Join the conversation [ADD A COMMENT]

View our commenting policy and standards | Commenting FAQ | Report a problem

1. scott whitaker | February 11, 2013 at 10:32 am

   Jim Demint, right wing, TP’er, former Sen. from SC. Opposed abortion in case of rape and incest. Opposed the bailout of GM and Chrysler. Wanted to make English the “official” language of the country. Accused Obama of being soft on terrorism but no doubt would now be one of those opposing drone strikes on Al Qaeda. Opposed gays and anyone cohabitating from teaching in schools. Decided he be better off at the Heritage Institute where I hope he wallows in obscurity and lousy ideas that never see the light of day.
2. Sandi Saunders | February 11, 2013 at 10:33 am

   I think that as usual Jim DeMint is wrong. I think a candidate who vows to go after the banksters and Wall Street and end the inequality in our tax structure would win big.
3. Kristen | February 11, 2013 at 10:35 am

   I had some dealings with the Roanoke Police Department this weekend and I have to say, the officers with whom I dealt could not have been nicer or kinder.
4. scott whitaker | February 11, 2013 at 10:35 am

   Another day and another shooting, this time at a Courthouse in Delaware. A Courthouse, where unless Delaware is different than Virginia, plentiful security is armed.

   http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20130211/NEWS01/302110044/5-wounded-NCCo-Courthouse-shooter-dead?odyssey=mod
5. Mike Scott | February 11, 2013 at 10:44 am

   I see it’s time to Pope shopping again.

   I’m kinda hoping Cardinal Fungi is still available…you guys all remember Cardinal Fungi, right?

   http://youtu.be/xtbYrwlgJWk
6. Newman | February 11, 2013 at 10:47 am

   I’ve been gone for a few days. Did Casey get on the NRA enemy list?
7. pistol pete | February 11, 2013 at 11:14 am

   Let’s go green everyone…SOLAR energy is the way to go!

   http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SOLAR_PANELS_HAZARDOUS_WASTE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-02-10-14-14-17
8. Ron May | February 11, 2013 at 11:33 am

   scott,
   Below is a link to an article regarding the death toll gun violence is taking in our country. More than 31K guns deaths in last year. That’s 86 per day. This particular article speaks of the random causes and perpetrators. Despite the NRA, and the 2nd Amendment, we must have a reasoned conversation about violence in our nation. I am proposing the confiscation of firearms. The loud voices on the varied sides of this issue need to come to the table with open minds and find a pathway that leads us to less violence. It’s a multifaceted problem that will require multiple approaches to solution.

   http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/09/16912259-death-takes-no-holiday-tracking-gun-violence-over-one-long-january-weekend?lite
9. pistol pete | February 11, 2013 at 11:36 am

   Ron May, ask the citizens of Mexico about not having firearms. (Cartels in control)

   Or, you could ask German Jews in the late 20′s early 30′s when their arms were confiscated.
10. VT Hokie | February 11, 2013 at 12:04 pm

    Yes, we must have a reasoned conversation about violence in our nation. One important thing to note is that, while there are many legal gun owners throughout the country (many times more than the number of gun deaths each year), the violence is not happening throughout the entire country. It is concentrated in certain areas.

    http://www.theatlanticcities.com/neighborhoods/2012/12/geography-us-gun-violence/4171/

    If you click on the link and scroll down there are maps that show where the majority of the gun violence is taking place. Look at the large areas of the country that see very little gun violence.

    The problems of extreme poverty and socio-economic inequality seem to have a great impact on the increased violence in these areas, more so than simply the number of guns available.

    “Poverty is a substantial factor in gun deaths by metro, as it was in our previous state-level analysis. The percentage of a metro’s population below the poverty line is significantly associated with all three types of gun death — homicide (.45), suicide (.35), and the overall rate (.49).”

    Even if you despise the NRA (which I do), you can’t ignore that the data suggests that that other factors are at work besides simply being able to obtain a gun. Our area of Virginia has lots of guns, but we just don’t have a lot of shootings. On the other hand, places like New Orleans, Detroit, and Philadelphia do. It’s the root of this culture of violent behavior that needs most strongly to be addressed. The tool used to do the violence is immaterial. That’s why Britain is now working hard at “knife control”. They may have reduced the “gun” part of gun violence, but the “violence” part remained.
11. gdad | February 11, 2013 at 12:13 pm

    Is this the part you wanted us all to see, PP:?

    “The roughly 20-year life of a solar panel still makes it some of the cleanest energy technology currently available. Producing solar is still significantly cleaner than fossil fuels. Energy derived from natural gas and coal-fired power plants, for example, creates more than 10 times more hazardous waste than the same energy created by a solar panel, according to Mulvaney.”
12. Justin True | February 11, 2013 at 12:15 pm

    pistol pete, you are comparing two totally different scenarios. The average citizen in Mexico is more concerned with where their next meal is coming from and how to stay out of the way of Cartel members and there unlimited money supply that buys there guns and ammo. The German Jews situation was in a different time in History, in a different country, and under a dictator… how is either of these comparisons comparable to our situation today?
13. Ron May | February 11, 2013 at 12:25 pm

    pistol,

    I left a word out of my earlier comment. That sentence should read, “I am NOT proposing the confiscation of firearms.”

    That should answer the questions you asked.
14. Frank | February 11, 2013 at 1:17 pm

    Hey you libs!

    Please check out the link below.

    dorner is developing a following of ….libs. dorner’s anti-NRA, pro-obama comments in his “manifesto” is gaining traction with libs.

    I think all the folks in the area dorner is thought to be in, who have fire-arms, should immediately contact their local police and turn in said fire-arms.

    django, anyone?

    Sad.

    http://www.dailynews.com/ci_22543783.html
15. Dan Casey | February 11, 2013 at 3:37 pm

    VT Hokie, a question:

    Do you think it’s possible the gun-manufacturing industry profits in any way off the illegal trade in guns in this country? I would argue they do, because the guns that ultimately end up in criminals’ hands are sold legally to begin with.
16. Kristen | February 11, 2013 at 3:38 pm

    http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/119543/gun-control-and-the-holocaust/2

    PP, here’s a Jewish magazine that calls the comparison of efforts in gun control here to Nazi Germany and the “disarming” of the Jews inaccurate.
17. Dan Casey | February 11, 2013 at 3:52 pm

    Frank, the Dorner supporters are conservatives masquerading as liberals (hence all the fake names they’re using, not their own) in order to make liberals look bad.
18. Dan Casey | February 11, 2013 at 4:29 pm

    I fear we’re running into a persnickety little issue, regarding one poster’s “alias” here and the abbreviation we have been using for it.

    Pistol Pete has been around for awhile now, and many of us have taken to addressing him as PP.

    Now, however, we have a relativly new posted named PP. So responses to Pistol Pete addressed as PP might be an area that causes confusion.

    Just wanted to bring it to your attention.
19. Cold n P | February 11, 2013 at 5:17 pm

    Nugent goes to Washington for the SOTU address? Hope he gets a real comprehensive cavity search and a hosing down before they let him in.

    Steve Stockton R from Texas, is a creep. I hope some of Nugents stink rubs off on the seditious Mr Stockton as they hold hands in the peanut gallery.
20. mike o | February 11, 2013 at 5:22 pm

    Newman, 10:47
    Nope, Dan did not make (“bad” right wing) NRA list or the (“good” left wing) Dorner list.

    Dan, got any proof of your comment (3:52pm) or is that just a belief? I suppose his facebook fawning over liberals is just another “vast right wing conspiracy”.
    I suppose you also believe this nut is hiding out with Cheney somewhere in the “badlands”.

    Can’t make this “tin foil hat” stuff up.
21. Dan Casey | February 11, 2013 at 5:36 pm

    mikeO, my comment is 100 percent as provable as Frank’s.

    What, don’t you trust him?
22. gdad | February 11, 2013 at 5:53 pm

    #14 Wow, Frankie, 100 people on an anonymous FB page. How did you come up with that incredible find? Just amazing.
23. gdad | February 11, 2013 at 5:55 pm

    mike o, buddy, Dan’s just taking a page from suzie and from paranoid right-wing tinfoil sites like Free Republic.
24. gdad | February 11, 2013 at 5:58 pm

    You’re right, Dan. Just want to make sure that pistol pete knows that my comment at #11 was directed to him. I’m sure he wanted us to know about the part of his link that tells us how much cleaner solar is than fossil fuels.
25. scott whitaker | February 11, 2013 at 6:16 pm

    PP, while that article about solar panel waste is interesting and enlightening, it did say there is no indication of any impact on human life. That is in direct contrast with numerous studies which show petroleum based power plants account up to 13,000 deaths just in this country and of course that does not include those who contract respiratory illnesses such as bronchitis and asthma. It is estimated that up to 50 tons of mercury a year is released just by coal fired power plants in the US.That accounts from 30 to 50% of all mercury released in our environment. Coal power plants are the single worst emitters of mercury not only here but the world. Mercury in particular is a serious problem as it leads to many neurological problems and fetal abnormalities.

    http://www.groundtruthtrekking.org/Issues/AlaskaCoal/CoalMercury.html

    http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/1e5ab1124055f3b28525781f0042ed40/55615df6595fbfa3852578550050942f!OpenDocument
26. gdad | February 11, 2013 at 6:22 pm

    This is stupendous. Fox “News” did a piece bashing feminism and women’s right to independence. They included a photo that for them represented traditional marriage. Problem is, the photo was of the first female couple to wed on top of the empire State Building.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/allison-hope/fox-news-equality_b_2649780.html?utm_hp_ref=gay-voices
27. mike o | February 11, 2013 at 7:24 pm

    Dan,
    Am I to understand your admitted response in 5:36pm is grade school “he did it first…”…. LMAO you made my night…
28. Dan Casey | February 11, 2013 at 7:30 pm

    “Dan,
    Am I to understand your admitted response in 5:36pm is grade school “he did it first…”…. LMAO you made my night.”
    –mikeO

    Have fun, mikeO! But whatever you do, DON’T question at all WHAT FRANK WROTE — because you WANT TO BELIEVE that, right? Right! That’s the way it is with you. You believe what you want, the facts be damned.

    (It’s still no more provable than my response to him).
29. mike o | February 11, 2013 at 7:50 pm

    Scott,
    Studies on petroleum based plants have had the opportunity to “study” for decades. Study on the new CFL’s (still in infancy) has proven problametic and expensive; not to mention deadly. Many CPA’s have suggested staying 2-3 feet away from the bulbs, and using “hazardous cleanup methods should one break”.
    So the bottom line is we pay $20 for a bulb that we can’t get within 2 feet of (for fear of death); as opposed to paying $1 for something that we have used for decades.
    Does this make any sense? Are you too young to remember the time when coal was good and “nuclear” power plants would destroy the entire planet?
    Now many lib’s think that we should move to “clean nuclear” and away from “evil coal”.

    I suggest further open minded study.
30. Sandi Saunders | February 11, 2013 at 8:00 pm

    Mike O, I think what you are missing as you “LMAO” is that Dan has played you like the proverbial fiddle and you do not seem to get it.
31. Dan Casey | February 11, 2013 at 8:13 pm

    mikeO, what store are you allowing to totally rip you off, paying $20 per for a CFL bulb?

    LMAO!

    Also, I don’t believe CPAs have warned against these. Riichard Beason, care to comment?
32. Dave Hicks | February 11, 2013 at 8:28 pm

    Re: Kristen @ 3:38 pm

    Vs. http://jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/fear.htm
33. Dave Hicks | February 11, 2013 at 8:34 pm

    Harking back to the tax gas threads and other occasional comments on the gas tax debate:

    Dick Saslaw’s pants are on fire, jet again.

    http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2013/feb/11/richard-saslaw/dick-saslaw-say-except-virginia-all-states-keep-ra/
34. Sandi Saunders | February 11, 2013 at 9:05 pm

    “Remember Lindsey Graham’s demands for answers over intelligence failures around WMD’s in Iraq and the 4,488 dead and 33,184 wounded Americans?

    Remember him questioning President Bush’s minute by minute activities, the deaths during the reelection campaign & holding up his Cabinet confirmations?

    Neither do I.”
35. Kristen | February 11, 2013 at 9:06 pm

    DaveHicks, you found what s basically a Jewish NRA site. I wouldn’t credit them anymore than our mainstream NRA.
36. scott whitaker | February 11, 2013 at 9:18 pm

    Mikeo, I have to agree with Dan on the price of a cfl, I have them exclusively in my home and haven’t come anywhere near that price. But you raise a valid point about mercury in CFL’s even though PP and I were discussing power plants or energy sources. Actually, by using CFL’s we are emitting less mercury into the atmosphere/environment than incandescent lights as they use far less energy to burn (of course if that energy comes from a coal fired power plant.

    http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CD0QFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.energystar.gov%2Fia%2Fpartners%2Fpromotions%2Fchange_light%2Fdownloads%2FFact_Sheet_Mercury.pdf&ei=b6IZUYHuE5Sy9gSN5IDYCg&usg=AFQjCNHZp77l35a0Bk604tfrNbmFo242Gg&sig2=QJ8NyIl6dCiPWwLf3oJQVA&bvm=bv.42261806,d.eWU

    Additionally, though a single generic say 60 w CFL does not cost $20, it does cost more than its incandescent cousin. But, because it costs far more to power, it will cost you less in the long run.

    http://www.getrichslowly.org/blog/2007/10/29/how-much-do-compact-fluorescent-bulbs-really-cost/
37. Dave Hicks | February 11, 2013 at 9:23 pm

    Re: Kristen @ 9:06 pm

    Didn’t expect you to.

    You credit your cherry picked link, I credit mine — and neither of us should claim that either one represents everyone’s opinion.
38. scott whitaker | February 11, 2013 at 9:23 pm

    In other words, go green. I’ve even seen a few Prius with Romney stickers on them! Buy cfl’s, put a hot water solar heater on you roof. Unless your local TP honcho does an inspection on your house, your RW cred will stay intact and you’ll save money and even help the environment (though we can keep that last part hush hush…)
39. scott whitaker | February 11, 2013 at 9:31 pm

    oops, in my 9:18 entry I meant to say “…”though” it costs more to power…”
40. J.M. White | February 11, 2013 at 10:30 pm

    I suggest further open minded study.

    Comment by mike o — February 11, 2013 @ 7:50 pm

    Me too.

    Your erroneous pricing has already been covered by others; you are confusing LED bulbs and CFL bulbs, but I’ll cover that later in this “go green”, tree-hugging hippie eco-terrorist diatribe.

    Tube fluorescent bulbs have been ubiquitous for decades (think schools, offices, stores, pretty much any business in which you’ve ever set foot) and you don’t see any HazMat teams cleaning them up on the rare occasions when they break. As a matter of fact, HazMat containment isn’t even listed on the MSDS for fluorescent bulbs. Caution and care, like you would use when handling any broken glass, is suggested. And guess what else? Those tubes also have way more mercury, argon and several other heavy metals and gases than your average household CFLs. If those bulbs were as dangerous as the fearmongers would have you believe, the EPA would’ve banned or regulated them heavily years ago. CFLs also have an average lifespan 5x that of incandescent bulbs and use ~1/5th the electricity.

    LED bulbs, on the other hand, are about $20 each. The only danger they pose is to vision (from staring directly at them) and maybe some minor electronic interference. They can, depending on manufacturing processes, color range and output, produce infrared or ultraviolet wavelengths of light, but that can be minimized or even eliminated with a simple diffuser or shade. LEDs have an average lifespan of 10-20x that of incandescent bulbs and use as little as 1/50th the electricity.

    Incandescent bulbs are inefficient, short-lived and obsolete. The design is over a century old, with virtually no advancements in the technology. As much as 90% of your electricity is wasted in the form of heat. Considering that you are more in danger from the lights above your head in the store where you buy your light bulbs than you are from having CFLs in your home, there is no reason to continue this fear-based misinformation campaign against them. This resistance to a change that benefits everyone, including your wallet, is ridiculous. Do people actually like throwing away money? You might as well light two dollar bills on fire every day.

    - The disposal argument is dead. We can recycle CFLs now. By their increased lifespan alone, there will be less of them in landfills.
    - The hazard argument is minimized. How many bulbs do you really break in your house per year anyway? You get more dangerous chemicals from the exhaust from the car in front of you on your commute to work than you’d get from cleaning up a broken CFL.
    - The cost argument is dead. I was replacing around five to seven incandescent bulbs per year in any place I’ve lived. After switching my entire apartment to CFLs ($35 total), I’ve replaced two in the last 30 months. Additionally, my electric bill has been reduced by 40%, more than paying for the price of the bulbs in full.

    It’s time stop resisting change just for the sake of resisting. Do some real research and pick the right bulbs for your needs. Help us all out. If you won’t do it for the environment, do it for the money. Everyone wants more money, right? You can start putting it back in your pocket by next month. You won’t regret it and you won’t look back other than to wonder what took you so long.

    /hippie spiel

    Thanks for your time.
41. gdad | February 11, 2013 at 10:58 pm

    So mike o and pistol pete have both gotten environmental stuff wrong on this thread (well, pistol pete’s wasn’t “wrong,” he just wanted you to believe that an article was all negative about solar). Anybody else?
42. wayne goodman | February 12, 2013 at 1:22 am

    The ignorant, out of control, callous rantings of the NRA continue almost daily. To them and their lobbyists, the Newtown massacre of school children and teachers is now “the Connecticut effect” which they view as just another inconvenience or bump in the road on the way to pushing their
    agenda.

    http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/02/11/1567931/nra-connecticut-effect/
43. Art Hill | February 12, 2013 at 2:26 am

    The postal service isn’t going broke, it’s being robbed.
44. Debbie | February 12, 2013 at 6:48 am

    Start your morning with a chuckle, albeit a juvenile one. A friend who lives in CT has been posting on Facebook about all the snow they got. Her latest post said they’re calling for another storm in from the gulf. “After two feet, six inches will feel like a breeze.” A male friend of hers said, “I so want to comment on that, but I’ll keep my comments to myself.”
45. scott | February 12, 2013 at 7:05 am

    Thanks J.M. White for saving me the typing. I was about to bust out some knowledge, but you summed it up pretty well.

    The one argument that never gets defended enough are the people who gripe about how CFLs have terrible “color”. And that’s partly the fault of the buyer, and partly the fault of the marketing of the lamp maker. They make all sorts of color temprature CFL lamps. READ THE LABEL, you might get a bright “blue” on when you really want a more natural light. Stick to 2500-3000K color temperature for the more traditional warm color, if that’s your thing.
46. Suzie | February 12, 2013 at 10:03 pm

    The postal service isn’t going broke, it’s being robbed.

    Of course. When you rely on a nut site, you might draw that inane conclusion.
47. gdad | February 13, 2013 at 8:40 am

    “Of course. When you rely on a nut site, you might draw that inane conclusion.”

    Please provide your proof that anything in the article is factually incorrect.

    I predict silence from suzie.
48. gdad | February 13, 2013 at 8:42 am

    Having heard nothing else from Pistol Pete, I guess this was indeed the part of the piece he linked to that he wanted us to see:

    “The roughly 20-year life of a solar panel still makes it some of the cleanest energy technology currently available. Producing solar is still significantly cleaner than fossil fuels. Energy derived from natural gas and coal-fired power plants, for example, creates more than 10 times more hazardous waste than the same energy created by a solar panel, according to Mulvaney.”
49. Dan Casey | February 13, 2013 at 8:58 am

    “The roughly 20-year life of a solar panel still makes it some of the cleanest energy technology currently available. Producing solar is still significantly cleaner than fossil fuels. Energy derived from natural gas and coal-fired power plants, for example, creates more than 10 times more hazardous waste than the same energy created by a solar panel, according to Mulvaney.”
    –Article quoted by gdad

    I wonder Which poster will dispute this, with some kind of tarty claim that CFLs cost $20 per bulb or that they pose a huge environmental danger?