Moderate (George Lippencott)

Follow

Comment history

Letter: Judging Reid

Wow. The Republicans would not agree to compromise on anything. Really??!! Perhaps you could suggest what some of the compromises offered by the Democrats were that were refused by the Republicans??

April 14, 2015 at 10:31 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter: Climate politics

Thought I commented once on this. I do not understand your comment as addressed to me. I am no fan of the carbon industry. The punishment I refer to is of us the consumers. Taxing them is taxing us! It solves nothing. Worse it punishes disproportionately consumers who rely on carbon heavy generation today. They did nothing wrong and should not be punished. They need to address their resource to correcting the problem not to a tax that does nothing. My approach pays for clean up/replacement directly. Like it or not the industry supplies us energy and right now that is regardless of the energy source.

February 1, 2015 at 4:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter: Climate politics

Huh?? Do you understand how the current system works??

January 30, 2015 at 9:46 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter: Climate politics

Chris, How about the KCC?? Government already has a strong hand on what utilities do. My way avoids punishing people for what they did not do. Your way is punitive to those who have done nothing wrong. The Interstate highway system worked. This can work. Of course Government will find it harder to redistribute income as will likely happen with your approach. But we have been around this many times before. By the by who raises the carbon tax - the government!!!

January 30, 2015 at 9:38 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Letter: Climate politics

Taxing carbon at the source is fine for activities that can be readily changed (light bulbs, etc). .Replacing a coal fired power plant is neither cheap nor something done quickly. Addressing major pollution sources such as power plants should be part of a national program (similar to the interstate program) where we all pay and the money is distributed according to a set priority. No one is at fault for choices made decades ago to use carbon intensive energy solutions. No one should be punished! The proposed carbon tax punishes selectively!

January 28, 2015 at 11:19 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Opinion: Explaining white privilege

I do not agree. Revisionist history selectively demeaning a race is racist and yes minorities can be racist.

December 7, 2014 at 6:01 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Opinion: Explaining white privilege

Through out this thread the existence of "white privilege" is assumed. First define it and then provide proof for such a broad charge. Yes there are aspects of our world where minorities take hits and we should address them. "Band ids "that are not color coordinated just reduces the real issues to ridicule. Find another term that is not disparaging of whites!!!

December 7, 2014 at 5:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Opinion: Explaining white privilege

I never argued we were done. I did argue that blaming "white" people for the normal course of events is unjust, morally bankrupt, extremely self serving and truly despicable! Not much more to say.

December 7, 2014 at 5:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Opinion: Explaining white privilege

I have been aware of this reality since I was a kid and people looked down on me because my father was a soldier. At that time the military was notionally integrated - but not really. I grew up partially in the South. I knew the obvious.

I did not grow up with privilege and have rarely experienced anything approaching it. In my world minorities got pretty much what I got. I Really do not need elites throwing around a poorly defined term about one group of us getting privilege. We are all privileged in some aspects and penalized in others. Should we require the NBA to extend privilege to short white guys?

I wonder if the Appalachian poor feel privileged??

How about we stop making idiots of ourselves and address real issue (not band aids)_

December 6, 2014 at 7:06 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Opinion: Explaining white privilege

I am sorry I do not think so.

We are all part of a culture. Play the game or get penalized. Are you really suggesting that a business that works with the public change its standards to allow employees to use Ebonics with white customers or that white customers should learn it??? If I did that I would also be penalized - whose privilege is that??

If you really define that term so broadly we are going nowhere except in college towns where they haven't figured out that in the real world there are rules and consequences and costs matter.

And as to band aids the majority of us are white and the business that produces band aids are playing to the majority. Of course there are increasingly products that offer band aids that are not flesh colored (white) with choices of many colors or even no color.

When I was a young man my high school was integrated at the point of the bayonet. Now we have a minority president and minorities in many other high value roles. Great progress has been made. Instead of acknowledging it we now want to argue about the color of band aids. Go figure.

Are there not more substantive issues other than your implied notion that the majority must become like the minority or we have privilege. Common sense seems to have gone out the windows.

Did the Canadians not try this drill by mandating bilingual government activities. Perhaps we can mandate that all our government activities be done in Ebonics and every other conceivable language..

You know that if we wait a bit there will be no majority and the color of band aids will become a rainbow (some already are)!

December 6, 2014 at 6:55 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Previous