keepthefaith

Show me the portion of the population that has at least a high school education, that gets up everyday and gives their best effort, that doesn't do drugs, that doesn't belong to a broken family and are honest and not criminal that can't find comfort, health and happiness without government support?

Good question. Another might be: At what level of taxation on the rich do they get thanked for their large contribution instead of being criticized for not paying their "fair share"?

The Spam rep for that store is doing a fantastic job.

I'd like to see a nationwide poll on how decided people are. We still have a long way to go. Many in either party may not be firm in their preference yet.

Cruz, Christie and Carly are my top 3 on the Repub side and not necessarily in that order.

She's trying to stay out of jail.

Care to explain why flat taxes don't work? Here in Illinois we have a flat state income tax. The previous governor raised the income tax rate by 60% before he would lift a finger to cut one dime out of the state's bloated budget. He ran for re-election and lost to a Republican who ran on keeping taxes lower and cleaning up the state budget. With a progressive tax we may have never gotten the election outcome this state badly needed. Since everyone was affected in the same way, voters all had the same motivation.

That's good. Spam has a half-life of at least 1 million years which is not a mock. It's a feature.

Have watched the last 20 minutes of the debate. Gosh is Hillary sucking up to Obama. She must be frightened that if she doesn't he'll send his justice dept after her on the email stuff.

You mention the least ambitious.... There is a slice of our population that chooses poverty. They choose not to finish high school, they start families they cannot or choose not to support, when given a work opportunity they screw that up by being unreliable or putting forth a lousy effort. They choose a public assistance alternative. Governments often respond by improving benefits for these folks, putting no limits on the length of time they can draw upon them and then the politicians who support these programs ask for their votes. This group of people we are not helping. We are perpetuating the lifestyle. We are rewarding irresponsible and lazy behavior at the expense of others. What this group of people needs are incentives to get off the dime and help in doing so. One form of help could be as simple as letting them know that there are limits to benefits and that the government is not going to help beyond a reasonable point and that they will have to turn to family and private orgs for help beyond that. An Amish or similar lifestyle is always an option. We are a better society the more we can limit the number of people on the government dole. We are a better society the less taxation is imposed. We are a better society employing as many people as possible in a growing private economy. We are a better society when the policies imposed by government are as evenly imposed as possible. We are a better society when government support is more narrowly focused on those truly in need.

Let's hope that the lack of enthusiasm for the Dem debates carries over to the election.

Yes but sadly the fine American public elected the community organizer twice.

If you take a Prilosec OTC first you have a better chance of that Spam not ruining your day.

We have enormous coal reserves and generating power from it is relatively cheap. Would you support government funded research to develop methods to better eliminate coal burning emissions?

No, it's the pressed bits of flesh that are recovered when sweeping the floor after each shift in the meat processing plant.

Yes but it was for the greater good. The truth could have handed the election to Romney which would have ended Obama's reign and eliminated Hillary from a 2016 run. The country would have fallen into the hands of the evil racist Republicans. It was Obama and Clinton's duty to prevent that from happening.

I think the vast majority of people would support a simpler, flatter tax system that eliminates some of the mystery that can be exploited by corps and some of the rich. I would issue a stiff challenge to you though regarding the majority of the 1%, 2% and those over $350K annual income. Vast majority of these folks are paying very high rates of federal income tax and not getting any special treatment. That and these folks are footing the country's bill for the most part. A flatter tax code where all pay more similar rates (and all actually pay) takes much of the politics out of taxation. Especially if a law is passed that says tax rates only can go up or down for all at the same time and rate. This is where we need to go IMO. Lastly, I think it's immoral for the fed gov't to take more than 25% of anyone's income (in the form of income tax) regardless of how much a person makes. If the Fed takes 25% and states take 6% on average plus FICA, Medicaid, Medicare - you're at 33%+ total. No way the taxing bodies should take over 33% of what people earn. Just my opinion.

Hell of a plan

Me too. I really thought Carly would get more traction a couple months ago.

Without a doubt.

So did Joe Dufek and he showed up sober every day.

If you bring in any player and that player makes the team then the team expects that player to be able to perform. You can't even count on JM to show up. What team needs that? Someone will give him a chance at some point.

When somebody runs for President, they have a good idea what they're walking into. If someone doesn't like the cards they'll be holding on day one in office, don't run. Obama came in with an agenda, just not the correct one for the time (or any time).

No, but this is a man who was never serious about doing the whole job of President. Wars, budgets, terrorism, a weak economy and having to actually work with people were huge distractions from his fairness and racial equality agenda.

A few observations.... Ruth Ginsberg - is she really gonna stay on the court for another year? Way past her bed time. So many people falling asleep on camera including the Syrian refugee while Obama was talking about refugees. The military leaders - the look on their faces said it all. They aren't sold on the commander in chief. Good grief we are governed by a bunch of old farts. Obama said the deficit has been cut by 75% . Sure when compared to the porkulus year. My wife mentioned that Wasserman Schultz looks hideous. I corrected her and said "she is hideous". Paul Ryan. One look says 1000 words. Bernie Sanders, Ditto. The whole speech was geared to the clueless that only tune in once or twice a year.