Comments by rh_02eat1

Written on Study: Global warming is causing more storms in Ventura County :

in response to TomcatDriver:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

But for their grace, you have a voice...

Written on Incentive program sought to protect whales and cut pollution :

I can't wait for enviro science pastor guy to weigh in with some command and control suggestions for the elitist regulators to try.

Written on Anne McFeatters: Tax return stance says everything:

in response to VintageRacer:

"...it would show how wildly successful Bain Capital is in saving and creation more jobs..."

HAHAHA. Romney Admits Bain Capital didn't create jobs

"Bain wasn't always a passive investor. As the Priorities USA and the Obama campaign have been pointing out, there are numerous examples of Bain bustouts—cases in which Bain bought a company and took over its management, loading it up with debt, extracting millions, and letting it crash."

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/05...

http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-...

Romney’s Bain Capital invested in companies that moved jobs overseas

http://www.washingtonpost.com/busines...

Pretty un-American

And how much of our tax dollars has Obama sent overseas? This is a specious argument.

Written on Anne McFeatters: Tax return stance says everything:

in response to TomcatDriver:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

5 trillion to by 172,000 jobs, U3 at 8.3%, and you're still under the effects of he koolaid, you know how silly your post sound to any rational reader?

Written on Anne McFeatters: Tax return stance says everything:

in response to Lurker_X:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Lurker, we're way off the path here but Obama's school records are fair game, Harry Reid has just made the use of here say and rumor the minimum for discourse. The article is further evidence of media peddling Democrat's mud as legitimate news. So too, the rumors by Obama's classmates that he was not on campus and likely garnered degree as a favor if he even has them is as valid unil proven otherwise as the questions about Romney's taxes. It is really no wonder print media is in decline when they shill for Dems like this.

As for the referenced post at the Harvard Law Review, it looks like little more than high priced cover by his handlers to me.

Written on Parker: Is it un-American to be a Christian? :

in response to MW21:

Lets be truthful - this is odd, since most Americans consider themselves Christians. Many non-Christians dislike Christianity because it the religion seems bent on limiting human freedom, compassion, and knowledge.

As long as the Westboro Baptist Church exists, Christianity will be a target. As long as Christians rely on the Bible to condemn homosexuality and deny evolution, there will be resistance to that religion. The reluctance of many Christians to deny reality in favor of fiction (such as the origin stories in Genesis) makes their religion look silly and outmoded.

Westboro Baptist is a sect, they picket Christians too, your point is specious.

Written on Erbe: Now, let's have gun control laws:

in response to ENVIROSCIGUY:

WINC: Could you tell this" irresponsible liberal" what gun laws you would support and what ones you wouldn't? How about closing the "gun show loophole" that CJ doesn't think exists? Only 6 states require gun shows sellers to do a background check on customers. That's why 40% of all guns are NOT purchased at gun stores. http://www.csgv.org/issues-and-campai...

How about a ten bullet max on magazines and clips? How about requiring trigger locks, safety courses, and maintenance lessons? I know Heller v DC (another 5-4 decision) basically overturned gun lock laws and loaded gun prohibitions, but do you think such laws are unreasonable?

On another note, you want citizens who wish to exercise their rights to own firearms to attend a safety course and gomthrou background checks before they do, but you stand in support of those that say asking someone to present a photo ID to vote is an attempt to deny them the right to vote. Your logic is inconsistent don't you think?

Written on Erbe: Now, let's have gun control laws:

in response to ENVIROSCIGUY:

WINC: Could you tell this" irresponsible liberal" what gun laws you would support and what ones you wouldn't? How about closing the "gun show loophole" that CJ doesn't think exists? Only 6 states require gun shows sellers to do a background check on customers. That's why 40% of all guns are NOT purchased at gun stores. http://www.csgv.org/issues-and-campai...

How about a ten bullet max on magazines and clips? How about requiring trigger locks, safety courses, and maintenance lessons? I know Heller v DC (another 5-4 decision) basically overturned gun lock laws and loaded gun prohibitions, but do you think such laws are unreasonable?

If someone threatens as in a home invasion or other attack, they won't typically wait for you to unlock your trigger. When the store wonders in LA during the Rodney King Riots were defending their property from looters, I don't think trigger locks or 10 round clips would have been looked at favorably then. How many lives were saved by the availability and use of weapons. I find your premise specious and your promotion of further erosions of our liberty offensive.

Written on Erbe: Now, let's have gun control laws:

in response to pilgrim2014#403694:

At least you are honest. I'd give it about 350 million to 1 that martial law is ever declared and I don't mean "ever in our lifetime"...I mean ever. That said, I'm not too worried about not being able to get an AK-47. Besides if martial law were ever declared, wouldn't everbody basically be on lockdown? The only armed people would be the military and police in which case you wouldn't stand a chance with or without an AK. I'm trying hard to see any kind of relevant point with your response. The simple truth that you all don't seem to want to admit is that nobody who is living legit needs an assault rifle, full body armor etc. In the meantime, people who do want them and aim to use them leave us as sitting ducks. The optimal balance would be to restrict those types of weapons that cause MASS casualties in MINIMAL time. Why is that so hard to grasp?

We have precedent in abuse of citizens without cause, asks the Japanese Americans about that. Also, when there is no law, as in LA following the Rodney King verdict, the law everyone respects is the law of force, those with weapons at that time survived the riots mostly intact.

Written on Villarruel: Affordable health care hinges on the fall election:

in response to ENVIROSCIGUY:

I don't think the GOP will be able to repeal the ACA even if Romney and the Republicans win. Our government gridlock has reduced "hope and change" to nothing more than political rhetoric (for either side).

At least the Dems hope for changes that will save lives, improve health, and help the poorest segments of our society.

Do the neocons really hope we "let people die" (as shouted to Ron Paul at a debate)?

Enviro science right-think dude, I've lived this, I know what it is like to participate in health care decisions that we're either years of debt for children or the inevitable death of a parent, been there and done that. This isn't theory or games to me, it is personally relevant. Further, I have given strict guidelines to my loved ones, there are to be no heroics or exhaustive measures to preserve my life that would deplete the small amount in my estate that would be better spent by those I will leave behind. If I had more resources the answer or directive might be different, but it is a matter of dignity. I will not ask anyone to labor for my benefit without fair payment nor ask another to pay my debt. I will choose to live and die within my means.

You on the other hand extol another morality which I find offensive. You would suppose the right to ask me to borrow funds to provide choices to others I would not support for myself. Your premise is antithetical to the principles of liberty and personal responsibility which made this nation great. Your supposed higher morality is a joke.

Written on Ojai women want every household to donate $100 to schools :

I've done my part for VUSD, pulled the kids and put them into private school, much happier with the product and the people. Should turn state funding into a voucher and let those of lesser means have the same choice, oh but that's a dirty word isn't it?

Written on County pension fund fits the trend with flat returns:

in response to StillSickOfIt:

THE EXACT POINT I MADE IN MY INITIAL BLOG.

No the point of your original post was:

"In the public sector there are no check and balances, if you blow your budget simply cut back services and/or raise taxes. That is exactly what we are seeing today."

I provided a link that showed the County recently set the budget without any major cuts in services. The opposite of what you posted. Then you posted:

"And its (SIC) a complete joke for deputy's(SIC) to pay ONLY 2.5% toward their lavish pension. Previous articles about the CHP state their pension cost near 40% of a officers pay. VCSD is probably close to that.

At the minimum they should be paying 20% of their pay.

Same goes for the fire department. And you wonder why we are sooooo broke!"

I posted a link that showed Ventura County is not broke. The opposite of what you posted.

In the last one, you were writing about VCSD deputies and the fire department, now you try to say you were talking about other cities and the State as a whole? Please...

I am not going to get into a back and forth with you and risk getting my comments removed but it is the same old story with you. You post misleading and false statements and then when called on it, you start to squirm.

You mean to say "we're not broke" while citing an 84% funded without citing that we're banking on 7.5% average returns on investments. I think there are some rosy projections here.

Written on County pension fund fits the trend with flat returns:

in response to Vox_Conscientia:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

This is a false argument. Nobody is discounting the value of some public sector employees, the question is compensation and benefits. Public sector unions have ripped us off through the unholy alliance with the democratic party. We may not be able to break the contracts for current but there are strategies. Term all current contracts, if you want to retire with current benefits, see you later. Start fresh and let time begin to erode the debt. But let's stop accruing more in debt than our children can afford or should have to pay just so Steve Bennett can get elected.

Written on Walters: Unfunded pension liabilities threaten credit rating:

We need to have a Democrat tax, let those that are responsible pay the bill.

Written on Elias: Schwarzenegger's apt warning to state GOP :

in response to ENVIROSCIGUY:

I guess you didn't bother to read the FACTS & NUMBERS I posted, so here's the redacted version:

BLUE STATES SUPPORT RED STATES BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PROGRAM OF WEALTH REDISTRIBUTION CONTROLLED BY A SENATE WHERE ALASKA HAS AS MANY VOTES AS CALIFORNIA.

Neither America or California is BROKE. Here's a cartoon version of THAT story: http://www.storyofstuff.org/movies-al...

I DARE you to take 20 minutes out of your day and watch it.

I took your dare, you owe me for that. Question is, you seem bright but I am not sure how bright anyone can be and still find value in that video, it is mistaken in so many ways.

How about the claim that taxes pay for the things that made this country great, like the EPA and Social Security, really? I would have considered a tripartite government with equal branches, the rule of law, free enterprise, our Republican form of government from the people serving as electors. How can one suggest the other two with a straight face?

The EPA is now one of the most corrupt agencies using government largess to fund science as a means of driving regulation. The process corrupts those involved to the extent people no longer trust scientist, once the most trusted professions. But their actions in accepting money is return for their credibility has been to their own demise from that lofty position.

SSN was from its inception a means of introducing Socialism to us; it was sold to our parents while in shock from a Central Bank induced Depression using populist rhetoric and is now threatening our fiscal stability as a nation.
The video suggest subsidies as being appropriate for forward looking or shall I say Proggessive favored industries, I suppose in the model that the Messiah Obama has taken rewarding his friends while wasting the money taken from our life energy in the form of taxes. How about we stop subsidies for all industries, if you can't compete go broke and let the best ideas win in the market.

Further, the video decried tax money spent on defense, but tell me, what does the Constitution indicate the proper role of the federal government is for if not defense. Now, I take issue with both parties here, I would support a strong defense BUT I only support deployment for the purpose of laying waste to our ene,is in a just cause of defense and then coming home with no nation building or reparations afterward, no more niceness, just waste them and come home. Also, no foreign aid, let the despots fall to tinder the weight of the fury of their people, it is unconscionable that our tax money would pay despots to subject their citizens or harass their neighbors.

Too much else here and it is time to stop. Before I do I will say a few things about your posts. You have to be employed in education or some other form.of public service, who else would find value in that video or postulate your various positions?

You mention that .79 cents of each dollar is returned by the federal government, but why do we expect them to take and return anything, isn't that what's wrong witH Washington?

You mention AK having as many votes as CA, but I don't guess it bothers you that MA, RI, DL, NH, etc. also have this representation in the US Senate because they are Progressive.

Written on Elias: Schwarzenegger's apt warning to state GOP :

Arnold can keep his advice, as the state bumps up against insolvency there will be a sea-change in political will.

Written on Largest public pension fund earns dismal 1 percent :

What (name calling removed) put the taxpayers on the hook for less than 7 1/2 % per year gain? Oh, yes that would be the Democratic geniuses who are bought and paid by the public employee unions. This is why we need to stop collective bargaining for all public employees.

Written on Robinson: The GOP's crime against voters:

in response to eng42:

What a croc! Where is there any indication that the
"legitimacy of our Republic" was under any kind of threat?

The republic has seen the rise of the imperial presidency with Obama, Presidential Decree becomes law of the land, citizens are forced into commerce even if they choose not to participate. No serious lover of liberty is without concern for the erosion of our liberty under Obama.

As for the question on Seals hitting back, there are a few links:
http://www.mrctv.org/videos/navy-seal...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/artic...

The second link has the best info from Seal Team 6 members, pretty upset with the portrait of the mission and of them by the WH seeking glory.

Written on Robinson: The GOP's crime against voters:

in response to TomcatDriver:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

More of the same, 200 miles, come on, nobody has to drive more than they might have to for medical care or groceries to get state ID.

Note how fast and lose you are with facts, not that you know what a fact is, you just like the word I think.

Written on Robinson: The GOP's crime against voters:

in response to TomcatDriver:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Pretty easy to get that remedied, no reason to stop states that wish to protect the integrity of the polling process.

Written on Robinson: The GOP's crime against voters:

in response to ENVIROSCIGUY:

As LBJ told Bill Moyers after just signing the Voting Rights Act, the South had been handed over to Republicans for 50 years. http://presidentialrecordings.rotunda...

Since then, the conservatives (in their effort to conserve institutionalized racism) have used all kinds of "southern strategies" to avenge the "treachery of one of their own".

LBJ had to reject the nomination, another Kennedy (and a whole bunch of black leaders) had to be killed, a convention in Chicago had to be turned into a riot, and one election had to be outright stolen. Then IT happened, and a Northern Democrat finally became President (mostly because of another Texan - GWB).

LBJ's prediction was cut short by 9 years, because Southern blacks "got out to vote". Some whites in the Peripheral South voted for Obama, but the Deep South whites said "Heck No". http://www.southernstudies.org/2008/1...

Since then, the Deep South has taken their frustrations out on mountain tops, women, and the LGBT community. They have also told their Peripheral neighbors to "fix the problem" and spread this strategy to the Northern states hit worst by unemployment.

Some of you "blame the immigrants for everything" people have been lured into their clutches. Some of you "believe the Breitbart conspiracy theories" folks also have been captured. But this stuff only REALLY matters in the swing states. Can they suppress the voter turnouts THERE? If so, the South will have risen once again - but "unfortunately" in a year when the Republican candidate is a Yankee.

You watched too much of Dan Blather and his ilk for far too long, you are incorherant in your arguments.

Written on Robinson: The GOP's crime against voters:

in response to eng42:

WHAT does that havew to do with today and making voting very difficult for some people?
The Southern racists all left the Democratic party after 1964

Simply not true, you've only changed the definition. The plantation owners and keepers remain Democrats to this day.

Written on Robinson: The GOP's crime against voters:

in response to TomcatDriver:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

You are full of yourself, even indigents can get a state ID, quit trying to confuse the issue.

Written on Robinson: The GOP's crime against voters:

in response to Decline2State:

Not to be obtuse, but I'm not sure I understand your comment on the current guy in charge and blaming the past. However, I do agree that we all need to work together on the future.

Surely you jest in suggesting you do not understand the reference to "the guy in charge". To help decode he obvious, the speaker s referring to President Obama whom he correctly indicates only takes responsibility for dates with girls that did not exists, inventing techniques for stretching every bit of smoke from the pot he lit, killing Osama (too bad the Navy Seals hit back on that one) and saving us for certain doom, after all, he is the Messiah. As for working together, have you noticed how the GOP while in control of the house has allowed Democrats to offer amendments to bills being considered yet in the Senate the Dems won't allow anything to happen at all, no amendments and not even the ability to vote. If you want to work together get your party leaders to stop hijacking the process.

Written on Robinson: The GOP's crime against voters:

in response to TomcatDriver:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Nobody is suggesting a drivers license as a requirement for voting, we are simply suggesting the same thing one might need for a myriad of legal or constitutionally protected activities. I can't by alcohol, a gun or attend some events including the NAACP meeting without presenting a legal picture ID. Why should voting be any different? Voting is a right we should all cherish and seek to hold sacred; one vote per citizen voted by that citizen. A requirement to present a lawful picture ID is the minimum we should all expect to preserve the legitimacy of our Republic.

Written on Nonprofit gets green light to build BMX track in Ventura:

This is great news, love that we provide activities for kids.

Written on Uncertainty surrounds Homeowner Bill of Rights:

Typical progressive lunacy, where is tomcat calling us names for questioning the brilliance of our Democratic masters on this though?

Written on Nation divided over health care, or is it bridge to unity?:

in response to AngryChihuahua:

It's interesting that no one mentions how the insurance companies have been pretty much stealing your money. Huge premiums, huge deductibles. Then when you get sick, they kick you off! It's a ridiculous when your health insurance premium is higher than your mortgage. Is it because the cost of health care is so high? Or is it because the insurance companies take a huge chunk of your premiums to pay executive salaries. Just for kicks you should google health insurance CEO salaries. They make tens of millions a year! One CEO actually made a billion dollars! Under Obamacare, health insurance companies have to spend 80% of your premiums on your healthcare. If they spend less than 80% they have to give you a refund. And they can't kick you off if you reach your cap. I guess my right wing friends would say that Obamacare is taking away insurance companies freedom to gouge you. Please read the bill! While it's not prefect, it's better than nothing.

Do you have the same venom for union bosses who are surely guilty of the same charges you make against insurers?

As to attacking insurers, if they are making bank I suggest you become a stockholder, share in the process and vote for change in the compensation model for executives. Better yet, pool your money with others and create a company that offers better solution, take all the risks of underwriting policies, fighting with fraudulent claims, provider over-charges, and abusive litigation by politically connected lawyers, and show us how an ethical provider of coverage can exist and thrive.

Written on Nation divided over health care, or is it bridge to unity?:

in response to steveinsocal:

See left and right can have a constructive debate every now and again :-)

Not sure coercion was kept to a minimum(!) as you have 30 days from registering with the Controle des Habitants and obtaining your "Permis" to register with an insurance provider. If not then the Canton will mandate one.

I can't comment upon lawyers and malpractice suits, but IMHO, we Europeans tend not to be as litigious as our American cousins and I suspect that it is something that as a nation you need to address.

NYT columnist and economist Paul Krugman commented that the US could do worse than adopt the Swiss model..

Of course Politicians could work together to resolve this, although if the past few years are anything to go by it's in neither interests.

Steve, you still read Paul Krugman, really? Have they moved his column to the funny pages yet? Oh, I forget, the NYT is the funny pages.

Written on Nation divided over health care, or is it bridge to unity?:

in response to VintageRacer:

Yes there is a penalty. From what I can gather, the penalty will be deducted from your tax return. Those that forgo getting insurance will pay the penalty. For the poor, nothing has changed. They still can get Medicad.

For the large pool of under insured and those with pre-existing conditions, the pool of insurers (should) reduce the individual costs. I can't predict one way or the other if this will work. Some experts say it will. Others say it will raise the premiums.

The ACA specifically states that illegal immigrants are not entitled to care under the ACA.

Your comment about "the uneducated, the lazy..." makes no sense.

If you are currently working and have an employer funded health care plan, there will be no impact to you. For those that currently pay for their own healthcare like me, there will be little or no impact.

Two problems with your last statement.
1) our costs associated plans provided by employers or secured prvately are going up due to mandates of coverage and increase in costs.
2) neither you nor anyone else can ensure that employers won't drop coverage shifting our plans from the current model to increased use of government provided coverage.

The current model is flawed, that seems to be agreed upon. I think that portability has been and remains a key issue because insurance is related to employment, change employment and change plans. We didn't address this because unions own the Democrats thus they are not able to provide a solution to this key issue. Fix this and the driver for costs is modified by putting the citizens in direct control of creating demand that will drive costs down for the working class. In that this increased use of consumer discretion will reduce the strain on the system the costs to cover the uninsured can be managed with less costs. Since increased taxes are called for in the ACA to cover these individual, the amount of tax and the way it is attached are what remains for debate.

In the end there are many other solutions to the challenge of providing coverage to those without and relief to providers stuck holding the bag, the above are only a start. The fact remains, some very destructive precedents were set in the ACA and the opportunity to provide real and beneficial improvement to the model was squandered by Pelosi/Reid/Obama. Those that support this have done a huge disservice to the following generations.

Written on Crisp: Obamacare deserves a chance:

in response to Lurker_X:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

You don't believe in free markets or the power of market forces to drive suppliers meeting the choices of consumers?

Written on Crisp: Obamacare deserves a chance:

in response to VintageRacer:

I don't understand gateaway's repeated comments that present lies and misinformation concerning the Affordable Care Act. For most Americans there is little or no impact. For me there is no impact. I currently have health insurance. But for my adult daughter who has a life threatening pre-existing condition, it is a God send. She can now get insurance. She isn't getting entitlements. She will be able to afford health insurance herself. For that, I am thankful.

I think you are unaware of how your costs have been impacted and what changes await as the ACA is fully implemented. We are stealing from our children to pursue a utopian dream that will cause much harm before it dies naturally. We can only hope that November brings a sea-change of political clout sufficient to the challenge of repealing this.

Written on Crisp: Obamacare deserves a chance:

in response to VintageRacer:

Unfortunately that would put the onus of checking citizenship on non-law enforcement or non-INS employees. Rather unfair for them to have to do that.

Too many simple means for this to be minimized. I can agree that medical professionals are not Imigration specialist, and that it is unwise to ask them to expend energies to this end, yet there are so many ways the process could be supported through administrative function it is silly to suggest we can't at least try.

Written on Crisp: Obamacare deserves a chance:

in response to Lurker_X:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

So what, own your own rights and responsibilities, purchase the plan you want and leave the rest of us alone.

Written on Crisp: Obamacare deserves a chance:

in response to rebel123:

The only "free healthcare" that illegals get is the same healthcare that all those, including citizens, without insurance get when they fail to pay their bill. You seem to imply they have some sort of special queue with a sign saying "FREE CARE FOR ILLEGALS HERE". There is no such thing. Many more Americans are using ER and medical care facilities without paying for their care than illegals. If you believe that we should not treat sick and injured people based on non-citizenship, you could be honest enough to state that position up front.

I struggle with turning away sick people, so how about a compromise, treat them while arranging deportation? I'm willing to work on a compromise if you are.

Written on Crisp: Obamacare deserves a chance:

in response to ENVIROSCIGUY:

I still haven't seen one conservative post their "superior alternative". So I guess the choice is "Obamacare" or 45 million un/under-insured Americans, 22,000+ preventable deaths per year, 1 million health-related bankruptcies, and $1000 added to each families premium to cover the costs of the status quo.

If that's the choice, America will choose Obama-Romney-care. Thanks all your help in the re-election campaign Mitt.

I'm not sure I qualify as a Conservative, more of a Libertarian, but let me take a quick stab.

How about the first thing is, honor individual rights to purchase what we want or ldon't want and be responsible for the outcomes.

How about, if you want insurance you pick from any list of coverages you think advisable cafeteria style.

How about we stop treating health care from employment more favorably than from private or co-op style contracts where people join groups they choose apart from employment ensuring true portability and choice.

How about we use a tax funded means to pay providers a fair return for treatment provided to indigents unable to pay for immediate care needs so that they can stay open and provide adequate care for all. I don't mean to suggest equality of care for indigent patients as those that have secured means to pay their bills, but a modicum of care with some level of dignity. Funding for this is provided by repeal of all prevailing wage laws and canceling collective bargaining rights for public employees.

These are just a few, there are many more ideas we could work out the details to that would not intrude on individual rights or further perpetuate the generational theft from our children which we are guilty of with things as they are at present.

Written on Editorial: Congress should not force the issue on 'Fast and Furious' :

in response to TomcatDriver:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

The only rise was in public sector and short term project jobs which had no stick. In the mean time we have dramatic imposition of regulatory burden disrupting the normal recovery process and resumption of job losses. Any way you slice it, this is Obama's recession now and by his own measure he is a failure.

Written on Editorial: Congress should not force the issue on 'Fast and Furious' :

in response to TomcatDriver:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

As I posted this morning, infamous Democrats like Steve Jobs and Al Gore have an entire supply chain based overseas and they are strident anti-union in their on-shore operations. Guess Romney is in pretty good company except that there are no accusations of mass suicides at any of his operations as there are for the magic duo's chinease plants.

Written on Editorial: Congress should not force the issue on 'Fast and Furious' :

in response to TomcatDriver:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Tom, more half truths. 4000000 jobs created but you forget to subtract those that are lost. That is the problem with facts, they aren't always pretty. The jobs lost data is why we are at 8.2 for U3, and don't even begin to look at U6, you have to go way back to find a President with worse economic performance, perhaps as far back as Carter.

Written on Editorial: Congress should not force the issue on 'Fast and Furious' :

in response to TomcatDriver:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Tom, too many post have been made showing how F&F was vastly different than previous gun walking programs, the article you reference discounts this entirely. It is obviously the work of but one more lazy media apologists work on behalf of Obama and the Democrats by a paper renown for such abuse. But it is of little surprise that you would source from a totally disrespected rag in debate.

Written on Editorial: Congress should not force the issue on 'Fast and Furious' :

in response to TomcatDriver:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Oh, so he (Romney) outsourced, kind of like many affable Democrats like Steve Jobs or Al Gore, and. Your point is? If outsourcing is a successful strategy, isn't the correct thing to do in response more positive in nature than negative. As a former business owner you know successful businesses react rationally, swat s the rationale? Answer that and you can solve our economic problems, but the lack of answers shows tht neither you nor Obama have a clue so you resort to ad hominem attacks and destructive rhetoric. Such a simplistic approach is more suitable to a third word despotic regime than te ideal of a liberal democracy.

Written on Editorial: Congress should not force the issue on 'Fast and Furious' :

in response to TomcatDriver:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Tom, a person with the requisite wit understands Scalia's approach in questions, I'll leave you to apply the test.

Written on Editorial: Congress should not force the issue on 'Fast and Furious' :

in response to gateaway:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

And Sotomayer is qualified because she is a legal scholar vs a person with life experiences like many common people, right? Isn't that what the Prez said when he nominated her? Scalia on the other hand is a scholar with principles, to compare him to Sotomayer, Ginsberg or Breyer is a joke.

Written on Editorial: Congress should not force the issue on 'Fast and Furious' :

in response to Poplicola:

Do you just invent nonsense to reiterate the mantra "Bush did it, Bush did it?"

The media is curiously forgetting to tell audiences about Operation Wide Receiver, 2006 and 2007, a bad idea, but not a monstrous horror like Obama's gun walking programs:

1. Wide Receiver was less than one-quarter the size of Fast and Furious, involving about 500 guns. About 450 guns made it across the border into Mexico. Not only was Fast and Furious much larger & it was one of SEVERAL gun operations launched by Obama.

2. Unlike Obama's debacle, there actually was a serious attempt made to track the Wide Receiver weapons. Some of them were even fitted with radio tracking devices.

The signature features of Obama's debacle is that absolutely no effort to track the guns was ever in place. ATF agents have testified they were expressly ordered to stand down when they tried to follow the cartel straw purchasers.

3. Special Agent In Charge Bill Newell was also involved with Operation Wide Receiver. He’s also the ATF agent that originally told Congress that he mentioned gun walking in a roundabout way to his old buddy Kevin O’Reilly of the White House national security staff. O'Reilly was exposed as a liar when the same document dump that put AG Holder in jeopardy of perjury charges revealed a constant stream of emails between Newell and O’Reilly, lasting over a month.

4. Operation Wide Receiver was shut down after its weapons dropped off the grid, and the ATF realized it had blundered. Operation Fast and Furious was only shut down because two of its weapons were discovered at the scene of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry’s murder. The Terry shooting panicked top ATF brass into halting its gun walking operations.

5. The Obama Justice Department cobbled together significant inter-agency co-operation for its huge gun walking programs. The FBI, the DEA, DHS, the State Department, the IRS, and even the White House Security Council.

6. And, of course, there was no massive cover-up of Wide Receiver. No senior Administration officials committed perjury to distance themselves from it. The ATF was not exactly advertising the existence of the operation, or its conclusion, but that’s very different from the thick stone wall Obama and his people tried to build around their far larger and deadlier operations.

In summary, Operation Wide Receiver was a small-scale botched sting operation, in which a foolish, but faintly plausible, plan to track straw gun buyers to their criminal customers went terribly wrong. The Obama Administration used this disaster as a template, radically increased its scale, and turned it into something else altogether.

Far from letting the Obama Administration “off the hook” because “Bush did it too,” an understanding of the full Operation Wide Receiver story makes the Obama scandal worse.

Thank you for some factual perspective.

Written on Editorial: Congress should not force the issue on 'Fast and Furious' :

This is perhaps one of the most banal articles in this paper in a very long time. The principles of a tripartite system and the power of the Presidency are not an issue, there is no legitimate grounds for privilege unless the President was involved in the program which he has denied knowledge of. It is a specious point and not a matter of law but a matter of justice, something the AG seems to know little about.

The facts are that Fast and Furious was either run by a cadre of incompetent bafoons or it had a different purpose altogether. Secretary Clinton's efforts to build a case for Gun Show Weapons feeding cross-border violence provides a clue as to the real intent behind F&F, build the case for further infringements upon our rights to keep and bear arms.

While I hate to ascribe too much faith in the competence of the Obama regime given his close resemblene to Carter, he does seem to be very adept at attacking our liberties and eroding our freedom. The only way the author of this piece could miss such an obvious link is to be hopelessly biased,in which case the article should carry a disclaimer.

Written on Brown, lawmakers strike budget deal that cuts children's healthcare program:

in response to Cy:

Just a thought...health care for children is usually pretty cheap because they are so healthy. Education is a great investment for society. The problem is that we waste so much money on adults who have had their shot at working and providing for themselves and failed. We should be cutting the money that goes to prisoners, retirees, over-paid administrators and people sitting on government boards.

Adults make the bed they lie in. Children deserve a good education and health care.

But the liberals, socialists and communists in the Democratic party know that it is better to cut the budget of childrens programs because it makes people want to vote for more taxes.

Partially correct, the other thing is that to cut further means they have to pick from their own ranks for sacrifice which is inevitable, it's just women and children first. Typical for a tyrant. Not that I would suggest Brown or the Dems in Sac are tyrants, that would probably result in Tomcat getting this post removed. Musn't speak ill of Democrats you know.

Written on Brown, lawmakers strike budget deal that cuts children's healthcare program:

in response to VintageRacer:

If pensions could have been modified, they would have done them by now. But since they're protected, they'll likely remain a problem.

Don't get me wrong, some pensions ARE outrageous. But most are within reason, especially for clerks and other low level employees. And remember, they don't get Social Security.

Oh, so you're suggesting that they don't have to join the ponzi scheme like the rest of us, don't contribute to their retirement, and want us to stand by the promises of the crooked pols their unions foisted upon us? That really makes me feel better about how public employees and their union bosses have bankrupt the state.

Written on Brown, lawmakers strike budget deal that cuts children's healthcare program:

in response to TomcatDriver:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

What a banal statement, the man responsible for the state of the state through extending collective bargaining for public employees urging his first stint as governor is now fumbling with smoke, mirrors and a prayer he can get higher taxes in November. This is no budget, it's is very sad story. This state run by the Democrats is sinking and the bumbling fool of a governor we have in Brown is clueless as to what to do besides dump the kids overboard. Don't think about some of the obvious fixes, those things would threaten the power of the unions and watermelons.

Written on Crisp: New deportation policy is fair, compassionate :

in response to ENVIROSCIGUY:

If your "security" ideas are inhumane, they are evil.

Your ideas KILL people! That's evil. Come up with new ideas or expect huge numbers of people to disobey your inhumane laws.

You're a bright person, you've demonstratred that in the past, surely you will admit that this submission is hyperbolic. You use harsh rhetoric without basis in fact, it is only by stretch in logic that me can arrive at your position. Surely a debate of this import deserves more thoughtful and honest discourse.

Written on Crisp: New deportation policy is fair, compassionate :

in response to ENVIROSCIGUY:

CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE IS RIGHT!

http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/71

"I became convinced that noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. No other person has been more eloquent and passionate in getting this idea across than Henry David Thoreau. As a result of his writings and personal witness, we are the heirs of a legacy of creative protest." - Martin Luther King, Jr, Autobiography

So, following your logic, since I believe the federal and state governments propogate evil with the money they take from me in taxes, is it therefore moral to evade paying taxes?

Featured Promotions

Videos


Social

Wire

Features