Because it is tax season. . . Let's put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand.

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100.

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.

The fifth would pay $1.

The sixth would pay $3.

The seventh would pay $7.

The eighth would pay $12.

The ninth would pay $18.

The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until on day, the owner threw them a curve. "Because you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20."Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?' They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:

The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).

The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).

The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).

The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).

The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).

The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

"I only got a dollar out of the $20,"declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man," but he got $10!"

"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!"

"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.

Professor of Economics

University of Georgia

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.

For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

If the Democrats are confident that the American people and thus Congress want out of the war then why don't they introduce individual bills that cut off funding and call for a withdrawal by a certain date.  Not tied to anything else, no pork attached, clean bills stating their case.  A case for surrender but a case nonetheless.

The answer is they know that the bills will not pass.  They know that they have to tie the withdrawal date to the funding.  Then they can claim the President is not supporting the troops when he has to veto the bill due to the withdrawal date.  They put themselves into a win-win scenario by pushing the Presidnet into a corner.

A bill to cut off funding clearly shows the Democrats do not support the troops so they will not attempt that issue by itself.

A bill for withdrawal shows that they have given up i.e. surrending/losing/etc. 

Therefore, the Democrats need to tie the bills together so they can make claims about the President when he is forced to veto them (i.e. playing political games).

Bottom line: If the two issues (Stop Funding and Withdrawal) were that important to the American People then Congress could pass Bills without the pork.  We all know they can't pass the bills individually so they play political games to make the President look bad.

I don't understand how this guy can make this claim but he won and is getting paid for protesting.  Maybe I'll give up my day job.  He clearly admits his purpose (Protesting) for being in the park. 

Lead plaintiff Ken Hankin, a Boeing worker, said he was pleased the settlement had been reached but added that getting a few thousand dollars seemed paltry compared to the violation of his rights. He spent three days in police custody and wasn't released until the WTO meetings had ended.

"I lost my right to protest the WTO," he said. "That's something I feel very upset about."

He was arrested for protesting (albeit peacefully) in an established "No Protest Zone" and is complaining that he lost his right to protest.  All he had to do to avoid getting arrested (and preserve his rights, his choice) was to stay out of the "No Protest" zone.  My assumption is the zone was declared off limits so the protesting would not affect citizens out to enjoy the park.   

The trial stemmed from the mass arrest of protesters at a downtown park, where they were sitting and singing patriotic anthems. That week, 50,000 demonstrators had swarmed Seattle, overwhelming police and closing down parts of the WTO meeting.

The park was in a "no-protest" zone established by the mayor, but officers made no effort to determine whether the protesters had other legitimate reasons to be there before making the arrests, the jury decided.

If I lived in Seattle and knew my tax dollars were paying for insurance coverage that pays out money to protesters, I would not be happy right now.  In fact, I feel very upset that he got a paycheck from the city for protesting.  

 After listening to all the rhetoric during the elections last year from Democrats about how they "Support the Troops but not the War", I am disgusted by the Bills being worked on in Congress.  The only way the Democrats feel they can convince the President to get out of this war is to stop the funding for the war.  That funding is what keeps the troops alive, buys them body armor, upgrades the Humvees, buys them bullets, pays for the training, etc.  How can they feel good about the decisions they are making when they are taking away the support they campaigned about providing to the troops. 

The reality is that the rhetoric regarding providing adequate training for the troops is bogus.  My friends and fellow soldiers are getting the training they need.  The MN National Guard spent 6 months getting the training they need to deploy before going to Iraq.  The average Active Duty soldier can go through basic training and AIT for 4 months and get shipped over.  Many guard members have many years of National Guard experience beyond that 6 months of training as well.

The argument about not providing adequate equipment is also bogus.  The argument was valid early in the war when we provided everyone with gas masks because Saddam had used gas attacks (can you say WMD?).  The threat changed and the military adapted. 

The point that I am trying to make is that the Democrats have exhausted the ability to use rhetoric any longer.  They do not have substantial grounds for making the tired old arguments they had been making for the first couple years of the war because the Bush Administration actually listened (more rhetoric I can debunk) and made the changes to protect the soldiers.  The arguments from the first couple years of the war are no longer valid but that does not prevent the Democrats from using those arguments. 

That being said, the Democrats can no longer hide the progress so they have to prevent the progress in order to keep supporting their arguments.  If progress is made then they have no argument.  Odd how the media does not focus on that.  The only way for them to do that is to stop the funding, i.e. stop supporting the troops!!!  If we stop supporting the troops the war is over.  We have lost and the terrorists win.

No funding = No Troop Support = Giving Up = Losing the War

Terrorists - 1
Democrats - 0

My Congressional Representation
Sen. Norm Coleman (R) - Voted to Support the Troops
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D) - Voted NOT to Support the Troops
Rep. Michele Bachmann (R) - Voted to Support the Troops

2 out 3 people representing me voted to Win the War on Terror!!! 

I can't imagine the thoughts that go through the mind of a soldier in Iraq when Congress votes to cut off funding for the war that he is willing to sacrifice his life for.  I recall sitting in Bosnia and Afghanistan watching CNN and wondering why the politicians were playing games with the troops.  I can't imagine how the soldiers in Iraq feel about the games the politicians are playing now.

Last weekend at the Wright County Republican convention, I had the pleasure of talking with Rep Michele Bachmann.  In her speech to the delegates from Wright County, she told a story of meeting a Home Depot employee that was leaving for Iraq the following week.  Her words struck me in that she emphasized the personal aspect of that soldier.  She asked herself  "How could I as a Congressman face a constituent going off to war and not vote for the funding of that war?".  

Rep Bachmann did vote to continue funding the war and I applaud her for taking a stance in support of the troops.  As a former soldier, I am grateful to have her representing me in Congress and more importantly, standing up for my fellow soldiers who are still fighting for this great country.

If Congress manages to pass the Bills to stop funding of the war, we may as well bring the troops home tomorrow.  Congress is NOT supporting the troops if they cut off funding.  The line between supporting troops and supporting the war will be gone.  If that Bill passes, it is the equivalent to America surrendering.  We will have conceded defeat and we should bring the troops home immediately because we will have lost!!!  We will need the troops back here because the world will know how weak America is and we will get attacked on our home soil AGAIN.  Congress has forgotten that the reason we are in this war is because we were attacked on our home soil on Sept 11.  Iraq was not directly involved in the 9/11 attack but they were a State Sponsor of Terror, they paid the families of suicide bombers, they harbored and trained terrorists and they most certainly had connections to Al Qaeda, not to mention Chemical and Biological weapons. 

I support the war and the troops 100% but if Congress is not willing to finish the war they voted for then the terrorists win and America should bring the troops home immediately.  The constituents of America wearing a uniform, the soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines need to contact our Congressmen as the people in the fight (not the 60% of the people on the couch at home who have given up) and let them know how we feel.  If America is truly committed to winning the war then the soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines need to stand up and say to Congress "Give me the support I need to finish this fight!!!". 

I am proud of Rep Bachmann and ashamed that the Democrats (and Chuck Hagel) of Congress are giving up!

Congressional Delegation Discusses Brigade’s Mission, Progress in Iraq During Taji Visit
Story by Sgt. Jon Cupp

...Rep. Marcy Kaptur, D-Ohio, asked the brigade leaders about successes in improving essential services in the area.
   
One example cited was the Husayniyah power plant.
   
“A company out of Texas is helping us to grow the capabilities in the power plant,” answered Lt. Col. Ken Kamper, commander, 1st Battalion, 37th Field Artillery Regiment. “We’re making progress and there’s a decent system in place.”

Rep. Steve Rothman, D-N.J., voiced concerns about the sectarian violence in areas surrounding Taji, and whether any of the attacks on U.S. troops were a result of the people being unhappy with a lack of essential services.

“We believe their motivation is something different. There are various extremist groups. They aren’t attacking us because of a lack of essential services,” answered Funk. “It’s more of a grab for power by sectarian groups (of various factions) who are trying to expand their position.”

Funk added that the Iraqi people living in the region are making a genuine effort to end the violence. He cited an instance where a Shia sheik brought together both Shia and Sunnis to meet because they were tired of violence in their village. He also said that he does not believe that most Iraqis hold a sectarian view.
             
“That’s the kind of thing that’s starting to happen in our zone,” said Funk, noting the Sunni and Shia efforts to stop sectarian violence in his area of operation.
   
“The Iraqis have more of a national view, and they don’t want the influences of (foreign fighters from) Syria or Iran,” he told the delegation. “I think they’re tired and they want the violence to end.”

To illustrate the point, Funk noted the rise in the number of tips that ISF and Ironhorse Soldiers are receiving from concerned citizens, which lead to the capture of insurgents.
   
Near the end of the briefing, Kaptur asked the brigade senior leaders if they were concerned about polls that sometimes have a negative slant against U.S. military efforts in Iraq.

“I’m not really concerned with polls. When you go out and meet with the Iraqi people, they tell us they feel safe when we’re there and they’re happy to see us,” Funk said. “Sometimes it can bring tears to your eyes, especially when you look in the faces of the children. When you look in their eyes, you see hope and you know you’re making a difference.”...

Bravo Michelle for this article.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/MichelleMalkin/2007/02/21/hillarys_phony_coat_of_armor

I could care less about the political games played by Hillary.  The message in this story is that the troops ARE getting the equipment they need.  The Army is constantly improving what the soldiers have and the comments made by the soldiers in the article are a testament to that.

Early in the war everyone had chemical suits because Saddam had threatened to use Chemical Weapons (I believe that qualifies as a WMD) on us if we attacked (but of course, he had no WMD's as the liberals point out).  Everyone believed he had them because he used them on the Kurds and had threatened to use them on us, but I digress.  Therefore we equipped ourselves for that threat.  The threat changed to IED's as the insurgency grew in strength and we adapted and retrofitted for the new threat.  That's what makes the American military the best in the world, our ability to adapt. 

  I am not frustrated by the pace of the war. I have military experience and training in counter insurgency operations and I know from that knowledge that fighting a counter insurgency and performing a nation building mission takes time. Historically, we have numerous examples of counter insurgencies that went on for years and were very successful. It takes time.

We cannot judge how successful the war is through body bags as the media is doing. We need to count the tangible progress and listen to the Military Commanders on the ground. The reports I hear from friends and family that have served or are serving in Iraq tell me that progress is being made.

I hear reports that Iraq has less electrical power than before the war. Does that take into account the additional electrical devices drawing power from the grid? That was a measure of success in Bosnia and also is in Iraq. Count the number of satellite dishes on the rooftops. The economy in Iraq is booming and people are buying TV's, radios, DVD players, etc. The markets are full of people and progress is being made.

There are still issues in Iraq and the security in Baghdad is not up to par. The troop surge will address that. The analogy that is used in Insurgency operations is that of a bucket of water. When you put your hand in, the water cannot take up that space. When you pull your hand back out the water fills the space back up.

Real world tells us that when the military takes a city the insurgents scatter and when we leave they come back. In Iraq we spent the first 2-3 years training and building the Iraqi Army and we were the hand causing the insurgents to scatter. We did not have enough troops to keep them from coming back as was evident in Fallujah battles I & II.

Now that the Iraqi Army has enough soldiers that can actually hold territory, yes I believe they can, when the American hand is pulled out, an Iraqi hand replaces it and keeps the insurgents from returning to that city. That strategy has worked in Afghanistan and is working in Iraq also. Baghdad is a huge city and it will take additional troops to plunge into the bucket and scatter the insurgents. The Iraqi troops will be necessary to hold Baghdad.

This is from an email that I received from a childhood friend who is serving in Iraq with the MN National Guard and has just been extended as part of the troop surge.

Dear Friends,

My team and I have enjoyed great progress with the Iraq Battalion that we coach, teach, mentor, and advise. When we arrived in June, 60 percent of the soldiers had not been paid since joining the Iraqi Army between November 04-February 05. Over 90 percent of the soldiers being paid were being paid at the level of trainee pay (below private). Currently we have 6 pay issues out of the hundreds we had when we first arrived and the issues are self inflicted by the soldiers themselves.

The living conditions for the soldiers were terrible. They didn't understand or practice basic hygiene as a group or as individuals. Some examples of these, and I won't be to gross about it, are as follows; kitchen established next to the wash room/bath room/garbage piles, food storage not organized just all over the floors where people walk (yes, next to the bathrooms), soldiers not using bathrooms just utilizing the location of their choosing, no personal hygiene at all, no AC, no management of supplies such as drinking water, food, and fuel. The soldiers would continually ask/beg U.S. soldiers for supplies and equipment no matter if they had it or not. Since that time in June the supply management has been organized and is well managed, hygiene issues have been addressed and have greatly improved to the point that they will get on each others case about keeping clean, the locations of the food preparation area, garbage, and bathrooms are well separated. The soldiers and the officers take pride in their jobs and have gained some self respect and dignity as human beings and have begun to take the initiative to make their situations better (not just waiting for it to be done for them). They have stopped begging (for the most part) for items and now request items through their chain of command the proper way.

The operation of the Battalion as far as getting bad guys was none existent. Currently we daily are cleaning the local streets of bad guys. The Iraq Officers have established themselves as the leaders in the area, the long arm of the law. They have involved themselves in the process of standing up local government, leadership and local justice. This includes civilian representatives, Iraqi Police, and local businessmen. In most cases the information that they gather is way better than our own efforts. They love learning the new technology and give briefs by power point better than some U.S. units. Yes, we have been busy. Everyday we move the 1st down marker means we are that much closer to getting into the end zone. Right now, the guys we work with are in the red zone and they won't just settle for a field goal.

We are very proud of the results/development that we have seen with the guys we work with. My team will be done with this portion of our mission in the next 6 weeks and it has gone pretty quick in some respects. I think the longest and hardest period of time was during the holidays but it has always been that way.

My family and I had been looking forward to March when my unit would return home. We had talked about things we would do and made some tentative plans. You may have heard some things in the news lately about a serge in Iraq. The bottom line is that my unit has been extended. My family and I make contact once a week by phone or by IM. It just happened that we were IM'ing when the first news of a four month extension that included our unit was released. We stayed on line with each other until it was confirmed that we wouldn't be home in March but the plan at this point is August. We both feel blessed that we were able to share the news of this together. Needless to say the news was difficult to take by family friends, myself and my soldiers.

Our mission working with the Iraq Army will end as planned and we will return back to a base that has better living conditions and to many friends that we left prior to heading out on this mission. I want to thank you again for your support, thoughts, and prayers. If you didn't know this about Sue and I, we are actually members of the St. Cloud Optimist Club.

Take care,
Wade

I can validate for you that progress is being made in the area that I'm in and it is happening much faster than projected. The other day a Special Forces training group came to evaluate our group and several times it was stated that this Battalion was the most advanced(professional)that they had seen and that didn't take into consideration that it is the youngest in the country that's not to shabby.

This is an email that a friend of mine serving in Iraq forwarded regarding the troop surge in Iraq.

Dear Friends & Family, 
 
The below letter written to the Fargo Forum in response to attacks and 
accusations about his commitment to his newly elected office by some of his 
opponents that ran against him for Clay County Attorney this last fall.  This 
letter is by my friend Brian Melton.  It speaks clearly of the situation at 
hand.  I fully support his writing and his attitude towards the extension and 
thought you might like to see it as well. 
 
Sincerely,  
 
Wade 
 
Emotions slowly give way to a soldiers commitment 
 
With the recent announcement of the 2-136 Infantry�s Iraq tour being 
extended for four months, I feel compelled to write to the citizens of Clay 
County. 
 
As reported in The Forum over the last few days, this announcement came as a 
surprise to the soldiers and families of the battalion. There is a great deal of 
emotion that comes with an announcement such as this; varying from shock and 
anger to resentment and disappointment. Those emotions slowly give way to 
steely-eyed resolve and commitment to the task at hand. 
 
To say that the extension is unprecedented would be an understatement; no one at 
the highest levels of command expected such an event to occur. But what does one 
do when the impossible becomes the improbable and the improbable becomes a 
certainty? You remember that there are some things that are worth fighting for; 
that selfless service and commitment to a greater purpose oftentimes outweighs 
the interests of a single person, and you dig down deep to continue fighting. 
 
I am reminded of the soldiers who fought in World War II: from Africa, Italy, 
Germany, and the Pacific, many of those veterans were given no time line for 
returning home and fought in battle after battle for three and four years. The 
men who fought with the 34th Red Bull Infantry Division, during 
that time, served the longest continual tour in combat of World War II. Those 
men came back to be our future leaders in business and industry and rightfully 
are known as the greatest generation. 
 
 
The 1st Brigade, 34th Infantry Division, which 2-136 Infantry is a part of, will 
now have the distinction of serving the longest continual tour in combat in 
Iraq. The men and women who return from this war will go back to school, return 
to their lives and their work, and return to their families. 
 
They will be our future doctors, lawyers, teachers and business owners. They 
will be better and stronger for what they have experienced and will have a 
greater depth of knowledge and understanding of the importance of America and 
the benefits that we have living in freedom. 
 
I ran for Clay County attorney because of my belief in public service and 
commitment to my community. I am looking forward to coming home and serving the 
citizens of Clay County, but we have a job to finish in Iraq first. I appreciate 
the Clay County attorney office�s support of me and what I am doing. I am 
grateful for their hard work and dedication that enables me to do what I need to 
do in Iraq. 
 
To the wives, husbands, and families of the soldiers who are staying here 
longer, I empathize and share your feelings of frustration. I recognize and 
appreciate that you are also willing to do what you need to at home to enable 
your loved ones to complete their mission overseas. You have sacrificed a great 
deal. 
 
I look forward to seeing all of the families and friends when we return, and I 
continue to be proud to serve with the men and women of the next 
greatest generation.
 
By Brian J. Melton 
1/17/07 
 
Melton was elected Clay County attorney in November. He is stationed with the 
2-136 Infantry in Iraq. 

General Abizaid Statement: 
"When I come to Washington, I feel despair. When I'm in Iraq with my commanders, when I talk to our soldiers, when I talk to the Iraqi leadership, they are not despairing."
David Limbaugh Comment:
"I hope Americans were listening. It's the mainstream media and naysaying politicians who are responsible for a great deal of the public's "despair" on Iraq."

The sad truth is that Americans are not hearing this message.  It is squelched by the overwhelming MSM drum beat of failed policies, dead soldiers, suicide bombers, and doom and gloom rather than the true picture.  General Abizaid provides a clear picture of the situation and the needs.  The best way to get press is not to agree with the person in charge but rather to disagree.  That's what we see daily is people (mostly politicians and media) disagreeing to get press time.  Sadly, most of that press time is driven by political needs rather than the needs of the country, the mission or the soldiers. 

This letter was emailed to me from a friend that I served with in AF.  It's an excellent response to Senator Kerry's remarks and I needed to share it. 

{This was written by my husband, Aaron, who is currently deployed  to Iraq, in defense of a recent comment made by Senator John Kerry.}  

 Yesterday John Kerry said, "You know education, if you make the  most of it, you study hard, you do your homework, and you make an  effort to be smart, you can do well, and if you don't , you get  stuck in Iraq! 

 So I wrote him a letter:

 I am a Sergeant in the United States Marine Corps. I am currently  
on my second tour in Iraq, a tour in which I volunteered for. I  
speak Arabic and Spanish and I plan to tackle Persian Farsi soon. I  
have a Bachelors and an Associates Degree and between deployments I  
am pursuing an M.B.A. In college I was a member of several academic  
honor societies, including the Golden Key Honor Society. I am not  
unique among the enlisted troops. Many of my enlisted colleagues  
include lawyers, teachers, mechanics, engineers, musicians and  
artists just to name a few. You say that your comments were  
directed towards the President and not us. If we were stupid  
Senator Kerry, we might have believed you.

 I am not a victim of President Bush. I proudly serve him because he  
is my Commander and Chief. If it was you who was President, I would  
serve you just as faithfully. I serve America Senator Kerry, and I  
am also providing a service to the good people of Iraq. I have not  
terrorized them in the middle of the night, raped them or murdered  
them as you have accused me of before. I am doing my part to help  
them rebuild. My role is a simple one, but important. You see  
Senator Kerry, like it or not, we came here and removed a tyrant  
(who terrorized Iraqis in the middle of the night, and raped them  
and murdered them). And we have a responsibility to see to it that  
another one doesn't take his place. The people of Iraq are  
recovering from an abusive relationship with a terrible government  
and it's going to take some time to help them recover from that. We  
can't treat this conflict like a microwave dinner and throw a  
temper tantrum because we feel like it's taking too long.

 Senator Kerry, you don't have to agree with this war. You don't  
have to say nice things about those of us who choose to make  
sacrifices for the rights of every American rather than sit back  
and simply feel entitled to it. But please Senator Kerry, if you're  
going to call me a stupid murdering rapist, stick by what you say.  
Don't tell me that I misunderstood or that you would never insult a  
veteran because you're one too. Having been there and done that  
does not give you a free pass to insult me.

 My suggestion for you, Senator Kerry, is to remember that your  
speeches are recorded, and broadcast to us simpletons over here.  
You may want to write down wha t you want to say before you say it,  
maybe have somebody look at it before you say it and tell you what  
others might hear. Remember that we can't read your mind, if there  
are any misinterpretations in what you say, it's because you didn't  
communicate clearly.

 Good luck to you Senator Kerry, if nothing else it's always  
entertaining to watch you try and climb out of the holes that you  
constantly dig for yourself.

 Sincerely,
 Somebody who is watching his daughter grow up in photographs so  
that you can have the right to say whatever you want about him.

What will the MSM do if the Democrats win?  Everyone knows that the Democrats will not be able to correct the situation in Iraq in a short timeline.  Everyone knows it's a long term issue, including the GOP (who has taken that stance since the end of major combat operations). 

Even if the Dem's win, they will have to deal with another two years of playing the blame game.  Lucky for them, they will still have the Bush Administration in office.  After two years, if they play the game correctly (yes, the political game and they are playing it) they will take control of the White House.  At that point, the MSM will need to make some hard decisions. 

Do they start reporting the war is going better because the Dem's are now in charge?

Do they continue to spread the word that it is failing? 

What happens if the war subsides in the next year?  How do they handle that situation?  Is it suddenly because the Dem's took charge of Congress? Or is it due to the sustained operations of our military and the policies of the Bush Administration?  I suspect that the former will get the press and the latter will not get mentioned. 

The MSM has already taken such a hard partisan stance that they cannot simply change position.  By taking a hard partisan stance the MSM has backed itself into a corner.  How does the MSM objectively report the news?  When the party the MSM opposes is having success, how do they report that?  Conversely, when the party they favor is failing, how do they report it?  Thus far it has been with skepticism, when the Iraqis elected a President, a Congress, etc.  When Iraqi forces stand up and take over, it is with skepticism that it is reported.  I can certainly find numerous video clips of Chris, Katie, Keith, Brian, Wolf, Anderson, etc spewing forth the rhetoric that the war is failing despite the best efforts of our soldiers. 

When will the MSM change it's position because the Dem's are in charge?  One day, week, year, the next election?  Time will tell.  Time should not be the factor, Truth should be the factor.

Tomorrow is a very important day for the future of America.  I know where my vote is going and I know what it means to America. 

*** ST MICHAEL GOP NEWS***
**MESSAGE FROM THE BACHMANN CAMPAIGN**