I like how they get gridlocked when they have to read the bill. Ummmmm, isn't that supposed to be how it goes? How about, i'm just thinking aloud here so stay with me, they UNDERSTAND the bill, after they read it????

Once those who just are surface dwellers understand what the bill means, if they still wanted it, they would prove which they are: for completely transforming America into a progressive/socialist/communist regime or they are just that selfish that they don't care what happens to Americans as long as they are set for life.

As a daughter and wife of a serviceman, I hope you know that I know exactly what I'm saying when I tell you from the bottom of my heart: Thank you so much for all the sacrifice that you have given in defense of this great country.

I firmly believe that the American people are in a position where we want the military to be given EVERYTHING they need to WIN this war so they can come home, or just bring them all home now so none have to die in vain. The blood of the fallen rests on the heads of those who send them without support. If the dems use claims of poor weaponry to put a stop the war because they want it to end, then so be it..

I do agree with you that since it's really just a game to those people, they need to all be flushed right out! Then, we can kill the enemy, win, and come home!!!

I like how the descendants of those who championed statehood of Hawaii forget that their ancestors were delighted beyond belief that they would become part of the US and not any other country. There were plenty of countries who were licking their chops after Hawaii.

Do you think that any other country would have allowed a race based government that didn't consist of that country's people to be formed? Just think of all the countries that have ever taken over any land...who formed the governments? What language do the conquered people speak? What customs must they observe?

Yeah, the US adopting Hawaii was a dream come true for the natives at the time. Funny how in just a few short generations the kids will forget the most important stuff.

What you are missing is that without so much insurance, the cost of things would go WAY down over time. Yes, at first the rich would be the only people to get the expensive procedures. But, think about computers with A-drives (remember from long ago those "floppy" drives??). People with lots of money bought them first. Then, they got cheaper. Now the rest of us "have-nots" sneer at the thought of owning such a dinosaur of a computer. The same would be for medical care. The cancer treatments that are top of the line now would shortly become much cheaper (and then the market would keep discovering so many more advances such the cycle was perpetuated) so all could afford it instead of the government keeping costs up artificially. Is that the perfect system? Of course not, perfect is that everyone is healthy, makes perfect life choices, etc. But this way, no one is a drain on society and the government doesn't need to get involved (meaning screw it all up), and there would be a huge number of doctors that could afford to offer reduced care to the poor (ever heard of doctors without borders? They would be here, too, if it weren't for the stupid people in our Fed Gov't.). All could logistically be cared for through the free market...getting the government involved in things that they are not Constitutionally allowed to do is just asking for more trouble.

As for how long it would take for the poor to get served, I really feel that in our nation that is know for compassion and giving (more than any other country in the world and more than some countries combined), we would take care of each other. And, states could come up with their own systems that filled the needs of their regions without big brother trying to level the playing field from DC.

There is almost always a free market answer that is not listed on the "options" list that the government presents. At the risk of using a worn out analogy, we have to not only think outside the box...but we have to tell them that we don't even have a box and to get the heck out of our lives!

This is really not that big an issue, but I just have to mention one thing:
The joke is on her because in the military, "Ma'am" is the term of respect. She downgraded herself to "Senator" from "Ma'am."

Thank you for setting this up. I like that the912project.com has a mission, but commenting really is nice and reading others' comments can bring new insight and knowledge.

So, here's the thing. Presidents have been using the bully pulpit to encourage kids for ages. This is nothing new. What's new is the curriculum that went along with it and the fact that no pres before has asked children to HELP/SERVE HIM (that was in the original speech).

The curriculum handed down by feds is ILLEGAL, period. That violates the very core of laws in the US Dept of ED. Even if the curriculum was good, and not completely a policy agenda pushing tool, I would still be against it...on account of it's ILLEGAL!

And, even though he changed the speech, we know from the first that he feels that the public owes him something...not the other way around, which is the reality. He owes us because we hired him to lead, not to subjugate the American populous. He works for us and is supposed to be a public servant. How is it that he thinks we are supposed to pledge to work for him????

So, even though, on the surface, the new speech seems downright inspirational, isn't it enough that we know what he really thinks? And the fact that they haven't withdrawn the curriculum altogether is a huge issue!!! It's okay to break laws if you right a different speech???

Hobbes, you are entirely correct that I jumped to the conclusion that you had voted for BO.  I apologize for my hastily drawn conclusion.  When I read the first two sentences of your post, the feeling that I got was that maybe you had believed him previously, but now don’t.  Therefore, you are correct in your accusation and I do apologize.

Now, you did write: “while this may work for you in the home school situation you'll find adults less likely to respond well to such patronizing babble. You need to get out more.”  This would indicate, factoring your tone and your words condemning the actions of the orchestrators of the site, that you believe that I am not out mingling in society enough and that my behavior in general, and specifically making a misassumption about you from a post, is due to that lack of socialization.  This is an attack on character because you are insinuating that my choice of home schooling has made me feeble minded due to large amounts of contact with my children.  By this logic, all school teachers and childcare professionals should be the same, or does one not become feebleminded if they are not your own children?  

And, contrary to what many think…behavior of a person defines that person’s character, the child raising technique of non-character judgment phrases notwithstanding.  The PC thing is to not judge a person’s character by their actions.  While this can be true in certain circumstances (e.g. children), as adults, our actions define our character, so you have, in fact, attacked my character.

My assertion that I have traveled (never once professing pride in it) was because I was stung by your words that I don’t get out enough, and I was trying to defend myself that I was not some ignoramus, which is what your words suggested.

I do believe that your anger has lead you to take sentences like, “Please be nice,” as patronizing.  Would you rather I wrote something like, “In the future, it would behoove one to discontinue the use of negativity that may impact the ability of others to read your posts without prejudice.”?  Come on!  Simplicity is good. 

Ok, now that we have wasted precious time that we will never get back, I am going to drop this infighting and get back to getting our country restored.  The choice to do likewise is yours.

I’m sorry you took my comments to be patronizing.  They were not intended to be so…they were meant to be a simple reminder of one of life’s great joys, kindness.

I wish you would choose your words carefully as you have made a character judgment about me, regarding the fact that I home school.  It may surprise you that I have traveled the world extensively, know three languages fluently, and belong to many an organization and, therefore, still “get out” often.

I understand that you probably have a bitter taste in your mouth from voting for a person who turned out to not be what you expected.  However, you will do well to not extrapolate your wrath to others who have, as of yet, done nothing untoward. 

I sincerely hope that you will be instrumental in keeping the person you voted for from, in his own words, “fundamentally transforming” this nation.  Thank you for having the guts to unhinge from him, as I did from Bush, when he turned out to be destructive to the country.

I read about people thinking voting is futile. DON'T GIVE UP HOPE! Just change the way you do things! Seek honest people who are just sick enough to run for office, even though they don't really want to, and help them win. Get to know who is running...there are good people out there who will be willing to run and then serve ONE TIME so they can raise heck while in office and then leave it a better place.

We must use the system that's in place to win...I LOVE guns, but not for revolution...it will END BADLY for anyone who gets violent. Read about the French Revolution...it was a BLOODY MESS, literally! We cannot break any laws (unless we are told not to worship God...I have that one exception), or WE WILL LOSE...guaranteed.

Peace. Endurance. Knowledge. That's how we'll win.