Among the self-evident truths on this matter is: IF they had been treating organizations of liberal/progressive persuasions equally and evenly with those of conservatives, we would have heard a simultaneous apology to all the groups and not just conservative groups.
The best revenue enhancer would clearly be a better economy. That could be achieved quicker by abandoning the war on business being waged by this administration and rolling back some of the disincentives to business that have been introduced since 2009. Obama's true goal of punishing achievers could not have been better illustrated than his disinterest in talking about providing the revenue he sought in the recent "fiscal cliff" negotiations (if one wishes to call his inactions "negotiations"). He would not have the revenue by any means other than increasing the tax RATE on the "wealthy". He had previously admitted publicly that such increase in the rate would not produce a meaningful improvement in our deficit, stating it would be more "fair". He will not rest until we are ALL living at the same level, regardless of our output and income. All EXCEPT him and his cronies, of course.
How many of those countries in the G7 with corporate tax rates in the same range as those of the USA exempt the tax on exports and give their corporations a more level playing field in the international markets??
The "Clinton surplus" was produced by a roaring economy and not by the few percentage points more in the tax rates; no more than we can produce a balanced budget by re-introducing those rates. The increases sought by Obama would narrow the deficit by less than 10%. He obviously did not get all he wanted but shows every sign of demanding more and more while unwilling to budge an inch on decreasing bloated government spending. He continues to appear to believe that he can spend his way into a booming economy; or, he does not CARE anything about the nation's financial success. IF it was his goal to destroy the economy of the country, in what way would his behavior be any different from what we have seen over the past 4 years??
I have known Dr. Desjarlais for 14 years and I can tell you that the "bats in the belfry" and the "violent, arrogant and psychopathic" terms used in previous posts are pure nonsense. As another poster noted, divorces do get messy and it is patently unfair and, in fact, stupid to base any conclusions on "allegations" made in those circumstances; false accusations and vastly blown out of proportion incidents in divorce cases are "the rule" and not anything unusual. Also, many people do and say things that are out of character for them during divorces. It is absurd to use those issues to attempt to prevent a fair assessment of this candidate for office...most likely simple attack politics. If anyone is concerned about those past issues, they should look at his current family relationship and the devotion they all have to each other as well as at the professionalism he has continued to show as a dedicated physician and valued member of the medical community in which he serves. They will find the current balance weighing heavily in favor of Dr. Desjarlais. Don't judge him by "accusations" made a decade ago.