It is "such a shock when news emerges that the government is doing something underhanded and illegal." I disagree. It is exactly the opposite. Ever since Bill Clinton got away with lying under oath and lying to the American people ("because, who cares, this is just about sex") we have become a nation that not only expects politicians to lie, but a nation that let's them get away with it when they are caught lying so long as the politician is a liberal.

They voted for him because he promised free things and no responsibility for your actions. They don't want government telling them what they can and can't do, just like they don't want their parents telling them what they can and can't do, but they want the free stuff the government offers, just like they want the free stuff that mommy and daddy offer.

Benghazi Plan: Step 1: Protect Obama so he gets reelected in 2012. [Check] Step 2: Protect Hillary so she can run in 2016. [In progress] Step 3: Use scapegoat if either Step 1 or 2 does not work. [Preparations in place]

Thanks, GW. I thought I had something original there, but I just did a search for the term "Uncle Juan" and according to the "Urban Dictionary" -- whatever the heck that is -- an "Uncle Juan" is "a latin-american shunned by his peers because he/she took the time to learn english." I still think that phrase will be used by so-called liberals against conservative Hispanics soon enough.

So have the liberals come up with an equivalent of "Uncle Tom" for Hispanics? Clearly they will need one that they can attach to a Hispanic conservative -- "White Hispanic" just isn't catchy enough. I'm predicting they start calling him an "Uncle Juan".

(continued from above) to what Krugman called the "coordinated fiscal expansion known as World War II" -- would be enough to break the cycle. "Paul is right, Feldstein said, "that was the fiscal move that got us out" of the last downturn comparable to this one, the Great Depression. I'm not saying they are advocating for a war, but clearly it is a solution that economists (and thus politicians who listen to them) consider.

Obama won't support them for life, Obama will force us to support them for life.

Cuccinelli's campaign needs to run an ad that simply quotes from McAuliffe's book and then say "Does this man's priorities match yours?"

The world may be hudling towards a big war. High unemployment among many nations makes war an enticing solution for many politicians. War serves to increase employment (need to build things for the war effort and hire soldiers) and also kills off a good amount of people thus lowering unemployment. To be clear, I don't want this solution, but it worries me that if the world has too many people without work or prospects for work, war becomes more likely. Indeed, economists on both sides of the political spectrum have noted that war could be a solution. Paul Krugman and Martin Feldstein, though often on opposite sides of the political fence shared the view that only a high-impact "exogenous" shock like a major war -- something similar...

I think those liberal/communist women think that sharia won't become the law of the land because they think they will be able to eradicate all religion including Islam. Quite a gamble to take, but I think they either don't see the risk or are willing to take that risk to achieve the communist utopia they dream about. To them, Christianity and the U.S. in its present form are the bigger threats right now to their dream.