published Saturday, October 8th, 2011

Herman Cain

about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

128
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
5v5 said...

Good 1 Clay>>>>

Cain the Sale_Out

October 8, 2011 at 12:07 a.m.
OllieH said...

Perfect.

Well done, Clay!

October 8, 2011 at 12:08 a.m.
dude_abides said...

You cain't raise a Cain back up when he's in defeat.

October 8, 2011 at 12:15 a.m.
hambone said...

Evangelicals say they can't vote for Romney because he's a mormon.

What's their excuse for not voting for Cain??

October 8, 2011 at 12:34 a.m.
fairmon said...

The media including FOX is trying to ignore Cain but he won't go away. If enough people listen to him or go to his web site there will be even more interest in his campaign. He doesn't have enough political experience to talk at lengh and say nothing. He is so naive he even makes spcific proposals about addressing critical issues. Some media critics say the fact he has turned around three struggling companies and made them viable profitable businesses again won't work in government. He even recognizes the value of making sure he gets input from credible sources and the importance of cabinet postion appointments. Maybe Cain can is an accurate motto. Unfortunately he doesn't have the funding to go up agianst the republican candidates then the billion plus fund and smear tactics of Obama's advisers. The fact the TFP acknowldeges he is a candidate is progress.

October 8, 2011 at 1:35 a.m.
alprova said...

Rolando quipped yesterday with: "I absolutely cannot wait for Bennett to start attacking Herman Cain..the current front-runner Republican candidate. Really. I cannot wait."

Oh me...oh my. I'm sure you've got Clay quaking in his tennis shoes at the thought that Rolando might become upset.

"What a quandary...attacking a black man just because he is a Republican...LOL. Serves him right. What goes around comes around."

Cain is the flavor of the week, depending on which poll you look at, but it's telling that YOU brought skin color into your own commentary. Apparently you think about the man on those terms.

"[Perry is currently #5 and is so yesterday.]"

Cain is only leading the race one major poll, and Perry has not slipped to #5 is any of them. Where are you getting your information?

Romney leads all but one of the major polling firms.

ABC News/Washington Post has Romney #1, and Cain and Parry tied for 2nd

CBS News has Perry and Romney tied for 1st and Cain 3rd.

Quinnipiac has Romney #1, with Cain 2nd and Perry 3rd.

Pew Research has Romney #1, with Perry 2nd and Cain 3rd.

Fox News has Romney #1, with Perry 2nd and Cain 3rd.

Zogby has Cain 1st, Romney 2nd, and both Perry and Ron Paul tied for 3rd.

It's really anybody's guess which candidate will emerge front of the pack come next year. It's not going to be Cain however. The man isn't raising enough money nor has he political experience enough to impress mainstream Republicans, which will most definitely prevent him from going the distance.

Cain will be one of the first to drop out after one or two of the first primary elections.

October 8, 2011 at 1:42 a.m.
Rickaroo said...

I suppose it's a sign of how much we have evolved, racially, that black people today are free to join the grand ol' party of narrow-minded rich old white men. It's also a sign of how much those blacks who join it have devolved - that they act and think just like narrow-minded rich old white men.

October 8, 2011 at 3 a.m.
rolando said...

By God, you did do it! [Delighted Laughter] Never thought you would stoop to what your side would call racism.

You could at least have made him an officer...he certainly isn't a foot-soldier any longer, although he started as one and came up through the ranks on his own merits [quite unlike the out-of-touch, incompetent born-rich, elitist now temporarily occupying the White House].

Now this one might be worth following, Clay!

Evidently you still read these threads of yours. They had become so same-o, same-o outdated stuff, I had pretty well stopped beyond a brief viewing...for what that's worth.

Obama being out of the question, now how about something on the same order for Holder...there is certainly enough material there, three years worth.

Or maybe Fast and Furious itself if Holder is too, too much.

Reid's total blocking of the vote on Obama's "jobs plan" [such as it is] might not be bad.

I ask this because you are the sole staff online cartoonist. I would think you would have a certain obligation to the public at large...but perhaps not. I certainly doubt you won your awards by being a paid lackey...go for the higher calling, every so often if nothing else.


A black man wearing a CSA uniform? Not bad...he does support many of our southern traditions -- like honesty, do-it-yourself independence, country, and a traditional view of and support for the Constitution as Amended.

Rather a well done cartoon, in my opinion, even if "racist". He has certainly done worse. Clay must think the CSA is something to ridicule instead of an historical fight for the Tenth Amendment. But then, it is a political cartoon.

October 8, 2011 at 6:24 a.m.
rolando said...

Deleted by author.

October 8, 2011 at 6:24 a.m.
rolando said...

Evangelicals say they can't vote for Romney because he's a mormon. What's their excuse for not voting for Cain??

We are not all racists like you present yourself, hambone. We vote for the quality of the candidate, not for the color of his skin.

You just cannot stand it because he isn't a Democrat...

October 8, 2011 at 6:35 a.m.
osama said...

modern day house boy! herman{toby)cain SAD!!

October 8, 2011 at 7:29 a.m.
aidehua said...

Funny, I thought it was the Democrats that fought to preserve slavery and Jim Crow laws. Herman Cain would have been a Union soldier and Republican if he'd lived back then. To those smug and deluded Democrats, it was your party that enslaved modern-day blacks in a dependent relationship that encourages out-of-wedlock births in exchange for a dependable voting block. How cynical and self-serving! As Frederick Douglass said:

I am a Republican, a black, dyed in the wool Republican, and I never intend to belong to any other party than the party of freedom and progress.

October 8, 2011 at 7:33 a.m.
patriot1 said...

Liberals/ democRATS just can't help it, this racism is just in their DNA I suppose. The party of slavery, Jim Crowe, the Klan and segregation rears its ugly head of RACISM again even in the TFP... Could Clay please tell us if Cain is "speaking with a Negro dialect" as Harry Reid described Obama?

October 8, 2011 at 8:08 a.m.
memphisexile said...

I find that calling one party racist is a really lame, useless thing to do. In the past both parties have done things that were shameful. Yes, Democrats were the party of Jim Crow and slavery, but the Republicans were the ones who fought tooth and nail to stop the passage of the Civil Rights Act. Much to my shame, the common thing amongst these bigots in the past was not their political party but where they were from, the South.

As far as Cain goes, I am sure he is a nice guy and probably brings a breath of fresh air to the primary race. I think it is fantastic that in a presidential primary there are minorities and women being represented. I do not care what color Mr. Cain is, I care about what he is saying. Personally, I think his tax policy is geared towards shifting the burden to the working poor in order to benefit those who make a living on investments. I disagree with this, so I will not vote for him.

Usually, I think Clay is hilarious, but I am not really sure what he was going for with this one.

October 8, 2011 at 8:47 a.m.
rick1 said...

"modern day house boy! herman{toby)cain SAD!!"

Talk about making a racist comment. It is amazing how the liberals call anyone who doesn’t agree with Obama a racist. Yet when the liberals do not agree with Herman Cain they make a comment like Osma made and you don’t hear a word from the liberals. You hate it when a black person does not want to live on the Government Plantation of entitlement programs and does not want to be controlled by the government.

You want everyone to be tolerant of your views but you are anything but tolerant when someone does not agree with your views, and then you will viciously attack them like you are doing to Herman Cain.

You are the racists.

October 8, 2011 at 8:50 a.m.
fairmon said...

Run Herman run.

October 8, 2011 at 8:50 a.m.
MTJohn said...

aidehua said...

Funny, I thought it was the Democrats that fought to preserve slavery and Jim Crow laws.

Distorted history. It was the Dixiecrats that fought to preserve slavery and the Jim Crow laws and most of those folks left the Democrat party during Johnson's presidency. And, with the election of Ronald Reagan, they became staunch Republicans.

October 8, 2011 at 8:51 a.m.
GreenKepi said...

And, if I was a 'betting' man...the ones of you that 'just love this drawing of Cain'...were the very ones "celebrating" the removal of Hank Williams Jr. from Monday Night Football...!!!

October 8, 2011 at 9:10 a.m.
riverman said...

As one who would be proud to have Herman Cain at the top of our ticket next fall I actually think the cartoon is pretty funny. Somewhere in the pursuit of Political Correctness we have lost our ability to laugh. HOWEVER it would be interesting to see the reaction of the bedwetters on this board if someone published a cartoon of Obama in Muslim garb.

October 8, 2011 at 9:16 a.m.
MTJohn said...

riverman said...HOWEVER it would be interesting to see the reaction of the bedwetters on this board if someone published a cartoon of Obama in Muslim garb.

Political cartoons typically work by exaggerating a truth that is implicit in the caricature. A cartoon with Obama in Muslim garb would have no truth.

October 8, 2011 at 9:31 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Harp3339 said: "The media including FOX is trying to ignore Cain but he won't go away. . . Unfortunately he doesn't have the funding to go up agianst the republican candidates etc."

Ultimately, it's Herman Cain's own fault, Harp3339. Like you, he advocates for the kind of laws and policies that makes it easy for wealthy corporate godfathers to rule this country.

October 8, 2011 at 9:32 a.m.
lumpy said...

I guess Herman Cain got too uppity for you Democrats. He's not the correct sort of black man for you. He's off your plantation. He's too independent minded. He's not a Democrat. He doesn't rattle off the company mantra. He actually believes in our Constituion and the freedoms it guarantees. He's a conservative.

How dare he!!!

Clarence Thomas got too uppity as well and he's been walking around with bulleye on his back ever since.

Cain must be an uncle tom for being a Republican, huh? I guess if Herman Cain was a leftist, a marxist and lighter skinned you'd be more comfortable with that.

Democrats like keeping people in their slots, in their roles.

Herman Cain and Bob Johnson, the billionare CEO of BET, break the stereotype of the black man you Democrats try and perpetuate.

Obama has the mentality of a slave master, just like all the other higher ups in the Democrat Party. When someone wanders off the plantation they pay for it.

October 8, 2011 at 9:37 a.m.
tderng said...

well,well,well,looks like Mr. Bennett has just shown his racist side.Placing a black man in a confederate uniform?The epitome of a closet racist.I hope Herman Cain gets a copy of this.Couldn't do one on Cain without bringing race into it?I rarely say negative posts about Mr. Bennett's cartoons themselves,and I disagree with his slant on his "humor" but this smacks of just plain old racism.SHAME ON YOU MR. BENNETT! Do you really believe Mr Cain would have fought for the Confederacy?If you do then you are an IDIOT AND A COMPLETE FOOL.He is the type of MAN who would have fought for the Union then returned to the south to create a business that would have raised this war torn area from its abject poverty instead of being a carpetbagger out for his own profits.

October 8, 2011 at 9:38 a.m.
timbo said...

Bennett is a blatant racist. What was his purpose here? He and the rest of you liberal juvenile delinquents are basically just trying to shock the real adults in the room with ridiculous comments and cartoons.

I haven’t voted for a Republican in the last two presidential races. I basically think that both parties are progressive and the difference is degree. Before that I grew up in a democrat /liberal household and it took me a while in the business world to grow up politically and become a practical conservative.

So I will quote 1st Corinthians 13 verse 11. “When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man (adult), I put away childish things.” You liberals are basically children. Believing in spending more than you take in, Global warming, socialist government, electing people with no practical experience, and calling a black man a racist when he doesn’t agree with you. That is just childish and immature. Your political beliefs are just fairy tales.

Bennett and the Times Free Press should be ashamed of themselves but they are too immature to get it.

So, I want you to know that these liberal discussions, and it is 80% liberal, has affected my life and my voting habits. I will now vote for any Republican over this immature, childish, philosophy called liberalism. That’s right, your temper tantrums have had the opposite effect. They are producing more Republican votes. Keep up the good work. You children have to be stopped.

October 8, 2011 at 9:39 a.m.
MTJohn said...

Timbo - apparently you forgot the rest of that chapter.

October 8, 2011 at 10:11 a.m.

I'd have rather seen Herman Cain dressed up like an Italian Godfather threatening to cut off several states if they didn't deliver. Feel free to use that idea, Mr. Bennett, I'm no artist so I couldn't draw it myself.

Or would that be racist too? Apparently it's impossible to criticize a black Republican for adopting the racist and discriminatory attitudes of the modern-day GOP which has become quite identical to that of the Confederate South. Because you see, there's still more white Southern racists than other voters, so basically it's a net gain. And they support the Constitution...saying what they want it to say. Segregation? Completely lawful! Nullification? Lawful! Secession when an election doesn't go your way? Lawful! Poisoning the environment, especially that of other states? Lawful! Denying jury participation to blacks? Lawful! Heck, why even give them a fair trial, who is the Supreme Court to say somebody must have one? Due Process? Not if it gets in the way of the people's right to lynch and murder somebody who just has the wrong skin color!

Oh well, I wonder how many of the people attacking Clay Bennett as a racist have themselves made such remarks themselves.

Next up, can we have something to do with Rick Perry and Mitt Romney arguing over what's a cult?

October 8, 2011 at 10:33 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Lumpy said: "I guess Herman Cain got too uppity for you Democrats. . . He's too independent minded."

Herman Cain is anything but independent minded, Lumpy. As Republican presidential candidates go, this title still belongs to Ron Paul who continues to speak the truth about oil, our initial military involvement in Iraq, and the neo-conservative agenda.

No, when it comes to the bottom line, Herman Cain’s candidacy reflects the same old status quo that his manipulative self-serving corporate godfathers have outlined:

"After an Iowa voter asked about increasing domestic oil production, Cain proposed creating a commission consisting of businessmen from the coal, oil, shale oil, and natural gas industries to gut environmental protections. Cain even said he would appoint the CEO of Shell, claiming the company had been “abused” by the EPA. Cain has close ties to several top oil executives."

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/10/06/334170/herman-cain-top-10/

October 8, 2011 at 10:34 a.m.
potcat said...

Cain or none of the others running don't have a chance in Hell of becoming President!

Its all smokescreens, they get your ATTENTION on some BS, when we should be PROTESTING to bring our Troops home NOW, Arrest the BIGGIST BANK INVESTOR THIEVES ever to ROB a Country blind and bring them to REAL JUSTICE, like when you give 20 yrs for stealing, Drugs ETC. They deserve life and to be made to PAY IT BACK... that will be the damn day..when pigs fly...

October 8, 2011 at 10:35 a.m.
murf said...

A much more appropriate cartoon would depict Caine as a slave trying to escape off of a plantation to freedom and his master, depicted by President Obama, chasing him with a noose stating "How dare you try to leave the liberal plantation.

It is obvious that is Clay's true belief in his cartoon.

October 8, 2011 at 10:43 a.m.
jesse said...

mt.john! i think obama in muslem garb would be just as valid as cain in a rebel uniform, which is to say NOT AT ALL!

October 8, 2011 at 10:58 a.m.

Hey there's an idea, have a bunch of Republican conservatives in cult robes chasing the one who has left their brainwashing behind.

I suppose Ron Paul comes closest, but he's gone over to a cult of his own.

October 8, 2011 at 11:03 a.m.
hambone said...

I challenge everyone posting here to apply Cain's 999 Plan to their gross income.

What you will see is a large jump in your taxes, while the top earners will see theirs cut in half.

At the same time Federal revenue would be about half of it's present ammount.

October 8, 2011 at 11:20 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Murf said: "A much more appropriate cartoon would depict Cain as a slave trying to escape off of a plantation to freedom and his master, depicted by President Obama, chasing him with a noose stating "How dare you try to leave the liberal plantation."

I believe you need to go back to school and try to catch up on some of the basics, Mr. Murf. A slave is a dominated person and the master is somebody in control. The bottom line is that it’s candidate Cain who essentially declared himself a master - but maybe you failed to note his arrogant unconstitutional stance in regard to Muslim-Americans:

“In an interview with ThinkProgress earlier this year, Herman Cain declared that he “will not” appoint a Muslim in his administration if he were elected president. In the months that followed, Cain qualified his position a number of times – at one point even telling Glenn Beck that he would appoint Muslims but only on the condition that they take a special loyalty oath – before finally recanting this unconstitutional stance and issuing an apology to Muslim-Americans.”

“During a Fox News Sunday interview, Cain professed his belief that if a community wants to ban a mosque, “they have a right to do that.” Rather than idle banter, Cain’s comments came fresh off his speech blasting the proposed expansion of an existing Islamic center in Murfreesboro, Tennessee because it was, in the former pizza executive’s estimation, “not an innocent mosque.” Cain’s view is squarely at odds with not only the Constitution, but basic precepts of tolerance and diversity as well.”

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/10/06/334170/herman-cain-top-10/

October 8, 2011 at 11:26 a.m.
timbo said...

MTJohn..... You are probably refering to verse 13: 13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity..

Charity is when I, me, the individual, chooses to help someone. It is not the government or you liberals stealing my money to give to someone else. That is a perversion of charity making it negative.

It doesn't surprise me that you don't know the difference. Again, you have a childish view of the world. Let the adults pay for my fun. Just gimme, gimme, gimme.....

When you grow up you will become a conservative.

October 8, 2011 at 11:30 a.m.
jesse said...
  1. was it churchill who said "a young person who is not libral has no heart,a mature person who is not conservative has no brain!"?(or words to that effect!) BTW: WHY do you bible thumpers HAVE to drag the BIBLE into EVERY debate on this forum? the BIBLE is irrelevant to discussions of almost everything EXCEPT religion!and we ain't discussin religion right now!(or are we?) BTW#2: just to clear up where i stand on christianity."the new testement is PROOF that somewhere on the road to damascus paul found johns stash of l.s.d. and proceeded to partake LIBRALY therof!!
October 8, 2011 at 11:38 a.m.
Facts said...

Great to see all the forward, progressive thinkers blast an independent man of color for not falling in line on the prescribed path to identity politics. Talk about group think-you're secret to win is to scream racism, intolerance. Look at yourselves in the mirror.

October 8, 2011 at 11:47 a.m.

Stealing? Maybe if you didn't get a vote. Maybe if you didn't have the right to complain. Maybe if you didn't have the right to leave and go elsewhere. Maybe if you didn't get anything in return for the taxes you pay.

But you do get all of those things. For good reason.

So no, you are not having your money stolen from you. Taken? Yes, but ultimately it is with your consent, and possibly more to your benefit than you realize. So you don't agree with everything that the government does with your tax dollars...guess what? Neither does anybody else, with the possible exception of Mr. Agreeable, who agrees to everything.

But we don't require unanimous consent for everything the government does for a reason. There are cases where it's more than a simple bare majority, but unanimous isn't chosen that often.

Don't get me wrong, if you disagree with something the government does, do feel free to oppose it, but don't do so with inaccurate misrepresentations that merely serve to inflame emotional reactions.

Now that's a childish view of the world, thinking you can just push people's hot buttons to get what you want.

To Jesse:

No, Churchill was never proven to say such a thing, it was misattributed to him, much like Romney did for another quote by Keynes.

And why is it that so many people are called an "independent thinker" when they're quite clearly adopting a party line? Show me Herman Cain repudiating a few Republican shibboleths and then I'll agree he's defying the party base.

October 8, 2011 at 11:50 a.m.
MTJohn said...

jesse said...mt.john! i think obama in muslem garb would be just as valid as cain in a rebel uniform, which is to say NOT AT ALL!

Jesse - there is a measure of truth in the suggestion that Herman Cain shares the values of those who still embrace the Stars&Bars. There is no truth in the implication that President Obama is a Muslim.

timbo said...Charity is when I, me, the individual, chooses to help someone. It is not the government or you liberals stealing my money to give to someone else. That is a perversion of charity making it negative.

Timbo - the charity to which St. Paul referred is charity firmly rooted in Agape. There are no distinctions and not limits to God's love. By the way, if you are really that concerned about the government stealing your money and giving it to someone else, I'd suggest that you follow the money. If you are middle class, you are doing more to subsidize the wealthy than to subsidize the unfortunate.

October 8, 2011 at 11:50 a.m.
onetinsoldier said...

The great religious battle has begun. Repugnants have narrowed their field to jesus, joseph and the godfather. You have joseph wearing magic underware to protect himself from the godfathers 666 plan and jesus is trying to lure the godfather to his hunting ranch. What a party.

October 8, 2011 at 11:55 a.m.
fairmon said...

mntl said....

"Cain has close ties to several top oil executives."

Where do you get this information? I hope this is true, he may have sufficient campaign funding to make it an interesting race.

October 8, 2011 at 11:58 a.m.
jesse said...

hey happy with the bulbs! WHOEVER said it kinda had it nailed!imo!

mtjohn! i don't see that at all!i mean he is outta the box for sure but i don't see anything that puts him in the ranks of the CONFEDERACY!(slavery,states rights,kkk,lynchins and such!

October 8, 2011 at 12:01 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Timbo said to MTJohn: "Charity is when. . . the individual, chooses to help someone. . . It is not the government or you liberals stealing my money to give to someone else. . . You have a childish view of the world. Let the adults pay for my fun. Just gimme, gimme, gimme.....When you grow up you will become a conservative."

Since the richest 20 percent of the U.S. population controls 84 percent of the wealth, I think it’s obvious who has been overindulged and who has been saying: "gimmie, gimmie, gimmie."

October 8, 2011 at 12:03 p.m.

Wouldn't that be because the liberal in their youth managed to accomplish their goals and thereby change society?

If they didn't have brains, then they wouldn't have done so.

But let's try another quote:

By 'radical,' I understand one who goes too far; by 'conservative,' one who does not go far enough; by 'reactionary,' one who won't go at all. --Woodrow Wilson

Or another:

Conservative, n: A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal who wishes to replace them with others. Ambrose Bierce

Or this last one:

If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him. Usually attributed to Richelieu (though obviously in French), but there's no provenance for it.

October 8, 2011 at 12:03 p.m.
fairmon said...

hambone...

Did you include the reduced cost of goods and services in your calculations? Did you consider the high income folks would have zero deductions, reductions etc. and pay the sales tax on their high level of spending? It would be revenue nuetral and a hell of a lot better than the 4 ft. high and growing book of manipulation and favor showing to the wealthy and favored corporations.

October 8, 2011 at 12:05 p.m.
dude_abides said...

*SELF IMPOSED RULE VIOLATION!

timbo, you promised we wouldn't be subjected to your garbage more than once a day, explain yourself. Oh wait, you can't, unless you commit a second violation of your rule. Maybe you could autoreincarnate as francis or sea monkey and pretend to defend timbo.

October 8, 2011 at 12:18 p.m.
jesse said...

hey mtn laurel! there is not ONE office holder in this entire country who does not have CLOSE TIES to the oil industry!! if you believe otherwise then you are demonstrating your ignorance!

AND if they DON'T have close ties they are trying to get them!

BIG oil has the bucks and BIG bucks is what it takes to get elected so all this hyperbole on these little forums we like to get on and rant our views of how to solve the nations problems are an exercise in futility!it is what it is and it ain't gonna change ! btw:dude abides,your avatar makes you look like an idjit!!

October 8, 2011 at 12:23 p.m.
fairmon said...

mntl said..

the richest 20 percent of the U.S. population controls 84 percent of the wealth

The good thing about it is you have the option of becoming one of the 20% that owns 80% of the wealth unless the government elects to make everyone equally impoverished by confiscating your wealth.

Steve Jobs and Bill Gates are two people that created more jobs, provided more people with health care and pensions than all members of congress combined. They were in a class with Eli Whitney, Henry ford, Thomas Edison and many others that created and manufactured things that changed the world and provided people employment and opportunities to work until the government ran them to other countries. Is it wrong they became wealthy? Why should the government require them to contribute even more than they did and do voluntarily? I am sure Steve Jobs recent death resulted in a wind fall of estate taxes to the government. Are you one of the few that don't have an I-phone, an I-pad? Obviously you have a computer and helped Jobs or Gates grow their business and hire more people.

Just keep on buying those imports and insisting on more taxes and increased welfare roles and you will accomplish the objective of making the wealthy less wealthy but not improving the lot in life of the remaining population. It is greed on your part when you insist on others sharing with you and insisting someone confiscate from them and share it with you.

October 8, 2011 at 12:24 p.m.

And both Steve Jobs and Bill Gates have had the help of the government in growing their business and hiring people. Without the benefit of the laws, they wouldn't be where they are, or have done what they did.

Which some people do have problems with, there's a reason the Copyleft and OpenSource movements exist, and yes, they have opposed the actions of both Microsoft and Apple. There are many valid concerns about each, even if you don't personally blame Jobs or Gates for them. And I didn't even bring up the suicide rate at the FoxConn factories! Is the result of their actions a net good? Perhaps, but there's still harm that has resulted from what they have done as well. We might indeed be better off if things had gone differently.

October 8, 2011 at 12:35 p.m.
rolando said...

So no, you are not having your money stolen from you. Taken? Yes, but ultimately it is with your consent, and possibly more to your benefit than you realize

newbulb -- So why is that if you refuse to consent to have your money stolen, the IRS will fill out your tax form for you and then steal your money at the highest rate possible?

"Consent" is a relative thing. A baby does not "consent" to having his life stolen through abortion.

October 8, 2011 at 12:56 p.m.
rolando said...

jesse: Two things...

1) Obama in muslim rig would be much more logical than H. Cain in a CSA uniform. Obama favors them, after all. Further, under muslim law [or whatever], Obama is a muslim by birth...through his father.

2) The reason the Bible comes up so often here is a) we are still a Christian nation, and b) religion is the basis of essentially all morality. What else established its bases? Morality enters virtually all threads on this forum...some are apparent, others are not -- but they are there.

October 8, 2011 at 1:02 p.m.
hambone said...

harp3339, By the reduced cost of goods and services, do you mean the blackmarket a national sales tax would create?

The middle income and poor will be spending all of their net income to live, while the wealthy will only pay tax on what they spend, in the US.

What Cain's 999 Plan does not seem to take into account is state and local sales tax, which in Tennessee would make those just barely getting by pay as much as 27% in taxes.

And revenue nuetral it is not! Unless you consider nuetral to be 1/2 of the present federal revenue!

October 8, 2011 at 1:08 p.m.

But you're not having your money stolen that's the point. If you object to the taxes you are required to pay by the law, you have several avenues to make protests. If you choose to refuse to pay, well, that is your choice, but expect there to be consequences for that decision. The government as currently constituted does have authority, and does not operate purely by absolutely voluntary consent. You are certainly welcome to try to change that, if you like, but I don't expect you to try, let alone succeed.

Bringing in abortion to this discussion won't make your point for you. How many women consented to being the gender that has to have the baby within their body? I guess you should go rail against our Creator for taking away that choice! All you're really doing is muddying the issue by bringing in yet another emotional plea to try to distract people.

Not that this particular nuance of the discussion isn't drifting off from Herman Cain, but that's a bit different from what you're trying to do.

If you want to get back to Herman Cain, we can do that though. Herman Cain says he has experience running a business that will help him run the country. He made Godfather's profitable. As I recall, he did it by closing half the Godfather's operations. Which half of the states should we close?

I wonder how he stands on Civil Unions, but last time I heard him speak on it, he just said he supports traditional marriages.

I wonder if he knew about my parents "traditional" marriage, and if he supported it.

October 8, 2011 at 1:21 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

"You liberals are basically children."

"That is just childish and immature. Your political beliefs are just fairy tales."

"Bennett and the Times Free Press should be ashamed of themselves but they are too immature to get it."

"You children have to be stopped."

Gee, timbo, think you can whip up on us cry-baby liberals any harder with your wet noodle? Here, I'm bending over, grabbing my ankles - let me have at least one more good whoopin', big daddy! Maybe that'll knock some sense into my wee wittul wibuhwull childish head.

A mark of maturity is balance. It is possible to think too much with your head and to feel too much with your heart. Today's conservatives, for reasons that don't really make a lot of sense, have fallen prey to the nonsensical rhetoric of the me-first Ayn Randian philosophy. Hell, that philosophy is not just me-first, it is me, me, and only me. That, sir, is what is childish and immature. It is not the wise and reasoned thinking of a person living in a civilized society and acknowledging his/her place in the grand scheme of things. It is rather the outlook of a 2-yr. old who's comfy and cozy in his little corner and is totally oblivious to the fact that the world does not revolve around him alone.

Spare us your "all grown up" conservative minded conceit. Far greater minds than yours have been liberal in their thinking.

"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill

"Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear." William E. Gladstone

October 8, 2011 at 1:27 p.m.
dude_abides said...

No, jesse, that's Rik Perry in the photo, not me. I will take it down if it's offensive to you, but only if you admit that the reference to "The Band" in my earlier post was clever.

October 8, 2011 at 1:36 p.m.
rolando said...

My use of abortion makes the point of "consent" as much as your use of "Taken" makes your point, newbulbs. You play symantics, I play comparisons [or whatever].

Just because we disagree makes neither untrue.

Women DO have the choice to change their gender, as do men. Blame their father...cloned females only make females. It takes a male to change that. Do you find that irksome?

I brought a baby into the argument, you brought God. So there you go. But God, after all, gave us free choice, didn't He? Except in the case of the aborted.

Closing states falls under the ridiculous -- Lincoln tried that and failed. Closing tax loopholes and eliminating most undeserved government handouts, subsidies, etc would be much more appropriate. And that's for starters.

The last depends on your definition of "traditional"...common-law, perhaps? Same sex? Jumped broomstick, maybe? Church? Civil? Underage? Non-consensual? Arranged? What?

October 8, 2011 at 1:37 p.m.
rolando said...

Actually, dude, I imagine a complaint to the TFP regarding a disgusting avatar implying an equally disgusting and immoral act by a candidate for public office would be enough. So go ahead...enjoy your self.

[Now pretend you meant to imply something else entirely...haven't I seen you using the word "teabagger"?]

October 8, 2011 at 1:41 p.m.

Your use of abortion is the same as describing taxes as theft, an emotional plea that distracts from the real issues in order to win the argument by weight of feeling. That's my point. You are the ones playing on semantics, because you have a connotation you wish to apply to a subject. I merely pointed out that it is biology (this being the responsibility of the creator) that causes a child to be born in a female, with her actual consent ranging from full participant to exploited victim. We are certainly fortunate to live in a time where the technology is available so that no woman who does not want to be pregnant has to be, she does not even have to conceive a child if she does not wish it. This also applies to men, in that they can avoid impregnating a woman with relatively great ease themselves. Unless, of course, certain right-wing conservatives get their way and deny them access to those options. Still, if you are upset with biology, you have to take it up with the Creator. And no, cloned females don't only make females, there are some species with different chromosomal arrangements that determine gender, or entirely different ways to do it. You may want to look up the science before you speak, and qualify your words appropriately. Especially since some people think the Y Chromosome may disappear in humanity for various reasons.

And Lincoln tried to close states? I'm pretty sure he was opposed to states walking off and leaving.

You are correct that "traditional" is poorly defined, which is why I did not respect Herman Cain's answer at all.

October 8, 2011 at 1:48 p.m.
jesse said...

hey dude abides! it does not offend me! but your avatar indicates a point of view and the idea that you see perry as providing oral sex to a HOTDOG reflects on you NOT perry!

October 8, 2011 at 2:04 p.m.
jesse said...

hey rolando! point #1 well taken! point #2morality as comming from a religious perspective is invalid due to the fact that 99% of the people expounding the morality of the christian faith #1 do not live by it.and #2 actualy belive that it does not apply to them!other wise how do you explain the venom,hate.and hypocricy coming from the church community!if you AGREE w/them they love you like a brother BUT if you trash their beliefs they have no mercy!

October 8, 2011 at 2:21 p.m.
rolando said...

Regarding the bases of morality, I said religion, jesse, not Christianity. All but the amoral have a set of personal ethics or morals to guide their lives. They are not necessarily the same. Whether they follow their scriptures or not is immaterial -- they still have a set of morals based on their upbringing (in general).

Governments make laws based on society's morals or mores. In our case, it was most commonly English common law.

The reaction to "trashing the beliefs" of a particular religion/sect depends on the religion/etc you are talking about. There are always those who hate others who disagree with them. It seems to be religion-independent.

October 8, 2011 at 3:41 p.m.
jesse said...

rolando! i can agree w/that ,although it seems to be more prone amoung religous and political groups! which may be due to the fact that folks are more FEVERANT about religion and politics!(ie:less rational)trashing was prob.a poor choice of words,disagreeing would have been better!) actualy imo. religion is a bad place to get HIDEBOUND in!at the end of the day you will prob. be proven wrong no matter WHAT you believe!

October 8, 2011 at 3:58 p.m.
rolando said...

So H. Cain evidently does not agree with your definition, newbulbs...or more likely, didn't know of it. Your respect must then depend upon agreement. Interesting, that.

There are other ways of "closing" or "closing out" states than having them walk away. Lincoln, by his actions, effectively "closed out" all those states who legally withdrew from the Union...post-war, it came to be called, "Reconstruction". For an example, check into what the citizens of those states had to do to regain their Constitutional Right to Vote unconstitutionally denied them in the war's aftermath. Lincoln held that those states were always part of the Union, even when they revolted...so they were still protected by its Constitution.

You still play at semantics. Rather standoffish, that. A child's sex is determined by the father...he is the one who contributes the variable chromosome. Use of the word "creator" is inaccurate and inappropriate...unless you mean "Creator". I, too, can play at semantics if you wish to go that route.

But we were speaking of the comparison of non-consent of aborted babies to "taking" a taxpayer's money [your word-choice] for something the "takee" abhors. The comparison is appropriate and valid and clearly makes my point.

October 8, 2011 at 4:27 p.m.
rolando said...

jesse: folks are more FEVERANT about religion and politics!

My momma always told be not to argue about those two...but I can agree with your take.

I understood you quite well. I simply quoted you to ensure you knew what I was talking about.

October 8, 2011 at 4:29 p.m.

Gee Rolando, you're making aspersions about me because I don't respect an answer I consider vague and poorly defined.

Except the reason I don't respect Cain's answer is because it was evasive and lacking in meaning. He was quite clearly trying to dodge the question. That's why the CNN fellow interviewing him had to keep repeating it. And yet he never did get an actual answer from Herman Cain on that issue. Three or four times all Cain had to say was "I support traditional marriage" which is not much of an answer.

Now constrast him with say Ron Paul, I don't agree with Ron Paul, but I respect him when he does respond to a question with a meaningful answer that clearly shows where he stands. I may still disagree, but at least there's something to disagree with.

And Lincoln did not get rid of those states. So some of their citizens were held accountable for acts of war, rebellion and treason...my, oh my, people actually being made to deal with the results of their actions. Including the only crime explicitly defined in the Constitution.

My bad for a typo with Creator though, but you really do need to look up gender determination, there is no inherent biological reason that the "male" is responsible for that determination. The human way of doing things is not the only way. And there are even some humans with irregular chromosomes. Some who can barely live (or not live, as the case may be), some who you could not identify without a microscope.

And no, your point still isn't made with abortion, it's just you bringing up another hot-button topic which doesn't make your point, but just serves to show what you're doing. Playing on emotions. And yes, you are doing it with semantics.

October 8, 2011 at 5:16 p.m.
fairmon said...

It seems some here would prefer everyone turn over 90% of their income or gains to the federal government and allow them to use what they need or want to spend and distribute the remains as they deem fairly among us.

Is it time to do away with cash and require everyone to have a card that tracks purchases and charges/adds enough consumption tax to fund all government spending? No purchases could occur without having a card which at some point in the future will be an implant. Would this fit the "mark of the beast" described in the bible?

October 8, 2011 at 5:22 p.m.
potcat said...

The Bible was wrote by Man. If they are a God, its has to be a WOMAN!!!

Look at how screwed up MAN Power has got the World, they can't get their Penis out of the way!

Smart,Educated Women need all Congress, Senate and President.

God is a Woman, if they are one, and a Arab at that! Just if it was a Man, he would be a ARAB, not a Jew, a ARAB,which i doubt either is true, since MAN wrote it.

Steve Jobs is not what all the Editorials are lauding as a inventer of Apple on him, nothing could be further than the Truth,look a little deeper and you will see a person that Manufactered Apple Products in the worst working conditions i have ever heard of, i didn't say invent, i said Manufactered.

Then when he needed a Liver he moved to the place where most young people are shot in a day " Menphis" and had a good Transplant Center to await a match. To bad he met with the same fate as most of the people who worked in his factories!!!

He did not invent nothing. Steve Jobs was a Snake oil salesman.

October 8, 2011 at 5:24 p.m.

Have I missed somebody's proposal for a 90% tax rate?

October 8, 2011 at 5:37 p.m.
fairmon said...

Happywithnewbulbs said....

Steve Jobs and Bill Gates have had the help of the government in growing their business and hiring people.

They had no more help than any other citizen while their return to the government through their personal taxes and benevolent acts and taxes paid by the thousands they employed was far greater than the rest of us gave back. If the government did assist them the return on the governments investment was tremendous. Do you think the government has benefited from their inventions and products? Although some departments still operate in the horse and buggy days to keep their budgets large and their employment numbers high some have made reasonable utility of technology. The only justification for resenting and confiscating more of their wealth is that they have it and you want some of it. I prefer them to keep it, keep inventing, sharing it with their employees and investors and creating more wealth creating jobs.

October 8, 2011 at 5:40 p.m.

No more help? No, they've had a lot more help than me. I've never had a federal agency create a task force to protect my copyrights. I've never had a multi-billion dollar government contract to purchase my products over those of others.

So they have had a lot of help on their own. And even the general help everybody gets...they have received proportionally more benefit from it than most others. And possibly cost more than the average citizen. This applies locally too, I remember stories of how Bill Gate's mansion required so much paperwork that the city or county it was in had to upgrade their servers to accommodate it.

Or do you think the government had no role in the society that enabled people to be able to buy their inventions and products? Do you think that the laws and practices of the government helped them live in a society where they could produce their products? That's the justification for taxes, that a person is not standing alone, entirely on their own, but receives the benefit of actions in the past, the present, and in the future. And you know what? I prefer living in a society that acts to preserve and improve itself, to keep things running, and stop potential abuses without requiring each and every person to stand on their own. This creates the opportunity for people to invent, share, and create more wealth than if the typical anarchist libertarian fantasy utopia were actually made into reality.

But if you want to account for every last penny of benefit and come up with a fair and honest calculation for each and every individual person, ok, we'll await your presentation of statistics. You'll probably need that electronic tracking system you mentioned above, and then some. It'll require a lot of data.

October 8, 2011 at 5:51 p.m.
fairmon said...

potcat..

I assume you don't own a cell phone or other technology devices? It is good to hear you most likely don't purchase imported products. There are some things I can't find that are made in America. Do you simply not purchase an item if it is not made in America?

Women are in control and have been the downfall of many good men. Women have all of what drives men to do crazy things and will at some point have all the money.

October 8, 2011 at 5:51 p.m.

Women are in control? Better not tell my friend who has unfortunately been driving to do all sorts of crazy things for one particular man, who may well have all her money way too soon.

Sorry, but man or woman, you're just as capable of being a fool or a con artist as somebody of the other gender. Same with skin and hair color, religion, ethnicity, language, profession...

October 8, 2011 at 5:52 p.m.
potcat said...

Oh yes Harp, the people Apple employed to actually make the Gadgets, which where made in China under HORIFIC dangerous physical conditions and meager wages, i very much doubt they paid US taxes.

All Billionaires and millionaires have tons of loop holes to avoid paying taxes, so don't go to wonder wonder land on that untrue fantasy.

Untill we start making- Manufactering our own Goods- Shoes, socks, Batteries,Food, Medicine ETC and I maen everything,we are going to have a Big Job prolem for America. Small Business is NOT the answer!!

October 8, 2011 at 6:06 p.m.
tderng said...

wow...potcat really hates men doesn't she?Of course women must be perfect huh potcat?At least,in my experience,they are perfectly insane without much ability to reason,are ruled by their emotions and get really testy about every 28 days.:)They meet you then tell you they love you and immediately begin to try to change you then complain that you aren't the same person they fell in love with.What the hell is up with that?!?!?

Gotta love them though!!!! They rule the world from the sidelines because they have all the real power. :)I read about a town in South America where the women got together and agreed to withhold all sex until a promised road to the next town was built. Strangely enough that road was begun and finished in record time after a lengthy delay was stopped by the people with the real power!!!So maybe women can be helpful in getting our ignoramuses in D.C. to get thing done!If the wives and concubines of the Washington power circles got together perhaps something could be done about the gridlock in D.C.How about it girls? Its worth a TRY!!!

October 8, 2011 at 6:15 p.m.
potcat said...

There is probaly nothing in my house thats made in America except some food, just bought a gallon of Mayfields milk and IceCream, so i am sort of sure they are made in America, can't say the same thing about the veggies and fruit. I do know that going to the Grocery Store is hurting the wallet more and more, thank goodness i have no children at home to feed.

October 8, 2011 at 6:21 p.m.
rick1 said...

Harp, don't you know that Apple is such an evil company that had gadgets made in China under HORIFIC dangerous conditions and meager wages. I guess potact visted the plant where they were made. Not to mention the wages they were making were better then then wages they were receiving when they weren't making. I bet the computer she is using has some of those parts from China but she will still use her computer. So potcat how many other items do you have TV, vehicle, clothing etc were only made in this country?

potcat you want us to only use goods that are made in this country. What about foreign companies that are located in this country. What about the materials they bring in from other countries? Would you make them use American made products only? How many americans who work for foreign companies may lose their job if their company leaves because they can but material cheaper from another country and close shop and leave?

You may want to look at what happened during the Great Depression when unemployment 25 percent, and our government who thought they could fix the problem created international trade restrictions designed to "save" American jobs. Other countries around the world created similar restrictions to "save" their own workers' jobs. Net result: world trade in 1933 was one-third of what it had been in 1929, making everybody poorer and therefore less able to create jobs.

October 8, 2011 at 6:33 p.m.
potcat said...

You misunderstood every thing i wrote, i love Men. I just don't think they can run things as well as a Women. Its damn time to give it a try, we couldn't do any worse!!!

I have a Son and a Grandson, Brothers and a Father hanging on by his chiny chin chin, so don't you dare say i hate Men, oh yhea i also have a Husband.Hands down the Women i know are by far Smarter and have an even temperment in critical thinking.They also don't have the PENIS PROBLEM!!!

October 8, 2011 at 6:34 p.m.
potcat said...

I didn't visit the Plant, but they are people who did, and they are telling a different version how things were run, and by the way Apple products should have been made in this Country and he would had made just as much money as he could possibly had ever wanted.

Mike Daisey did go to the Plants in China, read his comments, its not pretty.

Read Steve Jobs Biography, he denied a Child he sired in the 70s.That changed when it was proven through DNA.He was the Father, the Child was raised on the Dole by a single Mother, real WINNER!!!

October 8, 2011 at 7:09 p.m.
tderng said...

of course no liberal men deny their children.That's why so many people who live in the projects have a great fathers day!

on another note,I hear the liberal uber-rich Goerge Soros has been convicted of manipulating the markets(basically insider trading).Surprisingly I hear a thundering silence about this from the left.I wonder if it is because he gives so much to liberal causes and that makes his vileness more acceptable?If a conservative had done this he would be attacked relentlessly by the hypocritical left.

October 8, 2011 at 7:50 p.m.
tderng said...

potcat said...Hands down the Women i know are by far Smarter and have an even temperment in critical thinking.

must be why they have created all the inventions that we now use such as electricity,cars,planes,etc,etc,etc.I will acknowledge that there have been some great contributions by women however most have been by men.

October 8, 2011 at 7:59 p.m.
hambone said...

Bennett could post a cartoon of nothing but but a blank page!

BuRP would say he didn't know anything!

rolando would call him a racist! (for useing white paper)

Someone would call him a atheist!

Someone would say it's a abortion!

Nothing changes!

October 8, 2011 at 8:03 p.m.
potcat said...

I meant POLITICS Stupid!!!

October 8, 2011 at 8:07 p.m.
rolando said...

newbulbs: You have drifted much too far from the initial discussion between us.

Comparing the non-consensual killing of a baby through abortion with the non-consensual seizure of a worker's pay by the government is appropriate. Both involve non-consent; both are legal; neither is voluntary. You promptly expanded that, for some odd reason, to include humans who are unsatisfied with their gender. Red herring.

Your expansion of the topic of a cloned female [we were discussing humans] to include something else beyond the topic was a red herring. Your expansion of the male's sex-determining chromosome [another human] to include other undefined creatures and inserting diversionary minutia was a red herring.

You claim specificity from others yet refuse to define your terms -- "traditional" for one.

You essentially stated that you have no respect for someone who disagrees with you...without defining your position. "Disagrees with you" and "No respect" are the operative words. Seems a rather childish or perhaps elitist attitude, that. A "You will take your ball and go home" kind of thing.

You further claim, without basis in fact, that your reputation was harmed in some undisclosed manner.

You want specificity, start showing some. You want to discuss this topic on a normal conversational basis, fine. Otherwise, I will give you the last word on the topic.

October 8, 2011 at 8:24 p.m.
rolando said...

Only YOU would see "racist" in my remark to Clay, hambone. You protest too much, methinks.

October 8, 2011 at 8:29 p.m.

And comparing taxes to abortions isn't a red herring?

Sorry Rolando, but you're as responsible as I am for the drift in the conversation. If you want to stay on topic and not digress, feel free to suggest so in a neutral manner. I'll respect that wish. But don't waste time blaming me.

Which is all your post is, so you're not even trying to get back on topic. You can't even practice what you profess to preach. That's a rather childish and petty attitude. Even Herman Cain did better than that, he just asked to move on, he didn't try to harangue Wolfe Blitzer for questioning him. Though I do think Blitzer should not have let him get away with that transparent ducking of an issue.

I remarked on how gender is biologically determined in different ways merely as an aside to rebuke you for your assumptions about chromosomes (and no, I made no remarks about people changing their gender for whatever reason, you really went off in that direction on your own), I've never used the term "traditional marriage" to describe my own beliefs so I don't feel obligated to define it. Nor is my lack of respect for Cain's answer based on my disagreement with it, it is based on the nature of his answer being vague and evasive.

And I bet you don't even stand by your protests that you won't reply more to me. That's yet another childish remark too, stomping your feet and saying you'll go home yourself. And you complain about me doing it? Sounds like hypocrisy to me. Especially since I made no remark about that at all.

Odds are you'll reply anyway, but shock me by not replying.

October 8, 2011 at 8:48 p.m.
fairmon said...

Potcat said....

Untill we start making- Manufactering our own Goods- Shoes, socks, Batteries,Food, Medicine ETC and I maen everything,we are going to have a Big Job prolem for America. Small Business is NOT the answer!!

I agree, what is the answer a woman would provide us stupid men? What happens if people keep buying imports instead of American products?

Potcat also said.....

There is probaly nothing in my house thats made in America except some food.

Does this mean If you are not part of the solution then you are part of the problem.

October 8, 2011 at 9:17 p.m.
rolando said...

harp -- I believe her intent there was to show that very little except food is made in America by American companies. [I base that on her past posts and the purest of guesstimate work.]

October 8, 2011 at 9:32 p.m.
fairmon said...

hwtnb said...

No more help? No, they've had a lot more help than me. I've never had a federal agency create a task force to protect my copyrights. I've never had a multi-billion dollar government contract to purchase my products over those of others.

The copyright office didn't have to add people to handle their request plus they were chraged for most services received. Have you invented anything of value and created thousands of jobs? Their contribution to the treasury includes the taxes of those they employed in addition to their own contribution.

Did you also read that Bill Gates taxes more than paid the new servers. Did you also take note of how pleased the local government was that he located there and would be a source of revenue for years receiving no more service than other citizens?

The one for all and all for one philosophy is OK if those able would get off their lazy arse and at least try to provide for themselves (I know some do but others milk the system). We would probably never agree on what the federal government role should be versus that of state and local governments. In my opinion the federal government has grown so big, cumbersome, efficient, poorly managed and corrupt there is no stopping until we repeat the fall of every dynasty in history. They all thought it couldn't happen to them. Those in office don't even know all the programs that cost millions of dollars to administer and distribute.

October 8, 2011 at 9:39 p.m.
potcat said...

Part of the problem is finding anything thats made in America, how the hell are they a solution to that!

My purest guesstimate in Rolandos post is not a guess but that it is all over the place,same Repub post that has got us in the mess we are in, the same ole same ole, come up with something. real and interesting, you are getting old fast.

If you have to guesstimate what i am saying,maybe its time for a comprehension lesson. Quit trying to insult everyone over the writting of their post. Quit lying too, you understand every thing i am saying

October 8, 2011 at 10:05 p.m.
tderng said...

potcat said... I meant POLITICS Stupid!!!

like Nancy "lets pass this bill so we can find out whats in it" Pelosi politics?

October 8, 2011 at 10:10 p.m.

They're charged for services rendered, sure, though you can argue whether the charge covers the cost of operations, but not all services are directly rendered to the recipients. That's really why we do have taxes, and don't deny to me that Jobs and Gates got benefits from numerous government actions. Would they have had employees without educational institutions? Health systems? Clean air? The government helped provide all of those things, not directly, but in a diffuse way.

That's why taxes are applied. Because services are provided in a way that gives a benefit in a non-directed way, so the public at large is ultimately asked to pay for some of it even if they don't know they are personally benefiting. If you want it to be accurately assessed to everybody, then you will need so much surveillance that the monitoring will be far larger and more cumbersome than the current system. I do not consider that to be the more desirable solution. You'd have to charge people for every breath!

But if your concern is with people who don't get off their arse, well, that's moving on to a different problem though. Good luck differentiating between those who are unwilling and those who are truly unable. It'll probably be like the Florida drug screening, they'll spend thousands to find the very few offenders. How's that for waste? It's like this fellow I know who lost a penny once, and spent an hour trying to find it.

And no, I don't expect those in office to know everything happening in government, but then I don't expect Bill Gates to know everything that happens in his company. Or his foundation, since he's left Microsoft. Nor should he try. We don't need that level of micromanagement either, it costs far more than it saves.

Couldn't tell you what the people of King Count feel about Bill Gates residing in their area, or how much benefit it has been tax wise. I just remembered the story about the building plans leading to an upgrade of the servers. If you've heard something, do tell.

Also, in my opinion, it's local governments that tend to be inefficient, poorly managed and corrupt. But no, most dynasties do not think nothing bad could happen to them, because in many cases, they're quite aware of history. Remember Caesar, thou art Mortal is not at all new a concept.

If anything, the fear of that causes a lot of problems. It's why some people support, for example, a single term election. On the other hand, there's something to be said for somebody who does have to answer to the electorate.

October 8, 2011 at 10:35 p.m.

tderng, have you never noticed somebody misled by an outcry over something, to the point where the only way they'll be convinced that the outcry is wrong, is for them to experience the reality for themselves?

October 8, 2011 at 10:44 p.m.
fairmon said...

hwtnb says....

Would they have had employees without educational institutions? Health systems? Clean air? The government helped provide all of those things, not directly, but in a diffuse way.

True but how much disparity and demands of more to the public treasury should there be for those that create opportunities for others, spend and reinvest much of their gains in a way that increases the number benefiting? Every dollar the government deems it essential they extract from citizens is one less dollar available to spend and increase demand for products and services which increases the need for employees.

hwtnb says .... in my opinion, it's local governments that tend to be inefficient, poorly managed and corrupt.

does this suggest you think we elect more intelligent, capable and honest people to federal office than to state offices? Could it be that the federal government has usurped state sovereignty to the point voters don't pay attention and get as involved with their state government? The media certainly contibutes to the perception that only the federal government matters. Is it time for a constitutional convention with an attitude of "out with the old and in with something new"? Is it time to move from government assuring fair intra-state commerce to controlling all commerce?

October 8, 2011 at 11:34 p.m.

Except the dollar the government takes is not taken away and burned, but sent back out and spent on something itself. Believe it or not, it isn't a zero-sum process of Mercantilism.

And no, I think we allow more corruption and inefficiency in local offices, not that the character of the persons elected is any different. Intelligence or lack thereof is not part of it, a person can be smart and criminal too. And what's worse is when they are smart, criminal and capable. And energetic! Oh wait, that's for incompetence, not venality.

October 8, 2011 at 11:56 p.m.
AndrewLohr said...

Confederate uniform with "GOP" on the collar?

Mr. Cain in business made two shaky situations better. Mr Obama as President made a shaky situation worse.

October 9, 2011 at 12:54 a.m.

Better? Maybe if your Godfather's pizza didn't close. But mine did.

Kind of worse, really, if you wanted to eat their pizza.

October 9, 2011 at 12:58 a.m.

Wee luvs mrCane hes bootiful hes smert as un wip hes eleegunt hes un jentulman hes so funni! hes gud hes consurvatif hes un job maykur! hes butter dan prez O-Bama hes un karaktur hes hayted by da liftist an da libralls hes skeerin da libralls hes brung da rascissm outta da libralls!

yayyyy mrCane, raisn Cane, Cane em gud!! sugahCane!

October 9, 2011 at 3:07 a.m.

Racist? Against the GOP's adoption of the racist division of the old confederacy in order to get the votes of the Solid South?

Next you'll be telling me it's discrimination to discriminate against discrimination.

October 9, 2011 at 1:35 p.m.

Nope. Herman Cain saying "What?" demonstrates how Mr. Bennett feels that Mr. Cain is oblivious to what the party of Lincoln did once they saw an opportunity after the Voting and Civil Rights Acts.

It's called the Southern Strategy. They even had to apologize for doing it, not that they stopped, but they did admit what they did. Herman Cain, though, would deny any such thing.

If it's discrimination, it's discrimination against self-deception, and I don't see why that's racist. It's a common problem regardless of race.

October 9, 2011 at 9:51 p.m.

Stupid? Naive? No, self-deception hits even the smartest and most cynical. Payroll? Absolutely. He is running for office, and I'm pretty sure he's doing it out of some perceived self-benefit. That's true of all politicians. It's why Cain is willing to deceive himself.

But it's racist to point that out. Is it racist to point out that Cain came out against the name of Perry's father's hunting camp, claiming it was deeply offensive, then did a 180 overnight, and said it wasn't a problem? First he was angry, then he wasn't.

The problem, btw, wouldn't be with what Cain felt, but how he reversed himself. If it's wrong when Romney or Perry does it, it's wrong when Cain does it.

October 9, 2011 at 10:56 p.m.

Some people are tying themselves in knots so as to present others as racists.

It's clear for all to see that the problem is Cain's self-deception. It's wrong to be oblivious regardless of the color of your skin or the name on your church.

October 10, 2011 at 9:56 a.m.

So you're saying if Barrack Obama were white, Clay Bennett would be attacking him as much as the other cartoonists that appear in the paper?

October 10, 2011 at 8:48 p.m.
Devp7592 said...

I like Cain's 9-9-9 tax plan. I believe that less taxes on earnings is the way to go to generate economic activity.

To make it more palatable, I would like to add a 1% tax on the taxpayer's worldwide assets in excess of $1 million and remove the 9% tax on the first $30,000 of income.

This would also address the issue of the rich paying their fair share and give the poor a break. At the same time, the majority of people would now have money to go out and spend to generate economic activity and stimulate job growth.

  • 1% annually on assets (in excess of the first $1 million)
  • 9% income tax (in excess of the first $30,000 of income)
  • 9% national sales tax, and
  • 9% corporate income tax
October 13, 2011 at 5:49 a.m.

I know a lot of African-Americans think Herman Cain is an Uncle Tom.

But, as a Hispanic-American, my beef with him is his prejudiced, racist (ironic, isn't it?), and near-Genocidal political views he holds.

Here is a poster that pretty much summarizes his anti-immigrant, anti-Hispanic hateful views.

August 12, 2012 at 11:56 a.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.