Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Monopoly, foreclosure-style

By Tom Toles

c_10182010.gif

***

Do Tell

The gay rights movement is anomalous. I guess everything is anomalous to some degree, but gay people were like this giant INVISIBLE group that was right there amongst us all along, but everybody was pretending they weren't. This worked out nicely for straight people who didn't want to have to think about what they didn't want to have to think about. Well, what do you know, gay people got tired of pretending, because a) nobody likes pretending and b) it occurred to them that they might like the same legal and social rights as heterosexuals. Conservatives promptly labeled equal rights for gay people "special rights", meaning rights for somebody who wasn't them.

The good news is that progress has been, by historic standards, fairly swift. What may be the strangest residue of that progress is Don't Ask, Don't Tell. While you can argue that it served a bridging function while a tradition-oriented establishment came to terms with a new reality, history will look back with blinking incomprehension at a policy that will seem to have been thought up by a preschooler, along the lines of "If I cover my eyes, can you see me?"

So straight people have had to think a few thoughts that make them squeamish in coming to terms with all this. Sorry about that. But now that you've had those thoughts, you can stop thinking about it now! If you KEEP thinking about it, maybe you have other issues. -- Tom Toles

***
sketchicon_ver1.jpg

s_10182010.gif

By Tom Toles  | October 18, 2010; 12:00 AM ET
Categories:  Economy and jobs  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Metro riders need rescuing, too
Next: Unfinished business

Other Syndicated Editorial Cartoons:

Comments

On another note. What do you suppose Toles is trying to convey in that sketchpad of his up there?

Posted by: bertzel | October 24, 2010 4:18 PM | Report abuse

~~I look forward to your comments. I hope my dissertation does not give you the future present headache like it did me.~~

I am laughing out loud because, as strange as your comment is....I understand it.
Then again, maybe that is not a good thing.

Posted by: bertzel | October 24, 2010 4:15 PM | Report abuse


What about survival of the fittest = those who are capable of adapting to the 'world' as it 'morphs' into the the future?? That is ALSO a description.
Posted by Bertzel


Trying again...
The dynamics of change in a sequence of events from past to present to future in a forward sequence is an essential concept of reality. I like your use of the phrase, "the 'world' as it 'morphs' into the future".
The fact of the matter is that the past has 'decomposed' and 'reconstructed' to become the present. We continually exist n the 'present' and in the 'present' is the only time that we can change the 'future'. The fact that the future never exists is because everything is changing in the present. We exist in this volume of space that is always changing. "The future never comes because when it arrives it is the present." Because reality is a dynamic system, we can only change things in the present through our ability to comprehend how what we do in the present constructs our future present. Economics is a dynamic system that needs to change as we desire to create our future. 'Conservative' as in 'prevent change' does not work in a dynamic system because it does not create the necessary change that we need to have to create the desired future present. Also the future present has multiple possibilities and we have to be able to comprehend all of the dynamics of change in order to make rational decisions about what we will do in the present to create necessary change to survive and to thrive in the future present. False concepts of what will be better or worse for the future lead to untold disasters.
At the 'present' we are creating circumstances that will create disasters for our future present.
I look forward to your comments. I hope my dissertation does not give you the future present headache like it did me.

Posted by: OchamsRazor | October 24, 2010 1:29 PM | Report abuse

~~~~ While adaptation is a critical element of survival; it is unfortunate that those who do adapt can still be victims of other people's maladaption.~~~

‘tis a fact of life.

~~~ We all live in a yellow submarine~~~

Interesting analogy. Care to explain?
I, myself, still remember going to that movie when it first hit the theaters, tho I have not watched it since and really don’t quite remember the ‘moral of the story’ if in fact there was one. I do recall liking the music and colorful animation… Course, I also enjoyed "The Wall".

~~~~ You are right; it does come off as a contradiction~~~

I know I am…it was only one statement, not two. I did not ask for the meaning. I only stated that ‘supply & demand’ came to mind. You chose to explain what that term meant and also stated that government had nothing to do with it. You cannot blame miscommunication on that one.

~~~~Yes, I would like to know why I spell my 'login' name the way I do.~~~

Well if you don’t know, who then?? Perhaps I should consult him or her. : )
Also am curious as to why you sign in with one anonymous name and also post the name david eddy on occasion…what is the point behind that move?

~~~ Yes, I do have a cell phone~~~

Communication problem here, perhaps...
I ask because you seem so concerned with the microwave issue…perhaps you should not be using a cell phone either.

I will not ‘call’ someone I do not know. Fore I would not want to become a victim of another’s ‘maladaption’ ; )

Then again…I might text… lol


Posted by: bertzel | October 24, 2010 12:05 PM | Report abuse

What about survival of the fittest = those who are capable of adapting to the 'world' as it 'morphs' into the the future?? That is ALSO a description.
Posted by Bertzel

My reply
While adaptation is a critical element of survival; it is unfortunate that those who do adapt can still be victims of other people's maladaption.
We all live in a yellow submarine and if the submarine pulls apart due to conflicting directions, we all lose our lives.
We need dependable systems that keep our submarine functional and intact. Right now our submarine is trying to go forward (progressive) and backwards (conservative) at the same time. It is cooperation that makes our submarine viable.

~~~~~~~By the way, the government person has nothing to do with supply and demand. ~~~dave
Me thinks you contradict yourself w-a-y too much dave...care to explain?
Posted by Bertzel

My reply
You are right; it does come off as a contradiction but there is a difference between the two statements. The first statement refers to the meaning of words and the second statement refers to The effect of government on the supply and demand function of economics. Life does get complicated as does communications.

Also would like to know why you spell your
'login' name the way you do.
Do you have a cell phone dave?
Posted by Bertzel

My reply
Yes, I would like to know why I spell my 'login' name the way I do. I know that It is spelled Occam or Ockham and is actually William of Ocham. Communications can get difficult.

Yes, I do have a cell phone and will post the phone number if you wish.
Dave


Posted by: OchamsRazor | October 24, 2010 3:11 AM | Report abuse

"Survival of the fittest" is a world where life or death is based on who has the most weapons of mass destruction.~~~~

What about survival of the fittest = those who are capable of adapting to the 'world' as it 'morphs' into the the future?? That is ALSO a description.
~~~~~~~By the way, the government person has nothing to do with supply and demand. ~~~dave
Me thinks you contradict yourself w-a-y too much dave...care to explain?
Also would like to know why you spell your
'login' name the way you do.
Do you have a cell phone dave?

Posted by: bertzel | October 23, 2010 7:58 PM | Report abuse

You will also have to explain what you mean by ‘survival of the fittest.’ Since what I perceive the meaning of that statement to be is obviously not the same as your meaning….can’t continue without understanding….
Posted by: bertzel

"Survival of the fittest" is a world where life or death is based on who has the most weapons of mass destruction. It is a "Dog eat dog" environment where only the rich and powerful survive. Economically; it is "free Market" buyer beware and no survival for the weak and weary. More specifically; originally, "survival of the fittest" meant, he who has the biggest stick survives. Now; it means those who do not understand reality as it exists will not survive due to fatal errors.
Presently, we have a corporation monopoly Oligarchy that is sociopathic and a threat to everyone's survival due to our nations ability to self-destruct.


If you believe that government has no impact on ‘supply and demand’ you are naïve. A very simple example is the cost of gasoline and the fixed bottom price which must be adhered to buy the seller. As I stated, one, simple, example.
Posted by Bertzel

I agree government has a great deal of influence on supply and demand.
They are pumping money into the Economic "Supply" side when the "Demand" side of economics is bleeding to death due to stagnant wages and soaring costs.
The fall of the Roman Empire was said to be due to brain damage from lead pots. Maybe the use of microwaves is scrambling our politician's brain molecules causing the disconnect from reality.
Dave

Posted by: OchamsRazor | October 23, 2010 4:06 PM | Report abuse

If you prefer to identify the government and/or a corporation as a "person", you go right ahead. I, myself, consider them separate entities, yet one. The government has stepped outside the description of ‘we the people’. Tho I guess the common denominator concerning a person and government & corporations, would indeed be the desire for money and power, so I guess I see where you are coming from in that regard.
If you believe that government has no impact on ‘supply and demand’ you are naïve. A very simple example is the cost of gasoline and the fixed bottom price which must be adhered to buy the seller. As I stated, one, simple, example.

~~~Thanks to microwaves, people including myself are no longer able to comprehend let alone provide a truly functional society. My books are from an outside source and if published might prevent a total meltdown. We have burned our bridges at both ends.~~~

I won’t even touch that paragraph…sounds a bit “off” to me…perhaps you should ‘explain’ yourself.

As for China…we once were there. At least as far as a thriving, growing economy is concerned. You seem to have forgotten. Maybe it’s those darn microwaves??
You will also have to explain what you mean by ‘survival of the fittest.’ Since what I perceive the meaning of that statement to be is obviously not the same as your meaning….can’t continue without understanding….

Posted by: bertzel | October 22, 2010 8:40 PM | Report abuse

And of course let us not forget that nasty, human factor which craves...money and power. I have a prediction dave...your beloved china too will fall...eventually..
Posted by: bertzel

The government, like the corporation is a person according to the latest interpretation of the word "people" according to the Supreme Court. The government "person" is just as fallible as any person that looks like a person.
By the way, the government person has nothing to do with supply and demand. Supply is what is produced and demand is what people want to buy. Without money, neither of these activities can occur in a capitalist system. Even the government person has to have money to provide the services we need. Human fallibility is the reason the government person and the justice person must prevent the human person and the corporation person from having monopolies, cheating people, stealing from people and pay less than the cost of living wages to people. That is also the reason why we have to pay for an army and police.
The demand side of economics pays for everything. If they cannot pay, the nation will collapse into chaos.
Due to circumstances beyond my control, I cannot provide a paradise. The best I can hope for is not extinction. Our present agenda will leave a scorched Earth for our next generation.
Thanks to microwaves, people including myself are no longer able to comprehend let alone provide a truly functional society. My books are from an outside source and if published might prevent a total meltdown. We have burned our bridges at both ends.
On the subject "China"; they understand economics. They understand that the economic "pie" must grow to accommodate more people and more technology.
Our static understanding of economics is still based on the Adam Smith limited resources fallacy. Resources grow as technology progresses. Capital must grow to meet functional needs.
We are deep in hock to China and our economic structure will collapse long before China's economic structure. It is repugnant that we want to undermine their successful economic system.
It is our caveman "survival of the fittest" mind set that is a major problem.

Posted by: OchamsRazor | October 21, 2010 11:58 PM | Report abuse

Interesting move dave...

I cannot take credit for the words of someone else...that would be 'cheating'. I don't cheat.
I also do not 'dress in another's clothing'. Next you will be calling me the antichrist : )
And in case you haven't noticed, we already are living in 'hell on earth'and I am not just talking 'class'.
It would appear your 'dream' is to create paradise, hate to be the one to inform you, that job has already been taken...hope you won't be too disappointed when reality finally sets in.

"Free enterprise" has become the freedom to enslave the working people, destroy the environment and turn this country into an evil empire.~~~dave~~~

Perhaps that is true, however, I think that has happened with the help of our government....'supply and demand' comes to mind.
And of course let us not forget that nasty, human factor which craves...money and power. I have a prediction dave...your beloved china too will fall...eventually..

Posted by: bertzel | October 21, 2010 9:30 AM | Report abuse

Poverty and hardship build character. Maybe Government should have a little poverty and hardship for a while. Our standard of living was built on working for successful free enterprise.
Posted by; Bertzel

"Free enterprise" has become the freedom to enslave the working people, destroy the environment and turn this country into an evil empire.

You must be one of those people who enjoy a night of carnage on the television.

If you are a Democrat, then my concern that the Democrats are Elephants in Donkey clothing is substantiated. The poor and middle class will have to deal with hell on earth.

Posted by: OchamsRazor | October 20, 2010 8:48 PM | Report abuse

I laugh ha, ha, ha...You do not know me let alone my convictions. You 'pretend' to know and if you in fact read and or understood anything I have 'shared' you would have an idea of what I stand for. Please enlighten me as to what "I think I know." What I do know is that you like to play games. Period. You also like to 'rule the roost'.
Don't talk so foolish to me because you can not fool me with your 'jibberish'.
So what is your next move dave?? I find you very amusing!! btw let's take the republican name calling out of the scenario, we both know I am not...your move

Posted by: bertzel | October 20, 2010 4:30 PM | Report abuse

I prefer Albert Einstein...
'as far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.'
Posted by: bertzel

Tell that to the people who died from the nuclear attack on Japan.
Albert Einstein was responsible for providing the means to build the atom bomb knowing full well it would be the source of our extinction. He was an atheist who sold his soul to the devil.
You and your Republican friends are doing the same thing.
What you think you know is a lie and will destroy people's hope for a future.
There is on this earth a constant struggle between Good and evil. They are both as real as is gravity.
I am only a messenger and powerless to do anything other than communicate as I am so inspired. I offer you truth and you prefer the lies that will condemn you.


Posted by: OchamsRazor | October 20, 2010 1:30 PM | Report abuse

'My source is not only the best of mankind's understanding; it is also from a source I call "Universal Intelligence".
Many math axioms are based on Universal Truths.
I need all the help I can get publishing these important ideas'~~~~Dave~~~~

I prefer Albert Einstein...
'as far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.'

Posted by: bertzel | October 20, 2010 10:08 AM | Report abuse

And YOU Dave will be our new Savior and Chief...how convenient.
Glad I don't have a 'contrite' heart.

Posted by: bertzel | October 20, 2010 9:09 AM | Report abuse

To Tom Toles,
The Chinese know how to manage economics while the rest of the world is stuck in an unrealistic economic system that is doomed to failure and will cause a third world war with very few survivors.
The Christians will get the apocalypse they want and no salvation because of their contrite hearts.
David Eddy

Posted by: OchamsRazor | October 20, 2010 2:35 AM | Report abuse

Dear OchamsRazor, your rules are naive' and selective. Business can buy politicians? I suppose Unions cannot.
Posted by Bobbo2

Corporations buy both politicians and unions. Unions no longer represent the workers. Unions have become company lackeys that work the system to serve their own interests.
Your rules support the same old anal retentive conservatism that has lead to the present corruption of our government, the financial failure of our economics and the deterioration of the quality of people's lives. You live in a fools paradise based on lies, deceit, and self- destructive ignorance of reality.
The reality of the situation is that corporations control our lives and we the people get the crumbs from the table while fat cats eat high on the hog.
Our entertainment, our education and our news media have been corrupted to create sociopathic sheep to the slaughter.
Anyone who thinks for themselves is considered a threat to the corrupt establishment. The meaning of the word conservative has become do nothing to change the path to destruction that the Republicans have established.
A fool and his freedom are soon lost to fear and frustration as unseen forces destroy what could have been a fine future.

Posted by: OchamsRazor | October 20, 2010 2:13 AM | Report abuse

bobbo2... Wow. That is definitely one point of view.

Early Constitutionalists would have solved the job loss problem by raising import tariffs, but not you. A better idea, you say, would be to add a profit margin to the cost of public services in order to lower prices? While keeping wages the same? Or would wages necessarily need to go down in order to cover the profit margin that will go to the private contractors in order to keep them fat enough to be happy?

That's funny, because the defense industry has done a most excellent job of moving public money to the private sector in a big way, while giving us not really that much value in return except for a lot of weaponry that has no place to go. Ooh, maybe we could start another war or two, to attempt to justify spending 40% of our federal budget to defend against what (up until the time we invent them) are nonexistent threats.

Posted by: jonroesler | October 19, 2010 3:07 PM | Report abuse

pararanger22, you say you wrote a long commentary that was pulled "for review." You are probably unaware of it, but the WaPo software for comments has an automatic counter mechanism that allows posts up to 3,000 characters. If you exceed that limit, you get an automatic "held for review" message. You may think that somewhere a human person has read your post and rejected it, but that isn't so; it's all done electronicly by the software. (In a previous incarnation of this software, the limit used to be 500 words, not 3,000 characters.)

Also, there is a "dirty word" filter that rejects comments that have certain pre-programmed words -- most of the obvious ones you would expect, along with a few odd ones that are problematic, such as the "D" word that is slang for lesbian and which is part of the last name of comedian Dick Van D---. You can usually get around the dirty word filter by writing that word as Dy ke with a space in the middle. And sometimes you can substitute a numeral one for a ell (1 for l) which is virtually invisible to the eye but not to the software. Use the "at" sign @ in place of "a," use a zero in place of an "o," and so on.

Finally, let me also say that sometimes the software produces what is called a "Moveable Type" error, pretty much at random. If you refresh your screen, often you will find your comment has indeed been posted even when the Moveable Type error message told you it wasn't. You just have to be patient with all this software glitches and idiosyncracies, and not be paranoid about assuming some nefarious WaPo employee is out to thwart you, most especially if the content of your post is basically inofensive, as you say yours was.

Looking at the little box in the corner, I see that I now have a little less than 1,200 characters left. Whenever I know I'm working on a major rant, I do it in Word, and do a letter or word count, and break it up into smaller chunks that fit inside the 3,000 character limit.

Now have 1,002 left.

Posted by: curmudgeon6 | October 19, 2010 8:57 AM | Report abuse

history will look back with blinking incomprehension at a policy that will seem to have been thought up by a preschooler, along the lines of "If I cover my eyes, can you see me?"
-----------------------
So are you, Tom, already living in the 22nd century and sending us news from there? Or is this "blinking incomprehension" merely the projection of one Tom Toles who is also living in 2010, JUST LIKE THE REST OF US?

Personally, I feel that most useful changes happen gradually and it is good that they do so. No one wants to get into a car which is going very fast and the driver does not quite know where he is going.

With a large society like ours, it is better to go a bit slower, and once in a while, ask for directions. Very likely, DADT will be abandoned soon. It looks like it is not necessary now. It does not follow that it wasn't necessary when Clinton implemented it.

Posted by: rjpal | October 19, 2010 6:29 AM | Report abuse

jonroesler, great point. Union bosses are only concerned about membership and dues. When I hear the quote "I will be interested in students when they become dues paying members of my Union" that said it all. Our manufacuring base is gone. It is all overseas. And with it goes tax revenue. So now the Unions are focused on public sector services that you cannot export. And instead of losing jobs States are going into bankruptcy over ridiculous salaries and benefits to the Unions. One thing that can be done to end this tyranny is to privatize services. The Unions have done more to reduce income tax revenue than any other group.

Posted by: bobbo2 | October 18, 2010 6:16 PM | Report abuse

Tom, the crux of the issue is right in your opening lines......"... gay people were like this giant INVISIBLE group that was right there amongst us all along..."... but guess what? I venture to say that most people, when asked, really DON'T CARE. The problem is that unless gays proclaim, protest, march or somehow act out in some outrageous fashion, no one would ever really know they were gay. And THAT is the gay community's primary problem.

Most folks are going to be put off by ANYONE (name your cause or advocation) who gets in your face, calls you names, engages in offensive language or behavior, or otherwise harasses them in general. I submit also, that most folks don't really care what one does in the privacy of their own bedroom.

Call me homophobic (which of course, I'm not, and which of course I will be labeled now), and I still really won't care if you're gay or not. Sorry.

Posted by: Shrimper | October 18, 2010 4:55 PM | Report abuse

Question:
What is the benefit to the members of a union, if the salaries and/or benefits paid to workers were to drive their employers either out of business or to another place from which to do business, thus putting the union members out of work?

Correct. Which is why unions do not make demands which would put their members out of work.

Posted by: jonroesler | October 18, 2010 3:43 PM | Report abuse

Dear OchamsRazor, your rules are naive' and selective. Business can buy politicians? I suppose Unions cannot. The biggest, baddest guy on the block is a Government that can take your hard earned money, squander it and come back for more. And when it can't get enough it just prints or borrows more. Poverty and hardship build character. Maybe Government should have a little poverty and hardship for a while. Our standard of living was built on working for successful free enterprise. Government doesn't have to be successful to survive. It only has to have the authority to tax. Our Government is an addict. It is addicted to our money and it's ability to borrow more. Time for the addict to go into rehab.

Posted by: bobbo2 | October 18, 2010 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Yep...I was right...sometimes silence is indeed golden....

Poppycock.

Posted by: bertzel | October 18, 2010 2:12 PM | Report abuse

I know sometimes 'silence is golden' and I most likely should adhere to that saying now. Sometimes tho I just can't keep my 'mouth shut' when I see something and it just 'burns' in my mind until I comment on it. That being said,
PrairieDog, you could've just used the shorter version by purchasing the bumper sticker and putting it on your car or, if you don't have a car you could always tattoo it on 'your rear bumper'...most likely would have a whole different meaning tho wouldn't it...

Posted by: bertzel | October 18, 2010 2:03 PM | Report abuse

Monopolies prevent equity, justice, human rights and competition.

He/She who has the money write the rules and remove the rules...

A new rule is "buyer beware".

A new rule is that the profits justify the means.

A new rule is corporations can buy politicians.

A new rule is; convenience is more important than human life.

A new rule is that "truth" is what ever is convenient.

A new rule is poverty and hardship is good for working people.

A new rule is that "truth" is what ever is convenient.

A new rule is poverty and hardship is good for working people.

The rule that governments assure that there is justice and equity to support a quality life for people under their jurisdiction has been eliminated.

The elimination of monopolies that threaten competition is no longer a rule.

The rule that people are punished for "crimes against humanity" and "cheating people" has been eliminated.

Control of the economy has been eliminated.

The golden rule has been revised to "those who have the gold rule".

The rules that honesty and truth prevail has been removed.

It is obvious that the wealthy have managed to marginalize the working people to the point that they can no longer support the quality of our society or their lifestyles. The greedy corporations are stealing from the poor as well as the middle class.
There is a shortage of funds to opporate an efficient and equitable society and the anal retentive conservatives do not want to generate more funds to support quality societies that meet people's needs.

A new rule is "buyers beware".

A new rule is; corporations are “people” but are not responsible for their actions.

A new rule is that the profits justify the means.

A new rule is corporations can buy politicians.

A new rule is; convenience is more important than human life.

A new rule is that "truth" is what ever is convenient.

A new rule is poverty and hardship is good for working people.

The rule that governments assure that there is justice and equity to support a quality life for people under their jurisdiction has been eliminated.

The elimination of monopolies that threaten competition is no longer a rule.

The rule that people are punished for "crimes against humanity" and "cheating people" has been eliminated.

Control of the economy has been eliminated.

The golden rule has been revised to "those who have the gold rule".

The rules that honesty and truth prevail has been removed.

It is obvious that the wealthy have managed to marginalize the working people to the point that they can no longer support the quality of our society or their lifestyles. The greedy corporations are stealing from the poor as well as the middle class.
There is a shortage of funds to operate an efficient and equitable society and the anal retentive conservatives do not want to generate more funds to support quality societies that meet people's needs.

Posted by: OchamsRazor | October 18, 2010 1:59 PM | Report abuse

Most of the "rights" that gays want have to do with insurance and other financial matters such as income tax filing and medical coverage. In other words money. The adopting of children by same sex couples I still have reservations about. Not with the capabilities of same sex couples to raise children but the treatment of the child by small minded people. Kids can be cruel and so can adults. I would much rather see adoption than I would see this jumping through medical hoops to produce children when one or the other has fertility problems. A couple who love one another and want to share that love with a parentless child should be allowed to do so, whether that couple is opposite or of the same gender. Love is the common denominator.

Posted by: bobbo2 | October 18, 2010 11:18 AM | Report abuse

Reading some of the comments here, and reading the general tenor of conservatives, I wonder what religion they'll have to gravitate towards, or invent for themselves, as they drift farther from reality.

Many of them claim to be "Christians", which would be funny if it wasn't so dangerous. Just some questions for this group along the "WWJD" line...

1) How many gays would Jesus shun?
2) How much oil would Jesus hoard?
3) How many people would Jesus throw out of their homes and foreclose upon?
4) How many attack ads would Jesus buy?
5) How many people would Jesus deny coverage to?
6) How large of a bonus would Jesus pay to Wall St. execs?
7) How many Muslims would Jesus hate?
8) How many countries would Jesus bomb?

Hmmm, I'm thinking you folks might need a new Messiah, seeing as how you hate socialists and such...

Posted by: PrairieDog60 | October 18, 2010 10:41 AM | Report abuse

I would comment on this topic but yesterday, I wrote a long comment/same subject that was perfectly down-the-middle for this discussion and it was pulled by the Toles Team for review. It never saw the light of day.

Apparently when the WP and Tom don't like what you say, even when your comments are within the rules, they pull your words. I guess Conservatives on this blog don't have the same special rights as other bloggers.

Guess I shouldn't be surprised.

Posted by: pararanger22 | October 18, 2010 10:35 AM | Report abuse

JONAHandtheFISH writes
"For many sex is still a private thing."

and

"We like having all of them out of the closet so we can avoid them during social occasions."


So... which is it? Is sex a private thing, or something you're conducting during social occasions? If its a private thing, I don't understand why you're worried about someone else's private behaviors.

Posted by: bsimon1 | October 18, 2010 10:04 AM | Report abuse

sounds like 'shortsitedness' to me.

Posted by: bertzel | October 18, 2010 9:16 AM | Report abuse

Sounds like Democrats in Congress to me.

Posted by: jornolibist | October 18, 2010 8:51 AM | Report abuse

Money, Power, Control...sounds like business as usual to me.

Posted by: bertzel | October 18, 2010 8:34 AM | Report abuse

Banks don't win with foreclosures. No Bank wants to own a bunch of houses. They are in the banking business not the landlord business. People that got mortgages and got behind on the payments lose their houses. Simple. We haven't even scratched the surface of lost property tax revenue and the like.

Posted by: bobbo2 | October 18, 2010 7:12 AM | Report abuse

Nothing matters more to Conservatives than their own sensibilities. They want government off their backs AND they want government on the backs of people who behave improperly according to the lights of Conservatives. Get sick? Pay the doctor with chickens. Gay? Stop that! In trouble financially or otherwise? Pray to God. Presumably a small g government would have let Lehman Bros. and all its friends collapse thereby bringing on a Second Great Depression. Business activity is at a low ebb WITH government intervention that was too small. WITHOUT government intervention, we'd be experiencing THE END TIMES for America's economic engine and utter chaos in the streets, something that Conservatives apparently crave. Conservatives perceive that removing death panels from health insurance companies is obviously the result of a socialistic impulse, that Our Government exhibits, to run private businesses, rather than a desire to force health insurance companies to honor their promises. Saving the domestic auto industry was the opposite of a job killing procedure. Job killing is what Conservatives accuse Liberals of doing when government intervention temporarily raises the national debt. I don't see Conservatives patriotically volunteering to pay for their two fecklessly operated wars. Those wars, too, are the result of Big Government and the right wing habit of thinking that bombs and bullets aimed in the right direction will necessarily produce a better business environment for U.S. enterprises.

Posted by: BlueTwo1 | October 18, 2010 4:46 AM | Report abuse


The more I keep thinking about it, I think "What has don't ask--don't tell have to do with climate change, the 'science of evolution,' Sara Palin, or the 'party of NO?'"

Just like last week, you insist that I agree with you or risk being an obstructionist.

Whew! Just when I thought we were getting somewhere in the 2010 polls.

Posted by: quiensabe | October 17, 2010 10:46 PM | Report abuse

What's the difference between Maureen O'Dowd and Kathleen Parker? Jim Webb?

Posted by: bignoisylawnmower | October 17, 2010 10:06 PM | Report abuse

There are two types of people: those who think there are two types of people, and those who do not agree.

Posted by: GaryEMasters | October 17, 2010 9:32 PM | Report abuse

Tom homosexuality is not normal human behavior. So who is really pretending? Sex was originally intended for reproduction. People are being encouraged to accept homosexuality as something normal. If you don't accept it as normal you are referred to as homophobic. We like having all of them out of the closet so we can avoid them during social occasions. People can tell their children to avoid them also. Excuse me Tom but that is just how many people still feel about this issue. For many sex is still a private thing.

Posted by: JONAHandtheFISH | October 17, 2010 9:28 PM | Report abuse

Socialists have had a big run of everything for the last 20 months.

Posted by: bignoisylawnmower | October 17, 2010 8:28 PM | Report abuse

Toles on Facebook? Can i eliminate the Rep. comments??

Posted by: vacarollm | October 17, 2010 7:07 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company