Even Sanders admits that the kids today have to go to college to get a high school equivalent education. Instead of giving them FREE college, how about they make the public school system go back to teaching again? If the kids refuse to learn, that's their problem, not ours. Why should we pay for their partying? Liberals complain about unruly kids in school, yet defend their "individuality" and brainwashed entitlement attitude.

It is so hilarious to watch the Fox Comedy Hour (just pick any hour of the day!) and see how they want Trump out of contention.

The main word is now that there will be a contested GOP convention and that Trump will not be the candidate but a good possibility that someone like Romney or Ryan may get to be te nominee.

Does'nt the will of "we the people" mean anything? Should'nt the candidate with the most votes get to be the nominee?

Why should delegates who have gotten there based on contributions get to choose the nominee?

No wonder that Trump will run third party if he is not the GOP nominee.

I understand that Obama has been auditioning for a spot on Dancing with the Has-beens. The Entertainer-in-Chief is addicted to the TV limelight and will have to figure a way of staying in the public when he is evicted from the White House. The Obama's are planning on sticking around D.C. after leaving the White House because his daughters need to finish their PRIVATE school.

Ask Hillary about "the candidate with the most votes" since she already has all the super delegates and her and Bernie are just going through the process to make everything look legit. She's been coasting along, knowing she is all but coronated.

Trump won't be running a third party candidacy. The only way would be if his name was a write-in on the ballot. Trump knows that the "sore loser law" will keep him from winning the general election, even if many states do not supposedly enforce it. Trump seems to be losing his motivation or interest in the presidency anyway. He seems to be running out of steam, or is finally getting tired.

Sanders "Fifty years ago, you had a high school degree you could go out in this economy and probably get yourself a damn good job at decent pay," he told a big crowd at the Alliant Energy Center in Madison during a boisterous rally last month. "Today, in many respects a college degree is the equivalent of what a high school degree was 50 years ago. In the year 2016, we need to make public colleges and universities tuition-free!"

Do you understand that does not mean that high school courses are being taught in college?

Then what happens to the minorities? They'll be "left behind" again with no hope for a future! They don't stand a chance with REAL standards. How do you think we got where we are today? We dropped the standards to give women and minorities a chance. Look where it got us...WAY down the ranking for education. We're 17th or wherever we are because of our lowered standards.

It'll be too late to get on the ballot.

So women "need special treatment"? Then why do you claim yourselves equal?

I've read articles that say it is too late and others that say with enough campaign money and hired attorneys it isn't. If anything Trump is unpredictable. I think New York will be interesting.

Would you like to compare the quality of education today with that of yesteryear? You can twist what his meaning was all you wish, but the truth is there.

Before I had my degree, I was given reports to edit for those with college degrees that wrote like grade schoolers. They might as well have written their reports using crayons. When I had my first two year degree, I was making as much as my co-worker that had a PhD. I was an average student in high school. Apparently, you folks are not examining any of today's children's home work assignments or you would realize how dumbed down their classes have become. And this has nothing to do with the IQ of today's children. It has to do with lowering the standards so that they can increase the graduation numbers. If you don't believe me, then check out the world stats on education comparison.

And no, I do not edit my comments on here for proper grammar and spelling. It's just a conversation with no identity reputation to protect.

How can anybody warm blooded being with a heartbeat in good conscience ask such hypocritical questions.

And as for always being smart mouthed about FOX you certainly pretend to know a lot about them. I suppose it is hearsay and not first hand knowledge! If hearsay shame on you for repeating commentary you have no first hand knowledge about.....I guess that is sufficient if all one is going to do is call names and bash the opposition.

All you have to remember is to stay behind the keyboard.

FOX cable network thanks you liberals for consistently viewing their channel, making FOX the number one cable news network in the Country. If not for all those liberals watching, it would have been impossible for that ranking. Of course, it is the only and easiest means for liberals to keep up to date on current events. By the way, FOX gets most of their news from AP, so if you have a problem with their material, you can start your criticism there.

I've read this post before. Why would someone who watches Fox needs to agree with Fox?

Don't you investigate both sides of an issue?

The station with the most viewers doesn't win a credibility award?

Look at all the tabloids that continue to sell at Publix and WD. Why do they sell?

I bet you are embarrassed to admit that you watch FOX for your information. I understand........;)

I don't have cable or an antennae. I get my news online from all kinds of newspapers including Fox, CNN, PBS etc. If one has an opinion I look for it reaffirmed in a couple of other places.
How do you get your news?
.