keepthefaith

Yes, when you can find me 500 examples I'll be sold.

Satellite radio is great. Highly recommended if you're in the car a lot.

I don't see the correlation with a church near the OK City bombing at all.

Yes, but what I am referring to is the lack of significant and ongoing opposition to the ongoing violence. If the vast majority of Muslims and muslim religious leader are peaceful, then why is there not a large public outcry against the ongoing violence and the threats of violence? I don't see or hear that and over the past few years. On the other hand, I have seen a number of Muslim representatives of a variety of Muslim groups in TV interviews and nearly all have been hesitant to speak out against the violence. I think that if there was a radical group of Catholics or other Christian's that were promoting and carrying out large-scale violence, you would see and hear the Pope, Cardinal and other Christian leaders speak out very vocally against it. I just don't see or hear that from Muslims on a large scale as you would expect from a peaceful majority.

Why is it that leaders within the Muslim religion have not come out publically to denounce what happened on 9/11 and since? While I agree with you that it is a very thin slice of Muslims that are so radical, what's missing is any voice of opposition to the violence from the Muslim majority and leadership.

And let me add that if it's built and Bin Laden or his crew make a statement praising the construction of the facility in that spot, the populus will be vindicated.

If anyone is to be criticized over this, it's the NY Planning Commision that approved it and the Mayor who has a supported it. A lot of questions have still not been answered. Where is funding coming from? Why that location? Why was it given the name "Cordoba house" initially? The planning commission certainly was aware of the controvery that's ensued and could have done a better job in vetting the project and had they done that, would be in a better position to defend their decision. Still I think the best thing to do would be to find an alternate location. If not, there will be protest after protest during construction (if they can find workers to build it). The first time that anyone associated with terrorism is seen or heard from at that location will be a BIG problem.

People wouldn't care if he were governing well. He isn't, so everything is questioned. The thought of waiting to 2013 or OMFG 2017 to be rid of him is painful. We need a way to end the nightmare sooner. Space alien kidnappers might be our only hope.

Other than blind faith, there is no reason to expect the Bills to be good this year. Maybe there will be a few nuggets of hope for next year among some of the young guys.

Dave, you owe it to yourself to look at the issues Obama, Pelosi and Reid have addressed in the past couple years and then take a close look at the solutions that have been signed into law. If you're objective, you're going to find a lot of ugliness pure and simple. Obama is being attacked on very solid ground. His solutions and those being put forth by the Democratic leadership are ass !@#$ing bull **** horrible. Obama's greatest accomplishment to date IMO is that he has awakened a large base of common sense voters. They won't vote for Obama and the like. That will go down as Obama's greatest contribution to our country and for that I thank him.

Agree. We need to hack the **** out of spending. We need to stop treating every minitory, union member and illegal immigrant as "special". We need to tell more people to sink or swim. I know, pipe dream.

Ya know, if we cut spending and balanced our annual budgets, a little help from the Fed Reserve might not be the worst thing for us. Bigger problem is the trajectory of spending which compounds the problem every day.

Barney, Barney, Barney... You were never warned? It was all Wall Street's fault?

I think you'd find that a lot of people would be willing to accept a tax increase to help pay down our debt if they could bank on it being temporary and if it was done in conjunction with very large meaningful long-term spendng cuts. Until then, those that foot most of the bill are well justified in their objection to being taxed more IMO. Nobody wants to fund waste.

Well, Barry can check off the "I want to play ball with and NBA all star team" from his bucket list. Does he really think we'll believe that he did this for the few wounded troops that were on hand? He is a selfish arrogant elitist prick.

Uh-oh, even the left leaning CNN is bashing Michelle. http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2010/08/...onomic-climate/

Obama's are certainly governing and living like a 1-term President and first lady. Get it done now while they can. Belt tightening is not evident at any level in the Federal Government, including vacations.

What a bunch of stiff pricks.

Both parties when they have been in positions of control have usually !@#$ed up royally only to hand control to the other party so that they can do the same. Wash, rinse, repeat.

Ineffective would be a huge improvement over what we have now.

When you campaign on changing the way Washington works and you then govern in the worst possible way in which Washington works, then you deserve to be criticized. The big issues that we face as a nation are glaringly obvious when you look at the numbers. The stakes are higher now than I can remember in my lifetime. Somehow we have to find and elect people that will start managing by the numbers. Pipe dream, maybe. Clearly, however, the solutions to the noble causes that Obama and this Congress have addressed are not the solutions that will generate positive results.

Completely agree and I'll add that they are a very stubborn bunch. Even in the face of the numbers, (defecits unemployment, lack of benefit from stimulus program, real cost of health care bill, illegal immigrant burdens), they refuse to adjust. They are trapped by their ideology and deeply commited to partisanship over results.

Well, we agree on that.

I think the long extensions of unemployment benefits actually hurt the hiring market. Here's why... Each time benefits are extended, the costs for former employees or any that might be laid off in the near future rise. Unemployment insurance rates are usually set based on an employer's individual record of layoffs and the overall state financial picture for unemplyment benefits cost. This year we had a 600% increase in our unemplyment insurance rates which are tied to payroll. That means that when payroll goes up, so does unemplyment insurance and it's a big increase per employee at this year's rates. Here in Illinois, the rate increase affects rates for at least 3 years. Could be longer if unemplyment remains high into next year and beyond (which it will). This has resulted in a silent tax increase here because the state takes the fed money and still charges the employers the higher insurance rate even though the extensions are federally funded. If a company hires now and then has to layoff a person they will cause their unemployment insurance rates to rise even more down the road. It's cheaper and less risky to ask current employees to do more.

Everybody here deserves the same level of respect/disrespect. Respect preferred.