"In the world of sexual-harassment law, the accusations are bad enough. You’re guilty until proven innocent. The law is skewed toward the plaintiffs -- it’s hard to get even the silliest charges tossed out, and even then it often costs upward of six figures to do so. ... 

"Even what constitutes 'sexual harassment' has crossed from common sense into farce. In the 1970s, my mother was a lawyer who faced the real thing as one of the very few women in a testosterone-fueled district attorney’s office. Today, women are at or near parity with men in most every field, and are even ahead of them among entrants to the professions.  

"Yet where sexual-harassment law once protected women from being forced to be the playthings of crude lechers, it’s been transformed to enforcing a prim puritanism that drains the humor and humanity from the workplace. People are afraid to make an innocent joke or compliment a co-worker’s appearance for fear of crossing some unspoken line that will bring down the wrath of the human-resources department."

"In various cities across the country, mobs of mostly young, mostly incoherent, often noisy and sometimes violent demonstrators are making themselves a major nuisance. 

"Meanwhile, many in the media are practically gushing over these 'protesters,' and giving them the free publicity they crave for themselves and their cause -- whatever that is, beyond venting their emotions on television. 

"Members of the mobs apparently believe that other people, who are working while they are out trashing the streets, should be forced to subsidize their college education -- and apparently the President of the United States thinks so too. 

"But if these loud mouths' inability to put together a coherent line of thought is any indication of their education, the taxpayers should demand their money back for having that money wasted on them for years in the public schools."

"We shouldn't gut defense. A central question of our budget debates is how much we allow growing social spending to crowd out the military and, in effect, force the United States into a dangerous, slow-motion disarmament. ... 

"Defense spending is unlike other spending, because protecting the nation is government's first job. It's in the Constitution, as highways, school lunches and Social Security are not. We should spend as much as needed, but that amount is never clear. Even in the Cold War, when the Soviet Union's capabilities were intensively analyzed, there was no scientific and exact number. ... 

"By itself, defense spending doesn't ensure that our national power will be wisely or effectively deployed. This depends on our civilian and military leaders. But squeezing defense will limit their choices and expose U.S. troops to greater risk. Those who advocate deep cuts need to specify which goals -- combating cyber warfare, countering China, fighting terrorism -- should be curtailed."

"The world economy has once again dodged Armageddon. The European Union finally forged a Greek bond deal, and a rescue fund big enough to ring-fence banks and sovereign debt, in order to avoid a catastrophic, Lehman-like contagion event. At the same time, the U.S. economy moved away from the threat of recession with a third-quarter real gross domestic product report of 2.5 percent. In response, stocks are soaring. We'll live to see another day. ... 

"If only Washington would quit tampering with our free-market economy, and if only the president would see that the American economic system is supposed to reward success, not punish it, the animal spirits would recover and we'd double the economic growth rate. Unemployment would come way down in the process."

"Since 1985, college costs have risen more than 450 percent, which is about 4.5 times the rate of inflation. There is no justification for higher-education costs to have soared so dramatically. Faculty salaries have increased in most cases, but at only about a 10th of the rate of overall growth. Colleges and universities cite a variety of other factors, such as higher administrative costs and overhead, but these claims are unconvincing. The real reason schools charge more is because they can get away with it. ... 

"The higher-education establishment has no incentive to control costs so long as government continues to make it easy for students to get into debt and then have it forgiven. Mr. Obama would have us believe this racket can continue at no cost to the taxpayer. You don’t need a college degree to see through that one."

"The President has been talking a lot about math lately. He’s been saying that, quote, 'If we’re not willing to ask those who’ve done extraordinarily well to help America close the deficit… the math says… we’ve got to put the entire burden on the middle class and the poor.'  

"This is really a stunning assertion from the President. When you look at the actual math, you quickly realize that the way out of this mess is to combine economic growth with reasonable, responsible spending restraint. Yet neither of these things factors into the President’s zero-sum logic."

"PRINCETON, NJ -- Small-business owners in the United States are most likely to say complying with government regulations (22%) is the most important problem facing them today, followed by consumer confidence in the economy (15%) and lack of consumer demand (12%).

Rounding out small-business owners' top five problems in the Oct. 3-6 Wells Fargo/Gallup Small Business Index poll is lack of credit at 10% and poor leadership by government and the president at 9%."

"Congress's Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction is struggling to find $1.5 trillion in cuts over the next 10 years. This is a unique opportunity to use tax reform to reduce future budget deficits while lowering individual tax rates. 

"The Tax Reform Act of 1986, enacted 25 years ago last Friday, showed how a tax reform that includes lower rates can change incentives in a way that grows the tax base and produces extra revenue. The 1986 agreement between President Ronald Reagan and House Speaker Tip O'Neill reduced the top marginal tax rate to 28% from 50%. A conservative Republican and a liberal Democrat could agree to a dramatic reduction in top rates because the legislation also eliminated a wide variety of tax loopholes."

"What are we to think about a president and vice president who blow nearly a trillion dollars in borrowed money, accept no responsibility for it and then traverse the nation trying to convince Americans that if we don't spend half that much again, people will die from dilapidated bridges and women will be raped because we can't afford cops?

"What business do these two have lecturing anyone about anything, much less the conditions that might ensue if we were not to spend more printed money to pay for things they failed to finance the first time because they misappropriated the funds? ...

"It's time these two answered some questions themselves about the colossal waste of federal money they've directed toward the stimulus package, Obamacare, Solyndra, other green projects and scores of other boondoggles.

"Until they can give us an honest accounting for their recklessness, they have no standing to be demanding more."

"The Occupy Wall Street folks tell us to blame Wall Street for the nation's financial troubles. Notice the no-fly zone over President Barack Obama. Where are the anti-President Barack Obama signs or the verbal chants denouncing the President? Imagine the protests/sit-ins/rallies/mass marches on Pennsylvania Avenue -- not Wall Street -- if after two years of Republican White House leadership, America remained stuck on over 9 percent unemployment!"