Search results

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Story?id=6099188&page=1 Speaks for itself.

On that I think we can agree. On both points above. I am also hoping for mixed government. I think that was the intent of our founders. I wasn't making a bizarre claim, as the appointments were not relevant to my point, only the total number and the changing of a member, thereby...

It's unimportant who put the current justices in. What will matter is the one change that will swing the court.

Smart. You won't address the points that are not debatable. Kind of like some candidates. But I'll try again anyway. What will be the checks and balances in that arrangement?

It's been often stated in this forum that there were no checks and balances for a time with the republican majority and Bush in the white house. I disagree. They never had a super majority, and they never had the media. The dems have the media, they may have a super majority, they...

No, I wasn't kidding. I was being sarcastic. The government is extremely wasteful with "our" money. Both parties. The problem with the politicians is they spend it like it's not their money. I believe they should treat our money as if it was their own. I would wager that most of...

Among his supporters that don't want to find answers are the majority of the media, who seem more interested in finding out every last detail of a common nobody citizen than they are about the next leader of the most powerful position in the world.

I wonder if that 200 billion could be found in waste and fraud, and cutting useless programs.

That kind of sounds like a fellow by the name of Ayers once upon a time.

Something not being touched on much is the campaign managers. I watched Davis and Axelrod one morning, and it really hit me that no way McCain can win with Rick Davis. He seemed really high strung, talking very fast and talking over everyone. Axelrod was calm and cool. I may not agree...

I understand what you are saying. He floated the letter. It was not written into language because Nancy knew they could not get the bill passed with a punitive tax in it. Now to my point. With Obama as prez, with a 60+ Senate, why would it not be written into a new tax bill? I believe...

Let me repeat that part of his quote: "provide a disincentive to short-term traders" When it comes to Dems and taxes the word "never" is laughable.

I don’t have many friends in the GOP. They left me a long time ago, and only get my support because I don’t want Obama in office with a veto proof congress. This is what Defazio wanted to do. This is from his web page. Now if they didn't want to get republicans on the bill, you really...

Let me help you out. From the article: She said there are some members of Congress who want to impose "pay-fors" now. "I don't think that that position will prevail," she said. That shouldn't be too hard to understand.

The transaction tax was taken off the table to make the bailout bill more palpable to the nays. Here is an article about it. The door was left open. Dem 60+ Senate = anything goes. http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE48O7X720080925

Obama promises only the wealthy will see tax raises, but he knows very well how close the Senate is to 60+ Dems. If that happens, I believe we will see a definition of "the wealthy" brought down considerably for the purpose of taxation.

This editorial is not directed at either candidate since all politicians current and past play a part. Some interesting comments on gov intervention included. From Mar, 2005. http://www.financialsense.com/editorials/hultberg/2005/0322.html

He's actually right if he's talking about Mugabe. Or maybe he's color blind. Speaking of Mugabe, there is a fine example of socialist impact.

Like I said, I wasn't looking for a republican history lesson. I don't believe republicans will be a factor in the next two years.

I was too slow on my edit. If the congress is filibuster proof (and veto proof), it may not matter. [b] I don't think either party would be out of line to demand some compensation for the freedom we bought for Iraq. Half a trillion in oil over the next few years would be a good start.