Who is David Walker and Why Do I Care?

[On a personal note, I got on quite a prolific pontification with this post, but please take the time to read it. It is a bit long, but very eye opening]

Why do countries and empires collapse? Was the Soviet Union destroyed by a nuclear war? Was the Roman Empire destroyed by a rival army? How about something closer to home: Enron, PanAm Airlines, or the mom and pop restaurant down the street?

If you look at each one of these it comes back to money and structure. The two are interrelated. If your structure is too big and your money is not enough, you are bankrupt. End of Story. Now this can be caused by many different reasons: deceit, bad management, incorrect market expectations, or what is probably the case in most of them: arrogance.

Here is a great quote I found about the Roman collapse:

One of the primary catalysts to the deterioration of the economy was the lack of circulating currency in the Western Empire. Two reasons for the lack of funds are wholesale hoarding of bullion by Roman citizens, and the widespread looting of the Roman treasury by the 'barbarians'. These two factors, coupled with the massive trade deficit with Eastern Regions of the Empire served to stifle the growth of wealth in the west. ~ The Economic Collapse

Sound familiar?

So let me pose this question to you. Put yourself in the position of Osama Bin Laden. If you wanted to bring down a super power, your options are a direct frontal attack. Scratch That. How about a Hit and Run (9/11)? That causes damage but we always recover. How about I just cut off his food supply and he will starve? That works. Bin Laden realizes he can never beat us militarily, so instead he has set his sights on bankrupting us.

FOLKS! IT IS WORKING!

Bin Laden Transcript 2004

"We are continuing this policy in bleeding America to the point of bankruptcy. Allah willing, and nothing is too great for Allah," bin Laden said in the transcript.

He said the mujahedeen fighters did the same thing to the Soviet Union in Afghanistan in the 1980s, "using guerrilla warfare and the war of attrition to fight tyrannical superpowers."

All that we have to do is to send two mujahedeen to the furthest point east to raise a piece of cloth on which is written al Qaeda, in order to make generals race there to cause America to suffer human, economic and political losses without their achieving anything of note other than some benefits for their private corporations," bin Laden said.

Now let me ask a very hard question. When all is said and done with Iraq what tangible benefits will we, the American People, have received for our investments of our money, sons and daughters, and our military resources? What about Afghanistan? Remember them? When is the last time you heard a report out of Afghanistan? At what point are we coming home from there? We have been there for over 6 years now. In Pakistan, we have given Musharraf $10 billion since 9/11. I'm not seeing a return there. One report I read (If I find it again I'll cite it) said that we have over 700 bases around the world at a cost of around $1 Trillion per year to maintain. Do we really need a base in Japan and Germany 60 years after WWII?

If somebody attacks us, we have every right to defend ourselves (Japan in WWII, Afghanistan in 2001 are a fine examples, except we are still in Afghanistan with no plan to get out). Also we must maintain a strong national defense. That being said, lets face the cold hard facts, Iraq did not attack us. What would happen if every country in the world had the right to attack another country just because they *thought* they might be attacked? Total Chaos. Probably WWIII.

So back to my original question, who is David Walker?

I was sparked on this topic by a video of David Walker on Glenn Beck's show on CNN. You have probably never heard of David Walker, but in short, he is the Comptroller General of the Governmental Accounting Office (GAO). Basically he is the lead accountant for our Government). He is not in an elected position. He is appointed to 15 year terms, and he has just started his 2nd term. In short, he paints a very dire picture.

One side note, Republicans love to paint Democrats as the big spenders, but in reality, our actual debt has gone from $20 Trillion to $50 Trillion in the last 6 years. Who has been in control of both houses of Congress and the Presidency over the better part of the last 6 years? Republicans. There is plenty of blame to go around.

Here are the major points of his clip:

• Every household owes our US Government $400,000 to cover our debt
  
• By 2040, our Government can only cover Social Security and Medicare and NOTHING ELSE!
  
• Every year we don't act, our debt goes up $2-$3 Trillion based on compound interest
  
• If we were a business we would be bankrupt, but Government can just Tax more.
  
• Can not solve the problem through Tax increases, but through a combination of Tax Increases and Spending Cuts
  
• Ron Paul only candidate talking about these issues.
  
• Universal Healthcare is off the table. Tax Cuts don't cover it.
  
• This year, Government will run $163 Billion deficit, but the real deficit is $344 billion because the Politicians don't mention that they spent our Social Security surplus.
  
• If a business did this, somebody would be going to jail
  

So, now that being said, take a listen to our Chief Accountant.



Here are some additional videos. They are all worth watching:

David Walker on 60 Minutes

Recap of the 60 Minutes show

A 26 minute speech by David Walker

So what happens when we finally sink? Here is the answer:

Subprime Nation - Pat Buchanan

Since it began to give credit ratings to nations in 1917, Moody's has rated the United States triple-A. U.S. Treasury bonds have been seen as the most secure investment on earth. When crises erupt, nervous money seeks out the world's great safe harbor, the United States. That reputation is now in peril.

Last week, Moody's warned that if the United States fails to rein in the soaring cost of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, the nation's credit rating will be down-graded within a decade.

Why we need a Ron Paul Presidency right now!

Our political parties seem oblivious. Republicans, save Ron Paul, are all promising to expand the U.S. military and maintain all of our worldwide commitments to defend and subsidize scores of nations.

--Pat Buchanan


A drop in rating by Moody's is a very big deal. It would bring our economy to a very quick halt. Look what happened to Argentina from 1999 to 2002 [wikipedia]

Of all the presidential candidates, Ron Paul is the only one who is telling the truth. He has voted against nearly every spending bill put in front of him. He has the nick name of "Dr. No". This is a tough and lonely stance to take in Washington. John McCain bragged that he saved the American Tax payers $8 Billion on a taker deal. Thanks John, but that is just a drop in the bucket. Our spending needs to be BELOW our income so that we can start paying off the debt.

Take a look at:

Debt and Taxes and click on the Play button at the top right.

Another good one is How Government Debt Grows

Dr. Paul is the type of individual who runs his office so frugally that he actually returns money at the end of the year to the Treasury. Ask your Congressman if he does that.

Finally, this is a man who even votes against the Congressional Medal of Honor for people like Mother Teresa, Dali Lama, and Tony Blair. His reason? That is not a good use of the tax payers money. Each of those medals is $30,000. They are pure gold. He instead said that every Congressman should give $100 personally. Nobody took him up on that. Surprise.

I wonder if my colleagues see the irony in honoring a devout Buddhist monk with a material gift of gold. The Buddhist tradition, of course, eschews worldly possessions in favor of purity of thought and action. Buddhism urges its practitioners to alleviate the suffering of others whenever possible. I’m sure His Holiness the Dalai Lama would rather see $30,000 spent to help those less fortunate, rather than for a feel-good congressional gesture.

We cannot forget that Congress has no authority under the Constitution to spend taxpayer money on medals and awards, no matter how richly deserved. And I reiterate my offer of $100 from my own pocket to pay for this medal–if members wish to honor the Dalai Lama, all we need to do is pay for it ourselves. If all 435 of us contribute, the cost will be roughly $70 each. So while a gold medal sounds like a great idea, it becomes a bit strange when we see the actual cost involved.

-- Dr. Ron Paul -- Floor of the House -- September 13, 2007

Here is his speech from the floor of the House


Help save this country. Please consider voting Ron Paul.

A Soldier's View of the War

I have not blogged about the war because it is a sensitive topic among my friends and family and heated discussion usually ensues. Also, I have purposefully avoided criticisms of other candidates, as I see my job as highlighting Dr. Paul's views, and letting you make up your own mind by encouraging you to do the research yourself.

Please understand that I will continue to respect both of those. So to all you Huckabee fans on my list, I am not bashing Huckabee, more just pointing out Ron Paul. I disagree with Huckabee on policy issues, but feel that he is probably a good man. We just have different views on the role of Government especially in Foreign Policy.

So about the war, I am not a veteran, and I have not served in the miliary, so I have no basis to spout opinion, so I look to those that have served to ask them what their opinions are. In doing research about veterans and Ron Paul, I found this page on their official website. It lists veterans who are supporting Ron Paul. It seems to be growing by the day. To me that says more than anything else. Last I checked they were at 350, and it has only been up for less than a week.

RonPaul2008.com - Veterans

So as I said above, I do not want to share my opinion of the war, but the opinion of a soldier that recently returned from Iraq with you.

Like anything on the internet, it could be faked but I don't believe this is. Here is the bio he lists on his page (misspellings included):

Some have questioned my authenticity, but I am not a fake. I have recently returned from a 14 month deployment in Iraq and am now on reservist status. The purpose of this video is to express my frustration like many soldiers about the discrepancies between my experience in Iraq and the perception that the everaga citizen holds. More than ever, citizens must understand the situation in Iraq. Peace.

Note that there is foul language at around 4:30 into the clip.



Wars are horrible horrible things, and it is easy for us over here, who are sacrificing so little, to talk about grand ideas and morals for our troops and their missions, but instead we need to hush, and listen to them. Every soldier lost or injured is a family changed forever.

Iowa Is A Good Start

Some of my friends and family have asked me "How did your guy do?" Well, I thought I would just quickly type up my thoughts and send them out.

In short: He did good, and I'm looking forward to New Hampshire on Tuesday.

Here is the breakdown and my perspective:

Huckabee	40,841	34%
Romney	29,949	25%
Thompson	15,905	13%
McCain	15,559	13%
Paul	11,817	10%
Giuliani	4,097	4%
Hunter	524	1%

In short, he placed 5th, but the difference between 3rd and 5th was only 4,000 votes. Very positive. Also, this is a person who went to Iowa and said that farm subsidies are a bad idea. Go and research corn subsidies and you will see what I mean.

So in short, we are off to New Hampshire, and he has enough money to make it all the way to Super Tuesday.

The real story is the total decimation of Giuliani. Remind me again that he is the national front runner? And Dr. Paul almost tripled his take in Iowa? Rock On!




Now that being said, on the same station that gave the clip above they also gave us the clip below. Ron Paul was running just behind McCain and Thompson, but somehow they forgot to put his name in the pie chart. But if you look carefully, you will see where his name is suppose to go (grey area at the top), but it is conveniently left out. Journalism is in a sad sad sad state.

Fox News Should Be Ashamed

So in my post the other day lamenting how the media shapes our opinions about the candidates, I mentioned that Fox News is having a debate/forum this afternoon. Well, they only invited Huckabee, Romney, Thompson, Giuliani, and McCain to this event. They excluded Ron Paul. Ron Paul has participated in every debate since the beginning of the race, except this one. And their reason? I kid you not: There is physically not enough room at the table. Wow, how lame does it get.

This is a man who raised a staggering $19.75 million in the fourth quarter of 2007. He took 10% of the vote in Iowa, only 4,000 votes behind 3rd place Thompson. This from a man who went to Iowa and said farm subsidies are a bad idea.

The New Hampshire GOP actually pulled their support for the debate. Although I applaud them, I am not sure that it really did any good.

The setup is so bad, that even Greta Van Susteren of Fox News actually spoke up for Dr. Paul on her own station! Go Greta! Take a look.



In short, please think for yourself. If you hear a candidate sling mud, then go and lookup that fact and see their side. My dad is a lawyer, and one of the most important lessons I learned from him is that when hearing a "side" of a story, make sure to get the other side before coming to your conclusion, because if you are only hearing one side, you are definitely not getting all the facts.

Shame on Fox News.

Don't Let the Media Choose Our Next President!

Please, please, please, do not let the media choose our next president. Do the research yourself. Go and watch the youtube speeches by the candidates. Because of the internet, you have the ability to research candidates as never before. So here is a little test. I'm going to list the name of a candidate, and for each one, I want you to write down the first thing that comes to mind.

Hillary Clinton
John McCain
Ron Paul
Barack Obama
Mitt Romney
Mike Huckabee

Now, did you write down your answers? If you did, now look at what you wrote down and ask yourself "Why do I think that?" Is that grounded in facts?

I challenge you to go and watch a youtube speech for each candidate, do the research, then go back and see if you still think the same of the candidate.

Media Bias

So how did I get on this rant? Well, when you follow a candidate that the media does not like, it is very easy to get angry and disgruntled. I want to give you some blatant examples of media bias towards Dr. Paul.

Fair and Balanced? I think not!

Fox News and the New Hampshire GOP are putting together a debate/forum on Jan 6th in New Hampshire. Fox News decided to exclude Dr. Paul from this debate/forum. At first there were all sorts of wrong and misinformation floating around on the internet, but it looks like we finally have some solid information. Fox News and Ron Paul have never been friends, but that being said, Fox News should have enough journalistic integrity to include all the candidates. But I guess not. The problem is that they have invited Fred Thompson. even though Ron Paul has consistently polled above Fred Thompson in nearly every poll. See for yourself:

New Hampshire - 2008 Presidential Polls

Fox News has yet to respond to requests dating back to Friday as to why Dr. Paul was excluded. His own campaign has had trouble getting in touch with Fox News. That seems strange now that we have Text Messages, Blackberries, email and cells phones, that somebody at Fox can not confirm or deny if Dr. Paul has been excluded. At this point it is very hard to say this is just a miscommunication.

Here is the latest word from the New Hampshire GOP who is co-hosting this event:

New Hampshire Republican Party Chairman Fergus Cullen releases the following statement regarding primary weekend debates:

“Limiting the number of candidates who are invited to participate in debates is not consistent with the tradition of the first in the nation primary. The level playing field requires that all candidates be given an equal opportunity to participate – not just a select few determined by the media prior to any votes being cast.”


[Full Article]

Pop quiz: The owner of Fox News is Rupert Murdoch. Which presidential candidate has Mr Murdoch contributed the maximum amount to? If you said Hilliary Clinton, you would be correct.

Rupert Murdoch Political Contributions

He has given heavily to Republican Congressmen and to the Republican Party, but the only presidential candidate he has given to (to the best of my knowledge) is Hilliary Clinton. I do not know about you, but I found that interesting.

The truth about Earmarks

Dr. Paul was on Meet the Press last week. Tim Russert asked him about earmarks. Russert was trying to discredit Dr. Paul about his adding of earmarks to spending bills. The problem is that if you don't understand what an earmark is, it does sound like Dr. Paul is having his cake and eating it too. (Though in Russert's defense and my personal opinion, Dr. Paul did not do a good job defending his position) But if you dig a little deeper you start to see that Dr. Paul is working against a horrible system, and he is using a tool he is given. If he had his way, all earmarks would be banned.

Dr. Paul would put in an earmark to a spending bill, then vote against the entire bill. Russert's comment was this was similar to the "your were for it before you were against it". Unfortunately this shows a total lack of understanding about the nature of earmarks by Russert. So what came out of that interview was lots of articles bashing Dr. Paul's "hypocrisy". Well once again, if you go and read about what an earmark actually is you will begin to understand that it is more complex than a 30 second sound bite.

So what is an earmark? [wikipedia]

Earmarking bypasses the normal procedure by which tax revenue is pooled in a general fund and then allocated among various government spending programs as opposed to a specific program.

In other words, if during the creation of a spending bill, if you don't earmark money for a certain expense (a new highway or whatever), then the department that gets that money can decided however they want. The money will be spent either way, so Dr. Paul is trying to serve his constituents by bringing some of the tax money they pay into the Federal Government back to his district.

Here is an article from this summer on Dr. Paul's website about earmarks:

Earmark Victory May Be A Hollow One

Here is another good explanation:

In Defense of Ron Paul’s Earmarks


Paint Ron Paul as a racist

In the worst of all smears, the New York Times ran an article that said that Dr. Ron Paul has regular dinners with a White Supremacy group. The article was the worst of the worst. So after being up for two days, they pulled the article and put up a retraction.

The quote from the original article:

Both Congressman Paul and his aides regularly meet with members of the Stormfront set, American Renaissance, the Institute for Historic Review and others at the Tara Thai restaurant in Arlington, Va., usually on Wednesdays.

Oh for the love of all that is holy!

Here is the retraction:

The post also repeated a string of assertions by Bill White, the commander of the American National Socialist Workers Party, including the allegation that Paul meets regularly “with members of the Stormfront set, American Renaissance, the Institute for Historic Review and others” at a restaurant in Arlington, Va. Paul never attended these dinners, according to Benton, who also says that Paul has never knowingly met Bill White.

But the problem is how many people read the first article, made up their minds, and do not go back to check the facts. Does not matter I guess. The damage is already done.

PLEASE do not let the media choose our next president! Please do the research yourself and vote the issues. That is all I'm asking. If you vote for Ron Paul, then I think you will have made a good decision, but if you vote otherwise, just make sure you are voting your mind and not your emotions. Electablity is something We the People choose, not the media. And if you have not done the research, or can not backup why you like a candidate with facts, then please Do Not Vote. Seriously. A Republic only works, with an informed electorate.

Is anybody else scared?

I had a very powerful thought the other day pertaining to how people work in groups, especially when those groups have power over others. Anywhere from management of a company, to our State and Federal officials. The conclusion that I came to was this: Many folks start out with the best of intentions, but what happens is that apathy and arrogance kicks in, and the people in power quickly become comfortable with the power they have, and they forget where that power actually comes from. The only power that elected officials have, is the power that WE give them.

What happens at the point of apathy is that, even with the best of intentions, a solution to a problem is developed but because it is not well thought out, it has disastrous consequences. A prime example of this is the support of the Patriot Act in Congress. Many Congress men and women went along with this horrendous legislation because they thought it would make our country safer. We, the citizens, also went with it thinking the government needed this to help keep us safe. Government should move slow for a reason. If Government moves too fast, you should stop and investigate.

Do not forget that it is us, the citizens that are in charge and not the politicians. "They serve us", not "we serve them"!

So that being said, this was the main story that Google News picked up the other day.

FBI Prepares Vast Database Of Biometrics

Maybe I have just read too many books (1984, Brave New World, etc), but one of the key problems with power, is simply that it will pretty much always be abused. So when I see the Government spending a billion of our tax dollars to create a database to help track us, then I just keep thinking that we have been taxed to build tools to keep us in line. Just look around the world at all the tyranny of the past and present, and do not think for a second that our government, if left unchecked, is somehow immune to these thoughts. It may not happen intentionally by all, but it only takes a few leaders to lead the blind herd. Just look back at the McCarthy Hearings or the way that the 16th Amendment was passed. Also go and read about the current ideas floating around for a "National ID Card". This is another horrible idea that sounds good at first, but when you peel the layers back you see it for the terrible idea that it is.

A National ID Card Wouldn't Make Us Safer - Bruce Schneier

Finally, take a look at the this incredible piece of legislation: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 On the surface, it sounds fine, but when you start digging, it just has alarm bells all over it.

HR 1955 [wikipedia].

Sadly it passed 406-6. It was presented by a Democrat. So much for the Democrats sticking up for Civil Liberties. I guess that has fallen out of favor with both parties. My complaint about this bill is that it is totally unnecessary, but that is my personal opinion.

Here is the status of the bill now before the Senate.

In summary, do not let it be said that we built the cage for ourselves to be held in, whether it be taxes, civil liberties, or apathy. If you are not working against these items, then do not complain when we pay 50% of our taxes to a government that tracks our every move. As Dr. Paul said the other day (paraphrase) "Freedom is a new idea, Tyranny is old, very old"

The Voice of Ronald Reagan 1964

Here is a powerful quote I pulled from a youtube comment section:

Ron Paul's ideas only seem insane because we've lived under insane policies for all our lives. Ron Paul is the only one trying to bring us back to sanity. Please learn all you can about economics, history, and philosophy. Educate yourself. --odigity

Man! I could not agree more! The more I read, the more I study, the more I say: "WHOO! Stop this crazy train".

Ron Paul was on Bill O'Reilly a couple of months ago. It was a sham of an interview. [link] The problem with the interview is that Dr. Paul was repeatedly trying to explain the complicated history of dealing with Middle East politics, and Bill O'Reilly's comment was "we don't need a history lesson". (2:48 seconds into the clip).

Sadly we have all heard the saying: Those who don't study history are doomed to repeat it.

Also, Bill O'Reilly was looking for a "sound bite" answer, but Dr. Paul's ideas are bigger than any 15 second "sound bite" allows. The news media really does not allow for ideas that take longer than 30 seconds to be fully explained. (which is why I keep urging you all to read and research for yourselves). There are so many incredible ideas out there that are just not going to be covered by the core media (Fox, CNN, NBC, NPR, etc). But I digress...

So to help us remember our history, I ask that you watch this 6 minute video which is a mixture of a famous Ronald Reagan speech and Dr. Paul's speeches. It is really sad to me that all the Republican candidates love to talk about how awesome Ronald Reagan was, but sadly when Ron Paul makes the EXACT same statements about liberty, freedom, and small government that Ronald Reagan made back in 1964, Dr. Paul is considered "a kook","a gadfly", and the "far fringes of the debate".

Here is a link to the full text and audio of Ronald Reagan's famous 1964 speech:

A Time For Choosing - Ronald Reagan

For me, this is the crucial statement:

You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down: [up] man's old -- old-aged dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. And regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course.

WOWOWOW!!!!!

For me, the one issue I am focusing on for this election is Fiscal Responsibility. My thought is that if we can have Fiscal Responsibility then many of the other issues facing this country will fall by the way side. If the government does not have money to spend on terrible programs, then the programs will die. The rest of the Republican field, other than Dr. Paul, seem to just want to tinker around the edges. Even the Fair Tax, which is much better than what we have right now, just changes how the government gets our money, and not the amount they receive. It is time to clear house, and bring the Federal Government back to a more reasonable level. If the States want to increase their taxes to cover programs, then so be it, but we must move back towards a more limited government at the Federal level.


[NOTE: The text at the end of the video is actually a quote from Ronald Reagan about Ron Paul. Make sure to pause it and read it. The font is not easy to read]