An anonymous blog poster’s expression of angst
Your daily Letter to the Columnist — Feb. 15, 2013
Dan,
I have attached a MS word document expressing my thoughts regarding your blog. I suggest you post this as a “guest letter” on your blog so we can get some feedback.
Otherwise, I will consider a letter to the editor as a way to make my thoughts . . . as well as many like-minded folks known.
Please let me know your intentions regarding posting this on your blog as soon as you can. Otherwise, I will peruse other avenues.
Thanks,
(Another) Chuck
Attachement:
Mr. Casey,
I will begin by quoting your invitation to participate on your blog: “ Metro Columnist Dan Casey knows a little bit about a lot of things but not a heck of a lot about most things. That doesn’t keep him from writing about them, however. So keep him honest!
He welcomes your rants, raves and considered opinions, so long as the language is civil (i.e. no four-letter words). He’ll read all your posts and may or may not respond.”
Recently, I posed this question on one of Dan’s blog articles:
Dan, is your blog an officially sanctioned blog by the RT/Landmark? Are you paid to run and/or moderate this blog for the RT?
I will explain later why I asked this question, so please bare with me in the meantime as I provide some background on why I asked this question and hope for an answer.
Dan, there are certain regular and semi-regular contributors (me included) to your blog that attempt to add to the true spirit of dialogue you have asked for in your blog introduction. For the most part, we approach your blog from a more conservative point-of-view. Some of these are, Frank, Leon, Pistol Pete, John Wilburn, mikeo, Dave Hicks, Mike3, Terps and me, Another Chuck.
There are some “flamethrowers” from the conservative side too, which I did not mention. Outside of some occasional frustration, this group I mentioned above, tends to present reasonable observations, cites realities that attempt to hold accountable our current leadership especially, President Obama.
Following is a partial list of the realities we ATTEMPT to discuss on a regular basis:
- Unemployment is at 7.9% which is higher than when Obama took office. Additionally, the “total jobs available” number has been reduced by 8.5 million jobs.
- More US citizens are on food stamps than ever before.
- More US citizens are on welfare than ever before.
- Our debt has amassed shockingly more under Obama’s leadership than under any other President. Note: His policies are responsible for the expansion of the economy as well as spending.
- The US credit rating has been lowered for the first time during Obama’s Presidency.
- We have not had a budget for the US in 4 years. The budget proposals that Obama has sent to the Democratically controlled Senate have received 0 Yay votes.
- Obama extended the Bush tax cuts in concert with both parties.
- Obamacare is a tax and another costly social entitlement program.
- Due to Obamacare, some employers are cutting employees hours to part-time status…under 30 hours per week.
Guantanamo Bay is still open. Drone strikes are on the rise.
- 4 US citizens died in Benghazi including our Ambassador. The Obama Administration blamed this on an anti-Muslim movie for up to 2-weeks. The fact that this was a terrorist attack was known by the White House within 24 hours.
- The influence and control of the Muslim brotherhood is spreading during the last 4 years.
- We question why Obama is targeting certain weapons and magazine sizes for law abiding citizens, when most of the gun crime is committed in urban areas with illegal weapons.
- Generally, we question Obama’s agenda and his choice of priorities as President.
- Obama has owned a combination of 100% and 67% of the legislative and executive branches. Yet, many blame GOP obstruction on Obama’s lack of success. I don’t believe there has been one actual filibuster in Obama’s presidency?
I have more if needed, but I hope this list is adequate to make my point which will follow.
I believe this is a reasonable set of observations, realities and concerns regarding the state of our country and the effectiveness of President Obama. Here are some actual quoted words and phrases that are written in response to these concerns by a very prominent blog poster:
“non-sensical ramblings,” “deceptive,” “stupid lie,” “loony-tunes,” “willfully ignorant,” “get yourself some learning so you can catch up with the adults,” “liar,” “hater,” “silly fiction,” “out of your league,” “like a cheerleader in high school lifting her skirt,” and “ignorant.”
All of these responses are from you, Dan! And this is the reason why I asked my original question:
My point is, if you are a paid, or even unpaid representative of the Roanoke Times, perhaps you should be more focused on the mission of your own blog, which I assumed you wrote yourself. In my opinion, this should include reasonable debate on “stuff” you don’t agree with, or, “fits in” with your liberal bias . . . without the insults!
I realize my participation in your blog is 100% voluntary. I will end by quoting a post from one of your very liberal followers written today:
“Dan, how far down this rabbit hole do we have to go? When will enough be enough? Cannot the Roanoke Times give these people a place to vent and sniff each other and leave us alone?”
Dan, is this you want? If so, this will limit your blog participation tremendously.
Best wishes,
Another Chuck
————————–
Response: Best wishes, Another Chuck.
February 15, 2013 - 6:00 AM
I read the column regularly but this is my first post because of all the reasons listed by Another Chuck. Yes, there are conservatives who post nonsense and insults on here…not based on facts but on bias. That, however pales in comparison to the more liberal who simply dismiss with insults those with differing opinions. Yes, Dan, you do insult your posters with whom you disagree. You do not encourage discussion and debate, but seem to want only to inflame and do anything that will encourage people to throw insults at each other. It reminds me of the old Enquirer at the grocery store. I remember when the RT was asking people what would help this paper and reading the responses. Sandy ( one of your avid supporters) wrote how people should be polite and respectful. I actually laughed when I read that knowing how she assumes that those who disagree with her (and you) are ignorant and how those who agree are intelligent and “understand”. I would love a place for discussion of topics, and honest look at things, or as you said: “a place where rants, raves, and considered opinions” are welcomed. This is a place where if you agree with Dan and his followers, you are welcomed. If you disagree, you are ignorant. You, Dan, choose what this column is and becomes. There is not one thing wrong with a liberal column or a conservative column, but call it what it is. Thank you Another Chuck for your letter. Perhaps the newspaper will provide a place for honest, respectful discussion that is less insulting and more open minded than here. Until that, I won’t comment again and wish you all well…no matter what your beliefs.
I can’t stop laughing.
Could this interview represent O”Reilly’s real views or was he engaging in a comedy routine?? What do you think AC?
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/02/12/bill-oreilly-calls-for-gun-registration-on-letterman-just-like-you-have-to-register-your-car/
FINALLY !!! Some sense and honesty too this so called journalist column! No response from the liberal column author either?! No surprise there. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if The Roanoke Times would seriously look into and report on the failings of the Obama “team”? Accurate AND fair reporting?! That would be fresh from RT. Thank you Mr. Another Chuck for finally getting the word out!
No Another Chuck, it would NOT “limit…blog participation tremendously”. It is my belief, and I have heard this from others, that if they did not face the right-wing hate for every opinion expressed they would participate or participate more.
I cannot help but notice your glaring omissions, you dare to pretend you and other right wingers have only offered “a reasonable set of observations, realities and concerns regarding the state of our country…”. That is patently false. You also chose to repeat only the “insults” you kind, decent almost all anonymous human beings received in response, while conveniently leaving out any of your insults to us as “Obama worshipers” and worse. You and I both know a quick search of the archives would turn up plenty of taunting, hateful, insulting and truly sick “wishes” for us and Dan, and yet you conveniently leave all that out.
Tell you what sparky, you go on up that chain of command and you cause as much trouble for Dan and his blog as your anonymous entity can muster and when you are met with the truth we will gladly deliver, it is not Dan that will be proved to be in the wrong.
YOU post whatever amount of bile you like, add that to Suzie, pammala, and the 4 others who do the same and multiply that over days-weeks-months time and you tell me that you would stand by and take it without responding in kind and without the rancor the lies and insults deserve? Hell, you do not even have the courage to sign your names to your posts, but Dan does.
You are barking up a tree that bites back, get over it or move on! The archives will back me up, not you!
Great response Sandi, true to form and I’m sure Dan is very proud. It’s a pity you’re out of your depth on every subject. Now, get back to your macrame and give us a shout when dinner is ready. Another Chuck, home run, out of the park.
Baloney! Sour Grapes. Sore Loser. Do you want some whine with your cheese?
I mean really. What it boils down to is the average Independent or Democratic voter has been bullied for DECADES by the so called “moral Majority/Conservative Movement/Tea Bag express. We are sick of being bullied so when we point counter point with you, guess what, you are offended. Sorry, we have put up with RW crap for years. The best way to stop a bully is to bully right back. The Hagel nomination as an example. How childish can the GOTP get? Well, if it takes 60 votes to confirm our presidents cabinet choices, next election cycle we need to make you he GETS 60 senators who will vote form him.
Expect more of the same. If you want to take your toys to another sandbox I will not care one bit.
Maggie,
My columns and this blog are two different things.
What a self aggrandizing jerk. And yes that is an insult.
“The influence and control of the Muslim brotherhood is spreading during the last 4 years” “Muslim brotherhood” really!?
Some proof please.
This is the stuff you “attempt” to discuss before doing any research.
I’m a bomb thrower, not a flame thrower. A flame thrower attacks other people. A bomb thrower just tosses out bombs to get the livestock to stampede.
“I’m a bomb thrower, not a flame thrower.”
I always love people who are proud of themselves for tossing out lies to get a reaction. What weirdness.
“My columns and this blog are two different things.”
Why is this so hard for so many people to understand? It’s not all that difficult a concept.
“Now, get back to your macrame and give us a shout when dinner is ready. ”
From the side whining and sniveling about insults.
another chuck, please change your anonymous name to sparky so we know who you are.
other Chuck I hope you don’t mind me copying and pasting your bullet points to my face book page. These days it’s rare I find something I can have and not be overtaxed for it!
I reject your reality and instead substitute my own alternative reality.
Good stuff from Another Chuck, great response from Maggie.
I do believe Dan’s column and this blog are two different things, however most of his columns’ purpose is to only bring the fire out of the Right.
Dan, I respect you for even posting Another Chuck’s letter. But I think this is were he may be going with this….
Although I am a total social conservative, I am a moderate fiscal conservative. I do believe we must have revenue as well as cuts to balance a budget. I am man enough to admit that. I do find topics I agree with on the Left…not many, but there is always some middle ground.
Have you ever posted a topic/column where you agreed with a small nugget of the Right’s platform? Or are you afraid to go there because Sandi, Kristen, Hillary, or Cold might declare mutiny and you will lose followers.
I posted earlier this week that division is killing this country. When might Dan Casey do a column or blog post that might try to heal us? Will there ever be a day that Kristen and I, or Sandi and Leon can find common ground?
Maybe someone like you Dan, with your platform, could create that environment by the words that you write.
Another Chuck,
Good post. Good list of “danoisms”.
I don’t come over here and comment very often. One of the major reasons is that I was often verbally “attacked” by the regulars because I have a different point of view. Dan, I rather enjoy reading your columns btw. This blog, on the other hand, often times becomes nothing but a “hate fest” on anyone who is not a liberal, worshipping at the feet of the POTUS. The points that Another Chuck brings up are valid. But I have found that anytime someone chooses to disagree with the liberal stance, we somehow become nothing more than haters and racists. I truly wish that the regulars were actually interested in discussion rather than attack anyone who doesn’t fall in line with the liberal agenda. Unfortunately, I do not believe this will happen on this blog. There are too many people, on BOTH sides, that tend to enjoy causing uproars and being too inflammatory to prevent civilized discussion.
Mr Casey:
Here is a great idea.
If the Roanoke area has another snowfall this year you could host
the first annual “Dan Casey Stowball Shootout”. This could be a
fund-raser event to aid your favorite charity.
Participants could align themselves with the Blue (Liberal) army
or the Red (conservitive) forces.
Participants could pay a fee to attend and the proceeds could
be donated to your agency of choice.
If no snow this season, plan on it for next winter.
The bloggers and writers could actually meet each other and
put a face to a blog name.
OOPS!! should be snowball, my bad.
“I will explain later why I asked this question, so please bare with me in the meantime…”
Are we to be spared nothing?
A while back it was Terps who casually referred to the Roanoke Occupy protestors as “scum”. Personally knowing several of them myself, I cannot think of a less apt descriptor. I just wonder how I could “respond in the true spirit of dialogue” with this person when all I wanted to do was slap him silly? One of your conservative posters, Frank, seemingly introduce each of his entries with the call, “Hey you libs…”. I’m not sure that’s an introduction to serious, civil discussion. Though only one of the “semi-regulars”, I edit and delete to maintain a civil, non atagonistic posture yet I’ve been called an “idiot”, “moron” and a “jackass”.
Let’s face it and I’m not telling you anything you do not already know. This is primarily a political blog (or so it has morphed) and it is run by Dan, a liberal, who proudly dubs himself a “provocateur”. He enjoys antagonizing and I think he does a pretty good job of taking it as well as dishing it out. Many of his statements are cringe worthy, but I’ve also noticed he’s the type of guy who can drop the sword pretty quickly. These things became evident to me about the second day I was on this blog as I’m sure they were to you. In other words, you knew pretty early on what you were getting into. I liken it to buying a condo and later whining about the regulations of the owners association. Much of your frustration I know is that this is a forum where the conservative view is the minority (a rarity for this area for sure). If that is your problem, you and I know you have a wide variety of conservative blogs at your disposal and they’re all just a click away. I suggest you give them a try.
Maggie, you and Another Chuck should move over to the Round Table, which is also offered by this paper and is much more closely and severely moderated. Insults from either side are not permitted. Which is fair. Some wanting to insult, lie and present right wing talking points without being called out? Not going to happen, not here and not there.
They won’t go to the RT because it’s boring. What they really want is to be able to sling their “Obomba’s a KOMMIE” and “democrats are TAKERS WHO CONFISCATE MY HARD EARNED DOUGH AND SIT AROUND AND DON’T WORD” crap without push back. Sorry if we can’t make that happen for you.
BAM, the Roanoke Times is a local newspaper, they do not have national correspondents, so no, they won’t be seriously looking into the Obama administration or any other administration except for those in Virginia government.
Why do people not realize that caolumns and blogs are separate things?
Over the years, I have participated in blog discussions in spurts. So, lacking the credentials of regularity in posting, I can only assess the comments of more regular users based on my limited interactions.
That being said…
Even a casual reading through a few posts and their ensuing comments clearly provides the reader with the nature of this blog: it’s a gladiatorial pit. Ideas and opinions are tossed into the fray, armed only with blunted facts and the armor of ego and self-surity. These ideas are often butchered, maimed, evicerated, bludgeoned, and, on occasion, eaten by tigers (both the red and blue variations of the species).
There is no decorum in the arena, no mercy granted. It’s a spectacle, bread and circuses to entertain the average reader. Seriously, you don’t draw crowds by promising a fierce display of roses and kittens.
Granted, I have had civil discourse with individuals who hold ideals opposite to mine, but in this environment, it’s still more of a head-to-head between opponents who respect the prowess and feats of their proverbial foe.
It’s less open dialogue, more combative ego… less outsmarting your adversary, more low-blowing the easy win.
And it works. Because violence sells, especially that particular brand that only a laptop or smartphone can provide.
On many other sites and forums, I would agree with AnotherChuck’s issues: however, in this particular venue, it’s really comes down to, “If you can’t stand the kill, stay away from the games.”
And, then, remember that’s all this is… a game. With occasional tigers.
And Maggie, if you believe that the right wing insults and bile “pales in comparison” to the liberal posters or Dan, then you are not being honest or fair and have no call to complain. Some have cleaned up their act in preparation for this diatribe and some because they knew they could get booted, but NONE have stopped insulting, telling lies and repeating right wing talking points that are just sophistry. That is not debate is is baiting. Henry even admits it.
I have told the Roanoke Times on several occasions and venues to give the right wingers a blog and why they will not do so is beyond my ken. Everyone, even people whose ideology I despise, deserves an outlet. Then only the people who WANT to engage you people will do so and the rest of us can live in peace and relative harmony discussing reality and issues. They have right wing columnists and even a Roanoke Times hater, why not give you all a blog and make money off your hate? I have no clue why, but it sure seems like a no-brainer to me.
#15 Good idea, Sandi. The Round Table can always use more people interested in serious discussion. But I suspect that some of these folks (not necessarily AC, mind you) are just pissed off by the idea that anybody would insult right wingers anywhere.
Wow!
“Print my letter as a guest post or I’m telling your boss.”
Nothing says “I’m reasonable” like dropping an ultimatum on a man who provides you a FREE service and owes you NOTHING (then reiterating the threat, no less).
And as far as limiting blog participation is concerned, it’s not at all a concern. The conservatives could have their own blog (and do) but they’d still be here and you know it. It’s not about engaging like-minded individuals; it’s about the conflict – it’s about the debate.
Look, AC, you and I started to have a good discussion the other day before it got derailed by other posters. I silently moved on and you decided to go back to the tit-for-tat with them. I have news for you: that was your own fault. You could’ve ignored the others and we could’ve continued our reasoned conversation, but you chose to engage them instead. This belies your claim that you only want some reasoned discourse. The respect I gained for you that day quickly fades when reading this letter.
This comes off as nothing more than a giant whine about not getting your way. Do you roll up in other people’s houses and demand they turn the TV to what you want to watch? Do you book a room at the Super 8 and demand that they provide you with Howard Johnson shampoos and conditioners? You are fully aware that this is a left-leaning blog and you still come here regularly. To demand that your choice of topics be discussed is the equivalent of walking into a Taco Bell and demanding they start making McRibs. It’s positively reeks of an entitled mindset (you’re against those, right?). That’s not very conservative OR libertarian at all, IMO.
Seek and ye shall find: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=conservative+blogs
I sincerely wish you luck, but please don’t dish us this self-serving tripe again. It only makes you look like a spoiled brat.
Let’s just go through these talking points one by one, shall we. My response will be in italics.
Unemployment is at 7.9% which is higher than when Obama took office. Additionally, the “total jobs available” number has been reduced by 8.5 million jobs.
More net private-sector jobs have been created during Obama’s four years in office than during Bush’s entire eight years in office. The “total jobs available” has declined because Baby Boomers are retiring.
More US citizens are on food stamps than ever before.
More US citizens are on welfare than ever before.
That’s what happens in the aftermath of the deepest recession since the Depression.
Our debt has amassed shockingly more under Obama’s leadership than under any other President. Note: His policies are responsible for the expansion of the economy as well as spending.
Again, debt increase is what happens when revenue plunges during a recession and demands for services go up. The increase would have been the same, if not greater, under McCain because the recession would have lasted longer under his policies (just look at Britain, whose path he would have had us follow.
The US credit rating has been lowered for the first time during Obama’s Presidency.
According to the credit agency that lowered the rating, that was because Republicans, for the first time ever, threatened the full faith and credit of the United States by refusing a clean increase of the debt ceiling. It was the political dysfunction that illustrated not inability to pay our bills that led to the downgrade.
We have not had a budget for the US in 4 years. The budget proposals that Obama has sent to the Democratically controlled Senate have received 0 Yay votes.
You know this is wrong, yet you keep repeating it. The bills that supposedly represented Obama’s budget proposals were rejected by Democrats because they were put together by Republicans and did not accurately or completely represent Obama’s proposals.
Obama extended the Bush tax cuts in concert with both parties.
Only for the bottom 98 percent, which is exactly what he promised during both campaigns.
Obamacare is a tax and another costly social entitlement program.
According to the CBO, Obamacare will cut the deficit by more than $1 trillion in the next decade. It is designed to bring health care costs down, which we must do if we are to survive the aging of the Baby Boomers.
Due to Obamacare, some employers are cutting employees hours to part-time status…under 30 hours per week.
Yes, some are. Most aren’t, and many that said they would changed their mind following public backlash.
Guantanamo Bay is still open. Drone strikes are on the rise.
Liberals complain about both of these more than conservatives; though Gitmo only remains open because Congress blocked its closing.
4 US citizens died in Benghazi including our Ambassador. The Obama Administration blamed this on an anti-Muslim movie for up to 2-weeks. The fact that this was a terrorist attack was known by the White House within 24 hours.
Every question about Benghazi has been answered, repeatedly. The talking points were changed by the intelligence community to protect sources.
The influence and control of the Muslim brotherhood is spreading during the last 4 years.
And this is Obama’s fault because? Democracy is messy. As I recall, it was George W. Bush who hoped to light the fire of democracy in the Middle East. Did you really think they’d vote Republican?
We question why Obama is targeting certain weapons and magazine sizes for law abiding citizens, when most of the gun crime is committed in urban areas with illegal weapons.
Perhaps you recall the slaughter of 20 kindergartners? The slaughter of 32 Tech students. Etc., etc., etc.
Generally, we question Obama’s agenda and his choice of priorities as President.
Yeah. Well, guess what? You lost. Obama won. His priorities are the ones that matter, not yours.
Obama has owned a combination of 100% and 67% of the legislative and executive branches. Yet, many blame GOP obstruction on Obama’s lack of success. I don’t believe there has been one actual filibuster in Obama’s presidency?
Republican abuse of the filibuster has been unprecedented. I don’t know what you mean by a “real filibuster,” but nothing can get done in the Senate without 60 votes. Just yesterday, for the first time EVER, Republicans filibustered the confirmation of a Cabinet nominee.
You wonder why you’re not taken as seriously as you’d like? It’s because you put forth so much misinformation, disinformation and discredited talking points. Lots of us would love to have intelligent discussions and debate, but until conservatives rejoin the reality-based community, that will remain all but impossible.
I apologize if I don’t accept a pile of made up BS as a “differing opinion”. If someone wants to debate the value of the social safety net and its programs, fine. But we’re more likely to get the wingnuts who, instead, choose to denigrate the citizens who benefit from them. And I have no problem treating that sort of poster with the respect they deserve. None.
IMO, there is a difference between Sandi, for example, calling people names when she disagrees with someone (at times I think I can hear Sandi screaming at her PC screen as she types
than Dan, the host and moderator. This is especially true based up Dan coming up with a new “civility” policy just a few weeks ago.
I appreciate Chuck’s letter. They’re no reasoning with a die hard left wing nut job, which describes 90% of the posters here. Therefore, I rarely participate anymore, and am guilty as charged as a troll, bomb thrower, flame thrower, but I sure ain’t no flamer, oops, must be a homerphobe, and any other crass word the loony left want to toss my way.
I’m gonna hook Dan up with meet & greets with TED NUGENT!
pee pee on Sandi!!!!!!!!!!!!! Where’s your Obama avatar sheeple?
BAWAHAHAHAHA! Ladies and Gentleman, DAN RADMACHER!!
Biggest achievement in life is Bill O’Reilly mentioned his name!
Casey’s dream!
Mr. Casey,
Please tell Sandi, Kristen, gdad, and their friends to quit picking on Another Chuck at recess, and give him his ball back. I’m also concerned about the time he spends around Henry. We all know Henry likes to stir things up, but too often his actions leave Another Chuck shaken.
Thanks for your help.
Ron May:
“Could this interview represent O”Reilly’s real views or was he engaging in a comedy routine??”
It represents a new level of foolishness by O-Reilly. Bill O’Reilly is a very much an authoritarian. He’s a right-leaning one, but he always favors some law to fashion society to function the way he wants it to. As this video shows, Both Dianne Feinstein (authoritarian left) and Bill O’Reilly (authoritarian right) are in favor of the very same thing – full registration. Let this put an end to the notion that “conservative” = liberty or pro-gun rights.
J.M. White, AWESOME Google search, I did not know you could do that! I am impressed.
Hey, I know this blog tends to be more liberal. I feel like when I look at it I’m spying on the competition. Getting to that point…
@Dan The ACA (obamacare), despite its name, was designed to expand healthcare coverage, not bring costs down. The only way it decreases costs is by increasing costs on the young and healthy. You are welcome. Me, a young person that has just started earning his nest egg is paying healthcare for people who already had a chance to earn theirs. I guess that is paying my “fair share.”
Dan R, everthing you said there was debtable at best and incorrect at worst. I will reposnd to one of your statements.
According to the credit agency that lowered the rating, that was because Republicans, for the first time ever, threatened the full faith and credit of the United States by refusing a clean increase of the debt ceiling. It was the political dysfunction that illustrated not inability to pay our bills that led to the downgrade.
100% wrong…The underlying and the total reason for the downgrade was our unsustainable debt and the fact that there is no plan to deal with it.
Other than that one you wrote. Excuse, Excuse, Bush’s fault, GOP obstruction, Excuse, Bush’s fault. Don’t you see how disingenuous it is to absolve Obama of all responsibility>
Every time I read “I have attached an MS word document…” it makes me laugh. Someone’s taking this a tad too seriously.
By the way, both sides can be mean. I think generally people on this blog are respectful but sometimes passion takes over. Get over it. If you want enforce a civil discussion, join a debate team with rules and judges, not a blog. By the way, Thanks Dan Casey. Your blog is one of the more fun ones to read.
JM White, my letter was intented to express my opion that Dan should follow the mission of his blog, enforce the civility clause his created and reduce his own personal insults when folks disagree with him (Mainly on Obama.) He is a representative of the RT, not just a voice in the crowd like we are!
BTW, “Another Chuck”, you will not be sending any “letter to the editor as a way to make my thoughts . . . as well as many like-minded folks known”, because unlike Dan, they will not publish an anonymous screed. And I doubt seriously if the Editor or the Owners of the paper would put much stock in one either, especially not one so easily disproved.
Another Chuck,
I agree that this place is very biased, but it’s also completely voluntary and certainly not the only forum for free speech. I disagree with Dan’s logic and attitudes on a variety of things, but that doesn’t obligate him to be an impartial moderator. He has said himself that he is “baised as hell.” What’s the real complaint? I wrote off meaningful debate here some time back. The only thing I really dislike is his selective outrage of other bloggers’ civility in their posts. Left leaning posters do get by with more.
For the most part, this is a fun place to play, but it is not intended to be a unbiased forum that is impartially moderated. I bet if Dan were right leaning and the ratio of “liberal” to “conservative” here was reversed, you’d be just another voice in the crowd shouting “cry me a river”.
Not sure Dan is the one behind the decision to allow anonymous postings to this blog. While it’s admirable of some of you to use your real name, I suspect Roanoke.com knows that restricting posts to legal names, valid email addresses, accurate contact information reduces the number of participants. Advertisement rates are based on page hits, why should they do anything to limit the number of people they can count.
Signed
Wichita (not my real name)
Dan R, this article, although a few months old is a much better reflection of jobs created than the propogana the Obama Admin puts out: http://blog.heritage.org/2012/09/07/morning-bell-obamas-dismal-jobs-record/
Sandi, “Let Me Google That For You” has been around for quite some time.
It used to be a standard (smart-ass) response when someone would come into a forum and ask a simple or silly question. Just go to http://lmgtfy.com/ , enter the question and copy the resulting link back to the questioner. There’s even an embedded bitly link for shortening the output link (just in case your audience is lmgtfy savvy). It’s great fun for when someone comes in and starts demanding cites and/or proof of someone’s claim.
It doesn’t do much for reasonable, rational discourse, of course, but by the time you feel the need to use it, reason has often already taken its leave. It’s pretty much perfect for this blog.
JMWhite, that’s hysterical.
“They’re no reasoning with a die hard left wing nut job, which describes 90% of the posters here.”
Why are the “Bobs” who post here such liars?
@Another Chuck #41: You are still wrong. From the S&P report itself:
“We lowered our long-term rating on the U.S. because we believe that the
prolonged controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling and the related
fiscal policy debate indicate that further near-term progress containing the
growth in public spending, especially on entitlements, or on reaching an
agreement on raising revenues is less likely than we previously assumed and
will remain a contentious and fitful process.”
Heritage? Seriously, Another Chuck? What would you do if I put up something from moveon.org?
In any case, nothing in the Heritage commentary changes this fact: Obama’s job creation record far surpasses Bush’s. The difference in the article I linked has only grown in Obama’s favor since.
And, again, the labor force has shrunk because the Baby Boomers are entering retirement age (and many retired early during Bush’s Great Recession.
Sandi, I do appreciate the ability to maintain some privacy of this board. This is not because I am embarressed at all on the positions I take. The reason I choose this approach is to minimize my online footprint. Currently, I own my own small business, but I might want to change that one day. Employers today, diligently search all potential candidates online record in detail. One day, I might really want a position in a company that is lead by a liberal. Who knows, right? I don’t want to limit my chances over blog postings. I choose to look after my ability to make a living as a top priorority. If you’re not retired, you might to at least be aware modern hiring practices. If we ever happen to meet in public, I will be happy to introduce myself with my given name. BTW, several of my closest friend are VERY liberal. We just enjoy the non-political side of our friendships.
JohnW, I wouldn’t have thrown you or Dave Hicks in that particular pot. FWIW.
Dan R, Wrong!
“The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government’s medium-term debt dynamics,” S&P said in a statement late yesterday after markets closed.
What you quoted was a side-note…this is the reason!
A side note? What part of “We lowered our long-term rating on the U.S. because…” don’t you understand?
sandi, with maggie and another chuck ( aka sparky ) moving over to the round table, i too have a suggestion. why don’t you move over to the fridge magnet and post your comments. you could spew a whole bunch of leftwing crap then tell us what it tastes like.
Pistol Pete, “that environment by the words that you write” is and will remain, a two way street. I cannot tell if you all simply do not see your own insults and I cannot believe you can only see ours, but when we tell you over and over and over that they are there and you still deny it, when we show you over and over and over that your talking points have been debunked or refuted, I do not see how you can ask us to respect what is not respectable with a straight face. I get that you do it, I just do not get how you do it.
Dan, I know your standards of acceptability are different, but I really can’t believe you allowed that spewage by Bob #34. “pee pee on Sandi”? C’mon, Dan. Surely that violates the new civility standard.
Dan R, unless we address spending issues or we experience significantly higher expansion of the economy, we will down-grade again this year. It’s already being discussed by the rating organizations.
Dan Casey: providing folks enough rope with which to hang themselves since…when did this blog get started again?
I would love to see the Roanoke Times or ANY of the liberal Mainstream media take a serious look at Obama and his crimes. In usurping our Constitution, he has done plenty to make a case for Impeachment.
Since the Mainstream media has been in WORSHIP mode since 2008, I won’t hold my breath.
I now believe the US mainstream media is the most corrupt media in the world……
()<—- What is that you ask? The smallest violin player, playing the saddest of songs just for you and, Frank, Leon, Pistol Pete, John Wilburn, mikeo, Dave Hicks, Mike3, Terps.
Dan, I know your standards of acceptability are different, but I really can’t believe you allowed that spewage by Bob #34. “pee pee on Sandi”? C’mon, Dan. Surely that violates the new civility standard.
Comment by Dan Radmacher — February 15, 2013 @ 11:25 am
Dan R, I’m not sure it does. It depends on the mood of Dan at the time. Just yesterday, he told me it was Ok to call people names on this blog…which directly contradicts his civility policy.
Comment by Another Chuck — February 15, 2013 @ 10:33 am
That’s fair enough, AC, but you’re still holding Dan to what you think his standards should be. He was hired by the RT to be a provocateur, and he does that well. Sometimes, the way he acts and the things he says infuriate me… and that’s exactly what he wants and exactly what he’s paid to do, as a representative of the RT, no less. The RT isn’t going to stop him. Just look at the traffic that his blog brings to roanoke.com! Do you think for a second that they’re going to do something to disrupt the massive amount of page-views this site gets? Dan does what he does, and he does it well.
I came here because I remembered how his columns would piss me off (back when I read the RT) and wanted a chance to go a round or two with him. I damned sure didn’t come here expecting him to be on his best behavior, fair and balanced. Instead, I’ve met a wonderful, diverse group of people (some of whom take the internet WAY too seriously) and managed to stick around, even though I’m mostly a hit-and-run blog commenter. There is not a single person on this blog with whom I wouldn’t gladly meet and have a drink.
Regardless, this is still Dan’s house and any threats to go to his superiors, veiled or open, is a classless and tacky move.
Comment by scott whitaker — February 15, 2013 @ 9:37 am
An excellent post Scott, filled with accurate observations.
And, again, the labor force has shrunk because the Baby Boomers are entering retirement age (and many retired early during Bush’s Great Recession.
Comment by Dan Radmacher — February 15, 2013 @ 11:13 am
If the labor force shrinks, that means more jobs are available for the unemployed to get… and unemployment should plummet. Again, you are wrong! THe only thing that has “shrunk” is the number of available jobs (8.5 million less) since Obama took office. Just gone! I will use one of Dano’s favorties here, you are “out of your league” regarding the economy.
Another Chuck, I do not care WHY you post anonymously, I care what you say WHILE posting anonymously. Dan is not anonymous, he lives in this community, his family is here, he has to take whatever is dished out and it has often been far more insulting and brutal than anything you offered from him in rebuttal. Maybe he is just sick of it. If this is not his blog, if this blog is the Roanoke Times then that defeats the purpose of having it. Attendance remains voluntary.
I am well aware that there are valid and sensible reasons for remaining anonymous. I wish in many ways, I had done so, but that is just not me. I care when anonymous bloggers feel they can wield a cudgel with any credibility. If most of the people on here had to sign their name to their posts, the insults, as well as the outright lies, would be cut by 90% at least. It is a proven fact that anonymity emboldens the kooks as well as the credible. Sadly, few right wingers are credible. Therein lies your problem.
Comment by Dan Radmacher — February 15, 2013 @ 11:25 am
Come on, Rad. It’s Bob…
he’s like our very own little Tourette’s sufferer. He starts off fine, then instantly rails off and starts, in this case, blathering about golden showers.
Just chuckle and shake your head in pity like the rest of us.
hey dano,
In the direct and politly worded letter written to you by Another Chuck, there is not one word, sentence, or paragraph which conveys ….angst.
Instead, AC calmly and directly delievered to you his observations, pointed out some facts, and ended by sharing with you some advice.
But, since AC shares a political world view different from yours, you give him and his views stated in his thoughtful letter nothing but disrespect.
You just proved that you and those led by you can’t handle the truth.
…and the beat goes on…, …the beat goes on…
That’s fair enough, AC, but you’re still holding Dan to what you think his standards should be. He was hired by the RT to be a provocateur, and he does that well. Sometimes, the way he acts and the things he says infuriate me… and that’s exactly what he wants and exactly what he’s paid to do, as a representative of the RT, no less. The RT isn’t going to stop him. Just look at the traffic that his blog brings to roanoke.com! Do you think for a second that they’re going to do something to disrupt the massive amount of page-views this site gets? Dan does what he does, and he does it well.
I came here because I remembered how his columns would piss me off (back when I read the RT) and wanted a chance to go a round or two with him. I damned sure didn’t come here expecting him to be on his best behavior, fair and balanced. Instead, I’ve met a wonderful, diverse group of people (some of whom take the internet WAY too seriously) and managed to stick around, even though I’m mostly a hit-and-run blog commenter. There is not a single person on this blog with whom I wouldn’t gladly meet and have a drink.
Regardless, this is still Dan’s house and any threats to go to his superiors, veiled or open, is a classless and tacky move.
Comment by J.M. White — February 15, 2013 @ 11:55 am
JM White, I agree with your statement. The point of the intro part of my letter was to let Dan know I was serious about getting my feelings about the conduct on his blog “out there” I should have used less aggresive launguage. I have noticed that you have apologized at times when you have mispoke, I have too. We are quite the exception on this blog.
For anyone who wants to contact me directly, Dan has my email address and I give him permission to give it to you Sandi, or other regulars on this blog. I have nothing to hide. I’m just doing all I can to not limit potential career opportunities if they present themselves. By the way, I hate the fact that I need to do that and I think it is unfair. But, realistically, this is the world we live in.
Mr. Gresham and Scott Whitaker:
There is nothing in the mission statement of Dan’s blog that indicates this is suppose to be a liberal blog. If there was, your points would make more sense to me. If Dan wants this to be a liberal only blog site, the he has every right to change to that format. I doubt he wants that though,
Kristen:
“JohnW, I wouldn’t have thrown you or Dave Hicks in that particular pot. FWIW.”
No worries. The linear “liberal———-conservative” thinkers tend to think Dave and I are just a little less right of center than they are because we are pro-gun, but aren’t tea partiers. We often make it into that category when we shouldn’t.
AC, if I had authored that hot mess of self-pity and fail, I’d worry about my employability too. As it is, I’d blow up my computer and cancel my Internet before putting something that sad out there for other people to read. Seriously, this blog is free and voluntary.
In honor of our namesake, I would have entitled this thread “Fear and Loathing on Dans Blog”.
Another Chuck, in what realm of right wing thinking does the “Rationale” given by S&P mean it is relegated to “a side-note” instead of the realm of reality in which it is the reason for the decision? Your desperation to blame this all on the debt just makes it even more bi-partisan, which I am all for, but any serious and credible reading admits the truth, that revenue was down and that increasing revenue was also part of a viable solution.
In addition the mention in Dan R’s quote they posit:
“It appears that for now, new revenues have dropped down on the menu of policy options.”
“Standard & Poor’s takes no position on the mix of spending and revenue measures that Congress and the Administration might conclude is appropriate
for putting the U.S.’s finances on a sustainable footing.”
“The act contains no measures to raise taxes or otherwise enhance revenues, though the committee could recommend them.”
“…We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act.”
“In addition, it incorporates $950 billion of new revenues on the assumption that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for high earners lapse from 2013 onwards, as the Administration is advocating.”
It is ludicrous to say it was or is all about spending and you have to know that.
I have no wish to contact or meet you Another Chuck. I wish all anonymous posters would stop attacking and insulting from the safety of anonymity and claiming it is for any other reason though. Your admission that employers and business people might scour the internet looking for your bile is a pretty good reason not to put out the bile, not to hide while you do it.
For the record, I can be as mannerly, respectful and even friendly as anyone, but I do not bring that into a discussion that starts out maligning my beliefs and telling me lies.
This is the thing with that list, JohnW. He thinks he’s listing the standard bearers for conservative thought on this blog, and wraps himself, Leon the Birther, and HayFrank in the mix,but leaves out Suzie?? Suzie does what they do every day, more articulately and with more style, how ever annoying, all the time. Yet she gets left off because AC thinks she’s too purposely incendiary? Yet the Birther makes the cut. What?
comment by Bluemax: “I now believe the US mainstream media is the most corrupt media in the world……”
WRONG!
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/14/world/europe/six-more-british-journalists-arrested-in-hacking-investigation.html?hp&_r=2&
I’m pretty sure that News Corporation and it’s affiliates are considered conservative media, not the “liberal media” for which you speak.
Yo, Sandi, I just wanted you realize that I don’t care if you know my full name or not. And trust me, there is 100% chance we won’t be hanging out.
As far as out credit rating goes, if we don’t take drastic steps to lower out debt in the 1st quarter, we are projected to drop to an Aa1 rating by summer.
Funny thing about those meanie debt rating organizations, the don’t care about Obama’s excuses and his spin on what he passes off as the truth. And they do not care at all about the excuses you, Dan Rad and others make. The only thing that matters to them are the facts, the numbers and the action, or lack thereof to reduce our national debt.
“If no budget deal is reached in the early part of next year and the debt trajectory just continues to rise … then we’d be looking at a downgrade of a notch to Aa1,” said Bart Oosterveld, managing director at Moody’s sovereign risk group.
WOW! Bart Oosterveld is a hater liar ignorant, looney-tune….fill in the rest Sandi and Co.
You’ve got to be kidding me. And these people walk freely among us?
The president should put a few of these fat-cat bankers in jail then maybe they’d think twice about any downgrades.
Guess I might as well add my two cents. Another Chuck, the list of conservative ideas you give are 1) straight off Fox News of today’s conservative talking points and 2) obviously half truths at best. The fact that you guys write this stuff so consistently and in the exact same wording makes it clear that you are merely parroting the day’s agenda whether you believe it or not. Accordingly, it becomes really hard to take you seriously.
As for the name calling, baiting, etc on this site, there is enough to go around for everyone. If you feel jumped on, just read the next comment as someone else is getting it. Dan’s site is open and most of us come here accordingly. As for using your real name or not. I make it a point to not say anything to anyone I would not say in person and I use my name to back that up. If you are saying something that you would not want an employer or anyone else to know you said, then do not say it, pretty simple – it is not appropriate to say it.
If yo want a nice polite blog, try the Roaoke Times Editorial blog, they keep it much quieter.
“…but leaves out [name deleted]?? [name deleted] does what they do every day.”
Comment by Kristen — February 15, 2013 @ 1:38 pm
We’ve given her up for Lent, remember?
Yes Another Chuck, it is a “Funny thing about those meanie debt rating organizations”, they don’t care about your spin on reality and truth either. After their part in the financial collapse, I do not think for one moment that “The only thing that matters to them are the facts, the numbers and the action, or lack thereof to reduce our national debt”, but I can see that your mind is closed on the subject. Who’da thunk it?
Well said RJB!
AC, this is a rough and tumble place, to be sure. I dipped my toe in this pool several years ago, didn’t much care for the acrimony, and stopped posting. Not sure why I came back, but I think it has a lot to do with challenging my beliefs. Sure, there are some here that antagonize just because, but the real trick is to engage those who want to seriously discuss a topic and ignore those who are petty. I don’t agree with Dave Hicks and John Wilburn about guns, but I’ve learned from them. I do agree with Dave Hicks that the War on Drugs has been a bust.
Friction creates an opportunity for growth, for learning. I use this blog to stretch my mind, to keep informed. It is often passionate, sometimes crass, and always entertaining, and that’s okay with me.
“I would love to see the Roanoke Times or ANY of the liberal Mainstream media take a serious look at Obama and his crimes. In usurping our Constitution, he has done plenty to make a case for Impeachment.”
This is a fine example of the “differing opinion ” we’re supposed to pretend to take seriously?
JMWhite, sorry. I was genuinely hurt at her exclusion, when she does her best to shore up those lamers when she’s here.
Dan R- wrong again !
:We have not had a budget for the US in 4 years. The budget proposals that Obama has sent to the Democratically controlled Senate have received 0 Yay votes.
You know this is wrong, yet you keep repeating it. The bills that supposedly represented Obama’s budget proposals were rejected by Democrats because they were put together by Republicans and did not accurately or completely represent Obama’s proposals.
The presidents budget proposal goes from the White House to the senate, then the house. After a few years of Obama and the senate not doing their legal duty of passing a budget they passed some of their to go to Harry Reid’s desk and die. Ridiculous!
Compared to plenty of places on the www, this place is a cakewalk. Best not to bring a thin skin to the Internet.
Mr. Beason, the source of my information comes from many different sources, and most of the ones I mentioned in my letter are from the public records of the US. For instance, the budget office numbers say we are $6 trillion more in debt since Obama took office.
Jason, you always post thoughtful and tactful statements. We knew each other years ago….played golf together some and were on one of Buddy Sink’s teams together with Otey, Newsome , Sam Coles etc…My Dad, Bill was president of the Heights Club and coached the Blue team. I hope you are doing well!
I’ll just add this one more thing. When I first came to the blog I was more courteous of others and patient and understanding of others point of view. Why did I become so cynical and thick skinned?
Look in the mirror. Respect must be earned. Give respect and it will be given. With certain people on this blog, Not one bit of respect will be given, nor has it been earned.
SANDI– “I cannot tell if you all simply do not see your own insults and I cannot believe you can only see ours, but when we tell you over and over and over that they are there and you still deny it, when we show you over and over and over that your talking points have been debunked or refuted, I do not see how you can ask us to respect what is not respectable with a straight face. I get that you do it, I just do not get how you do it.”
In other words Liberals=ALL TRUTH — Conservatives=LIES
Wish Reagan was alive so I could call him a liar.
Now who sounds more like the brainwashed child?
Kristen:
“XXXXX does what they do every day, more articulately and with more style, how ever annoying, all the time. Yet she gets left off because AC thinks she’s too purposely incendiary?”
Spot on!
Jason Perdue:
“I do agree with Dave Hicks that the War on Drugs has been a bust.”
Count me in there, too.
“please bare with me”"…on one of Buddy Sink’s teams”
Um, no thanks, but that does explain a lot, AC.
Does anyone support the “War on Drugs” anymore?
Another Chuck – That is what I mean Chuck, you cite the budget deficit and indicate it happened under Obama’s watch. But you never detail that much of that occurred under GW Bush’s last budget that ran through Sept. opf Obama’s first year in office. You never mention that most of it is due to laws and spending authorized by the gOP under GW Bush. You never mention it occurred during the Great Recession tha tresulted in lost revenue by the government and increased spending to keep the States afloat. You mention only the part of the story trying to make the Obama Administration beat fault when in fact, they have minimized the damage these items have caused.
That is what I mean by your sourcves and the same old tired rhetoric.
For an example of Another Chuck’s purity of thought and civility, see below.
Suzie, the Obama worshippers on this blog love to cite this premise. They use the MEANINGLESS % of GDP statistic to support their argument. To be able to do this because they MUST ignore that HIS policies are responsible for the expansion of the economy (GDP)as well as spending control. Neither of these factors of the equation stand alone!!!NET RESULT: $6+ trillion in debt in his 4 years in office.
Dan is capable or reason, an intelligent point-of-view and debate. Why he chooses to continue this very misleading statistic is a mystery to me? On the other hand, Obama could sacrafice a goat in the Oval Office and Sandi and Kristen would cheer loudly about how the goat “had it coming” to him and how Barack’s brave actions taking on the beast will help the economy. Art Hill would state, “Cool, I love a good goat stew.”
Comment by Another Chuck — February 13, 2013 @ 11:44 am
AC: “The presidents budget proposal goes from the White House to the senate, then the house. After a few years of Obama and the senate not doing their legal duty of passing a budget they passed some of their to go to Harry Reid’s desk and die. Ridiculous!”
Truly ridiculous! Anyone with a basic understanding of the Constitution knows that revenue and spending measures, including budgets, originate in the House, not the Senate.
I did smile at the “bare with me” line. I could be wrong, but I don’t think Dan wants to get naked with you, AC.
For an example of Another Chuck’s purity of thought and civility, see below.
Suzie, the Obama worshippers on this blog love to cite this premise. They use the MEANINGLESS % of GDP statistic to support their argument. To be able to do this because they MUST ignore that HIS policies are responsible for the expansion of the economy (GDP)as well as spending control. Neither of these factors of the equation stand alone!!!NET RESULT: $6+ trillion in debt in his 4 years in office.
Dan is capable or reason, an intelligent point-of-view and debate. Why he chooses to continue this very misleading statistic is a mystery to me? On the other hand, Obama could sacrafice a goat in the Oval Office and Sandi and Kristen would cheer loudly about how the goat “had it coming” to him and how Barack’s brave actions taking on the beast will help the economy. Art Hill would state, “Cool, I love a good goat stew.”
Comment by Another Chuck — February 13, 2013 @ 11:44 am
Comment by wayne goodman — February 15, 2013 @ 3:59 pm
I thought that was pretty witty, Wayne. But, I guess you didn’t. Oh well. But notice, I didn’t call anyone an idiot, liar, out of their league, willfully ignorant, etc..
AC, weren’t you lecturing to me the other day about how to be more “effective” here? I bet even the you were crafting your little Unibomber “Publish my manifesto or I’m telling” word doc.
What, do you think Dans bosses can’t SEE THIS BLOG? You think you’re the first one to go whining? You might have the ability to blog here, but they can’t make us take you seriously.
I did smile at the “bare with me” line. I could be wrong, but I don’t think Dan wants to get naked with you, AC.
Comment by Debbie — February 15, 2013 @ 4:26 pm
Haha, nor me with him. I’m certainly not the worlds greatest proof reader!
Dan Rad, we no longer have a budget process. See the last 1387 days. If Obama was interest in having a budget to operate by, and the legislative branch was not doing its job….he could take it directly to the people like he did and is doing with Obamacare, gun control, pre-school and class warfare.
hey dan r,
please explain the purpose of the president’s budget proposals…why they are done, and where they go…do they get voted on, and by whom.
Are they required?
AC,
Your point to Dan Rad is right on point. Obama, and his minions, don’t want a budget. Heck, my wife doesn’t want a budget.
What a way to run our country.
Another Chuck, I hope you feel that you’ve gotten your chance to have a say in the letter above and the 16 comments you’ve put on this thread.
Now here’s mine, and it’s the only comment I’m going to make in response to your “issues.”
1. I direct you to the header at the top of this page. This is the “Rants and Raves” blog. That’s right up there above my mug. Surely you know what rants and raves are. Your assertion notwithstanding, there is no “Mission Statement” for this blog. If there was one it would be called “Mission Statement,” not “About this blog.”
2. Your statement that you “ATTEMPT” to discuss the long list of bulleted items above suggests that somehow, you have been prevented from discussing them on this blog. Do you really believe that? Almost every one of those statements has been posted repeatedly in the comments — by you. I can’t force others to agree with you, or engage in discussion with you, or stop them from disagreeing with you. This is a blog, man.
3. I never called you “a liar,” “a hater” or “ignorant.” I’m viewing that assertion in the context of your unreal claim Leon is NOT “a flamethrower” and that his observations are “reasonable.” Among many other unreasonable observations, Leon has repeatedly written here that Obama is ineligible to be president. (BTW, “Flamethrower” is your term directed at some other posters).
4. You seem unhappy that I occasionally express strong opinions regarding arguments and statements and actions by you. One example of such an action would be repeatedly posting “facts” that are so out-of-context that it strains credulity to pretend they are meaningful. You did this repeatedly on Saturday, posting the same national debt figures five or more times.
5. I have never discouraged strong language directed at others’ arguments. I have explicitly encouraged it, including in the thread about civility. But: A) I’ve repeatedly discouraged the use of four-letter words, racial slurs and certain other language in the comments. And B) I’ve asked people not to call each other names like “simpleton” and C) to respect the “handles” that anonymous posters choose for themselves.
5. Understand: There’s a key difference between calling a STATEMENT a “lie” and calling the person who makes the statement “a liar.” One never necessarily equals the other, except possibly in the wounded imaginations of people who are engaging in faulty reasoning. Comparing someone’s repeated attention-seeking actions to those of an ugly cheerleader at a football game is not the same as stating that person is an ugly cheerleader at a football game. Really. (It was a clever analogy, though). And the same applies to “nonsensical,” “ignorant” and other adjectives, as applied to statements, arguments, ideas, actions etc.
6. For someone who by his own admission values the opportunity to post his opinions here, such angst seems odd. Are you saying you’re entitled to your opinions, but that I should shut up about mine? That if an argument seems silly to me, I should never say so? Because I’m the moderator? Do you believe I should be limiting my comments to stuff like: “Interesting observation, Another Chuck!”
Go ahead and believe that if you want to. But please don’t delude yourself that such is the way things are going to work here.
Best wishes.
Dan, I will let the merits and thoughts behind my letter stand as is. Although, I do wish I didn’t write the word “bare.”. I appreciate you publishing my thoughts. I would thinks as moderator you would choose to remain somewhat above the fray, especially when “reasonable” arguments are presented that differ with your beliefs. Obviously, this is your blog and you can run it the way you see fit. Again, thanks for posting my letter exactly the way I wrote it….I imagine many bloggers would not have done that.
Dang, Dan, you and Sandi are so much fun to play with! Hey Sandi, now that you’ve used “Sparky” as a pet name for yet another person that is more intelligent than you, can we now rename you? I vote for “Queenie”. Heha, Queenie, get back up on the porch! Loved your last post Dan, absolutely does not need any further explanation. M-A-N-U-R-E.
Have a great day!
John Wilburn,
I guess I’ve finally found on which to agree w/Bill O’Reilly. However, I support a tax on all bullets of at least $2 per shell. I would support banning the sale of bullet/shell making equipment.
“Does anyone support the “War on Drugs” anymore?”
Yeah, the cops and the prison-industrial complex. Got to keep those warm bodies and federal dollars rolling in.
Another Chuck – “Obama has owned a combination of 100% and 67% of the legislative and executive branches. Yet, many blame GOP obstruction on Obama’s lack of success. I don’t believe there has been one actual filibuster in Obama’s presidency?”
Here’s a clue Another Chuck – what you “believe” and then post, Does. Not. Make. It. A. Fact.
“Filibusters used to be relatively rare. There were more filibusters between 2009 and 2010 than there were in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s combined.”
http://tinyurl.com/d5encp7
The filibuster is not in the Constitution.
The filibuster is not a “time-honored” tradition.
The filibuster is a symptom of the dysfunction of the senate.
A filibuster is a common tactic used in the Senate to prevent the legislation on the floor from passing
☻Every Republican in the Senate FILIBUSTERED the American Jobs Act October 11, 2011
☻Senate Republicans voted unanimously to block the Democratic bill to extend a lowered interest rate on student loans, 52-45, with one voting “present.
☻Senate Republicans led by Senator Corker (R-TN) FILIBUSTERED the Federal Aviation Administration reauthorization bill in order to demand a policy that prevents FedEx drivers from unionizing. [Secondary fact: Senator Corker's third highest campaign donor is FedEx.] http://tinyurl.com/cjtdvor
And just yesterday:
☻Statement from the Press Secretary February 14, 2013
“Today, Senate Republicans put political posturing ahead of our nation’s security. For the first time in American history, Senate Republicans FILIBUSTERED a nominee for Secretary of Defense – a member of their own party, a decorated combat veteran, and the right leader for our troops.”
These examples are just a 12 minute google search – there are actually hundreds of bills filibustered [obstructing].
So, AC, after your rant about having a “spirit of dialogue”, wouldn’t it be beneficial for that “dialogue” to encompass FACTS? According to you, “I believe this is a reasonable set of observations, realities and concerns regarding the state of our country and the effectiveness of President Obama.”
Your realities and beliefs need to be based in FACT to have a “dialogue”. Opinions should be based on “FACT” not your “feelings”
Are these examples of the obstructionism of republicans “reasonable observations”, in which I have “cite[d] realities”?
I certainly wouldn’t want you swooning and clutching your pearls over any incivility or “flamethrowing”…
Is walt your brother, Frank?
“please bare with me””…on one of Buddy Sink’s teams”
Um, no thanks, but that does explain a lot, AC.
Comment by Warren — February 15, 2013 @ 3:18 pm
It explains that I don’t always proof read well, and I played basketball for one of the best youth coaches in Roanoke’s history? Warren, what is your point?
Pistol Pete, I believe it is you “who sounds more like the brainwashed child” and the child who cannot comprehend the written word as well.
Another Chuck, I cannot decide if you are new to blogging or just new to the kind that blogs back, but the reason Dan’s blog is so popular is not the mud-wrestling aspect, it is his effort and his interaction with his bloggers. The only bloggers who even comes close to Dan’s devotion and interaction are Lindsey Nair / “The Fridge Magnet” and Kevin Myatt / “The Weather Journal”. Dan is consistently popular with readers and bloggers and his superhuman engagement, post moderation and varied topics, pictures and efforts have earned him many kudos.
You don’t like it? Leave. You have no right, no call, no complaint you can name that justifies you having even a fraction of influence on this blog or what is clearly working for Dan and us.
As I said, your deliberate gloss over the right wing and conservative insults we get while harping on what you feel they get in return is just plain whiny, childish and wrong.
Several of us have engaged you time and time again in spirited, fact filled rebuttals, overlooking the insults and whines, only to have you declare that we are wrong, that our sources are inferior or that we “worship” Obama. Another Chuck, YOU are the problem you are complaining about IMO and you just took credibility you could not afford to lose away from yourself. And that is all.
“Your realities and beliefs need to be based in FACT to have a “dialogue”. Opinions should be based on “FACT” not your “feelings.”
–Comment by Hillary
This is pretty much the crux of it, Hillary. The problem is, it’s difficult for many RWers to distinguish facts from things that aren’t fact at all. Once they believe something, they believe it’s a fact whether it is or not. The examples abound on this blog.
Sandi, I have been guitly of being insulting a small number of times, but I don’t believe I have named called much at all. On the other hand, you rarely make it through a paragraph with out calling someone a liar. I am flat our calling you out now….Your attitude and inflexibility is 80% of the problem with this blog. The others are bit players compared with you in terms of insults and rigidity. Anytime someone doesn’t kiss Obama’s as$, even with fact based arguements, you call them a liar or worst,then you google 5 links from some far left websites and act shocked how stupid anyone who disagrees with the “chosen one” (and you) is. Sandi, you are primarily responsible for the disfunction of this board. And that’s exactly why you whine to Dan, “Can’t the Roanoke Times give them a place to vent and leave us alone. Very sad!
Anyone who wants to contact me, and I cannot imagine why they would, can look me up in the phone book. I just prefer that all media interviews be scheduled in advance and only during business hours, thank you…
Just found time to read AC’s manifesto. Either the guy is blissfully ignorant of the facts, or he’s pulling our leg. Either way, he’s fast becoming a royal pain in the butt, and that’s probably the plan.
Comment by Another Chuck — February 15, 2013 @ 4:46 pm
“Dan Rad, we no longer have a budget process. See the last 1387 days. If Obama was interest in having a budget to operate by, and the legislative branch was not doing its job….he could take it directly to the people like he did and is doing with Obamacare, gun control, pre-school and class warfare”
Yes, at which time if the President takes your suggestion the RW of the republican party would call him a socialist dictator, a bully, fascist, a Muslim Marxist….
Oh yes Sandi – stop calling out AC and the others’ [ahem] “misinformation”, distortions; or their ridiculous and simple-minded RW mind-set. They often believe the parroted “manure” they spread – then, alas, become offended when they are told their “dialogue” s-t-i-n-k-s…
Heaven forbid they actually have to deal with FACTS, not their FANTASY, and then there you go, calling them out on their [ahem] untruths! Unheard of on any blog in the whooooole world!
Better to leave some wallowing in their own ignorance, especially when their only goals seem to be confusion, distraction, misdirection – anything but honest “dialogue”. I think a few of these posters have a real problem with a woman pointing out their lack of “truthful” postings.
I personally say, “you go girl”!
To my “friends” on the right:
“The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits.” ~ Albert Einstein
“If Obama was interest in having a budget to operate by, and the legislative branch was not doing its job….he could take it directly to the people.”
Such a statement demonstrates an incorrect understanding of the process. Under the constitution, the people may not pass a budget. The president may not pass a budget, either. Only Congress can do that. There is no plebiscite, for the budget or anything else.
It also demonstrates an incorrect understand of the bully pulpit, which is what “take it directly to the people” means.
It’s possible for a president to use the bully pulpit to appeal to voters to pressure their representatives on an easily understood, narrowly defined issue. Passing a budget is anything but that. There are tens of thousands of different issues contained therein, many of them incredibly abstract. And this is why there is no way to take “it” to the people.
Yes Another Chuck, I am clearly the problem. Now you sound like someone else we all know and don’t miss. You cannot beat me, not once, not ever, so you try to belittle and denigrate me. Well the joke is on you. Over and over.
AC So you don’t like Obama. So what? He is the President of this country. I didn’t care for George W. Bush, but I never spread the hate and lies that the GOP and Tea baggers do now. It all boils down to he’s black and mighty whiteys think they are superior humans. They can’t stand having a black man in the White House. Then they hate on Michelle Obama who has never been anything but a positive and respectful First Lady. I’m probably younger than you and I was still raised to respect the President of this country whether I agree with him/her or not.
America is not the world. As far as your islamaphobia; they are no worse than catholics and evangelical christians throughout history and today. So go back to your America hating ted (useless) nugent concert and stock pile your guns. Because people like you are embarrassing real Americans.
I give props to AC for being persistent and remaining civil. That’s it. I go back to my previous comment and ask if you can’t stand the heat…? Really AC, why are you here? You know Dan, you know and always have known he is a very active moderator, you have always known the majority here tend to the left, and unless you are totally blind you have always known scuds have been thrown from the left and the right, the single worst being from your side BTW. Do you think your standard pro business, anti government arguments are going to sway anyone here? They galvanize my concern for issues concerning education, environment, health care and the general well being of all citizens.
Again I think this has so much to do with Obama winning, yet again. With the fact that RWer’s cannot wrap their minds around the reality that there could possibly be a liberal majority point of view right here in the heart of NRA Land. The GOTP (thank you Sandi) lives in this good ol’ bubba boy bubble of RW invincibility and still cannot fathom that others, the majority, don’t share their point of view. That they are, alas, in the minority. And yes, you are in the minority. It’s grumbling and complaining and I have no sympathy.
Ok, Dan. So its ok that that the US has not had a budget in 1387 days. This has never come close to happening before in the history of our country. And after these 1387 days, Obama somehow missed the deadline for proposing this years budget. No lies here…just facts.
Wouldn’t a true leader that is willing to compromise be able to broker at least one agreement in close to 4 years? Obama is voting “present” as always.
“Ok, Dan. So its ok that that the US has not had a budget in 1387 days. This has never come close to happening before in the history of our country.”
I never said it was OK. You’re inventing that, for whatever reason.
It’s not OK to blame Obama for it. That’s what YOU’RE doing. No rational person with a half-decent understanding of the process would do that.
For the record: I have no idea why you’re doing this. But you do. Why don’t you tell us?
#113: “Warren, what is your point?”
Comment by Another Chuck
My post had nothing to do with the coach and former WROV basketball color guy, it was just playing off the name itself, “Buddy Sink” and its’ imaginative alliterations, along with your ominous insistence that we “bare with you”, and how perfectly they fit your Limbaugh-lite posts.
“Bear with me, (locked finger pokes the air), “or buddy, sink”.
What were you thinking I meant, AC?
Ahh, wrong again Another Chuck:
“Senate Democrats didn’t pass a fiscal 2011 budget because “Republicans were threatening to hijack the budget process and waste the American people’s time with pointless political votes,” a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told PolitiFact Florida. “Faced with this obstruction, we decided it would be a more productive use of the American people’s time to move on and address other issues critical to middle-class families.”
Our Florida colleagues also foundthat since 1983, the House and Senate have failed to pass a joint budget bill on four occasions.
For fiscal year 2003, the Senate, under Democratic control in 2002, failed to pass a budget resolution of any kind. On three other occasions (fiscal years 1999, 2005 and 2007), the House and Senate failed to reconcile their different bills and pass a compromise measure. In these latter three cases, the Republicans were in the majority in both chambers of Congress.”
http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2012/feb/02/paul-ryan/democrat-controlled-us-senate-has-gone-nearly-thre/
Now if you want to talk about what has “never come close to happening before in the history of our country”, let’s talk about the filibuster on Hagel. Pure partisan right wing politics!
And just in case you are not aware of how the spending works, passing a budget or a legislative spending/cutting bill is not that big of a deal. Continuing Resolutions happen and the wheels keep turning. Why this need to see a budget fight, is there not enough fodder in the partisan hopper?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuing_resolution
AC: Obama’s job, as Dan has explained, is to propose a budget. He has done that, despite the false accusation, repeated on this blog even after I linked to every single budget, EACH YEAR HE HAD BEEN IN OFFICE.
After that, it’s up to Congress. The Senate has opted not to take up a budget since 2009 because the House budget has been completely insane, and there’s clearly no opportunity to reconcile that with reality. Seriously, where’s the compromise between make sensible reforms that save $750 billion in Medicare (as Obama proposed) and the Republican position which is: End Medicare as we know it while simultaneously bashing Obama repeatedly for slashing $750 billion from Medicare?
Your party has gone nuts. Fix that, then get back to us. Until then, quit complaining.
“I have no idea why you’re doing this.”
He’s doing it for attention, and now he has 130 reasons to keep it up.
I’m guilty of feeding it, too, but not anymore.
Wow, AC, so we are going back a few years. I always thought that the best thing about playing for Buddy was how we brought together all these guys from different schools around the area and had a great time. For years after, we competed hard against one another, but the guys from that team remained friends. Hard to believe, Chuck, that was 40 years ago! Do you play bball anymore?
Wow, AC, so we are going back a few years. I always thought that the best thing about playing for Buddy was how we brought together all these guys from different schools around the area and had a great time. For years after, we competed hard against one another, but the guys from that team remained friends. Hard to believe, Chuck, that was 40 years ago! Do you play bball anymore?
Comment by Jason Perdue — February 15, 2013 @ 11:47
Jason, I know. It was an very cool situation for the Raleigh Court boys. to have you guys on the team. Sink wanted to win….period. He “recruited” in 1972. Anyway, no, I don’t play at all anymore, knees are shot, probably from trying to dunk forwever, a goal I never acheived with a basketball I did dunk a vollyball a time or 2. You guys were great teammates and their was not a minute of animosity. Thanks for responding, and its crazy its been 40 years!
AC, I play when my son and his buddies challenge me. They can’t believe a man of my girth could ever hoop. They describe the way I play as “old school” because I throw bounce passes and shoot bank shots and use a pump fake. Usually takes me about three days to stand up straight afterwards, but it’s worth it. The mind still remembers what to do, but the body cannot deliver. Good Stuff, Chuck!
Art Hill @131: He’s doing it for attention, and now he has 130 reasons to keep it up.
+1
LOL, good funnies this morning! Hey, I usually don’t enjoy working blue, quite the opposite. Obama cheerleaders bring out my Monsta’! Give me credit, I did say pee pee instead of piss!!!!!! Occupy Roanoke is now officially dead, so where else do you go to to have a little fun with brain dead liberals? Maybe I’ll try KOS or MoveOn.
Oops, sorry for the long pause, I had to reach a little for my bottle of water!
Obama to hold press conference today to announce what really happened in Benghazi!!! BAWA BAWA BAWAHAHAHA!!
I`ll be real anxious to hear from these liberal idiots now that their taxes are on the rise…and the REAL FUN part will begin when obamacare kicks in fully. They will finally get to see what they have been cheerleaders for…and they will cry…And despite the pain it will cause, I WILL find it in myself to LAUGH, and damned hard at that. Of course, it may not bother them at all…they seem to be able to walk hand-in-hand with misery.
“I`ll be real anxious to hear from these liberal idiots now that their taxes are on the rise…and the REAL FUN part will begin when obamacare kicks in fully. They will finally get to see what they have been cheerleaders for…and they will cry…And despite the pain it will cause, I WILL find it in myself to LAUGH, and damned hard at that. Of course, it may not bother them at all…they seem to be able to walk hand-in-hand with misery.”
–Awood aka Applewood
I love such smug, all-knowing statements, especially when they come from a poster who’s previously claimed Thomas Jefferson wrote something that was actually the work of some John Bircher/Joe McCarthy acolyte did it 200 years later.
But Dan,it’s his first amendment right to say anything he wants, it doesn’t have to be true.
dan r,
your excuse-ridden post yesterday at 11:02 pm is … intellectually pathetic.
harry reid doesn’t want to have anything to do with a budget.
nor, does obama.
nor, does ANYONE who wants their spending controlled.
ergo, the only bugets passed since obama has been in office have been passed by the republican-led house.
dan r,
oops, i left out the word “doesn’t” following “who” in the fourth line. but, you get the gist.
Frank, pretending Medicare doesn’t need reform is a way Santa Obama can keep fooling the low info voter and blame the GOP for wanting to push granny off the cliff. Medicare is going bankrupt and Obama won’t deal with it. Well, so is the country, and he wont deal with that either Intellectually pathetic, indeed.
The Republican-led House hasn’t passed a realistic budget, ever. Ryan’s budget, by the way, would have cut Medicare and Medicaid drastically, but most of the savings from that would have gone to more tax cuts for the wealthy, leaving the deficit in just about the same shape it is now. House Republicans don’t care about deficits, they care about cutting government services and cutting taxes, period.
The supreme irony of the day. Heyfrank calling someone’s post intellectually pathetic
The spirit of compromise starts with the president. Reagan, Clinton and even Bush worked well with the opposition. Obama’s social justice agenda won’t allow that to happen. Quit making excuses for him. He is not getting the job done…at any level.
Dan r,
The fact is, the republicans want a budget, and have produced a budget.
Harry Reid hasn’t even PROPOSED a budget, and you know exactly why.
He doesn’t want a budget.
Said another way, if harry reid wants a budget, then:
Why hasn’t he moved to put any of obama’s proposed budgets on the floor of his Senate for at least a discussion, let alone a …gasp! …vote??
Why hasn’t Reid moved to put any of the House-passed budgets up for a discussion and vote in his Senate?
Harry doesn’t want to even engage in DISCUSSING a budget, and you know it…and you know why.
And, that’s the sad thing…that you know it…and you just can’t bring yourself to admit it. Thats what you libs do.
Do yourself a favor and explain why, politically, Harry Reid believes he CAN’T bring up a budget for discussion in his Senate.
I’ll give you a hint: it means individual Senate members will have to expose themselves to their voters for what they are and where they stand.
Its called “accountability” to the voters, and it’s what Harry Reid and Obama fear most.
Another Chuck: Obama has bent over backwards to compromise with Republicans. All he ever got for it was double-crossed. There was a concerted strategy by Republicans to refuse to support any major initiative of Obama’s, however much he compromised. Obamacare is a very conservative, market-based approach to health care reform. In fact, it looks much like a proposal put out by Heritage (and almost exactly like health care reform passed in Massachusetts by a certain severely conservative governor). But because Obama proposed it, it’s UNCONSTITUTIONAL SOCIALIZED MEDICINE!!! Republicans thought unyielding opposition to everything he proposed would make Obama a one-term president. They were wrong. And now they’re mad because he’s not being nice enough to them? Screw that.
Reagan couldn’t work with the radical Republicans in this Congress.
I do know why Harry Reid hasn’t proposed a budget, and though I don’t agree with the decision, I sympathize with the rationale. Reid knows that no budget that could pass the Senate could be reconciled with a budget that could pass the House, because Republicans have gone bat-sh*t crazy. So Reid decided not to waste everyone’s time putting together a budget that stood no chance of passing the House.
And, Frank, if you want to discuss something with me in a civil, rational manner, quit with the “you libs” stuff. It’s stupid.
Dan Rad, if I were Reid I would pass something he considers reasonable and have the debate. If the GOP would block a reasonable budget package, then he would have them on record, right? That seems like good politics to me.
Here’s a very SIMPLE explanation on how the US Federal Government is SUPPOSED to come up with it’s annual budget:
http://www.pgpf.org/Special-Topics/~/link.aspx?_id=A5790999A14E4A66A3D0A6D97CA5B9A0&_z=z
The president can send down any budget he likes, but if the House and Senate do not reconcile on an acceptable budget, then one does not get passed.
The budget process was not even formalized until 1921, Congress appropriated funds on an as needed basis before that time.
I hope some people in sore need of education on how our government runs will take the time to read the link. Much more informative than El Rushbo or Faux News.
“Obama has bent over backwards to compromise with Republicans. All he ever got for it was double-crossed. There was a concerted strategy by Republicans to refuse to support any major initiative of Obama’s, however much he compromised. Obamacare is a very conservative, market-based approach to health care reform. In fact, it looks much like a proposal put out by Heritage (and almost exactly like health care reform passed in Massachusetts by a certain severely conservative governor). But because Obama proposed it, it’s UNCONSTITUTIONAL SOCIALIZED MEDICINE!!! Republicans thought unyielding opposition to everything he proposed would make Obama a one-term president. They were wrong. And now they’re mad because he’s not being nice enough to them? Screw that.
Reagan couldn’t work with the radical Republicans in this Congress.”
–Dan Radmacher
Dan Radmacher is exactly right about the ACA ake Obamacare. It’s a conservative healthcare plan, pushed as an idea by Newt Gringrich in the early 1990s, and further refined by the conservative Heritage Foundation, until it was sponsored by a Republican governor (Romney) who won its passage in a Democratic state. The Heritage Foundation poohbahs were on hand to celebrate that bill signing.
Why, then, would the conservatives be so angry about this, then? Though Dan’s right that the GOP has engaged in unyielding opposition to Obama, it goes deeper than that. Like the “individual mandate” proposal, it goes back to the 1990s and welfare reform in the Clinton years.
Welfare reform was a signature Republican issue back then. Clinton at first thwarted their efforts, then, after he had negotiated their demands down to something he considered reasonable, he joined them, and then grabbed a large share of credit for the bill. That absolute blew their minds. And they vowed back then that they would never again allow a Democratic president to steal credit for their ideas.
Which is exactly what Obamacare did, hence the anger.
The important point is, the Washington crown knows it’s ALL politics. But they can’t get their minions too outraged about that stuff. So they had to manufacture other reasons to get them all riled up.
“Dan Rad, if I were Reid I would pass something he considers reasonable and have the debate. If the GOP would block a reasonable budget package, then he would have them on record, right? That seems like good politics to me.”
(Pounding my head into a brick wall) Again, this betrays a lack of understanding of the process. If the Senate passed a budget, it would go over to the House. Even if Boehner brought it up for a vote (which he most likely would not) There would be no debate between Senators and House members. It’s not as if the Senators (after they pass the budget) get the opportunity to cross the aisle into the other chamber and then debate it with House members or vice versa. That’s not the way the process works.
There are debates among Senators on bills before the Senate, and debate among House members on bills before the House. The only time you see House members debating senators is as talking heads on Fox New, CNN, MSNBC, etc.
Dan, the “debate” would be in the details in the back and forth between the Senate and the House. That would be reported on and we would know, somewhat, what was going on.
You never explained how Obama and crew couldn’t get a budget passed in 2010?
Dan,
Thanks for your response. And, my use of the word “you” immediately before “libs” was superfluous and didn’t add to the point I was making.
Yes, I know you know the reason why harry reid hasn’t pursued a budget since obama has been president. Personally, I think its healthy for us voters to know how our US Senators and Representatives are representing us, and in this day and age especially, a vote on a budget gives constituents as clear an insight into their respective souls as is possible, I think….which is why I think Harry Reid and Obama want no part of a budget vote in the Senate….because they want the voters to have as little quantifiable information about the voting records of Senate-dems as possible.
149.”…if I were Reid I would pass something he considers reasonable and have the debate. If the GOP would block a reasonable budget package, then he would have them on record, right? That seems like good politics to me.
Comment by Another Chuck
That gets at the crux of the problem this country faces. AC’s “conservative” programmers have been acting exclusively in terms of politics for a long time, even pre-dating Obama. But good politics and good governance aren’t the same thing, and partisan obstructionism isn’t loyal opposition.
AC, good politics and good governance aren’t the same thing, and more than 47% of the U.S. electorate would rather reward good governance than politics. As conditioned as middle aged white Americans (especially southern men) are to think of public issues in adversarial terms as if they were meaningless team sports, they aren’t. And as democracy and American opportunity cause the electorate to become less like the one that you’d prefer, the rewards for sincere attempts at governance will continue to grow at the expense of insincere politics. Mike Deaver, Lee Atwater, Roger Ailes and Karl Rove’s legacies do not include enduring governing principles.
Too bad for dittoheads, but solutions are for winners, and scoreboards are for losers.
So congratulations, AC, you’re WINNING!!! Your “side” is WINNING!!! All the other “side” is doing is merely succeeding, but you’re WINNING!!!
I have to thank all you angry insulting conservatives. You do for voters what a certain poster does for religion. Nothing could make us look better than you do. Especially the class “Bob” brings to the table.
Ok,some of these great social programs and experiments have potential merit. The problem is that both parties have not managed OUR money with due dilligence and responsibily, and Obama is a total joke. Therefore, we don’t have the luxgury to spend in the Keynesian way, or take chances on what might of might not work. So now, we HAVE to cut spending, control our own energy even to the point we can export it, and be pro expansion of business so revenues and the GDP can expand. Do I dislike Obama? Obviously yes! Why would anyone want to fundamentally change the greatest and most benelovent nation in the history of mankind. Tweak it, yes. But Obama is trying to do just what he said,
We don’t have the luxury of NOT operating in the Keynesian fashion. Unless you want to be like Greece, w/ 25% unemployment.
AC, how long should it take us to reduce the budget deficit to an acceptable level?
I believe you said you run a business. If you had a deficit, would you look only to cut expenses, or would you look to cut expenses and increase revenues?
BTW, fundamental change would have been in the form of a single-payer healthcare system. Fundamental change would have returned tax rates formthe wealthiest Americans at least the 50-60% area. Fundamental change would have been in the form of clear regulations on the financial industry. Fundamental may well have included aggressive prosecution of the Wall Streeters who had a major role in this financial crisis. President Obama has not authored fundamental change!
Jason, revenue is a huge part of the equation. And the only way to get significant tax revenue is by expanding the GDP. Increasing taxes moves money around, but does not create new dollars. I believe we need a pro business government that promotes hiring, productivity and energy independence. I believe we need a president that feels the same . The IRS, all government, accountants and lawyers take money from the economy without production. Theyvare detractors Flatten the tax code and most of this leeching goes away. Taxes should be able to be filed on a post card.
“Pounding my head into a brick wall”
oh so NOW I see why your have the opinions that you do
AC, no doubt the IRS could be streamlined, but the Flat Tax is regressive and puts way more money in the pockets of the wealthy than it does into middle class and poorer folks. This will not lead to the increase in productivity you propose, because middle and low income folks buy the products that stimulate productivity. In my view, the trickle down theory has not worked. Folks who make the money haven’t put that money back into business in a meaningful way. Aren’t corporate profits more or less at an all time high? Why hasn’t that money been funneled back into business in the form of new jobs? You probabaly know the answer to that question better than I.
So, ALL government, accountants, and lawyers take money from the economy without production? Are you saying that you do your own books and you handle all your legal work? Are you saying that you don’t need/support interstate highways, safe food, safe drugs, police, firemen, trash pick-up, public education? No doubt our local, state, and federal governments can be improved, BUT, and AC, this is a pet peeve of mine, private business is no less or more effective than government agencies. Both have plusses and minuses. There is corruption in both.
You have your reasons, AC, why President Obama gets under your skin, but he has proven to be more pro-business than you will admit. He helped save thousands of auto industry jobs. He went very easy on blatant Wall Street abuses. And he threw a nice bone to the insurance industry with the Affordable Care Act. Sounds pretty business friendly to me.
“Trickle down” never was designed to actually trickle down. It was designed to put more money in rich people’s pockets, and to fool others into believing that the middle and lower classes would benefitl, too.
From that perspective, it DEFINITELY worked. But it just never trickled down.
Suckers!
Jason, I believe accountants and lawyers for the most part, are super-bright people. I’m am complaining about the tax code and our litigant society….which increases the number of people needed in these professions. Accountants and lawyers are merely conducting business under the rules the powers that be have inflicted upon us. I am complaining about the rules and the idiots that perpetuate them.