Why should they get a bonus just for meeting required goals anyway? Isn't that what is expected? Now if you were to meet and exceed set goals, that would be one thing, but a bonus just for doing the minimum at your job is ridiculous.

The funny thing to me is that my kids would love cold cereal for breakfast, but I make them eat pancakes most days, because cold cereal is too expensive. When we do have cold cereal, we buy generic, which makes it cheaper, but they'll go through an entire gallon of milk for breakfast with cereal, and milk isn't cheap. Maybe they're both cheaper in bulk?

YOU PAY WITH YOUR TAXES! You are paying! If the government wasn't taking those taxes from you, taking money that you worked to earn, you would be able to pay for your own healthcare. You just aren't paying only for your personal care, you are paying for everyone else's as well. I would rather pay for my own personal care, and donate money to charitable hospitals and foundations than have the money taken from me forcibly through taxes, and distributed as the government sees fit. I don't want to pay for others abortions, which I don't believe in- I would and do gladly donate money to hospitals that direct the money towards helping sick children, people with cancer, etc. Do a little research on how much the pharmaceutical companies spend on research and development, and compare that to how much they earn. Do a little research on how socialized medicine actually stacks up against a free market system. Every study I've found rates the free market system as having better care.

Our family of seven visits the doctor's office on average about 8 times a year. Contrast that with my brother and sister-in-law, whom I dearly love, but whose five person family visits the doctor about 25 times per year. Why should I be forced to pay for their extra visits?

And no one on this website ever supported giving money to the banks. It's not the government's money to spend. In fact, I believe nearly everyone connected to this site contacted their representatives to ask them to vote against the bailout.

Healthcare is available to everyone at the point of need. Hospitals are not legally allowed to turn away patients who are in need of care; it is ridiculously easy to sign up for free or reduced care from the government, and there are plenty of county hospitals that serve those who can't afford private hospitals. I know this well, as my father has worked at a county hospital for most of the last twenty years.

By the way, with my private insurance, which my husband works to pay for, we pay only $2.00 per prescription, although many are free. I don't know how that compares to what you quoted, but it seems pretty good to me. I'm betting that what we pay for insurance is significantly less than what you pay in taxes as well.

You know, those taxes that you willingly pay just in case you need healthcare so that you don't have to pay for what you need when you need it.

As responsible, Christian, home-schooling parents who love America and all she stands for, we have worked hard to ensure that our children know and believe that all men are created equal in God's eyes. The color of someone's skin means no more to our children than the color of someone's eyes.

If Barack Obama becomes president, he and his cohorts have every intention of forcing our children into public schools to be taught "social justice," i.e. that because God created them with light skin, they are inherently evil murderers. My children, like all of the children I know, are innocent in this. Yet Obama and his friends believe that because of something that happened decades before they were born, the children of today must pay.

Schools were intended to teach reading, writing, and arithmetic. They are failing miserably at this, and why? Could it possibly be that they are spending so much time teaching "social justice," "counseling," and "multi-culturalism" that they don't have time for the ABCs and 123s?

That's because it wasn't the press digging up the dirt on Joe the Plumber- government computers were used to find the info. It was just fed to the press by the right people. The MSM is just an arm of the left-wing political machine.

Or maybe it should have been:
What's the difference between Sarah Palin and Barack Obama?”

“One is a well turned-out, good-looking, and let's be honest, pretty sexy piece of eye-candy.

The other kills babies."

"What's the difference between Sarah Palin and Barack Obama?”

“One is a well turned-out, good-looking, and let's be honest, pretty sexy piece of eye-candy.

The other kills his own country."

I think the point is that McCain's campaign did, catch and rectify the issue. Obama's campaign, on the other hand, did the following:

In a nutshell: apparently, the Obama campaign disabled security checks that verify the name and address of a card-holder. So it’s possible to donate money using a real card, but a fake name and address. http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/31658_Oba...

This has resulted in cases like Mary Biskup of Manchester, Missouri who supposedly donated $174,800, which was just $172,500 above the legal limit.

Biskup told the Post that someone must have use her name but other people's credit cards to donate the money since no charges ever showed up on her bill.

I'll give them credit for the fact that they did catch Mary giving $172,500 above the limit, but for people like Steve and Rachel Larman, whose credit card number was stolen and used to donate to the Obama campaign, in the amount of $2,300, Obama's campaign did nothing. Of course, Obama's campaign is totally ignorant of the problem- it's somewhere out there with Bill Ayers' past- and no one associated with their campaign could be possibly be participating. Because if I'm stealing credit card numbers, the first thing I'm thinking is politics. Forget about that big screen tv or cruise to the Bahamas. That's so yesterday.

Money isn't a sin, the love of money is a sin. There is nothing wrong with money itself, with having money, or with making or spending money. It's when you put money above everything else, including God, that sin enters the picture. If you have no money, and spend your life focusing on the fact that you have no money and looking for someone to blame, rather than praising God that you have a life to live, it's just as sinful as someone who has a lot of money, and stepped on a lot of people to get that money. For a person to work hard, make a ton of money, and spend their time doing good is not a sin.

Bill Clinton's comment on the financial mess:

Clinton: "I think the responsibility that the Democrats have may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress, or by me when I was President, to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac …" In a moment of frankness, Bill Clinton says the Democrats are to blame.