Your task is to extract the thesis of an opinionated news article by selecting some of its text segments. The thesis is a summarization of what the author wants to persuade the reader of. Your answer should consist of segments of the given text. Note that you are not allowed to combine different sentences.

Input: Consider Input: The Real State of Our Union: More entitlements, taxes and unemployment. In his State of the Union address, President Obama will propose much he knows the Republican-controlled Congress will not enact , but his real agenda is to set the table for Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign . Once again, the president will propose soaking the rich with higher estate, capital gains and bank taxes, while adding to entitlements for the working poor and middle class--new tax credits, higher child care allowance and more college tuition assistance . It all sounds appealing in an economy where the top 10 percent have done quite well , while the rest struggle -- but it is not that simple . The president will argue the economy--and especially the rich-- can afford the taxes he wants because economic growth is so strong -- but that's a fib . Since the recovery began, GDP growth has averaged a mere 2.3 percent a year -- that's about half what Ronald Reagan accomplished climbing out of a recession of comparable depth . Now the recovery faces tough headwinds . Falling oil prices are curbing drilling in places like North Dakota and Texas , and big layoffs are not far behind . The dollar is quite strong against other currencies, limiting exports and boosting job-killing imports , because China's growth is faltering , Japan remains in neutral and Europe is on the edge of collapse under the weight of statism -- the very kind Obama and Clinton want to impose on Americans . The president proposes to legislate the basic contract between employers and workers . On top of higher minimum wages and mandated business financed health benefits, he wants employers to pay for mandatory sick leave and six weeks of paid parental leave . After five years, Reagan increased employment by 9.4 percent , whereas Obama has boosted jobs only 4.5 percent . Consequently , nearly one in six prime working age men between 25 and 54 is not working , and 72 percent of those are not even bothering to look . Obama has made Medicaid, food stamps and social security disability quite easy to get , and idle men form a new leisure class by combining those benefits with handouts from relatives and girlfriends . For employers, a higher minimum wage, compulsory health insurance, and sick and parental leave will make those men even more costly to hire . Enter stage left , more worker replacing robots . The number of young people--and especially young men--starting small businesses has fallen dramatically -- and that means fewer jobs over the next generation for everyone . Young folks start enterprises by raising a lot of capital from older rich people . Wealthy folks take the plunge on risky ventures , because the capital gains tax on successful enterprises is currently taxed at about 25 percent , whereas combined federal, state and local tax rates on ordinary income is often above 50 percent . Young entrepreneurs, who generally have not amassed much wealth, can't borrow nearly what they need from banks . Higher taxes on banks will make that problem worse . Hiking capital gains taxes will directly discourage older successful investors , who also bring a wealth of practical management experience and advice for getting young ventures off the ground . Older rich folks also take the plunge , because they can pass along assets at death to their children . But now the president wants to hike the tax rate on their estates , which is already 40 percent . The president calls it fair because it only falls on one percent of the population, and will paint Republicans who resist as defending the rich to the detriment of struggling Americans . His aim is to give Americans buyer's remorse about electing a Republican Congress and boost a Clinton campaign for the White House emphasizing similar themes . It would seem one out of six men unemployed, subsisting on government benefits and burdening relatives is not too high a price to elect another Democratic president .

Output: It would seem one out of six men unemployed, subsisting on government benefits and burdening relatives is not too high a price to elect another Democratic president Once again, the president will propose soaking the rich with higher estate, capital gains and bank taxes, while adding to entitlements for the working poor and middle class--new tax credits, higher child care allowance and more college tuition assistance


Input: Consider Input: Peace on Earth? There are a whole bunch of people who simply don't like Christmas and are fighting to get rid of it any way they can . And, there are a lot of people on the other side who are angry at those efforts . And so, this whole battle over whether to say Christmas or Happy Holidays misses the point . I suppose it may be hard to be a non-believer in the religious themes around Christmas and live in our culture . You are confronted daily with the religious symbolism of Christmas in the books you read, the friends you have and the movies you watch ; and , above all ,  you have to stay away from religious stuff...like Christmas celebrations . I'm a believer, but not without a modicum of compassion for those who don't share my religious beliefs . I can imagine how irritating Christmas must be for those whose whole worldview is built on the belief that Christmas doesn't matter because it points to what is spurious at best and dangerous at worst . I get that, too . I must admit, though, that I get irritated sometimes when a group of people bring a lawsuit to get rid of the town creche or when someone wishes me "Happy Holidays." It bothers me when universities remove Christmas trees or Christmas concerts are canceled because it offends those who aren't religious or Christian . Frankly, I listen to a lot of stuff from the other side all the time . Fair play suggests that it wouldn't hurt for the other side to abide some of mine . I decided that I'm just not going to fight the Christmas war . I'm an old guy and old people are already irritated about being old . As someone said, it takes very little to tick us off . Instead, I'm just going to sing as loudly and as publicly as I can a Christmas carol---a Christmas carol about love and a God who went to a lot of trouble to express his love for us . You see , in my belief system, Christmas doesn't mean that God came to destroy us or to kick posteriors . I believe that the reason he came was to tell us that he isn't angry . And when we make obscene gestures or get mean with those who disagree with us, it kind of misses the point . It becomes a disconnect between what I believe and what I do . And if I really believe(and I do) that the King came , it kind of changes my perspective . I have a friend whose family takes playing chess very seriously . It gets so "hot" sometimes that they end up throwing chess pieces at one another . As you can imagine , they lose a lot of pieces . One Christmas when they were playing chess, my friend took the baby Jesus from the small creche under the Christmas tree to replace one of his lost pieces . My friend then began to move all over the board, going after his brother's pieces . "You can't do that," his brother said,"that's illegal." "Oh, yes I can," my friend said."This is Jesus and he can do whatever he wants to do." Jesus does as he pleases and he does it right well . At Christmas he decided to love and, then, clean up the mess later . So I think I'll opt out of the war . The King was doing fine before I came along and will do fine long after I'm gone . He doesn't need my defense . So, Merry Christmas or...uh .... Happy Holidays . Whatever .

Output: There are a whole bunch of people who simply don't like Christmas and are fighting to get rid of it any way they can And, there are a lot of people on the other side who are angry at those efforts


Input: Consider Input: Why Washington should fear the silence of the anti-war movement. On this 73rd anniversary of the last declaration of war by the United States, as the Pentagon escalates its military actions in Iraq and Syria , the silence of the US peace movement carries an ominous warning for Washington, DC . The streets of major US cities are not filled with anti-war demonstrations , yet the apparent quiet does not signify consent . A look at history shows why . The US has been attacked on domestic territory twice in the past century . On December 7, 1941, the Empire of Japan bombed Pearl Harbour , killing 2,403 Americans and wounding 1,178 others . The next day, US Congress voted to declare war on Japan , thus committing to active hostilities in World War II . That declaration of war has since proved to be the last in the history of the US . The next and last mass scale violent attack by an outside aggressor on the domestic territory of the US occurred 13 years ago, on September 11, 2001, with the immediate death toll approaching 3,000 . Three days later, Congress adopted an Authorisation for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) against those held responsible for the September 11 attacks . In so doing, Congress delegated war-making powers to President George W Bush under the terms of the War Powers Act of 1973 . December 7 and September 11 are notable in part because in both cases horrendous violence against the people of the US was responded to with an act of Congress . Oppose or support US entry into either of those wars, question or affirm that those wars were lawful, there was no question in either case that Congress had signed off on them . Congressional approval . It mattered that Congress approve , because Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution accords primary war powers, including the power to commence and end war, to Congress alone . For a president of the US to make war without congressional approval was an unthinkable act that would have threatened the legitimacy of the federal government . With his war on the so-called Islamic State, US President Barack Obama has committed that unthinkable act , and Congress has let him . And yet ,  by all appearances, no one outside of a handful of members of Congress, legal scholars, and peace activists has spoken out in protest . Contrast this moment with that of the weeks and months following September 11 . On September 29, 2001, upwards of 25,000 people marched through Washington, DC, against the impending invasion of Afghanistan ; tens of thousands demonstrated elsewhere throughout the US . By April 20, 2002, the anti-war protest in Washington drew over 150,000 . By February 15, national protest turnout hit 2 million . Given this history, one cannot conclude that the size and volume of anti-war protests directly resulted from the relative popularity of a particular war . After all ,  the 2001-2003 protests erupted and swelled over a period in which polls showed continued strong support among the US public for Washington's war operations . And in fact, as in 2003-2008 public opinion turned against the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, the size and volume of anti-war movement went down . The simple and correct explanation for this history is that anti-war organisers made decisions in 2001, 2002, and 2003, to focus their energies on mobilising street protests , and that in the years 2004-2008, as anti-war sentiment was taken up by a majority of the American people, many anti-war organisers shifted much of their focus to electing anti-war candidates to office . What has changed since Obama assumed the presidency? In Washington, in terms of war and security, very little . Guantanamo remains in operation . The police state has expanded . Assassination and missile strikes have increased . Border militarisation and deportations have escalated . And US military operations have continued and spread further across the globe . Having lived and struggled through this history, why would anti-war organisers choose to respond to Washington's undeclared, unauthorised war against the so- called Islamic State by mobilising street protests? Why would they mobilise to elect anti-war candidates? The core of the peace movement remains active in many parts of the US . Every day I receive notices about civil disobedience at military bases, hunger strikes, local government resolutions calling for a shift in spending priorities away from the military, and much more . For this reason, the relative silence of anti-war organisers in the face of the war against the so-called Islamic State stands out as a warning to the Washington establishment; those who oppose their policies question whether Congress and the presidency can provide effective redress for the grievances of the American people . Washington should fear the silence of the US anti-war movement , for it is full of sound and fury and signifies everything .


Output: the silence of the US peace movement carries an ominous warning for Washington, DC


