Comments for: Tuesday, May 22, 2012: The war on poverty, nurses’ disturbing TV ad

Posted May 21, 2012, at 3:38 p.m.

Portland panhandling I am struck by the impact the story of Don Deitz, the homeless man in ” Panhandling in Portland” has had on me. As I completed the story of his struggle and the concern of property owners and merchants in Portland on what impact the increase in panhandling …

Guidelines for posting on bangordailynews.com

The Bangor Daily News encourages comments about stories, but you must follow our terms of service.

  1. Keep it civil and stay on topic
  2. No vulgarity, racial slurs, name-calling or personal attacks.
  3. People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked.
The primary rule here is pretty simple: Treat others with the same respect you'd want for yourself. Here are some guidelines (see more):

  • Anonymous

    Tonya, AKA “A flip flopper.”

    • Anonymous

      Rmoney AKA “The Etch-a-Sketch Shaker” candidate.

      Yessah

      • Anonymous

        Next President too….

        • Anonymous

           God help the world if he is.

          • Anonymous

            I don’t even think God can help America if Obama gets another 4 years. And if anyone votes for him because he’s for gay marriage, then they are voting for strictly selfish reasons, and not for which candidate is better for the country. You need to ask yourself; Is gay marriage more important than the survival of America? If you think so, then Obama is your man, because he’s killing this nation one spending bill, executive order, and back room deal at a time.

            By the way, if you think he’s going to promise SSM, just remember all the other promises he made……and broke.

          • Anonymous

            Obama isn’t killing this nation, that’s ridiculous. You can be supportive of Obama and supportive of marriage equality without being selfish as well. 

            I’ve seen the comparisons and Romney’s plans would increase our debt even more with additional unfunded tax cuts for the wealthy. It’s funny you bring up selfishness too — which candidate is the one with overseas bank accounts in order to avoid paying taxes to the country he supposedly loves?

          • Anonymous

            Nobody knows about Obama’s bank accounts, college transcripts, or even his upbringing. So, your point is void of any substance.

            And if you actually believe that adding over 5 trillion to the national debt in only 3 and a half years is good for the country, then you need to retake Economics 101. By they way, the projected increase in the national debt under Obama if it gets 4 more years is another 20 trillion on top of what’s already there. We can’t survive that. 

            And, no, I can’t be supportive of Obama. As for SSM, if Romney was for it, I would still vote for him. I’m not a one-issue voter; I vote for America, not a person.

          • Anonymous

            Yes we do know about Obama’s bank accounts. He’s released all that information. My point isn’t void of substance. You changing the subject to something else doesn’t suddenly make a bad deed evaporate. You talked about selfishness and I’d say a Swiss bank account sums up selfishness quite nicely.

            It’s also arrogant for you to assume that those who are supportive of marriage equality or those who are happy with Obama’s announcement are one issue voters hoping for the destruction of the country. Talk about baseless hyperbole!

          • Anonymous

            Baseless is what the Obama supporters do time after time…..they fail to defend him. Now why is that?

          • Joseph Willingham

            Why do you think they do that?

          • Anonymous

            They fail to defend him because he is indefensible. Just like he is so busy tearing down Romney because he can’t even defend himself. 

          • Anonymous

            When we see that you fault Obama for things that Romney does and does worse, we know it’s hypocrisy. It’s not even worth a response.

          • Anonymous

            Tell me what Obama has done to get this country out of debt, as he promised. Tell me how he cut the deficit in half, as he promised. Tell me how he was going to work with the Republicans, as he promised. Tell me how he was going to run an ethical and clean campaign, as he promised. Or is that not worth a response either?

          • Anonymous

             EJ, just because you are blinded by hatred, doesn’t mean our points are baseless or untrue. In my opinion, you might not see the truth if it hit you in the face. Also I do believe what I post, unless, I’m being sarcastic.

          • Anonymous

            I hate no one, so put that card back into your deck. And keep the race card, too. As a person, I believe he means well, but because of his socialist upbringing, his policies and vision for America is wrong. As a community organizer, he hit his peak. He doesn’t have what it takes to be a President.

          • Anonymous

            You don’t believe he means well, stop stepping back from what you’ve already said. You said he’s killing the nation. Just stop. What you’re doing IS hatred.

          • Anonymous

            Adding over 5 trillion in additional debt in less than 4 years is killing the nation. Declaring a war on the wealthy is killing the nation. Partisan politics of the worst kind is killing the nation. His socialist/marxist agenda is killing the nation. 

            Those are facts. Put the hate card away.

          • Joseph Willingham

            If such things were happening, then perhaps they’d be facts.  But can you back any of this up?  I mean, really, a war on the wealthy???

          • Anonymous

            Don’t change the subject. You’re saying hateful things and then you’re trying to step away from them.

            So much for personal responsibility!

          • Anonymous

             I didn’t say anything about race EJ. See you just outed yourself.

          • Anonymous

            That was just in case you planned on throwing it. 

          • Anonymous

            Do you really believe the stuff you write?

          • Anonymous

            Absolutely. Do you believe the stuff you write?

          • Anonymous

            Dont confuse them with facts, they dont know how to handle them

          • Joseph Willingham

            What facts?

          • Anonymous

            Have you seen Mitt (R)money’s birth certificate?  How do you know how he was brought up, maybe as a Mormon he has more than one wife.   I suggest you better check on this before you vote.  See if you can get him to sign over one or two of the overseas accounts while your checking on him.  Maybe you could get him to release his full tax info and list of bank accounts also seeing how he seems reluctant to do so, I am guessing it takes time to shuffle the figures and accounts around so it doesn’t show that he is un-american like he really is.

          • Anonymous

            My original comment was about Obama. But, the left can’t defend him without dragging other people and issues into the discussion. 

            Obama is bad for America. Even if Romney has overseas accounts, he’s a hundred times better for this country than Obama could ever be. 

          • Anonymous

            This will be an election between two people, almost certainly Romney and Obama. 
            You absurdly contend that President Obama won’t tell us about his upbringing or bank accounts.  That’s ridiculous and absolutely untrue. 
            In reply it’s fair game to ask whether Romney was born on the planet Mongo, and whether he can produce his birth certificate from that planet.

          • Anonymous

            If he was born on Mongo, he wouldn’t be eligible to run for President. And if he were, the left would have already picked up on it. You see, Romney is a Republican, so it’s fair game to ask him anything. I wonder if he ever attended Rev. Wright’s peace-loving church?

          • Anonymous

            Uh, no, he’s a Mormon.  They teach that God was once a man like us; and potentially any Mormon male may become a God with his own universe to rule. 
            Are you comfortable with that doctrine, EJ?

          • Anonymous

            Yes, he’s a Mormon. And Obama believes in Black Liberation Theology. I’m not comfortable with either one of those. But, I do believe that Romney won’t use his religion for personal or political gain like Obama has. 

          • Anonymous

            Obamas father had three wives all at the same time, too bad the media wont run with that story

          • Anonymous

            Mitts grandfather had many wife’s, so what is the big deal, so now we need to beat on people because of what their relatives did?   For the life of me I can’t understand why anyone would want more than 1 wife.   One of the reasons I am in favor of SSM is they should be made to suffer just like the rest of us heterosexuals, even my wife agrees.

          • Anonymous

            with comments like that I can understand your wifes suffering

          • Anonymous

            Such incredible baloney, and even if it was true it would be no more relevant than Romney’s polygamous great-grandfather.

          • Anonymous

            Do a little research  Obamas father was married before he came to the US, then when he met Obamas mother he was married to her. Shortly after Obamas birth his mother moved to attend columbia university and  his father went back overseas, where he married for the third time.Obamas speaches are full of lies. He stated that the march in Alabama helped his parents get together, when the truth is that the march took place after Obamas bitrth. You want to talk about baloney  research some of the things in Obamas speaches now that is not only boloney most off it is bullsh**

          • Joseph Willingham

            Why should he do research to prove your point?

          • Anonymous

            what an intelligent response, did you happen to read the rest of the facts I posted for you

          • Joseph Willingham

            Thanks!

            What facts?  Again, did you read how I asked for back up or am is it just fact because you repeat it?

          • Anonymous

            He should do research to disprove it. Trouble is, overtaxedagain is correct. There are so many lies in Obama’s books that it would be embarrassing to him if anyone on the left had the guts to actually challenge him with the things that he, himself, wrote. 

          • Anonymous

            boring,  your hateful tripe is ugly, pathetic and boring

          • Anonymous

            As I said, whether true or not (it’s probably untrue, but doesn’t matter whether it is true or false), it is no more relevant than the fact that Mitt Romney’s great-grandfather was a Mormon polygamist with four wives.  So what?  I don’t care how many wives Obama’s father had any more than I care how many wives Romney’s great-grandfather had.  Neither is relevant.

          • Joseph Willingham

            Sounds like a Biblical marriage!  Can you cite your reference to this information?

          • Anonymous

            Why should they ?   Do you think that President Obama is for plural marriage ?

          • Anonymous

            the media runs with every bit of smut  they can dig up on everybody else why id Obama not  included in the game they play

          • Anonymous

            and they have not investigated President Obama ?….. maybe you have been away or sleeping these last 4 years or so…. 

          • Anonymous

            actually they have not. Why dont they let the media run a story on how Obamas social security number starts off with digits that would put him born in conn. not Hawii   This is another well hidden fact

          • Joseph Willingham

            So hidden, but how do you know about it?

          • Anonymous

             You really come up with the nut case stuff, don’t you.  We all know he was born in Hawaii, as two newspapers reported at the time in their birth notices.  I’m sure you think he has a time machine so he could travel back in time and plant the birth notices in the Honolulu newspapers.
            The righty loonies have been saying he wasn’t born in Hawaii, but was born in Kenya — and now you say his SS# is from Connecticut.  Please prove to me that Mitt Romney wasn’t born on the planet Mongo, or go join the British Monster Raving Loony Party.

          • Anonymous

            Well Said.

          • Anonymous

            The British have a “Monster Raving Looney Party” that would be compatible with the views you have just expressed.  On the other hand, the British Conservatives are led by a Prime Minister, David Cameron, who says, “I support same-sex marriage because I’m a Conservative.”

          • If you actually vote for “the person” please tell me who Romney is?

            I have no love for Obama, and I believe he’s bad for the Nation, but Romney seems to have no substance at all.  He is for health care mandates in Massachusetts but wants us to believe he’s changed his mind. He’s for gay marriage in Massachusetts but he wants us to believe he changed his mind. He is pro choice in Massachusetts but he wants us to believe he’s changed his mind.

            He would be a wet-back auto worker in not for his famous father.  AND George was a liberal.

            So tell me who this suit is?

          • Anonymous

            I am a progressive, liberal democrat who at times would have voted for a republican.  Not anymore.
            I do have some complaints about President Obama, but I certainly do not see that he has been or is bad for our country.  If you are inclined, I would be interested to know why you feel otherwise.

          • Anonymous

            Mitt Romney is also a moderate Republican. An ideal candidate for me would be a true Conservative, but there were none in the race this year. Still, I will vote for Romney in November because, even though he’s changed his positions on a few issues, he’s still better for the nation than Obama, who, by the way, has changed his position on many issues also, but no one on the left seems to care.

            As for Romney, he is a middle-of-the-road Republican. He is a physical conservative and a social moderate. He knows how to run businesses, and is a friend to both small and large businesses. He cares about the military, and he believes that freedom is worth the efforts and sacrifices necessary to preserve it. 

            Romney tends to stutter when challenged with tough questions, but usually manages to express his beliefs and opinions in a way that is favorable to the country and the office that he is seeking. He is a strong family man and involved in his religion, even though I consider the Mormon religion to be more of a cult than a religion. At least he has enough faith to not use his faith as a political crutch of any kind.

            As for the slanderous auto-worker comment, give me a break. If Obama hadn’t been selected and groomed by the radical leftists around Chicago, he’d have never risen above community organizer.

          • Anonymous

            You write, “If Obama hadn’t been selected and groomed by the radical leftists around Chicago, he’d have never risen above community organizer.” 
            Please get serious, EJ.  If you’re going to go off the deep end like that, why do you bother to post?  Just so you can show how out-of-touch with reality you are?

          • Anonymous

            You need to study up on your messiah. Based on your comments, I have a feeling I know more about his history than you do. You should read his books.

          • Anonymous

            Your “messiah” comment shows that you’re just a parrot for the fringe right talking heads.

          • Anonymous

            Actually, Farrakhan coined that label in 2008. I don’t think Farrakhan is a fringe right talking head.

          • Anonymous

            Irrelevant. The fringe right frequently uses that in a disrespectful manner towards the President. Parroting others, disrespecting the President, race baiting, etc. — you must be pretty proud of yourself.

          • Anonymous

            Uh, no, Farrakhan didn’t coin the term.  It goes back to the Bible.  But no politician of any political persuasion should be mistaken for the Messiah.
            I’m sure that I have a lot more accurate information about President Obama than you have.  But you seem to like that crazy birther stuff, and all of the conspiracy theories that come out of the extreme right.

          • Anonymous

            Coined in reference to Obama. You know exactly what I meant.

            And I haven’t brought up the birth certificate for months. Get over it.

          • Anonymous

            When will you people realize, if you took every penny from  your so called rich  you still could not keep up with Obamas spending

          • Anonymous

            That’s not what I’m advocating and no one else is advocating that either. When will you realize that if you want to have a real discussion, you have to base things in reality.

          • Anonymous

            the reality is that Obama has out spent any and every president combined in the history of this country with no end in sight, and some of you think that increasing taxes on the successful people in this country is going to cure that, and it is not

          • Anonymous

            I think returning tax rates to Clinton era levels, decreases in spending (no more wars and a smaller Defense budget) will get our debt in check.

          • Anonymous

            Think that if you want, but it’s already been proven that it won’t do anything for the debt. In fact, you can take 100% of all the income over 1 million from every American millionaire and it might reduce the deficit by a few hundred billion. But until you eliminate the deficit, the debt will continue to rise. The only way to balance the books is through massive spending cuts in entitlements, elimination of the healthcare bill, and no more bailouts. Then, in about 20 years, our debt might reach maintainable levels, if we can keep Congress from spending. 

          • Anonymous

            As usual you miss the point that the policies in the U.S. continue to favor the haves at the expense of the rest of us which is eliminating the middle class and continuing to broaden the gap between the rich and the poor. The gap is greater than at any time and growing.  If you think that that is good or healthy for the country you are wrong.  

          • Anonymous

            Far too many of these policies have been put in place by the politicians in DC on both sides of the aisle. They have written into the tax laws protections for lobbyists, the wealthy, and the powerful. They have provided loopholes for their buddies and themselves that cost the middle class billions every year to cover. The vast majority of the Democrats and establishment Republicans, and the President, have been corrupted by the system, their own greed, and the money provided them by the lobbyists and wealthy that have  bought and paid for most of them. 

            It’s time to get the establishment politicians from both parties out of DC and replace them with politicians that actually care more about the country than they do about their bank accounts and buddies. And it’s time to make term limits a reality. These are two of the main points of the Tea Party platform. 

          • Joseph Willingham

            I have not heard this before.  Can you reference this, please?

          • Anonymous

            in order to save the country from going off a cliff and pay for all the obligations that Bush got us into..
            and by the way, Reagan doubled the debt and ‘W’ tripled it …. when ‘W’ took office there was a huge surplus, when he left we were in a free fall great recession…
            are you stupid, or simply too partisan to accept the facts…

          • Anonymous

            the facts are that Obama has outspent all presidents combined, you will have to do more than take your socks and shoes off to figure out what a trillion dollars looks like

          • Joseph Willingham

            References!?!!?!?  Do people just make statements here and expect us to believe them as facts?!?!?!

          • Anonymous

            even liberal media states these figures,,   need someone to run a power cord to your cave????????????

          • Joseph Willingham

            Again, people make claims on here expecting those reading to prove them.  Preposterous, I say!!!!!!
            If people can’t back up their claims and instead put the focus on those who question them by insinuating  that they’re stupid, then so be it.
            Good luck with your ranting!

          • Anonymous

            Correction: When Bush took office, there was a projected surplus. The actual surplus never materialized because of 9-11. 

            And, yes, every President over the last 50 years has added to the debt. Bush did allow far too much spending and government expansion. However, in his 8 years in office, Bush allowed just over 5 trillion in new debt. Obama passed that mark in less four. And it’s been projected that if he gets a second term, he will more than double the national debt. We just can’t handle that.

            No, I’m not stupid. But anyone that still blames Bush for Obama’s economy just might be.

          • Anonymous

            You are wrong .

          • Anonymous

            Prove it.

          • Anonymous

            No reason for me to further waste my time giving you facts.  Been there done that.  I have seen that in your case they fall on deaf ears.  The facts are easily available, but you are not interested in anything but your own prejudices.

          • Anonymous

            From a March 19, 2012, CBS article:

            (CBS News) The National Debt has now increased more during President Obama’s three years and two months in office than it did during 8 years of the George W. Bush presidency.The Debt rose $4.899 trillion during the two terms of the Bush presidency. It has now gone up $4.939 trillion since President Obama took office.The latest posting from the Bureau of Public Debt at the Treasury Department shows the National Debt now stands at $15.566 trillion. It was $10.626 trillion on President Bush’s last day in office, which coincided with President Obama’s first day.The National Debt also now exceeds 100% of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product, the total value of goods and services.Mr. Obama has been quick to blame his predecessor for the soaring Debt, saying Mr. Bush paid for two wars and a Medicare prescription drug program with borrowed funds.The federal budget sent to Congress last month by Mr. Obama, projects the National Debt will continue to rise as far as the eye can see. The budget shows the Debt hitting $16.3 trillion in 2012, $17.5 trillion in 2013 and $25.9 trillion in 2022.Federal budget records show the National Debt once topped 121% of GDP at the end of World War II. The Debt that year, 1946, was, by today’s standards, a mere $270 billion dollars.Mr. Obama doesn’t mention the National Debt much, though he does want to be seen trying to reduce the annual budget deficit, though it’s topped a trillion dollars for four years now.As part of his “Win the Future” program, Mr. Obama called for “taking responsibility for our deficits, by cutting wasteful, excessive spending wherever we find it.”His latest budget projects a $1.3 trillion deficit this year declining to $901 billion in 2012, and then annual deficits in the range of $500 billion to $700 billion in the 10 years to come.If Mr. Obama wins re-election, and his budget projections prove accurate, the National Debt will top $20 trillion in 2016, the final year of his second term. That would mean the Debt increased by 87 percent, or $9.34 trillion, during his two terms.

          • Anonymous

            see above, particularly the final paragraph… with this I am done with this argument… I had forgotten what a blowhard you are… will not make the mistake of responding to your foolish comments again.

          • Anonymous

            But I’ll miss your charming and insightful dialogue.

          • Anonymous

            I will leave you with this, ‘numbers don’t lie but liars use numbers’.  Take a lesson.

          • Joseph Willingham

            That’s what I was asking for.  There is so much talk back and forth on issue and people say that this is one way or that has happened.  How do we know for sure?
            Thank you for posting this.

          • Anonymous

            The national debt certainly does not exceed 100% of our GDP.  Do not believe all of  Parsons ‘facts’.
            Suffice it to say there are other discrepancies .    I do admire your patience and good humor.

          • Joseph Willingham

            It’s the coconut rum.  I drink copious amounts of coconut rum, pineapple juice, and cranberry juice.

          • Anonymous

            Yum, very good for your complexion and your digestion, truly.

          • Anonymous

            As usual you distort as you have below.  
            A dominant theme of the national political discourse has been the crushing spending spree the U.S. has ostensibly embarked on during the Obama presidency. That argument, ignited by Republicans and picked up by many elite opinion makers, has infused the national dialogue and shaped the public debate in nearly every major budget battle of the last thee years.
            But the numbers tell a different story.
            The fact that the national debt has risen from $10.6 trillion to $15.6 trillion under Obama’s watch makes for easy partisan attacks. But the vast bulk of the increase was caused by a combination of revenue losses due to the 2008-09 economic downturn as well as Bush-era tax cuts and automatic increases in safety-net spending that were already written into law.
            Obama’s policies, including the much-criticized stimulus package, have caused the slowest increase in federal spending of any president in almost 60 nears, according to data compiled by the financial news service MarketWatch.The chart shows that Presidents Reagan, both Bushes, and to a lesser extent Clinton, grew federal spending at a far quicker pace than Obama. Part of the reason for the slow growth is that Obama — unlike his Republican and Democratic predecessors — signed a law in February 2010 necessitating that new spending laws are paid for. In addition, Obama last year signed into law over $2 trillion in debt-reduction over the next decade.

          • Anonymous

            2 trillion in debt reduction? In order to get that in 10 years, the deficit has to be eliminated and an additional 2 trillion raised to apply to the debt. With no new spending at all, that means the government would have to collect over 20 trillion extra in 10 years. Ain’t gonna’ happen. Obama didn’t sign any such law.

            I think you might have the deficit and debt confused.

          • Joseph Willingham

            How would we realize that?  Because you tell us?  Can you provide more credible sources please?

          • Anonymous

            OK get out your pencil and paper, add up all of the wealth of the top  ten percent  you liberals always cry about, the look at what the deficit is. Put the bigger number on the top and take away the littler number and see what you have left over. That number will be the remaining deficit   You got that, or should I break it down a little more.  If you dont have a pencil go ahead and use your crayola  crayon if you havent eaten them all.

          • Joseph Willingham

            You’re both being rather silly. One of you makes a claim and then, instead of backing it up asks to be disproved. You reply in a sarcastic nature, knowing full well that your reply makes no sense in real economic terms.
            If you don’t know where your “facts” come from, then say so, but telling US that we have to prove YOUR points is just nonsensical.
            Crayons? Don’t be a buffoon.

          • “I don’t even think God can help…”

            I agree with you a little more than half the time, but I stopped reading right there. Is anything beyond God’s reach?

          • Anonymous

            Look at all the suffering in the world.  It would seem that a great deal is beyond your god’s reach.  Or perhaps he/she/it simply couldn’t care less.  Now there’s a god worth honoring.

            Or (my favorite), you’re putting your belief in a work of fiction.

          • Maybe God loves us enough to let us make our own mistakes in this temporary world, so we don’t have to be permanently destroyed? Else why mention an afterlife?

            You believe what you want, I can only be responsible for my own actions, but Jesus is responsible for everyone. Being sinless, he died “perfect”. That’s why Jesus is Messiah.

            This world is temporary, and the only way God can show us that sin leads to death, is to show us with our own mortality. You can’t change the fact that one day, you’re going to die. The good news is, it is only temporary.

            I imagine that, the only way to show us what spiritual death is like, is by showing us what a mortal death is first like. That doesn’t sound totally unreasonable to me.

            I don’t know how you view the bible, but it is a book of spiritual things. If you’re not willing to look into those meanings, then there is nothing I could possibly do to show you what I mean.

            God bless you.

          • Anonymous

            It’s interesting that you present so much as fact, when you really can’t know that.  Best you can do is hope you’re correct.

            My view of the bible is that it’s an interesting mix of some facts of the day with a great deal of fiction.  Of course, I can’t know that either.  Nor will I prentend that I do.  But it’s what makes the most sense to me, simply by seeing how the world is and how gullible people are when it comes to things like religion.

            I’ll set aside your last three words for when my allergies kick up.  :)

          • Thank you,

            This is where I normally talk about information theory and quantum mechanics, but whatever, no one really listens anyway. All I have as proof, is my own faith. That’s it.

            But just remember that God said that evil does exist, and it manifests itself in our evil actions, but originated in our evil thoughts. This is why Jesus said that a man who lusts after a woman in his heart [thoughts] has already committed adultery.

          • Anonymous

            As long as you understand that when you quote “god” to me, you might as well be quoting Mickey Mouse  :)  It’s rather moot…

          • This is true, it might as well have been Mickey Mouse.

            Unless the basis for evil as defined in the bible is true, as having originated with Satan’s rebellion. Then, everything matters.

            I just find the parts in Revelation where it talks about a world-wide government-type system (the beast, rising up out of the sea [great turmoil of many peoples] with 7 heads [7 continents]) very interesting when confronted with international governing bodies such as the UN. The framework is there, and some day a person could rise up to be uncontested ruler of the world — The oldest dream of every dictator in history!

            But what happens when there is world-wide government? Will it be enough? Will it sate their hunger for power over human life? Probably not.

            And you may not see it that way, but that’s the whole point. If the bible is true, and Satan is real, we have much bigger problems than a multi-trillion dollar deficit and the sound of war drums on the horizon…

          • Anonymous

            No, nothing is beyond God’s reach. But we have to actually seek His help. Less and less are seeking God’s help.

          • Anonymous

            People die in horrible ways every day in mid-prayer.  And what about those in the world who have yet to be reached by the religion peddlers?  

            Kids being struck down by disease and war…where’s their god, EJ?  Too busy helping some uber-ego sports star get a touch-down?

          • Don’t worry about them, worry about yourself, and just keep spreading the good news. No sense in bickering, arguing and fighting, it only drives them further away. Then this eventually leads to extremism of some sort, where a man finally decides to become a judge, jury and executioner, but clearly in error. Why do you think Jesus told us to turn the other cheek? Why do you think so many people blame religion for all the world’s woes, even if that is a lie too?

          • Anonymous

            Jesus never told a lie, nor did He ever sugar coat anything. He told the truth, not matter how tough it was for others to swallow. Jesus drove a lot of people away by exposing them to their own hypocrisy, hatred or prejudices. 
            I realize I get a little passionate on these threads, and I let the passionate human side take over many time. After being pummeled day after day by the hard nosed, lost left, I am amazed at how blind they are when it comes to reality. I’m just glad that I have peace in my soul and in my beliefs. 
            And you’re right. I need to quit bickering and arguing because there is nothing that can be said to many of them that would open their eyes to the truth of what’s happening in America, or to the Truth, Himself

          • Exactly, and I appreciate your honesty.

            Jesus did tell the truth, no matter how tough it was… But he was never political, it was always directed at the spiritual leaders of his time for their sinful lives and mis-representation of God. Politics are a thing of this world, something we as a collective made up to protect us from ourselves. Jesus said to “Render unto Caesar what is his, and to render unto God what is His”.

            Let them vote any way they want. You can’t legislate morality, but you can lead a life as an example for others to follow. You can also do it without being political, because in the end, your vote doesn’t count. Or have you forgot that Satan tempted Jesus with the power to rule the nations of the world?

            This world is Satan’s. Jesus himself said that Satan is the prince of this world. Nothing you do of your own two hands, like voting, will change a thing. We can’t keep looking to worldly and corruptible mankind for answers, when in over 8,000+ years of human history we still kill each other over the stupidest of things.

            Who is your brother? Your sister? Your neighbor? Even the worst of us are capable of good, and the best of us capable of evil; but they’re all our brothers, sisters and neighbors. Before we even come upon a disagreement that brings us to the point of violence, we should first turn the other cheek and be as wise as serpents, but as harmless as doves.

            Change begins with you, in your home, and in your neighborhood. When you start to see these rabidly anti-God posts on here, ya gotta remember that they’re being deceived by Satan, and in dire need of help. Only with love can you change someone, even if it means forgiving them just after being nailed to a cross and right before dying.

            “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” – John 15:12

          • Anonymous

            I’m voting for Obama because I believe that those of us who are not rich don’t have a chance under Romney not because he supported gay marriage. It is the Republicans who are killing this nation with their hatred of the poor and middle classes.

          • Anonymous

             Yes… you’re in favor of poverty.    Poor people hire a lot of other poor people.  I see it all the time in my town here in central Maine.

          • Joseph Willingham

            And then you can say that rich people move their companies to places like China where the labor is cheap.  So I can say that you’re in favor of moving jobs offshore….

          • Anonymous

            Don’t tell me you are still believing the trickle down bull.  When will people get it in their heads that does not work, it has been proven over and over.  The rich are taking over this country and soon there will be no middle class as the rich will own the government and everything will be govern in there favor as much of it is now.

          • Actually here in Maine the poor DO hire “lots of other people” in a way.  The biggest business in Maine is State government. 

          • Anonymous

            Unfortunately with all the cuts, federal and state, the # of government jobs is shrinking.  Not a good thing to happen in a recession.
            By the way, the federal government is quite a bit smaller now than under ‘W’.

          • Anonymous

            I take it that was sarcasm.  So who is doing the hiring in your town?  In my town it’s small businesses whose owners could hardly be considered wealthy.  These business owners typically earn $30- $100,000 tops in a good year. And none of them are able to offer benefits.

          • Anonymous

            Since Obama took office, people on welfare have doubled. Why? Because he’s building his slave base. 

            And it’s not the Republicans that are killing this nation. Since the Republicans took the House back, they have passed over 30 bills that would help the poor, middle class, and small businesses in this nation. Every one of these bills have been tabled in the Senate by the Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid. And just in case you didn’t know this, Reid is a Democrat.

            Go ahead and vote for Obama if you want. That’s your right. But remember this: America is on a downward spiral, and Obama is steering the ship. Keep him at the helm and we are doomed as a nation. And you’d better start learning Chinese.

          • Anonymous

            You’re the one race baiting and it’s disgusting. Don’t say that Obama is creating a slave base. How sickening and offensive.

            There have been increases in welfare because of the poor economy, OBVIOUSLY. The decline started before Obama even got into office, so your claims are unfair and clearly untrue.

          • Anonymous

            The slave base has more whites in it than blacks. Put the race card back in the deck.

          • Anonymous

            You’re invoking slavery to criticize a black man. You ARE race baiting. Stop it, it’s disgusting.

          • Anonymous

            You’re suffering from hopeless desperation. You throw the race card just because you can’t defend Obama. That’s pitiful. 

          • Anonymous

            No, I very clearly outlined how you were obviously race baiting. The fact that you can’t take responsibility for your actions and apologize is pitiful. But it just goes to show the kind of person you are and the tactics you have to resort to when criticizing the President. Again, that’s what’s really pitiful.

          • Anonymous

            Agree.

          • Anonymous

            lol

    • Joseph Willingham

      You point seems to be then that one must never change one’s mind and remain like a rock forever with one’s opinion.

      • Anonymous

        Obama changed his mind twice on the subject of gay marriage.  How can you trust him?

        • Joseph Willingham

          People change minds, especially politicians.  I don’t think either candidate is free of changing his mind on a topic more than once.  I don’t think it’s as terrible and manipulative that people are making it out to be.

        • Anonymous

          I don’t believe he changed his mind at all.  He has finally made his stand is all.  He came down on the right side of personnal freedom instead of the conservative notion of uptightness and properness.  Conservatives do not believe in personnal freedom at all.

        • Anonymous

          And you have a better alternative with Romney?

  • Anonymous

    Oh, those poor bankers being scapegoated. Boohoo.

    We’re going to pretend that “too big to fail” banks had nothing to do with what happened in 2008? This denial of reality here is getting pretty ridiculous. Greed happened and we’re paying for it.

    • Anonymous

      Granted, the banks deserve a portion of the blame, but a small portion at best. The major portion of the blame goes to the government for their massive spending and out-of-control expansion. 

      • Anonymous

        It wasn’t our deficit or massive debt that caused the crash…it was the bad behavior by the major brokerage houses, complicit with banks who inflated the housing bubble, and the government–of both parties–that allowed it to go on.

      • Anonymous

        I’m glad to see you denounce Bush for ending Clinton’s surpluses with reckless tax cuts, unfunded wars, and an unfunded prescription drug program for the elderly.  We need more conservatives ready to denounce Bush for a truly catastrophic presidency.

        • Anonymous

          if you would let your mind catch up with your mouth you would realize that Clinton was the one who forced banks to give loans to everyone, even those who had no means to pay them back  it just happened to finally come to a head when Bush was in office

          • Anonymous

            Pray tell me what legislation Clinton signed that “forced” banks to give loans.  I think it is time to cut off your supply of fantasy tea.

          • Anonymous

            He didn’t,  it was George W. Bush who actively promoted home ownership for all thru policies and rhetoric.

          • Anonymous

             Barney Frank, Charlie Rangel & associates pushed “rules” through HUD and FHA. There were no “laws” I’m aware of. They were concerned that some people were being unfairly discriminated against in home loans because of their race or gender.  They instituted policies aimed at evening out the race gender numbers with the home buying population at large. This meant that banks were more likely to make home loans to riskier clients based on their race rather than their “creditworthiness”.

            Bush did advocate home ownership and is as responsible for it as Clinton was, but you can’t condemn one without condemning the other. It was/is just bad policy.

          • Anonymous

            Legislators don’t write rules or regulations.  Learn some basic principles of government.
              No one forced the banks to do anything with their money.  The interest rates were high and the debt could be quickly repackaged and sold so that it became some institutional investor’s problem.  The banks got caught in their side bets, known as credit default swaps, which were unaffected by the Community Reinvestment Act.  That Act was passed in 1979 and amended under both Bush I and Reagan. Put the tea down and wake up and smell the coffee.  
              This was a replay, on steroids, of the Savings and Loan debacle, another product of deregulation.  It was also a replay of the many speculative crashes throughout the second half of the 19th Century leading up to the Great Depression.  This pattern came to a merciful end with New Deal regulation of the banking industry and Wall Street.  Beginning with Reagan’s deregulation of the Savings and Loan industry, we have lifted the hand of regulation and paid the price for it in speculative financing.  

          • Anonymous

             Perhaps you should read what I actually wrote, not what you think I wrote. That would be a good starting point for you.
            I said they “pushed” rules through, not wrote them into law. Learn some basic principles on the workings of government. Are you so inexperienced that you don’t know how it’s done?
            You do understand that many federal agencies guarantee these loans that are underwritten by private banks… Right? They have their rules and criteria that the banks have to live by in order to give out these loans. Am I wrong? 
            Your deflection of my point into CDO’s and such ignores my points that lots of people are to blame. Presidents and legislators from all parties. Governments and Banks. Your attempt to resurrect history from the 19th century is merely smoke to blame only those you want to be responsible… not those that actually are.

          • Anonymous

            Learn the difference between a credit default swap and a collateralized debt obligation.  
              Learn the history of boom and bust capitalism before the New Deal.
              Understand that the loan originators quickly resold these mortgages, thus insulating themselves from the risk of default.    It is the lack of skin in the game and the outsized rewards for gambling that made the 2008 crash happen.    Try reading the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission Report.    When you have done all of this we can have an intelligent conversation.
              

          • Anonymous

             Ok   S for O.  That’s your big point?? Really.

            I said nothing that disagrees with your report. Obviously I didn’t even address it. Your attempts to cover for Democrats is transparent.

          • Anonymous

            You begin by blaming two Democrats, Rangel and Frank, and blame Bush only for advocating home ownership.  It is not the advocacy of home ownership that got us into this mess, it was the advocacy of completely deregulated markets.  
              But the primarily responsible parties are the bankers and their allies who sold what they knew were worthless CDOs and then made some wild bets on CDSs because the bonus system rewarded short-term gains.  Your willingness to blame the political class and say next to nothing about the banks and financial houses is telling.  You remind me of the drunk who blames the liquor not himself for his actions.

          • Anonymous

            I mentioned Bush only because he was identified by another poster and so brought in Rangel & Frank. Follow the thread

             You remind of the drunk who stumbles out of the bar wondering where he left his car keys.

          • Anonymous

            Where might I find you blaming the drunken bankers rather than accepting their preposterous claims that the liquor made them do it?  
              How long will you hold Wall Street’s top hat and coattails while they bemoan the government regulators who allegedly made them get drunk?  
              When will you acknowledge that these regulators were actually missing in action during Wall Street’s bacchanalia?  

          • Anonymous

            OK This is good….funny even. Let me see your evidence that bankers claimed the liquor made them do it. You are hilarious, no doubt the product of a mid afternoon shot and a beer.

          • Anonymous

            Bankers are smart enough to get their toadies to carry their rhetorical burden: look at Fox News to see and hear the bankers’ toadies.  

          • Anonymous

             Probably just as much some posters carry water for Democrats.

          • Anonymous

            Predatory lending begun by the banks for fees that made huge profits for them with no downside because as you say they packaged the securities and then sold them in the various form that you describe.  The quasi-government agencies like Fannie and Freddie jumped  on the gravy train very late in the game.  They did not begin it.  Actually Barney Frank was instrumental in returning Fannie and Freddie to complete government control to end the practice.  I know that he is the republican’s whipping boy, but there is no there there.  It is true that Glass -Steagull was repealed under Clinton and he has said publicly that it was the wrong thing to do.  Have you heard any republican’s offer any mea culpas ?

          • Anonymous

            No mea culpas from Republicans will ever be heard.  You’ve made many good points. 

          • Anonymous

            Thank you.

          • Anonymous

             What you see as B. Frank returning “Fannie and Freddie to complete government control”  others see as “covering his tracks”.

          • Anonymous

            ask Barney Frank he will explain it to you

          • Anonymous

            Read my response to Cheesecake above and that will simply explain for you what you have not yet learned.  Congressman Frank could do it as well, but he would be more impatient with your learning curve. 

          • Anonymous

            I would be willing to bet you have no learning curve, it resembles your family tree….. straight as an arrow  no limbs

      • Anonymous

        This tune is really getting old.

  • kcjonez

    Tonya L. Troiani–I too am encouraged by Obama and the NAACP for finally stating the obvious–that equal rights for all is more important than petty fears or misplaced moral ideals.  At the same time, I am discouraged that so many supposedly good americans who claim to support our constitution are still vehemently opposed to equal marital rights for LGBT American citizens.  Fact:100% of the logical arguments support the institution of marriage for gays.  Hopefully 51% of our voters will agree.  

    • Anonymous

      I’ve been arguing logically in this BDN venue against SSM for quite sometime, but it appears my arguments have simply been dismissed by some people as “petty fears or misplaced moral beliefs” without being refuted.

      As to “equal marital rights” (that is, permitting SSM), state endorsement of a certain type of human relationship, namely that of opposite sex couples, over other types of human relationships – such as that of SS couples – is not an individual right, and was never intended to be. Thus the equal protection clause of the Constitution does not apply to SS couples seeking a so-called “right” to civil marriage. If state law prevented people from forming certain relationships like the ones based on homosexuality, then undoubtedly the equal protection clause would apply.

      To clarify, the equal protection clause applies to people only, not to types of relationships.

      • kcjonez

        So…….to follow your “logic” to it’s conclusion, you are saying that gays are not people?   
        Wow!  

        • Anonymous

          Absolutely not. The equal protection clause applies to all people. When people “marry” civilly, they enter into a man-and-woman bond endorsed by the state. It’s the bond that is endorsed, not the party to the bond that, for example, can be of mixed race. 

          • Joseph Willingham

            And it’s been that way only for 2000 years?

      • Anonymous

         You forgot the “equal” part.

  • Don Lewis,

    It will come to that. People are becoming increasingly radicalized all across the nation.

    Not too long ago on the BDN we had some commenter who identified himself as a “union guy” of some sort. He proudly proclaimed that “blood will soon run in the streets” when talking about the 1%. It seemed from his post that anyone who disagreed with him was a “1%-er” of some sort, and needed to be dealt with. The real scary thing is, he got like 80+ likes if I recall correctly.

    Even the so-called “Green Agenda” are ever increasing their call to arms, specifically highly respected professors giving speeches on how we need to curtail the population of the world to a manageable “500 million, give or take” and getting standing ovations for it!
    http://www.green-agenda.com/
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones

    We’re also seeing an increasingly hostile “race war” climate between people of all ethnic backgrounds. Granted, some of it is legitimate grievances, but most of the time it is an excuse to go around beating up people with a certain skin color. And this isn’t limited to just one ethnic group! Any search on this topic will bring up a number of hits for any given state across the country.

    On the religious side of things, radicals are taking hold of congregations and filling their heads with nonsense. Just in Christianity alone, we see plenty of examples of militias popping up all over the place, ready to “do battle against the anti-Christ”. Problem is, they specifically leave out the parts where Jesus says to turn the other cheek and all that other non-violent stuff.

    You think nurses are bad? Just the tip of the iceberg…

    • Anonymous

      Great post, agree completely. Radicals of any political flavor freak me out. Skinheads, neo nazis and abortion clinic bombers;  ELF and PETA crazies burning subdivisions and bombing research labs. Liberal radicals typically seem more silly, but I think that is changing. We know what right wing radicals could do.

      Sigh.

      •  Like Terry McViegh  (167 people dead), Davey Koresh,(82 people dead) Scott Roeder, who murdered George Tiller the Kansas abortion doctor IN CHURCH, and Bruce Pierce who murdered talk show host Alan Burg in Denver, Michael Frederick Griffin who murdered abortion doctor Dr. David Gunn?James Charles Kopp.who murdered abortion doctor Barnett Slepian Paul Jennings Hill who murdered abortion doctor John Britton.

        I challenge you to come up with a list of liberal killers (in the last 1/4 century as long as this.

        • The United States under the Obama administration who has yet to get the heck outa Iraq and Afghanistan? Not to mention any black ops he has authorized illegally? Not to mention Eric Holder’s total disregard for safety in a lame attempt to curtail the 2nd amendment in operation “Fast and Furious” which resulted in a US Border Agent being killed?

          David Koresh didn’t die a hero or martyr, but the Feds REALLY messed that one up bad. Autopsy reports verified that the majority of the dead at Waco died from the side effects of prolonged exposure to CS gas. Pictures you can search on the internet of the bodies of children and adults at the Waco compound (warning: graphic images…) can visually verify that the limbs and torso of the corpses were abnormally contorted from an overdose of CS gas. Prolonged exposure leads to death, and they were CS’d for well over 8 hours, more time than the filters on their gas masks would work properly for. Death from fire (and more likely, smoke inhalation) does not cause contorting of the torso and limbs in such a manner. You can thank Janet Reno for that one.

          Aside from that, you don’t hear much about liberal violence very much, because it doesn’t make good news. Did you ever hear about that woman at a Tea Party rally who had been beaten and stomped on, suffering injuries including a broken leg? Probably not, but you see what I mean?

          And why limit it to the United States alone?

          How about the People’s Republic of China, who still imprisons, tortures and kills political dissidents?

          How about FARC guerrillas in Colombia?

          But this isn’t limited to just one group of people. We’re pretty evil on our own without any real excuse.

    • Anonymous

      Nurses are not bad.

      • Yeah, and cops *never* lie?

        Okay, “usegoodsense”.

        • Anonymous

          You in trouble with the cops ?

          • Nope.

            But has a nurse ever willfully killed someone? Don’t blanket statement any group of people, whether by profession or anything else. Nurses are not inherently good people, simply because they’re nurses.

          • Anonymous

            It was in response to your sweeping comment about nurses being the tip of the iceberg, which I found to be a stupid remark.
            There are mad people in all walks, even on these threads.

          • The situation is the tip of the iceberg, not nurses.

            Don’t think police brutality exists? Or are you a cop, interrogating me? Lol imagine my surprise if you actually are a cop, and you watch the video in the link!
            (WARNING: VIDEO CONTAINS MATERIAL OF A VIOLENT NATURE. Some of this stuff actually made ME sick… Just when I thought I’d see it all. Sad.)
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=RVmGWLsn0iM

            Always be polite when the cops come, even if they’re not. Sadly, even then then it might not be enough to keep you from getting put in the hospital, or dead.

            You’re right, there are mad people in all walks of life, even on these threads. Only a madman would say that every nurse is a saint, and nary a single cop could tell a lie!

            (And my total respect for the cops who DO speak out. You are not forgotten, dad.)

          • Anonymous

            Do not put words in my mouth.  

          • Then please, tell me what you mean. Enlighten me. What words did I put in your mouth that you didn’t already type? Honestly, If I’m mistaken, I’ll apologize.

            But if I’m not wrong, then what does that say about you? Are you afraid of being wrong? What’s the big deal if you are?

            Only a fool believes their own lies, but dictators enforce them.

          • Anonymous

            You sure do like to go on and on.  I did say why I responded to your tip of the iceberg nurse comment.  I never said that all nurses are saints or that cops never lie.  No reason for you to call me a liar, a fool or to suggest that I am afraid of being wrong.  Do you read what you write.  Please, spare me any response.

  • Anonymous

    We are taught prejudice, plain and simple.

    • Joseph Willingham

      And we can unlearn it, too.

      • Anonymous

        Why?

        • Anonymous

          Sometimes you just cannot make up what some posters post.

          • Anonymous

            The “why” was meant for the wolfndeer poster as in the dialog “why are we taught prejudice. I hit reply on the wrong poster. “YOU are correct, sometimes you just cannot make up what some posters post” intentionally!

          • Anonymous

            Then please tell us why you think that prejudice is taught.

          • Anonymous

            I was asking him. Duh?

          • Anonymous

            Duh, and I am asking you.

          • Anonymous

            Oh my, I real winner here. LISTEN CAREFULLY, I didn’t write the comment “we are taught prejudice plain and simple”. That was a poster by the name wolfndeer. I asked “why”. Why meaning elaborate on his thoughts. “why does he feel we are taught that”. I personally do not think we are but I asked an open ended question, “WHY”, to see where he was going with his thought process. A thought process is well, nevermind.

            Seriously, if you can’t understand that…well, Good luck to you.

          • Anonymous

            Now I have my answer.  What a surprise.   You do not believe that prejudice is taught.  Good luck with that.

          • Anonymous

            That’s not what he said.

          • Anonymous

            I do not understand what you mean.  Bushfan said above that he does not personally believe that we are taught prejudice.  What am I missing ?

        • Joseph Willingham

          Are you asking me why we would want to unlearn prejudice?

          • Anonymous

            This was a true Freudian slip.  In his heart Bushfan knows that, without prejudice, the Republican party cannot motivate its base.  
               With some gay-bashing, anti-immigrant bile, trash talk about feminists, and some dog whistle racial messages (like the Willie Horton ad), the party has tried to compete.  However,  as our population becomes more diverse, the Republicans are becoming the party of the past.  Yet, they can’t unlearn their prejudices.  

        • Anonymous

          Ooops, the  “why” reply was towards wolfndeer.

  • Joseph Willingham

    Good point, Tonya.  As we learned in 1949 from the hit Rodgers and Hammerstein musical South Pacific, “You’ve Got to Be Carefully Taught.” Kids learn that behavior from others.

  • Anonymous

    Don, Welcome to Obama’s left wing America.

    • Joseph Willingham

      I’ll say that it’s better than the right-wing Christian aggressive administration we had for the 8 previous years.

      • Anonymous

         I don’t recall Christians advocating violence against individuals in a nationwide TV ad.

        • Joseph Willingham

          I never said they did.  Why do you say that?

          • Anonymous

            The topic was the Don Lewis letter was it not?

          • Joseph Willingham

            Okay, if you want to do that, I will say that I do recall that there are some Christians who advocate violence against gay people.  While it may not be on nationwide television, it is a message that is heard from coast to coast.  And just as I know not all Christians are violent toward gay people, I know, and you know, that not all liberals advocate beating Wall Street bankers with old-lady canes.

          • Anonymous

             Did they have a national ad campaign?

          • Anonymous

            The “No Special Rights” PAC had a campaign called “Gay Marriage House of Horrors”. It showed two images, one a military man smoking and another of two men at what I assume is probably a pride parade. It said “Red States” then “Blue States” and finally “Any Questions? Click to Donate”.

            I hope you find statements like claiming there is a need to “protect children” from gays and gay marriage similarly as alarming as what was depicted in the banker ad.

          • Anonymous

             Yes, as a matter of fact I do. 

          • Joseph Willingham

            Good.  It’s good to know that not everyone buys into that rhetoric…

          • Anonymous

            The banker ad was not alarming.

          • Joseph Willingham

            Can’t say.  I don’t know all ad campaigns.

            But I did address that point already.

          • Anonymous

            Have you ever heard of anyone being brutally murdered or maimed because they were heterosexual.  People who hold these hatreds, and there are many, need no national ad campaigns.

            This ad was meant to be a humorous look at a disastrous problem.  It is a complex ad, perhaps some don’t get it.  The argument here against it is absurd and anyone doing so is either stupid or cynically using it for their own purposes.

            It is a good ad and I suggest anyone who has not seen it use the link provided above by 
            HonkyTonk Bob before they jump on this stupid attack.

        • Anonymous

           this might not be a TV ad, but.  http://www.cnn.com/video/?hpt=

      • Anonymous

        Don’t forget messianic.

  • Anonymous

    To Tanya Troiani:   When Obama lied in 2008 about his stance that marriage was between one man and one woman (we know he lied because he supported same sex marriage as early as 1996),  and then “evolved” to change his position again (Republicans who do that are “flip-floppers”) in 2012, everyone knew that he was, of course, all along in agreement with the Gay/Lesbian community.   I asked many gay/lesbians how they could support Obama and they said “he’s just saying that” (in 2008) to win votes. He doesn’t really mean it.”

    I find it ironic that you mention how your children and grandchildren will live in a much nicer world if gays and lesbians have same sex marriages.    If your children are gay/lesbian and marry another of the same sex, the chances are much less that you’ll have grandchildren.

    • Joseph Willingham

      “Lied” is a pretty strong word.  One can change one’s opinion without lying. I never thought that he was ever 100% with us until last month.  MANY democrats are not 100% with us and it would be foolish to assume so.
      I find it interesting that even today, in 2012, people think that gay people are sterile and incapable of bearing children.  Ms. Troiani stated children and grandchildren.  Her children might be gay or straight and can have children themselves either way.  Or they may not have grandchildren.  That wasn’t her point.

      • Anonymous

        I said the chances are much less.  I didn’t say gay/lesbians were “sterile” or incapable of bearing children. In 2008, Obama never said that he had changed his mind (from 1996) about same sex marriage. He’s a serial liar. He says things that simply aren’t true and no one calls him on it, because of “his supposed “oh so deep intelligence and introspection.”

        • Joseph Willingham

          Okay.  While you may know that, the tone here from many others seems to be that they don’t believe that gay people are capable of, or have the desire to, procreating.  I hear all the time that if there were only gay people then the human race would die out.
          But then, really, so what?  I really don’t think that the chances are less at all.  I know more gay couples with kids than I do who have no kids.  I think that if gay couples could be legally married, there’d be more families with same sex parents and when the writers children are ready to have children, it might just be as common as straight couples having kids.  I don’t see any irony in Ms. Troiani’s statement.

          • We’re running out of water, cheap food, and space to live. we’ve suburbanized large tracts of ariable land, and built cities in deserts where water must be diverted.  We create a Texas sized island of trash in the middle of the Pacific ocean, and still people on the right and left believe no one but those with children deserve “rights”

            Gawd you sure can’t fix stupid.

          • Joseph Willingham

            Are you calling me stupid?  What is your point?

        • Anonymous

          Mitt Romney has changed almost every position he has ever taken — so do you call him a “serial liar?” (Newt Gingrigh, when asked if Romney is a liar, said “Yes.”)
          Other than a 1996 questionaire, which the White House says was filled out by a staffer and not by Obama personally, Obama’s position hasn’t changed radically.
          His  position on same sex marriage went from “undecided” in 1998 to favoring civil unions but opposing same-sex marriage  in 2004 and 2008, to “evolving” in 2010, and to favoring same-sex marriage today.  Many Americans have ‘evolved’ similarly on this issue.

          • Anonymous

            I think Mr Obama views may have evolved with the political winds that seem to favor his election and popularity. When one shifts positions on issues back and forth along with the winds of political change, there’s a good chance his positions are not always genuine.

          • Anonymous

            You write, “When one shifts positions on issues back and forth along with the winds of political change, there’s a good chance his positions are not always genuine.”
            Sure sounds like Romney.

          • Anonymous

            Romney is famous for having shifted his positions on abortion and embryonic stem cell research. He did not however go back on his decisions like Obama did on gay marriage. Also, Obama promised to respect the First Amendment Right of Religion at the beginning of his term as President only to narrow it down as being applicable to worship. He also promised during his campaign for President to bring those on Wall Street responsible for the last recession to justice. To date very few of them have been prosecuted. In fact there were a lot more prosecutions  of sleazy investors in either of the two terms under President Bush who made no such promise. 

          • Anonymous

            I agree that “Romney is famous for having shifted his positions on abortion and embryonic stem cell research.”  True, he reversed himself on both issues.
            Romney also got “Romneycare,” passed in Massachusetts, with an individual mandate — but he’s now against his own health care reform, and says the mandate is unconstitutional. 
            He also promised to be stronger than Ted Kennedy on gay rights. 
            He opposed a constitutional amendment to ban same sex marriage in 2002; then he supported it in 2007.
            He claimed to have seen his father march with Rev. Martin Luther King (something that never happened).   After saying he saw it, he later said he didn’t see it with his own eyes.
            He said that the minimum wage should keep pace with inflation, but later reversed himself saying that the minimum wage causes job losses.
            Romney said illegal immigrants should have a path to citizenship — later reversing himself saying that he was opposed to amnesty and opposed a path to citizenship.
            Romney refused to take a position on the Bush 43 massive tax cut plan, but later took credit for supporting it.
            Romney said that there should be no government bail out of the auto industry and that we should let Detroit go bankrupt — he later said “I’ll take a lot of credit” for the recovery of the auto industry.
            Romney came out for the Brady Bill and said, “That’s not going to make me a hero of the NRA. I don’t line up with a lot of special interest groups.”  He later joined the NRA and sought their endorsement.
            In 2007 (1/10/07) he said he was a gun owner, a hunter, and a member of the NRA.  Four days later (1/14/07) he told reporters that he did not own a gun.
            In 2003 he said that global warming was a real issue, that the debate on it was over and it was caused by fossil fuels, and we should take action now.  In 2007 he said that the science on global warming wasn’t settled, and that Republicans should not take liberal positions on global warming that would kill jobs.
            In ’02 he rejected the Grover Norquist anti-tax pledge as a gimmick.  In ’07 he signed it.
            He ran for the Senate as a liberal, ran for governor as a moderate, and now says that during that time he was “severely conservative.”
            And Romney was for spending limits in political campaigns before he was against them.
            Does Romney actually stand for anything that we can count on, or do his opinions shift with the political winds?

          • Anonymous

            I got your point concerning Romney – he shifted towards the conservative point of views over time- but you didn’t have to list an entire litany – which I could have done with Obama as well to prove my point.

            My point still is that Romney did not shift back to prior positions. Obama has.

          • Anonymous

            But Obama didn’t fill out that 1996 questionare, a staffer did.
            So in fact, Obama’s position on the freedom to marry has gradually shifted from a moderate position (favoring civil unions but opposing marrage equality) to a position favoring full equailty.  Many other Americans (including even Dick Cheney) have come to the same conclusion.

          • Anonymous

            This is a second attempt (the moderator didn’t like the fact that I used Cheney’s first name, a no-no apparently).
            Obama didn’t fill out that 1996 questionaire.  A staffer did.  So he was not in favor of same-sex marriage in 1996, and he did not “shift back to a prior position.”
            Obama’s position gradually shifted from supporting civil unions while opposing same-sex marriage, to supporting full equailty.  Many other Americans, including former V.P. Cheney, have come to the same conclusion.

    • Anonymous

      if Obama gets elected again, none of us will have grandchildren  we will become 3rd world country

      • Yeah Romney will be the next savior.. The second comming of Jesus.  The Republican answer to Moses leading the Jews out of Egypt.

        and Obama’s the devil.  Exactly what have you been smoking.

        • Anonymous

          And when Romney doesn’t get elected, they’ll claim the mainstream media and the establishment forced Romney upon them and they never thought he was a good candidate in the first place — like they did with McCain.

        • Anonymous

          something called reality, you should try a puff or two, may clear out some of the cobwebs

      • Anonymous

        There is a real political party in Britain called the Monster Raving Looney Party.  You might want to join.

      • Joseph Willingham

        That’s a very good point.  Is that because of his economic policies or because he supports the gay marry and that will result in no more births like in Children of Men?

      • Anonymous

        In case you hadn’t noticed, in 3rd world countries everyone has too many children and grandchildren.

        • Anonymous

          ever notice how they cant afford them  and they are half starved,,,   thats where we are headed 

          • Joseph Willingham

            Oy vey….

    • Anonymous

      Like “RegularJoe” I would say “lied” is a very strong word, and probably too strong in this case.  According to the White House, the statement that “he supported same sex marriage as early as 1996” is merely because an Obama staffer filled out a questionaire saying, “I favor legalizing same-sex marriage, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages.”  The answers were typed in, so you can’t say it was in Obama’s handwriting.  Obama said that he did not fill out that questionaire. 
      So we don’t know for certain what his position was in 1996.  It would have been very unusual at that time for any politician to support same-sex marriage.
      In 1998 on another questionaire he said he was “undecided” when it came to same-sex marriage.
      In 2004 he said he favored domestic partnership and civil unions, but was opposed to “gay marriage.”
      In 2008  he said he opposed same-sex marriage, but that he did favor equal treatment under the law for gays and lesbians in other areas. 
      In 2010 he said his position was “evolving.”
      He now he says he favors full equality for gays and lesbians regarding the freedom to marry.
      Mitt Romney, on the other hand, when he ran for the Senate in 1994, promised that he would be stronger than Ted Kennedy when it came to gay rights.  In 2002 he opposed a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage as “too extreme.”  Since Romney has flip-flopped on almost every issue by now, we really don’t know where he would stand on anything if he became president.

      • Joseph Willingham

        Romney did sign, along with Bachman, Santorum, and Perry, that wicked NOM pledge. http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2011/08/mitt-romney-gay-marriage-pledge-/1#.T7vLBGhbOFY

  • Anonymous

    Re “TV Horror,” can this be the ad that struck Mr. Lewis with such horror?  I don’t see anyone getting beaten up.  I see a little old lady tapping a banker with her cane.  It seems pretty mild to me.  And pure fiction, considering Jamie Dimon got to keep his job.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esJ4Up1qyiU

  • Anonymous

    Paul Newlin:  We have poverty in Maine because of Democrats in Augusta and their allegiance to the SEIU,  leftist environmentalists and corporate hogs like Donald Sussman (hubby of Democratic Representative Chellie Pingree) and Warren Buffet who moved Dexter Shoe out of Maine, to China so he could increase his corporate profits.  Shoes COULD be made in Maine.  New Balance is still making them in Skowhegan.  Greedy Warren Buffet, the big Democrat who claims he doesn’t pay enough in income taxes, simply wanted to increase his profits.  

    In my opinion, the Democrats are the party of servility and President Obama is the Poverty President. I’m sick of poverty. I’m sick of no jobs in my community. I’m sick of people with little or no income being forced to demand services from our state government which has no money because of decreased tax revenue paired with serving the demands of the SEIU. I’m sick of state and school employees having luxury health insurance policies paid for by the declining tax base… health insurance policies that no one else can afford.

    Ultimately in Maine, the only people who will have jobs in Maine that pay enough to pay income taxes will be government employees (state, municipal and school). The final irony is that THEY will have to pay for the shortfall of their own Maine State Retirement system because only THEY will be earning enough money to pay taxes.

    • Actually poverty in Maine has been decreasing for 20 years.  Our unemployment rate is almost 2 points below the national average, and we have the highest rate of home ownership in the Nation.  Our crime rate is near or at the bottom of the list year after year, The State has the highest rate of highschool graduation, the lowest rate of teen pregnancy, and the general quality of life issues are positive through Democratic, Republican, and Independent administrations.

      I suggest if you find that untennable maybe you should move to Florida.

  • Anonymous

    Tonya:  Obama’s “evolution” is a good term to use, I guess, but the Creator of men/women would totally disagree with you, and I do also.  16 years ago, Obama was for homosexual/lesbian marriage when running for office in his liberal district in Illinois;  then when he ran for the United States Senate, he was against it in order to appeal to a more conservative voting section;   now, in another expedient political move in this re-election year, he is for it. 
    It is not an “evolution” for him–it is where he has been right along, waiting for the right moment to come out of his closet.

    • Anonymous

       … you mean “come out of the closet again”.

    • Anonymous

      Obama didn’t fill out that 1996 questionaire.  A staffer did.
      That one questionaire, which Obama didn’t actually fill out, makes it seem as though he made a big change. He didn’t.
      Obama moved gradually from favoring civil unions and opposing same-sex marriage, to favoring full equality. His change wasn’t dramatic or unusual.  Many Americans have gradually changed their views on this issue toward greater equality.
      When Mitt Romney ran for the Senate in 1994 he promised to be stronger on gay rights than Ted Kennedy.  So his views have gone the other direction — and he’s flip-flopped on so many issues that we really don’t know where hel’ll stand on anything if he becomes president.

  • TV horror by;Don Lewis

    Don, I don’t think you listened to the ad.  It was a Rod Serling type look at what might be a Wall Street Banker’s nightmare. This ad assumes that a Wall Street Banker might have a conscience.

    It is a fact that while people like the subject of this ad raked in millions in bonuses, teachers, firemen, Policemen, and other workers lost their jobs.  The banks on Wall Street were not satisfied with traditional profits, they had to venture into the world of commercial deritives. They sold worthless paper they had insured for millions, and in doing so brought down banks and insurance companies alike, for individual gain.

    My feeling is they are lucky US citizens do not respond the same way the French did when their royalty lost touch with the people.

  • Anonymous

    What do you really expect Don, after 30 years of class warfare being waged by the 1% against the middle class. The American public are tired of being attacked and made to live in distress, by Wall Street bankers, greedhead politicians, un American media enterprises such as Fox News, Madison Avenue advertising executives, and bullying religious fanatics.  Because the attacks are now becoming life threatening.  If they stop attacking the middle class this outcome might not happen…

  • Anonymous

    Comment moved.

  • Anonymous

    Comment moved.

  • Joseph Willingham

    FYI.  This just in from ABC News/Washington Post: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/05/strong-support-for-gay-marriage-now-exceeds-strong-opposition/

    • Anonymous

      Mazel tov !!

Similar Articles