If you were successful and other Etch A Sketch moments
As we await the climax of The Year Politics Teetered on the Cliff — deal or no deal? — let’s review the Top 10 political quotes of the year as compiled by McClatchy.
Roanoke’s historic fire station was the backdrop for the “you didn’t build that” quote that came in on the list at No. 7.
Check it out here in The Sacramento Bee.
Is there a quote missing that you think belongs on the list?
December 31, 2012 - 1:23 PM
Romney’s campaign proved that the truth is optional.
#1 – Hell, Art, Obama proves that every time he opens his mouth!
Looks like the dems will be successful in raising taxes and increasing spending with the deal they made. It’ll take several months, but once it’s clear to everyone this didn’t work we’ll be one step closer to getting our country back. Proud to be a republican tonight.
@3 Eddie, I thought the whole fiscal cliff thing (which is what I’m assuming you’re talking about) was an event that raised taxes AND LOWERED SPENDING. You said raise taxes and increase spending.
Am I wrong?
For slow learners out there a “PSA” is a public service announcement. Apparently this production is either running, probably in calipornia or slated to run nationally. Follow it carefully. View it over a few time if you don’t get the message. I will make concessions in gun laws when someone somewhere takes action against the biggest promoter of violence in the nation…ie the “entertainment and vid game industry”. BTW, don’t you just love that new film due out soon featuring the governator shooting a machine gun from the back of a SCHOOL BUS. Wonder of the next school killing will be on a bus? Think maybe one of the many deranged youths of this nation is already planning it?
http://nation.foxnews.com/mock-psa/2012/12/31/new-video-mocks-celebrities-anti-gun-psa
@5 Mr. Greene, I watched the video at the link you posted. Thank you for doing so. So what you’re saying is the fictional portrayals of society’s problems…are actually the cause of those problems?
Should we ban toy guns then?
@2 Michael
Care to back up your accusation with specifics?
Scott: Please call me Bubba. YES, what you call fiction is reality to minds that are unable to distinguish fiction from reality. Just shoot away and when your done, press the “exit” key and go home and all is well.
Toy guns are used by people who are “playing” and guns are nothing to “play” with. I have no problem with restrictions or bans on such toys. BTW, here is another similar item:
“Candy cigarettes are a candy introduced in the early 20th century made out of chalky sugar, bubblegum or chocolate, wrapped in paper as to resemble cigarettes. Their place on the market has long been controversial because many critics believe the candy desensitizes children, leading them to become smokers later in life. Because of this, the selling of candy cigarettes has been banned in several countries such as Finland, Norway, the Republic of Ireland, Turkey and Saudi Arabia.”
Now, just to expand a bit more on the “yes”. The roots cause of “societies problems” may not be totally the fictional portrail. I think the root cause goes to the values and morals a society holds. We live in a world where anything goes. Our society today has developed the unfortunate habit of teaching children how to WANT before they are equipped with the knowledge and values of how to achieve. So, to me the root cause is much deeper than the fictional portrail but fictional portrail compounds the problem and AT SOME POINT fictional portrail may essentially gravitate to actually being the problem…I’ll call that the transitional phase and that where I see we are today.
I’ll conclude with another example. Recently I read of a criminal case which involved murder. The decision of the court was not guilty by reason of insanity. A quote from the article specifically said that the accused did not possess a mind that enabled him to make the distinction between the facts and realities of his deeds and the results of his acts. So you must question, Do we want to contribute to an already sick mind an even more confusing sequence of events?
Here is a quote fro the Telegraph-UK:
Connecticut school massacre: Adam Lanza ‘spent hours playing Call Of Duty’
The Connecticut school massacre gunman Adam Lanza spent hours playing violent video games such as Call Of Duty in a windowless bunker, according to an interview with a plumber who worked at the family home.
Now if you are not familiar with Call of Duty, here are some images for you:
http://www.google.com/search?q=call+of+duty+black+ops+2+zombies&hl=en&tbo=u&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ei=z3jjUIbFM4q80QHLuYGwDg&ved=0CHAQsAQ&biw=1600&bih=719
And one final point: Our miliotary uses vid game style software in actual training exercises. And we also know that some of our enemies in the middle east have also used off the shelf games similar to these for their traaining. Such devices are totally suitable for training an army on how to kill people (we call them the enemy). They are NOT suitable for use in American homes to be the “baby sitter” for little junior.
#& – Nah, gdad. If you can’t spot the lies, then me telling you would be a waste of time.
#6 – To say that violent video games do not influence the behavior of our youth is total denial, Scott, and shows a refusal to look at some of the root cause of some of the problems we face in society.
Companies spend millions on a 30-second Super Bowl commercial because it will influence people into buying their product, but hours and hours of mindless killing while playing a video game has no influence?
That’s absurd.
BTW, Scott. Just took in a advertisement for a new “action” movie due out Feb 1 with everyone’s good guy hero Sly Stallone. Title to this wonderful movie….Bullitt to the Head Don’t that make you feel all warm and fuzzy!
Check it out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDiaXZiIJOQ
What I would like to see is a standard of values in place where a responsible adult does not allow a young child access to crap like this. And very honestly, I would like to live in a world where responsible adults rejected this garbage as a form of “entertainment”. The same is true with “toy guns”. In my world responsible adults would not purchase them for their kids. And they would not let kids buy them with their allowance money. This is where the controls should be rather than through a “ban” as such. But if one is a hard core anti gun advocate they must be, IMO, also against the toy variety. It is funny, and possible a contridiction, but I played “army”, “cowboys and indians” and “cops and robbers” as a child. And I watched plenty of Roy Rogers and the Lone Ranger as well as Dragnet. So far, have not killed anyone as an adult. How could that be? Well, for one thing, at that time, the early days of TV, the good guys always won the battle, solved the case, came out on top AND got the good looking girl. Maybe the lesson was that virtue (socially responsible behavior)was a good thing and crime (deviant social behavior) was a bad thing. So, call me honest, truthful, trustworthy and a person of principal and convictions, but no public records.
Dear Bubba,
Thank you for taking the time to write such detailed and forthcoming responses. I mean this sincerely.
I was afraid you were going to hypocritical about the whole thing. I thought you might be taking the Hollywood movie actors to task for portraying gun violence but then being a gun rights advocate yourself which would have meant you were OK with guns in movies if you wanted to be consistent.
But you surprised me and were consistent in your anti-gun outlook. I applaud you for that.
To bring you up to speed on me. Our family doesn’t have commercial television because of the promotion of violence in part but mostly because of the trash on TV. We thought most of what’s on TV was inappropriate and mindless for our little ones so we gave it up.
My wife, being British, didn’t want even toy guns in the house but she’s relented and let’s my son play with Nerf guns.
It’s weird. He’s been exposed to a minimum of guns and things like that but he LOVES them as toys, reads books about tanks and aircrafts, etc. Wants to join the military when he grows up. I’ve never taken him hunting but he insists on dressing in camouflage.
So, we’re doing our part to the best of our abilities but there seems to be something innate in our beings or our cultures that loves violence and guns.
Best wishes.
@10 Michael, perhaps you misunderstand me. I don’t mean to say movies, advertisements, etc. don’t have an influence. I’m sure they do. How much I can’t say. But your assertion doesn’t answer the chicken/egg problem. Do violent movies and games encourage gun violence or do they reflect it.
But here’s the thing Michael and it’s an important point. While we can all agree the realism involved with violent movies and violent video games has increased, the National Crime Victimization Survey Violent Crime Trends, 1973-2008 have shown a decrease in violent crimes as popular culture violence has become more graphic.
You MUST see this table!
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/glance/tables/viortrdtab.cfm
We always here the expression “correlation doesn’t imply causation” and that’s true but there seems to be NO correlation between violent video games/movies and violent crimes unless it’s a negative one.
So we are all fine with stripping First Amendment rights because of “influence” but determined that the Second Amendment means the right to military style assault rifles and huge magazines remains easily available?
14 – Who is “we”?
Those agreeing that the problem with mass shootings is the violence in “entertainment” is the “we” mentioned in #14.
Scott: I don’t like trying to take this diccussion off the deep end. That’s a practice that leads to lots of notions and no solutions. I think it’s very clear young minds are different from mature minds. If you wish you child to be a virtuoso, introduce them to music at the age of 2. Multilingual people typically “learn” their variety of languages early in life. We don’t give kids pipe bomb kits for Christmas. Or maybe a “Jack Rapes Jill on the Hill” book. As to the survey, you have omitted the uptick reflected since 2009 but what one reads into such surveys tends to match what one’s views are. I could say, for example, that if guns ownership increases are what they are reported to be and if cc permits are increasing as they are reported to be,then a reason for the reduction in crime is due to more guns. The questions parents must ask themselves is not going to be answered by reading such surveys but by the simple common sense part of the brain (which seems to be not working well these days). Do I want my child to find enjoyment in such game activity? Do I want my child at this most formative age to have their young mind polluted with messages they are unable to sort out for themselves? As to “no connection” between violent games and crime. That’s one that needs to be revisited. The part of my brain controlling common sense says there IS a specific and direct connection.
Sandi: In 50 words or less, what’s your point?
16 – Sandi, recognizing that those comments were not directed at me, here is a free-market perspective (not that you asked):
I have seen a lot of people decry the violence that Hollywood and the computer gaming industry promotes, and I cannot fathom how such media could NOT influence behavior. I certainly will censor anything my children watch.
And I would encourage all parents to take such precautions. I have no problem with advocacy groups calling for grass-roots type boycotts and trying to influence the producers of that garbage into a producing more wholesome movies and games. And if enough parents put enough economic pressure on the gaming and movie industries, that will influence what they produce.
But I would never call for a government-sponsored ban.
On the flip side, I would end government subsidies to Hollywood (they do nothing but offer a government subsidy for filth):
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/01/fiscal-cliff-deal-also-doles-out-millions-for-hollywood-railroads-rum-producers/
But [the "fiscal cliff" deal] also includes these:
…$430 million for Hollywood through “special expensing rules” to encourage TV and film production in the United States. Producers can expense up to $15 million of costs for their projects.
(actually end all tax credits and subsidies)
“Bubba Green”, in 50 words or less, my point is #14.
We already instituted parental warnings and age appropriate viewing rules. What more is acceptable to strip the entertainment industry of their “influence”? Which is still a First Amendment right, or is it?
Do you support any effort to strip the easy availability of these mass shooting guns to the general public or mentally disturbed who are “influenced” by the entertainment industry violence? Which is still a Second Amendment right, or is it?
Will @ 7 – “Care to back up your accusation with specifics?”
I realize Michael declined to take you up on this, but I couldn’t resist. How about all of Obama’s promises that the working class people would not see their taxes increase under his plan. Instead he pledged that only those making over $250,000 would pay more because, as liberals love to tell us, the rich haven’t been paying their fair share (see France and its proposed 75% tax on millionaires that has people moving out of the country). However, now that the great Obama/Biden intervention has brought us back from the dreaded fiscal cliff, we have this:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/01/01/average-american-would-pay-680-more-in-taxes-under-deal/
@21 Chuck, meh….
His proposed plan was to keep the payroll tax where it was wasn’t it? He gave some and got some. Same with Republicans. Pledged not to raise taxes but income taxes are going up.
Chuck, from your link: “For people earning under $250,000, the only tax change is the expiration of the payroll tax holiday.” No sensible person thought, and Obama never promised, that the Payroll Tax Holiday on the SS/Medicare withholding would stay. He simply didn’t.
I didn’t realize Washington differentiated their promises as either “those sensible people would believe” and “those no sensible people would believe”. That’s convenient.
Really? I think even the most jaded observer can tell the difference. (and it is not unique to Washington DC either) To each their own as Michael says.
25 – well, the only promises that come out of Washington that I ever believe are those that actually promise to do more harm than good. Is that sensible?
Maybe “sensible” is not the best word to have used. The Payroll Tax Holiday was never meant to be permanent and as the middle class and working class depend heavily on Social Security/Medicare after retirement, we all know we need to fund it. Perhaps I should have said “informed” as the sad reality is that most people are not. The Payroll Tax Holiday was not in “the Bush Tax Cuts” under discussion, many people will likely not know that and be surprised at the “increase in taxes” and a supposedly “broken promise” and certainly those whom that serves will do nothing to correct that opinion.
Well, opinions cannot really be corrected, though we can hope they would be informed.
Nice job Sandi: But I don’t recall that being up when I posted my last comment. Of course I actually knew what you were eluding to just wanted to get it out in the open. My point is not about the 1st,2nd,3rd or any other amendment but just good old fashioned common sense. The degree of violence we see in the entertainment industry is excessive PERIOD. And I believe there is sufficient evidence that says it is not a good thing esp for young children. The industry has it’s own rating system which is a total joke. PG13 basically means lots of sex and violence. The current system is a “self regulatory” system set up by the industry. The fact that they even have it makes a statement. That statement is they know some content is not appropriate for some ages. And the reason they set it up is largly due to the reality that an imposed regulatory system would probably be more restrictive. BTW, where exactly is the amendment that guarantees these preverts to have “freedom of artistic expression”?
Now, if you want to protect violence, filth, obscenity and perversion under the 1st then maybe I’ll just say OK, YOU keep your filth and violence. But then how will YOU answer those who similarily say no restrictions of the 2nd should apply? Maybe it’s a pretty good deal when you think of it. You keep the entertainment trash, I’ll keep my guns!
As a responsible adult, I will not view it nor endorse it. THAT’S how I restrict it. Fact is it’s already too late. Several generations of humanity are already polluted beyond recovery.
“Bubba Greene”, I disagree completely, I do not believe for a moment that “Several generations of humanity are already polluted beyond recovery“. I suppose you think that insult is appropriate, regardless of its truth, but I think it is just plain sad to think like that and then call yourself a “responsible adult”.
It is odd to want to restrict and interfere with one Amendment while fiercely protecting another IMO, but such is life.
Any of the regulars here will be happy to tell you that I am just as much for regulation, restriction and consequences on “free speech” (AKA filth, immorality, violence and depravity) as I am gun rights. Maybe even more so. I am consistent in that regard.
I agree with Bubba. It’s a little too late to close the barn door.