Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Newspaper contacts | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Three strikes rule

June 5, 2013

The heat in recent days has set my mind spinning .....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(47)

ToTEXASfromPA

Jun-05-13 4:12 AM

Stanley you are now an enemy of the current administration since you have gone against the Emanuel Doctrine which is "You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before." But if you want to get back into their good graces, why don't you just file a lawsuit against God and once you win, then go try to collect.

20 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Don521

Jun-05-13 5:33 AM

I am so glad the republicans protected us from pork barrel spending. They are always looking out for our best interests. What a wonderful, caring, humanitarian, global warm fearing, spanish loving, war hating, bunch of people.

9 Agrees | 21 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Don521

Jun-05-13 5:33 AM

I am so glad the republicans protected us from pork barrel spending. They are always looking out for our best interests. What a wonderful, caring, humanitarian, global warm fearing, spanish loving, war hating, bunch of people.

9 Agrees | 15 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Ritty77

Jun-05-13 5:49 AM

"The heat in recent days has set my mind spinning ..."

Next time try getting your bearings before you write.

14 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Jun-05-13 6:01 AM

"I am so glad the republicans protected us from pork barrel spending." - Don521

*

They HAVE??!!!

How did they manage to fit-that-in...between "investigations"??

3 Agrees | 18 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ToTEXASfromPA

Jun-05-13 6:03 AM

"I am so glad the republicans protected us from pork barrel spending."--Don521

++

The problem is when they don't protect us from pork barrel spending, the debt rises considerably.

Democrats always want to increase spending and taxes; when Republicans went on a spending frenzy during the GWB administration without a way to pay for it, deficits and debt increased.

Necesitamos un presupuesto equilibrado.

15 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Jun-05-13 6:38 AM

"...when Republicans went on a spending frenzy during the GWB administration without a way to pay for it, deficits and debt increased." - ToTEXASfromPA

*

...And, we've got the Medicare D, to PROVE it!!

*

See:

Sacramento Gray Panthers Prescription Drug Plan Medicare Part D

6 Agrees | 14 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Tedeaux

Jun-05-13 7:17 AM

Why do I have homeowners insurance if the federal government build me a new home if this one gets destroyed?

11 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

eriklatranyi

Jun-05-13 7:27 AM

Liberal hypocrisy on display!

Republicans under Bush43 ran up the debt by spending too much.

Now that Republicans have elected some fiscally sane members, they are criticized for opposing bills that run up the debt by spending too much.

16 Agrees | 14 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Darlin

Jun-05-13 7:30 AM

Great response Bobbie2. I was thinking the exact same thing when I was reading this stupid letter. Another low informed voter writing it. Blame the Republicans while the Democrats waste more taxpayer dollars. That seems to be what they do best. Then that idiot Shamwow comes back with his stupid comments. Truly brainless. I can't even read his posts. They are beyond stupid!

16 Agrees | 12 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CHayes

Jun-05-13 7:39 AM

Virtually all flood insurance policies in the US currently, are underwritten by the govt's National Flood Insurance Program.

I believe, but could be wrong that that insurance will cover an individual for a limited number of claims (I think it's 4).

That being said, what the letter calls for, already exists.

What is sad is the number of people that think a standard homeowners policy covers flooding. It does not.

7 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CHayes

Jun-05-13 7:41 AM

"Blame the Republicans while the Democrats waste more taxpayer dollars."

Yeah! Did you know those dirty Democrats have wasted millions of taxpayer dollars voting 37 times to repeal a law that they know will never be repealed. Oh, wait a minute...

3 Agrees | 12 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CHayes

Jun-05-13 7:44 AM

"Republicans under Bush43 ran up the debt by spending too much."

And certainly the Bush tax cuts didn't have anything to do with it. First President in history to allow tax cuts to be extended during a time of war, and in this case TWO wars that cost over $3 Trillion.

7 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CHayes

Jun-05-13 7:47 AM

"Why do I have homeowners insurance if the federal government build me a new home if this one gets destroyed?"

The federal gov't will build you a new home IF you have flood insurance. If you don't, they will help by assisting you to get loans to rebuild your house yourself. They will back the loans, but they are still loans.

6 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Tgrammiex4

Jun-05-13 7:48 AM

We have a creek in our backyard and are zoned for 100 yr. flood. We've been here 20 yrs. and flooded 4 times.#1,3,4 basement only, #2 2 ft. on 1st floor. 1st time no flood ins. Fema helped us to an extent, didn't cover everything.Lost furnace, w. heater, elec. breaker box.They required us to get flood ins. The cost is outrageous and covers very little.Once you have flood ins. FEMA will NOT help you. Not sure about 4 claim limit, will have to look into that.

8 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Tgrammiex4

Jun-05-13 8:03 AM

We also found out last year (last time we got flooded)that the ins. doubled the deductible from $1000 to $2000 with no reduction in premium.We found that out from our agent, no notice was ever sent out.It also takes FOREVER for flood ins. to pay out. Last time we waited 2 months.

7 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Jun-05-13 8:33 AM

"Now that Republicans have elected some fiscally sane members..." - eriklatranyi

*

Please. Doing nothing, at ALL (as the Class O' 2010 has "managed"), hardly (that's "not hardly", for you Bush-fans) qualifies as fiscal-sanity. More-often-than-not, that "strategy" is still considered LAZINESS...but, they DO Thank (other) Republicans for falling for the 2010 Hu$tle.

7 Agrees | 14 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Jun-05-13 8:40 AM

"Blame the Republicans while the Democrats waste more taxpayer dollars."

Yeah! Did you know those dirty Democrats have wasted millions of taxpayer dollars voting 37 times to repeal a law that they know will never be repealed. Oh, wait a minute..." - CHayes

*

At least the Class O' 2010 will have 37 "bullets" for their Resume. It'll (almost) look like they'd actually participated, in Congress, that way!!

4 Agrees | 12 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

enigma

Jun-05-13 8:45 AM

Someone should tell Stanley that Washington is full of people coming up with plans that don't work, so he can take a break. What we need is plans that do work. How about this one, the government should get back to obeying and defending the Constitution. Some people might have a little trouble adjusting to freedom and the responsibilities that come with it, but I'm sure they could manage.

12 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Jun-05-13 9:13 AM

"Republicans under Bush43 ran up the debt by spending too much."

And certainly the Bush tax cuts didn't have anything to do with it. First President in history to allow tax cuts to be extended during a time of war, and in this case TWO wars that cost over $3 Trillion." - CHayes

*

The actual "magic" was in the sequence...that he'd given those tax-cuts, right BEFORE he'd "pulled-the-pin" on those Wars.

How "fortunate", for the high-roller$/1%ers, that their Defense Industry inve$tment$ were never negatively-impacted.

8 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Jun-05-13 9:26 AM

"How about this one, the government should get back to obeying and defending the Constitution. Some people might have a little trouble adjusting to freedom and the responsibilities that come with it, but I'm sure they could manage." - enigma

*

You "conservatives" surely aren't very-generous with those Constitution-details (to which you refer).

The next time one o' your "icons" raves on-and-on about "obeying and defending the Constitution"...you might want to inquire what-the-Hell they're talking-about. A few (additional) details...every time YOU mention "obeying and defending the Constitution"...would help making it sound like you know what you're talkin'-about...for a Change.

7 Agrees | 12 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

philunderwood

Jun-05-13 10:23 AM

Insurance companies ought to be able to base their premiums upon the risk they incur by issuing a policy. Regulations imposed by governments at all levels prevent them from doing so. I suppose some believe it’s only fair for those living in areas less prone to disasters help to pay for damages incurred by those choosing to live in places prone to damage.

Insurance companies and states would no doubt engage in mutual assistance programs if government didn’t allege to serve that purpose.

10 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Bufftrev1

Jun-05-13 10:26 AM

As usual, Erik's post is wrong.. recently elected republicans can claim all they want to be fiscally conservative but their actions prove otherwise. What they are doing is quietly voting for monies for their own pet projects and constituents.. ie, subsidizing rural airports in OK, AL and Ark... it seems it would be more appropriate to say they are fiscally conservative regarding others needs.. their own, that's somehow different. Spending on their own projects isn't wasteful, its spending on others peoples projects that's the problem. Rotten..

7 Agrees | 12 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Bufftrev1

Jun-05-13 10:28 AM

Chris, my better half and I put in an offer on a house in Montoursville and it was accepted. We close in august, we should get together sometime, play some hackey sack or grill some vegetables..

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

philunderwood

Jun-05-13 11:11 AM

Buff, you complain about Conservative politicians voting for funds for their pet projects, but complain when they vote to prevent new government expansion. I’ll posit that they are operating within the system to fund projects back home, while trying to change the system; there’s nothing wrong with that.

9 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 47 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web