Now, I don't have any statistical evidence on union membership and their respective income brackets. So, my question is, since the majority of members of labor unions are made up of service employee's, factory workers, and transportation employee's, wouldn't those people BE the middle class of America?

I don't know if they are or not, I need evidence and I'm not entirely sure where to find it. But if they are, wouldn't that mean that Republican and conservatives really are declaring war on the middle class by declaring war on unions? I realize that union leadership can sometimes be going in one direction while their members want or need them to go in another but for the most part, are they not representing people against gigantic corporations? I also realize that unions can cause headaches for smaller companies that don't have the resources of larger corporations but is this reason enough to get rid of them? With such consolidated power that you find in a large corporation, don't the people need a tool to defend themselves against exploitation and unfair employment practices? That was what unions where invented to deal with in the first place and I don't think the need is gone, even in this modern age.

I think it's absolutely disgusting that Walmart refuses to allow unions. I completely understand why they refuse, from their perspective. It would cost them money and their profits would fall. I just think that the employees of a company that work hard to make it profitable deserve to share in that profit to a reasonable amount.

Some will say unions drive companies to move overseas. It would be complicated, but I think that any company that is based in America that shuts down an American factory to ship the same jobs overseas should be made to pay a tax. Tax the hell out of those companies whose profits are more important than anything else. Capitalism is great but it's also heartless and greedy and unfettered capitalism is NOT our friend(unless you're super rich).

I was listening to the Glenn Beck program on Earth Day this year and had a bit of an epiphany. The man is a victim of probably frequent toxic fume inhalation, most likely on purpose. It seems some of his serious fans are the same way. I listened to these glorious nitwits call up his show one by one and celebrate the fact that they were being extra pollutive on Earth Day. One caller said he was a landscaper, and on Beck's suggestion, he started all his landscaping equipment just to let it idle needlessly. Beck also suggested that he rev the engine of his car, also needlessly. Another caller was proud that she had to let her semi-truck idle while she was waiting for her load to arrive. Now, it's one thing if you're not environmentally conscious(even though I think we ALL should be). But to make it a point to pollute the environment more than you normally would on a day meant to highlight the importance of the opposite is just plain childish and stupid. I know that these callers, and Beck himself, thought they were being rebelious and clever, but they were doing so in the way a 7th grader would. Like "My teacher said not to waste paper so I'm going to crumple up 20 sheets of it and throw it in the trash. Look at me everyone, I'm funny and rebelious!".

Just because being environmentally conscious is mostly seen as a liberal thing to do does not mean that opposing it should be done by being a giant douchebag on purpose.

I've heard many reasons why the stimulus is a bad idea. Concerns about paying for it and our children's future suffering because of it should not be swept under the rug. What I haven't heard are the opposing ideas, other than of course, precious tax cuts.

The financial crisis the world, not just us anymore, faces cannot be blamed on any one entity. Sure, some people may have gotten loans that they could not afford, and the lending institutions may have been under some pressure to give them because of CRA, but that is not, by far, the only cause of this situation. Frankly, I'm sick of hearing about how irresponsible people borrowing too much money caused this because it shows a complete lack of depth when it comes to understanding a complex problem like the crisis. I'm also quite sick of hearing that the businesses that contributed to this crisis should not really be blamed because "they were just trying to make money", because that's what they do. No. We don't exornerate a kleptomaniac when they steal just because that is what they do, because that is their nature. We hold them accountable. I don't care if you're in business to make money. When the actions you take to make money directly hurt the economy and many people unreleated to your business, you've acted wrongly and need to be held accountable. Greed and Capitalism are not a get-out-blame-free card.

President Obama's answer to the crisis has been the stimulus, and reassuraning the fragile confidence of this country that we will pull through. The stimulus is absolutely flawed in some areas. Personally, I think it should have had more tax cuts. However, tax cuts alone are not the answer and almost never are. There needs to be more accountability for corporations. If you're a corporation acting responsibly, regulations should not be a problem for you. It's only when you want to undercut the system, to make money in any way possible regardless of effects, that regulations get to be a snag. I think it's universally naive to think that our system could work without government regulation. Greed is as much a part of humanity as breathing and it's not going away. The only solution left is to take actions to limit it's effect. Regulations are absolutely necessary to protect people that do not have the ability to protect themselves. That is what government is supposed to do. Stand up for the little guy.

So, Republicans and conservatives, what are your ideas on what to do about the crisis? Tax cuts, I know. What else? Do you have anything else besides the tired and disproven methods that you always fall back on, and that always seem to benefit the rich more than anyone else? The country is listening, we'd love to hear your ideas, instead of just your "no's" and obstructionism.

Get rid of the congressional Democrats like Pelosi, Reid, and the two fools who spoke publicly in favor of the Fairness Doctrine. Somebody stuff a sock in Bill Clinton's mouth. I am having a hard time comprehending the thought process of these dimwits who actually think America wants or needs the Fairness Doctrine. At least Bush had the "courtesy" to subvert our civil rights in the shadows. These Democrats are trying to do it right in front of our faces and are convinced that regulating talk radio will solve their problems. If the Fairness Doctrine actually gets reenacted, goodbye Democratic majority, hello Republican no-holds barred big business butt kissing.

I hate to say it but I have to side with Limbaugh, Hannity, and the rest of the right wing loonies in their denigration of this travesty of politics. Democrats, you have no idea how mad you make me by making me have to say that.

We need a moderate political party in the U.S. Some of the Democrats have gone off of the deep end, squandering almost immediately the mandate they had somewhat earned with Obama's election victory. I think Obama's presidency will suffer because these Democrats who are tasting majority power for the first time are going completely crazy. I've always been wary of Nancy Pelosi. I can usually somewhat agree with her positions and opinions, but in the last year she has just taken a turn out into Crazyville. She needs to be voted out immediately in 2010 along with Harry Reid. Why is it that the Democrats, who are the only viable option if you don't want a Republican run government that kisses the tookus's of the religious right and giant corporations, seek to destroy themselves as soon as they are in a position to do some good. What a bunch of fools.

I think Obama is running into some snags because he's underestimated the idiocy of the congressional Democrats. I think these early missteps of his will be a learning experience for him and he will grow into a great president once he becomes comfortable. Some would say they told you so, that he's inexperienced. Obama's inexperience is still better than an experienced Republican government by far, and absolutely better than a conservative one.

I plan on quitting smoking in the spring. I quit for 2 months last year in the spring and I want to try again, preferably for a much longer time, if not indefinitely.

I have two major reasons. One, I have a fiance and children now, and I don't want to keep hurting myself and then years down the road have them have to suffer through the damage I've caused to myself with me. I want to be around as long as possible with them. Two, quite frankly, it's affecting my singing. I go out once a week to sing karaoke at a local bar. There's a group of maybe 5-10 regulars that are good singers and we all go out and sing our favorite songs. In the interests of full disclosure of course, I am one of the better singers there. I remember how much I improved in the two months that I'd quit smoking. I miss it.

I don't know why I decided to put this in my Townhall blog. Maybe it's because it's really the only blog of any type that I have. Or, it's a liberal conspiracy to show conservatives that people with liberal views are real humans too! ;)

While posting in a thread about energy, I began thinking about a scenario.

Lets say, hypothetically, a technological advancement gives us the ability to power our cars with a Mr. Fusion device(from Back To The Future 2). We can power our cars with trash. We no longer need mass amounts of oil to make gasoline. What happens to the oil producing countries whose main export, and often the biggest of a limited number of resources, is no longer in demand?

I have a question for conservatives.

Lets say that the federal government gets rid of all the programs that conservatives have problems with i.e. Department of Education, welfare, health insurance, etc. Because of this, the federal government lowers the income tax rate considerably. Once the federal government no longer handles those issues and it is up to the states to do it, would you have a problem with the states raising their tax rates to help pay for the things the federal government no longer does? What if you paid the same amount of taxes, only the bulk of your taxes go to your state and not to the federal government?

It's a rare occurance that Rush Limbaugh says something that isn't just cheerleading for conservative idealology. But even hot air balloons come down out of the clouds sometimes.

His recent proposal on what to do with the stimulus package makes a lot of sense. Split it up so that it is 50% funding for projects and 50% stimulus in the form of tax cuts. That seems to make a lot of sense to me and it would certainly help Obama in the eyes of a lot of more conservative voters.

The only problem I have is whether it would actually work or whether Limbaugh threw this proposal out there, knowing it would fail, in the hopes that Obama's team would bite since he seems to hope Obama will fail.

You can't really trust that man to give you straight up advice but I think some attention should still be given to his idea.

I don't "like" abortion. I don't think it's awesome and I don't want more abortions like some on the right would accuse pro-choicers of wanting. I may not like abortion but I think it's the mother's choice to make. I would probably support parental notification laws. I support the partial-birth abortion ban, as long as it makes exceptions for the mother's health. In fact, I think the law should limit the availability of abortion to the first 3 or 4 monthes of pregnancy, with exceptions of course for extenuating circumstances. Three or four monthes is a fair amount of time for the mother to make the decision on whether or not she wants to continue her pregnancy. I do not, however, support any law that limits a mother's access to an abortion if she has decided she wants one, including state and local laws. Abortion may be a hot issue but think about the precedant. A state passes a law banning abortion, a legitimate medical procedure no matter how you feel about it. What happens if the people decide that chemotherapy is also against their beliefs because it goes against God's plan in some way. Should the state be allowed to pass a law that bans chemotherapy, another legitimate medical procedure? I realize that a pregnancy is not life threatening like cancer(in most cases) and I'm not trying to draw a parallel between abortion and chemotherapy beyond that they are legitimate medical procedures.

I also support the right of doctors and other medical workers to decline to participate in an abortion if they are uncomfortable with it. However, I think that right should be limited to abortion only. It should not apply to birth control and contraception or any other aspect. I think it's wrong for a doctor to refuse to provide an abortion but also refuse to provide information or access to things which might prevent pregnancy and prevent the need for an abortion in the first place. I understand people have religious beliefs that run contrary to contraception and birth control but I line has to be drawn. If you're someone that does not agree with birth control, don't get a job where you may have to deal with it. Your religious beliefs don't trump the rights of other people to receive quality and effective medical information and services. If a doctor refuses to provide an abortion, he/she should at least provide a refferal to somewhere that will.

I'm not sure if man-made global warming is real or not. Perhaps it's not. Perhaps we lack the evidence to say either way.

I have to admit, I wanted it to be true. Or at least, I wanted people to take it seriously. Doing so would have produced many beneficial things such as increased investment and consideration of alternative energy, more regulation of polluters, and a general increase in the push for responsibility in taking care of the planet. I realize pollution controls are expensive but does that really mean we shouldn't inact them? Cancer treatment is expensive too. What will be even more expensive is when we have polluted the world to the point where we can no longer survive.

Argue what you will about global warming, but no one can deny that spilling millions of tons of harmful carcinogenic toxic material into the air, the water, and the ground is bad for the earth and bad for people. It will come back to haunt us. I'm an advocate of doing something about it now instead of after it's too late.

I just read a news story stating that Joe The Plumber is going to become a war correspondant for the website pjtv.com. He is going to Israel to report on the ongoing conflict stating that he wants to get the story from the "average joes" in Israel.

I don't have a problem with this at all, I just find it funny that everyone was defending Joe The Plumber from all the attention he received after McCain brought him into the election conversation and now it seems that Joe liked the attention so much, he wants more.

So, I see that Senator Harry Reid has stated he will refuse to seat Roland Burris who was appointed to fill Barack Obama's vacant Illinois senate seat. Obviously, given the evidence and charges against Governor Blagojevich, any appointment he makes must be questioned and investigated to make sure it is on the up-and-up. I'm not totally against Harry Reid's refusal to seat him if he was insisting on an investigation. What I don't like is the Democratic leadership's opposite stance on Al Franken. In what appears to be obvious missteps in the election board's recount and investigation, there is a legitimate cloud of doubt over whether Franken really is the winner in Minnesota. Why then does the Democratic leadership not refuse to seat him until there is no doubt that he won legally?

I've never believed the Democrats were above the fray when it comes to politics and shady tricks that come with it. What disappoints me to no end is that they are ruining the chances they have. The Democratic leadership strategy seems to always be; Win and then repeatedly stab themselves in the gut.

Pelosi, Reid, and Shumer, get the heck out of Congress please! For the sake of the pary and the country. Your credibility ebbs with each passing day and you provide more and more ammunition for the tin-foil hat wearing conservative right to fire at you and their criticism is becoming more and more legitimate. The Democratic victory in this past election is bigger than you and you MUST realize you're more of a liability and a hindrence now than you are a help.

To the issue at hand, either seat them both or refuse to seat them both. Choosing one and not the other makes you look like a jackass.

In defense of the Democrats, I would rather have a fractured party than a united party(Republicans) pushing for very bad idea's. So, I don't want to hear any "told ya so's". I'd take Pelosi and Reid over McConnell or any of the other Republican stooges any day.

I think that I am sick of Harry Reid. I don't disagree with him on policy usually but the man is just untactful and weak. Did he really need to come on the record and say that he was glad that smelly tourists wouldn't be in the Capital building anymore?

I think we need to get rid of Pelosi too. Again, I don't usually disagree with her on policy but she's creating more flack for the Democrats over her methods than she is over their policies. I think it's time to get some younger blood into the leadership positions of the Democrats. Or at the very least, more professional and less divisive people. I would love to see Russ Feingold in some type of leadership position. I've been very impressed with Henry Waxman.

Unfortunately, I think Pelosi and Reid are hurting the Democrats more than they are helping.

1)   Which of the following are the inalienable rights referred to in the Declaration of Independence?

A. life, liberty, and property

B. honor, liberty, and peace

C. liberty, health, and community

D. life, respect, and equal protection

E. life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness

2)   In 1933 Franklin Delano Roosevelt proposed a series of government programs that became known as:

A. the Great Society

B. the Square Deal

C. the New Deal

D. the New Frontier

E. supply-side economics

3)   What are the three branches of government?

A. executive, legislative, judicial

B. executive, legislative, military

C. bureaucratic, military, industry

D. federal, state, local

4)   What was the main issue in the debates between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen A. Douglas in 1858?

A. Is slavery morally wrong?

B. Would slavery be allowed to expand to new territories?

C. Do Southern states have the constitutional right to leave the union?

D. Are free African Americans citizens of the United States?

5)   The United States Electoral College:

A. trains those aspiring for higher political office

B. was established to supervise the first televised presidential debates

C. is otherwise known as the U.S. Congress

D. is a constitutionally mandated assembly that elects the president

E. was ruled undemocratic by the Supreme Court

6)   The Bill of Rights explicitly prohibits:

A. prayer in public school

B. discrimination based on race, sex, or religion

C. the ownership of guns by private individuals

D. establishing an official religion for the United States

E. the president from vetoing a line item in a spending bill

7)   What was the source of the following phrase: “Government of the people, for the people, by the people”?

A. the speech “I Have a Dream”

B. Declaration of Independence

C. U.S. Constitution

D. Gettysburg Address

8)   In 1935 and 1936 the Supreme Court declared that important parts of the New Deal were unconstitutional. President Roosevelt responded by threatening to:

A. impeach several Supreme Court justices

B. eliminate the Supreme Court

C. appoint additional Supreme Court justices who shared his views

D. override the Supreme Court’s decisions by gaining three-quarter majorities in both houses of Congress

9)   Under Our Constitution, some powers belong to the federal government. What is one power of the federal government?

A. Make treaties

B. Make zoning laws

C. Maintain prisons

D. Establish standards for doctors and lawyers

10)   Name one right or freedom guaranteed by the first amendment.

A. Right to bear arms

B. Due process

C. Religion

D. Right to counsel

11)   What impact did the Anti-Federalists have on the United States Constitution?

A. their arguments helped lead to the adoption of the Bill of Rights

B. their arguments helped lead to the abolition of the slave trade

C. their influence ensured that the federal government would maintain a standing army

D. their influence ensured that the federal government would have the power to tax

12)   Which of the following statements is true about abortion?

A. it was legal in most states in the 1960s

B. the Supreme Court struck down most legal restrictions on it in Roe v. Wade

C. the Supreme Court ruled in Plessy v. Ferguson that underage women must notify their parents of an impending abortion

D. the National Organization for Women has lobbied for legal restrictions on it

E. it is currently legal only in cases of rape or incest, or to protect the life of the mother

13)   Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, and Aquinas would concur that:

A. all moral and political truth is relative to one’s time and place

B. moral ideas are best explained as material accidents or byproducts of evolution

C. values originating in one’s conscience cannot be judged by others

D. Christianity is the only true religion and should rule the state

E. certain permanent moral and political truths are accessible to human reason

14)   The Puritans:

A. opposed all wars on moral grounds

B. stressed the sinfulness of all humanity

C. believed in complete religious freedom

D. colonized Utah under the leadership of Brigham Young

E. were Catholic missionaries escaping religious persecution

15)   The phrase that in America there should be a “wall of separation” between church and state appears in:

A. George Washington’s Farewell Address

B. the Mayflower Compact

C. the Constitution

D. the Declaration of Independence

E. Thomas Jefferson’s letters

16)   In his “I Have a Dream” speech, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.:

A. argued for the abolition of slavery

B. advocated black separatism

C. morally defended affirmative action

D. expressed his hopes for racial justice and brotherhood

E. proposed that several of America’s founding ideas were discriminatory

17)   Sputnik was the name given to the first:

A. telecommunications system

B. animal to travel to space

C. hydrogen bomb

D. manmade satellite

18)   Susan B. Anthony was a leader of the movement to

A. guarantee women the right to vote in national elections

B. guarantee former slaves the right to vote

C. ensure that harsher laws against criminals were passed

D. reduce the authority of the Constitution of the United States

19)   The Scopes “Monkey Trial” was about:

A. freedom of the press

B. teaching evolution in the schools

C. prayer in the schools

D. education in private schools

20)   Who is the commander in chief of the U.S. military?

A. Secretary of the army

B. Secretary of state

C. President

D. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs

21)   Name two countries that were our enemies during World War II.

A. Canada and Mexico

B. Germany and Japan

C. England and Spain

D. China and Russia

22)   What part of the government has the power to declare war?

A. Congress

B. the president

C. the Supreme Court

D. the Joint Chiefs of Staff

23)   In October 1962 the United States and the Soviet Union came close to war over the issue of Soviet:

A. control of East Berlin

B. missiles in Cuba

C. support of the Ho Chi Minh regime in Viet Nam

D. military support of the Marxist regime in Afghanistan

24)   In the area of United States foreign policy, Congress shares power with the:

A. president

B. Supreme Court

C. state governments

D. United Nations

25)   Free enterprise or capitalism exists insofar as:

A. experts managing the nation’s commerce are appointed by elected officials

B. individual citizens create, exchange, and control goods and resources

C. charity, philanthropy, and volunteering decrease

D. demand and supply are decided through majority vote

E. government implements policies that favor businesses over consumers

26)   Business profit is:

A. cost minus revenue

B. assets minus liabilities

C. revenue minus expenses

D. selling price of a stock minus its purchase price

E. earnings minus assets

27)   Free markets typically secure more economic prosperity than government’s centralized planning because:

A. the price system utilizes more local knowledge of means and ends

B. markets rely upon coercion, whereas government relies upon voluntary compliance with the law

C. more tax revenue can be generated from free enterprise

D. property rights and contracts are best enforced by the market system

E. government planners are too cautious in spending taxpayers’ money

28)   A progressive tax:

A. encourages more investment from those with higher incomes

B. is illustrated by a 6% sales tax

C. requires those with higher incomes to pay a higher ratio of taxes to income

D. requires every income class to pay the same ratio of taxes to income

E. earmarks revenues for poverty reduction

29)   A flood-control levee (or National Defense) is considered a public good because:

A. citizens value it as much as bread and medicine

B. a resident can benefit from it without directly paying for it

C. government construction contracts increase employment

D. insurance companies cannot afford to replace all houses after a flood

E. government pays for its construction, not citizens

30)   Which of the following fiscal policy combinations would a government most likely follow to stimulate economic activity when the economy is in a severe recession?

A. increasing both taxes and spending

B. increasing taxes and decreasing spending

C. decreasing taxes and increasing spending

D. decreasing both taxes and spending

31)   International trade and specialization most often lead to which of the following?

A. an increase in a nation’s productivity

B. a decrease in a nation’s economic growth in the long term

C. an increase in a nation’s import tariffs

D. a decrease in a nation’s standard of living

32)   Which of the following is a policy tool of the Federal Reserve?

A. raising or lowering income taxes

B. increasing or decreasing unemployment benefits

C. buying or selling government securities

D. increasing or decreasing government spending

33)   If taxes equal government spending, then:

A. government debt is zero

B. printing money no longer causes inflation

C. government is not helping anybody

D. tax per person equals government spending per person

E. tax loopholes and special-interest spending are absent

This is my first entry into this blog. I'm not really writing anything quite yet. If you want to know a little about me and my views, read my biography. I consider myself somewhat in the lion's den having a blog and posting comments here on Townhall.com since my views tend to lean left. I like it here though because I don't want to surround myself with only people that I agree with. You don't get a good debate that way and I love a good debate. There is no better way to polish the idea's you have, be introduced to new ones, and get perspectives you may not have had before.