Excellent comment JohnG... couldn't have said it any better myself!

You're so right Ted. It's also an indication that emerging reports that a major schism has occurred between Bill and Obama are true. Details are emerging and we plan to cover it tomorrow... stay tuned!

Willis, please lay off your jug of fermented Kool-aid. First, Reagan inherited a good economy? Really? When it comes to the Carter administration, you take “white-wash” to a whole new level. Our economy was in a horrific state of stagflation and it was Reagan’s supply-side economics that completely turned it around. Stop reading liberal blogs that peddle Keynesian fallacies with no logical or historical facts to back up their claims – the economic data don’t lie. You also conveniently forget to mention the eight years of Clinton (post-Reagan). It was during this period that the seeds of our recession were sown – the housing bubble. Malinvestment – not supply-side economics – was responsible for the recession, which, by the way, ended three and half years ago (though you would hardly know that thanks to Obama).

Second, if demand creates jobs (and deficit spending creates demand), then Obama would have delivered on the low unemployment and stimulated economic growth he promised us. Alas, it doesn’t and he hasn’t. Furthermore, we don’t have a liquidity problem (there is plenty of money sitting on the sidelines) – we have a confidence problem predicated on tax, regulatory and healthcare policy… combined with our debt problem.

Third, you completely contradict yourself. If demand creates jobs, then tax reductions (regardless of who they are for) will logically and necessarily stimulate job creation – duh. Even John Maynard Keynes understood that. Classical Keynesianism (not the insanity peddled by Krugman that symbolizes “modern” Keynesianism) posits that you lower taxes and increase deficit spending to prime the pump and escape a recession – the exact opposite of your (and Obama’s) approach to tax policy. Government spending is ALWAYS less efficient than private sector spending… so why give them more private sector money to waste through taxation?

Fourth, for the love of God, please stop whining about what Obama inherited. The issue is not where he started (which we all agree was not a happy place), but, rather, where he (and we) are four years later. What has his Keynesian policies and confiscation of wealth produced? Answer: nothing (except soaring deficits, socioeconomic strife and economic stagnation – the inflation comes later thanks to Uncle Ben).

Finally, regarding your other comment (submitted later), we moderate comments not to censor legitimate comments but, rather, to eliminate pointless submissions that contain only profanity, ad hominem attacks and baseless rants – which we do get our fair share of (surprise!). As you can see, if you even make an attempt at a logical point (no matter how poor that attempt is or how much we disagree with it), then we typically post it – as demonstrated by your comment. We make no apologies for our comment moderation policy and feel it best promotes a useful public discourse for all sides and all opinions. If you don't like it, then you can always take your comments elsewhere -- that's the beauty of the free market system.

Of course LRWC. That's the liberal mantra: Anything goes so long as we agree with it! They want the government to infiltrate every area of our lives (except of course the bedroom) so they can foist their free-thinking "religion" on everybody else. Forget about liberty... it's all about worshiping nature and humanity. It is ironic that a group calling itself "Freedom From Religion" is actually engaged in a crusade to replace one religion (which it does not like) with another religion (that it does like). They don't want freedom from religion... just freedom from religions they disagree with. So much for free thinking:)

That's awesome! Great response and one that communities should consider repeating everywhere this type of religious bigotry and bullying occurs.

I'm slightly amused at your thesis (viz., God and government don't mix) which ignores the entire history of our exceptional nation... including the reason behind the First Amendment. You have a very naive understanding of humanity. Religion will never die because we were designed by God to worship something. The object of our worship may change... but human beings will always worship something -- it is an inescapable condition of our human nature. America is a republic -- not a theocracy. However, that in no way means that religion is not at the heart of our political system -- on both sides of the aisle. Again, what each citizen worships may vary... but at the end of the day each and every one of us worships something or someone. Good luck trying to separate individuals from the spiritual vacuum inherent in each of us. The true danger comes in replacing the one true God with a counterfeit idol -- the disastrous results of which we have continuously witnessed since the Fall. Even Satan understands that he cannot eliminate the vacuum and seeks instead to replace God in the hearts of people with himself or another false object of worship. Ask yourself if atheists have really escaped "religion." No, they practice a faith just as strongly as any Christian, Jew or Muslim -- it is just a different variation of religion with a different object of worship. We are all "religious" and our personal religion shapes our values, virtues and actions -- including our understanding of government and its role. If God created the institution of government, then how exactly do you suggest the two do not mix?

Give me a break M Bender. I could respond to the first half of your disingenuous question but I'll focus on the second. I call anybody who uses the threat of high-cost litigation to bully others (who can't cover the costs) into submitting to their will "litigation terrorists." Get a clue... a bully is a bully is a bully. We can argue the merits of the "wall between church and state" argument; however, there is no intellectually honesty in denying the unethical tactics this group employs to get its way. If the shoe was on the other foot, you would be arguing the exact opposite. That demonstrates you are not a defender of truth, justice and the Constitution... just your theological beliefs. Stop cloaking your true motivations beneath the veil of a "constitutional watchdog" and come out of your "religious bigot" closet.

Magster... I'm going to assume you're using IE (which does crazy things when displaying webpages). We don't have any "moving" advertisements and nobody else we've talked to or heard from seems to have any problems with this (or any other) page displaying properly. My suggestion for a remedy would be to try a better browser (e.g., Firefox, Chrome, etc.).

We completely agree Linda. Sadly, Obama once again was more concerned about offending Muslims than saving our people. He did nothing because he feared acting without the approval of the Libyan government. Though unbelievably despicable, it is entirely consistent with his multinational "lead from behind" anti-colonial ideology... and it cost us American lives. He doesn't care about the details (or the faces)... he only cares about maintaining the power to continue his transformation of our nation in according with the dreams of his father.

Pat Smith, the mother of Benghazi victim Sean Smith, has responded to Obama's statement on The Daily Show:

"It's insensitive to say my son is not very optimal -- he is also very dead. I've not been 'optimal' since he died and the past few weeks have been pure hell."