Bern

None. When times are good and salaries are going up, governmental income increases at a greater rate than the increase in income. Besides taking a percentage of income, some are also pushed into higher brackets causing an exponential not linear increase in tax revenue out of the public pocket. Government is always looking to spend more and to pay for it by taxing more and borrowing more. Under Bush the Federal government has spent like drunken sailors and increased revenue by increasing fees and by borrowing. Does anyone really believe it costs them $100 to do a passport? Our economy is gearing down and tax revenue being a function of personal income and transaction income (sales, user, license and other fees) will go down. When we lose income or our salaries don't keep up with inflation, we learn to adjust. Governments need to do the same. When times are flush and income is rolling in, governments becomes inefficient, getting "used" to their higher revenues. You see the waste in the Defense Department, NASA, FEMA and many local governments. Programs that so many decry, like social security with their very low overhead have no waste. Tax revenue will go down and the first thing they come up with is putting their hands in our pockets.

The facts, which are very obvious, refute all your statements. Personal vendetta against the BOE? Twisting the truth? Not stating rebuttals? Your statements are ridiculous. You have serious lack of reality if you really believe the above. Under those circumstances, debating you makes as much sense as debating an inmate from Bedlam. I don't waste my time on nonsense. From now on I will be ignoring your posts.

If you can't argue cogently, then resort to insults.

Where did you get that that it takes five people to do the work of one? From the Limbaugh school of knowledge? The facts do not support your assertion. As I stated previously, the administrative overhead of SS and Medicare is about 3%. Very efficient compared to the 30 to 40% overhead of private insurance. And we don't have thousands of SS and medicare executives making in the millions. If anything, you're being screwed by our private insurers. Yes, at times our governmental programs spend more money than they take in. Its because they are obligated to pay out, no matter how much was paid in. Private insurers don't have that issue because they are constantly raising their rates. We've all seen health insurance rates double over the last 10 years. We could solve funding issues by doing what private insurers do. Do you want the social security tax rate doubled? What is your solution? Do you want to turn this over to private industry? Then expect a 40% social security and Medicare tax hike just to care of "administrative overhead." Expect aothe rvery large increase to tkae care of shortfalls. Do you want them to put our Social Security trust fund in the market, as Bush did? We would have lost 40% of our trust fund in the last four years. So besides complaining and decrying governmental programs, tell us your solutions.

I don't know where you got the poll numbers from but polls don't matter much when the "elite" want you in. They will matter when there's a real election. But so does money. Its not an image. It is a fact. So far, she and her minders have shown me the only thing she has going for her is being a Kennedy. Interestingly, the NY Times had critical story on Kennedy, the title being "In Appearance Upstate, Kennedy Says Little". I go back to the same link and the title is now "Kennedy, Touring Upstate, Gets Less and Less Low-Key". The original story stated that when she was asked why she is running and what her qualifications are, she refused to answer and walked away from the press. The press followed her and kept asking, whereupon one of her aides took her away, telling the press that she will not answering any questions. Until then, there was no problem talking to the press. The story changed. The revised story is http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/18/nyregion/18upstate.html?hp You can still find remnants of the original story if you go the NY Times Web site and put into the NY Times search box "kennedy says little". You will get a page of links with descriptions. Somewhere in the page you should get a picture with If you Google "rivoli kennedy says little" you will get a NY Time hit But, again, this is link to the revised story with the revised headline. This is like a murder mystery. Who killed the story?

Actually, he was Politics always involves back door deals. The life blood of politics is commitments and washing each others hands. Sometimes you break the line by directly soliciting for money. Normally it is you take care of us and later on when you need something we'll take care of you. I would think there is nothing on Emanuel, considering how Blago was railing against Obama because Obama did not offer Blago anything concrete and up front. I'm sure the Kennedy's talked to Paterson about Caroline's quest for the Senate. Many have suddenly have lined up to support Caroline, such as Harry Reid and Al Sharpton. Those Kennedy's: so persuasive.

They are working very well. Except for welfare, the administrative overhead of those programs average less than 3%. Compare that to private health insurance, where 30 to 40% of the money you or your employers pay in goes to the insurers instead of health services. If you don't feel that are working the best they can, tell us what you feel are the deficiencies and how we can overcome them. The "most important national issues now" thread may be the appropriate reply place. http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php?showtopic=25954 Our conservative President and real war hero Eisenhower knew that the programs are neccessary. So necessary, that he wrote Unfortunately, their number is no longer negligible. The dumbing down of America is succeeding.

That's silly. Why should YOU expect that? Is it too difficult for you to get to KOTW otherwise? If they put KOTW in, you will see every other business demanding the same.

Maybe you should stop listening to the likes of Limbaugh. Do your own research and find out who the activists are. Remember Terri Schaivo? Where the conservatives were shopping every court in the country to find activist judges to intrude on her husbands decision and her medical care consensus to let her go? When the conservatives couldn't find any court to support their activist position, Tom Delay wanted to investigate the Schiavo federal trial judge and the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals for refusing to overturn the Florida state courts' legal decisions over Michael Schiavo's decisions about his wife's medical care. Tom Delay, conservative movement panderer and critic of activist courts. So not only did Delay expect the court to become activist, he also threatened them when they did not. Or what about Bush vs Gore One time deal for Bush?

Don't count on it. As stated on the Federal complaint Right now I'm more interested in Clinton's NY Senate replacement. What will the Kennedy's promise Paterson for Hillary's seat? Why should it be Caroline Kennedy's seat? Because she's a Kennedy? I would think in the whole state of NY, with millions of capable people we can do better than selecting on some family name. Our republic seems to be turning into an oligarchy of leading families - the Kennedy's, the Clinton's, the Bush's, with many other minor families in local and state governments. Not an admirable situation..

Bhopal. Also http://emc.ornl.gov/CSEPPweb/data/Evacuati...tvilleqr178.pdf There is one guarantee: accidents will happen.

The village idiot.

Another good decision by Obama. Picking Gen. Eric K. Shinseki to head the VA Department. A soldier who has integrity, the guts to tell the truth, is competent and highly respected by professional military throughout the world. While Rumsfeld and his chief lackeys did not go to Shinseki's retirement party, many Chiefs of Staffs and senior military from throughout the world honored Shinseki at his retirement. He has the attributes despised and feared by our current administration. And none of the attributes they so love: cronyism, sycophancy and incompetence. There is hope that government may actually start working well again. I really wonder about those who are upset by Obama's election, their constant whining. Why? Why would anyone want to continue in Bush's path to failure?

Perception always trumps reality. If they were to build a modern nuclear plant, you would have thousands demonstrating. Yet here you have a chemical plant in a heavily populated areas which can make Chernobyl look like Disneyland and no one bats an eye.

Stolen? How can that be? Isn't the prime mantra for most religions "our God is a great and powerful God?" Why would their followers skulk around in the night and remove the competitions adverts? Should not that be best left up to their "Great and Powerful God?" They're so insecure.

Not really.

Oh get over it. Stop being so sour and stop your constant whining. Paul has always given us solutions. Its you whiners who are the problem. The country will stop going down the toilet now that Bush is out. Obama has shown us by the people he's picked and the ideas he has come up with that he is very competent. Things will be fixed. Compare that to the current current White House resident who filled the whole Federal administration with cronies, sycophants and flatterers. You have selective memory when you forget (or maybe to you, they were competent) Bush cronies like Gonzalez, Brown (Brownie the Clownie of Arabian Horse Fame) or Bush's superb Supreme Court pick, Harriet Miers (even the Republican senators gagged on that one). Consider Harriet Miers. She wrote to Bush, "You are the best governor ever - deserving of great respect". She also found him "cool," and said he and his wife, Laura, were "the greatest!". She also told him: "Keep up the great work. Texas is blessed." Talk about kissing ass. Really disgusting. I'd never kiss up to a boss like that. Bush has completely surrounded himself with sycophants and flatterers like Miers. They continually tell him he is brilliant, his decisions are wonderful and too bad the stupid ungrateful public does not understand that. No wonder Bush has lost touch with reality. And you're whining because the Democrats took over? Why? Are you infatuated with Bush? Read Machiavelli. In The Prince, had a lot to say about flatterers and princes who believe them.

What he said made lots of sense. Too bad his words are wasted on the likes of you. And to think, your vote helps to select our leaders.

You remind me of the Italians who loved Mussolini because the trains ran on time and the roads were maintained while not worrying about that little thing called freedom.

I don't think he got enough. A teacher like that shouldn't be teaching.

Really insipid and lame. Did you spend the whole night thinking up your little "witticism?" Sad.

Definitely. And here's an interesting article which expands on Paul's comments - that slippery slope.

From Obama's weekly address Good. He is stepping up to the plate. Of course, I expect the Republicans will do what they do best - obstruct.

Since when did we need the respect and admiration of AlQaeda? Why do you care? Do you need it? Considering the response from respectable world leaders, foreign editorials and news columnists, and foreign forums, I know that our stock has gone up in the eyes of the world.

I couldn't care less if we have a pledge. Most countries seem to do very well without a pledge. To me and most of my peers the pledge was a waste of our time. Everyone stand up, recite or else. I don't remember anyone inn school ever saying how much fun the pledge or how it built them up as citizens was or recommneding that we say it more often. I have to disagree with you if you believe that love of country is instilled by a pledge. Most of my peers felt the same. But to others it may. That's up to them. If they really felt that, then why not have a pledge at the work place? I notice that when the pledge is absent or dropped, rarely do the ones who are or may be subjected to it object. The objections come from "concerned outsiders."