Email, Hate Mail and Comments from Readers

John Ransom
|
Posted: Oct 09, 2011 12:01 AM

Robert G Munck wrote: "Trolls will be here after the mail and they cash their welfare checks."- We [trolls] all have direct deposit. - in response to The Hypocrisy of Dopes

Dear Robert,

You guys use direct deposit?

So how much is it worth to liberals to have money directly deposited to their account, immediately available for withdrawal, and obviate the need for making a trip to the bank?

Or is that just another innovation that saves consumers time and money that greedy Wall Street bankers should be paying you for?

I’ll have more to say about this below.     

Brad wrote: I don't have a party. I've been an independent since the first time I voted in 1978. I just believe the national Republican Party went off the deep end in 2002. - in response to The Hypocrisy of Dopes

Dear Brad,

Couldn’t agree more as to spending for the GOP.

But at least the GOP has a deep end. The depth finder can’t find the bottom for the Democrats right now.

I’m not a big fan of either party at times, but if you were a Republican before, I can’t believe that somehow the policies the Democrats have advocated since 2002 have spoken to you. If you are going to come here and pretend that you are a conservative who has been turned off by the party then you should give us some examples, so we can judge if you are a single issue nut job or a liberal nut job masquerading in conservative drag.

Rich wrote: I see true liberal is here today, but where are his cohorts; baggerturd, speedicut, lilly, etc.? Did they get arrested over the weekend protesting in Boston, or are they just out cashing their welfare checks? Must say it is rather harmonious on TH without them. - in response to The Hypocrisy of Dopes

Dear Rich,

Nope. I’m not being very tolerant with message board hijackers.

I’m cool with everyone who comes here and wants to debate the actual issues at hand- folks like Illinois Roy, Lilly, Lon, etc.

But those people who cut and paste off-topic posts that start “I was talking with a Teabagger the other day about the time Republicans shot John F. Kennedy…” or “Why do we even allow Russian Literature Majors to VOTE in this country?” “How come you can’t write about the pending Free Trade Agreements?”

The standard editorial practice at THFn is “When in doubt, strike it out.”

Xjnyc wrote: The only people who believe it are your audience, Ransom. "American People" and "Americans" means your small group of far right-wingers who come to the table hating Obama for his race, his fractured childhood family life, and for the fact that his mother once married a man of Islamic faith. You no nothing about Americans other than the opinions of your angry, chip-on-the-shoulder closed little group. You do not seek knowledge, information or opinions from anyone other than those who think like you do, so trying to paint a picture of "All Americans" is a ridiculous exercise in futility for you.- response to Obama’s No Harry Truman

Dear Xjnyc,

I don’t hate Obama.

I think he’s a horrible president, a corrupt politician and I don’t think he’s been honest with the American people about who he really is and what he believes.

Do I respect him? No. But I don’t ever remember him asking for our respect. In fact, I’m sure that he believes that what he thinks of us bitter gun-totin’, God-fearing Americans is much more important than what we think of him.       

His fractured family life never features in my columns nor does his race.

What does inform my political views is the fact that I grew up in a Democrat household in Cook County, Illinois in the 1970s and 1980s. No one was a stronger partisan for Democrats than I was when I was younger. I was crushed when as a freshman in high school Jimmy Carter lost to Ronald Reagan. 

But you know what happened? I grew up. I read books. I was alienated from a party that stopped representing the working class once Reagan seized the center of American politics.

For Democrats, it’s been one long drift towards more extreme ideas that divide America.

Say what you want about the right-wing, but at least we respect what made this the greatest country in the world. All liberals can do is try to rewrite history with thin claims that somehow the white guys in charge got it wrong for 230 years.

Oops. I mentioned that liberals mention race all the time. Sorry. Didn’t mean to point out that you guys are racists.  I know that’s racist of me when I dwell on the fact that race and identity is one of the prime characteristics of your movement.      

Illinois Roy wrote: Well people may not trust O'Bama but you've got the same problem on your side. I mean Rick Perry? You can't trust that dude as far as you can throw him. Romney gets the John Kerry flip-flop award every year. Those are the only two that stand a chance. –in response to More Than Ten Reason Americans Doesn’t Trust Obama

Dear Roy,

I wouldn’t be so quick to handicap the race. Election cycles are becoming unpredictable. Hillary was deemed the “inevitable” candidate at around this time in the last presidential election cycle. Didn’t quite work that way.

We’ve seen candidates rise, fall and rise. I wouldn’t count out even Bachmann yet.

It’s a pretty crowded field and that plays to candidates with high name ID like Romney. As the field narrows Romney and Perry’s native problems will come into better focus.

But the biggest game-changer is the Tea Party.

On they left they try to marginalize it. But the truth is that the Tea Party scares the pros on the left. That’s why they have been so anxious to have some movement from the left that they can use as a foil against the Tea Party. They are so desperate that they even are willing to christen the Occupy Wall Street as the progressive Tea Party.

Good luck with that.

Recreate ’68 anyone?

That ought to work well for the Democrats.                            

Gray Ghost wrote: The Democrat controlled US Senate won't even work with Obama. Astra, you need to get your head out of your a*s. –in response to More Than Ten Reason Americans Doesn’t Trust Obama

Dear Gray,

Nor will the House.

“In one of the signs that Obama may have more trouble inside his own party than with the loyal opposition heading in to the 'Ought-Twelve election cycle,” I wrote on the 15th,  “Democrats and Republicans are teaming up for an 11th hour effort to stop the EPA from putting the sea-ment shoes on the cement industry.”

This week the House passed the measure 262-161 with 25 Democrats bucking party lines to support the measure.

“The bill is sponsored jointly by both Republicans and Democrats including  Reps. John Sullivan(R-OK) and Mike Ross (D-AR), together with Adam Kinzinger (R-IL), Bob Latta (R-Ohio), Greg Walden (R-OR),  Joe Barton (R-TX), John Carter (R-TX), Charles Dent (R-PA), Dan Boren (D-OK), and Jason Altmire (D-PA).”

Expect more of this type of thing as election seasons goes on.

The GOP and Democrats will pass this type of regulatory rollback while paring out parts of Obama’s jobs bill like cutting the payroll tax. But first the Senate will stomp on Obama’s jobs bill.

It may not get one vote, just like his joke-shop, novelty budget from February.        

Lon wrote: Actually the Obama administration is unique in having gone this long with no top official being forced to resign due to a corruption scandal. We have a big government, and having nobody caught in corruption is oddly surprising. - in response to President Tantrum: Eat My Peas and Do My Homework

Dear Lon,

I guess your string was broken this week when Jonathan Silver was forced out at the DOE as an attempt to find a scapegoat for Solyndra. But since emails released this week also show that either Obama or Rahm Emanuel was the one putting pressure on the DOE to do the Solyndra loans, don’t expect the stoning to stop with Jonathan Silver.

And Holder? Ha! Ready made for an election year. I hope he never resigns. I hope a bitter Obama clings to Holder like a walked gun and fundamentalist religion.    

Ivan wrote: Resident Tantrum will be given the White house by Do-nothing Republican leadership, backed by a gullible Do-nothing Republican following. Republicans have fielded a Rino, an establishment bunch for the presidency. Each will be slashed, burned and cut to shreds by a fast and furious Democrat killing machine. - in response to President Tantrum: Eat My Peas and Do My Homework

Dear Ivan,

Whoops: The Worlds of Warcraft site is at http://us.battle.net/wow/en/?-

Delta wrote: Oh, please, please, please indict the antisemitic Turban, and Holder at the same time. With the election of Mark Kirk as a real Illinois senator, the incarceration of crooked Ryan, the convictions of crooked Blago, I am hopeful that I'm no longer the only voice crying in the proverbial desert to clean up Illinois politics. -in response to Indict Dick Durbin and Eric Holder Too

Dear Delta,

I would love for Illinois politics to change. But for that to happen, you’ll have to change Chicago.

They way the citizens embraced Rahm, I’m afraid it’s not going to happen in my lifetime.    

Wolfgang wrote: So Mr. Ransom - how big is your monthly check from Bank of America? You're nothing but a banking industry shill. -in response to Indict Dick Durbin and Eric Holder Too

Dear Wolf,

I don’t get a check from Bank of America.

My father worked for them after the bank he worked for was purchased by BoA.

He hated the company. I don’t hate them, but I defer to my father’s opinion.

He died in 2004.                                                                            

Lillian wrote: Bank of America is a horribly run company, makes horrible financial decisions, and is in deep doo-doo. Blaming the government and taking it out on consumers is a joke. Why we bailed them out and continue to bail them out is really the question. -in response to Indict Dick Durbin and Eric Holder Too

Dear Lilly,

See my opinion above.

But Bank of America isn’t the only bank imposing a fee for debit cards. It’s the only one that Democrat Senator Dick Durbin is trying to put out of business.

Why Obama and Geithner bailed them out with $45 billion isn’t the only question.

Ask why Tim Geithner, aka the federal government, forced BoA to buy the assets of Merrill Lynch and Countrywide. Ask why, since according to Durbin and Obama, BoA is in such great shape financially, that they keep writing down assets from those sales. Ask why the federal government denied BoA, just a few months ago, a request to distribute a dividend because the feds said they were capital impaired.

Why is the government even involved in any of this? Whether it’s the bailout or Durbin interfering in the regular business practices of transaction processors on behalf of retailers, they’ve done a great job Lilly.

Thanks for supporting the Democrats’ continued mismanagement of banks, especially Bank of America.

VermontAmerican wrote: Apart from Ransom's fine analysis, the problem is that almost anything Durbin says on the senate floor is protected speech. Another problem is that the law he cited applies to New York state. Durbin should be recalled (if Illinois law permits). -in response to Indict Dick Durbin and Eric Holder Too

Dear Vermont,

Of course nothing he says on the Senate floor can be used against Durbin. And also he didn’t make a false statement as was contemplated in the law I quoted.

Most states besides New York have similar laws.

I was being rhetorical in saying Indict Dick Durbin. I was also pointing out that society has a vested interest in an orderly banking system. Durbin and the Democrats would do well to understand that.

Note the word orderly.

That doesn’t mean that banks- even big banks like BoA- won’t go out of business because of poor business decisions. It means that they should at least expect that the government, which is supposed to be a fair arbiter in society, won’t give them a good push because they are angry.

Ask me, I’m tired of the government pushing everyone around.          

Anonymous wrote: Yes, [Solyndra] is a boondogle. As if nothing like this ever happened on Bush's watch. I can send you some in case you don't remember. But did you know it would take 5 or 6 of these to = what the taxpayers give to the poor oil companies every year? When I see you complain about that, I will think maybe you are serious about saving taxpayers money.

Dear Anonymous,

The poor oil companies pay about $140 billion in taxes every year and get about $2.2 billion in subsidies. That doesn't include what they generate in payroll taxes and income taxes.

That's why liberals should never be trusted with the economy. You guys can't add and subtract. The DOE gave out more money in one day to solar then they give the oil business in a year. And I'm 100 percent against ANY subsidies.

But oil accounts for 5 percent of GDP and solar accounts for a part of GDP that is not statistically significant; not in tax revenues- except what they cost in taxes- or total output of energy or in jobs.

Also: "They did it first" isn't an argument that worked with your parents. It won't work with me.

Anonymous wrote: "If the only defense liberals can bring to the game is that Republican’s were out of control" Huh? Republican's?  Mr. Ransom, please tell me that you, too, have not forgotten (or never knew?) how, when and where to use - and not use - the apostrophe.  "Republican's" means "belonging to a Republican." You make the plural of the word by simply adding an "s."  Republicans.

Dear Anonymous,

Please go back to teaching the third grade.

Every word you see on the site is either written by me or edited by me. Mistakes, typos and misspelling will happen.

I’m not the New York Times. We're in this make money. And we do.   

Insighting Truth wrote: John Ransom reveals a lot when he suggests the economy must be managed. Based on everything I've read that emanated from Ransom's careful pen, I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt regarding such a stupid statement. I think he was just sloppy. I think he knows that an unmanaged economy is the only solution. –in response to Ransom Talks to CBN About Americans Distrust of DC on the Economy

Dear Insighting,

Oh  brother.

I don’t think the economy can be “managed” in the way that you are implying. On the other hand it would be foolish to not admit that legislation enacted and decisions made by the executive affect the economy.

The third way I was suggesting that the economy could be managed would be by getting the government out of business, especially by introducing regulatory reform and by scrapping the tax code in favor of one flat rate tax.

I don’t go into interviews knowing when they are going to end or what they are going to ask me. I often don’t get a chance to say everything I want.  If I did I would have said that the economy would be best if we tried the alternative of not managing the economy and letting markets take care of themselves.   

If it were up to me I would get rid of the DOE, EPA, Department of Commerce, Agriculture, Transportation, the Post Office, etc.  

If you want to know more about this topic, on Friday October 21st, 2011 I’ll be at the Western Republican Leadership Conference in Las Vegas serving on a panel with Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform talking about, you guessed it, Tax Reform.

Hope I see you there.     


 

John Ransom | Create Your Badge

Twitter http://twitter.com/#!/bamransom -See more top stories from Townhall Finance. New Homepage, more content. Be the best informed fiscal conservative.