So Jr Senator Barack Obama has grand ideas for fixing the economy. Hmm lets take a look.

Lets first look at taxes. First he wants a windfall tax on oil companies. Yeah that will work, lets raise the price of gas for this tax, (see Windfall tax for oil companies

Post June 14th). Next he wants to raise the capital gains tax to 20%, which has been proven to bring in less tax money not more. Also would like to lower the child tax credit down to $500 from the current law of $1000. In addition in the tax area, is the dividends tax rate which is currently 15% and he wants to raise this to 39.6%. And don’t get me started on the income tax rate which he also has plans on raising-more info later in its own post with more details.

Also in his grand scheme of things he would like not to drill for oil in our own country even after other countries have done the same thing such as Brazil, Norway, France, and Venezuela. Most of America believe that we should “drill here, drill now”. Holding out just makes matters worse. Just the thought of us drilling just a few days ago lowered the barrel. His other stance on this issue is for America to lessen demand. I am sorry but I need to go to work, I need to go to the grocery store, and other places that are important in my life. I like my heat in winter. I like been able to sleep in the summer with my air conditioning. And mandating car manufactures may or may not help the situation in any real value.

Another idea of his is to cut our military and get out of Iraq. Now there is a great idea! Lets lose our nations security and open our self up for another attack. We need our military and we need to be in Iraq fighting for our great nations security against terrorism

Ann Coulter writes:

June 11th 2008

In a conversation recently, I mentioned as an aside what a great president George Bush has been and my friend was surprised. I was surprised that he was surprised. ………….
http://www.anncoulter.com/

I don’t regard George W. Bush as a lame-duck president. Between now and next January all sorts of challenging and unexpected events may take place. We can rely on President Bush to react promptly and decisively to them.

We saw this on Sept. 11. The President was as surprised as everyone else, as we grasped from the dramatic photograph of him taken as he was given the dreadful news at an elementary school. But he buckled down quickly to this unprecedented attack on America, determined that such a treacherous outrage should never occur again.

Nor has it. It is worth inquiring why. There is no doubt that attacking the American homeland remains the prime objective of Muslim fundamentalist leaders. Yet they have not done so. One reason for this is the success of Mr. Bush’s team in learning the lessons of Sept. 11 and building a security system of impressive strength and sensitivity. It has yet to be breached. Also, the suicide bombers fear being sent to Guantánamo more than they fear death itself. It is right that the prime defender of democracy and freedom should strike terror into the hearts of terrorists.

Brilliant Maneuver

Equally, if not more important, is the way in which Mr. Bush–partly by accident but mainly by design–has switched the war’s theater of operations to the death-dealers’ territory. At the time of Sept. 11 the battlefield was the undefended West, with its great, peaceful cities. The civilian population was exposed to mass murder at the hands of carefully trained and well-equipped fanatics. Now, thanks to the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan– which were achieved at relatively minor cost–the battlefield has been decisively switched to the Muslim heartlands. And in the Middle East the war is being waged against the fundamentalists by the highly trained and superbly equipped professional armed forces of the U.S., Britain and other nations. The results of this are reflected in the casualty figures.

It’s true that more than 4,000 U.S. servicemen and -women have been killed in this five-year conflict. But considering the extent of the operations, the importance of the war and the threat to the U.S. populace posed by these terrorists, this total is small. In World War I up to 60,000 casualties were inflicted in a single day. And there were many occasions during World War II when the U.S. and Britain lost more than 4,000 men in a one-day operation.

On the other hand, the number of Muslim fanatics who have been killed by the Allies in their operations or who have killed each other in Sunni-Shia clashes must be reckoned in the hundreds of thousands. We shall never know the true tally, but it is plainly enormous.

Each of those terrorists was capable of inflicting huge losses on the civilian populations of the West. To dispose of them, one by one, in the West is extremely difficult and expensive. In the Middle East, however, they congregate and can be killed more easily and in large numbers by Western firepower. Moreover, the fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan has attracted most of the bravest and most determined of the fundamentalists. They have swarmed there from all over the world–not least from Western cities–to achieve (as they believe) martyrdom, to fight and be killed. We must remember that every extremist killed in the suburbs of Basra or Baghdad or in the hills around Kabul or Kandahar means scores, perhaps hundreds, of Western civilian lives saved.

Clearly mistakes have been made in this war, some of them serious. Intelligence has been faulty. But then those of us who have served in our countries’ armed forces know that it always is. It’s far better for America’s President to react swiftly to intelligence reports of weapons of mass destruction being in the hands of his nation’s dedicated enemies than to ignore the warnings and risk such weapons being used against the U.S. and the West.

Mr. Bush was right to adopt a no-risk policy, accepting the partisan criticism of his party’s political opponents. This is what a President does in his capacity as Commander in Chief. Indeed, no President worthy of the office could have decided otherwise.

Looking back over the last few years, I find it hard to fault Mr. Bush on any major point. He has always been brave. He has never shown the slightest fear of unpopularity, putting the needs of the nation before his political fortunes. He has shown himself ready at all times to make big, risky and venturesome decisions, being persuaded they were in the U.S.’ (and the West’s) interests, and then sticking to them. Indeed, if there’s one thing that exceeds Mr. Bush’s courage, it’s his resolution, his pertinacity, his steadfast consistency.

He is a leader who will not give way to threats, criticisms and abuse, a man of valor when times are hard. In this election year, when the Constitution demands that he must give way to another President, I salute him and applaud his conduct of affairs.

Some may call President Bush obstinate; others may say, with some reason, that he is not skilled in explaining his policies. But I insist that beneath it all he has been a heroic leader in a time of testing, and I am glad that he will still be in charge for the rest of this year.

May his successor show the same dauntless determination.

Paul Johnson, eminent British historian and author; Lee Kuan Yew, minister mentor of Singapore; Ernesto Zedillo, director, Yale Center for the Study of Globalization, former president of Mexico; and David Malpass, chief economist for Bear Stearns Co., Inc., rotate in writing this column. To see past Current Events columns, visit our Web site at www.forbes.com/currentevents.