D. Holcomb: A different wish list

In response to Nancy Willard’s letter (Nov. 29), here is my wish list:

That the Affordable Care Act didn’t cut $716 billion out of Medicare during the next 10 years.

That more people knew about the alleged voter fraud when Al Franken of Minnesota was elected to the U.S. Senate in 2008. According to an article in The Washington Examiner, a group called The Minnesota Majority claimed that 341 convicted felons illegally voted for Franken, giving him the contested election that, in turn, gave Democrats the swing vote needed in the Senate to pass ObamaCare.

That generations of youngsters had not been indoctrinated in schools to worship the Earth and to reject capitalism.

That those people who stress the separation of church and state would reveal their real agenda of taking religion out of our lives.

That President Obama would stop spending $1 trillion a year, indebting the nation's children and grandchildren.

That more people know that taxing the wealthy, which would raise $83 billion, would pay for about 8.5 days of the deficit, according to a recent Fox News Channel broadcast.

Diana Holcomb, Norway

What do you think of this story?

Login to post comments

Our policy prohibits comments that are:

  • Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
  • Excessively foul and/or vulgar
  • Inappropriately sexual
  • Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
  • Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
  • Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned from posting comments.

Advertisement

Comments

Donald Irish's picture

Wish list

Obama care won't work because of the same reason Social Security and Medicare are going bust. Everyone doesn't contribute. This includes the President, Vice-President, all members of Congress, all Federal workers, all State and City workers, which includes Policemen, Firemen, School Teachers and your town employees. If everyone paid in it might have a chance. Wouldn't it be nice if EVERYONE paid their FAIR SHARE?

Richard Begin's picture

wish list AS iF

I have been Feasting on the many postings here on this Story which ws originally advanced by Western Maine [Useful Idiot MsNancy Willard.]

Her intentions are fine and her thinking like the Party she claims to Represent are as Usual very Flawed. making them an ] Easy Target.] The usual Suspects are Rambling on about little or nothing of merit.

Mike Gravel as Usual His writing well sensibly composed and [Ronald Rimi] and L[Zack lenhert] seem to be the new Standard Bearers.

Is the [Zack Lenhert] the Poster who Professed his unbrideled support for [Maggie Mag Pie Craven] this Summer during the Campaign Season?

If I am correct then say no more.

Zack and Ronald you may take turns Wearing the Dunce Cap
You two also Qualify to be Nominated to join the[ Confederacy of Dunces] that has Recently been formed

Zack Lenhert's picture

"Is the [Zack Lenhert] the

"Is the [Zack Lenhert] the Poster who Professed his unbridled support for [Maggie Mag Pie Craven] this Summer during the Campaign Season?"

Nope... you are incorrect, never endorsed her, not 100% sure who she is to be honest. I do recognize the name though in some capacity.

... and I fixed the spelling of "unbridled" in your quote, dunce.

Got any other brilliant observations to add to the conversation? or just more personal attacks because you can't keep up with the conversation?

 's picture

My original post, this morning...(But not before Ronald)

about how deeply the letter writer had drank of the Kool-aid appears to have served it's purpose (although not in the way I thought it would).
I was, admittedly, trolling to see who I could draw into a heated argument about God, Obamacare, Left vs Right, etc, and it worked. All of you responded in pretty much the way I thought you would but without the vitriol that usually accompanies these kinds of discussions, and to be honest, it kind of caught me off guard.
Everybody played their parts, just as I anticipated, but when the opportunity arose to take personal pot-shots at each other, everyone declined.
I don't know what to attribute this to, but I'm glad it has happened. I feel that it's now safe to rejoin this forum and know that I can expect , most of the time, that people will be civil to one another in spite of their differences of opinion.
This may not seem important to any of you, but it is to me. I missed being here, but couldn't take the HATE that was spit out. Glad to see that it has simmered down to "difference of opinion" levels.
On a different note, Ms. Holcomb is wrong on so many levels. Earth worship? Separation of church and state? (Constitution anyone?), Obamacare (look at Ryan's budget), Voter fraud?(even the Republicans admitted they screwed the pooch on that one), ! trillion a year? (started before Obama, but yeah, he kept it up)and finally , taxing the rich (are you saying it's too much or not enough?)
Have a good night all. Happy Holidays, Merry Christmas, happy Hanukkah, blessed Kwanza, or whatever else your particular preferred greeting happens to be.

JOANNE MOORE's picture

What the hell is wrong with

caring about the planet we all live on? No matter what side of the political spectrum you espouse to, we all need a decent environment to live in.

No one is "indocrinated" to "worship" the earth nor to reject capitalism. I remember quite clearly the business courses we took at school and college in addition to biology and other life sciences.

No one in their right mind is trying to take away anyone's religion. Sounds like you have the Bill O'Rilley syndrom - all blather and no substance.

Merry Christmas to you and yours. And, lighten up a little, will ya?

 's picture

Oh, for heaven's sake.

It's O'Reilly. And syndrome. Try to keep up.

JOANNE MOORE's picture

Agreed.

I stand corrected. Mea culpa.

Zack Lenhert's picture

"That the Affordable Care Act

"That the Affordable Care Act didn’t cut $716 billion out of Medicare during the next 10 years." - The Paul Ryan Budget that conservatives champion has essentially THE SAME CUTS.

"a group called The Minnesota Majority claimed that 341 convicted felons illegally voted for Franken, giving him the contested election " - MinnPost: Carruthers said that 270 supposed examples of voter fraud provided by Minnesota Majority "were just not accurate." MinnPost further reported that Carruthers cast doubt on many purported examples of voter fraud provided to the county by Minnesota Majority

"That generations of youngsters had not been indoctrinated in schools to worship the Earth and to reject capitalism." - I don't even know where to start with this one. I took multiple years of economics and business classes in a state university and was never "taught to reject capitalism", quite the opposite actually.

"That those people who stress the separation of church and state would reveal their real agenda of taking religion out of our lives." - matter of opinion.... projecting motives onto to others. Maybe those people are just trying to keep other people's religion from intruding in their lives?... different points of view I suppose.

"That President Obama would stop spending $1 trillion a year, indebting the nation's children and grandchildren"... Congress approves the spending, the President can only propose and veto Congress's spending. Neither Democrats or Republicans want to see deficit continue to increase, and they're both to blame for the current crisis.... BTW, the deficit as a proportion of the overall GDP has been falling.

"That more people know that taxing the wealthy, which would raise $83 billion, would pay for about 8.5 days of the deficit" Should we tax them more? What's your point with this statement? Your letter begins with your opposition to cutting Medicare. Where do you want deficit reduction to come from?

Zack Lenhert's picture

... and not one word to

... and not one word to refute anything in my response. It's the typical tea party tactic. When they don't like the message - heck, they don't even understand the message - they shoot the messenger. (sorry - couldn't help myself... I'm acting like a teenager - very childish)

 's picture

No need to be sorry ...

... for something you obviously have no control over.

Unlike both Democrats and Republicans, the Tea Party (and I am not a member of any of those organizations) has at least proposed plans to get the budget and deficits under control. The Ds and Rs just maneuver to acquire and retain power, and couldn't care less about the economy and what's fiscally best for the country.

 's picture

Three responses before this one ...

... and not one word to refute anything in Ms. Holcomb's letter. It's the typical leftist tactic. When they don't like the message - heck, they don't even understand the message - they shoot the messenger.

Not only do they try to shoot the author, they also bark like Pavlov's dogs whenever anyone mentions FNC. They have nearly the entire rest of the "news" media, and still they can't tolerate even one dissenting outlet. They think they'll be happy if no one is allowed to speak anything but the party line, but their happiness will be short lived.

!drawroF

MARK GRAVEL's picture

The tolerant left cannot

The tolerant left cannot tolerate opposition – plain and simple truth.

JOANNE MOORE's picture

We tolerate you.

(gritting teeth)

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Oh, still have teeth? Good

Oh, still have teeth? Good for you.

RONALD RIML's picture

We merely refuse to tolerate greed and ignorance.

The two properties (pardon the pun) Republican Conservatism, as espoused by Fox & Fiends, are founded upon.

 's picture

Another typical leftist tactic.

You have nothing of your own to propose, so you have to resort to manufacturing evils in the other side. We've (gee, I sure hope I get my contractions right) seen it over and over again since the first of the year: the war on women, the war on minorities, on the middle class, on hairy old geezers in tweed caps. You have to do that because otherwise your string-pullers would have nothing to run on.

I'm surprised you didn't throw in racism to reach for a trifecta.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Who decides what is greed and

Who decides what is greed and ignorance?

Your welcome to form you own opinion. That said, to discredit data simply because the source is Fox New is closed minded and immature. Attack the data on its merits alone.

RONALD RIML's picture

You obviously decide what is 'Greed'

as you accuse me of it often enough.

And I'm so very small potatoes......

JOANNE MOORE's picture

Oh for heaven's sake!

The word "your" is a possessive pronoun. The word "you're" is a contraction for "you are".In this case I am attacking your use of grammar on its lack of merits. Carry on.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Think of it as another thing

Think of it as another thing to look forward to besides your entitlement check.

Zack Lenhert's picture

You guys are so cute.

You guys are so cute.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Careful.....You may find some

Careful.....You may find some guy asking you for your phone number.

Zack Lenhert's picture

...I'b be flattered, but

...I'b be flattered, but unfortunately for them (fortunate for me) I have a beautiful wife.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Spoken like a true man.

Spoken like a true man.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Also smart enough to know how

Also smart enough to know how to keep his familial tail out of trouble.

 's picture

I sit here , dumbfounded...

What do far right people find in the kool-aid that compels them to drink so deeply?

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Probably the same crap that's

Probably the same crap that's in yours.

Zack Lenhert's picture

one is the blue kool-aid...

one is the blue kool-aid... one is the red kool-aid. Exactly the same stuff except for a little artificial flavoring and food color.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

You're making it awfully hard

You're making it awfully hard to disagree with you.

RONALD RIML's picture

"according to a recent Fox News Channel broadcast"

Rome has spoken, eh Diana...................

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

The parrot sez, had he been

The parrot sez, had he been her adviser he would have strongly discouraged her use of that phrase, given his broad knowledge of the feeding habits of the boo birds.

RONALD RIML's picture

Do I write: According to Minnesota Senator Franken.........?

You'd skewer me in a New York minute..........

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Haha....My point, exactly.

Haha....My point, exactly.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

There you go again Ronald “I

There you go again Ronald “I hate the rich” Riml.

You cannot dispute the fact, so you criticize the messenger. That is big of you is it not?

Is the fact wrong or is it not wrong?

Zack Lenhert's picture

We can't dispute the facts

We can't dispute the facts because there aren't any in there.

"a group claimed"..."according to Fox News"..."a perceived war on religion"

How did they calculate revenue raised? Where is this group's evidence of voter fraud? I've seen different numbers than $8 Billion, but I'm sure you can do some accounting tricks to make it look like whatever you'd like.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

You are injecting misleading

You are injecting misleading information. Let me recap what is said:

“That more people know that taxing the wealthy, which would raise $83 billion, would pay for about 8.5 days of the deficit, according to a recent Fox News Channel broadcast.”

If you have seen different numbers published (BTW nowhere did you see $8B, I assume it is a typo), why don’t you say what number you saw and quote the source. You are trying to divert from the crux of the statement with a tangential comment about fox news.
Behave like adult, not like a teenager.

The numbers come from letting the Bush tax cuts expire on the wealthy. That would raise about $830Billion in revenue over a decade or about $83Billion per year.

In closing, if you are confused ask for clarification. Attacking Fox News is childish and only distracts from examining the data with your thinking cap on.

JOANNE MOORE's picture

Attacking Fox News........

..........is not childish. It is patriotic. And it's called standing up to a bunch of idiots!

RONALD RIML's picture

So rejecting Revenue is a good thing???

Take the lead and do so yourself.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Yes, rejecting revenue is a

Yes, rejecting revenue is a good thing. Why?

First, Americans are taxed enough in my opinion.

Second, raising revenue will do nothing to lower the debt as shown using simple math; moreover, the government will find ways to spend the new revenue, perhaps to pay for growing ACA costs.

In the end, the debt will continue to grow without bounds. The discussion should not be on raising taxes but rather on cutting spending.

Zack Lenhert's picture

I didn't take the time to

I didn't take the time to look it up while responding but I have provided a source in a comment below. I have seen the 1.6 trillion figure multiple times.

"Attacking Fox News is childish" Where did I attack Fox News? only said I've seen different numbers.

"Behave like adult, not like a teenager." Really? What was childish of me? Stating I've seen different numbers? Seems to me you're the one attacking me and can't handle opposing views.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Yes, Really!

“We can't dispute the facts because there aren't any in there.
"a group claimed"..."according to Fox News"..."a perceived war on religion"”

The quote has nothing to do with the topic a hand. Why present it?

Zack Lenhert's picture

You're such a moving target,

You're such a moving target, I'm not sure what the topic is anymore.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

"What was childish of me?"

"What was childish of me?"

Next time don't ask any questions if you don't want an answer - you did ask, did you not?

Zack Lenhert's picture

I'm sorry, but you were the

I'm sorry, but you were the one changing the subject by calling me childish... not me asking you to explain yourself for a personal attack. You don't respond to the substance of my comments and attempt to "discredit the source" by calling me childish and telling me to act like an adult.

Pretty obvious whose resorting to childish tactics. Try choosing more pertinent adjectives and maybe our discussions won't devolve into name calling.

JOANNE MOORE's picture

LOL

Thanks for the giggle, Zack. I needed that.

Zack Lenhert's picture

"You cannot dispute the fact,

"You cannot dispute the fact, so you criticize the messenger." Said somebody somewhere on this thread...

to which I replied "We can't dispute the facts because there aren't any in there."

"a group claimed"..."according to Fox News" these were examples from the original letter. I was trying to point out that, for example, just because a group claimed something doesn't necessarily make it a fact.

Zack Lenhert's picture

...sorry $83 Billion was the

...sorry $83 Billion was the claim, not 8. I've still seen different numbers.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

What did you see? Where did

What did you see?

Where did you see it?

Otherwise, why comment at all other than to criticize Fox News?

JOANNE MOORE's picture

What is this?

The Spanish Inquisition? (with appologies to Monty Python)

Zack Lenhert's picture

According to CNBC "The

According to CNBC "The White House is seeking $1.6 trillion in tax increases"... that's over 10 years, $160 Billion per year. Twice as much as OP claimed. http://www.cnbc.com/id/50016612

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Here is the

Here is the difference:
1. $830B is form expiration of Bush tax cuts on the wealthy.
2. $1.6T is what the Obama administration wants (i.e. SEEKS) from the wealthy, which includes additional taxes on the wealthy as well as expiration of Bush tax cuts.

Moreover, if $83B funds the government for 8.5 days, then $160B only funds the government for about 17 days. Still trivial in the bigger picture.

Thanks for your participation.

Zack Lenhert's picture

"That more people know that

"That more people know that taxing the wealthy, which would raise $83 billion, would pay for about 8.5 days of the deficit, according to a recent Fox News Channel broadcast."

No mention of letting Bush Tax expire... just "taxing the wealthy". - "$1.6T is what the Obama administration wants (i.e. SEEKS) from the wealthy"

Where was I wrong again? I only claimed I had seen differing numbers, and provided an example, not that one was right or wrong.

"$83B funds the government for 8.5 days, then $160B only funds the government for about 17 days. Still trivial in the bigger picture."

The conservatives plan reduces the deficit approximately the same as the President's. Their plan supposedly raises $800B in new revenue? Is that trivial as well? Do you want the deficit reduced or not?

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Since when is comparing two

Since when is comparing two statements calling you wrong? That behavior is a bit schizophrenic in my opinion.

The point is that $80B per year is trivial in light of a $1.3T per year deficit. Also, it is more likely that government will spend that new money on something other than the deficit.

Zack Lenhert's picture

"The point is that $80B per

"The point is that $80B per year is trivial in light of a $1.3T per year deficit. Also, it is more likely that government will spend that new money on something other than the deficit."

Well you've got to start somewhere, and $160B per year is a start. The second part of your statement is improvable because we can't read the future and if history is our guide, yes, it probably will get spent. I'm not opposed to new spending if its used to grow the economy. I'd like to see cuts in wasteful, inefficient programs and savings be invested in things like education, infrastructure, and energy research, things that return more value than is spent. You know, like Keynes. Or a business upgrading its operations to become more profitable.

I don't think you even care about reducing the deficit as much as playing sides. Any effort from democrats to reduce the budget gets labeled as "trivial" by you. Fox News, Rush, and Howie Carr (yeah I listen to them) also pounds that into listeners heads, "its a trivial amount that won't do anything to help the deficit", all. day. long. . If its so trivial, why are Republicans proposing even less revenue increases?

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Let’s explore one of your

Let’s explore one of your comments (You should interpret this sentence as a transition into a new direction.) in more detail.

“I'm not opposed to new spending if its used to grow the economy.”

Can you please explore in more detail, such as in using examples, what the government can to grow the economy?

David  Cote's picture

Ron...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't taxes raised in 1993? And didn't the economy take off after that? I used to be on the fence regarding this tax the rich mantra. These days I say let em' have it!

RONALD RIML's picture

So is it your claim that......

As surely as day follows night an economy takes off after a tax cut??

Kindly prove cause and effect - not that one merely preceded another.

David  Cote's picture

Actually, that info is

Actually, that info is courtesy of William Gale, co-director of the Tax Policy Center in regard to what effect a tax hike has on our economy in a column he interviewed for through NPR.

RONALD RIML's picture

Pardon Moi

Tax Hike - Tax Cut....

I'm on four different threads at the time and didn't transition.

RONALD RIML's picture

Name Dropper.....

Actually posting the appropriate link/s would be more effective.

Are you up to that???

Zack Lenhert's picture

You guys are both trying to

You guys are both trying to make the same point. You're on "the same side".

Advertisement

Stay informed — Get the news delivered for free in your inbox.

I'm interested in ...