Open forum, July 23 - 29

Published:

 

The forums are moderated by Columbian staff and our community guidelines and terms of service still apply. To participate, login with your Columbian.com ID or register for an account at Columbian.com.

Columbian staff members create new forum threads. Don't see a forum topic here that fits your comments? Email Web Edtor John Hill -- john.hill@columbian.com.


222 comments

Comments

nailingit: Awhile ago, you wrote about some concerns you had that the Neighbors on Watch volunteer program (NOW) might attract a vigilante mentality, if officials are not careful with screenings of applicants.

I had that thought, too, especially in the wake of the tragic mass shooting in Colorado.

Police and firefighter applicants undergo personality/psychological screening, in addition to background checks. Maybe volunteer citizen NOW wannabes should have a little more rigorous scrutiny beyond the criminal background check, as well?

I predict that interest in this program will increase dramatically and that it may attract a fringe element. Right now, the small number of volunteers I personally know are mild-mannered retirees, none of whom have ever touched a gun.

NOW volunteers are not supposed to pack heat. From today's Columbian:

http://www.columbian.com/news/2012/ju...

manthou — July 23, 2012 at 7:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I might add this to my comment above: I do know some "mild mannered retirees" who have concealed weapons permits. They are law-abiding citizens and I am not equating a right to bear arms (or a right to bare arms LOL), with any sort of mental abnormality.

Just trying to be clear to reduce the blow back I am gonna be getting. :)

There are people, however, who should never get their hands on a weapon. These are the folks I think need to be screened out of programs like NOW.

manthou — July 23, 2012 at 7:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


read where an off-duty cop shot and killed his son that he thought was an intruder. I wonder how the number of accidental shootings-not related to hunting-compares to the number of crimes an armed person actually stopped.

mrd — July 23, 2012 at 7:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou — July 23, 2012 at 7:56 a.m.

It appears that I fit your description of a "mild- mannered retiree" with a CWP. I've had one for years, I had a job of serving papers on people and eviction notices for a few years and it seemed prudent to carry. I was actually thinking about joining the County's NOW program but haven't really made up my mind yet. Maybe if nailingit wants to join with me.....

hawkeye — July 23, 2012 at 9:26 a.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou — July 23, 2012 at 7:43 a.m.

"Police and firefighter applicants undergo personality/psychological screening"

I suggest you check out http://www.policemisconduct.net/ for some information on how good that screening works.

frobert — July 23, 2012 at 10:02 a.m. ( | suggest removal


***This woman (Bachman) is out of control and needs to be stopped!***

Huma Abedin's week got a bit scarier on Sunday when federal officials ordered extra security to her house after a New Jersey man threatened her. The New York Post is reporting a Muslim man from New Jersey threatened Abedin after Michelle Bachman accused her of having ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. The man was questioned by the NYPD but charges haven't been filed. Bachman was one of five Republican members of Congress who called for an investigation into Huma Abedin's (nonexistent) ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. John McCain was the first high profile G.O.P member to come to Abedin's defense. Then it was John Boehner. Then it was just about everyone else. There were rumors at the start of the week that Abedin's husband, Anthony Weiner, might be running for New York City Mayor next year. This is, hopefully, the end of a very weird week in the Abedin-Weiner household.

hawkeye — July 23, 2012 at 10:36 a.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou- I suppose with certain guidelines civilian activism might be okay...I don't know. Unarmed seniors walking a beat was the Columbian pic a few days ago. What if some of these folks have some meth heads/other confront them, it could turn bad for the volunteers in a hurry. As far as citizens on patrol not carrying guns, definitely one of those times where many would break the rules imo.

Cops are paid extremely well in this area, and have the backing and fire power to take care of situational crapolla.

---

hawk- *Maybe if nailingit wants to join with me.....*I'm semi-retired and have some experience in the security field, to include filling in as a bouncer for a friend of mine (who owned a hotspot bar in Japan) when one of his gorilla's would call in sick/other. It's been a decade, but most likely could handle a knucklehead or two!

I don't have a CWP but no doubt could obtain one. Interesting job serving eviction notices. I bet you have a tale or two you could tell!

I don't know about the NOW program. I have an aversion to dealing with law enforcement! Maybe we should explore this further. Private security firm? :)

---

I certainly believe in our right to bear arms. (or as manthou said, or bare :)) But I think we should have mandatory background checks (to incude gun shows) as well as some types of weapons banned for civilian ownership.

nailingit — July 23, 2012 at 11:21 a.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert at 10:02 am: I know. I know. :(

The adrenalin rush that shuts down the higher-order thinking part of our brains (flight or fight)can cause very reasonable people to go berkerk.

I was told once by a police officer that they pull back on high speed chases for this reason. Yes. They are dangerous due to the high speeds, but also because the officers involved have that adrenalin pumping fast and furious and are at risk for dangerous behavior themselves when they finally catch up with the perp.

manthou — July 23, 2012 at 11:44 a.m. ( | suggest removal


That's berserk above. Did not mean berkerk.

manthou — July 23, 2012 at 11:46 a.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou — July 23, 2012 at 11:44 a.m.

I for one do not buy the caught up in the moment or adrenaline argument. They claim to be trained professionals, in any other field the trained professionals are help to a higher standard.

frobert — July 23, 2012 at 11:54 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — July 23, 2012 at 11:21 a.m.

I've got a story or two, one that I remember quite vividly was a house that I had to post was surrounded by cops. They just arrested everybody in the house for meth production but I still had to post the house. I had a police escort to and from the front door.

hawkeye — July 23, 2012 at 12:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — July 23, 2012 at 11:54 a.m.

Apparently you have never had an adrenaline high. I can tell you from experience, it's not really something you can "train" for, unless you have the ability to be scared out of your mind in a controlled situation.

Maybe you can get someone to seriously shoot at you for an hour or so.

hawkeye — July 23, 2012 at 12:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — July 23, 2012 at 12:09 p.m.

Spoken like a true wannabe.

frobert — July 23, 2012 at 12:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I think/hope this will be a trend. People are fed up with the attempted right wing socialization of our free democracy, and demographics are changing rapido!

**Republican Party in California Is Caught in Cycle of Decline**

LOS ANGELES — This would seem a moment of great opportunity for California Republicans. The state has become a national symbol of fiscal turmoil and dysfunction, the Legislature is nearly as unpopular as Congress and Democrats control every branch of government.

An Orange County rally in June 2010 for Meg Whitman, the Republican nominee for governor that year, and Carly Fiorina, the Senate nominee. Both women are wealthy executives.
But instead, the state party — once a symbol of Republican hope and geographical reach and which gave the nation Ronald Reagan (and Richard M. Nixon) — is caught in a cycle of relentless decline, and appears in danger of shrinking to the rank of a minor party.

Registered Republicans now account for just 30 percent of the California electorate, and are on a path that analysts predict could drop them to No. 3 in six years, behind Democrats, who currently make up 43 percent, and independent voters, with 21 percent.

“It’s no longer a statewide party,” said Allan Hoffenblum, who worked for 30 years as a Republican consultant in California. “They are down to 30 percent, which makes it impossible to win a statewide election. You just can’t get enough crossover voters.”

**“They have alienated large swaths of voters,” he said. “They have become too doctrinaire on the social issues. It’s become a cult.”**

There is not a single Republican holding statewide office. Democrats overwhelmingly control the State Assembly and Senate. In interviews, Republicans were unable to come up with any names of credible candidates preparing to run for statewide office. By contrast, the Democratic bench is bustling with ambitious younger politicians who are waiting for their moment. It is a giant turnaround since 2003, when Arnold Schwarzenegger knocked out the Democratic governor, Gray Davis, in a recall election and set out to build a more moderate Republican Party.

“The national party is becoming a party of very enthusiastic social conservatives driven by Southerners,” said Bill Whalen, a fellow with the conservative Hoover Institution at Stanford University. “It’s a problem if you’re an independent voter in California. If you think about the Republican Party, what national figure comes to mind? George W. Bush or Newt Gingrich.”

Republicans said their problems were made worse this year by the emphasis during the Republican presidential primaries on social issues, particularly tough immigration measures and opposition to abortion rights. That focus could make it tougher to win independent voters who are crucial to any Republican resurgence in California.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/23/us/politics/california-republicans-seek-a-turnaround.html?_r=1

nailingit — July 23, 2012 at 12:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal where are you? In additional to your well informed viewpoints, you helped keep frobert in check!

...and it's only Monday......... sigh..........

nailingit — July 23, 2012 at 12:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal


In the "not intending to give this situation too much print department"...Say what you will about Obama, I believe our President is a man of character and compassion. Going to Colorado was the right thing to do. It had to help the victims & families to some degree to hear from our country's leader.

**Colorado theater shooting suspect makes first court appearance**

"I confessed to them that words are always inadequate in these kinds of situations, but that my main task was to serve as a representative of the entire country and let them know that we are thinking about them at this moment, and will continue to think about them each and every day," Obama told reporters after the meeting at the University of Colorado Hospital.

"It reminds you that even in the darkest of days, life continues and people are strong and people bounce back and people are resilient," the president said, after describing the recovery of some victims. "Out of this darkness, a brighter day is going to come."

Though much attention has been paid to the "perpetrator of this evil act," that spotlight will fade, leaving behind just the good memories of those affected by the tragedy, he said.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/23/justice/colorado-theater-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

nailingit — July 23, 2012 at 12:49 p.m. ( | suggest removal



Ever have a fighter jet crash (almost literally) at your feet? I have. Ever crashed a race motorcycle (on the track) at ~90 mph? I have. The "freaking out" part didn't happen until after I'd walked away realizing I was whole. Training and experience would be responsible for that. "Adrenaline" is no excuse for poor behavior by a professional.

Down on this end of the street I have a slug of friends. Most folks would call them neighbors, but in our case we're all friends. We watch out for one another. Others need not apply.

I just got back from four days of camping out in Forest Grove. I had a book signing Saturday and the PNW Crew gathered. The "Crew" being three fellas I served on the America with. I figure the hang-over will be gone by the morrow. I certainly hope. I'm too darned old...

Drift — July 23, 2012 at 12:59 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Spoken like a true wannabe.

frobert — July 23, 2012 at 12:11 p.m.

"wannabe" what?

hawkeye — July 23, 2012 at 1:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift — July 23, 2012 at 12:59 p.m

Never been on a carrier deck but I have crashed a bike on a track (Sidewinders) at a high speed and I've been involved in a high speed chase, and not on the wrong end. I never "freaked out" after the wreck (more relieved than anything, I'll guarantee you that slo-mo thing is REAL) but after the chase I was a little pumped. I can see where it would have an effect on someone.

hawkeye — July 23, 2012 at 2:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Nail_

Sorry bro, but Obama going to Colorado was more of a PR move than to lift the spirits of those families and people affected by this terrible situation...All the politicians/presidents do this and much more in election years to show that there human and have compassion for the fallen...He is all show and Blow.. You won't be able to change his MO...

vanwadreamer — July 23, 2012 at 4:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal


One of the reasons I enjoy participating in this forum is that it challenges my way of thinking, and sometimes causes me to search out subjects I normally would not research.

manthou is spot on with her thinking. On the flip side adrenaline (or is it?) can produce clarity/awareness and enhance responsiveness. Sometimes consequential decision making during a "rush" can be a negative thing.

My feelings are individuals are just that, and good training/experience for whatever life situation you're in is crucial.

Some good sites and entertaining reads...

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/threat-management/201001/adrenaline-rushes-can-they-help-us-deal-real-crisis

http://www.policeone.com/use-of-force/articles/1354204-Crime-fighting-can-be-exhilarating-but-beware-of-the-rush/

http://www.futurevisions.org/crr_burn-out.htm

nailingit — July 23, 2012 at 4:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal


vanwa- Regardless of his motives, it had to bring a level of comfort to those involved.

I don't think anything this Prez could do would change your personal views of him.

You never answer my questions to you concerning what policies Romney has laid out that would help your business, health care, taxes, etc. over Obama's. Why is that?

Maybe because the Mittster doesn't have any? Do you really trust the guy? If so..why?

nailingit — July 23, 2012 at 4:28 p.m. ( | suggest removal


vanwadreamer — July 23, 2012 at 4:06 p.m.

Huh, I didn't see where Romney went to Colorado. I guess not ALL politicians go to these disasters. Maybe only the ones that actually care.

hawkeye — July 23, 2012 at 4:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hawk, someone had sort of said something like (heh) the rush was an excuse for a behavior. My point was, it aint. Not in the realm of professionals, anyway.

The closest I've come to wetting myself was when I did a tandem chute jump. That first step is a son of a ...

I've responded to various emergencies where I've done it by the numbers. Not thinking of the risk to myself or even how dire the situation was - 'til after.

And then there wasn't a "freak out." Notice the way I framed the words - but a moment where I flashed on just how close I came, or maybe they came.

"Freak out" was for a dramatic effect I guess. A bit of a facetious statement aimed toward the previous posters words about adrenaline being an excuse for a behavior.

Hopefully, my head will be a bit clearer this Tuesday and I'll communicate a bit more clearly. Hopefully. I do hope I've not permanently damaged myself these last few days. Not that I'm freaking out about it, you understand?

Drift — July 23, 2012 at 6:16 p.m. ( | suggest removal


drift- I don't think *previous posters words about adrenaline being an excuse for a behavior.* is quite right. More of a cause & effect type deal. Psych data seems to back it up.

nailingit — July 23, 2012 at 6:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal



It is science, Drift. Your frontal lobe's ability to think clearly gets hijacked by your lizard brain.

You can learn how to fight that by counting to ten, taking deep breaths, doing the valsslva maneuver (look it up). It is hard to do when you are in the middle of a fight or flight confrontation, though.

Works better when you are po'd at something your boss says to you or something that is posted on the Forum. :)

I agree that this is no excuse for bad professional behavior, but it is used as an excuse anyway.

manthou — July 23, 2012 at 7:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal


It's valsalva maneuver. I cannot type today.

manthou — July 23, 2012 at 7:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift — July 23, 2012 at 6:16 p.m

I suspect that if we knew each other, we'd be good friends.

I find nothing wrong with your behavior.

hawkeye — July 23, 2012 at 7:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal


manthou — July 23, 2012 at 7:29 p.m.

Manthou, I'm familiar with the maneuver, I'm a certified diver.

hawkeye — July 23, 2012 at 7:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal


But it doesn't if you've been trained, manthou, is my point (lizard thing). Okay, maybe it still does, but with training and experience a person moves through molasses not hyper ventilating hysteria.

I've been there, done that. I've remained rock calm in situations and then only realized the gravity of the event when it was over. I've been shot at. I've treated an individual with a gunshot wound (both in the civilian world, by the way) - rock calm.

When the poop hits the fan, manthou, there isn't time for breathing exercises. A professional responds to their training. Or, my point being, they should. If they don't, either the individual or the training (possibly a lack of) are at fault.

Most people at an incident site are expected to freak. Most people are not prepared for what they might have just been involved in or witnessed. This is expected.

Would you give an EMT a break what freaked from having arterial blood sprayed in their face? I darn sure wouldn't. A good Samaritian on the other hand...

People on the street get a "bye" on freaking. Pros don't.
That's all I'm trying to relay.

Drift — July 23, 2012 at 7:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Thanks hawk. I try to remain calm. Now, don't get me started on those folks what make up the City Council. I'm liable to get a little loose around the edges ;^)

Drift — July 23, 2012 at 8:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Polls are showing that Washington residents favor marijuana legalization by a margin of 55% to 32% opposed. The only major groups that seem to be opposed to the measure seem to be medical marijuana groups. Do the medical marijuana users believe that the government has the right to impose on other peoples freedoms, just not theirs?

frobert — July 23, 2012 at 8:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift — July 23, 2012 at 8:05 p.m.

Wouldn't dream of it.

hawkeye — July 23, 2012 at 8:10 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I have to agree on Drift's point about training. The intitial reaction to potential danger is one of two possibilities. You could go with instinct, which means fight or flight, but most often flight. Or you can react in a way you are trained to do. Call it muscle memory. If you have rehearsed a situation enough times, you instinct will become what you have practiced to do.

While I will freely admit that is in no way 100% foolproof, it certainly will prevail most of the time.

And it is true no one is calling for a complete ban on firearms, yet. Remember the old saying, give an inch, they want a mile.

danabwoodley — July 23, 2012 at 8:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**N**eighbors **O**n **W**atch instructional video...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLsg0E...

nailingit — July 23, 2012 at 8:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Darn it fro... does this thing (forum comments) let a person know when their character set is maxed?

Yes, frobert, I'll put my lips upon your trolling hook (oooooh, gross!).

You're obviously referring to I-502. The "recs" are for it the "meds" are yelling, "Bullpoo!" Do you know why fro? Huh? Huh? Do ya, do ya?

Well, let me tell ya.

First and foremost, the initiative is fraught with issues. Let's start with the marketing scheme.

Gregoire vetoed 36 sections of 5073 based on her belief that the bill would put state employees at risk of federal prosecution. 502 would do the same. Real or not. It would (will?) do the same. The initiative is based on state government regulation.

Problem? Maybe. I dunno.

And then there's the taxing deal. It seems no one is really sure what an ounce of pot would go for at your friendly neighborhood retail store. The thing is, if it's more than 180 bones an ounce then the black-market will still have a decent customer base. How the heck is that supposed to be a viable business model for the state store?

But none of that, yet, splits the meds and heads, does it? That would be the 5ng/ml prime facie thing for driving while stoned. I wake up with more THC in my blood than that. And I'm totally straight. Most medheads wake up with more than that in their blood... totally straight.

Now, let's take into account the business' that will be (pretty much I think) out of business if 502 is passed and becomes a working initiative (fed lawsuits aside).

They are screaming at the top of their lungs, "It's a target on your back!" And, I might add, spreading hearsay b.s. - stuff like, because the initiative doesn't have a provision for growing then "patients" will no longer be able to have their 15 plants. That simply isn't so. 502 will not affect 69.51a in the least.

Fro, the medicinal folks have been like mice hiding in a basement since '98. Now and again a piper will come along and they'll dance the tune. They dance thinking it'll be a step to the Sun light. Some, most, don't realize they are dancing to nothing more than a fraudulent tune.

I've carried on and on about folks educating themselves. Whether it be the Council, Commissionors, heads or meds.

It's complicated.
But not.

But what it would do, if passed, is let the Feds know the people of the states are rattling their swords. You *are* hip to Oregon's OCTA, right? I believe Colorado has some form of cannabis legalization initiative coming up as well. And how many states have been petitioning the feds to allow the planting of "industrial" hemp?

Change the scheduling of cannabis. The house of cards will fall. Ohhh, feel that? Is that a strong breeze? Heh.

Drift — July 23, 2012 at 9:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift — July 23, 2012 at 9:25 p.m.

Sorry, I respect your opinion but the current level for driving is 0, any detectable thc in the blood is evidence of dui. They don't currently check, but they could start tomorrow without any new law. 502 is far from perfect, I believe the the government is overstepping reasonable bounds by telling citizens they can't grow any plant for their own consumption. Scheduling does need to change, but until we elect a Ron Paul or Gary Johnson as president that isn't going to happen.

frobert — July 23, 2012 at 11:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Medical marijuana growers are just like democrats, republicans, unions and thousands of other groups. They started out supporting freedom, but after time they support oppression if freedom impacts their bottom line.

frobert — July 24, 2012 at 12:21 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Fro, evidence of impairment must currently be shown. You'd need to point me to the RCW that reads anything over zero is a bust.

Under 502 if a LEO can come up with a reason -say a bag of weed laying in the seat - to order a blood draw and the results are = or > than 5ng/ml that's a bust. It's a bust even if the individual **is not** impaired, and there is no defense in court.

I'm not saying I favor nor oppose 502. I'm merely attempting to give you an answer to your question.

Frankly, I wish more folks would do their own thinking and come to their own conclusions. There's a fella up north that runs a weed clinic, a dispensary and a web forum. There's a core group of people who would jump off of a cliff if Steve told them to. Pop over to CannaCare and read the current discusion on 502. http://www.cannacare.org/bulletin/showthread.php?6491-Help-defeat-i-502

This type of mentality is a detriment to any form of legalization IMHO.

Drift — July 24, 2012 at 6:24 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Hey, fro:
http://www.grahamlawyerblog.com/2011/08/07/marijuana-dui-a-washington-lawyers-perspective-part-ii/
A person (currently) **cannot** be convicted on only the presence of THC.

Drift — July 24, 2012 at 6:32 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit @ 8:21 PM: Funny, funny! Thanks for the nostalgia and guffaw!

Drift: thanks for the link to CannaCare and the 502 discussion. There are so many big names and with legal beagle backgrounds and bonafides behind this measure that it was written to supposedly avoid legal challenges. I haven't a clue where the majority of the voting public stands on this issue. We will soon find out.

manthou — July 24, 2012 at 7:26 a.m. ( | suggest removal


A recent poll by King 5 has 55% pro 32% con.

Drift — July 24, 2012 at 8:06 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift — July 24, 2012 at 6:24 a.m.

My issue was with the person up north, His group has filed a lawsuit to keep the measure off of the ballot.

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Medical-marijuana-grower-others-sue-to-stop-pot-3721126.php

frobert — July 24, 2012 at 9:36 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Yep, fro...

I'd offer my opinion of Sarich, but in a public forum it's probably not a good idea.

Drift — July 24, 2012 at 9:57 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Hawk-

Guess your short sightedness is apparent. Did you go and give a speech in Colorado? No and what that means is you can stay away and not bring MASS numbers of unwanted people where I'm sure the cost had to be somewhere in the millions and most likely took precious resources away from more important work, just to have him come to town. It wasn't on his flight path either... Mr. Romney gave a good speech that imparted his heart felt sadness around the tragedy.

vanwadreamer — July 24, 2012 at 11:05 a.m. ( | suggest removal


vanwadreamer — July 24, 2012 at 11:05 a.m

"Hawk-

Guess your short sightedness is apparent. Did you go and give a speech in Colorado?"

Care to explain? Why would I go to Colorado, or give a speech?

Romney only said what someone else wrote for him to say. He has no idea of how these people have been affected, he's so disconnected from the "real people" of the world, he'll never know.

hawkeye — July 24, 2012 at 11:19 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Hawk- Your right no need to argue with you anymore... He is so disconected and you arn't... You a real person with real issues and concerns and you know how this has affected these folks in Colorado... If you can't see the reasoning behind going to colorado to give a speech then those that didn't, don't care.. That's your reasoning and oh yeah someone wrote the speech for Romney and yet Omama read his off a telepromter and he had Carney write it for him.. Reasoning with you is like reasoning with a bump on a log...But I won't throw out any wother words.Geez I'd like to say have a good day but i think you have sompin up your anal gland bothering you.

vanwadreamer — July 24, 2012 at 12:48 p.m. ( | suggest removal


vanwadreamer — July 24, 2012 at 12:48 p.m

Seriously, I really don't know what you are trying to say here. The only thing I can tell you is you need to contact your last English teacher and slap him or her.

hawkeye — July 24, 2012 at 2:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I passed high school English by taking a creative writing class. Pretty darned funny, eh? Snork.

Drift — July 24, 2012 at 2:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Someone ought to write a book that compiles really bad internet forum insults. Kinda like a Bartlett's Familiar Quotations that is indexed by subject.

manthou — July 24, 2012 at 3:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Anal gland? That one would make my list.

manthou — July 24, 2012 at 3:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Now that Madore has revealed himself as another lying politician-the Boldt thing-we're supposed to trust this guy? I need a break! Perhaps Dirty Dave has a magic bullet that will spur demand and create a couple of jobs, not in his sector, but in the general economy, then let's hear of it. Fact is, without increased demand, he can't do a damn thing. In fact, would he really support a lessening of regulations for a competing business? Give 'em tax breaks his business wasn't able to profit from? I doubt it. If a competitor "down the street", did so would Madore give him a leg up? No way! Pay up as I did. Madore's full of it.

Madore is a lying POS, and needs to be rejected as such.

mrd — July 24, 2012 at 7:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mrd — July 24, 2012 at 7:35 p.m.

I can think of several legitimate reasons not to vote for Madore, but, making a mistake on a political flyer isn't one of them. If a mistake on a political advertisement makes a candidate a lying POS, does the same apply to democrats? Or would you just consider that a honest mistake?

frobert — July 24, 2012 at 8:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal


crazytrain, And if I had business in Africa or New York, I'd be there whenever I was needed, wouldn't you? You say he lavishes in the WH, he also works 24/7/365, do you?

I was responding to this post.

.All the politicians/presidents do this and much more in election years to show that there human and have compassion for the fallen..

vanwadreamer — July 23, 2012 at 4:06 p.m

"Madore is a lying POS, and needs to be rejected as such."

mrd — July 24, 2012 at 7:35 p.m.

That's what I've been trying to tell everybody.

hawkeye — July 24, 2012 at 9:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hawk-

I know that I work 24/7/365 (366 every four years).

And I will also say that quite often it seems the most thankless work in the world. People either love you or hate you. In some cases it doesn't even matter who you are, or what you believe, the job itself is all that they see and what they base the opinion on.

Kind of like politics. Some out there will only see the party and decide they love, or hate the candidate. They don't worry about record, or position on issues, it's just red or blue.

That is what I call a sycophant.

danabwoodley — July 24, 2012 at 9:47 p.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 24, 2012 at 9:47 p.m.

I don't know what exactly it is you do but if it is military, I thank you for your service, I know it's not an easy job with little reward.

hawkeye — July 24, 2012 at 11:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Speaking of the military...
The book signing I did last Saturday was also a car/bike show. We raised funds for http://www.returningveterans.org/

My ol' Navy buddy (and character from "Carrier"), Stone, took a few photos and a vid or two. http://www.greatpicts.com/Events/Wild-Bills-2012/24369948_X4xhkB

I don't suppose it's too tough to pick "Cap'n Drift" out of the crowd. Heh.

Drift — July 25, 2012 at 11:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift — July 25, 2012 at 11:10 a.m.

Nice pics. Didn't know Joe Walsh was going to be there. I would have never picked the Cap'n out of that crowd, I would have thought you were the guy in pic #3. HaHaHa!

hawkeye — July 25, 2012 at 12:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal


No matter what, people will vilify the ACA. It doesn't matter to most on the right.

Anyone know what the Republican plan is?

http://www.columbian.com/news/2012/ju...

nailingit — July 25, 2012 at 12:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Pic three is Gator. He's obviously taking a break. Stone took the photos. Stone, Gator and Wild Bill (formally Fried Fred) are all cats I spent time with on the America. They're also characters out of that book. Hell... we're all characters. Heh.

Bill is the proprietor of the bike shop there in Forest Grove. Stone is back to work up in Edmonds. Gator probably made it back to The Rock (Orcas) yesterday.

We did good, hawk. I won't disclose the amount of money we raised, but I'll say it was a decent chunk. I've contractual considerations with the publisher, so my donation (100%) won't happen until my royalty check for this month comes in.

It doesn't get much better than last weekend, man. I got to hang with the fellas, we made a few bones for (what I consider) a good cause, AND I got drunk and danced. Sorta... Sorta danced, I mean.

Heh!

So, back to democrats, republicans, liberals, conservatives, lefts and rights, now? Kay... ;^)

Drift — July 25, 2012 at 12:49 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*I know that I work 24/7/365 (366 every four years).*

Professional forum poster?

*And I will also say that quite often it seems the most thankless work in the world. People either love you or hate you. In some cases it doesn't even matter who you are, or what you believe, the job itself is all that they see and what they base the opinion on.*

danabwoodley — July 24, 2012 at 9:47 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal | Ignore User )

Postal worker? School teacher? Special needs instructor? Waste Management?

While you're trumping yourself up, tell us what you do.

I might add for those who live their life through a military lens, be it from 40 years ago or currently, (Lew Waters comes to mind), thank you for your paid service and chosen taxpayer funded profession. I also would like to thank Postal workers, School teachers, DMV workers, etc., okay what the hell, to include the FBI.

I've spent many years working with and alongside Military personnel in remote locations. I won't give my personal opinion about military work ethic in the workplace as opposed to civilian. I'm sure I'll be trashed enough for previous comment.

Sometimes when we put a select group on a pedestal, we should take a step back and...

...keep it real.

Just sayin'. ;)

nailingit — July 25, 2012 at 12:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**This Conspiracy-Toting Conservative Blogger Could Be Headed to Congress
Wes Riddle's campaign says President Obama gave seven islands to Russia, and he's written that slavery was a net positive for blacks. Could he make it to Washington?**

In mid-May, Texas Republican congressional candidate Wes Riddle posted a new note on his Facebook page. It was written by his spokesman, Garrett Smith, and it was dire. "The reasoning for President Obama's impeachment," Smith wrote, "begins with the fact that the State Department is giving away seven strategic, resource-laden Alaskan islands to Russia."

According to the statement, Riddle—who has Rep. Ron Paul's endorsement and stands a good chance of winning in November if he can make it out of next Tuesday's runoff—believed that Obama's unprecedented giveaway included at least one island the size of Rhode Island and Delaware combined, "billions of barrels of oil" from offshore deposits, and unknown strategic advantages.

"The agreement was negotiated in total secrecy, not allowing the state of Alaska to participate in the negotiations, and…the public was not given any opportunity to comment," he wrote.

There were a few problems with this indictment of Obama: The president hadn't given away any islands; the treaty in question had been signed by President George H.W. Bush in 1991; none of the islands, which are well on the other side of the international boundary, had ever been officially claimed by the United States; and Alaska's two US senators at the time had publicly endorsed the measure. Smith's rant, much of which was copied word for word from a WorldNetDaily article, was based on a falsehood.

read more @

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/wes-riddle-congress-republican-texas-ron-paul

nailingit — July 25, 2012 at 1:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**Europeanizing America**

It's been done before -- including by the Founding Fathers and Lincoln

Our approach as a nation to foreign examples — in Europe, or Asia, or elsewhere — should be as pragmatic as the approach attributed to President Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War. Told that Gen. Grant was an alcoholic, Lincoln is supposed to have said, “Find out what he drinks and give it to my other generals.” If foreign countries do things better than we do — as today’s Europeans do social mobility, family leave and affordable healthcare better than today’s United States — then like the great Americans of the past we should not hesitate to copy the foreigners.

In the words of Patrick Henry, “If this be treason, make the most of it!”

http://www.salon.com/2012/07/24/europeanizing_america/

nailingit — July 25, 2012 at 1:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal


The nail: "Sometimes when we put a select group on a pedestal, we should take a step back and...keep it real.
Just sayin'."

What the heck is that troll about, nail? Will you please elucidate?

Drift — July 25, 2012 at 3:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hawk-

I see we have found common ground.. Madore.......He needs to get back to his own business and stay out of Clark County's business..

Danabwoodley- How true how true ""Some out there will only see the party and decide they love, or hate the candidate. They don't worry about record, or position on issues, it's just red or blue"".. And there is no common ground to be found there..

Ditto on what Hawk said..If your in the armed services thanks for your service.. I have one coming home shortly that spent a year in Afganistan and is transitionaing out of the service he spent 8 years in..

vanwadreamer — July 25, 2012 at 3:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift- So my opinion is a "troll"? :) What exactly is it you don't understand? Thought the gist of my post was pretty easy to grasp. Why the cheap shot "troll" remark?

nailingit — July 25, 2012 at 3:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Because of the word "pedestal," nail. That, in my opinion, was a cheap shot. Now, will you please clarify what the heck is is you are attempting to communicate? Frankly, I'm not real sure. It appeared to me you were comparing a mail carrier to some grunt doing a few months over yonder, hoping they come home to their family.

I could well be mistake. If not... well, I suppose that'll play out now, won't it?

Pedestal? Give me a break.

Drift — July 25, 2012 at 3:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Pedestal in this case would mean to elevate one group of public servants over another.

Those who would elevate "some grunt doing a few months over yonder" over a firefighter, cop, or like job/duty in which folks put their life on the line serving the publics interest.

The majority of current, ex military personnel who haven't, nor will ever, see combat, over a mail carrier, school teacher etc.

All serve the public's interest. Some more dangerous than others.

Not vilifying either. Just the opposite.

A little .. cranky today? :)))

nailingit — July 25, 2012 at 3:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal


The thing is, nail, there is no pedestal. I see you dropped the professions of DMV employees, postal workers and teachers from the post I'm replying to (3:36) and inserted cops and fire fighters as a comparison to a combat troop. I could debate that, but I'll let it go.

But then you stipulate a service member that doesn't see combat is at no more risk than a mail carrier or teacher. That is a false statement. Period. It's an obsurd statement and you darn well know it.

No, I'm not cranky. I'm just trying to keep it real.

Drift — July 25, 2012 at 3:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*I see you dropped the professions of DMV employees, postal workers and teachers from the post I'm replying to*

That's why I differentiated my last post, so you could better understand. I didn't think I needed to repost word for word!

*But then you stipulate a service member that doesn't see combat is at no more risk than a mail carrier or teacher. That is a false statement. Period. It's an obsurd statement and you darn well know it.*

I could debate that, but I'll let it go. I suppose if you read my .. troubling post through through egocentric eyes it would offend. No offense meant.

Valsalva time? (in jest!?!)

nailingit — July 25, 2012 at 4:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal


drift-

I gotta ask as I really don't know. There are approx 1 million service memebers stateside-assuming googling such info is accurate. Anyway, must be a bunch. There must be hundreds of thousands of military folks that pretty much work a job that is very similiar to a civilian job. Cooks, doctors, recruiters, and on and on. How are these folks at risk any more than a civilian counterpart? Just askin'....

mrd — July 25, 2012 at 4:18 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mrd - in that at any time these folks could be told (notice I didn't write "ask") to do their mundane jobs under mortar fire (or sumthin'). It's in the contract. Yes, they agreed to those conditions - to argue about that would be a bit of a red herring.

I've a nephew that's done three tours over yonder. He's applied, several times, for a job as drill sergeant. I sure hope he gets the job, sooner rather than later. So, would you point at him and say, "He's at no risk."

I served during the cold war. The closest I came to engaging the enemy was shooting the moon at a trawler. Yet my life was on the line everytime I stepped from the catwalk onto the flight deck. Hell, my life was on the line below decks.

My beef with nail, mrd, is how he appeared to be belittling military sevice by comparing it to service at the post office. BTW, I thought that had been somewhat privatized. The post office. You know, like the railroad?

You've gotta know ex, and maybe active current military folks, mrd. How many have you heard crow? How many have you seen perched upon the "pedestal" nail mentioned earlier? In my world I count zip. Zero. Nada.

I do think, however, that we as both citizens and a nation should realize the toll paid by some individuals in the interest of our government (right or wrong). We should take responsibility for -our- actions.

Nail's post twanged me. Saturday I watched a 13 year old little girl cry as she read from a speech she had prepared. A speech about the impact on -her- life from her father's service in theater.

Her dad wasn't a mail carrier, mrd.

Drift — July 25, 2012 at 5:41 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*mrd - in that at any time these folks could be told (notice I didn't write "ask") to do their mundane jobs under mortar fire (or sumthin'). It's in the contract. Yes, they agreed to those conditions - to argue about that would be a bit of a red herring.*

Yet you brought it up.

*My beef with nail, mrd, is how he appeared to be belittling military sevice by comparing it to service at the post office.*

Sorry you think of postal employees as less than. Many are ex service members continuing their government employment. No pedestals? Review post @ 3:36.

*BTW, I thought that had been somewhat privatized. The post office. You know, like the railroad?*

You could expound a bit on that! Also, there are thousands of CMR-APO Post Office employees worldwide, active duty, expats and life long civilians, that serve our military and family members faithfully.

*Nail's post twanged me. Saturday I watched a 13 year old little girl cry as she read from a speech she had prepared. A speech about the impact on -her- life from her father's service in theater.*

*Her dad wasn't a mail carrier, mrd.*

Dramatic. The same could be said for other sectors within government employment which involve dangerous duties. It's always sad when kids lose their folks. I know many and have attended many a memorial service.

I differentiated my post to you @ 3:36 in hopes you would understand. You're smart enough to know exactly what I was talking about, and in what context.

Not sure why you're wanting to argue. Whatever. btw, thanks for your service.............

nailingit — July 25, 2012 at 6:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — July 25, 2012 at 6:17 p.m.

What "dangerous" public sector jobs are you referring to?

Other then Military public sector jobs are relatively safe.

frobert — July 25, 2012 at 6:35 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I'm thinking somewhere in here we're having a communication breakdown.
In the written word it can be a real pain to get across what it is one is tryng to -say-.

I'll go about my way now.

Lefts, rights, republicans, democrats... Remember?

As you were. ;^)

Drift — July 25, 2012 at 7:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Saluting you Drift! Perhaps a miscommunikay. Peace.

nailingit — July 25, 2012 at 7:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal



Nails,

Would you care to elaborate on your experiencing working side by side with military in a remote location? This comment sounds like one I routinely heard from contractors working with our Army Signal folks in Macedonia; the guys who did the same jobs a SPC (E4) did, and had salaries in 6 figures. Damned right we threw everything their way; that SPC also had to pull guard duty, attend night classes to earn systems certifications, and a few other things - as well as worry about how his young wife was holding up back in Germany with two or three kids. And that young SPC was paid about a fifth of what that contractor pulled in.

Again speaking about what I know (Army) - what you say about all those people who've never seen a combat zone may have been valid prior to our little incursion into Iraq. The great majority of today's uniformed Active Army, and a high number of Reservists and Guardsmen, have been in Iraq and/or Afghanistan.

And even the peacetime Army can be dangerous - we don't pretend when we train. People die every year in parachuting accidents. I had to help patch up a buddy who took a round in the leg during a live fire exercise. I live on large doses of ibuprofen because I hurt my back falling about 15 feet from a helicopter playing war games (I jumped about 6 feet; the rest was because it was night and we were higher than I thought!) I can tell stories about similar incidents for hours.

And I can see why Drift is a bit perturbed with you too - just being on a live carrier deck is scary stuff. I worked with a few of the brown shoe crowd at one assignment - was hassling them over why they were so anal about memorizing the instructions to where they could repeat them verbatim. They got permission to take me on a carrier with F16s - I kind of got their point that if the people on the flight line make mistakes, then people can die.

roger — July 25, 2012 at 7:40 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Nails and Drift,

OK - I see you two kissed and made up while I was typing.

Never mind.

roger — July 25, 2012 at 7:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Nail,I don't take to much offence to your posts.But let me just say a few word.My grandfather fought in ww1 my father fought in ww2 one nephew just got out of a career in the Air force my other nephew returned home last year from a career he wanted with the marines. He came home from Afganistain missing both legs above the knee and most of his right hand and part of his groin.I served 2 tours in vietnam and came home with a purple heart but I am ok .Please don't post things that can be very hurtful to some people.Use a little more thought.

terick — July 25, 2012 at 7:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


You pulled the Zep card on me! That aint fair, man!!!
Heh.
No salute for me, nail, kay? I didn't earn it. How 'bout you drop a couple bones or so on http://www.returningveterans.org/ instead. They could use all the help they can get.

Peace, man. Peace would be nice...

Drift — July 25, 2012 at 7:50 p.m. ( | suggest removal


For a change in subject, kindly check out Editor Lou's most recent column. He was trumpeting the awards earned by people at The Columbian, so I asked him why he hasn't had Andrea Damewood follow up on her excellent expose of the CRC ignoring the need for the USCG to approve a 95 foot bridge. There are still many questions being asked that haven't been answered, and if we're going to vote in November on a C-Tran sales tax that (supposedly) is a prerequisite for federal light rail funding, then we really ought to have enough info to make an educated choice.

Lou told me he doesn't tell reporters what to do; I need to send Andrea an e-mail if I want to ask her to look into something.

Bizarre? Or perhaps a round about way of saying go to hell? I suppose Scott Campbell and his buddies at Identity Clark County might get a bit perturbed if The C comes down too hard on the CRC.

roger — July 25, 2012 at 7:52 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift- I'll do that!

terick- I've always had great respect for the military. This was lost in translation somehow.

Family & friends also have served/serving.

roger- Sounds like a Louroundabout.:)

nailingit — July 25, 2012 at 8:10 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — July 25, 2012 at 12:58 p.m

OK nail, the speculation is over, yes I am military.

And to be perfectly honest, you are right, there are some in uniform with questionable work ethics. Part of the blame is on the individual, and another part goes to the leaders that allow the slacking.

You also made it a point to emphasize the fact that our pay is funded by taxpayers. You are correct. But isn't that a part of the whole "provide for the common defense" thing?

It is true that across the board, the pay in the military has improved, considerably, over the past 20 years. The reason why this is good is because with the lousy pay, it would be difficult to maintain an all-volunteer force at the required level. Then you would need a draft to have the people required. Not may would approve of that.

But then, the salary we are paid is better than the option of an hourly wage. Could you imagine the OT we would rack up with the hours we sometimes work?

In a nutshell, I am just asking that you not condemn us all for the actions of a few.

danabwoodley — July 25, 2012 at 9:10 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Nail thanks for the response.There is no hard or bad feelings.

terick — July 25, 2012 at 9:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I have to chime in on the "dangerous" job thing, police aren't even close to the most dangerous civilian job.

1. Fisherman(about half the average pay as police)

2. Logger

3. Airline pilot(at least it pays better than police)

4. Farmer/Rancher(pays a little bit better then police)

5. Mining machine operator

6. Roofer

7. Sanitation worker

8. Truck driver/ delivery (yes postal worker falls into this category )

9. Industrial machine repairman

10. Police officer

Note taxi driver is not more dangerous than police this year but they are still more likely to die from homicidal violence.

I get so tired of hearing how police officers go to work without knowing if they will make it home, we should give some thought to these other jobs.

In Washington State two law enforcement officials were killed last year, yet law enforcement was responsible for 29 deaths, many of whom were innocent.

frobert — July 25, 2012 at 10 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Let me educate you on a recent piece of military lingo. Ladies and gentlemen, Let me introduce you to the POG.

The POG is an interesting creature, and there are a variety of definitions of what makes one a POG. Let me fill you in on mine.

First, as some of you know, a majority of the jobs in the military are not direct combat related (ie cooks, mechanics, logistics....) However, their duties may take them somewhere they are at risk (supply train mission, vehicle recovery....) They may spend most of their time inside the wire, but I would not necessarily call them a POG.

A POG is one who not only stays inside the wire, but will tell tales that makes it sound as though his specific duty is so important, the entire operation would fall apart without him. Occasionally, he may even invent stories of engagements with the enemy so he will sound even cooler. Or he may talk of his time on a "combat deplyment" when his location was nowhere near any shots being fired (such as UAE, Oman, Kuwait, are Bahrain).

The POG will commonly degrade is fellow servicemember that are outside the wire, in the line of fire, taking on the toughest missions. Why? Because they do not measure up to his standard in those important areas like filling out this form, or failed to wash the blood off his uniform from the mission he just returned from those 5 long minutes ago.

The POG can also commonly be found wandering around his location trawling for members of the opposite sex. After all, why should he be deprived of simple pleasures just because he is in a war zone?

The POG, I believe, represents at least a portion of the military personnel that Nail is referring to.

But alas, we should all raise our glass to the POG. Afterall, they do make for some of the interesting anecdotes we share when swapping our war stories.

danabwoodley — July 25, 2012 at 10:13 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — July 25, 2012 at 10 p.m

fro-

where did you get this list?

danabwoodley — July 25, 2012 at 10:16 p.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 25, 2012 at 10:16 p.m.

Here is the list I used, other sources used the same bureau of labor statistics data, but if you view another source look at the actual rate not the order they have them listed.

http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2011/pf/jobs/1108/gallery.dangerous_jobs/index.html

frobert — July 25, 2012 at 10:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal


My question is how many of the incidents that make up the stats were a matter of the individual being careless or an idiot?

Not saying there isn't danger in these occupations, but I know that even in my profession the majority of incidents are from negligence or other factors and not from the obvious dangers.

danabwoodley — July 25, 2012 at 11:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Thanks terick & much appreciated.

---

DBW-*In a nutshell, I am just asking that you not condemn us all for the actions of a few.*

Never would as I know better.

---

I noticed Lineman dealing with power pole connections weren't mentioned. Almost always at the top of casualty lists.

It was mentioned in the media a couple of weeks ago about putting America's power lines underground. A great infrastructure enterprise as well as effective with regards to power outages. Power lines, bridges, roads, light rail (AHHH!) etc. So many jobs could be supplied to Americans, to include returning service members, with investment & focus.

Austerity hasn't worked in Europe and it's not working here. (I had to get a little political before signing off. btw DBW, your service is much appreciated)

nailingit — July 25, 2012 at 11:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 25, 2012 at 10:13 p.m.,

OK, so I take it you're combat arms. POG is a bit elitist - Persons Other than Grunts. MPs and truck drivers get called POGs, yet they're getting shot at and blown up every day. And the truck drivers (or anyone else driving a vehicle) are a better target of opportunity for the bad guys anyway. But you recognize this, so we're in agreement.

What you describe as a POG is what used to be called a REMF. (Rear Echelon MF.) That was a better term for the hero who came home with more combat awards than an entire Infantry squad, despite the fact that the gunfire he heard was only off in the distance.

And if you're Active Duty, then prepare for a rude awakening on your return to the States. The Garrison types are gearing up to teach the disrespectful young NCOs and soldiers proper military discipline - those uniforms better look nice, don't forget to come to At Ease and "Yes, Sergeant Major" - that kind of stuff. If you're Army, then log onto AKO's NCO forum and read the stuff posted there.

roger — July 26, 2012 at 6:45 a.m. ( | suggest removal


When I was on the ship there were individuals we referred to as "No-loads." No load refers back to firing a catapult without anything attached to it. No-loads were basically screw ups.

Arresting aircraft aboard a carrier is slightly dangerous work. Our lives were literally in one anothers' hands. We chose not to entrust a no-load with that responsibility. They were relegated to jobs such as "compartment cleaner."

To work the flight deck in arresting gear a new hand would need both the approval of the Topside P.O. and the other topside crew members.

To be an (arresting gear) engine operator you had to have the nod from the rest of the crew.

No-loads cleaned toilets.

I've a suspicion (from watching the History Channel ;^) that practice is still in place on today's carriers.

Drift — July 26, 2012 at 7:46 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — July 25, 2012 at 11:58 p.m.

I also noticed that lineman and taxi driver were absent from the list this year. Mining and machine repair are not usually on the list.

frobert — July 26, 2012 at 7:49 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Roger-

REMF isn't used so much anymore. Someone found POG and decided they liked it better. Another modern term, though not used as often is Fobbit.

But I am fully aware of the things going on as far as discipline goes. Believe it or not we deal with it here in theatre as well. And if you have seen some of the proposed additions to the regulations (pending approval from CSA and SECArmy), you will understand why I am looking at hanging up my boots. But with the time I have invested, I will have to bite my tongue for a while so I can get my pension.

But all of that would have to wait until I can organize my thoughts without getting riled (which would be difficult). And it would be several posts. I have started voicing some to the SMA via facebook. Haven't put some of my more controversial ideas out there yet. I think I will wait until the results of the promotion board come out.

danabwoodley — July 26, 2012 at 7:58 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Harry Reid (D) Nevada has assured us that the "audit the fed" bill that overwhelmingly passed the House yesterday will not come up for a vote in the Senate. Mr. Reid has called for an audit of the fed many times. Apparently his only motivation for blocking it now is that it was proposed by a Republican, and he likes to call the Republicans the party of no.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXOsZ7...

frobert — July 26, 2012 at 8:53 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Dana and Drift,

Another fond Army recollection.

Once upon a time, only a select few wore a beret. You had to jump out of airplanes to earn it. An airborne soldier could go anywhere, and if you saw another Army guy wearing a beret, he was a brother. You'd stop, exchange a few pleasantries, spit a little tobacco juice, and make observations about how all the F'ing Legs were lower than pond scum. Mind you, there was a pecking order (green at the top, then black, then maroon), but we were secure in our knowledge that we were on a higher order than the rest of the world.

Then, about 1984 or so, someone (probably a heavyweight Leg) decided calling a person a Leg was demeaning. So Ft Bragg put out to the Airborne world that we weren't allowed to call them Legs - they wer Non Airborne Personnel (NAP). So, for a while, the conversation changed - all the F'ing Nappies were lower than pond scum. Eventually whoever it was gave up, and we called them Legs again.

Bottom line - we got names for everyone else. From Dana's earlier, I see nothing's changed much.

roger — July 26, 2012 at 10:48 a.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — July 26, 2012 at 8:53 a.m

Are you saying Harry is wrong? What's good for the goose.....

Nail, DWB, drift, FYI= I read an article the other day that said there were 300,000 truck driving jobs out there waiting for someone to fill them and the GI bill pays for their driving school. These jobs pay rather well for those that don't mind being away from home.

The only reason I mention this is maybe you know someone that's looking for work on their return. There are some great companies out there, Werner is one of the best.

hawkeye — July 26, 2012 at 11:03 a.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — July 26, 2012 at 11:03 a.m.

Yes, Harry is wrong, blocking a bill he ideologically agrees with, just because it was authored by a Republican, is the worst kind of partisan politics. The Republicans have blocked bills that they are ideologically opposed to, but they have passed several democrat proposed bills from the Senate.

frobert — July 26, 2012 at 11:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — July 26, 2012 at 11:43 a.m

Really?

There are none so blind as he who will not see.

hawkeye — July 26, 2012 at 11:49 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I hope there's a part to this story in the C I'm not hearing. A guy breaks out a kitchen window, and is breaking into a guy's house with a hammer. The guy shoots him "multiple" times and kills him. It seems the guy should have screamed stop or something and let the guy see he's armed. If he continues to come in, well, not much choice except to shoot I guess. If he had a gun, shoot first-no sense in waiting.

Also, a guy in Florida starts shooting at 2 robbers in a coffee shop or something. The guys took off running and the guy continued firing. He fired one shot at one of the robbers as he lay on the sidewalk outside the door where he had fallen. The robbers were in full retreat and the guy kept shooting.

Neither has been charged, and one won't be. Never did hear about the Florida guy. Question is, when does self-defense as a justification to kill end? I think the Florida guy was wrong to shoot at the guy who fell running away, it wasn't a case of self-defense at that point. As for taking out a guy armed with a hammer in the window, which may have been intended only to break out the window, that guy seems pretty trigger-happy also.

Granted, this is probably one of the most warlike and violent countries in history, but jeez.............

mrd — July 26, 2012 at 2:48 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mrd — July 26, 2012 at 2:48 p.m.

"Granted, this is probably one of the most warlike and violent countries in history, but jeez............."

The United States currently has the 35th highest murder rate. Far from the most warlike and violent in history. Europe's overall rate is even higher than the United States.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_...

frobert — July 26, 2012 at 3:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — July 26, 2012 at 11:03 a.m. --

Werner's rep is dropping rapidly among drivers - Dad turned the company over to son, and he reportedly doesn't care about anything except the dollar. Same story with WalMart, though they're still one of the better gigs out there for an OTR trucker. Sam Sr treated his drivers fantastically - my BIL spent a few years applying and reapplying until he finally got hired on by them. And he gets paid quite well - enough to snap up several bank repo homes on the northwest side of Phoenix and put them out as rentals. But the younger Waltons don't care about the drivers - again (as with Werner) the bottom line is most important. WalMart is contracting their shipping out more and more to companies that pay bottom dollar to their drivers. My BIL should make it to retirement, but the guesstimate is that the WalMart driver is a dying breed.

It's hard to know what to think about the career field. Teamsters portray any non-union company as crap to work for. But a general thread is that pay is dropping, and drivers are getting less respect/stability/stable workloads than in the past.

But another perspective is that driving is still a hell of a lot better than flipping burgers, or most of the other jobs available to people leaving the service.

roger — July 26, 2012 at 8:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I'm recommending people keep an eye on this one - just as much as what's going on in Syria.

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/07/26/12961535-iran-accuses-israel-of-blowing-up-tourist-bus-at-bulgaria-airport?lite

A tour bus of Israelis was blown up by an as yet unidentified suicide bomber. Seven died, and many more were wounded. Israel has accused Hezbollah, and Iran responded that it was an Israeli set-up.

So called experts are pretty much in agreement that this and other recent attacks are in response to Israel allegedly taking out Iran's nuclear scientists.

Israel is putting out that enough is enough - it's time for the world to take action to stop Hezbollah.

It is getting very shaky over there. And I really doubt we'd be able to walk away from the fight if Israel is involved.

roger — July 26, 2012 at 8:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal


roger,

If it was me, I'd go for C R England. They seem pretty good. I'd stay away from Swift, another Walmart sub contractor. I drove long haul for a few years, it wasn't too bad except if you think they treat you like crap now, 30 years ago was unbelievable. They made you carry two or three log books so you could squeeze thru the scales while driving 18 to 20 hours a day. Of course that was before everything was computerized and they couldn't keep track of the trucks. You just got where you were going as soon as possible and picked up your next load and ran with it.

I'm too old for the long haul, not that I can't, I just get too ticked off at other drivers now.

hawkeye — July 26, 2012 at 8:52 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — July 26, 2012 at 8:52 p.m.

Hawk, it was worse than that in the "old days" - I'm living proof. Never had a CDL in my life; learned to drive a truck moving trailers around the yard at a plant that made building joists in VA Beach. A couple of years later ('74 range) I had a buddy from South Jersey who had his own truck and did produce runs - Mario would take me on runs as his "loader" whenever I wanted to earn some cash. We'd go from outside Philly to Greenville NC, then to Orlando FL, back to Greenville, back to Orlando, and then return to Jersey - in 5 days. Ate a lot of little black capsules to stay awake, and guess who was usually behind the wheel flying down the highway in the middle of the night?

With two people it wasn't all that bad - we could doze and sort of sleep (as much as the pills would allow). But the only sleep Mario got when driving solo was when he pulled up to a dock early and had to wait for them to open. And he had to do it; if he didn't meet the timelines he wouldn't get the work.

Crazy days. I hope we're not going to see them return. Sometimes I wonder; I'll be driving around Columbia Blvd and 82nd Ave in P'Town and see a semi struggling to turn a corner. I'm thinking I could still do better than that; where do these guys get their training and licenses?

roger — July 27, 2012 at 6:33 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Yale study shows that the greater a person's scientific knowledge the less concerned about global warming they are. For several years now people on this and other forums have been falsely accusing global warming skeptics of being anti science. The very basis of science is skepticism and without it there is no science.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1871503&http;://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1871503

frobert — July 27, 2012 at 10:36 a.m. ( | suggest removal


roger, I know exactly what you mean. I ran mostly West coast but every once in a while I hit the East coast. I remember one run to California specifically. I was hauling cedar shakes to Folsom Prison. Why I don't know. Anyway, they had trustees unload it for me but it was really hot out and they were slowing down and I had to get to Salinas to pick up a load of cantaloupe. To speed them up, I got out and fired up the refer in the trailer, they couldn't wait to get back into that trailer to get another bundle.

On another note, I just saw a commercial for "Ice road truckers", what a bunch of goobers.

hawkeye — July 27, 2012 at 10:57 a.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — July 27, 2012 at 10:57 a.m.

I thought you would appreciate this one, I used to drive straight truck on this road, in fact it is where my wife is from.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aFzfD...

frobert — July 27, 2012 at 11:42 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Looks nasty, don't they believe in chains up there? I didn't see any on any of those wrecks.

hawkeye — July 27, 2012 at 12:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — July 27, 2012 at 12:27 p.m.

I never chained up before I moved out here, they don't use them at all back there, well once in a while you see them on the steers but never drives.

frobert — July 27, 2012 at 12:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal


(circa 1981) I ran a set of belly-dumps from a gravel pit to a screening plant on Hwy. 95 just outside of Yuma. I don't recall the round trip miles, but I do remember it was about 45 minutes - driving slightly (heh) faster than 55 mph.

At the pit I'd load myself with a large articulating frontend loader. At the plant I'd open the gates moving along at about 20 mph drawing long "lines" on the flat surface. It paid $4.00 a load.

During the day (on the clock) it was ten-wheelers loaded with units of concrete block. The wage was $5.00 an hour. Ever hear of a 4x4 progressive transmission? It took both hands. For unloading I'd either pull a Champ forklift or use another device that ran on rails mounted on the sides of the bed.

Now and again I'd be sent down into Mexico to pick up a load of brick. No, I never brought back any of those other "bricks."

Drift — July 27, 2012 at 1:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Drift, the first truck I ever drove (in 1968) was an old Pete with a 5 & 4 trans setup. It was 5 gears in the main box and 4 in the brownie. So, you'd shift the main into 1st and shift the brownie 4 times then shift the main to 2nd and 4 in the brownie, etc. You had 20 forward gears and 4 in reverse. It was a real workout if you had to shift all the gears. It was a 30 ft. tow truck and I was towing tractor/trailer rigs when I was 16. Talk about cutting corners. Ha!

boy, captcha is really crappy today

hawkeye — July 27, 2012 at 2:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawk, with the progressive it was slightly different. I don't remember exactly how the jungling act worked, but it wasn't like with the standard aux-box. Both sticks would be moved 'til the two found the big hole. It was common for me to have my left arm through the steering wheel.

Now, the RTO Road Ranger in the Western Star was sweet. A person could "preload" the air operated split and it wouldn't go until the throttle pedal came back off of the floor- and that tractor had air conditioning, too!

As far as CAPTCHA: I feel as though I'm learning to read a foreign language. At first glance I'll think, 'What the heck...?' and then I'll realize I *can* read the darned thing. Watch, I'll show ya. ;^)

Drift — July 27, 2012 at 3:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Police in Maryland executed a search warrant after this nutjob called his former employer, twice no less, and threatened to "blow everybody up". When police arrived, the nutjob was wearing a T-shirt that read" Guns don't kill people, I do". He had 13 legally registered guns among others.

Authorities detailed the weaponry in Prescott's home in their search warrant:
•4 30-round magazines
•2 shotguns
•1 Beretta .40-cal handgun
•1 Ruger .45-cal handgun
•2 KAHR 9mm handguns
•1 Beretta 9mm handgun
•2 Sig Sauer P226 handguns
•1 Browning Arms handgun
•2 Mauser rifles
•1 FN Herstal rifle
•1 Ruger 357 handgun
•1 Night scope
•100 rounds 12 remington
•40 large steel boxes of ammo of various calibers

The nutjob is undergoing mental evaluation. There's a real and on going problem here that needs some serious addressing, as does the daily carnage in the streets, and I don't think the answer lies with having the "good guys" arm up to protect themselves.

mrd — July 27, 2012 at 4:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mrd — July 27, 2012 at 4:11 p.m.

Feel free to start a petition to repeal the 2nd amendment. Might as well, Pelosi and others are already trying to repeal the first.

frobert — July 27, 2012 at 4:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGFV3JxEh9E

From what I can tell, no one is advocating against the right to bear arms. Just reasonable guidelines and restrictions. As well as the right to bear arms, citizens also have the the right to pursue life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

That would include nutjobs/insane/ legally purchasing weapons and using them on the populace when so desired.

Instead of taking up arms and firing to kill...

We should use our God given guns and shoot to thrill.

Take it away Angus!

nailingit — July 27, 2012 at 5:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — July 27, 2012 at 5:15 p.m.

"shall not be infringed" kind of implies that not many guidelines and restrictions are reasonable.

frobert — July 27, 2012 at 5:24 p.m. ( | suggest removal


You mean automatic muskets are cool?

nailingit — July 27, 2012 at 5:27 p.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUWrU8...

I don't think the founding ol' farts meant that we shouldn't infringe on the unhinged.

nailingit — July 27, 2012 at 5:33 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — July 27, 2012 at 5:27 p.m.

At the time, just about every plantation had a cannon with grapshot, so what's the difference?

frobert — July 27, 2012 at 5:33 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Should have been grapeshot, sorry.

frobert — July 27, 2012 at 5:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I wondered if they rolled them into the local Cinema 21 theatre.

It's the 21st century. I repeat...it's the 21st century.

Should anyone be able to own a bazooka? A tank? (I've always wanted one of my own!) nukes?

In a civilized society, certain civil safeguards make sense.

Otherwise....the pursuit of happiness ends up in grave. Like the mostly uncivilized societies whose rate of gun deaths are higher than ours. I'm sure their machete death rates are higher also.

Our founding fathers never intended for us to sacrifice common sense over hard line conservative ideology. .......... unless one of their slaves got out of line,,,,,,

nailingit — July 27, 2012 at 5:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — July 27, 2012 at 5:43 p.m.

I have no problem with military weapons staying in the military, but our Government has given that firepower to police, therefore under "equal protection" we have the right to own them.

On a side note, tanks are perfectly legal for civilian ownership, as long as the cannon is disabled or federally licensed.

frobert — July 27, 2012 at 5:49 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*as long as the cannon is disabled or federally licensed.*

What fun is that?!

nailingit — July 27, 2012 at 5:54 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — July 27, 2012 at 5:54 p.m.

Ya can still run over stuff.

frobert — July 27, 2012 at 5:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal


True...

nailingit — July 27, 2012 at 6:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I'm quite partial the the "Laws Rocket" myself. Anybody see the mess Madore seems to have gotten himself into...... Again?

hawkeye — July 27, 2012 at 8:49 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Another Dick Curless song, I'm not usually into country, but he was a local celebrity back in Bangor Maine when I was a kid.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysKbIg...

frobert — July 27, 2012 at 9:23 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawk @ 8:49-Should be interesting to watch the Madore thing play out. It's something to witness the blind devotion his followers (like Waters) exhibit. He can do no wrong with some people.

Something about the guys smile..........

nailingit — July 27, 2012 at 10:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Shel Silverstein has to be one of the most unappreciated song writers ever, and one of the most prolific.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TV5ztd...

frobert — July 28, 2012 at 12:36 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Fro-

Bangor?
Tell me your family wasn't there by choice.

I worked in Bangor from 07-09, orders are a !@#$%. Lived in Hermon, not any better.

But I did learn one valuable lesson:

I really hate the snow.

danabwoodley — July 28, 2012 at 1:15 a.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 28, 2012 at 1:15 a.m.

I delivered mail in Hermon in the 80's did you have a Carmel or Hampden zip?

I moved here because you don't have to shovel rain.

Were you ANG?

frobert — July 28, 2012 at 1:26 a.m. ( | suggest removal


It was a Bangor zip.

I was AD. I had everyone's favorite job:

Recruiter.

danabwoodley — July 28, 2012 at 2:12 a.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.theolympian.com/2012/07/28/2189245/how-children-learn-to-harm-themselves.html

OK, I know this is outside of Clark County, but I had to share this. I just want to know, does anyone else here think that this person went to far?

I am not commenting on the validity of the writer's claim of who to blame for the fiscal situation the country is facing. But I do believe they went too far in blaming children self inflicted wounds on the Republican Party.

This is an example of what I previously referred to as a sycophant.

danabwoodley — July 28, 2012 at 4:43 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — July 27, 2012 at 5:15 p.m.

I have an inkling that if gun laws do get tougher, that anybody who wants to invest in a firearm will have to undergo a mental evaluation prior to acquisition. So tell me...how many of those "nutjobs" (as some use as their choice of verbiage regarding the ones who take it upon themselves to shoot up a movie theater) will invest in a firearm the legal route?

*Curious scenario should such a law be implemented:*

*So you take someone who has gone through a traumatic experience in their life, suffers from PTSD or clinical depression but has managed to control their condition thanks to the wonders of modern medicine and have been cleared by their doctor/psychiatrist...will try to acquire a firearm for hunting OR for personal protection and will be denied the right to such a purchase because of their medical history???*

goldenoldie — July 28, 2012 at 6:32 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*I have an inkling that if gun laws do get tougher, that anybody who wants to invest in a firearm will have to undergo a mental evaluation prior to acquisition.*

Personally I've never heard of such a proposition. It's about background checks to weed out criminally insane/convicted felons/kids etc. Anyone or anybody can purchase anything at most local gun shows.

*...will invest in a firearm the legal route?*

Impossible to know. Personally, I wouldn't know where to begin to purchase a gun illegally. I'm sure many do, but I'm sure most don't, to include the "nutjobs" who would commit mass murder. Not too many civilian mass murders committed via rocket launchers, grenades etc. in large part due to restricted sales.

As for the other, no easy answers. As with health care, perhaps we should turn to other civilized countries and explore how they do it, and how effective their laws are.

Here is a link to the article mrd was referring to. Is this what the founding papatisto's had in mind?

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/maryland-cops-thwart-aurora-theater-shooting-copycat-discover-gun-stash-included-20-weapons-400-rounds-ammo-article-1.1123265

nailingit — July 28, 2012 at 8:02 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Adding to what goldie has posted, let's look at the other direction:

What about people trying to purchase a firearm with no documentation of their mental illness?

danabwoodley — July 28, 2012 at 8:02 a.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie — July 28, 2012 at 6:32 a.m.

Mental evaluation would never work, almost everybody has some sort of psychological pathology, in fact having none is rare enough that it could be considered one. Who would draw the line?

frobert — July 28, 2012 at 8:03 a.m. ( | suggest removal


My wife & I enjoy viewing the Olympics when they happen. Anyone catch the opening ceremony last night? Awesome!!

Go USA!!!

nailingit — July 28, 2012 at 8:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal


The mental condition that has been getting the most attention recently is PTSD. It comes in varying degrees of severity, with a variety of symptom sets.

Some have a mild case that is marked by periods of severe depression. For the most part functional, but can be lerthagic when it manifests. Medication prevents most problems these would have. This particular case has such a low likelihood of violence that it is near nonexistant.

danabwoodley — July 28, 2012 at 8:13 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — July 28, 2012 at 8:02 a.m.

" perhaps we should turn to other civilized countries and explore how they do it"

Considering a large number of the countries with healthcare don't guarantee freedom of speech, I would hardly call them civilized.

frobert — July 28, 2012 at 8:18 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nail-

I saw a brief portion of the openning ceremony. I notice something that I hadn't paid attention to before:

I didn't know that Palestine had its own Olympic team.

danabwoodley — July 28, 2012 at 8:19 a.m. ( | suggest removal


As for personal/family protection, when is enough enough? I've got a S & W .357 Mag (6" lugged barrel) & a 12 gauge Mossberg w/18" vented rib barrel fitted with a with pistol grip. (very cool by the way! :))

I enjoy shooting once in awhile, and appreciate the right to gun ownership. Just need to have some basic guidelines as we used to. And polls show most Americans agree.

The right tends to perpetuate myth's about the Fed controlling our every move and they shouldn't be trusted. True to a degree, but as with most issues, the right goes overboard and runs off the deck. It's time to stop bowing to the NRA and advocate some sane/sensible laws which perpetuate a citizens right to the life liberty and the pursuit of happiness in my opinion.

But my opinion is just that. Doesn't mean squat. But it's past time America has this discussion. We don't have many leaders with the brass B's to approach this subject, to include our current Prez and the wannabe.

nailingit — July 28, 2012 at 8:30 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Press Talk exploring the Madore thing. Madore's political acumen seems lacking.

Interesting comment yesterday from a supposed previous employee at US Digital. Ads up with the many early missteps from Madore.

He must run his business better than his campaign. Maybe?

Trying to keep it somewhat local. Madore makes it's easy! luvit? manthou? :)

nailingit — July 28, 2012 at 10:51 a.m. ( | suggest removal


DBW- *I didn't know that Palestine had its own Olympic team.*

Good for them!

nailingit — July 28, 2012 at 10:55 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Palestine has been on the Olympic committee since 1995, and has competed in each summer Olympics since 1996.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestin...

frobert — July 28, 2012 at 11:54 a.m. ( | suggest removal


"I have no problem with military weapons staying in the military, but our Government has given that firepower to police, therefore under "equal protection" we have the right to own them."

Hey, maybe I'll run out and buy one of those Bearcat armored personnel carriers like VPD has. I'm sure the optional machine gun is illegal, so maybe I'll opt out for the water cannon. That would be pretty cool. Wonder if VPD took that option.

mrd — July 28, 2012 at 12:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal


DBW- In case you are unaware of us (Bush admin) enabling the rise of Hamas

With the Bush administration insisting that the Palestinians stage free and fair elections after the death of Arafat in 2004, Fatah leaders hoped that coaxing Hamas into the electoral process would help weaken its more radical elements. Despite U.S. objections, the Palestinian parliamentary elections went ahead in January 2006 with Hamas' participation. They were monitored closely by international observers and were universally recognized as free and fair. With reformist and leftist parties divided into a half-dozen competing slates, Hamas was seen by many Palestinians disgusted with the status quo as the only viable alternative to the corrupt Fatah incumbents, and with Israel refusing to engage in substantive peace negotiations with Abbas' Fatah-led government, they figured there was little to lose in electing Hamas. In addition, factionalism within the ruling party led a number of districts to have competing Fatah candidates. As a result, even though Hamas only received 44 percent of the vote, it captured a majority of parliament and the right to select the prime minister and form a new government.

The demands imposed at the insistence of the Bush administration and Congress on the Palestinian Authority in order to lift the sanctions appeared to have been designed to be rejected and were widely interpreted as a pretext for punishing the Palestinian population for voting the wrong way. For example, the United States demanded that the Hamas-led government unilaterally recognize the right of the state of Israel to exist, even though Israel has never recognized the right of the Palestinians to have a viable state on the West Bank and Gaza Strip, or anywhere else. Other demands included an end of attacks on civilians in Israel while not demanding that Israel likewise end its attacks on civilian areas in the Gaza Strip. They also demanded that the Hamas-led Palestinian Authority accept all previously negotiated agreements, even as Israel continued to violate key components of the Wye River Agreement and other negotiated deals with the Palestinians.

While Hamas honored a unilateral cease-fire regarding suicide bombings in Israel, border clashes and rocket attacks into Israel continued. Israel, meanwhile, with the support of the Bush administration, engaged in devastating air strikes against crowded urban neighborhoods, resulting in hundreds of civilian casualties. Congress also went on record defending the Israeli assaults -- which were widely condemned in the international community as excessive and in violation of international humanitarian law -- as legitimate acts of self-defense.

Interesting stuff...read much more @

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid;=11609

nailingit — July 28, 2012 at 12:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 28, 2012 at 8:13 a.m.

DanaB: First of all, I have read your post stating that you are in the military. I want to personally thank you for your contribution as a member of our military service. It is an honor sharing in discussion with you and am glad you are here to share with us.

Secondly, regarding your post at 8:13 am regarding your views of PTSD...I want to bring to attention your post at 8:02 am and how you stated the issue of "no documentation." Many people go throughout life not even recognizing that they have certain conditions, either that or ignoring the symptoms...PTSD included. What I have witnessed in a long-time friend was the anger, the frustration, the hatred for not understanding what it was that was bothering the person...and it was built up over several years. All it took was a television show...a commercial...the backfire or blown tire on a car...not much; but it would throw the person back into the dark side of PTSD. The person, a decorated Vietnam War/Korean War Veteran who suffered injuries while on the lines would open up into a cold sweat and into a rage or curl into the fetal position in fear of witnessing yet another horrific situation such as they witnessed back in 'Nam...something I believe our Veteran's Administration didn't recognize till much later and today, society is just beginning to understand a bit of just what it is all about.

Now, regarding the homeless veterans of the Vietnam War era (and current wars)...it concerns me just how many of our fighting brave who have fallen into the grips of homelessness are victims of this mind-crippling disease. As you are aware, all military members are trained to handle weaponry, what to do, what not to do...and they all know how to use their weaponry...

What bothers me is the fact that so many people (not just military vets) who suffer mental anguish through psychological disorders (not just PTSD), don't even know they have the disorders in the first place. Some - their loved ones don't understand...others - the family members take the easy way out and just pack up and leave...and the one undergoing the wrath of the disorder, can't figure out where things went wrong. They sometimes become despondent, antisocial...even hold rage against leadership and their fellow man. They turn to drugs or alcoholism...even suicide before they can recognize and get the help they desperately need.

It's a vicious circle.

goldenoldie — July 28, 2012 at 4:56 p.m. ( | suggest removal


"""But my opinion is just that. Doesn't mean squat."""

Well Nailingit, this is where I have to disagree with you. Your opinion is just as important as the opinion of the next person. We don't always agree, but if we all agreed on everything, life would be rather boring...wouldn't you say???

I do have to say, I don't know exactly what you mean when you state *"The right tends to perpetuate myth's about the Fed controlling our every move and they shouldn't be trusted. True to a degree, but as with most issues, the right goes overboard and runs off the deck.*"

Maybe you could provide some reading material for me on this one. I'm curious as to what myths you speak of...especially if it's true to a degree. I'm not sure how a myth could be a truth...even a partial truth. (And please...no huffpost links, lol)

Now...regarding gun control...even if there were stricter laws regarding gun control, only the law-abiding citizen would follow the law. I'd highly doubt the others would gives a rat's patooty what federal/state/local law was implemented.

If there was a way all automatic weapons in the world could be destroyed, that would be a start but then...well...just figure out where those automatic weapons began and who sold what to whom, you know??? ;]]]

I'm sure someone would come up with something else just as evil.

And why in the aitch ee double toothpicks are there bullets that can penetrate just about anything, huh???

goldenoldie — July 28, 2012 at 5:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal


DanaB...one little extension of my note here for you.

What troubles me are those who have turned to narcotics and alcohol...or even those on prescription meds. Their mental capabilities are hindered and I don't think they are totally aware of their actions, including those who utilize weaponry.

I'd heard the young man who shot up the movie theater was under psychiatric care. I'd sure like to know what meds he might have been on...and if he was on any meds, just what the potential side effects were.

goldenoldie — July 28, 2012 at 5:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal


"Now...regarding gun control...even if there were stricter laws regarding gun control, only the law-abiding citizen would follow the law. I'd highly doubt the others would gives a rat's patooty what federal/state/local law was implemented."

Sounds like a total surrender to the criminal element. So maybe we should take the easy way out-we always do-and quit passing laws criminals won't obey. Stop enforcing laws people, in mass, disobey? If we stopped doing so, why the crime rate would drop immediately, heck we could say we've eliminated crime altogether by making the difficult to enforce crimes legal. Then we can keep shooting away!

mrd — July 28, 2012 at 5:34 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Hi goldenoldie. Since you want to get hung up on wordplay...

I suppose the ostensibly aspect would fit with my usage. Jesus Christ used parables...no truth to them?

Another would be .. If you're good at Christmas Santa will bring you gifts. In a parental context good will help bring gifts, yet no Santa. Does that help? I think you understand my intent. How about FEMA camps are created to imprison Americans? FEMA helps to house folks who need it, but not imprison. Myth mixed with some truth. They help to blur the lines. :)

myth noun \ˈmith\

Definition of MYTH

1
a : a usually traditional story of ostensibly historical events that serves to unfold part of the world view of a people or explain a practice, belief, or natural phenomenon
b : parable, allegory
2
a : a popular belief or tradition that has grown up around something or someone; especially : one embodying the ideals and institutions of a society or segment of society
b : an unfounded or false notion
3
: a person or thing having only an imaginary or unverifiable existence
4
: the whole body of myths
See myth defined for English-language learners »
See myth defined for kids »
Examples of MYTH

It's an enduring myth that money brings happiness.
I don't believe the myths and legends about this forest.
Contrary to popular myth, no monster lives in this lake.
Origin of MYTH

Greek mythos
First Known Use: 1830
Related to MYTH

Synonyms: fable, legend, mythos
Antonyms: truth, verity
[+]more
Other Mythology and Folklore Terms

elysian, fay, muse, nimbus, phoenix
Rhymes with MYTH

fifth, frith, grith, kith, pith, smith, swith, with, withe
Learn More About MYTH

Thesaurus: All synonyms and antonyms for "myth"
Spanish-English Dictionary: Translation of "myth"
Britannica.com: Encyclopedia article about "myth"
Browse

Next Word in the Dictionary: mythical
Previous Word in the Dictionary: mystique
All Words Near: myth
Seen & Heard

What made you want to look up myth? *Comments from goldenoldie.* Please tell us where you read or heard it (including the quote, if possible). The C' of course!

---

*If there was a way all automatic weapons in the world could be destroyed, that would be a start but then...well...just figure out where those automatic weapons began and who sold what to whom, you know??? ;]]]
I'm sure someone would come up with something else just as evil.*

Automatic weapons are evil? I don't think so. People have been asking for some basic guidelines to help weed out the "nutjobs"/convicted felons/kids etc from stockpiling fire power. This is pretty simple stuff. I understand if you don't agree, but your rationale seems a bit illogical.

nailingit — July 28, 2012 at 5:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal


mrd — July 28, 2012 at 5:34 p.m.

Your logic is fundamentally flawed and is the exact "logic" that gave us the war on drugs. More laws and regulation on law abiding citizens has absolutely no effect on the behavioral of criminals. Oklahoma City and 911 should have shown us that unhinged people are going to kill with or without firearms, outlawing them would just make criminals out of average citizens trying to protect their families. In my opinion fully half the laws on the books could be eliminated with absolutely no adverse effect on the citizenry.

Politicians and the Supreme Court need to go back, read the Constitution and restore the rights to the people that they have stolen. Restore the right to be free from unreasonable search, restore the right to make our own medical decisions, restore the right to make a living for our families, restore the right to marry whom we choose. Then we could go back to building our Utopian society.

frobert — July 28, 2012 at 5:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie @ 5:12- *What troubles me are those who have turned to narcotics and alcohol...or even those on prescription meds.*

Do you use the same rationale with drugs as you do with guns?

*I'd highly doubt the others would gives a rat's patooty what federal/state/local law was implemented."*

Why should we have any drug limitations? People who use don't give a rat's patooty, legal or not........

nailingit — July 28, 2012 at 6 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — July 28, 2012 at 6 p.m.

There should be no Federal limitations on our medications and very few Sate limitations. Outlawing drugs has not given us any less addicts or any less crime. In fact a huge portion of our crime is a direct result of drug laws.

frobert — July 28, 2012 at 6:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — July 28, 2012 at 5:53 p.m.

The police are responsible for many more deaths every year(with the exception of 2001) than the nutjob mass murderers, shouldn't we start by disarming them?

frobert — July 28, 2012 at 6:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal


fro-I pretty much agree, with the exception of sales to children.

nailingit — July 28, 2012 at 6:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal


fro @ 6:09- Something to think about! It's getting scary as we are agreeing on waaaay too much as of late!

Make the cops like the Bobby's of ol' England. I bet you can fit more than a half dozen doughnuts on a Billy Club.

nailingit — July 28, 2012 at 6:17 p.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — July 28, 2012 at 6:17 p.m.

17 of the "Dunkin" variety

hawkeye — July 28, 2012 at 6:26 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawk- LOL. Maybe 10 glazed and a couple of buttermilk!

nailingit — July 28, 2012 at 6:36 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hehehe....all right you guys...I get the point. Nailingit, you are right. Automatic weapons are not evil. It's the people who designed them and the irrational ones behind the trigger that are the evil ones, no matter who they are.

MRD, I'm not saying a total surrender. What I AM saying is...laws are made to control society...and laws are broken by those who don't have any respect for authority. Then again, some laws made restrict the rights of all people. I don't think it's necessary to lock up all the guns in the world, out of the hands of civilians. Seems to me that would be a control through the minds of those supporting a the New World (dis)Order. It is my belief that such an implementation could recklessly allow certain leading entities to achieve ultimate control of the people...possibly Fascist military rule without the civilians having any say, any rights whatsoever.

And Frobert...you say there should be federal limitations on our medications. Well my fellow forum dweller, there should most definitely be Federal limitations on the manufacture and distribution of medications which have not been approved (and I speak of the medications coming from companies better known in a conglomerate as BIG PHARMA)...most definitely. Some potential side effects have caused death to many a patient...before the drug was even approved.

(conspiracy time)...doesn't it make you wonder just why the Feds have allowed so many medications to be produced with such terrible side effects as evidenced by the long lists displayed on the attached flyer at the pharmacy as well as what is shared on all the commercials lately??? And what's with all these televised "Lawsuit Attorney" commercials against prescription meds??? Kinda makes you wonder, huh!!! They allowed the drugs to be sold on the market, complained about the high court and medical costs to the consumer, then the people or their loved ones who have gone after BIG PHARMA are tied up in litigation in the courts and potential dollar losses to BIG PHARMA, hospitals and doctors. Hmm...and who is it that profits out of all of this???? Take a guess...any guess!!!

Also...Federal laws should stay in place for those manufactured in the back room of meth and crack houses as well as those places making up that synthetic marijuana as well. Shut em down. Don't know if they'll ever control it, but too many little kids are involved...even the crack babies who never had a chance to say NO and the little toddlers wandering out of their homes while their cracked-out parents sleep off their high.

goldenoldie — July 28, 2012 at 6:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Nailingit, those buttermilks will just fall apart. Better stick to the glazed. That HFCS holds them together better on the Billy Club..8P'''

goldenoldie — July 28, 2012 at 6:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Oops... I meant fascist rule. I intended to remove the word "military." Guess I was too fast on the Captcha to get my comment out before. Sorry about that.

goldenoldie — July 28, 2012 at 6:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie- Agreed with the buttermilk (unless they were on top. Average shelf life of a buttermilk doughnut within the reach of law enforcement is 3 seconds. I'll look it up on the HuffPo!) :))

*Seems to me that would be a control through the minds of those supporting a the New World (dis)Order. It is my belief that such an implementation could recklessly allow certain leading entities to achieve ultimate control of the people*

Just curious, who are the leading entities within our borders?

nailingit — July 28, 2012 at 7:05 p.m. ( | suggest removal


goldenoldie — July 28, 2012 at 6:39 p.m.

The current FDA approval process is a joke it is long and drawn out and limits the liability of big pharma. Our government funds R&D;, issues a patent to the pharmaceutical company, relies solely on their safety tests and than limits their liability. Who do you think wrote these laws anyway? Cut the Federal Government out of the equation and don't limit the liability of the drug companies. If their money is on the line, drugs will be safer, and get to market quicker.

As far as crackheads, tweakers et al, the current system, making their addiction a crime just forces them to hide and further harms their children. How many would seek help if they didn't risk imprisonment and loss of their children.

frobert — July 28, 2012 at 7:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal


*How many would seek help if they didn't risk imprisonment and loss of their children.*

Not to mention the 100's of millions of dollars spent each year arresting, prosecuting, feeding, housing, etc. drug offenders. Just spend a fraction of the cost on education and rehab facilities, and America would be ahead of the game in a reasonable time frame.

And put an end to "the job creators" requiring Americans to piss in a cup to see if they took a hit of pot in the last few months. Life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. If an employer suspects a person's drug use would interfere with with a job, don't hire em'. If a person causes an employer to suspect drug use once hired, test em' with reasonable cause. Otherwise, keep your Mitt's out of our urine, blood & hair!

Much of the problem lies with Federal & local po po's not being allocated $$$$$$$$$$$, as it would cut into the massive amount of funding to fight this so called war on drugs.

amen

nailingit — July 28, 2012 at 8 p.m. ( | suggest removal



Goldie-

That particular group that has the disorders and isn't recieving proper care are the ones I am referring to. The whole process of self medication can be even more dangerous.

However, part of that is this stygma of seeking care. DoD has made great strides in reducing the stygma, but it hasn't been fully eradicated due to individuals. Unfortunately, some of these individuals are in leadership positions.

I know. I have seen it.
I have experienced it.

danabwoodley — July 28, 2012 at 9:49 p.m. ( | suggest removal


...even the crack babies who never had a chance to say NO

goldenoldie — July 28, 2012 at 6:39 p.m

Not meaning to change the subject, however this particular line does relate to another issue as well.

How about these babies that were never given a chance? They were instead aborted in the womb. Just like the babies born addicted to drugs, did these children have a choice?

Sorry, something I feel strongly about. Will get off the soapbox now.

danabwoodley — July 28, 2012 at 10:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 28, 2012 at 10:09 p.m.

Two completely different subjects however similar. Babies born addicted to drugs are totally different from fetuses aborted. Neither had a choice but neither could make a choice. In both cases it is up to the "parents". However, only one group will be children, painfully.

nailingit, I'm wondering about your stick. It must be a "Billy Club" as opposed to a "nightstick".

hawkeye — July 28, 2012 at 10:43 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawk-

Yes different subjects, but not completely. As you pointed out, it is a matter of the childs choice. In both cases, they do not have one.

danabwoodley — July 29, 2012 at 5:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Danabwoodley, I like the way you think.

Regarding your comment at 9:49 pm...it truly doesn't surprise me. There will always be an issue such as that, no matter what the subject whether it be PTSD, the Columbia River Crossing, Repubs versus Demo's versus Libs...whatever. I guess its the individual mindset and just who has the power to make or break any subject.

Regarding your comment at 10:09 pm...I hear ya on that one. Some folks just don't know how to practice abstinence in certain cases. I remember years back when they finally curbed the number of children a single mother could "use" in order to gain welfare bennies. Not sure if that's still the case, though. Others, victims of vicious rape and incest...that's a difficult decision for the female...something she would have to live with the rest of her life.

goldenoldie — July 29, 2012 at 7:17 a.m. ( | suggest removal


*"""Just curious, who are the leading entities within our borders?"""*

I'm laughing at that question, Nailingit. I won't point a finger at any particular person or party...not with a ten foot pole, lol. You have to admit there's a certain bunch with some level of leadership whether it be local, state or federal (even those who have secretly controlled world leaders with their sly handiwork) who will stop at nothing to get what they want, though. Sometimes they disguise themselves as someone with a certain political affiliation...and if they don't get what they want, they change sides. Others, they're caught doing something they shouldn't have done...even with the possibility that the one pointing the finger at them is playing the very same dangerous game at the expense of the people of the USA...of the World. AND, there's those who get away with it...and are never caught but those doggoned biographies show up years after they've died which folks all but shout out "I KNEW IT!!!" But then again, this is just speculation on my part...one of those "opinions" I'm exercising my rights to share. Can't hold that against me but maybe you could share your thoughts...your opinion...in educating from a different perspective to this li'l ol' grannie.

goldenoldie — July 29, 2012 at 7:27 a.m. ( | suggest removal


I've got to laugh at Captcha this morning. I decided to "google" the word and dates shown. The word "herogyC", led me right to a Guitar Hero Connect link. The dates, 1731-1808...led me right to several links of authors and famous people including John Freeth, a poet and song/ political ballad writer. Hmm...guitar hero and political ballads...NAW!!!

Funny what Captcha can share. Kind of a cryptic game of sorts.

goldenoldie — July 29, 2012 at 7:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Goldie-

While I understand what you mean regarding the product of incest or rape. But the question I have would be, how many of the near 400,000 annual abortions would fall in these categories? The remaining would be nothing more than a form of birth control.

danabwoodley — July 29, 2012 at 7:50 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Danabwoodley, that's why I mentioned the problem of those who do not know how to practice abstinence. Birth control in itself is something each person who has to make in that decision. Abortion isn't birth control. As far as I'm concerned...it's taking a human life. From this woman's perspective, a fetus...once conceived...is a human being. Yes, it may still be in the zygote stage...no brain and no heart, but it is still a human...a developing fetus. If "test-tube babies" are formed on a Petrie dish and implanted in the womb of a woman, it is a human even at the zygote stage.

The morning after pill is just a lame excuse for those who practice unsafe sex and don't want the responsibility of carrying the fetus to term. In the case of violent rape...I can understand the need for the morning-after pill but there are those whose religious beliefs prevent them from ingesting such a pill. There will always be a potential adoptive couple waiting for that innocent child.

Regarding abortion...it is my honest opinion (and my right to share my beliefs without judgment by others) that the ONLY time abortion should be executed is if the fetus has ZERO chance of survival outside the womb **OR** if the expectant mother has ZERO chance of survival while carrying the baby.

goldenoldie — July 29, 2012 at 8:11 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Applauding Goldie.

I was beginning to think I was the only one.

danabwoodley — July 29, 2012 at 8:18 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Morning all! Nice to see the week brought a number of posters, lots of different opinions, and nearly zero sniggering. Nice.
I am in a mellow mood after a good night's rest so I will just throw a few thoughts out there.

I am always interested in reading comments about those nearly sainted founding fathers. What did they have in mind regarding second amendment? Do we need to get rid of federal laws or nearly all laws on books, get back to constitution only? Simplifying here but the gist of the discussions seems to be always that we lost sight of the constitution and what those aforementioned saintly people had to say.

First- the constitution is a great document. So are the amendments. That out of the way...Second, time has moved on, things are changing. Does the argument hold that we only stick to what the document says and nothing else?

luvithere — July 29, 2012 at 9:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Probably expressing myself badly in above comment but early and only one cup of coffee so far.

luvithere — July 29, 2012 at 9:05 a.m. ( | suggest removal


luvithere — July 29, 2012 at 9:04 a.m

The function of the Constitution is to limit the authority of the Federal Government, through the fourteenth it also limits States authority when it comes to individual rights. The founders built in a mechanism for amending the original document if sufficient support is present. Simply ignoring the document or sidestepping is never an option.

frobert — July 29, 2012 at 9:20 a.m. ( | suggest removal


True Fro, I never advocated to sidestep or ignore. (In case that was not clear from my post).

All I am saying is the document was written quite a while ago and we need to take the different Zeitgeist into account. I think we are lacking in that respect a bit.

luvithere — July 29, 2012 at 9:31 a.m. ( | suggest removal


hawk @ 10:43-*nailingit, I'm wondering about your stick.*

**Hey Now!** :))

Good morning luvit. Something to keep in mind about our founding fathers dad's n' granddad's, when someone said "let's go burn one", most likely they were talking about the 'witch' down the street that wouldn't succumb to their every whim!

nailingit — July 29, 2012 at 10:53 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Now Nail,
here's hoping they were more enlightened about that.

My issue is that I do not revere them as much as others do. And here's why: all male, all white. Writing about the rights of all men, except they conveniently forgot they were slave holders. No rights for women either. Voting only for white male land owners.

Now I can ascribe all these flaws to the prevalent Zeitgeist. Therefore I can forget/forgive this wrong thinking. Or not. But it then leaves the way open for me to say the Zeitgeist has changed-get with it!

luvithere — July 29, 2012 at 11 a.m. ( | suggest removal


nailingit — July 29, 2012 at 10:53 a.m.

No witches were ever burned in the colonies, nineteen were hanged, this horrible, but isolated incident happened 83 years before the Deceleration of Independence. The founders established a constitutional code that strictly prohibited religious persecution or prosecution. Trying to tie them to these deplorable incidents is nonsensical.

frobert — July 29, 2012 at 11:09 a.m. ( | suggest removal


luvithere — July 29, 2012 at 11 a.m.

Good morning luv.

I see your point and I think that the country, the declaration, and life all see a natural progression.

"Change is growth" --- works for me.

hawkeye — July 29, 2012 at 11:24 a.m. ( | suggest removal


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yp_l5n...

Early teachings of the Libertarian party...

nailingit — July 29, 2012 at 11:24 a.m. ( | suggest removal


fro @ 11:09- *Deceleration of Independence.*

In some respects, I couldn't agree more!

*Trying to tie them to these deplorable incidents is nonsensical.*

I did say dad's n granddad's. And besides, when have I ever made sense anyway?

nailingit — July 29, 2012 at 11:29 a.m. ( | suggest removal


On another subject, I'm a little concerned with the direction the Olympics is going.

I turned on the TV and looked at the channel guide and on several channels I saw;

XXX Olympics

took me a second to realize it WASN'T porn.

hawkeye — July 29, 2012 at 11:46 a.m. ( | suggest removal


JERUSALEM (AP) — ***Mitt Romney says that if he paid more taxes than were required, he wouldn't be qualified to be president.*** *Wanna bet?*

The U.S. presidential candidate tells ABC News that American voters expect candidates to pay "only what the tax code requires." He says he hasn't calculated what percentage of his income was paid in taxes but says that he's been audited.

Romney's vast personal wealth has been an issue in the campaign.

Democrats have criticized him for paying only 13.9 percent of his income in taxes during the one year his taxes have been made public.

Romney says he will release an additional year of returns before Election Day. That has left some questioning whether Romney pays a smaller share than other Americans.

hawkeye — July 29, 2012 at 4:54 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — July 29, 2012 at 4:54 p.m.

Why the tax distraction?

You should be attacking Romney on his more war, less personal liberty platform. Oh yeah, you can't do that because that is the basis of Obama's platform also.

frobert — July 29, 2012 at 5:01 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Another take on the County Commissioner race and the local Repub party.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3jIE3...

roger — July 29, 2012 at 6:10 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — July 29, 2012 at 5:01 p.m

Not a distraction, just a CONTINUING dialog of how he is NOT Presidential material. Does he really think that if he had paid MORE income tax than he did, that would make him less Presidential? Ridiculous. It all comes back to him not releasing his tax forms.

For you to suggest other non-relevant subjects just proves you have no response, you are just trying to change the subject. Nice try.

hawkeye — July 29, 2012 at 6:46 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — July 29, 2012 at 6:46 p.m.

More war and less personal liberty is non-relevant?

Romney legally filling out and paying his taxes is as relevant as Obama's birth certificate.

frobert — July 29, 2012 at 7:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — July 29, 2012 at 7:07 p.m.

When he pays less than I do, I find it extremely relevant.

You talk about more war and less personal liberty, I think you have him confused with Bush.

But that has nothing to do with what I posted, now does it. You are just trying to change the subject again.

hawkeye — July 29, 2012 at 7:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — July 29, 2012 at 7:20 p.m.

$3,226,623 is less than you pay? Wow I had no idea you were that rich.

Bush, Romney or Obama it makes no difference when it comes to war and personal liberty. These are the subjects that matter in the upcoming election, I for one would not vote for either of the major party candidates.

frobert — July 29, 2012 at 7:32 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — July 29, 2012 at 7:32 p.m

My mistake. I gave you more credit, I guess you aren't smarter than a 5th grader. I pay more than 13.9%.

"Bush, Romney or Obama it makes no difference when it comes to war and personal liberty."

If that's the case, why did you bring it up?

hawkeye — July 29, 2012 at 7:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Taxes again, eh?

The only reason it is an issue this election is because there are those clamoring that people pay their "fair share".

Yes, those that earn a lot have tons of loopholes to take deductions that will lower their tax bill. And guess what, it is legal.

On the other end, there are those taking advantage of the various credits that are offered. In the end, not only are they not paying anything, but in some cases they come out ahead of the IRS. This is also legal.

So who is paying their fair share?

How about we do this: Start by eliminating the graduating scale. No matter how much you earn, we all pay the same rate. Now to make it appetizing we will lower that rate to a nice round 10%.

Next, eliminate all deductions. That way the high earners can't take steps to lower their bill. We will also eliminate credits. Now no one can get away with paying nothing, or getting paid by the IRS.

We apply this to all returns: personal, business, corporate. Now everyone will pay the same rate. Will that be a fair share?

This should increase revenue (even with a lower rate), and will also save money since there will be fewer people required to work at the IRS.

What you think?

danabwoodley — July 29, 2012 at 8:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 29, 2012 at 8:25 p.m

We should be increasing the number of people paying no tax not decreasing it.

frobert — July 29, 2012 at 8:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — July 29, 2012 at 7:37 p.m.

You said you paid more taxes and than made a feeble attempt at insulting me when I took you at your word. I have learned to expect no more from you.

The only way you can come up with a tax rate of 13.9% for Romney is if you believe he should have paid taxes on the over 4 million he gave to charity. So are you advocating eliminating charitable donations?

Come on read the tax return if you factor out both of their charitable donations Obama and Romney paid about the same rate.

This is just a red herring, provided to keep people off of the issues.

I am not a supporter of Romney and would love to see a scandal bring him down before the 27th but this is no more relevant than Obama's birth certificate.

frobert — July 29, 2012 at 9:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal


OK, you could have two possible meanings here-

If you mean that no one should have to pay taxes, that would be ridiculous. Without the revenue, the government couldn't function.

If you mean that the higher earners paying more, and people earning less paying nothing, then that wouldn't be "fair".

You may call this a catch phrase, but it sounds like a form of wealth redistibution. That leads to socialism. That is not America.

danabwoodley — July 29, 2012 at 9:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal


dbw,

I'm all in favor of a flat tax, no deductions.

Fro, I'm just saying that I paid more in taxes (%) than Romney. If you say that what he paid was fair then what I paid wasn't. I don't get all the deductions and breaks he does so I feel that there must be some kind of inequality in the tax laws. If you don't agree, I DON'T CARE.

Oh and I didn't come up with that rate for him, it was in the article that I posted.

hawkeye — July 29, 2012 at 9:31 p.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 29, 2012 at 9:11 p.m.

I disagree that the federal government couldn't function without income taxes, the problem is it is too big and trying to control too much that we are already controlling at the state level. Remove these redundant levels of government and the federal government could function without income tax. In 2006 individual income tax only accounted for 49% of the federal revenue.

Secondly, people have a right to keep the fruits of their labor, especially up to a reasonable amount to live on, if we take 10% away from the poorest people they can't pay rent or buy groceries. If someone works for a living they deserve to keep every penny.

frobert — July 29, 2012 at 9:31 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — July 29, 2012 at 9:31 p.m.

I agree that the rate you and I pay is not fair.

I do realize that the rate is what is being reported, that is why I suggested you read his tax return yourself. The news doesn't always tell you the whole truth.

frobert — July 29, 2012 at 9:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal


I will not disagree that a person who works should enjoy the fruits of their labor. I know that I am proud of what I am able to provide for my family. I feel that the level in which we live is a sign of my success as the head of my household. (Not the only measurement, but one of them)

And yes, the government is too big. There are many agencies that can be eliminated because of redundancy. Others need to be streamlined to be more efficient. Others still need to be audited to ensure they aren't wasting money where they don't need to spend it.

But-

Everyone in this country recieves a benefit of services recieved from the government. At a minimum, everyone recieves the protection from enemies that is provided from agencies within DHS and DoD. If you are recieving this service, why should you not contribute taxes to pay for these services?

danabwoodley — July 29, 2012 at 9:51 p.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 29, 2012 at 9:11 p.m.

On the subject of wealth redistribution.

Prescription drug laws force people that can't afford it to pay a physician in order to get their needed medication, this redistributes wealth to the medical profession.

Vehicle emissions testing forces people to purchase new vehicles more often redistributing wealth to the auto industry.

We are forced through taxes to pay police and firefighters excessive wages, redistributing our wealth to them.

Redistribution of wealth works up too, something the neoconservatives seem to ignore.

frobert — July 29, 2012 at 10 p.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 29, 2012 at 9:51 p.m.

Everybody pays taxes, it is a misnomer that people who do not pay income taxes pay no taxes. The other 51% of taxes we all pay, either though the prices we pay to corporations or through excise taxes on liquor, tobacco, tires, gasoline and many many other items.

frobert — July 29, 2012 at 10:04 p.m. ( | suggest removal


frobert — July 29, 2012 at 10 p.m.

Yea, if I buy food, that's wealth redistribution. If I pay insurance or taxes or buy gas or pay the mortgage, all redistribution.

Sucks, huh?

hawkeye — July 29, 2012 at 10:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — July 29, 2012 at 10:07 p.m.

I'm not talking about buying what you need, I'm talking about being forced by the government to buy something you don't need.

frobert — July 29, 2012 at 10:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 29, 2012 at 9:51 p.m.

"Everyone in this country recieves a benefit of services recieved from the government."

The services that actually benefit me are quite limited, why should I pay for the DEA to bust the medical marijuana grower down the street? Why should I pay for the government to make sure my neighbor doesn't have two wives? Why should I pay for bank bailouts? Why should I pay for the thousands of other thing they do that doesn't benefit me?

frobert — July 29, 2012 at 10:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal


Let's look here-

Prescriptions drugs: Many of these companies recieve grants from the government to develope medications to improve the lives of the population. So why are these medications so expensive in the first place. If you do not have insurance coverage to pay for your meds, then yes you will pay the Dr. directly for what he will provide you. And if you cannot afford to see the Dr. in the first place, then someone (read taxpayer) will foot the bill for you.

Emissions testing is advertised to improve air quality. However, this also means that the public must replace their vehicles with something newer ever so often. Yes, this keeps the auto industry going, but also auto workers. This (in theory) will keep them working. That means their union can collect their dues.

Police and firefighters, I see the same regarding the union.

Redistibution of wealth is dentrimental to most everyone. There are those that purport to be looking out for others, but seem to be taking care of themselves quite nicely.

danabwoodley — July 29, 2012 at 10:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal


**Prescription drug laws force people that can't afford it to pay a physician in order to get their needed medication, this redistributes wealth to the medical profession.**

*Or maybe it's for the safety of the patient. I'm sure you have the medical proficiency to prescribe meds for yourself and family. *

***Vehicle emissions testing forces people to purchase new vehicles more often redistributing wealth to the auto industry.***

*Vehicle emissions testing makes sure that your 15 year old Yugo isn't spewing too many toxins into the air. It doesn't MAKE you buy anything as long as you can repair your poorly maintained vehicle yourself. *

hawkeye — July 29, 2012 at 11:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 29, 2012 at 10:55 p.m.

If I have asthma and need a prescription for prednesone, why am I forced to visit a doctor? What service do they provide? If I know what I need I should be able to purchase it, **that** is the American way. The government is only responsible because they have drafted unreasonable laws that force people to see a doctor, these people are not leeching off of the system, the physicians are, by and through the government they have convinced that they are the only ones qualified to make peoples choices for them.

The drug companies are an even bigger scam, government money for R&D; than outrageous prices and the government provides them with limited liability.

Fixing these two areas would have gone a long way toward reducing the the stress on our healthcare system. Instead we try to regulate our way out of a problem that over regulation got us into in the first place.

frobert — July 29, 2012 at 11:22 p.m. ( | suggest removal


hawkeye — July 29, 2012 at 11:14 p.m.

When I was younger you could buy codeine cough syrup over the counter without a prescription, than the medical industry got it scheduled so you needed a physicians permission. Is there less narcotics addiction now? less overdose?

It is an inherent human right to make our own medical decisions, how could any thinking person believe that the government should forces us to cede that right to them?

frobert — July 29, 2012 at 11:30 p.m. ( | suggest removal


You may not like all of the services the government is providing you, but there must be some services you are satisfied with. DoT? Customs and Border Patrol? DoJ? (I won't say TSA, because I am sure I know the answer.)

I realize that some of those services you may not agree with, but I do believe they have a right to enforce the law, whether we agree with it or no. I do realize there are many laws that are selectively enforced, and I am enraged by this.

I only hope we can get an administration with the will and resolve to do just that.

danabwoodley — July 30, 2012 at 7:28 a.m. ( | suggest removal


danabwoodley — July 30, 2012 at 7:28 a.m.

" I do believe they have a right to enforce the law"

Show me that one in the Constitution, the Government has NO rights.

The government derives it's authority from the consent of the governed, and the feds have definitely overstepped that authority when it comes to marijuana,transportation security, search and seizure, surveillance and hundreds of other areas.

frobert — July 30, 2012 at 8:01 a.m. ( | suggest removal


... *but until we elect a Ron Paul or Gary Johnson as president that isn't going to happen.*

frobert — July 23, 2012 at 11:56 p.m.

Any evidence that either would actually be able to actualize any libertarian legislation?

mr_basil_seal — July 30, 2012 at 8:50 a.m. ( | suggest removal


mr_basil_seal — July 30, 2012 at 8:50 a.m.

Drug scheduling is decided by the executive branch, no legislation is needed.

frobert — July 30, 2012 at 9:07 a.m. ( | suggest removal


Forum Login