keepthefaith

Obama will enthusiastically support more domestic oil production as soon as he can get a new big tax on the drilling/mining rights and on the oil itself. This will raise significant revenue for his agenda and will keep fuel prices high enough that the public maintains an interest in alternative fuels.

It's a very interesting idea. If we split the country by political leanings, who would fund all the lib programs? Which "country" would have the greater population after a year or two?

Poppycock. The money kept by the top wage earner is either spent or invested or given away. All 3 generate positive economic activity.

You've completely missed the point. For the first time in a while, baby boomers put a candidate on the ticket that at least campaigned on reducing spending, balancing the budget and growing the economy. America rejected that candidate and it was the younger generation (which has the most to gain or lose from fiscal policy) to a great extent that put Barry back into office. Forget party. Forget religion. Break down the issues we have as a country and which candidate addressed those with better solutions? That debate is a no-brainer, but many baby boomers have no shame for the fiscal mess on hand and the younger generation is clueless to a great extent on the depth and consequences of the problem. The previous generation (to boomers) left a $1 trillion debt in 1982. Boomers had a big party for 30 years. The next generation is fu(&ed. All you under 35's, WAKE UP!

I did. Bush was particularly disappointing in his 2nd term even before the financial meltdown. He ignored a number of issues but remember, Nancy Pelosi and co. would have never approved a budget full of as she calls them "draconian cuts". Young people who voted significantly for Obama are falling into the Democrat trap of expanding entitlements. My generation (baby boomers) have been in power for decades and will continue to be in power for years to come and when it's time to turn the the country over to the next generation, todays 30 and under, we will be spending $1 trillion a year just to service the $30 trillion or so of debt that will be on the books then. That and all us old farts are gonna want our monthly SS checks, our organ and body part replacements and oh by the way we won't be contributing economically any longer except for making the pharm companies and the ones that make those wrap around sunglasses rich. All you 30 and unders, keep voting as you do and you're fu(&ed. The Democrat party basically guarantees the destruction of your prosperity.

Typical lib blather. Ask a lib why they vote the way they do and they lob bombs at the other side. You rarely (I'd like to say never) hear them talk about what is good about the agenda of the left. The group of voters that have the most to gain from fiscal discipline and stemming the tide of our massive debt are the young voters IMO. More than 60% of voters 30 and under voted for Obama. There's your election right there. What we have on our hands in this country is an awareness problem.

Right there with ya. If we surveyed young people who have no idea what the Federal and State income tax rates are in this country for the upper wage earners, and we asked them "What do you think is the maximum fair tax rate that anyone should pay the government for the money they earn"? What total percentage of your hard earned money should the state and federal government be permitted to take? I guarantee you all that you will find the answers to be well below what current rates are for the top few percent. I know. I have asked a number of my college age kids' friends. You will not get answers like 45% which is about where we're at for those in many states. The top are headed for above 50% once the Obamacare taxes and other rate hikes Obama wants are enacted. It's embarrassing that our government would ask for that much from anyone and find that it's still nowhere near enough to balance the budget.

OK Connor, I get that you're happy your guy won. Tell us what were the big issues for you in this campaign and what is it that Obama has done or will do to effectively address those issues?

Blame the voters. The choice for President was an easy one. Half the population is blinded by party loyalty, ignorance or selfishness.

Well, I'm nothing short of stunned at the Presidential election results. Stunned. To me it's impossible for any thinking person who pays attention to the very real and very large issues we face as a country to conclude that the current president is the better choice to lead this nation going forward. Our debt, our annual deficit, illegal immigration, a stagnant at best economy, oversubscribed and underfunded entitlements, a weakening international standing and a growing population of people not ready or willing to be self sufficient - all are staggering issues. The devil is in the details. The numbers tell the story. Bright and committed minds can solve these, yet our President has not presented one sound plan that can correct any of these issues. He speaks in lofty poll tested phrases and says nothing at the same time. He avoids the real numbers and does not have the courage to face these issues. Frankly, he is often less than honest and demonstrates this with regularity. Today voters are the problem. Too few are informed and too few are willing take the time to study an issue and think about how it should be solved and who is best to solve it. Too many vote for candidates who will deliver small things to them individually at the expense of the big picture. Too many even when faced with the facts vote for the man or women who is part of the problem or not a part of the solution. Who will solve our nation's issues, those now in Washington or the voters? I don't have faith in either one. Seriously, we are a nation committing suicide. No need to worry about me. It's most of you, my kids, my friends, neighbors and future generations that are screwed without a big change in direction soon on many things.

Congratulations on providing many of us on this board even more evidence that you are the biggest !@#$ on this board. With each additional post you simply lengthen your lead. You simnply cannot respond to anything without the unfounded faceless personal attacks. You're simply a nobody with a big mouth. Go ahead and respond and dig yourself an even deeper hole. !@#$ing Putz.

Nobody's on trial so the standard of innocence until proven guilty doesn't apply at all. It's not about that. At this point I'm not against the Mosque or for it in that location either. My point is simply that the concern (and it's a real concern IMO) for the real purpose for putting it there, who is funding it and why are they funding it has not been answered as far as I can see. If it's built and it turns out later that it was funded in part by terrorist groups or if the same groups hail the facility as a victory monument or if Pro-terror anti-American events occur there - we're going to have a big problem. You have to admit, it's a bad fit for the neighborhood. Yes, the City of New York should have and still should take a look closer look under the covers.

I expect them to continue to blame Bush for everything during the campaign and try to scare voters away from voting for Republicans. With control of Congress comes a record and they certainly can't run on that.

He fails to address the concern that the project might be funded in part by money from terrorist groups or supporters of terrorism and that there could be an intent for the facility to be used for purposes other than peaceful religios worship. The NYC board that approved the project should have IMO done more to investigate this and would be in a much better position to defend their decision had they done so.

Bravo. I'd take the ball with rare exception.

Based on this, I'm rethinking my position on guns.

It's a good way to reduce taxpayer expense, especially if done sooner and more often.

LMAO

It's chicken scratch. When they build nukes and launch them on their fellow Muslim dominated countries I'll be happy.

We need to figure out how to get them to kill each other. May as well put that energy and passion to good use.

Yep, the mud slinging and venting is quite therapeutic and helps many of us to have more positive relationships with our familes, friend's and co-workers.

There is so much wrong with the health care and health care insurance market that I don't know where to start. A couple things that don't get much air time that drive me crazy are these: 1. All the parents that run their kids to the emergency room for the smallest things and the same that take their kids to the doctor whenever they get the sniffles or a fever. There are a lot of them that I know. They're idiots. 2. Most people want their health care to be FREE. If you're low income, you want it for free. If you're employed, your employer should pay for a cadillac plan. If you're old you want medicare to cover everything. People need to have skin in the game and insurance should not provide "FREE" care for every little thing. People need to have a financial stake in their own health IMO. 3. There is a pill for everything now and I'm amazed at how many people young and old are on meds for every little thing real and imagined. ****, Viagara is an insurance scam. Too many people and too many doctors are pill happy. If people had a financial stake in their prescription plans, they might make different and better decisions. 4. There is a procedure for everything and it's abused by both doctors and patients. I know someone that is elderly that has a lot of wrinkly skin around the outside of their eyes. Not terribly attractive. Now that he and the doctor have decided that the skin is affecting his peripheral vision (which is bull **** in this case) the surgical procedure will be covered. Again, no skin (pun intended) in the game so we go on a spending spree. 5. End of life expenses are horrific and this needs to be addressed, but it needs to be addressed head-on and not through cuts and complicated language buried in a health care bill. It needs to be debated and resolved out in the open. When we start "insuring" necessary and expensive treatment only, we'll see insurance rates come back to reality. Until then, it'll remain mostly free for everyone at great expense.

You're gouing to learn that your comment that the locals don't have a big issue is very false.

Yes, they have approved it and I question the decision. Had they done otherwise, they would have been criticized also for sure. I believe they chose the greater of two evils and would have served the local taxpayers better by simply suggesting to the developer that they find another site. Taking all of the religious crap out of the equation, they have approved the construction of a new business facility. The business is controversial in nature and may create security and crime risks and the added expense to the city for this reason. Same as a strip club, casino or dirty book store might in some areas. It's just not a good fit for that neighborhood.

You might be supporting his point with this. You might want to open a dirty book store in a location that is correctly zoned as retail, but the governing body that approves your permit might say no because they know the nearby population won't want it there. They aren't saying you can't sell dirty books, just not there. Saying no to a Mosque near ground zero doesn't restrict religious freedom. It might simply be because it's not a good fit for the neighborhood.