TheFundamentals most significant fundamental is DEFICITS = DEBT = DESTRUCTION. We have been researching and writing about specific examples of this formula for quite a while. It appears that a growing portion of our citizens are beginning to grasp the applicability of this formula to both their local fiscal situation and the national situation. A recent Gallup poll indicated the 47% of Americans do not want the federal debt limit raised and that included 30% of Democrats. There are some notable exceptions to this growing awareness. Perhaps the most notable are the citizens of the state of Illinois. These folk are living in a state of denial. All except one, the treasurer of the state, Dan Rutherford. Here are his exact words describing the financial mess in Illinois:
• Bond repayment debt currently stands at $45 billion. Illinois must stop borrowing. In 2002 bond debt totaled only $12 billion. Illinois’ financial position leaves our credit rating second worst in the country, only ahead of California.
• Pension and retiree health care liabilities add up to $140 billion.
• Total debt liability for Illinois families currently stands at $42,000 per household.
• Responsible budgeting: spending only as much money as the state brings in. This will help set Illinois on a course of financial recovery.
• Freezing state spending will begin to shrink the debt and help repair Illinois’ miserable credit rating. Taxpayers, pension recipients, and future generations of Illinois citizens can afford nothing less.
The entire document is only 4 or 5 pages long. It may take thousands of pages of silly laws setting up wasteful government bureaucracies employing hundreds of thousands of unneeded costly public employees but when the end comes it will be quick and concise. The document is available at: http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=10150187523669562
Regardless of where you live, we suggest you walk away with some simple conclusions from Rutherford’s comments:
1. No More Debt, regardless of where you live.
2. The Pension Problem, at all levels of government, across the United States is not just a prospective problem. It needs to be addressed for current pensioners as well as future pensioners. It requires drastic change to defined contribution plans for all current and future government employees. Today. Now. Immediately.
3. The stark difference between the words of the Illinois Treasurer and the Federal Treasury secretary. One says no more debt; live within our means. One says raise the debt; full speed ahead on deficit spending. Geithner and his foolish sidekick, Bernanke must go. In November 2012, their boss must go.
4. Their replacements cannot be more fools of the past. They must have the credentials, the experience and the will to correct the financial mess we are in. They must recognize that no other issue matters if we do not get our finances in order.
5. The party in power and their special interests view any attempt to either discuss these fiscal problems or offer solutions as an opportunity to attack and criticize those offering such proposals and terrify the voting public in order to gain more brief political advantage. Their reward should be complete political devastation (i.e. throw the bums out.)
6. Government is the problem. The solution is a combination of the reduction and, in many cases, the elimination of entire government departments. Small tinkering around the edges will not make any difference. Entitlements must be reduced. Military spending and activities must be curtailed. Now.
Thursday, May 26, 2011
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Bureaucracy Overwhelms Democracy
There are several major issues facing America on which the disagreement between the current handling by the government bureaucracy and the growing voter demand for alternatives now dominates all political debate. The disagreement or gap between the government’s policies and the wishes of the people has accelerated considerably since the November 2010 election. At that time, the people completely changed control of the only arm of government over which they had the opportunity to change control: the house of representatives. But, alas, there has been no change in all the remaining elected, appointed and hired government segments. Unless and until the house of representatives defunds the bureaucracy, there will be no consequence of the November 2010 election on any major issue including:
1. Military engagements (defense spending)
2. Government spending and resulting deficits (discretionary spending)
3. Reductions in government medical care programs (Medicare and Medicaid)
4. Government interference in commerce resulting in loss of economic strength and good jobs (regulatory, legal, bureaucratic, special interests, protected classes and an endless list of laws and their unaccountable consequences)
5. Government financing of incredibly overpriced higher education activities
The winners like to say, “Elections have consequences.” But that is patent silliness. If the military and all the other government bureaucracies and all the protected classes and special interest groups and all the laws on the books and all the courts in the land go unchanged after an election, there are no consequences. There is no change. Democracy fails. The bureaucrats; the millions of hired minions show up the next day and keep doing what they did the day before the election. Just look at the real change six months following the November 2010 election? NIL. Nothing. Nada.
Shutting the government down is not a ploy; it is not a tactic; it has become a survival necessity.
For America to survive the government must go. It matters nary a twit if the cause is an election or a bankruptcy or some other form of dynamic event. This government must be defunded and the freedoms of our founding ideals must be rejuvenated even at the cost of pain and suffering.
A bureaucratic America will not survive. But the bureaucrats will.
A majority of the electorate know it and they did their part in November 2010. But nothing happened.
So we are left with the stark reality of a nation burdened by too much government and an inability to unburden it. That is a depressing situation. Depressing situations bring about hopelessness. All we need to do is observe the Arab spring to see what hopelessness breeds.
America was founded 235 years ago by a group of bold individuals who had had it with bureaucracy. The kings men, in all their forms - governors, tax collectors, administrators, soldiers and court jesters had a strangle hold on the colonists. What were they to do? Vote them out? The colonists despised the bureaucrats. They pledged their lives, their fortunes and their honor to dispelling those who sucked the lifeblood from the young nation. They succeeded against all odds. And they formed a government and never foresaw that the very tyranny they overcame would rise again as a cancerous growth on their new "limited government" political body.
There is no compatibility between democracy and bureaucracy. Grasp that point and you will have grasped a very basic fundamental. If you believe in democracy you will control bureaucracy with an iron fist. All bureaucracy must be responsive to the voter or democracy ceases.
1. Military engagements (defense spending)
2. Government spending and resulting deficits (discretionary spending)
3. Reductions in government medical care programs (Medicare and Medicaid)
4. Government interference in commerce resulting in loss of economic strength and good jobs (regulatory, legal, bureaucratic, special interests, protected classes and an endless list of laws and their unaccountable consequences)
5. Government financing of incredibly overpriced higher education activities
The winners like to say, “Elections have consequences.” But that is patent silliness. If the military and all the other government bureaucracies and all the protected classes and special interest groups and all the laws on the books and all the courts in the land go unchanged after an election, there are no consequences. There is no change. Democracy fails. The bureaucrats; the millions of hired minions show up the next day and keep doing what they did the day before the election. Just look at the real change six months following the November 2010 election? NIL. Nothing. Nada.
Shutting the government down is not a ploy; it is not a tactic; it has become a survival necessity.
For America to survive the government must go. It matters nary a twit if the cause is an election or a bankruptcy or some other form of dynamic event. This government must be defunded and the freedoms of our founding ideals must be rejuvenated even at the cost of pain and suffering.
A bureaucratic America will not survive. But the bureaucrats will.
A majority of the electorate know it and they did their part in November 2010. But nothing happened.
So we are left with the stark reality of a nation burdened by too much government and an inability to unburden it. That is a depressing situation. Depressing situations bring about hopelessness. All we need to do is observe the Arab spring to see what hopelessness breeds.
America was founded 235 years ago by a group of bold individuals who had had it with bureaucracy. The kings men, in all their forms - governors, tax collectors, administrators, soldiers and court jesters had a strangle hold on the colonists. What were they to do? Vote them out? The colonists despised the bureaucrats. They pledged their lives, their fortunes and their honor to dispelling those who sucked the lifeblood from the young nation. They succeeded against all odds. And they formed a government and never foresaw that the very tyranny they overcame would rise again as a cancerous growth on their new "limited government" political body.
There is no compatibility between democracy and bureaucracy. Grasp that point and you will have grasped a very basic fundamental. If you believe in democracy you will control bureaucracy with an iron fist. All bureaucracy must be responsive to the voter or democracy ceases.
Thursday, May 19, 2011
Good News From The Newtster
The Newtster is running for president. No, that is not the good news.
The Newtster is now with the love of his life, the Callistameister. Is that the good news? No, that is not the good news. But you can still see their handiwork by clicking on: http://www.gingrichproductions.com/
The Newtster has sought redemption. Is that the good news? No, that is not the good news.
The Newtster wants you all to know that he has learned and grown over the last 15 years that he has been out of the public eye (think of the relief that comes when you get a speck of dust or dirt in your eye and it is very irritating.) Is that the good news? No, that is not the good news.
The Newtster says, “Together we will win the future.” See: http://www.newt.org/ Is that the good news? No, that is not the good news.
The Newtster apologized to Paul Ryan for saying that Paul Ryan’s proposal for financial responsibility is bad news. Is that the good news? No, that is not the good news.
The Newtster may also be spending a fair amount of dough at Tiffany’s. Helping the economy get back on its feet. Is that the good news? No, that is not the good news.
So, what is the good news?
The good news is this. The Newtster is a gasbag. Too many years in Washington DC. Too cute for his own good. Frankly just way too narcissistic even for American politics. And the Newtster just couldn’t wait to run his yap and show just what a narcissistic, yapster he is. He blew it. In record time. The good news is that the Newtster is done. Stick a fork in him; he is cooked. The Newtster is gonzo; kaput. Everyone knows now but the Newtster. When will he get the news? Soon.
That’s the good news.
The Newtster is now with the love of his life, the Callistameister. Is that the good news? No, that is not the good news. But you can still see their handiwork by clicking on: http://www.gingrichproductions.com/
The Newtster has sought redemption. Is that the good news? No, that is not the good news.
The Newtster wants you all to know that he has learned and grown over the last 15 years that he has been out of the public eye (think of the relief that comes when you get a speck of dust or dirt in your eye and it is very irritating.) Is that the good news? No, that is not the good news.
The Newtster says, “Together we will win the future.” See: http://www.newt.org/ Is that the good news? No, that is not the good news.
The Newtster apologized to Paul Ryan for saying that Paul Ryan’s proposal for financial responsibility is bad news. Is that the good news? No, that is not the good news.
The Newtster may also be spending a fair amount of dough at Tiffany’s. Helping the economy get back on its feet. Is that the good news? No, that is not the good news.
So, what is the good news?
The good news is this. The Newtster is a gasbag. Too many years in Washington DC. Too cute for his own good. Frankly just way too narcissistic even for American politics. And the Newtster just couldn’t wait to run his yap and show just what a narcissistic, yapster he is. He blew it. In record time. The good news is that the Newtster is done. Stick a fork in him; he is cooked. The Newtster is gonzo; kaput. Everyone knows now but the Newtster. When will he get the news? Soon.
That’s the good news.
Tuesday, May 17, 2011
The Mindset of Academia
"Dear Mr. Speaker,
We congratulate you on the occasion of your commencement address to The Catholic University of America. It is good for Catholic universities to host and engage the thoughts of powerful public figures, even Catholics such as yourself who fail to recognize (whether out of a lack of awareness or dissent) important aspects of Catholic teaching. We write in the hope that this visit will reawaken your familiarity with the teachings of your Church on matters of faith and morals as they relate to governance.
Mr. Speaker, your voting record is at variance from one of the Church’s most ancient moral teachings. From the apostles to the present, the Magisterium of the Church has insisted that those in power are morally obliged to preference the needs of the poor. Your record in support of legislation to address the desperate needs of the poor is among the worst in Congress. This fundamental concern should have great urgency for Catholic policy makers. Yet, even now, you work in opposition to it.
The 2012 budget you shepherded to passage in the House of Representatives guts long-established protections for the most vulnerable members of society. It is particularly cruel to pregnant women and children, gutting Maternal and Child Health grants and slashing $500 million from the highly successful Women Infants and Children nutrition program. When they graduate from WIC at age 5, these children will face a 20% cut in food stamps. The House budget radically cuts Medicaid and effectively ends Medicare. It invokes the deficit to justify visiting such hardship upon the vulnerable, while it carves out $3 trillion in new tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy. In a letter speaking on behalf of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Bishop Stephen Blaire and Bishop Howard Hubbard detailed the anti-life implications of this budget in regard to its impact on poor and vulnerable American citizens. They explained the Church’s teachings in this regard clearly, insisting that:
A just framework for future budgets cannot rely on disproportionate cuts in essential services to poor persons. It requires shared sacrifice by all, including raising adequate revenues, eliminating unnecessary military and other spending, and addressing the long-term costs of health insurance and retirement programs fairly.
Specifically, addressing your budget, the letter expressed grave concern about changes to Medicaid and Medicare that could leave the elderly and poor without adequate health care. The bishops warned further:
We also fear the human and social costs of substantial cuts to programs that serve families working to escape poverty, especially food and nutrition, child development and education, and affordable housing.
Representing the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Bishops Hubbard and Blaire have now endorsed with other American Christian leaders a call to legislators for a “Circle of Protection” around programs for the poor that you, Mr. Speaker, have imperiled. The statement of these Christian leaders recognizes the need for fiscal responsibility, “but not at the expense of hungry and poor people.” Indeed, it continues, “These choices are economic, political—and moral……”
Blah – blah – blah. You get the idea.
Sincerely,
Blah-blah and more blah
You can read the rest of this drivel and the long list of signers by clicking on: http://ncronline.org/blogs/distinctly-catholic/breaking-news-catholic-academics-challenge-boehner
TheFundamentals comments:
These "do gooders" have signed up with the catechism of the rapidly expanding Church of Obama. We suggest they turn over all their worldly goods to this new sect and dedicate their very being to its missions and messages. Fat chance, huh?
But signers, here are some fundamentals that your letter failed to mention:
1. The United States constitution prohibits the establishment of a state religion. Therefore the Church of Obama is illegal. And the governance system you wish to impose on speaker Boehner is duly illegal.
2. The “Circle of Protection” you admire must first be built on a “Foundation of Financial Responsibility.” Actually it needs even more than that. It needs an “Environment of Economic Growth.” You dopes don’t have a clue about either of those principles. The U S government is not a charity. It is a limited government gone wild (think of those movies about “college girls gone wild” (by the way, are most of you college academics?”) that is about to go broke. Please refer to US constitution for further edification.
3. Where do these you do gooders stand on vouchers for the parents of urban public school children who are being forced to attend crappy schools? Is that in your “circle of protection?”
4. Does you circle of protection include flat screen TV’s and mobile phones for the disenfranchised; internet connections and condoms; rap music and sugary treats; obese kids and numerous other forms of irresponsible behavior? Oh, and how about student loans to make sure your classrooms are filled with spongy minds to soak up your verbose drivel?
5. Closing comment. This essayist is Catholic. Thinks the church is top notch; does one heck of a lot more good than not good and seldom gets any credit from the left. The sooner these weak sisters move on to Obama’s church (aka Democratic Party), the better.
We congratulate you on the occasion of your commencement address to The Catholic University of America. It is good for Catholic universities to host and engage the thoughts of powerful public figures, even Catholics such as yourself who fail to recognize (whether out of a lack of awareness or dissent) important aspects of Catholic teaching. We write in the hope that this visit will reawaken your familiarity with the teachings of your Church on matters of faith and morals as they relate to governance.
Mr. Speaker, your voting record is at variance from one of the Church’s most ancient moral teachings. From the apostles to the present, the Magisterium of the Church has insisted that those in power are morally obliged to preference the needs of the poor. Your record in support of legislation to address the desperate needs of the poor is among the worst in Congress. This fundamental concern should have great urgency for Catholic policy makers. Yet, even now, you work in opposition to it.
The 2012 budget you shepherded to passage in the House of Representatives guts long-established protections for the most vulnerable members of society. It is particularly cruel to pregnant women and children, gutting Maternal and Child Health grants and slashing $500 million from the highly successful Women Infants and Children nutrition program. When they graduate from WIC at age 5, these children will face a 20% cut in food stamps. The House budget radically cuts Medicaid and effectively ends Medicare. It invokes the deficit to justify visiting such hardship upon the vulnerable, while it carves out $3 trillion in new tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy. In a letter speaking on behalf of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Bishop Stephen Blaire and Bishop Howard Hubbard detailed the anti-life implications of this budget in regard to its impact on poor and vulnerable American citizens. They explained the Church’s teachings in this regard clearly, insisting that:
A just framework for future budgets cannot rely on disproportionate cuts in essential services to poor persons. It requires shared sacrifice by all, including raising adequate revenues, eliminating unnecessary military and other spending, and addressing the long-term costs of health insurance and retirement programs fairly.
Specifically, addressing your budget, the letter expressed grave concern about changes to Medicaid and Medicare that could leave the elderly and poor without adequate health care. The bishops warned further:
We also fear the human and social costs of substantial cuts to programs that serve families working to escape poverty, especially food and nutrition, child development and education, and affordable housing.
Representing the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Bishops Hubbard and Blaire have now endorsed with other American Christian leaders a call to legislators for a “Circle of Protection” around programs for the poor that you, Mr. Speaker, have imperiled. The statement of these Christian leaders recognizes the need for fiscal responsibility, “but not at the expense of hungry and poor people.” Indeed, it continues, “These choices are economic, political—and moral……”
Blah – blah – blah. You get the idea.
Sincerely,
Blah-blah and more blah
You can read the rest of this drivel and the long list of signers by clicking on: http://ncronline.org/blogs/distinctly-catholic/breaking-news-catholic-academics-challenge-boehner
TheFundamentals comments:
These "do gooders" have signed up with the catechism of the rapidly expanding Church of Obama. We suggest they turn over all their worldly goods to this new sect and dedicate their very being to its missions and messages. Fat chance, huh?
But signers, here are some fundamentals that your letter failed to mention:
1. The United States constitution prohibits the establishment of a state religion. Therefore the Church of Obama is illegal. And the governance system you wish to impose on speaker Boehner is duly illegal.
2. The “Circle of Protection” you admire must first be built on a “Foundation of Financial Responsibility.” Actually it needs even more than that. It needs an “Environment of Economic Growth.” You dopes don’t have a clue about either of those principles. The U S government is not a charity. It is a limited government gone wild (think of those movies about “college girls gone wild” (by the way, are most of you college academics?”) that is about to go broke. Please refer to US constitution for further edification.
3. Where do these you do gooders stand on vouchers for the parents of urban public school children who are being forced to attend crappy schools? Is that in your “circle of protection?”
4. Does you circle of protection include flat screen TV’s and mobile phones for the disenfranchised; internet connections and condoms; rap music and sugary treats; obese kids and numerous other forms of irresponsible behavior? Oh, and how about student loans to make sure your classrooms are filled with spongy minds to soak up your verbose drivel?
5. Closing comment. This essayist is Catholic. Thinks the church is top notch; does one heck of a lot more good than not good and seldom gets any credit from the left. The sooner these weak sisters move on to Obama’s church (aka Democratic Party), the better.
Friday, May 13, 2011
Eisenhower Looks Forward
There was a lot more to retiring 34th US president, Dwight David Eisenhower's brief speech than a warning about the military industrial complex. First we present highlight phrases from his speech:
• “…there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration… balance between actions of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress…” Eisenhower is explaining the fundamental of setting priorities and making choices.
• “…we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations. “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” Eisenhower warns about a bureaucratic monster that will run its creators; not the other way around.
• “…we -- you and I, and our government -- must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.” These comments are self explanatory and immensely prescient about our fiscally promiscuous ways.
Here are three full excerpts from Five Star General Eisenhower’s talk:
Excerpt #1 (This excerpt deals with self discipline needed to maintain our freedoms)
“Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small, there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer elements of our defense; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research -- these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we wish to travel.
But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs -- balance between the private and the public economy, balance between cost and hoped for advantage -- balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable; balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual; balance between actions of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration.”
Excerpt #2 (This excerpt deals with creating a Frankenstein monster that rules its creators)
“A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.
Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.
Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.”
Excerpt #3 (This excerpt deals with fiscal responsibility and not burdening America’s youth)
“Another factor in maintaining balance involves the element of time. As we peer into society's future, we -- you and I, and our government -- must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.”
TheFundamentals highly recommends that you read the entire brief speech at: http://www.h-net.org/~hst306/documents/indust.html
We post these speech excerpts and reference because it is a profound reminder of a time when America was able to find and elect real leaders to its high positions of power. We had lots of problems back then also. But the leaders didn't just blame each other. They made choices that included doing without. We must return to TheFundamental values, beliefs and standards of these men and women if we are to provide future generations’ opportunities similar to those provided past generations. We must stop this culture and the political posturing that demands “to live only for today.” We must stop grasping for the “…recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties.”
These words were spoken just 50 years ago. General Eisenhower grasped, embraced, lived and reminded us Americans of fundamental values.
It is time for us to heed this advice. It is time for us to be responsible Americans. When Americans embrace responsibility, they will also find responsible leaders.
• “…there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration… balance between actions of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress…” Eisenhower is explaining the fundamental of setting priorities and making choices.
• “…we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations. “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” Eisenhower warns about a bureaucratic monster that will run its creators; not the other way around.
• “…we -- you and I, and our government -- must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.” These comments are self explanatory and immensely prescient about our fiscally promiscuous ways.
Here are three full excerpts from Five Star General Eisenhower’s talk:
Excerpt #1 (This excerpt deals with self discipline needed to maintain our freedoms)
“Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small, there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer elements of our defense; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research -- these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we wish to travel.
But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs -- balance between the private and the public economy, balance between cost and hoped for advantage -- balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable; balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual; balance between actions of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration.”
Excerpt #2 (This excerpt deals with creating a Frankenstein monster that rules its creators)
“A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.
Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.
Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.”
Excerpt #3 (This excerpt deals with fiscal responsibility and not burdening America’s youth)
“Another factor in maintaining balance involves the element of time. As we peer into society's future, we -- you and I, and our government -- must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.”
TheFundamentals highly recommends that you read the entire brief speech at: http://www.h-net.org/~hst306/documents/indust.html
We post these speech excerpts and reference because it is a profound reminder of a time when America was able to find and elect real leaders to its high positions of power. We had lots of problems back then also. But the leaders didn't just blame each other. They made choices that included doing without. We must return to TheFundamental values, beliefs and standards of these men and women if we are to provide future generations’ opportunities similar to those provided past generations. We must stop this culture and the political posturing that demands “to live only for today.” We must stop grasping for the “…recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties.”
These words were spoken just 50 years ago. General Eisenhower grasped, embraced, lived and reminded us Americans of fundamental values.
It is time for us to heed this advice. It is time for us to be responsible Americans. When Americans embrace responsibility, they will also find responsible leaders.
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Delusional Behavior by Armchair Rambo's
The conduct of the current president and his two immediate predecessors warrants special study by medical and psychiatric associations. Let’s briefly recap.
One fellow struggles with objective reality or criticism. He has created an aura about himself that would make any public relations agency proud. Solved the deficit problem. Left a surplus. Repaid debt. Build lasting international relationships. First black president. And now gallivants around the globe in the private aircraft of the extremely well to do solving problems that are rooted back in the time of Solomon. Solved that one; moving on to the next. His initiative is not for his country anymore; it is global. He struts around with the barons of industry; the blood lines of kings. He no longer chases fawning interns; he has learned. He has become his own eye candy. He is delusional. He’s Global Rambo.
Another fellow wisely has withdrawn. Locked the door. Pulled the shades down. Sits quietly in the darkened room. No more aircraft landings for this fellow. All dressed up in daddy’s uniform but wisely sitting in the jump seat. Banners flying. Anticipated accomplishments all ballyhooed up and quite visibly displayed. Wisecracks a plenty: dead or alive; don’t mess with Texas; bring 'em on. Surrounded with daddy’s associates, he blithely moves the chess pieces and, after each move, looks up and around to see if anyone noticed that he has no clue as to what he just did. He grins. Aw shucks. Delusional. He’s Daddy’s Rambo.
And most recently, the man whose clothes are being paid for with foreign borrowings and credit card bills that will be presented to his grandchildren; the man who travels with hundreds in a retinue fit for an Arab prince with producing oil wells; the man who skips out on his one major task (DEBT) but rather prances around on the efforts of others; sneaks on the field after watching the game from his basement shelter; has the groundskeeper turn on all the lights; calls in the most obeying of all the sycophants in the media and replays the game; minute by careful minute and then wanders to the end zone; picks up the football and, with the smugness that only the delusional can muster; spikes the ball. Meanwhile, the real players have long since left the field. Avoiding the spotlight. And guess what? He did it without a teleprompter? He is so proud of himself. Who says people can’t change? Six more years of this delusion? He’s Basement Rambo.
Do they learn this behavior in the eastern schools and the overseas trips and the ghost written books that they tout? Or is there a Manchurian candidate school that this very moment is turning out the next one? On our East coast? California? Or, in Manchuria? Is it possible that they were switched at birth? Could it be that we really do have a birther issue only not the one that the Donald was so concerned with? Could these three be plants from an enemy training camp; masterfully designed to play to our fears; our dreams; our hopes; our audacious yearnings? Switched at birth as part of a large design? Hard to believe the conspiracy theorists but can it be coincidental that one country; for 20 years running now has managed to locate and elevate and tolerate the most delusional goofballs ever to grace the people’s house at 1600 Pennsylvania avenue? Three consecutive times now? Beggars the imagination.
Or could it just be that we are drawn to those with the most pronounced feet of clay? We can detect true delusional behavior and we just must have more. Could it be that we have evolved in this mythology driven land of ours with all its plenty and superiority that we just plain like the story and we want to keep it going? We’ll take a pass on the reality checks, thank you very much. Don't you dare tell us the truth. We are perfectly okay with this self destructive gene that now dominates our behavior; our leadership selection process?
We hate to crack the door on this behavior but there is one small problem that we may wish to consider before it’s too late. We’re broke. Going up to the attic and dressing up in the clothes of heroes past and waving daddy’s sword around and glancing in that mirror that makes us look “oh, so thin” is not going to change the simple fact that we’ve spent the trust fund. We ran out of dinero a while back. Rambo is running on fumes.
Sorry to remind you. This brief reality check. So, let’s get back to the story line. Let’s see if we can find one more of these characters. These delusional fools. White House Rambo’s. It’s almost time to do it again.
One fellow struggles with objective reality or criticism. He has created an aura about himself that would make any public relations agency proud. Solved the deficit problem. Left a surplus. Repaid debt. Build lasting international relationships. First black president. And now gallivants around the globe in the private aircraft of the extremely well to do solving problems that are rooted back in the time of Solomon. Solved that one; moving on to the next. His initiative is not for his country anymore; it is global. He struts around with the barons of industry; the blood lines of kings. He no longer chases fawning interns; he has learned. He has become his own eye candy. He is delusional. He’s Global Rambo.
Another fellow wisely has withdrawn. Locked the door. Pulled the shades down. Sits quietly in the darkened room. No more aircraft landings for this fellow. All dressed up in daddy’s uniform but wisely sitting in the jump seat. Banners flying. Anticipated accomplishments all ballyhooed up and quite visibly displayed. Wisecracks a plenty: dead or alive; don’t mess with Texas; bring 'em on. Surrounded with daddy’s associates, he blithely moves the chess pieces and, after each move, looks up and around to see if anyone noticed that he has no clue as to what he just did. He grins. Aw shucks. Delusional. He’s Daddy’s Rambo.
And most recently, the man whose clothes are being paid for with foreign borrowings and credit card bills that will be presented to his grandchildren; the man who travels with hundreds in a retinue fit for an Arab prince with producing oil wells; the man who skips out on his one major task (DEBT) but rather prances around on the efforts of others; sneaks on the field after watching the game from his basement shelter; has the groundskeeper turn on all the lights; calls in the most obeying of all the sycophants in the media and replays the game; minute by careful minute and then wanders to the end zone; picks up the football and, with the smugness that only the delusional can muster; spikes the ball. Meanwhile, the real players have long since left the field. Avoiding the spotlight. And guess what? He did it without a teleprompter? He is so proud of himself. Who says people can’t change? Six more years of this delusion? He’s Basement Rambo.
Do they learn this behavior in the eastern schools and the overseas trips and the ghost written books that they tout? Or is there a Manchurian candidate school that this very moment is turning out the next one? On our East coast? California? Or, in Manchuria? Is it possible that they were switched at birth? Could it be that we really do have a birther issue only not the one that the Donald was so concerned with? Could these three be plants from an enemy training camp; masterfully designed to play to our fears; our dreams; our hopes; our audacious yearnings? Switched at birth as part of a large design? Hard to believe the conspiracy theorists but can it be coincidental that one country; for 20 years running now has managed to locate and elevate and tolerate the most delusional goofballs ever to grace the people’s house at 1600 Pennsylvania avenue? Three consecutive times now? Beggars the imagination.
Or could it just be that we are drawn to those with the most pronounced feet of clay? We can detect true delusional behavior and we just must have more. Could it be that we have evolved in this mythology driven land of ours with all its plenty and superiority that we just plain like the story and we want to keep it going? We’ll take a pass on the reality checks, thank you very much. Don't you dare tell us the truth. We are perfectly okay with this self destructive gene that now dominates our behavior; our leadership selection process?
We hate to crack the door on this behavior but there is one small problem that we may wish to consider before it’s too late. We’re broke. Going up to the attic and dressing up in the clothes of heroes past and waving daddy’s sword around and glancing in that mirror that makes us look “oh, so thin” is not going to change the simple fact that we’ve spent the trust fund. We ran out of dinero a while back. Rambo is running on fumes.
Sorry to remind you. This brief reality check. So, let’s get back to the story line. Let’s see if we can find one more of these characters. These delusional fools. White House Rambo’s. It’s almost time to do it again.
Friday, May 6, 2011
New Risk Policy: No Photos/No Debt
What follows is highly confidential. It involves the three most powerful men in Washington DC.
First, comes this new position taken by the Commander in Chief. Here are the very words he will use:
"I think that given the graphic nature of these photos, it would create some national security risk," Obama told the CBS program "60 Minutes."
Source: This coming Sunday night; 7:00 Eastern, CBS Network.
Next from America’s most powerful military commander. Here is the chairman of the joint chiefs speaking not too long ago: “The national debt is bad for the military, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Michael Mullen is telling business men and women…."The most significant threat to our national security is our debt," he told CNN Wednesday.”
Source: http://articles.cnn.com/2010-08-27/us/debt.security.mullen_1_pentagon-budget-national-debt-michael-mullen?_s=PM:US
Let’s just recap before we move on.
Releasing the photos would create some national security risk. Got it. So, no photos. Check .
Also, the US debt is the most significant threat to our national security. Got it. So, maybe no more debt, huh? Check .
So, who is in charge of stopping the debt? Answer: John Boehner, head of US House of Representatives.
Got it. Check. Now what? Well, it’s clear. The president must have prepared the following letter or something similarly worded for release early next week. Maybe he will address it Sunday night? We’re sure the 60 Minutes interviewer will connect these two situations. Even a politician or sycophantic media persons distorted sense of consistency would be inadequate to further what is described as America’s “most significant” national security threat while intervening and stopping an activity that generates “some” national security risk. So, TheFundamentals wanted to share this important change in policy with you promptly. Also, we didn’t see anyone else picking up on it.
Coming Letter from President Obama to Speaker John Boehner:
I’m going public with my concern about heading off any national security risk occurring as the result of releasing bin Laden death photos. I don’t want to add to our national security risk. So, no photos. If you don’t get this memo, just watch 60 Minutes this Sunday. Next, Chairman Mullen gets paid to keep America safe. He is big on this topic of national security. He says that debt is the most significant threat to the national security of the US. Do you see where I’m going with this?
The House of Representatives (of which you are the head) is responsible for creating debt and repaying debt. See US Constitution, Article I, Sections 7, 8 and 9 or just read “TheFundamentals” which is well versed on this subject (Aside: could you encourage some of my party members to read their essays and bone up on sound fiscal behavior?)
So, John, you can’t create any more debt. It is already the most serious national security problem we have (Mullen) and I can’t be making a big deal of these photos and then ignoring the real national security risks. Cripes, even I can grasp that. So stop with all this business about raising the debt limit. Also, please disregard all prior correspondence or commentary from Bernanke and Geithner to the contrary. Along with Biden, they don’t see the big picture as do the three of us.
We’ve got to look out for the people. Is that clear John?
Hopefully, your answer will be, “CRYSTAL.” Next time I see Nancy and Harry I’ll tell them to get with the new program. Biden doesn’t grasp issues at this depth. Hopefully Nancy will be gone soon. Harry should be in the minority soon too.
Do your job, John. No more debt. Blame me if need be. Well, I don’t really want you to but maybe we could share some of the blame together, huh? I think the folk are getting a bit tired of me blaming Bush for everything. Remember John, we're in this together.
Yours in a Secure America,
Barack Hussein (No photos/No debt) Obama II, Commander in Chief and President
First, comes this new position taken by the Commander in Chief. Here are the very words he will use:
"I think that given the graphic nature of these photos, it would create some national security risk," Obama told the CBS program "60 Minutes."
Source: This coming Sunday night; 7:00 Eastern, CBS Network.
Next from America’s most powerful military commander. Here is the chairman of the joint chiefs speaking not too long ago: “The national debt is bad for the military, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Michael Mullen is telling business men and women…."The most significant threat to our national security is our debt," he told CNN Wednesday.”
Source: http://articles.cnn.com/2010-08-27/us/debt.security.mullen_1_pentagon-budget-national-debt-michael-mullen?_s=PM:US
Let’s just recap before we move on.
Releasing the photos would create some national security risk. Got it. So, no photos. Check .
Also, the US debt is the most significant threat to our national security. Got it. So, maybe no more debt, huh? Check .
So, who is in charge of stopping the debt? Answer: John Boehner, head of US House of Representatives.
Got it. Check. Now what? Well, it’s clear. The president must have prepared the following letter or something similarly worded for release early next week. Maybe he will address it Sunday night? We’re sure the 60 Minutes interviewer will connect these two situations. Even a politician or sycophantic media persons distorted sense of consistency would be inadequate to further what is described as America’s “most significant” national security threat while intervening and stopping an activity that generates “some” national security risk. So, TheFundamentals wanted to share this important change in policy with you promptly. Also, we didn’t see anyone else picking up on it.
Coming Letter from President Obama to Speaker John Boehner:
Barack Hussein Obama II, President
White House
(For Your Eyes Only)
Dear John:I’m going public with my concern about heading off any national security risk occurring as the result of releasing bin Laden death photos. I don’t want to add to our national security risk. So, no photos. If you don’t get this memo, just watch 60 Minutes this Sunday. Next, Chairman Mullen gets paid to keep America safe. He is big on this topic of national security. He says that debt is the most significant threat to the national security of the US. Do you see where I’m going with this?
The House of Representatives (of which you are the head) is responsible for creating debt and repaying debt. See US Constitution, Article I, Sections 7, 8 and 9 or just read “TheFundamentals” which is well versed on this subject (Aside: could you encourage some of my party members to read their essays and bone up on sound fiscal behavior?)
So, John, you can’t create any more debt. It is already the most serious national security problem we have (Mullen) and I can’t be making a big deal of these photos and then ignoring the real national security risks. Cripes, even I can grasp that. So stop with all this business about raising the debt limit. Also, please disregard all prior correspondence or commentary from Bernanke and Geithner to the contrary. Along with Biden, they don’t see the big picture as do the three of us.
We’ve got to look out for the people. Is that clear John?
Hopefully, your answer will be, “CRYSTAL.” Next time I see Nancy and Harry I’ll tell them to get with the new program. Biden doesn’t grasp issues at this depth. Hopefully Nancy will be gone soon. Harry should be in the minority soon too.
Do your job, John. No more debt. Blame me if need be. Well, I don’t really want you to but maybe we could share some of the blame together, huh? I think the folk are getting a bit tired of me blaming Bush for everything. Remember John, we're in this together.
Yours in a Secure America,
Barack Hussein (No photos/No debt) Obama II, Commander in Chief and President
Thursday, May 5, 2011
Managing Information
Bernanke says there is no inflation. No consequence to his promiscuous production and distribution of US currency that is now driving commodity, oil, gasoline and grocery product prices through the roof. Oh wait, he modified that position recently to suggest that maybe there was a little price pressure.
When a government official, in this case a top, self glorified, non-elected official makes such blatant distorted statements, we ask, “What is going on?” We answer our own question, “One of two things.” Either he is deluded to the point of illness and does not have any sense of cause and effect much less the experience of pushing a cart up and down grocery store aisles and filling his own gas tank, or he is just plain deluded into thinking that his lying is of no consequence because his audience is either stupid, clueless or can’t do anything about the lies anyway so why be concerned. Transparency? Not an iota. Managing information. Sure. But in such a ham-handed manner that his foreign counterparts dismiss his monetary policy as just an extension of promiscuous fiscal political nonsense. Not only is he not doing his job, he is engaging in activities that produce results counter to the very objectives codified in the laws that empower him.
Does everyone lie? Everyone manage information? Does everyone spin for their own purpose(s)?
That question is pretty broad. Let’s back off for a minute. We’ll come back to it.
America’s appetite for goods and services does not appear to be abating. GDP, a fair measure of America’s consumption of goods and services, is presented below in purchasing power adjusted dollars (billions) and it keeps going up. Goes up by a lot over the last 60 years.
Source: http://www.bea.gov/national/index.htm#gdp
Pretty strong growth, huh? Lots of jobs, huh? As a matter of fact, we should have a job shortage based on the economic strength of the GDP numbers. So, why don’t we? Why are we tolerating politicians who cannot answer that simple question? Who actually pass laws and impose burdens that make the situation worse? Well it may just come down to managing information. We have now reached the point in our brief history where someone telling the truth appears to be mentally unstable. And they are dismissed as radical or goofy. They are ridiculed. We choose to embrace deceptions rather than face facts. We don’t want to hear facts.
Most politicians, when running for office, actually engage in a brief period of telling the truth? When is that? How can you tell when they are telling the truth? It’s simple. It’s when they are describing, critiquing or otherwise commenting upon their opponent’s record. That is now the only time in American political theatre when a politician tells the truth.
Obama ran on transparency. He governs opaquely. He chooses to not tell the truth or he obfuscates by telling us that he is doing something non transparent for our own good. Pretty rich, huh? Do they lie to us to protect us? Can we not handle the truth?
Right now, briefly, candidates like Donald Trump are speaking the truth. They are being ridiculed.
Could we actually elect a campaigning truth teller and survive if that person continued to tell the truth?
Apparently not. We, the people, go out of our way to avoid that situation. We most certainly do not hold our elected and appointed officials accountable to the same level of truth telling that they require of us. Very strange how the government can lie to us (legal) but we cannot lie to it (illegal.) Very strange indeed.
Colonel Nathan R. Jessep was right. We can’t handle the truth. We prefer to be lied to.
When a government official, in this case a top, self glorified, non-elected official makes such blatant distorted statements, we ask, “What is going on?” We answer our own question, “One of two things.” Either he is deluded to the point of illness and does not have any sense of cause and effect much less the experience of pushing a cart up and down grocery store aisles and filling his own gas tank, or he is just plain deluded into thinking that his lying is of no consequence because his audience is either stupid, clueless or can’t do anything about the lies anyway so why be concerned. Transparency? Not an iota. Managing information. Sure. But in such a ham-handed manner that his foreign counterparts dismiss his monetary policy as just an extension of promiscuous fiscal political nonsense. Not only is he not doing his job, he is engaging in activities that produce results counter to the very objectives codified in the laws that empower him.
Does everyone lie? Everyone manage information? Does everyone spin for their own purpose(s)?
That question is pretty broad. Let’s back off for a minute. We’ll come back to it.
America’s appetite for goods and services does not appear to be abating. GDP, a fair measure of America’s consumption of goods and services, is presented below in purchasing power adjusted dollars (billions) and it keeps going up. Goes up by a lot over the last 60 years.
Year GDP
1950 $ 293.7
1970 1038.3
1990 5800.5
2010 14660.4
Source: http://www.bea.gov/national/index.htm#gdp
Pretty strong growth, huh? Lots of jobs, huh? As a matter of fact, we should have a job shortage based on the economic strength of the GDP numbers. So, why don’t we? Why are we tolerating politicians who cannot answer that simple question? Who actually pass laws and impose burdens that make the situation worse? Well it may just come down to managing information. We have now reached the point in our brief history where someone telling the truth appears to be mentally unstable. And they are dismissed as radical or goofy. They are ridiculed. We choose to embrace deceptions rather than face facts. We don’t want to hear facts.
Most politicians, when running for office, actually engage in a brief period of telling the truth? When is that? How can you tell when they are telling the truth? It’s simple. It’s when they are describing, critiquing or otherwise commenting upon their opponent’s record. That is now the only time in American political theatre when a politician tells the truth.
Obama ran on transparency. He governs opaquely. He chooses to not tell the truth or he obfuscates by telling us that he is doing something non transparent for our own good. Pretty rich, huh? Do they lie to us to protect us? Can we not handle the truth?
Right now, briefly, candidates like Donald Trump are speaking the truth. They are being ridiculed.
Could we actually elect a campaigning truth teller and survive if that person continued to tell the truth?
Apparently not. We, the people, go out of our way to avoid that situation. We most certainly do not hold our elected and appointed officials accountable to the same level of truth telling that they require of us. Very strange how the government can lie to us (legal) but we cannot lie to it (illegal.) Very strange indeed.
Colonel Nathan R. Jessep was right. We can’t handle the truth. We prefer to be lied to.
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Public Enemy Number One
In order to gain presence on the FBI’s most wanted list, you must meet the following criteria:
• First, the individual must have a lengthy record of committing serious crimes and/or be considered a particularly dangerous menace to society due to current criminal charges.
• Second, it must be believed that the nationwide publicity afforded by the program can be of assistance in apprehending the fugitive, who, in turn, should not already be notorious due to other publicity.
http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten
Our candidate for the list meets the first criteria. Lengthy record/particularly dangerous menace to society. We offer the following evidence to support that claim:
1. Quotes from very important people:
“With uncharacteristic bluntness, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke warned Congress on Wednesday that the United States could soon face a debt crisis like the one in Greece, and declared that the central bank will not help legislators by printing money to pay for the ballooning federal debt. “Source: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/25/bernanke-delivers-warning-on-us-debt/
“The national debt is bad for the military, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Michael Mullen is telling business men and women…."The most significant threat to our national security is our debt," he told CNN Wednesday.” Source: http://articles.cnn.com/2010-08-27/us/debt.security.mullen_1_pentagon-budget-national-debt-michael-mullen?_s=PM:US
2. Statistics kept by the US treasury documenting Mr. Debt’s crime spree:
Mr. U. S. Debt as of September 11. 2001: $ 5,773,172,068,291.89
Mr. U. S. Debt as of April 30, 2011: $ 14,287,630,052,323.12
WOW! Obviously Mr. Debt has had a very successful take over the last 10 years!
So why isn’t Mr. U. S. Debt on the top ten list? Why isn’t he at the top of the FBI's list? Public Enemy Number One?
He’s at the top of our list at TheFundamentals. He tops our list because he meets the criterion of our number one fundamental:
He meets the number one criterion of the FBI also (see above.) We also think if he was on their list the nationwide publicity would be beneficial in bringing about his apprehension. The very same determination and the very same lengthy commitment to the pursuit and elimination of Mr. bin Laden now needs to be focused on Mr. Debt. Let’s get him before he gets us.
• First, the individual must have a lengthy record of committing serious crimes and/or be considered a particularly dangerous menace to society due to current criminal charges.
• Second, it must be believed that the nationwide publicity afforded by the program can be of assistance in apprehending the fugitive, who, in turn, should not already be notorious due to other publicity.
http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten
Our candidate for the list meets the first criteria. Lengthy record/particularly dangerous menace to society. We offer the following evidence to support that claim:
1. Quotes from very important people:
“With uncharacteristic bluntness, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke warned Congress on Wednesday that the United States could soon face a debt crisis like the one in Greece, and declared that the central bank will not help legislators by printing money to pay for the ballooning federal debt. “Source: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/25/bernanke-delivers-warning-on-us-debt/
“The national debt is bad for the military, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Michael Mullen is telling business men and women…."The most significant threat to our national security is our debt," he told CNN Wednesday.” Source: http://articles.cnn.com/2010-08-27/us/debt.security.mullen_1_pentagon-budget-national-debt-michael-mullen?_s=PM:US
2. Statistics kept by the US treasury documenting Mr. Debt’s crime spree:
Mr. U. S. Debt as of September 11. 2001: $ 5,773,172,068,291.89
Mr. U. S. Debt as of April 30, 2011: $ 14,287,630,052,323.12
WOW! Obviously Mr. Debt has had a very successful take over the last 10 years!
So why isn’t Mr. U. S. Debt on the top ten list? Why isn’t he at the top of the FBI's list? Public Enemy Number One?
He’s at the top of our list at TheFundamentals. He tops our list because he meets the criterion of our number one fundamental:
Deficits = Debt = Destruction
He meets the number one criterion of the FBI also (see above.) We also think if he was on their list the nationwide publicity would be beneficial in bringing about his apprehension. The very same determination and the very same lengthy commitment to the pursuit and elimination of Mr. bin Laden now needs to be focused on Mr. Debt. Let’s get him before he gets us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)