Bailout anger and frustration

September 30, 2008

There is profound anger on what the main stream media (MSM) is calling Main Street as well there should be about this bailout package.

If we don’t face the current realities, Main Street may end up hurting itself more Main Street can presently imagine.

As I’ve written before, Bush, Paulson and Bernake have done a dreadful job explaining how this bailout plan works. I’ve looked and looked for a cogent explanation of how this works and can find little. Here’s how we got in this mess.

  • Homebuyers who ordinarily would be unable to qualify to buy a home were offered mortgages that were “too good to be true,” e.g., no money down, 100% financing, “stated income” which meant no income verification, pay about half the house payment you ordinarily would for 3 years, etc.  [We can argue until the cows come home about “who’s at fault” but, it’s not going to solve the problem. We’ve hit a wall and we have to deal with it. Let’s just say the mortgage industry found a way to move more homes through creative lending.]
  • This loan situation drove the demand for homes higher and higher, both in terms of demand for homes and market valuations.
  • The homebuyers who bought these loans were told that in 3 years they would be able to refinance the house under the same extraordinary deal they enjoyed as “home values do nothing but go up.”  [This is key.  If home values go down–as they have–the home can’t be refinanced.  People can’t afford the new payment that effectively doubles their monthly payment so they have to walk away leading to foreclosures.]
  • Wall Street began buying and selling these mortgages to each other at a profit.  Selling the paper worked well when there was confidence that the paper valuation equaled or exceeded the actual valuation of the homes behind the paper.
  • What happens when the home value drops below the value of the mortgage?  Not good.
  • What happens when you can’t be sure that the appraised value of the house is even close to the value of the mortgage behind it?  Very bad.
  • What happens when people can’t qualify for loans to buy homes?   Yikes!
  • Now, the mortgage paper that’s been traded is of questionable value and has been moving that way for nearly 3 years.  Yet, Wall Street didn’t pause to reflect on this reality–it was “full stream ahead.”  Today, it’s not hard to find homes worth 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 percent less or even more than the value of the mortgage paper.  That piece of paper is no longer an asset–it can’t be converted to cash.  So, the mortgage is actually a liability–it can’t be used to borrow against or sold (unless you want to sell it at a loss).
  • So, Wall Street now has more of these “crappy” loans than you can shake a stick at and no buyers–well, no buyer that is until the Federal Government comes along and offers to buy the loans that no one wants to create cash where there’s a complete vacuum.   That’s what the bailout is about–buying crappy mortgages no one wants to provide a cash infusion to our economy.

Thus, the mechanism to generate cash that once existed to fuel the economy is severely restricted and is now affecting all areas of the economy.  If people stop buying or severely cut back buying homes, furniture, autos, groceries, etc., all the jobs attached to those industries suffer.   Those industries are supported by workers from Main Street.  The success of these companies impacts our investments, 401K’s, retirements, pensions, etc.

Money is the oxygen of our economy. Right now, our economy is strangling.   Without oxygen, the economy is put into a precarious state.

So, we know why this happened and what the implications are.  There is plenty of blame to pass around.  That’s not helpful.  We have a crisis and we need to come together to address this crisis.

Main Street should be angry. 

But, Main Street has to understand that failure to act by supporting some form of bailout package is going to hurt everyone and everything.  Main Street can’t get even with Wall Street without hurting Main Street.  We are all interconnected.

So, get angry and insist that reforms are put in place to make sure this doesn’t happen again.  Just be sure you don’t cut your nose off despite your face. 

What about all the alternatives?  I’ve given that a lot of thought and determined that, sadly, we need fast action.  Just about everything that we might do takes longer than we can probably tolerate at this point.

What should you do?  Call your Congressional representative and tell them that you’re angry we are in this situation, you want reforms put in place after this crisis passes, but you understand that something needs to be done and be done quickly.  Tell them to negotiate a bailout package and make it happen soon.  That, sadly, is our only choice.  I don’t know how big a package they need, but, something has to be done.

What do you think?  Democrat Dave

Advertisements

Paper endorses first Democrat for President in 72 years

September 29, 2008

The Record, a paper out of Stockton, California, has endorsed Barack Obama.  They’ve not endorsed a Democrat for President in 72 years.  Here’s part of what they wrote:

Barack Obama is our choice for president of the United States.
He has demonstrated time and again he can think on his feet. More importantly, he has demonstrated he will think things through, seek advice and actually listen to it.

Obama is a gifted speaker. But in addition to his smarts and energy, possibly his greatest gift is his ability to inspire.

For eight years, American politics has been marked by smears, fears and greed. For too long, we’ve practiced partisanship in Washington, not politics. The result is a cynicism every bit as deep as that which infected the nation when Richard Nixon was shamed from office and when Bill Clinton brought shame to the office.

This must end, but John McCain can’t do it. He can’t inspire, nor can he really break from a past that is breaking this nation.

Excellent. Most excellent! Obama-Biden in 2008. Democrat Dave


McCain & Kissinger both mistaken–FactCheck.org confirms

September 28, 2008

During the debate Friday evening, Barack Obama correctly made the assertion that Henry Kissinger had called for high-level talks with Iran and other nation states with whom the U.S. has differences without pre-conditions. 

John McCain scoffed at the remark suggesting that Henry Kissinger would never call for such talks without pre-conditions having been met.  This sounds consistent with Republican, Neo-Conservative thinking that, sadly, we’ve come to know all too well. John McCain is incorrect about what Henry Kissinger advocated.   And, Henry Kissinger’s statement via the McCain Campaign after the Friday debate is at odds with his own words. Perhaps both were having a “senior moment.”

John McCain also suggested that it would not be appropriate to start those talks at the Presidential level.  Barack Obama agreed with him on that point during the debate, but, it may have been lost in the storm around McCain’s response.

Here’s what FactCheck.org confirms:

Kissinger did in fact a few days earlier at a forum of former secretaries of state that he favors very high-level talks with Iran – without conditions:

Kissinger:Well, I am in favor of negotiating with Iran. And one utility of negotiation is to put before Iran our vision of a Middle East, of a stable Middle East, and our notion on nuclear proliferation at a high enough level so that they have to study it. And, therefore, I actually have preferred doing it at the secretary of state level so that we — we know we’re dealing with authentic…

CNN’s Frank Sesno: Put at a very high level right out of the box?

Kissinger: Initially, yes.But I do not believe that we can make conditions for the opening of negotiations.

After the McCain-Obama debate, however, Kissinger issued a statement saying he doesn’t favor a presidential meeting:

Kissinger: Senator McCain is right. I would not recommend the next President of the United States engage in talks with Iran at the Presidential level. My views on this issue are entirely compatible with the views of my friend Senator John McCain.

So, there you have it. McCain was mistaken; Kissinger is mistaken. Barack Obama represents the leadership we need.

Enough! Obama-Biden in 2008. Democrat Dave


I’m voting for Barack Obama because–by StrangeAnimals

September 28, 2008

My dad: “I finally feel at ease” with Obama
by StrangeAnimals (www.dailykos.com)
Sat Sep 27, 2008 at 06:51:44 PM PDT

I spoke with my father back in Ohio this afternoon. He is a lifelong Republican, though no fan of George Bush. While he could not bring himself to vote for Senator Kerry in 2004, he refused to vote to re-elect Dubya.

Four years on, he has joined the legion of disillusioned Republicans. He simply cannot abide John McCain, and over the course of the year, as he and I have discussed this election and this time in history, he has slowly come around to the Obama side. It was just last week that he surprised me by confiding that he’d decided to vote for Barack.

Today, he told me something that I think captured the essence of what Obama achieved last night. My father told me “I told you last week that I had decided to vote for your man, Obama, but after watching last night’s debate, I finally feel completely at ease with that decision.”

That’s what Obama accomplished last night. He made independents and likely even untold disillusioned Republicans feel at ease. That, to me, is the game clincher.

I didn’t want to leave you with such a short diary, really more of a long comment, so I’m attaching to the above story a list I sent to my father and to other fence-sitters I know, a list of reasons why I’m working so hard in support of Senator Barack Obama. I hope someone finds a use for it in their efforts to coax more fence-sitters down onto our side.

I’m voting for Barack Obama because on the day Barack Obama is inaugurated, America will think differently of itself, and this is no small thing. Imagine the symbolism of it. Do not short shrift symbols, for they are very powerful. To be able to point to a President Barack Obama and tell a child of any color anywhere in America that they, too, through education and hard work, could someday be anything they want to be…that’s a powerful thing, especially in our melting-pot nation.

I’m voting for Barack Obama because Obama’s narrative is quintessentially American. His is an All-American success story. A biracial kid with an absentee father raised by a single mother on food stamps. A kid with a funny name whose improbable path carried him from Hawaii to Indonesia to Chicago to Washington; a Harvard law grad who turned away from a coveted Supreme Court clerkship to work just out of law school as a community organizer on Chicago’s South Side; a United States Senator who, until his presidential campaign, still shopped for groceries with his young children, and who only recently got out from underneath his student loans; a family man with a solid marriage to a bright and dynamic, articulate and self-made woman; a man of faith who walks the walk of his religion. Nothing was handed to this man – everything he has accomplished has come from the sweat of his own grit and determination.

(Correction per noice: “Obama’s work as a community organizer was before he went to Harvard Law.  He did it after he graduated from Columbia University.  After Harvard Law, he went to work as a civil rights attorney instead of going for a Supreme Court clerkship.” Thanks also to kimberlyweldon and SDLinn for correcting my error!)

I’m voting for Barack Obama because Senator Obama inspires people of all ages to action. And while inspiration alone isn’t enough to get the job done, it’s a necessary ingredient to begin the hard work. After sixteen years of Clinton and Bush hyper-partisanship, Obama’s appeal to Americans to have the audacity to hope falls on fertile ground. He is a hope-mongerer facing down a legion of entrenched, Washingtonian hope-mockers. His unwillingness to cross the line into the dark side of politics has touched a fundamental place in the hearts of many who are eager to believe that the political process is not entirely a cynical joke.

I’m voting for Barack Obama because Senator Obama understands that you win elections not by pandering to your base, but by drawing support from independents and from the opposite side, by articulating what unifies people rather than exploiting what divides them. Change comes not just from knowing how to work the levers of power – it takes more than that. It takes creating the popular movements necessary to support and sustain change. No other candidate spurs that kind of enthusiasm.

I’m voting for Barack Obama because most politicians talk about “I”, the crafter of the policy, whereas Obama talks about “we” and “us”, the people who demand it and who jointly carry it out. He talks about this nation as if all of us are in it together. He speaks to the nation rather than preaching to the partisan choir. If he inspires fervor, it speaks only to the deep need of Americans to put behind us decades of the politics of selfishness, pettiness, divisiveness, cynicism, and greed. Americans are sick of it. Most of us are well aware that our nation, indeed the world, faces issues that are intractable, overwhelming, and terrifying, and we know deep inside ourselves that we have to do something different than what we’ve been doing in order to address them.

I’m voting for Barack Obama because Obama’s appeal also rests on an attractive optimism, a chance for America to move beyond the poisonous legacy of the divisions wrought between liberals and conservatives by the 1960s, Vietnam, and the 1990s. He meets a hunger that exists nationwide to turn the page on the tired ideological battles of the past. He captures the electorate’s hunger for meaningful change. With septuagenarian Senator John McCain as the Republican nominee, a man with broad popular appeal but also a man who, if elected, would be the oldest president at inauguration in American history, what better choice between past and future could Americans be offered than between he and Obama?

I’m voting for Barack Obama because Obama has built a powerful political network unlike seen before, based on cross-cultural and multi-generational grassroots movements and community building. He possesses an exceptional and enduring talent for organization and for connecting with voters, and has attracted voters on a level unseen in decades: over two million Americans have contributed to his campaign! He is about participation, and participation wins elections. His appeal is also much broader ideologically and racially than perhaps any politician in American history, and his demographic diversity contrasts sharply and is more representative of America than Senator McCain’s demographic monotony: mostly white, and mostly male.

I’m voting for Barack Obama because his relatively short time in Washington is more asset than handicap. Not long removed from the pool of the people, in Obama ordinary, everyday hard-working Americans of every political stripe will have a friend in the White House.

I’m voting for Barack Obama because he has the judgment and character necessary to lead this nation in these perilous times. He is serious, thoughtful, and decent. He exhibits charisma, coolness under fire, and an impresive understanding of the issues that face us. He gives rational explanations of his positions and brings people into his thought process, rather than talking down to them. He thinks about the questions, the daunting questions we face, and he answers those questions. He articulates and embodies the idea of a nobler America. He is pragmatic, and has exhibited throughout his political career a genuine commitment to the idea of finding pragmatic solutions by reaching across the partisan divide, and forging relationships with those of differing viewpoints.

I’m voting for Barack Obama because his is the face of the future. America in the coming decades will be predominantly a nation of color, and with the election of Barack Obama America will send a message to its own future that it is unafraid of it, that it welcomes it, and embraces it. That a black man in a country that denied black people the vote as recently as 1964, in a country whose past is disfigured by slavery, segregation, and unequal voting rights, is now the nominee of a major political party is itself an extraordinary comment on how far America has come over the past half-century. His election to the presidency would signal that the next half-century will likely bring continued progress toward genuine equality for every race, color, creed and orientation.

I’m voting for Barack Obama because on the day Barack Obama is inaugurated, the world will think differently of America. The election of Obama, a man with a multicultural name and heritage, would overnight begin to improve the image of the United States abroad, and send the global message that a post-Bush and post-Clinton 21st-century American era has arrived. With his election, the value of America’s moral currency abroad would begin to be restored.

I’m voting for Barack Obama because of Obama’s stalwart opposition to the Iraq War since before its beginning, and his stalwart dedication to see the Iraq War to its end. Obama said, in 2002: “I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world and strengthen the recruitment arm of al Qaeda. I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars.” In 2008, Obama speaks once again for millions: “I don’t want to just end the war, I want to end the mind-set that got us into war in the first place.”

I’m voting for Barack Obama because Obama is a Harvard-educated constitutional law scholar, and civil libertarian. In his campaign speeches, he has frequently referred to his desire to close Guantanamo, stop torture, restore habeas corpus rights to detainees, bring back our lost civil liberties, and return to a presidency that sticks to its vow to follow the U.S. Constitution.

I’m voting for Barack Obama because Obama pushes progressive values into the mainstream. He constantly talks about his core liberal philosophy in a way that’s appealing to non-liberals. He has an ability to use his eloquence not just to persuade, but to mobilize, and to unite. Unlike the method of triangulating, moving Democrats to the middle, Obama moves the middle to our values. He stands for progressive values while appealing to common sense and pragmatism over ideology and demagoguery. And the end effect might be an ascendant, mainstream progressive party that enacts its values into laws.

I’m voting for Barack Obama because Obama has the potential to be a transformative American leader. The best leaders are like magnets beneath a piece of paper, invisibly aligning iron filings into new patterns of their design. Obama could be such a leader. Most of the presidents in American history who have been transformative have been charismatic figures with exceptional oratorical skills who persuaded Americans to share in their larger vision. I am not able to imagine a President John McCain being similarly transformative, or being such a magnet.

I’m voting for Barack Obama because I know that most voters do not vote primarily on the basis of policies, but rather on values, connection, authenticity, trust, and identity. Obama has solid values. He connects with voters as no politician has done since Reagan, or Kennedy. His authenticity is unquestioned. Polls have consistently revealed great differences between Obama and McCain on matters of trust and identity.

I’m voting for Barack Obama because after the bitterness of the Bush years, America badly needs a dose of unity. We face huge issues in the years to come, and to work through them we need not only optimism, creativity, and courage, but also trust in one another, and an end to bitter partisanship. None of that arises out of cynicism and despair. Does anyone foresee an end to – or even an easing of – our bitter divisions with a President McCain?

I’m voting for Barack Obama because this era demands a president who will include all of us in the debate over our future, whether or not we agree on every issue. And while I do not agree with Senator Obama on every issue, it does not matter so much to me, because this election campaign is about so much more than individuals and their pet issues. It is about the reacquisition of an ideal that has been stolen away from us.

I’m voting for Barack Obama because for now, at this time in history, I believe Barack Obama to be the best antidote we’ve got to the darkness and division we’ve endured for too many years. He’s our best hope to re-dignify the office of President of the United States with a stature that symbolizes the awesomeness of America. He’s our best hope not to make change, but to remind us of our ability to make change.

I’m voting for Barack Obama because there is no question Obama is an icon of hope. And despite ridicule to the contrary, hope does matter. When people join movements to realize raised hopes, our nation has a chance of changing for the better. When they damp their hopes, as his opponents throughout this campaign have suggested, the status quo is preserved. Hope and fear, future and past are the determining factors in this election. Not gender, not race. Will grouchy and divided Americans be driven primarily by their fears, or by their hopes? By their nostalgia for some “better” past, or by the courage to face a new future? The possibility of a new president named Barack Hussein Obama hangs on the answer.

Yes, we can! Si se puede!

Update: Yeah! Rec List! First time since March…thanks everyone!!!

Update II: The overwhelmingly positive response to this diary is the biggest honor I’ve received since having met Senator Barack Obama here in Eugene, Oregon back on May 9th. Yes, I met the next President of the United States, and the picture of that meeting sits here still, framed, next to my computer. It inspires me every day, and to think that I’ve helped inspire others brings tears to my eyes. Thanks everyone. What a fantastic place is DailyKos.


Barack Obama background: FactCheck.org sets the record straight

September 27, 2008

There is a lot of misinformation on the Internet about Barack Obama.  I’m sorry to say that much of it seems to come from bloggers who lean to the Right.  So, I decided to do some research on FactCheck.org to see what I could find.   I’m sharing summaries below:

Did Obama say we “are no longer a Christian nation”?
August 26, 2008

FactCheck.org:  He said we are no longer “just” a Christian nation, but a nation of many other faiths as well. A chain e-mail drops that key word and thus changes the meaning.

 

Did Obama write that he would “stand with the Muslims” and that he nurses a “pervasive sense of grievance and animosity” toward whites?
June 3, 2008

FactCheck.org: No. A widely circulated e-mail fabricates some quotes from Obama’s books and twists others.

 

Does Barack Obama have Kenyan citizenship?
August 29, 2008

FactCheck.org: No. He held both U.S. and Kenyan citizenship as a child, but lost his Kenyan citizenship automatically on his 21st birthday.

 

Barack Obama Born in the U.S.A.
August 21, 2008

FactCheck.org: In June, the Obama campaign released a digitally scanned image of his birth certificate to quell speculative charges that he might not be a natural-born citizen. But the image prompted more blog-based skepticism about the document’s authenticity. And recently, author Jerome Corsi, whose book attacks Obama, said in a TV interview that the birth certificate the campaign has is “fake.”  We beg to differ. FactCheck.org staffers have now seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate. We conclude that it meets all of the requirements from the State Department for proving U.S. citizenship. Claims that the document lacks a raised seal or a signature are false. We have posted high-resolution photographs of the document as “supporting documents” to this article. Our conclusion: Obama was born in the U.S.A. just as he has always said.

 

Has Obama’s birth certificate been disclosed?
June 16, 2008

FactCheck.org: Yes. His campaign made a copy public after speculation by conservative bloggers that he might not be a “natural-born citizen.”

 

Sliming Obama
January 10, 2008

FactCheck.org: Dueling chain e-mails claim he’s a radical Muslim or a ‘racist’ Christian. Both can’t be right. We find both are false.

 

This is the extent of the information I could locate on FactCheck.org.  Democrat Dave


McCain voting record at odds with his “support” for veterans

September 27, 2008

Last evening, I saw an interview with a gentleman from VoteVets.org who clarified John McCain’s record on supporting veterans.  I’ve got to tell you, on this issue, John McCain really pisses me off!  

John McCain would have you believe that, being a veteran and former POW, he appreciates the sacrifice that our men and women have made and he’d go out of his way to take care of them.  This is absolute B.S.  

John McCain:  Your rhetoric doesn’t square with your voting record on veterans matters!  What a frickin’ surprise!   What a disgrace you are to our men and women in the military!!  I don’t know how you sleep at night given your voting record.  You aren’t a “maverick” when it comes to veterans issues–you are a pussy in the Bush Administration’s back pocket.

Over 4000 U.S. veterans have been killed in the line of duty in Iraq and another 30,000+ have been seriously injured, many with injuries that will impair them for the remainder of their lives.   And, this is just the Iraq war.  It doesn’t include figures from Afghanistan or other foreign conflicts.

Here’s a blog post in it’s entirety from VoteVets.org.  I hope they won’t mind me sharing it with you in its entirety here. 

Enough!!  Vote Obama-Biden in November.  Democrat Dave

 
 
McCain Overstretches his Support of Veterans and Troops  by Brian McGough Sat Sep 27, 2008 at 5:21 AM EDT

In tonight’s debate John McCain said “I know the veterans, I know them well, and I know that they know that I’ll take care of them, and I have been proud of their support and their recognition of my service to the veterans, and I love them, and I’ll take care of them, and they know that I’ll take care of them.”

Truth be told, this is not the case.  McCain has a lackluster voting record when it comes to veterans’ issues, and America’s veterans know it.  The Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America have given McCain a grade of “D” when it comes to voting in their interest.  The Disabled American Veterans have given McCain a 20 percent rating when it comes to voting in the interest of disabled veterans.

 
McCain has voted 29 times against veterans’ medical benefits.  In April 2006, McCain joined only 13 other senators in voting against an amendment that would increase funding for the VA to provide outpatient care and treatment.  Earlier that year, McCain voted against increasing funding for military and veterans’ hospitals.  This was money that could have been used to fix the problems at Walter Reed before it became a national disgrace.McCain was a staunch opponent of the bipartisan Webb/Hagel GI Bill.  This bill would have provided better educational opportunities to veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.  McCain called this bill “too generous” and tried to introduce his own watered down bill.  McCain didn’t even bother to show up to vote for the bill. After it passed the two staunchest opponents of the GI Bill, President Bush and John McCain, tried to take credit for its passage. McCain has an equally bad record when it comes to supporting our active duty soldiers.  McCain opposed the Webb/Hagel Dwell time amendment.  This amendment would have ensured that for every day troops were deployed, they would spend one day at home.  This time would have allowed troops to decompress from combat stress and to focus on maintaining the equipment necessary to fight a war.  Our troops and equipment are now dangerously overstretched.McCain opposed the Bayh amendment that would have provided $360 million for the procurement of up-armored humvees at a time when roadside bombs were killing American troops.McCain voted to kill the Reed Amendment. This amendment would have begun to increase the size of the active army in 2003 and focused on stability operations.

McCain voted against the Dodd amendment that would provide an additional $320 million in protective gear for our troops in harms way.

McCain also voted against a Landrieu amendment that would have given our National Guard and Reserve troops the equipment they needed to survive on the battlefield.

There is a distinct pattern in these votes, and that pattern shows that John McCain is no friend to veterans on Capitol Hill.  He may say all he wants that he is, but that doesn’t change the fact that he votes time and time again against the needs of veterans and active duty soldiers.


Are we safer from another 9/11 attack on U.S. soil?

September 27, 2008

I was disappointed by Barack Obama’s response last evening but felt he answered the only way he could.  He indicated we were safer (but not by how much) and then went on to point out that we still have real vulnerabilities in cargo through ports, airlines, etc., because of inadequate screening.  In Barack’s defense, to have answered otherwise would play into the Republican fear, uncertainty, doubt game that they execute so well.

I would have preferred that Barack say, “No, we’re really not safer and the threat of another terror attack on U.S. soil remains largely unchanged.”  Why?  That’s the truth.  But, after spending billions and billions on this, would the American people stomach the truth?

The Bush Administration created the hugely inefficient Department of Homeland Security which is such a behemoth that it can barely get out of its own way to support hurricane relief. We are only a bit safer as we’ve really only done cosmetic changes.  For example, if you think the TSA is going to make you safer flying, look at the media reports of all the tests successfully putting weapons through airport passenger security check points.  The U.S. provides the illusion of security, not security.

El Al Airlines–the Israeli airline–provides true security.  But, it is a level of security that American travelers would never tolerate.  With El Al, you show up for a flight 4-5 hours before a flight and go through multiple screenings including interviews.  Their planes are not parked at the gate at the airport; they park them out on the tarmac away from the terminal where armed people both on the plane and on the ground secure the planes when they aren’t in use.

We should not conclude that we are safer simply because we’ve not had an attack on U.S. soil like the 9/11 attack.  Those who seek to undermine the U.S. are patient and know that we continue to be complacent about security.  Think of it like computer virus software which needs to be updated daily.  There are constant, new threats to the safety and security of your computer.  Someone is always trying to exploit a new weakness that they’ve uncovered.  Homeland security is no different and much more challenging. 

Has the U.S. demonstrated a level of commitment to potential terror threats?  Or, have we created the illusion that we’re safer?  We have a long journey ahead of us that will require substantial funding and persistence. 

What do you think?  Democrat Dave