American Discretionary Spending

(foxnationnews.com)
(foxnationnews.com)

By: Wayne Brown


The Huffington Post is plastering today’s headline with news that the Federal Reserve is already preparing for the USA to default on the massive $14.3 trillion debt. What a load of hogwash! This is the second news story of this day alone that has emphasized that either the debt ceiling is increased or the USA defaults on their debts. Let’s place shame on the American media for not reporting the facts on this issue. Place shame on the media for misleading the citizens of this country so a group of politicians can continue to spend like sailors on shore leave. Assign shame on the media for not fulfilling the role of truth provider as it was originally envisioned. The media in general on this issue has played to the needs of the White House and the liberal left in tainting the minds of the American public.


If the debt ceiling is not raised, that means decisions must be made regarding those funds which are considered “discretionary” in the spending by the U.S. Government. This is not mandatory spending, it is elective spending and it is outside the silos of any entitlements. In 2010, the elective spending amounted to over $600 billion dollars. Our service on debt was just under $200 billion. We can pay our debt service by simply giving some things up on the elective side of the spending process.


Obama and the left leaning members of Congress do not want you to believe that. They want you to believe that there are only two choices: raise the debt ceiling or go down in flames. When, in the history or your household, have you ever sat at the kitchen table and decided that more credit and more debt was the best way to get out of the trouble that your budget was in? It is not a practical solution and it simply plays to the needs of those who want to continue to spend until there is no choice but to tax us all into the ground. As a public, we cannot buy into this. As a public we cannot allow the right side of the aisle to compromise on this issue. If we don’t hold the line here, the house will never be in order again, if it continues to stand at all.


Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle would like us to believe that the money which is spent in Washington today is all very necessary and that there are no programs which are wasteful or unworthy of our support. We continue to feed money into operations which have long since been capable of standing alone in their existence…Planned Parenthood being a prime example. Discretionary spending buys power and influence. It is pork and earmark in action. It’s the same money we use in our household to eat out on Saturday night. Don’t tell me that we can’t decide not to spend that money in that way.


These are the real choices our elected officials on both sides of the aisle and the President are avoiding. They struggle back and forth and throw around their rhetoric but ultimately there are not enough people in Washington with a spine to get the right thing done. Those sitting on the conservative aisle want you to think they are working hard in this process but it is simply eyewash. How many programs have you specifically heard mentioned by any of them that could be cut from elective spending…none is likely the popular choice? This is the closing act on a three act drama which is designed to convince the American public that we must continue to spend money and increase or debt or perish as a society. Lies, lies, and more lies.


When do we actually get serious about the issue of the national debt and the rampant out of control annual deficit spending by these clowns we send to Washington? When do we realize that men and women who have made million and millions of dollars do not just decide to spend their own personal money to get elected to Congress because they were called to serve. That is not in the math in their heads. They decide to do it because it is a gravy train for them…nice six figure salary with a guaranteed retirement, special benefits out the wazoo, prestige that money cannot buy, and a chance to curry a bit of favor from those who come to Washington seeking the influence of the elected ones. That is the reason personal funds get spent…the return on investment cannot be beat!


Our federal government is a parasitic nightmare at the present looking for more and more ways on a daily basis to live off of its host…the American people. If Obama wins the argument over debt ceiling, the right is conceding the argument on taxation. They are not saying that but I think you can count on Obama and company certainly assuming it. I think you can count on a movement in that direction once the debt ceiling controversy cools. Then all bets are off as to where it will all stop. 51% of the American public will continue to pay a higher and higher tax bill while we allow idiots to run our country.


Government cannot be everything to everybody. It cannot be all encompassing without sooner or later taking the assets of those governed in order to accomplish the task. Even if that were to happen, the government will ultimately fail for those who make up the “producers” will eventually cease their efforts and become part of the dead weight on the system. There is no reward in taxation except the growth of big government which is something Americans should run from like the plague.


Americans are among the most generous and caring people on earth. We tend to take care of those who are truly in need. Government, at some point, decided that it was the official arm of that effort for the American public and it would manage all thinking in that regard. At that point, we began the process of building the welfare state in this country. No longer was it one person helping another. Instead, it became the government giving away things to people who could figure out how to get it. Initially, that faction of the population was small. Today, it is huge and growing by the minute. Our elected officials have created a sector of society which actually believes there is a free ride to be had courtesy of the taxpayers of America. As we raise debt ceilings, borrow more and more money, we continue to perpetuate that myth and grow it. Discretionary spending by government officials is the prime tool driving this process and it needs to stop and stop now.


The issue currently on the table revolves around the debt ceiling. Most of Washington would like us all to be believe that is what the problem actually is…the debt ceiling. We have run out of room to use more credit to increase the national debt thus the credit ceiling is the problem. The actual problem lies in the spending practices of the government. Entitlements such as Medicare and Social Security took in more than $70 billion dollars more than the combined sums paid out in that year. The remainder was squandered somewhere in the realms of “discretionary spending” by those we elect to office. Don’t be fooled as to what the problem really is…it is SPENDING.

Spending buys votes and voter blocks; spending helps to guarantee the re-election of the incumbent spending buys power, influence, and prestige on a global basis which tends to feed the ego of an already rich man in a much different way than he can buy for himself. Spending makes those who come up with the ideas look intelligent because they can think of yet another way to spend money. Have you noticed how few ideas have been presented by either side of the aisle as it relates to reduced spending? The cupboard is almost bare in that department. There is no glory in fiscal responsibility in Washington so say those that we have elected to office.


The American public is offered up doublespeak, technical terms, far-fetched economic guesses, speculation, and yes, even lies to support this process of raising our debt. Personally, I think we start to scrape the bottom of the barrel for ethics and morality when the President is willing to stand before the public and threaten our senior citizens with the loss of their social security checks because the debt ceiling will not be raised. A responsible president would be on television doing just the opposite; assuring the senior that they had no worries in that area; assuring the American public that the interest on debt would be paid even if some discretionary spending had to be cut to do it. Unfortunately, we do not have a responsible president in office at this time.


Leadership is about doing the right thing; not the popular thing and not the thing that best suits the needs of your political party. Americans elected those in Washington, especially the President, to offer that form of leadership; to responsibly manage the affairs of America and see that our money is spent in a wise and efficient manner. Washington is currently devoid of anyone with those traits on either side of the aisle and it is high time that the American people realize that fact and do something about it. We must make it clear to every individual in Washington DC who serves in elective office that their job is on the line if this effort to manage our finances goes down in a compromise which does nothing more than raise the debt ceiling and allow the spending to continue.

We have choices to make as a public. We can elect to continue down the same road that we have seen for the past four years (two years of Obama + two years of democratic dominance in Congress 2007-2008), continue to watch people lose jobs and suffer the effects of a diminished economy and high unemployment, continue to watch the welfare state grow as more and more politicians on the left tell us that the only answer is higher taxes. We can continue to listen to Obama and his crowd raving about class envy subjects and point their fingers at the “rich” as the cause of all our woes. Or, we can come together as a majority voting block and send those who are not willing to carry out the will of the American people home to do other things. We are the governed, we are the ones who consented to be governed but we did it under the umbrella of the Constitution of the United States of America and it is high time that we return to that orientation. God Bless America.

©Copyright WBrown2011. All Rights Reserved.


More by this Author


Comments 31 comments

poetvix profile image

poetvix 5 years ago from Gone from Texas but still in the south. Surrounded by God's country.

I have seen several bits devoted to this issue on the news this morning. I think your version tells it better, more honestly, and without the smokescreen that is political correctness blurring the issue. Thank you. I hope the folks in Washington read this, maybe they can get a clue.


Jason Matthews profile image

Jason Matthews 5 years ago from North Carolina

The government is always looking to create a "crisis situation"...it helps them gain power. Good Hub!


Wayne Brown profile image

Wayne Brown 5 years ago from Texas Author

@poetvix...Thank you. The disinformation regarding this issue is beyond belief. The problem is clear..."it's the spending stupid!" The public sees fact clearly...Washington needs to wake up to that idea. WB

@Jason Matthews...Amen to that...everything in Washington is done in a state of emergency so that when it is question they can just say that it was an "emergency". We need to lose those folks and that attitude. WB


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 5 years ago from Rural Arizona

The recent threat by Obama that folks may not get their SS checks next month was despicable to say the least. I would love to see an accounting of how much is received vs how much is paid out on a monthly basis. I also question how SS and Medicare can be labeled as entitlements? I pay into both of these programs. To me an entitlement is something like food stamps, or the income tax refunds paid to people who never paid any income tax. To me a refund means getting back a portion of what was paid in, not a flat out gift.

Great hub Wayne, you said it very well.


breakfastpop profile image

breakfastpop 5 years ago

Never waste an opportunity to scare the hell out of the public and create a crisis. I think the Republicans and the Democrats should meet in an arena and duke it out. What is going on now makes for great political theater that should end in a physical battle with all the people cheering. Just like the Roman Empire before it fell. Up and useful, interesting and awesome.


D.G. Smith profile image

D.G. Smith 5 years ago

I don't know about congress but the people I talk to understand the need for compromise and believe there is a middle ground to balancing the budget. It shouldn't be done just by slamming the middle class and the poor. I say we end corporate welfare as well, and that is where many of the issues hit there sticking point. We all want government handouts to stop. Just many of us want it to stop for the wealthy as well.


FitnezzJim profile image

FitnezzJim 5 years ago from Fredericksburg, Virginia

I forsee a victory claim in the near future associated with paying out the Social Security checks. Nevermind the facts, and that Social Security is separate from the budget and the debt. With claims of victory come votes, and every politician knows us old geezzers are dumb enough to fall for it.


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 5 years ago from Rural Arizona

D.G. Smith - The subject of corporations not paying taxes has been beat around quite extensively in many different hubs. If you do some fact checking, you will find that most corporations are owned by small business, and I can assure you we pay at least our fair share of taxes. The big one's like GE bought themselves some incredible tax favors by giving huge campaign donations to some politicians. So to make broad statements in regards to corporate welfare is not really fair. Do some fact checking, see who received the huge campaign donations, and the picture will become a little more clear for you. Bottom line, GE bought themselves some tax loopholes and other favors as did other large corporations.


Wayne Brown profile image

Wayne Brown 5 years ago from Texas Author

@Old Poolman...They keep using that term so that when they take them away from you it will seem like you didn't deserve it in the first place. My guess is that we have run a surplus in SS and MC since the early 60's. LBJ made it possible to drop the money into the general fund with his legislation and from that point on, the money was squandered. We should let Bernie Madoff out of jail. WB

@breakfastpop...That is exactly what both sides of the aisle are counting on...a crisis. One had to get it done and the other did not have enough time to put up a fight...the same old crap in a different bag.

@D.G. Smith...I, like most, see nothing wrong with compromise. The left does not want to quit spending and wants a debt increast to boot. If spending is cut by some level, we could forgo a debt increase with some reduced spending in the discretionary sector...at least enough to cover the debt service. Right now, discretionary spending matches defense spending almost dollar for dollar and could easily pony up the money for debt interest payment. Some programs would get cut and some would be reduced in the process...nothing to do with Social Security or Medicare...that's compromise in my book. The compromise that Obama wants is for the right to give him the debt ceiling increase and then let him keep spending at the same level...where's the give and take here? Thanks D.G. WB

@FitnezzJim...Very true. They keep trying to dupe us with emergencies. "We would have done it differently but you must understand, this was an emergency". Our entire government has turned into one big emergency and no one is addressing the fact. WB


Wayne Brown profile image

Wayne Brown 5 years ago from Texas Author

@Old Poolman...Good point, Mike. Most of the corporate structures in the small business sector are "Sub Chapter S" corporation. The laws regarding these corporate structures do not allow that type of corporation to have any "retained earnings" on the books at the end of the tax year. Consequently the primary stockholders, normally mom and pop, must take the money in the form of income and roll it back out of their pocket into the business after paying taxes on it. Once a small business is caught up in this type of structure, they just about have to go public to get themselves out of it. It works well on the small scale but penalizes the owner greatly as the company grows. This is why those who appear to make $250,000 a year in the small business sector are called rich...unfortunately all that money does not make the bank account and taxes are paid on it...just as Mike points out. Part of the rationale that goes with not taxing large corporation is their ability to bring jobs to the market. Just as local governments often give large corporations extended local taxe breaks to lure them into a particular geographic area....the hope is that jobs will be created and more revenue will flow as a result. When it works, it normally works well. Corporations of size normally have significant "retained earnings" which are not declared as profits but rather reinvested over time back into the business structure for expansion and improvement. Again, the approach here is growth in the private sector which ultimately creates jobs and stimulates the economy. Under the present approach, big government wants to tax and spend their way to productivity in the private sector. We do not get out of economic slumps due to the government stimulating the job market. We get out of them because we have people in high places in goverment who realize that the government needs to get out of the way and let business work...things begin to happen then. The EPA will never be cited for stimulating the economic growth of America. WB


dahoglund profile image

dahoglund 5 years ago from Wisconsin Rapids

Somebody mentioned corporate welfare. I would say that all tax breaks etc. should have a justification. I fail to see why tax money is given to unions, or thr abortion industry.


Wayne Brown profile image

Wayne Brown 5 years ago from Texas Author

@dahoglund...It's all part of the "welfare state" which we allowed to be created with taxpayer money over time. It just gets more and more complicated the longer it goes on. You make a great observation and one that should be addressed. WB


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 5 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

This weekly 'crisis' scam has gone far enough! We have already been bilked into owing $47,667.00 each (every man, woman, and child in America), by the con artists in Washington, by their lying scare tactics.

Enough.


Stu From VT 5 years ago

Wayne, let's not forget about the "mandatory" part. It really isn't that mandatory. Alot of it goes to fund powers that are not enumerated to the fed's in the Constitution. Entire agencies need to be defunded, and all their regulations vacated. Take a look in the Constitution. Apart from national defense, coinage, treaties, and resolving disputes between states, what other powers do the fed's legally have? Why shouldn't the BATFE, Commerce, Agriculture, Education, FCC, ICC, DOE, HHS, etc. depts. all be zapped?


Wayne Brown profile image

Wayne Brown 5 years ago from Texas Author

@WillStarr...Amen to that, Will. I don't think my writer earnings are going to be able to cover my share! LOL! WB

@Stu From VT...I agree totally, Stu. I think that is an area that also needs to be opened up line by line and looked at. Having the term "mandatory" associated with it simply puts it under lock and key protection. There should be nothing about government spending that is simply classified as "mandatory". Our federal government over time has become one bloated "Fat Albert" of an operation that needs to be slimmed down for health reasons. Maybe Michelle needs to take that under her umbrella of a healthy diet. WB


D.G. Smith profile image

D.G. Smith 5 years ago

same old arguments. That somehow it is only fair to ask the poor and the middle class to pay for everything needed to be a country, because if you ask the rich corporations to do it then it puts to big a strain on the economy. They have worked hard to tie in a few elements used in small business to their own structure in order to create confusion so that any time we speak of their unfair power, and corrupt influence they can try to drag small business into the fray and make them a casualty of legislation. The truth is small business interest can and should be separated from large corporate interest.

here are a few facts.

Corporations are not in the business of 'creating jobs' or 'creating wealth' in any economy. In fact management of corporations are rewarded handsomely for cutting jobs and keeping salaries low and wealth in the hands of a few.

Corporations pay their propaganda machine to make sure they seem patriotic and caring, the truth is they have no interest in keeping employees or America (or any other country) strong. Capitalism has no country and no conscience, their only loyalty is to their bottom line.

These Corporate traits are not side effects of capitalism but the nature of the beast itself, in other words it is in the design. Please don’t misunderstand me capitalism has its place, and at one time there were laws that made the corporation subservient to the people not the other way around,

at one time this country had controls that were designed to keep the corporation in its proper place in society, they were part of what made our country strong.

Like our government Corporations had a system of checks and balances to try to insure they did not become a detriment to the common welfare of the country and/or the people. But, Like our Government this system has been subverted by our wealthy politicians and our courts, including the supreme court.

There is a difference between Free trade and capitalism, there is a difference between free speech and money, though our current supreme court ruled they are all the same thing. Allowing bribery and subversion to become the rule of law.

This will be the downfall of our country not some lame program that gave a few dollars to the poor. But a government that has eliminated a system of checks and balance and designed a system to siphon off power and wealth from the people. Putting all the power into hands of untouchable CEO's the Federal Reserve, and their cohorts, effectively disenfranchising the people and its government, keeping them from controlling their own money, resources, and wealth.

But go ahead keep believing it's WIC, and Food stamps, that is destroying us, after all it is so much easier then attacking the real problem of corruption at the highest levels. People who hide behind corporate laws and walls, manipulating this country and others, creating a pseudo governments that answers to no one. It is much easier if we crusade to save a few million off the poor, after all they have no champion, no army, no police force, no hit squads that can come for us in the night. Besides, Hell one day we might get to be a big Corporate CEO or a favored slave ourselves,,,,

sorry about the long rant, (couldnt help myself) In spite of my disagreement I did enjoy your article and the thought provoking people who responded


Wayne Brown profile image

Wayne Brown 5 years ago from Texas Author

@D.G. Smith...DG, I don't particularly disagree with you on a lot of this stuff. I see no gain in taxing the poor...it is basically impossible to do if they create no revenue. At the same time, there is the poor and those who feed off the poor...who take the food stamps and the WIC, etc. and effectively look for ways to keep from being productive member of society. The corporate side is one that I tend to agree that we have to collect a portionately great share of net revenue from but it is a fine line in a global society. One corporation looks upon America as a mature market and sees no real future growth. They sustain their business base there but quit investing basically putting the money where it gets the better return. Ultimately you and I could be label just as bank for taking our money out of one bank and moving it to another because it paid a little higher interest...return on investment. Corporations accounted for about 9% of the tax revenue in 2010...that figure should be higher. Unfortunately, when government goes out to raise the tax burden on corporations, they tend to ignore the bottomline for taxes and attempt to just close loopholes which are essential write-offs to the bottomline. Ultimately, this hurts the worker because the corporation immediately stops utilizing the writeoff...for example, they no longer buy new trucks every three years or they sale their corporate jet and do not replace it. All this impacts other industries who then have to lay off workers because their orders have slowed. Can you imagine what might happen if American or Delta could no longer depreciate their capital investment in aircraft as a function of their business. Boeing would soon feel th effect as would the unions. The we would all be riding in much older aircraft to our destination. So, I tend to favor getting more tax money on the basis of the bottomline but not closing loopholes and hoping that it improves the tax grab...that's a gamble that has backfired time and again. Of course you could make the jump from capitalism in the private sector to nationalizing all corporations and ultimately having the people own them and dictate to them. Countries such as France who have tried that under socialist governments have not fared well as it ultimately leads to the demise of the business. The fact of the matter is that income tax is a poor basis for taxation. It is an outdated unfair system that loads the middle class although there is still the statistic out there that says the top 10% of the wage earners pay the majority of the taxes...there is just not enough of them to keep pace with government spending. Transaction tax may be the answer on the selling side...3% on every transaction with no exclusions. This would include both the stock market and all real estate sales. Income tax could go away and the burden of the tax would fall to those who are doing the majority of the business transactions. The government will run like mad from such a proposal because they fear that the wealthy will not produce the transaction necessary to generate the revenue...there is no guarantee of that. On the other hand, everyone would be paying less and look how much more money we would take home from work while our employer also voids the gig. In our current system, the wage earners will be a shrinking population in the future and that represents a coming dilemma that can only be answered by continually raising taxes on them...eventually a person starts to question why they even try to work. Lots of things to think about here...glad to have your comments and your rant. WB


D.G. Smith profile image

D.G. Smith 5 years ago

I agree WB that the situation is not an easy one. I understand the principles of amortization and a need to insure honest and fare profits. I also agree that companies would throw what amounts to corporate temper tantrums that could hurt in the short term when we cut off some of their 'candy'. However, it has been my experience that the wealthy seldom deprive themselves for long, so, the corporate jet will eventually be ordered, along with nice new auto fleets, to keep up the image of success. I also think that if the laws are done properly and fairly after a short period of pouting Companies would realise that the closing of those loop holes are not worth abandoning good markets over, and would re-apply themselves to capturing those markets through investment or loose out to those companies that do.

As for Governments taking over companies, of course there is no need for that, we just need to return to a system of checks and balance that allow for honest profit, but curtails gouging, greed, and market manipulation. In short WE need to do what every intelligent government and people have done to maintain their health and future, and that is to be sure that the companies that operate here are doing so in a manor that benefits the country and its people. If we don't do this eventually all our resources and all our wealth will be taken away, and these companies will leave anyway because there is nothing left to take or sustain them.

good talking to you WB have a good evening!


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 5 years ago from Rural Arizona

We must understand that large corporations have the choice of closing their doors in this country, and relocating to countries with cheap labor, no unions, less regulations, and lower taxes. I'm not saying we need to kiss their butts, but we do have to make it attractive and affordable enough for them to stay on our shores. When they leave, the jobs are gone forever and the taxes they pay are also gone. Greed is a double edged sword and we need to be very careful what we wish for.


Harvey Stelman profile image

Harvey Stelman 5 years ago from Illinois

Wayne, You're really scaring me, really! I always thought you to be an intelliget man. You actually read the Huffington Post? Lord help us!

Why not just trust what Obama says, he NEVER breaks his word. H


Wayne Brown profile image

Wayne Brown 5 years ago from Texas Author

@Harvey Stelman...Sorry Harv, don't want to come off as the "Doubting Thomas" but I am quite doubtful about the real intentions of this imposter to the role of leadership! Actually, I didn't read the Huffington, the headline from it was spread all across my AOL page that morning...otherwise, not one of my rags! WB


Harvey Stelman profile image

Harvey Stelman 5 years ago from Illinois

Wayne, I just used Huffing to confirm the cost of Michelle Obama's trip to Spain to an idiot. Everything is ok, Wayne. H


Wayne Brown profile image

Wayne Brown 5 years ago from Texas Author

@Harvey Stelman...if you are looking for idiots, Harv...drop by American Romance's latest hum...it's covered up with 'em! WB


Harvey Stelman profile image

Harvey Stelman 5 years ago from Illinois

Wayne, Just may do. H


Stu From VT 5 years ago

Wayne - got a link to that AR Hub. Might drop by and say hi. :)


Wayne Brown profile image

Wayne Brown 5 years ago from Texas Author

Sent you an email! with the link. WB


Stu From VT 5 years ago

Coolio, thanks Wayne.


tsadjatko profile image

tsadjatko 5 years ago from maybe (the guy or girl) next door

Spending does buy votes as you say and that is why the democrats won't even allow a vote in the senate on a balanced budget bill. That is why the unions were bailed out by tarp so the democrats wouldn't lose their union dues which are donated to the democrat party and democrat candidates despite what rank and file members might wish for their money. Government is all corruption, the politicians, if they were in the private sector would be in jail for financial crimes, democrats and republicans alike and you are so right about the media like shown here http://www.mrc.org/realitycheck/realitycheck/2011/...


tsadjatko profile image

tsadjatko 5 years ago from maybe (the guy or girl) next door

And one more thing. I don't think you mentioned unless I missed it, but no one in Congress and certainly not the President is offering any cuts to the budget - they are talking about cuts in the rate of future growth! That is why you constantly hear 2, 3, or 4 trillion over ten years which winds up being a pitance in this year's budget - you see it is all how the CBO scores these things. The CBO has said if you were to freeze the budget at 2010 limits and not cut, simply freeze it, it would reduce the debt by 9.5 trillion over the next 10 years (that is what they project it to grow by over the next ten years). Have you heard any talk like 9.5 trillion cut over ten years? and that would just be the result of a freeze with no cuts to spending. No, because they aren't cutting anything but the rate of growth, and no cuts are binding to the next years congress anyway - so it is all a bunch BS...and their goal could be to break the US, ruin the dollar and go to a one world currency.


Wayne Brown profile image

Wayne Brown 5 years ago from Texas Author

@tsadkato...Reducing the rate at which anything happens has been Washington's magic formula for distracting the public with BS while they continued to do whatever the hell they wanted. If they stated it in a manner such: "If we reduce the rate of spending over the next ten years we will only have a national debt of 25 trillion dollars as opposed to the 35 trillion it would be if we continue at the same rate." Stated in that manner, it is clear to any individual that the debt still accumulates at the significant rate and reaches a total level that is still unacceptable. The only answer is to pick a hard base line to freeze spending limits, hold the line and make cuts where necessary to accomodate the revenue needs. Washington will spend every red cent it can find only to ask for more in the process of buying their votes. There are so many unnessary and wasteful projects in the government and our elected officials are too damn lazy to do their job and look for them. Both sides of the aisle really want the same thing...continued spending....as a public we should never lose sight of that fact and realize that our singular focus and purpose is to oppose that effort in Washington. WB


tsadjatko profile image

tsadjatko 5 years ago from maybe (the guy or girl) next door

Yeah, what I said. :)

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working