Anti-truth Vaccine Politics

I have done a couple posts on my take on Anti-Vaxx politics.  In my prior post, Death to the Heroes, I opined that first responders were the most important group that MUST vaccinate against Covid – for the protection of the population in general, and their patients in particular. In my Anti-Vaxx II post, I warned against generalizing the reasons for not vaccinating.  There are people who feel it’s an abundance of caution – or fear of negative reactions – or fear of needles – that keeps them from getting vaccinations.

But the data is clear. Ninety-five percent of those refusing vaccines are not cautious. They are politically aligned with a ‘personal right of refusal’.  It’s their constitutional right to refuse. It’s as simple as that.

These people are predominately Republican, white, and biased. They are over 80% Trump supporters and avid followers of Fox News and similar biased right wing news sources. They hold a palpable hate for liberals and progressives – and the scientific institutions or policies they support.

It’s not important that they can never cite any progressive program, decision, law, or regulation that has affected them personally. It’s not about actual facts, experiences or outcomes. It’s about politics.

I saw this graphic (scientifically developed and peer reviewed) from the CDC. Digest it.

Source: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7105e1.htm

The CDC is a civilian body. It is NOT a government agency and cannot be controlled by the President or Congress (Trump had many frustrations with the CDC but was powerless to control it).  The right-wing media – and even some left-leaning media – get this wrong. They think the CDC and the FDA are controlled in the same way. Nothing could be further from the truth. The CDC was intentionality made to be independent from governmental and political pressure. It’s pure science. Pure medicine. Pure research.

The illustrations show – beyond any doubt – that the Omicron strain of Covid was an unvaccinated pandemic. It took a highly contagious variant to illustrate the truth. The first illustration above is based on positive tests; and the second on hospitalizations.

What these illustrations DO NOT show is how many of the vaccinated or vulnerable were infected by the unvaccinated. The contagion level of an unvaccinated person is many times that of a vaccinated person. Enough to break-through the fragile immune barrier older, or immunocompromised, individuals have - even with a vaccine. Nor does it show how many hospital beds were occupied by the unvaccinated that were desperately needed by the ill or injured.

How many deaths, I wonder, due to these people’s need to practice a political ‘right of refusal’ account for?

We will never know.

JB

A Glimmer of Hope

I’m a bit of a news junkie. As if that were not apparent to anyone following my posts. But my news gathering regimen has taken quite a few turns over the last few decades.

Back in the day – before cable TV – the news was mainly what I read in the Sunday paper and saw on the nightly TV broadcasts (ABC, NBC, CBS,.. that was about it).  As new media was added in the age of the internet and satellites - along came cable channels like CNN.  A news junkies panacea of “Nothing but news 7x24”… I loved it.  Never had to wait for a news broadcast to catch up on the latest events.  CNN was followed by other similar formats, but CNN pretty much set the standard in the early days of cable. They were followed in short order by other topic driven channels like ESPN: Sports 7x24; Bloomberg: Business 7x24; etc.

The age of genre specialization was off and running and internet content was not far behind.  From YouTube to FaceBook the new social media platforms offered content so granular that individual genre in the form of ‘influencers’ has made what was once a source of information, now a source of uneducated opinion, speculation, conspiracy, and largely unrestrained hyperbole.

Faced with sensory overload and few bona fide fact-based sources I went into a sort of sensory shutdown. I deleted my Facebook account altogether; removed CNN and like networks (all were slowly becoming pits of opinion rather than news) from my favorites on my ‘Smart TV’; and basically, returned to where I started. I bought digital subscriptions to the Washington Post; LA Times, yada,… Started recording the news broadcasts of CNBC’s Shepard Smith and the weekly CBS 60 minutes series. Still needed a good conservative source though. CNBC was just not enough. FOX & Newsmax were jokes. Then, last weekend, CBS 60 Minutes had an interview with someone I had never heard of:  Andrew Sullivan (sincere apologies sir).  Apparently, I had been living under a conservative rock for decades.

As I listened to Mr. Sullivan’s story and philosophy, I could feel the cool breeze of fresh conservative air being brought back into my lungs. I subscribed immediately to ‘The Weekly Dish’: Mr. Sullivan’s blog. Then I read his latest (November 19, 2021) blog post and realized I had found my source of conservative integrity.  

He is the first bona fide conservative I have read that understands that the American form of Democracy is liberal by design. That true conservatism is a rudder not a sail. That the Constitution of the United States was – and should continue to be - one of the most progressive experiments in governance ever developed.

I never expected to be caught up in a modern day social influencer’s take on current events and political discourse.  But this man’s thought leadership is exactly what the American Right needs right now. I hope that, in some small way, I can help him be heard. 

JWB

 

 

The Next Crusade

I’m an atheist. Let’s get that out of the way up front. Those that are offended by others’ religious views can stop reading right now. Saves us both time and frustration.

For those still with me, I want to offer a serious challenge to each of you and our country as a whole.  I have no skin in the Religion game. I find all religions lacking truth, facts, and relevance. But I do have a home, family, and a country I love. And that's where our paths cross.

After the January 6^th uprising in Washington DC, there was talk from the far right of a civil war brewing. A Zogby poll taken shortly after, found that 46% of likely voters believed the country could experience civil war.  And not just republicans; both parties and independents held the same view.

On November 13^th, 2021 while on a ‘ReAwaken America’ tour with other like minded haters, Michael Flynn, a former Trump administration official, said, and I quote: “If we are going to have one nation under God, which we must, we have to have one religion. One nation under God, and one religion under God,…”. Of course, he was talking about the One true God. You know, the one attributed to Judaism.

While I’m sure Christian revisionist history is well preserved in this ‘tour’ of the self-righteous; the one religion all in attendance assumed he meant was, of course, Christianity.

Much of the recent talk of civil war in America centers, as it did 150 years ago, on bigotry. And it’s nothing really all that new. During Barack Obama’s presidency, racist GOP leaders in eight southern states wanted to secede from the union rather than live in a country with a black president.  

Not to be outdone by the racists, after the 2016 election of Trump, there was a secessionist movement by liberal elites in California.

Racism in and of itself is not going to spark a war. Civil unrest, maybe, but no one thinks basing a war solely on political divide or racial bigotry will ever succeed. However, religious bigotry has a long history of success in starting and fueling conflicts. Big ones.

Add to all this a recent ‘woke’ movement to remove or destroy all civil war relics and memorials; defund police departments; etc… and you have a heat building in the conservative heartland.

So, there’s a lot of civil tinder and accelerant lying around right now. All it needs is a spark.

Giving a platform and pulpit to the likes of ReAwaken America is as dangerous as it is traitorous. Our Constitution recognizes that only religious freedom will ensure civil freedom. It espouses the rule of law and equality for all. With CNN, Qanon, Facebook, Fox News, Newsmax,… yada, yada at their disposal, the perpetrators of civil conflict – on both sides - can get the upper hand in spite of the Constitution. We must stop giving these haters a voice.

All the media that these haters need to be heard and become powerful rely on advertising to keep them solvent. If enough people say ‘enough’ - and we stop buying from their advertisers (and we let the advertisers know Why we stopped) - the platform on which these traitors stand will soon collapse.

The religious Crusades of the eleventh and twelfth centuries were brutal conflicts that killed and maimed millions of men, women, and children. Fueled by the church, religious brainwashing, lies, bigotry and power mongering; this formula will still work today.

I challenge America to stop it while it can.

JB

 

 

 

 

Anti-Vaxx II

In my last post, Death to the Heroes, I opined that first responders were the most important group to take advantage of the FDA emergency use approval of Covid19 vaccinations. And I truly believe that.  When those in the public trust cannot be trusted to put the well being of others ahead of their political bias, they should not be serving the public. It's sad that some of these 'heroes' will undoubtedly die for their political beliefs.

But the issues for the rest of the public is not as cut and dried.  

Take for instance the real fact that none of the Covid19 vaccines were out of the FDA ‘emergency use authorization’ (EUA) phase, until November 2021, and you have a problem. At this writing (Nov 13, 2021) only one Covid19 vaccine is Fully FDA Approved: The Pfizer mRNA vaccine. However, it is only fully approved for adults.  It’s still in EUA status for children of all ages and booster applications.

Government regulation is almost always a double edged sword. And key governing agencies are always in a damned if you do; damned if you don’t paradox. The FDA, NIH, and independent organizations such as the CDC, are always walking a tightrope when it comes to medical evolution, drugs, treatments, approvals, and recommendations.

As I mention in my post Death to the Heroes – vaccines, inoculations, and treatments for various diseases in early years was anything but ‘scientific’ or safe.

In 1901, diphtheria patients were routinely treated with antitoxin derived from the blood serum of infected horses. After 13 children died of tetanus because of contaminated antitoxin, Congress passed the 1902 Biologics Control Act, giving the government its first regulation of vaccine and antitoxin production. That power moved to the FDA when it was formed in 1906.

The caution with which the FDA moves to fully approve a vaccine or treatment outside of EUA has been, historically, set in stone. It takes years. Many people think the FDA is moving too slowly to fully approve all available vaccines. But in reality – the recent approval of the Pfizer vaccine is one of the fastest since the FDA was formed.

FDA policy requires the long term effects of a drug, vaccine, or treatment to be reasonably understood before being fully approved. Included in ‘long term’ effects are the effects on children born to the patients, complications, or interactions with other drugs, or treatments later in life.

The mRNA vaccines offer a couple mitigating factors. 1) mRNA vaccines are not developed using a weakened strain of the virus or a serum derived from an infected person/animal; 2) mRNA vaccines use your own body’s immune process to create antibodies to Covid; 3) Numbers mean a lot. The total number of people vaccinated using mRNA under the EUA exceeds 150 million in the U.S. alone. Millions more worldwide. This includes all adult age groups, male & female, pregnant women, every race & culture, and those with major heath conditions. This enormous sample size is rare – and it clears a lot of doubt.

Being anti-vaccination is like being anti-health. It makes no sense. But being vaccine-cautious is another thing altogether.  I especially relate to those with young children. Even at reduced dosage, taking a wait and see approach is not, in my view, being anti-vaxx.

I wish the left wing media and the self-righteous influencers in this country would stop judging, name calling and cancelling others for using caution.  

I do not think, however, those that use political ‘personal liberty’ concerns as rationale for refusing a vaccine are not being honest. They are just being self-important, entitled, ignorant attention getters. They deserve whatever they get. Hopefully not a fatal case of Covid.

JB

Death to the Heroes

Born shortly after WWII, I am a ‘boomer’. A product of the post war baby boom when thousands of men returned home and thousands more women left the workforce to make room for the returning veterans - and return to a more ‘normal’ family life.  

It was a different time, with women being raised and educated in a way that supported the popular culture of the day. Then, being called a ‘housewife’ was a declaration of success wherein the breadwinner was able to afford supporting a home, a wife, and several children in a manner to which society approved.

It was the beginning of an era fueled by an economic boom like nothing before - and treating Black, Hispanic, and Gay populations with ignorance and segregation – even distain.

Thankfully times are changing.

Those days also gave rise to great innovations in medical care, and it was to be the spark that made the boomer era even more formidable.

One of the key contributors to the raise of global life expectancy over the last 250 years was the development of vaccinations. 

As seen in the table to the right, Oceana (Australia) and Europe were the first to experience a systemic increase in life expectancy. 

Life expectancy in Europe and the Americas started their increase in the mid 1800s - 80 years before underdeveloped areas. I believe it's not a coincidence that, in 1815, Sweden was the first nation to introduce compulsory Smallpox vaccinations to Europe. In 1853 this mandate spread to England and their colonel empire (Oceania & the Americas).

Only tuberculosis (TB) was a greater killer than smallpox in the 18^th & 19^th century. It was estimated that TB killed ¼ of the population of Europe in the 1800s. While an effective treatment (streptomycin) and a suitable vaccine (BCG) were developed, the biggest impact on TB was improved hygiene and the waring of masks in hospitals. But I digress. This post is not about TB.

Over the course of time in the 19^th and 20^th centuries many diseases were all but eradicated by vaccine. From polio to diphtheria and measles, vaccines – back in my day – were a no-brainer. Parents eagerly sought to get their children vaccinated as soon as their doctor would permit. Childhood deaths from many of these horrific diseases were all but eradicated. When I was born, children could be expected to live until age 55 - maybe 60. Today I’m expected to live to nearly 80. Likely longer.

I’m not proposing that vaccinations, in and of themselves, are the primary cause of increased life span. But they do mark milestones in the improvements in medical care and disease prevention. 

Some early vaccines were anything but safe and effective however. If they had 50% efficiency, they were considered good enough. Historically, vaccines were designed using a weakened form of the disease it was meant to combat. Some of the first cases of ‘inoculation’ were seen in ancient China where smallpox scabs from an infected person were scrapped off and pulverized to a powder. The powder was then inhaled by a healthy person to build immunity. It ‘appeared’ to work about half the time. You can imagine what happened to the other half.

Later in Europe, another practice used the blood of a person that survived the disease to create a serum for injecting into a healthy individual. It was also used as a treatment for the infected as well. This practice proved to have some of most effective outcomes. But it was a ‘hit-and-miss’ method that required many trial runs and often years of measurements to prove what dosage was going to prevent disease as opposed to causing it.  

Then, to reduce the hit & miss outcomes, laboratories began growing the virus or pathogen in the lab. There they could manage the strength of the disease strain and test on animals before moving to humans. But the process to bring a vaccine to market was still measured in years.

By the mid 20th century vaccines were the norm. Then in 1987 a grad student at the Salk Institute named Robert Malone mixed strands of messenger RNA (aka mRNA - a genetic element like DNA found in all humans) with droplets of fat. The reaction saw human cells creating proteins based on the mRNA / fat mixture. And customized proteins are the holy grail of human immune response.

The issues, however, were many. At the time mRNA was not easy to extract. At least not in any quantity. It was the early days of medical DNA/RNA research, and it was painstakingly slow and expensive. I’m not going to go over all the technicalities and gymnastics involved. But if you are intrigued by the genetics research behind the mRNA vaccines, please read The Tangled History of mRNA Vaccines published in Nature magazine.

From my perspective the BIG difference with the mRNA approach is that they are not ‘infecting’ the recipient with the virus that causes the disease. They are imitating the ‘protein’ the virus produces to create a ‘package’ of immune information that is delivered to your cells using mRNA. There, it is replicated using your natural immune response to create protein anti-bodies to the virus.

When Covid19 hit, the mRNA research spanned nearly 40 years of study and refinement. The anti-vaxers often suggest these vaccines ‘popped up’ on the spur of the moment and can’t be trusted as a result. Nothing could be further from the truth. If anything, we were just lucky that the maturity of the science and the onset of Covid19 occurred at the same time. 

The speed at which the mRNA vaccines were brought to market are a testament to the scientists, their long struggle and the U.S. Government’s focus on a solution. These vaccines effectiveness, now demonstrated with hundreds of millions of doses administered - and precipitous drops in fatalities among the vaccinated - make it one of the miracles of modern medicine and science.

Today – in step with the erosion of integrity in politics – there is an erosion in the integrity of people. Now, vaccination is more a political football than an obvious course of action. As I write this over 25% of Americans are refusing to get vaccinated due to ‘personal liberty’ objections. 

And for those that claim mandatory vaccination is illegal - it is not. As a matter of fact, compulsory vaccination laws were upheld in the 1905 landmark case Jacobson v. Massachusetts by the Supreme Court of the United States. The Supreme Court ruled that laws could require vaccination to protect the public from dangerous communicable diseases.

More surprising to me is that those individuals charged with the public trust are some of the most adamant objectors. Those that are sworn to serve, protect and do no harm, are doing anything but.

From police to hospital staff and EMTs, not being vaccinated is a clear and present danger to themselves and others. Sworn to protect and heal, you would think these people, of all people, would know that this decision is not about THEM. They will contract and spread this virus to anyone and everyone in the name of personal liberty?  Really?

Well, I say MY personal liberty is more important than theirs. I have a RIGHT to be safe – they do not have a RIGHT to endanger me, my family or loved ones. When your personal liberty endangers me & mine – it’s personal all right. Very personal.

Many of those I once regarded as heroes are now the spawn of zombie-like Trumpism. It’s like you are dead inside. America needs you to WAKE UP!

JB

The Experiment May Be Failing

The Great American Experiment in democracy was first labeled such by George Washington in an address on January 9^th, 1790:

"The establishment of our new Government seemed to be the last great experiment for promoting human happiness."

Ever since that time, American leaders and scholars have been referring to the Great Experiment to warn the American people: This democracy we hold dear is not yet, and may never be, without danger of complete collapse.

Throughout our two hundred forty six year history, only the Civil War was a greater danger to our republic than the nationalism and autocratic lure that surfaced during the Trump presidency.

I do not blame Trump for being Trump. As a mater of fact, some of his rhetoric is what many of us heard from family and friends at the annual Thanksgiving roundtable. In some ways, his lack of decorum and diplomacy was, somehow, refreshing - at first. 

But his abandonment of political correctness was not, as it turned out, the full measure of the man. Trump’s true nature was one of self-indulgent illusions of grandeur. Falsehoods, and an eerie attraction to dictatorial autocratic leaders, raised flags early. His autocratic role models played a part in his constant denials, coercion, and purges of those that spoke truth to power.

But Trump is not the bad guy here. It’s the Experiment that has failed us. The Experiment assumes the American system of government is run by patriots and servants of the people. It has checks and balances to protect the Experiment from any lone-wolf dictator that would subvert the rule of law and the republican institutions that make this Experiment work.

The deep allegiance to power that Trump fostered in his brief time in office has provided a primer on how to subvert the Experiment and introduce autocratic rule in an astonishingly short time. Trump was not exceptionally intelligent. The next person may be far more capable..

Trump surrounded himself with people smarter than him that he could manipulate. In short order he had loyalists in key roles in government administration and the judiciary. His popularity and ignorance combined to pull in factions in conspiracy theories and para-military militias. He elevated hate groups, Nazi organizations, and special interests that could buy his favor for an ever decreasing price.

The last vestige of the checks and balances lay with congress; and there he excelled. Using his nationalistic rhetoric and lies he could weld the power of his right-wing base as no one since Regan. His endorsement meant a politician could sustain their power and prestige. Opposition was a political death sentence for any right-wing incumbent. Nearly every right-wing politician pledged allegiance. They pledged not to America, as their oath demanded, but to an autocratic leader and a political party that was being built in his false image.

Thus, in November 2020, when the last true power behind the Experiment (We the People) could speak, he was voted out of office. The candidate that ousted him was not remarkable in any way. He was an aged lifelong politician. Lacked charisma. Nothing unique about his platform or agenda. But then the people were not voting for him. They were voting against what Trump had wrought.

Trump had thoroughly expected to win in a landslide. Just as he convinced himself that he was always right, even when lying, he convinced himself that any loss would be due to subversion. The primal fear of any dictator: A coup.

Trump rallied his pledges to get his power back. Power striped of him by massive fraud and deception. He called on everyone he had placed in office – from governors to judges and congress. He rallied his hate base and convinced them he had their back if they could overturn the election and reinstate him to power.

They actually tried.

Today, nearly a year after that election, his control over the right-wing establishment has weakened only slightly. Few right-wing politicians will admit Trump lost the election when asked. States still spend millions on lawsuits, audits, and other trickery to overturn – but it’s far too late. And nearly every state dominated by the Republican party has passed new laws in 2021 to insure more 'right minded' people can vote.

So, it sounds on the surface, that the Experiment did not let us down. We the People won out. Right?

Wrong. It should have never gotten to an election. And our nation is significantly weaker as a result. His fitness to hold the office was in question from the first year. Yet congress did nothing as they were ruled by party politics rather than their oath of office. If the Experiment had worked as it should, we never would have had the insurrection that followed.

It is clear to me now that Trump was intent on a second term because his complete transformation of the rule of law, the Republican party, and our checks and balances was not complete. He fully intended to ask congress to pass legislation that would allow him to be president for life. He just needed four more years.

Two key provisions in our government have made this type of takeover (from the right or the left) not only possible, but now I fear, probable, if we do nothing. They are both rooted in the lack of term limits.

Congress: Ridding the republic of incumbency is the ONLY answer to preventing political and special interest coercion. A SINGLE eight to ten year term (with provisions for recall) for any congressional seat - House or Senate - will suppress the need to abandon the oath of office for an oath of interest.

Supreme Court: A SINGLE twelve to eighteen year term of overlapping service that insures at least one justice is appointed to the court in each four year presidential term. And these appointments cannot be blocked by parliamentary means.

Single term congressional seats will result in several meaningful changes:

• More independent candidates: Without the ability to offer lifelong power and influence, political party endorsements will be less of an advantage. Often special interests today back parties & PACS. But with their influence on elections diminished, such interests would be open to supporting more independent candidates and popular viewpoints.
• More qualified candidates:  If serving in congress did not have a lifelong allure, we would see more retired veterans, collage graduates and business leaders willing to take 10 years to serve. They could still return to successful private lives and businesses when they leave congressional service. No more posturing for the next election. Once they were in office, their constituency would have more power than any party or interest.
• Much better governance: Case in Point: In 2019 the President attempted to subvert funds from FEMA to build a wall. Twelve republican senators voted with all democrats to block the move. Only those republican senators up for reelection during the Presidents term voted otherwise. Far from a coincidence, it serves as glaring proof of the coercion inherent in incumbency.

The role of parliamentary procedure in weakening the Experiment:

• The fact that a single person or president can appoint multiple Supreme Court Justices to serve for LIFE does not reflect the diversity of judicial integrity we should expect. Nor does the fact that a single person - like a Senate Majority Leader - can refuse to consider such appointments as long as they see fit.
• The parliamentary procedures that allow the party in power to delay administrative and court justice appointments must be outlawed. When the President submits an appointment for consideration the Senate should have 30 days to confirm or reject. If they do neither in 30 days, the appointment is considered confirmed.

Prince Otto von Bismarck (1815 to 1898) was a right-wing German empire builder, statesman and master manipulator. Bismarck is credited with crafting the popular diplomatic meme: "Politics is the art of the possible". 

Since Bismarck’s time, that phrase has been used as an explanation of failure to meet expectations by diplomats and politicians alike. The need to appease self-interest always trumps fixing what is broken. No pun intended. I have no illusions. This ailment will persist. 

On this date, October 2nd, 2021, congressional gridlock swirls around money. As it always does. Spending in and on America is the constant priority of congress and the interests to which they answer. How poorly the current government itself functions - and how grave the consequence of not fixing the causes – is on no one’s agenda.

JB

Debt Ceilings and The U.S. National Debt.

Let’s talk Money, Politics & Presidents. Political posturing and truth spinning over the last 85 years would have one believe that the following is true:

1. Republicans are conservative spenders and champion smaller government and lower national debt.
2. Democrats are socialist spenders that want to redistribute wealth through taxes and expensive social programs.

The interesting thing about history, mathematics and politics is all assertions are TRUE or FALSE depending on how they are measured.

Measurements:

First of all: Never look to ‘averages’ as a measure. Averages are for the masses – not a real statistician or analyst.  Averages are used to misrepresent facts thousands of times every day, by thousands of special interests.  Averages rarely have anything to do with real life outcomes. For instance, the average human being has one testicle and one mammary gland. While this is, on its face, factual, it does not represent reality.

The next biggest misused measure is ‘percentages’. There are some scholars that insist that, by definition, you cannot have more than 100% of anything.  When a glass is 100% full, it can get no fuller. Yet percentages are used to measure variances by mathematicians and accountants every day; whether or not is has relevance over time.

“Relevance over Time” is the critical objective of any measurement. But averages and percentages are in direct conflict with that objective if not given discrete rules of context.

In Figure 1 below the left side of the table represents the percentage the Nation Debt (aka Deficit) attributed to the ‘Top 10’ U.S. presidents by percent increase.  This is an ‘official’ accounting by the U.S. Government OMB. The mathematical context of the right side of the graphic tells a completely different story than the left.

Figure 1 - Presidents and Debt

Source: U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB)

If one were presented with ONLY the left side of the graphic above, Trump would be the biggest spendthrift of them all. That’s because ‘percentages’ are applied only in relation to the prior debt balance carried forward.

If one were presented ONLY the right side, Obama appears as the clear spending king.

The right side is a clearer indication of the how much each president actually contributed to the overall debt that now totals over $28trillion. But even that accounting is not in true context if we divide the amount added by the number of years in office.

Nor does the graphic have any context about the causes of the increases. i.e. Roosevelt had the great depression and WW2; Obama had the financial crisis and 2008 recession; and Trump had the 2020 COVID Crisis.

Nevertheless, using annualization will give us the most context for our measurements. Because, in reality, the impact of spending during a President's term depends entirely on how many terms they were in office. Which brings us to the measurements that truly matter. Using the OMB data, and comparing it to the number of years each president was in office, we get the clearest picture yet.

Figure 2 - Presidential debt by year

So, we have debunked every possible partisan spin on why the U.S. national debt is where it is today. It’s not a partisan issue. It’s an American issue. And its as American as apple pie.  Of the five largest contributors to the national debt, four of them are ‘conservatives’.

You see, Americans live on debt. We mortgage our homes, max our credit cards, finance everything from appliances to automobiles. Big business sells stocks, bonds, and promises to gain capital for operating and competing. 

The U.S. government is the single largest employer in the World. They are no different. They consistently mortgage the next generation for the current one and it has nothing to do with which political party is at the helm.

The ‘debt ceiling’ you hear so much about has nothing to do with future spending. In has to do with historical appropriations. The last administration gets approval to spend what the next administration has to cover. And that is why we raise the debt ceiling – to cover all the appropriations made in past years.  

The minority political party will ALWAYS try to hoodwink the voters my opposing raising the debt ceiling to cover the spending they likely already approved of.

God Bless America