Mid Week Open Mic

It seems that attempts to discuss ideas on how to solve the gang violence problem didn’t get very far. The divisions within our society are far to deep to allow for any common sense ideas to be given a chance to work. If nothing else, that lesson has been relived.  As is the norm, please feel free to bring up any subject that you wish to talk about, or bring forward stuff from past discussions.

Advertisements

Comments

  1. 🙂

  2. Holy Cow! This guy must be friends with Charlie! An excerpt:

    To the Left, the “Mr. Hs.” of America are only responsible for the extermination of Native Americans. He is only responsible for slavery, Jim Crow laws, the KKK and Black lynchings in the South. He is responsible for the state of Black America in our cities today. He denied women the right to vote and wants to control what they do with their “lady parts.” He is responsible for corporations pumping toxic waste into rivers and oceans and for that poor polar bear trapped on that shrinking iceberg.

    Read more: http://clashdaily.com/2013/02/its-the-culture-stupid-what-the-war-on-guns-is-really-about/#ixzz2LRva4bXA

    This guy has Charlie completely figured out, HAHA. 😆

  3. According to President Obama, cutting government spending will “certainly slow our recovery.” Over and over again, he has described the sequester’s threatened $85 billion cut in spending out of a $3.8 trillion budget as “devastating.” But that represents a mere 2 percent cut in spending. Obama frightens people by pretending that the $1 trillion cut takes place right away rather than being spread out over 10 years.

    Sounds like more of the same. During the 2008 presidential campaign, Obama continually promised to “cut net spending” and make government smaller. The stimulus was promised not to “raise projected deficits beyond a short horizon of a year or at most two.” Yet, now during the fifth year of Obama’s presidency, we are told that we can’t cut spending, that we need even more government “investments.”

    During his first term, when he racked up record budget deficits, we didn’t see much job creation. As a result, the number of people not in the labor force has grown rapidly, by more than seven times the number of jobs created. Most of the unemployed have gotten so discouraged that they have stopped searching for work.

    The last four years have proven that big government and deficit spending are not the answer, as we can see across the globe. Countries with the largest increases in spending or debt have also the fewest jobs created as well as the lowest economic growth.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/02/13/obamas-spending-failure/#ixzz2LRznjYMF

    • $3,800,000,000,000 in spending, if cut by
      $85,000,000,000, massive layoffs will occur of teachers, firefighters, etc. SandyAid of
      $60,000,000,000 would still be paid out (NJ unions will love that)

    • LOI, Now just imagine Charlie dancing around thinking about all that spending Obama wants to do. 😆 We are so screwed.

      • If instead of 3.8 trillion, he only has 3.715 trillion, he gets to decide on where many of the cuts go. Can he use that to enrage police, fire & teachers (most in unions) to protest, maybe even strike because the evil Repugs hate children & the elderly. Just wondering if the Repug’s have the guts to not blink. He keeps running the clock out on them, saying the sky will fall and demanding a unlimited credit card.

      • Nationalize everything and lay off the bosses!

        What a beautiful idea!

        • Brilliant idea Charlie 🙄 Let’s give the criminals in the District of Criminals total control. Brilliant, just brilliant. Drink some more Chevis, it’s working 😆

          • It’s Chivas, G … No, let’s give the people what THEY work for, not the polls in DC … those are your guys, handpicked by the people you seem determined to defend (the 1%) … but I’m still waiting for someone here to offset the stats I pointed to regarding LOI’s absurd claims (or assertions) that welfare is what brings about gang violence … how come the actual socialized countries don’t have anywhere near our violence? Must be all that uncritical thinking they do 🙂

    • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

      THEY didn’t build that.

      Everyone needs to remember that government NEVER builds ANYTHING.

      PEOPLE build things.

      The government can request/demand/mandate that people build certain things in certain places at certain times, but often, this is actually counterproductive, as the capital to accomplish this would very likely have been better off spent in some other way.

  4. I had never heard of the knockout game before, until now. http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/knockout-game-perp-shot-killed/

    • There is no European Economic model to follow or mimic. Live within our means. It is easy to balance a budget by raising revenue….it is hard to balance a budget with leadership.

  5. Matt Lockwood says:

    Let the sequester happen- cuts need to be made equally. It won’t be the end of the world or the end of America!

    • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

      Matt,

      Unfortunately, it isn’t really up to us to “let the sequester happen”. If it does, BOTH parties will characterize it as “the end of the world”, but of course, it won’t be.

      It also won’t even put the slightest dent in our deficit or our debt.

    • It might be close to the end of the world. I think it is a question of facing it now & having a recession or putting it off another few years and have another Great Depression. Cut it now, don’t let the tumor grow any larger!

  6. Look everyone! The TSA finally caught a terrorist redhanded 😆

    http://beforeitsnews.com/tsa-controversy/2013/02/tsa-terrorizes-3-year-old-girl-video-2430112.html

    Why do we continue to allow this blatant violation of our person’s and our 4th Amendment rights?

  7. In my opinion the GOP should stick to their guns and either let Obama fix it or let him own it. Let the sequester happen. It is, after all, just a cut in the amount of growth in spending, not actual cuts in spending.

  8. When a civilization destroys its families, then it destroys itself

    When a civilization destroys its families, then it destroys itself. A man cannot cut out his own heart and live. A society cannot destroy its own capacity for life and regeneration, and continue on blithely occupying itself with the wars on obesity, poverty, racism, cough syrup and gendered pronouns. The state may seem impressive, but it is only a scheme by which people pay officials to make life better for them. When the number of people begins to decline while the number of officials increases, then the man touches the place where his empty heart was, stumbles and falls.

  9. A new energy drink! From the article:

    Overall, I’m not sure who’s more stupid in all this: The company making it, the government agency regulating it, or the people buying and drinking it. To me, it all seems to be a collision of caffeinated morons. What kind of fool wants to wake up in the morning and chemically kick themselves in the b#lls while ingesting phosphoric acid, an extra dose of caffeine and synthetic chemical sweeteners?

    http://www.prisonplanet.com/extra-caffeinated-soda-and-chemical-sweeteners-for-breakfast-pepsico-introduces-kickstart-soda-for-people-who-absolutely-hate-themselves.html

  10. Hey, let’s just commit more fraud against the American people, says Obama

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/02/19/Obama-Energy-Is-Going-To-Be-a-Little-More-Expensive

  11. Hey GMan, Is this what you were referring to when you said you didn’t much care for the European model?

    http://bloodthirstyliberal.com/2013/02/20/dispatches-from-the-front-lines-of-socialized-medicine-4/#respond

    • HAHA, thats messed up 😆 However, I do want to fix something. Bob cherry picked my statement and of course Charlie enjoyed it as well. Here is what I wrote ” Although I’m not keen on European models, there are some good ideas.” It’s sad when people have to rewrite a comment so they can attack it with their little Liberal minds.
      🙄

  12. If this is true, what’s the deal here? Why the secrecy?

  13. So what say SUFA?

    If a business experiences cutbacks and layoffs directly because of O Adm’s policies, is it ethical for O voters to be the first to go? My husband is in the medical equipment business and several equipment vendors have had to make cuts due to the medical device tax in OCare. It was known before the election that if Obama was re-elected, OCare would stay and this tax would be implemented and cuts would be made. Under the radar, the conversation is O voters better be the first to go.

    They would merely be on the receiving end of what they voted for, right?

    http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2013/02/20/Ohio_woman_claims_she_was_fired_for_Obama_vote.html

    • Absolutely! Let those that voted for him reap the benefits, after all, that’s only fair. The liberals want thing to be fair, so this seems fair to me. 😆

    • Honestly Kathy, I don’t even know where to begin with this little gem…

      Do you really believe had Romney been elected, the ACA would be going anywhere? And where would you stand if a liberal business owner were threatening to layoff/fire conservative employees?

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Buck

        A good question which we will never know the answer.

        However, he could have stalled implementation by simply delaying the publication of the “implementing regulations” or by revising any regulations issued by this Administration.

        A tactic used by Clinton/Gore, in case you were wondering.

        But substantive changes would not have occurred assuming that the House and Senate would have turned out as they are today.

    • Ethical, yes, legal, maybe, maybe not.

  14. I get the feeling that Liberals don’t like being picked on. With that said, if my telling the truth about Liberals is keeping Liberals from posting here, should I quit telling the truth about Liberals so that we can have more Liberals post here?

    http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/i-honor-blacks-the-dems-destroy-them/

    • Yup, because that’s what these posts have been – telling the ‘truth’ about liberals. The other day you said to Bob that you criticize the Republicans just as much as the Dems…so, let’s see it already. I would love to see an article from you lambasting the Repubs as you typically do the Dems.

      • Buck, I agree. I have not come across any major issues to slam the Repubs lately. I might be because they aren’t in charge right now and basically on the defensive. I haven’t said they have done anything right either, although I have been hammering Liberals a lot.

        Bring something up! What are they doing wrong in your mind? The whole lot of them are a bunch of sniveling whiners anyway. I would not vote for anyone currently in either party for anything. I do have an argument for term limits though, what do you feel about that subject?

        • Playing defensive? I don’t know if that’s how I would classify it! But regardless, I’m not going to suggest a topic because clearly where I think the GOP deserves the most blame is where you are going to see them at least more in line with what you would like and blame the Dems and Obama for ‘imposing horrendous, evil European socialism’.

          So I am much more interested in hearing where you believe the GOP deserves blame and the same level of criticism you routinely place on the Dems.

          • Playing defensive? No. Being respectful? yep! It’s getting late and I would like to continue in the morning. On the subject of term limits and your thoughts, I agree in some ways, but I also can argue that it’s not working in the best interest of many people, especially minorities.

            Until tomorrow my friend, sleep well and stay healthy. That goes for your family as well 🙂

        • Oh and on term limits…I’m a bit torn on this and can see both sides but in the end I come down more against limits — if the public believes someone to be doing a good job and wishes to keep them in office, I feel they should have that ability,

          • You know in theory I agree with you Buck. But in practice it just isn’t working-to much of a buddy system and power structure happening. The government is supposed to be made up of “We the people” But it is becoming more the Government people vs. the rest of us.

            • So do you blame the government, or the people for continuing to elect these same people?

              • Just A Citizen says:

                BOTH

                That was easy!

              • Lots of blame to go around. The point is just having a government is a power structure-having our representatives stay around so long-builds a power structure within a power structure. So the structure ends up making all the decisions instead of our representatives actually representing us.

      • Buck, write an article!

        We’ve pleaded with you leftists to share your thoughts on how and why the direction we are headed is good.

        You whine about SUFA but I don’t recall ever reading one article explaining your thinking. Take the time to lay it out for us.

        • Awhile back I did write an article in favor of universal health care. I had sent it to USW to read, write up a reply, and then post both to start the discussion rolling. He never got back to me on it. I like to think it is because I completely swayed him to see the benefits of universal health care so there was nothing for him to respond to! 🙂

          Sorry but I just don’t have the time to write up article after article. Oh, and by the way, where is your article??

  15. I’d say so much for much of what LOI insinuates and/or states is the problem with our “welfare” mentality. Actual socialist countries don’t seem to be anywhere near where the good old US&A is by intentional homicide … and I suspect most violence. So maybe what we need is a better education system and less capitalism (dare I say it) … and more GENUINE equal opportunity?

    When the movers and shakers of this economy, to include bankers and lawyers have more than token blacks in their highest ranks, then talk to me about the eradication of racism in Ameri-cha.

    Go Bills!

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

    • Good call Charlie. Now look up where the vast majority of these homicides occur and you will see that the Liberal Democrats have a lot issues in their precincts. They won’t bother with fixing what you and I see as a problem, to them it’s just “after birth abortion”.

      You should be proud of this form of Communist population control, it has been the norm for all Communist ruled countries.

    • Charlie, do we accept that article & graph are near 100% true & reliable? Egypt is ranked the same as Australia. Libya & the US are equal? Couldn’t make out where Syria was in there. I’ve heard a “rumor” some countries fib about things they report to the rest of the world.

      • LOI, never accept anything as true or accurate … but that also includes cherry-picked right wing nonsense … I simply googled violent crimes by country (or something like that) but do you seriously doubt our inner cities exhibit greater violence than those in Sweden, Holland, France, etc.? All I’m suggesting is there are a lot more variables to why our country is so screwed up and violent prone, and much of it has to do with some stats you ignored (the tendency of minorities to be arrested more frequently, given jail time, etc. vs. whites). It isn’t just welfare … you don’t get to erase 400 years of slavery and the racist mindset in this country just because some laws have been changed that proclaim equality. Like I said, look at the power brokers in this country. Where’s the proportionate representation in major law firms, on Wall Street, etc.? Don’t strain yourself, it’s bascially non-existent.

  16. Government is too big, so many of us believe. is this a good idea? http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/obama-threatens-furloughs-for-800000/?cat_orig=money

    I think so. I don’t want to see anyone lose their job, but shit happens all the time.

    • Obama’s 2nd term is Bush IV, G … you know there’s no difference. This gov’t is “as liberal” as the 1% permits. No more. The tea baggers, Lord bless them, may just send a genuine liberal, social-democratic party to the forefront some day … why? Because they’re more brainwashed than many of the so-called leftwing Dems (if they were truly liberal, they’d walk from that party of fools too.

      Workers of the world unite!

      And Go Bills!

      • Nothing but puppets Charlie. This is what ALWAYS happens with governments. 😉

        • The problem, G, is you have to have them, whether you want them or not. Anarchy isn’t going to happen, so let’s get off that toilet bowl already. It’s going to be some form of government. I say take it out of the hands of those who created it for their purpose and put it to better use. Yep, kick the professionals out and require true representative government.

  17. Just a note. these idiots in government, all of them, can’t get a budget passed, can’t seem to live within their means but by golly they can sure make a spectacle of some gun control bill from Feinstein. Do you not see where they are wanting to go?

  18. Here is something to watch. Do the elected people listen? I have more research to do on the subject, but here is a good story to follow. http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/angry-citizens-rebuke-gun-control-lawmakers/

  19. A different perspective-that maybe our prison sentences are too long and end up contributing to fatherless homes and poverty. Opinions?

    Prison and the Poverty Trap
    Mary F. Calvert for The New York Times

    Carl Harris rejoined his wife, Charlene Hamilton, and their two daughters after 20 years in prison.
    By JOHN TIERNEY
    Published: February 18, 2013

    WASHINGTON — Why are so many American families trapped in poverty? Of all the explanations offered by Washington’s politicians and economists, one seems particularly obvious in the low-income neighborhoods near the Capitol: because there are so many parents like Carl Harris and Charlene Hamilton.
    Time and Punishment

    John Tierney, the Findings columnist for Science Times, is exploring the social science of incarceration. Articles in this series are looking at the effects of current policies on families and communities, and new ideas for dealing with offenders.

    With a new outlook on life, Carl Harris returned to his family in 2009. He works as a security guard.

    For most of their daughters’ childhood, Mr. Harris didn’t come close to making the minimum wage. His most lucrative job, as a crack dealer, ended at the age of 24, when he left Washington to serve two decades in prison, leaving his wife to raise their two young girls while trying to hold their long-distance marriage together.

    His $1.15-per-hour prison wages didn’t even cover the bills for the phone calls and marathon bus trips to visit him. Struggling to pay rent and buy food, Ms. Hamilton ended up homeless a couple of times.

    “Basically, I was locked up with him,” she said. “My mind was locked up. My life was locked up. Our daughters grew up without their father.”

    The shift to tougher penal policies three decades ago was originally credited with helping people in poor neighborhoods by reducing crime. But now that America’s incarceration rate has risen to be the world’s highest, many social scientists find the social benefits to be far outweighed by the costs to those communities.

    “Prison has become the new poverty trap,” said Bruce Western, a Harvard sociologist. “It has become a routine event for poor African-American men and their families, creating an enduring disadvantage at the very bottom of American society.”

    Among African-Americans who have grown up during the era of mass incarceration, one in four has had a parent locked up at some point during childhood. For black men in their 20s and early 30s without a high school diploma, the incarceration rate is so high — nearly 40 percent nationwide — that they’re more likely to be behind bars than to have a job.

    No one denies that some people belong in prison. Mr. Harris, now 47, and his wife, 45, agree that in his early 20s he deserved to be there. But they don’t see what good was accomplished by keeping him there for two decades, and neither do most of the researchers who have been analyzing the prison boom.

    The number of Americans in state and federal prisons has quintupled since 1980, and a major reason is that prisoners serve longer terms than before. They remain inmates into middle age and old age, well beyond the peak age for crime, which is in the late teenage years — just when Mr. Harris first got into trouble.

    ‘I Just Lost My Cool’

    After dropping out of high school, Mr. Harris ended up working at a carwash and envying the imports driven by drug dealers. One day in 1983, at the age of 18, while walking with his girlfriend on a sidewalk in Washington where drugs were being sold, he watched a high-level dealer pull up in a Mercedes-Benz and demand money from an underling.

    “This dealer was draped down in jewelry and a nice outfit,” Mr. Harris recalled in an interview in the Woodridge neighborhood of northeast Washington, where he and his wife now live. “The female with him was draped down, too, gold and everything, dressed real good.

    “I’m watching the way he carries himself, and I’m standing there looking like Raggedy Ann. My girl’s looking like Raggedy Ann. I said to myself, ‘That’s what I want to do.’ ”

    Within two years, he was convicted of illegal gun possession, an occupational hazard of his street business selling PCP and cocaine. He went to Lorton, the local prison, in 1985, shortly after he and Ms. Hamilton had their first daughter. He kept up his drug dealing while in prison — “It was just as easy to sell inside as outside” — and returned to the streets for the heyday of the crack market in the late 1980s.

    The Washington police never managed to catch him with the cocaine he was importing by the kilo from New York, but they arrested him for assaulting people at a crack den. He says he went into the apartment, in the Shaw neighborhood, to retrieve $4,000 worth of crack stolen by one of his customers, and discovered it was already being smoked by a dozen people in the room.

    “I just lost my cool,” he said. “I grabbed a lamp and chair lying around there and started smacking people. Nobody was hospitalized, but I broke someone’s arm and cut another one in the leg.”

    An assault like that would have landed Mr. Harris behind bars in many countries, but not for nearly so long. Prisoners serve significantly more time in the United States than in most industrialized countries. Sentences for drug-related offenses and other crimes have gotten stiffer in recent decades, and prosecutors have become more aggressive in seeking longer terms — as Mr. Harris discovered when he saw the multiple charges against him.

    For injuring two people, Mr. Harris was convicted on two counts of assault, each carrying a minimum three-year sentence. But he received a much stiffer sentence, of 15 to 45 years, on a charge of armed burglary at the crack den.

    “The cops knew I was selling but couldn’t prove it, so they made up the burglary charge instead,” Mr. Harris contended. He still considers the burglary charge unfair, insisting that he neither broke into the crack den nor took anything, but he also acknowledges that long prison terms were a risk for any American selling drugs: “I knew other dealers who got life without parole.”

    As it was, at the age of 24 he was facing prison until his mid-40s. He urged his wife to move on with her life and divorce him. Despondent, he began snorting heroin in prison — the first time, he says, that he had ever used hard drugs himself.

    “I thought I was going to lose my mind,” he said. “I felt so bad leaving my wife alone with our daughters. When they were young, they’d ask on the phone where I was, and I’d tell them I was away at camp.”

    His wife went on welfare and turned to relatives to care for their daughters while she visited him at prisons in Tennessee, Texas, Arizona and New Mexico.

    “I wanted to work, but I couldn’t have a job and go visit him,” Ms. Hamilton said. “When he was in New Mexico, it would take me three days to get there on the bus. I’d go out there and stay for a month in a trailer near the prison.”

    In Washington, she and her daughters moved from relative to relative, not always together. During one homeless spell, Ms. Hamilton slept by herself for a month in her car. She eventually found a federally subsidized apartment of her own, and once the children were in school she took part-time jobs. But the scrimping never stopped. “We had a lot of Oodles of Noodles,” she recalled.

    Eleven years after her husband went to prison, Ms. Hamilton followed his advice to divorce, but she didn’t remarry. Like other women in communities with high rates of incarceration, she faced a shortage of potential mates. Because more than 90 percent of prisoners are men, their absence skews the gender ratio. In some neighborhoods in Washington, there are 6 men for every 10 women.

    “With so many men locked up, the ones left think they can do whatever they want,” Ms. Hamilton said. “A man will have three mistresses, and they’ll each put up with it because there are no other men around.”

    Epidemiologists have found that when the incarceration rate rises in a county, there tends to be a subsequent increase in the rates of sexually transmitted diseases and teenage pregnancy, possibly because women have less power to require their partners to practice protected sex or remain monogamous.

    When researchers try to explain why AIDS is much more prevalent among blacks than whites, they point to the consequences of incarceration, which disrupts steady relationships and can lead to high-risk sexual behavior. When sociologists look for causes of child poverty and juvenile delinquency, they link these problems to the incarceration of parents and the resulting economic and emotional strains on families.

    Some families, of course, benefit after an abusive parent or spouse is locked up. But Christopher Wildeman, a Yale sociologist, has found that children are generally more likely to suffer academically and socially after the incarceration of a parent. Boys left fatherless become more physically aggressive. Spouses of prisoners become more prone to depression and other mental and physical problems.

    “Education, income, housing, health — incarceration affects everyone and everything in the nation’s low-income neighborhoods,” said Megan Comfort, a sociologist at the nonprofit research organization RTI International who has analyzed what she calls the “secondary prisonization” of women with partners serving time in San Quentin State Prison.

    Before the era of mass incarceration, there was already evidence linking problems in poor neighborhoods to the high number of single-parent households and also to the high rate of mobility: the continual turnover on many blocks as transients moved in and out.

    Now those trends have been amplified by the prison boom’s “coercive mobility,” as it is termed by Todd R. Clear, the dean of the School of Criminal Justice at Rutgers University. In some low-income neighborhoods, he notes, virtually everyone has at least one relative currently or recently behind bars, so families and communities are continually disrupted by people going in and out of prison.

    A Perverse Effect

    This social disorder may ultimately have the perverse effect of raising the crime rate in some communities, Dr. Clear and some other scholars say. Robert DeFina and Lance Hannon, both at Villanova University, have found that while crime may initially decline in places that lock up more people, within a few years the rate rebounds and is even higher than before.

    New York City’s continuing drop in crime in the past two decades may have occurred partly because it reduced its prison population in the 1990s and thereby avoided a subsequent rebound effect.

    Raymond V. Liedka, of Oakland University in Michigan, and colleagues have found that the crime-fighting effects of prison disappear once the incarceration rate gets too high. “If the buildup goes beyond a tipping point, then additional incarceration is not going to gain our society any reduction in crime, and may lead to increased crime,” Dr. Liedka said.

    The benefits of incarceration are especially questionable for men serving long sentences into middle age. The likelihood of committing a crime drops steeply once a man enters his 30s. This was the case with Mr. Harris, who turned his life around shortly after hitting 30.

    “I said, ‘I wasn’t born in no jail, and I’m not going to die here,’ ” he recalled, describing how he gave up heroin and other drugs, converted to Islam and went to work on his high school equivalency degree.

    But he still had 14 more years to spend in prison. During that time, he stayed in touch with his family, talking to his children daily. When he was released in 2009, he reunited with them and Ms. Hamilton.

    “I was like a man coming out of a cave after 20 years,” Mr. Harris said. “The streets were the same, but everything else had changed. My kids were grown. They had to teach me how to use a cellphone and pay for the bus.”

    The only job he could find was at a laundry, where he sorted soiled linens for $8.25 an hour, less than half the typical wage for a man his age but not unusual for someone just out of prison. Even though the District of Columbia has made special efforts to find jobs for ex-prisoners and to destigmatize their records — they are officially known as “returning citizens” — many have a hard time finding any kind of work.

    This is partly because of employers’ well-documented reluctance to hire anyone with a record, partly because of former prisoners’ lack of work experience and contacts, and partly because of their difficulties adapting to life after prison.

    “You spend long enough in prison being constantly treated like a dog or a parrot, you can get so institutionalized you can’t function outside,” Mr. Harris said. “That was my biggest challenge, telling myself that I’m not going to forget how to take care of myself or think for myself. I saw that happen to too many guys.”

    ‘Crippled by Incarceration’

    The Rev. Kelly Wilkins sees men like that every day during her work at the Covenant Baptist Church in Washington, which serves the low-income neighborhoods east of the Anacostia River.

    “A lot of the men have been away so long that they’re been crippled by incarceration,” she said. “They don’t how to survive in the community anymore, and they figure it’s too late for someone in their 40s to start life over.”

    A stint behind bars tends to worsen job prospects that weren’t good to begin with. “People who go to prison would have very low wages even without incarceration,” said Dr. Western, the Harvard sociologist and author of “Punishment and Inequality in America.” “They have very little education, on average, and they live in communities with poor job opportunities, and so on. For all this, the balance of the social science evidence shows that prison makes things worse.”

    Dr. Western and Becky Pettit, a sociologist at the University of Washington, estimate, after controlling for various socioeconomic factors, that incarceration typically reduces annual earnings by 40 percent for the typical male former prisoner.

    The precise financial loss is debatable. Other social scientists have come up with lower estimates for lost wages after incarceration, but everyone agrees it’s only part of the cost. For starters, it doesn’t include wages lost while a man is behind bars.

    Nor does it include all the burdens borne by the prisoner’s family and community during incarceration — the greatest cost of all, says Donald Braman, an anthropologist at George Washington University Law School who wrote “Doing Time on the Outside” after studying families of prisoners in Washington.

    “The social deprivation and draining of capital from these communities may well be the greatest contribution our state makes to income inequality,” Dr. Braman said. “There is no social institution I can think of that comes close to matching it.”

    Drs. DeFina and Hannon, the Villanova sociologists, calculate that if the mass incarceration trend had not occurred in recent decades, the poverty rate would be 20 percent lower today, and that five million fewer people would have fallen below the poverty line.

    Ms. Hamilton and Mr. Harris have now risen above that poverty line, and they consider their family luckier than many others. Their two daughters finished high school; one went to college; both are employed. Ms. Hamilton is working as an aide at a hospital. Mr. Harris has a job as a security guard and a different outlook on life.

    “I don’t worry about buying clothes anymore,” he said. He and his wife are scrimping to save enough so they can finally, in their late 40s, buy a home together.

    “It’s like our life is finally beginning,” Ms. Hamilton said. “If he hadn’t been away so long, we could own a house by now. We would probably have more kids. I try not to think about all the things we lost.”

    Accentuating the Positive

    She and her husband prefer to accentuate the positive, even when it comes to the police and prison. They appreciate that some neighborhoods in Washington are much safer now that drug dealers aren’t fighting on street corners and in crack dens anymore. They figure the crackdown on open-air drug markets helped both the city and Mr. Harris.

    “If I hadn’t been locked up, I probably would have ended up getting killed on the streets,” Mr. Harris said. His wife agreed.

    “Prison was good for him in some ways,” Ms. Hamilton said. “He finally grew up there. He’s a man now.”

    But 20 years?

    “They overdid it,” she said. “It didn’t have to take that long at all.”

    TIME AND PUNISHMENT

    A Family’s Sentence

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/19/science/long-prison-terms-eyed-as-contributing-to-poverty.html?smid=fb-share&_r=1&pagewanted=all&

    • Good Morning V.H. 🙂

      There are several issues that could be discussed within the article. The war on drugs is one for sure, but that’s an article in itself. Ending that in some ways, could help in many ways. It could certainly curb violence, in my opinion.

      The other issue is long sentences. This is touchy, because according to the FBI, a huge percentage of gun murders is committed by known criminals who have been convicted. Maybe changing the war on drugs could change this as well.

      That’s where what little pity I have ends. If you don’t want to do the time, don’t do the crime. In this guys case, he broke many laws. He turned into a violent savage and paid the price. This should be an example for those who think about committing crimes should think about. Others get harmed, in more ways than one. Young gangbangers just don’t get this.

      Speaking of gangbangers, what would you do, round them up and put them in re-education centers or round them up and just gun them down? The Communist way would be to gun them down on live TV and send a message. Good thing we ain’t Communist’s 😆

      • Yeah, it’s confusing isn’t it-Just my opinion but from my experience with a certain relative of mine-who is at this time serving pre-trial time, which is a sentence all by its self-which seems wrong on it’s own-not that he doesn’t deserve to be in jail but one shouldn’t have to spend a year or two before they even get to trial-but anyway, they tend to be too easy on them when they are young and start on the path to insanity-then when they hit legal age they throw the book at them. Perhaps they should teach the lessons at a younger age. Instead of claiming the youngsters are being treated unfairly.

        We also have wayyy to many people in jail for pot-just legalize pot and you would probably reduce the number of people in jail by a lot. As far as other drugs, I’m still working on reading Bob’s post-So I’m still thinking-but I do not think all drugs should be legal-decrimilized or depenalized maybe.

        • Legalizing drugs and controlling the potency would be a start. Pot should be legal, so I agree with you there. This could also be a good discussion, I’m sure everyone has different ideas.

          • If you haven’t -You should read Bob’s post -it is interesting but very long 🙂 .

            • The information in it would make for a nice article. And a great starting point for the should we are shouldn’t we legalize drugs conversation..

              • I will do just that. I have therapy, then a trip to be with Mom for her surgery (nothing major), make sure she is able to take care of herself then come home, probably Sunday. I’ll be on and off here, and can read it on my tablet while waiting. 🙂 Busy times lately, 3 deaths in the family and 3 surgeries this month so far.

              • So sorry to read of the struggles and sad times in your family Gman.

                😦

              • Kathy, Thanks for the kind words 🙂 We are a tough bunch and we will continue on. We will miss those we lost until we go. That is an unfortunate part of life.

  20. @Buck, Good Morning Sir 🙂

    In an effort to slam the Republicans, I would like to bring up some things that these idiots voted for in the past. Those who voted for these things should be arrested and hung from the nearest light pole 🙂

    The Patriot Act, The Food Safety Modernization Act, Any agreement to spend money without a budget, pork projects that help nobody, lying to the people (just a guilty as the Democrats, not quite as guilty as Obama 😆 )

    If you have some more, post them so I can cuss at them under my breath 🙂

    • Please understand that I blame the entire Federal Government for the many problems we have today and those that we will have in the future. If we have to have a Federal government we need a much better class of people representing us. That means that all 536 elected people can be replaced tomorrow and I would not shed a tear.

      At that point I would either demand the political parties disband, or seriously limit their ability to monopolize elections. That is part of the corruption problem.

      Lastly, I would make the Federal Govt a part time job with limited benefits and make term limits. This should not be a career, but an honor. Just some thoughts 🙂

      • G, you know term limits works for me … now get rid of the professional class of robots and put some longshoreman, truck drivers, farmers, word processors 🙂 and lawyers who don’t work for the top tier firms in there … make it a 2 year limit and accept the fact that “investors” should NEVER get to reap the lion’s share of profits off the backs of workers … and as for an Army/military … those elected to office, shoudl they have kids of age, those kids of age get to step up to the front lines in any act of aggression (offensive or defensive) the gov’t votes to engage … that includes presidents, thank you very much. I have to wonder how anxious Mr. Bush II and/or Obama would’ve been to keep these absurd wars going (or starting them) had their kids been on the front lines.

    • Not exactly a full length article blasting the GOP as you routinely do the Dems, but I’ll take what I can get.

  21. http://personalliberty.com/2013/02/21/shooting-children-pregnant-women-and-elderly-people-should-require-hesitation/

    Pictures of all the targets being purchased by the DHS and some police departments. I’m not keen on this stuff. The old people protecting their home, the mother protecting her child, really. Should the cops be practicing shooting these kinds of targets? What say you SUFA

  22. Are Democrats Hippocrits? http://girlsjustwannahaveguns.com/2013/02/colorado-democrat-buddy-system-and-judo-instead-of-guns/

    They claim that it’s a women’s body and they should decide what to do with it when it comes to abortion but the same women can’t choose how to protect their bodies. What a strange group of people.

  23. Really sorry G-have been and will continue to pray for you and your family.

  24. The GOP’s incoherence on the sequester
    Rick Moran

    Byron York dissects the Republican position on the sequester and asks some pointed questions:

    In a Wall Street Journal op-ed Wednesday, House Speaker John Boehner describes the upcoming sequester as a policy “that threatens U.S. national security, thousands of jobs and more.”

    Which leads to the question: Why would Republicans support a measure that threatens national security and thousands of jobs? Boehner and the GOP are determined to allow the $1.2 trillion sequester go into effect unless President Obama and Democrats agree to replacement cuts, of an equal amount, that target entitlement spending. If that doesn’t happen — and it seems entirely unlikely — the sequester goes into effect, with the GOP’s blessing.

    In addition, Boehner calls the cuts “deep,” when most conservatives emphasize that for the next year they amount to about $85 billion out of a $3,600 billion budget. Which leads to another question: Why would Boehner adopt the Democratic description of the cuts as “deep” when they would touch such a relatively small part of federal spending?

    The effect of Boehner’s argument is to make Obama seem reasonable in comparison. After all, the president certainly agrees with Boehner that the sequester cuts threaten national security and jobs. The difference is that Obama wants to avoid them. At the same time, Boehner is contributing to Republican confusion on the question of whether the cuts are in fact “deep” or whether they are relatively minor.

    Could the GOP message on the sequester be any more self-defeating? Boehner could argue that the sequester cuts are necessary as a first — and somewhat modest — step toward controlling the deficits that threaten the economy. Instead, he describes them as a threat to national security and jobs that he nevertheless supports. It’s not an argument that is likely to persuade millions of Americans.

    The Pentagon is ready to furlough 800,000 workers a couple of days a month, civilian contractors are preparing massive layoffs, other government agencies are preparing to cut back services – and the GOP is giving the impression that this is just fine with them.

    They should be pointing the finger at Democrats and accusing them of irresponsibility – and repeating it every chance they get. Instead,they are bogged down in this esoteric argument about replacing the sequester cuts with cuts to Medicare and Social Security.

    If they are going to support the sequester, York is absolutely right; embrace it and call it a decent first step. It may be political poison but its better than warning about the severity of the sequester and then standing by and doing nothing while the roof caves in.

    Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/02/the_gops_incoherence_on_the_sequester.html#ixzz2LY1D1qXI

    • I wonder where you would stand had a liberal representative sent such an unduly harsh and nasty letter to a constituent….actually, I think I know.

      • Both letters are “over the top” if you ask me. The lady wrote a letter based on her fears that are nothing more than MSNBC talking points and have no basis of fact. The politician appears to be annoid by this, that’s for sure. I would not have replied in the manner he did, I would have debunked the talking points and assured her that everything will be fine.

        Two wrongs don’t make a right, and this is a good example.

        • I agree Gman, he could have responded better, but sometimes…….

          And to Buck – you would not believe the letters I received from my representative during the WI Act 10 fiasco. I would have appreciated bluntness from her than the lies and propaganda she was spewing. When I would reply back and ask for details of how exactly the atrocities she was proclaiming were going to happen if we let evil Scott Walker get his way, she would get even more nasty. Glad to say she was defeated soundly in the next election. Still got a leftist as we are too close to Madison for clear thinkers, but he seems more honest.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        I found it refreshingly honest.

        And I would say the same for one written by a left winger Rep.

      • My position, first they screw up where they are, then it gets so bad they move, They learn nothing and then proceed to screw up where they have gone. Most recent example, Colorado. Old, old example, New Jersey who has the joy of having been screwed up by refugees from NYC and Philadelphia. Funny, how the people who had to bail out of Newark never followed that path. Possible reason was that Newark died of corruption. NY and Philly from best intentions gone wrong.

        • They’re in complete denial about what it is that has made their first “home” so bad. D13 has mentioned this before. CAians flee the state because of the high taxes, high regulations and move to Texas and then try to instill those same disastrous policies there.

  25. Police in Maryland arrested a man for recording them during a traffic stop even though a judge in that state determined a few years ago that police do not have an expectation of privacy in public.

    As we’ve seen so many times before, the Montgomery County police officer whose last name is Johnson wasn’t interested in hearing about the actual law once he announced that recording police in public was illegal.

    The man video recording is Jared Parr, who uploaded the video to Youtube on February 16, so we can assume the incident took place a few days earlier even though he doesn’t specify.

    Parr said he was charged with obstruction, even though it took cops an hour to come up with that charge, most likely after they realized that the wiretapping law would no longer apply.

    Parr said he started video recording cops pulling people over for making illegal right turns from inside his car, which drew the attention of the officers. He said he was arrested a few months earlier for warning drivers about the police operation.

    It’s best to fast forward the video to 1:00 because the first minute is pretty much wasted space.

    The cop starts off by asking Parr where he lives, which Parr refuses to answer. Then Johnson begins focusing on the fact that Parr is recording.

    Johnson: ”I’m asking you a question right now because I believe you’re videotaping, I believe you’re audio recording.”

    Parr: “I am.”

    Johnson: “Ok, you’re not allowed to do that. That’s against the law to audio record without my permission.”

    Parr: “You mean the wiretap statute?”

    Johnson: “Yes …. Step out of the vehicle.”

    Parr: “Am I being detained?”

    Johnson: “You’re being detained right now because you’re audio recording and you’re not supposed to.”

    In 2010, Maryland made national news when police arrested a man named Anthony Graber on felony wiretapping charges for uploading a video of an undercover cop pulling a gun on him during a traffic stop.

    Graber was facing 16 years in prison before Judge Emory A. Pitt Jr. dismissed the case six months later, stating the following:

    “Those of us who are public officials and are entrusted with the power of the state are ultimately accountable to the public,” the judge wrote. “When we exercise that power in public fora, we should not expect our actions to be shielded from public observation.”

    http://www.prisonplanet.com/maryland-cop-arrests-man-for-recording-despite-previous-case-law-allowing-it-updated.html

    @Bob, These are the kinds of government employees that many of us worry about. They are arrogant and not very bright. The badge does not make them God, although some seem to think that way.

    Question for all. Should this cop be fired? I say yes.

  26. Obama’s Response to 2% Cut: Let Criminals Free, End Food Safety Inspections
    Posted on February 21, 2013

    untitled

    Here’s the 3 by 5 index card version of what the GOP’s message on sequestration ought to be:

    Our current level of spending is unsustainable. Spending must go down. Period.

    This is a 2 percent cut.

    Sure, if we in the Republican Party had complete control of the government, we would be implementing the cuts differently. But we don’t.

    Congress can only appropriate funds; it doesn’t run the departments and agencies that spend the money. That’s the power and responsibility of the executive branch.

    If the Obama administration’s response to a 2 percent cut is really to let all the criminals out of the jails and end food safety inspections, then it is no longer disputable that he’s a Stuttering Cluster-you-know-what of a Miserable Failure.

    Read more: http://conservativebyte.com/2013/02/obamas-response-to-a-2-cut-is-to-let-criminals-out-of-jails-and-end-food-safety-inspections/#ixzz2LYbOAhIq

    it is no longer disputable that he’s a Stuttering Cluster-you-know-what of a Miserable Failure. I totally agree. If Bush would have said this, all the posters at HuffPo would have gone into epileptic seizure.

    • It’s travel time for me. I’ll be thinking of an article bashing Republicans for Buck. Fortunately, thinking like a Liberal doesn’t require much effort 😉

  27. Just A Citizen says:

    Charlie

    We have it on the authority of a great philosopher that your are “beautiful”. Ironically, it is his definition of “pride” which Ayn Rand uses in her description of values and virtues.

    Ancient Greek philosophy

    Aristotle identified pride (megalopsuchia, variously translated as proper pride, greatness of soul and magnanimity)[5] as the crown of the virtues, distinguishing it from vanity, temperance, and humility, thus:

    Now the man is thought to be proud who thinks himself worthy of great things, being worthy of them; for he who does so beyond his deserts is a fool, but no virtuous man is foolish or silly. The proud man, then, is the man we have described. For he who is worthy of little and thinks himself worthy of little is temperate, but not proud; for pride implies greatness, as beauty implies a goodsized body, and little people may be neat and well-proportioned but cannot be beautiful. [6]

    He concludes then that

    Pride, then, seems to be a sort of crown of the virtues; for it makes them more powerful, and it is not found without them. Therefore it is hard to be truly proud; for it is impossible without nobility and goodness of character. [7][8]

    By contrast, Aristotle defined hubris as follows:

    to cause shame to the victim, not in order that anything may happen to you, nor because anything has happened to you, but merely for your own gratification. Hubris is not the requital of past injuries; this is revenge. As for the pleasure in hubris, its cause is this: men think that by ill-treating others they make their own superiority the greater.[9]

    Thus, although many religions may not recognize the difference, for Aristotle and many philosophers hubris is altogether an entirely different thing from pride.

  28. Just A Citizen says:

    Boy, does time fly.

    For those of us old enough to remember, and the younguns’ who watch them late night cable movies.

    http://news.moviefone.com/2013/02/20/how-the-west-was-won-50th-anniversary_n_2729137.html?just_reloaded=1

    Another to add to the list. Across the Wide Missouri.

  29. I am impressed!!!

    Rand Paul cuts the feds a giant check, literally
    posted at 3:21 pm on February 21, 2013 by Erika Johnsen

    He did this last year too, actually, and so what if it’s a politically expedient and less-than-a-drop-in-the-bucket gesture? It’s about leaving no stone unturned in the quest for a more fiscally prudent bureaucracy, and I am one hundred percent for it. Via CNN:

    Sen. Rand Paul cut another six-figure check to the United States Treasury Wednesday, taking the money he said he didn’t need from his office’s budget to make a tiny dent in the nation’s massive federal debt.

    “We watch every purchase,” Paul, a Republican from Kentucky, said at an event next to an oversized check for $600,000. “We watch what computers we buy, what paper we buy, the ink cartridges. We treat the money like it’s our money, or your money, and we look at every expenditure.”

    The $600,000 reflects more than 20% of Paul’s annual office budget, according to a press release.

    Paul’s office returned half a million dollars about this time last year, adding up to a grand total of over a million dollars in savings in just his two years in the Senate. Again, taking the time to bother with even just the itty bitty chunk of the federal budget allotted to you may be a small thing, but it’s a good one. What if all Congresspeople, administrators, officials, agencies, bureaus, and departments were this frugal, instead of operating under the current use-it-or-lose-it mentality? It can be done, and that could very quickly amount to billions of dollars in government savings. It isn’t entitlement reform, but it ain’t nothin,’ either.

    Federal entities have pretty much zero incentive to save money, since the faceless, ‘endless’ supply of taxpayer dollars provides for their budget — but what if we could shift the federal government toward a more business-model, free-market based structure? Sen. Paul already has one such idea on the books — giving bonuses to federal employees who find potential for savings in their departments — and it could be a great way to get that slow-moving, big-spending bureaucracy off of its entitled collective backside and actually encourage innovation and efficiency. More, please.

    Mixing up the chemical makeup of the federal bureaucracy may very well be a long shot, but it’s a longer shot still if nobody bothers to even suggest it.

    Fiscal conservatism, for the win.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2013/02/21/rand-paul-cuts-the-feds-a-giant-check-literally/

  30. Not to be outdone with all the survivor shows on TV, Texas has decided to introduce its own version of survivor called SURVIVOR: Texas Style.

    The lucky contestants will all start in Dallas, drive to Waco, Austin, San Antonio, then over to Houston and down to Brownsville. They will then proceed up to Del Rio, El Paso, Odessa, Midland, Lubbock, and Amarillo. From there they will go on to Abilene and Fort Worth. Finally back to Dallas . Each will be given a hot pink Prius to drive and each will have 15 bumper stickers on the car which will read:

    1. “I’m A Democrat”
    2. “Amnesty For Illegals”
    3. “I Love The Dixie Chicks”
    4. “Boycott Beef”
    5. “I Voted For Obama”
    6. ” George Strait Sucks”
    7. “Re-elect Obama In 2016”
    8. “Vote Eric Holder Texas Governor”
    9. “Real hot sauce us made in New York City”
    10. “I Love Obama Care and Chuck Schumer”
    11. “Barney Frank Is My Hero”
    12. “I Side With Jane Fonda”
    13. “It’s Bush’s Fault”
    14. “Islam Is A Peace-Loving Religion
    And the last sticker is…;

    15. “I’m Here To Confiscate Your Guns”

    The first contestant to make it back to Dallas alive wins!!!

  31. gmanfortruth says:

    @Bob, I think we may have had a misunderstanding. IF SAYING the military is part of the govt makes you happy then so be it.

  32. Just A Citizen says:

    Directly from the Queen Jackass’ keyboard. Take a deep breath before reading so your head won’t explode. I left the link so you could all sign the petition. 😉

    Friend —

    Congressional Republicans have taken their partisan brinkmanship to an entirely new level.

    Unless they act by March 1st, billions of dollars in automatic cuts — the so-called sequester — will start to take effect. If it does, more than 2 million jobs could be lost, 70,000 children would be kicked off of Head Start, and 10,000 teachers’ jobs would be put at risk.

    With this fiscal crisis looming, what did John Boehner and Republican leadership do? They went on vacation, calling recess for the House this week even though Democrats voted to stay and work to avert this crisis.

    This is no time for recess. It’s time for them to do their job.

    Demand Republicans in Congress come back to the table and work with the President to avoid this crisis. Sign the petition now.

    The unbelievable thing is — this crisis is completely avoidable.

    The President has laid out a specific plan with detailed cuts to avoid the sequester and reduce the deficit in a balanced way, and Democrats in Congress have put forward a balanced approach as well.

    But Republicans in Congress would rather see our recovery and middle-class economic security be put at risk than close one tax loophole for big corporations and the wealthiest among us.

    John Boehner and House Republican leaders need to hear from thousands of Americans across the country that they must come back to the table and work with us to avoid these automatic cuts. The only way they’ll do their job is if our overwhelming response leaves them no choice.

    Sign the petition now:

    http://my.democrats.org/Sequester

    Together, we can do this.

    Thanks,

    Debbie

    Debbie Wasserman Schultz

  33. Has this been posted before? If so, I didn’t see it. Interesting paper on gun control and racism.

    http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/cramer.racism.html

    • I guess this is how the “mental” issue is going to be handled. The government is going to just Declare you Nuts by decree of somebody-who knows who-just somebody, somewhere. We are so Screwed !!!!! Have to stop writing now-the rest of my thoughts aren’t suitable for posting!

  34. Teacher reportedly refused to grade student reports on guns

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/02/21/teacher-refused-to-grade-student-report-on-guns-mother-says/?intcmp=obnetwork#ixzz2LdYmuaJB

    This teacher, which is actually from out of State……..had a choice. Take and grade the papers or lose your job. The papers were accepted and an apology issued.

    • Kathy, I remember when this was a “conspiracy theory”. I was told they would never do that. I wonder what else I was told “didn’t exist” or “will never happen” is coming true in the near future?

    • Just A Citizen says:

      There was actually a really good idea included among the comments to that story.

      What IF Americans pulled their kids out of public school en’ mass? Keep them home SICK.

      How many of you realize that the schools Federal funding is tied to weekly attendance?

      The problem with tax revolts is the threat of JAIL TIME for the ring leaders. But pulling kids from school for their SICKNESS cannot cause you to go to jail.

      • Bottom Line says:

        ” en’ mass ” is key.

        If you can do any one thing ‘en mass, what can’t you do?

        What do people do ‘en mass? Can we do better?

        How?

      • This comment sounds more like me:

        If I am in a ladies restroom and a woman pulls out a penis, she will be pepper sprayed and punched in the face.

        BL I’m not sure if you do or don’t like the idea. What do we do en masse? Lots of things. We go to church. We vote. We go to ball games. We line up at gun stores. We protest boycotts, as in Chick fil A. We could definitely pull kids out of school en masse. Question is do we have the will en masse to pull it off.

        • Bottom Line says:

          Exactly!

          People have the will to do things as a whole, so why not do something better as a whole?

          Who has the will to do better?

          Do people need to be forced into improvement?

          What is stopping people from doing things in mass?

          You want a better education for your children than the one provided by the state, make it happen. Youth is King. They are worth it.

          If the state says you can’t, …move to one that says you can. Youth is King. They are worth it.

          If 100 people in a school district withdraw their children from school, a dozen truancy officers have an increased workload and get a few more hours of a work week.

          If a 1000 people in a school district withdraw their children from school, a dozen truancy officers get an increased workload and have to hire more.

          If 10,000 people in a school district withdraw their children from school, someone with a say will pay attention.

          If 100,000 people in a school district withdraw their children from school, whoever thought they were in control will learn something.

          If everyone in a school district withdraws their children from school, there is no school district.

          Who rules?

          A: The People do

  35. Just A Citizen says:

    TOLD YA SO!!

    Although I thought they would hold off on Cruz for a little while. Guess they just couldn’t resist. Soon…….back to Paul and Rubio.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/22/ted-cruz-mccarthy_n_2741548.html#comments

    • Oh yeah. The “Co-exist” bumper sticker crowd. They are even going after Dr. Ben Carson, the guy who spoke truthfully at the prayer breakfast.

      The party of diversity – biggest bunch of hypocrites around.

  36. Just A Citizen says:

    Buck, Mathius, Charlie, Todd and Bob

    I am curious as to whether any of you agree that Mr. Obama is screaming WOLF over the Sequestration affects? Yes, Boehner is as well, just to a slightly lesser degree.

    Do any of you agree that Mr. Obama got his Tax Increases in the January deal? Or do you discount these and thus see the sequestration as “one sided” or “unbalanced”?

    Do any of you agree that much larger cuts are needed?

  37. Is this true? Why haven’t we heard about it? Why do hear ad nauseum about a murder in South Africa but not this?

    http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/02/21/muslim-beheads-two-coptic-christians-in-koranic-ritual-51726

  38. gmanfortruth says:

    The final family surgery event is success and all is well.

  39. Has anyone else noticed that when it comes to the words that those who push for gay rights want to be used changes? When it’s a matter of social interaction-they insist on using the common words marriage, wife, husband, boy, girl, parents. But when it comes to legal terminology all those words must change to accommodate them.

  40. Just A Citizen says:

    I want to share a thought or two on this sequestration thing and its real impact.

    One is that it won’t be as bad as everyone says. And that the Administration is controlling the reactions, not the Agency people. I know of one agency that advised its employees not to worry about furloughs, only to be over ridden by the Secretary with a letter telling them to panic. In plain words: The threats to shut down National Parks is coming from the White House, NOT the Park Service. No matter which person makes the statement, the words were handed out by the White House.

    Second is the fact that there could be an ACTUAL CUT for this fiscal year. As we know the cuts in future years are just part of the projected increase. But the 2013 Budgets have been set. So cuts to the remainder of the year are cuts to planned budgets.

    Unfortunately this is not as clear as it should be. Many agencies are operating under Continuing Resolutions. So those agencies may or may not have planned on expenses beyond March at the same level. Some may have and others may not. I know several agencies have been planning for major cuts for three years. The 2.5% is well below what they were told to prepare for.

    This causes me to wonder if the Administration had planned to assign “disproportionate” burdens before but has been upended with the sequestration, or if they plan to simply carry out the disproportionate allocation with the sequestration attached.

    • One question-the defense has to carry 50 % of these cuts so how much of their budget is being cut?

  41. OMG……I think the lefties may have it……

    To date: Texas road deaths by vehicle since January 1….211.
    To Date: Texas gun deaths by assault or semi automatic rifle or shotgun since January 1……0.

    I can see it now…..time to regulate the SUV’s with high capacity gas tanks.

  42. Gotta another one for ya leftward types…..

    Now that you have preached tolerance of LGBT issues…..we now have a situation, not in Texas, where a court has ruled that transgender is to be tolerated and upheld if, the person feels they are transgendered, dresses transgendered, and acts transgendered….then they must be transgendered. So, a male transgender in high school is now showering in girls showers and dressing rooms and walking around naked in front of underage females and it must be tolerated. Parents are outraged of course but the school says they are to be tolerated. Some females are also complaining that it is not right for a male, transgendered or not, to be in a stall next to them in a rest room. Another suit has been filed to require separate facilities for the transgendered male but the defense is saying that is discriminatory and exclusionary and should not be allowed. The school and judge are expected to agree.

    Now, here is my question……..what if a pedophile decides to be transgendered and asserts his/her/its rights…………………………………………………….

    Be careful what you ask for……………………….

    • Obviously, the discrimination argument is total BS-Look at the whole court ruling-Why is it necessary for someone to “court has ruled that transgender is to be tolerated and upheld if, the person feels they are transgendered, dresses transgendered, and acts transgendered….then they must be transgendered. If the point is discrimination based on gender-then we wouldn’t be allowed to separate by gender in any area. If anything it seems this court decision is showing a direct attempt to discriminate on the basis of one being transgendered.

      • Dunno…….I saw all this on the news…trying to find references now.

        • Found this….. the EEOC states, ”[T]he Commission hereby clarifies that claims of discrimination based on transgender status, also referred to as claims of discrimination based on gender identity, are cognizable under Title VII’s sex discrimination prohibition ….”

        • And this……Safe use of bathrooms and locker rooms in schools and colleges is essential for
          any student—particularly transgender students, who can face unique challenges.
          Transgender people are individuals who have a persistent and deeply held identification
          with a gender that is different from that which they were assigned at birth. Like
          everyone else, transgender students deserve to use bathrooms and locker room
          facilities with assurances for their safety and dignity.

          A new, official interpretation of state law released by Massachusetts Commissioner of Education Mitchell Chester requires schools to permit “transgender” boys to use girls’ locker rooms, bathrooms and changing facilities if the boys “assert” they’re really girls.

          “Some students may feel uncomfortable with a transgender student using the same sex-segregated restroom, locker room or changing facility,” the official document admits, but then concludes, “this discomfort is not a reason to deny access to the transgender student.”
          Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/state-mandate-allow-boys-in-girls-locker-rooms/#Fb7OSl6LeesHbV4D.99

        • Furthermore, the policy document explains, neither doctor’s note nor hormone therapy nor even parental permission is needed for a student to switch sex: If a boy says he’s a girl, as far as the schools should be concerned, he’s a girl.

          “The responsibility for determining a student’s gender identity rests with the student,” the statement reads. “A school should accept a student’s assertion of his or her gender identity when there is … ‘evidence that the gender-related identity is sincerely held as part of a person’s core identity.’”

          The document further warns that referring to transgendered students by their birth name or sex, if it doesn’t match their current, preferred name or sex, “should not be tolerated and can be grounds for student discipline.”
          Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/state-mandate-allow-boys-in-girls-locker-rooms/#Fb7OSl6LeesHbV4D.99

        • In Maryland, for example, Montgomery County used the courts to quash a petition of 27,000 residents concerned about county legislation that granted men access to womens’ restrooms, and vice versa, in the name of “gender identity” and “anti-discrimination.”

          And in New York City, a lawsuit opened up the bathrooms in Grand Central Station after a man in woman’s clothing was arrested for using the ladies’ room.
          Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/state-mandate-allow-boys-in-girls-locker-rooms/#Fb7OSl6LeesHbV4D.99

          I dont think I need to research more……it is all over the internet.

          • I know that they do D- They have been using discrimination by race to stop discrimination by race for years. Now they are actually calling something discrimination, separation by gender, when they allow separation by gender. Neither is logical. And none of it should be legal.

            But if they are going to decide to pass this type of laws then they need to stop being wimpy and contradictory and decide -can we or can we not separate by gender-if we can transgenders have to go to whatever bathroom or dressing room that fits their actual physical gender or people can decide to make a third restroom available out of the kindness of their hearts or not. If they decide we cannot separate by gender than at least the law is equally applied. And the right to do something can be argued on the right basis-gender, not someones personal but unrealized feelings.

            • Bottom Line says:

              Instead of trying to make a law to regulate gender role assignment, why not make the facilities fit for individuals ?

              Construct individual rooms, each with a toilet, sink mirror, bench, shower stall, vent/window …and a lock on the door.

              Then is won’t matter if they are either, both, or none of the above.

              • Bottom Line says:

                ” Then IT won’t matter if they are…”

                (note to self – proofread before posting)

              • Just when we all thought if a person was born with a little willy hanging between their legs meant they were a boy, along comes someone to just screw that all up. No wonder we can’t get along anymore.

            • All in the name of a kinder, more gentle world.

              As a guy who used to avoid religious debates like the plague and would never ever think of bringing up the bible in a debate, I have now gone to understanding Sodom and Gomorrah either as a parable or as a real life event. Same with the tower of Babel. My very first drill Sergeant in the Army never tired of telling us, “trainee, you are too dumb to live.” This society as a whole has now reached that point.

              I guess we are supposed to tell our daughters and grand daughters to “hold” it until they get home.

%d bloggers like this: