We have the wrong people in office on both sides of the aisle in the Congress to address the coming fiscal Armageddon. There are a handful who acknowledge that the country is moving towards a financial disaster but not enough of them to make a difference. Mitt Romney, even if he defeats Obama, is not the conservative savior we require. I have not wanted to accept what now appears to be inevitable: the inevitability of failure in solving our fiscal problems. If someone sees any reason for hope for a different outcome I am more than willing to listen.

The Republican Party is becoming a dinosaur without a doubt and will increasingly offer the same inducements that Democrats have offered for decades to Hispanics and Blacks. That means even more reckless spending and increasing deficits. It also means that as they go the way of the Democrats the country will go the way of Greece and ultimately will collapse like a roof with too much weight on it to remain intact. There is no way this country is averting economic disaster and social disintegration. It's only a matter of when it happens, and that can be measured in years, not decades.

Ideas and visions do have serious consequences and the wrong ones have drastically painful ones, as we are finding out. But the worst is yet to come, especially if Obama is (God forbid) re-elected.

There is no one more hopeless of hapless than Obama. Yet few are as skilled at providing slogans which seem to represent the sentiments of the people, no matter how vague, ambivalent, undefined or irrational. He never defined what he meant by "Hope and Change" in 2008 and he has not, and will not, define the term "Forward". By being unspecific he can let the voters define the terms as they decide. Who would vote for a man like this?

There was a time (not long ago) when someone like Obama would not have even been considered for nomination as the Democratic Party's standard bearer. Back then he would have been far too radical and a leftist extremist. In 2008 he became the actual, as opposed to a possible, candidate for President. He came out of nowhere, or did he? How was a man of very modest means able to pay for first-rate academic education? How was someone with almost no significant experience of any kind able to ascend to the most important position in the land? There were obviously important and wealthy people involved and supporting his dramatic ascendancy. The wealthy have recognized from time immemorial that governments can provide them with consequential benefi

Liberals don't get excited by terms like "job creation". No, their juices start flowing when they hear "more taxes on the rich" - which, of course, always end up being taxes on the middle class. "Rate of return on investments" is deplorable capitalist lingo to them. They prefer "infrastructure investments", "green jobs", "social safety net", ad nauseum. Profits are anathema in their Marxist mind sets. Taxes are the cure for all of society's ills, although taxes have kept increasing since 1913 but they seem never to be enough to solve all of social problems in the country. Here's the solution they never want to debate in public: take every penny earned by individuals and corporations in the form of taxes, then redistribute the wealth.

We can all be assured that when Obama gets that 3am phone call that he will do the WRONG thing. Far better for all of us that he never gets that phone call before or after Nov 2012. But is he does then I will simply say "It's been a pleasure. See you on the other side."

The Left is stupid but united. The Right is smart but divided. The nation is most definitely divided but until Nov 2012 we will not know if it's smart or stupid. Pray that the result will be 'smart'.

"It’s always liberals who ask for commonly available citations, quotes and research in order to act like they don’t understand. You know, if you did the research work yourself you’d probably end up being conservative." John, you absolutely right in your comment about Liberals posing the questions and having conservtives provide the answers. I have never been able to determine whether they do so because they are lazy or stupid, or some combination of the two. Of course it could also be that they are close-minded or fear having their faith threatened by the truth. The faith of liberals and progressive in the propaganda and dogma that has been forced into their minds is so unadulterated and rigid that even considering an alternative point...

Many people have argued for more drilling. It creates jobs. It results in lower energy costs. It results in profits which can be recycled into investments to create more jobs and to lower energy costs even more. What if the government decided that technology companies are evil and make too much in profits? Would Apple have produced iPad 3? Would we be trying to decide whether to implement 'cloud computing'? The arguments for drilling are too convincing and sensible not to do so. Yet, the Democrats are opposed to allow drilling on public lands, or anywhere they can for that matter. Why? Is it to punish oil companies? Is it to cripple our economy? Is it to appease the environmentalist wackos? Is it payback for colonialism? Is it to drive...