Roadside danger

Full story: TwinCities.com

Debbie Porterfield's death when her car went into a retention pond stirred up an old anger I have about allowing these 9- to 10-foot-deep pits to be dug so close to roadways .

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 20 of21
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Former Ranger

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Apr 15, 2010
 

Judged:

3

3

3

"Such sound bites make great catch phrases but don't answer a lot of important questions" I'll bet you thougt the catch phrase "Hope and Change" answered all of your questions!
We want to take the country back from the most radical President in our history. We don't want government control over every aspect of our lives and trying to take control over the rest of the economy that they haven't so far.
Former Ranger

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Apr 15, 2010
 

Judged:

2

1

1

"Regardless of whether I am cycling, walking or motoring, the public right of way is not "my road" — it is "our road." "
Okay then, let's allow bicyclists and pedesterians on all roads.
Dewey Cox Died

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Apr 15, 2010
 

Judged:

5

4

4

Former Ranger wrote:
"Such sound bites make great catch phrases but don't answer a lot of important questions" I'll bet you thougt the catch phrase "Hope and Change" answered all of your questions!
We want to take the country back from the most radical President in our history. We don't want government control over every aspect of our lives and trying to take control over the rest of the economy that they haven't so far.
Ahhhhhh, excuse me. Your forgetting that "hero" of yours, G. W. Bush, spent eight years setting this up to happen. THAT is what`s costing us now.
gzaiger

Saint Paul, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Apr 15, 2010
 

Judged:

8

6

5

Obama might be radical, but thank goodness he is. So far his radical ideas have transformed a govenment that was stagnant. He has acheived, whether the right agrees with it or not, an amazing change with health care reform - something past presidents have tried and failed.

He may be radical, but he's smart and he's not dangerous, unlike our last administration. Dick Cheney, pulling the strings of a puppet president - wow, now that was scary!!!!
thissucks

Lakeville, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Apr 15, 2010
 

Judged:

2

2

1

While I agree it's a sad thing that Debbie Porterfields life ended so suddenly and tragically, a chain link fence wouldn't have prevented her from going into the pond. You aren't going to stop a 4,000 lb. vehicle going 20mph, much less 40, 50, or 60., with a fence. More people die hitting trees with their vehicle than from going into a pond. Should we cut down all the trees near roads?
Gndydncr

Plymouth, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Apr 15, 2010
 

Judged:

3

2

2

Max, we are losing our country to politicians who want to control us. Our freedoms are being continuously, bit by bit, eroded away in such a manner that we hardly notice it until its too late. So far, in the last year and half, we have lost freedoms the areas of mortgages, banking, manufacturing, and health care with threats of losing freedoms in the area of labor and speech looming on the horizon.

To those who have no aspirations, its no big deal. To those who choose to achieve, it is a very big deal. Where do you fit it in?
CURRENT Ranger

Saint Paul, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Apr 15, 2010
 
Former Ranger wrote:
"Regardless of whether I am cycling, walking or motoring, the public right of way is not "my road" — it is "our road." "
Okay then, let's allow bicyclists and pedesterians on all roads.
Yeah, right! How bout the freeway too???? Huh? Come on, think a little.
CURRENT Ranger

Saint Paul, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Apr 15, 2010
 

Judged:

5

4

3

Dewey Cox Died wrote:
<quoted text>
Ahhhhhh, excuse me. Your forgetting that "hero" of yours, G. W. Bush, spent eight years setting this up to happen. THAT is what`s costing us now.
Ahh, so true, so true! For every socialist program out there filled with "entitlement" programs, there is an under-taxed CEO feasting on their own "entitlements."

Where's the out-rage about Petters, Madoff, Hecker. Lay and all the others??

Oh, I'm sorry, they're all freedom loving Republican donOrs!!

!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!DON'T DRINK THE TEA!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!
gzaiger

Saint Paul, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Apr 15, 2010
 

Judged:

5

4

3

Gndydncr - I have a huge libertarian streak, which I confess is often at odds with my support for Dems (which I support because I'm a tree-hugging, pro-choice femenist who thinks govt can and should help the little guy).

I very much oppose city regulations on silly, tiny things on my house, and seat belt laws and the such. But I fail to see how the things you listed effect my freedom. I think banks need more regulation so they don't sell people poorly set-up mortgages. I think health care will be improved and offer more choice for coverage. I didn't support bailing out the auto makers, because it seemed unwise and not how capitalism works, not because it effected my freedom.

Now, Bush, and now Obama, doing warrentless wire-tapping - that scares me a lot. Talk about Big Brother! And this new thing of our Presidents basically taking our country to war without Congress declaring it - another very scary over-reaching of executive power. Thank goodness we have a president who's all about ending war, not starting them.
Gndydncr

Plymouth, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Apr 15, 2010
 

Judged:

2

2

1

gzaiger wrote:
Gndydncr - I have a huge libertarian streak, which I confess is often at odds with my support for Dems (which I support because I'm a tree-hugging, pro-choice femenist who thinks govt can and should help the little guy).
I very much oppose city regulations on silly, tiny things on my house, and seat belt laws and the such. But I fail to see how the things you listed effect my freedom. I think banks need more regulation so they don't sell people poorly set-up mortgages. I think health care will be improved and offer more choice for coverage. I didn't support bailing out the auto makers, because it seemed unwise and not how capitalism works, not because it effected my freedom.
Now, Bush, and now Obama, doing warrentless wire-tapping - that scares me a lot. Talk about Big Brother! And this new thing of our Presidents basically taking our country to war without Congress declaring it - another very scary over-reaching of executive power. Thank goodness we have a president who's all about ending war, not starting them.
" ... who thinks govt can and should help the little guy"
Hmmm. Very interesting. I know you're a big Viking fan and I envision government to be like the officials in a football game. The players (that's us, including American businesses) are supposed to have the FREEDOM to play the game within a set of rules (the constitution) and government are the officials put in place to ensure that the players actually obey the rules. Note: the officials (government) are not supposed to be actually playing the game or controlling it, just monitoring it. The players are supposed to have the FREEDOM to develop their skills as best as they can using whatever methods they choose and play the game better than anybody else, if they can. If Adrian Peterson (the big guy) can run faster and be quicker than any of his defenders (the little guys), you are saying that you would be in favor of the game officials (the government) stepping in and hamstringing Adrian Peterson so that the little guys have a better chance of catching him? That doesn't make any sense. That's not the job of the officials (or the government).

"... Thank goodness we have a president who's all about ending war, not starting them. "
And which President would that be??? It certainly hasn't been Mr. Obama!!
BUD

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Apr 15, 2010
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Gndydncr wrote:
<quoted text>" ... who thinks govt can and should help the little guy"
Hmmm. Very interesting. I know you're a big Viking fan and I envision government to be like the officials in a football game. The players (that's us, including American businesses) are supposed to have the FREEDOM to play the game within a set of rules (the constitution) and government are the officials put in place to ensure that the players actually obey the rules. Note: the officials (government) are not supposed to be actually playing the game or controlling it, just monitoring it. The players are supposed to have the FREEDOM to develop their skills as best as they can using whatever methods they choose and play the game better than anybody else, if they can. If Adrian Peterson (the big guy) can run faster and be quicker than any of his defenders (the little guys), you are saying that you would be in favor of the game officials (the government) stepping in and hamstringing Adrian Peterson so that the little guys have a better chance of catching him? That doesn't make any sense. That's not the job of the officials (or the government).
"... Thank goodness we have a president who's all about ending war, not starting them. "
And which President would that be??? It certainly hasn't been Mr. Obama!!
I like your analogy. If only people would think.
gzaiger

Saint Paul, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Apr 15, 2010
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Here's a different football analagy. You have one kid who comes from wealthy parents who can afford the fee's for him to play football. They can buy him all his equipment, have a car to get him to all the practices, go to every game to encourage him, etc. Then you have another kid whose father left when he was born, his mother works 3 jobs to stay off welfare, and has no extra money for the fees, much less equipment. So, do we let only the rich kids play football, or do we help the other kid have a chance too?

To stay with your analogy, I still do have the freedom to develope my skills and play the game any way I want. If you feel you can't do those things, it's certainly not because of the govt. Of course I don't agree with ham-stringing anyone. But I do think that a very poor Adrian Peterson would develop more skills with help.
Gndydncr

Plymouth, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Apr 15, 2010
 

Judged:

2

1

1

gzaiger wrote:
Here's a different football analagy. You have one kid who comes from wealthy parents who can afford the fee's for him to play football. They can buy him all his equipment, have a car to get him to all the practices, go to every game to encourage him, etc. Then you have another kid whose father left when he was born, his mother works 3 jobs to stay off welfare, and has no extra money for the fees, much less equipment. So, do we let only the rich kids play football, or do we help the other kid have a chance too?
To stay with your analogy, I still do have the freedom to develope my skills and play the game any way I want. If you feel you can't do those things, it's certainly not because of the govt. Of course I don't agree with ham-stringing anyone. But I do think that a very poor Adrian Peterson would develop more skills with help.
I don't think your analogy holds water. There are plenty of stories of poor kids making the big leagues with help from benevolent INDIVIDUALS, not government. Besides that, a fact of life is that life is not fair. Adrian Peterson makes millions of dollars a year and I don't. Is that fair? Maybe not, but its also not fair that Adrian Peterson be taxed 90% of his income and give it to me in an attempt to level the playing field.
gzaiger

Saint Paul, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Apr 15, 2010
 

Judged:

1

1

1

I think what we're talking about is degrees. Noone should be taxed 90%, and I don't think anyone is. But what we see with no government intervention is the condtions at the turn of the 19th century. The rich are getting richer, the poor are increasing in number - the middle class is getting smaller and smaller. Human greed will always win out without limits being placed on it or some help given so the poor can acheive middle class. That's what makes for the healthiest and most stable countrys.

No one is being hamstringed, no one is being taxed 90%- but yes, government needs to intervene when the better part of the nation is struggling.
gzaiger

Saint Paul, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Apr 15, 2010
 

Judged:

1

1

1

But I want to add thatI think balance is important. Very important. I think if the Dems were in total control, we would in deed have a over-reaching welfare state. I think if the republicans were in total control, we would have the masses in squalar and total environmental degredation while the wealthy few got ever richer.

Currently, I think the state of our enviornment (another huge garbage field was found in the Atlantic Ocean today) and the obscene salaries of the wealthy warrent a tilt toward Democratic policies.
Gndydncr

Plymouth, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Apr 15, 2010
 

Judged:

1

1

1

gzaiger wrote:
No one should be taxed 90%, and I don't think anyone is.
It seems like liberals continue to scream for increased taxes on the rich and conservatives keep asking how much of an increase - "how much is too much" Essentially, the question goes unanswered - until now. At least I have discovered a number that is above your "too much" figure. Care to expound? Have you given any thought about what you would consider a fair taxing policy? What is your "too much" threshold?
Dave

Eau Claire, WI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Apr 15, 2010
 

Judged:

3

3

2

gzaiger wrote:
I think what we're talking about is degrees. Noone should be taxed 90%, and I don't think anyone is.
Problem is we are spending at the 90% level but not collecting taxes to cover those costs. We are going to go bankrupt because of the over spending and borrowing. At which point we will not be able to help anyone very much and the pain will be immense. We must get goverment spending under control at a sustainable level today. To wait untii the bills are stacked to the moon with no way to pay is not responsible goverment no matter which letter follows the politicians name.
Gndydncr

Plymouth, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Apr 15, 2010
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Dave wrote:
<quoted text>
Problem is we are spending at the 90% level but not collecting taxes to cover those costs. We are going to go bankrupt because of the over spending and borrowing. At which point we will not be able to help anyone very much and the pain will be immense. We must get goverment spending under control at a sustainable level today. To wait untii the bills are stacked to the moon with no way to pay is not responsible goverment no matter which letter follows the politicians name.
Good point.
jcf817

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Apr 15, 2010
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Gndydncr wrote:
Max, we are losing our country to politicians who want to control us. Our freedoms are being continuously, bit by bit, eroded away in such a manner that we hardly notice it until its too late. So far, in the last year and half, we have lost freedoms the areas of mortgages, banking, manufacturing, and health care with threats of losing freedoms in the area of labor and speech looming on the horizon.
To those who have no aspirations, its no big deal. To those who choose to achieve, it is a very big deal. Where do you fit it in?
Which specific freedoms have we lost?
Gndydncr

Minneapolis, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Apr 15, 2010
 

Judged:

2

2

1

I guess if you want me to look up the names of the banks and mortgage companies that were bailed out along with General Motors, I could but I believe you are on top of things enough to know that it happened. With the intervention of government via Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac, mortgage companies and banks were denied the freedom to screen borrowers the way they normally would have. In bailing out the banks, mortgage companies, and General Motors, the government denied them the freedom to fail and their competitors were denied the freedom to buy them out.

It may sound a little odd to use the phrase "freedom to fail" but in reality, failure makes us stronger. I think there are case histories where the successor to failed companies emerge stronger, better, and more efficient than their predecessors. If I remember the history of Thomas Edison correctly, he failed hundreds of times inventing the light bulb before he finally found the right combination to make it work. Children learning to walk take many, many, pratfalls before they finally master the task. Fortunately, they have short stubby legs so they don't have to fall too far and get hurt. Many a youngster has endured skinned knees and elbows in learning to ride a bike. Failure makes us stronger. So, as I see it, government has denied its citizens the freedom to enjoy the benefits of stronger, better, more efficient banking and manufacturing operations.

As far as health care is concerned, there is no doubt that the new law will limit the freedom to choose any insurance company we want although we may have a limited choice for a short while. Eventually, private carriers will go out of business and then our freedom of any choice will be gone. There is no doubt that our freedoms to choose the doctors, clinics, hospitals, and procedures we want will be either limited or eliminated. Ultimately, our freedom to even choose end of life care will also be taken from us.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 20 of21
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Other Recent Hugo Discussions

Search the Hugo Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Eagle brook is a joke (Dec '11) Thu Christie 76
Irrigation Outfitters - Tax fraud (Mar '08) Jul 8 St Pauls Church 12
MN Who do you support for Governor in Minnesota in... (Oct '10) Jun 12 doomsayer2014 847
hx of bullying at Mahtomedi schools (Oct '09) May '14 Therarestflower 6
Lino Lakes Prison (Sep '12) May '14 JJJ 3
stave robins robinson jerry thompson May '14 dana 1
KMSP drops chief meteorologist Janie Peterson (Oct '06) Apr '14 son or daughter 94
•••
•••
•••
Hugo Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

Hugo Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Hugo People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Hugo News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Hugo
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••