David Neamand
-
The Basics
-
David on Patch
-
More Stuff
Comments
-
On the Blog Post Fire!
-
On the Blog Post Fire!
David Neamand
11:55 am on Wednesday, April 3, 2013
Sergei / Kirk
While a lively topic for discussion, worker's rights hardly correlates to gun violence and does not appear on point to the blog discussion which is the anti gun rhetoric. Debating the number of shootings hardly helps solve the much wider issue of violence in America nor will it help with the band aid suggestions of gun control as a way of stopping the violence. Sergei, when one looks to some of the recent shootings, you can't draw the conclusion you are hoping for, and I totally disagree with your statements regarding the NRA. This organization does serve as an effective watchdog to the globalists who wish to deprive US citizens of constitutional rights. Look at this blog where the delusional author accuses all gun owners of being a murders "Hunters and “sports shooters” can have their guns. They are going to have to fill in forms, and do it more than once. Those minutes devoted to filling in forms and waiting for approval will save countless lives." This type thinking is (naturally) ridiculous as most here have pointed out, yet this self righteous author still feels she is above rational argument until thrown a bone. That being a pro unionist comment which she characterizes as a "breath of reason". Never mind totally off point, never mind many well thought out arguments or postulations presented, non fit within her thinking methodology so are summarily discounted. Since pro unionist fits into the little world of her creation, she will jump on it. -
On the Blog Post Fire!
David Neamand
9:55 am on Monday, April 1, 2013
An excellent point but I have notices in the past that she has a tendency to cherry pick that part of the constitution convenient to her way of thinking. When you read the diaries and journals of the founders and framers of the constitution (history is a hobby of mine), you will see that the direct intent is that all citizens have a right unfettered by the federal government to own weapons.
I also notice and remark that she choose Gandhi to end her argument, attempting to give credence to HER thought at the only truth.
-
On the Blog Post Fire!
David Neamand
9:19 pm on Saturday, March 30, 2013
ReplyYour idea of liability insurance has been pushed before. Do you purchase liability insurance when you purchase a knife or a hammer? How about a ticket on a jet? Why not all these things have been used to kill. No only guns because it is the easy way out. This is a much larger issue and won’t submit to a knee jerk solution. I suggest if you wish a civil discussion on this issue you first turn down the rhetoric, then perhaps some solutions can be found.
-
On the Blog Post Fire!
David Neamand
9:19 pm on Saturday, March 30, 2013
ReplyNow let’s talk about the sentiment of your post. You ask for a voice of reason, then post anything but reason, using graphic language” It is evident that you feel quite strong about this topic, yet fail to recognize that there are others who feel just as strong but fail to agree with you, so they are labeled “gun nuts” and summarily dismissed. I must remind you that you are also dealing with a difference between regulation and legislation. Also a difference between legislation and amendment. The second amendment was written to prevent government from restricting the individual ownership of firearms. The federal government can legislate that only semi-automatic firearms may be owned without severe restriction, and they do. The state government also can mandate paperwork be filled out describing the person purchasing a firearm providing proof of identity, and require submission to a background check and they do. Beyond that and you first must AMEND the constitution.
Now I want to talk about your equating every gun owner as a potential killer of their wife friend or family member. A spurious argument. I won’t bore you with the facts, since you apparently aren’t interested in them, as a gun owner, I take extreme exception of your characterization and that of my son, and daughter. All own firearms, all are proficient, and while I can speak for myself only, the only time I would or could be labeled a killer were if my home or my family were threatened.
-
On the Blog Post Fire!
David Neamand
9:18 pm on Saturday, March 30, 2013
ReplyAnn
I just read your post, and felt compelled to answer some of your comments so took time from this beautiful spring day to write down a few items. First, Your alliteration of blasting a pig apart was uncalled for and certainly nothing but inflammatory. Why anyone would want to do such a thing is beyond me. I can see hunting wild boar for table fair in which case you would certainly use a weapon that wouldn’t blast it apart. You also circled back to the alliteration again, perhaps you are aiming a barb at someone?Once again in this post you use a youth metaphor “The utterly ridiculous posturing of three young Republicans”, forget your comment about “ridiculous”, I could use the same language about your post “the ridiculous senile ranting of…” Achieves nothing but belittlement. In a civil discussion we attempt to present facts not belittle. You also say three but only mention two names, guess we will have to be kept in the dark on the third huh? You used this meteor “young republicans” in a prior post on Paul Ryan which I comment on. When was 42 and 43 considered young? Or you just making a crude attempt to once again belittle? I wonder if you referred to Bill Clinton as the “young Bill Clinton” when he took office.
MORE IS AN ADDITIONAL POST -
On the Blog Post Ryanethics
David Neamand
5:09 pm on Friday, March 22, 2013
ReplyFarther comment on your post
Comments regarding the gallop pole Why if you are so concerned with feeding the poor didn't you decry the waste of $450,000,000 to Egypt this year, last year it was over $1,000,000,000. All this to a country controlled by the Muslim brotherhood, an organization dedicated to the total destruction of Israel and the USA? That money could have fed a lot of our own poor right here in this country couldn't it?As to Obamacare, consider this study done by the CBO which states that "Obamacare is going to be more expensive than the Obama administration thought, disrupt the marketplace more than it thought, and be tougher to implement than it thought." For the entire article here is the link
http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2013/02/11/cbo-skeptical-about-obamacareMany of the programs eliminated are wasteful needless and redundant. The CBO identified
You are incorrect as his budget does nothing to Social Security. The Pell system isn't eliminated but rather the standards for obtaining a grant would be tightened. As far as student loans, again the standards would be greatly tightened. If you are unaware the student loan program is a financial ticking time bomb see:
http://thebottomline.as.ucsb.edu/2013/01/washington-begins-to-tackle-student-loan-issues
Our run away spending and borrowing has to stop. The country can not afford to be paying billions and billions in interest payments to China and others while our poor suffer -
On the Blog Post Ryanethics
David Neamand
4:46 pm on Friday, March 22, 2013
ReplyAnn,
This blog appears to contain all the talking points that the left usually uses when looking at the proposed Budget brought forth by the house. I wonder if you have read it? By your comments it looks doubtful, but rather cherry picked points. First you start with the young Paul Ryan. I didn't realize that 43 was considered young. Did you refer to former president Bill Clinton as "the Young Bill Clinton" when he took the office of president? He was only 45 at the time.Your first paragraph then proceeds in gross generalities to state that Rep. Ryan has little care for the poor and the sick. I have read the house's proposed budget which contains the Ryan proposals to balance the federal books. There are cuts and changes to health care. Thank goodness he also proposes to repeal Obamacare. I know my personal healthcare plan has gone up almost 40% in the last couple years, and I can't believe that it is just coincidence that the huge jumps in premium correspond to the passing of Obamacare. Medicare needs to be examined and redesigned if it is to provide for seniors in the future. I approve of the voucher system for those born after 1957.
I have much much more to day, and will have to state it in subsequent posts
-
On the Blog Post Changing Your Spots
David Neamand
10:12 am on Tuesday, February 12, 2013
ReplyAnn,
An interesting blog. I had to read it several times to get what you are trying to say. One correction, our form of government - we were set up as a republic, not a representative democracy. Thank you Thomas Jefferson! It is up for argumentation if we still have a republic. I personally believe we do not.
A few other observations - I agree with you about labels. I call them boxes. Something that conforms to the following... I also agree with you about news, personally I prefer AP raw as a news source. I must admit that occasionally I will watch Bill O'Reilly for news/entertainment. I agree as well about your issue regarding verification, but there you must be careful where you verify. You look long enough and you can always get corroboration of a story even is it is false.
Gerrymandering - is a dirty little game that has been played since this country has been formed. The last 2 were republican controlled within this state, prior years been used just as viciously by democrats.
As to our two party system, both parties have been hijacked by the radicals. Perhaps it is time for a third party in this country, one based on moderation rather then extremism.
I also agree with you that the where do we go from here scenario is a difficult one in this country. First the finger pointing and blame game must stop. Any public official who finger points or attempts to place blame is part of the problem and not part of the solution. -
On the article Gas Tax Would be Passed on to Motorists, Economist Says
David Neamand
3:40 pm on Monday, February 11, 2013
ReplyWith Gas at over $3.65 a gallon how could an additional tax on gas even be considered? I agree our roads need to be fixed, however not at over $4.00 a gallon, surely there must be a better solution
David Neamand
12:02 pm on Wednesday, April 3, 2013
Sergei, While an interesting theory, it isn't on point to this discussion. Can we leave this issue to some other thread?