Hey readers,

I received another response from my family member that I thought I would post for everyone’s benefit. Naturally I’ll continue to protect / respect this individual’s privacy. This time, we were talking foreign policy.

 

____Family Member’s Response_________________

While our foreign policy probably has had negative unintended consequences doing nothing would have also had negative unintended consequences. As doing nothing is also foreign policy.  I believe the real motivations of the Islamic jihadists is based in their religion and world view. Read http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=4292, and http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=3821 .

Our policies are sometimes go too far, total isolation and doing nothing will probably encourage our enemies. Bin Laden stated that our lack of response indicated that we were weak and could be attacked. Also, Islamic terrorism in not limited to the US. There are attacks all over the world in countries with no people in the middle east. There have been attacks in Thailand, the Philippines, Bali, Sudan, Ethiopia, India, Russia, China, Pakistan, Nigeria to name a few.

I am curious, what has Ron Paul said his response to 9-11 would have been?

 

___My Response Below_______________

to […]

GREAT questions.

I don’t believe they attack us because we are free. After all, they don’t attack Sweden or Switzerland. The question is what would we do? This video does a good job contextualizing. http://youtu.be/XKfuS6gfxPY

If Ron Paul was president, there wound not have been a 9/11. Watch him predict that our foreign policy in the 90’s would lead to attacks on our homeland. He would not have conducted the attacks that aggravated them in the first place. http://youtu.be/_6hxE3mPgtM

If we listen to Bin Laden’s reaction to 9/11, we should also listen to his reasons for the attack. He told us outright why he did it, and he didn’t say “because they are free.” He said, because we’d been bombing the middle east, and we had bases on their holy land.
http://youtu.be/DJLMtRt88ZUhttp://youtu.be/-qQYDn5wqeg

NOW let’s say Ron Paul was not the president back then (which obviously he was not) and that 9/11 did happen (which obviously it did). President Paul would have voted for the authority to go after those who harmed us, which he did. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Ron_Paul#Terrorism
He also introduced the introduced the Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001 which would allow us to go after the terrorists, not just after the countries that harbor them.

The problem is that the USA didn’t go after Bin Laden in Afghanistan. Rather we went after Saddam who had no link to Bin Laden according to the 9/11 commission report.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5228545/ns/msnbc_tv-hardball_with_chris_matthews/t/commission-no-link-between-bin-laden-saddam/#.TvFPxdRSQsI

In fact, Ron Paul would have killed Bin Laden in 2001 when he was cornered in Tora Bora
http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2011/05/bin-laden-dead-why-didnt-we-get-him.html

To recap:

  1. 9/11 would not have happened under President Paul (or constitution lover like him)
  2. In the event of a 9/11 like attack happening, he would go after those who actually did the dirty deed, not some random dictator.
  3. Under President Paul, Bin Laden would have been killed 10 years earlier than under Bush/Obama

Remember, Ron Paul is the only candidate with military experience, and has raised more money than all other GOP candidates combined (and also more money than Obama) from military and their families. http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2011/07/ron-paul-military-campaign-donations-/1 He is much more trustworthy on foreign policy than someone like Gingrich who dodged his draft orders. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/newt/boyernewt2.html

Thanks again for another quality debate! See you soon,

-DM

P.S. Just for fun, here is Ron Paul predicting the economic collapse – http://youtu.be/9S3lXDOQ7ec

Really Long Email to my Aunt

September 15, 2011

Hi all!  Yep, I agree, being politically involved in today’s world is vital.  Too many people focus on football and American idol… meanwhile the country is falling apart!

Unfortunately, not all of the GOP candidates are pro 2nd amendment, and few are as aggressively supportive as Ron Paul.  I’m glad to hear you like a lot of what he says, and that it’s his stance on moral issues that are troublesome.  In a ‘free’ country, moral issues should not be dictated by the government, but decided on an individual basis so those issues shouldn’t stand in the way of voting for him in the upcoming primary.  Generally speaking, these moral issues are decisive games that politicians play to win votes, but really have little impact on the country… at least compared to war / an economic collapse / a monetary collapse. 

Marriage:

To me, this is an easy one.   I think it’s important for us to understand our roles as Christians, and as citizens and where the two delineate.  The First Amendment states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Federally defining marriage is clearly making a law that respects an establishment of religion.  As Christians, you and I can decide that marriage is between a man and a woman, and we can even promote that idea through the Church, and in our interpersonal interactions.  However, as citizens, we don’t have constitutional authority to define marriage… at least not in a ‘free’ country.  There are lots of things that we oppose as Christians that are legal.  Let’s take the 10 commandments for example:

 

 

  • I am the Lord your God.  You shall have no other gods before me. – legal
  • You shall not make for yourself an idol. – legal
  • Do not take the name of the Lord in vain. – legal
  • Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy. – legal
  • Honor your father and your mother. – legal
  • You shall not kill/murder. – it is illegal to kill
  • You shall not commit adultery. – legal
  • You shall not steal. – it is illegal to steal
  • You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. – legal unless you are under oath
  • You shall not covett your neighbor’s wife. – legal.
So 80% of the 10 commandments (while they are obviously wrong to break) are perfectly legal.  For the U.S. Gov to insist on defining marriage to preserve the moral fabric of the country, shouldn’t that mean that they need to make all of the 10 commandments illegal too?  Shouldn’t they make divorce illegal?  Obviously I’m being sarcastic.   

It’s also interesting to study the origins of modern marriage.  We’ve only had federally recognized marriage for about 100 years, and the reason the government got in to the marriage business was (they said) for health reasons.  The reality, is they didn’t know the ramifications of interracial marriage and because they were afraid of it, they decided to make it illegal   Now, interracial marriage is commonplace, but we are left with the government deeming who is allowed to fall in love (and be recognized) and who is not.  In other words, when George Washington was married, it was not federally recognized… and why should it have to be?  The REAL way to protect the definition of marriage is to let the CHURCHES define it… not the government.  If anything, I think we as Christians should be offended that the government gets to decide who is married and who is not.

As for Ron Paul’s other more ‘out there’ issues, I say this:  Freedom means having the ability to make good and bad decisions.  After all, if we are free only to make good decisions… are we really free?  Does the prohibition of marijuana help anyone?  The prohibition of alcohol gave rise to Al Capone and the gangsters of that era.  Prohibition actually gives power to criminals who will sell it on the black market.  I live in CA where it is easier for under age people to get MJ than it is for them to get alcohol. Keep in mind, I am saying this as someone who has never smoked marijuana, and I never would no matter if it is legal or not.  There are plenty of things that are already legal that I also won’t be doing because I’m capable of making those decisions for myself.

In conclusion (and again, call me crazy) I think God wants us to choose Him, and choose to trust Him and live our life according to His will.  I don’t think there is anything to be gained by forcing others who have not made that Godly commitment to live in His ways.  If anything, I think this pushes people farther from God and alienates them from the Church.  Regardless, if we tell people we are a free society, we should act that way.

Sources

 

 

 

Capital Punishment

I’ve read lots of Christian debate on Capital Punishment and it confuses me honestly.  I personally will stick to “thou shalt not kill.”  While we are on the topic, though, here is a great bit of scripture: 1 Samuel 8:10.  The more I look at our government, the more it resembles an old kingdom… and that really bugs me.

 

Sources

 

 

 

Electability

This is where the media bias just crushes Paul unfairly.  He actually has the best chance against Obama, but the media is viciously anti Ron Paul… and to me that is more confirmation that he is the right guy.  Here are some stats to back up what I am saying:

 

Long story short, don’t believe MSM.  Ron has a great chance to win… they just don’t want him to.  After all, the only thing it takes for him to win… is for him to get more votes than the next guy!  Nobody thought Obama would get elected… and look at the mess we are in now.
Really Awesome Videos

 

 

 


Conclusion

Thanks so much for listening to my craziness.  I agree with you completely – we need to find the best candidate.  The Country can not withstand very many more lying politicians.   I see the big three issues as 1) the economy, 2) health care, and 3) foreign policy.  Fortunately Ron Paul is the only 1) economist, 2) doctor, and 3) Military (air force) person in the race!  

Much love (and thanks for the robust debate),

I actually agree that the ultra rich should pay more in taxes, and do agree with Buffett that the line should be drawn somewhere around the $1 million mark, not the $250K mark as others would suggest. One tax analyst I was watching said that this would raise something like $50 billion in the first year… but that is supposing that all of the people who make $1M decide to stay in the country. I imagine at least some would leave the country. Let’s say they don’t, and the gov raises an extra $50B… so what. That’s a drop in the bucket compared to the… what $12+ trillion of debt?

It’s silly to figure out what the government is spending, and then just try to raise that much money. That presupposes that everything the government spends money on is worthwhile… including war, the “vanishing 25 billion,” TSA, etc. What if the government decided to provide computers for all of us… that’s obviously not the role of government, but should we just raise taxes to meet that demand, or should we actually question what the government spends money on?

The end issue is philanthropy. They tell us that taxes feed the hungry and educate small children and every other fluffy thing they can think of. The reality is that most of the income tax goes to pay the interest on our debt to the federal reserve… so it goes to the bankers. State property taxes pay for schools, and capital gains taxes pay for defense. Federal money does not cover local roads, etc.

At the end of the day, I’d like to see money going to the disadvantaged, not lining the pockets of bankers and politicians, or funding wars and corrupt governments of other countries. What I’d like to see here is some REAL incentives to give to charities. Now, you get a tax deduction that is so small, it’s hardly worth declaring unless you are ultra rich in the first place, and donated tons of money. If in place of a deduction, I could outright REPLACE my taxes (or some percentage thereof) with charitable gifts, I’d make a freaking HOBBY out of charity. In other words, if I could pay 30% in taxes, or pay 10% in taxes and give 20% to give to the charity of my choice, I’d much rather give to charity directly. This also cuts the fat out of the middle man so that the people in need get a higher percentage of my gifts. I don’t have to pay someone to give someone else my money. I’d also feel like I was actually making a difference as opposed to throwing money into the black hole of government.

Another idea is the “opt out” idea. I’d like it if there was an option to pay 10% – 15% federal income tax, and then opt out of some of what the federal government provides. Opt out of social security (because let’s face it, we won’t get it anyway), opt out of medicare and medicade and save/invest/ get our own insurance. Then if the people who believe in the system decide to pay 30%-50% in taxes, more power to them.

I digress.

As it relates to this article, I think Buffett sort of implies in on sentence in the middle that higher taxes means more jobs… which is obviously silly. Even if the government could create jobs, we have no indication that the jobs they decide to create are worthwhile. One of my favorite economists Milton Friedman was in China and some of the government officials were showing him around. They went by a construction site, and there were hundreds if not thousands of Chinese citizens digging a foundation. He asked why they were not using modern machinery – that would make their task much more efficient. The government officials that he was with said “that’s true, but this is a jobs program.” He replied, “I see. Well, if you wanted to create more jobs, you could take away their shovels and give them spoons.” Having jobs for the sake of having jobs is as silly for taxing just for the sake of taxing. The market leads people to make good decisions on how to spend their money carefully. Central economic planners are wasteful because they can’t be as precise as lots of collective individuals.

I’m also wondering how long it takes to raise the taxes for the rich… it seems as though Obama has been in office for a while, and enjoyed a democratic house and senate for the first two years of his term… is it naive of me to think he could have done this? I think not; I think it’s naive for anyone to still believe there is any difference at all in these two parties.

P.S. the Super Committee is ridiculous. No constitutional authority, and small groups are very susceptible to corruption.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/who-pays-the-supercommittee/

Thanks for asking for my opinion 🙂 Sorry you actually got it.

Here is how we are told to act. First, pick a box to get into, then do not think outside of it. Politics asside, we are taught to have these attributes. Don’t believe me? Look at the props in Sean Hannity’s show for starters. Themes of football, country music, trucking, and the open road.

Democrats:
Transportation = Public Transpo or Small cars
Music = Broadway/Big Band
Computer = Apple
Sport = Baseball or Basketball
Home = Live in the Big City

Republicans:
Transportation = Trucks
Music = Country Music
Computer = PC
Sport = NASCAR or Football
Home = Live outside the big city

They are teaching us our roles… pushing us into boxes that they can control. You want out of the box? Take the red pill.

http://www.infowars.com

A friend asked me what I thought of the SOTU Address… here is what I sent him:

-first response

_____________________

False Recovery:

If you walk into a building and there is a crack on the wall, it’s responsible to patch it up.  Government (Bush, Obama, everyone for the last 40 years) has not fixted the crack in our economy, rather they put some paint on it.  Unfortunately the people won’t wake up to this until our dollar collapses and our economy bubble bursts again.  That is what Keynesian economics does, and that is what we have had in America for at least 4 decades.  We are just printing money, utilizing deficit financing, and we’re not allowing the market to adjust.  We’re not allowing the debt to liquidate which is what is supposed to happen in a correction.  Nobody in government want’s everything to fall apart on their watch, so they just patch things up enough to get to the next president.  It’s corrupt, and we ultimately pay the price.

Each job Obama said he created cost the taxpayers over $80K… for that kind of money he could have paid twice as many people to sit on their butts at home… then he could say he created TWICE as many jobs!  Even though they are jobs that we don’t need and are silly political games.

SOTU Fact Check: Obama Lies About Lobbyists
http://townhall.com/blog/g/6d127822-9bc5-4872-8648-dcadf09c6445

Obama won’t freeze budget:

I don’t like McCain, but HE proposed the budget freeze long ago… Obama is jumping on the bandwagon?

Obama lies about taxes:
Fact checks are being calculated as we speak so more will come on this.  However, when you inflate the currency like he and Bush did, you don’t have to tax.  You don’t take any money from the people… you just take it’s worth so it’s a tax you can hide.  No matter if he literally taxed more or not (which I am sure it will turn out that he did) he indirectly taxed us through evil inflation that is yet to catch up with us.

::BLOGS that I agree with on this topic::
http://maroonedinmarin.blogspot.com/2010/01/state-of-obamas-union-lies-arrogance-on.html
http://news-political.com/2010/01/28/what-was-your-favorite-lie-from-the-state-of-the-union-address/

…other than tha the just told the same lies he told to get elected.  I’ll bring the troops home, I’ll cut taxes, I’ll do health care reform (presumably not making it worse), etc.  He used it as a big PR move… didn’t tell the truth.  Funny that he is now ready to Drill (a conservative idea that he was opposed to at first) go necular (a conservative idea that he was opposed to at first)… there were a few more things that I’m sure the partisin (D)’s will love to hear that they only now like because he is saying it.  No loyalty to truth or what thing is best… just whatever the puppet president says.  The republicans did this with Bush too.  It’s amazing how partisin politics play the people like a flute.  It’s like nobody things for themselves.  McCain says freeze the budget, republicans say YES and democrats say NO.  Then Obama says freeze the budget… republicans say NO and democrats say YES.  Bunch of cowards is what everyone is.

You want to hear the real news?  Download and listen to this on your way to work:

-first response

Cry for Me, Argentina!

January 4, 2010

**another chain letter I received:

_______________________________________

In the early 20th century, Argentina was one of the richest countries in the world. While Great Britain ‘s maritime power and its far-flung empire had propelled it to a dominant position among the world’s industrialized nations, only the United States challenged Argentina for the position of the world’s second-most powerful economy.

It was blessed with abundant agriculture, vast swaths of rich farmland laced with navigable rivers and an accessible port system. Its level of industrialization was higher than many European countries: railroads, automobiles and telephones were commonplace.

In 1916, a new president was elected. Hipólito Irigoyen had formed a party called The Radicals under the banner of “fundamental change” with an appeal to the middle class. (“Fundamental change”… now where have I heard that recently?)

Among Irigoyen’s changes: mandatory pension insurance, mandatory health insurance, and support for low-income housing construction to stimulate the economy. Put simply, the state assumed economic control of a vast swath of the country’s operations and began assessing new payroll taxes to fund its efforts. (Beginning to sound more familiar?)

With an increasing flow of funds into these entitlement programs, the government’s payouts soon became overly generous. Before long its outlays surpassed the value of the taxpayers’ contributions. Put simply, it quickly became under-funded, much like our Social Security and Medicare programs. (As will our Health Care and other programs!)

The death knell for the Argentine economy, however, came with the election of Juan Perón. Perón had a fascist and corporatist upbringing; he and his charismatic wife aimed their populist rhetoric at the nation’s rich. (Sounds more and more like our current death march into total collapse!)

This targeted group “swiftly expanded to cover most of the propertied middle classes, who became an enemy to be defeated and humiliated.” (And, more!)

Under Perón, the size of government bureaucracies exploded through massive programs of social spending and by encouraging the growth of labor unions. (Do you see the light?)

High taxes and economic mismanagement took their inevitable toll even after Perón had been driven from office. But his populist rhetoric and “contempt for economic realities” lived on. Argentina’s federal government continued to spend far beyond its means. (Can’t happen here you say…Yes it Can!)

Hyperinflation exploded in 1989, the final stage of a process characterized by “industrial protectionism, redistribution of income based on increased wages, and growing state intervention in the economy…” (Will Never Happen Here…it has already begun!)

The Argentinean government’s practice of printing money to pay off its public debts had crushed the economy. Inflation hit 3000%, reminiscent of the Weimar Republic . Food riots were rampant; stores were looted; the country descended into chaos. (Impossible! Do not wait to STOP IT!!!)

And by 1994, Argentina ‘s public pensions — the equivalent of Social Security — had imploded. The payroll tax had increased from 5% to 26%, but it wasn’t enough. In addition, Argentina had implemented a value-added tax (VAT), new income taxes, a personal tax on wealth, and additional revenues based upon the sale of public enterprises. These crushed the private sector, further damaging the economy. (Can only happen in those lesser countries! No, ARGENTINA was a World power stronger than the US!)

A government-controlled “privatization” effort to rescue seniors’ pensions was attempted. But, by 2001, those funds had also been raided by the government, the monies replaced by Argentina ‘s defaulted government bonds. (Hmmmm….just what is about to happen in the US!!!)

By 2002, “…government fiscal irresponsibility… induced a national economic crisis as severe as America ‘s Great Depression.” (Will we set on our hands and let that happen again… will we?)

We’ve seen this movie before. The politician’s populist plans NEVER work, because power corrupts and government bankrupts everything it touches. For those that will listen, history shouts over and over that we cannot sustain the wild spending and government takeover of business, banking, health care, and continue to inflate unfunded entitlement programs! Like history tells us, it will be utter and complete disaster!!!

Today’s politicians are guilty of more than arrogant stupidity; they are enslaving future generations to poverty and misery. And they will be long gone when it all implodes. They will be as cold and dead as Juan Perón when your children and grand children must ultimately pay for the blind arrogance of politicians!

THINK AMERICA !

WE ARE ALLOWING POLITICIANS TO REPEAT THE FAILURES OF HISTORY!

VOTE EVERY DEMOCRAT OUT OF PUBLIC OFFICE FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS OR THE ABOVE WILL BE YOUR FATE AND MINE FOREVER!!

THINK…. AND ACT ! !

PS…. while working America cuts back… Congress just increased “government expenditures” by 12% in the “Omnibus” spending bill of nearly half a TRILLION!

Here is just one example of “Government” waste…last year there was ONE person in the entire Dept. of Transportation making over $170,000!
This year that same “Government” Dept. has 1690 people making over $170,000! They are paid over $300,000,000 of our tax dollars for what????

Is your employer, or ANY company, doing that well? NO, they’re losing their business, being forced to lay off tax-payers, and having Democrats increase their taxes.
AND, this Democrat sponsored Omnibus bill has 5,224 earmarks (totally waste-full pork-barrel pay-offs) totaling $4,000,000,000! That’s your wasted taxes and mine tossed to the wind without a single care for the hard, hard work we women (and men) put into our jobs!

December 16, 2009

Dear C4L Member,

Early tomorrow, the Senate Banking Committee is expected to vote on Ben Bernanke’s nomination to a second term as Federal Reserve Chairman.

Click here to get contact information for Senate Banking Committee members.

Chairman Bernanke has operated without any real accountability while printing trillions of dollars out of thin air and keeping interest rates artificially low, practices that continue the destruction of our dollar and will eventually plunge our economy into an even greater crisis.

But the real issue at stake during this confirmation process is transparency at the Fed.

No one – whether a “Person of the Year” or not – should be able to commit us to deals with foreign central banks or give taxpayer dollars to Wall Street while refusing to tell us who is receiving our money.

When you call the Senate Banking Committee members, urge them to join Senators Jim DeMint, David Vitter, Jim Bunning, and Bernie Sanders by calling for a hold on Bernanke’s confirmation until there is an up or down vote on Audit the Fed (S. 604).

If neither of your senators are on the Banking Committee, click here to contact Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and tell him it is long past time Audit the Fed receive a standalone vote on the Senate floor.

In Liberty,

John Tate

President

This is a very important step back toward economic liberty.  More than half of the congress has co-sponsored the bill (including 80 democrats – so truly bi-partisan) and it asks for one simple thing.  Transparency.  After all, it’s our money, and our government… shouldn’t we have a right to know where all of the money the fed prints out of thin air goes?  This clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUreWxKGOkY) seems to indicate not even they know where it goes!

Update – the hypocrisy – government promises transparency… but does not take opportunities to deliver on that promise.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tRQHsXujpo

More information on auditing the Fed:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xx-UYvtSqeI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGAQIJWUJVU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpbW64vRrMc

Update – Freedom Watch – Judge Andrew Napolitano

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGAQIJWUJVU – the Fed’s response (besides hiring the Enron lobbyist)

Congressional report admits economic collapse was government’s fault:

http://americaswatchtower.com/2009/07/09/congressional-report-blames-the-governement-for-the-mortgage-crisis/

You can’t fairly blame the free market anymore – after all we have not had a true free market in this country for decades.  You can try to blame lack of regulators, but some of the big organizations that they say need regulation had literally hundreds of regulators already… and the answer can’t possibly be to give the federal reserve the power to regulate the banks.  Did you know the federal reserve is a private organization?  It’s a bank… for the banks.  Giving it the power to regulate – isn’t that like allowing banks to regulate themselves?  Actually reading the plan, one learns that many of the ‘regulations’ become optional anyway (so it’s a big bank regulating (in many ways) itself… but only if it wants to).  You can read the entire plan here: http://thehill.com/images/stories/news/2009/june/white%20paper.pdf – and a critique of it here: http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=20147

If I’m wrong about any of this I’d love to hear about it so I can continue the learning process.  If you agree, contact your government here – https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml and tell them to support HR 1207 and government transparency.  Also, feel free naturally to forward this to others if you want.

I hope you all are having a wonderful week!  I wish the best to you.

Joe Biden: donated $369 last year to charity, and Barack Obama donated 1 % of his salary.

These stats were taken from Glenn Beck’s revision and addition to Thomas Paine’s Common Sense

This was sent to me – enjoy!

How Gubment Works

Once upon a time the government had a vast scrap yard in the middle of a desert. Congress said, “Someone may steal from it at night.”  So they created a night watchman position and hired a person for the job.

Then Congress said, “How does the watchman do his job without instruction?” So they created a planning department and hired two people, one person to write the instructions, and one person to do time studies.

Then Congress said, “How will we know the night watchman is doing the tasks correctly?” So they created a Quality Control department and hired two people. One to do the studies and one to write the reports.

Then Congress said, “How are these people going to get paid?” So they created the following positions, a time keeper and a payroll officer, then hired two people.

Then Congress said, “Who will be accountable for all of these people?”
So they created an administrative section and hired three people, an
Administrative Officer, Assistant Administrative Officer and a Legal
Secretary.

Then Congress said, “We have had this command in operation for one year and we are $18,000 over budget, we must cutback overall cost.”

So they laid off the night watchman.

NOW slowly.

Let it sink in.

Quietly, we go like sheep to slaughter.

Does anybody remember the reason given for the establishment of the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY?

Anybody?

Anything?

No?

Didn’t think so!

Bottom line. We’ve spent several hundred billion dollars in support of an agency …  the reason for which not one person who reads this can remember!

Ready??

It was very simple … and at the time, everybody thought it very appropriate.

The Department of Energy was instituted on 8-04-1977, TO LESSEN OUR DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL.

Hey, pretty efficient, huh???

AND NOW, IT’S 2009 — 32 YEARS LATER — AND THE BUDGET FOR THIS
“NECESSARY” DEPARTMENT IS AT $24.2 BILLION A YEAR. THEY HAVE 16,000
FEDERAL EMPLOYEES AND APPROXIMATELY 100,000 CONTRACT EMPLOYEES; AND LOOK AT THE JOB THEY HAVE DONE! THIS IS WHERE YOU SLAP YOUR FOREHEAD AND SAY, “WHAT WAS I THINKING?”
AH, YES — GOOD OLE BUREAURCRACY.

AND, NOW, WE ARE GOING TO TURN THE BANKING SYSTEM, HEALTH CARE AND THE AUTO INDUSTRY OVER TO THE SAME GOVERNMENT?