Due to the weather, some customers may experience late delivery of The Roanoke Times. We apologize for the delay.
View our commenting policy and standards | Commenting FAQ | Report a problem
The lack of comments could be related to the lack of information. Link goes straight to blog without showing the article.
No,it does not make sense and how anyone could see fixed network as “news” is beyond me, its not. If it is then we need to redefine the word, balance,fair.
President Obama is pulling a Romney here. That’s double talk, or he’s lying with regards to what he says after he disrespects the reporter. President Obama has clearly stated that he wants higher gas prices and for them to be gradually increased. It’s well documented on this blog thanks to Suzie, LC and Pistol Pete. He has what he wanted. He said those words, I don’t trust him on this at all.
He’s smart enough not to say he wants prices higher! That would be the “sound bite of death ” for him. As much as I would like it he’ll never admit that is what he really wants. His actions prove it though.
Good reply, Mr. President. Could the Fox guy have been more stupid?
Wow, the blog even has some posters as ignorant and as much of a tool as the Fox guy.
Well gee Uptheriver, I know Obama will be crushed to lose your trust. The overall goal is to decrease our dependency on oil, to build and strengthen our economy so that we are not held hostage by enemies and if that means higher gas prices in the short term it is still well worth doing. Artificially lowering gas prices is government interference and we know you all do not sanction that…
Can someone provide a link to any video or print article where Obama said he wants higher gas prices? Google must be part of the conspiracy, because I can’t find one. The closes I got were a few references to Steven Chu, but even those links go back to 2008 (prior to Obama’s election and Chu’s appointment as Energy Secretary).
4.He’s smart enough not to say he wants prices higher!
Right…so we’re…just guessing. Obama’s a crafty guy!
SayWhat, we just “know it”. He hasn’t said it, but that doesn’t keep us from “knowing it”. It’s obvious, and the fact that he hasn’t said it makes it MORE obvious, much in the same way not finding WMD made it EVEN MORE CLEAR Saddam had them.
Obama clearly doesn’t tolerate fools gladly. Nor should he have to.
They’ve told us multiple times what they wanted to happen.
They got it. High gas prices are okay with Obama and Chu. I believe their words.
BTW, their “real” goal of limiting our dependence…MASSIVE FAILURE. Another scam to pump money into the pockets of friends and supporters.
Are you all seriously NOT bothered by all the “green” companies that got money and are now conveniently going BANKRUPT?
You guys aren’t that naive are you?
Say what? – I found this but I cannot watch it due to company spam blocker so I can’t confirm it’s content – let me know what it says:
They got it. High gas prices are okay with Obama and Chu. I believe their words.”
Notice, no links to go with those assertions. Is it possible LC can’t provide any?
As Obama pointed out very clearly for those having trouble following along…the last thing an incumbent president wants going into an election year is high gas prices.
Here you go…
Here’s Obama talking about how he would hope for a more “gradual increase”, so as not to SHOCK people.
Steven Chu, who does and says what Obama tells him to…said “the overall goal” was NOT to get prices down.
I will say this…about a year ago (or more), I could find 10-20 links to video showing Obama saying what he said about gas prices.
Google is cleaning up his mess, for sure.
I had to go to BING.
LC – notice how conveniently the Libs on this blog ignore your comments about green companies like Solyndra? They pick and choose which topics they will respond to. It’s called selective memory……..
Thanks, Matt…the clip says it’s a campaign ad from the RNC. It contains a very brief snippet from an undated CNBC interview that looks to be from the 2008 campaign. The ad has the same Obama quote repeated several times interspersed with some undated Fox News clips about rising gas prices (some of which might have even been from the Bush era). The interviewer asks Obama, “So could these high prices help us?” and Obama replies “I think that I would have preferred a gradual adjustment.” Not exactly what some of the posters are quoting him as saying. There’s also nothing to put it in context, so it would nearly impossible to determine what he meant unless the whole interview is available somewhere.
Oil prices always go up when the refineries stop production to retool. Add in a fire and the shutting of an east coast refinery and up goes the prices. The Oil make a fortune each year doing this. Plus it gives the Tea Party something to gripe about.
This price rise is but temporary. Long-term, you had better look for those alternative energy companies to be successful as China and India will be buying up the oil.
#9 Yeah, Kristen, and the more he doesn’t limit or grab guns, the more they know he will.
#17 Repubs also forget to add that their constant drumbeat about Iran and veiled threats of war cause prices to rise.
#15 Matt Herring, I generally avoid replying to LC and his ilk when they attempt top out words in my mouth or attribute thoughts or feelings they’ve made up to me.
And isn’t it great that LC, terps, suzie and other right-wing types NEVER pick and choose topics they’ll respond to? They ALWAYS reply to EVERYTHING.
(Psst, Matt, that was sarcasm)
gdad you have cracked the code.
The Libs on this blog are constantly calling Romney a flip flopper. What do they have to say about Obama flip flopping over taking Super Pac money? I guess that’s okay huh………….
It was a simple question. A simple yes or no answer would have sufficed. The reporter asked a question based on a published, documented statement by mr O. But once again King Obama in his typical elitist style dodged the question and talked down to a guy who is just trying to do his job. Maybe that is what the king needs — a REAL job for once in his life.
Let’s help him out with that in November!
I wish a MSM reporter would ask him when he’s returning Bill Maher’s $1 million super-pac donation. That will happen when hell freezes over.
MSM staff meeting: “And remember. NO tough questions for the retarded guy.”
Obama can’t return money from a Super PAC. Neither can Romney or Gingrich. By law, they cannot control them.
@#3: “President Obama has clearly stated that he wants higher gas prices and for them to be gradually increased. It’s well documented on this blog thanks to Suzie, LC and Pistol Pete.”
In writing these sentences you, sir, have done more to prove your amazingly limited powers or reason for yourself and the Three Stooges than I could ever hope to. Thanks for saving me the work.
No pol takes PAC money or can give it back. Why don’t you look into what PACs are, Matt, before asking any more fooling questions.
Foolish not fooling. And apparently I’m posting too quickly.
Yep. They can. They can demand the money be returned. But partisan hypocrite 0bama isn’t going to do that, and you guys aren’t going to ask him to.
It sounds like you yearn for more responses from the conservatives on this blog. Great! You may learn something. If I ever fail to respond and you want to know what my thoughts are, please refer to this post:
1) stay out of my wallet
2) people can do whatever they want underneath the sheets
3) no comment on guns and abortion
4) OWS are scum
That sums it up…hope it helps you.
@#27: Stop. You are attempting to debate a lampshade. Just smile and move on.
But they don’t have to take the money in the first place do they? Then they would not have to return it. Don’t play word games Kristen.
Compliments of talkingsides.com quote:
Obama Flip Flops On Super PAC’s
By Carole on Feb 7, 2012
Two years ago President Barack Obama railed against a certain type of political action committee known as super PAC’s as a “threat to our democracy”. Today his reelection campaign confirmed that both administration and campaign officials will fundraise for Priorities USA Action, a super PAC backing the president.
In October of 2010, shortly before the shellacking his fellow Democrats took in the mid-term elections, Mr. Obama spoke at a rally in Philadelphia. He attacked these groups which the Supreme Court ruled could raise unlimited sums from corporations, unions and other groups, as well as individuals. He implied they all had sinister motives and told outright lies about foreign entities being involved in swaying US elections.
“You don’t know,” he said. “It could be the oil industry, it could be the insurance industry, it could even be foreign-owned corporations. You don’t know because they don’t have to disclose. Now that’s not just a threat to Democrats, that’s a threat to our democracy.”
During the same time, the Democratic National Committee produced an advertisement accusing the US Chamber of Commerce of using secret foreign funds to influence US elections; actions which would have violated existing law. When the president’s senior adviser David Axelrod was asked by CBS’s Bob Sheiffer if he had any evidence that the claim was true his reply, “Well, do you have any evidence that it’s not, Bob?” exposed the allegations as the desperate lies they were.
Evidently these threats to our democracy don’t seem so threatening to our Campaigner-in-Chief anymore. Obama Campaign Manager Jim Messina sent out an e-mail to supporters saying that, “The campaign has decided to do what we can, consistent with the law, to support Priorities USA in its effort to counter the weight of the GOP super PACs.” Mr. Messina added, “We will do so only in the knowledge and with the expectation that all of its donations will be fully disclosed as required by law to the Federal Election Commission.”
Now that Obama & Company have acknowledged that super PAC’s are legitimate groups of Americans legally participating in the political process subject to reasonable oversight, will he apologize for the wild and baseless accusations he and his cronies made against them when it suited his political purposes to do so? Somehow I doubt it.
Obama was criticizing “the rules” as they were set by the Supreme Court. He was advocating for “the rules” to be changed. They were not.
It is not hypocritical for him to be playing by them even if he believes they’re ultimately damaging.
It is hypocritical for you to be 1) not advocating they be changed or 2) advocating they be changed only for Obama 3) while you are criticizing him for playing by them.
If a basketball coach believes the 3-point line is too close to the basket in college basketball, and unsuccessfully advocates to get the line moved back, should he not accept the points his team scores from that line?
Or should he accept them, until the line is moved back?
32.But they don’t have to take the money in the first place do they? Then they would not have to return it. Don’t play word games Kristen.
Comment by Matt Herring — March 7, 2012 @ 2:09 pm
Matt, you don’t know what a PAC is or how it works. He doesn’t run it and has no control over it. He’s not taking anything. I’m not playing “word games”. You don’t know what you’re talking about. Again….read on up what a PAC is and how it’d administered.
Kristen – I do not what a PAC is – apparently you don’t. And by the way Kristen/Dan, Rick Santorum returned PAC money when he learned the corporation that donated was a foreign corporation.
Dan – Obama is the President – if he can’t change the laws, who can? Or perhaps he just realized he was going to be shellaced in the fund raising dept if he didn’t take PAC money. But I am sure his pals at Solyndra (remember them?) have already made him a large donation with the taxpayers money Obama gave them (emphasis on the word “gave”)
It get so boring proving you Liberals wrong time after time. Now I know how Suzie must feel.
You all criticize Dan and this blog, no one makes you come here. If you want to throw your dirt, you have to come to this sandbox. You play by the rules of the game, so do politicians. When the Supreme Court upholds the devil, there is no way not to dance with him, even if you know he is evil.
Compliments of northwestohio.com quote:
Santorum super PAC returns illegal foreign donation
Posted: 02.21.2012 at 12:21 PM
WASHINGTON (AP) — A political action committee supporting Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum says it has refunded a $50,000 donation from a London-based securities firm because the money came from a foreign source. Such contributions are illegal under U.S. law.
It was the first acknowledged evidence of foreign money in the 2012 presidential race.
A spokesman for the Red, White and Blue super PAC said the $50,000 donation from Liquid Capital Markets Ltd. came from an American executive at the firm but was returned because it was mistakenly drawn from the foreign firm’s accounts.
Okay Kristen/Dan – schools out! Once again you have proven that you do not know what you are talking about.
If he started now and flip flopped every day until his 2nd inauguration he would STILL trail Romney in flip flopping and influence peddling. YOU don’t have to get on here and post but you do. Super PACS are us with money.
The only people playing word games are the ones claiming “President Obama has clearly stated that he wants higher gas prices”.
There is nothing in any of the links were he “clearly” says “I want higher gas prices.”
Get over it folks. Your fools for believing the lies Fox News and talk radio are telling you. I would call you kool-aid drinkers but I tune into those programs sometimes and know you prefer the title “Dittohead”.
#30 Sorry, terps, but I was merely trying to explain the lack of response to newbie Matt and I was pointing out for his benefit that the right wingers on this blog frequently don’t answer, either. Thank you for confirming my point with your little list.
#23 Of course it wasn’t a simple question, will. Are you really that naive?
There is NOTHING Mitt Romney won’t change his stand on if he thinks it will get him votes from the TP wing to help him get the nomination. For years, right up until last month, he has supported increasing the minimum
wage with a plan for indexing it to some common wage or price increase index. After repeating that a couple of weeks ago, he got a barrage
from Santorum, Gingrich, and the far right faithful. Now he has changed that stand and said there is no need to increase the minimum wage. There is no core to this man.
So you believe the president can unilaterally overrule the Supreme Court? Or can unilaterally rewrite the constitution? That sounds as wacko as Wayne LaPierre.
You have my pity . . .
Matt Herring, it was an ILLEGAL donation. Any Super PAC would have done the same.
OMG Matt Herring. “If he can’t change the laws who can?’ That might be the single most uneducated ignorant post I have seen today. Congress makes the laws. The Preident signs them. The Preident can propose a law. He has suggested numerous times that he would sign a bill that reforms campaign finance. And then, even if he does, the RW dominated SCOTUS
(you know Matt, that’s the Supreme Court) will throw it out to protect the power of the “corporate persons” who dominate the Republican Party.
Time to click off Faux “News” and Rush and listen to or read something that actually has facts in it.
Matt Herring-may I call you Red?-your civics teachers have egg all over their hazmat suits at this point. That’s because of your aggressively ignorant declaration ” Obama is the President – if he can’t change the laws, who can?”.
If you’ll learn more than you seem to currently know about the Constitutional separation of powers and the role of the Legislative branch, you’ll understand how that remark is the political equivalent of “Birds can fly-if they can’t stop air pollution, who can?”.
Matt Herring at 3:04
OOPS! Just showed your ignorance and lack of understanding again. Nothing in that article you posted said that Rick Santorum returned anything. The PAC that is supporting him did because it was an ilegal contribution under federal law. And rhe article cites who at the PAC was responsible for returning the contribution. When you improve your reading habits and comprehension skills a little, come back again and ntry to play with the adults.
Just to be transparent, ya’ll:
Matt Herring used to post here under another name, and he was banned for good reason. I’m allowing him back on here so long as he minds his manners.
#49 Oh joy.
He must be the same guy who insisted for over two years that because Democrats controlled over 50% of the votes in the Senate, they could pass anything they wanted to. Never did seem to understand the 60 vote rule for cloture and bringing a bill to the floor which enabled the Repubs to block every damn thing that was meaningful as long as they held their party line together. So mDD returns. Echo gdad@4:31
#49 Another reason to read books instead of the blog.
Really Matt? The president can “change the laws”?
While you’re googling “pacs” , try googling “executive and legislative branches”. It might be enlightening. Or nottingham.
Below is a link to a series of clips that appeared on FOX in 2008. Remember who was president then. Interesting how the song has changed since 2008. If Bill O’Reilly and his cohorts at FOX keep this up they’ll be singing soprano pretty soon.
#24 MSM staff meeting: “And remember. NO tough questions for the retarded guy.”
suzie got called out a couple of years ago by (I believe) the parent of a special needs child for using “retarded” or “retard” repeatedly but I guess she’s getting more and more desperate for attention and has decided to sink even lower. Sad.
That was an amazing link to the Fauxies. And every one of them today is attempting to blame high gas prices on the President and screaming drill baby drill. The fact is we have increased domestic oil production during Obama’s administration, they have granted multiple deep sea drilling permits, oil consumption domestically is down 8% and carmakers are building more fuel effficient cars than ever. But gas prices continue to go up because the oil companies manipulate the supply by adjusting refinery production, because speculators artificially inflate the price of oil by the barrel with irresponsible unregulated gambling in the futures market, demand from China and india continues to grow higher,
and mideast instability makes the market nervous. And NONE of those things is under the control of the President and none of the candidates promising to reduce prices can deliver on that promise.
I have a cochlear implant
I didn’t realize Debbie was an old grandma too. I just thought her puppet was.
@54 – Silly Ron. Faux Noise lies? Ergo…
Suzie, once again your idiocy shines. Children have cochlear implants. Deafness can happen to anyone at any age.
I am also a proud Grandma. Not an old one, but a very proud one. It’s not an insult.
Of course anyone can go deaf at any time. Rush managed to crackpipe himself deaf.
In his case, insurance should not have covered the surgery that recovered his hearing. His deafness was self-inflicted.
@59 – Not sure what Suzie has against grandmothers anyway. Maybe her own grandmother was a democrat or something.
Hey Dave I’m getting ready to get in my non PC SUV that gets about 10 miles to the gallon driving down hill and go to Richmond. Not approving the pipe line was stupid. Drill now, drill everywhere!
Rush managed to crackpipe himself deaf.
Isn’t it ironic a supporter of Monkey Boy would joke about crack?
Sure Michael, as long as we can start with fouling your land and water first.
No more ironic than a supporter of a crack head sex fiend would make a racist crack about the president.
@63 Sterotype much?
Ouch, Sandi and Miriam just made racist inferences. Monkeyness is not race-related.
#60 That Rash is a pretty old guy, Kristen. Older than some of the folks on this blog who suzie calls old, in fact. Hence, suzie thinks Rash is just a decrepit old guy.
Mr. Husein Obama, a legend in his own mind.
I can think of no finer repudiation of the Bush administration the subsequent election of a black guy named Barack Hussein Obama. Maybe if his last name were Bin Obama. I can’t think of a much fatter middle finger the country could have given the Bushies.
@67 I believe I accused you of stereotyping…beyond that, you are the only one injecting race into my comment to you. Silly creature.
@69 Maloof, I’ve said many times before and I will say it again, I think to show such an utter lack of respect to the leader of the free world, and the president of our great nation belittles you. You do not have to like Obama. You can hate him for all I care but as a citizen of this country, I think it is unpatriot to use those terms for his name.
“I think it is unpatriot to use those terms for his name.”
In fairness, Miriam, did you always refer to President Bush respectfully? I for one do not call Obama anything less respectful than “Obama” out of respect for the office itself. Mr. Obama tempted me to do otherwise, however, when he was seen with his feet up on the desk in the oval office that time. I don’t guess that’s such a big deal, but he hasn’t done anything to show me that he has a lot of respect for the office either.
@73 John, no one would be able to find a single reference I have made to GWB or any other president that is other than their name on this blog. I actually practice what I preach as far as this particular topic goes. I’m a hypocrite about tons of other stuff…haha
@69 I am just showing Mr. Husein Obama the same respect the left showed George W Bush.
When we talk about the “office of President”, it doesn’t mean a room.
Yeah I hear you John Wilburn, that was the turning point for me respecting Bush too. Just trashy behavior.
And I can promise you, I never said another nice thing about Ford after this episode either!
John – Don’t forget in the Muslim world showing someone the bottom of your feet is a great insult. Being a Muslim himself, I am sure Obama knew exactly what he was saying to the American public when he had his feet up on that desk!
Awwww….DD can’t quit us.
And just a moment ago, he was calling someone else “classy”. Leopards do not change their spots.
Yes Maloof, because two wrongs make a right, right? If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em; that’ll learn ‘em how far above ‘em you really are! Let me guess, FlimFlambaugh taught you that?
My personal favorite:
Reagan with his a$$ on the desk:
It’s a desk, people. A desk.
“Come on folks…the guy went to “church” with the racist marxist Rev. Wright”
Lake Claytor, I’m not trying to make an adversary here, but I’m going to say the same thing to you as sister Suzie: Just because it is “church” as in so-called church to you, does not mean it is not real church to him. Your putting church in quotes suggests to me that if it isn’t church as you see it, that it isn’t really church at all.
This self-righteous position breeds impenetrable minds. I hope that was not your intent.
Folks, I have to agree even though we strongly disagree with President Obama’s policies he is our President and deserves respect as such. I remember getting really aggravated at the Left for being disrespectful of President Bush. We should not be guilty of the same thing we are better than that. I often tell my boys while we disagree strongly with the way he is doing his job we do respect him as a good man and as the President of The United States.
Sandi, if we could put a well in front of my house I would be for it. I would rather do that than continue this insane fight with the Middle East which is absolutely about the oil. Always has been. Oil is the life blood of our economy. As you well know I spend a lot of time in the outdoors cave diving, skiing, hunting and fishing, and I’m willing to accept the risk for the good of our standard of living and the economy. And no I’m not willing to drive some electric car for the “greater good”. My brother has a Prius and I laugh every time I see it. I can almost walk and out run it.
What we have is a fraud and a socialist radical who conned his way to the top. This is a man who truly believes America deserves to be cut down to size, who truly believes we deserve to be punished. He is not deserving of respect from me, and I don’t give it to him.
If you remember the left said many of the same things about President Bush and we still expected them to show respect. Please don’t stoop to their level.
Thanks Michael, I appreciate the respect for the office and I agree that two wrongs do not make a right. I will live by the lesson learned on that one.
I was only kidding about fouling your nest, but you can drill till the cows come home and no pristine land is left and it will not solve the problem of us not having what the Middle East has. Any oil we dig here, whether by drilling, piping, fracking, or sipping from a straw, will go on the open market and still cost too much (that is capitalism). So we can only buy “independence” for a time while the rest of the world makes whatever deal they can to get the oil from the ME and life goes on. It simply will not work. I love the “little engine that could” mentality as much as anyone, but when a Fred Flintstone car is your great grandchild’s only choice they won’t thank you. You might want to consider that “the greater good” includes the world your son’s will be trying to raise a family in. You have a good heart and there is nothing at all wrong with being conservative, dreamers can go off half cocked and muck up things, I know this; but be careful of talking points instead of facts. It trips some folks up mightily.
Thanks Sandi, I’m sure you understand I use this Blog to, sometimes vent frustrations. I also will attempt to do better.
@82 “FlimFlambaugh” is that the special of the month at IHOP?
That pipeline will not add one gallon of gas to the U.S. supply. The oil belongs to the Canadians and to Keystone XL (which John Boehner owns a chunk of). The oil will be refined in refineries in La. and then they have already signed contracts to sell it to the Chinese. It will be shipped out of southern ports and sent directly to China. The wild claim
by Republicans about the hundreds of thousands of jobs it will create in the United States is also a fiction. Best estimates are that it will create perhaps 10000 temporary construction jobs. There will be up to 2500 jobs created maintaining the pipeline after it is built and a small increase in refinery jobs to handle the extra production. Meanwhile the Republican Governor and the Republican controlled legislature of Nebraska are oppose tp the pipeline and its location due to a potential threat to the aqufer in that region. Open your eyes and ears before mindlessly advocatijng something that will not do anything like what the drill baby drill contingent says it will.
I agree that all people have different ideas of what a “church” is.
My personal opinion is that Rev. Wright is not “reverend”. I also believe that the group that he leads is a “church”…the same as way that Westboro Baptist is a “church”.
John, look up “Black Liberation Theology”.
Coming from you Maloof, “words matter” is funny.
1. a. nonsense; foolishness
b. (as modifier) flimflam arguments
2. a deception; swindle
vb -flams, -flamming, -flammed
(tr) to deceive; trick; swindle; cheat”
Describes him perfectly IMO. That so many fall for it is the bigger concern. A circus clown normally is only good for a little while. The sad fact is that many like his brand of hate, divisiveness, and dishonesty. Says a lot about folks that FlimFlambaugh has credibility with them and the duly elected head of this nation does not. Says even more that his listeners believe they are better informed and more intelligent than the people who know better than to listen to his hate. The right wing is becoming more and more like a cult.
“Your beliefs don’t make you a better person, your behavior does”
Michael, I would never advise anyone to “follow my lead”, but sometimes, if you pose a question instead of slapping down what you think is a fact, you can get better and certainly less defensive answers.
Say for instance if you had said:
Don’t you think approving the pipe line and “Drill now, drill everywhere” is a good idea to get us the oil independence we all know we need?
Maybe people would have been more forthcoming and we could discuss the issue, which is real, solutions, which we need, and concerns, which some folks legitimately have. Do you see what I am getting at? It is how you present the issues and if you take a stand and draw that bright deep line in the sand, that is going to draw fire. Like I said, I do not consider you “the bad guy” but you know we will all pounce when someone draws that line. I know I rise to the bait worse than one of Pavlov’s pets but I do value genuine discussion and I respect disagreement that does not insult me. Don’t we all?
Ok, so if the answer to high gas prices is to ” Drill Baby Drill” as some folks believe, why do we export oil and oil products, and wouldn’t we just export more of what we gained by doing so?
How would that lower prices?
Right now any job is a good job. As I’m sure you are aware Oil is traded on the futures market, the futures price of a barrel of oil is determined by many things, supply/demand and of course speculators. The speculators are buying future contracts betting that due to the instability in the Middle East prices will continue to rise, pretty much to date they have been right.At some point in the time the price will have to reflect the actual supply and demand formula. There are of course many ways to solve the long term energy problems in our country and the world. Conservation and new technology are of course important but equally important, IMO, is increasing oil production in other areas of the world that have more stability than the Middle East. By increasing oil production in North America the world will become less reliant on Middle Eastern Oil and as such the instability in the region will have less and less impact on the price of oil. This is a long term possible solution to rising energy cost and not a knee jerk short term solution to rising gasoline prices.
I actually put some thought into that one Sandi!
Name is required
A valid email is required (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Comment is required
Your email address will not be published.All fields are required to comment.
Sat, 07 Dec 2013 22:47:41 +0000
Metro Columnist Dan Casey knows a little bit about a lot of things but not a heck of a lot about most things. That doesn't keep him from writing about them, however. So keep him honest!
He welcomes your rants, raves and considered opinions, so long as the language is civil (i.e. no four-letter words). He'll read all your posts and may or may not respond.