I want to go back to school for law at the ripe old age of 43, because of yah-bos like Reid.
I want to work in politics, so there is a presence of someone REAL somewhere in the process, since so many seem to be so immersed in their own delusions of grandeur, power, and "do-gooder" mentality that they can't see how harmful they really are. And that goes for politicians on both sides of the fence.
What really is a travesty is that I have to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to get even an entry level position anywhere in the system that is meant to be "Of the People". Which people do they mean? Evidently, only college grads with advanced degrees and millions to spend.
The reality of "we the people" is that most of us...

In reading the blog entry, as compared to many of the comments here, Ms.Bachmann certainly has a much better grasp on the idea of bipartisanship than most, from either side of the fence.
If you believe so strongly that only your way will work, then no other ideas can be put on the table to see if they can be made to fit into a workable plan. You cut off your hand for no better reason than because it scratches the right (or left) side. This is what I've been seeing the Democrats in congress doing lately.
There are certainly times when compromise is not an option, but realistically speaking, this is one where we MUST find something workable and affordable, or our nation will pay for the pigheadedness of a few for generations to...

Lonny writes: Friday, November, 06, 2009 8:06 PM
does tort limitation
mean when your doctor messes up on your child so they need 24/7 help for the rest of their lives, that child gets nothing? Or do you want tort 'reform' only for those cases you think are not worthy?

Lonny, you're implying that people don't want victims of incompetence to get anything. Not so. But since when has a child's potential earnings, plus costs of care ever exceeded maybe a couple to a few million over a lifetime? There are numerous cases where people get tens of millions in damages for unforseen complications. These are punitive rather than compensatory, and only serve to drive up malpractice insurance costs. Turning victims or their families...

It is not your neighbor's responsibility to see that you spend your earnings wisely. What would you have them do if they decided YOUR money wasn't being spent the way THEY wanted you to?
We have the right to succeed OR fail in this country, based on our own choices, be they good or bad. It has nothing to do with "selfishness", other than that of the individual, and it is NOT up to the government or your neighbors to see to it that you do not fail or are not selfish, by anyone's definition.

Thank you again for answering my comments. I expect us to cross paths again, and probably on the same side of an issue.. because in spite of my views on religion, I'm much more conservative than most would believe.. hehehe.. (I screw up all the polls, on both sides!)
Have a wonderful night, and a good weekend. You are appreciated!

Evidently, I'm not asking the right people, since YOU certainly couldn't answer, and instead chose to denegrate me.
Typical answer from somoene who has no answers.

Thank you!
I appreciate your giving your own opinion, and your own take on the article.
I agree that Brit, and hence Anne, were giving the suggestion that Christianity can offer Tiger something he may find lacking.
I can understand that, even if I don't agree with it. I just get tired of those who would proselytise, and denegrate those who do not convert to their way of thinking.
I don't know as much about Buddhism as I'd like, but it is MY understanding that they believe everyone IS god, not that they are their own god; god is absolutely everything in the universe, complete. God is the plants and animals we consume, the turf we walk on, the things we create, the sun we see rise, the stars, the moon, everything.. not...

I'd hardly say that what I've written in the thread are "rants", especially when compared to the vile, nasty, bashing that has gone on, on both sides of the fence.
If you don't like people to speak their minds when it doesn't reflect your own brand of thinking, then say so. Or are you afraid you might sound like a liberal?

is primarily the assertion in the article and in many comments that christianity is the ONLY true religion, and the ONLY one that guarantees entry into "heaven", and the only way that Tiger Woods (or anyone, according to believers) can redeem themselves. The thread seems to have became a theological battleground between christains and non christains. Of course, neither Ann nor Brit mentioned which flavor of christianity that Tiger should enter into in order to gain this redemption.. and there are far far too many for us to just assume they meant whatever flavor we as readers happen to practice as individuals. Yet, I didn't see too many comments that actually said Tiger should become a member of their specific church. I wonder why that...

And by good, ethical, staunch Republican parents.
My sister is a raving liberal of the academic set, and she has accused me of being further right than my parents.
In many ways I am. But, I'm an independent sort, and I actually started questioning my religion before I could read beyond the 4th grade level.. I was about 5. My Parish school teachers- all good Sisters of Notre Dame- couldn't answer the most elementary of questions without saying "Because it says so in the Bible". The bible is a BOOK.. it's not even a complete book, since dozens of texts were thrown out for purely POLITICAL reasons.
And yet, christians of all sorts resort to this incomplete book of words, written by men 2,000 years ago, when civilization was NOT...