Associations cast shadow on Obama's character
I think you may have missed the point of this article. Nowhere does Charles Krauthammer say that Obama is a terrorist because of his association with Ayers, nor that Obama is a criminal because of his association with Rezko, nor a racist because of his association with Wright. In fact, Krauthammer specifically says that these associations do NOT mean Obama is any of those things. He was making a point of how Obama was using those associations and relationships and what that means about the man. (4 hrs ago | post #3)
Sunday's Letters to the Editor
Margaret Litman - I am not defending Sarah Palin, however, I have a tough time any more trying to believe that paying taxes is my patriotic duty. Paying for legitimate requirements is a something I have no problems with. I have a huge problem with paying for all the pork that our taxes ends up paying for. I would have no problems with paying my taxes if the money goes for worthwhile needs. I have many problems paying my taxes into a bottomless pit that makes politicians rich and their lobbyist interests richer. I am really very sick and tired of paying for all the government waste. I am especially resentful at the waste of my tax dollars after spending 14 years in service to my country trying to make it better. Personally, I believe we need to dismantle the IRS and start over. While we're at it, we perhaps should dismantle the government and start over with that as well. (4 hrs ago | post #2)
Sounds to me like you don't really know the difference between liberals and conservatives, let alone the varying degrees of separation existing between them. That's really too bad. (Friday Oct 3 | post #15)
I think history might prove you wrong on that one. (Friday Oct 3 | post #14)
Stocks open sharply lower ahead of bailout vote
If our government can't or won't buy up the the sagging investments, can the Chinese? They could make a killing on the eventual stabilization of the market and end up owning a good bit of America's business community. (Monday Sep 29 | post #1)
It started many, many years ago (see Dino's post above). There are traceable lines of responsibility to both scapegoats and people who are actually accountable. Yes, money does just disappear, sort of. A big part of the problem is that the money wasn't there in the first place. It was just on paper; various contracts representing money and vested interests. A mortgage contract would be a prime example. It doesn't represent real money. It represents future money and the increased value of the property. If the property does not increase in value, the future money diminishes. If somebody defaults on a mortgage, the future money becomes almost worthless. Meanwhile, corporations (and also individuals) use the future money to guarantee loans for real money to spend and then those guarantees become worthless. Ultimately, the house of cards begins to crumple. And the more it crumbles, the faster it crumbles. In some smaller cases, the crumbling has been stopped because somebody was big enough to buy out the failing company. That requires a huge upfront expense that hopefully will pay off in the future (and most of the time it does). Now it has gotten so huge that there is nobody who can buy out the crumbling companies to slow down or stop the fall, except for the Federal Government. It is large enough to be able to invest the required amount of capital and also be able to hold onto that investment for the long term required to recoup the initial investment and, hopefully, an actual profit. Heads do indeed need to roll and most likely will (i.e., Enron) but that is really not relevant to fixing the immediate problem. In the meantime, the longer we wait, the more likely the amount needed will increase while the economy continues to fall at an alarmingly increasing rate. I don't know if $700 billion is what is needed. I just know that something is needed, needed sooner rather than later, and must be large enough to cover the wound. Otherwise, it is very conceivable that we could end up in a financial collapse that makes the '29 crash look like a minor blip on the radar. Politically speaking, the fault for this lies with both parties. Now we have a bipartisan effort to pass the current legislation and a bipartisan effort to defeat it. I guess we can say that this whole thing has sort of unified the government. (Monday Sep 29 | post #8)
Thursday Letters to the Editor
Regarding the debates . . . I think they came out pretty much even. Neither one did as well as I would like to have seen. I don't think they would change anybody's mind who has already settled on a candidate and I think they probably have not done much to sway many of the undecided. At least not from these debates. (Monday Sep 29 | post #21)
Thursday Letters to the Editor
Cyndi - your remarks really do sound like a hatred of Republicans, even in the way you claim to have voted for them. I also think your disrespect is vulgar. I believe both of the candidates deserve respect whether or not I agree with them. As far as veterans go . . . I am a member of the VFW, the VVA, and the DAV. I'm a 100% service connected disabled Vietnam veteran. The majority of the vets in those groups who I know are supportive of McCain over Obama. To suggest that McCain is lying about this support suggests that you are speaking from a very uninformed position. It is simply untrue that the DAV gives McCain a 20% approval rating. They don't give out "ratings. " Neither do the VVA and the VFW. I've heard this supposed "only 20% approval rating" attributed to the VVA, the DAV, the VFW, AmVets, and the American Legion, none of which give out such ratings or rankings. This has been one of the more perpetuated lies in this whole campaign. I am very curious as to where you get all your information about these various service organizations -- or even any single one of them. Of which of them are you a member? Another one of the lies that keeps being repeated along these lines is how McCain voted down the recent new GI Bill. It's true that he withheld his support -- in the early stages. He refused to support a bill lacking certain benefits he felt needed to be included. He got them included. By continuing to spew forth the lies you've been regurgitating from other propaganda sources, you make yourself no better than anyone who has been slandering Obama in the same manner. You have become what you obviously do not like, someone who is lying through their teeth. Or at best, someone who is just repeating someone else's lies because you have no base of accurate information of your own. Senators McCain and Obama are two honorable men, nether of whom deserve you. (Monday Sep 29 | post #20)
Gardena backs off 'saggy pants' ordinance
Candy -- Not really. In school they can keep the pants pulled up and then let them drop when they leave school. (Monday Sep 29 | post #33)
Thursday Letters to the Editor
I can't argue with a degreed, professional mathematician about what constitutes an algebraic equation. I apologize for not recognizing your name. (Saturday Sep 27 | post #11)
Gardena backs off 'saggy pants' ordinance
Candy -- What you say is all well and good, but this article has nothing to do with school dress codes. It deals with what you say in your final sentence regarding the wear of these stupid clothes on weekends (and of course, in public after school). A school dealing with dress codes is a different matter. (Saturday Sep 27 | post #31)
An alternative nuclear-energy solution
Sounds like it makes sense. I know nothing about IFRs, but after reading this I know I would like to learn more. (Friday Sep 26 | post #1)
Thursday Letters to the Editor
Don't think that's algebra. I learned it in math prior to my two years of algebra. (Thursday Sep 25 | post #6)
Gardena's proposed 'saggy pants' ordinance should be dropped
Excellent points, especially the last one. (Thursday Sep 25 | post #1)
Like what you see?
Create your own Topix Profile
