Comments


  • No I am 100% right.

    October 31, 2011 at 8:12 p.m.

  • Writein

    Your half right, you have waisted your time & so have I. Have a good one. GW

    October 31, 2011 at 8:10 p.m.

  • Gary.

    I do not know why I am responding to you because I can barely make out what you are saying. On top of that I am wasting my time. First of all, I am a man about context. Meaning I am putting this in the context of the here and now. Yes, there is no need for you to preach to me about the Bible, when I already read it. So don’t assume anything or everything that goes against your world view as demonic or satanic.
    So let’s talk about the context of this era in history, which you are overlooking and refuse to acknowledge a few issues. You view this problem too simplistic and based on certain bias. Instead of you telling me how wrong everyone is, you should open your eyes a more.
    I may have a dislike of George Bush and others, but at least I am being fair. George Bush, Barack Obama, or any other American President concerning this issue is not Ungodly. You are not the judge of their souls. You have no place to call anyone Ungodly. The only thing that is Ungodly is your attempt to revisit history and lie about certain policies.
    President Clinton wasn’t trying to give Israel up. He was trying to broker a deal for peace, which almost would have succeeded if it wasn’t for the Palestinian Leader. Don’t blame Clinton for doing the right thing for trying making a peace deal. I do not see you try adding Israel Prime Minister Barak. Why is that? Clinton’s own personal sins weren’t your business or my business.
    You said the Israel treats non-Jews well. Ok fine, but you fail to mention the mistreatment of Ethiopian Jews (aka Black Israelis) and Israeli Arabs living in ghettos. Unlike you, I am even handed. Both sides should be treated as adults and not as children.
    Make sure the voices in your head are telling you right. I asked because years old another VICAD commenter (Kenneth Schurserit) said the Katrina was caused because of New Orleans gambling. Which is it? Is it Israel or gambling, Gary? Take a pick. You do not have direct line and I do not have a direct line. If you really want me to take you seriously then, let’s talk rational. You are not an irrational person. You are so irrational that you consider everyone ungodly. This is what I call self-righteousness.
    Although I am not a Catholic, but I do find your anti-Catholic tones sicken and disgusting. The only person who should be pray for is you. No one is after you. Not everyone who disagrees with you is ungodly. Do not call me brother when you spread ignorance and half-truths. Do not. You should pray to gain wisdom and knowledge.

    October 31, 2011 at 8:03 p.m.

  • Writein

    Most of the Arabs vacated Israel at the request of the major Arab nations poised & promising to murder & rape the Jewish population before the six day war in 67. Once again the Jews miraculously & supernaturaly defeated & devasted the armies of the uncircumcised Philistines. THese armies were over whelmingly larger,stronger etc.

    The Arab race is a result of Sarah, Abrahams wife unbelive in Gods promise to Abraham that he would have a son. Sarah talked her husband into sleeping with her Egyption hand maid. The result was Ishmeal a wild race who every mans hand would be against them & vice versa. God gave Ishmeals race (Arabs) a land; Saudia Arabia. Most muslem/Arabs are extreamly jelouse of there half bros the Jews. Now God gave the jews the land of Israel before the Arabs were hardly in existence. Today the Arabs, Christians etc are welcomed in Israel if they promise not to murder the Jews.

    October 30, 2011 at 11:13 p.m.

  • Writein

    I am sorry for not getting back to your concerns. It would probably be best to discuss these things privately. I am ready to die for the Lord but would just as soon put it off for awhile if possible.

    Pres Bush went on public record saying that for every dollar spent on there (Israels) protective fence that would help save lives of Israeli children from being blown to bits by the Arabs, then he would with hold that many U.S. Dollars from Israel.( SOME FREINDS) of course in the mean time we are building huge fences to save us from Mexico. HYPOCRITES

    Pres Clinton so desperately tried to force Israel to give up its security by giving land to them that are killing them almost daily. This is how he spent his last days in the White house. While he was involved with these anti christ activities the Monica Lewinske sex scandle brakes out, effectively cutting short that liars agenda & hopes.

    President Bush was very effective in persuading the IDF to literally drag off Jewish settlers out off there GOD given lands in various settlements. I was deeply disturbed as I witnessed these events unfold. Watching ungodly govts persecute Gods elect. While at work I paused & asked the Lord what was going on as hurricane Katrina was recking devastation on our land? A voice spoke to me & said THEY WANT A LITTLE BIT OF MY LAND SO I WILL TAKE A LITLE BIT OF THERES.

    We displaced a hundred or so settlers & so He displaced a couple of million of ours from a city that it is famous for its sinfulness.

    Most recently Hillary/Obama busied herself with demanding that Israel stop building apts in the Jewish part of Jerusalem. Imagine that kind of arrogance of a dominating female to make her/there demands on any nation. The pressure they were applying was distracted a bit because they had other more pressing concerns to worry over; THE GULF OIL SPILL.

    After the anti Israel govt had time to catch there breath Mr Obama was at again I had just been on the VicAd site declaring to yawll that He that curses Israel will be cursed. I also that night emailed a missionary friend of mine in Middle East I told him THAT WE HERE ON THE US MAINLAND WERE BRACING FOR GODS REPRAISELS concerning the appartement issue. With in 24 hrs or less the Joplin Missouri's tornado disaster struck, BRAKING ALL TIME US RECORDS FOR THE SINGLE MOST DEADLY TORNADO ON RECORD.

    I could say much more, your so called forien policy equates into dominating the glob, especially ISRAEL. I hope by now you will begin to see how the US is money whipping Israel. As I said before these so called love gifts to the the Jews have major strings attached; strings that demand the Jews disobey GOD. America has sold its birth right out to Rome & so we want to teach Israel to follow in our rebellion. Please pray about it my brother.

    Thanks GW

    October 30, 2011 at 9:58 p.m.

  • Gary White.

    When will you answer the questions?

    October 29, 2011 at 7:30 p.m.

  • Gary White.

    Who is my group? I speak for myself and for no other man. What does the Vatican have to with this? I deal with facts, not conspiracy theories and hearsay. You are ignoring and refusing to mention the “right of return“ of those who settled the land before 1948. Why is that? Why are you ignoring that fact?

    What have the Clintons, the Bushes, and President Obama has done to Israel? It is one thing to disagree with them, but it is another to lie about them and their policies. Each one of them has protected Israel in the United Nations, but it seems that you lack the reason to research the problem. If you have done your research you would know. If I were in the position of President Obama and the like, this issue would be played even handed.

    I believe it is disrespectful fto MIKE in hijacking his blog on how or what to restore America into religious discussion about two groups (Israeli and Palestinians) who seems to have nothing better to do but kill one other. It is disrespectful to me, personally, that you cast me or anyone as the Anti-Christ. You do not deserve the respect I am giving to you now.

    “Turn from evil and do good; seek peace and pursue it. -Psalm 34:14”
    Here is something to enlighten you my “14 points in the Middle East Idea.” http://www.victoriaadvocate.com/weblo...

    Mr. Williams

    October 24, 2011 at 4:17 a.m.

  • Writein

    Your group may not want to destroy Israel physicaly but they do want to control it, dictate to it etc. I belive your group would like to destroy it but you have sence enough not to try.

    The Vatican/U.S. etc wants Israel to COMPROMISE on its God given promises of posseing the land & restoring temple worship.

    His holiness (so called) wants Jersulam for him self, he wants his pupet; America to force the Jews to make Jerusalim an international capital of course with him self governing things.

    I encourage America & its empire building ways to keep its nose &
    hands off of Gods People & out of Gods Land. Of course we will not change course & we will continue to reap the destruction of our Nation.

    He that bleeses Israel is blessed & he that curses Israel is cursed.

    Not all Israel is Israel & they as a nation are certainly prone to do the wrong things, but I certainly support them as they try to fight off the Yoke that Hillary, Mr Obama, Mr Clinton & the Bushes etc have so dilligently endavered to put on them..

    Thanks GW

    October 23, 2011 at 10:59 p.m.

  • Mike.
    I am for Term Limits because forces the people to vote someone different, to think differently and to decrease apathy. It also force career politicians to understand that the PEOPLE RULE, NOT THEM !!!!!! Let’s take 1972 Presidential candidate George McGovern for example. When he left the Senate, he had a hard time trying to create a business, a hotel I think, he realize the burden of the tax code which he help create.
    Nancy Pelosi had done harm with her role as Speaker of the House. Sheila Jackson Lee had done harm by saying and doing stupid things in Washington and in Houston.

    October 23, 2011 at 12:58 a.m.

  • Gary.
    Who is the Anti-Christ? If I were Anti-Israel, then wouldn’t I seek to destroy it and its people? You refuse to take in account of some policies Israel has taken. Why is that? Answer the QUESTION!!!! Should we as a nation, a culture, and a people judge Israel based on its merits and not just for their religion? It is my opinion that I think Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his political coalition favors war. My opinion is shaped by his attitude and behavior.
    Where in my statement did I urge Israel to give up its land? Where Gary White? ANSWER THE QUESTION!!!!!! Even implying that makes you into a liar. Nowhere in our Constitution says we must protect and favor other nations based on their religion or ours. The problem with your warp thinking is that one cannot criticize a policy of Israel or the Pro-Israel lobby. Since when questioning a country a sin? Tell me, Gary White. Your mentality among that of others prevent other people to seek alternative methods for a real peaceful solution, I firmly believe everything must be on the table. The old two-state solution isn’t working and we have been trying on this for 60 plus years. 60 plus years of doing the same ole thing is unwise. If it isn’t going to work, then stop and rethink. There are many options to be considered. There is the one state solution; the three -state solution, the four-state solution, and yes the no state solution. Personally, I am between the one state and the three-state solution.
    The main point, which I want you SOAK THIS THOUGH YOUR HARD HEAD, isn’t about dividing up Israel or Jerusalem. THIS IS ABOUT NOT ALLOWING OUR FORGIEN POLICY TO BE TAKENOVER BY A FORGIEN POWER whether it is friend or foe.

    October 22, 2011 at 11:28 p.m.

  • Writein

    Anyone who tells (forses) Israel to give there land up, especially to those that will murder them just as soon as posible is not only anti Israel but anti Christ.

    Please explain to me why America has such a keen intrest in Israel.?

    Dont ever think that there are not some big time strings attatched to our so called love gifts to Israel.

    October 22, 2011 at 10:17 p.m.

  • wayward wind
    Sorry for your loss.
    Yes,we've had some give and takes and some spirited ones..:-)

    October 22, 2011 at 9:45 p.m.

  • Writein
    I am not for term limits because I believe in the power of the ballot box and the people's wishes...As I've said it's a two year term in the house of representatives,there is your term limits;vote them out every two years....Nancy Pelosi,Sheila,or Ron Paul have never done me any harm...The house is made up of 435 members and getting a bill only needs 51% of the votes to pass,so a single congressperson cannot do any harm.You might not like them but others do;that's how our system works...Fresh leadership is not a sure thing nor is it always desired...

    I happen to like Leon Panetta and so did the CIA and he will do the same as Sec. Of Def. and Hillary is doing a tremendous job as Sec,. Of State with an approval of 75%..I don't have anything against experience and good results.

    What you don't see: The old hands have already been vetted....When Obama was elected,it had been 8 years since a democrat was the president,so with two active wars and the economy in free fall ,it was not a time for inexperienced people...You might not think so,but I trust Obama's judgement. We did not go into a depression,so it was not a bad decision...You are already seeing changes being made for a second term.

    The president can nominate anyone but that person must win senate approval...You and I don't know what's in someone's background that will keep them winning approval..It's not as easy as you might think...One senator can keep a nominee on hold.

    You can't please everyone all the time.

    Btw Some have said(and I agree)that a line item veto is unconstitutional  and not needed.
    The president already has the veto...We don't want a president to change what both houses of congress have passed...It gives the president too much power....I respect the separation of powers.

    October 22, 2011 at 9:41 p.m.

  • Mike...Thank you for the kind words. My computer went hors de combat and then there were some family problems that were much more important. Sadly, my brother passed away last week. I finally got the computer back in battery Thursday evening. I have missed the give and take.

    October 22, 2011 at 9:34 p.m.

  • Mike.
    What you said is untrue. Never in my statement have I favored undemocratic means. I favor ridding government of corruption, cronyism, and the continuance of unneeded controversies. You said “Our government shouldn't dictate who the elected representatives are”. Ok, Mike then please re-read U.S. Term Limits, Inc v. Thornton and that Arkansan election law. It didn’t ban a candidate to run, it force the candidate to run as a write-in. If overturning “Thornton” is undemocratic, then should we overturn the 22th amendment about Presidential term limits? Some of these Congressmen are similar to kings or nobility with unchecked and unchallenged authority. With unchecked and unchallenged authority you get cronyism and corruption hadn’t Rick Perry’s rein as governor taught you anything? We either need to overturn Thornton decision, ban gerrymandering, or have each state appoint an equaled member citizens board that draws Congressional districts. If we keep on with Sheila Jackson Lee’s, the Ron Paul’s, and the Nancy Pelosi’s of the world then nothing gets done. Fresh leadership and fresh ideas will be a joke.
    Here is the problem with every President’s cabinet and appointed since Nixon. All of these cabinet appointments are rehashed of the older administrations. Clinton gets some of Carter’s old officials. Bush gets his brain trust from Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and his father. Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Powell comes to mind. Sadly, President Obama is getting his from Clinton like Hillary Clinton, Leon Panetta Eric holder etc. It would be refreshing to have an Administration that is a fresh start and clean break from the traditional inside the beltway musical chairs. Ask yourself this when the last time was, you have a Sec of State, Treasury, and Defense that wasn’t a part of the establishment?

    October 22, 2011 at 8:21 p.m.

  • writein

    As I've told you many times, you are against the very basic principles of democracy such as constituents choosing their representatives, whoever they might be. A house representative only serves a two year term; the ballot box should take care of any discrepancies. Our government shouldn't dictate who the elected representatives are. It's the same way when elected officials take office; they choose who will represent them and serve them. You might want someone in the cabinet that I don't like but that shouldn't matter because I didn't vote for a candidate just to micromanage them. I don't expect a person to be perfect because I'm surely not.

    Again, just because one has an opinion on foreign policy doesn't mean our nation is influenced by it. America should go in the war only when it needs to not just because we can. I don't believe we will be involved in another Iraq -like situation because I think the new foreign policy will be an ally driven, shared expense, smaller footprint (special forces) with an extensive use aerial drones.

    October 22, 2011 at 11:30 a.m.

  • Newcowboyintown

    You would be surprised on how much we agree. You hit the nail on the head when you said that nothing will be done until after the election.

    I believe Dr. Paul knows that this economy can't be turned around unless the solution is a bipartisan one. As you say, it will take more time for this economy to recover.
    We are in a global economy.

    October 22, 2011 at 11:15 a.m.

  • waywardwind

    It's been too long since I've heard from you but it's always nice when I do.

    As you probably know, I wasn't encouraging the use of more credit but merely stating the obvious fact- not spending will hinder job creation. It's part of the formula but I would like a way for us to find a way to get the Fortune 500 companies to start spending that $2.5 trillion cash they have in reserve.

    October 22, 2011 at 11:07 a.m.

  • Mike...I agree with you that when a dollar is being saved, it isn't buying, but so many of our dollars spent are not buying anything -- they are paid out as interest charges that don't help the economy. I'm not against purchasing, I am against purchasing using credit.

    My parents taught me that if you can't afford it, you shouldn't buy it. I was stupid and didn't listen. My wife and I had good paying jobs and when we wanted something, we got it. If we couldn't write a check for it, we used credit. Heck, we used credit even if we COULD write a check because it was so easy. Like most people, we had a lot of debt, but our jobs kept us afloat. Then in 1984-85, we had a wake up. Boone Pickens was hell-bent on destroying the company for which I worked. Remember Gulf Oil? It seemed that Gulf would be going away, so we stopped buying stuff and started paying off our debt. By the time we got VISA, Sears, Foley's and Penney's out of our check book, we found that we in fact had more money that we could spend on stuff if we were prudent and bought more of what we needed and less of what we wanted AND paid cash for it. Without having to pay finance charges, those dollars could be used for actual purchases. Money in savings could be used by the banks to make loans to people for automobiles and homes so those savings dollars really were used for purchases -- just not by me. Our standard of living did not suffer, but we were out of debt except for the mortgage on the house. It felt GREAT! Since that time, my wife and I have dedicated ourselves to those practices of my parents -- use it up, wear it out, eat it all. I've found it doesn't bother me to not drive a brand new car or have a large screen hi-def television. I still get where I want to go and watch what I want to watch and I've got money in savings that will be put to good use in 17 1/2 months when I retire.

    I heard a commercial on radio this afternoon for a company that promises to use some kind of voodoo to get people a $25,000 credit card if they will use their financial service. They are dedicated to "getting you the credit you deserve!" It's credit horrors like this that are largely responsible for the mess the economy is in today.

    Credit can be a good thing IF it is used wisely and the balance is paid off as soon as possible. It can bury a person if it is abused.

    October 21, 2011 at 9:16 p.m.

  • John Lara.

    I actually appreciate that you are offering solutions to the problem rather than whining about them. Your National Fair Tax doesn’t work; neither does Herman Cain’s “666” plan. I would urge you to look up the economic theories and ideas of 1960 Democratic Presidential Candidate Paul C Fisher, which influenced my own ideology about taxes.

    This is what I favor.
    1. Uncap the oil reserves in Montana and the Dakotas.
    2. Open trade with Cuba.
    3. De-globalize the economy by ending NAFTA, CAFTA, and remove membership from the WTO.
    4. Audit, Amend, or end the Federal Reserve.
    5. Amend the Tax code and adopt some tax idea from Paul C. Fisher and that of the Reform Party/Moderate Party. (2% sales tax and an asset Tax (or a flat tax of 10- 20%) for those making over $300,000.
    6. Place tariffs on unfavorable nations, like China, Middle East, Iran etc.
    7. A bailout for every American on debt. This should have occurred during the Bush-Obama transition.
    8.A Constitutional Amendment for a Presidential Line Item Veto, and/or peacetime quadrennial Balance Budget.

    October 20, 2011 at 10:40 p.m.

  • Mike.

    Remember the discussion on your off site blog a few weeks ago? This is what I am talking about RESETING the nation and consider this as a reply and rebuttal of your blog. With the recent death of Moammar Gahhafi, the economic misfortunes, and general hardships including my own, I feel that a reset button must be pressed. Unlike some poster who favor revolution and he shall remain nameless, I believe the reset button can be achieved by doing a few things. Pressure the next President in not appointing old worn out and corrupted officials to the cabinet, this is why I am deeply disappointed in the makeup of the Obama Cabinet especially that of the Treasury Secretary and the Attorney General. Plus I would to see a President who would appoint an UNITY Cabinet to balance policy and to prevent politics superseding governing. Second I would favor the overturn of U.S. Term Limits, Inc v. Thornton. It is sickening to see Sheila Jackson Lee, Jeb Henslaring, Ted Poe, Ron Paul, Harry Reid, and others returning to Washington every year with the same ole talking points. Finally our foreign Policy must be just that OUR foreign policy, not the foreign policy of Rev John Hagee, The John Birch Society, or the AIPAC. Even then-Senator Obama said it best and I agree with,” there is a strain within the pro-Israel community that says, 'unless you adopt an unwavering pro-Likud approach to Israel, that you’re anti-Israel,' and that can’t be the measure of our friendship with Israel”. American Foreign policy should be about one thing and that is protecting the American people from harm and help preventing a death of an American Solider.

    October 20, 2011 at 9:58 p.m.

  • Mike,
    We agree on somethings and not on others. That is what makes blogs good - differing opinions - expressed, discussed, and even debated. We do agree that this is not and never will be an overnight fix - it will take several years and I really wonder if Dr. Paul really believes he can turn it around in a couple of years.

    The point you make about the sales tax is valid. One reason I feel the 9-9-9 is a bust. If only new would be taxed the 9% - if I was smart I would never buy new again. Why should I?

    It is going to have to be some of everything - reduction in spend the money we don't have, smart spending of the money we do have, additional revenue from taxes, and most of all - jump starting the economy so there is something to tax.

    October 20, 2011 at 11:01 a.m.

  • John

    I've got a little more to say because if sales are down; how will a national sales tax bring in the revenue necessary to pay a our existing and future bills. How will a national sales tax pass a conservative house of representatives?

    Kyle

    Turn it off in turning on again, sounds like a reset.

    October 20, 2011 at 9:38 a.m.

  • BSspotter
    I think we probably disagree on 99.9% of things because of our basic principles. You believe in " individualism" and I believe "it takes a village."

    We can never discuss economics because I know that we're not going to get rid of the fed, adopt an "austerity only" policy,or reduce government down to the size of a Radio Shack outlet. I also don't believe that we should have an unfettered free market. I've seen our economy go up and down, granted this stubborn economy gives me pause but I'm optimistic. I know we will come out of this slowly but surely. I start with the administration dealing with a economy in a free fall. I still support prudent spending such as repairing infrastructure, education,R&D, and grants for innovation.

    It gets back to my 80% rule that was backed up this morning when someone said 80% of the world has problems of their own and the other 20% don't really care about ours.

    I also disagree with your views on foreign policy even though the I agree that we should make a orderly and safe withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan because it looks like from the scope of things they will be insignificant in the future. It's just a hunch but I believe the *leading from behind has a lot of merit because according to Reuter and other sources, Omar Qaddafi has been killed. Leading from behind was just a talking point used by the right but the administration can adopt it. That's about a billion bucks allowing our Allies and the Libyan people to topple their own leader.

    BTW after Tuesday's laughable debate, the administration has a new air of confidence for now. The election is still 13 months away but the two front runners are Mitt Romney but the conservatives do not like and the former CEO of Godfather Pizza... Need I say more?

    October 20, 2011 at 9:33 a.m.

  • My advice in these situations: turn it off and then turn it on again.

    October 20, 2011 at 12:04 a.m.

  • This comment was removed by the user.

    October 19, 2011 at 11:30 p.m.

  • Mike,

    I've used the term "reset" too, as in, "hit the reset button". I think in some cases we might agree on the 'what' but not the 'how' and certainly not the 'why' or 'who'.

    I don't think we're going to incite growth by using the same tactics that drove growth away. I have a real problem with gov't being such a large portion of our economy while we're scratching our heads about what's dragging down the economy. I think Paul's plan is important because it opens up a conversation we weren't having before. It may not cut in the right places or by the right amounts (for the masses), but I think it's the right order of magnitude overall.

    October 19, 2011 at 4:21 p.m.

  • BSpotter

    You use "restore America" I have said we need to " reset America" but both mean the same thing because we should know that polarization will not allow a meaningful discussion toward a path forward.

    I don't think there's anything magic about reducing one trillion dollars but we can't do it in a single year without further damaging our fragile economy. Several different committees have used that $1 trillion figure as the standard but they expand it over 10 years. That's where I stand, I know the debt is out there and the future consequences of it, but right now, I think the focus should be on things that spur growth. I think austerity only and massive tax increases have the same negative fact on our economy. As you know, every dollar saved is one less dollar that consumes, meaning without sales, the job market will remain stagnant. We are in a global economy and right now, the austerity measures Europe took, is having a devastating effect on our economy.

    I have criticized the Obama Administration for not implementing Bowles-Simpson. It was a bipartisan approach that both political parties liked and disliked and it was an idea created by this president. Bowles-Simpson is not perfect but this plan would stabilize the markets, promote cohesion, and instill consumer confidence. The economy is not always about spreadsheets and economic philosophy because I don't think we can accurately gauge what the consumer will do.

    I have to admit that the tea pary and Ron Paul has shed light on spending and our massive debt, so whenever we do, should be revenue neutral. Having said that we can't just let other countries pass us by while we get our fiscal house in order. I'm for a plan that will start a downward trend of the debt in say,5-10 years but creating an atmosphere for jobs(tax revenues) will reduce the deficit, spur growth, and perhaps take us back to the year's when we were less polarized.

    October 19, 2011 at 10:30 a.m.

  • Mike,

    It's good to see someone giving Paul's plan (www.goo.gl/J0FGo) some thought. Just as it's difficult to have a one-size-fits-all national gov't, it's hard to come up with a one-size-fits-all plan to correct her wayward course. I'll admit that I cringed a little (in agreement) when reading the breakdown — thinking "this won't go over well nationally" — but I think we're in worse shape than even the most cynical mainstream "analyst" would admit, and drastic measures are in order. If we don't do something to reverse the mass exodus of productive jobs, retract our massive debt (contract the paper money supply), and create an environment that encourages savings, we're toast. Tinkering won't save us.

    Do you think it's possible to reduce annual Federal spending by $1T, and do you think it's even necessary to "restore America"?

    October 19, 2011 at 9:44 a.m.

  • To me the 9-9-9 isn't a silver bullet - I don't think it would work and also feel it would impact the people who can least afford it - even me.
    I do think that we need to make deep cuts in the way Washington spends money. As I have said before - we need representation in Washington willing to make the tough decisions - even it if means they might not get reelected next term. Dr. Paul has proposed a plan, at least he has put it out there for all to see. Don't think I have seen that from other candidates so far - other than the 9-9-9 which doesn't really have any substance either.

    Problem is - figures can lie and liars can figure - so we continue to see charts and data to support the hot headline of the moment.

    Right now - nothing is happening - to bad we have to wait till next year - after the elections - to have something done.

    October 19, 2011 at 7:15 a.m.

  • Reeder.

    Is there really a need to insult the writer of this blog?. Let me say this the 999 plan doesn't work. I have a better plan.

    October 18, 2011 at 10:08 p.m.

  • Noticed your data doesn't show what's happened since your hero was elected. I just can't understand why you liberals can't see that the country is BROKE. We can't afford all of the entitlement programs that we have. We need to install austerity programs to reduce the budget. I personally favor the 999 plan because it makes everyone pay part of the tax burden.

    October 18, 2011 at 9:15 p.m.