published Wednesday, July 4th, 2012

Forward

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 ...

237
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.
Salsa said...

Not even close.

July 4, 2012 at 12:04 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

I hope TFP doesn't pay this mope much.

July 4, 2012 at 12:07 a.m.
Easy123 said...

Very clever! Funny as well.

July 4, 2012 at 12:10 a.m.
blackwater48 said...

SPOT ON

Obama started out by making the mistake of trying to work with republicans. The original stimulus bill was amended to reduce money for infrastructure and increase tax cuts as GOP congressional leaders requested.

Didn't matter. They voted against it anyway.

When Obama proposed the Affordable Care Act he included the republican proposal to control health care costs - the indivdual mandate - to garner bipartisan support.

Didn't matter. They voted against it anyway.

The sole stated purpose of congressional republicans - from day one - was to make Obama a one term president. Nothing else. Not to govern. Not to legislate. Not to compromise, but to block the president even on legislation they fully supported.

So they played four corners. They bled the clock. They had frequent and extended meetings on the mound. They took extra long smoke breaks and then screamed like murder over whatever legislation made it through and called it socialism.

I find it quite astonishing that media continue to categorize their infantile outbursts as legitimate news.

About the only thing republicans are good at is ruining the economy. Take the last republican president. Please. (rim shot) He and the republican congress passed big fat tax cuts for the rich and corporations (to make them bigger and fatter), relaxed legislative oversight, killed regulations, increased military spending, invaded the wrong country, borrowed a trillion from China and then tried to blame democrats when the economy wound up the in the crapper.

And by crapper I mean 800,000 layoffs per month, GDP shrinking at 9%, and the stock market sinking to around 6,000.

And now here comes the marvelous Mr. Mitt, waving to the crowds, grinning like the Joker, suggesting that W didn't go far enough. He says W was chicken. He says W couldn't bring himself to fully install the complete conservative game plan.

Mitt has promised to double down on W's economic train wreck: bigger tax cuts, bigger military budget, fewer finacial regulation (if you can't trust a banker who can you trust?), and a general reuturn to the basic presidential nightmare that was George W. Meathead.

I especially like today's cartoon because Clay placed the tea bagger INSIDE the boat drilling holes. He doesn't care - or it hasn't dawned on him yet - that he's going to drown and take everyone with him. Obviously, republicans will do anything to try and stop the Presdent.

Spot on.

July 4, 2012 at 1:07 a.m.
fairmon said...

Obviously, republicans will do anything to try and stop the Presdent.

Spot on.

And, the president appears to be helping them in a bipartisan way. Could it be he is tired of being president? Is he wanting that nice early retirement income plus speaking fees and book sales.

July 4, 2012 at 2:05 a.m.
acerigger said...

Kinda looks like todays Democratic party.

July 4, 2012 at 2:34 a.m.
Rickaroo said...

I hate to say it but I almost want the Romnoid to be our next prez. Let's stop postponing our inevitable sinking and get it over and done with already. If Obama wins it'll just be more of the same, with the Republicans lying, filibustering, carrying out wasteful and senseless "investigations"...anything to obstruct him and the Democrats and keep the economy in the toilet. If Romney wins and we get even more of what Bush gave us, that will be the final nail in the coffin before this stagnating recession that we have been enduring becomes a full-blown depression. And once these clueless, complacent teabaggers feel the hurt that so many other people have been feeling, maybe then they will finally wake up and realize that they have been screwing themselves all along by supporting the wrong guys. However, the ignorance and stupidity of most of these ideological dummies is such that, even then, they probably won't get it. They will still be blaming "big government" and things like gay marriage or Obamacare or Planned Parenthood or public education or people on food stamps and Medicaid... or not praying enough to Gawd and Jeezus.

Regardless, our ship is sinking fast and it won't really matter who is at the helm. If it's Obama we might be able to postpone the inevitable a little longer. With Romney at the helm we'll sink faster than a box full of bricks. I think the best we can hope for is for something positive to come out of the ashes of the destruction that we are about to bring on ourselves. It's either gonna be an outright revolution or death by stupidity and apathy... one or the other, folks. It's just a matter of time.

Happy Independence Day and all that. We'd best enjoy, while we can, what still remains of a free and relatively prosperous life in these dis-United States of America.

July 4, 2012 at 3:13 a.m.
fairmon said...

Happy 236th and we wish you many many more.

July 4, 2012 at 6 a.m.
fairmon said...

How many really believe who is elected will have a significant impact of the inevitable economic demise of the U.S.? If so what will be done to prevent it?

July 4, 2012 at 6:05 a.m.
fairmon said...

Drill baby drill, make a huge hole in the boat. A torpedo or bomb would work better. The sooner we sink and some drown and some survive the sooner we suffer the unavoidable pain and begin to heal.

July 4, 2012 at 6:10 a.m.
degage said...

You notice the boat is sinking with Obama at the Helm. The rest must be His czars.

July 4, 2012 at 6:16 a.m.
degage said...

opps just noticed the tea bags. Just like a Alinsky liberal to blame others for their failings.

July 4, 2012 at 7:02 a.m.
conservative said...

The country is drowning in debt and this loontoonist blames the tea party!

July 4, 2012 at 7:28 a.m.
moon4kat said...

Sadly, the Commander hasn't cited the tea party goon for treason. Treason for undermining every effort to keep the boat afloat.

July 4, 2012 at 7:47 a.m.
patriot1 said...

Not to forget libs.....we're celebrating independence day not dependence day.

July 4, 2012 at 8:06 a.m.
conservative said...

Notice the inevitable fate of an entitlement boat.

July 4, 2012 at 9:06 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

We need MORE tea partiers. Not less.

July 4, 2012 at 9:06 a.m.
mymy said...

“These are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives everything its value.” ― Thomas Paine, Works of Thomas Paine

Thomas Paine was called the “pamphleteer of the revolution.” His words inspired many Americans to oppose the oppression of King George’s Redcoats.

Now, as many are turning to the Tea Party movement and Americans are preparing for a crucial mid-term election that may determine whether America remains a free republic.

July 4, 2012 at 9:38 a.m.
LibDem said...

Hope everyone has a great holiday today! We may be a little pessimistic, but we're still No. 1!

July 4, 2012 at 9:43 a.m.
degage said...

GOD BLESS AMERICA!

July 4, 2012 at 9:54 a.m.
joneses said...

The Tea Party has a very deep love for the uniqueness of the United States of America, a desire for the limited government that our Founding Fathers created, a fairly "strict" interpretation of the Constitution, a belief in capitalism and free enterprise and a strong sense of personal responsibility.

Those against the tea party such as Hussein Obama and the liberals obviously have no love for the uniqueness of the United States of America, no desire for the limited government that our Founding Fathers created, no fairly "strict" interpretation of the Constitution, no belief in capitalism and free enterprise and no strong sense of personal responsibility.

This is proven by Hussein Obama's and the liberals failed policies. If you are against the Tea Party then man up and stop attacking it's members and admit you have no love for the uniqueness of America and you are not for limited government, capitalism and free enterprise, personal responsibility, and the U.S. Constitution. Just admit who you are liberals.

July 4, 2012 at 9:56 a.m.
miraweb said...

Now I understand "Drill, Baby, Drill!" ;)

Happy 4th of July, everyone!

Grills Not Drills!

July 4, 2012 at 9:57 a.m.
tderng said...

actually,in at least one respect,this toon is correct. Obama standing at the helm unaware,or uncaring,that the boat is sinking and blindly staying the course.

July 4, 2012 at 10:10 a.m.
Rorschach said...

Mitt Romney lives "rent free" in Clay Bennett's head.

July 4, 2012 at 10:23 a.m.
rogerdodger said...

This could have been a day where if Clay had any respect for America and the people that have died to gain America the freedom that we love, he could have gone away from his usual STUPID political opinion. But yet once again he proves he is nothing more than a one trick pony. I can't wait until the TFP is done with him and his mindless antics.

July 4, 2012 at 10:26 a.m.
Easy123 said...

Roger,

He gets paid to draw cartoons. If you don't like the cartoons, then don't look at them. Or just keep whining!

Happy Independence Day!

July 4, 2012 at 10:30 a.m.
conservative said...

rogerdoger...

We all new the cartoon would not be patriotic or positive so just turn it around on him and expose him and the unpatriotic Liberals and Socialists who would support him. I have seen some good comments already.

July 4, 2012 at 10:45 a.m.
Easy123 said...

Conservative,

We all knew you would call someone unpatriotic and Socialist today. There is no need to turn anything around on you because we already know your routine. You have been exposed many times before. :)

July 4, 2012 at 10:49 a.m.

harp3339 said... “How many really believe who is elected will have a significant impact of the inevitable economic demise of the U.S.? If so what will be done to prevent it?”

Exactly. Markets adjust themselves every 4-5 years, resulting in a recession and then a recovery. Whoever is in office during the former gets blamed. Whoever is in office during the latter gets credit. Neither is deserved. The actions of neither presidents nor congresses create recoveries. The more they try, the longer it takes for recovery to occur. Markets outsmart politicians and demagogues every time. Suckers who chomp at the bait of rhetoric like “making others should pay their fair share” or who chant the mantra of “trickle-down economics” are gullible and envious sentimentalists. There are much more productive and compassionate ways to practice democracy. The generations who inherit the consequences of the ignorance and folly of statism will curse its advocates for the economic slavery to which they are being subjected. Compassion. Hope. Change. (LMAO.)

July 4, 2012 at 10:50 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Wonder how many dead-beats the thousands ("stimmalas") of IRS agents will have jailed? Guesses? Anyone? Anyone?

July 4, 2012 at 11:04 a.m.
alprova said...

Jack_Dennis wrote: "We need MORE tea partiers. Not less."

I agree. The problem is that there are not quite enough Tea-Party members to get the job done. Nothing has been responsible for ripping the very fabric of the Republican Party to shreds, than the actions by ultra-Conservative, hopelessly selfish, Tea-Party members, who are fighting with every breath to hijack the Republican Party. They cannot survive as an actual stand-alone political movement, so they have attached themselves, very much like leaches, to one that does have life.

They have caused gridlock of immense proportion within the Republican party. They have wasted precious time pulling political stunts, rather than to work to accelerate this nation's economic health. But then, most Tea-Party members have a more desperate goal in mind.

Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky for instance, has attained a fine reputation of obstructing legislation by attaching totally non-related and outrageous amendments to legislation just prior to them hitting the floor for votes.

His latest stunt was to attach an amendment calling for a first vote on defining life as starting at conception, as part of a bill renewing national flood insurance. House and Senate leaders negotiated an agreement to combine the flood insurance bill with highway and student loan legislation, as a means by which to prevent Rand's amendment from being voted on.

Representative Mick Mulvaney, R-South Carolina introduced a bogus 2013 budget bill calling it "The President's Budget" into the House on May 16th of this year. On the same date, a similar stunt was pulled in the Senate. Both time wasting measures were unanimously defeated in both Houses of Congress.

Less than 18% of Americans approve of the job that Congress has been doing and nearly 78% disapprove.

41 percent of Americans identify themselves as Tea-Party supporters, compared with a high of 47 percent last September. Forty-five percent oppose it. 14 percent have no opinion. Support has dropped tremendously among young adults, down 20 points from 51 percent to 31 percent.

Despite a good run over the past three years, the support for the Tea-Party movement is waning. Most people are waking up to the fact that for the most part, ultra-conservatives are once again desperately trying to work their way into positions of power by masking their true intent to insert religious dogma into legislation.

They keep trying to pull the same stunts, which have never worked, expecting a different result.

July 4, 2012 at 11:11 a.m.
tderng said...

alprova said...They keep trying to pull the same stunts, which have never worked, expecting a different result.

sounds like the lovers of socialism to me.

July 4, 2012 at 11:28 a.m.
tderng said...

well I'm off to celebrate Independence Day! Only hope its not our last!! HAPPY FOURTH OF JULY EVERYONE!

July 4, 2012 at 11:32 a.m.
Easy123 said...

Tderng,

Why are you Repub's so obsessed with Socialism? You do realize you can have socialism without communism, right?

July 4, 2012 at 11:34 a.m.
fairmon said...

I read a quote that said the best form of government is no government.....we appear very close to perfection.

July 4, 2012 at 11:35 a.m.
conservative said...

Let's see who is opposed to these principles on this 4th of July ( yes, we already know most of them ).

"The Tea Party movement is a grassroots movement of millions of like-minded Americans from all backgrounds and political parties. Tea Party members share similar core principles supporting the United States Constitution as the Founders intended, such as: • Limited federal government • Individual freedoms • Personal responsibility • Free markets • Returning political power to the states and the people"

http://www.theteaparty.net/

July 4, 2012 at 11:38 a.m.
fairmon said...

Easy 123 said.....

You do realize you can have socialism without communism, right?

Neither is as good for more people than our free markets capitalist system that no longer exist. France may be a good example of a socialist country.

July 4, 2012 at 11:40 a.m.
Easy123 said...

Tu,

It's kindof scary that you took the time to copy and paste portions of my posts over a three day period. And I need to get something addressed? Inferiority complex? LOL!

Internet stalkeresque. Gives me the creeps.

July 4, 2012 at 11:44 a.m.
Easy123 said...

Harp,

But the fear of socialism is directly connected to the fear of communism. I'm just pointing out that socialism isn't always associated with the the dreaded communism. I agree that both systems are less than desirable but there is no reason to have this irrational fear of them. We are not a socialist country, not even close. But Republicans bring it up like we are one step away from the Gulag.

July 4, 2012 at 11:48 a.m.
fairmon said...

conservative posted the principles of the tea movement.....

• Limited federal government • Individual freedoms • Personal responsibility • Free markets • Returning political power to the states and the people"

Excellent except their ultra conservative social position is not consistent with these principles. These principles are consistent with libertarians ideology except in addition libertarians don't attempt to control social and moral issues from a bloated, incompetent central government. I like John Stossel's views and reports on current issues.

July 4, 2012 at 11:49 a.m.
fairmon said...

easy123 said....

I agree that both systems are less than desirable but there is no reason to have this irrational fear of them. We are not a socialist country, not even close.

I think you are right although I think we are moving more and more to a centralized and more influential central government with local and state governments abdication of their responsibility.

July 4, 2012 at noon
Easy123 said...

Tu,

" so that I don’t have to search them out individually to rub their faces in their own poo."

Thump your chest sweetheart. Your constant need to stroke your own ego is quite pitiful.

July 4, 2012 at 12:01 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Easy123 has recently googled the difference between socialism and communism. Now he knows what everyone else has known for years. BTW, Ease. The socialistic regime you honor is within grasp.

July 4, 2012 at 12:27 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Tu,

Communism is a form of socialism. That's where the fear of socialism comes from. I'm saying that the fear of socialism is irrational because socialism is not always associated with communism.

July 4, 2012 at 12:31 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Easy123: Duh!

July 4, 2012 at 12:37 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Jack,

I'm glad you agree that the fear of socialism is irrational. Please, spread that message to your little buddies on here. :)

July 4, 2012 at 12:43 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Easy123: Do you have a plastic statue of Joan Walsh on your dash?

July 4, 2012 at 12:48 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Jack,

How would I fit a statue on my dash?

July 4, 2012 at 12:50 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

"Neither is as good for more people than our free markets capitalist system that no longer exist. France may be a good example of a socialist country." - harp3339

The free market capitalist system you are referring to that was so good and that no longer exists was the time immediately following WW2 and lasting for the better part of 2 decades, a time when the free market functioned with certain New Deal restraints and regulations in place that ensured the system worked for the good of the most number of people and not just the wealthy. Labor unions were at their strongest, tax rates on the wealthy were higher than they have ever been, public education was good, and health insurance was accessible and easily affordable. It was a time when a blue-collar worker could make a decent living, support his family, buy a nice home, and retire in dignity on a pension and Social Security.

There is no such thing as a purely "free" market system. We tried that already. Those were the days of the robber barons and rampant worker abuse. Captitalism left to its own devices will devolve every time to mere greed and self-interest, as we are seeing now in the huge monopolies that have so much power that they literally control the government.

And your point about France being a good example of a socialist country is what exactly? The French are not exactly living in squalor. They enjoy a very high standard of living with far superior health insurance and public education systems than we have. What's more, the people of Norway, Finland, Denmark, and the Netherlands, countries quite prominently "socialistic," were found, in the latest Life Evaluation Poll(or "Happiness Quotient") to be far happier and content than the citizens of any other countries in the world, including the U.S.

July 4, 2012 at 12:59 p.m.
lightkeeper said...

Where were all of you repub-lie-cons when Bush was running up a 1.3 trillion dollar deficit, thats when you should have been whinning.

July 4, 2012 at 1:15 p.m.
mymy said...

America the Beautiful: Rediscovering What Made This Nation Great
Ben Carson M.D. (Author)

PROLOGUE—first 2 paragraphs and last :

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is still the pinnacle nation in the world today. It is not, however, the first pinnacle nation to face a decline. Ancient Egypt, Greece, Rome, Great Britain, France, and Spain all enjoyed their time at the top of the world, so to speak — in many cases, for several hundred years. Then, as they began to decline, they all experienced some peculiar similarities: an inordinate emphasis on sports and entertainment, a fixation with lifestyles of the rich and famous, political corruption, and the loss of a moral compass.

One certainly sees this pattern being repeated in American society today, and if we continue to follow the course of other pinnacle nations prior to us in history, we will suffer the same fate. The question is, can we learn from the experiences of those nations that preceded us and take corrective action, or must we inexorably follow the same self-destructive course

In this book, we will examine whether we can advance the great experiment that is the United States of America, perpetuating a free and prosperous nation that is “of, by, and for the people,” and whether we can learn from the mistakes of our past. If we can, rather than seeing the decline that has characterized all other pinnacle nations before us, I believe our best days will still lie ahead of us.

July 4, 2012 at 1:31 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

"Where were all of you repub-lie-cons when Bush was running up a 1.3 trillion dollar deficit, thats when you should have been whinning." - lightkeeper

Exactly. I seem to recall our grand wizard veep Dick Cheney saying at the time that "deficits don't matter." Apparently Republicans are concerned about the deficit only when a Democrat is in office.

July 4, 2012 at 1:47 p.m.
riverman said...

Notice the resemblance of the guy in the back to Little Johnnie Roberts. You'll go down in history Johnnie Boy but not with Earl Warren or Oliver Wendell Holmes, but with Benedict Arnold, the Rosenbergs and Robert Hansen, all traitors like you you little punk.

July 4, 2012 at 2:09 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Riverman,

Are you related to Joneses?

July 4, 2012 at 2:55 p.m.
mymy said...

Obama will go down with his boat load of misery he has given this country. History will write the tale about the Dreams of his Father!

July 4, 2012 at 3:08 p.m.
joneses said...

lightkeeper,

Many of us were pissed that President Bush added 5 trillion dollars to the debt in 8 years. So you can understand how pissed we are with Obama adding close to 6 trillion in 4 years. We have fools in our party that did not hold President Bush accountable. The problem with your side is not one foolish liberal has enough courage to say anything against Obama. The liberals continue to let Hussein Obama deceive them. Are yo-u happy he added almost 6 trillion dollar to the debt with nothing to show for it? I was not happy with president Bush. Can you say the same about Hussein's failure to cut the debt in half like he promised?

July 4, 2012 at 3:18 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

"THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is still the pinnacle nation in the world today." - mymy

Really? Here are some stats that show otherwise. And not only are we not even close to being #1 in any category, we are way down near the bottom in most of them.

LIFE EXPECTANCY - the U.S. ranks 30th; DEMOCRACY - 17th; FREEDOM OF THE PRESS - 41st; INTERNET SPEED - 15th; SMALLEST PRISON POPULATION - 40TH; LACK OF CORRUPTION - 22nd; EFFECTIVENESS OF EDUCATION - 35th; MOBILE PHONES PER CAPITA - 16th; RENEWABLE ENERGY USE - 27th; SCIENTIFIC LITERACY - 33rd; QUALITY OF HEALTH CARE - 37th; INFANT SURVIVAL RATE - 31st.

I think that for a nation to merit "pinnacle" status it would have to be #1 or near the top in at least a few of those categories.

Indeed, we have the most wealth of any other nation but it is concentrated in the hands of the fewest number of people. So you could say that we're #1 (or close to it anyway) in income disparity. I don't think that's much of a "pinnacle" to boast about, though. And we're easily #1 in military spending (we outspend practically all countries combined in that area). But, there again...not exactly anything to pat ourselves on the backs about. And even though we have the most expensive and technologically advanced military in the world today, we can barely hold our own against simple native peoples who live in jungles or the desert.

It is mostly in the eyes of those who think that God has somehow appointed us his modern-day "chosen" who cling to the myopic and arrogant view that we are exceptional, just by virtue of being "blessed." But we will never achieve any worthwhile pinnacles until we learn to take care of our own and spread good will to other lands instead of bombs and bullets. And we especially need to realize that greatness is earned, not automatically conferred by some invisible granddaddy in the sky.

July 4, 2012 at 3:24 p.m.
riverman said...

Exactly, the worst thing that ever happened to this country besides electing the Kenyan was when Ronald Reagan chose George H W Bush as VP. The Bushes pretty much destroyed the Republican Party in the 12 years they were President and hopefully we will make a comeback in 2012.

July 4, 2012 at 3:26 p.m.
anniebelle said...

"I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations which dare already to challenge our government in a trial of strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country." --Thomas Jefferson

Oh well... Happy Independence Day!

July 4, 2012 at 4:09 p.m.
Andyman said...

Hey Jack_D - if you hate CB's toons so much, why do you read and comment just about everyday?

July 4, 2012 at 4:23 p.m.
rick1 said...

rickaroo,please read this link on health care http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA547ComparativeHealth.html

Please name a one aspect of American education that has improved since the teachers' unions took it over in the 1960. In fact education has gone down since the 1960's. The teachers unions are more concerned about political favors from the federal and state govt. then they are about the education of our children.

Freedom of the Press. Obama has not been friendly in this regard. “Obama is the sixth administration that’s been in office since I’ve been doing Freedom of Information Act work. … It’s kind of shocking to me to say this, but of the six, this administration is the worst on FOIA issues. The worst. There’s just no question about it,” said Katherine Meyer, a Washington lawyer who’s been filing FOIA cases since 1978. “This administration is raising one barrier after another. … It’s gotten to the point where I’m stunned — I’m really stunned.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/73606.html#ixzz1zggGV1QS

July 4, 2012 at 4:30 p.m.
alprova said...

riverman wrote: "The Bushes pretty much destroyed the Republican Party in the 12 years they were President and hopefully we will make a comeback in 2012."

I don't know if it was the Bush's that destroyed the Republican Party or not, but to pin your hopes on the likes of Mitt Romney is just about the most laughable idea I've read in a long time.

The man is totally out of touch with what makes the average American tick. He's setting himself up to another Republican only beholden to Corporations. He's absolutely established a horrible habit of telling tall tales.

Throughout the history of this nation, only one President has won an election as President, after losing the popular vote in both his state of birth and his state of residence. In 1844, James K. Polk lost the vote in both North Carolina and in Tennessee.

Mitt Romney is not going to win Massachusetts. Obama leads by 20 percent. In Michigan, his state of birth, Obama is leading by 2 percent.

In the last 100 years, only two candidates were elected President after losing their respective home states. Woodrow Wilson won in 1916 and Richard Nixon won in 1968.

In my opinion, what has destroyed the Republican Party is this constant struggle for power, even among themselves, by those on the far right of the spectrum.

It's never enough for these clowns to live their own lives as self-determined, morally superior beings. Power to force everyone else to live their lives as they deem proper means everything to them.

July 4, 2012 at 4:51 p.m.
blackwater48 said...

SHE'S GOT WAY TOO MUCH TIME ON HER HANDS

Darling TQ was sweet enough to critique my post so let me return the favor.

Since the Libards (sic) had complete control of both houses of Congress the Republicans could not block any budgetary plan that TheObozo (sic) proposed.

Sweetie, I know you hate to let facts fog up that pretty little head of yours, but a republican filibuster requires a 60 vote super majority to pass the Senate. Not 51. Add in the handful of conservative blue dog democrats and 'ironclad super democratic majority' never existed.

I don’t remember TheObozo (sic) actually working with anyone on Obozocare (sic) as the Libtards (sic) in Congress wrote it behind closed doors.

Wow. You must be gorgeous. One of the architects of 'Romneycare' - Jonathan Gruber - actually helped craft the Affordable Care Act. That's why they are so similar. Gruber said Obamacare and Romneycare were "The same f@*&ing Bill." Shake that pretty head of yours and clear the cobwebs.

Are you actually so naive as to think that if Romney wins that the libtards (sic) will not be working from day one to defeat him in the next election and make him a one term president?

Can't say that. Based on how republicans have acted it wouldn't surprise me one bit, but show me anytime in history when the senate threatened more filibusters? You can't. Republicans don't want to govern, they don't want to legislate, they only want to wage partisan political war.

Typical Libtard (sic) feelings that compromise and bi-partisanship is the Republicans abandoning their policies completely and adopting the Fleabagger (?) point of view. How could it be otherwise since they have held a slight political advantage since 2008?

Not talking about republicans abandoning anything you pretty little loon. Why can't republicans take yes for answer? (I bet you have plenty of times, wink wink) Once upon a time in Congress republicans and democrats would begin with stated positions on pending legislation. Each side would give a little to pass, for instance, a highway bill. Each side could declare victory and that's how countless bills were passed. Not today. Even when the President includes republican initiatives - like the individual mandate, cap and trade, bigger tax cuts - republicans ABANDON THEIR OWN PRINCILPLES just to oppose Obama. It's pathetic, really. Do you ever play games like that with your boyfriends? Do you have one firm position or are you flexible?

I’m afraid that you’re witnessing the inevitable demise of the socialist mothership as it falls victim to its inherent inabilities to provide for its own survival in the area of economically viable systems. What you don’t see is the free market, privately owned, and chartered craft that is standing by to pluck the Tea Partier and any others that wish to advance their quality of life or just save their azz from drowning.

Yep, you must be one gorgeous dame.

July 4, 2012 at 5:04 p.m.

You do well to wish to learn our arts and ways of life, and above all, the religion of Jesus Christ. These will make you a greater and happier people than you are. Congress will do every thing they can to assist you in this wise intention

July 4, 2012 at 5:11 p.m.
miraweb said...

Seriously TQQ. You really think the guy wearing these shorts is going to make it all better now?

http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1106443.1341252403!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_635/image.jpg

If you think Mitt Romney is in it to make your life better vote for him. If you think Mitt Romney is in it to make Mitt Romney's life better, think it over.

I would have more confidence if Our Little Mitt knew anything about your (and my) life. So far, it doesn't look good.

July 4, 2012 at 5:13 p.m.
alprova said...

Rick1, the Politico article on FOIA requests was lacking in detail in regard to what these requests were for. Only two specific types of requests were mentioned.

Requests for photos of torture of prisoners by our military and Osama bin Laden's body and burial at sea were denied. Surely you can understand the reasons behind such denials.

Before one assumes that the man has went back on his word to be more transparent, it would have to be determined if the requests being made are in line with those of the past, and if the denials of those requests are for reasons of national security, a very big concern that affects us all since September 11, 2001.

July 4, 2012 at 5:29 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Andyman: Because I love irritating southpaws like you.

July 4, 2012 at 5:43 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

Rick1, I'm famiiar with the report that you cite. It is correct in one regard: it is unfair to relate the statistics in life expectancy and infant mortality directly to the overall quality of health insurance or how accessible it is or isn't to the most number of people. But the statistics I cited are stand-alone and are not making the claim that infant mortality or life expectancy are tied in any way to health insurance or a lack thereof. Though they CAN be attributed to a lack of good health care in many cases, there are other variables that enter into those statistics, and whatever the reasons are that people don't live as long in this country or that infants die in greater numbers, the fact is that the numbers are what they are and those numbers alone determine the ranking that a country earns. If we are not living as long and our infants are dying more frequently, that is still not a good thing, whatever the reasons.

Likewise the statistic showing our country to be 37th in quality of health care is a stand-alone statistic and not related only to infant mortality and life expectancy. There are many other variables, such as affordablity and accessibility for people at all levels of society, administrative and government costs in relation to GDP, unintended deaths in hospitals due to medical negligence or error, etc. The fact is that we have decent medical care in this country ONLY if a person is rich enough to be able to afford its exorbitant cost or fortunate enough to work for a company that still provides comprehensive coverage to its employees. That is not exactly an exemplary model for a national health plan.

As for education, yes, there has been a steady decline in our public education system over the years. But given the fact that Republicans and conservatives have fought and railed against public education almost since its inception, you cannot say with any certainty that it has been teachers' unions that have had such a strangehold on it. The Republican policy of "starving the beast" has had as much to do with the downfall of public education as any other "socialistic" factor that you can name.

Look, you can pick any of those statistics that I listed and maybe make a case that we shouldn't really be 37th or 15th or 23rd or whatever...that maybe we should be only 35th or 10th or 19th instead. And you might be able to make a valid argument. But my whole point is that we are not EVEN CLOSE to being number one in any of those categories. And for someone to say that America is still the "pinnacle nation" is complete BS. It is a lie perpetrated by those who just want to have a warm and fuzzy pseudo-patriotic feeling about the USA, when in fact we have a hell of a lot of work to do to actually EARN the status of being a pinnacle nation.

July 4, 2012 at 5:43 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

And a big Happy 4th of July to Chris Rock.

July 4, 2012 at 5:45 p.m.
alprova said...

conservative, for some unexplained reason, your links are now dead ends.

It's easy to understand why it is that you have a particular objection to any omission of the word "creator" from any quotation of the Declaration of Independence, a very applicable document 225 years ago.

Over the objections of a minority of people today, it has become practice and policy to separate church from state. The movement or remove references to a "creator" or "God" from all things governmental has pretty much become the law of the land. Displays of religious belief are now patently illegal on Government and public property.

The United States Supreme Court has ruled in 15 times since 1878, that secular references or acts in conjunction with government functions or on public property are unconstitutional.

At the time that the Declaration of Independence was written, it was very likely that all or almost all Americans shared the same religious beliefs. In the year, 2012, that is no longer the case.

Thus, as distressing as it may be to you and some other Christians, despite your particular beliefs and tightly held values, this country is not one that belongs exclusively to those who believe in God or a Creator.

The President, being a former constitutional law professor, is likely omitting the word in compliance and in agreement with the Supreme Court's many rulings on the issue.

July 4, 2012 at 7:22 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Thank God for the Tea Party.

The notion that Obama can be compared to Washington is truly offensive. Obama and his pathetic followers are forever trying to attach our ridiculous president to likenesses of greatness. He looks more like Chavez, Mao or Hitler to me.

July 4, 2012 at 7:40 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Physicists find evidence of new subatomic particle. Continue to search for evidence of Easy123's brain cells.

July 4, 2012 at 7:54 p.m.
miraweb said...

Colin Powell recently was asked about his favorite books and authors. One of his "must reads" is General S.L.A. Marshall.

I tracked down a copy of General Marshall's "The Officer as a Leader". It is his revision of his book for military officers that he edited after he left the service so he could add in the bits that he didn't include in the "official" version.

It is a mighty fine read.

He has a definition of patriotism better than any I've read before. It seems appropriate to Independence Day:

"But to get back to those simpler virtues that provide a firm foundation for patriotism and may become the fount of courage, at least these few things would have to be put among the fundamentals:

  • A man has honor if he holds himself to a course of conduct because of a conviction that it is in the general interest, even though he is well aware that it may lead to inconvenience, personal loss, humiliation, or grave physical risk.

  • He has veracity if, having studied a question to the limit of his ability, he says and believes what he thinks to be true, even though it would be the path of least resistance to deceive others and himself.

  • He has justice if he acknowledges the interests of all concerned in any particular transaction rather than serving his own apparent interest.

  • He has graciousness if he acts and speaks forthrightly, agrees warmly, disagrees fairly and respectfully, participates enthusiastically, refrains from harboring grudges, takes his reverses in stride, and does not complain or ask for help in the face of trifling calamities.

  • He has integrity if his interest in the good of the Service is at all times greater than his personal pride, and when he holds himself to the same line of duty when unobserved as he would follow if all of his superiors were present."

July 4, 2012 at 8:07 p.m.
chatt_man said...

BRP, Obama is the epitome of greatness... great debt, great arrogance, great lies, great associates, great ego, and great similarities to the guys you mention in your last sentence.

July 4, 2012 at 8:14 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Chattman,

I'd love to see you outline the great similarities between Hitler, Mao, Chavez and Obama.

July 4, 2012 at 8:29 p.m.
alprova said...

Anyone here over the age of 50? Are you currently down in the dumps over the Supreme Court upholding the Affordable Care Act? Do you routinely pull out a pair of scissors and cut off part of your nose?

Fox News has an article that I think you should read;

http://www.foxbusiness.com/news/2012/06/28/column-why-upheld-obamacare-is-great-news-for-older-americans/

Are you under some impression that most Americans are opposed to ObamaCare? The results of a recent poll, taken following the Supreme Court ruling, might surprise some of you;

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/07/01/poll-most-americans-want-to-keep-obamacare-in-some-form/

The only majority of people opposed to ObamaCare are Republicans.

ObamaCare isn't poised to be a deciding factor on which candidate will receive votes either. So all this hype that Republican leaders are heaping out, in thinking that the voters are going to support them with their votes, to accomplish their mission to repeal ObamaCare, isn't going to come to pass.

July 4, 2012 at 9:16 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

""Obama AGAIN Omits ‘Creator’ From Declaration of Independence." - con-man

If Obama did so, then he is in good company. Jefferson himself omitted it in his original draft of the Declaration:

"We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independent, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness."

Jefferson submitted his draught to John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, and two others on the Committee of Five before the final result was handed to the Continental Congress. No one knows for sure who was insistent on adding the word "Creator," but it was most likely not Jefferson himself who changed his mind. He is known to have not taken kindly to any changes whatsoever that others suggested.

July 4, 2012 at 9:47 p.m.
mymy said...

Alpo: Just keep on believing......

Article was by Reuters. So, they are fair and balanced.

"WE report your decide."

July 4, 2012 at 10:20 p.m.

alprova (unbelievably) said...

"The movement or remove references to a "creator" or "God" from all things governmental has pretty much become the law of the land."


How many drinks have you had today, Alprova? You might want to check the Constitution on how laws are established in our country. Can you cite such a law or a provision in the constitution? Laws are never "pretty much" established. They are either enacted or not enacted.

You can't even cite a Supreme Court decision, even a bad one, that is as extreme as the religious bigotry you are advocating. Abolition and the civil rights movement would have been stopped in their tracks if your utterly ridiculous position were adopted. The Declaration of Independence would have to be revoked. Obama could be sued for having a Christian prayer at his inauguration. The First Amendment protection of free speech and religious exercise are far clearer than your attempt to re-write the establishment clause in order to avoid having your sensibilities offended.

Religious folks, including elected officials, are sometimes insensitive and pushy, and many of them should be a lot wiser in how they engage in policy debates. But their constitutional and human rights are cannot revoked simply for being uncouth.

You've gone off the deep-end on this one.

July 4, 2012 at 10:44 p.m.

George Washington:

Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor; and Whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me to "recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:"

Now, therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday, the 26th day of November next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the signal and manifold mercies and the favorable interpositions of His providence in the course and conclusion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty which we have since enjoyed; for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enable to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and, in general, for all the great and various favors which He has been pleased to confer upon us.

And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions; to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to all the people by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have shown kindness to us), and to bless them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and us; and, generally to grant unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as He alone knows to be best.

Given under my hand, at the city of New York, the 3d day of October, A.D. 1789.

July 4, 2012 at 10:50 p.m.
alprova said...

WWWTW wrote: "How many drinks have you had today, Alprova?"

I never touch the stuff.

"You might want to check the Constitution on how laws are established in our country."

Sorry. I don't need to.

"Can you cite such a law or a provision in the constitution?"

Are you trying to say that every law that is passed is contained in the Constitution?

"Laws are never "pretty much" established. They are either enacted or not enacted."

That, or it becomes pointless to continue to try to wee wee in the wind after the Supreme Court refuses to hear appeals of lower court rulings related to this issue.

"You can't even cite a Supreme Court decision, even a bad one, that is as extreme as the religious bigotry you are advocating."

There are two Supreme Court decisions that have addressed the specific issue of Separation of church and state:

Engel v. Vitale, 82 S. Ct. 1261 (1962) - Any kind of prayer, composed by public school districts, even nondenominational prayer, is unconstitutional government sponsorship of religion.

Lemon v. Kurtzman, 91 S. Ct. 2105 (1971) - Established the three part test for determining if an action of government violates First Amendment's separation of church and state:

1) the government action must have a secular purpose; 2) its primary purpose must not be to inhibit or to advance religion; 3) there must be no excessive entanglement between government and religion.

On January 17, 2012, The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal from a North Carolina county commission over the "Christian prayers" offered when opening public meetings.

The justices left in place, by failing to allow a hearing on the matter, a federal appeals court ruling that held that the Christian prayers at the start of Forsyth County commission meetings violated the First Amendment’s prohibition on government endorsement of a particular religion.

The commission argued that its doors have "long been open" to religious leaders of many "faiths," but the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va., found that more than 3/4 of the 33 public prayers offered before council meetings between May 2007 and December 2008 referred to "Jesus," "Jesus Christ," "Christ" or "Savior."

Coincidentally, this same court ruling will surely be cited in the Hamilton County case currently in litigation. Their new policy of inviting religious leaders of other religions to conduct prayers will not fly for one minute.

"Abolition and the civil rights movement would have been stopped in their tracks if your utterly ridiculous position were adopted. The Declaration of Independence would have to be revoked."

I'm not sure that I understand what you are trying to say. What do abolition and civil rights have to do with separation of church and state?

(To be cont.)

July 5, 2012 at 12:28 a.m.
alprova said...

(Cont.)

"Obama could be sued for having a Christian prayer at his inauguration."

The Freedom From Religion Foundation filed a lawsuit in order to force the removal of Christian religious rituals from the 2009 Presidential Inauguration.

Michael Newdow filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in 2004, which he lost. In the case, he cited that two ministers delivered Christian invocations at Bush's first inaugural ceremony in 2001, and that plans call for a minister to do the same before Bush was to take the oath of office Jan. 20, 2005. He filed another case in the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Clearly, none of these suits were won, but eventually someone will win. Christianity is certainly under attack, particularly when it is mixed with Government.

You might be surprised to learn that the first inaugural invocation took place in 1937 before the inauguration of Franklin D. Roosevelt.

"The First Amendment protection of free speech and religious exercise are far clearer than your attempt to re-write the establishment clause in order to avoid having your sensibilities offended."

Sir, I am not offended. I am absolutely a Christian myself. At the same time, I firmly believe that religion and government should never cross paths.

"You've gone off the deep-end on this one."

Have I now?

You're probably of the opinion that this country was founded by Christians.

In 1797, the United States Senate ratified a treaty with Tripoli that stated in Article 11:

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

Article VI, clause 2 of the Constitution states that treaties are "the supreme Law of the Land." Thus, the Treaty of Tripoli affirms and solidifies the position that the government of the United States is at all times to be religiously neutral.

July 5, 2012 at 12:28 a.m.
Easy123 said...

Alprova,

Terrific posts.

July 5, 2012 at 12:46 a.m.
alprova said...

Mitt Romney is losing it.

He finally came out and answered the burning question of the week.

Question: "Is the Supreme Court correct in calling the funds assessed those who fail to comply with the mandate in the Affordable Care Act a tax, and wasn't it a tax when you signed it into law as Governor of Massachusetts?"

MR: ""Supreme Court is the final word, right? The highest court in the land? They said it's a tax didn't they? So it's a tax, of course, if that's what they say it is."

"States can implement penalties and mandates and so forth under their constitutions, which is what Massachusetts did. But the federal government does not have those powers, and therefore for the Supreme Court to reach the conclusion it did, that the law was constitutional, they had to find it was a tax, and they did. What I did in Massachusetts was a state solution to a state problem."

"I will move to repeal the federal law if elected president."

Mr Romney is shaking that 'ole Etch-o-sketch harder and harder, trying to erase his past and starting over.

July 5, 2012 at 12:50 a.m.
blackwater48 said...

POOR MISS THING

TQ got all huffy and sobbed,

You Libtard (sic) Boys are so cute when you try to bait women you disagree with but always making sure that your type of women couldn’t trace it back to you.

I wasn't trying to 'bait' you. While destroying your pathetic arguments I decided to add a few crude comments designed to mock you, but I don't want to discourage you from attacking my comments in the future.

On the other hand, you've become shallow and predictable. Seriously, I guess I'm used to arguing with conservatives smarter than yourself. They actually cite facts, argue the merits, and don't mind finding common ground. Sometimes we agree to disagree.

You obviously see yourself as some cavalier conservative tilting at liberal windmills to reveal the socialist hypocracies of our times. Unfortunately, you're simply not very good at it.

By the way, my type of woman has long leg, good looks, and brains. From what I know about you, you're batting .000.

I bet when you do this it gives you such a since of power that you get a semi rigid woody that you personally take the opportunity to work off yourself.

Really Miss Thing, this is public formum. No need to talk like a whore. However, I noticed that you got so caught up in your paranoia that you failed to dispute even one point I made.

I guess you couldn't argue the message so you attacked the messenger. Such a republican thing to do.

Seriously, honey, is that all you got? (rim shot)

July 5, 2012 at 1:47 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

Comparing Obama to Washington in ANY fashion is a slap in the face to Washington. Washington "cannot tell a lie". Obama "cannot tell the truth". I agree with the post above, Use a torpedo to sink the boat, we don't want to go where he's taking us.

July 5, 2012 at 6:53 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

"Well, the next time they control Congress, they "fix" it. And if this doesn't go right (and it won't), if it survives, it's gonna be an absolute disaster, which is made to order for Obama and the Democrats. Blame the insurance companies for not cooperating! Blame Walmart, somehow! Blame the drug companies! Blame Republicans for all the problems! The media will be right in there. Dupes like Juan Williams will be writing, "Oh, yeah, it's the Republicans' fault! It's the drug companies' fault!"

They'll all be in there. That's the pattern.

The more chaos, the better. The more problems, the better. We get another government program to fix it! See, Obamacare is just the baseline. Obamacare is just the starting point. When it doesn't work, we need a fix program. We need a program to fix this, and then another program to fix that. And pretty soon there are gonna be 14 different versions of Obamacare like there are 14 different versions of Social Security. Now there's Social Security disability where 8.7 million people are on the program. I don't think that was part of the original idea. Ditto, the income tax".

July 5, 2012 at 7:07 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

And all you libs that hate the "rich". You must realize that the "rich" will be the ONLY people who get private health insurance under Obamacare, right?

and alprova is smoking crack when he claims that France has a superb health care system.

July 5, 2012 at 7:16 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

"I'm with the gubment and I'm here to help you" (What a load of it)

July 5, 2012 at 7:36 a.m.
Easy123 said...

Toes,

Your first statement is a lie.

And the W.H.O. found that France provided in best overall healthcare in its most recent assessment of world healthcare systems.

Maybe YOU are the one smoking crack.

July 5, 2012 at 8:23 a.m.
rogerdodger said...

Hey Easy, the 4th of July celebrates those people that dies to give this country it's freedom. That is something your cowardly ass would never do. So if you have a problem with someone standing up for those I suggest you look in the mirror punk and realize without those you could not be on here acting like such a horses ass every time someone makes a good point about something you may disagree with. I dont give a damn if you would BLOW Obama or not my remarks were trying to do nothing but focus what the holiday was about but you are too childish to know the difference.

July 5, 2012 at 8:41 a.m.
Easy123 said...

Roger,

The Fourth of July is federal holiday commemorating the signing of the Declaration of Independance. So you got that first part wrong.

Second, you're right about that not wanting to die part. I'd rather not die. I guess, since you are here typing, you are alive also. Does that make you a coward as well?

Third, I highly doubt anything you typed could be deemed "a good point".

Lastly, you don't even know what the holiday is celebrating. Your explanation for what the holiday is about would fit with Memorial Day or Veteran's Day, not Independance Day. So if I act like a horses ass, I guess you act like a dumb ass, right?

Are you mad? LOL!

P.S. I bet you know a think or two about BLOWing, don't you big fella'?!

July 5, 2012 at 8:59 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Easy123: Is just a kid. Has probably been cut too much slack in his young life. He doesn't get it. Believes everything they teach him at Mobray Jr. College. Lad is pitiable.

July 5, 2012 at 9:48 a.m.
lightkeeper said...

Easy123....Don't lower yourself trying to have an intelligent conversation with these country backwooded repub-lie-con idiots, when you have a conversation with them you have to keep it simple, like, when the last time they had sex with the puppy, then you probably would get a decent response..lol

July 5, 2012 at 9:59 a.m.
alprova said...

TOES02800 wrote: "and alprova is smoking crack when he claims that France has a superb health care system."

It's not my claim. It's a verifiable fact.

http://careandcost.com/2011/10/22/top-9-health-care-systems-in-the-world/

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/9994.php

July 5, 2012 at 9:59 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

lightkeeper:
Easy123... . "Don,t lower yourself trying to have an intelligent conversation with these country backwooded rebub-lie-con idiots, when you have a conversation with them you have to keep it simple, like, when the last time they had sex with the puppy, then you probably would get a decent response..lol" Talk about lowering yourself...

July 5, 2012 at 10:02 a.m.
lightkeeper said...

@ Jack Dennis...I see you were the first one to holla..lol

July 5, 2012 at 10:07 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

lightkeeper: And your point is?

July 5, 2012 at 10:08 a.m.
lightkeeper said...

what I said earlier a country backwooded hick that I'll not lower my standards with...Iam not like the rest of them on here..you need to take yourself on and mess with someone else or I'll make you look like the idiot you are....get the point now

July 5, 2012 at 10:18 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

lightweightkeeper: Don't get cheeky. I'll own you.

July 5, 2012 at 11:38 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Rueters: Bern, Switzerland:Physicists at the world's largest atom smasher announced July 4 that they are more than 99 percent sure they've found a new, and heavy, boson particle, that may be the Higgs boson. Two experiments at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in Geneva, Switzerland, show this new particle has a mass of about 125 GeV, with 1 gigaelectron volt about the mass of a proton. Physicist also announced the discovery of an even smaller particle. Tests reveal the sub, sub, atomic particle to be EASY123's brain. DNA matching pending.

July 5, 2012 at 11:52 a.m.
lightkeeper said...

@Jack Dummy...you just worry about owning your own stupid arse. You don't own or will never own anything here, what a stupid remark just to prove my point. @ tu quoque your stupid remark is like the wind...it blows

July 5, 2012 at 12:19 p.m.

alprova said...

I never touch the stuff.

It was a joke. Lighten up.

Are you trying to say that every law that is passed is contained in the Constitution?

No. I was saying that laws are passed by legislatures, not courts. The Constitution limits the matters on which legislatures may pass laws and courts may interpret laws. Your statement that “references to a ‘creator’ or ‘God’ from all things governmental has pretty much become the law of the land,” is unsupportable, which explains why you still are unable to cite such a law passed by representatives of the people.

That, or it becomes pointless to continue to try to wee wee in the wind after the Supreme Court refuses to hear appeals of lower court rulings related to this issue.

The Supreme Court’s refusal to review a district appeals court ruling does not establish the law of the land. It is simply a determination not to re-try that particular case in that particular district.

The movement or remove references to a "creator" or "God" from all things governmental has pretty much become the law of the land. Displays of religious belief are now patently illegal on Government and public property.

There are two Supreme Court decisions that have addressed the specific issue of Separation of church and state

There are many more than two cases which have addressed this issue. None of the cases you cited deal with removing “references to a ‘creator’ or ‘God’ from all things governmental." Neither do they address the alleged illegality of “displays of religious belief on Government and public property.”

Van Orden v. Perry, 545 U.S. 677 (2005) was a case decided by the Supreme Court, involving whether a display of the Ten Commandments on a monument given to the government at the Texas State Capitol in Austin violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The Supreme Court ruled on June 27, 2005, by a vote of 5 to 4, that the display was constitutional. It reached the opposite conclusion in McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky, a similar case challenging a display of the Ten Commandments at two county courthouses in Kentucky.

There were different circumstances in the two cases related to whether or not the displays served a secular purpose. In one case, it did. In the other it did not. The implication is that some religious displays can serve secular purposes. Others do not. Neither case was determined based on whether or not they included “references to a ‘creator’ or ‘God’ or included “displays of religious belief on Government and public property.”

Every federal appeals court that has decided cases involving the use of “one nation under God” in the pledge of allegiance has affirmed that the practice is constitutional. References to God or religion in government buildings do not necessarily constitute any state establishment of a particular church. You haven’t cited a law or a court ruling stating that this is so.

July 5, 2012 at 12:30 p.m.

alprova said...

this same court ruling will surely be cited in the Hamilton County case currently in litigation. Their new policy of inviting religious leaders of other religions to conduct prayers will not fly for one minute.

We’ll see.

I'm not sure that I understand what you are trying to say. What do abolition and civil rights have to do with separation of church and state?

They are examples of political movements to change unjust laws which were argued and fueled by religious ideas in the Declaration of Independence, namely, that all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights … Using you criteria for “separation of church and state," those phrases would have to be stricken from the document which established our independence as a sovereign nation. Military and congressional chaplains would be eliminated, as would other longstanding, common sense accommodations to the practice of religion in the operation of our public institutions.

You took the sound principle of separation of church and state to the extreme of excluding the free exercise and expression of religious ideas in public (governmental) settings. It’s a common error, but it is not constitutional and it should be (and will be) resisted.

You might be surprised to learn that the first inaugural invocation took place in 1937 before the inauguration of Franklin D. Roosevelt.

I am not surprised. Nor am I surprised that Democrats are leading the charge to preserve invocations before county commission meetings. Not all Democrats think like you do.

I firmly believe that religion and government should never cross paths.

As you often say: That is your opinion. Nothing else.

You're probably of the opinion that this country was founded by Christians.

“Founded by Christians” and “founded on the Christian religion” are not the same. The issue is not as black and white as either side typically portrays it in this debate. Most, not all, of the founders were professing Christians. They were members of a variety of (mostly Protestant) Christian traditions and almost all of the conclusions they reached about the role of religion in public life were compromise statements. No founder agreed completely with everything that was decided. There was no intent whatsoever to establish a theocracy. But there was also no intent to extinguish religion from “everything governmental,” as their words and actions clearly demonstrate.

http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/

July 5, 2012 at 12:38 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Tu,

"I bet when you do this it gives you such a since of power that you get a semi rigid woody that you personally take the opportunity to work off yourself. Remember to wash off the keyboard and your hands”

I'd bet the ranch a man hasn't climaxed in your general vicinity for many years now.

July 5, 2012 at 1:06 p.m.
lightkeeper said...

More than likely work of somebody else woody....can't you hear the sexual flustration

July 5, 2012 at 1:19 p.m.
alprova said...

WWWTW wrote: "The Supreme Court’s refusal to review a district appeals court ruling does not establish the law of the land. It is simply a determination not to re-try that particular case in that particular district."

If the U.S. Supreme Court denies a petition for a writ of certiorari, then the decision of the lower court is final.

July 5, 2012 at 1:20 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Lightweightkeeper: Are you Easy123? You sound just as sophomoric.

July 5, 2012 at 1:33 p.m.
lightkeeper said...

@ Jack Dummy....Oh you mean overconfident, but not very well informed like you and tu quoque, no Iam not Easy123, but he makes much more sense than you do

July 5, 2012 at 1:45 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

lightgweightkeeper. Now you've gone and hurt my feeling.

July 5, 2012 at 1:49 p.m.
lightkeeper said...

I think deep down you like it...now get a alcohol pad and wipe off your hands and your keyboard like Easy123 said

July 5, 2012 at 2:01 p.m.
lightkeeper said...

Scum usually requires alcohol........or are YOU that stupid

July 5, 2012 at 3:48 p.m.
alprova said...

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_happens_if_the_Supreme_Court_refuses_to_hear_a_case

I guess we have a disagreement between two people who supplied information on Wikipedia pages.

The first sentence on the above page states;

"If the U.S. Supreme Court denies a petition for a writ of certiorari (a request to hear a case on appeal), then the decision of the lower court is final."

July 5, 2012 at 3:52 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

For once, I agree with Barry O. (blessings upon him) It's NOT a tax. Therefore it's unconstitutional.

July 5, 2012 at 4:13 p.m.
mymy said...

Unions need to go:

Check in to the luxury $187 million Westin Diplomat Hotel on the beach outside Fort Lauderdale, Fla., and you’ll be impressed by sumptuous, art deco features, hotel suites overlooking the ocean, flowing fountains, waterfalls in its infinity swimming pool, the plush green golf course and the top-notch restaurants.

It’s a place even Donald Trump might envy.

You might also be impressed that this opulent hotel is owned by a labor union, and is frequently used for union junkets, government documents show. As is the $15.4 million Hillcrest Golf Club in Saint Paul, Minn. As is the $33 million lakeside resort and golf club in Onaway, Mich., owned by the United Auto Workers Union, a resort now hemorrhaging millions of dollars at a time of auto bailouts and auto job losses.

Labor officials routinely blast U.S. companies for not paying their “fair share” in taxes, and criticize fat-cat pay for executives, especially bankers in a time of bailouts...........

Read more: http://www.foxbusiness.com/government/2012/07/05/union-bling-union-junkets-1969452526/#ixzz1zmUa1BOg

July 5, 2012 at 4:19 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

mymy: Union people, like leftists, easily duped. Sad but true.

July 5, 2012 at 5:02 p.m.
Easy123 said...

"You got your azz handed to you and your just too lame to admit it."

It never fails. You must have never won anything as a child. Now you think the TFP comment section is a formal debate with winners and losers. LOL! You're a sad little human tu_. Your boasting and constant ego stroking (that's probably not the only thing you like to stroke) is absolutely pitiful.

LMFAO! No one would actually handle your ass in order to hand it to you!

July 5, 2012 at 5:17 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Easy = light keeper. no doubt.

July 5, 2012 at 6:31 p.m.
lightkeeper said...

No Easy...you got it wrong, those type of so called conservatives like tu quoque usuall in the mens restroom stroking everybody else while they always talking about liberals

July 5, 2012 at 6:38 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Jack_Dennis = Dumbass. No doubt.

Just accept it Jack, you'll never be the man your mother was.

July 5, 2012 at 6:40 p.m.
miraweb said...

One small clarification on the Supreme Court. If the court doesn't take an appeal, the judgement of the Appeals Court stands as the law in that circuit.

Different circuits can come to different opinions (and often do). One of the reasons the Supreme Court may take a case is to resolve differences in the law between different circuits. That was one of the reasons cited for giving cert for the Affordable Care Act. Once the Supreme Court issues an opinion, that becomes the law in all parts of the country.

July 5, 2012 at 7:53 p.m.
alprova said...

"It don't make no kinda sense. She won't sit next to a liberal, but she eat eggs that shoot right outta chicken's ass." - Slightly altered quote by Cicely Tyson, spoken in the movie, Fried Green Tomatoes

July 5, 2012 at 8:09 p.m.
alprova said...

tu_quoque wrote: "You got your azz handed to you and your just too lame to admit it."

Do you read English? I still say there is a discrepancy. You went to a lot of trouble to post the same thing I have maintained all along.

"If a case is denied certiorari, the decision of the last "court of competent jurisdiction" to handle the case is affirmed and the case is concluded."

Now read that until it sinks in. It doesn't begin to suggest that any case can be refiled in another Federal Court of Appeals. It says that the lower court ruling, which would be in all cases the applicable Federal Court of Appeals, the last stop before the U.S. Supreme Court, is affirmed and the case is concluded.

The Wikipedia entry that suggests that if the Supreme Court refuses to hear an appeal of the Federal Court of Appeals ruling, that it can be filed in a Federal Court of Appeals in another district, is incorrect.

The Federal Court of Appeals decision, filed in the proper and appropriate district, usually will be the last word in a case, unless that court sends the case back to the trial court for additional proceedings, or one or both of the parties ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case.

Any assertion that the same case, involving the same litigants, will be heard in two different Federal Courts of Appeals, prior to the filing of a writ of certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court is ludicrous.

http://www2.maxwell.syr.edu/plegal/scales/court.html

July 5, 2012 at 8:52 p.m.
lightkeeper said...

I think Alprova smoking crack..they getting their people mixed up...don't listen to a word they say

July 5, 2012 at 9:01 p.m.
rogerdodger said...

Wow easy you are living proof that of the sad shape this world is coming to. I do believe the holiday is call "independence" day you dumb ass. I also like that as a coward you can judge those who gave you the complete freedom to show your ignorance. It truly amazes me how ALL you foolish idiots cry about the way others talk about you but never think twice about doing it yourself. I guess that is why you are called a HYPOCRAT a dumb democrat that never admits they were wrong. Get out your moms basement & come out to the real world. That idiot you elected just imposed the largest TAX increase in US history & you and the other fools are ok with that.

July 5, 2012 at 9:34 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Roger,

It's called "Independence Day" to commemorate our independence from Great Britain (e.g. The Declaration of Independence). It has nothing to do with any other war or soldiers dying. It's very strange that you don't grasp that.

I haven't judged anyone but you.

Obamacare is not the biggest tax increase in US history. Your daddy Rush Limbaugh is lying to you. But I'm sure you have your face nestled so close to Rush's testicles that you don't really care about the truth anymore. You have already drunk the Conservative Kool-Aid. You are mentally compromised!

Thanks for playing. But you're still a moron. Next time, remove your head from your anus FIRST, then try to think.

July 5, 2012 at 9:53 p.m.
fairmon said...

Alprova posted.....

If the U.S. Supreme Court denies a petition for a writ of certiorari (a request to hear a case on appeal), then the decision of the lower court is final."

You should add in that district...

July 5, 2012 at 9:53 p.m.
fairmon said...

alpro further responded....

Any assertion that the same case, involving the same litigants, will be heard in two different Federal Courts of Appeals, prior to the filing of a writ of certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court is ludicrous.

True but this is different than your initial response. The same issue may be appealed in a different district but not by the same litigants. There have been differing rulings by different courts on the same or similar issues.

July 5, 2012 at 9:56 p.m.
alprova said...

Harp3339 wrote: "You should add in that district..."

It makes absolutely no difference how it is phrased. A couple of you are hung up on the word "district." The applicable word that applies is "case."

In each case appealed to the Supreme Court, following a ruling in one of the 13 Federal Courts of Appeals, if that case is denied a review by the U.S. Supreme Court, then that case ends right then and there, and the Federal Court of Appeals ruling stands forever, in that case.

I've never argued that two similar cases could not worm their way up the chain and not have two different rulings.

But when a case makes its way up and is heard in any one of the 13 Federal Courts of Appeals, and the case goes no farther, any one of those 13 Federal Courts of Appeals have nationwide jurisdiction.

If a case goes no further than one of the 94 District Courts of Appeals, then any decision rendered is limited to the district in which it has jurisdiction.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/uscourtsystem/a/fedcourts.htm

July 5, 2012 at 11:30 p.m.
alprova said...

RogerDodger wrote: "Hey Easy, the 4th of July celebrates those people that dies to give this country it's freedom."

"I do believe the holiday is call "independence" day you dumb ass."

You're attempting to confuse and to combine two separate days of historical observation into one. Memorial Day is the day set aside to honor the fallen. Independence Day is set aside to celebrate the signing of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776, declaring independence from the Kingdom of Great Britain.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independence_Day_(United_States)

"That idiot you elected just imposed the largest TAX increase in US history & you and the other fools are ok with that."

Rush Limbaugh said the same thing. That's probably who you heard it from. It's a shameful lie. Read the facts for yourself, if you really want to know the truth.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jun/28/rush-limbaugh/health-care-law-not-largest-tax-increase-us-histor/

July 5, 2012 at 11:46 p.m.
alprova said...

TOES02800 inserted a link to: "Lawyers Have Already Drafted 13,000 Pages of Regulations for New ObamaTax Law"

Can you point to any credible source where this or any other similarly titled article appears?

The Gateway Pundit, the origin of the article in question, is nothing more than the creation of Jim Hoft of St. Louis, Missouri, a man on a quest to seek fame and fortune by any means necessary, mainly by espousing his conspiratorial Conservative crap and by misleading people with bogus headlines.

Case in point:

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/07/arkansas-state-senator-and-dem-congressional-candidate-gene-jeffress-talks-ngger-babies-at-campaign-stop-video/

July 6, 2012 at 12:21 a.m.
rogerdodger said...

Hey Sleasy & Alpo even the spokesperson for the DNC has called it the largest tax increase ever. I have never nor would I ever listen to Rush or watch fox news, but you 2 idiots only listen to every thing from the people that deny the facts. It is laughable the 2 of you could be so stupid to try and deny something that everyone else in the world knows is true. Keep drinking the Osama kool-aid until you drown

July 6, 2012 at 2:59 a.m.
fairmon said...

Alprova...

If any any ruling applies to all jurisdictions then why is there a jurisdiction? REcent rulings regarding Obamacare differed in different jurisdictions. The ruling would apply to those states within the jurisdiction of that appellate court. The 9th district court may be more conservative in it's rulings than the 3rd district etc. etc. These differences at times influences the SCOTUS to hear arguments and rule on a legislative issue.

July 6, 2012 at 4:03 a.m.
fairmon said...

The federal district appellate court is unique among the thirteen with nationwide jurisdiction in a variety of subject areas such as international trade, patents, trademarks and money claims against the government federal personnel, veterans and safety personnel claims.

July 6, 2012 at 4:21 a.m.
Easy123 said...

Roger,

Still a moron. And a liar too. Your misguided view of reality is amusing and very pitiful at the same time.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jun/28/rush-limbaugh/health-care-law-not-largest-tax-increase-us-histor/

But seriously, you're patently ignorant.

July 6, 2012 at 6:25 a.m.
alprova said...

Rogerdodger wrote: "Hey Sleasy & Alpo even the spokesperson for the DNC has called it the largest tax increase ever."

Proof?

July 6, 2012 at 9:36 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

ZZZZZZZZZzzzzzz

July 6, 2012 at 9:44 a.m.
alprova said...

Harp3330 wrote: "If any any ruling applies to all jurisdictions then why is there a jurisdiction?"

The answer to the question is obvious. The thirteen courts are spread out to serve the entire nation, and to prevent judge shopping.

"REcent rulings regarding Obamacare differed in different jurisdictions. The ruling would apply to those states within the jurisdiction of that appellate court. The 9th district court may be more conservative in it's rulings than the 3rd district etc. etc."

District courts are two steps below a hearing by the Supreme Court. Rulings by a District Court are appealed to the Federal Appeals Court, which serves three to nine states, depending on location of the District Court, but any decision rendered by any of Federal Appeals Court, if not heard by the Supreme Court, applies nationwide.

"These differences at times influences the SCOTUS to hear arguments and rule on a legislative issue."

That is quite true, and it is done so to resolve those differing opinions.

July 6, 2012 at 9:54 a.m.
alprova said...

Harp3339 wrote: "The federal district appellate court is unique among the thirteen with nationwide jurisdiction in a variety of subject areas such as international trade, patents, trademarks and money claims against the government federal personnel, veterans and safety personnel claims."

I'm done with this one. I supplied the links to the explanation of our court system. Any decision at the Federal Appeals Court level regarding civil lawsuits based on U.S. Constitution interpretation, not kicked up to the Supreme Court, can and usually does apply nationwide, just as do decisions rendered by the Supreme Court.

July 6, 2012 at 10:03 a.m.
whatsnottaken said...

Lookat all the freeloaders on King Kenyans boat as he invades the Sudan

July 6, 2012 at 10:13 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Easy123: Voted all-time leading name caller on this site.

July 6, 2012 at 10:41 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

White House urges Americans not to "read too much" into any single monthly report. Ok, how about 41 monthly reports?

July 6, 2012 at 10:57 a.m.
conservative said...

Very instructive! The freeboaters have sunk our economy and drowned us in debt.

July 6, 2012 at 11:10 a.m.
lightkeeper said...

What makes some of you conservatives always accuse Democrats and liberals of being freeloaders and living off "your taxes". The last time I went to the store, gas station or anywhere else that currency is exchanged, I do believe taxes were taken out of those transactions. We all pay taxes, not just repub-lie-cons. My tax dollars are being used for services in areas that I'll never see, example, like my Hamilton County property tax being used in unincorporated areas of the county I'll never live in, then you say your not a part of the city that city taxpayer money is being used to pay for infrastructure and other services, talking about freeloaders! This is America, a democracy. Some republicans are so anti-American due to their own selfish greed, pride and prejudice its sickening.

July 6, 2012 at 11:17 a.m.
Easy123 said...

Conservative,

Yeah, it was the "freeboaters". Two wars, the housing crisis, corruption on Wall Street, bank fraud, and the large increase in oil prices had nothing to do with it.

July 6, 2012 at 11:18 a.m.
conservative said...

Hey Jack, can I borrow that line?

July 6, 2012 at 11:20 a.m.
miraweb said...

I saw the clips of Barclay's Diamond testimony in Britain along with Goldman's Dimon testimony before Congress.

I was struck by the difference between that and the investigation of the Fukushima meltdown. Could you imagine if the investigation of Fukushima started out with "Well - we are a large organization and even though I am in charge and am paid well for that, I couldn't possibly keep my eye on the important functions that could cause a complete meltdown and destroy lives and my own company."

Each time I hear this argument, I think the case for breaking up banks into manageable organizations grows. This isn't something the government should even have to do.

If a bank doesn't have a handle on the operations that could cost it billions, then it isn't too big to fail. It is too big to succeed.

July 6, 2012 at 11:52 a.m.
lightkeeper said...
<p>@conservative...The freeboaters are large corporations and banking empires that got their millions of the sweat and backs of the poor and middle class. This country was sinking eight years before The Obama Administration took office thanks to George W.T.F Bush, thats when you should have been whinning.

July 6, 2012 at 11:57 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Conservative: Sure, I borrowed it.

July 6, 2012 at 12:53 p.m.
tderng said...

miraweb said...If a bank doesn't have a handle on the operations that could cost it billions, then it isn't too big to fail. It is too big to succeed.

Dang! I agree with you on this one.NO MORE BAILOUTS FOR ANY BUSINESSES!

July 6, 2012 at 1:36 p.m.

Of the many, many things keeping Obama from becoming a President of Washingtonian character or accomplishment, the Tea Party is among the least of them.

July 6, 2012 at 2:13 p.m.
miraweb said...

Americans actually agree on most things. Politicians even agree on most things. During a campaign you would hardly think so, but it's true.

I did get one thing wrong - Dimon (not Diamond) is JP Morgan's CEO. My bad.

July 6, 2012 at 2:46 p.m.
conservative said...

There would be no Demoncrat party without freeboaters! There would be no Demoncrat party without freeboaters!

July 6, 2012 at 3:02 p.m.
alprova said...

tu_quoque wrote: "The ruling in one federal circuit does not set a precedent that is applicable and restrictive to other circuits except for the Federal Appeals Court of the Federal District."

You seem to be the least informed of all of us.

I would appreciate it very much if you would post the address of this mythical Federal Appeals Court, located in the Federal District, that alledly holds the power to set precident over the other twelve.

Then, after you post the address, please back up this claim with a link to the court system that says exactly what you just said.

All thirteen Federal Appeals Courts are equal in authority and each can and does establish precident with their rulings, unless the Supreme Court hears any case appealed. If the Supreme Court denies a hearing on a case ruled on in any of the 13 Federal Courts of Appeals, then the ruling stands and if the case is constitutional based, it stands nationwide.

July 6, 2012 at 3:07 p.m.
mymy said...

U.S. employers added a paltry 80,000 jobs in June, capping off an abysmal quarter of employment growth and raising the pressure on the Federal Reserve to once again stave off a double-dip recession.

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows Mitt Romney attracting 46% of the vote, while President Obama earns 44%. Four percent (4%) prefer some other candidate, and six percent (6%) are undecided.

Matchup results are updated daily at 9:30 a.m. Eastern (sign up for free daily e-mail update).

Romney has a six-point advantage among unaffiliated voters. He also picks up 20% of the vote from White Democrats.

July 6, 2012 at 3:13 p.m.
chatt_man said...

miraweb's theory that large institutions are too big to keep a good eye on things, is the very premise that a lot of conservatives have about the Government trying to run the things that should be handled by the states.

In the states, a large amount of money seems like a large amount of money, because they deal with lesser amounts. The federal government throws the terms billions and trillions around like it's nothing.

Governors of states can do much better managing their money because it's closer to them, means more to them, and smaller budgets are easier to manage effectively.

July 6, 2012 at 3:15 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Mymy,

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html

RCP average has Obama up 2.7 points. And that is based on the average of all the polls.

Jack,

Keep reaching.

July 6, 2012 at 3:29 p.m.
lightkeeper said...

There would be no Republican Party without greedy lying conservatives making billions off the backs of the working poor and middle class...There would be no Republican Party without greedy lying conservatives making billions off the backs of the working poor and middle class

July 6, 2012 at 3:56 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

lightweightkeeper: Silly, even for you.

July 6, 2012 at 4:25 p.m.
lightkeeper said...

no more silly than the things you say, scroll up and see it was from a silly respone to the same thing conservative said...now make yourself look stupid again, which is nothing new for you

July 6, 2012 at 4:34 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

"[I]t is important not to read too much into any one monthly report and it is informative to consider each report in the context of other data that are becoming available [emphasis added],” Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers Alan Krueger writes on the White House’s official website."

Don't believe your lyin eyes! (you can't make the shiz up, folks)

July 6, 2012 at 4:39 p.m.
chatt_man said...

Maybe the other data they need to consider is the 40 previous months. Wait! Oh crap, maybe they shouldn't do that.

July 6, 2012 at 4:55 p.m.
lightkeeper said...

After inheriting a 1 trillion dollar deficite Obama signed 2 trillion of spending cuts into law. Since Obama has been president, federal spending has risen at the lowest pace in 60 years...source: CBS MarketWatch. The big surge in federal spending happened in fiscal 2009, before Obama took office due to George W.T.F. Bush. Since then, spending growth has been relatively flat. Over Oama's four year budget years, federal spending is on track to rise from 3.52 trillion to 3.58 trillion an annual increase of just 0.4percent. There has been no huge increase in federal spending despite what you hear, just more lies from repub-lie-cons because they have nothing else to go on.

July 6, 2012 at 5:36 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Lightkeeper should shut the fuc# up. Why aren't you downtown giving your money to the homeless since they have less than you do? Do you let the less fortunate sleep in your home to escape the heat? Do you invite the hungry to eat from your table? If not, then shut the fuc# up! your senseless liberal blabbering is annoying.

If Bush's crazy spending is what got us in this mess, then why in the hell did Obama double down on even more spending?

July 6, 2012 at 6:01 p.m.
lightkeeper said...

You make about as musch sense as a dead horse. You shut the f_ k up! I don't want more of you prejudice dogs in the white house. You bring your ignorant a s downtown and help someone instead of running off at your stupid mouth

July 6, 2012 at 6:12 p.m.
miraweb said...

There are large institutions with attention to detail who do difficult, even dangerous things. The U.S. military does a fine job of handling nuclear submarines. Airlines handle thousands of take-offs and landings with remarkably few accidents. When any accident occurs, there are people whose job it is to find it, fix it, and make sure it doesn't happen that way again.

I believe that modern banking may have become one of those highly technical, highly dangerous professions that requires the kind of attention and controls we see in other industries.

I don't think the management, control, and training structures have caught up with the task. Just making a bank smaller won't cure the problem, though it may help.

Romney is talking about fewer controls, less regulation, and less oversight. In my view, that is approaching magical thinking.

It's a hard problem. The solution will be hard too.

And all of us are at risk if it isn't done right.

July 6, 2012 at 6:23 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

You're nothing more than a hypocritical blazing liberal. You constantly say how greedy the republicans are, but yet it's the liberals who want to take every dime they can from the pockets of the taxpayers.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/charitable_giving_liberals_vs_conservatives/

Government spending is NOT charity! Turns out that republicans give far more to charity as do liberals. A true blazing, sniveling lying, bleeding heart liberal who doesn't know jack shiznit! Greedy? look no further than your own liberal heroes.

July 6, 2012 at 6:27 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

TOES: Not true. Joe Biden gives away hundreds.

July 6, 2012 at 6:31 p.m.
lightkeeper said...

Look ignorant ass...Liberals pay taxes just like repub-lie-cons do. Nobodys taking anything from you s.o.b.'s. So whoever you've been listening to, I don't care if its your mammy....you don't know what the hell you talking about.

July 6, 2012 at 6:33 p.m.
lightkeeper said...

You take it and shove it up your conservative ass

July 6, 2012 at 6:39 p.m.
rick1 said...

Waiting for the liberals to call out lightkeeper for making the comment "I don't care if its your mammy." Al,are you going to step up?

July 6, 2012 at 6:44 p.m.
lightkeeper said...

My democratic friends and family and neighbors work like dogs to keep what we have, do your stupid ass think that liberal, democrats and black people have nice homes, cars and businesses by being lazy and living off "your taxes" I think not. Iam a Liberal, I don't believe in abortion, but in a case like you, if I had the opportunity before you were born, I would have made an exception. One less dumb ass in the world.

July 6, 2012 at 6:46 p.m.
lightkeeper said...

you need to get your conservative friends to step up and correct toes for telling me shut the you know what up...This retard attacked me and I retalliated. This is a public forum, you don't talk to people like that, so get over it.

July 6, 2012 at 6:50 p.m.
miraweb said...

I feel no need to defend LK. I agree that what is being written is offensive and childish. One of the great rewards of free speech is it makes it easier to spot the fools - of whatever political bent.

July 6, 2012 at 7 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

lightweight: You should advise your BBF Easy to lighten up on his nasty rhetoric.

July 6, 2012 at 7:01 p.m.
lightkeeper said...

If you want Easy to know anything Jack Dennis....tell him yourself

July 6, 2012 at 7:10 p.m.
alprova said...

TOES02800 wrote: "your senseless liberal blabbering is annoying."

And your conservative blabbering is not?

**"If Bush's crazy spending is what got us in this mess, then why in the hell did Obama double down on even more spending?

He didn't. It's just another Republican sponsored myth.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/the-reality-behind-obama-and-bushs-spending-binge/2012/05/25/gJQAK8ItpU_blog.html

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/may/23/facebook-post-gets-it-right-about-obamas-record-sp/

July 6, 2012 at 7:10 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

lightweight, stop living off of your "friends and family and neighbors" and be somebody. You proved yourself an idiot since you obviously think that all republicans live in mansions and ride in limos. You've been "brain" washed by liberal spinsters and think it's gospel truth. Obama could burn your moms' house down and you'd blame Bush You're beyond hope. Again I say, shut the fuc# up.

"correct toes"? who the hell are you? my school marm?

July 6, 2012 at 7:12 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

You live on this site alpo! I chime in when I'm bored enough to. You libs on here all want something for nothing. That's why you love Obama so damn much. But I will NOT let lightsleeper slide by with claiming republicans are more greedy than liberals. That is a myth created by the liberal class warfare patrol. Romney gave over 16% of his income to charity the last two years. The Obama's pale in comparison.

July 6, 2012 at 7:20 p.m.
lightkeeper said...

I live on my own....your probably living at home with your parents and by the way you sound, smoking crack at that. I hope everybody on here hears this guy. Its better to remain silent and thought a fool, then to open your mouth and remove all doubt..fool

July 6, 2012 at 7:23 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Toes, stop living off of your "friends and family and neighbors" and be somebody. You proved yourself an idiot since you obviously think that all democrats live in mansions and ride in limos. You've been "brain" washed by conservative spinsters and think it's gospel truth. Romney could burn your moms' house down and you'd blame Obama. You're beyond hope. Shut the fuc# up.

Lol! Sounds about right.

July 6, 2012 at 7:23 p.m.
lightkeeper said...

@ toes...you don't stop me from saying anything I want to say..Iam not going to let you slid by saying all liberal live off your taxes, I live off my taxes, I can tell your a prejudice s.o.b and you really don't want to go there. I'll shut you up or they'll shut this forum down.

July 6, 2012 at 7:31 p.m.
alprova said...

TOES02800 linked to: "Roll Your Own Operations To Be Snuffed Out"

It's amazing, the things that the President gets blamed for. Senator Max Baucus (D) Montana, is the man responsible for adding that provision to the Federal Transportation bill.

This provision only affects stores that have commercial machines, capable of rolling out cigarettes quickly enough to make a carton of cigarettes in short order. They are offered as a means by which to dodge cigarette taxes.

If any store has wrapped their very survival on sales from cigarettes produced from these machines, then they deserve to be put out of business. They are enabling people to become tax evaders.

Taxes on tobacco are completely avoidable by quitting the consumption of tobacco products. If people are determined to smoke and save money doing it, then they are still free to purchase a hand-held cigarette roller, and supplies that are taxed. It's still cheaper than buying commercially produced cartons or packs of cigarettes, but it will be a bit more inconvenient to roll their own smokes.

July 6, 2012 at 7:33 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

68 hours in one week ain't bad. 48 hours regular and 20 hours overtime. What did YOU do all week? I already know what easy did.

I don't think I smoked any crack. Unless your mother sneaked in my house and forced me to in my sleep. Hey, stranger things have happened! You can sit at your "house" and wallow in your misery like a good little liberal. I'll continue to happily go to work and pay my own way in life. Laughing at you the whole time.

July 6, 2012 at 7:36 p.m.
alprova said...

Rick1 wrote: "Waiting for the liberals to call out lightkeeper for making the comment "I don't care if its your mammy." Al,are you going to step up?"

Why should I? I didn't type it.

If you are personally offended by lightkeeper's use of the word, then flag his post.

July 6, 2012 at 7:39 p.m.
lightkeeper said...
<p>@toes..is that all you got...my mother could't force you to do anything in your sleep because you sleep with your sister.

July 6, 2012 at 7:40 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Show me where I said liberals live off my taxes. Step away from the pipe! Now you're just telling fibs.

July 6, 2012 at 7:41 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

lightsaber, WHIIINNNNEE!! SLLUURRRP!! WHAAAAH!! Is that all you do?? You bore me.

July 6, 2012 at 7:44 p.m.
lightkeeper said...

@ Toes..when you turn five, I might try to have an intelligent conversation with your dumb ass

July 6, 2012 at 7:48 p.m.
alprova said...

TOES02800 wrote: "You live on this site alpo! I chime in when I'm bored enough to."

Which is about as often as I do. Did someone appoint you forum monitor -- and award you the responsibility to attempt to limit participation in here?

"You libs on here all want something for nothing."

But of course. Feel free to offer yet another unsubstantiated, baseless assertion.

"That's why you love Obama so damn much."

I do not "love" the man. I respect him and am of the opinion that he is constantly maligned by people, such as yourself for instance, for many reasons, which I shall not enumerate.

"But I will NOT let lightsleeper slide by with claiming republicans are more greedy than liberals."

So, you feel that such an expression of an opinion, no matter how off base it may be, deserves to be responded to with telling him or her to "shut the eff up?"

"That is a myth created by the liberal class warfare patrol."

Do you really think it matters? If this forum is any evidence whatsoever, the lobbing of myths about liberals, by those assumed to be conservatives, occurs all the time.

Your statement that "You libs on here all want something for nothing" is living proof that you believe in all kinds of myths yourself.

"Romney gave over 16% of his income to charity the last two years. The Obama's pale in comparison."

So? Romney earns about 10 times what Barack Obama earns too. Mitt Romney sure has more disposable income to give away that won't begin to put a damper on his lifestyle, wouldn't you agree?

I don't size up people based on what they publicly declare that they give to charity. We have no way of knowing whether or not that the President claims tax deductions for every charitable contribution that he makes.

There are by far, many more charities out there that the IRS does not recognize as being deductible contributions, than there are that they do.

And it may well be that the President, being the public figure that he is, prefers to keep some or most of that information completely private.

It's a petty and pointless issue to ponder, in my opinion.

July 6, 2012 at 8:17 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Toes,

You do realize that you are the only one whining here, right?

July 6, 2012 at 8:53 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

I think Lightkeeper gave Easy a reach around.

July 6, 2012 at 9:21 p.m.
mymy said...

LOL

Pesident takes heat from Republicans for calling weak job growth 'step in the right direction' during campaign stop, only to drop the line from his speech at the second stop of the day.

July 6, 2012 at 9:24 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Jack,

I heard you were a maestro at the rusty trombone.

July 6, 2012 at 9:33 p.m.
lightkeeper said...

@Jack Dennis...I think you telling on yourself...whats the matter ? Jealous? lol

July 6, 2012 at 10:26 p.m.
alprova said...

mymy wrote: "Pesident takes heat from Republicans for calling weak job growth 'step in the right direction' during campaign stop, only to drop the line from his speech at the second stop of the day."

Blaming the President for weak job growth is rather pathetic. Republicans rooting for Mitt Romney, thinking that he will be able to do anything more in terms of creating jobs, are laughable to say the least.

While Romney attacks the President on the campaign trail over weak job growth numbers, how does his own record in that department, as CEO of the State of Massachusetts, compare?

During the Republican debates from which he emerged victorious, his fellow candidates hit him hard with the fact that as Governor, he was a failure in creating jobs, as Massachusetts was 47th in the nation in job growth.

During Romney's four years as Governor of Massachusetts, only 61,000 new jobs were created. Massachusetts had 2.5 percent of the nation's population. Thus, if we multiply that population figure to reflect the nation as a whole, using the same job growth potential as Massachusetts experienced during the Romney years, 2.4 million jobs would have been added.

During the first three years since President Obama has been in office, 4.1 million new private-sector jobs have been added. The three year jobs growth percentage stood at 3.79% in January of this year.

If Mitt Romney has the desire to claim that he is a job creator and that President Obama is a job killer, he or anyone else who wants to jump in on the debate, sure needs to explain why it is that the President has seen 40 percent more jobs created during his three years in office throughout an entire nation, than Mitt Romney saw created within the confines of the relatively small State of Massachusetts.

Mitt Romney has also compared himself to that of Jimmy Carter. Does he fare any better against him? Not on your life. Read more on that below.

What percentage of actual job growth did Massachusetts experience during the years Romney was Governor? 1.3%

How have other Presidents stacked up in witnessing job growth over the last 39 years? (Every year figure below reflects 1st day in January)

Nixon/Ford(R) 1973-1977 - +5,072,000 jobs, 6.29%

Jimmy Carter(D) 1977-1981 - +10,339,000 jobs, 11.36%

Ronald Reagan(R) 1981-1989 - +16,102,000 jobs, 7.79% Note: 1st term percentage was 5.52%. 2nd term percentage was 10.06%

George H.W.Bush(R) 1989-1993 - +2,592,000 jobs, 2.36%

Bill Clinton(D) 1993-2001 - +22,744,000 jobs, 8.99% Note: 1st term percentage was 9.49%. 2nd term percentage was 8.48%

George W. Bush(R) 2001-2009 - +1,094,000 jobs, .41% Note: 1st term percentage was -0.01. 2nd term percentage was 0.83%

Barack Obama(D) - 2009-2012 - +4,101,000, 3.79%

All the above numbers and percentages were taken from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

July 6, 2012 at 11:33 p.m.
alprova said...

tu_quo_que wrote: "Here you go: (Wikipedia link)"

Oops...Sorry. You need to go back to work.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit only hears cases of a certain nature and in no manner is used hear any case that would be heard in a Federal Court of Appeals. That particular court only hears cases kicked up to it by one of the 94 District Appellate courts, pertaining to issues that it is specifically empowered to make rulings on.

You should have read the following sentence at the start of the "Jurisdiction" section: "The Federal Circuit is unique among the courts of appeals as it is the only court that has its jurisdiction based wholly upon subject matter rather than geographic location.

You should have also read the link to 28 U.S.C. § 1295. Here, I'll help you;

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1295

For certain, that particular court's rulings apply nationwide, as do all of the 13 Federal Courts of Appeals, but that court would never hear a case involving any interpretation of the Constitution.

July 7, 2012 at midnight
rick1 said...

Al said **"If Bush's crazy spending is what got us in this mess, then why in the hell did Obama double down on even more spending?

He didn't. It's just another Republican sponsored myth.

Al, since you have said you are an accountant you know your above listed comment and the links you provided are a lie.

http://news.investors.com/article/612620/201205241756/obama-is-a-spendthrift.htm?p=ful

July 7, 2012 at 12:06 a.m.
alprova said...

rick1 wrote: "Al, since you have said you are an accountant you know your above listed comment and the links you provided are a lie."

No they aren't. Forgive me for discounting your link's credibility for lacking the name of the person who wrote it, and for all of the disputed information lacking documentation.

Take a few minutes and read a thoroughly documented argument that makes the case that I most certainly am not guilty of lying.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/may/23/facebook-posts/viral-facebook-post-says-barack-obama-has-lowest-s/

July 7, 2012 at 12:32 a.m.
alprova said...

Okay, I've spent a couple of hours digging for proof positive to what geographical area that decisions rendered by the 13 Courts of Appeals are binding upon.

I can now categorically state that I was incorrect. I retract my challenges to Harp3339 and to anyone else whom I offered disagreement with on this issue and I humbly offer my apology for offering those challenges.

The United States Courts of Appeals are the intermediate appellate courts of the United States Federal Court system. The 12 regional circuits are organized from the 94 U.S. judicial districts.

A Court of Appeals hears and decides on appeals from the District Courts located within its Federal Judicial Circuit as well as appeals from decisions of federal administrative agencies and other designated federal courts.

The decisions of the Court of Appeals are binding on the District Courts located within its Circuit.

Amazingly, I perused many U.S. Federal court websites and I could not get a clear answer to the question as to what geographical area an Appeals Court's decision applied.

I finally found the answer here:

http://system.uslegal.com/us-courts-of-appeals/

A couple of my assertions that I argued are correct.

1.) If a case heard by an Appeals Court is an issue of Constitutional interpretation, it will never wind up in The United States Court of Appeals in the Federal Circuit.

2.) A Federal Court of Appeals will rarely, if ever, take on a case that it deems to have been settled in another Federal Court of Appeals. In that respect, most issues involving interpretation and application of Constitutional issues will be cited by an Appeals Court as a reason to deny an appeal, and thus, a decision can apply to all districts and circuits.

That in no manner suggests that every decision by a Federal Appeals court is final or absolute, but the vast majority are.

Again, I apologize to everyone for dragging this out, but at least give me credit for doing the right thing and admitting, retracting, and apologizing for being incorrect.

I always have, and I always will admit when I am wrong.

July 7, 2012 at 2:19 a.m.
alprova said...

tu_quoque wrote: "Now you repeat my posts and agree with my position to the extent that you are nearing the point where you are claiming to hold my position even greater than I do."

Excuse me, but you presented that court as one in a request to prove that there is one court that can set precedent over the other twelve. It does not. It hears only cases that the other twelve do not have jurisdiction to hear.

"Now you repeat my posts and agree with my position to the extent that you are nearing the point where you are claiming to hold my position even greater than I do."

Not even close, my scrappy archenemy.

"Didn’t I just post that same information just a few minutes ago?"

Pardon me. I reread what I wrote and see the glaring error. I meant to type "The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit only hears cases of a certain nature and never hears any case that would be heard in any of the other Federal Court of Appeals." Jurisdiction by a Federal Appeals court is not limited to geography. That particular court is the only one authorized to rule on a long list of issues, but it does not entertain those pertaining to interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.

Once again, the type of cases that particular court hears are outlined in 28 U.S.C. § 1295, which can be read here;

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1295

"However the basic dispute is whether the other 12 courts can establish nation wide precedent or not."

They can and they do, and those precedents are published and cited all the time in lower court rulings, however, I have made the proper retractions to the extent of the geographical areas in which their decisions are binding.

(To be cont.)

July 7, 2012 at 3:15 a.m.
alprova said...

(Cont.)

"I have provided proof but to this point I have not seen one scrape of info from you to prove your point so if you’ve got it post it. But you don’t do you and we both know that to be the truth. You can spin around in circles forever and create a great dust storm but it won’t change the truth we both know."

My retraction has been made. But you brought up another issue that hasn't been under contest, that is until now.

Rulings in Federal Courts of Appeal are indeed precedent setting decisions and are published as such and cited in lower court cases all the time.

From the following link;

Decisions of the United States courts of appeals have been published by the private company West Publishing in the Federal Reporter series since the courts were established. Only decisions that the courts designate for publication are included. The "unpublished" opinions (of all but the Fifth and Eleventh Circuits) are published separately in West's Federal Appendix, and they are also available in on-line databases like Lexis or Westlaw. More recently, court decisions are also available electronically on the official Internet websites of the courts themselves.

Further, most recently, on May 31, 2012, the panel of three First Circuit judges, in Boston, Massachusetts, declared the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) unconstitutional. Two of those judges were Republican, believe it or not.

Do you think that decision will not be cited as precedent in the future in other cases? Will another case appealed in another circuit not possibly be ruled as being constitutional, forcing a writ of certiorari to be filed with the Supreme Court?

Right now, my updated understanding of our Federal court system, provides me the wisdom to now correctly attest to the fact that the First District Court's decision is only binding within the circuit of district courts within it's jurisdiction, but time will tell how far reaching that decision extends around the Nation.

It will most certainly be precedent setting.

July 7, 2012 at 3:15 a.m.
alprova said...

tu_quoque, I want to personally thank you for the civil tone you have shown today, despite our disagreement. You kept your sarcasm levels in check, refrained from referring to me with disrespect, and I appreciate it more than you will ever know.

July 7, 2012 at 3:33 a.m.
rick1 said...

Al, did you read te link I provided? If you did please explain why the CBO counted TARP and the Fannie/Freddie bailouts separatley in its Monthy Budget Review reports. (http://cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/2011_Nov_MBR. pdf) — something Nutting apparently never bothered to check when putting together his bogus chart.

Facts are facts Al it does not matter who preented the facts but as I have said before they are only facts if you agree with them. Like the links you provide are not biased.

July 7, 2012 at 9:09 a.m.
fairmon said...

Alprova..

I accept and respect your retraction regarding the judical system which is rather complex actually. You are correct that rulings by one court is often used to influence other decisions although not binding. The only way to break a precedent is to establish a new one. Most people have no idea how powerful a judge is or how dangerous a nutty one can be.

July 9, 2012 at 2:10 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.