Recent Comments

1. almost 13 years ago on Stuart Carlson

   And just how is electricity made? By burning fossil fuels! It won’t “change” anything to go to electric cars. We’ll only increase the use of fossil fuels and line the pockets of electricity companies AND oil companies.

2. about 13 years ago on Stuart Carlson

   Ummm, have you SEEN the people on Medicaid recently? Gold teeth, iphones, $200.00+ tennis shoes….and all on Uncle Sam’s money!!! And Medicare has the same problem…..people on disability for “the stress of life” and other phantom illnesses because they “can’t” work any longer. Bunch of free loaders!!! And the government has set it up that way! THEY’LL take care of us. But with who’s money? The rest of us who have that silly sense of responsibility and actually WORK for living! Isn’t it time to clean up the system a bit?

3. about 13 years ago on Ted Rall

   Does that include the cost of us rebuilding it after WWII??

4. about 13 years ago on Joel Pett

   THe key is WOULD HAVE BEEN. Unions, like all organizations that vie for power, become bloated, top heavy, and greedy over time. While I agree unions have donw many things for the middle class and worker safety, etc., isn’t it time to work WITH management and not demand more and more when the rest of society is getting less and less? Remember, unions have been the downfall of many a company too….and that means NO ONE works. Think of the steel mills and the auto industry. If it weren’t for unions and their greed for more money and power, both of those industries in this country would be strong and healthy. There has to be balance and cooperation from both sides for it to work. That includes unions.

5. about 13 years ago on ViewsAmerica

   Interesting how Obama will take credit for something that he truly had NOTHING to do with. I seem to remember some major ahifts in foreign policy toward the Middle East under Republican Presidents that would have more to do with these changes than what any Democrat has done when in Office. Just sayin’…..

6. about 13 years ago on Ken Catalino

   Actually, how many union employees pay anything for their (or their families) health insurance? How many of them don’t have a true pension, but a 401(k) or something similar like the rest of the working population they serve? Why should I, a taxpayer, pay more taxes to give them better benefits than I, or my contemporaries get in the private sector? Benefits should at LEAST be equal, not better when working for the government (at any level). And that thought goes for elected officials as well. I don’t think they should get the hefty paychecks and fat benefit packages they get either. Time to cut the waste on BOTH sides of the equation and get back to work!

7. over 13 years ago on Marshall Ramsey

   Don’t you mean the “takeover of society”? Just let Big Brother handle it all for you. Don’t worry…….you don’t need to work for a living, or live within your means, or even give up cigarettes, beer, and all your bling just to have health care….Big Brother will provide it for free! What a scam! It’s time people in this country wake up and learn the history of where we came from. We were founded on the principals of hard work, self sufficiency, and the possibility of each person to do or become what he/she wants. Notice I said POSSIBILITY…..not definite….and definitely NOT a handout. Many in this country have become fat, dumb and lazy at the hands of people who would have us believe the government is here to take care of us. It’s not. Get a grip on reality!

8. over 13 years ago on ViewsAmerica

   It’s a metaphor. And what you posted is exactly the thought behind the cartoon.

   Oh, and just why did anybody compare Mr. Obama (or ANY public figure for that matter) to the Messiah? Does anyone REALLY think government will save us? Government’s purpose is not to save us form ourselves and provide for us. Last I looked, a government that did that went belly up after being corrupt, overbloated, topheavy, and totalitarian for 50+ years (in case you can’t figure it out, I’m talking about the former Soviet Union). Our government was supposed to be BY the people and FOR the people…….not to SAVE the people. You won’t find the Messiah in politics. Not now, not ever. You wanted saved, find religion. You want good government, don’t blindly follow ANY politician, or EVER compare one of them to ANY savior.

9. about 14 years ago on Joel Pett

   And the Dems are better how? Government has grown exponentially with them in power. We now have the largest debt in our history. If we continue like this, we’ll have so much debt we won’t be able to pay even the interest on it. The federal govt now has controlling interest in banks, stock trading, housing, and they’re trying to take over health care. If they take that over too, where will free enterprise be? There soon won’t be ANY.

   Reagan expanded govt and spending, but what he did set up the Clinton Admin. to be able to take credit for a budget surplus. Bush II squandered it, but this bunch of “leaders” has only expanded every part of govt. to become hugely bloated, more controlling of more of the economy, and more willing to “steal from the rich and give to the poor”. Why do people feel the federal government is there to support them? The purpose of a unified federal government is for general (said country wide) protection, to ensure equality and consistency to all citizens and allow commerce among and within the 50 States. Nowhere in there does it say “take care of” people. Entitlement programs only foster less self worth and desire to succeed and serve to perpetuate themselves (for the sake of those running them and at the detriment of those supporting them……those who actually PAY taxes). The Speaker of the House comes for a State that is bankrupt and she’s trying to do the same thing to the entire country. And this is good how?

   On war, Obama hasn’t done what he promised he would. We’re still in both countries just as we were, we’re sending MORE people to Afghanistan as we speak, Bin Laden is nowhere to be found, relations with Israel are at an all time low, terrorism continues to prosper, and our “security” in this country is a flat out joke. We’re no more safe now than we were under Bush II.

   Healthcare is fraught with multiple layers of oversight that compete against each other and bloat the system, physicians are losing reimbursement and leaving the profession, ER’s are overcrowded to such an extent they can’t take care of those who really need it, and we’re holding the Mayo Clinic up as a gold standard for the rest of the system. They overcharge and overtest and have actually CUT what they do for people who don’t have the money. Is that the gold standard we want?

   The Dems went after credit card companies. What did those companies do ahead of the legislation going into effect? They raised EVERYONE’S rates to almost 25%! That sure helped!

   Tell me again how Obama will be our savior? Tell me again why the Dems should stay in power and continue to amass more wealth and control of my life? Tell me again why I should pay more money to the Federal govt. to take care of other people who choose not to get a job (because the welfare system pays more and allows them to NOT work)? Tell me, when will we be out of the two wars we’re in? Weren’t we supposed to be pulling out and done with them in the very near future? Like that’s going to really happen.

10. over 14 years ago on Jim Morin

    satipera4

    Why must you feel the need to get nasty? We are having a discussion. Can it not be a disagreement in a gentlemenly way and not deteroiate into mud slinging? Is this your plan?

    As for the links, again I will say it as plainly as I can. The BBC article shows VIOLENT crime went UP 5%. Is this not a true statistic? In the link to the Home Office, I am talking about the “British Crime Survey” that is below what you speak of. It clearly states the two statistics I posted before. Are these not also true statistics? Again, I read the report from the Home Office. They clearly state that the 5% increase in crime was “insignificant”, yet that represents a large number of incidents.

    To your quote “If it does increase this year (still way below 1995 levels) what the hell has that got to do with a gun ban imposed in the 1990’s?”: That IS my point. Vilent crime and firearm ownership have NO correlation. Gun banners tout that people will be more safe and less likely to be victims if guns are banned. Yet, in the UK violent crime is increasing (by 5% as stated by the Home Office) and the chance of being a victim has increased also. This directly refutes the concept of a safre society without firearms. My point, and the pooint of others who have posted is that people will commit violent crimes aginst their fellow citizens with or without firearms. The difference is that when law abiding citizens are allowed to own and carry firearms for their own self defense, criminal activity against the person decreases and has not risen in 10 years (here in the US). In fact, violent crime is at its lowest point EVER since statistics have been kept by the DOJ. So the argument that guns are a major part of violent crime is, by the statistics in both the US and the UK, invalid. Violent crime rates show no correlation to firearm ownership. Do you not see that in the statistics? Do you not understand what I and others have been saying? Or do you choose not to see it? Again, I respect your position that you do not wish to own or carry a firearm. That IS your right. Why though do you argue to take that right away from others? You still have not answered that quetion in any of your posts. What is your reasoning for not wanting anyone to own or carry a firearm? I am still curious to read your answer to that. And, should you respond, would you please attempt to refrain from telling me to “go play in traffic” or some other derogatory statement? I have not tried to degrade or intimidate you, and I only request the same in return.