I'M JUST SAYIN'

[Guest]

Remember the election in 2006?

Thought you might like to read the following:

A little over one year ago:

1 ) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2 ) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3 ) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.

Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 we have seen:

1 ) Consumer confidence plummet;
2 ) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $3.50 a gallon;
3 ) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase ) ;
4 ) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses ) ;
5 ) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion dollars;
6 ) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.

America voted for change in 2006, and we got it!

Remember it's Congress that makes law not the President. He has to work with what's handed to him.


A liberal is a person who will give away everything they don't own.

[Guest]

And Congress is part of the group referred to as "the current administration"!!!!!!

BTK

[Guest]

English, I take great exception to your definition of a liberal.

Miriam-Webster says "liberal" means: 1lib·er·al
Pronunciation: \ˈli-b(ə-)rəl\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Latin liberalis suitable for a freeman, generous, from liber free; perhaps akin to Old English lēodan to grow, Greek eleutheros free
Date: 14th century
1 a: of, relating to, or based on the liberal arts <liberal education> barchaic : of or befitting a man of free birth
2 a: marked by generosity : openhanded <a liberal giver> b: given or provided in a generous and openhanded way <a liberal meal> c: ample, full
3obsolete : lacking moral restraint : licentious
4: not literal or strict : loose <a liberal translation>
5: broad-minded; especially : not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or traditional forms
6 a: of, favoring, or based upon the principles of liberalism bcapitalized : of or constituting a political party advocating or associated with the principles of political liberalism; especially : of or constituting a political party in the United Kingdom associated with ideals of individual especially economic freedom, greater individual participation in government, and constitutional, political, and administrative reforms designed to secure these objectives
— lib·er·al·ly \-b(ə-)rə-lē\ adverb
— lib·er·al·ness noun
synonyms liberal, generous, bountiful, munificent mean giving or given freely and unstintingly. liberal suggests openhandedness in the giver and largeness in the thing or amount given <a teacher liberal with her praise>. generous stresses warmhearted readiness to give more than size or importance of the gift <a generous offer of help>. bountiful suggests lavish, unremitting giving or providing <children spoiled by bountiful presents>. munificent suggests a scale of giving appropriate to lords or princes <a munificent foundation grant>.

Princeton University describes a liberal as:

broad: showing or characterized by broad-mindedness; "a broad political stance"; "generous and broad sympathies"; "a liberal newspaper"; "tolerant ...
having political or social views favoring reform and progress
tolerant of change; not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or tradition
a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties
big: given or giving freely; "was a big tipper"; "the bounteous goodness of God"; "bountiful compliments"; "a freehanded host"; "a handsome allowance"; "Saturday's child is loving and giving"; "a liberal backer of the arts"; "a munificent gift"; "her fond and openhanded grandfather"
a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets


I've found that most liberals are generous to a fault -- not just of YOUR money, but their own as well. They are also eternal optimists, hoping that good will come of the use of those funds.

Personally, I see nothing wrong of being tolerant of change nor of being pro-civil rights. Favoring reform and progress isn't that bad of a thing, either.

As to your statistics, you make an easy assessment basically putting the blame on a Democratic Congress. Some basic realities are that "creative financing" for home purchases occurred in the late 90s and early 2000s. Those packages have now reached the time where those homeowners have to refinance but have neither the equity nor the ratios to qualify -- they didn't when they got the loans, they don't today. That's why foreclosures are skyrocketing.

Unemployment is occurring because more and more corporations are taking their business overseas. Again, this is not something recent but has been an ongoing problem for the past decade, no matter what side was in power. Unemployment will probably continue to rise as prices continue to rise and small companies go bankrupt and middle-sized companies go overseas. Milk prices have increased over 100% in the past five years and probably will continue to do so. We have yet to reach European (or even Canadian) prices for gasoline. Alaskan gasoline is sold to Japan because they'll pay more for it. They have had contracts with the Alaskan pipeline companies since its inception (yes, I know it is technically the Aleyska Pipeline Company but many oil companies own large blocks of it).

To put the blame of today's woes on any one party, group or entity is ridiculous. About the only thing that can be laid fairly on one person's shoulders is the Iraqi War. There is little doubt that Bush pushed hard and fast to start this war, got other countries on board, stated unproven rumors (WMD) as fact.

The question today shouldn't be who to blame but rather how to solve some of these problems. How do we get corporations to stay in the US without totally bailing them out? How do we save peoples' homes when there was no sound fiscal reasoning in the purchase or should we even save them? What jobs can be reasonable created that will truly help America and not just be make work and add more to the national debt?

America needs to do something about its education woes. No child left behind is a farce. It is more like no child will get an education and children will not be held accountable for failing. We put more stock in state-regulated testing than in educating our children -- teachers today teach kids to pass the test rather than teach for a child to learn.

So, back to my argument, we liberals don't want to give everything away. We want real solutions. We don't want to hear a bunch of stupid "it's your fault, no, it's yours!" If it takes change to get this beautiful country on track, then let's start changing it!

Okay, off of my high horse ... at least for now.

[Guest]

BTK

So tell us which laws the Democrats passed that created these problems? So go back to your list and go through it one item at a time and state the Democratic passed legislation, passed since January 07, that created the problem.

Good luck hot shot!!

293 more days!!!!!!!

[Guest]

I liked it when the Democrats got control of Congress. I'm one of those people who believe the country is better off when one party has a small majority and thus controls the Legislature, and the other controls the Executive. That way it always takes a "super-majority" to pass any legislation (insuring a veto can be overridden), and I feel more confident that any legislation is really "for the good of the country" as opposed to "the good of the party."

As far as education woes, we've had those since the '60s when the SAT scores started to curve downward. The circumstances which caused the downturn never were corrected, and the "softening" of curricula and demise of discipline that have progressed over the years have not helped. Until we go back to what used to work (and what works elsewhere in the world), the American publilc school system will continue to be a warehousing action where those who succeed within it are the exception, not the rule.

Unemployment will probably continue to rise, as long as the "undocumented" control a measurable segment of the work force. There is no job Americans won't do - just pay a fair wage for the service. Those who hire the "undocumented" to cut overhead and pocket the difference (including the avoidance of the employer's share of Social Security) hurt all of us.

I agree that solutions are in order, and positive change should be based on true problem identification and quantifiable solutions which include the process to be followed and the result expected based on cost/benefit principles. Snappy catch phrases are not solutions and nothing was ever "changed" by a nifty slogan. To paraphrase an oldie, but a goodie - where's the beef???

I have no idea who will be elected President in November, but I do hope that one party does not control both the Legislature and the Executive. My wallet and bank account are afraid of the result should that happen.

[Guest]

Steve, at this point I think I'd be happy for the chicken. Sadly, I've given up on the beef but I like your statements. I'm not sure agree with everything said but most of it. I'm really not afraid of it being Demo/Demo, but Rep/Rep does scare me. Right now the Demos are so polarized that even if they have full control, they'll disagree enough to not go totally overboard, IMH[umble]O. Demo/Rep would be okay. Ditto Rep/Demo.

[Guest]

And yo! It wasn't my list or my post!!!!!!

I only assigned them as part of the current administration!!!!!!

Jeees!!!

BTK :dontknow:

[Guest]

English, you're showing your naivete about the political process. Democrats hold a slim majority, they cannot override vetoes easily, and they've inherited years of the Bush/Republicans mess. As much as we would all like things to change, there's no way it can happen that quickly.

[Guest]

:agree: With Lil Dancer. And English, if you really think the mess we're in is not a culmination of the disastrous last eight years, I want to smoke what you've been smokin'!

[Guest]

I find it very hard to blame all that on the new Democratic congress. Bush is still vetoing everything.

The housing boom started long before the Democratic change came about. People started buying up the houses and try to sell them at a profit. This was waned to be a bad thing back two years ago . After the bubble burst, people were caught with houses they could not afford and houses they could not sell.

Blame the houses in foreclosure on the Republicans that tweaked the requirements for getting a home so that all of those that could not afford one became eligible and took out the ARM loans and got screwed by big business.

A lot of the confidence and unemployment can be tied to the housing collapse. No one can buy new homes because they are over-pricing their old homes and cannot sell them so no homes can be built. Therefore they are laying off most of the construction type workers.

The price of oil is going up because Bush started the war with IRAQ and ****ed at least half of the middle east countries. Now it is costing $2 billion a month to support the war. No wonder prices are plummeting.

Just my thoughts.

Z

[Guest]

I agree with Lil Dancer, Chelsea24 and Z. Luckily-most of America does too.
I am trying very hard to not read the political threads because I have better things to do...It is pointless.
But thanks Lil Dancer, Chelsea24 and Z for expressing how I feel.

[Guest]

I find it very hard to blame all that on the new Democratic congress. Bush is still vetoing everything.

Z


Z, I hate to quibble with your rationale, but George Bush has vetoed 9 bills, with one overridden by Congress. By comparison, Clinton vetoed 37 bills and Papa Bush a whopping 44 in just 4 years. The major complaint conservatives have about George W Bush is that he did not veto nearly enough spending bills during the first 6 years in office when the Republican majority was acting like Democrats.

[Guest]

Beg to differ, the Republican majority was acting like Republicans. Oh and is that the major complaint the conservatives have about George W. Bush? Well, here's another one, how about over 4000 flag draped coffins?

[Guest]

You forgot about the two pocket vetoes Bush attempted while Congress was not in session -- those were considered to be enacted because he didn't return the legislation. What I would like to know is how many Bush considered vetoing but found out he would be overridden if he did veto them. I can remember a few vetoes being threatened but then the law was enacted. I would guess they were not vetoed because Bush knew he would lose.

He did not veto any bills for his first five years in office. Here is what the Christian Science Monitor, "On many major bills that Bush has signed - No Child Left Behind and tax relief, for example - the veto was never a consideration because the White House itself had proposed the legislation. Yet on dozens of other bills, the president has become a rubber stamp for a spendthrift Congress, betraying his campaign image as a fiscal conservative, critics say." (http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0816/p01s04-uspo.html)

Maybe the bills he did NOT veto should be considered as much as the few he did?

[Guest]

I'M JUST SAYIN'


Does that mean you're talking here just to hear your voice? That nothing you say has any value and/or integrity? That once your statements are refuted, you didn't mean what you said? What, exactly, does "I'M JUST SAYIN'?" mean?

[Guest]

.... Well, here's another one, how about over 4000 flag draped coffins?


As someone who has been in harm's way and almost came home in such a manner, I think better reflection is necessary before insinuating that any sitting President is callous regarding military deaths.

WWII, Korea and Vietnam resulted in over 380,000 military deaths. The administrations in power at the time for 90% of those were Democratic. This is not an indictment of the Democratic Party - just a realism that things happen on an administration's watch and since we have given these folk this authority ("power" if you will..) to act on our behalf - hopefully because they have common sense, ethics, knowledge and experience, and reasonably decent judgment - we need to reflect why we gave them that authority "back then" as opposed to someone else. These folk have access to a LOT of information - much of which can't be made 'open' lest it be used against those we want to protect the most. So, the question is whether we still trust their judgement or not based on what information they had available to them then, and if not, why not?

While wars rage, there are always those who advocate to cut-and-run, as all wars last longer than the patience of the public. In many ways, that's good, because it shows we as a people are sensitive to the loss of life and view those who serve as valuable members of society who should not be 'consumed'. That doesn't change the fact that "things happen" during an administration that no one could foresee, and the decision to deploy the military into harm's way happens. That decision is never taken lightly, as it is never really popular for long. We Americans are an impatient people who expect immediate gratification (and success), and that expectation is often exploitable by those who would do us harm.

Thanks to the foresight of many, no one person can remain as President anymore longer than two terms of office. That also means a complete change shall occur in all appointed leadership posts within the Executive Branch as well when administrations change.

However anyone feels about the administration today, the real question is, based on the state of the world and country as it is today, what do we want to occur next and who do we trust to take over as "CEO" of the Executive Branch next to make it happen?

There is no way to accurately forecast whether the next administration is going to find itself facing the potential for another war after Iraq and Afghanistan dissipate. My gut fear is that another one will happen, and the pointing at coffins and anguish of death will occur again to include the tagging of the then-sitting administration as the perpetrators of the situation. It's just the way of things.

[Guest]

Steve Z, I'm sure Bush does feel guily in his quiet hours. He's human. (I think?) But HE did start this unwarranted war. I'm talking as someone who has a very very dear loved one that has been over there fighting (third rotation). I pray everyday that he comes home safe and if he doesn't -- you're damned right I'll blame Bush.

[Guest]

4000 Dead What about the 30000 that are coming home with mental problems no arms and no legs And how do you win a war against the idiots who don't care if they live or die

[Guest]

Steve Z, I'm sure Bush does feel guily in his quiet hours. He's human. (I think?) But HE did start this unwarranted war. I'm talking as someone who had a very very dear loved one that has been over there fighting (third rotation). I pray everyday that he comes home safe and if he doesn't -- you're damned right I'll blame Bush.


Chelsea24 - Don't get me wrong. War sucks, and in the end the best you get is a draw - but that's better than coming in second. I've got folk close to me there, too. It's very easy to blame one person for the horror of it all, but there's a lot of people who were involved in the decision to go there and stay there - Iraq & Afghanistan.

BSLINY - You are so right about the 30,000+ WIA. I commute between my TV home and my DC home due to work. A couple of visits to Walter Reed and Bethesda Naval can sober anyone, and there is no doubt that if the American public thought we VietVets were squirrely, wait until the PTSD issues for this latest generation of vets starts to lava to the surface in a few years. There is no doubt that a job with the V.A. has the greatest amount of job security ever, as their work load will really go off the charts.l

[Guest]

Let's not forget about the Iraqui people that have been killed and/or wounded.....

[Guest]

Let's not forget about the Iraqui people that have been killed and/or wounded.....

Let's also not forget that almost all of the Iraqi killed and/or wounded has been at the hands of fellow Iraqis...

[Guest]

Again, WE SHOULDN'T BE THERE!

[Guest]

Again, WE SHOULDN'T BE THERE! I AGREE

[Guest]

You know, I have been monitoring TOTV, and just really discovered the political forum - you guys are a hoot! I must compliment you on discussing without resorting to personal attacks - I am very impressed by that. Just a few things -

1. Just so you know, I am 44, thinking about buying a property in TV for the tax break and so my parents can "snowbird" there.

2. It is most interesting for me, as someone who works at a major corporation (as a supply chain manager) to listen to all of you retirees who get your news from the liberal media. Let me tune you in to a little secret - the economy is not bad at all. Yes, there are some foreclosures and credit is tight. The market is down from its highs, but it is still higher than it was about 18 months ago. The thing I am disappointed in is that all of you who lived through 1970s would even buy the "recession" hype. There is no doubt the economy has slowed down, but the reality is that unemployment is still at historic lows, there is a severe worker shortage, and salaries are increasing. I get head hunter calls 3-4 times a week as do all my friends. Our company is running at a very steady pace. Our biggest problem is that world demand for resources is strong, and prices remain high because we are exporting.

3. The real problem with our government is not the Dems or Reps, it is that there is NO difference. Could we please have somebody that would balance the budget and stop all the earmarks? I mean come on already. We kicking out the Reps because the dems were going to fix this, but as I suspected, they are worse. Poo on all of them. I agree about splitting the government between parties - a good idea in my book, unless you could get Republicans to act conservative instead of just running that way, then turning into democrats when they hit the hill.

4. Iraq - get a backbone. Almost all of those killed OR wounded volunteered AFTER we invaded and believe in what they are fighting for (which by the way, despite all of you spineless types, IS a good thing). I was an Armor officer, and there is nothing a soldier hates more than bleeding hearts back home who don't really care about them. People don't go back for 3 tours when they think what we are doing is not right. Use some common sense. And BTW - Saddam killed MILLIONS, believe me, these people are much better off than they were when he was running things. And why don't you all worry about the 40,000 people killed in car accidents in this country as much as the 4000 killed over there in 5 years? Amazing.

5. Loved Redwitch post on liberals - use the dictionary, right. To me, the argument is very simple - and has NOTHING to do with how much anybody cares. Conservatives care just as much as liberals, and are just as broadminded. That is not the issue. Here is the difference -

Liberals look at the answer to any problem as obvious and the government as the answer - for instance, if people are hungry, the government should give them food. The other thing liberals tend to think is that it is always someone elses fault - they are in jail because they are black, not because they commited a crime, etc... it is societies fault.

Conservatives look past the obvious answer, because they are aware of the basic law of unintended consequences and they look at the Market as the answer. For instance, they look at hunger and realize you can't just have the government feed people, because it will destroy poor families, create dependency, etc. So conservatives believe you need to help people by teaching them a skill and letting the market work its magic. Conservatives are big on personal responsibility - which can seem heartless to some, but really is not.

Neither philisophy is perfect, I think there is a balance. We need government - but we need to use it correctly. The worst thing about government is even if a new program does not work, it never goes away!!! We need to cost reduce the government. Not really a hard thing to do, we just have no spine for it. It will have to become a crisis before we do.

I think many times - liberals and conservatives agree on more than they admit and we just argue about the minutae. it is pretty funny really. Nobody thinks we should go back to 70% marginal tax brackets so we argue abou 35 versus 38 as the top bracket - give me a break.

And by the way - who picked these 3 as the best we could do for president?? Man, I know we could do better -

1. A women who says she has experience because her husband had the job - it would be like me going in tommorrow and doing Stress tests (my wifes job).... insane

2. A guy from the Chicago political machine, backed by a bunch of unions, who is more liberal than Dennis Kucinich, but is running as a moderate. He is running for Change, but has no track record of any change at all.

3. A guy who has been in the senate for about 200 years - ok, he is an awesome war hero and has shown some propensity for reaching across the aisle, but campaign finance reform? Couldn't he find something else to do that with? Well, I will vote for him because the alternative make me choke - but that does not mean I am doing backflips either. Not that many of the other Dems or Reps were much better. I wanted to like Romney, but just could not warm up to him.
oh well. we get what we deserve. Ronald Reagan, where are you when we need you??????????????????????????????????

BTW- for those of you "retreaters" when will be getting out of Germany, Bosnia, and Korea - all started by Democrats, and we are still there.

[Guest]

You know, I have been monitoring TOTV, and just really discovered the political forum - you guys are a hoot! I must compliment you on discussing without resorting to personal attacks - I am very impressed by that. Just a few things -

1. Just so you know, I am 44, thinking about buying a property in TV for the tax break and so my parents can "snowbird" there.

2. It is most interesting for me, as someone who works at a major corporation (as a supply chain manager) to listen to all of you retirees who get your news from the liberal media.


No comment about your content/opinions here or in the other threads. However, I think there is a possibility that you might be misjudging the audience. First, a lot of the members here are similar to you, working "up north" while looking into TV. They have similar work experiences and similar sources of information. Second, do not underestimate we "retirees" who have settled here. The stereotype of the pink haired ladies whose lives revolve around playing bridge and going to the earlybird special doesn't apply. Here the stereotype might be the pretty physically fit individual going to the wellness center, doing volunteer work at the hospital, getting in a quick 9 holes of golf, going to a class on the history of Jerusalem or maybe genealogy at the Lifetime Learning Center, and attending a meeting of their local Republican or Democrat party. And then finishing the day with a late dinner at one of the squares. And then the next day is really busy.

Folks here are well informed. Some may be delusional (and we'll leave it open as to which side that is), but it's not for lack of information. We even have the FOX News Channel. Now if we only had Fox Business News. I'm very happy to see your posts and look forward to your comments in the future.

[Guest]

OK, let me get this straight, you think us "retirees" all live in a comatose state, you think the economy is not bad, you think there's only been a few forclosures, you think we should be in Iraq, you're voting for McCain, AND you're a Packer Fan! I find myself speechless and as Uncle Muncle will tell you, that's a rare occurrence. :o

Take it from a Chicago girl -- NEVER CALL A COOT A HOOT!

[Guest]

Chels, you forgot to mention he thinks Reagan walked on water.

[Guest]

Some people down there at TV knows that here in the North and mostly North East of the country is Liberal Country, after 45 years listening to this garbage of Right Wing Politics I am desperate to get out of here and go to a place where the news are not so distorted.
Our young people are being brainwashed in the Universities by the Left wing professors, that dont see anything wrong on making a fortune on salaries and benefits as long as the rich people pay, and their repayment to society is to infect the students minds with their left wing philosophies. Some one once said that America will be taken without shouting a bullet and I am tending to believe it. On the same subject, there is a CD called: "ISLAM VS ISLAMISTS" that everyone should see to understand what is really going on.

[Guest]

Chels, you forgot to mention he thinks Reagan walked on water. OH NY GOSH HE DIDN'T

[Guest]

1. Muncle - like your comments, nothing I did not know. However, I think if your only sources of information are the major networks and the news networks(including FOX btw), you are not getting half the picture. Now, if you throw in the BBC, and BBC world, you add a lot. If you add in a few Asian news channels, you might have more. If you throw in Autonews, the Wall street Journal, Platts, AMM, and the 10 or 12 other business news release services I get all the time, you start to get the real picture of what is going on in the economy. Ok, you can throw in the internet - but there is a lot of junk to sort through first.

2. I never said anything about pink haired old ladies. I have a good friend who owns a home down there, and I have been through, that is why I am on this board. I am planning on buying a place in TV - probably sooner than later. I am waiting for the market to bottom out. From everything I have read, my political views will fit in just fine down there.

3. Just for Hillary's daughter :o ;D and Redwitch info, where I live is a heck of a lot more liberal than Florida - I mean I come from the land of Russ Fiengold for heaven's sakes! And our taxes make you blush they are so high.... I can argue with liberals with the best of them - I am surrounded up here.

BTW - Chelsea - have you walked in on Daddy lately, or maybe you were evading sniper fire with your mom ;) (I am just KIDDING here).

4. I never said Reagan walked on Water - I just think he was a great president because he stuck to his principles - he was not perfect by any means. There are 2 great failures he had in my opinion - first, he never stood up to congress on spending and made them cut things like he wanted to, he gave in a little too much there. Also, he handled Iran Contra badly - he should have told the Dems to Shove it and shut up.

5. Not only am I a Packer Fan - I noticed the Brewers took the series against the cubs to open the season - 2-1....... :#1:

6. Efrahin- I am not sure I get the point of the first half of your post, I think I am missing something- however, I agree when you on what I THINK you are trying to say, but mispelled-
"America will be taken down without SHOOTING a bullet". I believe you are saying we will self destruct. I don't disagree -

We are fat and whine how bad things are
We make excuses for everyone who commts a crime and wonder why society is out of control.
We give the Lazy people anything they want, and wonder why our kids don't want to work.
We don't want to go through the hard work of going to college, and then wonder why we can't get a job.

And it is always somebody else's fault........

We will pay for this, sooner than later. I just hope I am gone when it happens.

[Guest]

Packer Fan -- You're not only full of yourself, you're full of :edit:! Just my opinion. ;)

[Guest]

Ladies and gentlemen.

The beauty of boards such as this one is the ability to share ideas and viewpoints - especially contrary ones - with the hope of learning more, influencing some, and occasionally (it seems!) amend our own views due to having learned more.

One of the uglier aspects of these boards is to the ease by which posted commentary can turn to insults and snobbery - neither of which "neighbors" should do or act.

Let us not forget that we either are now neighbors or are potentially neighbors, and let's keep the dialogue "neighborly." The anonymity behind a nom de plume should not be considered license to rudeness or denigration of persons for their opinions or ideals.

TOTV has not only become a text forum, but has also spawned lunches, events, etc involving its e-citizenry. So, let's keep it all as we would if we were face-to-face, because sooner or later that will happen.

I haven't met anyone on this forum personally yet, but I am looking forward to it. In the end, regardless of politics or any other topic, we all have one thing in common - The Villages! That one thing bonds us all - whether we recognize it or not - as neighbors who should have the maturity and civility to enjoy each other's company (including opinions!) in our common goal of well-earned retirement (full or part-time).

[Guest]

Steve Z if you're referring to my comment to Packer Fan, which I'm sure you are, I would say it to his face. I'd say it to anyone's face that would stand in front of me and tell me that our economy is in great shape, refers to me as Clinton's daughter, and thinks we're all a bunch of addle brained coots. Guess what! I'm not even old enough to be his mother.
Just my opinion. ;)

[Guest]

SteveZ:

:agree: :agree: :agree: :agree: :agree:

Keep it civil, guys ::)

[Guest]

Packer, I gotta say this. I like and respect most of the people on this board, even those that are extreme conservatives. You may fit in by your political viewpoints but unless you get off your high horse, you won't fit into TV at all. Amazingly, many of us have the same access to news sources you do and the intelligence to understand what is being discussed. You seem to be under the illusion that those who live here are limited in our resources or perhaps too old to understand what we do hear and read.

You diatribes remind me of my daughter but she has an excuse -- she's young. Since you're over 40, you don't quite have that excuse. You're also not old enough to be so condescending. Don't treat those who live here as idiots, we're not.

[Guest]

Steve Z if you're referring to my comment to Packer Fan, which I'm sure you are, I would say it to his face. I'd say it to anyone's face that would stand in front of me and tell me that our economy is in great shape, refers to me as Clinton's daughter, and thinks we're all a bunch of addle brained coots. Guess what! I'm not even old enough to be his mother.
Just my opinion. ;)


Chelsea24 - No, Ma'am. The post was not specifically referring to you or your comment. It's a general observation (mine) on how this thread and others (threads and persons) within the Political Board, seem to be losing their civility. I'm as 'guilty' as anyone, because the subject matter can fire the emotions at times, and alienation never has served anyone well.

[Guest]

SteveZ mentioned job security in the V.A. Well, I work for the V.A., and I can tell you....yes...there are plenty of vets....from previous conflicts as well as the current one and the number is growing. Job security is not what it's about. Caring, dedication an honor is what it's about. The wounds we are now seeing are different....and I'm not talking about PSTD. Because of our military's excellent and swift medical care....those that would have died in the field in the past now survive....and must deal with personal horrific injuries. I see them every day. I also see "Support Our Troops" ribbons on cars all the time. Want to support our troops....visit the V.A. in Gainesville or Lake City, FL......visit a vet.....or better yet sign up as a VOLUNTEER. Push a wheelchair....and talk to the vet in it. You might be surprised at what you hear. Get up off your duffs and DO something. Anything else is just talk and it does nothing to help our wounded brave young men and women coming home. Want to learn how or what to do to help out besides talk....email me.

[Guest]

SteveZ mentioned job security in the V.A. Well, I work for the V.A., and I can tell you....yes...there are plenty of vets....from previous conflicts as well as the current one and the number is growing. Job security is not what it's about. Caring, dedication an honor is what it's about. The wounds we are now seeing are different....and I'm not talking about PSTD. Because of our military's excellent and swift medical care....those that would have died in the field in the past now survive....and must deal with personal horrific injuries. I see them every day. I also see "Support Our Troops" ribbons on cars all the time. Want to support our troops....visit the V.A. in Gainesville or Lake City, FL......visit a vet.....or better yet sign up as a VOLUNTEER. Push a wheelchair....and talk to the vet in it. You might be surprised at what you hear. Get up off your duffs and DO something. Anything else is just talk and it does nothing to help our wounded brave young men and women coming home. Want to learn how or what to do to help out besides talk....email me.


JohnZ - no one has more respect for the VA than me. I use its services mainly because having been exposed to Agent Orange and Lord knows what else, no other medical establishment can better recognise if the part of the past is going to haunt me later.

The young men and women Vets of today are a fabulous bunch. I ride with several and they give me hope in the future of this nation. I couldn't agree more that time spent LISTENING to them provides much more insight than the preaching from afar or to.

Thank you for your service with the VA.