The US cannot take on the responsibility for the rest of the world. At base is overpopulation, for which we have no answers. The only solutions are the 4 horsemen, which seem to be gaining strength.

DONT LET YOUR PAL BUSH KNOW YOU ARE A CHRISTION. HE WILL SEND WORD UP TO GOD, THE GUY HE TALKS TO, AND WILL NOT PERMIT YOU THRUE THE PEARLY GATES! HE COMMENTED ONLY BABTIST ARE ALLOWED IN HEAVAN. WHAT HAPPENED TO THE THE LAST CHRISTIAN POPE WE HAD? IS HE FLOATING AROUND SOMEWHERE?

The US set a great example of this in Iraq where Emperor Crocker diverted $1 billion marked for water purification to "security" and one in eight Iraqi children under five died of water borne diseases.

I think we should take a clue from those food-donor organizations, and suggest that every American skip taking one shower a week, which would save enough clean water to provide for an African family of four.

that, combined with taxes on the rich, would give us the most chance to pay off our country's debt, though a few programs may need cutting, the government needs to be careful not to cut things that help the economy, and thus tax rolls. (They need to be careful about minimizing this when cutting the military budget as well!)

Strange that my comment got cut off.

Chico,
You miss the point of the article. Lack of fresh water throughout the world is the problem. The president is pointing out the problem to us in the United States who don't travel and are insulated in our way of life. Most of use don't even own passports so how would we understand that the things we take for granted, basic necessities are not available to over 1 fifth of the global population.
This is not an ideal opportunity to fabricate some platform for attacking our commander in chief. Why not save your fingers for something juicy.

Our country needs to increase taxes on the rich if we want to get out of debt. They've had huge amounts of capital since about a year after teh crash, and yet they haven't spent it, which is half the source of our woes.
Considering that many of them earn their money not through some great feats of intelligent and heroism, but mere success in the marketplace as actors, football players, and sensationalist news commentators who often get the facts wrong and fail basic tenets of journalism, there's nothing wrong with increasing taxes on them, unless you honestly thing a sports star deserves 100 times the money of 90% of Americans.
While the debt needs to go, some of this money should go to charity, as opposed to being pooled up by the rich.
Additionally, taxes on the rich were extremely harsh in the 50s through the 70s, so don't tell me that the economy can't boom without the rich having the ability to sit on absurd amounts of money.

The income of the top 5% of Americans has increased DRAMATICALLY since 1980. The income of the bottom 90% has barely kept pace with inflation.

In the meantime, this country also needs to cut the military budget. That is definitely the biggest source of waste in our budget, has been since the 80s. That, combined with taxes on the rich, should

Is Obama sincere about charity? Keep in mind that he pushed killing the charitable deduction which would have crippled literally thousands of non-profits that touch the lives of tens of millions of the least-fortunate Americans for the better -- and, likewise, that Mr. and Mrs. Obama gave less than 1% of their salary to charity from 2000-2004.

Charity begins at home. You can quote the bible, but the Bible doesn't say you get credit for stealing money out of the pockets of your neighbor on the left to do good works for the neighbor on the right.

When it came time to reach into his OWN pocket, Mr. Obama told those in need, "Nah, I'd rather spend the money on myself. I have mine; you go get yours."