Ann Romney: The little people don’t deserve to see our taxes
Ann and Mitt Romney | AP Photo
As F. Scott Fitzgerald might have written, the Romneys are different than you and me. Take Ann Romney for example, the wife of Mitt Romney, the putative GOP presidential nominee. The little people have no right to know about her “family” finances or taxes. It’s none of their business, she said on TV Thursday.
From Huffington Post:
[ABC interviewer Robin] Roberts pressed: “Why not show that, then?” and reasoned that people could “move on” if her husband released his returns.
Romney responded, “Because there are so many things that will be open again for more attack… and that’s really, that’s just the answer. And we’ve given all you people need to know and understand about our financial situation and about how we live our life.”
Did you catch that? “You people.”
Her husband is running for president. She is running for First Lady. And we salary pikers are unworthy of knowing what’s in their tax returns. We should simply trust them. To her credit she didn’t say, “Let them eat cake.” But it was close.
Let me be clear. I don’t know whether Mitt Romney paid a lot of taxes, a little, or zero in the years for which he so desperately wants to keep his returns hidden (unlike every major party candidate who has run for president in my lifetime). Whatever it was, he should say so, by disclosing those returns.
It would resolve some nagging questions.
- Did he pay anything in 2009?
- Was his rate that year higher or lower than the average bus driver? Ronald Reagan had some opinions on that question, and so do I.
- The Romneys have made an issue out of their giving to the Mormon church (and Ann did it again in this interview). Did they tithe on their gross income, or their net?
- Is the Mittster reluctant to release those returns because it would show he illegally hid income in a Swiss bank account, and the IRS caught him, and he availed himself of the agency’s amnesty program that year? Sorry, but I want to know if the guy asking for my vote is a tax crook.
- Do the returns list him as CEO of Bain Capital in 2000 and 2001, contrary to his statements that he left the company in 1999?
- Or is he refusing to release them out of mere arrogance?
The answer to at least one of the above is a blinger. I’m a nosy cuss when it comes to candidates running for president, and I want an answer. No apologies, Mitt. You’re auditioning for my vote.
So what is it?
July 20, 2012 - 6:00 AM
One wonders, we’re you just as nosy in regards to Obama’s own background during his election? His administration? Me thinks thou profess too much sir.
Dan,
I saw a sign in a gift shop yesterday, that if I can get back there later today, I’ll take a picture of it and send it you via email. The sign offers, in my view, an appropriate comment on this column.
I could care less whether the mittster tithes to his church..otherwise the answer is likely all of the above.
This article also explains the attitude people like the Romney’s display to “you people.”
http://www.nationalmemo.com/being-mitt-romney-means-never-having-to-explain/
It’s not just the wealthy Romneys who exhibit the attitude. This Tea Party/Republican exhibited it too. There are other examples, but I have other things to do today.
http://www.nationalmemo.com/tea-party-senator-government-subsidies-are-communism-unless-they-make-me-rich/
Did you catch that? “You people.”
Yeah, “You people” as in the leftwing media snerts who are carrying the water for Idiot Boy. The left doesn’t “want to know” what’s in the taxes; they want fodder for more attacks no matter what Mitt’s returns say.
You people always focus on the BS, the meaningless nothings and try to make them the same as, say, a president wrecking the economy and leading America’s decline into socialism.
Running for First Lady? Really? I didn’t know it was an elected position. I don’t like it when right wingers pick on Michelle Obama and think this is just as bad. I am sure there is information in those returns the Romney’s don’t want the public to see, but her statement is pretty accurate. The returns they have released have been gone over with a fine toothed comb. There is no up-side to releasing more.
The left is fired up about this, but I suspect most swing voters want to focus on what Romney would do as president to help the struggling economy. The focus on gaffes, personal finances, and other distractions does very little to help voters make an informed decision. Unfortunately the media seems to focus on litle else.
Dan-I think that when Mrs. Romney stated the “you people” line, she was referring to the press. Spinning it another way makes you look a little eager to find something, anything, to sound off on. All of this harkens back to everyone (conservatives) wanting (and still wanting) to see Obama’s birth certificate and proof of his birth in the U.S. Let’s give all of this a rest, including Romney’s taxes from years ago (liberals) and focus on what needs to be done, and that is improving our economy, which is continuing to spiral down the toilet. I for one am ready for a change. I did not vote in the last election but I am sure going to this go-round.
I think she is referring to the press and media with the words “you people.” Mrs. Romney knows that Mitt won’t get a free pass the media gives the left when something comes out about their personal lives, so why bother. On the charitable giving aspect, they could claim, as Al Gore and Joe Bided did (when their tax returns exposed them as tighter than a drum), that they volunteered a lot of their time, instead of giving their money. That worked for them, but wouldn’t for the Romneys.
The comment “You people” was directed at the press, not the public. Of course that doesn’t fit your spin does it Dan.
From the Huff Post artticle cited:
“”He’s a very generous person. We give 10 percent of our income to our church every year.”
10 percent of what? A mormon told me that elders in their church look at members tax forms to verify the correct tithe was paid. Given his incredibly convoluted and diverse portfolio, how would they go about figuiring out such a tithe?
Here’s the article from which Shillary posted figures about percentage of donations churches give to charity:
http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=fi&page=cragun_32_4
Read the whole thing, and if you are thinking about starting an illegal enterprise in which you need to launder money, I’m thinking a church would be the very best way to do it.
That is so unbelievably offensive. To say “you people” the little people and the big people and the medium people and the media and the blacks, and the whites and the yellows and the greens, and the illegal aliens and the citizens; “you people.” Looks like I’m now sitting out this election.
Romney is not required by law to release them. Doing so will not gain him a single voter, in spite of your statement that he is “auditioning for my vote.” We all know that his tax returns could say he was Jesus Christ and he wouldn’t get Dan Casey’s vote.
What would happen is the left would pour over them, distort the contents and use them for attack ads. I understand why he won’t release them and support the decision.
And while we’re in the spirit of disclosure, how about Obama’s university transcripts? He’s not required by law to release those either but I’d like to make sure there isn’t anything to which I object in there.
Tax Returns aren’t the issue today — It’s Obama’s Fire House #1 Hose!
-
Was Roanoke’s Fire House #1 Obama’s Waterloo?
-
http://roanokeslant.blogspot.com/2012/07/was-roanokes-fire-house-1-obamas.html
-
Lars,
If you want the answer to that question you’ll have to read my Sunday column!
Let’s not forget that the Romney’s contribution to their church is tax deductible. I wonder if they would give 10% if it were not deductible?
Dan, looks like the Romney rescuers are keeping an eye on your column now.
Awww, look how charitably they insist on interpreting her remarks, as opposed to Barack or Michelle’s. You people are so transparent. Hypocrites to the core!
Hell no it was not “Waterloo” Lars Hagen! Americans want answers but they are smart enough to know that whole kerfuffle is a lie. President Obama came up from a broken home of modest means to be President of the United States due to “personal initiative” and he would never dismiss it or belittle it. He touts is constantly. His point was valid, it was understood in context and the right wing liars are making a mockery of the middle class and workers by backing a Wall Street corporate raider and claiming to care about small businesses when he gobbled up and abused them for a fortune! What a crock of crap!
13. “Romney is not required by law to release them. Doing so will not gain him a single voter…..” –Comment by Katie
It might lose him a few, though.
@15 I dedicate this song to your Sunday column, courtesy of the Beatles.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUUfY6CN8yw
I love this! Michelle Obama says she was “proud of her country for the FIRST time” upon her husbands election and, of course, this has never been mentioned by objective journalists like Dan Casey. I also love how the wonderful and objective Roanoke Times NEVER reported on Obama’s 3 major gaffes at his Roanoke speech. LOVE IT! First Obama tells those that need medical attention from the heat to get help from “paralegals,” then tells business owners “you didn’t build that, somebody else made that happen,” and then he referred to Obamacare as a TAX after he and his administration have been fighting that name since the Supreme Court ruling!! Not one mention of any of these in the articles in the Roanoke Times in the days after Obama’s speech, even though national news agencies covered all 3! Thanks, Dan. And thanks Roanoke Times. You guys really take the term “partisan hacks” to a new level. Obama plays class warfare right here in Roanoke, and people like Dan Casey never mention it, and are worried about the term “you people” from the presumptive Republican nominee’s wife. LOL!!
Again with the transcripts! Are you afraid he made Cs, like George W.? Are you afraid he made the dean’s list, which would prove he was intelligent? Most people who hire for their businesses don’t ask for transcripts for people in their 40s and 50s, as your college grades are pretty irrelevant after 30 years. My first employer wanted to see my graduate school transcripts, as I was 1 month away from graduation when I started that job, but didn’t care about my college transcripts even then. Subsequent employers have never asked for any transcripts.
We all know that his tax returns could say he was Jesus Christ and he wouldn’t get Dan Casey’s vote
Line of the day.
If “you people” was meant to mean the press, then how can one deny the contextual truth that Obama’s comment was referring to infrastructure? Did Mitt Romney and Bain build the internet they use? “You people” at the least shows an arrogant attitude towards the press, not a promising stance in a potential leadership team.
BTW, the one released Romney return was incomplete. Until the key missing information is supplied, it is wrong to say he has released even one full return. The missing info relates to his (possibly illegal) Swiss bank account.
Not hard to see what the RW meme of the day is….”You people means the press.” “You people means the press”.
“You people” don’t even pretend to think for yourselves. Your posts are completely fungible.
14
I’ll answer it now, Lars.
Obama’s waterloo comes on election day, but this was the beginning of the end for him.
I agree with Mark Levin.
Obama needs to give us the names of his cocaine dealers.
We have a right to see who he bought his drugs from all those years he was a (self-admitted) dope head.
Come on Barry, who did you buy your blow from? Did you smoke crack?
LOL.
Isn’t it amazing what poor old Bill Clinton had to go through…for smoking a little weed? Crazy how different he was treated.
Or Obama’s birth certificate. Or Obama’s school records. Or Obama’s Fast and Furious documents. Or the list of lobbyists from the Coffee Shop meetings. The little people don’t need to see that stuff.
So Katie, you don’t think that Romney should release his returns yet you want to see Obama’s university transcripts? How are 30 year old college transcripts more relevant than 10 year old tax returns?
You argue that the left would just pour over Romney’s tax returns and use them for attack ads…what do you think the right would do with college transcripts? The same d**n thing.
Nancy Pelosi won’t release her tax returns and says the whole tax returns thing is a distraction.
http://www.rollcall.com/news/nancy_pelosi_downplays_tax_return_demand-216283-1.html
(crickets, crickets)
None of this would be happening if Romney would simply release his tax returns going back to 1999. If there are things in them that appear to make it look like he did not pay enough, or a higher rate, or whatever, use the examples to talk about how and what he would do and propose to re-work the tax code and system to make it more fair and equitable to the working and middle class. Continuing to fan the smoke of this into everyone’s faces every day only makes it appear that there is fire somewhere. I simply can not understand why Team Romney wishes to continue running-up their negatives.
LB, I don’t know if it was his waterloo, but by the dropping poll numbers here in the commonwwealth I’d say it removed the blinders for a few folks, even when they read or hear it in its entire context. There may be hope for Romney yet….wouldn’t it be rich if Obama’s undoing in November was seeded right here in little ol’ Roanoke while being hosted by the ultra libs of the RT? If so, let me be first to say thank you to them in advance.
I don’t care how much tax Mitt Romney pays or not.
I am concerned about how much tax I pay.
Romney wants to stabilize the tax code, do away with
loopholes and lower tax rates.
Obama wants to increase taxes on 50.5% (those who actually pay tax)
of the population. I for one, am tired of paying taxes so that
the Feds can give it to people in foreign countries.
For me the choice is simple.
Wow, Mitt is hiding behind his wifes skirt. The Mormon church is known as being one of the stingiest churches when it comes to actual charity. They give between 0.7% and 2.6% to actual charity work. The bulk of what they spend their money on is building resorts and shopping malls, and bigger temples. Mitt has given to other charities such as the George W. Bush library and Citizens for Limited Taxation, a charity that fights to lower taxes by eliminating services. I guess the Mormon church doesn’t care about the poor either.
I truly find this whole dust up laughable. Romney has a gaffe and we are to forgive, Obama has a gaffe and “he meant that”!
One day the right wing is demanding that all business did it all on their own and the government only interferes and causes them problems, then on another day they are excoriating the town, city or state for not doing more to gain and keep business. Seriously, is the right wing schizophrenic?
The business community in Roanoke in general is well loved, and from what I see, accommodated as best they can. Individual business and people may see a different personality but overall I think Roanoke does support, appreciate, try to hold on to and assist the business we have. I think they are doing all they can to lure more business, market the area, have a better education system, better infrastructure, atmosphere, culture and transportation (all needed as bait and sustenance). You know, all those things Obama was talking about when he said no one does it all alone?
OMG is Nancy Pelosi running for President?
Rob Thommins hits it on the head, all right wingers in this country think they pay too much in taxes and that even if he is the devil incarnate, Romney will “fix that”. They are clearly delusional. If you believe the US can pay our debt, fix the deficit and give you all tax “relief”, you are in a stupor that only hate can induce. And you prove it with every post.
Re: “…his tax returns could say he was Jesus Christ…”
There’s a question on a church sign in my hometown that asks, “If Jesus was running for President, would we elect him?” I’m thinking a majority of Christians wouldn’t recognize Him and would reject Him based solely on His platform!
Say, Jesus wouldn’t want to drop bombs on nearly enough people.
“Romney wants to stabilize the tax code, do away with
loopholes and lower tax rates.”
Did you honestly say with a straight face that Rmoney wants to get rid of loopholes? His entire return is loopholes. This is just funny.
“We all know that his tax returns could say he was Jesus Christ and he wouldn’t get Dan Casey’s vote.”
Hell with the tax return. I wanna see THAT birth certificate!
Say What!
I have a special surprise for you on the Saturday OPEN thread. Tune in tomorrow at 9 a.m.
Hell with the tax return. I wanna see THAT birth certificate!
Date of Birth: December 25, 0000
Place of Birth: Bethlehem, Judea
Mother: Mary
Father: God
Neither God nor Mary are Americans…ergo, Jesus isn’t an American. Hence, not qualified to be president.
The interview with Ann Romney is actually inaudible when she SUPPOSEDLY uses the term “you people.” One can listen to it over and over in slow-mo and you can’t definitively hear her say “you” people. But, leave it to Dan Casey and the libs to jump on something fake like this instead of discussing all of Obama’s failures of the last four years. Either way, we all have to thank Obama for coming to Roanoke. Since then, and his gaffe-laden speech, Romney has now taken the lead nationally in the polling. According to the most recent NY Times/CBS poll released this week, Romney now leads by a point. And both of those sources are hardcore liberal entities, so no whining about right-wing inflated numbers! LOL! Good times. So, thanks for coming to Roanoke Mr. Obama! Come back, any time!(Just don’t expect the Roanoke Times or Dan Casey to objectively report what you say)
I beg to differ. Tax returns are the question of the day. I for one have never voted for a Democratic Presidential Candidate, believe it or not. 3 times I have voted 3rd Party because of dissatisfaction with the GOP candidate, however, I still could not make myself vote Democrat. I voted for Perot, and Nader twice. Since, I have realized that voting 3rd party was merely throwing away my vote.
Will I vote Democrat in 2012, probably. The biggest reason being I just don’t trust Romney to have our countries best interests at heart. Why does he want to become president? To fulfill his Daddies dream? Or is it that he wants to be in position to finish off average working Americans? Lower the minimum wage, repeal Obama Care, go with the Ryan budget plan, Cut, chop and sell off to the highest bidder what is left our Natural Resources and Technology. Does Mitt really want to get aggressive with China and deal with them in an way no other president has in the past? Just how is he going to accomplish that? Is he going to pay off our Chinese Debt himself? Not likely. Start a trade war and load up tariffs on goods coming from China? Where will the poor shop after Mitt drops the minimum wage and the cost of goods rises because Mitt gets tough on China?
What about Iran, does Mitt really want to start another war? Me, I’m ready to give our hard fighting, sacrificing, dedicated soldiers a rest. A decade and more of war is enough. Beating the war drums is just not something I’m looking for in a presidential candidate.
No that’s no it. Mitt just wants what Mitt wants. He’s gotten what he wants all his life, be it a police or fireman uniform from daddy to a Harvard education to avoiding the Vietnam war to making millions of dollars from questionable business practices to changing political views based on what his audience wants to hear and on and on and on.
No, I don’t trust Mitt and I think Dan raises very valid points. Poor grades in college are one thing. Tax cheats are a whole different ball game. Someone possibly investing in foreign capital to hedge against the dollar is not presidential material by my moral and ethical standard. Do we really want to vote for a man who so obviously has something to hide? I think not.
So, how does Mitts tax returns fit into all this confusion? Why should the American people have a right to know Mitts “business?”
1. Did Mitt shelter money illegally in Switzerland?
2. Was he caught by the IRS in 2009 and come in for the IRS Amnesty program?
3. Was he hiding money in order to pay less taxes? This makes him a crook if true and not fit for the office of president.
4. If Mitt does release his tax returns then he might be exposed as a greedy cad who worships money more than his opportunity to becoming president of the US.
5. That being pure speculation, however, if true, how fast would the GOP Dump Mitt and draft another candidate for president?
6. The GOP does NOT want to have this scandal right before the election. Not only would they lose the presidential election, just how far into the congressional elections would this ripple.
Folks, this stuff is not so far off. It’s out their. You can read here:
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/2012/08/investigating-mitt-romney-offshore-accounts
And more on how Romney got the money to start up Bain here:
http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/
Here’s the GOP getting very nervous about what Romney is hiding:
http://www.examiner.com/article/video-republicans-growing-impatient-with-mitt-romney-s-refusal-to-release-taxes
Just saying. We are electing the president of our country in November. I want to know as much about the candidates as possible. Do your homework folks.
“According to the most recent NY Times/CBS poll released this week, Romney now leads by a point.”
Leading by one point. Break out the champagne and have a party!
Sarcasm font off now.
“You people” is very telling. It speaks to a sense of exclusivity that the Romneys seem to possess in spades. It doesn’t matter one iota if it was in context of the press or not.
A person uses “you people” to denigrate, stereotype and caste those they think are beneath them. It is the very essence of elitism. No one finds it strange that the same man who was running on his merits as a business man and career executive is now being overly protective of his financial records? Isn’t one of the conservative mantras “if you don’t have anything to hide…”?
There are things about Romney that I like, but there are some truly terrifying ideas coming from his camp as well. This campaign has been a long, hard slog and the wear is starting to show on his face. Can he perform under the increasing pressure or will a darker side come to light? We all have our weaknesses that we hide and protect from the world. All it takes is the right amount of pressure in right place and time to break someone. When Romney finally comes open (and he will), I’m interested to see the true substance of which his yolk is made.
In regards to Obama transcripts, don’t think for a second that Obama isn’t biding his time with that. He wants you tin-foil-hatted conspiracy theorists to continue braying like jackasses just so he can make fools of all of you, but only when the timing is right and political advantage is optimum. It’s all about strategy and the more you fools gnash your teeth about college transcripts from a 50 year-old man who graduated over two decades ago, the more you play right into his hands.
What a beautiful tragedy. Plato couldn’t have written it better. Sadly, though, it is us who are the fools in this play.
So if and when Obama releases his college transcripts, the folks whining about that on this blog will what, AGREE that Romney should release his tax returns back through 1999?
Do any one of you Obama haters want to comment on that? (Thought not).
I love J.M White’s comments, insults and all. These kinds of debate tactics that lack any kind of true intellectual thought are always so amusing, and usually come from libs when their heads are spinning away and they just can’t help themselves. Your silly insults are merely a defense mechanism because you are worried that your golden boy will lose the election. One can actually watch you, as one reads down your liberal tripe, trying to talk yourself into feeling better about things. You keep talking about Obama’s SUPPOSEDLY amazing transcripts and Romney’s tax returns instead of focusing on Obama’s failure to fix the economy, his massive waste of taxpayer dollars on “green energy creation,” his failure to pass even ONE SINGLE BUDGET (even when the Democrats controlled Congress for two years), his polarization of this country, his backhanded way of passing Obamacare as NOT a tax…only to find out it IS a tax that will be fronted, 75%, of those earning UNDER $120,000 a year, his continuation of the war in Afghanistan (after promising to end it), his failure to close gitmo (after promising to do so), his way of deciding which federal laws to obey by simply dismissing them (immigration enforcement) and stomping on the Constitution…Yeah, don’t talk about ANY of that…just keep whining about Romney’s tax returns from 10 years ago and philosphers from thousands of years ago!! LOL!
No Dan, we would hope that Romney, if elected, would simply wait FOUR years until it was time for re-election, and then MAYBE entertain the idea of releasing his tax returns from 13 years ago. What, isn’t that the precedent that Obama and you “Obama-lovers” have already established??(Since you equate college records to tax returns)
a question on a church sign in my hometown that asks, “If Jesus was running for President, would we elect him?” I’m thinking a majority of Christians wouldn’t recognize Him and would reject Him based solely on His platform!
Absolutely. Jesus is a conservative. Conservatives stand for everything Jesus stands for.
Jesus was prolife, He believed in using one’s resources to help others, and He was at odds with the big autocratic leftwing government of His day because his message was 100% antithetical to theirs. In fact, the big leftist government hated Him so much for His blasphemy they killed Him.
I really couldn’t care less if I ever see Obama’s transcripts. I was using the point ironically to demonstrate how both tax returns and university transcripts are irrelevant. See how quickly the people claiming they have to know about Romney’s taxes were to dismiss the idea that transcripts matter? Try being objective and applying the same standards to both candidates.
Say, Jesus wouldn’t want to drop bombs on nearly enough people.
You don’t think He’d be doing the targeted drone strikes against brown people or dropping atomic bombs like the Democrats?
@49 – I agree completely. Good Luck with that.
Well matt, we love your lies, like you love J.M.White’s comments! Only problem for you, is that you made it too easy. But hey, what is integrity?
If this was Obama, you people would be apoplectic not to have years worth of tax returns and we all know it. Whine on. Defend what you have cursed for 4 years, it is hilarious.
This is history repeating itself and not in a good way for Romney. Typical: “Fehrnstrom defended the campaign’s posture, saying that O’Brien was trying to hide important information from voters by declining to reveal her husband’s returns, while Romney was simply acting on principle.”
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/07/16/romney-called-for-tax-transparency-in-past-campaigns/
When Romney released 23 years worth of tax records to John McCain. McCain decided Sarah Palin would be a better Vice President. Any questions? Seriously, what could be more damning than that?
Romney knows that if he releases his tax returns, he will never again be able to speak credibly about the tax structure or anyone not paying taxes.
Romney knows that if he releases his tax returns he can never again attack Obama for telling the truth about the tax gifts that the wealthy get.
Romney knows that if he releases his tax returns he can never speak about any out sourcing or off shore issues with any integrity.
He is cooking his own goose with the very natural speculation of the people. Look what you loons have speculated about Obama. And he released his certified birth certificate. You dismiss anything you don’t agree with so what is it Romney would ever lose with you?
Suzie’s diseased profile of Jesus explains why she identifies with him. She has defined him in her own unique, dishonest, deranged way and that Jesus does sound like a conservative. Thankfully that is not the Jesus of the Bible.
Ya gotta wonder — Did Mitt, back in 2008, say to the McCain campaign: “What, you want to see 23 years of my tax returns? Are you crazy? They’re none of your business!”
But he didn’t do that, did he? No He turned them over — presumably the returns up to an including tax year 2007.
Romney did that because he understood there were certain minimum standards, understood by all, that ticket leaders have in making the decision who to bring on the national ticket. And the Mittster understood that to get on the ticket he had to meet them.
It’s interesting that this time around, now that he’s the putative presidential nominee, that he no longer feels any such compunction. Unlike his dad and every other presidential candidate of his lifetime.
It also makes you wonder: what’s in there, post-2007, that he doesn’t want us to see?
“Conservatives stand for everything Jesus stands for.” When did Jesus become pro-rich, pro-war, pro-death penalty, etc.? Those positions contradict a lot of scriptures that I and many others hold dear (have you read His Sermon on the Mount?).
“If this is going to be a Christian nation that doesn’t help the poor, either we have to pretend that Jesus was just as selfish as we are, or we’ve got to acknowledge that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy without condition and then admit that we just don’t want to do it.” — Steven Colbert
matt, I can’t take you seriously when you rail about polarization while assuming I am: a liberal, Obama is my golden boy and that I was insulting anyone except paranoid, pseudo-persecuted conspiracy theorists. If you can’t see the irony in you blatantly promoting polarization while trying to blame only one side for it, then you are lost, my friend. Both ends are being played against the other and only an utter fool (or complacent simpleton) would suggest otherwise.
If you should happen to be a paranoid, pseudo-persecuted conspiracy theorist, then I pity you in your ignorance, and I offer no apologies. You wouldn’t believe Obama was a native-born citizen if you had 8mm Zapruder footage of him dropping from his mother’s womb in front of a “Welcome to Honolulu” sign with Old Glory in his right hand and a bald eagle perched in his left.
OH NO! You slapped down a (tired, rehashed) list of failed achievements for a U.S. president… Perhaps, matt, in your infinite wisdom, you can point to any president who has kept all of his campaign promises and delivered everything he said he would. Also, if it doesn’t tax your brain too much, perhaps you can reference me to a president that didn’t have egregious wastes of money during his administration. Obviously you have a skewed idea of how politics works. This is no single hand that drops the executioner’s axe in this country.
Get a clue. This constant blame game has become an epidemic on BOTH sides. We know what the problems are already! It’s time to present the solutions. I’m not going to play this game with you, matt. I can just as easily post a list of his accomplishments so far, as well as a list of loose ends he’s tied up from the previous administration. Half of what you listed is so misinformed that it doesn’t even merit response. Is he the best president we could have? Certainly not, but Mitt Romney pales in comparison. If this is what the Republican party has come to, you can count me out. I guess I am a liberal. Peace and love, my brother.
matt and every other Rmoney apologist, you’ll convince me you’re acting from consistent principles when I hear the details of how “conservatives” strongly insisted on seeing the minutes from Cheney’s secret energy task force in 2001. Or you can try to make the case that the task force’s work didn’t affect the American people. On that bit of history, only one or the other approach can prove an unpartisan interest in policy.
If one won’t admit that Rmoney has not even released one year of complete tax returns, one is not being honest, because he has not. His 2010 return is missing key information about his Swiss bank account being closed out in the year of the amnesty program, leaving a shadow whose source he refuses to address. His entire campaign is about his business acumen, making the possibility of his having evaded his tax responsibility relevant.
More fundamentally, for one to say, as matt did in post #50, that the president can “fix’ the economy, is the sort of childishly simplistic mindset that makes substantive policy discussion too difficult.
matt and other Rmoney apologists, answer these paragraphs with details pertinent to Romney as best you can, or else own up to your childishly simplistic “I did not, you did” approach.
“If Jesus was running for President, would we elect him?”
Not a chance. Looks and charm win over substance of message. Not to say he wasn’t charming, but the Bible did say see was nothing special to look at or something to that effect. Jesus was of modest upbringing. Now one has to either be born with a silver spoon in his mouth or questionably even born here!
No, I don’t think today’s voters would be that receptive to Jesus. They’d likely argue about his origins, family, message, and then crucify him all over again.
“Christian” is in, but “Christ-like” is a rarity.
Suzie, Jesus believe in using ALL of his resources to help others, including his life, not just some and not what he deemed fit. I don’t believe that falls under the conservative mantle in any way and we all know that you’re not willing to do that. So, why don’t you go get your nails done or something and leave queries about the political affiliation of Jesus to theologians. Thanks. You’re a peach.
This effort to conflate a school transcript with tax returns is funny but ineffective. So…they’re both “documents” so they’re therefore comparable?it’s like comparing snow to mashed potatoes because – hey! They’re both white!
“matt and every other Rmoney apologist, you’ll convince me you’re acting from consistent principles when I hear the details of how “conservatives” strongly insisted on seeing the minutes from Cheney’s secret energy task force in 2001.”
None of your business, Warren. You people know all you need to know. This is the new GOP meme. And Ann Romney came up with it!
Yeah, but if Jesus ran, would he release his tax returns?
“it’s like comparing snow to mashed potatoes because – hey! They’re both white!”
Nice one, Kristen! Will you grant me permission to steal it and use it in a column some day?
#68 “Yeah, but if Jesus ran, would he release his tax returns? –Comment by Dan Casey
He probably wouldn’t have any to release. Not being a materialist, he would be below the poverty line and not have enough income to report.
Although, I’d say his Super PAC would carry a pretty big wallop!
Shame on you for reporting like that. Please highlight in your next article where she says “All you little people.”
Come on! She was talking about “YOU PEOPLE” as in the media. Get a life. Don’t worry, ACORN will make sure Obama has enough votes so we can struggle for another 4 years.
Remember the famous Gettysburg Address, spoken by our 16th President, Abraham Lincoln to rally all Americans together even with a continuing Civil War [1863], and evoking in his closing statement a government in pursuit of equality?
Did it sound something like this?
” … government of ‘you people’, by ‘you people’ and for ‘you people’ !
Forgive us, your “Majesty” [Ann]….we forgot our place by asking for what others have historically done in the past – releasing their darn tax returns!
Speaking of the real Queen [the one in England] her financials are open for public scruting:
http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/leg_sovereign_grant.htm
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/theroyalfamily/8933942/The-Queens-income-frozen-until-2015.html
Shrilliary, the Romneys have already disclosed more than the law requires, damn it, and they’re not going to disclose ONE MORE BIT of their finances.
You people have all you need to know!
We will all “get a life” as soon as the right wingers who parse every word the President and First Lady say does so!
Would Jesus say his mom made a great ham sandwich, as one of Va.’s most prominent career politicians (with a Jewish mom) said?
Or, like Va.’s other most prominent Jewish career politician, would he favor a philosophy of accumulating wealth for oneself and letting the benefits trickle down to the poor? Would he bet against the U.S. dollar as that one did?
Would Jesus favor welfare for billionaires?
Would Jesus insist that men have legal control of women’s bodies?
Would Jesus claim that prominent Va. Republicans Oliver North (arms sales), Gordon Liddy (burglary), Phil Hamilton (bribery), Vance Wilkins (sexual harassment), and Newt Gingrich (adultery) have done nothing specifically wrong?
Would Jesus publicly pick someone out in a crowd and bully them with ethnic taunts? Would Jesus be enough of a habitual jerk to do it on camera? Did his mother make a great ham sandwich?
That was a good one Kristen!
Haha, again, the liberal heads are spinning away, grasping at straws to defend their diatribe and failing ideology. No need to discuss our current president and his infinite failings. No need to objectively report the facts (Dan Casey). We merely gloss over ALL of that and continue repeating our tired mantra, discussing Jesus, whining about tax transcripts from 13 years ago (read your own liberal “we have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it” Pelosi’s comments on tax returns), whining about Dick Cheney from 11 years ago, and whining about an inaudible one word comment from Romney’s wife! It’s fun to watch. Anything we can do to keep the discussion AWAY from our current presidents massive record of failure. As for Dan’s “all you need to know” comment in regards to the GOP, I wonder if he uses that same childish tone to opine for the documents to Fast and Furious, in which our governemnt may have run guns to Mexico, resulting in both American and Mexican deaths??? Or as far as disclosure and transpareny, I wonder how ol Dan and you libs feel about your very own Jew-hating Helen Thomas…ya know, Head of the White House Press Corps for years?? Yeah, you might want to check out her comments in regards to the “level of control and LACK of transparency” this current administration has exuded. She said not even NIXON controlled the press like Obama. YIKES. LOL. But again, what does she know, right? She’s just an uninformed pseudo-intellectual liberal like most of the other commenters on this blog, right? Dan???
I have ask many, many liberals one question and none have yet to answer it.
What has Obama done so well for this country that he needs to be re-elected? It’s a simple question. It’s been four years. No Bush blaming! Just answer the question.
I have seen many of his campaign ads and all he talks about is Bain Capitol. How is Romneys dealing with Bain Capitol going to help get the country out of recession? Fix unemployment? Curb government spending?
What is going so right in this country?
Don’t come back with Romeny this, his wife called us “those people”, outsourceing, George Bush, etc.
One question. What has he done so well?
“you are in a stupor that only hate can induce. And you prove it with every post”
Wow pretty strong words, I guess I am a racist also.
Isn’t that the standard montra of the tax and spend crowd?
“I have ask many, many liberals one question and none have yet to answer it.
What has Obama done so well for this country that he needs to be re-elected? It’s a simple question. It’s been four years. No Bush blaming! Just answer the question.
I have seen many of his campaign ads and all he talks about is Bain Capitol. How is Romneys dealing with Bain Capitol going to help get the country out of recession? Fix unemployment? Curb government spending?
What is going so right in this country?
Don’t come back with Romeny this, his wife called us “those people”, outsourceing, George Bush, etc.
One question. What has he done so well?”
Adam, one problem is the assumption implicit in your question. You’re assuming that everyone who vote for any candidate is voting “for” that candidate.
At least half the time I cast my ballot, I’m actually voting “against” the other candidate. And that’s the way I expect I’ll approach the November election.
Adam. Could it be as simple as folks are going to vote for the devil they know? The other devil could be much, much worst and I suspect he is.
Sure the country is in the crapper. With an obstructionist House and a GOP objective set the day after Obama was elected to make sure he was a one term president, just what do you expect? Martial law? A dictatorship in which the president enacts sweeping change to move the country forward?
I thought not.
Oh, what has he done so well? Ended one war and winding down another are 2 real good thing. Then there’s that killing Osama incident. Wait, that’s 3 things. Are you satisfied?
Obama certainly has flaws as a president.
We’re still in Afghanistan; we should not be.
He didn’t close down Gitmo tho he promised to do that.
He didn’t beat hard enough on Democrats in Congress in 2010 to end the Bush tax cuts for people who make more than $250,000 a year.
All of those are strikes against him in my book. Particularly Afghanistan.
But there are more strikes against Romney.
The guy has set the Guiness Book of World Records for flip-flopping by a politician. He has NOT ONE conviction other than he’ll say whatever he has to for votes.
He wants to attack Iran.
He wants to raise taxes on the poor and cut them on the rich.
He’s desperately hiding his tax returns from public scrutiny, perhaps because they would disclose that he’s a tax crook who got amnesty.
And that’s just for STARTERS.
Adam, one problem is the assumption implicit in your question. You’re assuming that everyone who vote for any candidate is voting “for” that candidate.
Dan,
I would have to say your are wrong with stating the above statement. I don’t think there have been many elections in history that your statement above has been MORE true! There are millions of people voting “for” Obama only because of his race. Let’s not forget Acorn last election! Let’s not forget his recent policy on illegal aliens that are now allowed to stay in the country. Funny about the timing of that!
Now I am sure there will be many people calling me a racist or something like that. That seems to be par for the course nowadays. If you don’t support him, your racist.
I don’t support his policy. I don’t support 8% unemployment. I don’t support huge government spending. I don’t support his foreign policy.
These are the reasons I don’t support him. It has nothing to do with his racial background.
Again, Please answer the question, What has he done so well, that we need four more years of? Romney is likely not the answer, but he certainly can’t make the country much worse than it is now under Obama’s leadership!
“Again, Please answer the question, What has he done so well, that we need four more years of? Romney is likely not the answer, but he certainly can’t make the country much worse than it is now under Obama’s leadership!”
I answered your question.
Moreover, it seems like you’ve already answered your question after claiming you didn’t know the answer.
Sure Obama has flaws, but for those not blinded by right wing hate, he has many accomplishments.
http://pleasecutthecrap.typepad.com/main/what-has-obama-done-since-january-20-2009.html
Here are the first ten:
“1. Ordered all federal agencies to undertake a study and make recommendations for ways to cut spending
2. Ordered a review of all federal operations to identify and cut wasteful spending and practices
3. Instituted enforcement for equal pay for women
4. Beginning the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq
5. Families of fallen soldiers have expenses covered to be on hand when the body arrives at Dover AFB
6 Ended media blackout on war casualties; reporting full information
7. Ended media blackout on covering the return of fallen soldiers to Dover AFB; the media is now permitted to do so pending adherence to respectful rules and approval of fallen soldier’s family
8. The White House and federal government are respecting the Freedom of Information Act
9. Instructed all federal agencies to promote openness and transparency as much as possible
10. Limits on lobbyist’s access to the White House”
http://3chicspolitico.com/president-obamas-accomplishments/
I do not know why you are asking. Your jaundiced eyes will never see beyond your hate. It simply is not possible.
As others have mentioned, the bottom line for me is that a Wall Street fat cat being President after what they did to this nation is the worst insult this nation could foist on ourselves. I will never support a Plutocracy. I will proudly vote AGAINST Willard Romney and I would do so even if every ugly, dishonest and twisted thing you right wingers have ever said about Obama was indeed the gospel truth. That none of it is, only makes the choice all the sweeter. Like the vilification of Jimmy Carter, the protests and lies from the right while pretending Obama made this mess seals their fate with the thinking folks in this nation. Good luck with the minority that is unthinking like you. The best man does not always win, but in this contest, Obama will always be the better man.
Yeah, and we should note, Obama gave the order that got bil Laden.
Bush blinked!
And Romney? He was for it, until he was against it, though I think he’s for it again.
Adam,
as you can see, Dan is not intent on truly answering the question(s). He is a rigid ideologue who actually CAN’T answer the question, as proven by his flailing statements. He won’t actually debate any of the specific qustions you asked him. His big problem seems to be Romney’s flip-flopping, which is rather accurate. Yet, to argue this point, Dan has to be intent on disregarding all of Obama’s MASSIVE flip-flops from campaigner Obama to president Obama. So, Dan, like so many of his ilk, will be voting FOR high unemployment, FOR disregarding federal laws that are already on the books in regards to illegal immigration, FOR a president who uses class warfare as a means to attain votes, FOR massive out of control government spending, FOR taxing the rich, because as we all know, Democrats are always for fairness and equality unless, of course, you are rich, then all such notions are thrown out the window. He will vote FOR a foreign policy that sends American troops to drop bombs on other nations without Congressional approval and leading from behind (Libya), FOR a foreign policy that would allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons even though their theocratic government has promised to use them to wipe Israel off the face of the earth, FOR an administration that could care less about transparency and disclosure (Fast and Furious), and FOR four more years of the downgrade of the American economy and society as we know it. So you see, you will not get honest debate here. You will only get a rigid adherence to what I suspect, was an ideology formed long long ago…
To get back on track in regards to the topic of this thread, it turns out President Barack Obama is the one who said “you people” during an April speech at the University of Colorado:
“It shouldn’t be a Democrat/Republican issue,” Obama said. “America is not just about you people doing well. America is about everybody doing well.”—-Ooooooops! The horror! What an awful man! Talking down to people like that!
This happened in April, nearly three months ago. Where was Dan Casey’s, the commenters on this blog, and the rest of the liberal media’s outrage then??? LOL!!
See what I mean? One will not get objective journalism here from Mr. Casey, just partisan drivel.
#78 Adam wrote: “I have ask..one question and none have yet to answer it…One question. What has (Obama) done so well?”
Adam amd Matt, you’re just so determined to reduce everything to a single layer of complexity, and I know that people get lots of conditioning to do that, but it’s still useless when you do it. Our best answers won’t come from just one question. The best solutions won’t give one “side” a “win”. And there are some comparisons that are relevant and others that are specious.
There have been lots of posts giving Obama’s achievements, his disappointments, and policies that haven’t been settled. A brief look through recent threads will show that. And it’s not “whining” when we draw continuities across the years, beyond a given administration’s term.
Politics ain’t beanbag, but it ain’t team sports either. Recognition is the first step to improvement. Please?
BTW, Rob Thommins, a typo maybe(?) but “mantra” is the word you were going for in #79.
matt,
Different context. Let it go man. You know I’m right, and you know what Ann Romney meant. I understand, it hurts when the guy you hope so desperately would take down a politician you despise is on the ropes.
I understand. But you’ve just got to move on.
Really, Dan?? Let it go?? That’s the best you can do??? Haha! I love it. Back a lib into a corner, and one can ALWAYS expect just such a retort. Or, better yet, the ol “different context” argument. How weak. How sad. Romney is on the ropes?? I think that would be YOU who is unable to see the writing on the wall, eh? Didn’t catch that NY Times/CBS poll from THIS WEEK that shows Romney has now gone ahead of Obama in national polls for the FIRST TIME? But it’s ROMNEY who is on the ropes, right? LOL. Dude, you REALLY need to work on being a true journalist and exploring ALL the facts. But, it’s sadly apparent that you lack the integrity and fortitude to do so, and you only denigrate your profession by failing to adhere to basic journalistic practices. This would be the reason the Times and other media sources that operate in the manner you do are “on the ropes.” LOL. Happy writing, Dan.
It is truly hard to credit a human being dumb enough to both support Romney and claim Obama is the one who has the “MASSIVE flip-flops”. That just stretches the bounds of intellect to the limit. Name an issue, beside the protection of wealth like his and his religion that Romney has NOT flipped on? And that was WHILE he was campaigning! You people are truly unbelievable, in the most literal sense of the word.
matt I’m happy for you, personally, that a poll has happened that you can take some comfort in. But you know what? There are outlier polls, and this may be one. The next 4 or 5 polls will answer that question. And you know what else? Those results are well within the margin of error. Do you know what that means? With a 1 perent margin and a 3 percent margin of error (the poll in question may have a greater one) it means the results are jack.
It means it’s JUST as likely that Obama is up 5 as Romney is up 1, pal. THAT’S what it means, and THAT’S why you shouldn’t start those cartwheels until at least 4 more national polls are in.
And Btw, that is what any true journalist would tell you. And what are you, anyway? A true anonymous commentor on a blog? Do you want me to bow?
While you’re waiting for those 4 more polls, pay attention to Gary Johnson. He’s biting into Romeny in the swing states.
#83, adam wrote: “There are millions of people voting “for” Obama only because of his race…Now I am sure there will be many people calling me a racist…That seems to be par for the course…If you don’t support him, your racist.”
adam, I don’t hear people actually saying that nearly as often as I hear those like yourself saying they do. But here’s what many people DO hear in the defensive tone of such protests of “they’ll play the race card”:
Fear of becoming a minority, with the attendant disadvantages, after generations of having received majority advantages. It’s not racism per se, it’s that most exploitable emotion, fear, as Rmoney’s owners know.
Pres. Obama is a modern American, in ethnicity, cultural background, education, spiritual journey, and every other way, who hasn’t been limited to only the most common and provincial American experiences. Nothing can soften that truth if it hurts, but that’s not a race card, it’s a reality card.
matt, not for nothing, but hiding in the safety of anonymity and attacking someone who is here every damn day facing the fray is actually the person who is totally lacking in “integrity and fortitude”, not Dan!
Dan has answered this same drivel a hundred times, read the archives and stop thinking you have offered anything new or original. You have not earned his C game, much less his best effort. You can’t hang and that is painfully obvious.
And Gary Johnson has credibility Romney can only dream of!
So, it looks like someone in the Roanoke Times is planning to inform the folks in his Sunday column what obama REALLY meant with his “small business” comment uttered while attending his Waterloo in Roanoke last Friday evening…and a most memorable comment it was….and, it wasn’t a “lonely” comment either, as there were others…! I feel like I’ve really gotten to know our potus through the comments he delivered to his Roanoke groupies. I should say that I’m a small business owner, and have been since 1996. And, I’ve been left wondering for 7 days whether or not the comments I’ve heard come unprompered directly from potus’ mouth, and read elsewhere, would finally and simply appear in the Roanoke Times….until Dan’s earlier comment. On Sunday, 9 days from his fateful pronouncement, it looks like the gloves are gonna come off, and Dan is gonna REALLY tell us what he thinks potus meant when he said those things about small business owners. In the meantime (the time from potus’ spewing his true beliefs, until Dan decides to tell us what HE thinks potus meant), many I’m sure have been wondering why the RT has ignored what appear to be particularly revealing comments by our potus. In other words, the RT has chosen to IGNORE those comments, and by doing so is hoping to shield the minds of its readers from having to endure the awesomeness of potus’ true beliefs about small business owners. This kind of thinking briefly perplexed me. I wondered if that might mean that the RTs doesn’t agree with potus? Well, by reading this quite interesting and revealing thread, I will disabuse myself of any such thought, and will be reconciled that the leftist RTs simply continues to practice dishonest liberal journalism.
Several points need to be made here, Dan.
First, I can tell that I am getting to you. To ask a commenter “what are you anyway, a true anonymous commenter on a blog” speaks to this. Last I checked, your blog only asks commenters for their first name and an email address. Would you rather I provide a brief bio so you can feel more comfortable about the commenter that is causing your head to spin and smoke to come from your ears? Sure. No problem, but you shouldn’t hold anonymity against commenters when your OWN blog is set up to provide…well…anonymity. Sheesh. I grew up in Roanoke, graduated from a Roanoke high school, and recently graduated from the Hollins Graduate Program. I enjoy knowing what is going on in my hometown, so I have read the Roanoke Times for years, which means, unfortunately, that I am quite familiar with your consistent partisan hackery.
Second point. Your statement about the 1 percent margin and the 3 percent margin of error in the NY Times/CBS poll is certainly correct. Though, you failed to understand the point I was making (I’m not surprised). The point was that now, one week after Obama’s visit to Roanoke, Romney now leads Obama nationally…FOR THE FIRST TIME. I am not doing cartwheels over this, I am simply pointing out the FACTS that seem to elude you on a consistent basis. My bringing up this most recent poll was in response to YOU claiming that Romney is “on the ropes.” YOU claimed Romney is on the ropes, and I showed you poll data (from your most admired liberal source) that proves otherwise. Ouch, I guess that one really stung. But you are welcome to continue flailing about in an attempt to save face.
Third Point. You claim to be a “true journalist.” Well, Dan, doesn’t TRUE journalism entail providing BOTH sides of a story and at least ACCURATELY reporting on events? Yes? Well then, could you please explain to me WHY, neither yourself NOR the Roanoke Times has made ONE mention about Obama’s statements in Roanoke, in which he told business owners that “they didn’t build that, somebody else made that happen.” Or, how about the fact that Obama called his healthcare plan a TAX on several occassions in his speech when both he and his administration have been railing against that moniker since the Supreme Court ruling? Or, just for fun, how about when Obama told those who need medical attention that they should get “help from paralegals.” Now that last point is just for giggles, but the first two points deserve serious reporting and at least should have been mentioned in ANY reporting done by a TRUE JOURNALIST, right? Would you not agree then, that since both you and the Times have failed to mention ANY of these points that you both have failed in staying true to your profession? We all know that if this had been a Republican president making outlandish statements and idiotic gaffes here in Roanoke, you and the times would have gleefully written about them in abundance. Did the college/university you attended not teach you that a TRUE journalist reports BOTH sides of the issue, and EVERYTHING that was said by the person you report on?? No?? Well I guess that would be your ONLY excuse. But don’t pretend that you are a true journalist, when large portions of the Roanoke citizenry heard the presidents comments, and large portions of the Roanoke citizenry has seen your failure to report them. Dan, don’t think for one minute that I don’t know that you intentionlly CHOSE not to report on the “other” aspects of Obama’s Roanoke speech. Doesn’t that bother you when you lay down to sleep at night? To know that you have fallen into the trap of being a partisan journalist, damaging your profession along the way?? Happy writing Dan, and sleep well.
“Third Point. You claim to be a “true journalist.” Well, Dan, doesn’t TRUE journalism entail providing BOTH sides of a story and at least ACCURATELY reporting on events? Yes? Well then, could you please explain to me WHY, neither yourself NOR the Roanoke Times has made ONE mention about Obama’s statements in Roanoke, in which he told business owners that “they didn’t build that, somebody else made that happen.”
mark,
Congrats on your graduate degree from Hollins. I’m sure you feel very proud.
My whole column Sunday, all 30 inches, is about Obama’s remarks in Roanoke, and why he was correct, and why the city Market Area was a perfect place (but not the only place in Roanoke) to make them and the sleazy hullaballo over them spun by the right wing.
Btw, I wrote it Thursday, before you made the suggestion. So don’t bother taking credit for it. And it’s chock full of facts, and examples, and numbers, and places, and history — the kind of stuff certain fools don’t have time for.
This link has several good points but this one is gold:
“…the very rich had a bad 2009, but an incredible 2010. Their share of national income bounced back to 19.77 percent. So inequality is marching upward once again. And there’s reason to believe this will keep going.
It sure seems awfully silly that Joe the Plumber was so concerned over Obama’s talk of “moving the wealth around.” The wealth is clearly moving in the precise direction Joe the Plumber wanted. (Which is, specifically, “away from actual plumbers.”)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/20/mitt-romney-barack-obama_n_1690835.html?utm_hp_ref=politics
It also speaks to an interesting irony:
“…(Once again, Obama’s ahead in the Fox News poll and behind in the New York Times poll, making everyone question their tribal politics.)“
Wow, who peed on matt’s cornflakes?
matt, seriously, if “partisan journalist, damaging your profession” is a valid accusation, what the hell do you even say of FOX or The WSJ? And FGS don’t tell Suzie, she actually believes FlimFlambaugh is a journalist. “The greatest” in fact.
You are confusing journalist with reporter IMO and that is a darn shame for a Hollins graduate. I am embarrassed for you. Having or trying to portray a “lack of bias” is a lot of things, but it is by no means the distinction of a journalist. Is George Will a journalist? Is Charles Krauthammer? Pat Buchanan? Was William F. Buckley? Dude, you are just seriously lame!
Sandi, as you know but many apparently don’t, the term “journalist” is a catch-all. It describes people who write, edit, photograph or do graphics arts for periodicals (some of them write non-fiction books, although they may not have the academic credentials to be called an economist or a historian).
Under the umbrella of “journalist,” there are many different hats: reporter, opinion columnist, photographer, story editor, line editor, copy editor, graphics artist and so on. There are similar, though not necessarily identical standards for each.
For example, reporters are supposed to keep their personal opinions out of their stories, and balance them. But that doesn’t mean reporters have to take it to the extreme and include obvious lies as so-called “balance.” A reporter writing that person A said 2+2=4 is under no obligation to go out and find some nut who says 2+2=5, then include that as “balance.”
Similarly, it’s silly to charge that an opinion columnist’s work “lacks balance.” That’s like criticizing rain for being wet. The charge does little but betray the critic’s lack of knowledge and understanding.
Graduate-degree holders like matt who haven’t bothered to acquaint themselves with the subsets of “journalist” often get them confused, and apply standards for one that don’t necessarily belong to another.
*Note: In the original version of this comment, I inadvertently referred to the poster “matt” as “mark.”
MY BAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dan:
68.”Yeah, but if Jesus ran, would he release his tax returns?”
Of course not. He wouldn’t want folks to know that he didn’t pay capital gains tax on all those loaves and fishes above the original 5 and 2, respectively.
Dan, it seems that not only do you have a problem reporting facts and staying true to your profession, but you also have a reading comprehension problem. My name is Matt (as has been posted countless times on this thread), but, as with most of your reporting, I am sure the “mark” comment was just a “factual error.” Man, it’s almost like you are intentionally setting yourself up…it’s great!
And hey, wonderful news that you and the Times have decided to actually report the FACTS from Obama’s Roanoke speech. You said you decided to do this on Thursday, just SEVEN days after Obama’s visit, AFTER many articles have already been written by the Times with NO mention of what you supposedly will be discussing??? LOL. Well, GOOD FOR YOU, DAN! What a great journalist you are. It only took SEVEN days for you to have the gumption to accurately report the FACTS. Great job, man. I guess I’ll start doing those cartwheels now. Unfortunately, I fear that most of us objective readers will find your words will ring so very hollow, since we all will be able to tell that this is just a mea culpa, in a way, since you have to save face and give the appearence of “objectivity.”
As for your “fools” comment…The true fools out there are the kind of people that will actually buy the BS you put forth week in and week out. And I’m sure your column this Sunday will be “chock full” of all kinds of sleazy hullabulo, factual inconsistencies, and partisan spin we have come to expect from you. Can’t wait! Keep up the great work, Dan. You do journalistic integrity proud.
Oh, and yes, as for being a Hollins grad, I AM quite proud, thanks. But how about you, Dan? When you look in the mirror, are YOU proud? Proud of being a part of the “journalistic generation” that has taken a once-proud profession to new lows?
Jesus said render unto Caesar the things that are Caesars and unto God the things that are Gods.
First, I have to laugh at Dan’s responses to Matt. Obviously Matt has touched a nerve.
As a second point, I would like to post an alternative view to the earlier RT’s push to explain President Obama’s “If you have a business, you didn’t built that remarks”.
The RTs tried to rationalize that by saying the Presided obviously meant that the business did not build the roads or businesses that allow traffic to flow to them.
Well that is a wonderfully flawed argument, the argument ignores the fact that the businesses and individual tax payers fund such infrastructure. Resources are available to every American and even immigrants. There are too many success stories of those starting with nothing or negative circumstances and those handed the world that end up with nothing.
To continue, the most offensive omission is that of the individual, their drive, intelligence and hard work as the X-factor in success.Mr. Obama said there are many hard workers out there, there are many smart people out there. It couldn’t possibly be due to the work ethic or intelligence that an entrepreneur succeeds. No way!!
True, each business has roads, bridges, loans, teachers, family, etc that influence their life. These play a huge role in life. However, the President fails to mention that these are available to each and every citizen, every entrepreneur is afforded the same opportunities in America, each restaurant owner is granted the same access to resources. Yet, many and most small businesses fail. Why is that? Is it because one had better bridges or roads? Is it because one had better loans or wealthy parents?
What the President ignores is the variable in the equation. The variable is the individual, and that is dependent on the intelligence, the work ethic, the appetite for risk and sometimes a little luck. There is no perfect formula for success, that is where risk and reward comes into play. Obama does not understand this concept.
Be sure that everyone has help along the way, whether it is a millionaire or a junkie, but the ultimate determinate factor is the individual. Not the government.
So when I see a successful business, a shop or restaurant I like to frequent, I don’t say jeez this road is awesome, I will come back and spend more money. There are places I go that are hell to get to and have horrible roads, but the business is unique and provides a desired good or service.
Did the owner build it or did someone else?
I vote the owner.
matt is quickly turning into the gift that keeps on giving. In all honesty, “most of us objective readers” does not include you matt. It just doesn’t.
Dan, I sure hope your column on Sunday will tell your readers why you and your bosses decided to wait 9 days to reflect on the several facts which were voiced by our potus last Friday in Roanoke, yet were ignored by you and your paper….particularly regarding small business. No doubt the city market area is going to get kudos for improving downtown living in all its glory, as it should…and most of us already know that the city coffers, along with tax credits of various sorts, have been employed in order to incentivize private investors and businesses to accomplish what might otherwise not have been possible. Then there is the for-the-most-part privately funded art museum…which I don’t imagine is generating any meaningful tax revenue for the city, yet. Maybe your data will show that the city market building is doing what the planners said it would, and the businesses are all thriving. All in all, I think the downtown area of Roanoke appears to be heading in the right direction.
You might also include in your story a blurb on the business-savy wisdom surrounding the city’s decision to take the private property of a successful carpet business on Reserve Avenue. That was a real humdinger example of how the city works with some businesses. I do have hope that the revitalized city market area might attract new businesses to our area, but I also have some reservations about how the city rather ham-handedly took the successful Surfaces business property on Reserve Avenue, and how the appearance of that “ham-handedness” might appear to potential new businesses. Hows the development going on that site, btw?
“Every entrepreneur is afforded the same opportunities in America.”
BM, it’s a nice, romantic line. But, ROFLMAO, it’s so laughingly untrue that it almost doesn’t even deserve comment.
George W. Bush, before his entry into politics, is just one of many examples. He was a business failure coddled by his Big Daddy’s pals. They set him up and bailed him out over and over again.
Or how about this local example? The developers of a mixed commercial/residential project persuaded Roanoke County to give them 20 years of tax rebates for the whole thing. Roanoke County has NEVER BEFORE offered tax rebates for residential development. No other residential developer gets them.
You’re fooling yourself with your lofty, romantic notions, BM. It ain’t reality.
Oh, I get it now! Thanks Sandi, and thanks Dan for making the distinction between journalist and reporter (more grasping at straws). I mean, I had absolutely no idea. I was under the notion that to be a writer, reporter, journalist, basically anyone who disseminates non-fiction information to the public, that one would be bound by some form of integrity and honesty. I see now that I was wrong. After reading both of your posts, I see that the difference is that a reporter is bound to keep things factual while keeping opinions out of their reporting. But, an opinion columnist such as Dan Casey is allowed to get away with merely vomiting out their opinions with no regard for honesty, integrity, accuracy, or fairness. So, it’s simply not fair to ask someone like Dan Casey to adhere to any of these values. An opinion columnist of the Dan Casey ilk does NOT have to be fair, honest, OR objective, as he essentially makes clear in his last post. Gotcha, thanks for clearing all of that up Dan, and for admitting what we all already knew about you.
And Sandi, please save your embarrassment for yourself. After reading your comments, full of childish insults and pathetic name-calling, it is clear that you are not even capable of arguing/debating in an adult manner. You need to work on that, it’s embarrassing…and lame.
Oh Big Momma, you rolled in and wallowed as usual, the President quite clearly acknowledged just what you say he should have!
“…look, if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own. You didn’t get there on your own. I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something — there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there. (Applause.)
If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.
The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don’t do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires.
So we say to ourselves, ever since the founding of this country, you know what, there are some things we do better together. That’s how we funded the GI Bill. That’s how we created the middle class. That’s how we built the Golden Gate Bridge or the Hoover Dam. That’s how we invented the Internet. That’s how we sent a man to the moon. We rise or fall together as one nation and as one people, and that’s the reason I’m running for President — because I still believe in that idea. You’re not on your own, we’re in this together.”
It is ludicrous to make his remarks more than what he said and equally crazy to pretend that there is a “self-made business”. We are all well aware of the workers and businesses that pay taxes. That we all POOL those resources and put them where they are needed is precisely Obama’s point. Few businesses can afford to build a bridge for their trucks to travel over, no matter how badly they need that route. The schools that we ALL pay for educate the workers (and customers). The roads, landfills, sewer treatment plants, libraries, parks, police, fire fighters, hospitals we build add to the quality of life in any area and attract business. The employees who help produce the product or deliver the service a business profits from (some wildly) are the fuel for personal success AND taxes. That is simply a fact. Whether you can admit that or not. I am truly not sure how anyone thinks we can have all that and maintain a decent society to live in without paying taxes.
Yes, we pay the bills with work and commerce but it is the Constitution and our determination to have a great nation that makes us the society still envied all over the world. People will make money with low taxes sure, but we will never maintain our nation with them this low, that is why we have been borrowing for so long. Even Saint Reagan added to the problem and yet Obama is being blamed for not fixing it all.
“But, an opinion columnist such as Dan Casey is allowed to get away with merely vomiting out their opinions with no regard for honesty, integrity, accuracy, or fairness. So, it’s simply not fair to ask someone like Dan Casey to adhere to any of these values.”
“After reading your comments, full of childish insults and pathetic name-calling, it is clear that you are not even capable of arguing/debating in an adult manner.”
The two quotes above came from the same post by matt. You can’t make this stuff up!
Big Momma, I think you hit the nail on the head. Well done!
Libs can’t seem to recognize individual accomplishment, good or bad. Same holds true for accountability. They can’t seem to recognize that individuals are accountable for their actions, good or bad….as evidenced by those sorry, fake, dishonest journalists at ABC for attempting to tie that INDIVIDUAL evil murderer in Colorado to the Tea Party. It seems to me that the only time lib media willingly recognize individualism is when they try to blame Bush for something.
Very nicely written post on your part.
Frank Peck, the misspeak not withstanding, Obama has said the same thing since 2008. That the right wing pounced on his gaffe while denying and defending every one of Romney’s is a lot more telling than any “over sight” you believe the Roanoke Times committed.
Oh, and just for fun, this is for you Sandi and Dan. This is from Dan’s comment in post #93: “And Btw, that is what any true journalist would tell you.” LOL!!!–This is Dan, making it clear, after providing some drivel, that he acted in the manner of “any true journalist.” So, stupid me for confusing him with a…wait for it…journalist!! You guys are great. You deviate and change stories from one post to the next as long as it serves your argument(which is typical).
And you stay classy, Sandi.
Sandi, it’s not difficult to be objective about the fact that Dan and the RTs have failed to make any mention of our potus’ small business comments from last Friday. You know, it’s not like he said those things up in Wasilla, AL….he said them right in Dan’s home town, and likely Dan was well within hearing distance….kinda might make Dan a primary source, no? So,in the interest of being objective, lets call Dan’s reporting, and the RTs’ decision-making, “one-sided journalism.” Clearly, that’s what it is.
“Oh, I get it now! Thanks Sandi, and thanks Dan for making the distinction between journalist and reporter. . .”
matt, please pay careful attention here. It’s silly to talk about “the distinction between a journalist and a reporter.” Probably you meant, “the distinction between a reporter and an opinion columnist.” That’s OK, though. We all make mistakes. You are forgiven.
Now here’s a little lesson to help you keep these complicated concepts straight.
A reporter IS a journalist, absolutely. But a journalist is not necessarily a reporter.
Let me put it to you in terms of cars, to make it easier to grasp:
A Mustang is a Ford. But a Ford is not necessarily a Mustang. Capiche?
By the way, a Thunderbird is a Ford, too. But a Thunderbird is definitely NOT a Mustang. And on top of that, a Mustang is definitely NOT a Thunderbird, either.
It’s the same thing with reporters and columnists. We’re both journalists, but reporter doesn’t = columnist and columnist doesn’t = reporter.
No matter how badly, for the sake of your crummy argument, you want them to.
“This is from Dan’s comment in post #93: “And Btw, that is what any true journalist would tell you.” LOL!!!–This is Dan, making it clear, after providing some drivel, that he acted in the manner of “any true journalist.” So, stupid me for confusing him with a…wait for it…journalist!! You guys are great. You deviate and change stories from one post to the next as long as it serves your argument(which is typical).”
Unreal. The guy still doesn’t get it, after I laid out the simplest explanation possible.
Hey matt,
I think I already know the answer, but I’ve just gotta ask: Your degree wasn’t in journalism, was it?
Please answer no and make me feel better.
Dan, I think we both know you are again grasping at straws in post 113. Even for you, that was just weak and disappointing. I expect better, even from someone like you. I don’t blame you though, you have to attempt to save face at some point. Keep tryin, buddy.
Oh, and I notice several new posts from a couple different commentors above that have excellent points contained in them, along with several questions. But, you continue to ignore them. Maybe they will go away, after all, you are just an opinion columnist, you get to pick and choose when to be objective and when not to be…
Right, Dan. I get it. Bottom line, being just an opinion columnist, YOU don’t have to be objective. Point made. YOU don’t have to be fair. Point made. YOU don’t have to be honest. Point made. YOU don’t have tell both sides of the story. Point made. YOU are allowed to use all the spin you want, regardless of the facts. Point made. So basically, every single one of your columns should come with the heading: “Some truth contained within, some falsehoods contained within. We do not differentiate between the two. Read and digest at your own intellectual peril.” Gotcha! Thanks, Dan. This has been fun. I hope your head has stopped spinning so you can get some sleep. You have a big column, a whopping 30 inches of tripe to provide us with on Sunday. Happy writing.
matt, who seems so insanely jealous of someone else locally drawing a paycheck for writing, are you the poster who has used mattyr as a handle before? Could you be Matt Prickett, Hollins ’10, MFA in children’s lit, who’s published on such topics as gay sexuality and the “colonization of children”?
Oh, and whoever you are, are you happy about our “conservative” governor giving $5 million of taxpayer money to billionaire Dan Snyder?
Frank Peck, big momma, or matt: tell us what you know about how private companies initially developed the internet. Or if you’d rather, explain how Bain Capital does business without it.
All Trans Ams are Firebirds, but not all Fireburds are Trans Ams.
Jimmy fallon pretty well summed up the Romney attitude tonight with this gem “I see the tea party patriots just announced a new bus tour in support of mitt Romney. The..Romney campaign responded by asking.— what’s a bus?
For Matt to chastise anyone for being a rigid ideologue, a pseudo intellectual, or for engaging in name calling and insults is one of the most hypocriticalccomments ever on this blog .
Warren, as I think Dan has gone to bed, I am off to sleep as well. I’ll provide a more in-depth comment on your questions tomorrow. But, I’ll respond quickly to a few of your questions.
1) I have never posted to any of Dan Casey’s blogs before, so I am not the mattyr you are referring to.
2) No I was not a 2010 Hollins Grad and I did not earn a degree in Children’s Lit.
3) What do you mean “private companies developed the internet.” We ALL know that Al Gore invented the internet. Duh!
4) Hey Dave, how do you square a bus tour funded by willing political contributors compared to a president riding around the country campaigning in a bus funded by and paid for by taxpayers in the worst economy since the Great Depression? (Crickets chirping) But, I guess that’s why Jimmy Fallon is…well…Jimmy Fallon. Wait, who is Jimmy Fallon?
can’t spell firebirds correctly twice in the same sentence, eh contra..watch out your libbie friends will jump all over you for that !
” that is why we have been borrowing for so long. Even Saint Reagan added to the problem and yet Obama is being blamed for not fixing it all. Comment by Sandi Saunders — July 20, 2012 @ 11:55 pm”
wrong AGAIN. sad that you STILL dont understand…sad…IT’S HIS FREAKING POLICIES STUPID !! They will NEVER work,they have NEVER worked in the past and will NEVER work in the future. That is why we have to put a restraining order on his dumbass this fall.
“If this is going to be a Christian nation that doesn’t help the poor, either we have to pretend that Jesus was just as selfish as we are, or we’ve got to acknowledge that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy without condition and then admit that we just don’t want to do it.” — Steven Colbert
Hate to tell you, Say What, but Steven Colbert is a FICTIONAL CHARACTER. It’s like quoting Archie Andrews.
He wants to raise taxes on the poor and cut them on the rich.
Why not? The poor don’t pay one red cent in federal income taxes right now. The rich pay nearly all of it. Why wouldn’t you relieve the burden on the ones who shoulder almost all of it?
All Trans Ams are Firebirds, but not all Fireburds are Trans Ams.
Oh, boy. More POS Car Talk.
Please, one of the dimwits in here chanting the Nutball meme “Obama gets gazillions of votes just for being black” why A) it’s taken us so long to have a black president, since being black clearly confers UNFAIR ADVANTAGE and B) why, if being black alone gets you elected, why the senate house and governors mansions in is country aren’t just crammed with blacks?
Really, one of you, please enlighten me.
And Obama will win because we have no alternative. He’s not perfect, and he’s too moderate and accommodating for my taste, but Rmoney in the WH is unthinkable.
SuzieQ, based on your comments, I have to wonder which word you don’t understand…”fictional” or “character”. Because Colbert is neither.
http://suite101.com/article/stephen-colbert-satirist-comedian-prophetic-christian-voice-a383109
He is a devout Catholic.
Since I know Suzie won’t read the entire article I linked to, about Stephen Colbert,if she reads any of it at all, I’ll post this last paragraph.
“I love my Church, and I’m a Catholic who was raised by intellectuals, who were very devout. I was raised to believe that you could question the Church and still be a Catholic. What is worthy of satire is the misuse of religion for destructive or political gains. That’s totally different from the Word, the blood, the body and the Christ. His kingdom is not of this earth.”– Stephen Colbert, in an interview from the magazine Time Out New York.
If Stephen Colbert is a fictional character, then Rush Limbaugh is Jaba the Hut
pamadoodle @130 imitates most ill-informed in language skills – or
lack thereof. As I’ve said before, gratuitous mindless insults… How very adult of you.
“If your brains were dynamite there wouldn’t be enough to blow your hat off.” ― Kurt Vonnegut, T
Good grief, matt. As much as you whine about fairness, are you sure you’re not a liberal? Are you going to start demanding a participation trophy for commenting on Dan’s blog? Grow up. This isn’t a playground and mommy isn’t going to swoop in and make everyone play nice with you, especially when you’re being a punk to anyone who doesn’t want to play your game.
Dan irritates me with something he says here at least once a week. He has an arrogance and unwillingness to acknowledge valid counterpoints that’s infuriating at times. That’s part of what makes him a good columnist, though.
Bottom line: This is his BBQ; if it doesn’t taste good to you, you’re welcome to hit the bricks and we bid you godspeed.
shrillary, it figures you would concentrate on my ‘skills’ and not the point of the comment, that just shows what a lame brain you are dear.
if bammy gets gazillions of votes for being black then all of them simple minded racists.
“All Trans Ams are Firebirds, but not all Fireburds are Trans Ams.
Comment by Contrasuzie — July 21, 2012 @ 1:09 am”
shrillary, you’re such a grammar policething so why didnt you jump all over this one too,..is it because you are truly a low life libbie com that is showing its intolerance?
For once pammala got it right, although her chastising anyone on spelling had me laughing so hard I almost missed it.
You are correct that it was Reagan’s “FREAKING POLICIES STUPID !!” “They will NEVER work,they have NEVER worked in the past and will NEVER work in the future“. Like I said, that is why we continued to borrow, grow the government and ended up failing so miserably. Choosing “Rmoney” will ensure they go on. That the truly stupid people are choosing to blame that on Barack Obama is just what the intellectuals call “scapegoating” and obviously for the dumbmasses it is working. Beyond Sad.
A “restraining order” is doubtless something you are familiar with.
I am truly starting to feel sorry for the classless twit calling himself matt. If indeed you have a graduate degree and remain that stupid, it is truly frightening and sure sways my opinion on Hollins. Do them a favor and don’t go around repeating that is where you got that seriously lacking education. I only have a high school and hard knocks diploma and I have wiped the floor with the butt you chose to show.
We see that you have no grasp on journalism and not much of one on politics or blogging. How about accepting a clue? When it is the host’s blog, home, car or pool, they have the unique position of calling the shots? Ever heard of that concept? Do you also go into someone’s home and insult and demand answers from them? What a fun guest you must be.
Dan Casey is literally an award winning journalist who has done some fantastic columns of real human stories and even affected Virginia legislation. His blog is THE most popular on Roanoke.com, it is a separate entity from his columns and most of what is done here is for hits and giggles. That you want to hold him to some imaginary standard that your silence and ignorance says you do not hold to others, is just quite immature, ridiculous, and if you had any sense, embarrassing.
Participation here is voluntary and getting insulted is part and parcel of putting your opinions out there. I think the concept is covered under “free speech”.
Put on some big boy pants and own your dysfunction, especially since you are not trying to hide it. Go on a right wing blog if you want affirmation and butt kissing for your “brilliance”. They are experts.
JM White, did you really say that part of what makes Dan Casey such a good “columnist” is his willingness to dismiss valid points and his arrogance??? Really??? That’s what it takes? Statements like that are just mind blowing. Better be careful Dan, sounds like you and Rush Limbaugh were made for each other…
Oh and JM, your childish insults continue to reflect well upon you. As they always say, if one can’t actually debate on an intellectual level, then insults will be all such a person has left. You stay classy.
Suzie:
“Oh, boy. More POS Car Talk.”
I know you hate enthusiasm for cars, but what makes them a POS? What do you drive. I’d like to know what’s good enough to haul you to and from those Planned Parenthood protests.
pammala:
143.“All Trans Ams are Firebirds, but not all Fireburds are Trans Ams.
Comment by Contrasuzie — July 21, 2012 @ 1:09 am”
shrillary, you’re such a grammar policething so why didnt you jump all over this one too…”
The only error in the sentence is substituting a “u” for an “i”. Since they are next to one another on the keyboard, it is obviously a typo rather than bad grammar unlike “…you’re such a grammar policething so why didnt you jump all over this one too…” which is a grammatical train wreck.
I knew Screwzie would have to comment on my Firebird post. Too damn easy to pluck her strings anymore.
pammalapdog, Shrillary didn’t correct my typo because a) it’s a typo, which is not the same as your illiteracy and b) she likes me but she doesn’t like you.
Neener! Neener! Boo! Boo!
#143 pamadoodle, to answer your question:
because unlike your myriad of posts, Contra’s makes a point – and uses no derisive name calling! Here’s some of your tedious pejoratives:
lame brain
stupid
dumbass
And those were just from three consecutive posts…maybe you and most ill-informed could expand your vocabulary by reading actual books…now run along “dear” and let the adults on this thread “converse”.
Sandi, with some people you can explain it TO them, but you can’t understand it FOR them.
Sandi, I’ll address your comment in just a moment. But first…
Dan, I notice that, from post 120 to post 151, the only comment you bothered to post was your last one-liner at post 151 that pertained to… me. I have to say, I’m touched. That makes my day.
Also, I saw your post about the unexpected trip you had to make this weekend to Maryland. I hope everything works out, and all is well for both you and your mother.
Sandi, ya know, you are someone that is usally not worth responding to. I can at least respect someone like Dan, who seemingly remains calm and even a bit sane while taking others’ best shot, and then returning fire. Dan gives as good as he gets, but he is able to keep any true hint of anger or lack of control under wraps (even when his head is obviously spinning). You, on the other hand, debase an argument/debate so very quickly that it is readily apparent that no true intellectualism exists in you. This might have to do with your high school education, and probably goes a long way in explaining your lack of any real substantive quality in your posts. I wouldn’t go around touting that and then showing up to post such drivel that it reminds one of the writings of an angry teenage girl. It merely perpetuates your own stink. But hey, in Dan’s words to me regarding my own education, “I’m sure you are very proud.” It is quite obvious that you are unable to stay focused and carry out a rational and coherent point without flailing yourself off the deep- end with ugly insults and embarrassing vitriol.
Sandi, let me show you some examples of your childish and angry manner. In your last post, post #145, you used several words and phrases. Here is a brief sampling: “Classless twit, stupid, wiped the floor with the butt you chose to show, (and these two are my favorite) immature and ridiculous.” There are many examples of this from you throughout this thread, but again, this is just from your last post. Now, YOU tell ME, what do those words sound like to you? To me (and probably to everyone) they sound like a deranged child.
Sandi, in several of your angry and indignant posts, you felt the need to call Hollins Unversity into question. You see, this is why intelligent people usually don’t post personal information on blogs and such; because pseudo-intellectuals such as yourself will use it as some sort of fake fodder later on in the discussion. It’s a tactic people like YOU use when you can’t use your brain to intellectually debate points or show any kind of analytical thinking. The funny thing is, it was both you AND Dan who called into question my commenting on this blog while attaining anonymity (even though the blog is set up for one to be anonymous, and Dan’s Home Page say “All RANTS AND RAVES WELCOME…” But, I was willing to divulge a little personal information. So I did, and then there you were, insulting the school I graduated from. I KNEW that would happen, I just wasn’t sure which poster would stoop low enough to knee-jerk themselves into doing so. YOU did, Sandi. You must feel proud. I too, feel proud. I put myself through school the last six years in a row, earning an Associates Degree, a Bachelors Degree, and a Masters Degree. As your posts clearly show, you wouldn’t last a single week at Hollins. Angry and out-of-control persons of your ilk would certainly never be welcome in ANY University or College of higher learning, let alone a respected and esteemed University like Hollins. Those Grad Students and PhD professors would chew you up and be done with the likes of you very quickly. I thoroughly enjoyed my time there, earned straight A’s, and was considered by my professors and peers as one of the better, more informed students during my two years there. And Sandi, nearly EVERY one of my professors was a hardcore liberal. So, if my education is so severly lacking to someone like you (ironic), I guess you only have your own political ideology to blame. Either way, Dan has made it very clear throughout this thread that he is willing to debate with me. But YOU, Sandi? You just aren’t worth it…
Dan/Sandi, the bottom line, no matter how you slice and dice Dan’s actual title within his profession, his own bio shows that he is a journalist. That’s what it says, and that’s the only point I was trying to make. Dan referred to himself on this thread as a journalist. Regardless of what TYPE of journalist Dan is, he gets paid to offer his opinion to the public, and in doing so, Dan disseminates information to the public. In my opinion, someone who gets paid to provide the public with information should WANT to adhere to some form of ethical journalistic standard. That would include providing both sides of the facts and trying to at least form some sense of objectivity, even when giving an opinion. At least, that’s what I was taught by those silly liberal professors at Hollins. Since you both have established in this thread that Dan is not bound or held to any kind of journalistic standards, and he chooses to dismiss them because he is merely an opinion columnist, I guess there is only one clear choice left. Dan is a “journalist” in the ilk of Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck. You both have made it clear that Dan is essentially the Rush and Glenn of The Roanoke Times, just from the opposite end of the political spectrum. He gets paid to discuss what he wants, provide opinions on the select topics of his choice, and he is not required to and chooses not to provide any kind of balance or fairness to his columns. He paints things in a way that only one side’s story is told, and the other is relegated to obscurity with no voice (at least, in Dan’s articles). I was taught, well before Grad School, that resorting to such tactics is bad journalism, regardless of one’s political persuasion, “style” of journalism, or specific “title” within the profession of journalism. So now, going forward with my new knowledge in regards to the Dan Casey “style,” I look forward to future blog postings from The Roanoke Times’ very own Rush Limbaugh. Happy writing, guys.
If a T/A was good enough for the Bandit, it’s good enough for me!
Dan:
“Sandi, with some people you can explain it TO them, but you can’t understand it FOR them.”
+1 and +1 again.
matt
Calling what you post debating is a serious perversion of the meaning of the word. Where I went to school debating involved having actrual facts
to back up your opinions and statements. That didn’t mean taking the middle ten words or so out of somebody’s statement and attempting to use it to weave a web of lies and insinuations in an attempt to prove what you can’t back up with facts. All the mindless drivel and conservative talking points and spin you have deluged us with have been backed up by no facts whatsoever. Sandi in her own inimitable style, cuts through the bulls**t and tells it like it is. And after she finishes barbecuing you like a shish-ka-bob over a fire, she usually backs her statements up with real, verifiable statistics and facts, not something that she heard on Rush Limbaugh, or from Hannity and Faux “News”. For all your lengthy attempts to prove ypur superior intelligence and education, you come off just like another Texas pseudo political theorist—all hat and no catlle.
matt’s style—never say anything in 10 words when you can use 110 is very reminiscent of that of another confused blogger who finally seems to have gotten the message. Anybody remember SharonN?
152
I always enjoy when someone pushes the reset button and brings everything back in line to where they should be.
In this blog, the crazies tend to be the majority, and so you have a lot of truth perversion.
Matt said a lot of things that have needed to be said for a long time. Hopefully, they will have an effect. I doubt it, but you never know. But at least he got them out there.
I admire how “Matt” uses 2000 words to explain to Sandi that she’s not worth responding to. Yawn.
Matt,
There is no way you are a college graduate. Sorry, you fail. Your reasoning and pseudo intellectualism would not give you a passing grade in a 101 composition class at VWCC, not to mention Hollins. Don’t even get me started on your writing style; too emotive and short on substance. If you really did go to Hollins those girls would have been giving you wedgies and Indian Dutch rubs and stealing your lunch money on a daily basis. They would have walked you on a leash to class.
Matt, nobodies piling on you because of your degree; it’s the blatant ignorance you display while trying to play the education trump card and convince everybody how smart you are. You’re too much of a cluehound to go head to head with Sandi and you don’t even know it. We’re laughing AT you, Matt, not WITH you. Big dif, sport. Sandi eats blowhard’s like you for breakfast.
If you want to come on board and start braying about how smart you are and how good your degree is, by all means feel free to share. Just don’t be surprised when you get both barrels directed at you for coming across like a shallow ass-clown. Stop acting like you’re a breath of fresh air on Dan’s blog; there’s already a surplus tin foil hat wearing teabaggers who regularly chastise us for being such suckers for believing President Obama is an American citizen and that he’s going to be reelected in November. You’re not bringing us anything new here, junior, except for demonstrating your talent for wasting hugely impressive amounts of bandwidth. Seriously, do you think your childish jihad has changed anyones mind? If you want to impress us with your shiny new degree, how ‘bout shutting the hell up except for when you need to call upon your impressive powers of reasoning to determine if your customers need fries with their meal or not.
“Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.”
– Abraham Lincoln
dave on cramming 10 words into 110:
“Anybody remember SharonN?”
Yeah, thanks for reminding me…. words…words…words… filler…filler…filler… new opinion of gays….filler…filler…filler…. take a naps….. more words…. blah, blah, blah….. did you know my boyfriend is black…..filler, filler, filler….. redundant, redundant, redundant….. The last sentence sums it all up.
That Sharon N?
Thanks, Suzie. What you say is so true, the crazies are truly in the majority on this blog, but, considering the source of the blog, that is to be expected. I have enjoyed your posts throughout this thread.
And Steve C successfully defends hs title as insult champ of Casey’s Blog. We’ll get matt’s smoking carcass out of here before the stinch offends the neighbors.
Steve/Dave/Sandi…you guys really need some counseling. Such anger. I bet all three of you are one outburst away from a domestic violence or assault charge in your daily lives. Steve/Dave, you guys must have gone to the same high school as Sandi (since we know higher learning is out of the question). Chill out, let your heads stop spinning, and then try and post a rational and coherent rebuttal. If you can’t do that, it’s best to take your own advice and shut your mouth.
http://tinyurl.com/bvbjurx
**
22 July 2012 Last updated at 12:20 ET
Tax havens: Super-rich ‘hiding’ at least $21tn
A global super-rich elite had at least $21 trillion (£13tn) hidden in secret tax havens by the end of 2010, according to a major study.
The figure is equivalent to the size of the US and Japanese economies combined.
The Price of Offshore Revisited was written by James Henry, a former chief economist at the consultancy McKinsey, for by the Tax Justice Network.
Tax expert and UK government adviser John Whiting said he was sceptical that the amount hidden was so large.
SNIP
**
i read your column in today’s RTs, and found it to be a factual summary concerning the context you were looking for to “explain” the inflamatory “small business…” statement uttered by obama during his recent Roanoke visit. That said, I’m curious (actually, I’m not really surprised…) why you didn’t also extoll the virtues of our local government’s leadership in the government-driven urban renewal projects forced on Gainesboro…or at least give it mention somewhere in your column. Nor did you mention the City’s taking of a successful carpet business on Reserve Avenue known as Surfaces, for the Carilion Medical Complex…which of course you DID extoll the virtues of in your opining on the “facts” concerning obama’s comment. Your failure to mention the Gainseboro Urban Renewal projects, which include: The Conference Center at the Hotel Roanoke (you DID mention Hotel Roanoke in today’s column, but not in any context to The Conference Center…and nothing of course about Gainesboro…), the Roanoke Higher Education Center, Eight Jefferson Place, and the Dumas Center For the Artistic & Cultural Development…anywhere in your columnm speaks volumns about your chosing to present only “part” of the story. In fact, much was written about the government-driven Gainsboro renewal project by your colleague Mason Adams, and published in the RTs on Sunday, August 31, 2008. Since you know about that sad story, and since it didn’t meet the parameters of the “facts” you needed in order to fill many column inches explaining the context of obama’s remark, your omission must have been deliberate. Nowhere within those “many column inches” did you have any room for the tragedy foisted on many of Roanoke’s poorest and most disadvantaged, and some might say, most defenseless citizens….by their government’s efforts to promote business development.
I suppose many will say your story is factually correct, which I’ve already said I wouldn’t dispute. But it’s clear that there’s so much more to the story involving government involvement in “helping” business enterprise, and it ain’t pretty, and you wrote as if Gainsboro never happened. In other words,isn’t what you do really just like what Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, and El Rushbo, do? You simply spin your story and present facts which will support your opinion, just like they do, and you all ignore the rest of the story.
John Wilburn, I think you meant to use the word “stench” in the last sentence of your last post. But, we all make mistakes. You keep trying, buddy. And everyone enjoy Frank’s post as it directly speaks to the point I have been making throughout this thread. Great post. Happy reading, and happy spinning.
“Let them eat cake”
So Frank’s saying….Dans piece was “factually correct”, but because he didnt include a bunch of crap from 4 years ago that was already reported, he’s manipulating the story. OK.
#163 (door)Matt,
Anger? Do I seem angry to you? Bless your ignorant little teabagger heart, (door)Matt, I humiliate ignoramuses like you for sport. Honestly, I find it extremely relaxing to pull the wings off helpless flies. By all means keep it up so I can carpet bomb you back to the Stone Age.
I’m not exactly sure what your problem is but it very well might be rooted in your parents not giving you enough attention when you were a kid, triggering your latent need to jump up and down while waving your freak flag by neck puking 20 sum odd posts trying to express what Frank did in one. Either that or maybe you got your cycle synchronized with your classmates at Hollins and we’re lucky enough to witness the blessed event in all its hormonal insecurity this weekend. Whatever the case your excessive attention whoring is making a very compelling case for brevity, a lesson most college graduates learn in their entry level composition class. Hint; if you missed this at Hollins, VWCC offers this essential critical thinking class during the fall semester. I can send a link if needed. Let me know.
You’re getting a buy tonight, kid; unlike you I got a job I have to be at at 8:00 am and I’m still a little hangover from last night and I really, really need my beauty sleep. Take this opportunity and run like a Hollins graduate (girl) back to your Mom’s basement and your sweet nintendo system before I really give something to bitch about.
If anybody sees (door)Matt running down the street please stop him and get my shoe out of his ass for me.
Steve, to answer your question, “Do I seem angry to you?” I would have to say that my answer is an unequivocal “yes.” You are obviously a very, very angry person. And, judging from your implied threats and rabid, hate-filled insults from your post at #169, I’d say you are potentially dangerous. A walking, ticking timebomb; or that could just be all the alcohol talking. Who knows. But a rant such as yours deserves no real reply (or respect).
Oh, and MOST of us have to be a work tomorrow at 8am. But most of us just do it without whining…
Steve C is not an angry person. He used to be disgusted. Now he’s just amused.
His aim is true.
Alison!
Steve C:
“If anybody sees (door)Matt running down the street please stop him and get my shoe out of his ass for me.”
Sorry, between that and him being “carpet bombed back into the Stone Age,” I’m laughing too hard! LOL!
matt@163
Just for information and to calm your inflated ego and high opinion of your academic status , I’ll be happy to match my degrees and academic credentials with yours any time you wish, not to mention your poor debating skills. You commented earlier about some excellent liberal professors at Hollins College. I’m sure there are some, and I even knbow a few of them. The tragedy is you claim to have a graduate degree from there but seem not to have learned anything from those distinguished and worthy academics. You still seem inflicted with the same set of preconceived ideas with which you were apparently endoctrinated before you had the opportunity to actually learn something. What a terible waste
of time you have suffered without gaining any benefit from it except a piece of paper to hang on your wall.
Dave, I normally never go here…but dude, you probably didn’t even graduate high school…not with spelling like yours. It’s bad, bro. You need to work on that to be taken seriously when insulting others about a lack of intellect…but then again, that would go right along with typical Democrat hypocrisy. Makes sense.
Oh, and the kind of comments that come from Steve C and John Wilburn are usually the result of being born with tiny genitalia. This means they have grown up feeling insufficient and lacking, probably have terrible lives, have been made fun of by those they are intimate with, and this results in childish and angry outbursts on blogs and such.
“I’ll be happy to match my degrees and academic credentials with yours…”
“…apparently endoctrinated before you had the opportunity to actually learn something. What a terible waste…”
It’s a “terible” shame that nobody “endoctrinated” Dave in Spelling while he was earning his degrees. Oh, the E and I are close together on his keyboard? Sure.
#161 Funny thing how matt gets all high and mighty about anger and insults and one-sided posts … and then congratulates the angry, insult turd queen of the blog for her posts.
holy cow. some of you folks are just downright mean. i’ve noticed that only very occaisionally has any of the “you folks” actually dealt with matt’s initial questions and comments. that’s typical of closed minded people.
in another thread, dan’s still focused on my underwear. that’s pretty silly, and i think we all know it’s childish.
matt, I don’t know enough about tiny genetalia or intimacy complaints to answer you. Sorry. I’m not angry, either; I’m laughing at you. Dude, you’re 0 for 3 on that one.
matt and Mark, Dave has stated more then once, that he has severe arthritis in his fingers which causes typing errors sometimes. Whether he has misspelled words or not, you get the gist of his message. Get over yourselves.
Who here understands that Ad Hominem attacks/fallacy (particularly Abusive Ad Hominem attacks) in a debate are a sigh of weakness — either 1) signs of weakness in one’s own arguments / positions / propositions about the topic of the debate or 2) signs of weakness in one’s debating skill?
The whole point of logic, in debate, is to develop techniques for evaluating the cogency of arguments independently of the arguer’s identity, or other irrelevant personal circumstance surrounding your opposition.
Keep in mind is the distinction between argumentation and testimony. Credentials, personal creditability, ethical lapses, etc do have a bearing on testimony and can lower or raise the evidentiary value of an endorsement. In contrast, they do not affect the evidentiary value of the argument, itself — for arguments can and do stand or fall on their own merits, not on who is espousing them.
It’s a “terible” shame that nobody “endoctrinated” Dave in Spelling while he was earning his degrees. Oh, the E and I are close together on his keyboard? Sure.
Hilarious, Mark. Dave needs to throw two ‘nickles’ into the pot. In case you missed it, Mark, we’re collecting five cents for each spelling mistake by the left in here and donating it to the Literacy Fund for Liberal Bloggers. We chose that amount because of Kristen’s infamous spelling gaffe of “nickel” made also while touting her education credentials.
Too funny
Re: my last
The charge of unfair “ad hominem” directed toward “personal” attacks on the actual candidates is often raised during political campaigns. However, if the attacks are based on facts, it is seldom logically warranted when talking about the actual candidate, himself or herself.
IMHO, we vote for, elect, and are governed by politicians, not party platforms. In fact, historically, political platforms are primarily symbolic and seldom actually enacted.
So, personal criticisms are logically relevant in deciding who to vote for. The actual candidate’s actual qualifications, credentials, personal creditability, ethical lapses, etc do have a bearing on our trust and support, IMHO.
In my last I was addressing the Ad Hominem attacks/fallacy (particularly Abusive Ad Hominem attacks) non-candidates debating positions at issue — not addressing those seeking our trust to govern us.
However, name-calling, racial, unsubstantiated claims fail, IMHO. Documented qualifications, credentials, personal creditability, ethical lapses, etc issues are one thing. Lies are another.
#161 Funny thing how matt gets all high and mighty about anger and insults and one-sided posts … and then congratulates the angry, insult turd queen of the blog for her posts.
If you notice, Matt, the leftwinger in here get all snitty if you give them their own medicine. Conservatives aren’t supposed to be allowed to fight back.
I am not clear in what realm it takes a college education to recognize a waste of skin, but out here in the real world, the people like matt do not stand a chance and it has been proven in this one thread. Whine and retort all you like; YOU made your bed: YOU told the simplistic lies, YOU dragged Hollins into this (and embarrassed them), and YOU gave as many insults as you received. Typical right wing dingbat.
A college degree is a piece of paper. It is only worthwhile if you got an education. And with matt, the jury is not convinced to this point.
Keen intellect, common sense, decency and the capacity for grasping and telling the truth are all apparent, with or without a degree. I admit my lack of formal education because so many people believe me to have some. I used to believe that was a compliment, until I met one too many matt and Suzie “educated” types. Yes, being called out and bested by me is sad…for you.
I repeat, you have not seen me angry. I was playing with you like a cat does a mouse. This is pure fun for me and I do thank you and Suzie for playing.
@171 Dan, yay for the Elvis Costello quote!!!!!
Frank, yes the wit around here takes many tangents. You folks may speak the way matt and other TP/GOPers did originally on your right wing hate blogs, but such antics will ALWAYS be met with the same as you have received here. Do you believe we are treated one iota more respectfully in sites from “your” perspective?
No doubt matt thought he was being witty and repeating right wing parrot points none of us have ever heard or refuted. You all think you have re-invented the wheel when you roll in here full of lies and vinegar you pulled off the “inner webs” challenging the God-less liberals and the almighty Casey. And you go down time and time again, for a reason.
Dave Hicks, maybe folks will better understand the fallacies you so frequently want to instruct them on if you gave examples from when you’ve made them.
And Suzie lies again, trying to CYA as usual. What a broken record…you forgot to mention your own use of “nickle” long before Kristen’s… Too funny, indeed.
“Can I say something? If your daughter has piercings anywhere other than in her earlobes, you as a parent have lost control.
Something I see in teen boys that is not only disturbing but a little grotesque –ear gauges. These are holes in the ear lobe the size of a nickle or quarter that holds a hollow or solid ear piece. If I had a boy like that, I’d get counseling for him pronto.
Comment by Suzie — April 25, 2011 @ 8:44 pm”
http://blogs.roanoke.com/dancasey/2011/04/a-masticating-monday-open-thread/
Yes, the first to jump on others is seldom innocent.
“…he has severe arthritis in his fingers which causes typing errors sometimes”
Oh, the E and I are close together on his keyboard? Sure.
Can we change John’s name to “Little-John?” I think that would be more appropriate, considering the obvious circumstances…
If anyone else wants to play schoolyard games with you Mark, they are welcome to it. I am not the least bit interested.
Seriously, MMM, you make your big return to start picking nits over spelling?
Thank you Sandi….I’m sure SuzieQ can now come up with the post where I made that mistake. I’m looking forward to seeing it. Pony up, Suz!
Not only am I not sure why matt is so fascinated with my junk all of the sudden, but I also don’t know whether he’s jealous or interested?!?!?! Whatever flots your boat, but sorry, I don’t swing that way.
#181 And suzie declares every one of her spelling mistakes a “typo,” so we just do the same whether it is or not. We’ve quit keeping count of the times she’s misused heterographs and then declared it a “typo.” Or declared something ironic when it isn’t.
sandi, as far as the “wit” around here goes, i’d prefer we leave my underwear out of it. i have had a long-seated, horrible time with my underwear since early childhood, and now with dan’s attacks on my underwear, i just don’t know if i can bear it much longer. i truly fail to see the wit in grown men commenting on underwear…unless it involves thongs worn by svelt young women.
Also, please let me know of 1 lie i have posted on this, or other threads. if you can, then we can make THAT the issue.
Sandi! Nice to see you back on this particular thread! I’ve seen you on OTHER threads of Dan’s in the last day or two, but not this particular one. I guess you stayed away on purpose. Can’t say I blame you, especially considering the verbal thrashing you received here last time. LOL!
I also notice how you STILL refuse to intellectually debate ANY of the points myself or others brought up so very long ago in this thread. “There you go again, Sandi.” You merely whine, flail about with wild accusations, don’t provide any kind of substance or points of your own, and simply throw out insults and say “it isn’t true,” all the while never backing up ONE iota of the vomit you spew. Yikes. You need to work on that. You just continue to prove the stereotype that one is usually lost with just a high school diploma. I’m sorry your life turned out so crummy. But hey, at least you have blogs like Dano’s here to vent on! You are oh so angry, just don’t get angry enough that you faint or need medical attention. You never know how long it will take those “paralegals” to get to you…
John, how does a boat “flot.” Just wondering…
Re: Comment by Warren — July 23, 2012 @ 1:34 pm
Dave Hicks, maybe folks will better understand the fallacies you so frequently want to instruct them on if you gave examples from when you’ve made them.
———
Re: Ad hominem (an attack on the character (or other irrelevant personal circumstance) of a person rather than her/his opinions or arguments)
Examples:
1) [fill-in-the-blank] organization’s strategies aren’t effective because they are all dirty, lazy hippies (or a Tea Party members, or rednecks, or whatever).
In this example, the author doesn’t even name particular strategies which the organization
[fill-in-the-blank] has suggested, much less evaluate those strategies on their merits. Instead, the author attacks the characters of the individuals in the group.
2) [fill-in-the-blank]‘s position is ridicules because he (or she) has no college degree and probably didn’t even graduate high school — not with spelling like his (or hers).
In this example, the author doesn’t even name particular position that the individual
[fill-in-the-blank] has suggested, much less evaluate that position on its merits. Instead, the author attacks the credentials of the individual or his/her educational level.
3) Dan is a “journalist” in the ilk of Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck … He paints things in a way that only one side’s story is told, and the other is relegated to obscurity with no voice.
In this example, the author doesn’t evaluate any particular position on its merits. Instead, the author attacks the idea that being an advocate of an ideology is wrong, in and of itself; thereby alleging/suggesting that whatever is being advocate is, by default, wrong.
———
As I have said, before, even a blind hog finds an acorn, occasionally. So, deal with the actual arguments or opinions being put forward not with the irrelevant personal circumstance of whomever put forward those arguments or opinions.
Umm Kristen, I don’t know why you would call it a big return. I just made a couple of comments about spelling. No big deal.
I only made them because the person who is misspelling (repeatedly, I may add) is calling someone else out by stating that his/her educational level is superior to the other’s. That’s what makes it funny. If you don’t get it, you don’t get it.
Miriam gets it. Let me give you an example of how Miriam did exactly the same thing on a different thread:
http://blogs.roanoke.com/dancasey/2012/07/sundays-column-in-roanoke-businesses-got-lots-of-help/#comment-192209
Oh Dave Hicks,
It appears you didn’t actually go back far enough in the thread to see the several attempts I made at providing counter-points and factual statements to off-set the Obama-zombies. Others on this thread have seen them and commented on them, but I’m sure you just “accidently” missed them. LOL. It was only when these were met with personal insults and hate-filled rhetoric that I simply jumped into the cess-pool with most everyone else on this thread. But you did provide a nice list of cherry-picked out of context statements (Dan would be proud), while of course, ignoring all of those other pesky facts…
In some of your above cherry-picked examples, you even pull out statements of mine in which I was doing exactly what you are claiming I didn’t do! You just didn’t cut and paste that part, merely to give the illusion that you are somehow being objective. FAIL. You guys are amazing. Spin baby spin.
Re: Comment by matt — July 23, 2012 @ 4:21 pm
If the shoe fits, wear it.
I was asked for an examples — not a complete catalog of all the Ad hominem attacks in this thread or on this blog.
No, I did not not have to go back far in the thread to find them. I just far enough to find some glaring examples.
FWIIW, my example of “all dirty, lazy hippies (or a Tea Party members, or rednecks, or whatever)” provides balance and underlines my objection to Ad hominem attacks from whatever quarter.
Whether burned in counter-points and factual statements, or as standalone comments, Ad hominem attacks are Ad hominem attacks.
As to “FAIL” where did I present any character assessments or any assumptions or other irrelevant personal circumstance about you?
The string of dishonesty from matt continues unabated. Believe it or not, you have less than no priority for me. If I see your bile, I will respond as I choose.
Let’s review: Your very first post in this thread started with a lie!
You lied: “Michelle Obama says she was “proud of her country for the FIRST time” upon her husbands election” No one is going to offer to ” intellectually debate” that lie. Why would we? Go ahead and “provide any kind of substance” you can for that lie.
Maybap in the intelligentsia discussions you have been privy to, President Obama had “3 major gaffes at his Roanoke speech” but in the real world, that is a lie as well. Seriously “paralegals”? You are Forrest Gump brilliant and I cannot see how I missed that! How about you “backing up ONE iota of the vomit you spew” first? Oh to be a fly on the wall of those heavy intellectual exercises.
You came in here a “partisan hacks” and never let up. You tried to be a snob and got your butt handed to you. It happens regularly and yes, I am sure it galls you “educated” folks to be owned by little ole me, but it is there for the world to see. You did not make any “counter-points and factual statements” for anyone to rebut. I think your idea of debate was honed on the third grade playground.
“For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country. And not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change.” -Michelle Obama (Remember you called me a liar for this Sandi)
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/m/michelleob409144.html#utI94XYPxSTu3RrW.99
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYY73RO_egw
–TRY THE ABOVE LINK SANDI, YOU CAN WATCH HER SAY IT!
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/02/michelle-obama.html
Wow Sandi. I guess, considering your last post, you have NOW finally proven yourself as an ignorant partisan hack, TO EVERYONE. You accused me of lying for saying Michelle Obama said this, NEVER bothering to go back and actually research it yourself. Heck, I bet just about everyone in this entire thread, Democrat or Republican, conservative or liberal, knew/knows it is a FACT that Michelle Obama said that…and we have known since she said it back in…2008!!! Now, the significance of the comment is up for debate, but you didn’t even KNOW about it. I mean, it blows the mind. How can you consider yourself someone who is even versed in the issues if you didn’t even know this? You do know that most REAL news is often reported by other media outlets than MSNBC and the Roanoke Times, right? But hey, I wonder how you will talk your way out of it, at least in your own mind, after you finish watching her say it from the clip above…
As for me backing up the “vomit I spew” in regards to Obama’s gaffe’s in Roanoke?? Really??? Again, Sandi… Have you read about or even watched Obama’s Roanoke comments?? The Roanoke Times doesn’t count. We know it took the Times’ Dan Casey 9 days and 30 inches of space to “simply put into context” Obama’s biggest Roanoke gaffe, which was the “if you have a business you didn’t build that, somebody else made that happen” statement. Dan reported on this in Sunday’s column. Maybe you missed it (can’t say I blame you though as it was full of half the story, as usual). Some commenters on that thread have asked Dan about his inclusion of only HALF the story, to which he simply replied “he didn’t have space” in the 30 inches worth of “journalism” he provided. LOL. Either way, that covers GAFFE ONE.
Gaffe # 2, From Roanoke:
“On Friday evening, over 20 people collapsed at a campaign event for President Obama in Roanoke, Virginia, Joel Gehrke reported at the Washington Examiner.
According to CBS News White House correspondent Mark Knoller, Obama told supporters there were “paralegals” available to help those who felt weak from the heat.”–Remember you called me a liar for this???
http://www.examiner.com/article/media-silent-as-obama-tells-fainting-supporters-to-get-help-from-paralegals
Gaffe #3, From Roanoke:
“At his third campaign event of the day, President Obama told supporters in Roanoke, Virginia those with health insurance, under ObamaCare, won’t get “hit by a tax.”
“By the way, if you’ve got health insurance, you’re not getting hit by a TAX,” Obama said at a Friday night campaign rally. (which means if you don’t get healthcare, you ARE getting hit by a tax)
Now, most of us who actually follow politics in America (unlike Sandi, since she is unaware of what the president of the United States says in her hometown) know that Obama and his administration have been vehemently ARGUING, railing in fact, against the Supreme Court ruling Obamacare as a “tax.” Obama has denied and continues to deny that those who choose not to purchase healthcare will NOT be hit by A TAX. So he can’t then, with a brain that actually works, come into Roanoke and give a speech where…HE CALLS IT A TAX!! So, there you have them. All 3 Gaffes, PLUS Michelle Obama’s comment, proven right before your very eyes. there are the FACTS, Sandi. And you called me a liar for ALL four of them! Wow, If I were you Sandi, I would feel so incredibly foolish right now. There really aren’t any words… So much for being owned, as you declared in your last post, eh?? You should educate yourself before spewing your pseudo-intellectual BS. Either way, everyone now knows you don’t even bother really knowing the issues, you are just a hack for the Democrat Party, and your only argument, ever, is to call others liars (erroneously I might add).
Sandi, I forgot to add the link to the last gaffe…in case you needed.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/07/14/obama_if_youve_got_health_insurance_youre_not_getting_hit_by_a_tax.html
#177 Frank,
Thanks for your advice to “us folks” regarding (door)matt’s initial questions and comments and our inability to answer and/or debate them. Frank, you’ve done a reasonably good job of making a cogent point using less ink than Tolstoy did when he wrote “War and Peace”. Cograts; that’s quite an accomplishment for a conservative. We’re all very proud of you and your ability to craft a somewhat coherent post that actually reads like it was composed by someone with a H.S. education. Outstanding work. Take a bow. When your finished your victory dance, could you please school your buddy (door)matt in how to make a point in, say, less than the 20 plus posts he’s graced us with in this thread? That’s 20 posts, Frank, 20 posts and what, like, 6 or 7 minutes wasted that we’ll never get back. Gone…Forever… And for what, Frank? Honestly, I went back and re-read the first three posts. You know what the questions and the comments that (door)matt made was? No? What a coincidence, because nobody else here does either! He was droning on like a starry eyed Hollins freshman reading her first Shakespeare sonnet! And your defending this ass-clown’s right to waste perfectly good bandwidth? Why, Frank, Why?
The larger question is of course why would a somewhat reasonable and intelligent guy like you defend an uneducated ignoramus like this clown simply because he shares your ideology? Seriously, Frank, is this the company you keep? You dig hanging out with the guy that delivers your pizza and mows your lawn?
Do me a favor, Frank; maybe I’m just getting too old and losing it a bit. Maybe my striking intellect just aint what it used to be. In short, I think I could use a little help, Frank. Could you go scrub through all 20 plus of (door)matt’s posts he neck puked on this thread and distill it down to the “questions and comments” (door)matt made so maybe a simple mind like me can understand what the hell (door)matt is trying to convey to the rest of us? Other than the penis envy, I mean. Could you do that for me Frank? Get back to me when you are able to divine the point he’s trying to convey because nobody else here can understand what the hell he’s mumbling about.
Thanks, Frank. You’re the best.
wow, sandi, you just can’t stand the heat. if matt didn’t quote mrs. obama correctly, please share what she actually said in that said…the actual words, not YOUR interpretation of those fateful words. not what you THINK she said. we got a 30 inch sunday column from dano telling us what obama said during his visit to roanoke last friday… i’d be happy with hearing from you just what mrs. obama actually said (if matt was truly lying), instead of 30 paragraph after paragraph of what you THINK she said. Fair enough? by the way, your silence will be enlightening, if not golden.
Dave Hicks, your logic tutorials, as you present them, are neither “opinions or arguments”, therefore the definition of ad hominem you pasted:
“an attack on the character (or other irrelevant personal circumstance) of a person rather than her/his opinions or arguments”
…does not apply to my post. I only suggested that you include personal examples with your fallacy definitions, so a claim of “ad hominem” might only apply if there was a premise given of there being no such examples. In my short post, the only thing I characterized was the frequency of your lectures. In any case, not every assertion about a person is always an ad hominem attack; it can be relevant if the person is themself the subject of the debate.
By contrast, both my previous post and this one are opinions, so by the very definition you provided, your seeming to imply that my post was an ad hominem attack without offering your reasoning itself approaches ad hominem territory. Unless, as often (in my opinion) seems to be the case with your use of these unsolicited tutorials, you were attempting a type of between the lines passive aggression. If you meant to say that you thought it was an ad hominem attack, why didn’t you say so forthrightly, and give your reasons? If not, why include that definition, and what WAS your reply?
Again, these are opinions, not the declarations that you often admonish people to back up with facts and links; except, that is, when you don’t, such as with people who agree with you on gun threads. Even with the dozens of RSS feeds that you have time to monitor for cut and pasting every day, hopefully you’ll find time at some point to paste the definitions of the self-exemption and selective observation fallacies, with personal examples included, in your next imperious tutorial.
matt sure uses a lot of words in demonstrating his superior intellect. His posts are almost as long as Sharon N’s!
Dan, in regards to the length of my posts, coming from an award-winning “journalist” who just used 30 inches of space to describe a single comment from Obama, I’m sure you understand! Lol. I also notice you didn’t refute a single point. Again, thanks! As for the superior intellect comment, again, thanks. I guess it stings to see your top cheerleader (Sandi) taken to school. Lol!
Steve, chill out. You’re TANF check is in the mail. Soon enough, you’ll be back to being drunk and kicking your dog. Cheers!
#203 Come on, matt, you can argue #s 1 and 3 all you want from either side, but presenting #2 as some sort of serious gaffe — something he IMMEDIATELY corrected and joked about — just shows your true petty partisanship. Really pitiful.
Maybe matt went to Sweden to change himself into SharonN.
It is truly sad that a college educated man can stoop so low. Of course you lied matt! Watch closely as you seem to be impaired:
You QUOTED Michele Obama as saying she was “proud of her country for the FIRST time” when she actually said “For the first time in my adult lifetime, I’m really proud of my country… You deliberately left out the context AND mangled the quote. Quotation marks mean something. YOU made it a lie.
Then you added “upon her husbands election”. Which was also a lie as she said it on the campaign trail months before he was elected.
You are truly pathetic, grasping at straws and misrepresenting the public record that is easily verified. You lie.
Wow matt. I guess, considering your last self righteous meandering post, it is you who has “NOW finally proven yourself as an ignorant partisan hack, TO EVERYONE”. I accused you of lying because you did. YOU are the one who NEVER bothered “to go back and actually research it yourself”. Heck, I bet just about everyone in this entire thread, Democrat or Republican, conservative or liberal, knows it is a lie to misrepresent a quote and it aggravates the lie to pull it out of context and lie about the circumstances.
Now, the significance of the lie is up for debate, but you wouldn’t even admit your mistake like people with integrity do when called out. You did not even acknowledge the misrepresentation, just kept digging and insisting your lie was not a lie and I was a partisan hack too ignorant to understand. It does blow the mind. How can you consider yourself honest if you lie about something so easily verified and corrected much less someone who is educated and versed in the rules of grammar?
The “vomit” you “spew” in regards to Obama’s gaffes in Roanoke is simply and literally pathetic, desperate and terribly telling. But do keep on, I am enjoying the show.
Don’t look now but Sandi Saunders just owned matt, who I predict will shortly respond:
“You dumb unAmerican liberals! It doesn’t matter WHAT Michelle’s words were. It doesn’t matter WHEN she said them. What matters is that I have a masters from Hollins and you don’t. What matters is what I know she meant by reading her mind. What REALLY matters is whether I can twist it into something ugly and divisive.”
Frank, your hate has got the best of you. It happens to a lot of right wingers when they meet resistance. Apoplexy is the new black.
If you too had bothered to notice the quote matt offered in quotation marks, meaning he was quoting her, you too might have noticed he did not do so correctly and he lied about the reason for her remarks even as he misquoted them.
I am well aware that playing fast and loose with truth, facts, context and fairness is what you all do, we see it daily, but they still matter and I am always here to help.
You people are not offering any “heat”. Hate, smoke and mirrors is all you got.
I think it is your silence that would be both “golden” and “enlightening” for a change.
Nice, Dan. Nice, Sandi. You BOTH have been relegated to arguing over WHEN the statement was said, and the SEMANTICS of the statement, AND NOT THE STATEMENT itself, which was ALWAYS point, and you know that. Not even you liberals are THAT dumb. I guess since M.Obama said it on the campaign trail a whopping few months before the election…means it was never said! Oh no, my quote is now totally destroyed. I lied about the whole thing! So, in your minds, simply adding the “adult-life” part to her quote, and taking off the “upon her husbands election” totally makes her statement irrelevant! Gotcha! Even AFTER witnessing her say it above, on the link provided, you are still flailing about trying to save face. Admit it, you got destroyed. Your argument was annihilated by the FACTS, of which I posted several links to above. Continue to ignore them, you always do. But there is no way you intellectual losers can weasle out of this one.
Also, notice how BOTH Sandi and Dan only cherry-picked ONE of the four examples provided. Sandi called me a liar for THREE of the other statements, but notice, she used two different posts, and only mentions them briefly in passing. She does NOTHING to dispute or refute them! LOL!! And Dan went right along for the ride. Yes, Sandi. Your silence on those remarks is “golden” and “enlightening.” LOL. Yours too, Dano. Especially considering you did NOTHING to disprove Michelle’s statement.
Dano, we know you don’t get paid much to work for a tiny liberal hack-machine like the Roanoke Times, but I expect better…even from you.
“Steve, chill out. You’re TANF check is in the mail.”
Masters in writing from Hollins, huh? This SNAP-receiving non-Hollins- Masters welfare queen liberal knows “your” from “you’re”. Oh snap.
Ahh Kristen, ya got me. No good excuse (other than I was going too fast and didn’t proofread, which I usually don’t do on a blog, as I like to live dangerously). So, congrats.
But your post was only half-correct, in that I didn’t earn a Masters Degree in writing and never said such a thing. So, do I get a little mini-snap (SNAP) for your factual error???
And hey, I never said welfare was bad, so I’m not sure what your assumption is. I just told Steve to chill out and it would be there soon. And, it’s rather ironic to see you get bent out of shape over such a comment, considering ALL of the hatefilled, nasty, misogynistic, and near-threat filled posts from Steve. There’s that objectivity thing again…
At least thanks to Obama, people won’t have to worry about not getting their TANF checks just because they don’t look for work.
Ron May:
212.”Maybe matt went to Sweden to change himself into SharonN.”
He does capitalize a lot of words in the posts like Sharon N. Hmmm….
Oh, and since he likes to point out typos, what is a “weasle”?
#210(door)Matt,
What in the hell are you babbling on about now? Sunday you whined about me threatening you and now two days later you’re claiming I hit women and kick dogs? Please make up your mind about whose ass I’m planning on kicking. FYI, I only have two feet so by default you’ll have to eliminate at least one and that’s assuming I have about a five foot vertical leap, quite an accomplishment for a fifty year old. Helpful hint; in all likelihood, the dog would bite me, the hypothetical woman would hit back and so far all you’ve been doing is curling up in the fetal position and screaming to mommy about how I’m mean to you. That narrows your choices down to eliminating at least one of the first two and then going on from there. Hope this helps you figure out my three tiered hierarchy of who gets an ass whippin’.
(door)matt, do you really think I’d lay my meat hooks on you and risk assault and battery charges? Seriously? You need to grow a pair and stop sniveling like a 12 year old that just got her lunch money stolen and shoulder-blocked into the lockers. Stop it, (door)matt, it’s undignified. Dear Lord, son, It’s obvious to everybody all I’d have to do is just say cruel and unforgivable things about your shoes or your hair to set you off squealing again.
sandi, i just got back on, and admire how you can diagnose my “hatred”? after only a one or two typed words, none of which were demeaning, attacking, belittling, mean, nasty, biased, and/or the any other types of horrid comments which so easliy flow from your heart through your fingertips, on out into the public realm.
as far as m. obama’s quote goes, i agree with you, the quote was not exactly depicated as stated. however, none of the things you found innaccurate from the actual quote changed the meaning of the original words used by m. obama….not one bit. however, i’ll be happy to learn from you how those minute differences changed the original meaning, if you’d like.
I will vouch for masters degree matt that he didn’t get his graduate degree in writing (which should be obvious to anyone who reads his stuff, anyway). He got it in something else like basket-weaving or something.
No harm. Heck, it took me 8 very bumpy years, and many threats and prayers by my parents, and a long talk with my guardian angel (she was gorgeous, naturally) on a very weird night, for me to get a damn bachelors degree. And after that, the poobahs at the University of Maryland more or less said, “Begone! we don’t want your likes sullying our beautiful campus any more!” Ever since then, on any campus, I have gone incognito.
My 4-year degree is not in writing either. It’s in English.
Sorry Matt,…all I know of Hollins’ post grad stuff is the esteemed writing program.
For the record, I don’t care about that “your” thing. But if you’re going to come in and immediately start dropping the “all of you liberals are ignorant uneducated welfare recipients”‘ you pretty much have to keep your posts pristine. I don’t think there’s a single “liberal” on this blog who doesn’t work, fwiw.
Frank, read your #206 again and then repeat that there was nothing “demeaning, attacking, belittling, mean, nasty, biased”, in there, if you can. You may be a grasshopper in comparison, but it was hardly kind and respectful.
And again, the fact that you misquote while quoting, matters. I disagree with you both on “the meaning of the original words” but even so, quote them accurately or pay the price. If it is your quote that gets changed and altered you might understand what I was saying. It speaks to credibility and integrity when you take a moment to be sure you are correct in what you are quoting before you denigrate it.
And matt, yes, here in the real world, when you add to, take out of, or misrepresent a quote, and when it was said, it is a lie. Whatever license to create they gave you in academia is null and void here.
Watch out, Kristen. If you start talking about liberals who work you might blow off the top of matt’s head. And besides that, I would note that so far as I can remember he has made no hint that he’s employed, despite his proud educational pedigree.
It would be supremely ironic if he didn’t have a job, and was collecting TANF, or SNAP or unemployment and he was busting the chops of those of us who are working and collecting none of those things.
But, IF it was true, it would not be the first time!
Yo Frank,
Did you get those stock tips I sent you?
Pay no attention to them.
#219 The only threats we’ve ever seen on this blog have come from right wingers, matt.
sandi, i won’t be able to get this description exactly right, so please don’t call me a hate-filled liar, or something similar, if i don’t get what i told you i would do,exactly right: you posted in this string on 7/23 that i was a liar, and yet when i called you on it, you couldn’t remember…and i said i’d look it up. actually, i thought that you had called me a liar more than once, but upon further review those other times were not me, but suzie and matt, who you branded as well. nevertheless, you seem to use that ugly term frequently (which might explain why you could’t remember doing so to me), no doubt fueled by your apparent belief that all who disagreee with you must, while doing so, use perfect english, have every single word in a guote exactly transferred, in exact context, etc. whoa be unto any mere mortal who dares not get those little things exact to your satisfaction…lest he or she be branded with the worst contempt possible, and then be called a “liar” to boot.
Dan, I work my 40 a week. It’s a good job (thank goodness for those silly degrees, right?). And decades from now, when I’m your age, I certainly won’t be working a hack-job earning a bum paycheck (for a small-time hack-media source that isn’t very respected). Good luck with that buddy. Retirement must look great.
matt, good for you. You work. Congrats! And 40 hours a week!
Thanks for clearing that up. Note that I never said you didn’t work. I merely noted the fact that you had never addressed the issue.
I am happy for you.
Now, tell us everything you learned in your studies about veterinary ethics.
sandi, i’ll ask again, please show me where i lied. i’m responsible for my own posts on this blog. and, if i “lied” about something, i’d hope someone would call me out about it. where did i lie?
With your winning personality, matt, your success is assured.
Dan, from what I can tell, the only few on here that don’t work are on the right. Not that that doesn’t mean they’re not free to come out maws a-blazing, blathering on and on about the lazy welfare peeps. Not at all.
Well, Michael Howdyshell works. And Terps works, too. He actually works real hard. I have seen that with my own eyes. I believe Big Momma works. Suzie doesn’t work. I don’t know about pammala or BobH, though.
How about it, guys? Do you work?
I think most of us have jobs, which is why I don’t understand why, when we have a newbie RWer, the first thing they do trying to score big “points” is accuse the rest of us of all being on welfare or SNAP or whatever. Because, you know, that’s such a witty and novel approach.
Again Frank, I am not clear when or what I called you a liar on but you clearly are bucking to add ‘jerk’ to the list of epithets you charge me with, and I am cool with that as well. Still ignoring your own though I see.
If, in your conquest to be called a liar, you are referring to this remark, which is the only one that comes close: “You all think you have re-invented the wheel when you roll in here full of lies and vinegar you pulled off the “inner webs” challenging the God-less liberals and the almighty Casey“, then that is a FAIL!
If you do not understand the difference in the collective “you all” and “Frank”, I cannot help you. One would also think that the word ‘lies’ is recognized as the substitute for the correct word in the phrase, but that is apparently WAYYYY over your head so never mind.
“col·lec·tive (k-lktv) adj.
1. Assembled into or viewed as a whole.
2. Of, relating to, characteristic of, or made by a number of people acting as a group”
It is not my job to explain the grammar rules on using quotation marks, but most sane intelligent people, agree that you quote someone directly and correctly if you use them. Why that is a hard concept for you and matt is your problem.
You whined, “actually, i thought that you had called me a liar more than once, but upon further review those other times were not me”. Big of you to admit that Frank. I do call ‘em like I see ‘em. Suzie IS a liar, a big one, a proven one. matt started with a lie and no amount of excuses can cover it up. And BTW, why are MY insults in reply the only ones concerning you? Does matt’s offensive vocabulary bother you at all?
You have not been here for Suzie’s favorite epithet, “bastards” (among others) apparently, but I apologize for using an “ugly term frequently” and try to gently remonstrate with, “dishonest” in the future when someone or a group of them, lies, if you like.
It is not remotely necessary for “all who disagreee with” me to “use perfect english”, but yes, everyone should “have every single word in a guote exactly transferred” or it is not a quote and yes, changing the “context, etc.” matters too. See if you do not agree the next time it happens to one of your own? It IS a lie to quote someone with words they did not say. It IS considered a lie to do so.
Sorry Frank, you lose.
I would note, sadly, that the “almighty Casey” struck out.
The last two stanzas from the famous poem — thank you, Ernest Thayer.
The sneer is gone from Casey’s lip, his teeth are clenched in hate;
He pounds with cruel violence his bat upon the plate.
And now the pitcher holds the ball, and now he lets it go,
And now the air is shattered by the force of Casey’s blow.
Oh, somewhere in this favored land the sun is shining bright;
The band is playing somewhere, and somewhere hearts are light,
And somewhere men are laughing, and somewhere children shout;
But there is no joy in Mudville — mighty Casey has struck out.
sandi, no, i don’t see it as you do. i’m also not calling you a liar, just because our perspectives come from different places.
#236 Kristen, I don’t have a job. I am drawing one of those UAW “thug” union pensions the right is always whining about. Teehee. Now, if they’ll just leave SS (which I have contributed to since I was fourteen) alone, I plan on drawing that, too.
dan, …cute comment, although not as cute as your starving bull dog…which appears to have some foul and sweaty oder coming from it. you might feed it better, and bath it once in awhile.
I work between 40 and 60 hours per week, any hours, any days.
I’ve never collected unemployment.
I’ve turned down food stamps when I was eligible to receive them.
I’ve been called a liberal on the Internet, though only once have I’ve voted for a Democrat.
I like puppies, long walks in the mountains and baking.
When I grow up, I want to throw away my college education by being a serial halfwit on the Internet, so consumed and entangled in my superiority complex that I can’t distinguish from which end I’m talking. I want to be so blinded by my self-initiated pseudo-crusade to purge the liberal menace that I fail to realize what I’m actually doing is the equivalent of standing in another man’s house and calling him a dishonest sack of crap to his face. I’ll then further be too busy patting myself on the back to realize that said man is ALLOWING me to stand in his house and call him that, thus proving that he is a better, kinder man than I.
Dan, if I build a “Tool of the Year” trophy for you to award, can we start nominations now?
LOL! Yeah, seeing a picture of THAT brings everything into perspective. Ohhh, I laughed out loud right here in the office. Good stuff, Frank.
I work at least 40 a week, sometimes 50-60. I used to work 70-80 hours a week when I held 2 part-time jobs in addition to my full-time job. I’m so thankful those days are behind me now…
I work every weekday, and quite often one or both days on the weekend…to the chagrin of my wife and my golf game. I have no idea if I’ve ever qualified for any social programs, I’ve never tried…aside from student financial aid. And I am incredibly thankful for that assistance because it allowed me to transition from a $5.25/hr manual labor job at a golf course (I couldn’t complain, the golf was free any time I wanted to play), to the college-educated person in a good career path that I now enjoy…making several times what I once did (my payroll taxes last year, just Federal, were larger than my annual take-home pay for that first job of mine, even with me working that one full-time). And I too, have only voted for a Democrat Presidential candidate once (out of 3…Libertarian and Republican the other 2).
By the way, despite the fact that several people I’ve known have said i should run for some sort of office, I won’t…and this year’s election is a prime example of why. I simply have no tolerance for it…nor would I want to endure the trouble of having to align with a political party just to get the funding necessary to buy my way into a victory. It’s sad that ideas and statesmanship no longer drive an election.
AlfredE, i didn’t want to appear to be doing employment roll call. I don’t care much what people are doing, but neither would I wander around blasting “accusations” that others are unemployed or on assistance. Which isn’t a crime anyway, its just a popular cudgel around here.
jmwhite, dan is smart enough to know that our side fills a necessary role on his blog for you guys…if we weren’t posting, you folks would have no choice but to spew your venom on your own.
Sounds like it is time for the good ole Craig T. Nelson line: “I’ve been on foodstamps and welfare, did anyone help me out? No.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTwpBLzxe4U
If you went to public schools, you got government help.
If you ever borrowed from a library, you got government help.
Ever been on a highway, interstate, bridge, or seen a dam?
Ever hooked up to water and sewer service? Haul trash to the landfill?
Ever needed the police?
Ever called an ambulance or firetruck with paid EMT’s?
Ever been to court?
Ever taken a tax deduction?
Add in unemployment, food stamps, Social Security/Medicare, student aid, FHA home loans, and a myriad of other things I cannot think of this moment and YOU have been helped by the government we created and the society we live in.
Are you ALL socialists? Are your parents? Were your grandparents? Have any disabled friends?
Dan:
224.”I will vouch for masters degree matt…”
And here I was thinking one had to have a phD before their sh** didn’t stink.
doormatt:
231.”Dan, I work my 40 a week. It’s a good job (thank goodness for those silly degrees, right?). And decades from now, when I’m your age, I certainly won’t be working a hack-job earning a bum paycheck…”
Wow, has the real world yet to kick you in the arse or what?! 40 hours a week punching a clock for someone else and thinks the master’s degree guarantees that for life? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! Poor baby really thinks he’s paid his dues, does he? I have two degrees. The diplomas have never been out of the envelopes. Yours is probably tattooed across your back. I work way harder than any 40 hours a week running a business that doesn’t care who graduated from where. There are 11 degrees between 5 of us in a business that doesn’t require them. One of my agents has a phD in Chemistry and while very accomplished, is as humble a man as you’ll ever meet
Your degree-dropping nonsense isn’t impressing anyone here lower case “m” matt.
Funny Sandi…up there with “Keep the government’s hands off my Medicare!”
You’re right, Sandi. I find it incredibly ironic that of my closest and most vocal anti-government conservative friends and family members, several either work for, or are drawing a retirement pension from, a government agency…be it public schools, the military, etc…and all of them have made use of public utilities, public highways, public education, etc. I guess it’s ‘do as I say, not as I do’.
JohnW, we are in rare agreement. I was going to point out to the mattster up there that if he’s as young as he’s implying and on as great a career track as he’s implying, his butt should be working a lot more than 40 hours a week. But I decided it would be pointless.
Oh yes Other John, beyond doubt they are some of the loudest voices decrying “the government”!
I applaud initiative and achievement, as much as I bang on ole John Wilburn, I truly respect his hustle and his moxie. I don’t denigrate being a worker bee and I do not bow to being the queen bee, both are roles that need filling and both have their limits and stress levels. A good boss respects their workers and a good business succeeds because of them both and they know it.
When you cannot even get people to acknowledge simple truths like the great society and structure WE have built that does encourage and reward effort and striving, but also does not let people starve, you have to wonder if there is any hope for figuring our way out of this economic mess.
To add to Sandi’s post @247
Do you know any returning vets?
Do you breath clean air?
Drink clean water?
Fly on an airplane that is safety regulated?
Have money in a bank that’s FDIC [insured]?
Eat food that is inspected by the USDA?
“I have two degrees. The diplomas have never been out of the envelopes.” –John(Little)
“There are 11 degrees between 5 of us in a business that doesn’t require them.”–John(Little)
John, being the down-to-earth rational guy you are(LOL), I’m sure you will find the above statements ironic and hypocritical. Plus, the whining about your “tough” life doesn’t become you…
Other John, every thing you mentioned in regards to those “public” entities requries the taxpayer to pay FOR them. The government was only able to build those things with taxpayer dollars. So, I guess that matters to the 50% of us who do actually pay taxes…
Kristen…ehhh.
Kristen:
“…[doormatt] should be working a lot more than 40 hours a week…”
But Kristen, he has a master’s degree. Please bow down with me. Working 60+ is for the rest of us. He’ll find out one day and it’ll be a lot less kind than the good-natured flak he’s getting here.
@245 Kristen, I took no offense at your post. After reading my post again, I could see why you might think I was being defensive. I was aiming it at the same people you were. I thought I might get a comment from someone about the union pension.
sandi, i think the word you were looking for in a post this morning is “quest”, not “conquest”. in the same post, when you lump me in with “you all”, then call all of us (meaning “you all”) “liars”, well, the context seems clear to me. frankly, sandi, i don’t think many, if any, would ever accuse you of having un-clear context. all may not agree with it, but it never seems to be un-clear.
Just a question:
Why would anyone work more than one full-time job if that job is able to fulfill all financial obligations, and allows them to lead a comfortable life? I don’t see how my working 40 hours a week and your working 60 hours a week is some kind of trump card. If “the rest of you” work 60 hours a week, isn’t that YOUR choice, one way or the other?
“Kristen…ehhh.”
I dunno, JohnW, based on matt’s offering above, I don’t think we’re equipped to hang with him on here. Maybe Dan needs to add “post graduates only” to his blog parameters.
matt:
“Why would anyone work more than one full-time job if that job is able to fulfill all financial obligations, and allows them to lead a comfortable life?”
Because some of us have been around long enough to know that prosperity isn’t a promise and none of us are promised tomorrow. Had I not prepared in the better economy of a few years ago, I would be out of business in this economy. You think like a teenager with a very limited amount of perspective. I wouldn’t knock you for it, but you are getting a good experience here… if you’ll listen, that is.
Sandi, Kristen, Warren, gdad, Dan, and others are the folks I scrap with the most on this blog, but they have a lot of experience and perspective that you don’t. Dave Hicks is as wise a man as you’ll meet. I recognize that. You don’t. Let your time here test your beliefs and if you’re right, they’ll have stood serious debate with smart people and be stronger than ever.
Frank, are we going to have this kind of relationship?
Do I need to go back and parse your posts for misspelled words, typos and word usage errors AND lies? I agree that quest would have been better than “conquest” but that was hardly the point of my post. I could ask you what “unprompered” means. But since you have repeatedly insisted I mention the lies I accused you of, let’s start with this one: That the Roanoke Times “is hoping to shield the minds of its readers from having to endure the awesomeness of potus’ true beliefs about small business owners“. Now you and I both know you have no basis in fact for that comment so I judge it a lie.
I also believe that your accusation that the Roanoke Times “continues to practice dishonest liberal journalism” is a lie.
Then you lied: “Libs can’t seem to recognize individual accomplishment“.
Do I need to go on? I can. Or you can let it all go and move on. Your choice. I don’t like nit-picking, but I can damn sure do it.
Re: Comment by Shrillary — July 25, 2012 @ 3:00 pm
Eat food that is inspected by the USDA?
—————-
Yup!
Food inspection/safety is one of the great insights into the value system of both the left and right, IMHO.
Is there a reverse acronym for NIMBY.
The reaction to “The Jungle” — Upton Sinclair is also, IMHO, an insight into the me-first mindset.
http://tinyurl.com/cy6gym7
**
‘I Aimed For The Public’s Heart, And. . .hit It In The Stomach’
‘The Jungle’ Was A Socialist’s Cry For Labor Justice. It Launched A Consumer Movement Instead.
SNIP
One hundred years ago, American business leaders and politicians celebrated the free market. They praised the virtues of small government, competition and laissez-faire capitalism. They said that with enough hard work anybody could make it to the top. Although free-market rhetoric was plentiful in those days, free markets were hard to find. Almost every sector of the American economy was controlled by a handful of corporations whose executives met in secret, set prices, determined wages and conspired to destroy labor unions. These interlocking corporate and financial monopolies had a pleasant, innocent-sounding name: trusts. There was a steel trust, a sugar trust and a coal trust, among others. The markets weren’t free, but the trusts were-free to employ children in factories, free to make people work 60 or 70 hours a week, free to pollute rivers and streams, to hire private armies, to bribe state legislators and members of Congress, to sell what they wanted at whatever price they liked.
The freedom of big business seemed limitless. Drug companies sold patent medicines containing heroin, morphine and cocaine that promised to cure all sorts of diseases but actually cured none of them. Food companies sold children’s candy colored with toxic heavy metals. Cheap margarine was routinely marketed as butter. Crude mixtures of apple scraps, glucose, timothy seeds and food coloring made from coal tar were sold as strawberry jam. In the age of the great trusts, the gulf between the wealthy and the poor became enormous. Robber barons built their homes in imitation of European palaces, while millions of American workers lived in urban slums.
Upton Sinclair was moved by these injustices. During the fall of 1904, he left his home in New Jersey and traveled to Chicago, intending to write a novel about the plight of the city’s meatpacking workers. The beef trust controlled the industry with an iron fist. It had recently crushed a strike by union members who were seeking a pay raise of less than 3 cents an hour. The meatpacking industry seemed to embody everything that was wrong with American society, operating largely in secret, wielding unchecked power, threatening the health of workers and consumers. As Sinclair later argued in “The Jungle,” the beef trust was “the incarnation of blind and insensate greed . . . the Great Butcher . . . the spirit of capitalism made flesh.”
SNIP
**
So, want was the public’s reaction? Not justice for the workers. Not reform of financial/cooperate corruption. No. It was make my food safer for me.
matt, your l fantasy of career success and prestige won’t be achieved by the guy with the eye on the clock who’s first out the door. And I wasn’t talking about working two jobs either. But none of this matters really.
John,
I recognize and appreciate the “peacemaker” in your tone. That is to be respected. Could have done it without “You think like a teenager with a very limited amount of perspective” and “…they have a lot of experience and perspective that you don’t.” Both are opinions of yours, assumptions. It would seem that everyone on this blog will have a unique perspective on life, and we all have different levels of experience in different things.
“Let your time here test your beliefs and if you’re right, they’ll have stood serious debate with smart people and be stronger than ever.” Sounds good to me, John. I can work with that.
Kristen:
264.”matt, your l fantasy of career success and prestige won’t be achieved by the guy with the eye on the clock who’s first out the door.”
This is true. When working a long day, if I note what time it is, I think “man, I need to get out of here…”. An hour later, I’m still working, see the clock and think “man, I need to get out of here.” Around 1:30am-2:30am I (sometimes) finally get out of there. It’s such a different mindset when you don’t have an hour quota to fill. I can’t think of a day in the last month where I walked away from the office at 5:00pm and declared the work day over. I already know I’ll be working to midnight on Friday. All that said, I don’t envy the 40 hour a week people whatsoever. Making your business work for your customers’ schedules with freedom to schedule and do things with family makes it all worthwhile.
sandi,
thank you for not making misspellings, etc. the point of our conversation. i think we can both agree that stuff like that takes away from the point of debate.
i made the point that the RTs practices dishonest journalism because i honestly believe it. i know of an incident about two-three months ago (it can be easily googled), and reported by the virginian-pilot about 3 weeks after it happened, by the RTs sister the Virginian pilot, of a report that 2 of their reporters got viciously beaten by a gang of around 100 youths in Norfolk, when they were just sitting at a red light at an intersection in Norfolk…Brambleton and Church. it took the rts sister paper 3 weeks to even report that such an assault on 2 of their staffers had even happened…i surmise because of the case in florida where a black youth was killed by a white-hispanic. the rts covered the travon case, and appropriately so, a person was killed. however, when was the last time the rts covered the killing of anybody in Sanford, FL, besides the little anthony girl. the answer? never. now, why didn’t they cover the viscious assault of 2 of their norfolk sister’s 2 reporters, beaten to a pulp by a gang of about 100 youths? because the rts is dishonest, openly biased, or, well, hmmm, dishonest. What principle, among the 9 Pew Journalistic Principles, did the rts adhere to?
i can promise you the that the customers and staff of the business i started with my life used the roads all of us and parents paid for, used the internet that our tax dollars paid for (developed by that dastardly defense department that obama and the libs are trying to financially obliterate)…., yes we were schooled by tax dollars, but i can assure you that in both our cases, it was predominently local tax dollars which funded our public school educations. however, it was our risk of everything we had built as a couple that ultimately made our business a go, and it was well-paid staff and happy customers, along with 80 hour weeks, no vacations, and on, and on, which also made our business a go. it appalls me to hear obama say what he said. i heard him, and i don’t need dan’s 30 column inch of a biased, one-sided column to tell me i heard different.
as far as what ann romney said, that is peanuts compared to the words, and the context, of what i heard the potus say. and when the CONTEXT of what ann romney said is factored in, it becomes a non-issue….as supported by romney’s position in the polls next to the “transormational” potus. transfomational, my butt hollow road…and i’m sure that most if not all of the good folks who happen to live along that beautiful byway fully understand the context of what i just said.
last, is there any reason the good community of Gainesboro should feel good about what gov’ment intervention has done for the city market area and for the medical complex on reserve avenue?
by the way, i know you can nit-pic, sandi. have at it.
Very nice, Frank. I remember the story of the two Virginian-Pilot employees, and the RTs failure to mention it. I wonder what the RTs coverage would have been like if the script was flipped, and it was 100 white youths attacking two black adults who worked for their very own sister paper? Hmmm…
Frank, we are not having a conversation. That requires listening and trying to understand a person’s POV. You are only interested in brow beating me into believing as you do and accepting your POV as superior. Your dripping condescension is not any more conducive to conversation than your continued insistence that I just shouldn’t question what you “know”.
I am very familiar with the “controversy” you use to indict the Roanoke Times and I cannot fathom why you need to bash your local newspaper (also a local employer and tax payer) over something so obviously and easily explained, because of what you choose to “surmise”.
National news is both appropriate and understandably limited in our local paper. The national headlines will doubtless make it in. The Virginian-Pilot explained their delay to my satisfaction. They did not want to seem like their employees being “attacked” was news when in reality, the people who are often involved in similar situations are not remarked upon at all. The police blotter is apparently pretty normal with such incidents. They were literally damned if they did and damned because they did not. Naturally your bias led you to damn.
Despite your determination to believe what you want, in truth, nothing Obama said in Roanoke (or anywhere else) had taken away from your herculean efforts to be successful and despite your word play, calling our society and structure of support “tax dollars” does not change the boost and support they gave to your business and every other. Oh wait, I suppose you think he said he paid for it too? No Frank, you did not “hear” him, you heard what you wanted to hear. That is crystal clear.
If it was Michelle Obama who had refused to give us any more financial information than one partial year so far in their campaign, you would be as apoplectic as many “on your side” still are about Obama’s college papers. Given his particular career in financial machinations and his desire to run this nation, Romney has not even come close to meeting the expected disclosure and if he were Obama you would be screaming about it AND his wife’s audacity in expressing that they had “done enough”. Who is it you are trying to kid?
I do not recall off the top of my head if or what Dan has ever written about the Gainsboro “redevelopment”, though I know I have read about it, but I know beyond doubt he was all over the Surfaces debacle and he did not excuse the City or Carilion.
You remain the typical right winger we see here. And that remains sad. I love my country enough to want you all to be way, way better than you are.
oh she’ll get you for not capitalizing Frank, thats what she’ll focus on, all the libs will.
The facts seem to escape Sandi on a consistent basis. My favorite quote from her desperate, emotive, and excuse-laden diatribe was: “They did not want to seem like their employees being “attacked” was news when in reality, the people who are often involved in similar situations are not remarked upon at all. The police blotter is apparently pretty normal with such incidents.” Really? Oh sure Sandi, all those times when two innocent citizens are violently assaulted by a mob of 100 teenagers is a normal, everyday occurrence. As you say, it’s “normal” and happens all the time, so much so that local news agencies don’t even bother to report it. YIKES. I’m gonna take a page out of Sandi’s book and call her a flat-out liar until we are provided with compelling evidence that violent assaults on innocent citizens by mobs of teenagers 100-strong are so “normal.” So normal in Norfolk, in fact, that they don’t even bother reporting about it. And notice there was never an excuse given for the RTs failure to report it. Interesting.
Frank, in regards to your business: “you didn’t build that, somebody else made that happen.” Ya know, like Sandi says, it was the “boost and support” from our wonderful government that made your business successful.
It is not Sandi that “facts seem to escape”.
“We have done our due diligence with the story. We have checked the police report. I have read it. On its face, it would not merit a story.”
http://hamptonroads.com/2012/05/memo-coverage-assault-pilot-reporters
“The Pilot published an opinion piece about the incident by columnist Michelle Washington, who wrote it with the cooperation of Forster and Rostami. An opinion writer can editorialize about an event. We can’t do that on the news pages.
We still have no idea what motivated the attack.”
http://hamptonroads.com/2012/05/column-pilot-stands-handling-attack-staff-members
“They had stopped at a red light, in a crowd of at least 100 young people walking on the sidewalk. Rostami locked her car door. Someone threw a rock at her window. Forster got out to confront the rock-thrower, and that’s when the beating began.
Neither suffered grave injuries, but both were out of work for a week. Forster’s torso ached from blows to his ribs, and he retained a thumb-sized bump on his head. Rostami fears to be alone in her home. Forster wishes he’d stayed in the car.
…A reporter making routine checks of police reports would see “simple assault” and, if the names were unfamiliar, would be unlikely to write about it. In this case, editors hesitated to assign a story about their own employees. Would it seem like the paper treated its employees differently from other crime victims?”
http://hamptonroads.com/2012/05/beating-church-and-brambleton
matt, you seriously are not very good at this. And you do not have the sense to know it.
thanks pammala. i don’t capitalize on purpose…for that very reason, and i also “through” in a mis-placed and/or mis-spelled word every now and then…
sandi, a couple of points. regarding Surfaces…if my memory serves me correctly, dan awarded the business a “dano”, in effect for “not taking the large financial offer the city made, and moving on” or some such thing. those likely aren’t his exact words, but i believe they do reflect the gist of what he did say.
sandi, the curious thing is, i heard exactly what obama said before, during, and after he said those “interesting” words. i don’t need to have to read dan’s 30 colmn inch one-sided explanatory column to “understand” what i heard….although i did read it, and what he said in his narrow-minded,30-column inch, one-sided defense of the potus was just that…something to defend the potus. period.
i’ve never felt that the tax returns of any candidate belong in the public domain.
national news being what it is, i wouldn’t ordinarily expect our local paper to carry something like what happened to those two white reporters in Norfolk. however, did you happen to read the article which Bob Molinaro, columnist for the virginian-pilot, had published by the roanoke times in early May of this year? his column was titled, “Money Trumps Iffy Academic Standards”…and was a good article. as i read the article, it appeared to me that his premis applied to his own employer, the Virginian-Pilot, for behaving in the same manner as the “academic institutions bob was verbally taking to task, and rightfully so, i thought. then it hit me, those 2 badly mugged reporters were his colleagues. he probably saw the 2 of them with at least some frequency. and yet no one thought to raise the same type of questions with the virgininian-pilot as bob was raising about academia….and their own employer kept their vicious beating under the rug for weeks. quite frankly, i suspect if the virginian-pilot were say, the richmond times-dispatch (and therefore un-related by common ownership to the roanoke times), somehow a report would have been found in the rts. remember the Pew Principles…
i’ll close with GAINSBORO. i visit a deli on Williamson Road about every 3-4 weeks for dinner. i travel through Gainesboro. when i see what is there now, and i think about what it once was (as relayed to me by a friend), i am sickened. and, i have been driving through Gainesboro regularly for almost 30 years. during that time the city govenment has done little to nothing visible for that neighborhood, except perhaps erected a sign or two. and, that’s the same gov’ment as extolled by dan through-out his 30 column inch, one-sided, explanation of what he thinks obama really said. perhaps dan should have ridden trough Gainesboro before he so eagerly typed his one-sided missive extolling the virtues of what he thinks obama “meant to say” two weeks ago. yes, it was dan who extolled the virtues of gov’ment making rich white guys richer via tax credits, and by taking private property from ordinary, tax-paying, successful small-business owners, and giving it essentilly to Carilion….who now doesn’t want it. for every tune dan sings, there is often another one he sweeps under the rug.
Pammala, your transgressions extend far beyond mere spelling; you waterboard every aspect of the entire freakin’ language along your whipping boys logic and reason. The only person on this blog that does more damage to conservative causes is your half-witted twin Jethro the Dodo, although (door)matt is the object in your rear view mirror that is larger than it appears. You guys are without a doubt our village idiots.
Frank, I’ve got to get in and say you’re way off with your complaints and the examples you’re basing them on. You seem so determined to believe in scary fantasies of an out of town racial episode being deliberately unreported, and inexplicably relating it to the local coverage of Gainsboro development, that you’re imagining links and motives that don’t exist.
Besides the primary sources that Sandi gave you about the Norfolk story, you don’t seem aware that the RT has always reported on problematic matters pertaining to its’ own personnel. It’s from the RT itself that we read of a BAC transgression by one of its’ writers in recent years, and before that coverage of a lawsuit involving the photography staff. It has also covered the Gainsboro redevelopment controversies from the beginning, which would be at least fifty years or more. Anyway, that’s a subject that needs deep perspective to gauge, from the area’s earliest days through the era of the Yard and northwesterly black migration, to an overall knowledge of the urban transitions in Roanoke’s history. You admit you’ve only observed Gainsboro since the ’80′s, mostly on occasional drives through it. It’s a shame you think that’s sufficent to judge either the development issues or their coverage; a shame on you, that is.
It’s especially ironic that you use the Richmond Times-Dispatch as a comparison. The RTD resolutely supported projects like the Powhite Parkway’s destruction of the Oregon Hill neighborhood. Should we think their coverage and editorial support of Oregon Hill redevelopment was support for government intervention in the private sector? Because it certainly was, in a much more overt way than RT support for any similar process. Under the Bryan family the RTD has been much more ideologically driven and reportorially proscribed than either of the papers that you condemn(Roanoke & Norfolk). Fun fact: as a college student in the 1950′s, RTD publishing heir J. Stewart Bryan III had a mysterious car wreck on Roanoke’s Airport Road that landed him in General District court, an episode noted by the RT’s predecessor paper but not by his daddy’s RTD. Shall we invent some crazy connection of that story to anything else?
Meanwhile, The RT’s owner, Landmark, made important precedent in a 1970′s Supreme Court case about publishing information about public officials. There has never been the corporate culture at their properties such as you imagine.
BTW, I get your Butt Hollow reference but don’t think it makes any worthwhile point, nor is it even clever. If clarity of thought were assessed like neighborhoods, yours wouldn’t even be North Beverly Heights, it’d be a pre-redevelopment ghetto. You know: an area that the private sector’s prejudices lets get so bad that the public sector has to step in and restore it to livability. You’re so clouded by resentment at the RT that you see shadows where there are none.
A small but delicious clarification of my previous post: The Bryan era at the Richmond Times-Dispatch was in the past, and the paper is now owned by a subsidiary of Warren Buffet’s Berkshire Hathaway. You know-THAT Warren Buffet, supporter of restoring the 1990′s tax rates and a guy who’s honorable capitalist credentials make most anyone else’s pale by comparison.
Sandi,
Your links do nothing to prove your statement from an earlier post: “They did not want to seem like their employees being “attacked” was news when in reality, the people who are often involved in similar situations are not remarked upon at all. The police blotter is apparently pretty normal with such incidents.” You have failed to show us how violent assaults by a mob of 100 teenagers is a common occurence, in Norfolk or anywhere else, and is not newsworthy. The most telling statement contained in your first link is: “As journalists, we report facts, not assumptions.” Well, the FACTS were widely available to anyone who chose to ask their OWN reporters what happened. Yet, for a little over two weeks, the Pilot kept this entire story under wraps, even though it was their OWN reporters who were attacked. How strange (regardless of the spin and excuses you or the Pilot provide).
“Wave after wave of young men surged forward to take turns punching and kicking their victim,” Washington wrote. Forster stepped from the car to confront the rock thrower but was punched by him and several other black males, the police report says. When Rostami tried to reach over the driver’s seat and pull Forster back into the car, she was struck in the head, cheek and eye areas by a black assailant standing outside the car, the police report says. They (the two victims) told Washington that a responding police officer did not take witness names and told Rostami (the woman victim) to ‘shut up’, and that the attackers were probably teenagers from nearby public housing.”
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/05/02/11507850-questions-raised-over-virginia-newspapers-delay-in-report-of-attack-on-reporters?lite
Your second link does nothing but prove my point. Both victims were out of work for a week due to their injuries. The female victim now “fears to be alone in her home.” That sounds pretty serious. Injuries that caused them to miss work for a week? A violent assault that now causes the female victim to live in fear in her own home? But sure, none of that is newsworthy, even if they are both reporters and are the best primary source one can interview regarding the incident. The hypocrisy in claiming this was not newsworthy is alarming.
And your final quote from your third link is just silly, desperate really. “A reporter making routine checks of police reports would see “simple assault” and, if the names were unfamiliar, would be unlikely to write about it.” Reporters did not NEED to check police reports, other than to corroborate the victims account. As I previously stated, they already had the best source possible to get the facts from this case…their OWN reporters who were the victims! Everyone at the Pilot had to have known about the violent beating; they were out of work for the next week. Hmmm? “Anybody know where Forster and Rostami are??” “Yeah, they suffered injuries in a violent beating the other night so they are gonna be recuperating at home this week. Forster’s ribs ache, he has lumps on his head, Rostami was punched in the face and eye and her hair was violently pulled and she is scared to death to be in her own home alone.” –Sure Sandi, none of this is newsworthy. You keep believing that and making excuses for the Pilot (and the RTs) failure to report the news.
Finally, I asked the question above that Frank was too PC to ask: Do you really feel that if the races of the victims and attackers were reversed that this probably wouldn’t have made headlines all over Va., if not the country? Can you imagine the “reporting” if a mob of 100 white youths violently beat two black reporters senseless for no reason? Norfolk would have been graced by visits from the wonderful Al Sharpton and other race-baiters screaming for “justice.” You and I both know it, but only one of us is willing or objective enough to admit it. Keep being a hack Sandi, it’s what you do.
sandi, you left out the best quote from the virginian-pilot’ Ms. Washington, “They (the two reporters…) had stopped at a red light, in a crowd of at least 100 young people walking on the sidewalk”. Michele Washington is the Editorial Writer for the virginian-pilot…
yep, all those “young people” were just “walking on the sidewalk”, all 100 of ‘em… great story telling, where’s the happy ending? …swept under the rug, although in this case it was washed down the storm sewer in Norfolk, va, at the intersection of Brambleton and Church.
#273 “i don’t capitalize on purpose…for that very reason, and i also “through” in a mis-placed and/or mis-spelled word every now and then…”
Get that, folks? If Frank ever makes a mistake, he did it on purpose. He already said so.
How elementary schoolish, Frank.
LOL, Dan is “narrow-minded” but Frank is not? That is too funny!
matt, does it escape your genius that if indeed the two VP employees had been attacked by a mob of 100 that they would likely have ended up dead, not just “assaulted”? Your entire post, trying to make a mountain out of a molehill speaks volumes about who is the “hack” here and who is not. Pitiful, that is what you are.
Re: Comment by Frank — July 27, 2012 @ 3:43 pm
i don’t capitalize on purpose…
———
I purposefully don’t read comments that are all shouts (i.e., all caps) or comments w/o relatively standard English, capitalization, and punctuation.
So, I guess we are even.
True communication is difficult enough w/o folk trying to make it more difficultly.
“I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I’m not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.” — Robert McCloskey
gdad, gee,you saw write thru that line, didn’t you, you big, smart guy. no fullin’ you, that’s for sure!
warren, my man, there you go with the personal stuff. by the way, i’m very familiar with the Gainesboro case, as it was written up in 2008 by the rts, and i was aware of it decades ago. my point, which you have missed, is simple: dan wrote his resurrection piece for obama by extolling the virtues of the local gov’mint enabling two already rich white guys, and the largest and most powerful corporation, well…to get more rich, more larger, and more powerful. and, they took the private property which housed a successful SMAll BUSINESS to transfer to the biggest and most powerful corporation….and that powerful corporation didn’t even want it. somehow, since dan’s piece was almost entirely written about gov’mint enabling small business to achieve success, i thought i’d share just a little bit of the other side of the story.
and regarding Gainesboro, i think the entire city council has been derelict in it’s duty to in it’s failure to think of a way to “enable” some already rich white guy or gal’s companies to receive some of our tax dollars and use them to leverage their investment in THAT community. i know, it’s simply not as easy as i might make it seem, but i do know that unless someone on council, or someone in the rts made an issue out of it, it has a better chance of happening than simply ignoring it. as dan did in his “small business” ode to the potus.
Sandi, matt is distorting the facts in a feeble attempt to make his feeble point. Actually his point is not feeble. His point is nonexistent.
Example: matt writes: “You have failed to show us how violent assaults by a mob of 100 teenagers is a common occurence, in Norfolk or anywhere else, and is not newsworthy.”
Actually, matt made up the part about the violent assault by a mob of 100 teens. The original report in the paper did not say that. The newspaper wrote that they had stop the car at a red light, where there was a crowd of about 100 teens on the sidewalk. It didn’t say all 100 attacked the two reporters in the car. It said that the reporters told the police at least 30 had participated. It does not say that all 30 of those threw punches or rocks. Whether did or not is unclear, but it’s doubtful.
matt either made up that part intentionally or his poor comprehension skills led him to a bad conclusion, and that caused him to exaggerate the size of the so-called “mob.” In the former case he would be being disingenuous. In the latter, just plain old dumb.
The king-hell irony of the whole situation is that matt (and everyone else who heard of this incident) knows about it precisely because the newspaper wrote about it. The newspaper PUBLISHED A COLUMN ABOUT IT, two weeks after the fact. Then they got hammered by some people who obviously don’t understand the news business for not publishing something sooner. It’s actually hilarious when you think about it from that perspective.
But let’s look at the facts.
1. It was coded by police as a simple assault, which likely means that the newspaper’s police reporters never saw any mention of it. In Roanoke, simple assaults hardly ever make The Roanoke Times because the police don’t tell the newspaper’s police reporters about them. And the Roanoke police DO NOT give the paper’s reporter access to their crime reports. They COULD, and the SHOULD, but they have elected not to, and they are allowed to make that called because of a big, fat exemption in the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (which I’m sure ONE MORE THING matt is woefully ignorant of.
2. It is likely that the Norfolk police didn’t issue a press release about it. Why? Because the victims did not require hospitalization. For example, that is one of the bars for traffic accidents (unless it involves a crime such as DUI, or there is something else extraordinary, like it caused a 3-hour, 12-mile backup on I-81). If there is no crime, no severe injury, and no other extraordinary circumstances about the wreck, it is unlikely to make the newspaper. If I was involved in a fender bender, and I wasn’t arrested or otherwise charged in the accident, and nobody was seriously injured, I doubt the RT would publish a story about it. The last time this happened to me was in Annapolis. I hit a telephone pole head-on while driving to work early in the morning (I was avoiding an idiot driver who swerved in front of me). I was treated and release at the ER, and I missed 3 weeks of work. I also wore a neck brace for 8 more weeks. The other driver was charged with negligent driving. There was no story in the Annapolis Capital about that.
An even bigger irony in all of this is that matt, and some other know-little critics, have criticized the RT for not reporting this. Any reader who has half a brain already realized that HARDLY EVER do we report on violent crimes in other Virginia cities. When was the last time you ever recall reading, in The Roanoke Times, about an armed robbery in Virginia Beach? It was a long, long time ago, if we ever carried that stuff. We just don’t carry that stuff.
They MIGHT have a shred of an argument IF the two reporters were attacked BECAUSE they were reporters for the the newspaper. That would be a different situation. But all the facts say the much-less-than 100 youths who attacked had NO IDEA who the two victims were — it was just a random vandalism and simple assault.
But, as I well know, critics such as master’s degree matt will grasp at ANY straw, no matter how slender or silly it is, in order to level some concocted criticism. And sometimes, they even make stuff up, because they realize how weak their argument is. That’s what it appears matt has done in this case — although it may also be simply because he’s dumb.
dan, glad you put some effort into your response. your va-pilot brethren swallowed what the police said in this case pretty easily, don’t ya think? the fact that the assault didn’t show up on a police blotter was good enough for your sister paper…even though the paper had the 2 best primary witnesses they could possibly hope for, right? oh, except for one teenie little thing…did the fact that these two victims were not black, asian, or hispanic have anything to do with your sister paper’s squelching the story?
doesn’t it bother anybody that something like this can happen to innocent people, black, white, whatever, and it not make the police blotter? dan, did you read about the injuries to your fellow newspaper journalists?
if something like this can just “happen” and nothing be done about it, do ya think the perptrators might think they can get away with it again? and if they DID try it again, the public would never know about it unless the injuries were “more serious”… somehow, that doesn’t seem like good newspapering to me.
time for bed dan, so one last thing…this wasn’t a car accident.
Frank,
You’re making yourself look sillier with every post that you write. Did you know that?
Did you know that the era of the “police blotter” died about 40 years ago?
Did you know that police departments don’t have “a blotter” any more?
Did you know that Virginia police departments ROUTINELY withold daily crime reports from the news media, and that the police departments pick and choose which ones to release, and they still don’t release the crime report — they write a press release?
Did you know that the media has in the past fought against this practice?
There are arrest logs the media can consult, but do you realize that no arrests were made in this case?
Did you know that the two reporters in question were treated on the scene by EMTs who judged their injuries not serious enough to go to the hospital?
Did you know that they didn’t go to work for the next week?
Do you have any proof that the Norfolk paper routinely runs police briefs about crimes categorized by the police as “simple assaults” that include injuries no severe enough to go to the hospital? (If you do, let’s see it).
Frank, your answer to every one of the questions above has to be “no,” for all the silly blathering you are doing about this three-month-old minor crime all the way on the other end of the state.
Just by the way, folks: in keeping with the long ago announced policy on this blog regarding people who use multiple nicknames, I feel compelled to disclose that the person posting here as “Frank” was recently ALSO posting here as Frank Peck.
Remember, we like posters to pick one “handle” then stick with it, so as to avoid sock puppetry and confusion.
hey dan, did you know that those 2 reporter victims were first person sources for a crime?
OMG, I just realize what Frank and matt are so worked up about. They’re among the self-righteous bigoted right wingers who work themselves into a faux lather about the media supposedly hiding every crime committed by black criminals on the innocent put-upon white race while making white people seem like demons constantly attacking black folk. You see these threads all the time at places like Free Republic or in websites run by people like Bill White.
Frank claiming ahead of time that any spelling errors are on purpose was a new twist, though.
#287 Dan, re my comments above: If Frank and matt are among those who obsess about such incidents, they will continue to argue and argue and argue and, if they haven’t already (I haven’t read all the posts), start to shower us with other examples where the media hasn’t sufficiently, in their eyes, publicized black on white violence.
“#287 Dan, re my comments above: If Frank and matt are among those who obsess about such incidents, they will continue to argue and argue and argue and, if they haven’t already (I haven’t read all the posts), start to shower us with other examples where the media hasn’t sufficiently, in their eyes, publicized black on white violence.”
Usually people who obsess about the oppressed white majority are a little quicker on the ball, though. They don’t wait 3 months before they suddenly discover “the unfairness!!!!”
Next, they’ll be claiming Rosa Parks never paid for her bus ticket.
After skipping the vast and empty inches of Matt’s and frank’s posts, I’m beginning to appreciate SuzieQ. If nothing else, she’s brief.
Dano the entertainer,
“You have failed to show us how violent assaults by a mob of 100 teenagers is a common occurrence, in Norfolk or anywhere else, and is not newsworthy.”
Where in this sentence (or anywhere else in my post) does it state that all 100 teens participated in actually punching or kicking the victims? A mob: A large crowd of people, especially one that is disorderly and intent on causing trouble or violence. Whether or not all 100 teens in the mob participated, the 100 number actually came from the VICTIMS. So, I guess Dan just doesn’t believe them. As for how many actually participated in the punching and kicking, from the contortionist Michelle Washington’s original report from May 1: “Wave after wave of young men surged forward to take turns punching and kicking their victim.” Wave after wave? Hmmm…sounds like a lot of them participated to me. And “The responding officer coded the incident as a simple assault, despite their (the victims) assertions that at least 30 people had participated in the attack.” And “The officer pointed to public housing in the area and said large groups of teenagers look for trouble on the weekends.” “It’s what they do,” he told Forster. But, since Dan is all-knowing and claims it’s “doubtful “ that 30 teens actually participated, then that certainly must be the case. Hey, he is an opinion columnist after all. When it comes to facts and objectivity, we know nothing gets past ol’ Dano. Either way, it’s funny to see Dan play semantics with the 100 number and then use it as the general theme for his entire post of drivel when it was never asserted that all 100 teens participated in the actual violence of the incident. But, we must remember: Dan admits to being “subjective as hell” and never worrying about those silly “ethical standards in journalism.” So, if he needs to twist and distort things to fit his subjective tripe, he admits that he has no problem doing just that.
Dan says: “If there is no crime, no severe injury, and no other extraordinary circumstances about the wreck, it is unlikely to make the newspaper.” First, this obviously wasn’t just a car accident as Dan equates it to. Dan somehow feels that he pulling an Obama Sr. in Annapolis and a violent, unprovoked beating by a large group of teens are fairly close to the same thing. Many people would disagree. As for there being “no crime” or no “extraordinary circumstances,” most would probably disagree with that statement as well, especially the victims of this case.
Finally, bachelor’s degree Dano goes on to give props to the paper: “The newspaper PUBLISHED A COLUMN ABOUT IT, two weeks after the fact.” Sweet. Good job. It only took two weeks for them to publish a story about their own reporters being beaten four blocks from their office. Kudos to them. They must be “journalists” in the Dan Casey/RTs vein. From M. Washington’s column on the incident: “How can we change it if we don’t know about it? How can we make it better if we look away? Are we really no better than this? I think, in regards to el Dano, we all know the answer to those questions…
Oh yeah, Dano: police blotters. You might want to actually scroll up and read that it was your very own truth monger who introduced that one. “The police blotter is apparently pretty normal with such incidents.” –Sandi. Yikes. It needs better training, Dano.
matt, don’t you seen the irony in bashing a newspaper for publishing something two weeks after the fact when your distorted criticism comes 3 months after the fact?
I mean, really.
Or, are you part of “the conspiracy” to keep this covered up?
“…but do you realize that no arrests were made in this case?”–Dan Casey
http://hamptonroads.com/2012/05/3-more-teens-charged-beating-pilot-journalists
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/05/03/11524741-teen-arrested-in-mob-assault-on-2-reporters-in-norfolk-va?lite
Yikes.
matt, who is speaking up for Frank, AT the time the newspaper reported it, no arrests had been made. That’s why the arrest logs, which are available to the media (unlike incident reports) were useless.
Now matt, why don’t you tell the rest of us whether there’s a relationship between you and Frank and tell us what that is?
hey dan, yer underwear needs some freshening up. oh wait a minute, that’s your line, isn’t it? haha.
From matt on July 21 @ 9:15pm
While addressing our “Favorite” whiny crap flinger, wrote:
“It is quite obvious that you are unable to stay focused and carry out a rational and coherent point without flailing yourself off the deep-end with ugly insults and embarrassing vitriol.”
matt, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. Not only for the laugh I got while reading that, but from now on, whenever I read any of Sandi’s posts, rather than thinking how sad it is that she invents hate to constantly whine about, I will actually get a little smile while I play that little “mind movie” you placed in my head.
By the way, to the rest of ya, I actually read and commented on the other thread before reading this one, thanks for missing me. (wink)
“Anybody remember SharonN?”
Yeah, thanks for reminding me…. words…words…words… filler…filler…filler… new opinion of gays….filler…filler…filler…. take a naps….. more words…. blah, blah, blah….. did you know my boyfriend is black…..filler, filler, filler….. redundant, redundant, redundant….. The last sentence sums it all up.
That Sharon N?
Comment by John Wilburn — July 22, 2012 @ 12:02 pm
John, John, John, if people would actually learn to READ, I wouldn’t have had to have kept repeating myself.
Case in point: I never said I had a “new opinion” of gays. Accusing me of that suggests that I used to have an unfavorable opinion, but changed my mind, when that has clearly not been the case. What I changed my mind about was same sex marriage.
It’s true that I may have mentioned my BF in that post, when I mentioned to my neighbor that when he thought of the Tea party, I knew he had been told that we were all racists, and he could clearly see that was not the case, likewise the Tea Party did not “hate” gays, no matter what he may have been told.
In the beginning, when I came here and everyone knew I was “Tea Party”..some started calling me “racist”..At FIRST the only thing I said was that anyone who KNEW me knew I was not now, nor had ever BEEN “racist” I tried to leave it at that, ’til some folks still wouldn’t leave it alone…so, I mentioned him, and ten years, and then still had to mention his large family who none of THEM would call me racist either, nor would any friends I have. One, I won’t mention names, even said that I could have a black boyfriend for ten years and STILL be racist. Actually, after that little rebuttal, I didn’t mention it again, until commenting on my talk with my neighbor.
I have NEVER posted “Did you know?…..”
Get it right!!!
Yep, same Sharon N alright!
Sharon N, you enjoy your fantasies, whatever gets you through the night, I admit it is difficult to stay focused and carry out a rational and coherent point when I am talking to idiots of the first order who cannot put two thoughts together and who hurl “ugly insults” and “embarrassing vitriol” while whining that I am the problem. Your club is growing, but that is an embarrassment not a feat.