?

If you cut off the employment, illegal immigration will be greatly reduced. So which candidate will put more money into enforcing that part of the law.

Why hasn't either side focused on the real source of the problem? Employers. At $25,000 per illegal, I'm sure we could fund a greater amount of enforcement.

So has your candidate said anything about going after industry? Or are they just taking their donations for reelection?

Honda lost a small claims case in CA and have said they will appeal. That appeal will have to happen before the judge makes a decision on a class action settlement. My question is, will the judge making a decision on the class action, after seeing the appeal filed, rule that she won't make a decision until after the other case is resolved? My reasoning is that because the cases are the same at the heart of it all, she will defer her ruling until the appeal actually settled in a court of law.

Me: I didn't think homosexuals should be in the military. I was in my early 20's, in the military. Then I got to know homosexuals that were in the military (while I was still in). I also saw how policies were not evenly applied to all. I changed my opinion in my late 20's. I realized that I was giving in to peer pressure. I think you do the right thing because it's right.

That's when I shifted to being a staunch independent. I had voted Republican earlier (peer pressure from the military). Later, I focused on what was right for the nation. That left me voting for third party candidates and write-ins for a long time.

The argument goes that the only ones that want health care are those that "need" it, so that makes it expensive. But, if you bring in the healthy and focus on prevention, overall costs come down.

But on the other hand, can you force people to buy something they don't want? But to add to that, we will always treat someone, covered or not. (So shouldn't they have to pay extra taxes for their care?)

We mandate auto insurance. But I guess the difference is driving on public roads is a privilege, not a right. Life is a right. But don't rights come with responsibilities?

Editorial: I think the problem with ou health care system is the focus for too long has not been on health, otherwise we would have paid for prevention long before now, we wouldn't be so fat as a nation,...

Anyway, what's the right thing to do? And if it's not legal, should we amend the Constitution to do it? Or is there some other way?

They were 10th last season, they are 29th this year.

So do you bench McNabb for that?

I was listening to "Hazard" by Richard Marx and was trying to think of more songs like it.

Can you think of more?

Alleged murderer was found by collecting his DNA from a restaurant. But I'm wondering is it reasonable to expect that when you go out that you don't have to worry about someone gathering up your stray hairs (as in the movie Gattaca)?

There was another case similar to this in that a guy in his home was found to be growing marijuana by the heat coming off his house. The police were driving around neighborhoods with infrared detectors looking for excessive heat from grow lamps. The drug dealer won because they said it was a reasonable expectation that you can't use technology to "search" a home even if you stay outside.

http://www.infoplease.com/cig/supreme-court/findin...

I know once you throw something in the trash, you don't have a privacy right, but used silverware at a restaurant with your spit on it is acceptable? Are we going to have options at restaurants to sanitize our silverware before we leave and incinerate napkins and leftover food?

I believe in use of cameras on streets. I don't think that's an unreasonable invasion of privacy. If you are walking on the street, it is quite likely you will be seen so the cameras act like policemen that we can't afford to hire. But if this is allowed, it really limits what you can do without being tracked by government.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist and I'm not a criminal, so I don't have to worry about this. But what if they used this kind of information to track people that gathered together to speak out against the government? Wouldn't that be a violation of our rights to free speech and assembly?

So they've got three great 1 on 1 players. Doesn't that scream zone defense?

I've seen many players slowed down by the zone.

They will need Miller to shoot over the zone and loosen it up.

Everyone saw it with the Lakers during the season. They would lapse, lose interest, and lose the game. Playoff time rolls around and they get serious.

Now, they know they will have to maintain their intensity and take it up an even further notch in the playoffs. They can't lapse because they want to be flawless come playoff time.

Boston and Orlando will have to do the same, but they already have chemistry. I looks as though Boston will have the Big Three + One back and I would dare say that will be difficult for Miami. If Ray Allen is on he can kill you. (As a Laker fan, I know this all too well.)

Orlando, with Dwight, will control the paint.

So can the challenge of the Heat make real contenders better?

Here it is (and from a source I hope you find "reputable"):

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/07/07/apnewsbreak-e...

So there are two issues:

1. The government not fining Exxon and forcing them to clean up.

2. Exxon not self policing themselves (get away with what you can).

Now that "Me" can read the article, he/she can answer the questions.

Everything seems to be so negative. When people comment, it's usually an insult about another rather than a positive. And I don't mean because you disagree you're a hater. But when you disagree and insult you go down that path.

Example: People don't like Serena Williams. That's fine. But people calling her a man, insulting her looks, etc., that has nothing to do with her game and it's just "hating".

Same in politics: Look at the insults about Palin or Obama. Obviously people will disagree on their politics, but the insults, which have nothing to do with politics, what purpose do they serve?

Do people hate because the internet is anonymous? Or has hating grown in the real world? Do the two relate? (Does life imitate art or art imitate life kind of thing.)

Are you a hater?

Every serve he has to reach back and adjust. Can't Nike do something for him?

Commonly a $200,000 a year income is thrown about as rich.

Most of us look at that and say it's a lot, but they wouldn't consider it "rich".

Here's the thing, that's about four times the median income.

So does it mean that the median income puts us at the poor level and four times as much just gets you to the point of surviving easily? Do people at the median have to borrow extensively to scrape by?

And does making $200,000 mean that you still have to worry? Yeah you're making a lot, but you haven't escaped financial worries.

To be "rich" do you need to make ten times the median? Do that get you to the point of not worrying about money? Does being "rich" mean not worrying about money at all?

Could it be that we don't understand what "poor" is? Do we look at $44,000 a year and say that's great? Is it enough for an average household to live on?

Commonly a $200,000 a year income is thrown about as rich.

Most of us look at that and say it's a lot, but they wouldn't consider it "rich".

Here's the thing, that's about four times the median income.

So does it mean that the median income puts us at the poor level and four times as much just gets you to the point of surviving easily? Do people at the median have to borrow extensively to scrape by?

And does making $200,000 mean that you still have to worry? Yeah you're making a lot, but you haven't escaped financial worries.

To be "rich" do you need to make ten times the median? Do that get you to the point of not worrying about money? Does being "rich" mean not worrying about money at all?

Could it be that we don't understand what "poor" is? Do we look at $44,000 a year and say that's great? Is it enough for an average household to live on?

I'm not asking whether you think they should be treated differently (more or less taxes). I just wonder how people would define rich. If you could come up with a dollar amount, that would be great for comparison. Or something like "income four times the national average".

Thanks.

First the use of the preposition "from" in this case strike me as negative. Why is everything so negative?

Anyway here's the agenda:

1. Identify constitutionality of every new law: Require each bill to identify the specific provision of the Constitution that gives Congress the power to do what the bill does (82.03%).

2. Reject emissions trading: Stop the "cap and trade" administrative approach used to control pollution by providing economic incentives for achieving reductions in the emissions of pollutants. (72.20%).

3. Demand a balanced federal budget: Begin the Constitutional amendment process to require a balanced budget with a two-thirds majority needed for any tax modification. (69.69%)

4. Simplify the tax system: Adopt a simple and fair single-rate tax system by scrapping the internal revenue code and replacing it with one that is no longer than 4,543 words -- the length of the original Constitution.(64.9%).

5. Audit federal government agencies for constitutionality: Create a Blue Ribbon task force that engages in an audit of federal agencies and programs, assessing their Constitutionality, and identifying duplication, waste, ineffectiveness, and agencies and programs better left for the states or local authorities. (63.37%)

6. Limit annual growth in federal spending: Impose a statutory cap limiting the annual growth in total federal spending to the sum of the inflation rate plus the percentage of population growth. (56.57%).

7. Repeal the health care legislation passed on March 23, 2010: Defund, repeal and replace the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. (56.39%).

8. Pass an 'All-of-the-Above' Energy Policy: Authorize the exploration of additional energy reserves to reduce American dependence on foreign energy sources and reduce regulatory barriers to all other forms of energy creation. (55.5%).

9. Reduce Earmarks: Place a moratorium on all earmarks until the budget is balanced, and then require a 2/3 majority to pass any earmark. (55.47%).

10. Reduce Taxes: Permanently repeal all recent tax increases, and extend permanently the George W. Bush temporary reductions in income tax, capital gains tax and estate taxes, currently scheduled to end in 2011. (53.38%).

The percentages are the percent of online votes for each one used in creating the Contract.

I am a liberal and would like to see a lot of this. I only really disagree with 2 and 7, no tax and cap and getting rid of the health care legislation.

1 and 5 are not as needed and we might find that we may like some of those "unconstitutional" laws and agencies and we may want to have an amendment or two. I don't say get rid of those two, just don't assume that the result would be what you expect.

Also, I find it interesting that in something so obviously Conservative, only 56% said get rid of "Obamacare".

When you take into account inflation the federal tax, which hasn't increased since 1993, and better mileage vehicles, we are paying an all time low.

But God forbid we change that. And if you're worried about the money going to roads, just write it into law that it can't go anywhere else. But neither Democrats or Republicans would limit themselves the opportunity to spend.

My state has a transportation dilemma: too many repairs and upgrades needed and not enough money. To help, the outgoing Democratic governor closed some rest stops, an unpopular decision. The incoming Republican governor opened them back up. I just don't know where the money came from or what we'll be doing without.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/20...

I heard on the radio today (conservative) the implication that the Constitution is not a living document. I take this to mean that it is inerrant, much like the Bible.

If you believe that it is not a living document, at what point did this happen? After the 26th amendment or before?

If it is a living document, what changes are allowed? Everything?