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

Nothing

December 27, 2013

I am getting tired, really tired. Our Constitution is no longer respected, our laws are being ignored, and what can the populace do? If you speak out the IRS pays a visit with an audit....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(50)

spike2

Dec-29-13 8:08 AM

A 3 agree 4 disagree proves my point. The agrees are at a higher number than the percentage needed from this conservative area to assure a Democratic win.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Dec-28-13 10:03 AM

Zook- I have suggestion for you but I have manners. I was commenting on Capricorn1's post. So your post means not a thing to me.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JohnZook

Dec-28-13 9:13 AM

Reeder- Get your head out of the "sand" and realize it's governments' fault. Stop with the Dem/Repub stuff and realize that this gov't is a self sustaining entity, whose only purpose is to enrich themselves and consolidate more power over the populace. The "Puppetmasters" have used their "ace-in-the-hole" by electing a minority "rockstar" to implement the repression of the populace that "whitey" cannot criticize.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Dec-28-13 8:23 AM

It is Republicans and Democrats but if we listen to the right wing here it is all Obama's fault.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Dec-28-13 8:21 AM

Trying to kill Bobbie with kindness?

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JerryfromRI

Dec-28-13 7:25 AM

Hi Bobbie! I hope you are well my friend.

Thank you for the compliment!

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Capricorn1

Dec-27-13 10:36 PM

Wasn't it GW of the conservative party that gave us the Patriot Act? -Sidelined

Actually it was Republicans AND Democrats in Congress that supported and passed this law for signature. It was passed in haste at a time when our nation was vulnerable and many were in fear and it was a bad law then, and it's a bad law now and should be abolished immediately.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JohnZook

Dec-27-13 9:53 PM

The author believes that it did not take a famous person or a politician to remove God from schools or from the public square. When just anybody can hook up with the ACLU, find a liberal judge, and sue a school district or community to have anything with a possible religious connotation removed because "they" are offended, regardless of the communities view, yes anybody can remove God from the public domain.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DavidBross

Dec-27-13 8:00 PM

"I pray for sanity to return to our government but I think we earned God's scorn when we stood by and let just anybody remove Him from our schools and slowly from our public places." Just anybody? Does this mean the author believes that there are people who can remove Him and the author wouldn't object? Farmer, I do so enjoy your posts. My favorite is still"Come to the dark side, Luke. We have cookies."

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

eriklatranyi

Dec-27-13 6:54 PM

Liberals absolutely use suppression of free speech to silence critics when they can't argue the merits.

That is why low-mentality liberals like Shaman, RealAmerican and Mr. Reeder with divert the subject or throw the race card out when they can't defend their side's lies, malfeasance and blatant corruption.

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

eriklatranyi

Dec-27-13 6:51 PM

Bush43 was not a conservative, neither was his father.

Examples of Bush43's liberalism:

The Patriot Act

The Medicare Prescription drug plan

No Child Left Behind

Deficit spending (increasing the national debt)

McCain's (and many others) who support amnesty for lawbreakers are not supporting conservative principles.

Romney's Massachusetts healthcare was not conservative.

Paul Ryan's budget compromise had no conservatism in it.

Chris Christie's support for gun control is not conservative.

Want me to go on?

We have no issue identifying those who take big money and respond with legislation beneficial to the donor.

But, we just don't identify them, we actually try to throw them out of office in the primaries.

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

spike2

Dec-27-13 5:32 PM

No Enigma, just lose another election and another and another unless the moderate members of your party prevail.

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

sideliner

Dec-27-13 5:03 PM

leaningright, good luck with offering up a "true conservative" in '16. Boehner and his boys are already cutting loose the albatross around the party's neck that the Tea Party was in '12.

erik posts: "But, since liberals (mostly) have thrown out the constitutional limitations on federal power"

Wasn't it GW of the conservative party that gave us the Patriot Act? That was a raping of the Constitution that far expanded federal powers. It was the precursor and catalyst to the massive surveillance tactics conservatives are in an uproar about today. They asked for it. They got it. Now they act like they it wasn't their idea to begin with.

A wise person once said to be careful what you ask for because you just might get it...

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CMReeder

Dec-27-13 2:34 PM

Just who do you think is doing the bribing Erik? The Navy is being rocked with a bribery scandal, the man who is doing it is a businessman.

Conservatives are not above bribery, they also commit it and Republicans don't oust any of their bad colleagues.

4 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JerryfromRI

Dec-27-13 2:29 PM

There's really no reason for any liberal to comment here. Erik speaks for all liberals, he alone reports their beliefs and convictions.

4 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

eriklatranyi

Dec-27-13 2:02 PM

It is no wonder bribery is allowed to continue, based on the liberals posting here.

Not one liberal is willing to condemn a politician on their side.

No, they condemn corporations.

The truth is that corporations would not lobby or donate if politicians would not give them an advantage.

What liberals really want is the power to control business and private lives while simultaneously silencing anyone from supporting an opposing point of view.

4 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Capricorn1

Dec-27-13 1:05 PM

Of course, you would. Doing what you're TOLD TO (for too-many years), "kinda" hinders the ol' logic-capabilities. -Shaman

Once again when you have nothing of substance you deflect to nonsense and speak towards things you KNOW nothing about because you NEVER served. You can speak to me regarding my service when you have earned the right to do so. Otherwise, spew your ignorance elsewhere.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Dec-27-13 12:49 PM

"Obama himself stated he would not use money from Lobbyist to get elected" - Capricorn

*

"Yeah he used the IRS and Acorn to do that." - leaningright

*

That's what Porky Limbaugh said, huh??

2 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Dec-27-13 12:45 PM

"So, where was your head...when the Supremos decided that limits, to campaign-contributions, was the same as limiting speech...that campaign-contributions were a FORM of "speech"?? -Shaman

*

"So I guess the only time a campaign contribution or a "gift" from lobbyists is considered bribery is when its done for conservatives." - Capricorn1

*

Of course, you would. Doing what you're TOLD TO (for too-many years), "kinda" hinders the ol' logic-capabilities.

3 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

leaningright

Dec-27-13 12:35 PM

"Obama himself stated he would not use money from Lobbyist to get elected" - Capricorn

Yeah he used the IRS and Acorn to do that.

7 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Capricorn1

Dec-27-13 12:23 PM

So, where was your head...when the Supremos decided that limits, to campaign-contributions, was the same as limiting speech...that campaign-contributions were a FORM of "speech"?? -Shaman

So I guess the only time a campaign contribution or a "gift" from lobbyists is considered bribery is when its done for conservatives. You all can skirt around the issue all you want and deny it's not a problem, that in itself is the problem. I'm quite sure the SCOTUS didn't imply that freedom of speech included money being used to persuade legislation. Obama himself stated he would not use money from Lobbyist to get elected and he was disgusted by the decision handed down from the Supreme Court.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RealAmerican

Dec-27-13 12:14 PM

MONEYTHEISM. Erik is a believer in this bizarre religion of Monetheism. In this universe, corporations never do any wrong. The free-market is infallible. The "invisible hand", as described by Adam Smith, is the hand of God in Moneytheism. It's a religion that blinds people to reality.

2 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Alsever

Dec-27-13 11:47 AM

Lobbying? Just read that AARP spends $120 million per year to keep old people around!

AARP is as bad as the Taliban!

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Dec-27-13 11:34 AM

"Corporations giving money to politicians is not the problem at all.

What is wrong is when the politicians exceed their constitutional authority and inject legislation inside another bill that either benefits or hurts certain corporations." - eriklatranyi

*

Those are called "riders", Lil' Rikki....which brings us right-back to Phil Gramm's Magical-Meltdown legislation!!!

*

See:

American Casino - YouTube

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Dec-27-13 11:22 AM

"Enigma, we both know the type of "lobbying" I was referring to and so does Chuck." - Capricorn1

*

Gee...whatta "great little job" o' better-defining what you were "referring to"!!!

4 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 50 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