Burch: Independence Day madness

Thursday, July 5, 2012 at 10:05pm
By Michael R. Burch

The birth pangs of Tennessee and the United States were virtually simultaneous. In 1775, working for the Transylvania Company, Daniel Boone and a group of 30 axmen hacked out a trail called the Wilderness Road across the Cumberland Gap, opening up the western land for settlement. So when the United States was formally created on July 4, 1776, the path had been blazed for approximately 300,000 settlers to enter the new territory over the next 30 years.

Many of the early settlers came to Tennessee seeking freedom. They fought for independence from King George III, who was called a despot by some of the founding fathers and mad by others.

Tennessee earned the nickname “Volunteer State” after hundreds of Tennessee militiamen helped turn the tide of the Revolutionary War at the 1780 Battle of King’s Mountain. After the war, more than 2,200 veterans elected to settle in Tennessee, which became the first federal territory to be admitted to the Union, in 1796. During the Civil War, Tennessee once again lived up to its nickname, furnishing more soldiers for the Confederate army than any other state, and more soldiers for the Union army than any other Southern state.

Today most Tennesseans claim to be free as they celebrate Independence Day, but I have my reservations. Did we escape the clutches of mad King George, only to bow down to other irrational tyrants, such as:

King Romney the Elect. All indications are that if Mitt Romney is elected president, he will do everything in his child-of-privilege power to favor the 1 percent over the 99 percent, leaving millions of elderly, poor and disadvantaged Americans with hastily shredded safety nets.

King Pain. It also seems likely that Republicans in their current lost-marble madness will try to junk the Affordable Care Act without bothering to provide real-world solutions. To these self-professed Christians, helping the sick, elderly and poor is “socialism,” even though that’s exactly what Jesus Christ spent most of his time doing, asking nothing in return.

King War. If Israel attacks Iran, the U.S. could end up fighting its third major war in a decade. But we are already drowning in debt, much of it due to unfunded war spending. Even if the new war goes well, which seems unlikely, our country might go bankrupt before it’s over.

King Oil. Depending on oil for energy makes war more likely, because the lowest-cost oil is in the Middle East. But even if we can purchase enough oil peacefully at reasonable prices, the real cost remains far too high because polar ice caps and glaciers are melting at a rapid pace. Rising sea levels appear to be indisputable proof that the overall temperature of the earth is increasing. But American politicians — especially Republicans — seem to be impervious to scientific facts and reason.

King Ignorance. We the people have no one to blame but ourselves. We willingly believe lies, such as the one about 9/11 being the result of Muslims hating our lifestyles and values, when in reality the terrorists who were captured clearly said that the attacks were due to the injustices of Israel and the U.S. in the Middle East. Thus, we seem doomed to fight unnecessary, unwinnable wars, rather than simply ending the injustices that cause other people to attack us.

King Kong. The biggest brute on the block is our gargantuan government, which consumes a large percentage of everything we make, wastes mega-billions, and still manages to run up humongous debts. And this King Kong obviously believes that bigger is better, as it constantly sucks up to Big Oil, Big Banks, Big Business, and anyone else with Big Bucks. Republicans who claim they want “smaller government” cannot be believed, because their warmongering puts more power in our bloated federal government’s hands. There is only one true conservative left in the GOP: Ron Paul, a lone voice crying in the wilderness that wars and excessive military spending are bankrupting our nation.

How long can Americans afford to serve so many insane masters? How can we end this Independence Day madness? I believe the path back to sanity is to vote the Republican lackeys of the super-rich out of office, then put pressure on Democrats to end the wars and force the government to start living within the American taxpayers’ means.

Michael R. Burch is a Nashville-based editor and publisher of Holocaust poetry and other “things literary” at www.thehypertexts.com.

Filed under: City Voices
Tagged: Michael Burch

136 Comments on this post:

By: Mike Burch on 7/6/12 at 8:52


President Obama and the majority of House Democrats opposed the invasion of Iraq. If we had not invaded Iraq, the price of oil would not have skyrocketed, causing a ten-year global recession. We would have spent trillions less on the war, and we would have billions more in tax revenues. So don't blame Obama for the mess. Blame the Republicans, since they demanded the war.


By: Mike Burch on 7/6/12 at 8:57


Yes, I think the Republicans are creating a class divide, by always favoring the 1% over the 99%. The super-rich are getting richer, and the 99% are getting poorer. The result is very much like the feudal system of mad King George, which the founding fathers risked their lives to escape.

I think it is only the ignorance of the American public that keeps us in chains of serfdom. The solution is simple: stop voting for Republicans, give the Democrats the majority, then hold them accountable for implementing a more just and equitable system.


By: Captain Nemo on 7/6/12 at 8:58

The worst thing a politician can do to get voted out is to tell the truth. We don’t have any Statesman leading the country anymore. We have someone who is afraid of being voted out of office.

Saying that I will continue to vote Democratic over a Republican not because they are better, but because the Republican are the worst. They have been corrupted by defecting Democraps running from the segregation moment of the 50’s. Now the Neo-Nazis, KKK and Tea Bags have infected the GOP, I believe beyond repair.

By: Mike Burch on 7/6/12 at 8:59


I agree. Everyone should read the Vanity Fair article about Romney's offshore tax shelters. And I have written an article that explains why a $101 million series of tax shelters probably reduces Romney's tax rate from 14% to 7%, here:



By: Mike Burch on 7/6/12 at 9:02


I agree. Millions of Americans seem to be willing to cut off their noses to spite their faces. Prejudice over President Obama's skin color and odd-sounding name causes them to vote in favor of the 1%, who will laugh to the bank while the 99% work harder and harder and become poorer and poorer. Many Americans are so ignorant, they can't see that their votes have turned them into serfs, and that they are no longer free and equal.


By: gdiafante on 7/6/12 at 9:07

With each mention of class, I cringe. That's why the Dems have a hard time, they don't get their message across as well as Republicans.

We should have equality of opportunity. Social equality is unobtainable, and, IMO, incompatible with a Republic form of government.

There will always be rich, there will always be poor. But what drove America to greatness was a thriving middle class. I'm not sure that either party give a damn about them.

By: Mike Burch on 7/6/12 at 9:09


I think it is quite possible that we will end up at war with Iran. If so, it won't be because of President Obama, who prefers to use diplomacy. It will be because "conservative Christians" demand that the US always support Israel, even when Israel uses our money and weapons to steal land and water from Palestinians, which led to 911 and two trillion-dollar wars that resolved nothing. A third war with Iran will also resolve nothing. Israeli intelligence has gone public, with former heads of the Mossad and Shin Bet saying that Iran's leaders are rational, and Israel's aren't.

But our own war hawks are just as mad, and the only men willing to stand up to them -- President Obama and Ron Paul -- are ridiculed when they suggest saving money and lives, and using diplomacy instead.


By: BenDover on 7/6/12 at 9:13

Burch your paradigm is flawed in that you see government as the means to an end of charity.

Charity is an individual responsibility. Vesting such power in the hands of a central government does not foresee the inevitable consequence of that power being wielded by a central planner unwilling to give up on his ideal.

You use the Christian ideal to justify your position but you forget that stealing and covetousness (a necessity of the aims to empower government) are on the top 10 list right up there with murder, adultery and idol worshiping.

And which party do you advance? Which presidential candidate do you support? Well they are the ones who encourage covetousness and have no problem with taking the earnings of others at the muzzle of a gun in order to buy favor with their political constituency.

You try to use fragments of a philosophy and social order with which you wholly disagree (and demonstrably misunderstand) to make a case for your Pollyannish political wet-dream of a society run by egg-heads who know better for every individual than the individuals know for themselves.

Why don't you balance some of your study of Marxs, Keynes and Krugman with some Locke, Hayek and Hazlitt? You might soon discover as I did that your bigh hearted cure is the cause of much misery in the people you purport to wish to help.

By: Mike Burch on 7/6/12 at 9:15


You said, "BTW, Romney will be visiting Israel in September...he's been there at least 11 times before...the devout Mormon Jewannabe will don the required yarmulke and he will pray at the Wailing Wall...he'll shove a prayer note into a crevice in the Wall...then he will be briefed by Israel's top guns...Romney already brags about getting daily briefings from the Israelis....he's working behind the back of a sitting POTUS...isn't that treasonous?"

Yes, I think it is treason, or bordering on treason, for American politicians to put the interests of Israel above those of Americans, especially when that has led to two wars, and now seems likely to lead to a third. And Romney is not the only lackey of Israel. In his book "The Great War for Civilisation," Richard Fisk described the elder Bush flying over Israel in Ariel Sharon's helicopter, weeping and pledging eternal fealty to Israel. His son was a "true believer" who never stood up to Israel. When President Obama tried to stop the expansion of Jewish settlements in the West Bank, he had no support in Congress, the media, or from the American public, so he could do little to stop the madness, but at least he tried. Then he was called a Muslim, a terrorist, the anti-Christ, etc.

No wonder we leap from war to war in the Middle East.


By: Captain Nemo on 7/6/12 at 9:17

Mike, how many of the so called War Hawks are just Chicken Hawks, wanting us to go to war? Will the American public go for a war so close to the last two wars?

By: gdiafante on 7/6/12 at 9:18

Ben, without covetousness, our economy would tank (even more than it already has). It is the engine that drives consumerism. That seems to indicate that our entire way of life is against God's will. How do you reconcile that?

And the anology of robbing at the point of a gun is so overused it's borderline ridiculous.

By: BenDover on 7/6/12 at 9:36

You can want increasing comfort and security without maligning others who already have it gd. As for the muzzle of a gun, I found Burch's work today to be inspiring so I chose an accurate and powerful metaphor about what happens to people who refuse to engage in a monetized slavery to support a favored political group... and then, in turn, refuse to be arrested for it.

By: Captain Nemo on 7/6/12 at 9:43

I get it; it is ok to rob at gun point as long as you are pointing the gun. It is bad if you are facing the business end of the gun. Thanks for the tip Ben. ;-)

By: gdiafante on 7/6/12 at 9:43

Right...the greed that spurs consumerism is only to obtain comfort and security...that 55" LED comforts me so much I think an 80" would solve all my problems...lol

Again, the class BS is cringeworthy and sidesteps the issue. But, just to humor you, how is maligning the "have-not's" as lazy, welfare-seeking losers any different?

That's rhetorical, by the way. This is a prime example of the hypocrisy I mentioned earlier.

By: yogiman on 7/6/12 at 9:52

So, Mike, are you saying there is no multimillionaire Democrats? Can you name one Democrat in Congress that isn't worth that $250,000 number that's been posted so much?

By: BenDover on 7/6/12 at 9:57

Well gd wealth redistribution via the tax code does not discriminate based on any factor other than one person has and another does not. I have on numerous occasions said that a social safety net is beneficial to society to give a hand-up to people in a time of need; but to arbitrarily take from one person to provide for another just because one has and another does not is a very dangerous proposition.

I believe the market to be a fairer arbiter and one that doesn't involve men with guns taking honest earnings to buy favor with people purposely conditioned to see no harm in the violation.

There are exceptions but in my experience it is the people who work hard, who postpone gratification and who play by the rules that are the ones who are most often punished to support people who made the opposite life choices and this is a system that encourages itself by upsetting the work/reward cycle.

I sometimes think you guys don't actually know any poor people.

By: Mike Burch on 7/6/12 at 10:00


You said, "Saying that I will continue to vote Democratic over a Republican not because they are better, but because the Republican are the worst. They have been corrupted by defecting Democraps running from the segregation moment of the 50’s. Now the Neo-Nazis, KKK and Tea Bags have infected the GOP, I believe beyond repair."

I agree. The Democrats are far from perfect. But the GOP has gone literally insane. Anyone voting for Republicans is just as nutty, in my opinion. Right now we have little choice, but to vote for Democrats, then put pressure on them to create a more just, equitable system that doesn't turn the working class into indentured serfs.


By: yogiman on 7/6/12 at 10:05


I believe the one thing we all agree on: Race should not be a factor on anyone whether they're running for office or working in a factory. But the race issue is constantly coming to the front on this site.

I'm accused of be a racist (and you don't know me personally) because of my objections to Barack Obama's place in office because of his illegality. But the only thing I have "read" about those voting for him is because it was placing him in office as our first black president.

If not because of race, why did you vote for him when he wouldn't even identify himself?

By: gdiafante on 7/6/12 at 10:07

You don't even realize the inconsistencies of your statements. You believe there should be a safety net but that no one should pay for it, especially those that can afford to.

You believe the market is fair and doesn't involve "men with guns"...maybe you don't remember 2005-2009...lol

And let's get the prize winner....

I'm right because I know poor people lol

My goodness...thanks for the laugh.

By: Mike Burch on 7/6/12 at 10:08


We can debate the ethics of "taking from the rich and giving to the poor from now till Doomsday," but that isn't the main issue. The main issue is clear and indisputable: the transfer of most of the nation's wealth into the hands of the richest 1%. This leaves MOST working people in the US at a huge disadvantage, even if they only work their asses off and have never taken a penny in entitlements.

The biggest problems the Republicans present are:

Shielding the richest Americans from paying their fair share of taxes, which means everyone else works harder and has less to show for it.

Using war to force other nations to do the bidding of rich Americans, particularly over oil, but also to prop up unjust allies of the US, such as Israel, Egypt, pre-war Iraq, etc. This has cost American taxpayers trillions of dollars and has cost untold numbers of lives, American and Muslim.

Destroying the environment by ignoring scientific facts, such as rising sea levels.

There are many other problems caused primarily by Republicans, but these three threaten our very existence. Charity is only a small part of the puzzle. A far bigger problem is what happens to us, when we can no longer work, after we worked our asses off all our lives. It seems to me that the super-rich and their political lackeys the Republicans will be more than happy to let us rot, or die, after we paid the taxes they shirked.

By: Mike Burch on 7/6/12 at 10:12


I voted for Barack Obama because I am not foolish enough to commit hari kari by voting for Republicans. I would vote for any decent Kenyan, or any decent Martian, before I would vote for someone like Romney, who is willing to see 99% of Americans rot or die, while always favoring the 1%. And he will no doubt have us in a third war, against Iran, for the sake of his rich buddy, Bibi Netanyahu, who keeps Palestinians in chains while stealing their ever-dwindling land and water.

If you want to bankrupt our nation and destroy the world, vote for Romney.


By: Mike Burch on 7/6/12 at 10:14


I agree with you, but I hope that in the coming elections enough Americans will open their eyes and use their brains to start booting Republicans from the halls of power. If we do that, we still have a chance to create a better nation and a better world for our children and grandchildren.


By: gdiafante on 7/6/12 at 10:15

You make a good point, Mike. The facts are:

The middle class has lost 40% of their wealth to the 1%. That isn't hyperbole, it's fact.


The recession caused the greatest upheaval among the middle class. Only roughly half of middle­-class Americans remained on the same economic rung during the downturn, the Fed found. Their median net worth — the value of assets such as homes, automobiles and stocks minus any debt — suffered the biggest drops. By contrast, the wealthiest families’ median net worth rose slightly.

So, Ben, if you truly detest the transfer of wealth, why is it that you're ok with this trend? Who's getting robbed?

By: yogiman on 7/6/12 at 10:23

I hate to tell you, Mike, but there is as many "nuts" voting for the Democrats as there is "nuts" voting for the Republicans.

Honestly, except for their spelling, can you tell any difference between those two parties today?

By: yogiman on 7/6/12 at 10:31


Since this country is deeper into debt after 3 1/2 years under Obama than all presidents before him combined, he's pulling us out of debt?

And to state you would vote for anyone regardless of their legality gives a strong view of your ignorance to what the Constitution means. With your frame of mind, it's no more than a packet of toilet paper.

By: BenDover on 7/6/12 at 10:32

What you don't seem to understand Burch is that your cure is the cause. All of your attempts at direct redistribution are the reason for the increasing gaps between rich and poor.

Minimum wage, unnecessary labor laws, regulatory compliance issues, health care, et al are why I and others like me make a fortune building software systems and machines to minimize labor costs.

You toss around 1% and 'fair share' when the people you target are already shouldering the largest part of the burden and the people you support are paying almost nothing.

You clamor for a system of higher taxes on the wealthy when it's their discretionary spending that makes or breaks our economy. The reason the economy is in the crapper is that business owners and medium to high income families are scared shitless because Obama and Co have painted great big targets on their backs and are acting in ways that will affect their long-term security. Combined with the absolute chaos of health care reform, financial reform, labor enforcement, tax and regulatory changes and it's amazing we're not in a full blown depression right now.

Do you not see that punishing success and rewarding failure is a recipe for economic collapse?

Half the 2nd income in two earner professional households now already goes to taxes in one form or another. Do you really want to continue to create obstacles and disincentive that will push that second earner into playing defense rather than offense with the family income. Many people would rather stay home than work anyway and you propose to offer even more financial justification? Who wins when that happens?

You may not like those high income households and feel they need to be brought down a notch or two to benefit the poor but it's their discretionary spending upon which our whole service economy depends? What if they succumb to the pressure you are imposing and simply check out? What if they decide the sh*t to net income ratio of working is too high and it makes more sense to conserve than spend?

This is the delicate balance we walk in society because the idiot policy makers have made our revenue so dependent on a minority tax base than can choose whether or not it wishes to participate any more.

By: gdiafante on 7/6/12 at 10:36

You clamor for a system of higher taxes on the wealthy when it's their discretionary spending that makes or breaks our economy.

That's flat out wrong. I'll chalk up your complete lack of truth on the fact that you're basically presenting your self-interests...you benefit from the tax cuts, so you don't want them to go away. Although the threat you issue sounds more like a child throwing a tantrum than sound economics.

If I don't keep my tax breaks I'm taking my ball and going home.

At least you have a home. The poor bastard that made the ball can't say the same.

By: gdiafante on 7/6/12 at 10:39

What if they decide the sh*t to net income ratio of working is too high and it makes more sense to conserve than spend?

You do realize that is what the rest of us have been forced to do...that sound you hear is the worlds tiniest violin...

Welcome to the party, pal!

By: BenDover on 7/6/12 at 10:49

Sorry to break it to you guys but the people who are paying the biggest share of taxes work at their own discretion and are motivated by their net incomes.

Many two earner professional households in which income inflation pushed them into the punitive tax brackets now weigh whether it makes sense to continue to spend 1/2 their day working for uncle sam or spend their whole day with the kids.

The super high incomes of executive professionals and high-demand tech workers are even more inflated because the labor market is driven by net income not gross income and increased taxation creates greater discrepancy between the top and the bottom.

Wake up children... there is no Santa Claus and your top down planned, egg-head, Harvard teacher lounge economy simply doesn't work. And it hurts the people at the bottom the worst.

By: brrrrk on 7/6/12 at 11:00

Rasputin72 said

"Burch, you are correct in one thing there are so many "Kings" pulling and tugging on the fabric of the United States that a day of reckoning is coming.

The "Kings" that I abhor are King Underclass,King Free Stuff,King Entitlement and King Class Envy and King Wall Street Slut."

In other words, let them eat shit.....

By: bfra on 7/6/12 at 11:09

Rasputin72 sounds like NewYorker1 using a different user name.

By: brrrrk on 7/6/12 at 11:12

It appears that Ben has to say what he says to justify his own worldview. The fact is that the number one indicator of ones success in this country is not intelligence, not ability, not willingness to work and work hard, but the wealth of ones parents. If this isn't an indicator of what Jefferson called the "monied aristocracy", I don't know what is. Rasputin is right in one regard, there is a day of reckoning coming.....

By: brrrrk on 7/6/12 at 11:16

bfra said

"Rasputin72 sounds like NewYorker1 using a different user name."

Speaking of users we haven't heard from lately, I wonder what rock serr8d has crawled under. Maybe he couldn't handle to confrontation here.... or got kicked out of his parents basement.

By: BenDover on 7/6/12 at 11:17

That's not true, brrrk. I've often said that the income tax should be replaced by an inheritance tax.

By: Rasputin72 on 7/6/12 at 11:38

Brrrk........I think you summed it up pretty well with your 12:00 post. Being the humantarian that I am I would offer one other alternative to the "eat shit" approach. How about "Get a Job"

By: Ummm... on 7/6/12 at 11:54

Brrrrk, maybe if you get a job (jk- I'm sure you have one already), Rasputin will get a conscience. I know, "don't hold your breath," etc....

By: yogiman on 7/6/12 at 12:08

There are people who worrying now about the possibility of losing their job. They simply want to work for their living. But there are others that wouldn't go to work if they were offered good pay. Why? Because it's so easy for them to collect welfare.

During the depression of the late 20s and 30s, jobs were created for a man to work to earn his money. The only ones that didn't have to work to get "handouts" were people who were unable.

How many of your remember the "specialty" job of leaning on the shovel?

By: brrrrk on 7/6/12 at 12:45

Ummm... said

"Brrrrk, maybe if you get a job (jk- I'm sure you have one already), Rasputin will get a conscience. I know, "don't hold your breath," etc...."

You're right, I have a job.... pretty good one at that. I don't have any issues paying a little more in taxes so as to give others the opportunity to achieve. Contrary to what Rasp and others believe about me, I do believe in investments, but I believe in investing in people as well as in businesses. And also unlike Rasp and the rest of his ilk, I don't see life as a zero-sum game. Don't get me wrong, I'm no saint. I'd like a little more in my pocket at the end of the day just like everyone else.... but on the other hand, I don't believe that it's necessary to step on others to get there, nor that it is necessary to have a society where the least of us must suffer so that others may benefit. Frankly I find that to be the lazy way to make gains in ones life. But unfortunately we live in an environment where destruction and absorption are preferred to real competition.

By: Loner on 7/6/12 at 12:50

Thank you, Mike Burch fpr the personal reply. We seem to be in general agreement on the US-Israel "special relationship".....it sucks.

By: Loner on 7/6/12 at 1:18

Ben Dover wants to return to the days of yesteryear......to the good old days...when the Christian churches handled the social welfare duties in society.

Ben wants to return to the days of Charles Dickens....when Scrooge exploited Tiny Tim's dad...and Tiny Tim got nothing from the government simply because he was a handicapped youngster in a very poor household....and the Christian holymen of the day were busy building cathedrals to give a shit about Tiny Tim's family.

We tried the charity & alms approach to social welfare...it failed miserably....but Ben Dover and the right-wing Christians out there want to return to the failed model.


I think that those who think along the lines of Ben, Rasp, Govseptic, Yogi, Budlight etc. know damn well that secular government does a much better job of protecting the most vulnerable members of society than the churches ever did....these right-wingers just want to avoid paying taxes and they don't give a shit about the Tiny Tim family and the millions of others who are destitute and desperate. "Screw 'em!"

Folks like Ben et al. are not their brother's keeper....they feel like they are the helpless victims of state-sponsored larceny.....so they loathe the federal government, the New Deal, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, "Obamacare", Food Stamps, Unemployment Insurance, Minimum Wage Laws and all manner of federal and state welfare programs.

Hopefully, those who wish to return to Dickensian Times are a tiny minority in America today.

By: yogiman on 7/6/12 at 1:37

You can only speak for yourself, Loner. You don't even know the people on this site you're bitching about.

I know who I am, and I know how I think, as do all others, so don't quote what kind of people you can only think we might be.

You're brain doesn't have enough knowledge in it to know what you think.

By: BenDover on 7/6/12 at 1:53

Them's bold words in defense of a social safety net where obesity is a leading indicator of poverty loner.

A more accurate picture would be that individual liberty and the free market, to the degree it has been released in America, has until recently outproduced the excesses of government 'charitably' and its negative effect on society as a discouragement to production.

We underwrite the defense of our western European allies who instead chose the labor and social welfare path Burch would lead us down and who are suffering bankruptcy because of it. As do we underwrite the whole price controlled world with our medical markets that encourage development of all those whiz-bang drugs and procedures we are all so dependent upon... this in addition to all of the direct aid.

Tiny Tim, Loner? Best of times, and worst of times too, I guess... The richest society of all human history where even the most lowly among us live better than kings 100 years ago; yet we're all queued up for another French revolution, I guess; and it's Loner who lights the fuse. Letting them eat cake is not enough it seems as loner won't be happy until every man of relative wealth is reduced to a least common denominator of poverty and pittance.

By: dargent7 on 7/6/12 at 1:58

It's already 102 deg outside, so I can only talk for a second....
Yep, Al Gore is sure full of shit with his 'Global Warming" hoax......The guy's obviously nuts. Like Galelio was in 1500 saying the earth revolved around the Sun.
My personal answer to things is this : education.
Read, re-read, and re-read some more.
If Romney's dad was born in Mexico, as was his father, it's of no consequence, since "Mitty" was born on American soil. If you categorize Detroit as American soil.
So, these idiotic 'Birther's" who talk about name changes, college transcripts, birth certs., "naturalized parents" is all horse shit. "Born in America" is all that counts as eligibility for becoming president of the USA. Not that any sane person would want the job. Except for free air travel, meals, room and board, and your face on a $3. dollar bill.
I, quite frankly, don't remember where I was born.
But who, would say they were born in Detroit, if they weren't?

By: yogiman on 7/6/12 at 2:14

Damn, I just read where the restaurant owner in Ohio where he ate breakfast this morning has died from a heart attack.

I hope he don't come to my house wanting something to eat. I'll refuse to feed him.

By: brrrrk on 7/6/12 at 2:16

BenDover said

"Them's bold words in defense of a social safety net where obesity is a leading indicator of poverty loner."

This statement alone show's your ignorance regarding obesity and poverty. The fact is that processed and fast foods are not only cheaper than eating healthy, but in many poor communities there aren't any reasonable alternatives. Do yourself a favor and look up "food deserts". Add to that the fact that many of the poor don't have a truly easy means of transportation to get to a location where they can get healthy food. You are in a bubble Ben, that's obvious.

By: BenDover on 7/6/12 at 2:25

You are in a spin bubble brrrrk.

People eat junk food because it tastes good.

Poor people are more apt to have a lack of self control with respect to food as well as just about everything else in their lives.

I've always been one of the 'two marshmallows later rather than one right now' kind of guys... I'm willing to put off immediate gratification to serve the larger goals... and I've usually had something productive to do with my time rather than just eat.

Your 'food desert' thesis is just another rationalization in support of a liberal ideal. If there was a demand for healthy foods in those markets someone would answer it... and you know deep down that this is true.

By: Rasputin72 on 7/6/12 at 2:27

LONER.......You make a statement based on your view of the world just as I do, As a matter of fact this little board and the 17 to 20 people who comment have given me the answer as to why Obama will be re-elected easily.

There are just too many people in this country who are living on $50,000 dollars a year and less. But they view the TV and magazine and media ads for items that cost more than their gross income. (watches,rings,cars,vacations and etc.)

Obviously they want those things and since they cannot have them flail out to the world and the government for more help. "Free stuff" as I call it. Then there are people in that bracket who are even bright like yourself that succumb to the "wail of the sirens."

In your case you call out that I do not want to pay my taxes. You could not be further from the truth if you were a "Christian" or Hindu or Budda. I probably have paid more in income tax in my lifetime than the entire 17 to 20 people on this message board. In fact I may have paid more in federal income taxes than the gross income of all of these 17 or 20 people.

I do not mind paying taxes. The only thing I ask is that I only pay my share and not the share of myself and the 47% who pay no federal income tax.

That is the view from my world.

By: yogiman on 7/6/12 at 2:28


If you only have to be born on American soil to be qualified to become president would mean any of these women coming into the US illegally to have a baby to qualify that baby for future handouts, then takes that baby back to her native country; when that baby turned 35 years old it could come back "home" and run for the president's office even though it couldn't speak the language.

Have you read the SCOTUS decision in the Minor v. Happersett in 1875 where they stipulated she was a natural born citizen because both of her parents were American citizens?

When did they make the change anyone born in the US with a foreign father could become president?

That is with the exception of the children of foreign ambassadors.

By: brrrrk on 7/6/12 at 2:43

BenDover said

"Poor people are more apt to have a lack of self control with respect to food as well as just about everything else in their lives."

And there you go...... the poor are just naturally inferior and the wealthy are just naturally superior. It has to be that way. If not the poor wouldn't be poor and the rich wouldn't be rich. Everything else is irrelevant. Mighty are the Bens of the world.

By: Rasputin72 on 7/6/12 at 2:49

brrrk........WE all have opinions,you,BENDOVER and myself included. I have a theory that if you took all the money in the United States and divided it equally among every 21 to 50 year old person that within 25 years the money would be back in the hands of 85% of the people who originally had it before.