Library commendation
I would like to commend the BDN for its placement of the story about the awards given to Maine libraries, which appeared on the front page of the State section of the paper on Monday. I would like to further point out that the Southwest Harbor Public Library received an overall five-star rating from Library Journal, the only one to be selected last year for this distinction and one we share with two other libraries this year.
We celebrate the success of all of our sister libraries but would like to single out library director Candy Emlen, her talented and dedicated staff and the small army of volunteers who keep our library at the heart of our island community.
Patsy Fogarty
Chairwoman, Southwest Harbor Library trustees
Southwest Harbor
Auction success
The Merrymeeting Conservation and Education Alliance would like to sincerely thank the community for the fantastic success of the first annual online auction. One hundred sixty-four items were auctioned off and more than $24,000 was raised for the three partnering conservation organizations — the Brunswick-Topsham Land Trust, the Cathance River Education Alliance and the Kennebec Estuary Land Trust — to conserve land and to conduct nature-based education programs in the Merrymeeting Bay region.
We greatly appreciate the resounding support from the businesses and individuals who donated and solicited items to this year’s auction, and we are already looking forward to next year.
Carrie Kinne
Bath
Continue labor merger
In an OpEd on Nov. 26, “ Maine workers and employers deserve more attention,” Democratic state Reps. Terry Hayes and Paul Gilbert advocated splitting up the Legislature’s Labor, Commerce, Research and Economic Development Committee and creating a committee focused solely on labor issues. This is the way it was years ago, but the committees were recently merged in order to bring unions together with employers so that no single special-interest group gained too much influence.
It is important for labor and management to come together around the same table to reach compromises. We see the need for this especially in the wake of the closing of Hostess Brands and its layoff of 18,000 workers due to a dispute between labor and management. LCRED, the newly combined business and labor committee, has been instrumental in crafting sensible laws that both unions and employers can agree upon.
Breaking it up and sending each group in its own direction would be a big mistake and a regrettable step backward at a time when our economy needs to move forward without the kind of disasters that we saw at Hostess.
I urge the new Democratic leadership to maintain the harmony that the merged business and labor committee has provided and reject the proposal of Hayes and Gilbert.
Irv Marsters
Glenburn
Immigration reform
An “Other Voices” editorial on Nov. 24-25, “GOP needs Immigration Change,” repeats the standard political narrative concerning “comprehensive immigration reform” originally proposed by Sen. Ted Kennedy and Sen. John McCain in 2006. We are told that it was repeatedly defeated by Republicans, but we’re never told why.
The “comprehensive immigration reform” bill would have massively expanded legal immigration, providing millions of new temporary workers a path to citizenship. The amnesty for 11 million illegal immigrants was tiny in comparison.
A 2006 population impact study by Robert Rector of The Heritage Foundation estimated that “comprehensive immigration reform” would add between 100 and 192 million new immigrants in two decades. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that providing public services to amnestied illegal immigrants would have added $126 billion to the budget deficit.
The numbers and the costs. That’s why it’s been repeatedly defeated.
Kenneth Roy
New England Coalition for a Sustainable Population
Lovell
‘Fiscal cliff’ compromise
With the “fiscal cliff” looming over the nation, the constant wailing of those on Capitol Hill appears to be almost exclusively about defense cuts. Other considerations have been seemingly cast aside in favor of their favorite drum to beat, a strong military.
We spend more than the next 17 countries combined. $16.2 trillion of U.S. debt and counting says at some point, something has to give. With a divided Congress and nation, the reality is it can’t come just from entitlements or a tax on the so-called rich.
Just a few weeks from now, after Dec. 29, 2.1 million Americans will see their Emergency Unemployment Compensation stop immediately if no deal is reached. That means a little over 40 percent of the estimated 5 million Americans on EUC will be in dire straits very quickly, and with the winter months just taking hold.
Compromise has become a dirty word on “The Hill.” The divisive nature of the partisan political directive has driven a wedge between us and pushed class warfare and party agenda ahead of common sense.
Congressional backbone virtually disappears if the tenant in the White House has the same letter in front of his/her name as the respective senator or congressman does. Our nation can’t survive much more of this neglect. They need to do their job and do it soon, or their jobs and our nation will become irrelevant.
Michael D. Hilliker
Lewiston/Auburn
Not above the law
If Gov. Paul LePage were to walk into the state library and remove a book that he was at variance with from one of its shelves, thereby removing that book from the purview of the public, he would have effectively destroyed an item of public property, an item bought and paid for by the people of the state of Maine. And he would have done so willfully and maliciously! If you don’t believe so, there is a seminal court case that says as much: State v. Ronan, 380 A.2d 207, 1977.
Now a labor mural is not a book, but it is an item bought and paid for by public funds and therefore public property, and when LePage sequesters such a mural in his figurative desk drawer, he functionally destroys that mural by removing it from the public purview, willfully and maliciously, and is, therefore, criminally culpable. Bring an action against him and force him to cough up our mural and restore it to a place of display commensurate with its statement.
Phil Tobin
Ellsworth
Pastry politicians
Now that the end of the Hostess company seems to be at hand, Twinkies will certainly be hard to find. But there is positively no chance that we will ever run out of Ding Dongs as they are all in Washington and they call themselves Republicans.
Russ Irwin
Hampden
P. Fogarty, P. Tobin, R. Irwin; good letters.
Phil Tobin–Governor LePage can go into the state library and purloin as many books as he wants.
It’s called “government speech”.
The controversial labor mural symbolically stated the following: “Businesses are not welcome in Maine because job creators are evil and they mistreat workers. Therefore, we do not want any more job creators coming to Maine to wreck our state.” LePage clearly knew that this mural message wasn’t symbolic of the values the majority of Mainers hold dear, nor was this the message we wanted to send to potential out of state job creators. LePage was justified in taking down the hostile mural and the courts have agreed that he was within his rights to do so. Case closed!
Sez you.
. . . and correctly!
The labor mural symbolically states that Maine is a state where we value our workers. Our job creators are traditionally not wealth extractors which is what the term “job creators” has become a euphemism for. The mural is a view of Maine tradition which will last long after Paul LePage and his tea-party cronies are an unpleasant footnote in our history.
Whatever you think the mural stands for, it was the governor’s choice to take it down or leave it as it was. He chose to do the former. When liberals have there day in the Blaine House they can do away with LePage’s highway sign that states “Open for Business”. So what’s the big deal for those sore losers who want the ball all the time? Really, it’s childishness at its peak.
Not understanding the difference between taking down an important mural and changing a slogan on a billboard puts you on the same intellectual level as Governor “Kiss My Butt”
I’m sorry you had to take my comment personally. It was not intended to put you down. I was merely trying to communicate that voters are polarized on the mural issue like so many issues. It’s a fact of life. But to apologize for what I believe in, I’m sorry. I can’t and I won’t.
Also, I don’t know why you brought up the governor’s comment. It’s not directly related to the mural issue. Like you however, I didn’t like his kiss-my-butt comment. I do understand though it was provoked by the NAACP’s attempt to bully the governor. What the governor should have said – and did in fact say – in his own defense for his refusal to meet with a particular group of black inmates is that he would meet with all inmates to hear their complaints. He also stated in his own defense of an accusation of racial insensitivity by the NAACP that he had been attending an annual NAACP sponsored breakfast celebration of civil rights leader Martin Luther King for several years without lapse.
That poster continues her practice of, dishonestly, saying things like “I’m sorry you took my comment personally” etc. She puts in her digs in , couched in that kind of language. She seems to think she has a lot more impact on posters than she does. She seems to think she upsets other posters. (or hopes she does. ) It appears she has a very inflated sense of herself.
Then why did Forbes Magazine rate Maine as the worst state to do business in October, 2010? It’s because of the adversarial relationship that existed between the job creators and workers was a jobs killer. The hostile labor mural is a clear testament because it speaks volumes in expressing this anti-business mentality. Had the mural been a painting that depicted the co-operation that exists between businesses and workers, it would still be there. Halleluiah, it’s gone and not a moment too soon.
The mural neither says nor implies any such thing. It is a history of how the people of Maine gained legal rights and benefits for their labor. If it reflected badly on corporations that wasn’t the fault of the workers of Maine.
Governor LePage acted childishly in hiding the mural. He behaved petulantly in keeping it hidden. And his actions have been interpreted by everyone except the court as a mind numbingly stupid way for a governor to act.
If there are pictures in the Dept of Commerce one would expect them to show the glorious moments of businesses and how they have benefitted Maine. As far as I know no Democratic Governor has taken down a Commerce picture hanging in the Commerce Department because it wasn’t labor friendly. Presumably, that would be because they all have an intellectual capacity above average.
That is your opinion, but anyone who isn’t a flaming liberal would disagree with your so called analysis.
I’ve got a better idea. Why don’t we put up several paintings of Ronald Reagan in every state office building? It would be interesting to see your reaction, along with the reactions of the anti-business crowd. If it’s speech the liberals agree with, it’s OK, but if the artwork doesn’t fit the liberal narrative, then we cannot allow it. I get it now, it’s a double standard.
The one thing that Governor LePage accomplished with the mural fiasco is that he is a blatant lier. I believe that he has given at the least, three different versions of why he had the mural removed. At the minmum two of these reasons are out right lies, because none of them were the same.
Could you please provide the links to your claims? If so, it would be easy to refute because I too can think of 3 reasons why the mural should have been removed: 1) Change Maine’s negative image toward job creators, 2) End the adversarial views toward businesses and workers, 3) Create an environment where businesses are encouraged to come to Maine because of our co-operative work force. 4) Teach our workforce that businesses are not the enemy and if businesses succeed, so do the workers. Wow, that was easy and I even added a 4th item. While you liberals have been crying about the North Korean propaganda removal, LePage has been busy creating jobs. Let’s talk about jobs and not irrelevant murals. Check out this link and learn about the 7,400 private sector jobs that have been created since July 2011. Now this is something that is worth talking about, not silly murals. http://www.gngnews.com/issues/pro-growthreformsarehelpingtocreateprivatesectorjobs
The Bangor Daily News would be one source of two of the lies made by Governor LePage in lieu of an honest explanation. The other was on the National News when he was asked by Edwards why he took the mural down he stated that he took it down and would put it back when the state was reimbursed the $60,000.00 cost. There was one well publicized claim that there was an anonymous letter or e-mail that complained about the mural, that was the 1st lie. Then he lied again stating that business interests had objected to the mural.
Each time the Governor seems to come up with a different reason for his actions. The man is an obvious lier and not a very good one at that. You would think something as big as this would be faily simple to keep your story consistant.
7400 private sector jobs were NOT created by Governor LePage. They were created by the PRIVATE sector.
I do recall Governor LePage saying that there were over 20,000 skilled jobs going unfilled in Maine because there weren’t enough qualified job seekers in Maine to fill those positions. At no time has he published something that would be helpful, like what specific qualifications the employers were seeking, where the jobs were, how much they payed, where one might go to aquire these needed skills. In short, he complained that we were incapable of doing these mysterious jobs. Source: The Bangor Daily News and all the major TV stations.
Your first mistake is to believe anything the BDN displays as accurate news. The BDN is nothing but a left wing propaganda spinning machine. I get no pleasure saying this, but the BDN destroyed their own credibility, not me.
The private sector never raised the $60,000 needed. The mural was paid for with taxpayer money (wasteful spending at its finest). Please challenge me if someone has come forward with the $60,000 and I will have a different viewpoint. “Something as big as this.” What, you’ve got to be kidding me. Nobody cares about the silly mural except for some on the far left.
Yes, the only jobs the governor can create are public sector jobs and we’ve already got too many of those. What makes the 7,400 jobs so special is the fact that they were created by the private sector. Think of the additional revenue our state government will now receive, what a blessing this is. Grow revenue through jobs, not additional taxes. This is a good thing and it’s further proof that the policies implemented by the 125th legislature and Governor LePage are working. The mural’s removal also contributed because businesses realized that our ME State Gov’t was no longer hostile to business development. Being fair minded, I will even give credit to some of the DEMS because some of them voted in favor of these pro-jobs policies.
So you see, while you were fixated on the mural, good policies were being written and passed and Maine is now a better place. We can thank LePage and the 125th for that. He’s not the demon you try to make him out to be. LePage also isn’t a demon for removing the silly and anti-business mural in a state government building, nonetheless.
The anti-business crowd preceded LePage and we are now a pro business and pro jobs state. You can’t be anti-business and pro private sector jobs growth. The logic isn’t there to support such a philosophy.
The mural removal had nothing to do with business moving or leaving Maine.
I recall very well previous adminstrations doing everything in their power to save paper mills. Now if you consider their anti jobs attitude for Washington County, that hasn’t changed one bit with any of the recent administrations including the present one.
The mural represented the mindset that Maine was hostile to business. It was completely one sided and showed an adversarial relationship between businesses and workers. The mural never represented the accomplishments, donations or the philanthropy that occurred by our businesses.
Baldacci couldn’t have tried too hard to keep the Millinocket mill open because it closed under his watch and no wonder. LePage did his best to find a buyer and to work out a deal, so the mill could re-open and the liberals even attacked him for that of all things.
I can’t provide the link because I’m illiterate when it comes to the computer, but I remember him being interviewed by Brian Williams of NBC who asked him (on national TV) why he took down the mural and he said it was because it cost too much, not that it did not encourage business as he initially said.
It did cost too much. Imagine paying $60,000 for a piece of art, all while our Maine roads were falling apart and all while some Mainers were going hungry. What is the problem again?
It had already been paid for. Unless he wanted to sell it for revenue, there was no monetary reason to take it down.
Yes, it had been paid for by taxpayer dollars, which made it government property. Our current governor felt the mural no longer represented Maine’s anti-jobs values, so he removed it, which the courts have all said was within his rights.
Excellent!
Yes, Big lots just opened a new store in Farmington. They are the ones who are creating these 7,400 private sector jobs. 55 jobs to be exact. 55 part time jobs that pay “public assistance” wages. 55 new employees that will need food stamps, heat assistance, and “free” medical care down at the emergency room. How about some jobs that do not actually place MORE burden on the rest of the tax payers? Any of those type of jobs in that 7,400?
I believe we had some at Hostess. Unfortunately, their union leadership sold their members down the drain by convincing them that being unemployed is better than a job with paid vacations, benefits and pensions.
No, that is not an “opinion”. Those are facts. It is a fact that the mural doesn’t “say” anything. It
depict labor history in Maine. It is a fact that most of the people think LePage has acted childishly. And it is a fact that no Democratic governor has taken down any pictures or murals in other departments out of pique.
Your silly suggestion that pictures of Reagan be installed in all state offices is on the same level of maturity as LePage’s removal of the mural.
Sorry, they’re opinions! Most people don’t care about the silly mural. The only ones acting like children are you far left liberals. That’s OK, LePage moved on the day the murals were removed and it’s a good thing because 7,400 jobs were created in the private sector, since July, 2011. Go ahead and whine if it makes you feel good, but we have moved on. Down with the mural and on with JOBS!
Reagan would be considered a flaming liberal by today’s Tea Party.
If your analysis is accurate, I would presume you are a strong Reagan supporter? Are you?
As a woman, I find the historical row of pictures of white men in Bangor City Hall offensive. Where are the women? Sexism has kept down women politically. So, if I become the mayor, do I have the right to take down those pictures so that I won’t have to look at them every day? And it sends the wrong message to the young girls who look at those pictures and think “There’s not a woman there. I guess I can’t become mayor of Bangor”. As new mayor, I want to change that mindset. So I unilaterally take down those pictures of all the previous mayors of Bangor and lock them away where nobody else knows where they are.
Yes, the courts have deemed his actions legal. Doesn’t make it ‘right’.
Then you must be extremely upset with the fact that the DEMS failed to select women in leadership positions in their new House and Senate majorities. I am outraged by this! Talk about a “War on Women.” The war on women is by the ME DEMS!
I hear what you are saying, but the mayoral pictures represent the fact that males were the elected mayors at that time. Right or wrong, this is a fact. I do hear what you are saying, though. Perhaps you could also include some positive things that women were doing during these same time periods to counteract the mayoral pictures. That would be a reasonable thing to do. Unfortunately, for the mural, there was no counteraction. The mural only represented labor’s struggles and not the struggles and accomplishments of our businesses The mural never displayed anything positive about business owners. Take Harold Alfond, for example, why wasn’t there any pictures of him showing his philanthropic deeds to Maine communities? Had the mural been more balanced, it would still be there.
—
“The mural only represented labor’s struggles and not the struggles and accomplishments of our businesses”
That’s right, it was commissioned by the labor department to depict labor’s history in Maine. It was a mural about labor. It was a hung in the Department of Labor.
If the Commerce Department had commissioned a mural or a picture about the history of capitalism in Maine would you expect to see the glorification of labor’s struggles depicted? I would be equally outraged if some idiot Democratic governor sneaked into the Dept of Commerce and took down one of their murals or pictures. It’s stupid, childish, counter productive and honestly doesn’t make much sense, unless you are simply trying to randomly irritate people. That a governor is doing this instead of acting like a leader shows appallingly poor judgment.
I’m curious; why is this so hard for you to understand.
Well, I’ve heard a lot of interpretations of what the removal of the mural meant, but I’d have to say yours is the most complete and certainly the dumbest. It’s almost as if you were privy to LePage’s thoughts. LOL
Michael D. Hilliker-First, there is no fiscal cliff. The concept is a myth designed to scare us into allowing our well-being to be compromised. It is directly related to “WMD’s”, remember that myth?
The compromise needs to be between a “taking” one time wealth tax of 10%-15% coupled with a currency and commodities trading tax, and something more reasonable like Robert Reich’s plan. We need to make it perfectly clear that the obfuscaters who are serving their wealthy and corporate masters instead of the US citizenry are the problem.
http://robertreich.org/post/11753807617
btw I agree with you that our bloated military is the part of the budget that can withstand major slashing.
What is this wealth tax?
I would impose a one-time, 14.25% tax on individuals and trusts with a net worth over $10 million. For individuals, net worth would be calculated minus the value of their principal residence. That would raise $5.7 trillion in new revenue, which we would use to pay off the entire national debt [and shore up the Social Security Trust Fund].
Donald Trump July 2000
http://www.ontheissues.org/America_We_Deserve.htm
Much of this wealth is in real estate. Who do you suppose would have the available cash in order purchase this property in order to pay this “Wealth Tax” ? Maybe the Chinese who are not subject to this tax. Looks like you want to sell the country lock stock & barrel.
I also think we might have Constitutional issues over a “Wealth Tax.”
You appear to have either completely missed my point cheesy, or, perhaps you are merely trying to steer the debate away from progressive ideas to more ‘hot button’ topics
I am not saying that we need a one time wealth tax. This is a direct quote from Donald Trump back when he had presidential designs. It was actually coupled with some terrible regressive ideas btw.
No, I am saying that the compromise needs not to be between where we are now after decades of trickle down travesty and a more socially disruptive option. It needs to be between a radical solution such as Mr. Trump’s and a more viable solution such as incurring a small financial transactions tax, a tax which would target primarily the wealthy and also would hopefully put the brakes on the Wall St. casino that is back in full swing trying to crash our economy again.
I misunderstood your posting of Trumps comment as an endorsement of his position.
I still think it’s a dumb idea and would not get the desired result.
The “Wall Street Casino” you refer to is what provide jobs. Business has a cycle. There are swings up and down. History has never seen an economy of any kind continue indefinitely an upward trajectory.Even the most strictly run government economies have the same problem.
I understand how the stock market works and invest in it myself. The disconnect comes with those who have gamed the system to buy and sell millions of shares at the speed of light. These “traders” are extracting huge wealth from the system and paying nothing for the privilege. When their gambling put our economy at risk, we the taxpayers bailed them out to the tune of well over $100 billion. We have sales taxes on many things and a small transaction tax would matter little to those of us who invest in the market but would slow the casino mentality that has made the market so volatile. There are currently several bills proposed in the senate and congress designed to effect this.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s1787
I would gladly pay half a percent tax on my investment transactions if it would help bring the market back to a more level playing field.
from today’s Washington Post–
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ralph-nader-why-a-tax-on-stock-trades-should-be-part-of-a-fiscal-cliff-deal/2012/11/30/d6a1285e-3a38-11e2-8a97-363b0f9a0ab3_story.html
The financial structure we call “Wall Street” was set up to serve the needs of the business world. Wall Street is no longer a good business partner. They are simply serving themselves and their gods. They are no longer a constructive component of society. They profit from raping and pillaging American business. They are destroyers not builders and they certainly are not job creators.
Mr Masters,First of all the unions won a huge battle against corporate America not only did they shut down a evil corporation they sent a message to the other capitalistic pigs that they are not afraid to put the people that they represent on the unemployment lines to prove there point.Compromise? They need to shut somebody else down so that people will take them seriously.
You are so right. Oh, and you forgot there was the debt that was loaded onto the company by the vulture capitalists and the 401k employee program that was robbed. Sure, it was the employees that brought the company down. We all know now how this works. I am glad they did not cave at the end.
Let’s not pretend that the unions destroyed those jobs by shutting down Hostess.
Hostess was in the process of being “Bain-ed”: the process of buying up, selling off assets and loading up with debt. The next step is always telling employees they can save their jobs by working for nothing. That allows the “Bain-ers” to wring the last pennies out of the company. The final step is firing everybody and shutting the plant. The “Bain-ers” never, ever intended to keep the plant open and people employed ………… Never!
All the union did was stop the “Bain-ers” from squeezing the last bit of cash out of the company before they shut it down.
“Let’s not pretend that the unions destroyed those jobs by shutting down Hostess.”
Those jobs were not destroyed. Hostess never created or provided any jobs. The demand for snack cakes is just the same as it was before the Hostess debacle. Other companies will just have to hire more bakers, and route drivers, and supervisors and so forth to handle the increased demand that they will experience.
Yep, in Mexico, where the companies there don’t have to pay the exorbitant import tax on unprocessed sugar US companies must.
The Hostess Union workers recognized the fact that the holding company had NO intention of making a go of the company. They were in the process of raping the company and dismantiling it piece by piece. The union members knew that if they didn’t act now that the holding company would take their pensions and pocket the money.
All of you that replied to my post are right the unions gave that corporation and the employees exactly what they deserve. Go Union.
Tobin, apples to oranges.I find it amusing that in your opinion that no wall hanging should ever be removed from a govmint bldg.
Fiscal cliff, I hope they run this puppy right off the freaken rails full steam ahead baby.16,250,000,000.
I am hoping and praying we go right over this fiscal cliff. Congress created this boondoggle. Let them deal with it. This has nothing to do with the executive branch. The legislative branch created this because they just cannot seem to work together for the American people. Let them deal with the aftermath of this Fiscal Frankenstein they have created….. and our ire. We will survive. As our VP has said, “It is never a good bet to bet against the American people.”
“The legislative branch created this because they just cannot seem to work together for the American people.”
You are right that the legislative branch created this mess. Unfortunately, you are wrong about how they created it. It was not because they could not work together. It was because they did work together.
Both Democrats and Republicans have spent the last 30 years helping business increase profits by using free trade, illegal immigration, and deregulation to drive down wages and destroy benefits for America’s legal customers. Oh, I meant workers. Well, they are the same thing but American business owners don’t know that. Their greed blinds them to that fact.
All of the so called job creators, and entrepreneurs, and producers, and so forth are abject failures without plenty of customers with plenty of money to spend. It is simple supply and demand. Without the demand provided by well paid workers, America will not return to prosperity. Further inflation of the supply of labor just drives that demand downward and makes life harder for both workers and business owners.
Actually I think the fiscal cliff was a creation of President Obama!
You are joking right? Congress created it…. in the event they could get nothing done. And, oh, look. They have gotten nothing done. The President submits a budget. That is all. Congress actually decides what to spend where. When was the last time they passed a budget? It has been extensions of this and that but no balance the books budget. The fiscal cliff was created by the Budget Control Act of 2011. And passed under the leadership of the same R and D guys/gal that are wrangling now.
Doesn’t the budget originate with the president? Also, I think the 2011 budget was voted down by both houses of the congress – including the democrat controlled senate. The agreement that has resulted in the “fiscal cliff” situation was promoted as a compromise to raise the debt ceiling. You are correct that there has been no agreement on the budget and there should not be until spending is reined in before any thought is given to raising taxes.
The concept of “free stuff” should be forever expunged from the minds of the electorate! Sadly, after November 6, I doubt that it ever will!
The President prepares a budget. End of story. What Congress does with his budget requests is up to them as they are charged with raising the revenue needed. This is a dysfunctional Congress that I am beginning to think does not have the brains needed to design a budget that is sustainable. They want the President to do it for them. Well, he has. The budget he wants. Now the ball is in their court. And America will hold them, Ds and Rs, accountable.
No, The so-called fiscal cliff was an agreement reached between all parties to enforce cuts and tax increases if a better agreement could not be reached.
Yes, that is what I said. Ds and Rs created it. Congress bears the responsibility for all budgetary decisions. The President can sign it or veto it. If that is what you mean. But my point still stands. It is the job of the legislative body to provide the funds for the government. They created this and they have to deal with. I hope we go roaring right off it.
How?
Mr.lrwin, I am shocked at your comparison of Republican politicians to Ding Dongs. This type of metaphor is beneath contempt. Despite their lack of nutritional value, Ding Dongs have some inherent worth. Don’t degrade them by comparing them to the likes of John Boehner!
I fear that, by insinuating that Republicans have no nutritional value, you are straying into the dangerous realm of cannibalist thinking. Please, for the love of God, don’t take “Eat the Rich” seriously!
Ah, but Jonathan Swift taught us, in “A Modest Proposal,” that it is the rich who eat the poor. As Republicans have no nutritional value, no one would ever consider feasting upon them!
Ding Dongs also don’t have that fake orange tan look.
Phil, the governor does have the right to make decisions regarding displays in administrative buildings, BUT it was NUMB to take the murals down for the right wing fanatical reasons he did, and so he will PAY in 2014 at the polls if he decides to run again which seems unlikely because he still has a enough sense, hopefully, to realize he will not be elected dog catcher.
Kenneth, we can find the right balance. We need comprehensive immigration reform, and it can be passed with bipartisan support. And NOTHING can be trusted from the right wing corporate toadie Heritage Foundation. That organization is of, by, and for the rich and could care less about ANYTHING else.
Michael, we can’t get compromise when we have TeaRadical Republicans who are entirely against any notion of compromise (which is a disgrace and an affront to the very Constitution they claim to praise which was founded entirely on compromise). They are NOT “conservative.” They are drowned in RADICAL RIGHT WING IDEOLOGY. Let’s put the blame SQUARELY where it belongs. Obama and Dems are ready to negotiate cuts over revenue at a rate of at least 2 to 1 if not 3 to 1. For goodness sake, Republicans still can’t agree? It is DISGUSTING. We can do it through making the rich finally pay somewhat of a fair share again, staying on track to get out of Afghanistan, making needed cuts in the very bloated defense department (we DO NOT NEED over 600 bases around the world), raising the cap on the Social Security payroll tax so that upper income people and the rich are paying a fairer share, closing all kinds of corporate tax loopholes and shelters, making strategic cuts in other areas throughout the budget while maintaining critical investments to continue to improve the economy, and with very minimal adjustments to Medicare and Medicaid. We DO NOT NEED to do this on the backs of the middle class, the working class, the poor, veterans, and the elderly when the richest of the rich have had to sacrifice NOTHING in the recession.
Russ Irwin, some of the ding dongs are still in Maine and they write letters to the editor.
Mr. Marsters and Mr. Roy – excellent letters!
Mr. Irwin – please grow up. In blaming Republicans for the closure of Hostess, you are merely displaying your ignorance of the underlying causes.
Not to mention the owners are Democratic donors.
Interesting that those screaming loudest about the deficit are the same ones most wanting to avoid the “fiscal cliff” which does exactly that, it quickly cuts the deficit…
To Mainemajority who thinks that Mainers don’t care that the governor took down and hid a mural he didn’t like, an informal poll taken by the LA Times show differently.
“The mural should stay. Gov. LePage had no right to order its removal. 58.77%
The mural should go. It’s a shameless piece of Socialist propaganda that has no business being in a public building. 19.91%
So long as Maine reimburses the federal government, the state can do whatever it wants with the mural. 3.44% ”
Want to revise your opinion that Mainers don’t care, Mr. Mainemajority?