The Difference between advising on a decision, and making a decision!

This is an article about presidential decisions but I assure you every business leader is faced with this each and every day.  There are always many people who will tell you what you should do or how they think things should be done, but like in politics those advisors come and go, and it is the leader who has to make and live with the final decision.  

One of the things employees want and need is a person with life experience, some gut feel, and the willingness to take risk on their behalf!  The leader is not always right, but he/she is always responsible and accountable for his/her decisions!  

Peter Wehner | @Peter_Wehner03.25.2013 - 12:00 PM

  MATERIAL DELETED . . . . ENDING PARAGEAPH HERE

When asked by ABC’s William Lawrence to look back over the first two years of his presidency, John Kennedy said this:

I would say that the problems are more difficult than I had imagined them to be. The responsibilities placed on the United States are greater than I imagined them to be, and there are greater limitations upon our ability to bring about a favorable result than I had imagined them to be. And I think that is probably true of anyone who becomes President, because there is such a difference between those who advise or speak or legislate, and between the man who must select from the various alternatives proposed and say that this shall be the policy of the United States. It is much easier to make the speeches than it is to finally make the judgments, because unfortunately your advisers are frequently divided. If you take the wrong course, and on occasion I have, the President bears the burden of the responsibility quite rightly. The advisers may move on to new advice.  

It is in the nature of things that in America, the leader is the individual who has to sort through competing counsel and decide which course of action to take. And then he or she must do all in his or her power to execute effectively and take responsibility for the decision.  

People want to be lead but they need leaders with experience, character and willingness to lead and adjust to accomplish well defined goals.  

Remember this when you are selecting some one to lead you, be they leaders of Companies, Countries, or Cities.  

People simply can't be American if they Can't Speak English . . Is that really necessary?

Bill Neinast


IN PERSPECTIVE

“Having pledged our allegiance to the Flag which protects our nation, we maintain our insist upon a 100 per cent Americanism, which includes speaking the English Language.”

This quote could be the rant of an ideologue frothing about any hint of amnesty for undocumented aliens in the country.  The thought, however, is much older than the current debate over the hordes of illegals doing the stoop labor in our vegetable fields, cleaning our hotel rooms, and roofing our homes in summer heat.

The words are almost 100 years old.  They were taken from a Ku Klux Klan proclamation posted on the doors of Ebenezer Lutheran Church in the Berlin community of Washington County, Texas, during WWI.  The threats in the proclamation were directed at the residents of German descent who were the backbone of the farming and business communities in the county.

Those threatened were first and second, and maybe even third, generation Americans who conversed more in German than in English.  The sermons and records in Ebenezer Lutheran and other Lutheran churches in the county were in German.  Some senior citizens remember that in the first two decades of the last century, German was the predominant language on the streets and in the businesses of the county.

Clinging to the language of the citizens’ ancestors, however, was not a sign of disloyalty.  Nonetheless, the hysteria against anything German back then was as widespread as that against those wading the Rio Grand today.

Consider, for example, this excerpt from a lengthy article on the web site of the Authentic History Center.

“As the [federal government’s] propaganda machine was cranked up, public rhetoric soon took on a distinctly anti-German-American tone. Literature began to directly attack German-American churches, schools, societies, and newspapers as agents of Imperial German conspiracy. Soon there were calls to throw out the German language and ‘all disloyal teachers.’  One publication read, ‘Any language which produces a people of ruthless conquistadors such as now exists in Germany, is not a fit language to teach clean and pure American boys and girls.’  The American Defense Society, an off-shoot of the National Security League, encouraged the public burning of German-language books and campaigned to change the names of cities, streets, parks, and schools in America to the names of Belgian and French communities destroyed in the war.  Germantown, Nebraska, became Garland after a local soldier who died in the war. East Germantown, Indiana, was changed to Pershing; Berlin, Iowa, became Lincoln.  Berlin, Michigan, became Marne (after the Second Battle of the Marne).  In June 1918, a Michigan congressman introduced a bill that would have required such name changes nationwide.

“Super patriotism soon reached ridiculous levels. The names of German food were purged from restaurant menus; sauerkraut became liberty cabbage, hamburger became liberty steak.  Even German measles was renamed liberty measles by a Massachusetts physician.  Super patriots felt the need to protect the American public from contamination via disloyal music by pushing to eliminate classic German composers such as Beethoven, Bach, and Mozart from the programs of community orchestras. Some states banned the teaching of the German language in private and public schools alike. In July 1918, South Dakota prohibited the use of German over the telephone, and in public assemblies of three or more persons.”

Speaking a language other than English was the excuse for much of the senseless violence locally and nation wide.  That seems one of the lynch pins for the knee jerk objections to any compromise on the current illegal visitor conundrum.

Oddly, not everyone complying with the law and applying for U.S. citizenship have to speak English and sample questions and answers are published by the USCIS in English, Spanish, Chinese, Tagalog, Vietnamese, and Azerbaijani.

So here’s the perspective.

The English language is the principle ingredient in the mix of factors that meld many cultures into the unique republic of 50 independent states. “Speak English,” however, is a red herring that misleads or detracts from the actual issue of solving the illegal immigrant problem.

One who is not fluent in English may not be able to participate fully in the American experience.  A lack of fluency in a language foreign to an applicant, however, should not bar his or her realization of the dream to become a legal, productive citizen.

Becoming fluent in a foreign language is not easy.  Learning English is particularly difficult with some quirky spelling and pronunciation anomalies. Consider, for example, chair and choir; to, too, and two; duck and ducks, but goose and geese and on and on.

So before becoming entrenched in the speak English only mantra, remember how long it took our non-English ancestors to learn the language.

I am an American!

Texas A&M - There is s Spirit that can ne'er be told . . .

I don't know this couple, this photo was taken today (March 24, 2013) by the President of Texas A&M and posted on his Twitter account.  The tree however is the Century Oak on the Campus of Texas A&M and has seen many proposals and family photos throughout the years.

I know I am prejudiced beyond reason but there simply is no other place like Texas A&M!

Gig Em!

Marcus J. Lockard '72

BTW according to President Loftin, she said yes!

What is a liberal?

A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which debt he proposes to pay off with your money! - G. Gordon Liddy

You might live in a Country run by idiots if . . .

If the only school curriculum allowed to explain how we got here is evolution, but the government stops a $15 million construction project to keep a rare spider from evolving to extinction . . . you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots!

Wasserman-Schultz: My Aides on Brink of Starvation

WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: MY AIDES CAN'T AFFORD GOOD MEALS

By MIKE FLYNN  | Breitbart.com

On Tuesday, FL Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz and her colleague VA Rep. Jim Moran openly whined about the impacts of spending cuts on their personal office budgets. Moran fretted that, with the looming sequester cuts, he may have to cut one staffer from his office. Wasserman Schultz upped his ante, however. She, almost literally, suggested that her staff were on the brink of starvation, due to the cuts. 

Speaking at a hearing of the House Legislative Branch Appropriations Subcommittee, Wasserman Schultz worried that prices of meals in House restaurants are getting so high that aides are being "priced out" of a good meal.

At the carry-out cafe in the Cannon Office Building, where Wasserman Schultz has her office, you can get an 8oz bowl of Ham and Bean soup for $2. You can buy gourmet sandwiches and wraps for around $5. Both of these are cheaper than I can get at delis down the street from my house. 

Her aides could walk across the street to the Longworth Building, which has a large sit-down cafeteria. Today, it is featuring a roasted stuffed Chicken, with asparagus and mashed potatoes, for around $7. Or, one could opt for a heaping 12oz bowl of Chicken Chili for $3. 

There is also the tried and true method enjoyed by millions of workers around the country: a brown-bag lunch. 

Wasserman Schultz's top aide earns around $160k a year. She pays two additional aides around $120k a year. She has five additional aides who earn between $60-100k a year...

Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/rep-debbie-wasserman-schultz/2013/03/22/wasserman-schultz-my-aides-brink-starvation#ixzz2OLkbQebR

And it is worth pointing out that none of these looming sequester cuts (reductions in spending increases) has even hit yet. 

Is it any wonder why Americans simply don't believe what Congress tells them?

Your Thought for the Weekend!

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.  - George Bernard Shaw

Quote for your Day

I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to pull himself up by the handle. - Winston Churchill

I think we have drifted from the original game plan!

Recently read a blurb on John Adams and discovered the word Republicanism so I Googled it and found this at Ask.com!    

Republicanism is the ideology embraced by members of a republic -- a form of government in which leaders are elected for a specific period by the preponderance of the citizenry, and laws are passed by leaders for the benefit of the entire republic, rather than a select aristocracy. In an ideal republic, leaders are selected from among the working citizenry, serve the republic for a defined period, then return to their work, never to serve again. 

Republicanism stresses several key concepts; notably, the importance of civic virtue, the benefits of universal political participation, the dangers of corruption, the need for separate powers and a healthy reverence for the rule of law. 

Interesting, could this have something to do with the idiocy of the world!

Marc

Great Truth from Great Americans - March 20, 2013

Great Truth for March 20, 2013

 

In my many years I have come to a conclusion that one useless man is a shame, two is a law firm,and three or more is a congress.-- John Adams

 

From Wikipedia - John Adams (October 30, 1735 (O.S. October 19, 1735)  – July 4, 1826) was the second president of the United States (1797–1801), having earlier served as the first vice president of the United States. An American Founding Father,^[2] he was a statesman, diplomat, and a leading advocate of American independence from Great Britain. Well educated, he was an Enlightenment political theorist who promoted republicanism and wrote prolifically about his often seminal ideas, both in published works and in letters to his wife and key adviser Abigail as well as to other Founding Fathers.

Why Medical Bills are Killing Americans!

Bill Neinast

IN PERSPECTIVE

Steven Brill’s “Why Medical Bills Are Killing Us” may be the longest article ever to appear in Time Magazine.  The 39 page article in the March 4 issue is not cluttered with distractions.  There are 11 full page pictures and a few scattered reproductions of parts of hospital bills.  That leaves 56 long, wide columns of detailed reading.

Brill concentrates most of his attention on hospitals.  He includes for profit institutions and the not-for-profit conglomerates, including MD Anderson headquartered in Houston.

Until the last few pages, he seems to be applying sound business principles to his analyses.  In the end, however, his cover is broken. His suggestions for possible corrective action indicate that he may never have been in a management position in any business and that he believes the government is the answer to every problem.

Then, after some calm reflection on the entire article, clearly the major cause of escalating medical costs is understated or ignored completely.  Instead of the government being a solution for the problem, it is the principle cause of the problem.

Throughout the article, Brill lays blame on chargemasters.  Chargemasters are the computer billing programs for hospitals with an amount listed for thousands of individual procedures, medications, supplies, etc.  Each hospital and hospital system has a unique chargemaster developed for and by the institution.  In nearly every instance, the amount listed has no basis in reality.  Each of those amounts could be called obscenely high.

Analyzing why those amounts are so grossly exaggerated leads to one conclusion.  The primary reason is the government’s intrusion.

There were many huzzahs and hurrays when Uncle Sam announced that it was going to help seniors pay for their medical care.  Then the reality of Medicare set in.

The government was going to pay 80% of the charges it deemed reasonable.  Reasonable charges would be discounts of the average of charges for a procedure or bill within specific regions. 

Hospitals wanting a reasonable return on their investments, therefore, had to do whatever possible to raise the “average” in their region.  That meant everyone pegging their chargemaster prices as high as possible and then negotiating with the government and insurance companies to obtain that discounted rate.

Bills churned out by chargemasters, however, are rarely paid in full.  Patients who normally pay in full are wealthy foreigners and unknowing or uncaring Americans. 

The government and insurance companies know those chargemaster bills are mere starting points for negotiations and rarely, if ever, pay as much as one half of the bill.  

The system has also spawned a new cottage industry.  

Knowledgeable and experienced individuals are now becoming representatives for uninsured patients presented with massive hospital bills in six figures.  The representatives take the bills apart line by line and frequently end up with the patient paying no more than the government or insurance companies would pay under their negotiated fees.

The escalating fees will be exacerbated by Obamacare.  The new law is already bringing more Americans under the government’s or insurance umbrella.  When complete, every American will be covered by Medicare, Medicaid, or insurance.

Everyone will be lulled into thinking that medical care is now free or almost free and do what many people do when they think something is free.  They will use it, without regard to whether they really need it.

Two other factors that Brill discusses in relation to exorbitant hospital bills are the million dollar salaries for the non medical administrators of hospital system and run amok personal injury lawyers.

Some of the million dollar salaries are mind boggling.  Consider, for example, MD Anderson in Houston.  According to Brill, “Ronald DePinho’s [President of MD Anderson] total compensation last year was $1,845,000.  That does not count outside earnings derived from a much publicized waiver he received from the university that, according to the Houston Chronicle, allows him to maintain unspecified ‘financial ties with his three principal pharmaceutical companies.’

“DePinho’s salary is nearly triple the $674,350 paid to William Powers Jr., the president of the entire University of Texas system, of which MD Anderson is a part.”

The nauseating nightly TV ads for law firms urging anyone who has not been made completely whole by any medical procedure to contact them “for the compensation you deserve” has been discussed here too often to require repeating.  Just to talk with any physician about what that constant threat of malpractice law suits requires them to do above and beyond what they think is reasonably required.  Each Xray, MRI, and Cat Scan they require “just to be sure”  does nothing in most cases but add to the patient’s bill.

So here’s the perspective.

Brill’s article is a good read on how and why American medical bills are so much higher than the rest of the industrialized world.  He also has some ideas on how some of those bills might be reduced.

One of his suggestions, however, goes too far.   He would have the government cap the salaries for hospital administrators.  

Whenever the government starts stepping into office buildings and telling businesses what they may pay their executives, we are in deep trouble.

What's Your 45?

This was written by Regina Brett, 90 years old, of the Plain Dealer, Cleveland , Ohio .

"To celebrate growing older, I once wrote the 45 lessons life taught me. It is the most requested column I've ever written.

My odometer rolled over to 90 in August, so here is the column once more:1. Life isn't fair, but it's still good.

2. When in doubt, just take the next small step.

3. Life is too short, enjoy it.

4. Your job won't take care of you when you are sick. Your friends and family will.

5. Pay off your credit cards every month.

6. You don't have to win every argument. Stay true to yourself.

7. Cry with someone. It's more healing than crying alone.

8. It's OK to get angry with God. He can take it.

9. Save for retirement starting with your first paycheck.

10. When it comes to chocolate, resistance is futile.

11. Make peace with your past so it won't screw up the present.

12. It's OK to let your children see you cry.

13. Don't compare your life to others. You have no idea what their journey is all about.

14. If a relationship has to be a secret, you shouldn't be in it.

15. Everything can change in the blink of an eye, but don't worry, God never blinks.

16.. Take a deep breath. It calms the mind.

17. Get rid of anything that isn't useful. Clutter weighs you down in many ways.

18. Whatever doesn't kill you really does make you stronger.

19.. It's never too late to be happy. But its all up to you and no one else.

20. When it comes to going after what you love in life, don't take no for an answer.

21. Burn the candles, use the nice sheets, wear the fancy lingerie. Don't save it for a special occasion. Today is special.

22. Over prepare, then go with the flow.

23. Be eccentric now. Don't wait for old age to wear purple.

24. The most important sex organ is the brain.

25. No one is in charge of your happiness but you.

26. Frame every so-called disaster with these words 'In five years, will this matter?'

27. Always choose life.

28. Forgive.

29. What other people think of you is none of your business.

30. Time heals almost everything. Give time time.

31. However good or bad a situation is, it will change.

32. Don't take yourself so seriously. No one else does.

33. Believe in miracles.

34. God loves you because of who God is, not because of anything you did or didn't do.

35. Don't audit life. Show up and make the most of it now.

36. Growing old beats the alternative of dying young.

37. Your children get only one childhood.

38. All that truly matters in the end is that you loved.

39. Get outside every day. Miracles are waiting everywhere.

40. If we all threw our problems in a pile and saw everyone else's, we'd grab ours back.

41. Envy is a waste of time. Accept what you already have, not what you need

42. The best is yet to come...

43. No matter how you feel, get up, dress up and show up.

44. Yield.

45. Life isn't tied with a bow, but it's still a gift."

A Question of ID's

Michelle Bachman reportedly asked in her speech at CPAC this week, why you need to show a photo ID to go on a White House tour but don't need to show a photo ID to vote for the person who occupies the White House!

Not everyone has access to a photo ID.  Elderly and illegal immigrants may not be able to obtain an ID, the sick and invalid are at risk at missing the tour because they don't have an ID!   Can America tolerate this kind of discrimination and visitor intimidation?  

Could we be Making a Breakthrough in Washington - We can hope!

Bill Neinast


IN PERSPECTIVE
Reviving monsters should be avoided.  Occasionally, however, remembering one best left forgotten can illustrate a point.

This may be one of those occasions. Let’s remember Joseph Goebbel for a moment.

Goebbel was Hitler’s Propaganda Minister.  He believed that if a lie is repeated enough, it will be believed.

Recently, he must have been smiling in his grave.  There were his hated enemies, the naive Americans, reading from his instruction manual.

For weeks, President Obama had been on the campaign trail warning anyone who would listen about an impending disaster.  According to his rhetoric, if the government had to return to the same spending level of the previous fiscal year, every American soldier, school child, airline passenger, visitor to the nation’s capitol, and park visitor would feel the pain.

When the president was not available for a campaign show, one of his cabinet secretaries would appear to spread the propaganda.

If the Goebbel formula worked, Americans would begin to feel the pain and know the cause.  They would believe that their discomfort was due to Republicans wanting to curtail spending, balance the federal budget, and not tax the rich. Then, in eighteen months, they would be eager to turn Congress over to the tax and spenders and let Obama control both the executive and legislative branches.

Fortunately, reality quickly began to disprove the lies.  The weather was causing far more delays at airports than Transport Security Agency screeners.  Custodians at the nation’s capitol kept showing up to keep the buildings clean and secure.  Soldiers were told they would continue to get their pay, but their commanders might have to cut back on buying some “toys.”

Facts are not the only obstacle to the Goebbel theory of lies becoming believable. Repeating the lies effectively requires a controlled or compliant press.

As the facts became too hard to ignore, even the normally fawning press began to assign Pinocchios to the statements of disaster coming out of the White House.

When the long noses of those Pinocchios began to point to a down turn in the President’s approval rating, Obama apparently thought, “Oops, Goebbel may have been wrong.  Occasionally the sheep will see through the lies and become disenchanted with those spreading the misinformation.  Maybe I’d better change course.”

Nonetheless, in a last feeble attempt to show the people that he was not misleading them, the President decided to take one last strike at the ball.  Now, instead of giving up several trips in Air Force One to golf tournaments, he would announce that the horrible sequester of his funds forced him to cancel public tours of the people’s house, better known as the White House.

Then last week, a new President emerged.  Now he is that reasonable man who wants to negotiate with the enemies of the common man.  He invited 12 Republican senators to dine and talk.   This was followed with a one-on-one with his nemesis, Paul Ryan, Chairman of the House Budget Committee.

So here’s the perspective.

For whatever reason, the two sides in Washington are now talking with each other instead of accusing the other of nefarious actions.   They may be closer to a compromise than either side will admit.

The major difference is now a simple matter of semantics. Both sides claim to want to reduce spending but believe they differ on whether to raise taxes.

Actually, they agree on raising taxes.  To admit this, however, both side would upset their bases. 

President Obama insists on “enhancing revenues” by making the rich pay their fair share.  This is interpreted within his base of radical tax and spenders to mean raising the rates on millionaires and billionaires so that they will at least pay a higher rate than their secretaries.

The Republicans, however, insist that the President got his tax increase in the action to avoid the last fiscal cliff and they have pledged to their bases not to raise taxes again.  They are anxious, however, to clean up the tax code by eliminating loop holes.

Facts should trump rhetoric in this disagreement.  A tax payer’s rate is determined from his taxable income--the higher the taxable income, the higher the rate.

Taxpayers like secretaries generally have no loop holes or shelters to keep some of their salaries from taxable income categories.  The tax code, however, is loaded with loop holes that allow wealthy tax payers to shield some of their income from taxable categories and place them in lower rates .

That is why billionaires like Warren Buffet can file returns with lower rates than their secretaries.  Although they still pay a lot more in actual taxes than their secretaries, the President’s base would feel better if the rich paid at least the same rate as their employees.

If both parties would accept and emphasize this simple tax fix, Congress could give the President his revenue enhancements without increasing tax “rates.”  Then they could go about bringing the budget into balance by fixing the entitlement problem, which both say they want.

That is a winning solution in which neither side would have to utter that detested word, compromise.

OMG - The Sky is Falling, The Sky is Falling

My friend Bill Neinast's regular column discusses the Henny Penny's tactic used so regularly the world has tuned him out.

Bill Neinast


IN PERSPECTIVE
Not a single plane fell from the sky.  No elevators stopped forever between floors.    Ninety-nine percent of the world’s population is still alive.  None of the ground water under Washington County has been sold and siphoned off to metropolitan areas.  Flu did not devastate the country.  Finally, as of this writing, the federal government is still alive and well.

This is an abbreviated list of catastrophes recently predicted that never occurred.  Remember that at one second past midnight on Dec 31, 1999, airplanes, elevators, and anything dependent on computers would crash. When that occurred, very few people would be effected because most of the world would have succumbed to AIDS.

Although AIDS is a devastating disease, the world’s medical community rose to the occasion.  Through the development of medicines and education, at least in developed countries, the disease is now just another serious but controllable condition like cancer and other deadly diseases.

By now, according to one scenario, Washington County would have been drained dry by “Water Barons.” There was nothing to fear, however, because another bureaucracy would be created to challenge those Barons.  You know, those friendly guys who say, “Hi!, I’m from the government, and I’m here to help you.”

At the crucial time back then, the voters were smart enough to say, “No thanks.  We have too many bureaucrats already.”  Everyone, including those in panic mode over this, are still drinking, cooking, showering, and watering their gardens from the same local sources as before.

Although the flu was more widespread than normal in the last few months, the extraordinarily long funeral lines did not develop.  Now the disease is not even making the evening news.

The most ridiculous of all these bugaboos is the one kept alive and hyped by President Obama.  On his campaign stops, and that is what they were, he was scaring his staged audiences with predictions of a virtual governmental slow down or shut down if the Republicans did not compromise and give him more “revenue enhancements.”

As the leader of the tax and spend party, he is the one who would not compromise.  He refused to come off his, “If we do not make millionaires and billionaires pay their fair share, I will not approve any budget cuts.”

If that failure to come off his demand for more taxes is compromising, why is the Republican failure to abandon its insistence on attacking the problems with budget reductions a refusal to compromise?

In any event, as of this writing, the sequester has been in effect for more than 48 hours and the federal government is still alive and well.  Actually, the left leaning press is even beginning to question the President’s prediction of disaster.

The Washington Post is now assigning its caricatures of Pinocchio with a nose that gets longer with each lie to the President’s and cabinet members’ tales of dire consequences if the sequester takes effect.

Secretary of Education got four Pinocchios for his claim that 40,000 teachers could lose their jobs.  The President got two Pinocchios for his claim that janitors and security personnel in the capitol building would get pay cuts.  The Architect for the Capitol and the Sergeant at Arms who supervise those employees also denied this claim by the President.

Senator John Cornyn recently commented on the President’s scare tactics. 

He stated, “To put this in perspective, lets look at what a 2.4 percent cut to a family budget would look like. To reduce their spending by 2.4 percent, the average Texas family would need to:
 “Run cars on 94.7 gallons of gasoline a month instead of 97 gallons per month
“Find $6 in savings from a $250 monthly grocery budget
“Look for ways to conserve $4.20 from a $175 monthly utilities bill
“All working Americans had to figure out how to make ends meet with 2 percent less in their paychecks last month when the payroll tax expired. How is it that Washington can’t do the same?”

So here’s the perspective.

The sequester will cut $85 billion from a $3.8 trillion budget.  Relatively speaking, if this sentence represents the budget, the cut is equivalent to the period at the end.

The effect of the cuts can be ameliorated by moving funds among line items in each department’s budget.  Some claim that the President already has authority to make those moves and the Congress is willing to give him specific authority to do so.

He refuses to do so, however, because that would weaken his arguments of impending doom and blame for the Republicans when the economy goes South this year.

Rising gas prices and the pay cuts that kicked in for all American workers on Jan 1 when the reduction of payroll taxes expired will be major factors in the slip back into recession. 

You will never hear that from the White House.  Everything coming from that source will be that any down turn is due solely to the Republicans insistence on spending cuts only and no new taxes.

All of this over a 2.5% cut in a budget that has grown by 17% in the last five years.

The sky did not fall on Henny Penny’s head.  All the feared catastrophes mentioned above fizzled.  A good bet, therefore, is that the feared “devastating” effect on the bloated federal government will meet the same fate.

Return to Makin Island

This is a phenomenal story about the honor and respect that we need one hell of a lot more of in this great Country.  The Greatest Generation makes me smile.

Thank God for the United States of America and those who love her!

Semper Fi to my Dad and all of those who serve or have served this great country in the United States Military!

Marc