"The scandals are taking a toll. They are distracting embarrassments that are dominating public attention while Obama seeks to focus on difficulties abroad and jobs at home. And they are giving Republicans an opportunity to question his competence and leadership, an opening for Romney in a race so close that any advantage might make a difference." AP is completely in the tank for Obama - the last thing he wants to do, or has been doing these last few months is focus on his record or his job.

I suggest you read Milton Friedman's book "Capitalism and Freedom." It will explain the difference for you. Leftists have taken over the terms Liberal and Progressive. They need to as the accurate term for their beliefs - leftist - has fallen into use as a pejorative, and rightly so.

You are correct to suspect such figures, they are a static number and do not take into consideration changes in who is in the top 20% over time. Thus, the 80% includes a number of people who will over time move into the 20% over time and vis versa.

The actual statistics are top 20% own 85%, as of 2007. This means that the other 80% owned over 8 trillion dollars of net wealth. Not sure why this is necessarily bad, especially considering who makes up the 80% group. It would be bad it it was locked in, in other words those in the 80% could not move up. However, studies demonstrate we have very high mobility. For the 10 year period 1996 - 2005 nearly 58% who were in the poorest income group in 1996 had moved into a higher income bracket, with 25% jumping into the middle or upper-middle income groups, and 5.3% making all the way to the top. The next bracket had 50% move up.

The House passed a budget in May - the Democrats in the Senate voted not to even debate the budget, and the Senate voted down Obama's proposed budget (97-0), but the Senate has yet to pass a budget of their own. So who is being obstructionist. The Democrats, who controlled the House and Senate until this year have not had a budget for the last several years. (BTW Budget bills are not subject to filibuster, so don't go there, and try to blame the Republicans). Reid constantly turns the World on its head..

This reflects an appalling lack of research, of a very complex subject. I have never seen anyone assert that low taxes cause recessions/depressions. Perhaps you can point me to any scholarly work that makes this assertion. Turning to your assertions: 1. The lowest US Income tax rates were in 1913-1918 - top rate 6%, raised to 10%. 2. The causes of the Great Depression have been analyzed, there is a consensus that its principal initial cause was the easy credit policies of the Federal Reserve and the resulting stock bubble, not a lower of tax rates. 3. Look at the four deepest modern recessions - '37 - top rate 68%; '45 - top rate 94%; 73/74 and 81/82 - top rate 70%. Sorry your comments do not withstand even cursory analysis.

There is no "duty" to defend the nation - congress is empowered to provide for the defense, just as it is empowered to provide for the general welfare. Please these are not even serious constitutional arguments.

You must be joking - "not mentioned in the constitution" - that's the standard according to you. Where do you get that constitutional limitation? Article One states "Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States" Welfare as used meant "health, happiness, or prosperity; well-being" You do not think that what the NWS/NHC does promotes the general welfare in that sense. Really.

I do not know whether Mr. McNicoll is a Luddite or simply misinformed. The NHC work, including its hurricane hunter trips into the hurricane and dropesonde readings form the basis for every one who makes predictions about hurricanes, even Accu-Weather. Its satellites provide the information for modeling the hurricane. If you want to read what a person informed about hurricanes thinks of the NHC efforts read the following blog by Dr Jeff Masters at Weather Underground - www.wunderground.com/blog/JeffMasters/comment.html?entrynum=1910. As for the NHC's accuracy on Irene go to www.nnvl.noaa.gov/MediaDetail.php?MediaID=821&MediaTypeID=2 it's amazing This article is an embarrassment to any knowledgeable, thinking person

While I agree with the sentiment in the article, his comment about a sale to a visitor for Ohio is wrong - a sales tax would be charged, unless the goods were sent to Ohio by the merchant, not given to the buyer. Sales by bricks and mortar merchants are not subject to sales tax if they are delivered out of state. I have used this to save sales tax.