I'm sorry if I misunderstood your comment "she's about as believable as the candidates she's endorsed." If you didn't mean it in a nasty way, I'm sorry to have taken it that way, but that is how it came across.

I love that EVERYONE on this comment page, airs their view, that's very important and I really believe the majority of people who voted for Mr. Obama used your methodology. For me that's sad, because I think the change that is coming is one that most people will not enjoy. Change for the sake of change isn't always good...change can be bad too. Keep hoping and commenting, because that's the only way to ever try and understand people with different views. Mr. Irishman and myself disagree, but usually very agreeably! :)

Overall, I wasn't totally "for" any candidate. I had to weigh things out & make a decision.

I do feel like this country is ready for some new blood, so to speak. The "old boy" ideals are for the old boys.

Mr. Obamas' slogan was "Change". I was simply backing him with hope.

I just can't relate to a 70-something rich white guy's concept of what we need.

You call people nasty & it's "airing your views"....I air my views & I'm nasty. Interesting.

Hey Utopia, you won, why are you still so nasty? You should be dancing in the street.

In regard to my statement of two months ago, if you check out Sept 23 comments at 3:05 PM you'll have my reason for jumping back into the fray.

As far as I know this is still America and I can air my views all I want, until that freedom is taken away.

BTW I'm very believable, check out everything I've said, I don't think I've change my views at all. I always thought people like you wanted all sides of issues out there, but I've come to realize that all you want is mind-less boobs who will agree with whatever you say. Sorry, that's just not me.

PS. You may be surprised to know that I whole heartedly agree with you about about your property. The stipulation about not selling to "negro's" was ugly and I'm glad you have the right to vote for who you want. People should be judged on their character. God bless you!

I see She's still at it. Even though two months ago she'd mentioned she was all finished airing her views. I guess She's about as believable as the candidates she'd endorsed.

Now that that is out of the way:

In June of 07 I purchased an old home in the Historic District in Front Royal. Interested in the history of my home, I ran a deed search at the courthouse.

In 1912, Byrd Fletcher sold my 2 lots under the stipulation that for 20 years this land, or buildings thereon, could NOT be sold to any person of the Negro race. Three years later, the white landowner sold the property to another couple, purposely omitting that ugly stipulation.

Fast forward to Nov 6, 08. The white woman now in posession of this property heads to the polls and proudly selects a Negro as President of the United States of America.

Every step forward is a step toward PEACE.

I heard a rumble that day...I believe it was Byrd...rolling over in his grave.

SENATOR STEVENS 7 FELONIES CONVICTED . WOULD SOMEONE PLEASE SLAP HIM ON THE WRIST. OH WAIT A MINUTE HES DIFFERENT? TREAT HIM FAIRLY . HES HELPIN RUN THIS COUNTRY DONT BOTHER HIM.NOT WHAT YOU DO ITS WHO YOU ARE?

VOTE FOR SOMEONE YOU NEVER HEARD OF, BUT DONT FIGHT A CHICKEN. THIS COUNTRY IS SO HIPOCRITICAL I JUST CANT SEE HOW PEOPLE KEEP LETTIN A FEW RUN THIS WHOLE COUNTRY .THATS RIGHT, THEYVE HAVE HAD ALL THE FUN THEY WANTED . LETS OUTLAW IT NOW!

FIGHT A HUMAN BEING BUT NOT A CHICKEN

Excuse me but the Obama team used race continually during this campaign. Whether it was himself pointing out he was black, or anyone who disagreed with him being called a "racists" he definitely injected race into the election. He even tried to call Bill and Hillary racists during the primaries.

It is historic, no doubt, but as sad as it is that there were people who didn't vote for him because he was black, it's just as sad that a majority of people voted for him simply because he was black. Dr. King dreamed of a time when men would be judged on their character and not the color of their skin. That barrier has yet to be met, Obama's character was never vetted, he was simply fawned over and worshiped by the main stream media. In my mind he has much to answer for, and while I will never consider him my president, I will pray for him and for our country, because I believe we will need God more than ever.

PS. You can quit dissing Sarah Palin now. Say what you will, but she has more experience than our President elect and way more class...May the "shut up Kim", "you're hateful Kim" comments begin now.

November 4th, 2008...The day America died!

I promise all of you out there that I will support and treat Obama the same way you treated Bush.

This is the first time in my life that I'm NOT proud to be an American.

When I was growing up my family did not have a whole lot but we were able to make do with what we had.

We never took or expected anything from the government but to guarantee our right to freedom.

Now along comes Prince Barack Obama who wants to provide his loyal subjects with government run everything!

This cradle to grave security sounds appealing, but is it worth selling our souls for?

I choose freedom!

I choose McCain / Palin!

McCain's health-care plan will undermine employer-financed health-care? Hello! can you be this ignorant? Obama is the one who will undermine employer-based health care. Who in their right mind is going to pay for their employees to get health-care when the government is going to tax the you-know-what out of them to pay for the "uninsured?" No one that's who.

Have you even looked at Hawaii's recent try at universal health-care for children? They had to stop it after only 9 months because, SURPRISE!, people quit paying for private insurance (since they were being taxed anyway) and the State couldn't handle it.

Perhaps Mr. Obama will cover more of the uninsured by "spreading the costs more fairly", but his plan will lower the quality of health-care and ruin it for everyone. Perhaps if people would put their cigarette money, or their junk food money, or their date night money towards health insurance there wouldn't be so many uninsured...but then I guess it wouldn't be fair to actually expect people to be responsible for themselves when Obama's "nanny state" will take care of them.

How can we trust Barack Obama to be a good steward of our tax dollars when his campaign spent millions of dollars trying to investigate and discredit a plumber who asked a simple question?

It must be driving Obama crazy after spending money like a drunken sailor and having John McCain remain within striking distance!

Let's keep our hard earned money in our pockets instead of sending it to the Washington liberals.

Vote McCain / Palin on November 4.

As I sit here praying for our country God brought to my mind an uplifting thought, for all of you out there afraid Obama and the Dems are going to win. Even if God chooses to punish our country for it's many sins, as he did Israel when they turned away from Him, by sending us into exile (socialism) for awhile, we can have hope for the future in the fact that as Democrats and moderates continue to kill their unborn children, Christians are being blessed with an abundance of them and in 14-20 years there will be more Godly people than ungodly (assuming Jesus doesn't return by then). However it goes we can depend on the goodness of God's promise that "if we raise our children in the way they should go, when they are old they will not depart from it." Bless all of you out there who are raising many Godly children, in them perhaps God will again bless our nation!

Let's see if I get this straight, The Economic Policy Institute, and Barak Obama think that if we spend more, spend more spend more, give money away in tax rebates (that will go to people who don't pay income taxes), have a Payroll tax holiday (which takes money away from social security)then our economy will grow? It doesn't make sense. If we are short on funds we (hopefully) don't spend more than we have or give money away before taking care of our own house, do we? No, we restrict our spending (freeze it), work harder to make more money (impossible if government keeps taking it) and save as much as possible.
Businesses don't create jobs when they don't have "extra" money. Rich people don't invest in small business or entreprenurial (sp)ideas if they don't have "extra" money. In an economy such as this helping business will help make jobs. It worked during the Reagan years, and yes during the Bush years...the thing that caused our recent economic downturn are the welfare policies of the early Clinton administration, forcing banks to make loans to people who COULD NOT pay them back and House and Senate DEMOCRATS who would not fix the problems with sub-prime loans when REPUBLICANS tried back in 2005 to fix Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. That's the truth.

I'd like the editor of this paper or any of you "independent" or liberal thinkers who comment here to show me one example of where "redistribution of wealth" has worked to lift lower income people out of the dregs rather than bringing upper income people down into the dregs. The ultra rich such as the Kennedy's, Kerry's, Soros's, etc. will always be rich...where's the justice?

Recent radio ads have attempted to portray Barack Obama as being pro Second Amendment but his political record has proved just the opposite.

Perhaps the most glaring exposure of his sham pro gun position comes from none other than the Brady Campaign.

That's right fellow gun owners. The most radical gun ban group in America has endorsed Barack Obama for President!

This leaves little doubt that Obama would be a liberal anti gun rubber stamp for a liberal anti gun Congress.

The judges he would appoint would have a field day trashing the rights of law abiding gun owners.

Protect your Second Amendment rights.
Vote McCain / Palin on November 4.

Recent radio ads have attempted to portray Barack Obama as being pro Second Amendment but his political record has proved just the opposite.

Perhaps the most glaring exposure of his sham pro gun position comes from none other than the Brady Campaign.

That's right fellow gun owners. The most radical gun ban group in America has endorsed Barack Obama for President!

This leaves little doubt that Obama would be a liberal anti gun rubber stamp for a liberal anti gun Congress.

The judges he would appoint would have a field day trashing the rights of law abiding gun owners.

Protect your Second Amendment rights.
Vote McCain / Palin on November 4.

How surprising! The editor of this paper must continue to denigrate Sarah Palin. It's interesting how you left out the point that JOE BIDEN also answered the "5th grade question" about the vice president wrong. Attacking Sarah Palin for "inexperince" is a joke because she's only our VICE-PRESIDENTIAL candidate and has more experience than the top of your ticket. Obama hasn't done anything of note that I've seen. He's never made a decision that affected anything. He usually voted "present" in the Illinois Senate so he wouldn't have to take a position without over explaining it and saying nothing.
Sarah Palin has run a town, and a State. As Governor of Alaska she is privy to "top secret" information, our Air-force bombers are prepared for any "Russian" problems that may occur. She manages a home and family and is a down to earth person. She TRUMPS Obama in everyway that matters!
I don't even know how Obama could get a security clearance with his known drug abuse and highly questionable associations with known terrorists and pro-communists. Any normal person would be turned down flat with his resume, for a security clearance. It makes you wonder who's pulling the strings behind Obama. Sarah is vastly better prepared than he.

NObama! *McCain/Palin '08* *Palin 2012*

"you all"

Right...we're all alike. Don't tell me what "you all" believe, because no two people are alike.

Enough is enough.

Utopia13, you completely miss our side of the argument. Perhaps your side wouldn't kill Palin's baby or grandchild...now, but you all sure as would have counseled a woman with a downs baby and a teenage girl to terminate...that's what planned parenthood does all around the country.

The pro-life side doesn't see an unborn child as an intrusion or a mistake, what about the baby's choice? What about the father's choice in the matter? No one ever really cares whether or not a man wants his child, or whether the child might like to live, only the woman's opinion (except the unborn woman) counts.

If you look at the statistics most abortions are not provided for rape or the life of the mother...most abortions are chosen because the parent/s don't want a downs syndrome child or other form of handicap or a woman just missed her pill or accidentally got pregnant. Selfishness is the main cause of abortion and I for one think it's sick.

I would never assume I could change your mind, just as you wouldn't assume you could change mine, but don't "wonder" where Illeen R and myself and other pro-lifers get the idea that your side would prefer these children dead, because your side pushes abortion on demand for any reason, and your candidate Barak Obama voted 4 times to allow babies born alive after botched abortions to die. He's sick and if you support him you're sick. Go ahead, make your choice, allow your children to "make their choice". Good for you all, but remember to receive forgiveness first one must realize they have sinned and the way our country has embraced abortion on demand, how will anyone realize it is a sin that needs to be forgiven? The bible says, "woe to those who call good evil and evil good." Abortion is evil.

I pray that God will forgive our country the sin of abortion, but first we must acknowledge it as a sin, turn from it and move past it. Will that happen? Who knows.

Barack Obama has said he would only raise taxes on those earning over $250,000 yet he is on record as having said he favors a 500 percent increase in taxes on firearms and ammunition. Most of the people I know who purchase firearms and ammunition make a lot less than $250,000! I wonder what other "back door" taxes he has in store for working people.

In reply to Illeen R.'s post:

That's a pretty harsh remark, saying that Palin's Critics would have KILLED her son & grandchild!

Not one of her critics would want to kill either of those children, or ask her or her daughter to do so.

Where you got that idea is totally beyond me.

I know this is a tired old argument. You will not sway me...not will I sway you. We both have our own beliefs, which is fine.

But to say that her opponents want to tell HER what to do with HER body...that's totally her choice, but it's also what you want to take away from us...the other side. Go figure!

I do believe the editor of this paper has a veil over his eyes as much as the rest of the biased, pro-Obama media, because I just don't think I watched the same debate as you guys. I, and many, many other people, thought John McCain was the one who looked jovial and amused, while Obama frequently scowled, and rudely interupted McCain whenever he didn't like the truth spoken about him.

John McCain pointed out, rightly so, that Obama will take us down the path to socialism. Why should a small business, and check out most small businesses make over $250,000 just to buy inventory and make payroll, have to pay for people, like my brother, who are content to work only 8 hours a day and no overtime while waiting for their income tax returns (which they get extra money for simply having extra kids because he doesn't make enough to pay income tax he gets "tax credits" which are nothing more than welfare) to pay off their extra, unnecessary expenses -- like a dog, expensive food, or other wasteful things while not insulating their attic for the coming winter...and did I say my brother lives in Wisconsin? Yes, we'll all get to pay for his stupidity, and while I love my brother, sister-in-law and my neices and nephews, I don't think you or I should have to pay for their stupidity. And that's where hard working people, like Joe the plumber and other people willing to work extra for the American dream get robbed by the Government.

When the Bush tax cuts get rolled back, under an Obama presidency and a democrat congress, everyone who got a tax break, down to those only make $40,000 a year will get a tax increase, plus everything you buy will be more expensive, because here's the nasty, little secret...Business don't pay taxes, they pass it on to consumers through higher prices and job lay-offs. Giving businesses tax breaks, or not increasing their taxes allows them to invest in jobs and the economy, they will continue to go over seas under Obama. Bush will be gone in 3 months, McCain is not Bush, HE WILL root out the corruption in the Government and I think that is the most important thing to fix almost ALL of the problems in our country. Think about it.

I agree that money should be put forth to get all children on a bus to and from Skyline High School. My son lives 1.1 miles from Skyline. I find this very disturbing. Upon driving my son to school in the mornings (he has to walk home because I am unable to get him due to work) I see numerous buses pass by my house. What is the reasoning that there is no bus for the Viscose City neighborhood? At only 13 years old (not quite fully responsible) and being a boy ( I would hate it more if/when my daughter starts high school) that the County thinks it's okay for a child to walk that far. What about when the weather is 20 degrees. What if some child molester decides that he will give my son a ride? How would Warren County/Town of Front Royal handle that situation if something was to happen? What can we do to prevent it?

Please don't shut me out...just this once. I would like to ask all my acquaintances on this comment sight who is HONESTLY to blame for this recent financial fiasco? If you look into it and are HONEST you must conclude that the Democrats led by Bill Clinton, Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and yes Barak Obama are more to blame than anyone. If you look into the TRUTH of the matter and check out the records, literally listen to the debates on Freddie and Fanny back in 2005 you'll see that it was Republicans who were DESPERATELY trying to fix the problem with sub-prime mortgages, forced on banks during the Clinton era. The Democrats said "everything was fine" and as we all now see it wasn't.

I don't expect to change any of your minds, but without any anger or "name calling" I'm asking you to really check out who you're voting for. Obama as much as said that he wants redistribution of wealth, that means Socialism and I don't know how you guys can truly want that. Irishman, you said you want the money to go to the people in our country, but as I see it, the people he's going to be giving money too are foreign entities, through the UN. I'm really asking for one of you to give me something to understand your point of view, because putting everything else aside, including your hatred of G.W. Bush, do you really want to take the country Obama's direction?

And please don't worry I'm not "on the edge" I'm just frustrated and would like to understand...please!

I disagree with almost every view my relative has on politics, but his first Commandment especially irks me. Being in a minority does not make one unfit to run the country. I am legally blind and thus a member of a minority. I graduated college magna cum laude and will continue to receive my Ph.D. one day. I don't want to run the country, nor am I qualified right now. However, if I chose to pursue politics, I don't see the problem with someone in a minority overseeing the rest of us. I do see the problem if the minority were extremely rich people or aristocracy, as in Europe before the French Revolution. But we're not talking about the aristocracy. We are talking about race or any other minority based on superficial characteristics. Those should have absolutely nothing to do with one's ability to lead a country.

I guess I am the only person in the United States who is better off now than I was 8 years ago, and I give the government zero credit for it. My husband and I saved our money, put a proper down payment on a house, told the lender who wanted to give us $600,000 for a mortgage "no thanks" and bought a beautiful house we could afford. We pay off our credit cards every month. We own all of our cars, because, again, we didn't buy more car than we could afford. We didn't go on vacation every year or a cruise a month, instead we went to local site seeing places or enjoyed our yard and town. We've lost A LOT (on paper) from our 401K, but since we didn't sell anything and made wise investments we intend to make money coming out of this down turn... providing we keep the concept of "trickle down" economics, otherwise we probably won't recoup much.

I just drove across half the country last week (hence my absence) and from all the people out driving, shopping and eating out, I sure as heck didn't see many people in crisis. I think this is a made up tragedy to scare people, yes there's a problem and yes it needs to be fixed...but not with bailouts and government pay offs. Keep your head, don't sell off your 401K and things will turn up. I am afraid, though, that if Obama gets elected I will be WAY WORSE OFF in 4 years because even though I don't fall anywhere near the $250,000 magic cut off for "rich" people everything that we buy, everything that we do and everything in our lives will be more expensive. Yes, people if Obama gets in get ready to tighten your belt...unless of course you got a mortgage you couldn't afford, or used more credit than you could pay for, or made STUPID financial decisions, me and my family will be paying it off for you.

The last 8 years of championing unfettered business doing what it wants, when it wants, unburdened by oversight or regulation, has been soundly discredited.

Witness today’s stock market, the condition of our national economy, the deficit, growing unemployment due to job exports, erosion of income growth, and increased local taxes.

Most disappointing are politicians digging in their heels resisting change while clinging to the last dregs of political dogma, praying for miraculous intervention and redemption of failed economic policies. They plead for another bite at the apple, promising to do a better job of husbanding our country. Thanks, but no thanks. Failing to do the job you were hired to do does not merit another vote of confidence.

Trillion dollar bailouts of Wall Street money-mongers DOES NOT validate the philosophy of trickle-down wealth and Keynesian economics. It testifies to gluttony, greed and avarice.

Let me tell you about my 401(k) retirement account, my declining home value, my property tax increases, and the threat to my future Social Security retirement income that others and I have paid into for 50 years. If these problems were the result of something I did I would not burden you with my complaints.

My complaints are the result of politicians betraying the public trusts while acting in their own best interests. Enough is enough.

Thanks to today’s version of our government, I am much worse off today than I was 8 years ago. How about you?

After spending a week listening to all of Obama's promises and all the people who are so excited about the Government taking over control of their lives I have a great idea to destroy the principles of America (capitalism) quickly and make all you moderates/ independents/and liberals happy.

Let's just hand over our paychecks to the government. 1/3 to the Fed, 1/3 to the State and 1/3 to our localities and let them spend it for us. Then we'll have crappy healthcare...but it will be there, crappy homes...but everyone will have one, crappy neighborhoods, because no one will help each other or make independent decisions...but we'll have curbside recycling for everyone. Heck we'll just let Government tell us what to do, how to think, where to live, work and play. Wait, that already existed. It was called the USSR and it failed miserably. That's just what we'll get with Obama and the current Democratic leadership.

That's change everyone can believe in, but is it really what we want?

NObama *McCain/Palin '08*

Kim...I knew you couldn't leave this one alone.

First of all, it was the daughter of a dear friend. This decision was not mine, nor was it her mother's. The young girl made this decision.

She is not ashamed of what happened to her. She knows it was not her fault.

So, I guess you're saying her mother should have forced her to carry that child to term, totally screw up what was left of her psyche...all to appease people (like you) out there she'll never know.

She has enough personal healing to do without putting that burdon on her as well.

Everyone has the right to their own opinion, and my opinion is that Sarah Palin has a very dangerous and one-sided agenda.

That's the wonderful thing about this country...FREEDOM.

*lastly, I do wonder, if her mother wasn't the figure she is, would her daughter be carrying the baby of her boyfriend, who admittedly did NOT want children? NOT having that child is/would not be allowed by her mother.

So much for her daughter's freedom....

I guess I'm not a "woman" because I thank God for Sarah Palin standing up for life.

I'm so sorry for your daughter, but how was it the unborn child's fault? How's your daughter going to feel in 5, 10, 20 years when she remembers the life she destroyed...and yes it was a life. She should never feel ashamed of what happened to her and I hope no one judges her, but you, ma'am, should be ashamed to have put your daughter through another ordeal. I pray she finds peace in her life, because she is precious, as was her child.

Perhaps Sarah can bring us into a world where life, yes even unexpected life, can be loved and given to those who could and would care for it. God will bless Sarah Palin for her stand!

Sarah Palin is slapping every woman in the country in the face!

How can any woman consider taking away the right for women to choose what to do with HER own body?

Please, before I'm bombarded by all the "pro lifer's"...save it. When your 16 yo is raped by a family friend and ends up pregnant...then tell me how you feel. The main concern was for THAT child, not the one she was so unwillingly carrying.

But...Sarah wants us all to go back to the butcher shop...the dark ages.

She should be ashamed of herself!!!

Blame it on McCain! Blame it on Bush! Blame it on the Republicans! You guys are pathetic!!! Check out who's really to blame. Blame Dodd! Blame Obama! Blame Clinton! Blame the Demon-crats! Blame those who refused to fix Fannie and Freddie! Blame Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi for words without substance! If you did your homework and quit using Democrat talking points you might find and print the truth.

McCain has been asking Obama to debate all summer. Barak kept saying no. Finally, in a controlled atmosphere of course, we'll get to see experience (McCain) vs. words (Obama). Hopefully Obama will be able to finish a thought in the time allowed without saying "uh! or um" a million times. Great orator, I think not. Great actor, oh yeah!

NObama! *McCain/Palin '08*

Will wonders never cease. I actually agree with the comments of this editor. I think besides saying CEO's shouldn't get golden parachutes when they run a company into the ground it should be their assets/profits seized to pay off the debt, as well as the people on the board of directors and especially the people in congress (Republican and Democrat and independent)who are responsible for over-site, but never do anything until something like this happens.

I feel bad for people who took out loans they can't pay back, but that was their choice and they should have to deal with it as well. Why should the tax payer have to bail out any of these people? Our government is now taking over too much private business and socialism, while already here in small amounts, ie. Social Security, Medicare/aie, etc., is at the door. This is a nightmare scenario, that I don't know if we'll ever bounce back from. Government messes up EVERYTHING they touch. Woe to all of us!

I was not going to write anymore, but (sorry all) I just can't stand the left slant of almost every editorial in the paper. Let's spread the blame around. Clinton's administration wanted/told lenders to let people have homes which they couldn't pay for. Republicans AND DEMOCRATS lowered regulation, which isn't always bad, but here we see the problem with it.

As I remember, John McCain and the Republicans tried to stem the problems with Fannie and Freddie a few years ago. Who stopped it? Oh Yeah, the Democrats. Who took the most money from Freddie and Fannie? Oh Yeah, Democrats...Obama getting the second highest amount.

If we're going to blame people be fair, blame Clinton, Bush, Republicans, Democrats, Independents, unscrupulous lenders and dare I say the greedy fools who took out mortgages that they knew they couldn't pay for. Too bad we have to clean up the mess now.

NObama! *McCain/Palin '08*

Dear Mrs. HrdWrkngAmrcn,

If you are a residential or agricultural property owner, you have had your pocketbook picked thanks to the real estate tax reassessment of 2006. To pay for the operation of Warren County government, you now pay more because commercial/industrial property owners pay less.

Family Dollar and other commercial/industrial businesses transferred a portion of their cost share of government operation onto the backs of residential property owners. Evidence suggests this has happened twice before with the 2003 and 1997 reassessments. Coincidence? Plausible, but not likely.

If you are a commercial or industrial property owner, owners of residential and agricultural properties are now paying the money you saved on your real estate tax after the reassessment.

Unless you are a shareholder of Family Dollar or stakeholder of other local big business, you just got screwed. Was it as good for you paying more as it was for them paying less?

If you as a residential property owner enjoyed paying more than your fair share, perhaps you and I can do some business in the future? I have a need to reinvest.

Best regards to all y’all

gee i wonder what Family Dollar did with the xtra $'s? reinvest maybe? Mr. P i think u r not as smart as u think. i think bizness needs to keep more of the $'s. lawyers and politicians git enuff already.

Re: Mr. Biggs letter published 09-15-08.

Mr. Biggs’ proud lack of answers is poised to enjoy the taste of shoe leather. Before I turn to the particulars, please allow me to restate my contention: The 2006 Warren County real estate reassessment and corresponding rate adjustment resulted in lower taxes for commercial/industrial properties and higher taxes for residential properties in 2007. Evidence suggests the same thing happened in 2003 and in 1997.

Mr. Biggs’ carefully crafted statements are deceptive and he has deliberately misled you, dear reader. Mr. Biggs has personal experience that what I say is true; he owns a residence on Greystone Drive and he owns a commercial building on Chester Street. Let us look at the numbers:

Warren County Real Estate Tax Paid – Greystone Drive Residential Parcel:
2006 - $2,209.90
2007 - $2,364.75 (tax increased $154.85 due to reassessment)

Warren County Real Estate Tax Paid – Chester Street Commercial Parcel:
2006 – $2,708.46
2007 - $2,488.95 (tax lowered $219.51 due to reassessment)

But wait, there’s more. Mr. Biggs’ commercial property is located in Front Royal. He pays Front Royal real estate tax too.

Front Royal Real Estate Tax Paid – Chester Street Commercial Parcel:
2006 – $429.39
2007 - $387.17 (tax lowered $42.22 due to reassessment)

Mr. Biggs claims reassessment tax rate adjustments are “determined by the amount of money needed for the county to operate its government”. This definition is not true for a reassessment and would be illegal. Mr. Biggs is wrong, again.

The tax rate adjustment that accompanies real estate reassessments is an administrative function to prevent a tax increase exceeding 1% due to the reassessment process. Code of Virginia does not permit reassessments to increase tax revenues.

Mr. Biggs claims “if the county does not need more money to operate the county government, then your taxes will be the same before and after a reassessment”. Mr. Biggs is wrong, again. Substitute “budget hearing” for “reassessment” and you would be correct.

Machinery and Tools taxes are a separate and distinct tax category imposed on Industrial businesses. Mr. Biggs is foolish to claim “Real Estate Tax” and “Machinery & Tools Tax” are the same thing. Wrong again Mr. Biggs.

For proper perspective, remember many commercial properties are valued in the millions of dollars. Look at the numbers for Family Dollar, located in the 522 Corridor:

2006 assessment of $43,992,600 paid $363,480 in real estate taxes; $0 Machinery & Tools Tax
2007 reassessment of $54,631,800 paid $249,250 in real estate taxes; $0 Machinery & Tools Tax.

Thanks to the reassessment process, Family Dollar enjoyed a $114,230 real estate tax decrease.

Well, Mr. Biggs, can you tell us who received a tax break and who received a tax increase? You received both, a unique position. Why did you not tell us about it?

Best regards to all y’all,

Time has come to cross the street. I hear a cymbal band approaching.

"Some cause happiness wherever they go; others whenever they go."
- Oscar Wilde

Best regards to all y’all

our gov would not give it to him even if he was to win does any 1 remember how ole george got in there -with a little help from ole jeb bush. bunch of bull s. ( him is obama)

i have three words to describe how the republicans have messed up the country . WE DID IT WE DID IT . LOL LMAO

Cover your ears and close your eyes, guys, I'm back...I'll try and keep it brief.
If Governor Warner's record is so great why is he afraid to debate Governor Gilmore? Could it be because he took what Gilmore had done and left it ready to fall apart as soon as Governor Kaine took over? Questions, Questions.

Touche' Bill, Touche'.

Dear Mrs. Bishop,
Play guitar and harmonica at the same time and folks think you have talent. When you strap a pair of cymbals to the inside of your knees, those same folks will cross the street to avoid you.

Incoherence using the most words while expressing the fewest facts is not a virtue. To Mr. Bishops’ chagrin, Mrs. Bishop is not anorchous.

Will the expected “always get the last word” reply be over or under 350 words? I bet over. Earplugs standing by, I await my inevitable fate.

Best regards to all y’all.

Sticks and stones, horselover2, sticks and stones! I am not hate filled nor do I need anger management. I'm fine however this election turns out (are you?). If you look at most of my comments they are not attacks, but simple truths. You see me as hateful, because you don't like what I say...I'm sorry that you feel that way. If you want hateful look at how the media has treated Sarah Palin and her family for the last week.
Why do you call my "attacks", baseless? Show me where I'm wrong please...based on the candidates words and actions, not on your opinion.
You, my dear, seem to be the one who's about to self destruct. I'm as happy as a clam with my choice for pres/vice-pres and your words certainly aren't going to take away my enthusiasm.
Here's a question for you: Have you ever experienced government run healthcare? I have and it's not good, I've also seen the results of socialist government, first hand, and can tell you it's also not good. I will forever fight against it in this country, so I guess you'll have to get used to seeing my name, although like all free Americans you are free to ignore it.
Thanks for your thoughts, and blessings to you!

I would like to address Kim Bishop/Seeks4Truth's MANY hatefilled comments. The way you write you are always in attack mode. This method of "debate" will not convince anyone of what you espouse, but actually drive them further from your points. When anyone sees your name(s)they don't need to read your comments it's the same baseless attacks, again, and again etc. We have a long time to go until the election is decided and you should seek professional help before you self destruct. Perhaps Seeks4Truth should be Seekshelp whether it be anger management or pastoral intervention.

This goes to show how out of touch most media people are in this country. Sarah Palin is the best pick McCain could have made. Everyone I've talked to, including me, was not going to vote for John McCain, but go third party. However, after the Saddleback interview we all thought, "OK, let's see if he means what he says," and he knocked it out of the park with Mrs. Palin. She is strong and able to take on the corrupt Washington machine (Dems, Reps, and Inds) not to mention she proudly stands up for conservative, Godly values. The fact that all the left-wing pundints are saying what a mistake she was, just validates that they're nervous about her and that she was the best choice. Finally, conservative women and girls have a role model to look up to. She's wonderful, and if she did have to take over on day one I think she'd do a way better job than Obama or Biden, because she has a foundation to stand on...actual works (she got a lot done in Alaska) unlike Obama and Biden who've made a few speeches but never had to make a decision of their own. Yay! John McCain!!!!!!

Comments on Comments;
Why would someone want everybody to think just like they do?

All of us are biased in some way, shape or form. Biased people look for and find confirmatory evidence for what is already believed and will ignore or discount contradictory evidence. We will remember only those things that confirm our beliefs and we will forget all those things that deny those same beliefs.

Minor biases exist that do not affect those around us. Liking corn flakes better than oatmeal might be an example of minor bias that does not hurt anyone except, perhaps, makers of corn flakes.

At the other extreme we find full blown examples of bias that are offensive, divisive and hurtful towards innocent people.

Possession of an innate ability to weigh newfound ideas against present beliefs and adapt to changing circumstances marks the lives of self-actualizing people.

This balance with life and the surrounding world is in contrast to the single mindedness of a small percentage of our overly vocal and narrowly focused citizens who are quick to condemn, eager to humiliate, and obsessively driven to convert those who differ from their political perspective.

Resistance to change marks the lives of political party shills and cheerleaders, self-appointed spokespersons shrieking never ending verbal streams of blather as gospel for hopeful consumption by the unwashed masses. Desperation seems to raise the volume beyond reason.

Do we all deserve earaches?

Obama is an elitist snob. One interview and his propaganda on his web site don't change his over-all attitude. I don't take only one part of a person or one piece of news for my decisions. I look at the person as a whole, and what I see of Obama is that he wants to punish people who make money, which in turn hurts the poor, because then jobs go away, prices go up and basically the poor stay poor and the middle class gets poorer. He wants the government to dole out cash to those he feels deserve it.

The left's dream is for an elite class at the top who doles out wealth to those under them. That is what Communist countries do and that is what the Democrat party (at least those at the top) are trying to do. Obama is with them, so yes I say he's a Communist/Socialist.

Mr. Gwyer’s 28 July letter (published 8-18-08) professes support of Del. Gilberts remarks. Mr. Gwyer offers no original thinking and no unique viewpoint. His comments appear to copy the work of “Accuracy In Media”, a G.O.P front organization charged with discrediting anything at odds with the Republican Party. Accurately telling the truth is not a requirement or goal.

Created in 2001 after Bush’s first election, Karl Rove is credited as the founding father of AIM whose mission is to manipulate news to conform to the party viewpoint. AIM is a forum to “load the lips” of loyal party members who are encouraged to repeat the party rhetoric.

AIM is offering proof it is a one trick pony. Current articles available on their web site are entitled:
Obama’s Communist Cover-up Continues
Obama Confirms Relationship with CPUSA Member
Barack Obama’s Global Tax Proposal
ConWeb Artists
Obama’s Scandal is Bigger than Edwards’
AP Lies About Obama’s Red Mentor

Blindly following the political party rhetoric is the role best played by sheep. Without the capability to suspend belief, to seek independent information, to question leadership ideas, you remain trapped allowing others to set your agenda.

Barack Obama IS NOT A COMMUNIST!
------------------------------------------------------

Per the definition (thank you Wikipedia):
Communism is a socioeconomic structure that promotes the establishment of an egalitarian, classless, stateless society based on common ownership of the means of production and property in general.

To quote Barack himself:
“I believe that America's free market has been the engine of America's great progress. It's created a prosperity that is the envy of the world. It's led to a standard of living unmatched in history. And, it has provided great rewards to the innovators and risk-takers who have made America a beacon for science, and technology, and discovery. We are all in this together. From CEOs to shareholders, from financiers to factory workers, we all have a stake in each other's success because the more Americans prosper, the more America prospers.”
— Barack Obama, New York, NY, September 17, 2007

How exactly do you translate a quote like that into “Obama is a borderline communist”? Your logic is flawed, ma’am.

Barack Obama’s tax plan specifically addresses tax relief FOR middle class Americans (LOOK MA, NOT A CLASSLESS SOCIETY). Exactly where are you getting your information?

Straight from Obama Website is the truth about his plan.
Provide Middle Class Americans Tax Relief
Obama will cut income taxes by $1,000 for working families to offset the payroll tax they pay.
• Provide a Tax Cut for Working Families: Obama will restore fairness to the tax code and provide 150 million workers the tax relief they need. Obama will create a new "Making Work Pay" tax credit of up to $500 per person, or $1,000 per working family. The "Making Work Pay" tax credit will completely eliminate income taxes for 10 million Americans.
• Eliminate Income Taxes for Seniors Making Less than $50,000: Barack Obama will eliminate all income taxation of seniors making less than $50,000 per year. This proposal will eliminate income taxes for 7 million seniors and provide these seniors with an average savings of $1,400 each year. Under the Obama plan, 27 million American seniors will also not need to file an income tax return.
• Simplify Tax Filings for Middle Class Americans: Obama will dramatically simplify tax filings so that millions of Americans will be able to do their taxes in less than five minutes. Obama will ensure that the IRS uses the information it already gets from banks and employers to give taxpayers the option of pre-filled tax forms to verify, sign and return. Experts estimate that the Obama proposal will save Americans up to 200 million total hours of work and aggravation and up to $2 billion in tax preparer fees.

It appears that you are the recipient of seriously flawed information.

We Is Good, They Is Bad?

Partisans on both sides need to pause and think.

Ideology is not thinking. It is a substitute for thinking. Volume and certitude do not equal the indisputable truth.

Blindly following the political party rhetoric is the role best played by sheep. Without the capability to suspend belief, to seek independent information, to question leadership ideas, you remain trapped allowing others to set your agenda.

The combination of unrestrained partisanship and the corrosive influence of big money have all but paralyzed the political process into never-ending exchanges of name calling that serve no useful purpose except, perhaps, inflating the speakers ego. All we need is a willingness to uncritically believe and we will become part of the problem, not part of the solution.

A scant few years ago I was fond of saying the Republicans had bad ideas and the Democrats had no ideas. Today, the descriptions have reversed, and yet too many politicians remain in denial they have become complacent and out of touch with the lives of ordinary people.

On both the national and local level, political party support derives from the “low information” sympathizers who gladly respond to appeals directed towards their base prejudices and misunderstandings of the world that surrounds them. “We is good, they is bad” is a sure-fire message to rally the unblinking faithful.

Muckraking your opponent instead of interacting with the ideas and feelings of others by conducting meaningful conversations was predicted 2,500 years ago by the philosopher Cicero who is reputed to have said, “When your argument lacks substance, abuse your adversary”.

It never ceases to amaze me how people on the "left" can call their opponents name after name after name and never get called on it, but when someone, Todd Gilbert, calls it like it is he gets crucified. How dare he speak the truth. I see Obama and all the democratic leaders of this country as Socialist/Communist and make no apology for it. When a person or group of persons want to take money (taxes) from the hard working, moderately wealthy, middle class and redistribute it to the public, while they themselves live in the lap of luxury away from the "peons" I don't see how you can call that anything but communist.

Redistribution of wealth has not worked anywhere it has been tried. Europe is falling apart and no matter how much our Democratic leaders or their false messiah, Barak Hussein Obama, try to "do it better" they won't, they can't, because it doesn't work. I think I'm the only person who's written into this paper supporting Todd Gilbert and I say keep the truth coming! Obama is a borderline communist.

Correct me if I am mistaken, but I believe Mr. Gilbert's defense of his remarks as an "exaggeration" may fall short of describing his intent to influence his like-minded listening audience with a negative description of a political adversary. I believe Mr. Gilbert carefully chose his words for maximum impact, not to exaggerate his opinion.

Thirty years ago may mark the first use of the 'plausible deniability' defense popular within the Nixon administration. Is it plausible Mr. Gilbert knowingly used exaggerated comments to emphasize his opinion? Plausible, but not likely.

One of the accepted definitions of 'comity' is a state of mutual harmony, friendship, and respect.

I submit to you Mr. Gilberts' version is "He hit me back first".

Wesley Clark should be ashamed of trying to mess with McCain's history. Most people who support McCain for president use his time in the military to show his character, as a POW. To stand against such evil forces, voluntarily, shows great strength of character, even if it was years ago. Does it make him qualified to be Commander in Chief...I'd say more so than Obama. Does it make him qualified to be President of the US...I'd say no. He's flip-flopped as much as Obama on the major issues (minus the war)and is just as untrustworthy as Obama to be President. But, I believe ANYONE running would be better than Obama as President, as he's a borderline communist, leftist.

Everyone can say what they will about the people running for office, but to attack McCain's character as a war hero is despicable...and that's what Mr. Clark did. Clark is nothing more than a political hack these days.