Displaying 17,611 To 17,640 Of 19,504 Comments 100 years of a national park done right Welcome to The Planet, A.J. Otjen. I look forward to checking out your site and getting familiar with your positions on the issues. We happily welcome “good” Republicans here. Cheers! » Posted By AdLib On January 4, 2010 @ 5:50 pm Guns, Knives, Hammers and Bricks* Psst…as a practical joke, just edit and correct your comments and you can make me look clueless! » Posted By AdLib On January 3, 2010 @ 3:56 pm Outlaw an emotion? That gets to be Phillip K. Dick territory. The potential for abuse by disgruntled ex-spouses, employees, etc. would be mind boggling. Whole groups could embark on strategies to anger those belonging to other groups (i.e. Repubs vs. Dems) to be disarmed for good while they stocked up on weapons. One good thing, no one at HuffPo would be able to get a gun! » Posted By AdLib On January 3, 2010 @ 3:46 pm 2nd Amendment? » Posted By AdLib On January 3, 2010 @ 3:38 pm Yes, it’s horrendous, truly horrible. I’m sending all my best thoughts to her. From what Emerald says, it was a man she had rented a room to. » Posted By AdLib On January 3, 2010 @ 3:35 pm I will bet on the inherent goodness of people to pull together in a crisis. Yes, there will always be the selfish, greedy, sociopaths but there’s strength in numbers. Also, I’ve repeatedly seen how people become more kind, not more heartless in the aftermath of disaster. » Posted By AdLib On January 3, 2010 @ 3:32 pm I am fine with people having guns as self protection, as you describe though I don’t own a gun and never expect to. As you say, after the Earthquake here in L.A., people came together. Yes N.O. was madness but I also know of many amazing stories of compassion and coming together there. In fact, in other parts of Louisiana, such as Baton Rouge, you would have been hard pressed to find someone who was not sharing their home with someone from New Orleans who was homeless. Yes, after a major disaster it could be Thunderdome or it could be a post-9/11 coming together of people. Just to explore the duality of your scenario though, having a gun in your home could protect one from harm or provide an unarmed intruder with a way to harm one. There’s no knowing and I certainly think we all have to decide what’s best for us. » Posted By AdLib On January 3, 2010 @ 12:30 pm Excellent comment! I would suggest though that it is not an “either/or” situation. The psyche of American society as you artfully describe combined with the easy access to push button murder are a fatal cocktail. People kill people and guns kill people, no need to let either off the hook. Yes, the people who use guns are a problem but so are the temptation and instant gratification that guns provide. As others have said below, taking away that simple button and replacing killing with brutality and the intimacy of physically murdering someone or killing oneself provides a barrier of time and repulsion that would surely prevent some killings. We can’t outlaw anger (or HuffPo would be out of business along with the GOP and Glenn Beck). So there is no way to prevent domestic conflicts from occurring. And BTW, most people who commit most murders throuugh domestic violence have never committed a serious crime before in their lives. Practically speaking, the only way to reduce murders is to make it harder. And reducing the availability of guns would do just that. » Posted By AdLib On January 3, 2010 @ 12:21 pm Let’s focus only on the proposition here, “Does the pervasiveness and availability of guns beget more murders?” Bernard appears to be expressing that guns make killing and killing more people easier and quicker and do cause more murders to take place. The question here appears to be, “If the proposition is that murderers will kill the same amount of people no matter what and regulating guns makes no difference, why should we regulate the possession of any other more dangerous materials or weapons if it is futile? I tend to agree with this proposition. If somehow one could regulate bomb making materials and guns so that the terrorists in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan could not use them, would they in fact be killing as many people as they do with IEDs, suicide bombings, etc., if they just had hand-to-hand combat as an option? Similarly, would those in the U.S. who shoot their spouses, family members, friends, bosses and coworkers murder less or not at all if they couldn’t dispense death with the pull of a “button”? Does something like murder being easier to do make it happen more often? Or if one would have to go through a more difficult struggle to accomplish something, would some not do it? As opposed to focusing on the career criminal, let’s focus on what is the cause of most murders in the U.S., domestic violence. According to the DoJ, the most commonly cited reason for homicide is argument (including arguments about money & property under the influence of alcohol or narcotics). One third of all homicides in 1997 were triggered by arguments. Felony (rape, theft, narcotics, etc. ) accounted for a fifth of homicides and gang killings accounted for one twentieth. About a third were of unknown motive and the other 10% were miscellaneous motives. So, if the push button ease of murder by gun was removed from domestic conflicts, if a physical fight and might was always required (don’t forget that some murderers are weaker than their victims) might at least one murder not have taken place? What about two? Then there might be many more and the argument for gun control is validated if it would be seen to protect lives. » Posted By AdLib On January 3, 2010 @ 9:39 am Below is a chart on murder rates in different countries. In exploring a corollary between the proliferation of guns and murders, it is interesting to see that the U.S., which has among the most “liberal” policy towards gun ownership and possession, also finds itself among third world countries in per capita murders. As Michael Moore has proposed, why does Canada, just across an imaginary line on the same continent, have so many fewer murders proportionately? It is true that Canada does have gun control and the U.S. doesn’t, could that be a contributing factor? # 1 Colombia: 0.617847 per 1,000 people SOURCE: Seventh United Nations Survey of Crime Trends and Operations of Criminal Justice Systems, covering the period 1998 – 2000 (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Centre for International Crime Prevention) » Posted By AdLib On January 3, 2010 @ 8:58 am Abby, with all respect, Bernard is making a legitimate argument that is not intended as and shouldn’t be taken personally. In order for people to test the logic of an argument, using comparisons is a common approach and is not putting words in another’s mouth. Good propositions deserve good arguments. » Posted By AdLib On January 3, 2010 @ 8:19 am Vote Now for PlanetPOV’s Top Posts of 2009! Very cool, lots of great ideas for and musings about marketing The Planet through fun (and useful) merchandise! I thought I’d use one post to reply to several folks. javaz and Abby: Great ideas for copy and images! Cher, Emerald and Jan: Thanks for offering to help! We’ll need you! K7: I am 100% in agreement, we aren’t the Anti-HuffPo and shouldn’t promote ourselves in that way. As we all know, The real Anti-HuffPo will have three “7”s on his scalp and always hit the jackpot on Progressive Slot Machines. We absolutely do have so much to be affirmative about, that’s what this awards event is all about. At the same time, addressing Cher’s point, I definitely do want a strong awareness of The Planet among folks at HuffPo so that we are seen, not as the anti-Huff site but as the #1 alternative to HuffPo. As for making money in this way, who can say how much may or may not be generated but since there is no expense to doing this at Zazzle, what have we got to lose? Some here have already said they would buy some items. If we use our wit and talents, we may even tempt you to buy something cool! Nellie: I really like our existing logo but we could create new ones for different products. For example, I like the idea of a shirt with just a big “POV” on the front with the planet in the “O” and the full PPOV logo and url on the back…leaving it a little enigmatic. KQuark: Yes, as we decided at the founding of the site, we will not accept advertising from any entity that goes against our progressive principles. I’m not as concerned about branding the site through merchandising. We should definitely think about it and make good choices but this site isn’t going to be cemented in people’s minds by logos on coffee mugs, it’s about the voices of our members and that will always be what brands us. As for the money received going to charity…er…there aren’t any hedge funds financing this site nor will there be…we do need to keep The Planet spinning and it does take money. I feel like the annoying landlord, having to periodically ask members to contribute when they can but that’s the only way to help pay the bills and for ongoing development right now. Any additional revenue we can get to help cover expenses from merchandising or advertising would be a help. K7 made an excellent point about the problem of deciding on a single charity…and that’s how both of you got me thinking about an idea I’ve put aside for a while. Instead of a charity…how about this? A percentage of all revenues from merchandising goes into a Progressive Candidate Contribution Fund? When election time rolls around, members here can select by popular vote, which race(s) and whose campaign(s) the money goes to? I remember discussing this concept with Tyler-Durden a while back. Now, before you read on, this is an aspiration, it would take some time to get to a position to where the amounts referred to would be meaningful enough but… How cool it would be to set up a grass roots, populist kind of contribution fund, like a combo of MoveOn.org and ActBlue that democratically decides, by its members’ votes, which Progressive candidates its contributions go to? Members could contribute directly into such a fund too and instead of separately spreading smaller amounts of money around to candidates, contributions could be focused in particular races to really have an impact. And such a populist fund would become more and more a force to be reckoned with. IOW…a lobby for the American People. Now, I know absolutely nothing about how election laws would or wouldn’t be applied to this style of political contributing, would it be a PAC? Would it need to be registered? A separate entity from PlanetPOV? We could investigate. Whoops! Now look what all you clever folks have made me do!!! I’m getting way ahead of myself and The Planet now. However, this is the direction I’d like to see us progress towards, making a bigger and bigger difference. Becoming more politically involved, collaborating on initiatives and campaigns with other progressive sites and organizations, etc. But you do have to crawl before you can walk. We are a relatively new site and we don’t want to bite off more than we can chew at this point. It’s a lot of cool stuff to think about but the real question here is…how cool are you going to look each morning, blogging while sipping from your coffee cup that says “Morning Blog at PlanetPOV – Good till the last post!” » Posted By AdLib On January 6, 2010 @ 6:57 pm The enthusiasm for PlanetWear has assuaged my “too early?” concerns. Haven’t discussed this with the other founders yet but if they’re also cool with it, here are a few suggestions that could get the ball rolling: 1. We could open a post in Speakers Corner, open to all members to propose copy and submit graphics. This way, we could get the membership’s input to help us decide on designs. 2. The copy should be fun and/or funny. I like AlphaBitch’s suggestions on snarky one-liner’s, they could be about blogging, specific articles at The Planet, issues or politicians (yes Sarah, I’m talking about you). 3. For a variety of reasons, it would probably be best for PlanetPOV to have its own Zazzle account/store which the Admin could help set up. We would love to have members working together with us to set up and “run” the store, the Admin here is stretched a bit thin so we would be grateful for volunteers on this. 4. With support from our volunteers, we could create new designs on an ongoing basis, keeping up with the latest issues and stories. 5. We’d have to decide on what merchandise we would be offering and have designs that work for them. 6. Lastly, it would complete the circle to collaborate on a plan on how best to market and promote the store and PlanetWear…and ultimately, the site. The Planet is sustained right now by your generous donations. We will be seeking advertising soon, only for select and compatible businesses (no HuffPo type ads for killing health care and promoting right wing sites) so if we can sell a few shirts or hats here or there too, it would help The Planet keep spinning and give us a bit more towards building up and growing the site. Thoughts on this? » Posted By AdLib On January 6, 2010 @ 1:44 pm Heh! That’s my kind of humor! Sure, let’s discuss it! » Posted By AdLib On January 5, 2010 @ 11:01 pm Do you think folks would be interested in PlanetWear? Please do email me admin@planetpov.com and let me know what your thoughts are on this. I’d be happy to wear a snarky PlanetPOV t-shirt. I take mine in an X-Snark. » Posted By AdLib On January 5, 2010 @ 10:59 pm Morning Emerald! You’d be surprised how many people here feel as you do, impressed by what everyone else contributes and modest about their own contributions. As I’ve mentioned before, when someone writes about something that matters to them, it often makes for a strong article that makes a real impact on readers. » Posted By AdLib On January 5, 2010 @ 8:37 am Congrats for your Week of Liberation from Crazytown.com! I’ll bet your blood pressure and stress rate is substantially down from where it was too. Though the crack-like properties of HP can be addictive, the speed and intense emotions, it just seems more satisfying to me to actually and thoughtfully discuss and debate issues here than throw rocks at each other’s heads over there. I mean, wasn’t that the original intent of our desire to blog? I second your props to the members here for the genuine concern and generous contributions of time and energy they’ve invested in sharing their thoughts with us. » Posted By AdLib On January 5, 2010 @ 8:26 am Indeed, talk about a brain trust or a think tank, my takeaway from putting this all together is that the community here as a whole is pretty damn impressive. » Posted By AdLib On January 5, 2010 @ 8:16 am I definitely understand. My suggestion for those who are tight on time is to at least skim each article for familiarity then make a return trip for reading comments. Thanks so much for your support and spreading the word. I can’t think of a better way to promote or present The Planet to new people than to send them a link to this post and let them browse through this amazing selection of articles. Hope lots of folks here share this with others! » Posted By AdLib On January 5, 2010 @ 8:08 am Two helpful suggestions then: 1. Voting is anonymous Hope you feel more comfortable about it now, participating in this event by voting is all about celebrating the contributions and accomplishments of the membership here. » Posted By AdLib On January 5, 2010 @ 7:54 am Really, congratulations to all our members, whether or not they’re on these lists. The entirety of all the posts and comments on this site is really phenomenal. » Posted By AdLib On January 4, 2010 @ 7:38 pm That’s a great point, on top of all the great posts here are all the great comments! The Planet has indeed become a “smarts” factory and our warehouses are packed to the rafters. Now, if only we could export our surplus to certain other websites and political parties. » Posted By AdLib On January 4, 2010 @ 7:34 pm So glad you took the time to go through them. This would’ve been so much easier if folks didn’t have to be so damn talented here! » Posted By AdLib On January 4, 2010 @ 7:20 pm You’ll enjoy it, though! » Posted By AdLib On January 4, 2010 @ 7:18 pm No kidding! Imagine having to pare down to just these! » Posted By AdLib On January 4, 2010 @ 7:18 pm I really enjoyed going through articles from the launch of the site through last week. I can’t tell you how many wonderful articles aren’t even listed as nominees! It was tough and painful narrowing them down to this many. I hope any members whose posts aren’t listed understand that it’s a situation of an embarrassment of riches. » Posted By AdLib On January 4, 2010 @ 7:17 pm Just gave you 5 stars and a thumbs up for that! » Posted By AdLib On January 4, 2010 @ 7:08 pm Thanks Bernard! Fixed now and when it comes up, I recommend clicking on it to see it full sized. » Posted By AdLib On January 4, 2010 @ 7:02 pm In case you didn’t see my other note to you…welcome to The Planet, Jan! FYI, the brilliant Nellie recently proposed a project for the community here to collaborate on, researching, creating then widely distributing a substance and fact based expose on HuffPo. The word needs to get out as HuffPo continues to claim it represents the voice of Progressives. I’m on board with that project. » Posted By AdLib On January 3, 2010 @ 4:09 pm Welcome to The Planet, jan4insight! So glad you’ve found us! We do have many HuffPo members, past and present. You’ll find yourself warmly welcomed by many to join this remarkable community where there’s true Freedom of Expressionand respect for all members. Welcome! » Posted By AdLib On January 3, 2010 @ 3:52 pmComments Posted By AdLib
# 2 South Africa: 0.496008 per 1,000 people
# 3 Jamaica: 0.324196 per 1,000 people
# 4 Venezuela: 0.316138 per 1,000 people
# 5 Russia: 0.201534 per 1,000 people
# 6 Mexico: 0.130213 per 1,000 people
# 7 Estonia: 0.107277 per 1,000 people
# 8 Latvia: 0.10393 per 1,000 people
# 9 Lithuania: 0.102863 per 1,000 people
# 10 Belarus: 0.0983495 per 1,000 people
# 11 Ukraine: 0.094006 per 1,000 people
# 12 PapuaNew Guinea:0.0838593 per 1,000 people
# 13 Kyrgyzstan: 0.0802565 per 1,000 people
# 14 Thailand: 0.0800798 per 1,000 people
# 15 Moldova: 0.0781145 per 1,000 people
# 16 Zimbabwe: 0.0749938 per 1,000 people
# 17 Seychelles: 0.0739025 per 1,000 people
# 18 Zambia: 0.070769 per 1,000 people
# 19 Costa Rica: 0.061006 per 1,000 people
# 20 Poland: 0.0562789 per 1,000 people
# 21 Georgia: 0.0511011 per 1,000 people
# 22 Uruguay: 0.045082 per 1,000 people
# 23 Bulgaria: 0.0445638 per 1,000 people
# 24 United States: 0.042802 per 1,000 people
# 25 Armenia: 0.0425746 per 1,000 people
# 26 India: 0.0344083 per 1,000 people
# 27 Yemen: 0.0336276 per 1,000 people
# 28 Dominica: 0.0289733 per 1,000 people
# 29 Azerbaijan: 0.0285642 per 1,000 people
# 30 Finland: 0.0283362 per 1,000 people
# 31 Slovakia: 0.0263303 per 1,000 people
# 32 Romania: 0.0250784 per 1,000 people
# 33 Portugal: 0.0233769 per 1,000 people
# 34 Malaysia: 0.0230034 per 1,000 people
# 35 Macedonia: 0.0229829 per 1,000 people
# 36 Mauritius: 0.021121 per 1,000 people
# 37 Hungary: 0.0204857 per 1,000 people
# 38 Korea, South: 0.0196336 per 1,000 people
# 39 Slovenia: 0.0179015 per 1,000 people
# 40 France: 0.0173272 per 1,000 people
# 41 Czech Republic: 0.0169905 per 1,000 people
# 42 Iceland: 0.0168499 per 1,000 people
# 43 Australia: 0.0150324 per 1,000 people
# 44 Canada: 0.0149063 per 1,000 people
# 45 Chile: 0.014705 per 1,000 people
# 46 United Kingdom: 0.0140633 per 1,000 people
# 47 Italy: 0.0128393 per 1,000 people
# 48 Spain: 0.0122456 per 1,000 people
# 49 Germany: 0.0116461 per 1,000 people
# 50 Tunisia: 0.0112159 per 1,000 people
# 51 Netherlands: 0.0111538 per 1,000 people
# 52 New Zealand: 0.0111524 per 1,000 people
# 53 Denmark: 0.0106775 per 1,000 people
# 54 Norway: 0.0106684 per 1,000 people
# 55 Ireland: 0.00946215 per 1,000 people
# 56 Switzerland: 0.00921351 per 1,000 people
# 57 Indonesia: 0.00910842 per 1,000 people
# 58 Greece: 0.0075928 per 1,000 people
# 59 Hong Kong: 0.00550804 per 1,000 people
# 60 Japan: 0.00499933 per 1,000 people
# 61 Saudi Arabia: 0.00397456 per 1,000 people
# 62 Qatar: 0.00115868 per 1,000 people
2. Voting will help to make this celebration of our members a success.
«« Back To Stats Page
Home Stats