published Thursday, February 28th, 2013

The Time Bomb

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 ...

78
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.
fairmon said...

Sequestraing is a joke. The reduction in the growth of the budget and debt is so small it is not meaningful. Any manager that cannot find a way to reduce spending by 2% is a p poor manger...I can't argue the fact that we have that manager. Any business that can't reduce the increase in their cost by 2% is bankrupt.

February 28, 2013 at 4:35 a.m.
jesse said...

The real time bomb is the fact that politics is taking precedence over governing!

If you spend all your time posturing you have no time left to take care of business!Seems like their day job is raising money to get re elected and to heck w/anything else!

February 28, 2013 at 5:10 a.m.
Cactus said...

Everyone knows government and its workers are so efficient and productive that it cannot find 5% waste to cut.

February 28, 2013 at 6:06 a.m.
degage said...

Tu the fed deficit is 16,603 trillion and the budget deficit is 1 .1 trillion not billions. I'm sure the libs wouldn't correct that and I,m quite sure you meant trillions.

February 28, 2013 at 6:20 a.m.
hambone said...

There's very little Mickey can do!

Goffey controls the House!

February 28, 2013 at 6:30 a.m.
degage said...

Lets not forget dirty Harry has not brought a budget vote to the floor of the senate in 4 yrs.except Obamas budget that was defeated by dems and republicans because it was so out of line that even the dems couldn't justify it.

February 28, 2013 at 6:33 a.m.
fairmon said...

Put a freeze on hiring, including replacing attrition and freeze department budgets at current levels, the budget would become balanced and the debt reduced significantly. Quit paying congress and provide congress no benefits until the budget is balanced without adding taxes. That would be sequestering as it should be.

February 28, 2013 at 7:07 a.m.
fairmon said...

I cannot see how anyone can buy into the concept that you can borrow and spend your way into prosperity. I cannot see how extracting wealth (taxes) from the economy will increase demand for American goods or services therefore increasing the need for employees. I cannot see how increased hiring by governments and the resulting cost is good for the economy. Every government has enough non essential departments and spending to have a surplus with current revenue without denying the needy current support.

I am sure someone will have explained these things to me by parroting some politician or journalist when I come back later today.

February 28, 2013 at 7:25 a.m.
EaTn said...

Congress and Wall Street are like the two blind and deaf monkeys. The deficit and unemployment snow-ball started by Pres Bush and continuing into the current administration can't be stopped until it hits bottom. The Fed has shot all the big bullets and is now down to bow and arrows. With interest rates near zero, the only way they can go is up. The resulting increased payment on the debt and drag on the economy will kill any hopes of balancing the budget. We're riding on a runaway train.

February 28, 2013 at 7:31 a.m.
librul said...

"Boo Hoo" Boehner, "Mister Ed" McConnell and the "Our Gang" of Flea Party idiots are destroying America simply because they cannot stand it that women should control their own bodies; that in a government "of the people" there is a law that says all the people should participate in creating it; that they have created the massive debt and deficits by leading America into a pit of warmaking and corporate slease; and, most galling to them, that THE LAST ADMINISTRATION TO CREATE A BUDGET SURPLUS WAS OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY AND WAS LED BY BILL CLINTON AND AL GORE, JR.

February 28, 2013 at 7:46 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Indeed, Clay Bennett. . . Meanwhile, back at Mickey's barnyard, our overindulged juvenile representatives continue to play irresponsible games while serious public health risks are beginning to develop for the rest of us. . . Of course, the Republican Party has never shown an interest in public health so I guess it’s one more issue that doesn’t matter:

“Federal support of the vaccination of children may be the best example of well-spent federal dollars. Because any time vaccination is stopped—­for religious or ideological or personal reasons—disease reappears.

In the last decade, the U.S. and Europe have seen the return of pertussis (whooping cough), mumps, and measles due to incomplete vaccination, while Africa and Asia continue to battle outbreaks of polio. The famous Swine flu pandemic of 2009 infected about 60 million Americans and demonstrated the startling reach of a dangerous disease without an effective vaccination.

And yet, with the sequester set to shave $2.4 billion off public health initiatives, there will be 840,000 fewer vaccinations—shots not given to infants and children (and a few adults) to prevent infections, all cheap to prevent and expensive to treat."

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/112532/sequester-cuts-childhood-vaccinations#

February 28, 2013 at 7:48 a.m.
degage said...

Librul, You forget Clinton had a republican congress and he was willing to work with them. So how can you give him all the credit? Obama is not willing to work with anyone including his own party. His way or the highway.

February 28, 2013 at 7:52 a.m.
conservative said...

alprova,

" If I am indeed being blasphemous, which I know that I am not, I will pay the price for it."

Of course you are and you know you are. It is obvious that you can do a google search because you go to anti Christian websites for your information. You sought out and found homosexual websites that lie about Scripture permitting homosexual behavior.

It was easy for me to find your sources because I just typed in the phrases that you copied from these anti Christian websites.

Who are you fooling? No Christian assembly, not even one would ever accept you as a member as you may have already experienced.

Why the charade? Is it for business reasons? You surely couldn' t fool any family members who may be Christians.

You lie about the sinless character of Jesus and accuse him of stealing. This is clearly blasphemy. It has to be intentional for you could have easily typed in "verses about the sinlessness of Jesus" but you went elsewhere to anti Christian sites, mostly homosexual.

You obviously have contempt for the intelligence of others.

Your latest blasphemy accusing Jesus of stealing a colt is easliy refuted by looking at Mark 11:1-6:

1And when they came nigh to Jerusalem, unto Bethphage and Bethany, at the mount of Olives, he sendeth forth two of his disciples,

2 And saith unto them, Go your way into the village over against you: and as soon as ye be entered into it, ye shall find a colt tied, whereon never man sat; loose him, and bring him.

3 And if any man say unto you, Why do ye this? say ye that the Lord hath need of him; and straightway he will send him hither.

4 And they went their way, and found the colt tied by the door without in a place where two ways met; and they loose him.

5 And certain of them that stood there said unto them, What do ye, loosing the colt?

6 And they said unto them even as Jesus had commanded: and they let them go.

alprova, just don't call yourself a Christian because you are a blasphemous liar!

February 28, 2013 at 8:01 a.m.
jesse said...

Clinton was just lucky! read this if you wanna know how the Clinton boom came about!

http://www.nytimes.com/2000/02/18/business/worldbusiness/18iht-think.2.t_2.html

February 28, 2013 at 8:10 a.m.
patriot1 said...

Why all the "hair on fire" about the sequester when we've already reduced the deficit by 2.5 trillion according to Obama. When was the hysteia when these cuts happened?

February 28, 2013 at 8:13 a.m.
alprova said...

degage, you and others have a very selective memory. Bill Clinton won those balanced budgets after shutting down the Government twice. He refused to sign budgets that were bundled with tax rate decreases for the wealthy.

He banned Newt Gingrich to the back of Air Force One when the man was Speaker of the House, who held up budget negotiations because he wanted tax decreases for the wealthy.

Clinton isn't shy about explaining what happened. The budget deals he made with the congressional Republicans were significant, but not nearly as significant as the tax increase on the wealthy that he passed, without a single Republican vote of course, in his first budget in 1993.

Voting to raise taxes on the rich was the crucial step toward fiscal responsibility and a long period of high employment and national prosperity.

Taxes are going to have to rise, significantly and remain that way for years to come. There is no other way to stabilize the budget without them.

February 28, 2013 at 8:22 a.m.
degage said...

Al, you are right taxes will raise on everyone if Obama is going to have his way, that includes the middle clas that he loves to claim he is helping. I was concidered myself middle class in the 90's and my taxes went up.

February 28, 2013 at 8:29 a.m.
alprova said...

conservative wrote: "You sought out and found homosexual websites that lie about Scripture permitting homosexual behavior."

Uh...no I didn't. My response yesterday had nothing to do with your anti-homosexual rantings. It had everything to do with your claim that Jesus was a man who was allegedly without sin.

"It was easy for me to find your sources because I just typed in the phrases that you copied from these anti Christian websites."

Then cite them.

"Who are you fooling? No Christian assembly, not even one would ever accept you as a member as you may have already experienced."

Outside of your little closed-minded world, there are many people much like myself who do not view the Bible as "the word of God," who tend to understand that it is a work of mortal men, both when it was compiled, and when it was translated into 3,700 different languages.

"You lie about the sinless character of Jesus and accuse him of stealing. This is clearly blasphemy."

No, no, no. I stated that he "conspired" to steal. I did not accuse him of stealing himself, but he did order two disciples to do the deed. Surely you do not suggest that the ass belonged to no one. If it was "borrowed" as some apologists suggest, where is the scripture that proves it was ever returned to the rightful owner?

"It has to be intentional for you could have easily typed in "verses about the sinlessness of Jesus" but you went elsewhere to anti Christian sites, mostly homosexual."

Sir, I first read of the tale of the taking of the donkey when I was 14 years old.

"You obviously have contempt for the intelligence of others."

Sir, I do not express contempt for no one. I simply have alternative views when it comes to the Bible. You Sir, are the one who routinely expresses contempt.

"Your latest blasphemy accusing Jesus of stealing a colt is easliy refuted by looking at Mark 11:1-6:"

Thank you. That was the third scriptural reference to the incident I could not recall last night. What is it EXACTLY that is written there, that excuses the taking of the donkey without the rightful owner giving permission to take it?

Some people standing around who dropped their challenge to the two disciples while they were untying it by citing the Lord's name, does not give me any reason to think that the rightful owner was present to consent. Sounds like theft to me.

Nowhere do I read that the Lord commanded the two men to find the rightful owner and obtain permission to use the donkey. They were commanded to simply untie it and to bring it to him, and if they were challenged, they were told to say that it was needed by Jesus.

Am I right or am I wrong? You know that I am right.

"alprova, just don't call yourself a Christian because you are a blasphemous liar!"

What I call myself is none of your concern and what you believe is of no consequence.

February 28, 2013 at 9:15 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Degage says: “taxes will raise on everyone if Obama is going to have his way, that includes the middle class that he loves to claim he is helping. I was considered myself middle class in the 90's and my taxes went up.”

Sounds like you forgot the Bush era tax cuts were supposed to be temporary and there was an expiration date to the Bush tax cuts:

“Why were the tax cuts given expiration dates, rather than made permanent parts of the tax code?

The bills were written that way because the Republicans had only the slimmest of Senate majorities — in fact, Vice President Dick Cheney had to cast a tie-breaking vote to pass the 2003 bill. To avoid a Democratic filibuster, the cuts were rolled into a so-called budget reconciliation measure, which cannot be filibustered.

But under Senate rules, reconciliation cannot be used for any bill that would add to the federal deficit after 10 years. The “sunset’' provision that called for the measures to expire meant that the deficit was calculated as if the higher tax rates were back in place for succeeding years, a step Democrats criticized as camouflaging the bill’s true cost.”

No, ultimately, we were scammed. Although households with incomes above $250,000 will be paying a bit more in taxes now, almost all of the Bush tax cuts have remained in place at a cost the Congressional Budget Office estimates to be at $4 trillion for the next decade.

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/t/taxation/bush_tax_cuts/index.html

February 28, 2013 at 9:23 a.m.
chatt_man said...

Obama personally approved of the plan for Lew and Nabors to propose the sequester to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. They chose the cuts on the list. The sequester was their creation and idea.

Why do we not hear anything about this from Obama on his scare tactic tour?

The Washington Post even awarded Obama four out of four Pinocchio’s for his blame shifting on the sequester.

Careful what you ask for, you might get it, and it might go BOOM!

February 28, 2013 at 9:25 a.m.
alprova said...

Polls taken all over the place show that regardless of what some people claim, it will be the Republicans who will own the sequestration cuts and any fallout that results from them.

Bob Woodward is whining in front of every camera that he was threatened by the White House. What a drama queen.

February 28, 2013 at 9:30 a.m.
degage said...

This WH doesn't like anyone challenging it. Woodward is just letting the people know what the chicago thug in the WH does to anyone brave enough to challenge his agenda.

Al, you are right, the republicans will be blamed because that was the plan in the first place. When Lew proposed the sequester it was to get republicans to cave so Obama could keep spending. Obama has played the blame game since 2007, that is the progressive way. Note I did not say democrat way.

February 28, 2013 at 9:43 a.m.
chatt_man said...

Yes, Al, you are correct. The media will not report any negatives about the current administration that they aren't forced to.

The Obama administration may suck at governing, but they are proficient at thuggery.

February 28, 2013 at 9:55 a.m.
joepulitzer said...

conservative: Drama queen al has a really difficult time reading the Bible while hugging a tree. And he will keep hugging until his lord Obama cuts it into firewood -- like he is trying to do to the entire country.

February 28, 2013 at 10:23 a.m.
conservative said...

Alprova,

"It was easy for me to find your sources because I just typed in the phrases that you copied from these anti Christian websites."

"Then cite them."

gaychristian101.com

http://www.gaychristian101.com/how-do-you-interpret-leviticus-1822-and-2013-man-should-not-lay-with-man.html

"Gay and Lesbian family values" http://webspace.webring.com/people/rc/candy675/LEVITICUS.html gaychurch.org

http://www.gaychurch.org/Gay_and_Christian_YES/the_bible_christianity_and_homosexuality_justin_cannon.htm

These and many others try to justify homosexual behavior contrary to the teaching of the word of God. Were these your sources or would like to cite your favorite blasphemous, anti Christian cite?

February 28, 2013 at 10:29 a.m.
just_wondering said...

Any manager who cannot find a decrease of 2% in the increase in their budget does not deserve to manage even a little league ball team. This is not a cut in the current budget but a cut in the increase of the next budget. I have to wonder if the American peoples "adrenaline rush" from the constant use of scare tactics by this administration will eventually subside and become apathy. We seem to lurch from crisis to crisis like a drunken sailor staggering from bar to bar. As soon as one crisis is dealt with another looms on the horizon.While I do not lay all of the current problems on this administration I do lay all of the scare tactics squarely at Obama's feet.We do all know what finally happened to the boy who cried wolf.

The intractability of the far right to even consider any revenue increases is mirrored on the far left by their refusal to even consider any spending cuts. Both parties are to blame for the current crisis and to point the finger at each other only keeps any compromise from being found. Do the sycophants from either side who post hear really believe that it is only "the other guys" that are at fault? Neither party will receive glowing praise when they stand before the history scholars in the future. Indeed if there is still an America,in any way in it's current form,the scholars will probably get a good laugh and lots of comic relief from our current staggering around.

February 28, 2013 at 10:43 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Alprova notes: "Bob Woodward is whining in front of every camera that he was threatened by the White House. What a drama queen."

Personally, I don’t have a lot of confidence in Bob Woodward’s assessment skills. The guy’s credibility rating went down in my book a number of years ago.

During one of Woodward's TV appearances - Larry King Live - a telephone caller asked him: "Suppose we go to war and go into Iraq and there are no weapons of mass destruction," which I thought was a reasonable question.

I also thought Woodard’s attitude and response to the caller was cocky and irresponsible. He said: "I think the chance of that happening is about zero. There's just too much there."

February 28, 2013 at 10:58 a.m.
conservative said...

alprova,

"Outside of your little closed-minded world, there are many people much like myself who do not view the Bible as "the word of God," who tend to understand that it is a work of mortal men, both when it was compiled, and when it was translated into 3,700 different languages"

Yes, many lost souls like yourself do not view the Bible as "the word of God." However, they are not Christians and like you have no right to call themselves Christians.

Why don't you identify yourself a heathen like Ike?

February 28, 2013 at 10:59 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Just_wondering said: "While I do not lay all of the current problems on this administration I do lay all of the scare tactics squarely at Obama's feet. We do all know what finally happened to the boy who cried wolf.”

You sound be somewhat detached here. Surely, you’re not arguing that no one is going to be hurt by these cuts. If so, I can think think of a number of sectors of the U.S. population that are going to be seriously impacted. In fact, the Washington Post has a pretty good chart outlining what the States are going to be losing, including Tennessee. For starters. . .

Tennessee would lose approximately $1,031,000 in funds that provide meals for seniors.

In Tennessee around 2,590 fewer children will receive vaccines for diseases such as measles, mumps, rubella, tetanus, whooping cough, influenza, and Hepatitis B due to reduced funding for vaccinations of about $177,000.

Up to 800 disadvantaged and vulnerable children could lose access to child care, which is also essential for working parents to hold down a job.

Tennessee will lose approximately $606,000 in funds to help upgrade its ability to respond to public health threats including infectious diseases, natural disasters, and biological, chemical, nuclear, and radiological events.

In addition, Tennessee will lose about $1,480,000 in grants to help prevent and treat substance abuse, resulting in around 700 fewer admissions to substance abuse programs. And the Tennessee State Department of Health will lose about $252,000 resulting in around 6,300 fewer HIV tests.

Tennessee would lose about $2,211,000 in environmental funding to ensure clean water and air quality, as well as prevent pollution from pesticides and hazardous waste. In addition, Tennessee could lose another $1,216,000 in grants for fish and wildlife protection.

In Tennessee, approximately 7,000 civilian Department of Defense employees would be furloughed, reducing gross pay by around $36.9 million in total.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/sequestration-state-impact/

February 28, 2013 at 12:27 p.m.
just_wondering said...

mountainlaurel...so I take it that you are for the status quo of continued deficit spending? A mere 2% cut in the Increase of spending should be able to be cut by even a decent manager. There is plenty of waste in every department of the federal government that even a poor manager should be able to find 2 percent that can be cut from a budget increase. for instance instead of hiring 100 new people he could hire only 98. If that causes a collapse of that department then the department desperately needs a new manager.

February 28, 2013 at 12:54 p.m.
limric said...

Off subject but this needs to said!

Conservative,

Your incessant badgering, name calling and hateful diatribes lend the need for a REALLY important question (s) and no holds barred clarification.

People such as you believe, and I’ve heard say, atheists have no morals. Why, because they lack a moral guide. I know for a fact you believe this, and as such, let me ask you something. As an avowed Christian, chances are very high you look to the Bible is your moral guide, but is that all the Bible, or just some of it? Admit it, it's just the good parts - isn't it? The parts you cherry-pick; because if you wanted to live in a Leviticus-style society (which you quote over and over ad nauseam) where people are stoned or mutilated for insane and trivial reasons…you could just move to Saudi Arabia. Same god isn't it?

So. Just how do you decide which are the good parts and which are the bad in the Bible? What do you use as a moral guide? It’s the Bible, right? Well, obviously this ain't the case. If it were, you would have to accept the bad along with the good, which is clearly what the Bible wants (orders) you to do, otherwise the bad wouldn't be in there in the first place, would it? But no, you don't do that. You defy the Bible, a publication you yourself proclaimed the WORD OF GOD! You conveniently sift out the bad and discard it for the ignorant primitive barbarism it is. In short, you edit the Bible to suit your own sensibilities (or lack thereof). So where do you get the moral guidance to impose your authority (editing) on the word of the Bible? It has to come from a higher source, doesn't it? (These things usually do.) And it does, of course. It comes from you. You are a higher source than the Bible, a much higher source. The quacks who run organized religion don't want you to know or to act upon this because then their influence over Ovis aries like you would be…nonexistent! Why do you think holy men refer to their followers as sheep? Yet the evidence is clear. You sift the good from the bad in the Bible in contradiction to Gods word. You did it against the Bible's will, and you did it all on your own. Whether you like it or not, you have a conscience, which means that you are capable of distinguishing good from evil without the help of edited scriptures, and I have just proven it beyond any shadow of doubt. So, in reality, the Bible is not your moral guide and it does not provide you with any type of compass. You do. And the only faith anyone needs is faith in oneself. Not a book of myths and fairy tales.

Not being a believer I say with the the utmost conviction that Alprova is truer manifestation of Christianity than you could ever dream to be.

Thanks Pat

February 28, 2013 at 1:03 p.m.
patriot1 said...

Fourth quarter economic growth at 0.1%...what's the sequester going to do to Shotgun Biden's summer of recovery 5.0?

February 28, 2013 at 1:05 p.m.
alprova said...

conservative wrote: "gaychristian101.com"

I've never been to that site in my life.

"These and many others try to justify homosexual behavior contrary to the teaching of the word of God. Were these your sources or would like to cite your favorite blasphemous, anti Christian cite?"

Sir, you accused me of quoting material from that site. I didn't even address your homosexual rantings at all last night, except to accuse you of being a closet queen, which I am firmly convinced that you are and that you will always be.

February 28, 2013 at 1:08 p.m.
alprova said...

conservative wrote: "Yes, many lost souls like yourself do not view the Bible as "the word of God." However, they are not Christians and like you have no right to call themselves Christians."

Who cares what you think? I'm not aware that you are the one person on Earth who has any right to declare who is Christian and who is not. Shut up already.

"Why don't you identify yourself a heathen like Ike?"

Why don't you go find a coke bottle, sit on it, and spin yourself around like a 45RPM record and get a thrill for once in your life?

February 28, 2013 at 1:12 p.m.
conservative said...

alprova,

That site, the other two and many other homosexual sites all make the same excuses for homosexual behavior as you do.You also used Wickedpedia

Who are you trying to bamboozle?

February 28, 2013 at 1:14 p.m.
conservative said...

alprova,

"Outside of your little closed-minded world, there are many people much like myself who do not view the Bible as "the word of God," who tend to understand that it is a work of mortal men, both when it was compiled, and when it was translated into 3,700 different languages"

So, why do you keep citing the Bible when you blaspheme?

February 28, 2013 at 1:17 p.m.
conservative said...

alprova said...

conservative wrote: "Yes, many lost souls like yourself do not view the Bible as "the word of God." However, they are not Christians and like you have no right to call themselves Christians."

"Who cares what you think? I'm not aware that you are the one person on Earth who has any right to declare who is Christian and who is not. Shut up already"

A poor strawman!

However, as I have stated numerous times no assembly of Christians would ever accept you as a member knowing what you have written.

Why the charade?

February 28, 2013 at 1:24 p.m.
Easy123 said...

limric should get 'Post of the Year' for the post at 1:03 PM.

February 28, 2013 at 1:30 p.m.
Easy123 said...

alprova,

conservative has feelings towards you. You are the only poster he has any interaction with. I truly believe that he gets off on debating you.

I think you may be correct about conservative being a closet homosexual.

February 28, 2013 at 1:37 p.m.
limric said...

I actually paraphrased and higly edited bits (like the good book) of Sanskrit, er I mean transcripts (got keep that good ole religion in there).

Hence the 'Thanks Pat' at the bottom.

But thanks Sneezy - er I mean Easy. :-D

February 28, 2013 at 1:39 p.m.
jesse said...

I wish con man would get off the homosexual wagon for a while and get on self righteousness and holier than thou stuff!

Might get him thinking and have himself a self awareness moment!!

He might realize he is a text book case of monomania!

February 28, 2013 at 2:10 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Just_wondering notes: “A mere 2% cut in the Increase of spending should be able to be cut by even a decent manager. There is plenty of waste in every department of the federal government that even a poor manager should be able to find 2 percent that can be cut from a budget increase.”

From what I’ve observed, I don’t think we can count on U.S. politicians cutting waste and being “decent” managers. Indeed, I just read that the one of the Republican’s top Senators John Cornyn is promising his colleagues that the Pentagon’s budget will be going up not down.

February 28, 2013 at 2:23 p.m.
MickeyRat said...

I took a bath last night. Hope you all like me on the clock. I think I'm oh so cute.


Russell (Limric) Brand Invites Conservative and Maximus over to say hi.

Which one is Connie? Which one is Maxi? God wants to know. OH WAIT, he already does....

February 28, 2013 at 2:35 p.m.
nucanuck said...

Almost everyone would like to see (their version of) budget cuts. Almost no one wants to see job losses. Budget cuts are the very definition of job losses and in a fragile economy, those cuts will likely lead to negative GDP numbers. Maybe that is OK, but it is and will always be unacceptable to either party when in power.

The unstated intention of government planners is to inflate away debt until it fits with the ability to pay. Financial repression has been underway for many months with the sole purpose of lassening the impact of the rising debt. Will it work? Maybe not, but it is the best hope of a lot of highly educated people who think this stuff up.

We have a lot of trouble understanding these concepts, even fractional reserve banking, because if we, individually, tried similar tactics, we would go to jail. We have a double standard and that is not going to change.

Without growth, debt is not sustainable. We are headed toward a no-growth world. There is no pleasant way to get from here to there.

February 28, 2013 at 2:44 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Tu_quoque says: "Odd that you remember that but didn’t remember . . . a PBS interview with Woodward."

Your comment only reinforces my thoughts about Woodward being cocky in the first place. He could have responded to the caller in variety ways instead of making his all knowing statement: "I think the chance of that happening is about zero. There's just too much there."

As for observations, I also recall reading that President Reagan once called Woodward a liar. Apparently, President Reagan along with a lot of other people firmly believed that Bob Woodward had fabricated an alleged deathbed interview with former CIA Director William Casey.

Tu_quoque says: “That he [President Obama] is presenting these estimates so as to elicit the most emotional responses from his low information supporters.”

I believe it is you who is the low information supporter here. With the exception of abortion and contraception, a majority of these Republican politicians have made it clear over and over again that they’re just not interested in issues that impact the public and public health – especially Tennessee’s House Republicans. Their vote against the renewal of the Violence Against Women Act is the latest example:

WASHINGTON — All seven Tennessee Republicans in the U.S. House today voted against renewal of the Violence Against Women Act.

That group includes U.S. Rep. Chuck Fleischmann of Ooltewah and U.S. Rep. Scott DesJarlais of Jasper.

The Volunteer State’s two Democratic House members — U.S. Reps. Jim Cooper of Nashville and Steve Cohen of Memphis — supported the legislation, siding with the majority. . .

. . . Now headed to the Oval Office, the bill reauthorizes various dating and domestic abuse initiatives. They include rape prevention programs, HIV/AIDS counseling and specialized training for law enforcement officials handling sexual assault cases.

February 28, 2013 at 3:15 p.m.
fairmon said...

mountainlaurel said the sequester would affect Tn as follows....

Tennessee would lose approximately $1,031,000 in funds that provide meals for seniors.

In Tennessee around 2,590 fewer children will receive vaccines for diseases such as measles, mumps, rubella, tetanus, whooping cough, influenza, and Hepatitis B due to reduced funding for vaccinations of about $177,000.

Up to 800 disadvantaged and vulnerable children could lose access to child care, which is also essential for working parents to hold down a job.

Tennessee will lose approximately $606,000 in funds to help upgrade its ability to respond to public health threats including infectious diseases, natural disasters, and biological, chemical, nuclear, and radiological events.

In addition, Tennessee will lose about $1,480,000 in grants to help prevent and treat substance abuse, resulting in around 700 fewer admissions to substance abuse programs. And the Tennessee State Department of Health will lose about $252,000 resulting in around 6,300 fewer HIV tests.

Tennessee would lose about $2,211,000 in environmental funding to ensure clean water and air quality, as well as prevent pollution from pesticides and hazardous waste. In addition, Tennessee could lose another $1,216,000 in grants for fish and wildlife protection.

In Tennessee, approximately 7,000 civilian Department of Defense employees would be furloughed, reducing gross pay by around $36.9 million in total. [GOOD, duplicate that in every state]

It appears Tennessee and I am sure other states needs to suck it up pay their own way instead of the federal government continuing to put future generations further in debt. When people know the impact of their demands they are more likely to make intelligent decisions. My blood pressure goes up every time I watch Obama talk about how more more revenue is needed and spending increased. Increasing taxes would be OK if the out of control spending is reduced. I have the same reaction to the spending decisions they say will be made in military and defense spending, why make dumb reductions instead of smart and logical ones?

February 28, 2013 at 4:34 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Fairmon says: "It appears Tennessee and I am sure other states needs to suck it up pay their own way instead of the federal government continuing to put future generations further in debt."

Sure, sure, Fairmon. It’s easy for you and some of these reckless irresponsible Republican politicians to say stuff like this since you’re not among those 2,590 infants and young children in Tennessee who need the vaccines for diseases like measles, mumps, rubella, tetanus, whooping cough, influenza, and Hepatitis B. Yes, I suppose the only issues that might actually impact people like you will be things like unsanitary water, or dirty unhealthy air, or contaminated food, or some kind of natural disaster like a tornado.

February 28, 2013 at 4:55 p.m.
alprova said...

conservative wrote: "That site, the other two and many other homosexual sites all make the same excuses for homosexual behavior as you do.You also used Wickedpedia. Who are you trying to bamboozle?"

Sir, you are absolutely lying through the tips of your fingers. I did not consult one single site in my response to you.

Can you not read? Did you not read my post last night to you? I did not even address your homosexual rants last night. Everyone knows you are a closet case. There is no need for me to address a thing you type regarding that subject.

February 28, 2013 at 5:01 p.m.
conservative said...

alprova:

"Leviticus is traditionally believed to have been compiled by Moses, or alternatively believed that the material in it goes back to his time, but Biblical scholars have dated material contained in Leviticus sometime after Moses walked the Earth. Scholars are practically unanimous that the book had a long period of growth and that it reached its present form around 538 BC."

and

"The Holiness code contained in Leviticus was to be regarded as a separate document that was later incorporated into Leviticus, with the Holiness authors editing the book with the Priestlycode."

and

"Homosexuality was an abomination cited by the authors of Leviticus for any man seeking to be a high priest. Outside of that context, who knows?"

alprova said:

"conservative wrote: "That site, the other two and many other homosexual sites all make the same excuses for homosexual behavior as you do.You also used Wickedpedia. Who are you trying to bamboozle?"

"Sir, you are absolutely lying through the tips of your fingers. I did not consult one single site in my response to you."

my words:

"That site, the other two and many other homosexual sites all make the same excuses for homosexual behavior as you do.You also used Wickedpedia"

"Who are you trying to bamboozle?"

February 28, 2013 at 5:26 p.m.
conservative said...

alprova,

"There is no need for me to address a thing you type regarding that subject." at February 28, 2013 at 5:01 p.m.

Let us see how long you keep your word on that.

February 28, 2013 at 5:53 p.m.
fairmon said...

mountainlaurel said... Fairmon says: "It appears Tennessee and I am sure other states needs to suck it up pay their own way instead of the federal government continuing to put future generations further in debt."

Sure, sure, Fairmon. It’s easy for you and some of these reckless irresponsible Republican politicians to say stuff like this since you’re not among those 2,590 infants and young children in Tennessee who need the vaccines for diseases like measles, mumps, rubella, tetanus, whooping cough, influenza, and Hepatitis B. Yes, I suppose the only issues that might actually impact people like you will be things like unsanitary water, or dirty unhealthy air, or contaminated food, or some kind of natural disaster like a tornado.

I didn't say those things should not be provided but that Tennesseans should pay for them instead of the federal government borrowing more to send to Tennessee. It is easy for you and others in both parties to say we must provide things which I have no objection to..but, pay for them, quit financing those children's future to provide them. Tennessee has an EPA and Chattanooga has an EPA with both often duplicating the federal EPA..why? If that dumb butt president you love so much and his colleagues and the republicans cannot figure out how to reduce the cost of government without reducing those critical items they use to scare people they should be criminally charged and sent to any country that will accept them. Your denial of reality is not unlike those that cannot and will not accept that this fiscal issue is destructive. BTW....there is no noticeable economic slump in D.C.

February 28, 2013 at 6:03 p.m.
nucanuck said...

tq,

Are you sure that you have a clear, in depth understanding of the economic principles about which you speak? You may get to see the economic collapse you allude to, but the causes will be shared by all. There will be no emergent victorious political philosophy, only mutiple failures on all sides. Capitalism itself will be called into question and the union will be hard pressed to remain as one.

Shooting off your blame thrower makes you look shallow and poorly informed. Are you?

February 28, 2013 at 6:13 p.m.
alprova said...

conservative...please alleviate your suffering by putting the Bible into context, quit manually manipulating yourself to online porn, and take a trip to a gay bar and find someone to hook up with. Marry him if you feel so inclined.

Never in my life have I ever encountered someone so sexually frustrated as you clearly are.

Sheesh....

February 28, 2013 at 6:50 p.m.
DJHBRAINERD said...

It has been fun having cable ,while on vacation , listening to the talking heads telling me the sky is falling. We will have old people in the streets , convicts turned loose, teachers laid off, children dead , borders will be wide open and on and on. It is good entertainment to say the least. Don't believe the hype! It is a reduction of a future increase, so why can't we do the same things we did last year with the same amount of money? The fed says inflation is at zero while they print billions a month buying bonds (QE3). I did not recieve a cost of living increase for the last several years due to the economy and got a payroll tax increase this year and well I'm still trudging right along. Doing the same things I used to do with slightly less money. To me it is a non issue but of course I will be flying back on tuesday so maybe I'll rethink my position when I get to the airport and there aren't TSA agents everywhere. since hopefully that is all I will be needing from the government in the forseeable future. Untill then I think I'll mix another rum drink, take it keysee, and watch all the doom and gloom on the tube later tonight. And of course I'll make sure to watch cnn and fox so that fox can tell me about reduction in military rediness and cnn can go on and on about the poor, the elderly and the children!

February 28, 2013 at 7:03 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

How was the diving?

February 28, 2013 at 7:11 p.m.
DJHBRAINERD said...

It has been great. First day was a little scetchy with 4-6 ft swells but that adds to the adventure. Unless you are one of the unlucky ones chumming over the rail! I got 2 tanks on the spiegle grove today with calm seas and great viz while finishing up my advanced cert and will be trying to get on the Vandenburg tomorrow or saturday if this front will get out of here. Thanks for asking. I always enjoy key largo , it is so laid back. Can't wait to get to schooners warf for a cheesburger and oysters. Have a great day and try to stay warm now that it is only 70 :)

February 28, 2013 at 7:22 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Ahhhh Spiegle Grove... although I have advanced open water I have not yet been on that dive.

We are still in Garrison Bight-went from 20 mph winds from the north to less than 5 from the south in a matter of minutes, with sudden calm. Very weird...

Off shore diving in marginal conditions? Last time I dove with my sister getting back on the boat was a trip! Being lifted out, then dunked under repeatedly while carrying 50 lbs on your back; we had a lot of laughs and bruises when we got back (small middle aged women)

February 28, 2013 at 7:31 p.m.
DJHBRAINERD said...

It is very large. Takes a couple tanks just to see the whole thing without penetration. It is a great dive with lots of coral. Seeing the American flag waving in the current really makes it worth it! That and the cranes covered in coral are images I will allways remember. You should rent a car and stay at the pelican MM100 bayside (divers room very small 60$ a night) and get it in while you're down here. Or do 1 tank with the Benwood wreck for the 2nd. Ocean divers does it a couple times a week and the benwood is a great wreck. It colided with another vessle while running dark during WW2. With so much marine life, it alone is worth the drive up. In my opinion Largo is the best when it comes to diving simply for the variety of reefs and wrecks that is why I usually start there to get my fix then finish on Key west. Another great dive is the Eagle off Islamorada but you have to call around to get a charter to go there. I am at Looe Key tonight and they already said they won't be running tomorrow am so maybe southpoint on front st will go on thier night dive tomorrow night.

February 28, 2013 at 7:47 p.m.
conservative said...

alprova,

"Outside of your little closed-minded world, there are many people much like myself who do not view the Bible as "the word of God," who tend to understand that it is a work of mortal men, both when it was compiled, and when it was translated into 3,700 different languages"

So, why do you keep citing the Bible when you blaspheme?

February 28, 2013 at 7:52 p.m.
patriot1 said...

This intellectual giant says we're going to lose 170 million jobs due to sequestration. Anyone want to guess how many people are employed in this country, total?

February 28, 2013 at 8:02 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Sounds great, but it will have to wait for another trip, Our gear is in storage and our skills rusty. But hey-something to look forward to, Gotta get home- money is running out...

February 28, 2013 at 8:08 p.m.
DJHBRAINERD said...

Have a safe trip. I hope the locks still work after the devastating world ending budget nonincrease decrease takes effect!

February 28, 2013 at 8:18 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Fairmon says: “I didn't say those things should not be provided but that Tennesseans should pay for them instead of the federal government borrowing more to send to Tennessee. . . quit financing those children's future them.”

I believe Tennessee’s politicians have already demonstrated they’re not interested in the needs of its residents, especially when it comes to investing in children. Like a lot of other “red” states, Tennessee is one of those infamous “welfare dependent states” that gets a lot more from the Federal government than it pays in federal taxes. Indeed, if wasn’t for all of those "blue states" helping out Tennessee’s residents, the state would be in a lot of trouble – God forbid if Chattanooga should lose the tourists along the income that it gets from sales taxes, which may happen once the Republicans start fracking the mountains

Fairmon says: “Tennessee has an EPA and Chattanooga has an EPA with both often duplicating the federal EPA..why?”

Please. Republican politicians have a disgraceful reputation when it comes to the public safety and environmental issues. One only has to look at what has been occuring locally to see this – but maybe you didn’t note that Hamilton County was recently fined by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for dumping more than 354 gallons of raw sewage into the Tennessee River.

And then, of course, there is the fracking issue and the reckless political games Tennessee’s Republican politicians are playing with the water issues:

"Injecting nitrogen and water into a gas well in karst [cave and sinkhole-riddled] geology is bad," says Renee Hoyos, executive director of the Tennessee Clean Water Network. "It's bad for groundwater, drinking water and surface water."

. . . Tennessee's new rules don't even require drillers to test wells or notify neighbors unless they pump in more than 200,000 gallons of water, Hoyos said.

. . . And there's the question of Chattanooga Shale itself, which forms dangerous radon when exposed on a roadside or in a basement.

In New York, environmental advocates say waste fracking fluid contained levels of radioactive radium and other elements 100 to 1,000 times higher than federal drinking water standards.

Anne Davis and Gwen Parker, attorneys with the Southern Environmental Law Center, are fighting Tennessee's new gas and drilling rules -- which came about just as the state was streamlining regulatory agencies in the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation . . .

"On Sept. 20, the oil and gas board approved rules and then ceased existence and was merged with the water board as of Oct. 1, so it's now the water and oil and gas board," Davis said."

February 28, 2013 at 8:44 p.m.
fairmon said...

ml said....

I believe Tennessee’s politicians have already demonstrated they’re not interested in the needs of its residents, especially when it comes to investing in children. Like a lot of other “red” states, Tennessee is one of those infamous “welfare dependent states” that gets a lot more from the Federal government than it pays in federal taxes.

That is even more justification that Tennessee should pay it's own way. Obviously those blue states aren't kicking in enough to help out those sorry red states, if they were the debt and deficit would not be growing so fast. Once people in Tennessee and those other blue states realize their politicians are not doing the right thing they can elect someone like Obama or Bloomberg in New York. If Tennessee wants it they should pay for it, if they are too stupid to know what they should have then let them be stupid.

Behavioral scientists have found humans to engage in herding. We tend to think and act like the majority of other people we observe, rather than being completely independent in our thoughts. ML...keep reading, listening to and parroting the scare tactics and being the lemming they want you to be and drown in the debt.

February 28, 2013 at 11:36 p.m.
fairmon said...

mountainlaurel....

There is a lot of disinformation around fracking. The federal EPA says it can be done safely and has issued the criteria required to assure it is done safelly. A lot of the criticism comes from the old technology, a typical environmentalist extremist ploy to get their way and to get in the way of progress they don't agree with.

Why would you object to those Tennesseans that are as stupid as you suggested in earlier atatements destroying themselves and ridding the earth of their ignorance? Why do you feel so compelled to save people from themselves? Apparently there would be far fewer republicans to get in the way of those socialist tendencies of the blue states if those stupid republicans were allowed to do themselves in. It appears you are pro-choice unless you disagree with the choice. That old constitution is a pain in the neck isn't it?

February 28, 2013 at 11:42 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Fairmon concludes: “Behavioral scientists have found humans to engage in herding. We tend to think and act like the majority of other people we observe, rather than being completely independent in our thoughts. ML. keep reading, listening to and parroting the scare tactics and being the lemming they want you to be and drown in the debt.”

Since I appear to be having “blue” thoughts while living among a predominately “red” herd, I don’t see how you can conclude that I’m a victim of “herding.” Indeed, it seems to me that if I were a victim of “herding," I wouldn’t be having all of these “blue” thoughts. I would be reading, listening to and parroting the scare tactics being peddled by the “red” herd. In other words, I would always be thinking “red” thoughts like you do.

Fairmon asks: “Why do you feel so compelled to save people from themselves? Apparently there would be far fewer republicans to get in the way of those socialist tendencies of the blue states if those stupid republicans were allowed to do themselves in. It appears you are pro-choice unless you disagree with the choice. That old constitution is a pain in the neck isn't it?”

Since you’re the one demanding a justification for my thoughts and political opinions, I’d say you’re the one who is having difficulty in tolerating people who do not share your choices. I’ve never felt compelled to save people from themselves, but I do believe in certain basic human rights, social programs that promote the general welfare of our citizenry, and the need for fairness when it comes to governing, which means that I do have certain expectations when it comes to public policies and political leadership. You on the other hand reference things like the constitution, but clearly object to promoting the general welfare of our citizenry and the right of ordinary citizens to oversee matters that impact their lives.

Fairmon says: “There is a lot of disinformation around fracking. The federal EPA says it can be done safely and has issued the criteria required to assure it is done safelly. A lot of the criticism comes from the old technology, a typical environmentalist extremist ploy to get their way and to get in the way of progress they don't agree with.”

I note that you’ve opted to make few general statements about fracking instead of actually addressing the specific concerns that many Tennessee residents have in regard to this particular situation. You say the Federal EPA says that fracking can be done safely and has issued the criteria required to assure it is done safely, but totally ignore the fact that the fracking regulations set up by Tennessee’s lawmakers are lenient, full of loopholes, and do not assure that fracking would be done safely in Tennessee. If Tennessee lawmakers want to assure safe fracking so to speak, why did they set up such loose regulations and the type of loopholes that would make it difficult for anyone to provide adequate oversight?

March 1, 2013 at 11:47 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.