When the Cash for Clunkers plan was first announced, it appeared to be a flawed plan right from the start. There were some obvious problems with the scheme to get people into more politically correct green friendly cars. With the plan only a few days into operation, the plan has successfully seduced so many more people to trade in there bigger, safer cars to snag their share of taxpayer or Chinese money that the initial billion dollars has already swirled down the drain. The government is busy patting itself on the back and proclaiming the program a total success. But is it?

According to a recent Rasmussen poll, 54% of the voting public was against the plan while 35% favored it. Among those with a little more financial interest, 62% of investors thought it should not be done... and an even 50% of all respondents felt that if they were going to run a program like this, it should be restricted to American made cars. However, like so many programs coming out of our nations' capitol... bailouts, health care and all sorts of things we haven't even been told about, the desires of the people... as in “We the People”... have been ignored in favor of elitist programs and schemes to involve the government in more areas of our lives.

Let's look at what really took place in our country. Thousands of buyers have happily driven away from lots in their shiny new or late model cars, with salesmen and women tallying their skyrocketing commissions and dealers themselves hoping they were going to see the promised money. The scenario fits perfectly the thinking of the current administration... transferring dollars to supposedly disadvantaged or favored and adding burdens to evil business owners.

Several dynamics were at work in each transaction... let's look at them.

The most obvious action was people who may have been thinking of replacing their current mode of transportation for a new one saw the incentive of having their fellow citizens chip in to help pay for their car. Often, these were people who could already afford a car and perhaps were planning to buy one in the next year or two. This program just compressed the process. I guess it goes back to the definition of fairness promoted by many in our government for many years... that someone else pays for my benefit. It's human nature... and not the nicest side of it.

However the they are not home free with no down side. In many cases, people have traded in a functioning automobile that carried no payments for another, probably better car, with significant payments. In other cases, some who could not quite swing the deal for the car found a way, with the incentive, to squeeze it into their budget. At a time when people are trying to cut down on their debts, these buyers have been convinced to join the federal government in increasing their monthly expenses in spite of increasingly insecure employment situations. We saw what happened when easy terms and low interest rates drew more and more people into the housing market who should not have been there... to the detriment of the themselves, lenders and our country in general. One has to wonder if this is just a repeat of a foolish strategy that may drive us into even more negative circumstances.

The salesmen are loving the increase in sales at car lots that have been devoid of customers for months. Customers have been waiting in line just to talk to one of these purveys of economical transportation. Assuredly, they will see some massive checks, but at what cost? Customers may have bought their new car next month, or a few months down the road, even into the next year. So we see a spike in sales this week at the cost of many future sales that would have given them a steady income over the months to come.

The dealers are seeing cars roll off their lots in, sometimes, record numbers. They have been told to sell the car, fill out the 1040 type forms, and wait for their payments... if they are approved. Already reports are coming in that submissions are being rejected... meaning the dealer is not getting the money. With hundreds of thousands of cars on the streets through this program combined with the efficiency and effectiveness of the government in getting payments out the door... this could conceivably be responsible for closing more dealers than the auto companies themselves as, essentially, the dealers have to pay off new cars coming out of their floor plan, pay commissions to salesmen and cover a variety of costs of doing business. The more successful they are, the more they are depending on the government to keep its word in a timely manner.

The cars themselves show the desire of the administration to destroy anything they just don't like. They're not all junkers... some are decent transportation for someone without a lot of money, yet, but terms of the agreement, they must be destroyed withing a few days... long before any payments will be received from our Big Brother in Washington. They cannot even be sent to junk yards for salvage, but are destined to be crushed and melted down. So strong is their desire to remove these politically incorrect vehicles from the streets, our “benefactors” don't have any concern for the less financially well off they claim to want to help by shrinking the supply of inexpensive vehicles.

The administration, and even some Republicans who should know better, are touting the plan as a massive success, to the point of looking for an additional two billion dollars from the American people beyond the initial one billion allocated to the plan. All one can do is only look back at one of the gravely voiced Everett Dirksen's favorite quotes, “A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money.” Unfortunately, the damage goes far beyond the dollars down the drain.

I spent what could have been a perfectly good evening watching Barack Hussein Obama lay out some of the information about his proposed health care for the masses plan. While he talked for almost an hour, he gave out little real information. It is entirely possible he believed every word of it. What is unfortunate is that most of what we learned has no relationship to reality.

Somewhere around the fourth or fifth exit in fantasy land was the claim that the health insurance plan would not add to the deficit. The total cost, we were told, would be covered by cost cutting and re-allocation of existing federal health care programs. If we could just have an example of this ever working with a government program the assertion may actually have some credibility. It reminds me of the old saying “fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice (or thirty seven times), shame on me”. One has to wonder why, if they have identified that much waste already, it is not being squeezed out of the system now... unless that waste lies in delivering care to those deemed unworthy of the expense.

The president is determined that the cost of health care will not be thrust onto the backs of middle class families. Now, let's think about this. Who makes up most of the population and who will use most of the health care? At least at this point, our country is made up primarily of middle class families. Why should they not pay for their health insurance? And where are all the temporarily rich people that will actually pay for this? There just aren't that many... so where will the money come from? Ah yes... from the re-allocation from other government programs like Medicare which, while far from perfect, is something many have come to depend on.

He says some people will be unhappy about the change, that some people will be content with their current plan, but they are not as important as those he is trying to help. The implication is that the fat and happy few want to prevent the others from getting decent care. The problem is that, according the most recent Rasmussen poll, 53% oppose the plan and only 44% support it. While the government must look after everyone's interests, they have lost sight of the chain of command and who their real employers are when they are acting against the welfare and wishes of the American people.

The president revealed his ultimate goal when he told us that only a single payer system would be effective in achieving universal coverage as anything else would permit people to slip through the insurance cracks and become a financial drain on society. He then made his point with an illustration of a diabetic having surgery to remove a foot, but by making sure a proper diet was maintained, that foot and the money would be saved. This is a worthy goal... but how would they be certain diets were maintained. Is he proposing diet police? If we followed that thinking, cigarettes would have been outlawed years ago. Some say you can't legislate morality... well it would seem proper to say you can't legislate common sense... and you can't enforce it. And our federal government is one of the last organizations present itself as a purveyor common sense.

When asked by a reporter if he would be open to using the public option himself, Obama said of course he would, that there would be various levels depending upon the individuals needs and ability to pay... so we had our answer, of course he would not take the basic plan he was hawking to the great unwashed masses.

Rasmussen also tells us that people are more concerned about the cost than the universal nature of the coverage. Apparently the White House reads the Rasmussen reports as well since we were told that he understands and is sensitive to the fact that people are queasy about the deficit. Queasy is not really the word when people see the amount of debt already piled upon themselves, their children and their grandchildren. Either the man is purposely ignoring the anger sweeping the country or he is so wrapped up in pursuing this socialist dream that his is blissfully unaware of the mayhem he is inflicting on the country.

Perhaps the biggest whopper of all and the thing that throws the most doubt on any of the information we've been fed about the plan is the statement that they have already taken steps the would reduce spending by 2.2 trillion dollars over the next ten years. One has to wonder if the next step will be to try to sell us a bridge or ask some of his Nigerian friends or Kenyan relatives to request our help in moving cash into the country.

He wrapped up the press conference with a few other questions. I was glad it was over. I survived watching the whole thing, learned little, but felt kind of dirty... like I had just taken part in something immoral. The point is that even if we don't buy what they are selling in Washington, we need to be aware of it. We need to know this material to help spread the truth. It's just part of the unpleasant grunt work required of us if we are to remain free.

This past weekend, those who were watching honest reporting saw some headlines reflecting the esteem our country and our president commands throughout the world. What is interesting is that the man sitting in the oval office, along with his party, roundly criticized what they perceived to be George Bush's heavy handed approach to foreign affairs... vowing to bring about a new era of respect and respectability.

It is reported that Israeli ambassador Michael Oren was summoned to the State Department.* He was told that a building project being developed by an American investor in east Jerusalem must not go forward as it interfered with their plans for regional peace. The State Department sought to forbid any Jewish development on captured lands in an attempt to draw boundaries more satisfactory to the Palestinians.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded to the attempted land use demand by commenting, "I can only imagine what would happen if someone suggested Jews could not live in certain neighborhoods in New York, London, Paris or Rome. There would certainly be a major international outcry." This new construction is part of his plan for a unified Jerusalem. It is surprising that he took no public offense at the treatment of his ambassador as some lackey from a client state... however, it appears that he is focused on what is best for his country and not on petty one upsmanship.

Meanwhile, former first lady and current Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton was hearing from India’s environment minister, Jairam Ramesh,** that his country had no interest in signing on to environmental demands of the Obama administration and Europeans who have bought into the man-made climate change hysteria. Even though she dangled technical partnerships in front of him, Ramesh did not bite.

Mrs. Clinton was not able to convince him that the fate of the world hung on their decision and that only by working together can we overcome all the evil, planet warming pollution that the reprobate western corporations have been spewing for years. Not only did she apologize for the west, and US in particular, for gunking up the planet but she offered to help them fix our errors. The minister was not impressed. India, along with China as well, have chosen not to, lemming like, follow the US and our slick lipped shyster down the path to economic suicide.

It appears that foreign leaders do not fall under the same teleprompter induced spell that hypnotizes many in the slack jawed segment of our electorate. They seem to be more able to see through the soaring rhetoric to the harsh economic realities that underlie the awesomely proposed plans of our fearless leader. They see the destruction that lies down the path we, as a nation, have chosen. The man has made his pitch, but they are not buying.

Perhaps they are understanding that there is more form than substance to this administration, it's rhetoric and it's plans. On the other hand, they just may not have the emotional attachment to the president who wants to solve all our problems by sticking it to the rich... or they may not have given any thought at all to the President of the United States.

It is possible that they just looked at the plans in both cases and rejected them because the simply were bad ideas. I had a friend who, when he was training to be a camp counselor for middle age children, was told that for them to follow and respect him, he not only had to be right, but he had to appear to be right. Unfortunately Barack Hussein Obama has neither of these going for him.

* Israel Rejects US Call to Halt Jerusalem Project http://tinyurl.com/ljbhz3
** India Rebuffs US Carbon Demands http://tinyurl.com/nugzw2

Bono-Mack, Castle, Kirk, McHugh, Reichert, Smith, LoBiondo, Lance – names of Republicans who voted with the Democrats to pass the abomination called cap and trade. The sad thing about this is that we have come to expect the party of Barack Hussein Obama to sell out their countrymen in the quest of power and control. We used to expect more of Republicans, but recent events have shaken our belief that the Republican Party was really the party of smaller government and free enterprise. These eight could have helped put some luster back on that image. They chose not to do so. The

y chose, instead, to accept the unproven and highly suspect global warming theories and take an action guaranteed to ruin the economy of our once and future great nation. These house members, chose to leave their fellow party members to follow a fantasy. Some will say they showed courage and followed their consciences... doing the right thing and all that. That is what they often said about the party's eminently successful presidential candidate last November.

There are areas where we can have differing view points, and there are issues that go the heart of who we are, as a party and as a nation. It's like Jim Croce once wrote “After all it's what we've done that makes us what we are.” What they've done is turned their backs on those who were supposed to be their allies and gave the victory to those who would rule over us. I will leave it to the reader to decide what that makes them.

In some ways, it may not have made much difference in the ultimate outcome. However by sticking their thumbs in the eyes of all their constituents who called, wrote, faxed and emailed them objecting to this form of madness, they gave several Democrats a free pass. It is apparent that Speaker Pelosi let some of her minions vote against the bill as their votes were not necessary for passage. So, not only did they make their own re-election more difficult, which is not a bad thing, but they gave cover to several other would be socialists who did not have to annoy their constituents with an unpopular position.

Given the districts these people represented... east coast, west coast and Illinois, it may be possible that they are the best the Republicans could elect. I don't know that this is the fact, but this is the party line: that we have to accept those who lean toward progressive thinking if we are to win. Then I have to ask, what is the point? Are we just going to concede these areas to the statists and be happy that some of the statists are wearing the right jersey?

This is the “big tent” thinking in operation. What it really means is that we either don't know what we believe, or we don't have the confidence in our beliefs to present them forcefully in a way that helps people catch the vision of freedom. I believe much of this comes from the professional politicians who cynically view their careers as more important that any issue. We may have been able to let that pass in the past when we were not faced with such an assault on what it means to be an American, the values our country stood for and the freedom we once had.

Today we are fighting battles on far too many fronts: the economy, health care, environmental extremism, hostility to Christians... the list could go on and on... we cannot afford to let the self-serving political types determine the direction of the opposition party or of our country. It's time to put up with more dates on our calendars and more lost sleep as we work to restore the country to what is once was and what it can be again.

The “big tent” is really not a bad idea, as long as it's filled with conservatives and libertarians. Now is the time to do it, while we can do it peacefully... before Washington controls every area of our life and treats us, not as citizens to be respected, but as pawns to be manipulated and taxed to carry out their grandiose schemes that leave us with nothing but a tax bill.

The cash for clunkers is one more plan by the Barack Hussein Obama that not only attempts to make all of us good little subjects, but actually transfers wealth to his supporters who comply. The idea of the government giving $4500 toward the purchase of a new or late model car, if it is a car approved by our beneficent government is opposed by the 54% who understand the implications of this incentive program.

Only about a third (35% according to a recent Rasmussen poll), think it's a good idea, with government employees giving it higher marks than the general population. That pretty much aligns with the number of hard core Democrats... maybe even the future number of government workers. This form of social engineering is an attempt to get people to buy cars that both foreign and domestic manufacturers have been producing, but people have not been buying in significant quantities. They are trying to get people to purchase smaller, lighter, more fuel efficient vehicles that most people understand instinctively are more cramped and hazardous to their occupants.

I am wondering how many of us are willing to put our children and, in my case, grand children, at greater risk to solve a problem that, most likely, does not even exist? For the presidents rabid environmentalist supporters who believe that man's presence is detrimental to the earth itself, the answer is simple. The earth must survive, even if I and my family do not.

These undersized and generally underpowered machines are touted to have passed the regular safety tests our big brother now imposes on all vehicles sold in the US. This is great, but they leave out the getting-run-over-by-an-SUV test and don't even think about an eighteen wheeler.

The other problem with this, besides the safety issue, is that our country has an almost ten percent unemployment rate, many people are struggling to get by. Many have learned that debt, while it lets you get nice things now, is killing them financially. They have put off buying a new, or late model, car so they can get their financial house in order. The government is, once again, enticing these people to act against their best interest and go into debt to buy another vehicle that they may not really need, but will make mother earth and the environmental extremists happy.

Perhaps the worst part of the plan is that it takes borrowed money and gives it to a favored few who can already afford a car and leaves it to future generations to pay back. It does not help the general welfare of the citizens, unless one buys the argument that everyone benefits from the marginally cleaner air and more stable climate these cars will facilitate. If one does not understand the logic of our betters, it's just more money taken from everyone and flushed down the drain into the pockets of the favored few.

Should some readers believe this is a good idea, or think it's a bad idea, but are willing to take advantage of it anyway, it's been suggested that even if you don't have a suitable junker to trade in, go out an buy a $700 clunker to trade for the $4500 credit. Apparently to prosper in this new world order, it helps to have a larcenous streak with no conscience to get in the way.

California election day, May 19, 2009, may have been the start of our country’s climb out of the financial abyss. In spite of the Governator’s dire warnings delivered with the fervor seen in Henry Paulsen and Tim Geithner as they stampeded a gullible Congress into their high priced bailout schemes, the electorate proved they were not so gullible. This time the results were different because the audience was different.

Instead of the beltway elites who have the inflated delusions that they can solve most any problem by throwing our money at it… we saw the response of the people who actually have to pay for for these machinations. They have decided that rather than bankrupt themselves, they would call the government’s bluff that rapists would be set free from prison and may even be filling in for laid off teachers in the middle schools. They took the risk that their homes may burn down because of there would be no more firemen or they would be robbed because there would be no police. For once they did not buy the story that their money was really needed to help the sea otters and illegal aliens.

How much of this backbone came from the tea party spirit and how much was natural individual frustration at the continual abuse from Sacramento, is hard to tell. In some ways, it doesn’t matter because the people have spoken. No, the people screamed at the top of their lungs, “NO MORE!” The voters finally had a say in this financial dissipation.

What is interesting is that there were not lines of people waiting to make their wishes known. Turnout was low but margins were high… almost 2 to 1 rejecting some of the proposals. It did not take massive numbers to set California on the course to fiscal sanity. Apparently most of residents were resigned to the state government squeezing more and more out of them, in much the same way the folks in DC do… or they saw the poll numbers and were willing to let others do the lifting for them. It is sad that so many took this view and didn’t make themselves part of the victory. It’s even more frightening because that is how freedoms are lost and tyranny solidifies power.

On the other hand, it shows us that a small but motivated group can actually make a difference in the world. It shows that the citizens have more sense than the professionals who are paid to make government work efficiently and effectively. As I write this, I understand I am talking about residents of the land of fruits, nuts and flakes. The system can even work there. Again I have to remind myself it was a motivated minority that got the job done… and we have to thank them for their efforts.

The denizens of Sacramento got the message. The question remains, “Did the beltway appropriators get the message?” Immediate feedback doesn’t show much of a difference in the spendthrift approach to problem solving. However we can’t be discouraged. We saw progress! We saw the people could defeat the politicians. The boys in DC may just be a tougher nut to crack but with sustained pressure and, may I say, harassment, they will hopefully get the message soon, or find a new career.

The glory days of Smokey Yunick and Fireball Roberts charging around the stock car tracks of the south and Farmer Arnie Beswick tearing up the drag strips through out the country are long gone... as are the Firebirds Burt Reynolds thrilled us with on the big screen. Government Motors snuffed out the life of this once proud automaker on April 27, 2009. Once number three in sales, Pontiac had slipped down near the bottom in recent years, a victim of union excesses, inept corporate management, insurance standards and government regulation.

Pontiac's story is one of the entire American auto industry. Union contracts that were almost reasonably workable when the industry was living high on the hog and making so much money they built amazing buildings as monuments to themselves, seem oddly out of place when the profitable sales have been lost to foreign competitors. The adversarial relationship that seemed appropriate when the big three had the US market all to themselves remains, to the detriment of all concerned.

Times change, so do market conditions. The US automakers were up against foreign competition where labor and management understood they needed to work together to produce a product that would penetrate the US market. Somehow the this spirit of cooperation never caught on in the US, even at Pontiac where once there existed a pride in achievement. The unions kept asking for more and more and the greed and lack of resolve on the part of the companies made avoiding the lost production of a strike outweigh the long term destruction of overpriced contracts.

Many other factors played into the downfall of the auto industry, not the least were government regulations in the name of safety, fuel efficiency and others, just because they could. Some of us remember the foolish “double nickel” speed limits imposed by our “benefactors” in Washington until sanity returned. What we saw in this case and around the industry were companies that paid attention to their operations, but not the market or environment they lived in.

In the early '60s I was considering attending General Motors Institute... a fine engineering school with the obvious emphasis on the automobile industry. While checking into this I had the opportunity to visit the main offices of the Pontiac Division. The place was adorned with all sorts of signs touting the number three in sales and an institutional pride rarely seen in the business world. The company took a higher price product and went head to head with lower priced Ford and Chevy. These were the victorious days of Roberts and Beswick. Management at that time had taken a dull, stodgy, but reliable product and morphed it into one of the most desired cars of the time.

They worked on the concept that you could sell a young man's car to an old man, but you couldn't sell an old man's car to a young man... and it worked. They turned out some of the baddest street machines for their time and backed it up with winning efforts in NASCAR, NHRA, USAC and who knows how many other forms of racing. For myself, I had a Tri-Power '60 Ventura and, later, a '64 GTO. Both were fun to drive and just a little nicer than their lower priced Chevrolet cousins.

This was not to last, however, as fuel shortages, insurance rates and government regulations put and end to the no holds barred competition between the auto companies... and we started the long, downward spiral to the indistinguishable econobox lumps so popular today.

The point is that, for the most part, the excitement of the “new car” has been beaten our of our society. Few really are exciting. They have become so expensive that without a rich daddy, young people can't afford anything remotely interesting. Foreign manufacturers, reading the market better than their American counterparts, brought annoying little cars the kids call “tuners” into this environment. Once again, the big three were outmaneuvered. Parking lots that once were filled with Chevys, Fords and Pontiacs are now homes to Hondas, Mazdas and Hyundais. As Chester A. Riley used to say, “What a revoltin' development this is!”

So one more American icon is passing from the scene. It's a sad day. However to the progressive ideologues inside the beltway this is a good thing. The old must be destroyed to make room for the new, the centrally planned Government Motors car that looks like all the others and is certainly less than what are used to, but more then they believe we deserve. For those familiar with the development of the first Volkswagens it is, to quote a great American philosopher, “deja vu all over again.”

In honor of the occasion, perhaps we should dig out a copy of “Little GTO” by Ronnie and the Daytonas - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44kg0IENTPU – and play it a few times.

The government giveth and the government taketh away. That seems to be lesson we can take away from the recent events in Washington. The good congressmen and senators, eyes bloodshot with rage promised the American taxpayer that the outrage of AIG taking money from the government (read taxpayer), then giving millions of it out to their employees in the form of bonuses would not be allowed to continue.

We were told that these were retention bonuses that would keep these high performing employees on the job. These are the same high performing employees that produced the massive profits that led the company to come back to the taxpayers time after time – promising each time would be the last.

After nearly bursting a blood vessel and almost falling into an apoplectic seizure, Senator Dodd came back the next day and admitted that he had actually inserted a provision in the porkulus bill that specifically permitted these employees to receive the bonuses. So much for the claim of surprise! The man should get an Oscar for his manufactured rage as it's difficult to be sincerely angry with someone for doing what you said was permissible. After more prodding the good Senator also remembered that that he had inserted the provision at the request of the Obama administration through the Treasury Secretary's office.

So we have the public and much of our government going into a hissy fit over one more action of our new president. How did this come about? Are the people in the White House so inept or confused that one hand does not know what the other hand is doing? That would be the easy ,but not very comforting, answer. The answer could be more sinister. Could it be one more distraction to keep us from noticing the really damaging behavior of the Obama administration... kind of like the fuss about Rush Limbaugh.

Could it be that the millions of dollars flushed down the drain in AIG bonuses were just a smoke screen to hide the billions of dollars AIG funneled to foreign banks? I have to wonder why this does not make the lawmakers at least as angry. I would think that seeing all those taxpayer dollars flowing overseas doing nothing toward the proclaimed purpose of making credit available to US businesses would make loyal officials go through the roof. This money isn't doing a whole lot to help people facing foreclosure on their homes either. All it has done is help a multi-national corporation get its books in looking a little better, and for all we know, making massive bonuses possible to foreigners in Dubai?

I'm having trouble deciding what message is actually coming out of Washington. Are the banks that valuable that we have to spare no expense to save them, yet the people running them so morally crippled with greed that they cannot be trusted to handle our money? The conspiracy theorist in me sees in this action an attempt to shore up the institution of banking while removing the bankers. To what effect? Possibly big government sympathizers whose loyalties lie with the Obama administration rather than with the shareholders and depositors. I don't know... just a thought. But the way they have been demonized by the press and congress... even the President, I am concerned that these evil financial wizards are about to be marched off to an encampment next to Joe Arpaio's desert prison.

More likely this is just a bunch of political types, not smart enough to come up with the more involved plan, looking for cover when a payback for huge political contributions to Sen. Dodd, the President and many others is exposed. It may be that seeing the light in the distance from the torch and pitchfork brigade of outraged citizens made them turn on the people who helped get them elected.

One almost has to feel sorry for the executives at AIG who thought their contributions to the Democrats bought them immunity from common sense business practices... particularly when the actions of Dodd and Geithner specifically paved the way for them to receive their rewards. Unfortunately for the execs, they found out you can't make deals with the devil. Those giving to and voting for hope and change apparently did not get the change they hoped for.

Perhaps a lesson can be found here for many in the business community that looking to curry favor with those who don't understand and value what you do and who are basically looking for sources of revenue to fund their grand social schemes, may make you the next village getting looted in the pursuit of their impossible, and I might add, immoral, dream.

This brings us back to looking at politics and government in a radical new way: looking for what is good for the entire country full of people rather than what I think will benefit me. Sure this means that you won't get any special advantage or be supplied by the work of someone else... it also means it won't blow up in your face and you won't be publicly pilloried and threatened. You may not get quite the financial reward, but then you may well have a strengthened customer base... and that's not all bad. As Rick Warren would say, “It's not about you.”

AIG, we are told is too big to fail. Same with General Motors and a host of other corporations run by, at best, semi-competent but connected executives. They employ many but control boatloads of assets. Unfortunately not enough assets as they found themselves owing more than they could pay. The courts have a way to deal with these situations. It's called bankruptcy. For you and me this is the way to resolve these negative situations.

These rules are for the little people. If you are big enough, rich enough or contribute enough, they somehow don't apply. Your friends in government will be happy to take taxpayer money and give it to you. This has happened before and will happen again, and again, and again!

To keep up with this high end charity, our government goes deeper and deeper in debt. Our government is running up debts that are getting very close to exceeding it's ability to pay. What happens when our government finds itself in this position? Is it too big to fail? Who will bail it out? Will they turn to us, the taxpayers as an unlimited source of funding once the rest of the world, which is running out of money itself at a breakneck pace, stops buying our paper?

The federal government is big. It's ambitions are big... bigger than it or we can pay for. It is bigger than any of the corporations it tells us are too big to fail. Yet, what will happen when our government can't pay it's bills? Will it begin sending out IOUs al a California? Will it take more and more of our privately held assets to feed it's voracious appetite? Is there anyone in Washington who knows what they are doing?

Despite all the propaganda, presidential speeches and friendly news reports to the contrary, one simple truth remains... no one is too big to fail... not AIG, not the federal government!

Many of our problems today come, not from any particular event or situation, but from a lack of confidence to move forward. The stock market is basically in a downward spiral because investors don't believe problems are being fixed... in fact they believe just the opposite. Banks aren't lending money... maybe because they don't have confidence in the economy the borrowers will operate in, or perhaps they feel they've been burned and lost confidence in their own ability to make good decisions and they've become overly cautious.

It appears that we don't really have an economic problem... but a confidence problem. It's not that we lack cash... the Fed is printing paper just as fast as the presses will run. We have a president with no lack of confidence in his ability to do everything short of walking on water. As we haven't discussed the matter, it may be that he believes it possible to be an aquatic pedestrian. At this point thought, his extreme confidence in himself is not shared by Wall St. or Main St. People have begun saving what money they have and stopped buying much that they really don't need. The economy is slowly grinding to a halt.

One would think that all the people who voted for the O-man would have the confidence to move the economy forward, yet even they... the bankers who received bailout money... and gave some to his campaign... don't have the confidence to start the credit flowing again. For the bankers, it's not a cash shortage, they just received billions of our money from the government, but an unwillingness to lend it out. It's hard blame them too much as they've made a couple too many bad choices with their own money... some because of government rules and intimidation.

We are told that the banks are the key to freeing up the credit that keeps our economy moving. Individuals and companies in debt up to their eyeballs don't necessarily need more debt to get them out of debt. The same could be said for governments. Somehow many in our population know this instinctively, but it somehow escapes the thinkerbrains in Washington who have no other answers for us. They tell us to have confidence in them... however more and more people aren't working, and neither are their answers... but they cost us money... they cost our children money... they cost our grandchildren money.

The truth of Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal's statement, "Who among us would ask our children for a loan, so we could spend money we do not have, on things we do not need? That is precisely what the Democrats in Congress just did. It's irresponsible..." cannot be overemphasized... and even the kool aid drinkers understand this, however they don't admit it publicly.

We are facing a crisis of confidence in our financial markets, our businesses, our government, in America... even in ourselves.

What can we believe in, that will get us moving? Perhaps it is the Christians who have confidence that goes beyond the financial institutions and government to listen to the wisdom of God and lead us forward. We are following people who have no idea what they are doing. Watching the current DC drama reminds me of a political consultant who is fond of saying, “Never assume malice when incompetence will do.” If ever there was a time for a calm word of common sense, it is now.

The solutions we are offered are massively more of the same thing that got us into this mess. Of course, they won't listen to us, just like they ignore Republican objections because, “I won!”. Perhaps we can show our fellow Americans the way out by taking care of our families and refusing to take part in the “sky is falling” rhetoric. Where there are problems, there are also opportunities. The only way to find them is to lose the panic mode and logically assess the situation. Asking for wisdom could go a long to insuring a happy outcome as well.

Someone has to lead our country out of the fix we're in. The people in charge don't have the sense to know that when you find yourself in a hole... STOP DIGGING!