State of the Union from Kathleen’s POV

49 comments on “State of the Union from Kathleen’s POV”

1. Take a drink every time he says the word “I”. Double shots for any “Let there be no mistake”, “Some have said”, and “Let me be clear”.
   .
   Cheer wildly if, as is being rumored, he calls for an end to “don’t ask don’t tell”.

   1. Who cares how many times he says “I”? Instead of looking for inane things to whine about, why not try to do something positive to help America.

      1. Somebody’s a crankypuss this morning!

   2. Take a drink every time he says the word “I”.
      .
      Maybe it was subtle advertising for Apple? 🙂

      1. Given how underwhelmed everyone seems to be with the Ipad (now extra absorbent!), they could use some good publicity

2. After eight months or more of neglect, apparently the White House has opted to refocus on the economy — specifically jobs. If anyone wants to start a pool, my guess is that the word “jobs” will be mentioned 27 times in tonights’s State of the Union speech. The winner gets a No-Prize.

   1. Wow!!!!! If I get credit for the four SINGULAR references of “job,” I hit the nail on the freakin’ head at 27!!!

      1. Good for you!

   2. Obama hasn’t been ignoring the economy. And health care reform would help the economy, too, as people would have more cash to spend on other necessities.

      1. What has Obama and Congress done to improve the economy and create jobs since passing the stimulus bill almost a year ago?

         In addition, that stimulus bill only targets a very narrow segment of the work force and doesn’t help most of the unemployed one whit.

         Since being laid off, a friend of mine in his late 50s has been agressively looking for work for more than 18 months with no success. For the past six months or so he’s been trying to get ANY kind of work — whether it’s in his specialty areas or not. What’s he going to do when his unemployment benefits run out?

         And your theory that healthcare reform will give people more cash to spend on other necessities, thus stimulating the economy won’t work. Most people I know who currently do not have health insurance, like my friend, just don’t go to the doctor — even when they have jobs. It’s too expensive. In those cases, there would be zero “extra money” going into the economy if a healthcare bill is passed.

         I’m all for healthcare reform, but passing such reform isn’t going to have a significant effect on the present unemployment situation unless it somehow generates hundreds of thousands of new jobs.

3. Glad to hear him saying that we need more nuclear power plants. It’s a proven technology that’s killed far less than say, coal or oil, and can generate enough electricity to make us far less dependent on either of those.

   1. I love how you measure energy technology based on how few people the tech has killed. Not mocking you, just find it a really funny perspective.

   2. At the rate we’re going Iran will be building new nuclear power plants before we do. Kudos to Obama for bucking his base on that one.

4. Kath: 9:33 We do need to strengthen the schools we have. Math and Science are important but we also need the Arts.
   Luigi Novi: I would say that the humanities like reading, history, math and science are more important, because they’re more fundamental, and may lend themselves to the careers of more students than the arts.

   1. And languages but we also need the arts because without that, we are less as a nation. Look at the fall of various empires and what was going on in the Arts (or lack there of)

5. 10:19 — Geez! You read my mind — virtually in unison!!!

   1. He had been doing it all along slightly but then it started getting really noticeable.

6. “9:42 No one should have to go broke going to college but many do. Textbooks are a big problem too.”

   My family came close to going broke. Even worse, after tuition, I didn’t have the money to afford the required textbooks–USED.

   1. Textbooks are a racket many companies make their nut with textbooks and the students don’t have a choice. The new thing is “renting” the books for the class and then returning them to the bookstore.

      Understand that I have family members who have written them

      1. We did pretty well this year on ebay. A surprisingly good source.

      2. RENTING? Criminy!

         One of my Professors had decided to fail me because I didn’t get the required book. He believed I was trying to coast the class. There just wasn’t money to buy the book.
         I ended up having to leave due to other issues, but couldn’t afford tuition to return(The cost raised the next year).

         College became a dream deferred.

7. Kathleen,
   Don’t have time to respond to a lot tonight. But had to with thses two points:
   “Health Care: Oh boy there’s a mine field. But considering what some friends of mine are currently going through with barely having health insurance, I want reform so bad. Considering the profits on insurance, there has got to be some limitations on how much they can fleece America.”

   Sorry about your friends. But can you say how Obamacare will help them? Seriously. Do you know for a fact that it will? Because part of the problem is that Obama made a DEAL with the insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies so they wouldn’t lead the charge against the bill like they did Hillarycare. The problem for Obama is the more people find out about his ever-changing bill with ever-changing priorities, the more they hate it. It wasn’t the insurance companies that sent a message last Tuesday in Massachusetts, it was the people.
   But seriously, how will Obamacare help your frinds? And, with all due respect, saying “Anything is better than what we have now” is notthe kind of answer I am looking for.
   And villifying the insurance companies? I believe they were recently ranked as the 38th most profitable industry in the U.S. with a whopping – not! – five percent profit margin. It may make people feel better to blame an easy bogeyman, but it does nothing to solve the problem – and I trust insurance companies a hëll of a lot morethan I do the government.

   “10:13 Civil rights..Is he going to do it? Or….THANK YOU!!! He did it. Let’s not lose trained people because of what they do in private. (FOX is gonna have a field day with this one”
   I wouldn’t be so quick to assume that FOX as an entity will have a field day with it. It depends on how it’s followed up. If it’s presented as gays are being victimized, well, people are tired of everyone claiming to be a victim…but, if he talks about how we can ill afford to lose any men and women who are willing to serve their country while there are two wars going on and makes it a national security issue, he’ll have a winner.
   Heck, the godfather of modern conservatism, Barry Goldwater – the man who inspired Ronald Reagan – said (and I’m paraphrasing) “I don’t care if somebody’s gay or straight, as long as they can shoot straight.”

   1. Jerome,

      If more of the current conservatisms followed Goldwater or Jack Kemp, I might be inclined to vote GOP again.

   2. Doing nothing, which you Republicans seem to prefer, does not help anybody.
      .
      The Republicans had control of Congress for 12 years, had the Presidency during 6 of those years, yet did nothing to help anybody making less than a million a year. They destroyed the manufacturing base, and have destroyed the potential future of this country all so the rich could get richer.

      1. Alan, Alan, be fair…the GOP isn’t doing nothing. The GOP wants to work very hard…to stop the Democrats from doing anything. Because anything that the Democrats accomplish serves to make it harder for the GOP to take back power. And since the Democrats are traditionally splintered and the GOP operates in lock step, they’re very good at doing that.
         .
         Give ’em credit.
         .
         PAD

8. Bill Mulligan,
   “Take a drink every time he says the word “I”. Double shots for any “Let there be no mistake”, “Some have said”, and “Let me be clear”.”

   If I did what you suggested, I wouldn’t be able to function for the next three days:)

   1. I think he was actually restrained in the cliche’s this time–maybe somebody has been monitoring the blogosphere and seen how much folks on both the right and left have been mercilessly mocking some of his idiosyncrasies. One should never make things easy for Saturday Night Live.
      .
      (On the other hand, whoever is in charge of choosing the photos of the President that get shown on the White House webpage should be fired. On the spot. I’m pretty sure he or she is a member of the Teabag brigade. The seem to go out of the way to pick shots that make him look arrogant and classless (or perhaps they mistake casualness for cool).
      .
      Only real mistake of the night, IMHO–calling out the Supreme Court while they were right in front of him. Just didn’t feel presidential.

9. I was at work, missed it because the tv is satellite there and it went out because it snowed for five minutes.

   But I don’t take much stock in politician promises or state of the union addresses. They just say a bunch of stuff that sounds good and it rarely if ever gets done.
   Health Care reform? Not going to happen, too convoluted. Personally if I were president I would just get rid of the whole industry and make sure that prices of health care would stay low enough that everyone can pay for it–I’d totally do that if it were cheap enough. But then if I did that if I were president then I’d get wrapped up in a web of red tape and nothing would happen (and the whole everyone in the insurance industry would be out of a job and that would create a mess of the economy and crap like that…but they totally had it coming).
   .
   Personally, I think we’ve reached the end of a civilized society. The wrong people have come into power and have taken advantage of the legal loopholes or created them making it hard or down right impossible to get the right thing done because they won’t profit from it.
   .
   But then again it’s probably always been like this in the history of America. We just gloss it over in history class (the gilded age seems to come to mind). So it was and it will be and so on and so forth.

10. “””Come on Obama, see the need to let schools teach not just to take a test but balance a check book and create a budget. To have basic skills so that Colleges don’t have to become high schools.”””

    Amen. Many college friends I know still can’t balance a check book.

    1. I might upset some people with this, but I don’t think Obama should be dealing with education at all. Schools in this country are primarily controlled locally, with some State oversight. When the Federal Government gets involved– even when they have good ideas– it just causes problems, what with extra bureaucracy and turf fights and such. They should stick to matters in their own jurisdiction.
       I know education is a popular issue, and it’s very difficult for Congress and the president to resist getting involved. Crime is another issue like that, but the Federal Government tends to cause problems when they get involved there as well.

       1. Like it or not because of No Child Left behind the Feds are in there up to their eyeballs. Until that goes away, then the Feds have to deal with education.

       2. Yeah, I know the Federal Government is already involved. I just meant that Obama should be getting them out instead of involving them more. (And it would be nice if he cancelled a lot of Bush’s other policies, too.)

11. If anyone gets a chance, watch Obama’s address/debate with the House GOP. Pure awesomeness.

    I believe it rebroadcasts tonight at 8pm on C-Span. Bring popcorn.

12. “Alan, Alan, be fair…the GOP isn’t doing nothing. The GOP wants to work very hard…to stop the Democrats from doing anything. Because anything that the Democrats accomplish serves to make it harder for the GOP to take back power.”

    Right. Because what they perceive as policies like cap n’ trade and the government taking over 1/6 of our economy, etc….their opposition to what the Democrats perceive as wonderful things couldn’t possibly be because they see these things as bad for the country and that, by opposing them, they are doing so out of true conviction and the benefit of their constituents.
    And the Democrats have had all the power to get basically anything they wanted passed. That they have been largely unable to do so is pretty big evidence that the benefits of all these wonderful ideas is not only politically risky, but dubious – or else they would have true bipartisan appeal.

    1. Jerome, the fact remains that whenever the Dems try and push heath care reform, the Republicans do whatever it takes to shoot it down, regardless. And then when the Republicans have the majority, health care reform is the furthest thing from their minds.
       .
       There are things that the health care companies should not be allowed to do, but the Republicans seem to have no interest in stopping them. They should not be allowed to drop you from coverage on a whim. They should not be able to deny coverage to children. If you are paying for insurance, a medical emergency should not send you to bankruptcy. Yet all these things happen every day, and the Republicans do nothing to change it.
       .
       For all the bluster thrown out by people like Palin last summer about “death panels”, *they already exist* in the form of the insurance companies, and the Republicans just do not seem to care.

13. Sasha,
    “If anyone gets a chance, watch Obama’s address/debate with the House GOP. Pure awesomeness.

    I believe it rebroadcasts tonight at 8pm on C-Span. Bring popcorn.”

    I saw it today as well. THIS is the kind of stuff broadcast TV should be showing. I felt like I was in Britain with the House of Lords. I believe both Obama and the Republicans benefit from this format and the exchanges that result.

    1. Yeah, I think you have to give Obama major props for doing this. If this level of transparency had been done with the health Care reform plans they would not be in the trouble they are in.
       .
       The lesson he needs to take from this is that he needs to take the reins from Congress and lead. Trusting Pelosi and reid to accomplish much was a huge mistake. Obama has skills, he needs to use them. Especially is, after November, he no longer has a democratic supermajority to depend on (for all the good that did him anyway).

14. Kathleen David,
    “Like it or not because of No Child Left behind the Feds are in there up to their eyeballs. Until that goes away, then the Feds have to deal with education.”
    Mary Warner,
    “Yeah, I know the Federal Government is already involved. I just meant that Obama should be getting them out instead of involving them more. (And it would be nice if he cancelled a lot of Bush’s other policies, too.)”

    Hoo boy. Where to begin?
    First of all, Kathleen, funding by the Feds is still incredibly small in relation to funding of schools by state and local governments. I belive it was only 8% before No Child Left Behind. I don’t think it’s incredibly more now. Even if their share tripled to 24%, which i highly doubt, that would still mean the bulk of education dollars comes from state and local governments.
    Yet every Democratic (and many Republican) candidate always promised more money for “educating our children” – with more federal dollars. No Child Left Behind finally gave them that additional money – the bill crafted by Bush and that legendary conservative Ted Kennedy simply had the audacity to expect results in return.
    The reason so many hate No Child Left Behind is that the standards put in place to receive the money reveal an unpleasant truth – too many of our children are not being educated. But rather than blame the schools, the teachers or cultures that make uneducation “uncool”, it is far easier to blame people who actually want students to achieve before giving schools additional dollars.
    An example of how Democrats put the teachers’ union’s interest before those of our kids is taking place in New York, where they simply refuse to open up the public schools to more competition from more charter schools – and as such are perfectly willing to turn down $700 million. $700 million! That is some real money! But those in power would rather keep the status quo. If the money came with no strings attached, I’m sure the vore to accept it would be unanimous. But competition? Accountability? Standards? For many, the price of those things is too high to accept $700 million.

    Angry parents yesterday ripped Albany for putting the teachers union before kids, as lawmakers moved to block the expansion of charter schools — jeopardizing New York state’s bid to win $700 million in federal education funds.

    “They know better. My son be dámņëd!” fumed Dan Clark, whose son, Dan Jr., is an eighth-grader at Democracy Prep Charter in Harlem.

    “What this fight is really about is power and money,” Clark said. “The legislators are afraid of the unions.”

    The deadline is today for the state to apply for the federal “Race to the Top” cash — and lawmakers still had not reached an agreement on how to revamp the charter law to put New York in the best possible position to nab the funds. Talks at the Capitol were expected to continue today, with the application deadline looming at 4:30 p.m.

    Parents, many of them minorities fed up with lousy schools, said lawmakers should be ashamed of themselves.

    “It’s a travesty. We know that charter schools give the best education possible and put families first,” said Washington Heights mom Alexcia Daniels, whose daughter, Aaliyah, 8, attends Hyde Leadership charter school in Hunts Point, The Bronx.

    “What those Albany people are trying to do is say, ‘We won’t service the people who need services.’ I really think they’re doing a disservice to our children.”

    Shawn Kaba said her daughters — Aissah, 12, and Kadijah, 9 — are on charter waiting lists.

    “We don’t need those Albany lawmakers if they’re not helping us. They’re not treating us fairly. They’re not giving us an equal opportunity,” said Kaba, 43, a Monroe College librarian.

    Cynthia Eytina, who lives in Harlem with sons Skye, 8, and Taj, 6, who both attend a traditional public school, said, “It’s very stressful that legislators would put more restraints on the system when it’s already tough to get into a charter school.”

    Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver (D-Manhattan) and Senate conference leader John Sampson (D-Brooklyn) proposed legislation that would theoretically double the charter cap to 400.

    But in practice, the bill would actually try to restrict charters by making the union-friendly Board of Regents — appointed by Legislature — the sole authorizer of new charters.

    That amendment would keep the more charter-friendly State University of New York and city Schools Chancellor Joel Klein from authorizing the schools, charter supporters say.

    The measure would also give public schools veto power in allowing charter schools to share their buildings, and it would put in other onerous building requirements, charter advocates charge.

    Both Gov. Paterson and Mayor Bloomberg said those provisions imperil the state’s chances of being awarded up to $700 million in Race to the Top funds offered by President Obama.

    In a fiery speech commemorating Martin Luther King Jr. Day at City Hall, Bloomberg said the Albany charter-school plan amounts to an “insult” to the civil-rights leader’s legacy.

    “Parents have every right to be furious,” the mayor said. “Dr. King told us that a right delayed is a right denied, and this bill would continue to deny those children the quality school options that they deserve.”

    Paterson has his own proposal to boost the number of charters to 460, without restrictions.

    Submitting a proposal that restricts charters “would be like shooting ourselves in the foot,” Paterson said yesterday.

    Last night, as he scolded lawmakers after they failed to act, Paterson pointedly refused to rule out signing the Silver-Sampson bill should it pass. “I haven’t made a final decision

    about that,” Paterson said.

    1. I don’t know why everyone acts so shocked at the revelation that teachers unions are not, in fact, putting the education of children first and foremost. It’s not like automakers unions are fighting for better cars.
       .
       Teachers unions are fighting for A- better stuff for its members and B- more power for its leadership. Hopefully, though not at all necessarily, in that order. Understanding that might make it easier for politicians to say “no” when the union makes a demand that seems counter to an ideal that isn’t one of their top 2 concerns.
       .
       (And I’m not bashing the union for this, though I wish they were a bit more concerned about A and less about B, which might keep them from making mistakes that make them look bad and hurt the public’s perceptions of teachers.)

       1. Yeah, the auto unions are fighting for crappier cars so that more of their union members can be put out of work.
          .
          Please.

       2. Alan, saying that auto unions are not fighting for better cars is not the same as saying that they are fighting for crappier cars, no matter how much you want it to be. A better argument would be to show when the auto unions have actually tried to mandate better cars that consumers would want, thereby ensuring their future jobs. That argument may well be valid. But it would take work on your part, as opposed to the usual strawman argument. But at this point, who is impressed by that?

       3. The auto unions have no say over corporate decisions. Corporate decisions are what has caused the auto company problems, from lack of good gas mileage to quality problems to the abandonment of the small car market.
          .
          All the unions can do is try to protect their members.
          .
          And that is also what the teacher unions are trying to do. Teacher unions want certified teachers teaching the children. Teacher unions want to better educate children. Teacher unions want to help make the children into good citizens.

       4. If the choice is between a policy that will possibly better educate kids but will probably reduce the influence and power of the teachers union or one that will increase said power but have dubious, if any, positive influence on education, the union will probably make the same choice it usually makes.
          .
          I do not actually condemn them for this. It’s kind of their purpose in life. One can find a lot of examples to back this up, starting with how incredibly difficult and expensive it is to get rid of a bad teacher. Does this benefit teachers, myself included? Well, yeah. Job security to that degree is something most people do not have. So, thank you, union! Does this improve education for kids. No, not really.
          .
          Even Roger Ebert, no big righty he, in a review of “Waiting for Superman”, says:
          .
          “Waiting for Superman” argues that the greatest enemies of American primary and secondary education are the teachers’ unions. Yes. This is not an anti-labor film. It was made by Davis Guggenheim, whose last documentary was Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth.” Among those at Sundance in support of it was Microsoft’s Bill Gates, who appears in it. Liberals.
          .
          There are countless dedicated public school teachers in our nation. Guggenheim made a doc in 1999 focusing on them. But educators and the teachers themselves acknowledge that schools have teachers who are not merely incompetent, but even refuse to teach. Protected by the tenure guarantees in their union contracts, they cannot be fired. In some schools, their rooms are referred to as Classrooms of Death. A student assigned to them will fail. Principals know this, and every year engage in something variously known as the Lemon Dance or the Turkey Trot, transferring bad teachers to other schools, and praying that the new teachers they get may be better.
          .
          Tenure is a sacred concept in higher education, attained after years and rigorous peer review. In primary and high schools, it comes automatically after as few as two years. Tenured teachers have a job for life. They cannot be fired for proven incompetence. The American Federation of Teachers and other unions fiercely protect their jobs.
          .
          …Decades of research and test data indicate that the primary factor determining a school performance is not its budget, physical plant, curriculum, student population or the income level of its district. It is teaching. The most powerful opponents to better teaching are the teachers’ unions. I am a lifelong supporter of unions. But “Waiting for Superman” makes this an inescapable conclusion. A union that protects incompetent and even dangerous teachers is an obscenity.

15. Starting with “Angry parents yesterday ripped Albany”, I copy and pasted a story from the New York Post. The beginning of the post is all mine up until the point.
    Sorry for the mistake.

16. Alan,
    “The auto unions have no say over corporate decisions.”

    When you’re a union as big and powerful and entrenched as the United Auto Workers, of course you do.

    “Corporate decisions are what has caused the auto company problems,”

    Right. Blame the big, bad corporations for everything, as usual. Ever notice in movies and TV corporations and Nazis never have to have their “evil” explained – it’s just assumed by everyone that they are? The people who believe such things must be really happy, then, when corporations struggle. Take big, bad Wal-Mart. It currently is struggling a bit and as a result announced 11,500 layoffs at Sam’s Clubs nationwide. It’s too bad all those people lost their jobs but at least the big, bad corporation isn’t seeing it’s “greedy” shareholders make money right, Alan?

    “from lack of good gas mileage to quality problems to the abandonment of the small car market.”
    This is all liberal claptrap. “Claptrap” is a polite way of sayomh “bûllšhìŧ”.
    Americans, except when the price jumps dramatically, aren’t really that concerned with gas mileage. They also love their SUVs – and that was one of the few types of vehicles that were actually making money for the Big Three. Americans want vehicles they can feel safe in, that are stylish, that can go successfully on all types of terrain and that they can fit their three kids, groceries and items for going on a week’s vacation in. that’s a huge reason why SUVs are so popular and reman so.
    But thanks to government intervention, as part of the bailout, the the two auto companies that are hemorrhaging money have agreed to make even more cars that Americans have shown they don’t want to buy! Only the government could come up with something so brilliant!
    Quality is the #1 issue. everyone from the CEO of the company I used to work for to my father tried to keep buying American cars for as long as they could, before coming to the conclusion that they could get a foreign car of better quality, more reliability, better customer service and a cheaper price.
    While some corporate decisions undoubtedly played into this, the fact that the UAW is so powerful to the point of having wages and benefits even some doctors, lawyers and engineers would envy for their members, which added a substantial amount to the sticker price of each car made did not help. And do you really think it would be that easy to fire someone for laziness, absenteeism, and not giving a šhìŧ about doing their job right when they had the automakers paying people who were not working in their”job banks”? Those unions were powerful. But all that power and inflexibility has now come to bite them in the ášš.

    I will
    .
    All the unions can do is try to protect their members.
    .
    And that is also what the teacher unions are trying to do. Teacher unions want certified teachers teaching the children. Teacher unions want to better educate children. Teacher unions want to help make the children into good citizens.

    1. “Alan,
       “The auto unions have no say over corporate decisions.”
       .
       When you’re a union as big and powerful and entrenched as the United Auto Workers, of course you do.”
       .
       Jerome, you are delusional if you think the auto unions have any power over the companies. The only power they have is the power to strike, and when was the last time there was a protracted strike?
       .
       The auto unions used to have power, but that power is gone, along with the size of the union. A union based company used to be the place to make good money and get a retirement, all while requiring no significant education. Not so today. Starting wages for new employees are in the range of $14 an hour, which is actually about what you can make managing a Burger King.

17. I don’t think it’s delusional to think that Unions have any power over the companies. For example, in the very next sentence, you mention a power–the power to strike. And the fact that there has not been a protracted strike in some time does not mean this power is nonexistent–it is the threat of the strike that gives one power. Nobody has dropped an atomic bomb on anyone for the last 65 years or so but the threat still carries a punch.
    .
    And you ignore another power–the power of influence. One can come up with many many examples of unions using their political influence to shape legislation, including the current debate on health insurance reform. I can provide references if you want but a simple google news search would reveal that the Big Unions have had considerable input in just that legislation alone. I believe that the teachers union is currently the single biggest donor to the national Democratic Party–can you seriously suggest that largesse has bought them no power?
    .
    Lastly, I might be wrong about this but I recall reading that the auto bailouts of GM and Chrysler gave the unions there a significant chunk of ownership, to the point where some snarked that this was their big chance to show what a union in control of a company could do. I wouldn’t go that far–both companies are in dreadful shape, I don’t know if a genius could help them at this point. (It doesn’t help that Ford can proudly advertise that they are NOT run by the government and, in fact, they just made a profit for the first time in who knows how long. Evidently even those who think that the government can do a good job on health care don’t seem to be in any hurry to buy a car that has a government taint to it.

    1. The union does not directly own equity in the companies. The shares belong to a VEBA, which is using the money to manage a portfolio intended to pay for benefits for the union members so that Chrysler and GM could write off that obligation from their balance sheets.
       .
       It’s akin to having a 401k with all the money invested in the company you work for. If the company fails (see the Republican sponsored rip off of shareholders called Enron), the union employees lose their benefits.
       .
       I again repeat, the union did not run the companies into the ground. The union has given up item after item over the last decade, and changed work rules almost every year, only to have the companies ask for more changes the next year. A couple decades ago, they gave away wage increases in exchange for profit sharing, only to see in the last decade that there were no profits to share, and the companies making frequent “accounting method” changes to wipe out the any potential profit sharing.
       .
       And if you want to see the straw that broke the camel’s back, look no further that the highest gasoline prices to date, which were subsidized by that rat bášŧárd Bush the Lesser, his Republican cohorts, and his ‘friends’ in big oil. They have raped this country in a way that makes Bin Laden jealous. History will reflect that they are the true traitors to our country, causing more harm in their eight years of mismanagement than Al Queada can do in a century.

       1. Interesting. yet it has been the policy of many on the left (I will leave out any tit for tat name calling as it is both nonproductive and something I have hopefully outgrown)that we should tax gasoline at much higher levels since that will drive down demand and help solve the global warming crisis (which is driven in large part by auto emissions).
          .
          But I’ve pretty much given up on expecting consistency on that front–I don’t know if the worst case scenarios on the global warming front are accurate but I sure hope not because it is very clear that very few people on either side of the debate are interested in doing anything remotely like what it would take to actually reduce emissions.
          .