Thursday, May 28, 2009

right time for tax cuts

rappers

cutting corporate taxes

Rhode Island’s Governor Don Carcieri is trying to make the state more attractive for businesses, and buseiness people.  He has proposed a phasing out of the corporate tax, and a reduction of the personal income tax.  Social service advocates say now’s not the time to cut taxes, when everything else is tight.  Here’s what rappers think.
You betcha it’s time. The services that might get cut are mostly being given to ILLEGALS anyway, the truly needy are shunted off. So, cut the taxes so us hard working LEGAL RI residents can receive a break for a change!!
Bil from Warwick

Cut the taxes.  We need real jobs in this state.  not the restaurant jobs that pay minimum wage.  We drove off all the manufacturing jobs and now are paying the price.
Sailor

Sooooooo, you wonder why everyone is leaving (or trying) to leave RI….... the housing market is horrible, and that’s why some are STUCK here.  The taxes are through the ROOF…...other than you CAN’T sell your home…..... what other reason is there to Stay Here???
Carol m

I am so sick and tired of corporate America getting all the breaks! Yeah, lower our state income taxes but… eliminate the corporate tax all together. Please tell me why the people in charge squander all our money away and then we have to make it up! Yeah, that’s fair! Then they cut the programs for the aged, handicapped and poor instead of getting rid of state provided cars ( I believe that would save eleven million dollars alone)! state provided cell phones, get rid of the assistant’s assistant’s assistant and so on and so forth! It is so sad that they keep taking from the poor and giving to the rich! But hey, we live in the crookedest little state in the union. All I know is if they give us, Joe public a buck, that means they are filling the fat cats pockets to the hilt!  As far as more jobs, remember Regan’s trickle down theory? Yeah, right!
R.S., W.Greenwich

Why pay taxes to a State that pays themselves a salary to tell you they have managed and administrated a condition of out of money. fool me once fool me twice.
Zuke

I know it is counter-intuitive, but the last thing we should do is lower any taxes. What we need to do is fire the bums that got us into this financial mess, but Rhode Islanders don’t have the guts for that. As long as we keep re-electing the same incompetent boobs to our state and local governments, we will continue having the same problems. If we lowered the tax rate to zero, we would become Somalia. We need to get rid of the fools we keep electing and try to find someone that wants to fix RI instead of lining his own pockets.
Bill G, Cranston

Yes but I need to be convinced that a reduction should be enacted at this time; I can, however, be convinced of the immediate need for action now.  I think an incremental tax cut should be considered.  I’d suggest leaving taxes as they are, during this fiscal year: then, incrementally, over three years, until the desired level of taxation is reached.  As incentive to not waste three years, I would suggest businesses locating here, during this fiscal year and the next, be given an additional of a percentage (possibly 5 or 10 percent) of their third year tax reduction, to be applied to their tax bill in each of the ensuing 5 or 10 years.  This is a little more pragmatic approach to the problem.
Joe T, East Providence

They only way out of our financial mess it to cut taxes and draw business into our state rather than watching them run screaming for a better business advantage elsewhere.  Our elected officials love to spend the taxpayer money and hand out contracts that are unsustainable.  It is time for them to go or to curb their spending like the rest of us have had to do. I am not sure why they don’t get it, as they are supposed to be intelligent individuals. Maybe it is time to make all in government stand in the same lines their constituents do. Too many perks have made them think money grows on trees.
It is time to let the Governor govern and stop fighting him based on political party. He has the right idea.  The Dems in RI are the party of NO.  Save our state, don’t sink it.
Lee, Woonsocket

Friday, May 22, 2009

Torture

rappers

Should the Senate drop the investigation?

The ongoing investigation into who authorized enhanced interrogation techniques has stirred up a debate…it’s either ‘whatever it takes, they have no rights’, or ‘we can’t lower ourselves to inhuman tactics, and must obey OUR laws.‘  read on for the rants and heartfelt opinions of the best viewers in television…you, the rappers.

It occurs to me that there a lot more pressing matters(the economy,employment,banking industry and automotive industry, for a couple of examples) than our treatment of those who, not only plot against us, but who actively take part in that mission and who go around killing our citizens.  It is my consideration that we should use the exact methods they use to extract information.  Therefore, there is no doubt, in my mind, that further investigation must be halted. 
Side note:  this is nothing more than an transparent attempt by our junior senator (his title does not rate a capital s) to advance his pathetic career.
Joe T,  East Providence

Any suspected violation of the Constitution must be investigated. There is also a long legal history stretching from the removal from duty of Major Glenn in the Spanish-American War to the 1983 conviction and sentencing of Sheriff Parker in Texas that makes waterboarding both torture and illegal under US law. This is a slam dunk. As an aside, the Constitution can be a suicide pact. Its purpose is best reflected by the state motto of New Hampshire. If you don’t have the guts to live by the Constitution, you should either shut up or investigate living arrangements in places that pretend to be free, like Britain or Israel.
Bill G, Cranston

Those that seek to control and
dictate a Free Society; through torture, and believe confessions begotten by such methods are valid; will never know Freedom.
Only Madness disguised
as an exemplary protection of
a sane and civilized world.
Zuke

I believe the united states was justified in there means of interrogating the terrorists that have or have been a part of killing hundreds of American citizens.They are no different than murderers and should be treated as such.
Ron, Coventry

I think that we must accept the fact that it is a daunting task to keep our nation safe and that dealing with terrorists may involve advanced interrogation that we may find appalling but in fact play a pivotal role in keeping our nation safe.
With so many other issues right now, I feel this is clearly a diversion from a failed stimulus package, a flip-flop on Guantanamo Bay, and a spiraling National debt.  However, I expect this issue will be put to rest very soon as Nancy Pelosi seems to be caught in some"misstatements” about the “briefing” that she really wasn’t “briefed on”.
Mary Beth, Swansea

Of course the Senate should continue to investigate the illegal activities of the previous administration. They have to. Those acts were ILLEGAL. Duh! They violate US LAW. They violation the GENEVA CONVENTION. Not to mention being highly immoral. If it had been your kid that was waterboarded you wouldn’t be asking such a ridiculous question.
Kalula

If Shelly Whitehouse wants to make a name for himself with his Senate hearings on torture,  that name should be Jane Fonder; both he and she give aid and comfort to the enemy.
If he had a relative who had his head sawn off, would he still be willing to give wanton murderers who have no respect for human life all the comforts of a Club Fed? A terrorist will no longer fear being tortured by having ladies panties covering his head or having a cricket set loose in his cell if Shelly has his way.
The world is listening, and because of the Senate hearings, America’s enemy’s will perceived us as a weak, effeminate nation. An intelligent Alcaide or Taliban fighter knows that he has nothing to fear from America if captured; he will no longer live in a feces ridden cave, but in a clean cell with clean clothes and a full belly.
Remember 1950s McCarthyism and the Red baiting House Un-American Activities Committee, and the way he and his committee tore away freedom of association in America? Well, welcome to Whitehouseism, the new search to scourge patriots at the Senate hearings whipping post.
DRDIX, Bristol

Bill,Bill,Bill…..If investigating President Clinton about his affair during his presidency seemed necessary; don’t you think a president approving illegal torture tactics should be looked at also?  Or, have we as a society totally warped our morals into thinking our tax money should be spent on questional affairs instead of what the real and more important issues are in this world.
Go Figure?!?!
Nothing surprises me anymore!!
Gail,  Riverside

I think that the people responsible for ok ing the torture should be held accountable and that includes the bald headed, hidden for 8 yrs VP.  and his puppet, the president.
Judith, Coventry

This sets a dangerous precedent.  If it’s done to one administration, it then opens the door to investigate any others in the future.  We have been at war before, and we will no doubt be at war again.  Who will want to serve in the military or make the difficult decisions in any administration if there is the possibility of prosecution for protecting the citizens of this country.  Who makes the decision as to what constitutes torture in those gray areas?  These people put their lives on the line to keep us safe, and this is the thanks they get? their reputations destroyed or prison?  There will always be the few who will cross the line—that is a separate issue.  I am by no means in favor of real torture, but this whole idea of investigating our own frightens me into thinking that our country has gone weak and spineless.
Julie, West Warwick

No, this is a of the senate’s time and the taxpayers money, by an effete senator who has no concept of what is important to his constituents and the country
he serves.
Joe T, East Providence

Friday, May 15, 2009

Overblown Coverage?

rappers

Enough or Too much?

rappers pretty much as a person felt the Swine Flu threat was way overblown.  Of course, their opinions might be different if it had swept the nation and killed a bunch of people.  But then, if my mother had wheels, she’d be a trolley car.  Every American who got sick, recovered…thankfully.  and the total number of cases remained relatively small…much smaller than the seasonal flu we deal with every year.  so, here’s the line from rappers responding to the question..was swine flu coverage too much?

As a news junkie I watched as the media hyped this minor issue into a Pandemic over a weekend.
Flu is around us all the time.  We live with it year in and year out.
As the hysteria built it just got to the point where I just tuned it all out.  Guess what????  It’s NO big deal.  A few folks died a few more got sick.
And a bunch of talking heads justified their huge salaries.
I understand the NEED to make people aware but, this media fed hysteria is just over the top.
Further, instead of closing schools because ONE student MIGHT have the bug is terrible and unneccessary.
IF they think the student MIGHT be sick make that student stay home.
IF folks were not so anal about bacteria, they might not get sick all the time.  You do need to live with germs and dirt to be healthy.
Judith, Coventry

The only reason there is so much coverage of the swine flu
is because there hasn’t been another disaster to cover lately.
The news is about selling advertising and newspapers.
Price of gas is down, now we have a real President, ...boring.
Stuckinri

It’s the flu people, the flu.  Take precautions you would normally take to avoid catching any virus.  This strain does not cause you to sprout pig ears & a tail!
Cathy,  Cranston

We have been inundated with the “terrible” Swine Flu Pandemic news. From what I have read this flu is no more dangerous than the flu virus that hit this past winter. I think it’s just a way for the news media to sound off and to try to convince us that they are necessary, justifying their existence as it were. Certainly we needed to hear about it, but the media lead every newscast with this story, and as sure as we needed to be informed we didn’t need to be terrified. I wasn’t.
Al, Johnston

Absolutely!  There has been excessive coverage regarding the flu pandemic that so far doesn’t exist.  We not even close to an epidemic!  Time for the state to spend their resources on something else.
Deb, East Greenwich

Here’s what my research has gotten me:
With approximately 6,575,298,222 people on earth, and there being *so far* 331 confirmed cases of swine flu, your chances of having caught it so far are approximately 5.03399221 × 10^-6… that’s .000005%. That mean’s you’re more likely (far more likely) to be struck and killed by lightning, than you are to have contracted this media-sensationalized sickness. Not to mention what we’re hearing about those who are contracting it… “...likely to make a speedy recovery…“? Wait, what? I thought this was the next black plague!
Kevin S, Rhode Island College

there was too much hype that generated public panic, but not enough fact.
Richard, Bristol

On its death bed, the media now blows everything out of proportion these days. Whether it’s the swine flu, the blizzard of the century that never comes or the latest car wreck hoping for the ultimate blood and guts scene, the media preys on people’s worst fears.
Sergio, Narragansett

I come at this issue with a very different perspective. I am a Pastor, and several years ago, while waiting with the funeral cortege in the very north end of the North Burial Ground in Providence, I saw something that to this day sends chills down my back. In that section alone there are perhaps a hundred or even more grave stone, all with the same death year, 1918. Go take a look at it, with a photographer - I think it might give you pause as you consider the coverage of this flu outbreak. They were victims of the “Spanish Flu” which it is estimated killed anywhere from 50 to 100 million people worldwide, or the approximate equivalent of one third of the population of Europe. An estimated one third of the world (500 million people) became infected. It was caused by an unusually virulent and deadly Influenza A virus strain of subtype H1N1. Sound Familiar?
Also, here is a link to a Washington Post article by David Brown, entitled “Age of Flu Victims Has Big Implications” which gives reference to scientists who say that the relative youth of ill people is evidence of pandemic potential
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/16/AR2009051601850.html?wpisrc=newsletter
Has there been too much swine flu coverage? We probably won’t know for a while. From my perspective, with the memory of seeing nearly a hundred grave stones in North Burial Ground, all with the same death date of 1918, I’d rather have enough information to take appropriate precautions, if necessary, than have another generation look sadly at another cluster of grave stones form the early 21st century.
Sincerely,
Rev. F. Richard G, North Kingstown

I haven’t actually seen that much of news coverage of the swine flu scare, but it depends on the person watching and what they watch and how much they watch; so, if they are watching several news media channels and/or reading the local papers, then they might be saying there’s too much coverage.  On the flip side, if one doesn’t watch enough news or read their newspapers, then they say there’s not enough.  If people want to be scared out of their wits about some pandemic the medias are drudging up, then they’ll watch and listen and read.  However, accounts of the flu bug rising does not necessarily mean there’s widespread pandemic either; it depends on the people reporting it, receiving proper health care for it, and taking care of themselves from it.  The more “scares” we get from you guys, the more the public is apt to get frustrated and actually act out the scare themselves, hence, adding to the unofficial numbers the government wants to get to feed to the general public itself.  If we all will be just more aware of ourselves, keeping clean, washing hands (I do it all the time where I work….but don’t see too many others doing it), covering mouths when coughing/sneezing, we’ll eliminate the germ ourselves.  We don’t need the government to step in to “scare” us into their pandemic outcries.
C-Ann-C
Coventry

Friday, May 01, 2009

morning after

rappers

teens can get anti-pregnancy pill

Yes, I called it an anti-pregnancy pill.  I know some call it an abortion pill. I’m not totally clear on which it is.  If it prevents the fertilzed eggs from implanting in the uterus…which is it?  If it prevents an egg from being fertilized, it’s more like a condom than it is an abortion.  Wait…I’ll google it.  It turns out it does both…prevent egg from being fertilized..but if egg is fertilized, it prevents implantation.  So I’m trying to stay neutral with the anti-pregnancy tag…though it may be just avoiding the issue.  Interestingly, most of you based your opinions on the teenage pregnancy angle, pretty much along the lines of the split between pro-abortionists, and those who say abortion is murder.  Here we go:

The liberals have gotten their way again. They pushed for parents to not be able to spank their kids, then they all but stopped the parents from disciplining the kids, they and the TV Networks push sex, first heterosexual, now homosexual into our living rooms. Now the kids are experimenting and they want the kids to get an abortion pill without the parents knowing. If that’s not helping to screw up this country I don’t know what is.
Al from Johnston

If teen agers do not know about prevention they have no business having sex. I agree with the morning after pill only in the case of rape. I believe that if you are old enough to do the deed, you should know how to prevent.
Lee L. Woonsocket

All teenagers (and adults for that matter) should be taught that the fastest way to poverty, is to have a child you cannot afford.
No one on this earth has a right to produce a child that is not wanted, and that you cannot afford to raise.
To do otherwise, is irresponsible and more importantly, immoral.
Sophia, North Kingstown

I think teens should be able to purchase the morning after pill. It would reduce the amounts of unwanted teen pregnancy. People worry that giving kids condoms and such will lead to more promiscuity but isn’t it better for them to be safe first rather than worry about what would happen otherwise?
SLK

I see no problem with 17-yr olds acting responsibly, instead of adding another unwed mother to welfare.
Bill, Portsmouth

As Goldwater and Buckley would have told you, one of the pillars of true conservatism is knowing when to mind your own business. This is one of those times. The choice belongs to the the young woman and should be the concern of no one else except her parents. I’ve never known anyone worthy of throwing the first stone.
Bill G, Cranston

Why not. It is a proven fact that we cannot control the raging hormones of teenagers. Even adults get out of control at times. By the same token, more intense education on the matter should accompany the pill.
Lee L, Woonsocket