Crystal, I was watching the NBA playoffs last night and Reggie Miller was one of the analysts for the broadcast. For those of you that don't follow basketball, Reggie was one of the best 3-point shooters ever, and drove opposing defenses crazy with his many game-winning shots. The other announcers were teasing Reggie last night because he would always get booed in every opponent's arena he played in. Why ? The fans from other teams hated Reggie because he was such a threat to the success of their team that night. You pose the same kind of threat to these scumbags that are attacking you. Think of yourself as Reggie Miller. They hate you because they know you're going to hit that last-second 3-point shot that will sink their pathetic team !

Pamela, you could always just say you disagree and then back it up with some proof. I used to carry mail for the USPS and I hated every minute of working for them, but sometimes a conservative/libertarian person has to swallow their pride and principles to make a living. Most criticisms of the USPS are legitimate, but saying that they are "on the take" from taxpayers is no longer true and hasn't been the case for years. Bruce Bialosky made the same mistake in one of his columns several months ago. Dr. Sowell is one of my all-time faves when it comes to skewering liberals, but he blew it in this instance. He is wrong, Mr. Bialosky was wrong and Pamela, you are wrong too.

Maybe we could give the Israelis the state of California. Imagine what they could do with a place like that ! OK, OK, I'm just kidding, but still, just imagine the possibilities !

The last paragraph of Dr. Kengor's column states : "My fear, however, is that the data just doesn’t matter to a huge number of followers of the party line. And that’s a very serious problem for this country, a giant propaganda hurdle that may be insurmountable." After a recent conversation with a very liberal relative, after exchanging emails with some of my liberal friends, after seeing Facebook posts with links to articles written by the Paul Krugmans of this world, after etc. etc. etc ad infinitum, I can almost guarantee you that the hurdle you reference IS insurmountable. They have totally left the realm of rational discussion and have passed through a one-way barrier into an alternate universe of insanity.

Mr. May says in his second-to-the-last paragraph : "To be sure, there may be some Europeans and Americans who suspect that all or most or too many Muslims endorse the crimes of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Ayman al-Zawahi, Anwar al-Awlaki and other self-proclaimed jihaidis. That’s wrong." Why would that be wrong ? Apparently, I am being given a choice here by Mr. May of "all", "most" or "too many" European or American Muslims agreeing with the jihadist views of the men he lists. What rational, well-informed person does not think that "too many" Muslims anywhere in the world sympathize with violent jihad ? No, Mr. May, it is YOU who are wrong ! I don't agree with choosing the words "all" or "most" for that sentence, but "too many" definitely fits

Maybe that "tired old conservative canard" got so old and tired because it is true and just won't go away. Actually, you can leave out the first part of the canard about "liberal politicians wanting to support millions of lazy bums". The second part is all that is necessary. Liberal politicians live for "taking hard-earned money away from honest citizens". As to their reasons for doing so.........well, they're apparently limitless !

Great series of quotes.........thanks !

"Exxon Mobil's accounting methods mask its relatively low effective tax rate." The problem is not Exxon Mobil and their accounting methods. They are just following the tax law as it is written. Every corporation and every individual has the right to pay as little tax as is legally possible. In the case of a publicly traded company, they had better follow this practice or their shareholders would go berserk ! The problem is the people we have sent to Congress and the way they have written the tax code. At least Exxon Mobil is paying taxes and providing jobs and a much-needed product. The greater shame is that 51% of Americans now pay no federal taxes whatsoever. What an ugly society this arrangement is going to produce-----a bunch of...

OK, that makes more sense. That was a good explanation and I agree that this is a pretty sweet deal. From what I have read, the US has the highest corporate income tax rate in the world, but of course, there are all kinds of loopholes such as this one. Like it or not, we still really need the oil companies and we should want them to be extremely profitable so they keep doing what they are doing. Instead of painting Exxon and others as villians and going after them specifically, why not just eliminate all these ridiculous special provisions in the tax code for ALL corporations and then we could lower the corporate tax rate to a much more internationally competitive level. Perhaps then, companies like GE would not be playing the games...

Sorry, but I don't understand your objection raised in the last paragraph. A royalty paid to a foreign government is an expense, so it should reduce their tax obligation just like any other expense. What the royalty is based upon is irrelevant. The only thing that is relevant is how much of their income they had to pay to the foreign government. An expense is still an expense regardless of what it is based upon.