You Deserved Better!

Terri Schiavo



You deserved to live on your own terms and die at a time of God's choosing.

You deserved more prayers and fewer right-to-die attorneys.

You deserved to be with your parents who wanted you to live instead of a husband and lawyer who waited for your last breath.

You deserved to die with dignity, which, contrary to your husband's attorney, you were not allowed to do.

You deserved to be able to choose your own destiny instead of having it chosen for you.

You deserved to be fed and hydrated, and to be surrounded by those who loved you instead of those who wished you harm.

You deserved a judiciary who would enforce the law instead of rewrite it to fit their agendas.

You deserved equal protection under the law.

You deserved due process.

You deserved to be heard even if you couldn't speak.

We are supposed to help those who can't help themselves.

We are supposed to act like Americans.

We didn't.

May the Lord hold you in his arms and do for you what his servants here on Earth refused to do. You certainly deserve it.

Show Me the Money

Just as I suspected, the real issue behind the Terri Schiavo case is not about life or death, but about who has the most money to pay the lawyers. It is a real shame that in a case that could possibly determine life and death in this country, it all came down to who had the deepest pockets. According to Steve Sailer's weblog, one Florida attorney wrote:

"I have been following the case for years. Something that interests me about the Terri Schiavo case, and that doesn't seem to have gotten much media attention: The whole case rests on the fact that the Schindlers (Terri's parents) were totally outlawyered by the husband (Michael Schiavo) at the trial court level.

"This happened because, in addition to getting a $750K judgment for Terri's medical care, Michael Schiavo individually got a $300K award of damages for loss of consortium, which gave him the money to hire a top-notch lawyer to represent him on the right-to-die claim. He hired George Felos, who specializes in this area and litigated one of the landmark right-to-die cases in Florida in the early '90s.

"By contrast, the Schindlers had trouble even finding a lawyer who would take their case since there was no money in it. Finally they found an inexperienced lawyer who agreed to take it partly out of sympathy for them, but she had almost no resources to work with and no experience in this area of the law. She didn't even depose Michael Schiavo's siblings, who were key witnesses at the trial that decided whether Terri would have wanted to be kept alive. Not surprisingly, Felos steamrollered her.

It has already been well documented that George Felos, Michael Schiavo's attorney, has a conflict of interest issue having served on the board of directors for the Florida Hospice currently housing Terri Schiavo. He is also famous(infamous) for his stands on right-to-die issues. The fact that he can report to the media how calm and and at peace Terri Schiavo appears to him, completely nauseates me. That it also boils down to who can show whom the money is equally appalling.

See Also: News Max

That's My View... What's Your's?

It's all Bush's Fault?

Confederate Yankee reported on his website yesterday that the conspiracy theorists and the Blame Bush crowd at Democratic Underground, are up to their old tricks again. I say old meaning that they haven't come up with anything new or creative, so all they can do is bash Bush and throw the same old crap against the wall hoping one day something might stick.

Well this is for our friends over at Democratic Underground. I have a top secret source, who just so happens to work at a gas station just down the street from the Pentagon. What he told me will knock your socks off. He told me that during a super secret meeting back in early January 2005, the Republican Leadership along with several high-level officials at the Pentagon met to discuss options for dealing with the tsunami threat.

After meeting for a few hours they approached the President with an idea of how to deal with the tsunami threat. Since President Bush with his environmental policies, secret nuclear weapon testing, and general all-around conservative principles,(you pick)are causing these major catastrophes, the thought was that he could also prevent them.

What they came up with was startling! It's called the Seismic Tsunami Upgraded Protection & Interruption Directive. Basically what this directive is designed to do is to allow the President of the United States to step in when a catastrophic event is imminent and push a button under his desk that will prevent it from occuring. The button relays a signal to hundreds of dolphins in the so called "Ring of Fire" who have been equipped with special electronic devices that emit a signal that will cause most events such as this to dissapate. These dolphins were equipped with these electronic devices during a midnight covert op undertaken by Navy Seals sometime in mid January 2005. The technology behind this is so baffling and top secret that I am unable to explain it to you, but there is proof that it works because there was no tsunami generated by the earthquake in Sumatra on Monday.

If President Bush can cause these catastrophic events to occur, surely he also has the power to stop them, don't you think?

By the way, when you guys at Democratic Underground research this new top secret government program, you might also try looking for it under it's acronym: S.T.U.P.I.D.

Sound ridiculous? Well, so are majority of the conspiracy theories you espouse.

That's My View... What's Your's

Hillary in '08? Let's Hope Not!

I saw a story on News Max today that really caught my attention. Although everything that can be said about the Terri Schiavo saga has already been said by one person or another, this story about Hillary Clinton causes me some concern. Whether a Republican or a Democrat wins the next election, we should all agree that the sanctity of life should be of paramount concern.

According to the article, Hillary Clinton has been nowhere to be seen during the last ten days or so of the Schiavo case. But in 1993, she was singing a different tune. She actually wanted to make it 'easier to deny long term care to patients with little chance of recovery'. It begins to get scary when you read what she actually said during her 1993 pitch of her health care reform plan:

Newsmax.com- "I think there should be a discussion in this country about what is appropriate care . . . with more thought and more concern about both the human and the economic cost," she told the Senate Finance Committee.

Referring to her own health care plan, Hillary explained:

"If we do this health care reform right [we can] create the kind of security we're talking about so that people will know that they're not being denied treatment for any reason other than it is not appropriate, it will not enhance or save the quality of life."

Apparently, according to Ms. Clinton, economic factors should be weighed equally with health issues in determining whether someone should live or die.

I sincerely hope that we never get to a point in this country that we decide whether a person lives or dies based on whether or not it fits within our budget. When the value of a life begins to be measured in dollar signs instead of vital signs, then what value will any of us truly have? I am afraid that is a price none of us can afford to pay.

That's My View... What's Your's?

Are You Kidding Me?

Now I've seen it all! Sam Kimery of Tulsa, OK has actually created a device that he is selling for $8.95 that will block Fox News from your television set. Is he suggesting that liberals either don't have the ability or the intelligence to turn the channel or the set off? I've known a lot of liberals in my time, and while I may not agree with them politically, I am quite sure they are capable of tuning out Fox News without any help from Sam.

I'm not trying to make waves here, but there is another way to do the same thing, and it doesn't cost one red cent. While I don't think anyone should intentionally block Fox News, I can't sit idly by and let this man take money from people needlessly. All one has to do to block any channel is take out the remote to your TV, go to the menu, find the add/delete section of the menu, and then delete the channel you don't want in the rotation. Do you want to know what happens then? When you scroll through the channels, the tuner will automatically skip past that channel every time. Problem Solved! If your TV does not have this capability, then throw it away and purchase a new one because it is so old that it will probably go out soon anyway. You don't have to thank me now. I am just happy I have been able to save people $8.95 of their hard earned money. By the way Sam, if you ever create a device that will block ABC, NBC, and CBS News, CNN and MSNBC simultaneously, then you might be on to something.

Read the story: The Seattle Times

That's My View... What's Your's?

Amber Alert!!!!

An Amber Alert is in effect in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia.

The childen are 4-year old Faith McDowell and 5-year old Jaquan Wright.

Backcountry Conservative has the full story with the missing children's photographs, suspect photo, and description.

Police are searching for a green 1998 Kia Sephia with Georgia License Plate ARL-5783.

Irreparable Harm

I found an article that was quite interesting in the archives section of the St. Petersburg(Fla.) times dated October 11, 2000. In summary, it was about a case where the State of Florida had attempted to withdraw Medicaid Funding from six Florida nursing homes that had "chronic patient care problems". U.S. District Court Judge James Whittemore ruled in the case that the State of Florida had overstepped it's bounds by requiring the transfer of 249 poor patients in three of the homes to more suitable locations.

Three things strike me as odd about this case:

• Judge Whittemore was supposedly sympathetic that the company in this case, Vencor, had been denied due process when their Medicaid contracts were cancelled and that a more measured approach could have eliminated these problems.
• There was a concern about the "trauma" the patients would experience from being moved to another location.
• Patients might suffer irreparable harm if no restraining order had been issued.

My question is this: If you felt a more measured approach, concern about trauma, and the suffering of patients was necessary in a case involving the relocation of patients, why has the same standard not been applied to a case involving the life or death of one?

The decision in the Terri Schiavo case deserved at least that much.

Read the story: St. Petersburg Times 10/11/2000

That's My View... What's Yours?

SHAMEFUL!

Bill of Rights

Article XIV.

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

I was just wondering if this still applies. It strikes me as completely shameful that the judiciary in this country can find it in their hearts to give food and water to the likes of Scott Peterson and others on death row while they await their "due process", yet they allow Terri Schiavo to starve to death during hers. I would be willing to bet that Scott Peterson will be old and grey before the appeals process runs out on his murder conviction. It's too sad that Terri Schiavo will probably not be afforded the same luxury given him. She, unlike him, certainly deserves it. My heart breaks for you, Terri Schiavo, and for all those who have shared life with you.
May God be with you all!

New on DVD!

Fox News reports today:

LOS ANGELES — Critics of illegal immigration say America's borders have always been too easy to cross, and now one Mexican state is trying to make it easier than ever.

The state of Yucatan (search) has issued a new 87-page handbook that tells people how to get across the U.S. border illegally. The guide, which has an accompanying DVD, contains a section on how to apply for a lawful visa but the remaining 50-plus pages are filled with instructions about how to safely sneak into the United States, then blend in.

Representative J. D. Hayworth R-Ariz. insists they "cease and desist" and I couldn't agree more. This takes us back to my post "Keeping Fox Out of the Hen House" on Thursday March 17. The Mexican government does not have the economy necessary for it's own citizens to thrive, or in many cases even survive, so they will use any means necessary to make sure that the problem of taking care of them rest solely on the shoulders of the United States government.

The story continues:

The newest guide also tells immigrants where to find health care, how to get their kids into U.S. schools and how to send money home — the reason some say Mexico is encouraging people to come to the United Sates illegally.

"This is really the way they keep their corrupt system afloat, by sending their excess workers to the United States and getting billions of dollars in remittances every year ... so for them this is a worthwhile investment," said Ira Mehlman of the Federation for American Immigration Reform.

I believe we should have cordial relations with our neighbors when possible and practical, but this is outrageous. The United States should not bear the responsibility of providing benefits of any kind to those who would enter our borders illegally, and we should not stand idly by and allow this to occur. Mexican President Vicente Fox was recently quoted as saying "No country that is proud of itself should build walls... it doesn't make any sense." What a crock! He doesn't want the wall built because he apparently feels it is our responsibility to provide for his people. I say, build the wall and make it tall!


That's My View... What's Yours?

A Slippery Slope

"I know in my heart that man is good,
That what is right will always eventually triumph,
And there's purpose and worth to each and every life."

Ronald Reagan


Today, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard Bob and Mary Schindler, the parents of Terri Schiavo, plead with them to spare their daughter's life after a federal judge in Tampa refused to allow Ms. Schiavo's feeding tube to be reinserted. Meanwhile, Terri's husband Michael continues his fight to deny her the nutrition she needs to maintain life. What's at stake here is twofold. On one hand you have the basic human rights of Terri Schiavo to be cared for in a humane way, and on the other, the rights of us all.

As for Terri Schiavo, the only things that she has been unable to do on her own are to feed and hydrate herself and to communicate verbally. What she has been able to do on her own have been captured by video footage, so there can really be no argument from that standpoint. In the footage I have seen, she exhibits facial expressions such as smiling, she turns her head back and forth, and she shows a life in her eyes that those in a "persistent vegetative state" do not demonstrate. I'm no medical expert, but these are all signs I associate with life. To me, life, no matter how limited, is worth preserving.

When and if the time comes for Terri Schiavo to die, it should be for her and the Good Lord to decide. They alone will know when the time is right.

As for the rights of the rest of us, they will be in serious jeopardy if activist judges use Ms. Schiavo to set a legal precedent regarding life and death. This nation will cease to exist, in the words of Ronald Reagan, "as the last, best hope of man on Earth", if the sanctity of life is threatened by the whims of a judiciary bent on determining the rules of life and death.

There are some decisions people were never intended to make. The Roe vs. Wade decision ensured that the rights of the unborn are not protected. Does anyone truly believe that the wrong decision in this case will not eventually lead to the loss of rights for those who have already been born? This case directly affects Terri Schiavo and her right to live, but if the judiciary gets the idea in their heads that they can control a person's right to live or die, the decision in this case may one day affect us all. Let's pray it never comes to that.

Read the story: AP News My Way

That's My View... What's Yours?

Thank You Michelle Malkin!

I would like to thank Michelle Malkin for linking to my story "Too Close to Home" from her website today. I respect her opinion enormously and consider it quite an honor.

You can find her at Michelle Malkin.com

The Palmetto Pundit

Howard Dean Unglued!

I saw this article in the Toronto Star today. The Headline is “Spreading the Message” by Peter Gorrie, Staff Reporter. Take a look at the first two paragraphs:

"Keep it simple" is the key to the White House, failed Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean told members of his party from around the world last night.

One major reason his party lost the 2004 race to the "brain-dead" Republicans is that it has a "tendency to explain every issue in half an hour of detail," Dean told the semi-annual meeting of Democrats Abroad, which brought about 150 members from Canada and 30 other countries to the Toronto for two days.

Basically, DNC Chairman Howard Dean is calling the Republicans “brain dead”. It takes a half hour to explain every issue the Democrats espouse, yet it is supposed to be the Republicans who are brain dead. If it takes that long to explain every issue the Democrats have, then maybe, just maybe, it is an issue not worth supporting. Good ideas don’t take long to be understood and accepted.

The hilarious part of the story appears in the forth paragraph:

The Democrats, in fact, will try to copy the Republicans, who are masters at making their message stick, he said. "The Democrats will have three things, maybe four, that we're going to talk about."

I’m no expert here, but does it make any sense to call someone “brain dead” and then later determine that the best way to deal with them is to copy what they are doing because they are masters at making their message stick? It sounds to me like the Democrats are the ones that are a little lacking in grey matter department not the Republicans. The problem is not in the presentation of the issues but in the substance of them.

Read the story: The Toronto Star

Too Close to Home

HOMOSASSA -- The body of missing 9-year-old Jessica Lunsford was found early Saturday, a day after officials said a registered sex offender confessed to kidnapping and killing the girl.

Citrus County Sheriff Jeff Dawsy said Jessica's body was found during an overnight search in a densely wooded area, only about 150 yards from the home the girl shared with her father and grandparents.

The dateline above is something no parent in this country wants to read, the discovery of the body of a 9-year old girl who has been missing from her home since February 23. What is additionally shocking is that they found her in a densely wooded area approximately 150 yards from where she lived. Why any human being would murder another human is beyond my ability to fathom. To murder a child, unforgivable.

I have been following the story since Jessica was reported missing, hoping and praying that she would be found alive and uninjured. I must admit, however, that I am seldom optimistic when these reports of missing children hit the headlines because I know that most of the time they end tragically. Sadly, this one did as well.

When I heard last Thursday on our local radio station WGAC-Augusta that authorities had arrested a person of interest in the case, my heart fell into my stomach. This is only 15 miles from where my wife and I live with our two young children. What if he hadn't been arrested and had committed the same type of heinous crime in our local community. When I heard authorities report on Friday that John Couey had taken a polygraph test and also admitted to murdering Jessica, my heart broke. In fact, authorities reported later that evening that Couey had in fact told them after the polygraph that there was no need to tell him the results, he already knew what they were. He then admitted to the crime.

To me, this is as sad as it gets. Not only did the man commit the unspeakable, he made the authorities "play the game" for a whole day as well. There is no better justification for "an eye for an eye" that I can imagine.

My intention has not been to draw attention to our local community due to the fact that John Couey was caught in our local area. It has instead been to demonstrate how complacent people can be about crimes such as this until it hits too close to home. My thoughts and prayers go out to the family and friends of young Jessica Lunsford, to those who have lost children in the past, and to those who are still searching.

And to those who would commit such acts, may the punishment truly fit the crime. You deserve much worse than our legal system can ever give you.

Read the story: The Sun-Sentinel

Can You Say, Contradiction?

I picked up on this story today by Reuters and was dumbstruck by the contradictions within the text of the article. The story is about Global Warming and, in a nutshell, it says it will keep getting worse no matter what we do, but we still must take steps to prevent it. Confused? So am I.

First of all, I don't get too bent out of shape over Global Warming because I have never been convinced that it is really a problem. If it is, I'm not so sure we could do much to prevent it. I believe that the Earth has been in either a cooling period or a warming period at different intervals since creation, and it has been doing it regardless of whether we "helped it along" or not. And if you remember, the world was created with people in mind, so I believe God's master plan probably had all this Global Warming stuff covered.

Anyway, these are the first two paragraphs of the story:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Even if people stopped pumping out carbon dioxide and other pollutants tomorrow, global warming would still get worse, two teams of researchers reported on Thursday.

Sea levels will rise more than they have already risen, worsening the damage caused by extreme high tides and storm surges, and droughts, heat waves and storms will become more severe, the climate experts predicted.

So I guess scientists believe the problem will continue to get worse regardless of what we do, right? Wrong?
Take a look at the very next sentence:

That makes immediate action to slow global warming even more vital, the teams at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Colorado report in the journal Science.

Why the urgency to take immediate action? I thought we were doomed! According to the next sentence, we are doomed:

"Even if we stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations, the climate will continue to warm, and there will be proportionately even more sea level rise," said the NCAR's Gerald Meehl, who led one of the two studies.

But wait, maybe we can do something. Next sentence:

"The longer we wait, the more climate change we are committed to in the future."

My head hurts! The longer we wait to do what? I thought there was nothing we could do to stop it.

The bottom line is, we can't stop it because we just don't have that much control. We were never intended to.

That's My View... What's Yours?

Read the story: Yahoo News

Follow the Money, If You Can!

Looks like Benon Sevan, the man who ran the U.N. Oil-for-Food Program, or shall we say scandal, received payments to the tune of $160,000 between 1999 and 2003. He has said that the money came from an elderly aunt in Cyprus. His aunt died in June 2004 after a fall down an elevator shaft in March 2004. According to Fox News, this is around the same time that the investigations into Oil-for-Food started. Call me crazy, but I just don't hear of a lot of accidental elevator shaft deaths, do you? So Sevan says that his aunt "gave him cash gifts to defray the cost of her annual stay" with him in New York. We can't ask her the reason since she is, at present, not alive. Seems kind of convenient to me. It gets even better. It is illegal to take more than 10,000 Cyprus pounds out of the country at any one time. I suppose now every bureau or agency with any type of investigative expertise will now want a piece of this action. So where did the money come from? Well, according to bank officials there was never that amount of money in her bank account. I would suspect that Spider Hole Saddam knows a ton about the money trail, but I bet he's not talking. Then again, neither is Aunt Bertouji.

Read the story: Fox News

Hope You Have a Window, Punk!

Scott Peterson,

It would be nice for you to have to look out over the very place where you dumped your wife and unborn child. How fitting it is that your prison overlooks this very spot. You probably won't have much time for that, though. I've heard that even the most hardened of criminals have a code of ethics, and what you did will probably not earn you any brownie points with the San Quentin crowd. Some things are just unforgivable, no matter whether the judge is in a black robe or an orange jump suit.

Read the story: AP News My Way

Keeping Fox out of the Hen house

Why is Vicente Fox so upset?

If immigrants can't get to this side of the border, Vicente Fox has to figure out how to take care of them on the other side of the border. Let's hope this slows down the gravy train of free goodies that illegals are currently collecting from our Federal Government.

Read the story: wpherald.com

SCARY! China/Russia Ganging up on Taiwan

Check out this story from Drudge. Looks like some things in the world are changing, and not for the better.

Story: Drudge Report

Dude! ,Where's my house?

No!! I said 212 Cleveland Street not 242!

Story: Fox News

Is Anyone Buying This?

Robert Blake was acquitted of the murder of his wife/grifter/nude model Bonny Lee Bakley in Los Angeles today. There must have been a problem with all of the compelling "circumstantial" evidence surrounding the case. I guess if you try to hire three different individuals to knock off your wife, you deserve a lot of credit for picking hit men whose credibility would be questioned due to heavy drug use or for just being a thug-turned minister. I suppose we are to believe that most people you hire to carry out a hit on your wife would be of impeccable character whose word would be as good as gold. You probably aren't going to find a lot of fine, upstanding citizens who just happen to do murder-for-hire on the side to supplement their incomes. And, of course, the fact that gunshot residue was found on Blake's hands, doesn't necessarily mean that he actually fired the weapon that ended his wife's life. It could just as easily have come from a weapon used to scare sea birds from the deck of his ocean side home. Of course, there is no reason to believe Blake would have committed the crime himself based on the six months of wedded bliss he and his wife shared.

So lets recap:

1. You try to hire two stuntmen and a minister to whack your wife.

2.They refuse, but testify that you asked them to do the job.

3. The two stuntmen and minister are found to be either too drunk, or too stoned to be credible.

4. You whack her yourself and throw the gun in a dumpster.

5. You get gunshot residue totally unrelated to the crime on your hands.

6. You have a four month trial and are found not guilty.

Open and Shut right?

That's My View... What's Yours?

Read the Story: My Way News

Face to Face with a Killer

I am sure everyone who has been at least awake for the past two days has been following the story of Brian Nichols, the man who, on Friday Morning, March 11, shot and killed a judge and 3 others in an Atlanta, Ga courthouse before fleeing to parts unknown. Unknown that is, until Saturday morning when a courageous woman in a Duluth, Ga apartment complex telephoned authorities and told them where they could pick him up. Sure enough, he was apparently right where she said he would be and waved the white flag or T-shirt of surrender to the SWAT team that was waiting outside, loaded for bear. When I heard the news of his capture, two thoughts immediately entered my mind. The first thing I remember thinking was how ironic it was that this waste of human flesh, who the day before had a total disregard for human life now suddenly thought his worth saving. The other was how brave and cool under pressure the female hostage must have been to have escaped the situation with her life. Little is known, or is being reported about exactly how she got away, but what is known is that she spoke to him about God, her husband who had passed away, and her daughter. I suppose even someone who is as messed up as Brian Nichols can be made to think logically, if only for a brief moment. I think he finally was forced by this woman to think about the consequences of his actions and the void the death of one person, not to mention four people, can make on many others. Of course I am just speculating here, but I also believe he was forced in those moments to consider the existence and power of the Almighty God and may have realized that this was one judge he couldn't take down. In this day and age where every reference to God is trying to be removed from the public consciousness by the ACLU and activist judges, it should at least be acknowledged that the same God they are trying to remove may have, in fact, kept the death toll from being five instead of four, and used this female hostage as his means to accomplish it. It is, at the very least, a possibility to consider.

Read the story: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,150280,00.html

That's my view... What's your's?

Courage

Well, it's finally over. Dan Rather's reign as anchor of the 'CBS Evening News with Dan Rather' mercifully came to an end yesterday. That's the good news. The bad news is he will still remain with the network as a contributor to '60 Minutes'. It seems to me a bit ironic that the network sees fit to allow him to continue on the one program that eventually led to his downfall. If Dan Rather had worked for anyone else other than CBS, he probably wouldn't have made it past November 2004 when the forged document fiasco reared it's ugly head. Heck, if he would have worked in any business I've ever set foot in, he would have been booted out the door in mid- sentence with the boot he was kicked with, followed quickly by his personal effects in rapid succession. Dan should consider himself fortunate indeed that he lasted as long as he did and that he worked for an organization that considered truth in reporting and fact-checking a mere inconvenience. If the truth be told, Dan was a slick as a used-car salesman at a leisure suit convention, his news reporting as rusty as the lug nuts on a '55 Chevy, and his honesty as thin as turnip soup. Dan used expressions like these in his news reporting but probably never thought they would be used to describe him. Here's a new idea Dan, if you report the news honestly and without bias, you don't have to use colorful expressions and euphemisms to keep your audience interested. The truth will speak for itself. I guess it's to late for that now. One more thing, Dan.....COURAGE.

That's my view, What's yours?

The Social Security Crisis

President Ronald Reagan once said that the best minds were not found working in government, if they were they would have already been snatched up by the private sector. This is not a direct quote, but it does sum up his sentiments. With that in mind, does it really make sense that we are letting the government plan an overhaul of Social Security? In my opinion, the program cannot be fixed in it's current state in a method that would ever be acceptable to both Republicans and Democrats alike. The only thing that can be done to add any solvency to the program in its current state involves either raising the FICA tax collected or raising the retirement age, or a combination of both. It has been said recently that for the program to remain solvent, the taxes collected would have to be raised to 30% of income or above to make the program sustainable for any length of time. The only other choice would be to raise the retirement age to around 95, therefore eliminating the need altogether for the program. The 95 year retirement age is ,of course, ridiculous, but it makes the point that without significant tax increases in the program, the only other solution would be to eventually raise the qualifying age to such a point that no one would ever qualify for it. There should be no mistake, the program is in desperate trouble. Even my 5 year old understands that if you spend all of your money on candy bars you will have no money left over for bubble gum. The problem is no more complex than that. The government has never had to worry about that because if they don't have enough money to pay for something, they just steal it. They call it taxation but it really boils down to simple theft. We would get 7-10 for the same offense, the liberals just call it progressive. Interesting how that works isn't it? The best solution to the problem would involve two simple steps. Step 1: Stop deducting FICA taxes from payroll. Step 2: Cancel the program. I can throw darts at a board and get a better return than Social Security. I know for sure that I am smart enough to invest the money myself rather than relying on government to do it. At least with President Bush's plan to let us invest a part of our Social Security in private accounts I would get a better return than the measly 2% I could expect from Social Security in its present state. By my numbers, if my payroll tax would have to be increased to 30% to get a 2% return, I would be better off taking that money and blowing it on candy bars. At least my son would be proud!