I have a very difficult time believing that Fox News hired him in any capacity.
Although I think that he is one of the few honest politicians , I think that his communication skills may, in the end, serve to hurt the "liberal" cause.
Ah, there it is, that doggone Fox is one step ahead again.
Now if they had hired his wife - - - -
Yes, they are the oddest combo with the exception of maybe Casey and Jean Kasem.
I was absolutely stunned the first time that I saw her with him.
I like Dennis. Spent a lot of time in Columbus back when he was first making his local moves oin Cleveland.
Very honest, hard working etc.. You can disagree with his politics, but he is not and has not ever been bought , I believe.You surely cannot say that for many Congressmen and that is probably why he is not one anymore.
But god did not smile on him when it came to looks and style.
And to end up with a chick like that - - - -
Renewed my faith in womanhood, and I go for a walk every night, late, hoping I will be attacked and ravaged by some young lady like that.
So far, no positive results , but if Dennis can somehow get tied to something like that, there is always hope.
Never been good at the casual thing.I have been posting my route on each of the 14 floors below me - without pictures of course -without any success.
I attribute the lack of action to their fear of the ladies getting involved in a "stand your ground" thing. Dam law has side effects that those guys don't grasp. At my age I am completely unarmed in all areas.
There might be a different problem here.
From your various posts I would assume that the only reason Dennis is with that lady is that he didn't meet you first. See, you should have stayed in the midwest.
Some numbers from Harper's index that might interest you, and Canuck.
Percentage of various folks who believe in global warming: Canadians - 98%, Americans -70%, Republicans - 48% (As usual, a rather inept presentation , since the "Americans" figure does include the Rpublicans, i.e., no figure represents the belief of non Republican Americans.
Percentage of U.S. girls who are Girl Scouts - 8% - Of female Senators 70 %
Unemployment rate in Valentia , Spain - 28%. Price of a week long prostitution training course - $127. (Enough to make one want to return to teaching).
Finally, my favorite - Percentage of Republicans who believe in demonic possession - 68%.
But there is hope for us old folks: Increase since 2009 in people over the age of 55 who are working - 3,710,000 - plus, ratio of farmers age 65 and older (the most profitable trade today) to those under the age of 35 - 7:1.
My fingers are tired.
Believe it or not, I sorta like the guy. I respect him much more than our gun-grabbing president - who is now my least favorite president of all time.
I have a few very close friends who are farther left than you or base - and one thing we have realized over the last few years, is that there is much more in common with the far left, the far right and the libertarians - than all the mealy-mouthed, ruling class elitists in the middle.
At the end of the day, there isn't much difference between Obama, Bush, Romney, Bush, Clinton or any of them.
I would rather be governed by Ron and Rand Paul and Justin Amash and Bernie Sanders and Kucinich - than ANY and ALL other politicians, who seemed to be made up of the crooked and evil ruling class elite.
But, that group of elitists IS good at getting us to argue left and right - while they destroy from the middle.
Percentage of various folks who believe in global warming:
Canadians -- 98%
Sheep -- 98%
Hey, good to hear from you.
Have not been paying that much attention to the Board in the off season but, in the stuff that I did look at, I had not seen your comments ( usually pretty emphatic), and kind of missed them.
As you might guess my view on guns does not coincide with yours, but I do feel that your thoughts on politicians -both semi left and semi right - are correct. Kuchinich and Paul surely do not have views that coincide, but either would be acceptable to me.
You know from some of our past conversations that I feel that (although there are many complexities) the basic problem is that lawmakers, and others of political influence, are all bought, mostly by corporations or special interest groups.
I had said -and I still feel that way - that in the long run and without taking a considerable amount of money (Kuchinich and what they now call those getting "primaried"). It is failure on our part to use the structure of our government to exert the controls that would limit the power of special interests
The gun thing , if pursued ,could end, down the road, in a number of states seriously advocating secession. To me, the gun situation also presents an unsolvable problem.
By the way, the funny numbers I was quoting to SC from Harpers Index also had this one: Number of signatures required in a month to whitehouse.gov in order to get a response -25000. Number obtained in Texas in a week calling for Texas to secede - 100,000.
This was prior to President Obama's gun "message". I would think that secession may become a real issue as the "unsolvability" of the more devisive issues among states becomes apparent.
The only good thing that I have found about being old is that I will not see a lot of how this plays out.
Hey Sixer , are you trying to pull the wool over my eyes again?
As we used to say in the olden days , that was the point of telling a young lady that her sweater was pretty.
His second wife, Sandra Lee McCarthy, is quite attractive as well. It's not all that uncommon for a guy with a little power and a few dollars to become more attractive than his physical attributes would otherwise employ.
MrOG, run for office!
Good to hear from you. Yes, I have been very busy and dealing with a bunch of that life stuff that happens. Not been on the board too much, either.
I agree that most politicians are bought and paid for by someone - and truly rich crooks are not liberal or conservative - they are soulless sociopaths who do not have an opinion on anything.
You are correct that we differ on guns - because logically, they don't work. If Obama got ALL of his laws passed, it would not stop the nutjob in CT or anywhere. If someone is so evil that they can randomly kill innocent people (thus breaking the Murder 1 law) they are not going to pay attention to any gun laws. Can you outlaw guns? They outlawed weed back in 1937 - how did that work out? They outlawed alcohol during prohibition - how'd that work out? Like I have to remind my Christian Conservative friends when they want something immoral outlawed - "You cannot legislate morality."
The gun issue is one area that the anti-gun left is 100% wrong and statistics back it up. We need to start going after people - nutjobs, wackos and psychos - and stop blaming guns. Like Archie Bunker so wisely stated, "Would it make you feel any better little girl if dey was trown outta windows?"
"Believe it or not, I sorta like the guy. I respect him much more than our gun-grabbing president - who is now my least favorite president of all time."
Don't worry, you'll be left with plenty of guns. But I will concur that Kucinich would be significantly preferable to Obama.
"I would rather be governed by Ron and Rand Paul and Justin Amash and Bernie Sanders and Kucinich - than ANY and ALL other politicians, who seemed to be made up of the crooked and evil ruling class elite."
If you would really prefer B. Sanders or D. Kucinich to the "ruling class elite" there is hope for you yet. But to think these guys are similar (philosophically) to the Pauls or Amash, is pretty much ludicrous. Claiming the "far Right" (which like it or not includes the Libertarians) and "far Left" have any commonality beyond their distaste for that "ruling elite" is even more ludicrous.
By the way, lately, I haven't seen you around here much, I hope all is well. And yes, I mean that sincerely.
All I'm lacking there is a little power and a few dollars.
The only real qualification for politics that I have is that I could be bought - easily.
<Percentage of various folks who believe in global warming:
Which one were you again?
There is an article in the "Atlantic" this month that kind of makes the point you are making.
It is rather lengthy, but the gist of it is that there is no way we can solve the problem, by outlawing types of guns, with 300 million guns out there. He advocates having more people carrying guns.
It is a fairly well written article but , in no way do I agree with his research or conclusions. For example he points out that overall the gun murder rate is declining, then subsequently says that the fact that the murder rate stayed the same in Ohio since they permitted concealed weapons suggests that mare guns do not mean more deaths. Sounds like he didn't read the first part of what he said.
He also points out that "civilized'" countries that have stricter weapons laws have far fewer deaths from firearms, while concurrently recommending that an increase in firearms may reduce deaths. This does not seem to follow.
I know there are a number of stats posted on each side from the knowledgeable "rent a University professor" group. All are more knowledgeable about the subject than I, but I usually suspect that their point of view may be somewhat prejudiced (both sides) based on something we like to call an honorarium.
What I do know is what the article says about the number of guns is true and that there is no way folks will give them up.However I would equate efforts aimed at solving the problem by identifying people who are likely to misuse them, to the efforts by many to suggest that the income problems be addressed by closing tax loopholes. Well yes, they should be closed and yes there is a lot of money there. But no, they will not be closed - that is why they are not identified with specificity -and further, more will be opened.The suggestion is quite simply a red herring.
It is not that I am saying that some effort should not be made to identify people who should not be buying guns, it is that such an approach would only serve to underscore that "the devil is in the details". It would be impossible to get agreement on anything that would have identified many of the culprits in the recent attacks over the past five years, and it is clear that the more guns that are out there the easier it would be for such folks to get a gun by hook or crook. The idea has merit but at some level I believe it is more of an effort to deflect attention from the assault weapon issue.
Put all of that with the fact that about half of the folks in the U.S. don't care. Unsolvable problem.
<<<He also points out that "civilized'" countries that have stricter weapons laws have far fewer deaths from firearms, while concurrently recommending that an increase in firearms may reduce deaths. This does not seem to follow.>>>
Maybe having more firearms here will reduce deaths. Perhaps having stricter weapons resulting in fewer deaths, only works in civilized countries?
Now really Mr Bounce is there any evidence then even when when you and I type words we are communicating?
One would think that our rather weak attempts at humor would probably not be recognized as "within bounds"even the loosest definition of communication.
There are standards you know!