Previous 11 - 20 Next
"If we vote on it, it will go down." Well, it CAN'T pass if you don't vote on it. If you really believe in the Simpson-Bowles commission's recommendations, put it on the floor, and see who opposes it. Anyone voting "No" will show that eliminating the deficit is not his priority. I think what this is about isn't that it wouldn't pass on a floor vote. I think it's about a majority of his party's caucus opposing it, and he doesn't want to embarrass them, and the president, in an election year.
In response to:

A Racial Revolution?

Ken1952 Wrote: May 19, 2012 12:06 PM
The largest category may well become "multiracial." On the other hand, given the amount of white that is already in the "nonwhite" mix--light-skinned black people, white or near-white Hispanics, American Indians that are already only one quarter Indians, Eurasians, what you may see is an apparent growth in the "white" population. What is the race of Mariah Carey or Freddie Prinze, Jr.?
If he loses Arizona, then his best prospects for picking something up in its place would probably be Wisconsin and New Hampshire.
Of the states Obama carried in 2008, there are two that he will probably lose in 2012--Indiana and North Carolina. Additionally, there's a fairly strong chance that he will lose Virginia and Iowa. He will also not get that one electoral vote in Nebraska he got last time. After that, it gets harder. He barely took Ohio last time; even the slightest slip in his strength there, and he loses it. The best prospect after that is Florida. Polls show that dead-even. Win that and the other states I've mentioned up to now, and Romney wins. Against that, Romney could lose Arizona, which McCain won, largely on the basis of being a favorite son, but with a large Hispanic population that might vote as a bloc for Obama. Then he needs something else
SSDI isn't the program that completely eliminates people from the workforce. On SSDI, one can have some employment, and there is provision by which one doesn't lose benefits immediately upon return to the workforce. It is SSI on which one can't work at all without losing one's benefits.
In response to:

The President's Private War

Ken1952 Wrote: May 05, 2012 11:54 AM
I have no problem with the use of a drone to kill Al-Awlaki. He was at war with us, directing attacks on us. In modern wars, our enemies have been no respecters of international boundaries, going back to the North Vietnamese attacking us and then retreating into neutral Cambodia. Basically, they play hide-and-seek with us. They come out, hit us, then run into another country, crowing, My goal, 1-2-3! You have to hit them where they are. This is not like when Shelby's brigade, at the end of the Civil War, crossed the Rio Grande into Mexico. They were not dodging into Mexico as a shelter from which they could hit us again. When they crossed into Mexico, they were done.
In response to:

Geithner Goes Over the Edge

Ken1952 Wrote: Apr 28, 2012 1:14 PM
There is no administration right now. There are the politicians and their hired shills and thugs. These people are a disgrace; we have to get them out this November, and the differences of opinion among those who are agreed on that one point should not obscure this.
In response to:

Decline or Decadence?

Ken1952 Wrote: Apr 26, 2012 11:42 AM
The Assads are nasty folks. On the other hand, they are not crazy. If the rebels take over, we may well find out, as we have found out in Egypt, that they ARE crazy.
High school boys in Buffalo probably approve!
If 70% of illegals get government aid, and 57% of all immigrants get government aid, that suggests to me that the percentage of legal immigrants on government assistance is probably not too much different from the percentage of native-born Americans on assistance.
He should have taken a couple of economics classes at Chicago's business school. That might have proven instructive for him.
Previous 11 - 20 Next