Recent Comments

1. over 12 years ago on Michael Ramirez

   Odon is another typical clueless voter. The first 2 years of Prez O had a supermajority in both Senate and House in which no Republican votes were needed for anything!

2. about 13 years ago on Michael Ramirez

   From the treasurer of Mass.

   http://www.sfexaminer.com/node/81706

3. about 13 years ago on Michael Ramirez

   Here you go….not really bankrupting just $2B over est

   http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/v30n1/cpr30n1-1.html

4. about 13 years ago on Michael Ramirez

   You guys are not getting it.. Peace will fall too. Hence the dominos.

5. over 13 years ago on Michael Ramirez

   Actually 63 new repubs as of today. But they better behave themselves or else it may swing the other way next time. If Prez Obama is smart he will do what Prez Clinton did. Move to the center if he wants to be a 2 term prez. And for all you Bush haters he was right center. The Prescription bill and Child left behind were democratic ideas. He was no way a hard right Prez.

6. over 13 years ago on Michael Ramirez

   Jade said “worked so well under Clinton”… why yes..and Clinton became a centrist and was led by a Republican congress (took the house in ‘94)!

7. over 13 years ago on Michael Ramirez

   corporations are made up of people…yes that is correct

8. over 13 years ago on Michael Ramirez

   Do people really think the 14th was written that it’s intent was for illegal aliens to break US laws, then give birth to a child here and that child automatically becomes a citizen? You really think that was the plan. Does that make any common sense? Hey why pay taxes….that’s a law…if you can break it and don’t get caught after some stated time..you’re free to get away with it….right….

9. over 13 years ago on Michael Ramirez

   do as i say not as i do….

10. over 13 years ago on Michael Ramirez

    Ramirez is great. His work makes you think. Yes, he may be conservative leading (based on the the intent of the founding fathers). This one is not stating the founding fathers did not believe in those things. His intent is that the 14th amd was not to be used in this sense. You can not make the 14th or any other amd meet your agenda. You abuse the constitution. You using something that should not be used to justify your issue. If that was the case just about any issue you could do that with.

    I believe the whole gay marriage thing is a pissing match between gay activists vs the relegious fanatics. Each wants to justify their beliefs.

    A mutual agreement could have been reached. Make it a civil union instead of marriage with the same benefits (marriage penalty taxation!) and don’t force a church to change their beliefs if they refuse to marry the couple.

    But neither side would budge.