Don't be Sorry, Blue Lady

Expressing views isn't something to be sorry about, but I will address this posting. This doesn't surprise me, coming from an article in the AJC. Nevertheless, I've heard this complaining about class division in the military. Well, last time I looked, this is a voluntary effort, no draft in this one. Therefore, our military personnel courageously decided to join because they wanted to. Nobody forced them to. They are proud of serving this country. Too bad so many aren't proud and appreciative of them for doing so. Sounds a bit familiar, like the idiot Sean Penn and his recent tirades about Bush's daughters not being in the war. Another Bush hater that didn't even graduate from high school. He's entitled to his opinion, but qualified to speak on world issues, I think not! I don't know whether the British monarchy is required to perform military service or not. I do know that it's Harry that's off to Iraq. William won't be deployed there because he's second in line for the throne. I think he's serving in the British Royal Navy. Did the princes voluntarily join, or did they have to go?

Let's get to the Dick Cheney rhetoric. Dick had been gone from Halliburton before running on the ticket. While there, the company had financial difficulties, due to a spin-off company they finally sold the later part of last year. This company was draining them. The reason they got the contract (and they did have to turn in a bid) is because the military issued a particular type of contract that is different from the norm. They were not allowed to estimate their losses in this one. Normally when bidding for contracts, you factor in estimated losses. Couldn't do that with this one. Any profits were deemed after losses they could not recover from the Feds. Therefore, their profits were at 3% of their investment in this venture. Now if you think about a profit margin of 3%, not much coming back to you. Do you think anyone would be pleased with a 3% profit margin? Now that they've sold the spin-off, they may be able to make a decent profit. I'm sure there are several reasons for relocating their headquarters to Dubai, not to mention the business they're in. This brings my response to the tax-avoidance issue.

When John and Teresa Heinz (he is her bitch you know) campaigned on bringing manufacturing jobs back to the states, I had one question. Will they close all the Heinz plants throughout the world and put some in the States? You know the answer to that. Now, the idea of Republicans being the only ones that avoid taxes by stashing money out of the country is beyond me. Since the cheap labor is mentioned in this topic, allow me to list some examples of Democrats working the system, as well. Mind you, these are all legal.

Joe Kennedy set up trusts in the islands (one in particular somewhere in the Pacific) where the government will never be allowed to touch the money. All of the Kennedy spawn gets an annual portion of their trust from this, without paying taxes, and it's legal. Also, years ago, the Kennedy's bought out a small oil field in Texas. The inhabitants of the land were poor and needed the money. The Kennedys bought it for next to nothing (essentially raping the poor owners), and it is now traded on the stock exchange, making a good profit. Michael Moore and Babs Streisand own production companies in Canada. They get a double whammy of a good deal. Don't pay U.S. taxes and are provided with cheap labor. Nancy Pelosi received an award from a labor union last year because of her stance in support big labor. Does she employ American labor to handle her real estate needs, along with her wineries? Nope, has immigrants that are paid next to nothing. These are just a few, I could go on, but I'd have to refer to my book, "Do As I Say" about the liberals complaining about the "rich" Republicans. There are a lot of "poor" Republicans out there. I don't know why these two words perpetually align themselves together. I suppose they're a mindset of certain people.

As for the war, I thought we kicked Japan's and Germany's asses because we didn't want the spread of Communism. It certainly was looming as Hitler planned to take over all of Europe before coming to get us. I missed the part about land. BTW, that's what Vietnam was about, stopping the spread of Communism. Now that was a war that instilled the draft. You could easily equate it to the war on terror. As Neal Boortz says, it's not a war on terror, terror is what comes with Radical Islamists that want to overtake the world. That's what we're fighting. While we're making an effort over there, we should take aim at the Radical Islamists here in this country and deport them as fast as we can. We are seeing the results of allowing known Communists in this country back in the 40's. The brainwashing is surfacing at a rapid pace. Our own people are hating their own in favor of everyone else that comes here. That's what a slow deterioration of a society will do to you. Look at the Roman Empire as a good example.

As for bin Laden, as I've said before, Clinton didn't do his job on more than one occasion on this guy (too busy having romper room in the Oval Office), so it's left up to the one in charge now.