1 - 10 Next
Right on.
Could it be that the White House wasn't consulted because Speaker Boehner didn't want the White House to interfere and bring pressure in advance on Netanyahu to decline the invitation? As it now stands, Netanyahu has agreed to come, and cannot easily back out without embarrassing the only real ally Israel has, which is the Republican Congress. So the smartest man in Washington (Obama by his assessment of himself) got outsmarted. Ta-Ta.
In response to:

Fetal Pain is Grounded in Science

SamT2 Wrote: Jan 22, 2015 9:46 AM
I do not understand why the liberal media object to this humane bill. If a woman gets herself pregnant, even by rape, this bill would allow her 20 weeks to get an abortion before the ban kicks in. This seems to me to be plenty of time to realize the pregnancy and take action if she feels she must. What gives?
In response to:

Healing the Racial Divide

SamT2 Wrote: Jan 22, 2015 9:35 AM
I hope sometime in my life we will all forget whose skin is what color or what ethnicity, and simply be all Americans. If you walk around with a chip on your shoulder, someone is sure to knock it off.
A problem Islam has is its "Holy Book" advocates just the type of violence that went down. The president of Egypt (a Muslim) recognized this in a recent speech, calling on the Muslim/Islam world to condemn the murderous actions of those who wish to practice this aspect of the religion. His has been pretty much a lone voice. Our president, who's dad was a Muslim, may be torn in his heart between his allegiance to the Bible and the Koran.
The man is a socialist and apparently does not adhere to the concept of free speech. If the religious leaders get to declare what is and is not allowed when speaking of religions, should not the politicians get to decide what speech is allowed in politics? I feel sorry for American Catholics who have to put up with this ignorant man until the Lord intervenes.
I receive SS and have Medicare. I worked for 50 years, most of those paying in the max for these programs, with payments matched by my employer. By God's blessing, I also had thrift plans that allowed contributions of about the same amount, again matched. I am now retired. My available income is far greater from my investment plans than from SS, and my asset base remains intact for my decedents. What is wrong with this picture? - it demonstrates once again how totally inept the government is in handling money. However, if the government programs are going broke, I will accept an equitable adjustment to my "entitlements" if shared across the board. I vehemently object to "means testing." How other folk handled their means when they had them is their problem, and adjusting for their mis-handling retroactively is immoral.
In response to:

E Pluribus Unum-Reclaiming What Unites Us

SamT2 Wrote: Dec 29, 2014 8:39 AM
The author notes, "The vast majority of Americans are saddened by the deaths of Michael Brown and Eric Gardner AND the deaths of Rafael Ramos and Wenjian Liu." I believe that is true, but there is a huge chasm between the first and second pair. The sadness for the first two is that somehow society failed them by not instilling in them the sense of morality to make the right choices between right and wrong. As a result, they got what they had earned by their misbehavior. In the case of the second pair, they were dedicated to protect their fellow men, and miscreant's in media and public office made inappropriate comments that led a nut case to kill two beautiful people. Both sad, but very different. I believe on the other side of the great divide, justice will differentiate.
Goldberg writes, "But it would be ridiculous to believe that De Blasio or Holder -- or Obama -- wanted this tragedy." I agree, but loose words have unintended consequences. Unwarranted comments about gun-happy policemen and support of mobs protesting the warranted deaths of two young thugs lead nut-cases
If Bob Benson had 5 thoughts about Obama's speech, that is 5 more that Obama has had in the last 6 years.,
1 - 10 Next