The current batch of candidates aren't too keen on taking up the cause because they will lose supporter funds. Those big money supporters are banks, developers, industry-types… essentially more of the same, which we can expect of our economy.

As for the war, why expend precious lives and blow material and cash we can use here? I'm not saying become America First isolationists, just that we must remove the plank from our own eye before identifying the mote in the eye of the world.

And what of Al Qaeda? Should we worry? Of course, but does anyone really believe our efforts in Iraq quell Islamic fundamentalism while our 'allies' in Pakhistan are harboring key fundamentalist figures?

So here we are. The solutions: make companies pay fairly and make them pay dearly for going Absent Without Responsibility, make banks and big construction suffer for offering the drug and then ravaging the addict, bring the troops home and stop paying for blood and armor, and give the American debtor, who has more credit cards than hope, a light at the end of their rolling-balance tunnel. Do some or all of these things and then money can be spent on “stuff.”

Too bad the Republicans seem to be backing a candidate who claims Americans are OK with US troops in Iraq for the next 100 years. The few anti-war candidates were summarily dismissed by the MSM even before they gave up the fight. Both Obama and Clinton voted again and again to fund the war and seem to have no real plans for bring the US soldiers out of the Middle East. No one bothers to remind us that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are costing between 12 and 15 billion dollars a month. Perhaps we need to just declare “We Won”, and bring the troops home.

Trenton's motto, by the way, is “What Trenton makes, the world takes”. Trenton doesn't make much anymore.

Can't stress this enough: Social Security is the system that supports those who have worked to build the vitality of this country. If we had the jobs, we still would and it wouldn't be entitlement because we'd earn it honestly.

Sure, we need to compete with the flat world. I read Friedman's book too. But to get all Biblical here, we need to remove our plank in order to address the world's mote. We have to fix our markets, our economy, our workforce, and then we'll be able to take our place with strength in the world market again.

And what the hell, maybe the dollar could rival the euro once more! Sure would make those import Radiohead CDs a hell of a lot cheaper!

I hark back to those days when all the good little leftists were crying about how only evil rich white men could partake of home ownership and how lending standards should be relaxed so all could enjoy the benefits of home ownership whether they could afford it or not. I'm sure Jesse Jackson and the Al Sharpton would be whining had those new loan packages not been offered.

BTW, are you aware of the recent study by the Mortgage Asset Research Institute in Reston, Va which found that 60 percent of people who signed up for no-documentation loans overstated their income by 50 percent or more? But hey, I guess Uncle Sam made them lie, huh?

Exposing the truth about LIAR LOANS

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesst...

BTW, if we had the jobs back as you say, how would our manufacturing compete with someone in a global economy making $5/day?

And people living above their means is why the subprime debacle occurred, as I previously stated. The government was responsible for making sure mortgage companies weren't, as I said, offering the drug and then ravaging the addict. The government turned a blind eye and let the bubble happen, fearing the killing of the golden goose, yet screwing the future to humor the present.

Government is responsible for those they govern, like it or not. We elect them to be proper stewards (you can tell I'm all about the New Deal, right?). The current administration is then accused of being improper in that task and the next administration, if they're at all interested in pulling this bird back up, had better address those mistakes.