zzzzzzzzzzzz . . . . huh? . . . zzzzzzzzzzzzz

So the tax only impacts 1% of the citizens. That's a very small minority. I guess the Democrats have no trouble legislating AGAINST the wishes of SOME minorities. It's like ALL minorities are EQUAL, but some minorities are LESS EQUAL than the ones the Democrats support. No surprise here. . . nor principles . . . but what else is new?

What does California, Michigan, Illinois, New York, and Massachusetts have in common? That's kinda tough. How about 2 liberal Democrat Senators each, Democrat dominated legislatures (for 20 to 30 years), insane environmental policies, hyper-inflated nanny-statism, widespread union influence, sanctuary cities, opposition to illegal immigration, assembly line abortion plants, sky high funding of schools producing substandard and illiterate "graduates." Maybe it's the strong scent of liberal irresponsibility.

That loud flapping noise is the chickens coming home to roost. If the lefty schools quit teaching moral relativist "fairy tales" and spent more time educating students on truth and reality, they might be able to comprehend "cause and effect."

Zinn's strident Marxism as religion (much as Ann Coulter wrote of the religious trappings of liberalism) raise the question that if the liberal mantra of "separation of church and state" should proscribe any mention of Christianity in the public schools, WHY isn't the teaching of Marxist/Liberalist/Atheism, not opposed on the very same grounds? The non-scientific basis of Zinn's pseudo-religious-philosophy should be held to the same standard. Now I know there are NO STANDARDS for moral relativists, however THEIR refuge for the past fifty years has been the COURTS, whose bottom line standard is precedent. So what gives??

Since when is a "poll" indicative of anything except a count of how many people have a similar opinion? There is NOTHING inherently CORRECT about a poll. It is just a count, and as such, (as is often the case) just the totality of so many "dumb opinions", "misinformed opinions", "wrong opinions", etc. The list goes on and on. Regardless, of HOW MANY people believe something, DOES NOT make the opinion CORRECT. It's simply a moral relativist ASSUMPTION that by counting something (actually this is an old Sesame Street routine), its "truthfulness" can be ascertained. THIS IS NOT TRUE. While there is an obvious limit on man's intelligence, there is NO LIMIT on his stupidity.

If you haven't yet figured out that this an existential battle between good and evil, you're obviously not paying attention. Morals are under attack in Hollywood, the schools, science (if you haven't noticed Climategate and the paucity of ethics in that HOAX), and in the Halls of Congress and "Copenhagen". The Father of Lies has encouraged calling lies, the truth, and the truth lies. (Just listen to Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi if you're not sure.) Try to comprehend the moral equivalency and convoluted logic, of Barbara Boxer who compares Viagra as the male equivalent health care "right" as the woman's right to abortion. Or how about Obama being nominated for the Nobel peace prize after a couple weeks in office. Kevin Jennings? Van Jones? John Holdren? Eric Holder? Tim Geithner? Barney Frank? Chris Dodd? Are you kidding?

The devil's greatest success was in convincing mankind that he did NOT exist. The backward, perverted, moral relativist world that we witness each day however, is the strongest proof that the Big D Does, in fact, exist.

The failure of the educational system is trumpeted in the ignorance of so many of these responses. The issue of subjective "truth", as opposed to objective truth is the foundation of the difference between liberal and conservative. It is the distinction between two contradictory philosophies. Moral relativism is the mindset within which liberals function. It is the de facto philosophy of today's education Industry/academia. It forms the sum and substance of the liberal perspective, decision process, communication process. Objective truth, logic, analysis, rational thought, moral codes based on objective standards of right and wrong constitute the philosophy of the right, not to mention classical philosophy, and most Christian denominations. In antiquity, a code of justice, like the ten commandments epitomized objective morality, while today's moral relativism, with its subjective discernment of "right and wrong" is basically the primordial description of Original Sin; that notion that man can be as God, and define what behavior is good, and which is evil.

Correct. He's already auditioning for his next job as Secretary General of the UN, with a plan to expand the powers and instrusiveness of that despicable band of cut throats.