ARE WE REALLY SERIOUS ABOUT CUTTING OUR DEBT

SO MY QUESTION TO ALL IS--do we really want to reduce our national debt or are we just talkingoutourass!!

ENTER -Erskine Bowles and Sen. Alan Simpson, co-chairs of the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform - and their report released a couple of days ago detailing some hard hitting ways to ACTUALLY CUT OUR DEBT.

A BIT OF BACKGROUND-

we have the republicans yelling that the only thing we need to do is lower taxes for the rich and super rich and our national debt will sink like the titanic--BUT IN A MUCH SHORTER TIME FRAME AAANNNNNND-WILL CREATE ZILLIONS OF FANTASTIC PAYING NON-GOVERNMENT JOBS TO BOOT.

the democrats on the other hand, think that all we need to do is raise taxes on the rich and very rich and DITTO --our national debt will sink like the titanic--BUT IN A MUCH SHORTER TIME FRAME AAANNNNNND-WILL CREATE ZILLIONS OF FANTASTIC PAYING NON-GOVERNMENT JOBS TO BOOT.

DONE BOTH AND SUPRISE SUPRISE--THIS IS WHERE ITS GOTTEN US. AND YET, we still have these same politicians and the newbies elected just 10 days ago promising to change "the washington ways" and then succumbing to the same "ways" they supposedly opposed.

the greatest threat to our national security is our financial security. we are spending our way into the poorest of the poor houses and whenever we are confronted with the empty piggy bank or balance sheet, we react by immediately blaming the other side for all our financial problems. the fact of the matter is that we are all to blame for the situation we find ourselves in. we continue to spend and spend and then tax and tax and then spend and spend--well --you get the picture.

we do not have the courage to finally realize that we are going to have to make some very hard choices that involve our most "sacred cows"-defense spending, social security, medicade,

its always amazed me to hear this or that person rant about not wanting their taxes raised and at the same time yelling till their blue in the face that america is going broke. we want to keep all of our perks and strip the other guy of his/her perks.

i'm a bit older but i would still be willing to hold off for another year or two if it helps to keep social security going for a few more years. i'd be willing to pay a bit more deductable on my vets medical if it helps to spread it around to more that need it most.

yet, there are very rich older vets and soon to be retired people that will fight tooth and nail to keep all their vet benefits and social security benefits even though their are making hundreds of thousands and in some cases millions of bucks a year. we need to remember that social security was not intended for rich folk--it was intended to be a safety net for the poor workers or those with no savings after working honest jobs for their whole life.

i think of sara palin and her conservative viewpoint that we are becoming a socialist nation and a welfare state--YET, she fails to inform us that alaska takes in more federal/state funds for welfare and other social programs than any other state in the union. if we pulled out all the federal and state workers and projects in the state, they would be left with virtually no jobs--

senators from every state--so-called blue and red states- haul tons of "pork barrel" projects back to their home states year after year and have the balls to go on tv and rant about ending these very same projects---JUST NOT THEIR PROJECTS!

we have two choices in this debate-
A-ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING ABOUT REDUCING THE DEBT BY TACKLEING THE SACRED COWS-MEDICAID, SOCIAL SECURITY AND DEFENSE SPENDING

OR

B-CONTINUE TO SAY WE WANT TO DO SOMETHING AND B.S. EACH OTHER AND CONTINUE TO PASS IT OFF TO FUTURE GENERATIONS

its time to "put up or shut up" to "shit or get off the pot"--THAT SIMPLE