Okay... I've Thought About It...

From the NY Post: "US taxpayers will be helping to foot the bill for the Greek bailout, via the International Monetary Fund. And if the Obama administration doesn't draw a clear line, Uncle Sam may soon be on the line for even more and larger European "rescues."

The Greek government, with its high taxes and profligate spending to support large bureaucracies and social programs, is bankrupt. Its bonds have been downgraded to junk status."

WHAT IF the United States borrowed money from either the International Monetary Fund or China in order to prop up the Greek economy? Then you could simply change the words "Greek Government" in the preceding paragraph to "U.S. Government", and the message would still be accurate.

Is Washington unaware that we are in dire financial straits ourselves? If this idiotic government were in charge of maintaining the oceans, they would be bone dry in 10 years.

WHAT IF there were a "global currency", as recommended at a G-20 meeting a bit over a year ago? The Euro surprised me by lasting more than 18 months. Why? Because the result was the successful European economies were keeping the less successful afloat, by reducing the value of all currencies to somewhere in the middle! A global currency would have the same impact... everyone's currency would be worth the same, but it would be worth less. Can somebody explain to me how this is different than "redistribution of wealth"? It's exactly the same thing, just on a grand scale!

WHAT IF instead of taking from rich individuals, the global currency would have the practical effect of taking from the more prosperous nations and redistributing the currency to the less prosperous nations? How does national prosperity become anyone's responsibility other than the government of the nation in question? How do our taxes become another country's prosperity? (Global currency is closer to reality than you may know - Russia introduced their proposed version of it at a G-20 meeting a bit over a year ago.)

WHAT IF our Congress followed the original intent of the Constitution, rather than trying to find ways to defeat it?

WHAT IF our elected representatives in Washington D.C. actually represented the people instead of big business, lobbyists, and their own personal interests?

WHAT IF all the members of the House and Senate, who are up for reelection in November, are replaced with people who do not believe that the road to national prosperity is paved with more bureaucracy, bigger government, and increased borrowing, spending and taxing?

WHAT IF We the People - the employers of those in the House and Senate - decided to fire the lot of them? Would their replacements be intelligent enough to understand the message we were sending to Washington? Just in case, here it is in plain English:

WE ARE TIRED OF BEING IGNORED BY THOSE WHO "REPRESENT" US!

WHAT IF we actually HAD "border security"? Anybody who votes for "amnesty" or "open borders" should be forced to live right on our southern border for 6 months... and then have another vote. Our borders are almost as secure as Heidi Fleiss' (the infamous "Hollywood Madam") virginity!

Obama Desires to Bill Military Members for War and Service Related Injuries!"

The following are quoted excerpts from "Our Voice" the American Legions' online e-zine - "WASHINGTON, DC (March 16, 2009) – The leader of the nation’s largest veterans organization says he is “deeply disappointed and concerned” after a meeting with President Obama today to discuss a proposal to force private insurance companies to pay for the treatment of military veterans who have suffered service-connected disabilities and injuries. The Obama administration recently revealed a plan to require private insurance carriers to reimburse the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in such cases."

The article goes on to say, “It became apparent during our discussion today that the President intends to move forward with this unreasonable plan,” said Commander David K. Rehbein of The American Legion. “He says he is looking to generate $540-million by this method, but refused to hear arguments about the moral and government-avowed obligations that would be compromised by it. There is simply no logical explanation for billing a veteran’s personal insurance for care that the VA has a responsibility to provide. While we understand the fiscal difficulties this country faces right now, placing the burden of those fiscal problems on the men and women who have already sacrificed a great deal for this country is unconscionable.”

"Unconscionable"? That word doesn't begin to describe my feelings toward the actions of your liberal, lying, left-wing, cowardly "leader". A man who, without any military experience whatsoever, is suddenly the Commander-in-Chief of our Armed Forces. A man who has so little respect, consideration, or compassion for those who have been placed in harm's way - by the government - that he would even consider such an outrageous plan. Despicable is the word that comes immediately to mind ... followed by unconscionable, and a few other words that I won't post here.

Want to save the taxpayers some money? It could easily begin with an across-the-board 50% pay cut for the members of Congress. That would save the taxpayers $46,477,250 per annum! Congressional office, mail, and staff allowances could also be halved.

In 2003 the total amount of allowance provided to Members of the House ranged from $701,136 to $1,636,750. Members do not have to use all of the money allotted to them in their allowances. (Each Member is allotted $748,312 to hire up to 18 staff and four additional temporary, part-time, of shared staff. Staff cannot be paid more than $151,974 per year.) That's a mean average of roughly $1,169,000 per representative. (Source: Congressional Research Service, January 26, 2004)

In 2003 the total amount of all three allowances provided to Senators ranged from $2,264,345 to $3,751,995 for a mean average of $3,008,170. Senators do not have a limit on the amount staff they can hire! (Source: Congressional Research Service, January 26, 2004) I think most people could run an office on $1.5 million per year - everybody I know could! The only thing you couldn't do would be to throw lavish parties for your supporters.

So, what would be the result of forcing military members to pay for their own health care? The immediate and most noticeable result, would be a sharp decline in enlistments and re-enlistments in our armed forces - especially those most likely to find themselves in the midst of armed combat, the Army and Marines. Our military would be reduced to the point where national defense would fall, once again, squarely on the shoulders of the "citizen soldier" ... shades of 1776! My assumption here is that your liberal, left-wing government would actually desire national defense. They believe that insufficient numbers of trained military will make the handover of our country that much easier - especially if they can pull off a nationwide gun grab.

A less obvious result of forcing our military members to pay for their own health care would be putting the government one step closer to realizing the control they can exert over the citizenry with a "National Health Plan". Old? Handicapped? Reached those non-productive years of retirement? Report to the nearest Soylent Corporation office - the year 2022 isn't that far off.

Obama has shown his true color ever since his inauguration. He's neither black nor white - his true color is communist red! This unqualified and unprepared usurper was elected to the most powerful position in the free world, by the sheep of our nation - the entitlement whores! God save us from ourselves ...

I could be wrong about this ... and Obama could care about the future of our country. FAT CHANCE!