Steve

http://news.yahoo.com/republican-house-member-boycott-obama-speech-133225145.html Republican House Member to Boycott Obama Speech Here is Lamborn’s explanation to his constituents in its entirety: “This is the first SOTU speech Lamborn has passed on Congressman Lamborn has attended all the past SOTU addresses. As for what makes this year’s speech different, Congressman Lamborn but believes the President is in full campaign mode and will use the address as an opportunity to bash his political opponents. As far as he knows, he is the only Republican who will pass on attending SOTU. He is doing this on his own and is not trying to coordinate this with any other Members. Congressman Lamborn is doing this to send a clear message that he does not support the policies of Barack Obama, that they have hurt our country. Congressman Lamborn respects the President personally, and the office of the President. Congressman Lamborn is protesting Obama’s recent 'recess appointments' to the National Labor Relation’s Board and newly-created Consumer Protection Board. He is protesting Obama’s decision to reject the job-creating Keystone Pipeline. He is protesting the President’s draconian cuts to defense. Lamborn wants to send a strong, clear message that President Obama’s deficit spending cannot continue. Congressman Lamborn plans to watch the speech on television.†This particular part is complete bullshit: "Congressman Lamborn respects the President personally, and the office of the President." Why is the ones that claim to love America the most are so often the ones who do the most un-American things? Its his right not to attend. I hope he gets drummed out of office. Sadly, his constituents will applaud such behavior in all liklihood. Just like in the military, you respect the office if not the man. His excuse is bullshit. As bad as Nixon was you respected the office he was in. Dems had more far better reasons to boycott Bush. I don't care which party, its disrespectful and the Republican leadership should call him on it. This guy shows how partisan things are. To use such bullshit reasoning and having the temerity to do it shows just how far gone things are. It shows just how friggin' partisan some members of Congress are. Like the guy who planned that 'Liar' thingy last year. Can't all Republicans get through one State of the Union without incident? Democrats are not the ideal but they at least show more respect. Good grief.

http://news.yahoo.com/los-angeles-mayor-signs-porn-star-condom-requirement-024936401.html Los Angeles mayor signs porn star condom requirement LA just managed to reduce their own economy...again. The porn industry is safer than the general public. At least i know there is an attempt to test the porn star I'd bang but no testing of the girl I talk to at the club at 3am. LA treated the movie industry like shyt and drove jobs to Canada and other locales.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etta_James Surprised I didn't see Etta James on here. She was 're-discovered' when a Jaguar car commercial had her hit 'At Last' as its theme song. I didn't know who she was but loved the song. I asked my parents about her when I first heard it and my dad said I should know who she was but had my head filled up with that rap stuff to appreciate good music (sidenote: why am I sorry I ever ask them anything? They only criticize me...arghhh!!) Anyway, I read her life story and hers was basically a poster child story for how a lot of black singers career was in those days. Glad she could re-capture some popularity before she died.

The religious right is so much hypocritical bullshit. They are religious when its convenient in picking a candidate that is born again but aren't when it suits them. McCain has never been the religious type and by all accounts Obama was more 'christian' than he was. Romney is a mormon and Obama is a born again Christian. Obama is a Christian family man, as far as we know hasn't cheated and Newt has family issues and as far as we know as religious as most of you on here. Which isn't a criticism. Religion and your own personal family shouldn't be an issue anyway but they made it one and the show so much hypocracy over it. Same with the black churches as well. Lets be honest. The religious right are the fundamental white churches, often the huge mega ones and the big mega black churches support any Democrat and would take a jewish Dem or a gay atheist Dem over a born again Republican. Both are wrought with hypocracy.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/buffett-blames-congress-romneys-15-155000898.html Warren Buffett, the billionaire calling for more taxes on the rich, said Mitt Romney's U.S. tax rate of about 15 percent reflects poor laws rather than failings by the candidate for the Republican presidential nomination. What makes the lowering of the tax rates that Romney, Gingrich and Republicans in general so odious is that multi millionaires as well as corporations don't pay their rate. There are so many tax write offs and loop holes it makes the existing tax rate a non issue. All of them talk of lowering the corporate rate. How many corporations pay it? I'd be shocked if any of them do. Truly. The tax code and the loop holes are written by the big money companies. They write their own loopholes. Its always been that way. You don't even have to be rich. Years ago I had a "business" that mysteriously lost money each year until I could no longer write off losees then I "went out of business". Its always done. Write off rooms in your home as an home office, etc. The tax rates are bullshit for anyone making decent money. Years ago, I loved tax time because I always got a refund. All legal.

Its simple. The health industry as a collective (HMOs, the doctor guild the AMA, big Pharma, etc.) have successfully been able to not only buy off the politicians have also been able to brain wash the masses with the oft said phrase 'best medical care in the world' and not saying the rest '...if you're rich and its also the most expensive medical care in the world'. The republicans would rather leave it out as an issue. They are forced to address it only because Dems have made it an issue in years past. The republican solution is the 'free market' will lower prices. I don't think it will and if its done as such it will basically make adequate healthcare something only for the rich. Americans travel to India, Mexico, Thaiand, etc. for surgeries too expensive in America. Best medical care? Complete bullshit. Medical tourism is now part of our lexicon because people are priced out of healthcare in America. 80% at least of Americans don't have a passport so all they know is what is spoonfed to them. Those of us that do travel see the bullshit for what it is. We get our dental and other medical needs done when we're in the kingdom at a cheaper price.

Obama 47 Romney 41.5 Ohio http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/oh/ohio_romney_vs_obama-1860.html Obama 43 Romney 39.8 Pena. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/pa/pennsylvania_romney_vs_obama-1891.html Obama 42 Romney 46 Fla (11/11 dated poll) Obama 41 Romney 46 Mich (11/11 dated poll) *Romney's dad is a former governor there http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/11/21/romney_leads_obama_in_florida_michigan.html Obama 305 electoral points v. Romney 220 http://www.nationalpolls.com/2012/obama-vs-romney.html However it will be closer as they placed Floria in leading Dem and I don't see it. Its Romney or toss up at best right now for Obama in Florida.

As far as his economic plan I see nothing new or innovative. Its mostly the standard Republican platform. Lower corporate and capital gains taxes, let oil companies drill anywhere it wants for oil. Not that I don't want the corporate rate lowered. However, it does NOT create jobs nor does it stop foreign companies from investing in America. America is the biggest, richest market. Even the poor in America have a color tv set and amenities that middle class folks in 3rd world countries have. Go to a housing project parking lot and you can't find a parking space. American companies have always made money no matter how much you tax them. They are not hiring because they have no faith in the economy and have no faith the populace will spend. Its not because their taxes are too high. Oh, they'll say that when they are asked why they aren't hiring so they can make more money but its not the reason. As far as capital gains, of course it can be lowered but people who invest don't look at capital gains. I've invested. I've worked for brokerages in all levels and those that buy stocks buy it based on it being a good stock and don't buy it based on it being a bad stock. People don't say, "Hmmm...capital gains is too high so I won't buy XYZ stock" Thats BS. They expect to make a killing and will worry about how to get the profits without paying as much taxes later. Its not even a considearation. Many of you have bought and sold common stock and know this. As far as drilling willy nilly, my issue is that it makes us more reliant on oil and being an oil based economy. America is a major world oil producer already. New oil fields are discovered and drilled all the time around the gloe but we don't see the price of oil lowering. Its all bullshit. Oil companies use any issue in the middle east as an excuse to jack prices and we don't even get nearly as much oil from the region as we did in the past. We should moving AWAY from an oil based economy NOT getting more entrenched in it. Oil has been trouble for years now. We've gotten into wars over protecting our source and we're stuck our noses in regions politically because of it. I'm failing to see how lowering taxes creates jobs and not just makes companies richer? I'd like to do both, jobs and profits not just one sided. I don't see where Newt does that.

With almost 2 out of 3 bankruptcies tied to health costs, I think healthcare as an issue is of paramount importance. Newt on Heathcare: http://www.newt.org/solutions/healthcare Newt's plan to save lives and save money 1.Make health insurance more affordable and portable by giving Americans the choice of a generous tax credit or the ability to deduct the value of their health insurance up to a certain amount and by allowing Americans to purchase insurance across state lines, increasing price competition in the industry. 2.Create more choices in Medicare by giving seniors the option to choose, on a voluntary basis, a more personal system in the private sector with greater options for better care. This would create price competition to lower costs. 3.Reform Medicaid by giving states more freedom and flexibility to customize their programs to suit their needs with a block-grant program similar to the successful welfare reform of 1996. With that block grant, each state can focus on providing the assistance to low-income families that they each need to buy health insurance. 4.Cover the sickest with a High Risk Pool set up by each state to cover the uninsured who have become too sick to buy health insurance. 5.Protect consumers by reinforcing laws which prohibit insurers from cancelling or charging discriminatory rate increases to those who become sick while insured. 6.Extend Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) throughout the health care system. Everyone on Medicare and Medicaid should be free to choose an HSA for their coverage. All workers should be free to choose an HSA in place of their employer coverage if they desire. 7.Reward quality care by changing the Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement models to take into account the quality of the care delivered and incentivizing beneficiaries to seek out facilities that deliver the best care at the lowest costs. 8.Reward health and wellness by giving health plans, employers, Medicare, and Medicaid more latitude to design benefits to encourage, incentivize, and reward healthy behaviors. 9.Stop health care fraud by moving from a paper-based system to an electronic one. Health care fraud accounts for as much as much as 10 percent of all health care spending, according to the National Health Care Anti-Fraud Association. That's more than $200 billion a year. Compare this to the 0.1% fraud rate in the credit card industry thanks to its high-tech information analysis systems. 10.Stop junk lawsuits that drive up the cost of medicine with medical malpractice reform. 11.Speed medical breakthroughs to patients by reforming the Food and Drug Administration. 12.Inform patients and consumers of price and quality so they can make informed choices about how to spend their money on care. Patients have the right to know this information, but finding it is virtually impossible. 13.Invest in research for health solutions that are urgent national priorities. Medical breakthroughs--ones that prevent or cure disease rather than treating its symptoms--are a critical part of the solution to long-term budget challenges. More brain science research, for example, could lead to Alzheimer's Disease cures and treatments that could save the federal government over $20 trillion over the next forty years.

I am pretty much only focusing on Newt's ideas. I personally don't think he has the temperment for the highest office. But I'm willing to put those concerns aside if he has a better plan than Obama. Lets look at what Newt would like to do with the economy: http://money.cnn.com/2011/11/29/news/economy/newt_gingrich_plan/index.htm Gingrich wants to sharply reduce corporate tax rates, while reforming entitlement programs, the Food and Drug Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency. He wants to repeal the health care and Wall Street reform laws, while getting rid of estate and capital gains taxes, Sarbanes-Oxley and the Community Reinvestment Act. But wait, there's more to his plan... Gingrich wants to extend the Bush tax cuts, balance the budget, institute an optional flat tax, break up Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and reform the Federal Reserve. Here's a snapshot of what the country might look like under President Newt Gingrich: Corporate taxes Gingrich wants to reduce the corporate tax rate from 35% to 12.5% -- a move that would take the corporate tax rate from one of the highest in the industrialized world to one of the lowest. He argues that a drop of that magnitude would make the U.S. a much more attractive place to do business. But at the same time, the drastic reduction would leave an enormous hole in revenue collected by the government, making a balanced budget all the more difficult. Individual taxes Gingrich wants to add to the current tax code by putting an optional 15% flat tax on income in place. Similar to the plan proposed by Rick Perry, taxpayers would be able to choose whether to pay the flat tax, or file under the existing tax code. The new flat tax would boost growth, Gingrich says, while saving hundreds of billions in compliance costs. But tax experts have thrown cold water on that idea -- arguing that adding an additional tax option would necessitate the preparation of multiple returns to ensure the lowest rate. In addition, Gingrich would like to eliminate the estate and capital gains taxes. Federal government If Gingrich gets his way, the size of the federal government will shrink dramatically, and the agencies left over will do far less regulating. Gingrich wants to replace the Environmental Protection Agency -- which his website calls a "job-killing regulatory engine of higher energy prices" with an "Environmental Solutions Agency." He would replace the National Labor Relations Board and reform the Food and Drug Administration The Federal Reserve's mission would be pared back. No longer would the Fed be tasked with keeping unemployment in check. Instead, the central bank would be limited to a goal of "maintaining stable prices." Less regulation Gingrich is in favor of "very serious deregulation" and wants to repeal the Wall Street reform law that, among other things, authorizes regulation of the murky derivatives market. Sarbanes-Oxley, which laid down new regulations on public companies after major accounting scandals hit Enron, Tyco and others, would be wiped off the books. And Gingrich would remove bureaucratic and legal obstacles that prevent offshore drilling and oil shale development. Entitlement reform Gingrich favors the creation of optional private Social Security accounts for younger workers. He also wants to give states block grants to fund Medicaid. As for Medicare, Gingrich wants new private insurance options with a regular "premium support" payment. Gingrich would also shift all federal means tested welfare programs back to the states, which he said would "help millions move from dependency to prosperity while saving taxpayer trillions."

I don't use Newt's marital issues and his not serving to judge him. Plenty of noble men, who did good things weren't the best husbands (MLK, Jefferson, etc.). His military issue was 40 years ago. No way I hold someone to the same frame of mind as they did 40 years ago. We don't do it for Ali or Foreman, two beloved people now who changed. People can and do change. Its his views now that matters. I do worry about the history of those that didn't try to serve being so willing to send people into harms way. Probably some sort of compensating psychological thing going on. His rhetoric suggests he'll be quick to pull the trigger. With regards to the race, and I've read this in a few articles brave enough to say it. Romney's ONLY appeal to the Republicans is how he polls against Obama. It has NOTHING to do with his proposed policies. That reason is why I see the Republican party has no soul. Huntsman, Johnson, Paul have far better ideas and are far better qualified. I see how Mondale is treated historically and I was son the 'loser' bandwagon at one time until I read his bio. The guy would have made an honest president. A great one possibly. I see the Dems as the far better of two evils. The Dem voters could easily have made the safe bet with Hillary. She'd have won with ease but credit to the masses for going with someone who they saw with ideas. How he governed is not the point, they went with their hearts. Some Republicans have done that with the popularity of Cain and Gingrich but the heirarchy is rotten to the core. Winning is all that matters. How the country will be is a side issue.

HH, you're a smart guy. I know that first hand. "Shirley" you don't believe Obama is that bad. Republicans get worked into frenzies sometimes to the point it defies logic. I'm sure you've said the same about EVERY Democrat president ever, huh? lol.

This won't get anywhere but its needed http://sanders.senate.gov/petition/?uid=f1c2660f-54b9-4193-86a4-ec2c39342c6c

Okay, even though some of it is spliced and being a bit hyprocritical of Romney because I also stammer, its still funny. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/18/mitt-romney-south-carolina_n_1213944.html

A large segment of our scientific community are Asian, Middle Eastern or Indian/sub continent peoples and I would be surprised if the government didn't take a closer look at them to see if secrets were being sold or given to China, Iran, India or Pakistan. In fact, I'd be pissed if they weren't. This may sound strange or even hypocritical from a black American who has been the 'victim' of DWB (drving while black) or sometimes walking while black. I see a difference. For example, there was a highway cop in one of the southern states who had a high positive arrest rate because he stopped blacks and latinos driving cars with NY, Penna., and NJ plates. It was no secret growing up that you could get paid well driving 'packages' as we used to call them from Florida to the atlantic states. A smart cop would be wise to stop those cars because the stats would prove that the vast majority of drug couriers fit that profile (which makes me wonder why they didn't use other races and other states tags...lol). Anyway, big difference between that and stopping a black guy in a suit driving in a white neighborhood. Stats don't bear out that a black guy driving a benz or BMW commit crimes in white neighborhoods. Those stops to me are based on prejudice/racism rather than logical police tactics. I've been stopped in my white shirt and tie in white neighborhoods. I was angry about it. If I get stopped in Georgia on my way back to Philly with Pennsyvania plates, I'm blaming the black guys acting as couriers rather than the cops for my being singled out. So, that's where I draw the line and make the difference. Jewish Americans have been passing secrets to Israel for years. My guess from what I've read is that they view helping Israel as non threatening to America because we are allies. As opposed to us helping Russia for example. I think the Chinese Americans helping China is partially for the money and partially dual allegiences. I've read that the Chinese military's ability (or soon to be ability) to reach the western U.S. with a missile attack was from stolen and/or sold technology. PS: I've long advocated all NY Yankees and Man United fans be watched closey as well. Tottenham fans shouldn't even be hired in the first place.

Its actually a good reason to piss off Rupert Murdoch... http://news.yahoo.com/rupert-murdoch-turns-twitter-attack-obama-175645674.html Media baron Rupert Murdoch used his new Twitter account this weekend to attack the Obama Administration's opposition to parts of proposed legislation designed to combat Internet piracy. "So Obama has thrown in his lot with Silicon Valley paymasters who threaten all software creators with piracy, plain thievery," News Corp's chairman and chief executive officer posted on his personal Twitter account Saturday. Murdoch, whose media empire includes Fox TV, The Wall Street Journal, Fox Studios and the Sun newspaper in Britain, continued with several tweets, attacking Google as the "Piracy leader" for streaming movies free. In later tweets he called Google a "great company." Google said it did not appreciate Murdoch's comment even after he back-peddled with a compliment. "This is just nonsense," Samantha Smith, a Google spokesperson, said in an emailed statement. "Last year we took down 5 million infringing Web pages from our search results and invested more than $60 million in the fight against bad ads. Like many other tech companies, we believe that there are smart, targeted ways to shut down foreign rogue websites without asking U.S. companies to censor the Internet."

You're possibly gay if this has any meaning to you. New Year, New Looks For Justin Bieber And Selena Gomez http://awards.music.yahoo.com/blog/135-new-year-new-looks-for-justin-bieber-and-selena-gomez?nc

This would be one of several reasons NOT to vote for such a candidate if they have such an asanine ad. Gingrich hits Romney for knowing how to speak French http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/gingrich-hits-romney-knowing-speak-french-150300235.html During his college years in the 1960s, Mitt Romney spent two years as a Mormon missionary in France. Now, Newt Gingrich is trying to use that time abroad against him. A new web ad released by Newt Gingrich's campaign titled "The French Connection" compares Romney to other politicians from Massachusetts, including former governor Michael Dukakis and Sen. John Kerry, both former Democratic presidential nominees. The "French Connection" of the ad's title? In a parting shot, the voiceover explains: "Just like John Kerry," the voice in the ad says, "he speaks French too!"

Scientist sentenced for selling chemical secrets to Chinese http://news.yahoo.com/scientist-sentenced-selling-chemical-secrets-chinese-234749316.html Wen Chyu Liu, also known as David Liou, was convicted February 7, 2011 of stealing and selling secrets about Dow Chemical's Tyrin chlorinated polyethylene (CPE) process. The process is used to manufacture automotive and industrial hoses, electrical cable jackets and vinyl siding. He also was convicted of perjury for lying to cover up his involvement in a conspiracy that included at least four of his coworkers. He was sentenced on Thursday in US District Court in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. In addition to the prison sentence, Liu, 75, must forfeit $600,000 and pay a $25,000 fine. Liu came to the United States from China as a graduate university student. He started working as a research scientist for Dow Chemical in 1965 and retired in 1992. Liu was based at the company's Plaquemine, Louisiana facility to develop elastomers, including Tyrin CPE. There have been far worse secrets sold as well. I think its far worse than we know and this includes Dept of Defense and strategic defense issues as well. No proof but I read an article several years ago about the army of hackers the Chinese have and that they may be able to render us non operational as a country by being able to shut down transportion, communication and defense abilities either through a virus or control from distance.

Interesting... Obama's olive branch to Iran turned into sanctions hammer http://news.yahoo.com/obamas-olive-branch-iran-turned-sanctions-hammer-203803187.html strategy is pretty good. Foreign policy was supposed to be his weakness but its been pretty good overall. I think foreign policy isn't too complex once you get an objective view of both sides of an issue. Maybe I'm naive but there are a lot of things discussed on this site that after reading comments from members who are knowledgeable about it and its debated, a good policy could be reached.

I would assume it could be successfully fought in court but the court costs may not justify it. I would have to assume their trade/lobby group can show the stupidity of it but wouldn't bet the gov't will act with reason.

Here's my quandry. I hate that Obama is for it and would gladly not vote for him because of that and other things. So, can HH, Flash and others tell me that Romney, Perry or Gingrich (the likely nominees) would NOT have signed it or even worse backed a stronger version of it? As far as civil liberties it seems to be Paul or no one, with regards to the major candidates. The inconsistency in the Obama thrashing (and its deserved) is that 'your' man is worse. Which shows us how f*cked up the country is given the choices we have.

Jules, I've been saying for years it was Volcker but Reagan got the credit. The sitting president gets the credit or the blame. What did Reagan accomplish economically? He made us a debtor nation.

The reasons may be that both Presidents were not the ones the party elites wanted. They were both outsiders and thereby not trusted. Also, Carter was aloof. He was not personable. Tip O'Neil the long time Dem head of the house actually got along with fellow Irishman Reagan than Carter. He did not like Carter at all. Obama hasn't forgotten that the entire Democratic leadership backed Hillary. They backed him only when they had to. It may also be his governing style as well.

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2011/12/20111229175312305398.html Generally speaking, the pro-Israeli adage and sound-bites are the brainchild of Israel lobbyists and Republican like Frank Luntz. But even Luntz has warned: "Don’t pretend that Israel is without mistakes or fault. It’s not true and no one believes it". In his how-to-market-Israel guide, he adds, "We’re at a time in history when Jews in general (and Israelis in particular) are no longer perceived as the persecuted people. In fact, among American and European audiences -sophisticated, educated, opinionated, non-Jewish audiences - Israelis are often seen as the occupiers and the aggressors. With that kind of baggage, it is critical that messages from the pro-Israel spokespeople not come across as supercilious or condescending." "You can be sure that Gingrich did not care a whit for what Palestinians, here or in the US, would think. The Palestinian vote will not decide swing states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, or, above all, Florida; a considerable shift in the Jewish vote could." Alas, there is no other point to this stupid statement. As Remnick said, Gingrich is ready to go very far to promote himself such as claiming that: "People like me are what stand between us and Auschwitz." And yet, he has a lot of catching up to do with House Majority Leader, Eric Cantor, an ardent Republican Jewish supporter of Israel who reckons "the 2,000-year-old dream of a Jewish state is in jeopardy, the Palestinian culture is infused with hatred and the international community is replete with anti-Semitic vitriol". He and the other Republican leaders and candidates speak of Israel as if it is the only country in the Middle East; as the only reliable ride in a sea of tyranny. As if nothing changed over the last year, alas. The Republicans have gone so far out, that Israel’s own friends and supporters in the US, have been repulsed including the J street lobby. ...So fearsome, it is referred to simply as "The Lobby". It’s not only what the Lobby can do to help, but more importantly what it could do to destroy a politician. The Lobby has been quite irresponsible in the way it throws its weight in Washington in recent years. Back in 1992, then Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, told the Lobby, for lack of better word, to shut up. In recent days, the Lobby has alienated some of Israel’s own friends among the US elite, including some in the organised American Jewish community. The New York Times widely-read columnist Thomas Friedman wrote: "I sure hope that Israel’s prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, understands that the standing ovation he got in Congress this year was not for his politics. That ovation was bought and paid for by the Israel lobby." Friedman stated the obvious, but also touched a nerve. This is a very touchy subject. However, it is part of the presidential selection process. All the politicians try and 'out Irsael' each other. This is done at the expense of fairness in dealing with the middle east issues. I'm a Christian. A born again Christian and a Zionist. Okay...okay...more accurately, I'm a hypocritical, whore mongering born again Christian. Happy? My views on Israel becoming a country can not be defended logically. Its from my view of the bible and I empathize with those who not only do not share that view but also say it should not be used as a reason for it to become a state since not everyone believes what the book I hold sacred as true. Totally agree. I do try and be fair with regards to the issues presently and the facts that I see is that Israel is too often a bully and antogonist when it settles into areas that are Palestinian and takes away water rights and the like. Israel does some things right but should also be criticized and dare I say, reprimanded for some things it does wrong. I hold our nation dear and the process to choose a leader as well. What I think is abysmal is that not only our foreign policy but our candidates are basing their view on what Jewish voters in states such as Florida primarily will think or do. I have always had a sympathetic view of Jews. Primarily my beliefs, my parents are zionists as they believe scrhipture and we both share a history of slavery and coming out of the bondages of slavery. However, due to our modern histories of slavery and Jim Crow for blacks and rampant and blatant anti semistism and genocide for Jews many Blacks and Jews have become hypersensitive with regards to ANY criticism and view it as racist/anti-semitic. Jews have a far less case in America than Blacks given the successes they have but Blacks have also had meteoric rise as well. I would think no one who was of age in the '60s, my parents included, and they are a most optimstic pair, would envision the current success of Blacks in America including the Presidency. My parents didn't think I'd live long enough to see a Black president. The political process is corrupted. Not only the Jewish vote, but the Cuban vote in Florida runs our policy towards Cuba. Its has to stop. The influence has to stop. There needs to be enough Jews, Blacks, Cubans of more sober minds as well as enough of the rest of Americans to nullify the hyper sensitivity vote of the aforemeontioned groups.