1 - 7
Many of us also projected that Obamacare's bureaucracy would drive many medical practitioners and practices from the market--bingo. This will reduce available quality care and ultimately increase costs. We also said, many corporations would reduce spending on research and development of new products--bingo. Many of also said this would be a magnet and huge benefit to illegals--it is. Many of us said this program would force moral Americans to fund immoral abortions--bingo. What about the number of hours many part-timers are allowed to work at any one job? (Again, lost income and benefits to people--see Staples/Osama interchange.) With all of these successes why does anyone suppose that a programs being supported by paid advertising and a shamelessly biased media--and yet the program continues to enjoy less than 50% popularity--how can this be??
Bizarre comments Illbay? Either you are ready to move on and stop blaming Christians for the crusaders or you aren't? (btw--these are the ultimate "Flat Earthers!") Raising huge money for a great charity is a good thing--doesn't even matter who does it as long as the money comes without strings. Besides kids spending 46 hours without chairs? Mrs. Obama should be orgasmic. How many lives does Olbermann have? The never was, never should have gotten a chance, never did--but somehow he remains.
Thank You, Chunkeylovemuffin! The shooter is a liberal wackadoodle--so expect the story to disappear shortly, but... Why the rush to tell us the victims were Muslim? Why the rush to tell us she wears a headscarf? What do those facts have to do with anything? Wouldn't it be more relevant to tell us about him? I mean--was he, (please God forbid) maybe wearing a hoodie? Had he recently eaten a rare cheeseburger? How does he feel about taxpayers having to pay for transgender surgery for prisoners? How can we trust a news industry that picks and chooses PC facts to flaunt in front of us, and yet regularly now has to admit that it routinely lies to us. Bring back a trustworthy and unbiased media!!
In response to:

Slow Your Roll on Scott Walker

Davey2 Wrote: Feb 07, 2015 5:00 PM
Good point to the article--Walker's ideas needs to be vetted. And fortunately for us--all Republicans are. I'm sure Walker will have some differences of opinions from all of us, but at this point--I think he has the 3 things we most need: 1) He's willing to fight back--no matter how thick the battle gets for himself personally. 2) He did what he said he would do! (And when those policies generated a budget surplus--he gave it back to the people!) 3) He appears electable. The unions tried everything in their power to unearth dirt and they didn't find any. He's young, and can put sentences together. Sure I'd love him to be talking about restoring power to the states, etc... but for now--I am very glad that we appear to have at least one bonafide winner we can support who hasn't thrown in hard on any of the major lib talking points.
I believe we can safely say that the Harvard professors acted stupidly.
Has anyone heard if the White House's 11% pay differential between men and women has been resolved yet?
In response to:

Using the IRS to Suppress Free Speech

Davey2 Wrote: Feb 07, 2014 8:41 PM
Thank you Star, It's hard to fathom how the founders would view the current situation--the fact that the citizens allowed the creation of an IRS organization, overseen exclusively by the Executive branch. An organization which essentially places the burden of proof on the citizen-- Additionally, a group that has the capacity to not only determine guilt but also extract penalties without the benefit of due process. And now we are wondering how anything could go wrong?
1 - 7