Excerpts from reader commentary on News staffers' online blog postings last week. Online comments come from registered users, but -- unlike reviewed and verified Everybody's Column letters -- can be posted under pen names.
Strictly Business: George Pyle's blog on what President Obama had to say on the anniversary of the Lehman Brothers collapse, and the lessons Wall Street should have learned, led to this response from Buffalo Libertarian:
The federal government can't even keep its own house in order and it presumes to dictate to Wall Street what to do and how to do it?
It was the government's insistence on following Keynesian economics these last few decades that created most of this mess in the first place.
These Wall Street companies should have been allowed to crash and burn instead of the federal government engaging in illegal (as in unconstitutional) take-overs at a cost of billions of dollars that will never be recouped.
The government has no reason to put its own house in order as long as it has a bottomless pit known as deficit spending. And, of course, it has taxpayers to eventually bail out the government.
Parent Company: Allison Connors' blog on the absence of a gaming system in the household brought this revelation from Joyce:
My 14-year-old son is highly addicted to Xbox, and will get very nasty and sometimes violent when he is told to turn it off. About a month ago, he got himself into some trouble in the neighborhood and is now grounded from all electronics -- computer, cell phone, AND Xbox. I cannot tell you the difference in my son!
I love to be around him and he has not had one outburst or temper tantrum. He just started high school and I'm leaning towards not giving it back, EVER. Even though he's done his "time" for his crime, am I really doing him a favor to give it back? He is a much better person without it, and even though he'll hate me now, won't it serve him better in the long run?
Matters of Opinion: Mike Vogel's blog on Obama's health care speech and other daily editorial board topics brought this from Hank:
President Obama's speech was masterful, if not decisive. It cranked the issue toward "must have reform," painted the GOP deeper into their corner, and probably unknown to editorialists, will allow the insurance industry to spend and redouble their efforts to defeat any real reform. . . . Progressives will get their government option as well as most of their other objectives as the guys in the black hats, i.e. insurance industry, ride heavy-handed into town. . . .
The House of Representatives will vote down any reform bill that does not include a government option. Even the Blue Dog Democrats understand that failure to reform now will be a failure pinned to them by a massive reaction campaign.
Rick added this:
The GOP doesn't have the numbers to hold up anything, and last night's speech didn't put them in any different of a position than before. The public option isn't going to happen because the public doesn't want it. If the Blue Dogs want to commit political suicide by voting for it, so be it. The speech was more of the same -- long on rhetoric, short on specifics. And, if we're to believe that the bill will only cost $900B, I'd like to know either which unrealistic assumptions were used or which math class Obama failed. There's no way the cost of the entire bill is anywhere south of $1T.
BillBoard: Allen Wilson blogged about the disappointing loss to the New England Patriots and Bills quarterback Trent Edwards' statement that his top receivers, Terrell Owens and Lee Evans, were being picked off. Larry replied:
I agree completely Allen. Trent is at best a work in progress. He did make a nice throw to TO over the outstretched hands of a defender on the first play from scrimmage after the Pats go-ahead TD. Just don't see enough of the 10-20 yard passing game out of Trent. Either he's not capable or the coaches don't believe he's able to make the throws. Gotta get the ball to your best players and Derek Schoumann is not one of them.