Greatest Economy?

When you look around at all the homeless, and are told unemployment is at an all time low, do you scratch your head and wonder how those two "facts" are compatible? When you see all the stores closing or hear about all the layoffs at financial firms, and read that the economy is "the greatest ever" do you even give the seemingly opposites another thought?

You should. Both statistics are Jerry-rigged beyond belief, but I'm just going to be talking about the supposedly booming economy. Because it's not. Far from it, in fact.

Remember way back in 2008-09 when we were introduced to something called "Qualitative Easing" or Q.E? For those of us not familiar with finance-speak, it simply meant the Treasury printed a whole bunch of money and shoveled it at the major players, such as the "Too Big To Fail" banks. It was a temporary, one-time measure to save the economy of the United States from crashing into a full depression. And it worked, for a bit. Remember the "temporary" part though, we'll be coming back to that.

That massive infusion of cash help bring back the market from the precipice, but we didn't use the near disaster as a teaching moment. Despite the best efforts of a few in congress and elsewhere, no measures were taken to prevent banks from gambling with your money. The reality ended up being that the major players on Wall Street being even freer to take risky investment opportunities. To the point that the banks are even more over-leveraged than in 2008! "Over-leveraged" simply means that they have nowhere near the liquidity, or cash in the vaults, to cover the bets they have made. Make no mistake, the stock market is every bit as much of a gambling operation as a horse race betting kiosk!

As Obama's 8 year run was coming to a close, the economy was for all outwards appearances, doing pretty well. Jobs were being added, and the Stock Markets were still climbing. But there were signs of cracks. Wages had still been stagnant, even declining. Investors and hedge funds were getting further into risky areas with nobody to rein them in.

Then comes The Donald into the Oval Office with a Republican Congress salivating to start weilding legislative machetes at any and all "Business Killing" regulations. Particularly any that might have been enacted by the Obama administration.

That, all by itself was enough to stimulate our economy as businesses, particularly the finacial industry, saw it as a green light to splash around lots of cash. But Republicans, seeing they had a tool in the executive office who would likely sign anything they put on his desk, passed the biggest gift to the wealthy and the multi-national corporations ever handed to them: the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. That massive infusion of free money spurred stock buybacks, driving up the stock markets and giving the appearance of a roaring economy.

But that bucket is dry now. There's nowhere left to go, and the overall economy should be slowing like the brakes are locked up. What's going on? We've seen daily dips in the Dow and NASDAQ that in "normal" times past would have scared hell out of everyone, notably the investment crowd.

Remember Quantitative Easing? The "one time" injection of cash into Wall Street and the "too big to fail" banks? So far we're into Round Three of Q.E.! Plus the Federal Reserve bank has been busily repurchasing bonds and stocks to halt downward spirals from continuing.

This is  the greatest economy in the history of our country? If so, why is it in need of these sorts of finagling?

How about that supposed 3.5% unemployment? Doesn't that figure clash with the exploding problem with homelessness? Simple; the fed monkeys with that statistic as well! It's easy to do when the percentage only relates to individuals actively looking for work. It does not include the thousands who have simply given up on looking for a job. Nor does it figure in those that are underemployed; that is, working a full-time job. According to the Department Of Labor, Full-time means averaging 30 hours a week or more. Sorry, but I don't consider someone who can't even afford to keep a roof over their heads to have a full-time job.

Let's not even get into the definition of a living wage. Anyone working for a paycheck should earn enough to have a decent space to live, put food on the table, support their children, and be able to take a little time off for a vacation every year.

From Franklin Delano Roosvelt: No business which depends for existence on paying less than living wages to its workers has any right to continue in this country.

Historically Low Unemployment?

I keep hearing that the homeless issue is purely a drug problem.

There's not a single easy answer. But what we all need to keep in our minds is that homelessness, yes and drugs, are symptoms. We have a far larger set of problems that are the cause.

Our government boasts about historically low unemployment, but at the same time homeless camps and people reduced to sleeping on the streets or in their cars. That just doesn't jibe with low unemployment. The government calculates unemployment by definition, not by realithy. The definition refers to "People looking for work." Obviously this doesn't apply to the majority living on the street. It's pretty hard to look for work when you don't have an address, let alone a phone number. Or a place to take a shower. The official unemployment rate is nothing but smoke & mirrors.

There are many things that could end with a person, or family finding themselves without a home. When people feel like they've played by the rules, but due to health issues, or rising housing costs, or job loss, or just stagnant wages, they lose their place to live. When one is forced to live like this, and see no way back, they lose hope. When people have no hope, they turn to drugs or alcohol to get them through their miserable days. If I had to sleep on the street, I believe I'd try to medicate myself into painless stupor as well!

Far from trying to deal with the real issues, it seems to be easier to just lock them away. But that can't work as our jails are full to bursting already. If the cops issue a ticket for vagrancy or whatever the offense will be called, the offender will not be able to pay whatever fines, so warrants are issued. But that brings us back to the part where there's no place to warehouse them.

Without addressing the problems at the top, there will be more on the way.

Outsourcing & automation, not so much illegals, are taking people's jobs. As time goes on, more and more jobs will go this route. Even jobs that once seemed secure are no longer immune. Watched a presentation not long ago where a combination of robotry & 5G data would allow a surgeon to operate on a patient on the other side of the world. Autonomous vehicles will put truckers & other drivers out of work soon. Toss the mentally ill into the mix and explode the nightmare! Since Saint Ronnie shut down care for mental patients in the 80s we've decided that the police are the way to handle them. Back we go to the overcrowded jails.

So-called 'Conservatives' say we need to do something about mental illness rather than do anything about guns. They don't see the need for the infrastructure to care for other illnesses, but we're going to take care of people with a mental illness somehow. Like that isn't going to create a host of other issues, not least of which the inevitable legal challenges when someone feels they have been declared incompetent or the nightmare when someone is declared 'sane' and shoots up a kindergarten with his legal firearm!

Okay, rant over. Mine's the nice white jacket with the sleeves that buckle in the back. I'll just leave the soapbox over here in case someone else needs to use it. Perhaps for firewood.

So what to do?

I was discussing the state of things this morning with another fella. Not sure of his views, other than he seems to watch Faux Noise. We were discussing the homeless here in town, and I said something about not having the money to pay for housing, he smirked and said "or drugs." No way would I deny that there is not some reality behind his comment, but it seems to stem from the whole "if they are living on the street, it's their own fault" mentality.

Let aside for the moment whether that is even a little bit true or not, how is it that in the richest nation in the world, a country that spends more on its military than all the other developed countries of the world combined, we can't find a way to provide adequate housing for those that need and want it?

We have an entire segment of our society that believes if you are broke and living on the street, or if you can't feed your kids, its your fault! Why should society have to pay for it?

As a nation we will be judged on, among other things, how much compassion we have shown for the least among us. I shudder to think how historians will view "this grand experiment" in the light of our inability to see further than our own selfish desires. From our refusal to educate the next generation, to our willingness to let those without medical care suffer and die from easily preventable or treatable conditions.

When I was young, I read avidly the works of authors like Asimov and Heinlein. I dreamed with them of a future so grand that robots and technology replaced grinding labor for all. When one could pursue any endeavor without having to worry about the next meal. A future where a person could dedicate their time to exploring, writing, painting, or just thinking. There are people who love to build things; let them! People who want to drive a taxi; have at it!

I know, I'm lost in a utopian dream, but it's a dream that could become a reality if there was just the national will to accomplish it. We have the robotics for the most part. We have the money, although it's locked away in the vaults of the super wealthy. It goes beyond socialism. It doesn't prevent one from becoming wealthy, if one wants. It merely establishes a baseline below which we allow no citizen to fall. A baseline that requires everyone to have adequate food, housing, and healthcare plus a stipend to pay for clothing and other items.

It could be done. In most Scandinavian countries, it is being done. Yes, Denmark, for example, has the highest tax rate in the world. But they don't blow it on a bloated military, either. It is spent on education, infrastructure, and social welfare. Guess what? Denmark is number one on the recent global happiness survey. The US did not even make the top ten.

Why can the United States not be the same kind of country? The very country that our Founding Fathers envisioned.

Not the corrupt Plutocracy that we currently are stuck with.

"Good" Christians

I was having a discussion the other day with a colleague I have known and done business with for many years. A guy I thought I knew fairly well. Our conversations in the past, I guess, had never really ventured into politics, as what transpired frankly surprised me. My friend has never made any attempt to hide his Born-Again Christian beliefs, but to his credit, has never tried any serious attempt to proselytize. In fact, I’m not even sure he knows that I am an atheist.

Our conversation turned to the current situation at the border with Mexico and that’s when stuff got weird. First he started into the old rant about how broke the country was, and therefore could not afford to care for all these children. Okaaay, but doesn’t your Bible tell us to care for others that are unable to care for themselves?* Not, apparently, when those others should not be here in the first place!

His solution is that we should finish the wall that would shut down the border. Apparently we have enough money for this. When I pointed out that the existing wall has not yet even slowed the immigration, he exclaimed that illegals should be “shot on sight!” No exceptions. Man, woman or child. No mercy. That, by God would fix the problem!

Frankly, I was stunned to silence, which I suppose led him to think he had won the discussion by the force of his wit. Far from it, what left me speechless was that this man considers himself a devout Christian. Further, that it was obvious that this opinion could not be his alone, but was likely shared by his Pastor and the other members of his church. I have no idea which church this man attends or the size of its congregation, but I wonder how many others out there share those views? How can these people possibly consider themselves to be Christians? I may be an atheist, but I was raised in a Christian family, attended church until my teens, and have likely read more of the Bible than most. Nowhere in it do I recall any discussion of borders with guard towers and machine guns murdering any that dare try to cross.

*1 John 3:17-18

But whoever has the world's goods, and sees his brother in need and closes his heart against him, how does the love of God abide in him? Little children, let us not love with word or with tongue, but in deed and truth.

Found this recently in an article on Huffington Post about the Conservative knack for re-ordering history. On this occasion, bemoaning the fact that the stimulus "failed to avert the recession."

It's just too cool not to re-post:

"Conservatism: a delusional force so powerful it can bend the space-time continuum." ~RJ Eskow

For the rest of the article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rj-eskow/five-years-after-the-stim_b_4812113.html

On "American" Business

The rich don't care about America. Most hardly even consider themselves citizens except when it is convenient to be one. Most of the big corporations are now what we refer to as "multi-national." Even that icon of American enterprise; Coca-Cola, now does something on the order of 80% of its business in countries other than the U.S! That includes not just sales, but manufacturing, distribution, advertising, etc.

So what does that mean?

It means that when they are lobbying Washington, or trying to influence the vote through their PACs, they are not in the least interested in changing anything for the public good. Only their own. 

We don't allow Chinese citizens the right to vote in our elections, or make decisions on foreign relations. We don't allow Saudi citizens to dictate our defense policy do we?

Well, yes we do. When we allow these multi-nationals to have the slightest sway in the running of our government  we are allowing this and more. 

We have been selling off our infrastructure to foreign investors for years. The current system is a farce. These investors now have input and control on the very laws and regulatory systems designed to protect the U.S. from foreign malfeasance. Why do you think there has been such a concerted effort to gut EPA, Customs, and FDA inspections? Currently, less than 1% of all shipments coming into this country's ports are inspected.  More stringent inspections might hurt the profits of the Taiwanese owned company that operates the terminals in Los Angeles, Oakland, Seattle, and Alaska.

I galls me when I hear Conservatives arguing for less regulation and more "freedom" for business when I know they are not thinking about the public good.

The fury over the Keystone XL pipeline comes to mind. Conservatives are so eager for more oil they don't even begin to consider that the forces that are pushing for this pipeline have not the slightest interest in the common good of Americans. The oil is not destined for the U.S. market. If it was, there would be no need to pipe it to the gulf coast. The pipeline is to be laid for one purpose: To mightily enrich a cabal of multi-national corporations and their masters at the risk to the environment of the United States. Little of the revenues generated will end up on these shores. And if the pipeline breaks? So what? The movers and shakers responsible won't have to live with the effects.

I don't know how we can fix this rigged system, but I do know we have to at least begin the dialogue!

FDR's Second Bill Of Rights

On January 11, 1944, as the country prepared for D-Day and the invasion of Normandy, Franklin Delano Roosevelt was already laying out his vision of what a post-war America should be. In his State of the Union speech FDR discussed the recommendations that the President had made to the Congress to stabilize the economy, including a new tax bill, a food price control law, currency stabilization measures, and a national service law. He also included the following:


"It is our duty now to begin to lay the plans and determine the strategy for the winning of a lasting peace and the establishment of an American standard of living higher than ever before known. We cannot be content, no matter how high that general standard of living may be, if some fraction of our people—whether it be one-third or one-fifth or one-tenth—is ill-fed, ill-clothed, ill-housed, and insecure.

Why aren't we even talking about this?

It's been quite a while since I've posted anything. The situation seems so immune to change. But at least I can bellyache even if I can't change anything.

Why is it that in every discussion about budget cuts, including those coming from the President and other high-level Democrats, there is little to nothing said about the military? 

We have something on the order of over 900 Flag Officers (Generals & Admirals) each with million dollar retinues to cater to their every whim. They have six-figure salaries, government provided mansions, cars and private jets. And when they retire on their six-figure retirement plans, a lot of them join companies like Raytheon, GE, Lockheed or the like to peddle more waste back to Congress and their erstwhile colleagues in the military. The waste here is incredible! How many kids could we educate with the savings from just slashing these cadres in half?

Why do we need to have over 700 military bases scattered around the world, not even counting the ones we built in Iraq and Afghanistan? How long could we extend Medicare for just the savings of closing half of those bases?

Why on earth do we need eleven aircraft carriers, when the rest of the world combined has only ten? And most of those belong to our allies. How many billions are spent each year on these carrier groups? How many years could Social Security be extended if we just reduced the size of our Navy by half?

The Pentagon plans to buy a total of 2,443 F-35 fighters at a rough average cost of around two hundred million dollars apiece. For what? Blowing up more goat-herders in the Middle East? I won't even suggest depriving the Generals and Congress their shiny new jets, but if they just cut that number by half, they'd save $244 billion dollars! How many bridges and highways could be repaired with that money?

But what are we arguing about? How big of a tax break we will be giving millionaires and corporations. And how many benefits we will be slashing to the poor and the elderly.

What the fuck are we doing?

America as a third world country

You don't think we're there yet? Check out this Google search result.

Was I Googling for Haiti? Pakistan? Fucking Cuba?

 Nope, I searched for "tent city America". The so-called "Recession" has resulted in these popping up from Seattle to Portland, Maine. From Los Angeles to Miami and all stops in between. These people, for the most part, are folks just like you and me. Caught in the trap of having lost their jobs, used up their unemployment insurance, and kicked out of their homes, they are camping out in hopes of a better day.

While the 1% get richer and the Politicians argue whether to give them more tax breaks or the right to pollute our environment so they can steal more money from this land, local governments are trying to deal with the homeless problem.

How? By passing new and tougher laws criminalizing homelessness.

It's starting to look like a significant portion of the voting public won't be able to bestir themselves to get to the polls in Nov '12 unless something changes radically. The Republicans don't seem to have a candidate they can rally around, and the left is pretty much disgusted with Obama. Of course, the center never really cared much either way, so their vote is completely up for grabs.

So which way will it go? Who the hell am I to try to predict.

But thinking about this has brought me to a realization of sorts. In the long run, it might be a good thing for the country if the Republicans won overwhelmingly. They have dug themselves so deep into the Tea Party line, that four more years of Republican insanity just might wake the country up from its fat, happy slumber.

Can you imagine, not just repealing Obamacare, but eliminating Medicare? How about privatizing Social Security? Eliminating the FDA and EPA? The Department of Education? All gone.

How long do you suppose it will take before we have rivers catch fire again? Until the smog in major cities makes Beijing look like paradise? How many will die from salmonella or e-coli? When all our kids are going to for-profit schools? We can barely regulate the drug companies now, what about when all our pharmaceuticals are being imported from China?

Oh, and we'll be accelerating the race to the bottom in wages, until everybody is working for Wal-Mart salaries. But it's OK, you'll be able to supplement your income with the hours you work every week at your second job at McDonald's.

If the country can survive it, maybe we'll be able to get together and force a movement to get the profiteers out of government and put the country back on a sane track.

*sigh* Or not. Your mileage may vary.

Of Hell & Handbaskets

After all the smoke and fury of the debt ceiling "debates", what exactly have we accomplished?

Nothing positive that I can see. It's still likely that the rating agencies will lower our coveted AAA status. After all, this debacle was the equivalent of buying a car on credit, then a year or two into the process, having a very  loud debate in the lobby of the bank in front of the manager's office over whether or not you cared to continue payment on the loan. Sound silly? It is!

We were not debating whether to run up more debt, we were debating whether we were going to pay for all the stuff Congress already bought.

So is the resultant agreement going to solve anything? Nope. In fact, the austerity measures called for in the bill without any attempt to raise revenues will likely choke off any hope of recovery from the recession, and may arguably worsen it. The Republicans held hostage by the Tea Party will not even discuss anything having to do with raising taxes on their wealthy overlords, and without at least repealing the Bush tax cuts, there is a popsicle's chance in hell of bringing down the deficit. Not with billions going to wars in the Middle East and to supporting a military that spends more than all the other developed nations in the world combined.


The only thing that will solve our deficit, and the recession, is jobs. Not jobs at Wal-Mart or McDonalds, but real, full-time jobs that pay a living wage. Failing that, collect taxes from the wealthy and corporations that are  currently paying less than the janitors that clean their offices. Even better, do both and use the funds to rebuild America's crumbling infrastructure. There's a job creator!

Cutting all those government funds is going to mean more layoffs, not less. People that lose a good paying job and are forced into a low wage position won't be buying new cars, or homes, or anything more than basic food and rent. They likely won't have health insurance either, at a time when Medicare and Medicaid are under the axe.

When the Republicans took office last year, they promised a "relentless focus on creating jobs".

So far, all we've seen is a relentless focus on driving the country off a cliff, just so they can hopefully blame it all on Obama next year.

I'm not seeing anything to feel positive about.

Oh, noes. Not again!

Matt Taibbi, about whom I've written previously, has written a new piece about Corporate America's ongoing rape of the country. In 2004, the Bush government gave a tax holiday to major corporations to allow them to "repatriate" their offshore earnings as they are supposedly only subject to tax when they bring them back into the country. The deal that the lobbyists sold was that these huge sums of money, once put back into the American economy would be used to create jobs etc. etc.

Only, as we have seen, it didn't. The money was paid out in insane bonuses to top executives and shareholders, or invested in the Wall Street bubble in full steam at the time.

Now they are making noises about doing it again as part of the debt reduction package circulating the Hill as we speak. For the same reason as before, too. The businesses, suddenly flush with all that cash, will immediately begin building factories and office towers and solve the job crisis!

What could possibly go wrong?

Doing the same thing again and again expecting a different result is the definition of insanity.

Make some noise. Write or call your Congress-critter and tell them we need jobs, not more Corporate Wealthfare!

Read the whole article here:

Corporate Tax Holiday in Debt Ceiling Deal: Where's the Uproar?

Aitch Eff See Ess

There is a huge controversy about High Fructose Corn Syrup, or H.F.C.S. What it is, what it does, and is it a cheap sweetener, or poison. I've done a lot of research on the subject, and the best I can come up with is: all of the above.

H.F.C.S. is a derivative of corn. A leftover, if you will, processed with enzymes, of the procesesses that render corn into myriad different products that are finding their way into our food supply these days.

Because corn is subsidized by our government, (another post coming on that) H.F.C.S. and other corn products like, for example, ethanol, are cheap and abundant. We grow more corn in the US than any other crop. H.F.C.S. finds its way into a myriad of food products that would surprise most consumers. I recently bought a box of saltines only to find that H.F.C.S. was prominent among its list of ingredients.

Saltines, really?

Anyway, to my point; H.F.C.S. has some very negative effects on our health that have been documented in great detail elsewhere, but even more important is the fact that sugars are being added to our diet without our knowledge across the board by manufacturers seeking, to put it simply, make their products taste better.

So what's wrong with that? Shouldn't a manufacturer of a food product want to make it as tasty as possible?

Well of course. But this amounts to cheating. Just think; would you have a problem with Coca Cola if they were still putting cocaine in their sodas to hook your kids on them? But that's different, you say; cocaine's an addictive drug! I submit that the added sugars in most prepared foods are the same. Especially for kids. We're not talking about candy and pop here. We're talking about things like my saltines, breads, sauces, canned tomatoes, cereal, shoot look for yourself.

At best there are no health benefits, in fact, they are greatly contributing to the obesity epidemic in the US. In addition, HFCS has been liked to liver and kidney disease. It's not a coincidence that the beginnings of the type two diabetes increase and the introduction of HFCS into the market occur over the identical time period.

Read the labels, guys! You are gonna be shocked at how many products contain HFCS, or just sugar, for that matter.

Griftopia

I just finished reading the well-researched, often profane, and supremely eye-popping book from Rolling Stone's Matt Taibbi which he calls "Griftopia".

Wow. Just...wow.

A lot of this book is about stuff that we may have already heard rumors and half-baked reports about. What Taibbi has done is to pull together all those rumors and facts and weeded through them for their underlying morsels of truth. He has taken research and reporting and woven a fact driven account of the intentional and ruthless ripping off of this country over the last twenty to thirty years.

So why should you read this book? I dunno, if you wonder at all about how we got to the crash of '08, or why gas prices keep balooning, even though there is no shortage of supply. What is "speculation" and why is it suddenly responsible for gas price increases? How do "Hedge funds" work and why all of a sudden do they earn so much freaking money? What is this dismantling of the regulatory environment that we keep hearing about, and exactly who is behind it? Sounds mind-numbingly financial and, well, boring doesn't it?

It's not. In fact it's a riveting read. Taibbi manages to get the interviews, pull together the documentation, and interpret the results in a manner that's as easy to read as, well, Rolling Stone. And yet, damn, I can't help but wonder how it is that a reporter for a fan-mag ends up writing about some of the biggest financial and political frauds in the history of the country.

Simple. Taibbi was assigned to follow the '08 election campaigns for the paper. In doing so, he heard and saw things that surprised him and piqued his curiosity as a reporter. Stuff that other, more mainstream colleagues knew, and in some cases, joked about. He decided to investigate further, and Rolling Stone encouraged him in doing so. None of the big outlets that we depend on for our news would dare touch it. They depend on the perpetrators either directly or indirectly for their revenue. Rolling Stone suffers from no such constraints. Again, our much vaunted Fourth Estate has abandoned it's mission of reigning in the more egregious violators in our government and industry.

The truly gut wrenching part of the whole picture is that all Americans should be screaming bloody murder about the crimes that have been, and are still being committed. Our courts should be fully occupied with bringing the people that wrecked the world's economy to justice and returning the stolen trillions(yes, that's trillions!) to the victims. Instead, not only have the criminals been given a free pass and a bailout, but they are still doing the same legalized roulette at the expense of taxpayers. Then they are given tax breaks for doing so.

Pick up a copy of Griftopia. Or go down to your local Library(remember what those are?) and check it out. It's a great read. In fact, it should be required reading for high school kids.

Oh, and here's a link to Taibbi's blog

Uncertainty?

Every time a Republican opens their mouth to talk about the reason business is not hiring, it's the "uncertainty" surrounding federal regulations, taxes, or (dire organ music) Obamacare!


I listened to Michelle Bachmann avoid answering Bob Shieffer's questions on Meet the Press Sunday. One of her long winded expostulations had to do with the "thousands" of business owners she has talked to and their unanimous feeling that it was the uncertainty in the regulatory climate that was preventing them from expanding or hiring.


OK, I can't claim to have discussed the issue with thousands of business owners, but I've talked to a few and I work for one. They have a much simpler take on the situation:

Misplaced priorities

I find myself once again agreeing with P.Z. Myers. Over at his blog Pharyngula, he comments on Joe Biden listing examples of what he considers government waste. While there is unavoidable truth in what Joe says, it only serves to illustrate how messed up this whole debate is. Biden talks about a website the gov't, for whatever reason, has dedicated to the Desert Tortoise. A project which costs the taxpayers a whopping $125 per year. More on that if you're interested here.

With our defense budget larger than all the rest of the developed world combined, Joe is gonna cure the deficit by eliminating a $125 website. We now have two and a half wars going on, military bases 'round the world and the world's largest navy. But do we hear any serious discussion about reducing military spending? Oh sure, they say they are going to stop using so many paper clips at the Pentagon, and the on again off again new engines that nobody, including the Air Force wants for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter are currently off again. (I think.) But nobody is talking about closing down unneeded bases in Europe, or Japan, or the Phillipines, or Korea, or dog knows where else. No one's seriously talking yet about ending our involvement in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Pakistan. Hell, we just decided that Libya was a neat place to waste money, and now I hear we've got troops in Yemen. I just listened to McCain bloviating about the need to back up the poor Syrians as well.

In the words of John Boehner: "We're broke!" If so, where in the treasury is the secret compartment with the money to pay for these excursions?

Obviously, there isn't one. We'll just have to steal it from Social Security, Medicare, and those damned Desert Tortoises.