Email, Hate Mail and Comments from Readers

John Ransom
|
Posted: Jan 01, 2012 12:01 AM

Sybil wrote: Many Republicans say that over half of Americans pay no federal taxes. Quite frankly, this reminds me of the statement Adolf Hitler made in 'Mein Kampf', thus, "The Jews are responsible for we German people losing the First World War."- in response to Top Obama Administration Predictions for 2012

Dear Sybil,

Seriously. There are medications that you can take for your condition.

You post literally hundreds of copy and paste screeds that make no sense every day. You have got be some psych-op from the GOP, because you completely discredit liberals.

Skeetshoot wrote: I predict Obama will win the election and people like Ransom will explode into a frenzy of anger. The Repubs will end up as the losers -- the obstructionists, the naysayers, the haters. ." - in response to Top Obama Administration Predictions for 2012

Dear Skeet,

Frenzy of anger? No.

Once again liberals confuse conservatives with their own OWS movement.

Conservatives don’t have a frenzy of anger, because we go out and vote.   

America is much bigger than who our president is.

I’m actually much more interested in what happens in the races for House and Senate.

Still and all, I expect that Obama will lose.

As far as being obstructionist: I’m thankful someone is saying “no” to the administration.

If you have a problem with the GOP doing that, you should take it up with the American people who voted in a new House in 2010 and tightened up the Senate too.

Elections, as Obama would say, have consequences. Quit whining about it.

Salemcom wrote: My concern is that Obama will launch a preemptive strike upon nuclear and other facilities in Iran, deliberately waiting until September or October to do so once lagging far behind in the polls, then demand to be reelected as a wartime president.... like George Bush. - in response to Top Obama Administration Predictions for 2012

Dear Salemcom,

I don’t think Obama has the nerve to launch a strike.

It’s more likely that he will come to some agreement with Tehran.

He’ll come home to the USA and declare “peace for our time,” with another faux peace agreement ala Munich 1938.

A year later Iran will announce they have a nuke.

And the rest of us will have to clean up his mess. 

Mac wrote: Where is it written and enforced that we no longer have the right to say Merry Christmas? I don't even know George Soros let alone LOVE him! Would stealing money from clients be like Congress robbing OUR social security? Like trying to ruin the US Post Office so their buddies FedEx, etc. can take over? - in response to Mr. Crony Went to Congress: Subpoena Soros, Buffett, et al.

Dear Mac,

Christian beliefs in the public square are increasingly under attack.

Here’s an example:

The Connecticut Post chose to not put a "Merry Christmas" greeting in print on the front page of the newspaper on Christmas Day. This was very disrespectful to the vast majority of the public who celebrate the day religiously and a poor choice in not honoring our national holiday.

Here’s another:

The Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation, a group that frequently targets the presence of faith and religion in the public square, is demanding that a nativity scene be removed from public property.

Does the Freedom from Religion Foundation ask women wearing burqas to remove them in the public square, or is it just Freedom from Christianity they seek?  Plus it's Freedom of Religion, not Freedom from Religion.

But what do you expect from the party that supports Eric Holder's "lying is a state of mind," and Clinton's "it depends on the what the definition of the word is, is"?

What would liberals be if they couldn't change the definition of words to support their perverted science?    

Truthful, that's what. And then the cat would be out of the bag.   

As far as robbing from social security, I think you are getting your philosophical lines crossed here. It wasn’t conservatives who did the robbing from taxpayers, it was liberals.

Lastly, I don’t know any one who works at FedEx, yet alone love anyone who does.

But to suggest that the Postal Service’s problems are part of some conspiracy is nonsense.

The causes of the USPS losing money annually are union-inspired practices like the one noted by Time Magazine:

The Washington Post’s Federal Eye blog reports that in 2009, postal workers were paid for 1.2 million hours of standby time, costing a total of $30.9 million. For the first half of 2011, however, the Postal Service has paid $4.3 million for 170,666 hours of standby time.

What, exactly, is standby time? Due to union agreements, postal workers can’t be laid off or reassigned during periods of low mail volume. Even if they’re not needed on the job, postal employees still show up at work (and get paid) for what’s known as standby time—which basically amounts to hanging out in a break room, conference room, or cafeteria for a few hours, perhaps all day. The scene calls to mind The New Yorker story about “rubber rooms” where New York City teachers accused of incompetence or misconduct sit idly for months, sometimes years, doing nothing except showing up to continue collecting paychecks.

Gerald wrote: The Teacher's retirement fund sued Bennet group. The suit was settled out of Court. Settlement terms are normally confidential so the ultimate profit made by Bennet group is likely much less than the alleged $1.4B. Normal analysis suggests that the Plaintiffs did not have a strong case that there were laws broken by the Bennet group or the Teacher's Fund would not have settled, unless there was a conspiracy with the Teacher's Fund. Teacher's funds are normally union controlled so there might have been other payoffs. Bankrupcy reorganizations are all messy and "sh-- can happen."

The Companies were in financial trouble and some jobs were saved. - in response to Mr. Crony Went to Congress: Subpoena Soros, Buffett, et al.

Dear Gerald,

The profit that Bennet and friends made was likely not “much” less than $1.4 billion.

Bennet did nothing illegal in the transaction as far as I can tell. From a financial point of view it was a smart transaction. But if he were a Republican, you’d be the first one to cry foul.

My issue with Bennet- and you- is the one of having dual rules. Bennet practices capitalism for himself and socialism for everyone else in that same condescending way that we have come to expect from crony communists who now run the Progressive Party that used to be known as the Democrats.

The Democrat Party used to be about the little guy. Now it’s just a party of great, big guys trying to make sure everyone stays little.

And it’s about the money that they want to make. Just look at who Obama surrounds himself with. Soros, Buffett, Pelosi, Kaiser, Corzine.

Ask yourself how Harry Reid came to be a multi-millionaire on a civil servant’s salary.

If you actually cared about the principles you espouse, you’d be more outraged than I am.

Jimiey wrote: In Fascism the government works with business, and in Socialism it owns business. It seems this admin. is both, a new breed a Fasolism. A sharp turn from a representative Republic. - in response to Mr. Crony Went to Congress: Subpoena Soros, Buffett, et al.

Dear Jimiey,

Very observant. We ran a column about that last week that you can see here. If you didn’t read it, you should. It details how 5 of the top 10 companies in the S&P 500 are directly tied to the Obama administration.

H20Skier wrote: I am glad TH is on top of Sybil's postings John. LOL. He has posted almost 300 posts today as WilliamKristol.  - in response to Economists Finally Get One Thing Right in 2011: Obama a Failure

Dear H2O,

Please point to me one of WilliamKristol’s posts that remain on Townhall.

You can’t. Because while you were whining, I took extra time to have our crack staff at the Townhall World Wide Technology Campus develop a top-secret algorithm that allows us to remove pesky posts from the site with a click.

I read practically all of the posts every week to prep this column. I actually don’t find the spam problem that out of control especially from other sites. We have to balance ease of access with ease of reading.

I think we do a good job of it.

And BTW, when you whine about it, you’re just doing what Sybil wants you to do.

Good job. You’re helping Obama.

Mike wrote: I have an Economics Degree and I got it from day one with this guy. A Progressive Socialist is the worst kind of President because he has no concept of reality and what makes the economy tick. He is arrogant enough to think he can spend his way to prosperity. He also doesn't think he will have to pay the piper one day when the economy is bankrupt. Look for the credit rating to be downgraded shortly when Congress gives him the $1.2 Trillion extra to fund the government and increasing the debt to $16 Trillion +.- in response to Economists Finally Get One Thing Right in 2011: Obama a Failure

Dear Mike,

I give economists a hard time. But I know that not all, or even most, are supportive of the liberal agenda.

The problem with most economists is that every problem looks the same to them. As the old saw goes, if you give a man a hammer and tell him to solve problems with it he’ll look at every problem as if it’s a nail.

True Conservative wrote: John, I believe that 4.2 billion a day is only about 1.5 trillion a year ... only about 10%, not 30% of the GDP. However, you're right that it would still be devastating! - in response to If You Thought War Expensive, Wait Until You Pay for Obama's Peace

Dear True,

I think I worded the sentence poorly.

As of right now, energy costs take up about 9 percent of GDP. If you raised oil prices by $150-200 times 19 million gallons per day, you’d get an increase of about $1.5 trillion per year, which is an additional 10 percent of GDP increase. I’m guessing too that other energy sources would increase also. I think I figured we’d end up at 25-27 percent of GDP in total energy costs. 

Salemcom wrote: John Ransom.... question: What would you do as president under present circumstances if Iran attempts to close the Strait of Hormuz... and if you chose war then what limits. Nuclear weapons to be used? - in response to If You Thought War Expensive, Wait Until You Pay for Obama's Peace

Dear Salemcom,

I don’t think anyone really cares what I would do. But I’ll bite.

I would attack Iran’s ability to interdict shipping first, then attack the Republican Guard, degrading their capabilities. I would measure out strikes hitting higher value targets as time passed until Iran agreed to back down.

I don’t think there would be any need to use nuclear weapons.

I can’t imagine a scenario under which nuclear weapons would be necessary even if the Arab states banded together.

Illinois Roy wrote: Well I think we need to strike a happy medium. PETA goes overboard at times, sure. But I also think anyone who would be gratuitously cruel to animals won't have any qualms about doing it to people either. For me it's not about elevating animals to human status but just a tendency not to want to cause unnecessary pain and suffering. - in response to PETA Wants Memorial to Cow Victims of 5/22

Dear Roy,

PETA goes overboard at times?

Dude, seriously. PETA’s like big, red clown shoes for the Democrats.

I don't know why you guys think that taking PETA seriously helps you rather than harms you.

Support for fringe groups like PETA is why Middle America has turned its back on the Democrats. Support for fringe groups like PETA is why Democrats can’t govern from the middle.

George wrote: Wow, with a few more "Big Mess Ups" like the successful Libyan policy, the death of Bin Laden, the careful handling of Keystone and the fight for tax fairness and President Obama will win by a landslide! - in response to Obama’s Top Boners of 2011

Dear George,

Oh yeah, that Libyan war is working well if your only goal was to kill Kaddafi. But this isn’t a Die Hard movie, where a happy ending is the death of a bad guy.

While I’m glad bin Laden is dead, too, I think the past months have shown that Bush was right: Neither from a tactical nor strategic point was Osama bin Laden that important. He was hiding in a mansion constructed out of mud with a bunch of women and children. 

Again, glad he’s dead, but it’s not made any difference militarily. Actually I think it would have been better if we had extracted him and sent him to Gitmo for some waterboarding.    

Lenape wrote: I don't know Ransom; quoting Bluto from Animal House doesn't exactly inspire confidence that you know what you're talking about. Do you have an actual career in finance, or are you just a TH Blogger? According to people like you, Mr. Ransom, everything the Dems do is wrong and everything the Repubs do is correct, so what exactly is the point of trying to "analyze?"  - in response to Obama’s Top Boners of 2011

Dear Lenape,

As a former Democrat I can tell you that one of the reasons why I evolved into a conservative is that I was tired of defending the indefensible.

So yeah, most everything the Democrats do is wrong. But it’s not like I’m not critical of the GOP either.

Ask the former GOP state chair in Colorado how uncritical I am.

Chances are his answer would contain a least three four-letter words starting with the earlier letters in the alphabet. 

I know you’d be more comfortable if I was quoting Karl Marx or Lenin, but Bluto from Animal House has more credibility on financial matters with me than Marxists do.

Anyone who has been paying attention to our coverage at THfin over the last year will acknowledge that our body of writers has kept people in front of the market and politics in a way that’s unique from other financial pages. You may not like our coverage or agree with it, but we’ve been right a lot.

Try doing that without a professional understanding of markets and politics.

It’s one thing to be merely a columnist, it’s a whole other thing to select, assign and promote stories that bring your site credibility.

Judging by our expanding number of readers, we’re doing both pretty well.

But nice try.

Happy New Year

V/r,

John