4,128 comments posted · 3 followers · following 0

15 minutes ago @ Daily - Dana Milbank: Putting ... · 0 replies · +1 points

Plus 1,000. Cruz may "die" but the truth won't.

10 hours ago @ Daily - Editorial: Younger Bar... · 0 replies · +2 points

While I am an avid fan and defender of G.W., I am so sorry for your loss. Peace to you. gene

1 day ago @ Daily - Editorial: Why is Gitm... · 0 replies · -3 points


It's a matter of degree. The awful wasted time and money consumed on income taxes pales when compared to the overwhelming imposition of government regulations on businesses, the national debt, and the lack of funding for future Medicare and Social Security. This issue ends up on the back burner.

1 day ago @ Daily - Kathleen Parker: Befor... · 1 reply · +2 points

Some folks who have been paying in for decades and planned their retirement accordingly would have a bone to pick with your point of view. Just sayin'.

1 day ago @ Daily - Editorial: Why is Gitm... · 4 replies · -5 points

Finally, after lo these several years, I have found a case where I can defend the inaction of our president. All politicians promise simpler income taxes. And all who get into the alternatives learn it's not possible to make major changes. Yes, we could and should tax certain traders on WS and at the CBOE differently, and yes some current regulations are unfair or far more complex than they need to be, but the fact we learn when we offer the "fair" and "flat" tax plans as alternatives is that they, upon implementation, need the IRS or some other agency too, and they will end up in tax courts too, and the majority of complicated scenarios in the IRC were created with fairness in mind. Some politicians say they would just eliminate complicated sections like deductions for medical or casualty expenses and exemptions for dependents - but truth is that removal would put some truly good folks in bankruptcy or jail. Yes, there is a wish to be Santa Claus in Obama and other politicians' hearts, a wish they could make Form 1040 a postcard. But asking our rep's to make major changes to income tax law and reg's is like asking them to change the weather - not humanly possible.

3 days ago @ Daily - Fareed Zakaria: The re... · 1 reply · -1 points


Please refer to omahaslim's comment above. And review the history of U.S./Iran deals. The bbc report failed to mention the killer in this deal - we are not allowed anytime/anywhere inspections. I can see how you are suspicious of our political leaders in the U.S. But I can't for the life of me understand why you would want to trust someone who daily asserts they want to eradicate Jews. How the he&& can you explain that? Do you hate Jews too?

Do you believe the Iranians when they say they aren't making a bomb and not believe them when they say they want to eradicate Jews?

4 days ago @ Daily - Fareed Zakaria: The re... · 4 replies · -3 points

Nobody, including Fareed and Obama and Kerry, believes Iran will under any circumstances, sanctions or not, abandon their nuclear weapons program. The question is whether we should add to their economic ability to expand the program and their nefarious intrusion into neighboring countries on behalf of some who are our sworn enemies. If Fareed (or Obama or Kerry) lived in Israel, his opinion would be different. It's not so easy to trust Iran when they're your neighbor and their stated goal is to eliminate your people. Perhaps the worst part of this scenario is that if the deal is made, it will be so mainly because Obama wants to add to his legacy of reducing Americans' leadership - at the expense of some of our best allies. Obama is presently offering payoffs via more aid to Israel to win their forgiveness for what he's doing. (Dem's have always enjoyed the Jewish vote.) It won't work, because the Israelis will not compromise their integrity and national defense. If this "deal" gets through Congress, there will be war. Liberals claim their opposition to war. We'll see.

4 days ago @ Daily - Mark Reynolds: Everyth... · 4 replies · -1 points

I can and have in the recent past listed several reasons a carbon fee and dividend won't work. The first is it won't have a major impact on climate change, since we need oil and gas for transport and heat, etc. Giving subsidies to alternate forms of energy haven't worked for the same reason. The second is that it would result in millions of bureaucrats added to the administrative payrolls. Yes, it is not the simple take and redistribute plan it is made out to be. Someone has to decide who is producing the carbon and charges/ collects the tax and who receives the dividend. There will be court cases galore defending against the imposition of the tax and arguing for the dividend. The main reason liberals have backed this tax is they like the notion of adding more government control over our lives. No, Republicans are not against protecting our environment. I'll give the writers of this column that as fact. But I guarantee they will not back any of the recent plans to add a tax on carbon.

4 days ago @ Daily - Broomfield crash kills... · 2 replies · -9 points

Right. They who are guilty of bad driving deserve to be dead, eh?

4 days ago @ Daily - Charles Krauthammer: T... · 1 reply · +2 points

Our position as world leader has earned millions their freedom from tyranny. And we'll begin anew as soon as we replace today's leadership.

Which other groups do not get the tax break? (Check YMCA, Boys/Girls Clubs, Big Brothers/Sisters, Disabled Vets, Goodwill, Salvation Army, Red Cross, Our Center, public offices, government offices, et al.)

I do not apologize for being proud of my country and its history of sacrifice for freedom and liberty. I'm blessed to be an American.