published Tuesday, February 21st, 2012

The Candidate

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 ...

109
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.
shifarobe said...

Another hairball coughed up by fur face.

February 21, 2012 at 12:26 a.m.
lumpy said...

WHAT A SURPRISE, Clay going after the candidate with the most momentum at the moment. Gotta love that he's consistent. You got it ass backwards, Clay, anyone on the right who expresses his faith is subject to the inquisition of the liberal media. Bob Scheifer, Charley Rose, Brian Williams are some of he inquisitors.

I'm guessing if he attended a church with a preacher who used the GD word and is an anti-semite he'd be A-OK with the media. Catholic candidates are ok with the media if they're Democrats.

February 21, 2012 at 12:39 a.m.
blackwater48 said...

AT LEAST HE'S NOT MITT

That's what republicans apparently are saying. I was going to say it's too bad people who identify with the GOP never paid attention to this guy before. He only knows one song and he's been singing it for years and years. And it's a hymn.

He believes birth control is bad. He believes ultra sound testing is bad. He believes being gay is bad. He believes public education is bad. He believes at least one thing is good, though: Income inequality.

I was about to make the point that republicans who support Rick probably never listened to him, but that is probably a wrong assumption on my part. I was going to make the point that conservative voters had other candidates leading in the polls besides Romney. At one time or another Trump, Bachmann, Perry, Caine, Gingrich (twice) and now Santorum have represented a political life raft for republican primary voters who refuse to buy Mitt Romney's imitation of a 'Conehead.'

But in reality, evangelical, tea bagger, and social conservatives alike have all been singing from the same hymnal for years. Rick is their guy. They think it's time to bring christ back to congress and god to the white house.

Welcome to the new culture war.

February 21, 2012 at 12:42 a.m.
onetinsoldier said...

Ladies, He'll bring back the pear of anguish so he can keep track of your eggs. He bring you back those lost and treasured days of coat hangers and revival meetings. REPUGNANTS!!!!! ARE YOU REALLY SERIOUS? Is this small minded idiot the face of your party??????? Obama could beat his wife and still win this election. PITIFUL PITIFUL PITIFUL

February 21, 2012 at 12:46 a.m.
librul said...

In my opinion, this darling from The Family house on "C" Street should be committed. He speaks in code words to crowds of equally delusional christo-fascists who openly glorify war, suborn murder of physicians, care nothing for our life-giving environment, denigrate science, disrespect the nation's highest office, engage in racism and foment the basest attacks on whole blocs of our population and, along with AIPAC and the state of Israel, are eagerly pushing America toward the brink of nuclear armageddon.

He is, of course, irrelevant in the context of a national presidential election. The Republican party knows this and will eagerly seek an alternative if Romney falters.

When he comes here to spew his poison to his "faithful" next weekend, I'm sure he will have an enthusiastic audience ready to lap it up - and these forums will be relatively quiet for a short while as all the local right wing extremists will be busy whooping it up at Central Baptist for a while. I certainly hope there will be even more folks defending Chattanooga's reputation outside so the national media do not have even more reason than the cranks in the Legislature have already given them to make fun of us.

February 21, 2012 at 12:57 a.m.
nucanuck said...

Now which Theocratic government/country do we admire most?

February 21, 2012 at 1:12 a.m.
fairmon said...

Ron Paul scares the media because his smaller central government agenda dilutes their power and influence. His liberal social agenda scares the republican power base. His agenda for responsible fiscal policies and lower taxes scares the democrats. His foreign policy of a strong defense with no interference in other countries politics and not being the aggressor nation is opposed by the military industrial complex and both parties. His age is a legitimate concern and in one debate the media high lighted that issue knowing they were not a potential employer so age discrimination was not a concern. I don't plan to vote for him but I don't like the media and other candidates obvious attempts to ignore him while he consistently gets 15-20% of the votes with less money, less party power base support, less media attention, fewer TV ads than any candidate and no PAC money. The way he has been treated tells a lot about our political process and the ability of some special interest to influence and control those currently in elected positions and candidates.

February 21, 2012 at 4:14 a.m.
joneses said...

I think a more proper cartoon would be Obama dressed as Stalin with a badge saying "Dicktator".

Onepatheticsoldier,

Why are you so hung upon contraception? Is this George "HedgeFund" Soros moveon.org strategy of the week? I think I know the reason. A poll was taken by the White House and found this pathetic fool you idol as president was loosing the women vote. So with typical liberal dishonest strategy the plan is to get all of you disgusting liberals to keep harping about contraception over and over again. This is your form of brain washing. When one watches the news the dummycrats are all saying the same thing over and over again about contraception like talking bobble heads. This is a simple tactic to take away from all the failures of this incompetant president.

February 21, 2012 at 5:53 a.m.
hotdiggity said...

I'm sure Santorum will be preaching his conservative christian values at the Abba's House in Hixon. After releasing his tax returns perhaps they should ask him why between 2007 to 2009 his charitable donations have averaged only 2.2%. In 2010 his charitable contributions dropped to 1.76% of his $923,411 in income. In 2010 President Obama gave 14.2% of his income to charity. He also gave the full amount of 1.4 million dollars to charity from the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009.

Does our self-proclaimed christian conservative who brays at us from his lofty, pious perch not understand the definition of tithe,(one tenth)? Perhaps Mr. Santorum would do better to walk the walk instead of talk the talk when he decides to preach christian values to us. It appears he is more concerned with mammon than tithing.

February 21, 2012 at 6:11 a.m.
woody said...

Let me see..oh yeah..it is clearly spelled out..and I believe in RED letters, "...render unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar's and unto GOD that which is God's...." It would seem not even Santorum, nor any of the rest, could question that..Woody

February 21, 2012 at 6:27 a.m.
sandyonsignal said...

No contraception, no abortion (except for Mrs. Santorum to save her life) but Santorum espouses for the rest of the female population to die instead of getting a medically necessary procedure - like Karen had. Santorum is a misogynist, gay bashing, anti-public education, anti-Prodestant neanderthal: what a great candidate the GOP has for 2012. Look forward to their brokered convention to see who is next in this list of losers.

February 21, 2012 at 6:33 a.m.
EaTn said...

Santorum is not the democrats' dream candidate like Newt but he's the next best. If you want to know how idiotic and out of touch the right-wingers are, look at their flavor-of-the-week candidates.

February 21, 2012 at 6:52 a.m.
sandyonsignal said...

Make that anti-protestant. Oops. Should have checked my post within the edit time.

February 21, 2012 at 7:12 a.m.
eeeeeek said...

Imaginary friends don't need money

February 21, 2012 at 7:26 a.m.
alprova said...

joneses wrote: "A poll was taken by the White House and found this pathetic fool you idol as president was loosing the women vote."

I hate to burst the bubble you're flying on up there way above the Earth, but the White House doesn't conduct political polls. It never happened.

February 21, 2012 at 8:21 a.m.
alprova said...

Santorum is already having to defend his public statements. The man just can't keep his mouth shut and his true colors are starting to shine.

The same thing happened when he lost his bid for his re-election bid in Pennsylvania to the Senate. He will not win the nomination in his home state, watch and see.

Put a gray wig on him and add a few pounds and you have a Newt Gingrich double.

Here's a few of his more outrageous utterings:

"I'm surprised that President Obama didn’t know when life began — given his skin color. I find it almost remarkable for a black man to say 'now we are going to decide who are people and who are not people.'"

"Forty-eight million people are on food stamps in a country with 300-million people. If hunger is a problem in America, then why do we have an obesity problem among the people who we say have a hunger program?"

"People who can’t afford health care should stop whining about the high costs of medical treatments and medications and spend less on non essentials. Stop complaining and instead lower your cable and cell phone bills."

"I had insurance under my employer. And when I decided to run for president, I left my job, I lost my insurance, I had to go out and buy insurance on the open market. We have a child who has a pre-existing condition and we went out and we said, we like this plan…we have to pay more because she has a pre-existing condition. Well, we should pay more. She’s going to be very expensive to the insurance company and, you know, that cost is passed along to us…I’m okay with that."

February 21, 2012 at 8:47 a.m.
MTJohn said...

sandyonsignal said...Santorum is a misogynist, gay bashing, anti-public education, anti-Protestant neanderthal: what a great candidate the GOP has for 2012.

Sandy - what have you got against Neanderthals?

Neanderthals might have lost the evolutionary race to the Sapients. In retrospect, that might have happened because Neanderthals were doing something right. Or, it could be that we are discovering that what Sapients did to Neanderthals are an indication of what Sapients eventually will do to themselves. Regardless, Santorum, Romney and Gingrich are all pandering to the basest level of what it means to be human which might not be Neanderthal attributes.

February 21, 2012 at 8:48 a.m.
blackwater48 said...

DON'T COUNT ON SANTORUM

That's not my opinion. Establishment republicans, the Washington guys who control the RNC money, are saying 'off the record' (which means 'don't quote me') that if Rick beats Mitt in Michigan there will be a new effort to talk Gov. Mitch Daniels (R-IN) into entering the race. Don't how that would work logistically, but I guess there is enough time to get Daniels on enough ballots in upcoming primaries.

The fear is that not only will Santorum lose badly to Obama, but he'll have a negative drag on down ticket republicans. If Santorum is the republican presidential nominee, the House and Senate would be back in play for Democrats. Right now republicans have a good chance of gaining a majority in the Senate and could hang on to the House. Rick would also negatively impact state races, too.

It's easy to see the split in the republican party between hard right conservatives and the more established moderates. Mitch Daniels could appeal to both camps, but tea baggers are not totally sold on his call for a 'truce' on social issues. Regardless, I don't think he'd fare very well in the general election. His resume contains one notorious entry that won't fly very well with independent voters: Budget Director under George Bush. Daniels ushered in two massive tax cuts primarily for the rich, underestimated the cost of the Iraq War, and helped enact the unfunded Medicare Part D which costs tax payers about $60 billion annually. (Drug companies love it)

But you never really know in American politics. Who knows? Maybe Rick will win the republican nomination and campaign to be choir boy in chief. And he can always appeal to women voters by asking, 'Who's your daddy?'

February 21, 2012 at 8:51 a.m.
fairmon said...

Both Parties are all wrapped up in social engineering while each one cent per gallon in the cost of gas equals reduced buying power by around 1 billion per year. From the average in January of 2009 to present equals over 200 billion in buying power therefore demand. Q: Would an aggressive energy program lowering the price of gas be a good economic stimulus. Most people and politicians blame the banks that were out of control for the economic collapse to a market low point in March of 2009 while ignoring that the collapse occurred when oil when oil went to around $150 per barrel. Every one is affected by high fuel prices but The middle and lower income people are affected most. The republican candidates have shown their ignorance by allowing Obama's team to distract them from the critical issues.

February 21, 2012 at 8:54 a.m.
MTJohn said...

alprova said..."I had insurance under my employer. And when I decided to run for president, I left my job, I lost my insurance, I had to go out and buy insurance on the open market.

I suspect that statement is a gross exaggeration. As a former Senator, he receives a retirement benefit and that benefit likely includes the opportunity to continue to participate in the Federal health plan. He might be responsible for a higher premium, but I suspect that he still gets it. And, if he does, the pre-existing condition would not have been an issue and his coverage includes birth control.

February 21, 2012 at 8:58 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Alas, I agree with most of you leftist wags. Santorum can't win. Not sure any Repub can EVER win a national election again. The takers (Euro-wannabees, welfare staters, entitlement lovers, intellectual wannabees, and elitists frauds) now outnumber the great unwashed. Toodle-loo America. Howdy Holland.

February 21, 2012 at 9:04 a.m.
whatsnottaken said...

Clay for Puppet of the Year.

February 21, 2012 at 9:09 a.m.
MTJohn said...

Jack_Dennis said...Alas, I agree with most of you leftist wags. Santorum can't win. Not sure any Repub can EVER win a national election again. The takers (Euro-wannabees, welfare staters, entitlement lovers, intellectual wannabees, and elitists frauds) now outnumber the great unwashed. Toodle-loo America. Howdy Holland.

Jack - I suspect that Dwight Eisenhower could win a national election today. However, he could not win a Republican primary. Don't blame the "Euro-wannagees", "welfare stater's", "entitlement lovers", "intellectual wannabees" and "elitest frauds" for that. Look in the mirror!

You in the great unwashed seem to forget that our "free-market" economy was built on the backs of slaves. That might have been "free-market" for the elite capitalists. It was hardly free-market for the rest of the economy. Now, the unwashed elite are working hard to establish an oligarchy. If that happens, the unwashed who support them will get screwed right along with the rest of us who stand in opposition. We are not Euro-wannabees, but I would take that in preference to what your side has to offer.

February 21, 2012 at 9:14 a.m.
davisss13 said...

The takers (Euro-wannabees, welfare staters, entitlement lovers, intellectual wannabees, and elitists frauds) now outnumber the great unwashed.

What a joke. NO ONE has a bloated sense of entitlement like the filthy rich in this country. You greed based 'unwashed' cashed in on every single law, bill or regulation the GOP crammed down the US' throat. You degenerate GOPers even had evangelicals lining up at the federal government trough for their snout full. Tom DeLay is the face of your amoral, two-faced hypocritical party. Praise Jesus and steal millions.

You go ahead and act like GOPers are white as snow... they are the worse of offenders.

February 21, 2012 at 9:25 a.m.
timbo said...

This is a prime example of both the liberals and the christian conservatives being wrong The libs are right, the government (or the pope) has no business in my bedroom or dictating what a women does with her body. Using the government as the morality police is unconstitutional.

On the other hand, the liberals want to use the power of the government to dictate a virtual smorgesbord of laws, regulations, and policies that control every aspect of life. The EPA, OSHA, environmental whacos of every sort beleiving in a stupid, unsupported "theory" of global climate change, Agenda 21,.....etc., etc., ect. All using the government's power to put their thumb on the rest of us.

In both cases, this is unconstitutional and morally wrong. Both sides are like two policemen playing good cop and bad cop. Neither really being serious about the subject they are talking about. It's all about power and money.

This page is a prime example of how both side want government to dictate to the other side. They are both guilty.

I want you both out of my business.

February 21, 2012 at 9:28 a.m.

Guess what timbo?

I want you out of my business. Unfortunately, it turns out if you aren't regulated, you can't necessarily stay out of my business, since we're all connected in this world to some extent or another.

Now you as the individual, burning a fire, might not mean to cause any harm, but harm can happen, even just from the smoke of your fire. More likely though, it's a conflagration that ends up burning all our homes. And when it turns out you're burning enough to cover 1000 (or more) homes, the risk gets even higher.

So...what to do, what to do? Because either way, somebody's getting in somebody else's business.

I think I'll choose the path that intends to look out for everybody, as opposed to the path of indifference that pretends inaction is a better solution. Why? Because with the former, I can offer genuine arguments to repair the path, with the latter, I just end up with suffering which I can, at best, remedy later. Sometimes I prefer prescriptive remedies to reparative.

Don't you?

Anyway, to get back on topic, Rick Santorum, while I might give him credit for wanting to do what's best for everybody, has one problem with his beliefs that I've noticed. He's not open to discussion or debate on much of it, there is just too much where it's an iron-clad unshakable precept, and it's in areas where I can't support him. I recognize the need for some unshakable principles, but my conclusions are the opposite to his in many aspects.

February 21, 2012 at 9:40 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

MTJohn: So the Middle and Righties are to blame for the pain caused by "the backs of slaves"?? Is that what you're saying? I've no doubt you DO prefer the Euro-style system. Good for you, pal, because here it comes. BTW, don't know what you mean about "my side". I stand in the middle with the dwindling masses. Now, what's the exchange rate for the Euro?

February 21, 2012 at 9:41 a.m.
News_Junkie said...

I am personally thrilled to see that all the conservatives are backing Santorum, and I hope that he wins the nomination because there is no way that he will beat Obama. He lost his last election big time. Note that dearth of endorsements from politicians that he worked with. Having him as the nominee guarantees that President Obama will get re-elected. GO RICK!

February 21, 2012 at 9:42 a.m.
LOL said...

Social issues, left or right, won't determine the outcome of this year's presidential race. High unemployment; rising gas prices along with low home sales figures (2011 was the worst in 13 years) are the most relevant political factors. Contraception; abortion; morality don't mean squat in an economy like ours.

February 21, 2012 at 9:44 a.m.
MTJohn said...

Jack_Dennis said...

MTJohn: So the Middle and Righties are to blame for the pain caused by "the backs of slaves"?? Is that what you're saying? I've no doubt you DO prefer the Euro-style system. Good for you, pal, because here it comes. BTW, don't know what you mean about "my side". I stand in the middle with the dwindling masses. Now, what's the exchange rate for the Euro?

Curious, Jack. I also stand in the middle, thus my reference to Eisenhower.

I blame all of us for our failure to get honest about our history and its consequences. I blame the elite capitalists for buying elected officials who are willing to perpetuate social, political and economic systems that allow them amass wealth at the expense of the rest of us.

I think we can do better than a European style system. But, let's at least note that a European system would not be either communism or fascism. And a European system would be preferable to a third-world oligarchy, which is the direction in which this country has been trending since the election of Ronald Reagan. And, that direction likely would continue with the election of any of the current slate of R's, including a few yet be be named "not Romneys". That is, after all, the very predictable outcome of the vision of folks like Grover Norquist and his bubble chamber.

February 21, 2012 at 10:04 a.m.
conservative said...

The latest TFP story on the occupy Chatanooga protest is out. The group looks pathetically small. So, why aren't you lefties down with the struggle or are you just lip servers?

If you want to see some pictures of the true believers go to this website, but I warn you they are graphic:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2046586/Occupy-Wall-Street-Shocking-photos-protester-defecating-POLICE-CAR.html

February 21, 2012 at 10:07 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

MTJohn: Agree somewhat. Though I disagree with the oligarchy bidness. I say don't fret, the oligarchy threat has ended. No one, even a skosh right of center, will ever win another national election here. The gubment teat is just too inviting.

February 21, 2012 at 10:21 a.m.

You do know that the devil will come to you in a tailored suit, and with all the charm and wit you will appreciate, right?

If there's anybody I don't trust, it's somebody who is too unctuous and smarmy.

It doesn't go the other way though, just because you're crass and offensive, doesn't mean I trust you implicitly.

February 21, 2012 at 10:23 a.m.
davisss13 said...

So, why aren't you lefties down with the struggle or are you just lip servers?

It's winter, genius. How many flebaggers are out yelling and screaming?

February 21, 2012 at 10:29 a.m.
Jemmy said...

It should be noted that Santorum had no problem with public schools while Pennsylvania taxpayers were footing the bill to send his kids to Western PA Cyber School. At the time, he was claiming that his primary residence was a two-bedroom bungalow in Penn Hills, a Pittsburgh suburb, when it was actually a grand McMansion outside Washington DC. He only turned to home-schooling his kids after he was outed by irate PA taxpayers and forced to pay back the tuition help his family had received through fraud.

February 21, 2012 at 10:47 a.m.
conservative said...

Do you claim to be a fair weather friend only?

February 21, 2012 at 10:48 a.m.
MTJohn said...

Jack_Dennis said...

MTJohn: Agree somewhat. Though I disagree with the oligarchy bidness. I say don't fret, the oligarchy threat has ended. No one, even a skosh right of center, will ever win another national election here. The gubment teat is just too inviting.

The "gubment teat" is, indeed, too inviting and it is those who would take us into oligarchy who benefit the most from it.

We have been on a trajectory toward a globalized economy since the election of Ronald Reagan. Bill Clinton helped to fulfill commitments made by those who preceded him in office. We have seen a decline in the influence of unions (the antidote to slave labor). Globalization serves the interests of the world's wealthiest and competent among the world's poorest. With globalization, there really is only one direction for our economy (at least the economy in which the 99% of us participate) to go - that is down. Don't blame either party for that, blame K Street and the politicians whom they own. Although, K Street owns politicians in both parties, the K Street brain trust is a product of and came to maturation in the Republican Party.

February 21, 2012 at 10:52 a.m.
NGAdad said...

How soon do the 'faithful' and 'God's chosen people' forget that the Catholic church killed them more than any other groups. Santorum is dangerous well beyond his devotion to Catholic dogma. He is truly hungry for power unattached to the wishes of the people. With the power of the new Homeland Security apparatus YOU, both Right and Left, may just land in a Romanian questioning facility when he damn well feels like it.

February 21, 2012 at 11:05 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

MTJohn: uncle

February 21, 2012 at 11:06 a.m.
jesse said...

finally a bennett toon i can agree 100% with!

if rick gets the nomination i'm gonna have to vote for Obama even though when i flip the leaver my hand will prob. fall off!

February 21, 2012 at 11:11 a.m.
MickeyRat said...

Rick is no different than the other right wing bible beating yahoos who scream "freedoms" on the one hand while calling out the "vagina police" to stand guard on the other.

One can only imagine a conversation with President Rick. Espousing from the oval office Creationism over science, that men rode dinosaurs like horses, or explaining how Adam and Eve had only two children because they followed the rhythm method. Citizens' united + defunding education = more right wing nut job candidates.

February 21, 2012 at 11:15 a.m.
acerigger said...

Santorum,"the dumbest man in congress",will never be the R nominee. But in the meantime, the MSM has gotta have their "shiny object".

BTW,anyone ever checked out Rick's connections to the Dominionists? Scary bunch ,sorta like an American Taliban.

February 21, 2012 at 11:19 a.m.
mtngrl said...

Anyone who claims contraception is "not okay because it’s a license to do things in the sexual realm" has no business selecting Supreme Court Justices.

February 21, 2012 at 11:19 a.m.
potcat said...

Everybody just go get laid or something pleasurable. Santorum will not be the POTUS, niether will any of the other pussyboys running, its ridiculous. Its called going through the MOTIONS, its a process we have to endure.

If this is all the Repugtards have, its pure comedy and a little on the PATHTIC side.

Obama will remain the President Of The United States, relax and get use to it.

February 21, 2012 at 11:26 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Great cartoon, Clay Bennett. I wonder if Romney shares Santorum’s view that mainline Protestantism has fallen under satanic influence. Indeed, somebody needs to ask him.

February 21, 2012 at 11:35 a.m.
MTJohn said...

Jack_Dennis said...

MTJohn: uncle

Jack - thanks for the conversation. From my perspective, if is not a matter of who is right/wrong or who has to say "uncle". What is important is what can we learn from each other. That is the kind of dialogue that is essential to making a democracy work and, unfortunately, the kind of dialogue that is impossible to have in this country, especially among our elected officials.

February 21, 2012 at 11:40 a.m.
jesse said...

nodoubt the repub.lineup is a bunch of second stringers BUT so is Obama! his election was a result of a fluke w/mccain showing bad judgement by picking palin for a running mate!

the prob. is no one of ability and smarts wants the job so we get all these bench warmers ! what the nation needs is a truman or ike or a first term nixon to snatch the country up by the stackin swivel and RUN THE COUNTRY! GET IT DONE and if you only get but one term ?hey you did your best! BTW:hey potcat!at my age gittin laid is no longer an option!!

February 21, 2012 at 11:51 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Hmmmm. . . . Yet, another Republican in the Grand Inquisition mode:

"INDIANAPOLIS – A Fort Wayne lawmaker's rant against the Girl Scouts went viral Monday after he called them a "radicalized organization" that supports abortion and promotes "homosexual lifestyles."

Rep. Bob Morris, R-Fort Wayne, sent a letter to Indiana House Republicans on Saturday explaining why he was the only member in the chamber not to sign onto a resolution last week celebrating the 100th anniversary of the Girl Scouts."

http://www.journalgazette.net/article/20120221/NEWS07/302219934

February 21, 2012 at 11:57 a.m.
jesse said...

hey mt.john! look at the dialog on this forum!

this is the mind set of the electorate!

civility,reason,logic and thoughtfulness play no part!

it's about dogma,lock step ph. and if you disagree w/me you are an idiot! seems like the most dominant attribute of most of the posters on here is not a debate of opinions but an opportunity to tell everybody else how smart they are and how stupid any body is who disagrees w/them is!

February 21, 2012 at 12:10 p.m.

jesse, I don't think you will accomplish anything by further criticism, it's just perpetuating the same thing you're complaining about.

Why don't you try constructive dialogue yourself?

February 21, 2012 at 12:12 p.m.
MTJohn said...

jesse said...

hey mt.john! look at the dialog on this forum!

this is the mind set of the electorate!

civility,reason,logic and thoughtfulness play no part!

I agree, Jesse. But, that doesn't mean that we have to allow ourselves to be captive to it.

February 21, 2012 at 12:13 p.m.
jesse said...

HEY BULBS!! of all the folk s on here you are the last to chastise anyone for venomous rhetoric!( well maybe not the last,BUT close!)

maybe joness beats you out BUT not by much!!

February 21, 2012 at 12:46 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Yawn, only 73 more?

February 21, 2012 at 12:48 p.m.
jesse said...

hey bulbs!! on this place,his place is all about a cadre of elitists pattin each other on the back tellin each other how smart they are ! click on the avatars and see how they blow smoke up each others a$$! you got about 8 or 10 posters on here that think they OWN this place!

and you know what?they DO because everybody elsy lets them!

February 21, 2012 at 1:02 p.m.
limric said...

C’mon Mountainlaurel, You gotta go for the gusto. Look to the heart of (sur)real America.

Didn’t think the GOP could not get any nuttier? Oklahoma State Senator, Ralph Shortey, introduced a bill into the Oklahoma State Legislature…WAIT FOR IT…banning the use of aborted human fetuses in the production of food for human consumption. Introduced 1/18/2012, Oklahoma SB 1418 – Re. Food: Prohibiting the sale or manufacture of food or products which contain aborted human fetuses.

Quote Senator Shortey, “People are thinking that this has to do with fetuses being chopped up and put in our burritos.” “That's not the case. It's beyond that." “There are companies that are using embryonic stem cells to research and basically cause a chemical reaction to determine whether or not something tastes good or not,” he said. “As a pro-life advocate, it kind of disturbed me that we would use aborted embryos or aborted human fetuses to extract stem cells and use them for research to basically make things taste better.”

Do you like Salvador Dali's art? I hope so, because America is slowly morphing into one of his paintings.

February 21, 2012 at 1:21 p.m.
JustOneWoman said...

jesse said... hey bulbs!! on this place,his place is all about a cadre of elitists pattin each other on the back tellin each other how smart they are ! click on the avatars and see how they blow smoke up each others a$$! you got about 8 or 10 posters on here that think they OWN this place!

and you know what?they DO because everybody elsy lets them!

Jesse, we don't just let them. We just let them think it. We just love it when they THINK they are in control. LOL

February 21, 2012 at 1:23 p.m.
jesse said...

hey limric?

do you honestly think the right wing nuts are the ONLY insane folks? this country is so far out on the edge on BOTH sides of the spectrum that the only way to go is off the chasm! un till a pragmatic ,go for broke realist gits in control it's a downhill slide of p.c., kiss a$$ ,stick your head in the sand and ignore the realities of the situation the country is in and just get by till i get mine! i very seldom agree w/you BUT you seen to reason things out SO enlighten me!WHAT IS THE ANSWER or IS there EVEN AN ANSWER!

February 21, 2012 at 1:59 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Good grief! . . . Yet, another Republican in the Grand Inquisition mode. . . . [Sigh]

This one is a preacher named, Franklin Graham. Some of you might remember seeing him in the news last year when he alerted us all that the earthquake and tsunami in Japan might be the second coming and Armageddon. I believe this one also has a set of double standards:

"Franklin Graham — son of Billy Graham — would not say if President Obama is a Christian during an appearance on MSNBC’s Morning Joe on Tuesday, insisting that “I cannot answer that question for anybody.”

Franklin claimed that the President began attending Church to bolster his political career and is a Muslim under Islamic law. . .

. . . The visibly shocked Morning Joe crew pressed Graham further and discovered that he was far more willing to accept the other presidential candidates’ personal testaments. Graham agreed that Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich were both Christians, while raising some concerns about Mitt Romney’s Mormon faith:

ALEX WAGNER (host, NOW): Reverend, what about Mitt Romney…is he a Christian?

GRAHAM: He’s a Mormon… most Christians would not recognize Mormons as part of the Christian faith. [...]

GRAHAM: Any one of these candidates. Newt Gingrich. Now, Newt has been married several times, so he’s had those issues — but he can make a good candidate. And I think that Newt is a Christian, at least he told me he is.”

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/02/21/428945/franklin-graham-obama-may-secretly-be-a-muslim-santorum-and-gingrich-are-definitely-christian/

February 21, 2012 at 2:07 p.m.
MTJohn said...

jesse said...this country is so far out on the edge on BOTH sides of the spectrum that the only way to go is off the chasm! un till a pragmatic ,go for broke realist gits in control...

Jesse - do you honestly think that we, the people, have the capacity to elect a "pragmatic, go for broke realist"?

President Obama, more so that way than any of the R's either running or waiting in the wings and the power brokers on the other side of the aisle seem to have little use for pragmatism. I'd agree with his critics who suggest that he has not been "go for broke" enough. But, if he had been, he would have been even more divisive than he has been for his sheer audacity of getting elected.

February 21, 2012 at 2:10 p.m.
tipper said...

Gas pump prices. Interesting. If I were an oil exec or one who believes in "drill baby drill," the best way to throw a tantrum and get what I won't is to up the price of gas. Some say $5 a gallon by summer. How convenient. Right before the election. Couldn't get the Keystone XL pipeline through to export more oil. Up against some who wish to see a more diverse energy policy. Why not make the entire country livid by penalizing everybody and blaming it on the current administration? If you get an extra $1000 from a SS tax break, the oil companies can put that money to good use for you. All of the "cultural war" idiocies and deficit spending issues are irrelevant. Ask yourself who or what is really running this country. We don't need government. Our benevolent corporations are watching out for us. Hey, but it's just "self-preservation." You can't really blame them, can you? Their the "job creators." They need the money more than you do.

February 21, 2012 at 2:12 p.m.
jesse said...

sooner or later(prob.later) someone is going to HAVE to step up to the plate and SAY"this is what we have to do!!

every thing that has happened from the "great society" onward has dug us into a deeper and deeper hole!

you can take GOOD INTENTIONS and $5.00 and buy a cup of starbucks coffee!

February 21, 2012 at 2:24 p.m.
sandyonsignal said...

I stand corrected. My sincere apologies to the Neanderthals. No way should I have equated the Neanderthals to Santorum. Santorum is best equated to himself, santorum. Google Santorum. I deeply regret insulting the Neanderthals.

February 21, 2012 at 2:36 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Limric said: “WAIT FOR IT…banning the use of aborted human fetuses in the production of food for human consumption. Introduced 1/18/2012, Oklahoma SB 1418 – Re. Food: Prohibiting the sale or manufacture of food or products which contain aborted human fetuses.”

C’mon Limric. You’re teasing us, right? Pleassssse, tell us your teasing us.

What kind of a person would even think of such a thing? If this is really true, I may never be able to eat in a restaurant owned by a Republican ever again.

February 21, 2012 at 2:36 p.m.
News_Junkie said...

Rick Santorum's biggest problem may be that his positions on some of the issues affecting women (e.g., contraception) fall far outside the mainstream views. That may very well prove fatal in a general election because, for example, in 2008 women cast 53% of the total votes. For a more complete discussion of this topic, go to: http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/02/21/147174400/santorums-problem-with-women-could-be-his-glass-ceiling?ft=3&f=1001&sc=nl&cc=nh-20120221

February 21, 2012 at 3:16 p.m.
mtngrl said...

Santorum's biggest problem may be with women, but I cannot understand how any conservatives actually support him with some of the things he has put out there.

Here is an interview where he states he does not support the right to privacy and even claims it is not in the Constitution. He also has the gall to state that the priests in the Catholic church molesting children was actually consensual (and the fault of liberals no less):

.. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-04-23-santorum-excerpt_x.htm

..

February 21, 2012 at 3:34 p.m.
jesse said...

hey mt. laural ,get over it ! limric is just playing one upmanship like 8 or 10 others on here! he don't believe all that b.s. he just wants to be contrary!

it's all a game and in the end it's all about who seems smarter! like robt.audry wrote about in "the territorial imperative!"!!

February 21, 2012 at 3:44 p.m.
MTJohn said...

jesse said...sooner or later(prob.later) someone is going to HAVE to step up to the plate and SAY"this is what we have to do!!

President Obama has tried at least a measure of that. In doing so, it has cost him votes.

February 21, 2012 at 4:24 p.m.
limric said...

Jesse asks, “WHAT IS THE (Em Effing) ANSWER?” – Sorry, I inserted that effing bit because I could hear it in your voice. Harp has, as have I, written many times about what needs to be done to turn this country around. It is based on the premise; The strength of a nation comes not from its military, but from its economy and its middle class. Think about what has been done TO us and by whom! Also, a strong third party, say a Russ Feingold Ron Paul ticket for example.

Do you honestly think the right wing nuts are the ONLY insane folks?” Of course not, but Oklahoma State Senator, Ralph Shortey and Rick Santorum bolster the argument well enough. The right as of late has become so thoroughly nutty that (paraphrase) “a cadre of about 8 or 10 elitists posters on here that think they OWN this place. Every day the right does something stranger. Maybe they have all taken to accepting, “When the going gets tough, the weird turn pro.”

By the way, The Territorial Imperative was a fascinating book. Haven’t heard of that in a long long time. Glad you read it. Since you’ve read it, you should have the “elitist’s posters” disciplined process of conceptualizing and analyzing that which is of a higher order of intelligence. BUT, you may be subject to the charge of "elitist" by those afraid of its use. Welcome. You're smarter than you think Jesse. Meka Leka Hi Meka Hiney Ho. Long live Jambi.

Mountainlaurel, I wasn’t teasing. It’s real (see Jesse’s second question above). You wonder if you’ll ever be able to eat in a restaurant owned by a Republican ever again. That is of course the only place to get your Soylent Green --- isn’t it?

February 21, 2012 at 4:29 p.m.

So jesse, which of your two comments do you want me to reply to? The one where you're demonstrating your hypocrisy by claiming I'm guilty of venomous rhetoric (though you don't provide any examples of it, which makes it a rather tenuous attack), or the one where you're justifying your own conduct by claiming some noble crusade that makes your sins into the work of an angel?

Oh well, I got them both in one. Never mind then.

You want to improve the tenor of these discussions, start cleaning up your own house.

However, I think you may want to consider something that "pragmatic" and "go for broke" attitudes are not very compatible. A pragmatic person will act with temperance, and work with what can be done. To "go for broke" one has to be quite dedicated to a theory and belief, in a way that doesn't fit very well with the realist posture you profess a belief in.

That said, if you want to see such an idea made manifest, Piers Antony wrote a book series where such a thing happened.

Also, I have no idea what goes on in profile comments, I don't bother with them myself, never even looked at mine. So if you say people are doing it, well, I don't, and I'm not interested in it.

February 21, 2012 at 5:04 p.m.
NGAdad said...

"tu_quoque said... " is as far as I got.

NO BODY need even read or respond to this poster.

It's called SCROLL....

Happy with much of the rest of the conversation, well so so anyhoo.

February 21, 2012 at 5:23 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Limric said: “You wonder if you’ll ever be able to eat in a restaurant owned by a Republican ever again. That is of course the only place to get your Soylent Green --- isn’t it?”

Soylent Green, indeed. It certainly doesn’t help matters with all of these Republican lawmakers working so hard to deny the public the right to know what kind of crap is being put into the food we consume. . . And then, of course, there is their resistance to basic health and sanitation laws when it comes to food safety. . . I guess the parents of these Republican lawmakers never taught them that “Cleanliness is next to godliness.”

February 21, 2012 at 5:31 p.m.

Clayduh! will certainly win yet another award from his peers, for this one.

February 21, 2012 at 5:36 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

We all notice that libtards want to try to credit Obama for every bit of good news while every bit of bad news is Bush's fault.

Which way does this go? Does Obama or Bush get credit for spikes in firearm and ammunition sales? Is firearm manufacturing and sales a cornerstone of the Obama economic plan?

Is that why the Obama Justice Department was "mandating" sales to known criminal's along the Mexican border? Economic stimulus?

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/might-barack-obama-be-the-greatest-gun-salesman-in-america-take-a-look/

February 21, 2012 at 6:51 p.m.
alprova said...

“tu_quoque wrote: "Unemployment in the U.S. rose to nine percent in mid-February, up from 8.3 percent a month earlier, according to a new Gallup survey."

Eliminating the rest of your post, I cannot for the life of me think of a more unreliable method of measuring unemployment than through the results of a Gallup survey.

The mere suggestion that unemployment could begin to be measured by polling people is ridiculous.

February 21, 2012 at 6:55 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

The Dork probably thinks the US government is a reliable source of unemployment information. Just like the US government is a reliable source of inflation statistics, right, Dork?

February 21, 2012 at 7:02 p.m.
News_Junkie said...

If Rick Santorum got the nomination, not only would he lose the general election, he would drag down other Republicans with him. For a fuller exposition of this point, go to: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/rick-santorum-could-take-republicans-down-with-him/2012/02/20/gIQA8Af8PR_print.html

February 21, 2012 at 7:02 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Jesse said: “it's all a game and in the end it's all about who seems smarter! like robt.audry wrote about in "the territorial imperative!"!!

I must confess I haven’t read this book so you will to walk me through your point here, Jesse.

I did look the book up and noted it’s considered a classic. The reviewer comments were sort of interesting. One reviewer suggested that readers keep in mind something that Pope John Paul II had once said as they reading The Territorial Imperative:

"Science can purify religion from error and superstition; religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes. Each can draw the other into a wider world, a world in which both can flourish...Such bridging ministries must be nurtured and encouraged."

February 21, 2012 at 7:24 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

I see Jonathan Zasloff at the Reality Based Community has challenged the Grand Inquisitor’s perspective on what it means to be a “steward of the earth.

According to Zasloff, if Rick Santorum truly believes as Santorum claims that “Man is the objective,” Santorum should be termed “a pagan or at least a atheist:"

“. . . the religious idea of humanity understanding its limitations is the essential idea of being the “steward of the earth.” In Genesis, God’s command to Adam to rule over the earth is not for Adam’s sake: it is to preserve it for God’s sake. We are servants of a higher power, who commands us to hold something in trust for Him (Her/It: Your Mileage May Vary). So of course we should not regard the Earth as simply something to satisfy our wants. Being a steward is not the same as being a tyrant. As I have written before, the Rabbis understood this: our right to rule over the Earth is only to the extent that we act as the Image of God. Santorum might not understand this, but It Is Not About Us.”

http://www.samefacts.com/2012/02/watching-conservatives/is-rick-santorum-a-pagan/

February 21, 2012 at 7:38 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

*tu_quoque said... "Following [Al Baby] around and pointing out all of your B.S. is very time consuming.

Now, That made me smile.

February 21, 2012 at 8 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

nooga said... "I swear I can't recall near as many gay scandals in the Democratic party, as I do in the Repugnant party"

What are you trying to tell us, that the Demokrats are not really the big inclusive party that the party operatives would like us to think? That they only use their black, Hispanic and gay constituents and give nothing in return?

I was suspecting that, but until you spoke up on the subject I was having a hard time believing.

February 21, 2012 at 8:41 p.m.

What people try to hide is always believed to be more salacious than what's in the open.

Relationships everywhere are...messed up. Go figure.

February 21, 2012 at 8:46 p.m.
rolando said...

The Obama has done wonders for this country's economy...in one industry and one industry only. The gun industry. He is the sole cause of the highest boom [so to speak] in the sale of guns and ammo in the history of our nation. The boom exploded [Oops] with his election and continues to rise.

For particulars, see http://townhall.com/tipsheet/danieldoherty/2012/02/21/barack_obama_greatest_gun_salesman_ever. Be sure to read the ammo.com fact sheet covering the sales that accompanies the report.

In passing, SNL has released a YouTube of their tongue-in-cheek pro-Obama discussion group...paying equal-time for their Palin/Tina Whatshername skits, evidently. Although the hardcase Liberals here [you know who I mean] will undoubtedly agree with all they say.

February 21, 2012 at 9:03 p.m.
fairmon said...

ML said....It certainly doesn't help matters with all of these Republican lawmakers working so hard to deny the public the right to know what kind of crap is being put into the food we consume. . . And then, of course, there is their resistance to basic health and sanitation laws when it comes to food safety. . .

Q: Can you provide the details and bill numbers you are referring to. Things are often not what they appear to be. Some journalist are pushed to get an article out with many reaching a conclusion without all the information. Some democrats in some states object to some good regulations that address beef and poultry processing.

February 21, 2012 at 9:20 p.m.
limric said...

Wow tu_quoque, do you walk to school or do you bring your lunch. Notice the text from the proposed bill below. Notice the text from your post. See any similarities? No? Neither would anyone else, because there aren’t any.

STATE OF OKLAHOMA 2nd Session of the 53rd Legislature (2012)SENATE BILL 1418 By: Shortey

AS INTRODUCED:

An Act relating to food; prohibiting the manufacture or sale of food or products which use aborted human fetuses; providing for codification; and providing an effective date. BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA: SECTION 1. NEW LAW A new section of law to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 1-1150 of Title 63, unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows: No person or entity shall manufacture or knowingly sell food or any other product intended for human consumption which contains aborted human fetuses in the ingredients or which used aborted human fetuses in the research or development of any of the ingredients. SECTION 2. This act shall become effective November 1, 2012.

Change your tampon sweetie. The one you are using has swelled up displacing the moth filled cavity known as your skull with an overabundance of fluid from your nether regions. The fluttering wings of a Lepidoptera infestation belie the true nature of your inner thoughts.

I (like most normal humans) am done with you.

February 21, 2012 at 9:28 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

nooga said... "I was referring to the fact that all you Repugnants are so homophobic"

Really? How can you reconcile your notion that there are more homosexual scandals in the Repugnant party and all Repugnants are homophobic? Do you figure that Repugnant homosexuals are afraid of themselves, and/or their lovers?

Might there be a flaw in your random hate filled discharge?

February 21, 2012 at 9:28 p.m.
limric said...

BRP, “ Is firearm manufacturing and sales a cornerstone of the Obama economic plan?” Maybe not, but it sure turned out that way. Oh well, kind of Backfired (like his Dept. of Justice) didn’t it? Pun intended.

February 21, 2012 at 9:35 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

rolando said... "The Obama has done wonders for this country's economy...in one industry and one industry only. The gun industry."

Please, do not forget the Obama Justice Department encouragement of gun sales to known criminals on the Mexican border. Obama sure knows how to grow an economy!

February 21, 2012 at 9:36 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

limric said... "Oh well, kind of Backfired ... didn’t it?"

Yes Sir, it did. Not nearly as bad as it would have if Obama did not have the MSM in his back pocket. You know heads would have rolled if some homophobic Repugnant had been responsible for that abomination. (I learned from nooga today that all Repugnants are homophobic)

February 21, 2012 at 9:41 p.m.
alprova said...

tu_quoque wrote: "..."Gallup’s survey is a random telephone tracking survey of 30,000 adults conducted through February 15, whereas BLS’s survey is done over one week in the middle of each month and surveys 60,000 households."..."

You think this proves reliability and accuracy? If you think that random dialing of households is a reliable method of determining unemployment, think again.

What percentage of people who had jobs and were actively working at the time their numbers were dialed were not available to answer the phone? What percentage of people in this nation no longer have a land-line phone?

The BLS compiles unemployment data from a US Census Bureau telephone survey of approximately 60,000 households - the survey you so confidently referred to above. The data from that mid-monthly survey is not used by the BLS in its official employment statistics. It is released for use by markets and the media.

Per internal regulation, the Census can only contact prospective survey participants via land-line. Therein lies the horrific error in the monthly survey's accuracy.

According to data from the telecom industry, cell phones have largely replaced land-line phones, including 50-60% of those age 18-30 and 40-50% of those who are older, but still of working age. The highest percentage of Americans with land-line phones (60-75%) are those who fall into the age group who have retired from the work force.

It's a mathematical certainty that contacting people by land-line telephones to attempt to gauge unemployment would indicate that it is higher.

This is the most laughable point that you have ever tried to post in this forum. The fact that it was posted on CNS, suspiciously seeking donations after luring people to read such a negatively constructed article, is even more hilarious.

CNS, founded by L. Brent Bozell III, as the Conservative News Service, now known as the Cybercast News Service, to cover stories he believes are ignored by mainstream news organizations. He has been quoted as having said that his "mission is to prove, through sound scientific research, that liberal bias in the media does exist and undermines traditional American values."

"Following you around and pointing out all of you B.S. is very time consuming."

The day that you successfully point out anything I challenge you on to be in error or false, is the day that I disappear forever and let you have your way in here.

Until that day ever comes, I consider it my duty to be a constant, irritating thorn in your side.

February 21, 2012 at 9:47 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Hey, Dork, is that what you have been doing for the last 2 or 3 hours, researching up that monotonous diatribe that no one is going to read?

Next assignment... Write a 200 word essay telling us all how one plus one is three.

How pathetic. I think I feel a nap coming on...

February 21, 2012 at 9:53 p.m.
fairmon said...

alpro said to t_q

Eliminating the rest of your post, I cannot for the life of me think of a more unreliable method of measuring unemployment than through the results of a Gallup survey.

A survey and the official number have margin oe error. Actually the only meaningful measurement is when any U.S. citizen that wants and is capable of performing a good job can get one. The only thing we can be sure of is the exact number is not known. Check out the process for calculating the number we see each Friday. Check out the M6 number which includes those that have given up, work part time or otherwise are under employed. It is about 16% and doesn't include those that were working odd jobs for cash that they can no longer easily find. It also doesn't include the thousands getting a retirement incentive to retire early with a reduced pension instead of people being laid off. The retiree is not eligible for unemployment.

February 21, 2012 at 9:56 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Harp3339 said: “Can you provide the details and bill numbers you are referring to. Things are often not what they appear to be. Some journalist are pushed to get an article out with many reaching a conclusion without all the information.”

You know what I said in my post is true so why are you pretending that it’s not true, Harp3339? The Republicans are always trying to figure out ways to reduce the effectivenes of the FDA.

Just last summer, Republican Rep. Denny Rehberg tried to get an amendment passed that would have keep the FDA from doing it’s job. According to FDA statements, the amendment would have seriously restricted its ability to ensure drug purity, protect blood safety and keep lead-tainted candy off store shelves:

“The agency gave Heparin as an example. . . . In 2008, 200 U.S. patients died after taking contaminated Heparin from China. The FDA quickly arranged for product recalls and nationwide notification to the tens of thousands of Americans who used Heparin. Under Rehberg's amendment, the FDA would have been hamstrung, having been required first to conduct extensive testing to prove it was the Heparin and to show the contaminant. How many more people would have died under Rehberg's amendment?

. . . In 2006, a poisonous chemical similar to glycerin but used in antifreeze cropped up as a contaminant in the glycerin used in cough syrup. In 2007, the same thing happened with toothpaste and the FDA quickly stopped its importation. . . Another FDA document stated the "bill language will prevent the FDA from taking prompt action to help ensure the safety of the blood supply." Some 30,000 Americans were infected with HIV after receiving HIV-contaminated blood. As people became sick, the FDA issued early guidelines for screening blood donors before a "hard science" test became available. . .

And then there's candy. "This amendment could prevent the FDA from promptly acting to issue import alerts to prevent lead-contaminated imports of candy from reaching consumers," FDA stated, adding, "Consumers, predominantly children, will suffer if FDA cannot promptly issue an import alert to stop imports of lead-contaminated candy or other food."

http://missoulian.com/news/opinion/columnists/article_7ce06622-ac90-11e0-854e-001cc4c002e0.html#ixzz1n4jNnUvs

February 21, 2012 at 10:52 p.m.
alprova said...

Try as Conservatives may, and much to their obvious dismay, there is no way to deny or refute that the economy of this nation, especially when it comes to statistics related to employment, are headed north, and that has held true since January of 2009, with only two one month dips during the entire time President Obama has been in office.

I'm not suggesting that the President has had a thing to do with it either, other than to have called for the passing of legislation giving businesses generous tax breaks and incentives to hire the unemployed, to have stood firm in saving jobs in the auto industry, despite massive criticism by people who had no stake in that industry, and to fight for people like most of us who discuss the issues in this forum, to get a fair shake.

Gee...maybe I am wrong. Perhaps the man has had more to do with the unemployment picture after all.

Contrary to popular belief by many on the right, there are fewer employees working for the Federal Government today than there were when Obama walked into the Oval Office three years ago. So that mistaken assertion is a moot point too.

It sickens me to no end to witness so many people in this nation, claiming to be patriotic Americans, so wistfully sizing up our President as a failure, and/or even worse, wishing him to fail at everything he does.

Never in my life have I witnessed so much rampant disrespect for the leader of our nation. What the hell is wrong with people that it has come to this? Disagreement with political idealology is one thing, but the level of hate expressed for our current President is beyond all comprehension of reason.

I can only speak for myself, but had John McCain and Sarah Palin won in 2008, I would never show the level of disrespect that I witness on a daily basis, here in this forum.

Regardless of our political affiliation, we should all be rooting for a return to prosperity of all the people of this once great nation. That my friends is the bottom line.

February 21, 2012 at 10:58 p.m.
alprova said...

BRP wrote: "Hey, Dork, is that what you have been doing for the last 2 or 3 hours, researching up that monotonous diatribe that no one is going to read?"

First of all, I don't care who reads what I write. I post what I feel like writing and so do you.

Your posts are very limited, in the taking of pot shots in daily displays of your obsession with the host of this forum and the occasional post outlining a lack of meaningful intelligence and expressions of misinformation.

"How pathetic. I think I feel a nap coming on..."

There truly is no person who participates in here, who is routinely more pathetic than yourself. You can't even roll around the rocks in your pea-sized brain to become cognizant to that simple and undeniable fact.

Rarely does a day pass that you don't post some passing remark towards Mr. Bennett, who has never personally written so much as one word to you.

I've often tried to imagine what it is that you do in your spare time to give meaning to your life. I've arrived at a conclusion. I imagine that you spend a great deal of time on the Amazon website.

Your prized purchase and possession is an Asian imported, latex life-sized Richard Simmons love doll, complete with a Clay Bennett beard and silicon in all the right places, without which, your sex life would be non-existent.

February 21, 2012 at 11:28 p.m.
alprova said...

harp3339 wrote: "A survey and the official number have margin oe error."

And errors are very routine.

"Actually the only meaningful measurement is when any U.S. citizen that wants and is capable of performing a good job can get one."

That affects the numbers of employed, but does nothing to prove the number of unemployed.

"The only thing we can be sure of is the exact number is not known."

Agreed. No method of obtaining and/or compiling data is perfectly accurate.

"Check out the process for calculating the number we see each Friday. Check out the M6 number which includes those that have given up, work part time or otherwise are under employed."

I am of the opinion that anyone who truly needs a job, never gives up searching for one. Those who work part-time or who are "under-employed," are not unemployed, and thus should not be counted as such.

"It is about 16% and doesn't include those that were working odd jobs for cash that they can no longer easily find."

We could nit-pick the figures all day long, but the bottom line is that the employment picture has dramatically improved over the last three years, a little at a time, almost every month.

"It also doesn't include the thousands getting a retirement incentive to retire early with a reduced pension instead of people being laid off."

So what? That is merely a personal option that people who have such an option decide to take.

"The retiree is not eligible for unemployment."

What's your point? If they make a conscience decision to take an early retirement, they often make more than had they filed for unemployment compensation. It may not be their first choice, but at least they are not without income, and they are definitely in a far better position than someone without such an option, who are up the creek without a paddle.

Again, compared to the employment statistics in January of 2009, the country today, as a whole, is far better off than they were back then.

We've still got a long way to go, but then it's only been three years. The circumstances surrounding all that collapsed our economy was nearly 20 years in the making. Why are people so blind to that simple reality?

When Reagan was elected, it was at the very end of his second term before this nation saw unemployment return to decent levels. Why people expect miracles from our current President in less than one term, defies all logic and reason.

February 21, 2012 at 11:55 p.m.
alprova said...

tu_quoque wrote: "First you tell us that polling to determine unemployment is ridiculous;"

"Then I post that is how it is done by both Gallup and the BLS:"

That is not factually correct. The Census Bureau, not the BLS, conducts mid-month polls, and then not for official statistics.

"You admit that it is done by phone survey but then you give evidence of how that method is flawed."

It is most certainly flawed and for all the reasons I cited. Further, that 9% claim is attributed to Gallup, not the BLS.

Please point to any such quote from the BLS that confirms the Gallup poll.

http://www.bls.gov/

"Since the Gallup survey closely tracks the official BLS numbers it appears as though they have addressed those flaws."

Now wait a minute. Either Gallup conducts their own poll or they don't. The one conducted mid-monthly by the Census Bureau is not official nor is it ever published. The BLS has not stated anywhere that unemployment went to 9% anytime during the month of February.

That figure came straight from Gallup and only Gallup.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/152753/Unemployment-Increases-Mid-February.aspx

"If I were you (and thank God I’m not) I would be preparing my spin for when the unemployment numbers go up for Feb. and you are fighting the continually losing defense of The Obozo."

And so what if the numbers do go up? Does that prove that Gallup's methodology is accurate? Nope. A clock with a dead battery is right twice a day.

"I’ve already lost count but I sure don’t want you to leave as you provide the most target rich environment around here."

You are without a doubt, eternally a legend in your own mind. You have never once proven conclusively that I have been incorrect about a thing, other than to correctly point out my mistaken, long held belief, due to numerous accusations that are still floating out there on the web, that Newt Gingrich served divorce papers on his wife while she was in the hospital.

Unlike yourself, I do admit when I am wrong, as I did on the day that you offered that correction.

"And as I said before … Following you around and pointing out all of you B.S. is very time consuming."

You just go on believing that Gallup has a handle on the unemployment picture by calling .0001 of the American people on the phone and asking them about their employment status.

I'll continue to put my faith in the reliable and credible numbers released by the BLS, whatever they may be.

February 22, 2012 at 12:43 a.m.
alprova said...

tu_quoque wrote: "Once again I see by the tampon comment that you just can’t deal with strong women as once they start to seriously challenge your position you resort to anti-woman language and the bully’s tactic of running from real confrontation especially from women."

Strong woman, eh? Ever heard of deodorant?

Whatever his reason for offering that comment, it was one of the most hilarious ever offered in this forum.

"Is this behavior in any way related to your mom letting your special uncle take baths with you when you were a mere lad?"

There is no way that you are actively involved in a loving relationship with another human being. You are simply too rude to an extreme to all other humans that you engage with.

Were you once kidnapped by aliens and did they forget to remove your anal probe?

February 22, 2012 at 1:24 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Hmmmm. . . . I see that Josh Barro at Forbes has also challenged the Republican's Grand Inquisitor. Barro suggests that the Grand Inquistor has a blind sport for the great historical injustices committed against early out groups in America such as women, slaves, and American Indians. Indeed, I agree. The Grand Inquisitor of the Republican Party does have a blind spot. In fact, I’d say their Grand Inquistor is literally covered with blind spots.

In Rick Santorum’s infamous attack speech of mainline Protestants at Ave Marie University, he claims that Satan didn’t have much success in his efforts to corrupt people in the early days because once America’s pre-eminence was sown by our great Founding Fathers our foundation was very strong, in fact, very strong. Like a great number of people, Barro is troubled by Santorum’s proclamation and points out that:

Let’s think back to what America was like almost 200 years ago. Slavery was legal, indeed enshrined in our Constitution by our Founding Fathers. The federal government was forcibly removing American Indians from their lands, leading to thousands of deaths. Women couldn’t vote and were limited in their rights to own property. And yet, Santorum sees Satan wielding more influence and having more success in America today than he did then.

“. . . . how does somebody look at the history of American society and see a country that was more Godly under Andrew Jackson than it is today? The answer is by focusing only on the rights and treatment of white, Christian men. When some conservatives and libertarians make paeans to a lost period of American greatness, they are treating the perspectives of women and minorities as if they don’t exist, or don’t count.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/joshbarro/2012/02/21/the-real-problem-with-rick-santorums-satan-remarks/

February 22, 2012 at 8:25 a.m.
chet123 said...

AFTER LEAVING THE SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONVENTION...I THOUGH ABBA HOUSE WAS ABOUT THE BIAS,ONESIDED POLITICAL CIRCLE THE COUNTRY HAVE TODAY FROM CHURCHES....BUT LOOK LIKE ABBA HOUSE IS JUST ANOTHER SOUTHERN BAPTIST ONE SIDED CHURCH,,,,SHAME ON YOU

THIS WHAT BLACK-AMERICAN GET FOR FLOCKING FROM THEIR OWN CHURCHES...THEY ARE THE BIG LOSERS.....DONT SAY I DIDNT TELL YOU SO(SOUTHERN BAPTIST)

February 22, 2012 at 10:34 a.m.
chet123 said...

ATLEAST STAY AWAY FROM SOUTHERN BAPTIST

February 22, 2012 at 12:56 p.m.
stanleyyelnats said...

Satan's own.

February 25, 2012 at 7:02 p.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.