Did you vote today?

[Dear Abby]

Dear Abby,





My husband has a long record of money problems. He runs up huge credit-card

bills and at the end of the month, if I try to pay them off, he shouts at

me, saying I am stealing his money. He says pay the minimum and let our kids

worry about the rest, but already we can hardly keep up with the interest.

Also he has been so arrogant and abusive toward our neighbors that most of

them no longer speak to us. The few that do are an odd bunch, to whom he has

been giving a lot of expensive gifts, running up our bills even more. Also,

he has gotten religious. One week he hangs out with Catholics and the next

with people who say the Pope is the Anti-Christ, and the next he's with

Muslims.. Finally, the last straw. He's demanding that before anyone can be

in the same room with him, they must sign a loyalty oath. It's just so

horribly creepy! Can you help?



Signed, Lost









Dear Lost,



Suck it up and stop whining, Michelle. You're getting to live in the White

House for free, travel the world, and have others pay for everything for

you. You can divorce the jerk any time you want. The rest of us are stuck

with the idiot for 4 more years.



Signed, Abby

[dont know nothin]

Raptor in Michigan wrote:

<quoted text>
"The Head Start Program is a program of the United States Department of Health and Human Services that provides comprehensive education, health, nutrition, and parent involvement services to low-income children and their families."
Thank you for telling me about what the Head Start Program is. It wasn't necessary though, as I am fully aware of what it is.
Tell me, do you really think people need a government program to teach people how to raise their kids properly if they are poor? Is there a problem with the elderly people who grew up poor and never had this program at their disposal?
Do you cheer when you walk into a bathroom and see the poster on the wall that explains in detail the proper way to wash your hands, with a phone number to call at the bottom if you don't fully understand?
BTW, I hardly ever watch Fox News. I saw nothing on that channel about this program. I will always maintain the best upbringing any child can have is Mommy at home teaching and nurturing; not throwing kids at strangers for half a day.
If I had kids, they would have likely been homeschooled. Though I went to a public school, my Mom stayed home with her children throughout the years. We never went to any programs as babies and we turned out fine.

for single parents of low income paying jobs that work and would rather send their kid to an early educational program, than pay for a babysitter when they are of age, and are eligible is far better for the parent and childs life and alot better for the parents wallet. there are many improvements that need to be made not only to the headstart progra but to all entitlements to help keep them solvent and more efficient.

[new to area]

sounds like u people need to get a life and a job

[dont know nothin]

Raptor in Michigan wrote:

<quoted text>
"we as a nation got ourself into this debt so we have to pull together and get out not by putting it on one person"
No, >WE< did NOT get ourselves into this mess!
THEY got THEMSELVES into a mess with THEIR spending!
I live on a tight budget and must sacrifice because I can't spend money I don't yet have. I will NOT pay for someone else to be irresponsible when I am expected to be.
And I am against ANY politician who votes to raise the debt ceiling.

lol you truely don't understand do you? we are americans and we stick together. we elect representatives to speak for us. when we go to war we don't just put them on credit cards we help out by having the people do what they can here to support the war, but it seems that people like you and others have forgot this. the defense budget does not account for 2 expensive wars waged at one time. and what are they spending money on exactly? spending spending spending, but on what? and if you do not know what the debt ceiling is then do not say you will denounce any politician who votes for it. those bills were passed a year in advance that took spening that has to be paid at the end of the year. granted that laws should not be put on a credit card, but they have been for decades, and politicians have been finding ways to offset spending for decades. Until recently when you have back to back lame duck congresses who do not compromise but instead use fear mongoring tactics and stalemates along with talks of government shutdowns. Then again, these tactics have been used before , but with less cynicism, and not as much "scare". there are some that reside in the house of representatives that are far more out of their minds than gingrich and others that have tried BS like this before, gingrich even implied so himself!

[Tired of Lies]

new to area wrote:

sounds like u people need to get a life and a job

Barney has a job, two nights a week, was employee of the week back in '08. It isn't much of a life but he really is at a disadvantage, government assistance doesn't go as far as it used to. I wouldn't want my son to date him but in Redd's book, he a swell fellow.

[dont know nothin]

Raptor in Michigan wrote:

<quoted text>
WELL REGULATED MILITIA means regulated by the PEOPLE, NOT the government. The second amendment was written to prevent the government from having too much power! Read the words of our founders on this issue!
"unless your preparing to be invaded by terrorist or the mob or a rival gang you have NO use for ANY firearm that holds more than 7 rounds."
I'll bet you said, "unless your preparing to be invaded by terrorist or the mob or a rival gang you have NO use for ANY firearm that holds more than 10 rounds" when they made the limit 10, didn't you! LMAO
Talk about being easily brainwashed!!!! I hope you have no contact with Charlie!!
BTW, I don't have any clue WHAT the scenerio could be, but it's my gun, my clip, my choice!! Even if the clip holds 10,000 rounds, nobody has anything to worry about if they aren't a threat to me.
"WHAT lady are you talking about?"
The lady in this story. Notice the guy didn't steal anything and leave....he looked for the woman and her two daughters......WHY? Note also, she ran out of bullets....
What if there had been two men?
And you want us to have fewer bullets? Get screwed!
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/woman-hi...
But the man eventually found the family.
"The perpetrator opens that door. Of course, at that time he's staring at her, her two children and a .38 revolver," Chapman told Channel 2’s Kerry Kavanaugh.
The woman then shot him five times, but he survived, Chapman said. He said the woman ran out of bullets but threatened to shoot the intruder if he moved.

LOL no kidding, i believe when around 60% of the country is in favor of these gun laws, then it is the people and the government has spoken and will speak for them. that is what we send them their for and that is what they are supposed to do. Why don't we just paste the rest of that story.

"The woman then shot him five times, but he survived, Chapman said. He said the woman ran out of bullets but threatened to shoot the intruder if he moved.

"She's standing over him, and she realizes she's fired all six rounds. And the guy's telling her to quit shooting," Chapman said."

Now this clearly shows that this lady has probably never fired a gun let alone this gun before, but has kept it for emergencies. This is a .38 revolver she was using and missed 1 of the 6 times and managed to miss hitting close to every major organ and artery.The pressure alone is enough to stop functioning of major organs if fired to kill. If you are going to own or carry a gun then you need to be well prepared on how to use it. If she had 6 shots to begin with and 2 guys would have been there then guess what she better be smart enough to empty a few into each one. If she would have actually practiced and used the gun on a weekly basis then i guarantee the guy would not have survived. If you need 10,000 rounds to kill anything your shooting at then you do not deserve the right to own a gun.

"My wife is a hero. She protected her kids. She did what she was supposed to do as responsible, prepared gun owner."

This lady had no clue on how to be a responsible prepared gun owner. She was LUCKY that her husband kept a loaded gun in the house and that she knew how to flip off the safety and squeeze the trigger, put a gun that is not a revolver in her hand and i bet she would of had difficulty. I am glad that she was able to defend herself and her children, but with no practice in firing a firearm or no gun safety course or being taught strict gun safety measures at home, you are just as dangerous with a gun than you are a help , not only to yourself but to others as well.

[something to think about]

dont know nothin wrote:

<quoted text>lol you truely don't understand do you? we are americans and we stick together. we elect representatives to speak for us. when we go to war we don't just put them on credit cards we help out by having the people do what they can here to support the war, but it seems that people like you and others have forgot this. the defense budget does not account for 2 expensive wars waged at one time. and what are they spending money on exactly? spending spending spending, but on what? and if you do not know what the debt ceiling is then do not say you will denounce any politician who votes for it. those bills were passed a year in advance that took spening that has to be paid at the end of the year. granted that laws should not be put on a credit card, but they have been for decades, and politicians have been finding ways to offset spending for decades. Until recently when you have back to back lame duck congresses who do not compromise but instead use fear mongoring tactics and stalemates along with talks of government shutdowns. Then again, these tactics have been used before , but with less cynicism, and not as much "scare". there are some that reside in the house of representatives that are far more out of their minds than gingrich and others that have tried BS like this before, gingrich even implied so himself!

I been reading yours and everybody else's post but yours stopped me, just wanted to let you know but incase you ain't aware of something. Obama and is responible for 40% of the national debt. He has an agenda and congress let's him spend and refuses to put their foot down and yes they are at fault too. But do not kid yourself obama has a spending problem that's completely out of control. Obama and congress haven't had a budget in four years. Recently i learned about half of what they are spending money is unnessary spending. Like for instantance some of the research studies they are doing. This wasteful spending and there is alot of it going on. Sure we are americans and taxpayers but doesn't give obama and congress a right to go on spending without thinking who will eventually pay for it all. We sent them to congress to be responible and they are doing a crappy job of it and obama isn't doing much better either. They shouldn't get paid either if they don't do their job. Do you have kids or greatgrand kids it will be all of them that pay for obama and congress's out of control spending spree. Do you not agree that this mess has got to stop.All the out of control spending has got to stop. Remember we got elections coming up next year if our congressmen here in arkansas don't start doing their jobs, it time for them to go.

[Old Army]

Then Senator Barack Obama voted against raising the debt ceiling in 2007.

[guess]

Dear Abby wrote:

Dear Abby,
My husband has a long record of money problems. He runs up huge credit-card
bills and at the end of the month, if I try to pay them off, he shouts at
me, saying I am stealing his money. He says pay the minimum and let our kids
worry about the rest, but already we can hardly keep up with the interest.
Also he has been so arrogant and abusive toward our neighbors that most of
them no longer speak to us. The few that do are an odd bunch, to whom he has
been giving a lot of expensive gifts, running up our bills even more. Also,
he has gotten religious. One week he hangs out with Catholics and the next
with people who say the Pope is the Anti-Christ, and the next he's with
Muslims.. Finally, the last straw. He's demanding that before anyone can be
in the same room with him, they must sign a loyalty oath. It's just so
horribly creepy! Can you help?
Signed, Lost
Dear Lost,
Suck it up and stop whining, Michelle. You're getting to live in the White
House for free, travel the world, and have others pay for everything for
you. You can divorce the jerk any time you want. The rest of us are stuck
with the idiot for 4 more years.
Signed, Abby

Abby very good answer i applaude you please keep up all those really good answers.

[something to think about]

One other thing don't know nothin, just curious are you for the second admendment or not. Have a question for you. If all the law abiding citizens have their rights restricted do you think this will keep the guns out of criminals hands? I'm sad to say no it won't A criminal does not follow the laws like the rest of therefore that is why so many of are repeat offenders. Chicago is a perfect example why gun control doesn't work they have the strictest gun control measures in the nation. Chicago has the highest death rate. You think the smart guys in charge would figure this out, their methods aren't working. I'm all for background checks and i do agree that something need to to keep guns out of those that have mental problems. But the biggest problems with guns are criminals that are repeat offenders and most do not get their guns legally. Law abiding citizens willing to follow the laws shouldn't by the president or congress be stripped of the rights just because we have a crime problem in america. One other thing Putting a sign up on any property that says "Gun free Zone" does let all the criminals out there is no gun on property and it's just asking for trouble. Those signs should be removed it sends the wrong message.

[Reality Check]

BARNEYII wrote:

<quoted text>
You need to decide which side of the fence you are on. Conservatives are not friends with diversity.
BTW -as far as I know the definition of "diverse" is the same for liberals as it is for any one else.

Says who? You mean conservatives are not friends with the liberal definition of diversity which must be different than the definition in the dictonary. If it wasn't different then no one would get left behind for being different. Diversity to liberals seems to be a tool used to set apart one group from another for the sole purpose of making one group hate another and give their loyalty to liberal politicians that say they want to help make everything "equal". That equality always seems to be in the area the liberals point out that one group has an advantage over another in. Don't you find that odd? I bet you don't.

[dont know nothin]

something to think about wrote:

<quoted text>I been reading yours and everybody else's post but yours stopped me, just wanted to let you know but incase you ain't aware of something. Obama and is responible for 40% of the national debt. He has an agenda and congress let's him spend and refuses to put their foot down and yes they are at fault too. But do not kid yourself obama has a spending problem that's completely out of control. Obama and congress haven't had a budget in four years. Recently i learned about half of what they are spending money is unnessary spending. Like for instantance some of the research studies they are doing. This wasteful spending and there is alot of it going on. Sure we are americans and taxpayers but doesn't give obama and congress a right to go on spending without thinking who will eventually pay for it all. We sent them to congress to be responible and they are doing a crappy job of it and obama isn't doing much better either. They shouldn't get paid either if they don't do their job. Do you have kids or greatgrand kids it will be all of them that pay for obama and congress's out of control spending spree. Do you not agree that this mess has got to stop.All the out of control spending has got to stop. Remember we got elections coming up next year if our congressmen here in arkansas don't start doing their jobs, it time for them to go.

why is he responsible for 40% of the debt? you tell me exactly what he has enacted single handly that has gave you that number. What unnecessary spending are you talking about? you say research studies but which ones? how do you know they are not useful? it must take alot of research studies to equal 40% of the debt don't you think? Yes we did send our elected representatives to do a job and only HOUSE REPUBLICANS are holding EVERYTHING up. Incase you have not noticed it is a spinless house leader leading a bunch of ravaging dogs. I agree they must be booted out and replaced, but that is not how our government works. I agree that it will take a long time for our debt to be under control and also agree that the debt is out of control and we have to do something to stop it. I do not agree that we kill jobs bills proposed and passed by the senate. I do not agree that we downgrade the countries credit rating and stall the growth of the economy and possibly ruin the world economy for several more years by not paying for laws that have already been passed by both chambers of congress and been running for the whole prior year. We had 18 debt ceiling raises under Reagan and 8 under Bush, "According to Bloomberg’s numbers, Republicans have raised the debt ceiling 49 times since 1960, while Democrats have only raised it 30 times. The debt ceiling has been raised 79 times since 1960." There is no reason behind the treason that is being commited in today's government. I do know elections are comming up and I believe it should be on everyones priority list to learn about the person they are sending to represent what is best for the country as a whole and does not send people to exercise a small percentage of the population's views such as TEA party candidates like Michelle Bachman, Sarah Palin, Marco Rubio, Todd Akin, Allen West, Herman Cain, and a host of others. Republicans criticize people for not being able to pay their bills and if they keep on the same track it will be our nation who will not pay it's bills.

[dont know nothin]

something to think about wrote:

One other thing don't know nothin, just curious are you for the second admendment or not. Have a question for you. If all the law abiding citizens have their rights restricted do you think this will keep the guns out of criminals hands? I'm sad to say no it won't A criminal does not follow the laws like the rest of therefore that is why so many of are repeat offenders. Chicago is a perfect example why gun control doesn't work they have the strictest gun control measures in the nation. Chicago has the highest death rate. You think the smart guys in charge would figure this out, their methods aren't working. I'm all for background checks and i do agree that something need to to keep guns out of those that have mental problems. But the biggest problems with guns are criminals that are repeat offenders and most do not get their guns legally. Law abiding citizens willing to follow the laws shouldn't by the president or congress be stripped of the rights just because we have a crime problem in america. One other thing Putting a sign up on any property that says "Gun free Zone" does let all the criminals out there is no gun on property and it's just asking for trouble. Those signs should be removed it sends the wrong message.

I believe whole heartidly in the 2nd amendment and want to keep it just the way it is. I do not think that ANYONE should be allowed to posses an "assault rifle", or carry any clip size larger than 10 rounds for all other guns. I am an avid hunter and see the need for NO such weapons or clip sizes. I hit what i'm aiming at and do not need 50 rounds and if i don't hit it with the first shot i damn sure do not need another 49 or 99 to get the job done. If people that use these weapons for target shooting or competition shooting, then the costs far outweigh any of these peoples views and they should understand that by doing this it may not end all acts like this but name a law that is 100%, but instead look as it will reduce the chance and is far better than doing nothing at all. We owe it to the families of those lost to do something responsible. If not this then what? this is something that is agreed on by a vast majority of the united states that has been polled and polled and polled again. In 2011 New Orleans had the highest murder rate followed by Detroit so where you got Chicago from is beyond me. Noone is stripping rights if a vast majority agrees on common sense legilation that will help keep guns out of repeat offenders and crazies hands. I have no problem with the laws because they do not affect me, nor do they apply to anyone i know. Those that i know that do have AR-15's and other assault rifles like my brother who is a former navy seal are not upset with any executive orders that have been passed nor worried about any of the legislation that might be passed. The reason is that he owns his guns he does not plan to sell them he does not own any clips that hold more than 10 rounds. His guns will not be forcefully taken from him and he does not plan to take the guns with him outside of his property. There is a lot of crazy fear mongoring going on when the only real people that are crazy upset are those that cannot see that a little give may save a lot of lives.

[dont know nothin]

something to think about wrote:

One other thing don't know nothin, just curious are you for the second admendment or not. Have a question for you. If all the law abiding citizens have their rights restricted do you think this will keep the guns out of criminals hands? I'm sad to say no it won't A criminal does not follow the laws like the rest of therefore that is why so many of are repeat offenders. Chicago is a perfect example why gun control doesn't work they have the strictest gun control measures in the nation. Chicago has the highest death rate. You think the smart guys in charge would figure this out, their methods aren't working. I'm all for background checks and i do agree that something need to to keep guns out of those that have mental problems. But the biggest problems with guns are criminals that are repeat offenders and most do not get their guns legally. Law abiding citizens willing to follow the laws shouldn't by the president or congress be stripped of the rights just because we have a crime problem in america. One other thing Putting a sign up on any property that says "Gun free Zone" does let all the criminals out there is no gun on property and it's just asking for trouble. Those signs should be removed it sends the wrong message.

A criminal cannot ever become a criminal without a law to break. All laws have to start somewhere, if not now then when? They may not solve 100% of the problem, but like i said before there is not one law that has been created that has not been broken.

[Old Army]

BARNEYII wrote:

<quoted text>
resorts"
No, not resorting OA, simply stating facts about imbeciles and Fox News faithful.
BTW- ant time you think you want a piece of the good fight bring it on, I noticed you have been semi absent, must have got a taste of that fight and new when to quit........

I'm probably more than "semi absent". It doesn't take long to catch up reading the posts where you and "don't know nothing" make fools of yourselves.

[something to think about]

dont know nothin wrote:

<quoted text>A criminal cannot ever become a criminal without a law to break. All laws have to start somewhere, if not now then when? They may not solve 100% of the problem, but like i said before there is not one law that has been created that has not been broken.

Yea but if they are repeat offenders then they have no business owning a gun don't you think. I do believe that the biggest majority of gun owners are good people and deserve to keep their rights. And if you do break the law by using a gun then you shouldn't be allow to own a gun. If you are violent criminal you really have not business on the streets and it does amaze how some of the have such short sentences. And if you are mentally ill you sure don't need one. How do you feel about well trained armed guards in schools. If someone comes in and runs into the guard the nutcase might think twice about shooting any body. And it just might stop some of these shootings. but placing restrictions on law abiding citizens is not the answers.

[something to think about]

Don't know nothin you want to know how i came up with 40%. These are not my figures this is what experts are saying after all they keep up with this stuff better than you or me and they would know. When obama came into office the national debt was 10 trillion(he didn't do that) now it's 16.4 trillion. I'm saying that him and congress are responible for over 6 trillion. You can't blame just republicans it is democrats that are at fault to. Don't you think they all could cut something if they really wanted to and NONE of them are willing to try. This is complete insanity to keep doing this, there is no really good reason we have a debt of 16.4 trillion. ALL OF THEM are addicted to spending which has seriously got to stop. I don't know about you but i don't want future generations to have to pay for all this insanity. Something has got to give. Your right we can't get rid of them but it would be a good start and it's a nice thought. But i don't believe any of has earned their paycheck do you. But these people have got to stop spending more than they take in, They need to do like the rest of us. I believe they need to stop raising the debt ceiling and learn to live in their means. If they don't stop and get their house in order, 2 credit agencies are threatening to downgrade us again and that would be a complete disaster for our people. You will have to admit it's all their fault(congress and obama). Until all of us call all of them and tell them it's time to stop spending and get a budget things will get worst and time is running out. I agree with you i do not want the 2nd amendment touched. I say just leave it alone it ain't brok so don't fix it. But when you start restricting any weapon you are on a slippery slope. It's not us law abiding citizens they need to come after. that's not the answer.

[Guest]

something to think about wrote:

<quoted text>Yea but if they are repeat offenders then they have no business owning a gun don't you think. I do believe that the biggest majority of gun owners are good people and deserve to keep their rights. And if you do break the law by using a gun then you shouldn't be allow to own a gun. If you are violent criminal you really have not business on the streets and it does amaze how some of the have such short sentences. And if you are

mentally ill you sure don't need one. How do you
feel about well trained armed guards in schools. If
someone comes in and runs into the guard the
nutcase might think twice about shooting any
body. And it just might stop some of these
shootings. but placing restrictions on law abiding
citizens is not the answers.

Do you think a criminal gives a rats ass about the right to own a gun??? Dumbass democrat!!!

[what]

Guest wrote:

<quoted text>
Do you think a criminal gives a rats ass about the right to own a gun??? Dumbass democrat!!!

democrat is just another word for criminal

[BARNEYII]

Reality Check wrote:

<quoted text>
Says who? You mean conservatives are not friends with the liberal definition of diversity which must be different than the definition in the dictonary. If it wasn't different then no one would get left behind for being different. Diversity to liberals seems to be a tool used to set apart one group from another for the sole purpose of making one group hate another and give their loyalty to liberal politicians that say they want to help make everything "equal". That equality always seems to be in the area the liberals point out that one group has an advantage over another in. Don't you find that odd? I bet you don't.

Let me spell this out for you, I relate diversity to change.

Conservatives do not like change.

You just don't get it do you, so let me be blunt about this as well, you sir are not smart enough to second guess me,

Regardless of the level of my intelligence.