Deciding the question
For the record, it should be noted that a majority of the Republican-controlled legislature did not vote in favor of a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. They voted to allow us — the voters — to decide on the question. They have been denounced by the media as mean-spirited, extreme, stupid, bigoted, un-American and of course homophobic. Incidentally, 30 other states also constitutionally ban gay marriages. Does that mean that the majority of citizens in the majority of states are stupid, bigoted homophobes? Wake up, North Carolina, and vote. It's up to the voters to decide, and it's our constitutional privilege to vote.
PERRY HUDSPETH
Winston-Salem
Making a difference
I am writing in response to Dr. Allison Brashear's guest column regarding The Women's Fund of Winston-Salem ("The Women's Fund is on the move," Oct. 24). I initially joined The Women's Fund as a participant scholar in 2008. Each year, women may apply to the two-year participant scholar program, which selects members based on their commitment to women's issues. As someone who has always been passionate about social change, I found the participant scholarship program empowered me to make a difference by providing a scholarship for me to vote on grants that positively affect the lives of women and girls in Forsyth County.
My involvement with The Women's Fund has only continued to grow in the past three years during my membership on the inclusiveness committee. It is exciting and encouraging to be involved with a committee and organization of women who care deeply about the needs of Forsyth County and are leading the way in effecting lasting change for the betterment of the community.
LESLEY-ANNE LAMB
MEMBER, INCLUSIVENESS COMMITTEE
THE WOMEN'S FUND OF WINSTON-SALEM
Winston-Salem
Flat tax?
The Internal Revenue Code has undergone a number of changes over the years. But it was originally a "flat tax." The IRC, even today, provides that "except as otherwise provided, (1) all income is taxable and (2) there shall be limited deductions from income." How much flatter can that be?
However, it is the "otherwise provided" clause that complicates the tax code. Do not forget, Congress can be, and has been over the years, "bought." There are certain types of income some people wanted excluded from taxation. There are many expenditures (contributions, medical, interest, etc.) that some people wanted deducted from income. So Congress "otherwise provided" that the IRC would become very complicated.
It started out so simple with only two basic provisions: All income is taxable, and deductions will be limited. Now candidates and economists are trying to sell a flat tax to the American people. We already have a "flat tax" complicated by some "otherwise provideds." If Congress will repeal all of the "otherwise provideds," we could have a real flat tax. Not a popular tax, but pretty flat.
Would Congress consider the massive changes necessary to achieve a truly flat tax? Tax life-insurance proceeds? No deductions for charitable contributions? How do you convince the half of Americans who today pay zero income tax?
We had a flat tax, but we kept excluding income and providing deductions so that we can't keep up with it. Is that going to change?
J. FRANK JOINER
Winston-Salem
Why regulations exist
As Republicans wage all-out war on government regulations, we should remember why regulations exist:
Left to their own devices, too many banks evict people from their homes using robosigners and bogus documents. Some of them make bad loans, package them as investment products, and lie about their value to prospective purchasers.
Republicans say, "Drill, baby, drill," then oil companies spill, spill, spill. They litigate for years to minimize their cleanup costs.
Some coal companies thumb their noses at mine safety as they blow the tops off beautiful mountains.
"A little salmonella with your chicken, ma'am?"
Power companies spend millions lobbying for the right to pollute the air we breathe.
Airlines have shown that, if unregulated, they are willing to make passengers sit on the tarmac for endless hours with minimal amenities.
The Dodd-Frank legislation created a Consumer Protection Bureau with the mission of protecting consumers from abuse and deceit. Big Business is against it, and Senate Republicans refuse to confirm any nominee as the bureau head, regardless of qualifications, unless the bureau is weakened into irrelevance. Are we to conclude that businesses will not be satisfied with the profits they can make if consumers are protected effectively from abuse and deception?
A massive Republican rollback of government regulations would make us unhealthy and un-wealthy. It would be so unwise.
LARRY ROTH
Germanton
For the record, it should be noted that a majority of the Republican-controlled legislature did not vote in favor of a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. They voted to allow us — the voters — to decide on the question. They have been denounced by the media as mean-spirited, extreme, stupid, bigoted, un-American and of course homophobic. Incidentally, 30 other states also constitutionally ban gay marriages. Does that mean that the majority of citizens in the majority of states are stupid, bigoted homophobes? Wake up, North Carolina, and vote. It's up to the voters to decide, and it's our constitutional privilege to vote.
PERRY HUDSPETH
Winston-Salem
Making a difference
I am writing in response to Dr. Allison Brashear's guest column regarding The Women's Fund of Winston-Salem ("The Women's Fund is on the move," Oct. 24). I initially joined The Women's Fund as a participant scholar in 2008. Each year, women may apply to the two-year participant scholar program, which selects members based on their commitment to women's issues. As someone who has always been passionate about social change, I found the participant scholarship program empowered me to make a difference by providing a scholarship for me to vote on grants that positively affect the lives of women and girls in Forsyth County.
My involvement with The Women's Fund has only continued to grow in the past three years during my membership on the inclusiveness committee. It is exciting and encouraging to be involved with a committee and organization of women who care deeply about the needs of Forsyth County and are leading the way in effecting lasting change for the betterment of the community.
LESLEY-ANNE LAMB
MEMBER, INCLUSIVENESS COMMITTEE
THE WOMEN'S FUND OF WINSTON-SALEM
Winston-Salem
Flat tax?
The Internal Revenue Code has undergone a number of changes over the years. But it was originally a "flat tax." The IRC, even today, provides that "except as otherwise provided, (1) all income is taxable and (2) there shall be limited deductions from income." How much flatter can that be?
However, it is the "otherwise provided" clause that complicates the tax code. Do not forget, Congress can be, and has been over the years, "bought." There are certain types of income some people wanted excluded from taxation. There are many expenditures (contributions, medical, interest, etc.) that some people wanted deducted from income. So Congress "otherwise provided" that the IRC would become very complicated.
It started out so simple with only two basic provisions: All income is taxable, and deductions will be limited. Now candidates and economists are trying to sell a flat tax to the American people. We already have a "flat tax" complicated by some "otherwise provideds." If Congress will repeal all of the "otherwise provideds," we could have a real flat tax. Not a popular tax, but pretty flat.
Would Congress consider the massive changes necessary to achieve a truly flat tax? Tax life-insurance proceeds? No deductions for charitable contributions? How do you convince the half of Americans who today pay zero income tax?
We had a flat tax, but we kept excluding income and providing deductions so that we can't keep up with it. Is that going to change?
J. FRANK JOINER
Winston-Salem
Why regulations exist
As Republicans wage all-out war on government regulations, we should remember why regulations exist:
Left to their own devices, too many banks evict people from their homes using robosigners and bogus documents. Some of them make bad loans, package them as investment products, and lie about their value to prospective purchasers.
Republicans say, "Drill, baby, drill," then oil companies spill, spill, spill. They litigate for years to minimize their cleanup costs.
Some coal companies thumb their noses at mine safety as they blow the tops off beautiful mountains.
"A little salmonella with your chicken, ma'am?"
Power companies spend millions lobbying for the right to pollute the air we breathe.
Airlines have shown that, if unregulated, they are willing to make passengers sit on the tarmac for endless hours with minimal amenities.
The Dodd-Frank legislation created a Consumer Protection Bureau with the mission of protecting consumers from abuse and deceit. Big Business is against it, and Senate Republicans refuse to confirm any nominee as the bureau head, regardless of qualifications, unless the bureau is weakened into irrelevance. Are we to conclude that businesses will not be satisfied with the profits they can make if consumers are protected effectively from abuse and deception?
A massive Republican rollback of government regulations would make us unhealthy and un-wealthy. It would be so unwise.
LARRY ROTH
Germanton
Huckabee says the "Herman Cain" story came from within the Republican Party. Cain had 10 days to get his story together and that's the best he can do: One hour it's I don't recall anything about a settlement. The next hour: The settlement was for 2 or 3 months salary. I'm afraid Black Walnut Ice Cream has been discontinued.
ReplyDeleteLTE #1.....whether or not the majority is stupid, bigoted, or even homophobic doesn't really matter. What really matters is any group, large or small, trying to use the Constitution of all the people to suppress and deny liberties to another group of citizens. Besides, elections are not decided by a majority of citizens, only by a majority of voters.
ReplyDelete“Democracy means simply the bludgeoning of the people by the people for the people.” Wilde.
“I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.” Jefferson.
LTE #3... How true. If businesses conducted themselves properly, there would be no need for regulations.
ReplyDeleteBTW "most all" is redundently incomprehensible. It's either all or most.
ReplyDeletehmm Roblo58a, you remind me a lot of Herman Cain.
ReplyDeleteOne day he says about abortion: the final choice is the woman's and her family and then the next day he is against all abortions all the time for all the reasons."
You: "I am pro-life but if a woman has an ultrasound and still wants an abortion, then so be it." Cain's comments,like yours, sounds like someone who is personally against abortion, but doesn't think it should be illegal -- an effectively pro-choice position held by many liberal Democrats.
When the WSJ went to the facebook format, I recall so many of the reactionaries saying the liberals would be gone now that names would be used. HA!!! We have names and pictures and see who's absent from the forum.
ReplyDelete"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch . . . "
ReplyDelete"We have names and pictures and see who's absent from the forum."
ReplyDeleteI've noticed that too. You've also seen a downtick in coded racial language (people talking about "unproductive" neighborhoods, or calling undocumented people "rats"...(that's kind of Gaddafiesque)).
Funny thing, that.
An aside from the overnight financial news. MF Global files for bankruptcy protection. These people are derivitives and commodities traders. The firm's traders are banned from trading floors from Australia to Asia and Europe as well as the US. This is taylor made for the Occupy mobs. Let's see what they do with former Senator, NJ Governor, and Goldman Sachs chief John Corzine being the head of MF Global.
ReplyDeleteThe Women's Fund must be an interesting group with a lot of reach. It is gratifying to see that it has an "inclusiveness committee" dedicated exclusively to the advancement of women. Working for "social change" is a good thing. Evidently a lot of that will be needed because, if polling can be believed, over 70% of Americans believe we are on the wrong track as a nation.
ReplyDeleteArthur....since you mention Quaddafy, it is now provable that he and OBL are dead because their names have shown up on the Chicago voter registration roles.
ReplyDeleteFlat Tax...the writer is correct, we started out with a "flat" tax long ago. Then over the years it seems to have gotten very lumpy. If you want to start armageddon in Washington, build massive public support for a very flat and broad tax to replace the current code. Blood and money will run in the streets as the code is the whole ballgame. It is where power is gained and lost with the simple addition or deletion of a line or paragraph. Committees in Congress will lose their power as will the ever changing Chairmen. This would be a war like no other since 1865.
ReplyDeleteLaSombra....did you go out trick or treating last night? I did for the first time in decades but I got home with a bag full of restraining orders.
ReplyDeleteWhy regulations exist? Human nature.
ReplyDelete@ww: nope, haven't been since my daughter grew up to think I wasn't kool enough to hang around with. She's now 28. Besides, had to work last night. No trick or treaters there, either. I love the holiday, though. Can be lots of fun, if I don't drink too much.
ReplyDeletePresidential approval polls are interesting. The WSJ has a set of charts showing the ups and downs of presidents from Truman on.
ReplyDeleteTruman had the widest range, varying from around 90% all the way down to 22%. In fact, his chart looks like the Pikes Peak & Death Valley roller coaster. He began at about 90%, plunged to 32, rebounded to 62, plunged to 34, rebounded to 70, plunged to 22 (the lowest of all) and was rebounding above 30 when he left office.
Kennedy, Ford and Obama are virtually tied for the narrowest range, varying no more than 20 points. Kennedy’s high was about 78%, his low 58%, but was plunging when he was assassinated. Ford began at 59%; his lowest was 39%, but rising when he left office. Obama began at 63%; his lowest is 43% and he is currently at 44%, remarkable considering the horrors of the current economy.
W had the second widest range, hitting near 90% after the Afghanistan invasion, then steadily falling to under 30% at the end.
Congress, on the other hand, has been around 40% approval since 1975, with a few dips and rises, the most spectacular being a leap to nearly 85% at the outbreak of the war in Afghanistan. Americans do love their wars.
But Congress has been rolling slowly downhill ever since and is now at the lowest ever, hovering around 10%. The few polls that differentiate between the houses show the Senate slightly higher and the House slightly lower.
Abdurrahim El-Keib was elected last night as the interim prime minister by the national Transitional Council in Libya.
ReplyDeleteEl-Keib has a PhD from NC State University (1984) and taught at the University of Alabama before returning to Libya in the 1990s.
Good afternoon folks!
ReplyDeleteLTE 1: "Does that mean that the majority of citizens in the majority of states are stupid, bigoted homophobes?" - no, it means the majority of voters that day were stupid, bigoted homophobes. The FF's never intended for the people to have a direct vote on any issue. They didn't trust the public to make wise decisions. The only people who should be allowed to vote on this referendum are homosexuals, because this issue only affects them. It's no one else's business.
LTE 2: Sounds like an awesome program. Since more women are attending college than men, there will be a lot more women in city leadership roles.
LTE 3: "We had a flat tax, but we kept excluding income and providing deductions so that we can't keep up with it. Is that going to change?" No, because there are too many powerful interest groups out there who insist on having their particular deductions as well as voters who would kick out any pol who even breathed a word of eliminating the mortgage, medical or charitable deductions. Btw...every employee who receives a paycheck has fed taxes deducted which goes to pay govt. expenses. Saying half "don't pay taxes" means half are either too young, retired on SS only, disabled, unemployed or paid under the table in cash.
LTE 4: Regulations exist because businesses have and continue to screw up resulting in tremendous harm to the environment, the economy, their employees and their customers.
A Halloween-themed email from the Loudoun County, Va., Republican Committee was swiftly condemned by conservative and liberal groups today for featuring an image of a ghoulish-looking President Obama with a bullet hole through his head.
ReplyDelete(The email was first reported by the blog Too Conservative, which said the group had gone “way too far” and should be reported to the U.S. Secret Service.)
John Corzine? Just another 1%-er.
ReplyDeleteStab, a follow-up on your comment about marksmanship at Manila Bay. The Navy ordered a detailed investigation and came up with the following numbers. Firing began around 5-6,000 yards and finished at around 2,000:
ReplyDeleteRounds fired: 9,500
Hits on Spanish vessels: 123
Percentage: 1.3
8" rounds fired: 405
Hits: 16
Percentage: almost 4%
The 4" and 5" guns were almost useless. It wasn't the gunners fault. No one had thought to provide any kind of aiming devices, so the guns were aimed by eye!!!
And it's a miracle that far more men didn't die from heatstroke. Nobody had thought to provide ventilation in the steel turrets, so many gunners ended up fighting in their underpants, wearing shoes to keep from having their feet ruined by the red hot decks.
Even so, it was worse in the engine rooms, where temperatures hovered around 200 degrees and the men were forced to continuously dip their hands in buckets of water to remain functional.
For a comparison of marksmanship, the Charleston Courier filed this report on January 10, 1861 regarding the efforts of the cadet gunners from the Citadel:
"At seven o'clock, when the 'Star of the West' had reached a point within range of the guns, Major Stevens fired a shot across her bows, as a signal for her to heave to. After waiting three or four minutes, no diminution in the speed or change in the course of the steamer could be noticed. A moment after, the United States flag was run up at her foremast.
The 'Star of the West' continuing thus defiantly to pursue her course towards Fort Sumter, the order was given to the men at the Morris' Island guns to open fire. Five rounds were accordingly discharged in quick succession. Two of these are reported to have taken effect, one forward and the other abaft the wheel. At the sixth discharge, the 'Star of the West' rounded to, and steered outwards towards the Bar. At the same time, the ensign, which she displayed immediately after the warning gun, was lowered. Three more shots were fired from Fort Morris and three from Fort Moultrie; one of these latter, it is thought, took effect."
"I think it's about time that the Christian right meet the right Christians."
ReplyDeleteAbout 50 years too late:
ReplyDeleteDeath Highlights Women's Role in SpecOps Teams
October 26, 2011
Associated Press|by Lolita C. Baldor
WASHINGTON - Army 1st Lt. Ashley White died on the front lines in southern Afghanistan last weekend, the first casualty in what the Army says is a new and vital wartime attempt to gain the trust of Afghan women.
White, like other female soldiers working with special operations teams, was brought in to do things that would be awkward or impossible for her male teammates. Frisking burqa-clad women, for example.
Her death, in a bomb explosion in the Taliban heartland of Kandahar, underscores the risks of placing women with elite U.S. special operations teams working in remote villages.
Military leaders and other female soldiers in the program say its rewards are great, even as it fuels debate over the roles of women in combat.
"We could do things that the males cannot do, and they are starting to realize that," says Sgt. Christine Baldwin, who like White was among the first groups of women deployed to Afghanistan this year as specially trained "cultural support" troops.
Male soldiers often cannot even speak to an Afghan woman because of the strict cultural norms that separate the sexes and the tradition of women remaining behind closed doors most of the time. Forcing the issue has yielded only resentment, military officials say, and has jeopardized the trust and cooperation of villagers. From the start of the war 10 years ago, Afghans have especially resented the practice of "night raids" in which male foreign soldiers enter and search homes, the traditional sanctum of women.
"We could search the female, find out the other half of the information," Baldwin said in an interview. "If you're missing half of the lay of the land, how effective are you in engaging the populace?"
Read the whole story here:
Women Warriors
Bob, the "christian right" is an oxymoron. They are not christians at all, just angry, bigoted, ignorant fools hiding behind the "christian" label. If Jesus actually did return, he would not recognize them as his own.
ReplyDeleteIf you read the rants on the Journal site by Harvey Pulliam, Deb Phillips and Kelliene (or whatever) and their ilk, they are indistinguishable from the rants of the Luddites, the Know Nothings and the Ku Klux Klan.
O.T. Rush " ... the rants on the Journal site by Harvey Pulliam, Deb Phillips and Kelliene and their ilk, they are indistinguishable from the rants of the Luddites, the Know Nothings and the Ku Klux Klan. ..."
ReplyDeleteIsn't that the truth!!! They continuously pontificate about individual rights and freedoms and the founding fathers but have no qualms about inserting their own self-righteousness, self-serving, pious, hypocritical demands for governmental involvement whenever it suits them ...
Mr. Pulliam indicated today that he will be gone from the Journal's site with the initiation of the new digital subscription requirement.
ReplyDeleteJournal institutes digital subscription for online content
Related
Digital Subscription Information
For more information
For a Q&A about digital subscriptions, go to
www2.journalnow.com/online/subscribe/subscriptionqa.
view more
By: JOURNALNOW STAFF
Published: November 01, 2011
I'm kind of surprised they're doing it...the New York Times they ain't.
ReplyDeleteOh well. I'm sure our Galtian overlords at Media General know better.
Who cares about the Journal and what it does. It's joke now anyway. If they indeed follow through with digital subscriptions, it'll just speed up its demise.
ReplyDeleteGood evening, folks!
ReplyDeleteNo, the Journal isn't the NYT, but Mr. Pulliam is leaving because he doesn't want to pay for what he uses? Doesn't sound too conservative to me. I pay for the print edition, so all I need to do is sign up?. Fair enough. Maybe I'll migrate back to the Readers Forum, long enough to pitch this site ;)
Hee Hee....you gotta love it.
ReplyDeleteHey Bobby, what will happen when this forum can no longer illegally copyright the LTEs?
I'm ready to go completely freelance. What say you and Stab?
I've got plenty of gritty conservative material on hold. Just give me the green light.
Hello Bucky.
ReplyDeleteActually, a Journal staffer gave this site her blessing for copying the LTE's. If they change their minds, we'll work it out, paraphrase or link the LTE's.
As for freelancing, I have no problem with diversity, actually have a different website on hold until I can fully set it up, which will allow separate pages for rants left, right, center. For the moment, we'll maintain as we have. I'd also like to build a bigger base of quality commenters, and that means we really don't need Harve and the like.
Yeah, I know Stab. In short, I'm not your favorite rantee. You'd like to get rid of me, truth be known.
ReplyDeleteYou gotta admit it, it'd be pretty boring without me though.
No, Bucky. If I wanted you to be gone, you'd be gone. I'm fine with your rants, minus the bucks and bad ends. Right now, however, I just don't have time to reconfigure things. My dad's situation is worsening; I'm settling into a new job; and I have multiple households, so I am simply a bit too busy to attend this site as I would like. Go find some good posters to stir the pot, and thank Bob for keeping the place tended. Best wishes.
ReplyDeletehmm, let's see: Boring or Boorish ?
ReplyDeletetough choice. that's my two cents.
We're going to see most daily newspapers adopting this same solution over the next few months. The New York Times, as always, is the leader, having implemented a similar policy some weeks ago.
ReplyDeleteA typical reaction from the Journal site:
Richard Head · Winston-Salem, North Carolina
...and now you want to charge for on-line access to "your" news (when there are countless other 'free' options to get it from...)
----
Mr. Head is clueless. Where does he think that he is going to get local news? The TV stations?
That is laughable. Obviously he does not understand how local news works. The TV stations cherry pick the Journal every day and mostly carry meaningless stuff aimed at the "Dancing With The Stars" set.
Producing a newspaper is a very expensive proposition. Online advertising can never replace the lost revenues of the print edition. Those who are too cheap to pay for local news can always go to any branch of the Forsyth County Public Library, where reading the print edition of the Journal has been free for 105 years.
Thanks Bobby for keeping the forum going.
ReplyDelete:), I enjoy every moment actually.
ReplyDeleteThe standard definition for "Boorish" is "ill-mannered and coarse and contemptible in behavior or appearance".
ReplyDeleteI find that "boring", so to me they are one and the same. Either is a perfect definition of you-know-who.