Carolyn G.'s Comments
Page 1 of 180  first | prev | next 
May 8, 2008 | comments: 69
Carolyn G. May 14, 2008, 3:24am EDT
Rich: Sometimes this country manages to get itself into such a mess that it's not "experience" we need to get us out, but rather good ideas and inspiration. Is Obama such a person? I personally don't know, but I do know that things such as that silly gas tax recess certainly shows me that what we don't need is "business as usual" out of Washington. The biggest comfort is that whoever wins has the advantage of knowing that they cannot possibly to worse than Bush. Technically speaking, given the nature of the job, the only person actually "qualified" to be president is a former president.
May 8, 2008 | comments: 69
Carolyn G. May 10, 2008, 7:35am EDT
Rocco: That story about stealing from the While House has prove to be totally false over and over again. It was on a line with the ruined keyboard canard; just a far right wing wet dream.

As for Hillary, she should quit if/when she is ready.
May 5, 2008 | comments: 53
Carolyn G. May 8, 2008, 3:55am EDT
jJack: what you say simply is not true. When I was still healthy enough to play, I played to relax at the end of a long day. My main character was hardly cheesecake. She is a huge anthropomorphized cow.
May 7, 2008 | comments: 2
Carolyn G. May 7, 2008, 10:54pm EDT
That whole event was staged pandering much in the way of the 30 a day gas savings. Those who buy it deserve her.
May 5, 2008 | comments: 53
Carolyn G. May 7, 2008, 8:28pm EDT
Your biggest mistake was to pick the wrong type of server for the reason you wanted to play the game. If you wanted to play for rest and relaxation you needed a Normal or at the very least a Role Play server. PvP servers are for exactly the type of snot nosed brats you encountered.
May 3, 2008 | comments: 65
Carolyn G. May 5, 2008, 10:37am EDT
Oh my. That thought also crossed my mind at one point as well, though of course not seriously since there are more people than illegals crossing.

I do see a huge difference, by the way between huge, even obscene corporate windfall price gouging and the Federal Gas Tax. I fully agree with you that the fund has been seriously mismanaged, not just by Mr. Bush and the current congress, but for literally a couple of generations. On the other hand, if properly planned and managed that fund could go far toward fixing the infrastructure. All the profits do is line the pockets of rich fat cats.
May 3, 2008 | comments: 65
Carolyn G. May 5, 2008, 3:29am EDT
Thanks, Shawn. I wasn't looking for pity though. I am a fighter. I was trying to explain why I can sometimes be really cranky.

To answer your question about conservative positions: I favor fiscal responsibility and a balanced budget. I think new programs must come in revenue neutral. I am for a total ban on porkbarrel spending (that might be a bipartisan one). I favor a crackdown on employers hiring illegal immigrants, the fence, border and port security, and immediate deportation of anyone who cannot prove they are here legally. Then if you can prove no American will take a job you are offering at the local prevailing wage you can go to a legal guest worker program. I want another total overhaul of our welfare system with real time limits, a requirement to work, be in training, or be in school as a condition of receiving a dime. Exceptions: those too physically or mentally impaired to be able to do so. Welfare should be a hand up and/or a safety net, not a way of life. Those are just a few. I also have a lot of moderate positions, and some liberal ones. I refuse to wear a single label.

In one way I agree about the need for more alternative forms of renewable energy; oil is not a renewable resource and continuing to scrabble for more sources of oil only discourages the government and the energy companies from actually looking for those. Also, if our oil production were sold here it might make a bit of sense to consider Anwar, but almost none of our oil remains in this country.

My comment about a child was contingent upon the fact that in my world at least, very few adult men engage in playground-level name calling in an attempt to make a point. Remember, you have a good reason for believing as you do. It's rude and disrespectful to assume that the person with whom you are exchanging ideas is not exactly the same even if their point of view is diametrically opposite of yours.

The bottom line in such a discussion as this is that we need to develop new sources of renewable energy, not simply go running around looking for a way of avoiding doing so. We have known this for over 30 years and ignored it. Now the chickens are coming home to roost.
May 1, 2008 | comments: 184
Carolyn G. May 5, 2008, 12:02am EDT
Bruce: I think what most offends me about Hillary's lies isn't that she lied. She's a politician. They all lie. What offended me is that she lied about things she knew could easily be checked and that would be. That shows a serious lack of good long-term thought and judgment. How can we trust what she tells us as President? I mean, look at Bush's record. If he's told the truth once, is was a slip.
May 1, 2008 | comments: 184
Carolyn G. May 4, 2008, 11:21pm EDT
When I started out I was pretty much open minded on both of them. I had some reservations on Hillary because she's a Washington insider who has done little to solve any problem in a long time. I didn't know Obama.

Over time I have to to admire the thoughtful way in which Obama looks at solving issues long term. He's not content to find some flashy 10-second sound bite answer to solve a major crisis. That's why he doesn't think that saving people 30 cents a day while killing road jobs and putting people out of work makes much sense.

What really turned me off to Hillary, however, are all of the bald-faced lies. One lie I can generally overlook. But they just keep coming. She would definitely still be better than McCain without a doubt, but so would Obama. While some of the solutions he's discussed would take longer and cost more than simple feel-good gestures, they might also fix something. Whatta concept.
May 3, 2008 | comments: 65
Carolyn G. May 4, 2008, 6:20pm EDT
Joe T: Excellent point. It is not as if the need for alternative energy sources has not been widely known for a generation or more. It's like the need for really fuel-efficient vehicles, etc. This country, however, has always been self-indulgent and content to just go with the flow until the flow becomes a major flood and it is too late to do anything effective in a short time.

Shawn: Thank you. I'm not being sarcastic here. I'm currently battling cancer and a good hearty laugh is a rare and a valuable thing. When I discovered that you had deleted one of my posts rather than deal with the contents I laughed until my sister came in to be sure I was ok. No. I honestly don't mind, but I appreciate the laugh. those are like small gifts from heaven these days.
May 3, 2008 | comments: 65
Carolyn G. May 4, 2008, 4:27pm EDT
Shawn: I have not called you a single name. I consider name calling juvenile and counterproductive. I consider that you don't know what you're talking about since you keep insisting on adding oranges and lemons and coming up with apple cider.

Marilyn: I could not agree with you more about using our own resources. I would like nothing better than to see oil produced in this country stay in this country and be used to meet our energy needs, thus reduce our dependence on foreign oil. If that is what would happen there would be a slightly better chance of actually getting the ability to drill in ecological sensitive areas. Unfortunately that's not how the oil market works, and while be continue to buy foreign oil, we sell our own production abroad rather than use it for that purpose.
May 3, 2008 | comments: 14
Carolyn G. May 4, 2008, 1:01pm EDT
If it were truly so important for us to win in Iraq, we would have gone in with a well-developed plan, and contingency plans to cover things as they changed on the ground. Our president would have listened to the military experts who told him how to do this and told him how critical it was to do so.

Mr. Bush did none of these things. In fact, every action he has taken in Iraq has served to increase the violence and destabilize the situation on the ground. Despite temporary small pockets of success, we are not winning there because even now he is unwilling or unable to commit the manpower, resources, and a solid strategy to winning.
May 3, 2008 | comments: 65
Carolyn G. May 4, 2008, 12:35pm EDT
Poor Sharon. You didn't say anything particularly bad and he's name calling again. That is the mark of a mid-to-late teen more than almost anything I can think of.

BTW Shawn: No. The Exxon money is a windfall, but the Federal tax is just that. It's a tax. It benefits ordinary people which is what it is intended to do. The Exxon money benefits nobody but the fat cats. And yes, it is extremely important where the money goes and who benefits from it.

I was out on U-Tube and found one of the funniest things supposedly from Fox. I'm fairly sure it was just joke tape since a so-called major news channel would never make a mistake that stupid; but it was funny nevertheless. It was a story on the Lincoln - Douglas debate. It showed the traditional picture of Lincoln, of course. The picture of Douglas was of Frederick Douglass, a Black man, rather than Stephen A. Douglas.

It has to be a joke since obviously the first serious Black candidate for President is Barak Obama, so it's not likely Lincoln was debating one back then.
May 3, 2008 | comments: 65
Carolyn G. May 4, 2008, 10:20am EDT
Shawn: You have more that proven numerous times in this thread that you don't have a clue as to what you are talking about. Further you don't have a clue as to what I do/do not know about anything unless I tell you. You proved that by calling me a left winger. I don't wear labels, and some of my positions on issues are far more conservative than yours will ever be.

I do applaud you for "knowing all about futures". You have to be the only person alive who actually is in a position of being so wise as to have nothing remaining to be learned about a particular subject.

Sharon: I am sure he's done well at the market. Sometimes I bet they even mark the strawberries down 20% or more. There are none so blind as those blinded by their own arrogance. Remember, this guy doesn't even understand the difference between windfall profits which benefit the company and the investors, and a Federal tax which benefits the rest of us by repairing our roads, bridges, and other aspects of our crumbling infrastructure (and would do lots more without the bipartisan porkbarrel spending) other than it amounts to 12 cents. I love how he says he thinks for himself then repeats every right wing exaggeration and misrepresentation on the books.

I'll check this later. Have to go lie down for a while for the pain meds to kick in.
May 3, 2008 | comments: 65
Carolyn G. May 4, 2008, 12:12am EDT
Shawn: I would address your issues were you capable of engaging in an intelligent exchange of ideas. I'm way too old and way too sick to waste even a modicum of my time attempting to civilly discuss issues with someone whose counter-arguments, when they don't have good ones, consists of name calling.
May 3, 2008 | comments: 65
Carolyn G. May 3, 2008, 4:57pm EDT
Bret? If the $10/gal happened over night, you would see a virtual collapse of a large portion of the economy before things could shake out. Imagine how many people would no longer be able to get to work.
May 3, 2008 | comments: 65
Carolyn G. May 3, 2008, 11:16am EDT
People want the truth; what they don't want is the gross exaggerations and outright untruth in your article. While I will not argue that it is well written, there are few truths in it.

The Federal gas tax is not a windfall profit. It is a tax. I suggest you look up the difference. The Federal Gas Tax goes into a highways fund and that money is used to repair our ancient crumbling infrastructure. Were it not for rampant porkbarrel spending on the part of both parties, much more of that would actually get accomplished. So instead of simply lining the pockets of corporate fat cats, at least some of that money actually benefits the American people with safer roads and bridges. Whatta concept! Think of what we could do if some of the enormous windfall profits and corporate welfare were directed in the same way.

You don't seem to understand very much about oil prices or you would know that we keep almost none of the oil we drill in our own country but rather sell it to Japan. The amount of oil in Anwar and off the California coast, while a moderate amount (they think) they would know more make us oil independent than would me buying a tutu would make me a ballerina. The decision to protect sensitive coastal lands has nothing whatever to do with anyone's view. May I see a picture of this mouse you claim is the only reason for not drilling in Anwar?

Anwar is not simply an ice desert to anyone but someone who regards our environment as inconsequential. It's one of the few pristine Arctic wildernesses still available to us.

You are correct about the refineries. Something needs to be done to allow new ones to be built and to put the NIMBIs to rest. The last plan I heard was an excellent one in which old abandoned military bases would be used. We do need to push for greater use of coal technology and nuclear. The nuclear with the caveat that it be inspected to death every step of the way. There are those of us out here who still remember the Inspector intimidation scandals, the faulty welds that were hidden from other inspectors, and the bribery and corruption that rendered parts of some plants unsafe. It was a greed factor--as usual.

I think you might find if you strip your articles of the juvenile name calling and hyperbole, you might be taken more seriously since you do make some excellent points even when this garbage is stripped out.

By the way, Mr. Bush has been in office for seven years. Anything Mr. Clinton did, he could have undone had he pushed. Remember, he had control of both houses of congress.
Apr 29, 2008 | comments: 31
Carolyn G. May 3, 2008, 4:45am EDT
The Rev. Wright does not represent the Black Church. It's about time people faced that. He represents some people who go to predominantly Black churches and who are still playing the race and victim cards on a regular basis. There is no such thing as a cohesive Black Church any more than there is a cohesive White one for whom one person speaks.

One of the positive things about all of Wright's hate mongering this past couple of weeks is that it has brought out the voices of reasonable Black clergy who don't want the country believing that Wright's brand of Christianity speaks for them or for the vast majority of their congregations. Just as Jerry Fallwell and Pat Robertson don't speak for every White Christian, Wright does not speak for other than some Blacks.
Apr 30, 2008 | comments: 24
Carolyn G. May 2, 2008, 1:24pm EDT
Fifteen year olds generally have the good judgment of a stump. The simplest way to have avoided this mess was for the parents to have viewed the entire shoot and insisted on the removal of any questionable photos. Ms. Liebowitz should have known better. Again her subject was 15 years old.
Apr 27, 2008 | comments: 87
Carolyn G. Apr 28, 2008, 11:06am EDT
From what I can tell, PTSD is real John. If it weren't the government wouldn't be working so hard and spending so much money to sweep it under the rug.
Page 1 of 180  first | prev | next 
 
Carolyn G.
Seattle area
Gather | Friends | Groups | Share
About Gather | Engagement Marketing | Make New Friends | Gather Points | Advertise on Gather | Gather Press | Privacy | Terms of Service | Community Guidelines
Books | Celebs | Entertainment | Family | Food | Health | Moms | Money | News | Politics | Spirituality | Sports | Travel | Writing
Version 16961, "Pacino"; Copyright © 2009 Gather Inc. All rights reserved.