We're sending money where?

This just in.... "The Obama administration is providing $100 million in new Syria aid, U.S. officials said Wednesday, but the money is for humanitarian purposes only and not linked to any decision on arming Syrian rebels."  I can't help but think of the SNL Weekend Update skits with Seth Meyers, "Really?"  Our county's debt is over $16 trillion  and though I realize that $100 million is just a drop in the bucket, Really?  Anti-American sentiment in Syria has been growing there of the past 21 months due to this administrations inaction so, NOW (after crossing the "red line" with the suspected use of chemical weapons) you're going to offer up some hush money? Really?

 This has been such a sore point with me for a while.  Sending billions of dollars overseas to countries where an anti-American attitude is the norm is mindboggling.  I know that every administration sends aid to different countries worldwide, I get it.  But, in this day and age when our country is in such dire straits economically and our deficit is exploding upward can we really afford to "help" others before we help ourselves? Here are just a few statistics from the U.S. Census Bureau that may make us want to reconsider this policy:

·       Approximately one out of every six Americans is now living in poverty. 

·       More than 146 million Americans are either "poor" or "low income".

·       Approximately 20 percent of all children in the United States are living in poverty. 

·       Approximately 57 percent of all children in the United States are currently living in homes that are either considered to be either "low income" or impoverished.

·       In Detroit alone, 60 percent of all children in are living in poverty. 60 PERCENT!!!

·       More than a million public school students in the United States are homeless. 

·       More than 100 million Americans are enrolled in at least one welfare program run by the federal government.  And that does not even include Social Security or Medicare.

·       An all-time record 47.79 million Americans are now on food stamps.  (That number is up by about 10 million since 2008)The number of Americans on food stamps now exceeds the combined populations of "Alaska, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming."  If you look at it that way, it's pretty eye opening.

These are just a few numbers from the Census Bureau.  I'm not even going to get into the entire government spending issue.  It is simply ridiculous.  I am all for assisting other countries around the world.  That is a responsibility that has been thrust upon our country since we became a superpower.  However, let's be at least somewhat responsible with how we go about doing this.  At one point we must take a look at the big picture and take care of our own business first.  If not, sooner or later we are not going to have the ability to assist other nations.  

 Now, I know what the typical argument will be here. "It's this guy's fault or he's the one who started this" (this modus operandi has become so old ).  Well, the blame game has gone on long enough.  It's been over ten years since the war in Afghanistan started.  Again, I get it..wars cost money but, regardless of one's position on the wars, it doesn't change the fact that they exist.  Blaming past administrations will only get you so far so, we need to deal with the here and now.  We spend approximately $70 billion dollars in foreign aid annually. Yep, a mere drop in the bucket but, when you're putting American workers on furlough, cutting $40 million per year from defense and over $2.5 billion from education....that $70 billion looks a whole lot different doesn't it?

Caught in a lie?

Opps! You got me!

From the Congressional report on the events that took place on September 11, 2012 in Benghazi, Libya.

During 2012, in numerous communications with the State Department, officials from the U.S. Mission in Libya stress both the inadequacy of security as well as the need for additional personnel.

The following cables address this issue:

~March 28, 2012, Ambassador Cretz sends a cable to Secretary Clinton requesting additional security assets.

~April 19, 2012, The response cable from the Department of State to Embassy Tripoli, bearing Secretary Clinton’s signature, acknowledges Ambassador Cretz’s request for additional security but instead articulates a plan to scale back security assets for the U.S. Mission in Libya, including the Benghazi Mission.

I found this to be rather interesting but, not earth shattering in the least.  Anyone with half a brain could see that something fishy was going on right from the first response that was issued by the White House.  I know that politicians lie, it's what they do.  I get it.  Point very well taken.  Where I have a problem is when they lie to cover up something so egregious as the deaths of Americans that may very well have been prevented.  I would have been quite impressed if the administration took at least a minute fraction of responsibility for their imprudence.  Would I still have been critical? You bet but, I would respect them a little more. 

To make matters worse, Secretary of State Clinton goes on a rant during her testimony (under oath mind you).  I certainly can understand her being defensive and I do not fault her for that.  That's what happens when someone gets called out and has no truthful retort.  Again, I get it but, she said two things that really pissed me off. 1.) "I had no prior knowledge of a request for more security" and 2.) "What difference does it make?"

Well, it makes a huge difference and even more so now knowing that you knew about it, lied and then attempted to cover it all up. You see it's all about accountability.  I like to think that I was taught better than that.  I was taught that if I screwed up, which I've been known to do from time to time, I am to man-up and take responsibility for my actions.  Don't try to hide it by lying and covering it up.  What kind of example does that set?  In the long run it only makes matters worse for one but, more importantly people lose respect for you and your word then becomes meaningless. 

TSA Leaders Propose Lift of Ban?

Guideline for acceptable knives.

So the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is considering letting travelers  bring small knives back on planes.  Along with knives they're also considering allowing individuals to carry golf clubs and better yet baseball bats on planes!  Who thinks this is a good idea?  Now I realize that the TSA has a very important job in securing flights but, really?  Baseball bats?

  

I've never really had a problem with the TSA.  The times I've flown lines have been relatively long but nothing too unbearable considering the options.  The first time that I ever dealt with TSA was when I flew from New York to Iraq.  We were informed that we had to secure our weapons, which we're carrying on the plane heading to war, by putting a zip tie through the chamber and magazine well.  This made perfect sense to me as I'm sure that no one on the flight had a knife.  The zip ties could easily be cut off but, I am pretty sure that no soldier on that plane was looking to hijack the flight.  It was just a formality I understand but, it was still pretty humorous. But, as I said, I never really had an issue with TSA.  I realize that they have a job to do and regulations are regulations. 

Now some brainiac, in office no doubt, has chosen to look at the policy which listed prohibited items and make some changes.  I certainly understand policies can change from time to time as needed but, allowing knives, regardless of the size, or baseball bats back on the plane is ridiculous!  They state that allowing passengers to carry these items will free up resources to deal with greater threats.  Really?  I didn't realize that it took so much time, energy and resources to identify a person carrying a bat!  This is where individuals in charge really need to look at how these decisions are made.  Better yet, maybe we should take a look at how these individuals making these decisions got it into those positions in the first place.

  

I can't fathom for the life of me how anyone would want or need to bring a baseball bat onto an airplane.  Now, I understand individuals in the past have brought some odd  objects into a plane but, I don't think I've ever seen anyone carry a baseball bat or a golf club into the cabin of the plane.  I have seen golf clubs as checked baggage which is perfectly fine.  But anyone who would bring a golf club onto a plane just makes no sense to me and if I saw an individual with a baseball bat on the plane, I would certainly be cautious.  Just saying.

Well I guess if they are going to allow baseball bats on the plane they will also have to allow cricket bats, golf clubs, hockey sticks, tire irons, hammers, and I guess if you're allowing knives you're going to have to allow screwdrivers and ice picks.  You never know when you'll need to break up your ice for your drink.  Where does it stop? And I don't mean the list of items.  I mean where does one's commonsense stop that makes them even consider that it might be a good idea to bring a knife or a baseball bat onto a plane?  Ridiculousness at its best.  GO TSA!