PearlY 3 hours, 56 minutes ago on Letter - Stop president from violating Constitution

jubilado, I never said that Republicans are smarter than Democrats. I think Democrats are wrong on the issues I think are most important to the country, but being wrong doesn't necessarily mean stupid. In fact, I think much of their 'wrongness' is a function of factors like age, quality of education, limited experience with certain aspects of living, and perhaps even temperament. (Which also explain, to me, the higher scores of Republicans on current affairs.)

Indeed, tribalism is powerful. Millions of people voted for Obama for no better reason than the color of his skin and probably millions of others voted against him for the same reason. Perhaps millions of people voted for Romney because he was Mormon and other millions against him for the same reason. Coincidentally one of the reasons I currently vote Republican -- because Democrats currently advocate tribalism more.


PearlY 4 hours, 10 minutes ago on Letter - Stop president from violating Constitution

Well, sure, and you could say that the assassination of JFK led directly to LBJ's taking office and ramping up the Vietnam War and that led to a ton of casualties and government spending. And no, Obama's immigration order won't top those numbers, either.

I would also dispute your characterization of 9/11 leading directly to the war in Iraq, although I know that's left-wing dogma and you'll stick to it no matter what, so let's let that go.

And your numbers, both on costs and casualties, are WAY off, even including Iraq.


PearlY 10 hours, 47 minutes ago on Editorial: Obama’s effort to promote ‘net neutrality’ is welcome

Just came across this interesting piece of info:

A 2007 Rasmussen poll found that 35% of Democrats believed Bush knew about the 9/11 attacks in advance, and another 26% weren't sure whether he did. For sheer craziness, having 61% of your party believing that is possible surely takes the cake. Nowhere near that many Republicans hold to 'birther' fantasies or the like. In fact (since I know you believe the Tea Party is the extreme nut-wing of the Republicans) only 30% of Tea Party supporters believe the birther story.

It's early days on the Death Panel claim yet. Obamacare's barely getting started; the Death Panels won't be needed until the bills start coming due.


PearlY 10 hours, 55 minutes ago on Letter - Stop president from violating Constitution

I hate suspense, and when you declined to say which side you thought would score best on a civics quiz and linked it to an undisclosed news network, I had to look up what the research shows.

The evidence is pretty strong that both sides hold on tight to their respective mythologies.

For example, 30% of self-identified Tea Party supporters hold to the 'birther' story, while only 20% of the general public does.

Meanwhile, a 2007 poll showed that 36% of self-identified Democrats believed that Bush knew about the 9/11 attacks ahead of time and another 26% weren't sure if he did - that blew me away. 62% of Democrats thought that was possible?!! Amazing.

And 32% of Democrats believe "the Jews" were either moderately or a great deal to blame for the 2008 financial crises, compared to 18% of Republicans.

As to general knowledge of public affairs, the Pew Research group (which leans left politically), consistently finds that Republicans are more knowledgeable than Democrats (although rarely, Dems attain a tie).

Democrats are more likely than Republicans to be tied to one particular news network: 51% of CNN viewers are Dems, vs. 39% of Fox viewers who are Republicans.

So, does that all match up with your opinion?


PearlY 16 hours ago on Letter - Stop president from violating Constitution

I'm not sure I get the comparison to the JFK assassination or 9/11 either, except perhaps to highlight the memorability the writer places on Obama's announcement.

The new announced policy itself will probably kill more people and certainly cost the country more money than either of the earlier two events. Whether that makes it a constitutional crisis or just a plain old disaster is hard to know without reading the as-yet-unwritten briefs to the Supreme Court.

By the way, although Obama's announcement was an executive order small case, I believe it was not a formal Executive Order.


PearlY 1 day, 11 hours ago on Editorial: Obama’s effort to promote ‘net neutrality’ is welcome

I disagree with just about every purportedly factual assertion in your comment, but it's Thanksgiving, so let's just give thanks that in spite of our respective views that things are going to Hades in a hand basket albeit for directly opposite reasons, we at least can both express our opinions freely and don't have to worry about being hauled off to a gulag. (Although probably I do have to take extra care on my tax return.)

Have a happy one!


PearlY 2 days, 17 hours ago on Better ways sought to reduce domestic violence

Better late than never, but teaching good manners is best started as soon as boys (and girls) are old enough to say, "Please" and "Thank you."


PearlY 3 days, 2 hours ago on Letter - Initiative 594 is a lawyer’s dream

Why would I look at a list of school shootings? I thought the issue was gun violence overall? You apparently don't care that Newton-level casualties are inflicted in Chicago every couple of weeks - I guess that's left-wing code for 'black people's lives don't count'.

You've given a reasonable explanation for why you'd start with 1998 for Australia's numbers, but it's not a reasonable explanation for starting with that year for America's numbers. You'd know everything there is to know about starting with your conclusion and finding facts to support it, though.

And who is that "you all" who say "that dog won't hunt"? That's apparently an "other" you have no problem stereotyping.


PearlY 3 days, 5 hours ago on Letter - Initiative 594 is a lawyer’s dream

Sure, but why start in 1998? Start in 1991 and our homicide rate's dropped by 54%, while Australia's has only decreased by 42%. Neither those stats nor yours prove anything about the effectiveness of gun control at saving lives. That's because there are tons of demographic differences as well as other policy differences ("three strikes your out" for example) that make it apples and oranges to compare Australia to the US.

Foremost of which is that Australia doesn't have Chicago, Detroit, St. Louis, New Orleans and DC. Most of our "gun violence" is concentrated in a relatively small demographic (being areas where guns have always been heavily regulated, and also being areas where Democrats have had free rein to fix things for decades with, shall we say, less than glowing success).


PearlY 3 days, 8 hours ago on Letter - Initiative 594 is a lawyer’s dream

Over the time period that Australia's firearms homicide rates have fallen, so have ours. Yet while Australia's ban pulled about 650,000 guns out of circulation (1 for every 35 people in the country) in 1996-97, in the U.S. gun sales have exploded in the last decade (largely thanks to Obama).

Just last year there were almost 20 million background checks (1 for every 16 people in the country) and you can buy more than one gun on a single background check, so the total number of sales may be higher. Yet in spite of the huge number of guns flooding the US, firearm homicides keep falling.