Thank You Ms. Malkin! I've been saying essentially the same thing for years! Pay attention to how you spend your money...the products you buy support political action more often than you realize! I don't research every single thing I buy, but there are numerous companies out there that I refuse to support due to their "politics," their business practices and/or the messages inherent in their advertising - I've sacrificed my favorite cereal, my favorite ice cream, and now it looks like my favorite brand of soda will join my list of taboo products.

All I can say about Romney, is that I will not cast a vote for him - not even as a vote against Obama. I'm tired of the lesser of Evils. If the GOP can't or won't present a decent candidate, I will write one in.

19% tax rate with no exception - UNLESS your income is from corporate dividends or Capital Gains? What kind of [explicative deleted] is THAT?!?! I have no issues with the flat tax concept, but income is income, source should not matter! (unless it's coming as a gift where the giver has already PAID the taxes due).

Nope, he's not..... he just went to Muslim schools in a foreign country during his formative years.

Let's put this another way....should Parents be so OBLIVIOUS that their 13-year-old could make a such a video game purchase without their approval & they NOT have any knowledge of it? I'd say the problem therein lies with the parents and their approach to child-rearing, NOT with the government.

I agree with your point & the basic message; however, I believe you veered a little too far left with all the snide remarks.

So.....what happens in a Democrat-led government should the US financial system actually collapse? I'm not at all versed in economics, and fairly new to politics, so my personal speculations may be way off base. However, I have to wonder -given what I can see of the Left's apparent agenda- is financial collapse the end goal perhaps? What happens, really, if the dollar becomes practically worthless overnight?

Reasonable collective bargaining -wherein both sides give in order to get & the outcome is equitable for all parties - might make a certain amount of sense. What the unions were doing was racketeering at best. If Unions did not consistently abuse the collective bargaining process, Wisconsin Unions would still have certain options open to them.

Did the owner of the restaurant get compensated for the loss of business incurred during the First Lady's visit? Or was he left holding the doggie bag?

Really? For whom? Verifiable facts with specifics, please.