Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Staff Contacts | Affiliates | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS

How would you rank the state and federal response to the nation's propane shortage?

  1. Good
  2. Average
  3. Poor
sort: oldest | newest




Apr-11-14 6:36 PM

As usual the rich get richer and the poor pay the price, They knew this was going to be a cold winter there is no reason for a short supply of gas, except to raise the price.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-06-14 1:36 PM

FORTY (40) words . . .

1 misspelled word

19 re·pet·i·tive words

11 periods

6 nouns 1 sentence

That means you have only spouted 20 words, LESS six (6) nouns,

to boast your trophy piece of writing.


DO have you the capability to countermand or disprove, anything I’ve put down that isn’t factual?

Nineteen repetitive words and that’s not blather ?

To date you haven’t served up anything credible to debate that’s factual,

nor debate worthy,

other than debating your ignorance,

which by your self-provided demonstration,

isn’t even debatable.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-06-14 11:39 AM

Would your brain

give you the capacity to chose something else to read and by pass my blather ?



Give your brain a life.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-06-14 11:33 AM


I've said it before,

but you have certainly missed the point, so I will repeat for you


"Are you qualified to give advice ?

Who “qualified” you in the first place . . .

donald duck or his fried friend goofy . . . Duhaaaaaaa ?

Unless you have a degree in crap analysis . . .

what said, or who said that you were qualified to judge what crap is . . . "

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-06-14 11:29 AM

let alone, - give an intellectual treatise,

- write a dissertation for your doctor of philosophy degree in crap studies . . .

- a systematic exposition

- an argument in writing,

- including a methodical discussion of facts

- and principles involved

- and conclusions reached

- on the topic of crap . . .

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Apr-04-14 10:45 AM

OMG, Whizzy Whig...blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah, diarrhea of the mouth yet again...yu really need to get a life and cut the crap with your blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah....

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-28-14 11:54 PM

Doesz ... dealing with 320 major corporations over a period of a year, over a million dollars in revenue, employment of 40 + people part time and full time every year for 40 plus years count for



0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-28-14 11:52 PM

That's okay.

I know you cannot respond.

Your rebuttals illustrate more than what you say.

With maturation you might present a compelling scenario, if you had an inherited gift of a native resource to call upon.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-28-14 11:39 PM

I’ve lived the history. I can recite chapter and verse, nearly from memory. That’s more than you can do with your brain on steroids but can’t do even if connected to the internet.

Give a person credit, for being a part of history, and not learning history from a biased book as you have read about history ...

credit for living to the age of 80+ years

dealing with snot-nosed kids, doesn’t have its just reward, especially since some of you don’t know half of what I know, half of what I’ve lived, no brag just fact;

for that matter there are many like you, who haven’t recited anything beyond an F.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-28-14 11:33 PM

To date you haven’t served up anything credible to debate that’s factual. Even your anecdotal data is fanciful conjecture on your part as it fails to take account of events that occurred prior to the point and time of your purported observation..

Just because you have a rain shower filled with excrement, doesn’t mean the sky is falling and the climate is turning to b.s., it’s just one rain shower among many.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-28-14 11:33 PM

Since you made the inferential claim that you are more up to date than what my posted comments were about .. .

give readers the benefit of your expertise and remove any doubt from a display of your intellectual acumen,

by providing a pithy one or two sentence synopsis/summary, why the following people were important to the modern world and their connection to recent historical events:

- william Clinton, allen greenspan, - robert rubin, larry summers,

- timothy geithner, phil gramm,

- wendy lee gramm, arthur levitt,

- thomas bliley, james leach.

BTW, were you EVEN living in the early nineteen seventies.

Judging from you comments and lack of anything resembling mature thought, I think not.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-27-14 8:04 AM


here's the truth, i don't read dumbed down public fish paper.

i call a spade when i see one,

besmirch or not, you don't know what you're talking about ...

nuting, at least from what you laid down here.

nuting . .

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-27-14 12:48 AM

The truth hurts, huh wig? You sound out of touch and I don't mean to be negative. Have you dealt with any business leaders or any businesses at all? That's okay, you don't need to respond, I can tell by your answers. If you had any real experience you would present more compelling and applicable information in your arguments other than what one would find in older, out-of-date political science textbooks. I do not mean to besmirch you but you sound disconnected and appear more like an armchair political quarterback who believes they are enlightened by reading the New York Times. Sorry.

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-26-14 11:18 PM


How’s this for even “dumber” :

“We may have democracy,

or we may have wealth

concentrated in the hands of a few.

We must make our choice.”

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-26-14 11:17 PM

The orginal words were paraphrased for you - hoping you could understand the idea with a few less words, but you didn’t.

Now then, Vuachie, want to hear something really dumber:

This is a quotation from Louis D Brandeis

Born November, 1856; died October 1941

He held office from 1916 to 1939.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-26-14 11:16 PM

I’ll not bore you to death with details, as you would no doubt, call them “dumb” as well.

Details that you won’t/can’t comprehend because of your cognitive dissonance.

On the other hand, try and educated the rest of those can read here,

why these word’s would bear repeating?

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-26-14 11:14 PM

And yet Vuachei,

here’s something really “dumb” to get your head around, have someone explain it to you . . .

He attended university, graduating at the age of twenty with the highest grade average in history, from the harvard school of law

He later published a book titled

“Other Peoples Money and How the Bankers Use It“ . . .

suggesting ways of curbing the power of large banks and money trusts, which partly explains why he fought against powerful corporations, monopolies, public corruption . . .

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-26-14 11:13 PM

He devoted much of his time to public causes

and was later dubbed the “People’s Lawyer.”

He insisted on serving on cases without pay so that he would be free to address wider issues involved.

The Economist magazine calls him "A Robin Hood of the law."

Among his notable early cases were actions fighting railroad monopolies (JP Morgan;

defending workplace and labor laws, helping create the Federal Reserves System, and presented ideas for the what was to be the Federal Trade Commission, (FTC).

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-26-14 11:10 PM

William O. Douglas said of Brandeis: "Brandeis was a militant crusader for social justice whoever his opponent might be.

He was dangerous not only because of his brilliance, his arithmetic, his courage.

He was dangerous because he was incorruptible. . . the fears of the establishment were greater because of [ his ethnic heritage].

His opinions were, according to legal scholars,

some of the "greatest defenses" of freedom of speech and the right to privacy ever written by a member of the supreme court.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-26-14 11:09 PM


You’ve convinced my that I’m dumb, and I shouldn’t have posted something like those “dumb” words.

Democracy ?

Republic, of course.

And Republicans, of course,

but before they hijacked the system with their brand of bank - rolling candidates they could corrupt, before and after, in office.


1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-26-14 10:16 PM


more accurately:

you don't know what you're talking about.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-26-14 10:14 PM


you know what you're talking about

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-26-14 2:23 PM

That is great that you can recall selective facts to articulate your point. I base my knowledge on the fact that I do business with medium and large sized manufacturers across the country. And they are all consistent in that they will expand business after this president gets out of office. It is these same OEM's that dramatically reduced orders (back log) in early 2008 and minimized forecasts. Not to mention downsized employees and operations. All because they saw a political party change coming to the White House. Right or wrong, this is the world we are in. Can the Democrats table anything to get businesses back to increase manufacturing and embark upon capital projects? Im not bashing the Dems, it's just what I see in the line of work I'm in. Funny the news doesn't talk about this.

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-25-14 11:47 AM

"You can have a democracy, and you can have the rich, but you can't have both" - Frog


Further, we as a country don't have a democracy, rather we have a republic (or we're suppose to).

The form of government we have is not meant to limit the amassing of wealth but rather power.

Both parties have those that circumvent this yet it isn't a product of government but rather a flaw in the human condition. One ironically that you and Whiz proclaim continuously, that of greed.

Therefore, your statement is false and in actuality based on the definition of a democracy (as a form of government) you will be MORE likely to have the rich elite class ruling unopposed. The exact opposite of what you claim.

We might argue our current leaders are trying to turn this country into a democracy as opposed to the republic the framers intended.

Limit governmental powers guided by a constitution and upholdable by a judiciary.

The problem is the current state of humanity (entitled

1 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-22-14 9:26 PM

You can have a democracy, and you can have the rich,

but you can’t have both.”

What are you saying when you say “Republicans” have a better track record” ?

“Track record for/at what”?

The “better track record” that you say Republicans have, has been fine tuned to the point of being subversive, or the antithesis that undermines the word democracy, and the well being of the general population, and for society overall.

Surely you jest, if you are addressing any narrowing of income and wealth gaps, and increasing the well being of the broader spectrum (not the rich) of society in the U.S.

Yes, Republicans, especially since the 1970’s have the better track record for dismantling the longest running period of time where the middle class actually increased in numbers, and overall, the benefits of the strongest economy in the world, “trickled-down” to the poor!

Now, yes the Republicans have a “better track record” at that aspect of their make-up.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 95 comments Show More Comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web