deal. Those with consciences and thin skin shouldn't apply for the jobs, especially at the top.

  • John Lucas posted at 3:28 am on Mon, Feb 18, 2013.

    John Lucas Posts: 2730

    I love Mr Osgood's letters. It is interesting to read the words of someone who is obviously out of touch with reality. You may not like the President's policies or politics but to think that he is comparable to Hitler or Castro is just insane.

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 8:17 pm on Sun, Feb 17, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    "Cancelled my subscription over your abuse at least twice" ROFLMAO [lol]

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 8:01 pm on Sun, Feb 17, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    We know where your TEA Party hatred comes from but where does your hatred of Constitutionalism come from?

  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 6:12 pm on Sun, Feb 17, 2013.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2370

    I never realized I possessed so much power as to have anyone buy or not buy a specific product. Of course to be accused of "abusing" a system that permitted me to use it as I did is somewhat out of line. But I'm not at all offended considering the source.

    To be clear, at one time the News-Sentinel did limit the number of letters printed by any one contributor to one per month. Personally I found the policy to be strange considering the purpose of any newspaper is the free-flow of ideas. Eventually the policy was changed that now permits anyone to write as many letters as they choose without limitation. Of course this doesn't mean that I expect any letter of mine to find its way into print; that is always left up to the editors of the News-Sentinel. But needless to say I appreciate this newspaper for printing my letters along with an occasional column when I find something interesting to submit that permits a few more words than 350.

    To those who take issue with my taking fair advantage of the policies and good will of this newspaper, might I suggest they sit down and tap out a letter or two from time to time and then submit them for printing. I would think such an approach would prove much more intellectually stimulating than whining about the policies of the Lodi News-Sentinel.

    But to think someone actually canceled their subscription because of little ol’ me?!? In a word – WOW! No apology forthcoming.

  • Joanne Bobin posted at 9:36 am on Sun, Feb 17, 2013.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    Another abuser of this feature.

  • Joanne Bobin posted at 9:35 am on Sun, Feb 17, 2013.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    As one who in previous years has also abused the "letters" feature, Mr. Kinderman, I can see why you are so passionate about this topic.

    Cancelled my subscription over your abuse at least twice (at which time I specifically told, in person, the circulation editor the reason was YOU. He exclaimed words to the effect, "I told them that was going to be a problem!") and cancelled again last August (basically don't need the excess recycling piling up).

    Just as you have a right to go on your little tirade above, I also have a right to complain about the inanities published in this periodical repeatedly by the same person, over and over.

    Get over it Jerry Osgood. Obama's here for another 4 years. The TEA Party is a farce, so it is NOT coming to your rescue. In fact, the TEA Party could care less about Main Street Galt and Jerry Osgood. They are too busy supporting corporate America and the nut brigade lead by Rand Paul, Michelle Bachman and Ted Cruz (the latest loose cannon in the Senate).

  • Andrew Liebich posted at 12:40 am on Sun, Feb 17, 2013.

    Andrew Liebich Posts: 2999

    How are things on Planet Pop-Tart today Ms. Bobin?
    I originally uploaded the story on Thursday, December 20, 2012 at 6:27 am

    Here is the link. [sleeping]


  • Ed Walters posted at 8:11 pm on Sat, Feb 16, 2013.

    the old dog Posts: 641

    Bravo Mr. Kinderman, a well written post. Score one for Mr. Osgood, zero for people who feel that letters to the editor should evidently be limited.

  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 6:57 pm on Sat, Feb 16, 2013.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2370

    Who cares how many letters a reader of the Lodi News-Sentinel writes? Mr. Osgood and others feel that they've got something to say and the newspaper provides the outlet for them to be heard. At the current time there is evidently no limit to the number of letters one can both submit and have printed. So I say, "go for it!"

    As for anyone with a problem regarding the current policy there are a few options. Number One: don't read the "letters to the editor." Number Two: write a letter to the letter opposing others who write too many letters to the editor. Number Three: if the outcome to Number Two doesn't yield the desired result, cancel subscription to the newsprint edition of the News-Sentinel if in fact one has been purchased. Number Four: if Option Numbers One through Three still don’t bring about satisfaction, take the Lodi News-Sentinel to court and sue them for actual damages (huh?) and for all that pain and suffering due to being forced to read all those oh-so-horrible letters to the editor.

    Keep in mind however, that during the civil proceedings there may be those in the community who might come to the defense of the bloviating letter writer that could have a jury side with the News-Sentinel. After all, the purpose of any daily newspaper is to bring the news to the people; and the opinions of the local gentry are often considered quite important.

    But just imagine the number of Letters to the Editor that such actions would bring about!

  • Steve Schmidt posted at 6:04 pm on Sat, Feb 16, 2013.

    Steve Schmidt Posts: 2685

    Moore's Law. Osgood loses.

  • Bob Weisenberg posted at 9:49 am on Sat, Feb 16, 2013.

    whtmtns Posts: 5

    I thought 2012 was our last chance? Or was it 2010?

  • Joanne Bobin posted at 8:18 am on Sat, Feb 16, 2013.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    FIVE Jerry Osgood letters since January 1st.

    THREE in the last 10 days alone.

    What is the limit? Apparently the LNS does not have one.

    The story might be different if Osgood actually had something intelligent to contribute rather than repeat the same old litany of word associations and cries for the TEA Party to come and rescue him.

    Enough is enough - Osgood - why don't you make better use of your time and become an activist instead of calling for others to do the work for you?

  • Joanne Bobin posted at 8:14 am on Sat, Feb 16, 2013.

    Joanne Bobin Posts: 4488

    Thank you for quoting Alex Jones word for word, Mr. Liebich and then pretending that YOU composed the sentence below.

    What a joke. Do you ever write original material? I doubt it, just as I doubt that you are actually capable of it.

  • Jeff Tillett posted at 7:42 am on Sat, Feb 16, 2013.

    Jeff Tillett Posts: 559

    Correct, charasmatic does not equate to good, but neither are they mutually exclusive.

  • Jerome Kinderman posted at 12:54 am on Sat, Feb 16, 2013.

    Jerome R Kinderman Posts: 2370

    I think it's sufficient enough just to say that Obama is negatively charismatic or even tyrannical. But when he's equate with especially Hitler I believe an important line has been crossed. Adolf Hitler was without a doubt the Twentieth Century's "bad boy." In fact, in modern history there has never been another human as evil as he. His plan was to among other terrible things murder all of Europe's Jews.

    Say what you wish about Barack Hussein Obama - but he's no murderer. I don't like what he's already done to our nation and now especially what he has planned. But to put him in the same category as Hitler makes no sense whatsoever.

    I understand that there were many liberals who drew this same inference to George W. Bush while he was in office; even to the extent of publishing pictures of him with Hitler's trademark mustache. But just because they did it doesn't mean we need to reduce ourselves in kind.

    There's plenty of other ways to get our points across regarding how we feel about this president. But to keep on comparing him to one of the worst human beings to ever inhabit the Earth is wrong.

    Naturally this is just my opinion and I support everyone's right to voice theirs. I would only suggest a little thought be put into what we wish to convey.


Recent Comments

Posted 6 hours ago by Ed Walters.

article: Raley’s celebrates re-opening of Sargen…

If you plan on speeding on Sargent Rd., beware of the roundabout as it will slow you down fast. [wink]


Posted 8 hours ago by Ed Walters.

article: Letter: The drought is punishment

Myers, man is always asking or praying for something, now you believe the West Coast is caught in a drought due to people disobeying God…


Posted 8 hours ago by Jien Kaur.

article: Letter: How is free community college g…

A friend of mine and I are both placing our bets on the 'Fox and Friends' as the show the Mr Wilson is dedicated to since it has the 3 peop…


Posted 8 hours ago by Ed Walters.

article: Letter: How is free community college g…

Chang, Insults, honest; [sleeping] [huh] [sneaky] [scared] Same O, Same O


Posted 9 hours ago by Steve Schmidt.

article: Letter: The drought is punishment

Ross Farrow is dead? I guess I missed that. Lodi is poorer without him. :(



Popular Stories



Your News

News for the community, by the community.

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists