The Horse Sense Blog compares the nonsense in today's news with good ol' fashioned horse sense


“…I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve.… It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.” - Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775


"The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it." - George Orwell

(c) copyright 2011-2016 Doug Johnson All Rights Reserved. All site content is copyright protected and subject to penalties for infringement of copyright laws.

Saturday, May 23, 2015

An Irresponsible Little Boy Trying To Be Our Leader

Here's the Nonsense:  Americans pick good people to be their leaders.  Sure, every now and then we get someone who isn't that good, but overall we do get people well qualified to be our leaders.

Here's the Horse Sense:  Americans have no clue how much trouble our nation is in or how to pick the right people to fix our problems and lead our nation.  

America is in crisis.  We are so far in debt that there really is no light at the end of the tunnel.  Given that problem, it's imperative that we need to rid ourselves of leaders who don't understand how to handle money.  And right now we have someone who is trying to be our leader that has not only been totally irresponsible with money, he's shown significant character failure in other areas of his life that make his leadership qualifications poor, if not nonexistent.  That's not the kind of person we can expect will fix our economy, let alone save our nation from collapse.

Experts disagree on the exact amount, but what we can be sure of is that our $18.2 trillion dollar national debt isn't all the money we owe.  With varying reasons as to why the numbers differ, we do know that our additional unfunded liabilities are $100-$200 trillion more on top of our national debt.  And those unfunded liabilities may not be called national debt, but they are exactly that.  Just because someone doesn't want to call something by it's proper name doesn't mean that's not what it is (this should remind you that we have this game of calling things different names because the charlatans we have running our government are mostly attorneys, who are experts at mincing and twisting words and their definitions.

State and local governments have their share of debt, too.  Estimates are that those total about $38 trillion more.  So, if we add that $38 trillion to the $18 trillion national debt the government admits and then add $200 trillion for unfunded liabilities, we could be in debt as high as $256 trillion.  If you sold everything in the country, everything everyone owned including all privately owned land and everything the government owned and all the government owned land, we'd only have about $100 trillion.  Did you get that?  We owe 2.5 times what we're worth!  In any honest person's book that's the description of someone who's bankrupt.

But those big numbers are hard to fathom.  Let's make it a little easier.  We hear million, billion, and trillion and don't really recognize the difference.  Let's compare it to time.  1 million seconds ago was just over 11.5 days ago.  1 billion seconds ago was the middle of 1984.  1 trillion seconds ago was about 29,694 BC.  That's how much larger a trillion is than a billion.

Before we talk about how this ties in with the irresponsible little boy trying to be our leader, let me make the point just a little clearer.

If we could pay more than it takes to run the government each day, we could pay down the debt.  We don't have that extra money.  In fact, with our government's spending, we're going further into debt each minute.  But assuming we curtailed much of our spending and could pay $1 billion per day towards our debt, it would take us over 701 years to pay off the $256 trillion.

Now that we've seen how desperate our situation is, wouldn't you agree that people who would handle the nation's money so poorly to get us into this predicament certainly should not be entrusted with more responsibility?  Quite the contrary, they should, at a minimum, be pulled back and watched closely.  Better yet, they should be removed from office and replaced with people who are trustworthy.  

You don't give more responsibility to people who've not proven they can handle lesser responsibilities.  Yet this is exactly what we see with one of the top polling presidential candidates for 2016.  He's proven not just once, but over and over again that he can't handle his own finances, so why would we trust him with our nation's highest office?  I wrote about him here and pointed out his problems with mishandling of campaign monies that got him in trouble with election officials in the past.  I also pointed out his lies about his background and other irresponsible things in his past.  

But if that wasn't enough, now another report comes out, this time in the Washington Post, and they are reporting that once again Marco Rubio is mishandling his money.  Yet this immature little boy (and given how he's handled things, that's the most appropriate description I can come up with for him) thinks he's qualified be our president.  

People think he's good looking and like his enthusiasm.  They relate to his financial problems and his excuse that his refrigerator broke so he had to spend $3000 on a new one and then fix the air conditioner in one of his houses and has a $40,000 tuition bill for his kids schooling to pay.  They think there's nothing wrong with him taking over $68,000 from his retirement funds to pay for these things, even though that's one of the worst financial decisions a person can make.  (Yes, it's legal for him to borrow from his retirement funds.  It just shows very poor financial judgment.)  It would have been cheaper to borrow the money than pay the fines and taxes he'll pay for doing what he did.  It's financially very irresponsible.  But people relate because he's living irresponsibly and most Americans are, too.  And that's the kind of man we want handling our nation's finances and other major decisions?

No one needs a $3000 refrigerator.  He could spend far less and get one that would do the job.  

His kids don't need to be in private school, but he seems to feel he has to live the life of the elite to be part of the upper crust of society.  

I can understand wanting the air conditioner in one of his homes fixed with summer coming, although then there's the question of why he needs more than one home.  (I realize that he has one in Washington, DC and one in Florida, but many elected politicians rent an apartment, even sharing expenses with other politicians to save money.  Some even live in their offices.  He doesn't have to own a second home in Washington and if he can't afford it, then he should not spend the money.  That's just what the government does, it spends money every day that it doesn't have.  I guess he didn't learn his lesson in Florida when he bought a second home in Tallahassee with another politician for them to live in while the legislature was in session, but they couldn't/didn't pay the mortgage and it went into foreclosure.)

But people relate to his financial condition because most Americans live irresponsibly when it comes to their finances, too.  Accepting his failures in financial responsibility eases a person's conscience about their own failures.  But you'd think people would be honest enough with themselves to admit their own failures and not want someone as irresponsible running the country.

Frankly, while he hasn't made a fortune in his career, his household income for many years has been a 6 figure income.  He could easily have chosen to live a less lavish lifestyle and saved some money and avoided debt (He needs to take one of Dave Ramsey's financial classes and learn how to handle money.).  

Rubio is a man who cannot handle his finances properly.  Remember how huge our nation's debt is?  Do you really want someone like this handling our economic policy when he can't even handle his own?

He cannot tell the truth even about his own parents story of coming to America.  (Just what we need, another liar leading the country!)

He cannot handle his campaign finances well enough to stay out of trouble with election officials, and cannot tell the truth about his "change of mind" on amnesty for illegals (remember, after telling Sean Hannity that he'd changed from his position with the Gang of Eight, he went to Univision and told them that he still believed in it, but had realized that it had to be passed in pieces because the American people wouldn't support it as one bill).

Is this the kind of man you think can save America? 

People are willing to throw their support behind him without thinking twice about who he really is and whether he's worthy of the most important job in the entire world.

This is a young man who has not proven himself to be honest or able to handle money, let alone worthy of the presidency. 

Add to that the support he's getting from many in the establishment GOP and caution signs should be flashing in our minds.  (When you see a major establishment GOP donor like Larry Ellison host a fundraiser for someone, you should take note who he is supporting because it's a sign that something's wrong with the candidate and conservatives better take notice.)

Americans should also be paying attention to the left's actions to influence who the Republican candidate is.  In past elections they've been very effective at getting the GOP to run the candidate that is easiest for them to beat. 

Just remember back to 2012 when the Democrats and the mainstream media went on and on about how Mitt Romney would be the toughest candidate to beat.  And the GOP fell for it and nominated Romney, who the Democrats beat handily.  Romney, as I warned at the time, was a very weak candidate and the one the Democrats wanted.  Their cries of "he's the toughest to beat" were simply reverse psychology to get the GOP to nominate an easy-to-beat candidate.  The fact that the GOP couldn't see through their actions should have astounded any thinking person.

Now we're headed to 2016 and the Democrats are being their predictable selves.  They know Rubio would be easy to beat and so they are starting with this piece in their loyal leftist newspaper, the New York Times, claiming that the Democrats are scared to death of Rubio running against Hillary Clinton, the presumed Democrat nominee.

Wake up people!  This is a repeat of what we've seen in the past.  Jeb Bush is having trouble getting his campaign off the ground and I assure you that the establishment GOP who lead the Republican Party are looking for an alternative in case they need one.  I have no doubt they are considering the possibility of Rubio as the nominee.  He's Hispanic, which they believe would endear them to the criminal immigrant invaders who are receiving amnesty from Obama.  He proved he's one of them when he joined the Gang of Eight and the likes of Sen. John McCain.  The left recognizes this as an opportunity to make a play to get Rubio nominated so they once again have another easy-to-beat candidate.  We're beginning to see the same old game played and Republicans are fools if they fall for it.  

Marco Rubio's popularity is just another example of how lousy Americans are at choosing leaders.  They use all the wrong reasons to decide someone's qualified to be a candidate.  That's the reason we ended up with Barack Obama and, in fact, haven't had a conservative get the nomination since 1984.  American voters need to pay attention and quit falling for the likes of most candidates we see throw their hat in the ring.