Comment

Comment by Leon Elledge on January 30, 2012 at 3:39pm

To: Chris W. Fowler

It strikes me as unusual that your perception of Germany and how people felt about our presence could differ so profoundly. I was in Germany, for a few weeks only, in the same period, about 1982. I was part of a unit assisting with an audit of the supply system in at BFV. Of course people expressed a preference for military people who, rather than stroll about in uniform,  dressed in casual garb, but that was normal. How would you feel if 80,000 uniformed troops strolling around your town?   In my experience, traveling through the Stutgard, Garnish,  region, I found most people happy we were there. We had many German friends among the people we worked with and their neighbors. We spent a Saturday at the Haffbraugh House, with a group of British Commandos, who also found the people very pleased with all but a few of the foreign troops they had experience with. At a small village off the Autoban, we stopped at what was a neighborhood restraunt. I was concerned when all of the tables appeared to be reserved, a practice in the area where almost everyone has a set routeen and dines at the same time. The hostess cleared one table, labeled 7:00 PM Hauseman, and when the family that had reserved the table arrived, introduced us to them and they had tables moved to join us. We all talked about news and events of the day in both German and English, and did  not leave until 10:30 PM. (A great experience!)  Later, the next day, we visited several castles in Austria, met retired american families that had estabilshed businesses and built a life in the area. They said openly that it was not the troops they objected to, only a few bad eggs: guys that had no respect for or interest in, the customs of the locals. Polite, consederate foreign troops were welcome. What they wanted was for the military to provide, at least, a set of standards to each serviceman on what would be tolerated and what would not. Then they should be enforced. We all agreed that this was where far too many commanders failed. Boom Boxes, Drugs, Foul Language, and Crime, were the main issues then. These complaints fell of deaf ears at many bases. 

Unless we are to all become Ron Paul followes and close all bases everywhere outside of our boarders, we need to teach our troops and their commanders, to show the same respect for the population and local laws that we would demand from their military if it was here. Aside from that, the contact I had was positive and very pleasent. I suspect that experience was closer to the norm. 

Comment by Chris W. Fowler on January 30, 2012 at 2:29pm

I personally want to hear more from Newt about cleaning up government waste and corruption. For example; corporate welfare, farm subsidizes, Medicare and Medicaid waste and corruption, plus getting rid of foreign aid. Trust me when I say the rest of the world hates America, even our so-called friends. I was stationed in Germany for two years during the mid 80's and seen it first hand, the people would openly express for us to leave our money and go home.

I like to see Newt remove Romney from the equation and start talking more about the changes he (Newt) is going to make as president. Romney keeps stepping all over himself and hopefully the people aren't listening to my former favorite news channel (Fox News) who is obviously an extention of the Republican establishment. Good luck Newt, you might not think so, but you have a lot of support here in Michigan no matter what the propaganda from Fox and others say.  

Comment by John Scott Barnes on January 25, 2012 at 9:40am

Privatize social security right away! Just look at how quickly congress tried to stop Bush from even telling the American people about the idea. The congress has already privatized their own SS, why not the rest of us? They have plundered our money that has been hard earned by citizens who deserve to know exactly where their money is, and have the right to control when they retire as well as where to spend their own savings, not a bunch of corrupt politicians like Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi. We have seen over the years that both side of the isle are guilty of making poor judgement concerning other peoples money, but Newt said clearly, "I'm not here for either party but for the American people". I for one believe him and will support him. 

Comment by Benjamin Pritchard on January 22, 2012 at 7:09am

Social Security doesn't need an overhaul as Congress would have you believe. What needs to happen get back to the orginal protected trust funds that are not put in general Treasy funds with IOU's from Congress. Congress has tapped these funds for years when the trust fund actually had a surplus. Then they decided if funds were put in general funds and IOU's put in Social Security the money would be availbe for other programs. Reality is funds were spent on other programs that had nothing to do with Social Security benefits. As you can see we now are facing short falls and more cuts. Now it does take some smart finical wizard to see, if you take the funds ans spend them on other things there will never be enough to fund the original benefits.  Let alone increasing benefit coverage over the original intent of the plan.  We have gone from a surplus to debit ridden position simply because Congress took the funds and spent them other things that were wasteful.

Comment by Janet Carney on January 21, 2012 at 5:30pm

Means Testing seems Viable too - It's not lke Warren Buffett & Bill Gates and Anyone Already with Significant Retirement & MEANS needs it --

Comment by Janet Carney on January 21, 2012 at 5:27pm

One of the things they are not willing to talk about is the FACT that Many of Pres. used SS Funds because they Needed it to Balance the Budget - My understanding is there are IOU'S in the SS Fund So Why not Demand as they Balance the Budget to Fairly See Where they are at 56 This Really Bothers me too.....With the Amount of $$$ the Put in Forg Aid - They Could Stop that Nonsense & Repay the SS Fund in No Time !!

Comment by Jeanie Scheirer on January 20, 2012 at 7:17pm

Need to stop paying Social Security to one's that never paid in.

Comment by Cynthia Bradford DeZearn (Cee) on January 19, 2012 at 6:22pm

I have a difficult time hearing "there won't be any social security left when you become eligible" when I consider the number of years employers and the American workers have paid into the program.  Robbing Peter to pay Paul never has worked.  The amount we pay into this program will never be seen by those of us retiring in the next 10 years. 

Comment by Jerry A Guisinger on January 4, 2012 at 11:03pm

You can begin to save Social Security by establishing a "hands-off" policy with regard to congress raping the funds that were contributed by citizens and their employers. As it stands we are paying far more into Social Security than we ever receive back from it.   Let's start by telling it like it is, and calling it by it's proper name. As long as congress can dip into it to replenish the "over spent" general fund it is nothing more than cleverly disguised increase to our Income Tax and encourages overspending.  When it comes to calculating a balance budget...  let's call apples - apples, and oranges - oranges.

Comment by Leon Elledge on December 18, 2011 at 1:39pm

I hope that you will give real consideration to replacing the IRS and current tax law with a consumption tax. That concept, if it includes a 1% tax on all stock transactions, and some flat 2% tax on untangables, nas well as a 5% national l sales tax, would solve most of our budget problems. (Not too far from Cain's 999 plan, but 521 is going to get broader support.)

We need the security of a fixed no nonsence, no exception, tax system tobring our economy back and stop the run away exploitation of the tax system.  We could then begin removoing the over regulation of industry and growth. Give it a fair review and let the voters decide.