Mr. Gorrel seems to imply he tried to warn us about this president, we were ‘forewarned’ by his last 4 years? i hope the silly grin on the cartoon’s face shows Mr. Obama is forwarned by his opponents’ recalcitrance. That he is forewarned of Republican willingness to take down the government if they don’t get what they want.I hope Mr. Obama will bring people who are crying out for help into the white house and in front of cameras, ask Mr. McConnall what he’s going to do to help a family from Kentucky who are falling between the cracks. I want to see groups of small businessmen sitting with Mr. Obama and after talking to their president, get the chance to talk to the legislators representing them. I want the president to help regular Americans be their own lobbyist the way it used to be. I still remember the picture from Life magazine where regular folks were sitting in chairs in the capital waiting to talk to senators and representatives. Not lobbyists, not retired generals or politicians getting huge pay from corporations, but regular people.I want a government of the people, for the people, and by the people. Respectfully,C.
Misguided – I think that is the best word I can find for C Downs comments. No one believes that truly needy folks should not have help. We® just believe that most takers are there as a result of bad decisions on their part. Too much drinking, having too many kids, not getting education, getting divorces, overspending, buying worthless items, excessive debt, not buying health/life insurance, not saving for retirement, not paying attention to basic rules of money, drugs, bad work habits – these are all bad decisions. And you and others are all expecting us, who have made good decisions, to pay for their folly. I don’t give a lot to charity, but I damn well take care of my immediate family and folks I know who are on legitimate hard times. What sense does it make for the government to take my hard earned money and give it to some crackhead in Chicago? Government is very bad when it comes to things like this. That is why we are against it. The thought that we® want to avoid helping truly needy people is repulsive and self serving.Very Respectfully,Roger
Roger: I assume you consider my son, crippled for the rest of his life because he made that “poor decision” to serve in the military for 13 years, before he left on disability, and they are still trying to screw him over, while VA has been trying to help, a “taker”?? Yep, he ignored my advice to avoid the “crazier people” in our military, served with those highly intelligent, but yes, somewhat crazy, folks, for five of his years, and did things not one of the “chickenhawks” who sent him to “those dangerous places” would ever think of doing.
He too was “forewarned” by his dad, a disabled vet, but saw that he too needed to serve his country with honor, even if it included risk.
I am angered by those who still sit in Congress, and say “Norquist is our king, long live the king!”, instead of “How can I truly serve my country?”
Yes, we were “forewarned” by Mr. Boehner and Mr. McConnell that they would not change, and they haven’t. There lies the need for “attitude adjustment”.
@C Downs – Yes, it is hard to find a place where civil discussions are tolerated and encouraged. I would welcome such a forum – when we say we are R or D, readers take it to mean we embrace all the downside that those designation embrace. No, it just means the we align ourselves with that group because it comes closest to our core beliefs – but we certainly do not adhere to all their beliefs nor we condone their actions.@dtroutma – your analogy is silly and insulting. We all honor the sacrifices made by our fabulous military. Please thank your son for me for his service and sacrifice. You certainly have my condolences about that. His was a decision of honor and service to country – certainly not a poor one.
^Veterans Day, and Memorial Day, both “set me off”, because we’ve sent too many to serve, and pay for the rest of their lives, for “chickenhawk” decisions, made for corporate profit.
Had a brother-in-law, and a sister-in-law that both made all those “bad decisions” with regard to drugs and alcohol, so DO understand where you’re coming from on that, they did need to take control of their own lives, and didn’t. BUT, what isn’t understood by way too many “conservatives”, and yes many “liberals” too, is that sometimes, programs aren’t available to HELP those folks, and most “conservative” budgets, have cut those programs, rather than “tax the rich”. An additional 4% on the top level, is hardly a “strain”.
@C Downs; I very much appreciate your comment regarding “the people for whom a good education was not enough due to bad parenting”. I understand exactly what you are saying there and you are (sadly) correct. But here is the problem – how in the heck can government intervene in such a way that they are not taking away the rights of the parents to “raise their kids as they see fit”. Would you want some government agent monitoring your parenting skills? That is really a tough one – I have no clue whatsoever how to address that particular kind of problem. Would a government solution be better than no solution? Again I have no idea. Also, I’ve got to believe that the ACLU would rear it’s head at some point in that situation – for better or for worse. If you have ideas on how to handle that, we would love to hear them.Respectfully,Roger
chazandru over 11 years ago
Mr. Gorrel seems to imply he tried to warn us about this president, we were ‘forewarned’ by his last 4 years? i hope the silly grin on the cartoon’s face shows Mr. Obama is forwarned by his opponents’ recalcitrance. That he is forewarned of Republican willingness to take down the government if they don’t get what they want.I hope Mr. Obama will bring people who are crying out for help into the white house and in front of cameras, ask Mr. McConnall what he’s going to do to help a family from Kentucky who are falling between the cracks. I want to see groups of small businessmen sitting with Mr. Obama and after talking to their president, get the chance to talk to the legislators representing them. I want the president to help regular Americans be their own lobbyist the way it used to be. I still remember the picture from Life magazine where regular folks were sitting in chairs in the capital waiting to talk to senators and representatives. Not lobbyists, not retired generals or politicians getting huge pay from corporations, but regular people.I want a government of the people, for the people, and by the people. Respectfully,C.
gordrogb Premium Member over 11 years ago
Misguided – I think that is the best word I can find for C Downs comments. No one believes that truly needy folks should not have help. We® just believe that most takers are there as a result of bad decisions on their part. Too much drinking, having too many kids, not getting education, getting divorces, overspending, buying worthless items, excessive debt, not buying health/life insurance, not saving for retirement, not paying attention to basic rules of money, drugs, bad work habits – these are all bad decisions. And you and others are all expecting us, who have made good decisions, to pay for their folly. I don’t give a lot to charity, but I damn well take care of my immediate family and folks I know who are on legitimate hard times. What sense does it make for the government to take my hard earned money and give it to some crackhead in Chicago? Government is very bad when it comes to things like this. That is why we are against it. The thought that we® want to avoid helping truly needy people is repulsive and self serving.Very Respectfully,Roger
Dtroutma over 11 years ago
Roger: I assume you consider my son, crippled for the rest of his life because he made that “poor decision” to serve in the military for 13 years, before he left on disability, and they are still trying to screw him over, while VA has been trying to help, a “taker”?? Yep, he ignored my advice to avoid the “crazier people” in our military, served with those highly intelligent, but yes, somewhat crazy, folks, for five of his years, and did things not one of the “chickenhawks” who sent him to “those dangerous places” would ever think of doing.
He too was “forewarned” by his dad, a disabled vet, but saw that he too needed to serve his country with honor, even if it included risk.
I am angered by those who still sit in Congress, and say “Norquist is our king, long live the king!”, instead of “How can I truly serve my country?”
Yes, we were “forewarned” by Mr. Boehner and Mr. McConnell that they would not change, and they haven’t. There lies the need for “attitude adjustment”.
gordrogb Premium Member over 11 years ago
@C Downs – Yes, it is hard to find a place where civil discussions are tolerated and encouraged. I would welcome such a forum – when we say we are R or D, readers take it to mean we embrace all the downside that those designation embrace. No, it just means the we align ourselves with that group because it comes closest to our core beliefs – but we certainly do not adhere to all their beliefs nor we condone their actions.@dtroutma – your analogy is silly and insulting. We all honor the sacrifices made by our fabulous military. Please thank your son for me for his service and sacrifice. You certainly have my condolences about that. His was a decision of honor and service to country – certainly not a poor one.
Dtroutma over 11 years ago
^Veterans Day, and Memorial Day, both “set me off”, because we’ve sent too many to serve, and pay for the rest of their lives, for “chickenhawk” decisions, made for corporate profit.
Had a brother-in-law, and a sister-in-law that both made all those “bad decisions” with regard to drugs and alcohol, so DO understand where you’re coming from on that, they did need to take control of their own lives, and didn’t. BUT, what isn’t understood by way too many “conservatives”, and yes many “liberals” too, is that sometimes, programs aren’t available to HELP those folks, and most “conservative” budgets, have cut those programs, rather than “tax the rich”. An additional 4% on the top level, is hardly a “strain”.
gordrogb Premium Member over 11 years ago
@C Downs; I very much appreciate your comment regarding “the people for whom a good education was not enough due to bad parenting”. I understand exactly what you are saying there and you are (sadly) correct. But here is the problem – how in the heck can government intervene in such a way that they are not taking away the rights of the parents to “raise their kids as they see fit”. Would you want some government agent monitoring your parenting skills? That is really a tough one – I have no clue whatsoever how to address that particular kind of problem. Would a government solution be better than no solution? Again I have no idea. Also, I’ve got to believe that the ACLU would rear it’s head at some point in that situation – for better or for worse. If you have ideas on how to handle that, we would love to hear them.Respectfully,Roger