Local Posts #4

2009-3-20 12:55:00

[Compiler's Note:  The "Local Posts" series of articles found here in "The Archives" are a collection of exchanges between JJ Dewey and others participating on a local online newspaper blog, and were subsequently re-posted by JJ Dewey on The Keys Of Knowledge discussion group.]

  

JJ:

I've been having fun tweaking the local group who respond to Letters to the Editor on an online blog. The posts can only be around 160 words or less, so there is not room to go into any topic deeply.

Here are a few for you.

  

March 14, 2009 -- Post Number One

JJ:

Judging from the percentage of letters from the Left lately you'd think we lived in San Francisco rather than Idaho -- the most Republican State. Either the Statesman is ignoring conservative letters or they are dropping their subscriptions because they do not feel represented.

Kimberly wants us to turn our lights off for one hour on March 28th in support of global warming propaganda. Wow! That's going to do a lot of good.

If you really want to reduce carbon emissions then support nuclear energy. This is currently our best hope of supplying clean energy without destroying our economy -- yet there is nothing in the stimulus supporting it.

Dumb.

I've written a treatise on this subject. You can read it at:

http://www.freeread.com/archives/ten_deceptions.php

  

March 14, 2009 -- Post Number Two

JJ:

Michael wants to defund the military and spend it on homes.

Another dumb idea. Without the military none of us would be secure in our homes.

Many fell into this illusionary thinking before World War Two because we had just fought the war to end all wars and we didn't have to worry about war any more. Europe, Britain and the USA all disarmed to alarming proportions when the threat of Hitler surfaced. Mighty France was conquered in two weeks.

Had the free world maintained a strong military Hitler could have been easily defeated and millions of lives, homes and houses saved.

If you want to drum up some money to build homes take it out of Obama's wasteful spending. We could build all the homes that everyone needs and just give them away free as well as feed all the starving people in the world.

  

March 14, 2009 -- Post Number Three

JJ:

Dear Nuke,

You won't get a sensible definition from a "Lefty" as to what a Liberal or anything else is because they do not reason, they concentrate on emotion. That's why they cannot respond intellectually, but resort to labeling and name calling.

Those who we call liberals are really more conservative than Jimmy Swaggart. They want to conserve most everything and keep it just the way it is.

Examples are:  ANWAR, every tree that exists, Social Security, Welfare, bureaucracies, deficit spending, earmarks, excessive litigation, one-sided media, nuclear energy, government red tape, space exploration, and even the earth's temperature.

The last thing they want to do is examine themselves and discover they are not progressive, but more conservative than conservatives.

Here's the best concise definition of today's Liberal:

"One who supports that which he feels should be true though he can't explain it neither does it have to make sense."

  

March 14, 2009 -- Post Number Four

JJ:

The "I Am Not Gay" guy (what kind of label is that for a Lefty?) incorrectly accuses me of being wrong on stating that Idaho is the most Republican State. You do not assess this by presidential elections. After all, New York and California voted for Reagan, but they are not Republican states.

You assess it by the percentage of Republicans actually elected in the legislatures. Idaho has the highest percentage of Republican legislators which is 76.2%.

For proof go to:

http://ncsl.typepad.com/the_thicket/2008/12/the-most-republican-and-democratic-legislatures.html

  

March 14, 2009 -- Post Number Five

JJ:

"Grandjester" can't argue with what I say so he throws in a bunch of labels. My thinking cannot be put into the tidy little box he tries to thoughtlessly make.

Are you aware that the Confederacy was composed of Democrats? Accusing Republicans of acting like Democrats of the Old South is a strange way for a Lefty to ridicule them.

  

March 15, 2009 -- Post Number One

JJ:

Dale Merrill echoes Democratic talking points when he puts all the blame for deficit spending during the Bush-Reagan years on the Presidency. Why do such persons conveniently forget that Congress is the entity that controls spending? At least Reagan made attempts to reduce spending but received little cooperation from the House. Both Bushes were big spenders, but as far as a percentage of increase none have compared to FDR. Under his administration the national dept increased by a whopping eleven and a half times.

Obama seems to be following his example. Obama and his like thinking democratically controlled Congress is on board to increase our debt by 3.7 trillion in his first term. Of course, if we have other little problems such as a 9/11, a war, or a Katrina we could be looking at $5-6 trillion which would make Bush look like Mr. Thrift by comparison.

Conservatives and Libertarians were aghast with Bush's liberal spending, but we are shell-shocked at Obama's madness.

  

March 15, 2009 -- Post Number Two

JJ:

You guys need to argue with what I say, not with what I do not say.

I said that all the blame or the Reagan deficit cannot be put on Reagan alone. Reagan had to make deals with Tip O'Neil and various Democrats in order to get the spending through Congress for his military budget to defeat the Soviet Union. If you think The Democrats did not push their own spending agendas in the 1980's through their House majority then I have a nice little Greenbelt to sell you by the Boise River.

Secondly, I said, "At least Reagan made attempts to reduce spending but received little cooperation."

Reagan's first Budget called for cutting $41.4 billion from 83 federal programs. This attempt was met with so much resistance after that he accepted his limitations due to a Democrat majority in the House and plowed with the horses he had. If Reagan had a Republican majority we could have a much better idea as to where he really intended social spending to go.

My statements on Reagan were correct as written.

"If you aren't fired with enthusiasm, you will be fired with enthusiasm."
  -- Vince Lombardi (1913 - 1970)