Truck and Barter

Tino: I discovered you thanx to Andrea from Il Motel dei Polli Ispirati.

Thank you for your passionate words. aa

Calm down, man!

USA has the greatest expenses in defense. But is US the safest place to live? No.

USA has the greatest expenses in health care. But are the US people healthiest? No.

As you said, America stands for 48% of world defense spending (read: military expenses), but only 25% in Official Development Aid. Great example, which are the priorities of USA.

So, what do you want to say with your statistics?

Critical: Your comment is of doubtful intelligence.

1) Can you explain me pls the relationship between defense expenses and security? If Bin Laden won, we'd need no expenses: the menace would be over. So? Switzerland does spend very few in defense, but it's because she relies on the onther's defense expenditures.

2) US people are not the healthiest only because of their way of life. If you studied, and read something, you'd know it. [The Power of Productivity, W. Lewis, Chicago University Press, 2004]

3) Us defense expenditure covers also other nations: Europe, Japan, S. Korea, Taiwan, etc. This is international welfare, man.

4) Dont' try to fool yourself with the statistics. They are clear, pretty clear. And also one like you should be able to comprehend'em.

aa from italy

aa, some notes for reply:

1) I understand very well, what you want to say. The main point of my comment was: that kind of statistics doesn't mean anything. Look at the title of the post: "America, First in the World". Should Americans be happy that their defence expences are the biggest in the world? Or what is the meaning of the post anyway?

2) I have studied, I have read something, don't worry. I know, the main reason is the lifestyle. But actually, there is another (not so big) reason: the way how social (health care) saecuriness is provided to people. Europe has managed to build less expensive but as good health care system as US.

3) Agree. Although, US wouldn't cover other's expenditures if it wasn't profitable to US.

4) I was saying this: US tries to solve problems with the price of military expenses, other western countries (Europe, Japan) try to deal the problems with other means.

Do you really (I mean, really) believe that you can fight terrorism with war? There is ALWAYS another bin Laden, who can hijack an airplain and crash it into skycrapers. You can't kill all muslims to prevent it happening.

Maybe you should eliminate social problems, bad relations between religions/nations/etc. This is the key how you can spread so called freedom over the world.

Although, US wouldn't cover other's expenditures if it wasn't profitable to US.

How is the defense of Europe and East Asia "profitable" to the US? It may be necessary, but it is hardly profitable.

US tries to solve problems with the price of military expenses, other western countries (Europe, Japan) try to deal the problems with other means.

Can you point to a European success? What problems has Europe solved through other means? Those "social problems" you talk about, and "bad relations between religions/nations", certainly haven't been solved.

critical

"Maybe you should eliminate social problems, bad relations between religions/nations/etc. This is the key how you can spread so called freedom over the world."

I think you are finally starting to get it. Remove the Taliban, remove Saddam, have Gaddafi roll over, isolate and neutralize North Korea and Iran for starters. Then as the despotic rulers are eliminated and representative governments are established the bin Ladens have less and less appeal.

And as Chairman Mao says "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun."

Maybe you should eliminate social problems, bad relations between religions/nations/etc. This is the key how you can spread so called freedom over the world. - Critical

And do you do that, genius? How is America to eliminate social tensions between the Western World and the Fundamentalist Muslim or Socially and Technologically antiquated Third World? Why should America, or Japan, or Sweden, or anyone tolerate forced female circumcision? Or the fact that Christians are banned from having religious services in Saudi Arabia, and Jews are banned from entering the country at all? Why should the Western World, which has developed the sciences and technologies which are responsible for mankind being freed from smallpox and multli-million death flu pandemics, tolerate Sub-Saharan African men raping prepubescent girls as a 'cure' for AIDS?

How are you going to make nice with Communist China, which starved and executed tens of millions of its own victim inhabitatants? They want more resources, and have shown a willingness to fight for them. Ask India how peaceful China is today. How are you going to find peace with Wahabiists who want nothing less than ownership of every inch of land on earth and the forced conversion of every man woman and child to Islam?

Those people want you subservient, stripped of your property for their gain, or dead. How do we make 'peace' with them again?

Critical, come back when have more than empty platitudes.

Tino - great site, found you through Tim Blair. Good luck on that PhD.

Point of the Text:

The extreme-left is constantly hoping that the US is in decline, which it isn’t. Also the American left has many weak-willed people in it, who are defeatist by nature. Right now they are crying “we are overstretched”, “America is on decline” etc. Furthermore, the US is an example to the world, especially us in Europe.

It is very sad that people like you are so upset when you read about the achivements of America. Very petty.

America is Europe’s friend, and their strength in research, defense, aid and freedom all help all the world. Instead of returning the friendship the Europeans left have demonized the nation that made their survival possible, that rebuild Europe after WWII and protected it for 40 years.

You illustrate this perfectly. My point was to show that ODA is only a very small fraction of total US aid, 19 billion vs. 60+. The private transfers are not included, such as the scholarships. But this was missed by you.
2.
>>

I am sorry but this is just laughable. Life expectancy (the US has almost exactly the same as the EU by the way) has almost nothing to do with health care spending empirically, which is about *health quality* and comfort.

Americans spend the most and have the best health care. This is why Canadians go to the US and not vice versa. The quality is seen in such measures as % probability to recover from a disease or amount of service given to patients. There are no lines in the US, there are massive lines in most of Europe.

That they have the exact same life expectancy than EU means nothing, Porto Rico and Denmark have the *exact* same life expectancy, does this prove Porto Rico has equally good health care?!? Japan spends 7.5% of GDP on Health Care, Germany 11%. Japanese live much longer. Since Japans has private health care, does this “prove” Germany should copy Japan?

In Sweden most people have to wait several weeks to meet a doctor (sometimes months) and several months to get a non-life threatening operation (sometimes years!). I will write a long post about this subject some day, it is one of the most spear leftwing myths.

I do find it funny that you bring up this subject that I wrote nothing about. Couldn’t find enough errors to complain about in the real text? ;)

3. Defence

Nations such as South Korea, Taiwan today and for a very long time all western Europe would not have survived without American Military protecting them.

In addition, the threat of the US military presence reduces the likelihood of warfare between states all over the world. Since the US is so strong regional powers do not bully each other as much, they know they would never get away with outright invasion and annexation. The world may seem very safe and thus the US military unnecessary, but this is because it is there.

>>

Which problem did they solve with “other means”? Bosnia? Kosovo? Did our “other ways” defeat Hitler or the Soviet Union? Why does Europe and Japan today 140.000 American Armed to their teeth If they have “other ways” that work as well?

Give me a break. Europe doesn’t take responsibility for the world, America does. You can always argue that this benefits the US, and I would agree. Doesn’t mean it doesn’t benefit the world.

Also social problems have nothing to do with Bin-Laden, who never talks about social problem. You socialists are just projecting your own opinions onto Bin-Laden.

I agree with you in one way. The best recruiting ground for Bin-Laden is right now the Muslims slums in Europe. These are the social problems the Europeans welfare state has created, read my last link. Oddly Muslims in the US are doing fantastic compared to Europe…

Impressive collection of statistics, and impressive responses to nitwit comments, Tino. You've made my day. Thanks!

Comment by Splashman at July 6, 2005 05:57 PM | Permalink

Dear Tino. Thanks for the kind words. There is a growing frustration by much of America with the lack of appreciation received from the rest of the "civilized" world. Envy counts for much of it. It is always nice to hear some kind words.

Two comments back to Critical.

America is a much safer place that you would imagine but it’s large cities suffer from much that ails the rest of the world’s large cities. Which would you say is safer, New York or Paris? New York may have more murders but Paris has large gangs that roam much of the city making it “off-limits” for visitors and residents alike. Also, America is a very large place. Much of the country you can still leave your house to go to work or shopping and not have to lock your doors. Can the same be said in Germany, Italy, France or Switzerland? I know for a fact that they cannot. (And for full disclosure, I live in San Diego, a large city in California and I cannot leave my home without locking the doors either. But residents in Julian, just 50 miles from my house, can and routinely do not lock their doors as they do not need to.)

America spends 48% of defense by the Government spends 25% of the worldwide aid budget. The 15 EU countries combined spent 55% of the budget and their $49.2 billion in aid was less than the $60 billion spent by private individuals. That’s a total of $79 billion in aid between public and private spending. How does the EU stand with that standard?

Thank you everyone, even the critics, for the intress.

Just a short note: 60+ billion is the SUM of Goverment and Private aid.

Thank you very much Tino!!! It's nice to see others around the planet that understand us!

Excellent blog my friend, outstanding!

Tino: great post. I just wanted to respond to Critical's question about whether Americans should be proud that our defence spending is so high, while our aid is so low (though it's not).

Let me tell you what we buy with defence spending and what the world receives by having such a benevolent benefactor bestriding the globe. From TheScotsman.com:
"A study from the Congressional Research Service (CRS) in Washington appears to confirm the overall picture of the planet creeping towards a more peaceful existence, with the value of worldwide arms sales falling in 2003 for the third year in a row.

The CRS report found the value of global weapons transfer agreements last year was £14.3 billion - a sharp decline from 2000, when it stood at £22.8 billion.

Conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, and last week’s school siege by Chechen separatists in Beslan, have kept war in the headlines, but the reports from SIPRI and the Canadian peace group Project Ploughshares show that, although the number of conflicts peaked in the 1990s when the collapse of the Soviet Union fuelled nationalist and separatist battles, the amount of bloodshed is on the decline.

The Stockholm institute details 19 major violent conflicts in 2003 - down from 33 in 1991 - in a report to be released later this month. It defines a continuing armed conflict as one which claims 1,000 or more battle-related deaths in a year.

Project Ploughshares, which defines an armed conflict as one that results in 1,000 or more deaths cumulatively, found 36 conflicts last year - down from a peak of 44 in 1995.

A further report from the Human Security Centre at the University of British Columbia in Canada includes a conservative estimate that 15,000 people were killed in war in 2002, rising to 20,000 last year due to the conflict in Iraq.

These estimates are a far cry from the 1990s, when annual war deaths ranged from 40,000 to 100,000, inflated by major conflicts in Zaire and southern Sudan, and they come nowhere near the post-Second World War peak of 700,000 in 1951."

Now, if Critical is still reading, I would ask him (her?) to explain these figures. Aid is all well and good, but to use food and developmental assistance you have to be living, first. That is what we do, or at least try to do. As Tino points out, regional war has become almost anachronistic, and it is not because human nature has changed. It is because American power watches from above, and even the most evil dictators know the lines they should never cross.

America is the de facto global constabulary. You would think that the enormous amount of expenditure this demands, in monies and human resources, would buy America a little protection from the blowhards around the world charging "greed" and "stinginess". Everything they take for granted in life is brought to them courtesy of American largess. We protect sea lanes, ensure territorial integrity, support currencies, and provide backbone to UN resolutions. We put our own cities and people on the line for fifty frickin' years to protect countries we had recently fought. Lately, we have sacrificed our country's best and brightest young men and women to help foreigners find their own voice and their own way. 50 million of them. Dissidents in dictatorships all around the world know who stands with them, and who exerts real power to secure their release. That is real aid.

To many Americans it would be very satisfying to simply pull up our bases and bring home our ships, create a Fortress America (with Canada and Mexico, unfortunately) and let the rest of the world fend for itself or go straight to hell. It is the much-derided idealism of us other Americans that prevents this from happening, and our critics should understand this.

So, when countries and people that have ridden American generosity for decades turn around and demand that it is America that needs to give more, care more, and be less stingy; well, that really, really pisses me off. Then I go down to the 100,000 square foot supermarket, pick one of the fifty different brands of Vodka, go through the automated checkout, return to my McMansion to fix myself a drink and think: thank God for America, and thank God for her Strength.

This site is right on. More pro American facts:

More people immigrate to the US every year than to all other nations combined. Humanity has voted with their feet.

The US defense budget should be much more regarded as an aid project to the world. For example, most global tsunami aid has been completed wasted-- sitting in Indoensian ports without transport. American military power projection provided the most efficient and effective delivery of aid.

US miitary aid and power projection provides advanced medical around the world to our armed forces and the domestic populations of those countries including Iraq.

US military power projection has restored thousands of hospitals and schools in Iraq. US military power projection builds generator stations and power grids.

It is rather evident that little of our national defense goes to defending our borders. Most of it benefits other nations. South Korea is a powerful example. South Koreans would be experiencing mass starvation comparable to North Korea without US force at the DMZ.

The list could go on infinitely.

>>It is very sad that people like you are so upset when you read about the achivements of America. Very petty.

Laughing... I didn't say even one bad word about the achievements:
1. First in Knowledge
2. First in Economics

I totally agree, that US has a great advance in those 2 issues (R&D, economics). But are the great expenditures in military an achievement? Then, I would say, the most advanced country in the world is Northen Korea, because they are spending a much higher % of their GDP to military. But no one thinks Northen Korea is advanced, do they? Laughing again...

Although, the Economics boost is partly achieved with high energy waste.

Compare USA and for example Germany's (I am not from Germany, but it's one of the biggest countries in Europe, so it's appropriate for comparing) facts (data collected by United Nations):
http://www.unece.org/stats/trend/usa.pdf
http://www.unece.org/stats/trend/deu.pdf

CO2 emissions per capita:
USA 1995: 19, 2000: 22
Germany 1995: 10.6, 2000: 10.1

Basically, every US citizen is ruining the ecological balance more than twice as much as Europeans. And as you see, things are going worse in US (negative trend).

kg oil equivalent per $1000 GDP:
USA 2000: 152
Germany 2000: 114

So, if you give 10 tons of oil to an American and 10 tons of oil to a German, the German manages to make almost 1.5 as much money and products out of it. As you all know, oil is limited resource... So, what about the high R&D level? The R&D should focus more on nature friendly technologies.

>> Why should the Western World /---/ tolerate Sub-Saharan African men raping prepubescent girls as a 'cure' for AIDS?

And what is US doing about this? How much money is spent on African issues and how much in Iraq? Oh, yeah... I forgot, there is no crude oil in Africa, so there is no point spending much money on it. Do you believe that US went to Iraq because US wanted to help Iraq's people? I can confirm you, that there are many places in Africa, where the situation is much worse (I mean civil wars). US went to Iraq only because of self defence (but hey, there were no mass destruction weapons found in Iraq, but this was the alibi for war!?) and oil.

What do you say about US soldiers raping women in Iraq, mistreatment of prisoners in Iraq. What about Guantanamo prison?? Why does US send war prisoners to Cuba? Because, there are no US laws and that means you can torture these guys. Is this the freedom and justice US is always talking about? That a man can only be found guilty in court rooms?

And one more thing... I hate the security measurements that were applied after 9/11. Every time I want to fly with an airplain, the custom workers are touching me like some [deleted].

I will repeat myself... The only thing I wanted to say with my very first comment was this: there is no reason to be proud of high military expenses.

Fellows, most of you have probably misunderstood me, I have nothing(!) against you and US. I think there are a lot of great people in US and many beautiful places. I am just realist and pragmatical about US government.

The backlash is finally on it's way. For way too long the leftist of the world, and in the US, have been using the United States as a punching bag, blaming her for every evil and ill of the world.
The question is why the left has been on this misinformation campaign and when did it start? After WWII the US was considered the savior for many in the world. What changed that?
A book written in 1963 sheds light on why many in the world view the US differently today then they did after WWII.
During the cold war the Soviets sent out people to infiltrate every major country of the world, including the US.

[From "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen]

CURRENT COMMUNIST GOALS

1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.

2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.

3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.

4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.

5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.

6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.

7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.

8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev's promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.

9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.

10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.

11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)

12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.

13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.

14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.

15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.

16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.

17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

18. Gain control of all student newspapers.

19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.

20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.

21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.

22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms."

23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art."

24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.

25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.

26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."

27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a "religious crutch."

28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."

29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.

30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."

31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the "big picture." Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.

32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.

33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.

34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.

35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.

36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.

37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.

38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].

39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.

40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.

41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.

42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use ["]united force["] to solve economic, political or social problems.

43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.

44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.

45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction over nations and individuals alike.

As one can see from this excerpt from the Naked Communist most of the goals of the Soviets were achieved save the last one - which Bush is firmly against and which Kerry, a stealth Communist, endorsed.
Though the Naked Communist was published decades ago it helps to explain why the left questions and perceives any high asperation and intention of the US as having an ulterior motive. Unfortunately for the Soviets their own form of government didn't last but their indoctrination of the world's citizens did in leftist thought and theology which is still present and thriving today.
Ronald Reagan, a staunch Democrat for most of his life, changed to a Republican later in life. When asked why he left the party he replied, "I didn't leave the Democratic party, the party left me." The Soviets were very effective in capturing the Democratic party and their ideological hold is still apparent within the party to this day. Unfortunately, this is also true of the media, social agencies, and the educational systems throughout much of the western world. But, the tide is turning. People, not only in the US, but throughout the world, are becoming sick of the 'blame America first' chant. They see the lies and unfairness of the accusations and can clearly see the ulterior motive of the left which is not to unite the world but to destablilze it. Though the backlash is just beginning it looks like the left of the world is likely to go the way of the Soviets.

Critical you are extremely misinformed about many issues:

1. “Why does US send war prisoners to Cuba? Because, there are no US laws and that means you can torture these guys.”

The US Supreme Court has already decided that US laws apply to the Guantanamo base. If you invested more time learning and less time hating you might have known this, and not embarrassed yourself.

Furthermore Guantanomo is a place to hold combatants, and has nothing to do with civilian justice. In Europe there seem to be no one left who understands this simple fact. Did the US need give-house warrants from judges when they bombed German buildings? Did they have lawyers for the millions of German war prisoners they took? Was anyone stupid enough to demand they did? GITMO is completely according to international law that regulates warfare.

At any case the US has made clear that IF they have criminal charges they will be provided with lawyers.

2. There is absolutely NO TURTURE at Guantnonom. What we have are accusations based on perverting the word torture to apply to any coercive measured to prisoners. Playing rap music, having women without bras or putting prisoners in handcuffs is not torture. Do not be so gullible.

3. “Africa has no oil”

Africa has a lot of oil. Even before the war Africa produced more than 10% of world oil, compared to 3% for Iraq. Africa has some 80 billion barrels of oil in proven reserves, and is estimated to have at least as much in unproven. (Not that it matter)

I will no go into a lengthy debate about this, because I find it boring. But the US did NOT invade Iraq for oil. If you think they did explain why. They didn’t take it (and even if they had the value of Iraq oil is half the original estimates for the costs of the war!!!!). And please don’t say they wanted “control” because this is just ignorance. Control has no meaning, Iraq already sold as much oil as they could. Control has no meaning with oil,

“Then, I would say, the most advanced country in the world is Northen Korea, because they are spending a much higher % of their GDP to military.”

Again you missed the point. It’s not input, but output. The US spends a small share, but thanks to capitalism this small share is enough to dwarf socialists who spend 30% of GDP.

“Although, the Economics boost is partly achieved with high energy waste.”

Again this is wrong, the US PAYS for the oil it uses, there is no “waste”. CO2 emissions are meaningless, it is just part of an unscientific global hysteria. I will write more on this later, but just to make three two quick points:

Even the worst-case scenarios the UN has produced with all the scare tactics the costs they estimate for global warming are only a small % of GDP. For example people are scared of sea levels rising, but the WORST CASE scenario is a 90 cm rise, which means almost nothing.

Bush said, “surface temperatures are rising”. Yes, but the did not point out that atmosphere and sea temperatures are not, that most of the rise was before 1950(!) and that the rise is much smaller than the UN climate panel expected.

There is nothing that suggests that global warming is inherently bad. This is just a ridicules assumption they have made with no analyses or proof.

“What do you say about US soldiers raping women in Iraq!

This is a conspiracy theory speared by Islamism using internet porn pictures. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38464

(of course in country of 300. million there will be rapes and murders, but should I hate Italy because Italian immigrants have raped Swedish women? Should you hate us if a Swedish criminal rape an Italian? Makes no sense.)

Lastly Critical I do not mind disagreement criticism, but please do not use such unaccepted language that is hurtful against a group.

You the man Tino. Thanks for the Blog! I got here from Tim Blair.

Those of us who live in America, and have seen other countries, know that you are correct. islam fears America... China is busy trying to buy or STEAL American know how... others criticize becasue they are afraid... Funny, we, as a people, do not go to you and seek to affect your lives unless you, like al quaeda, irritate us first..... Those of us who have not been brain washed by the Democrat Party and it Socialist agenda understand that today's WAR is not just a War on terror but also includes a HUGE component of a war based on the SOCIALIST (*do as we say and Mother Government will care for you*) mentality versus the Independent (*God gave me the strength and resolve to take care of mine and myself and I resolve to do it IN SPITE OF GOVERNMENT*) Mindset. The Socialist (in Anerica mis-labeled as "Democratic Party") Agenda is on the Wane in America... THANK GOD!

I always wondered what will happen to Europe's much vaunted health care system and welfare state if US decides to stop defending these countries! Let's say Europe is forced to spend double their current budget on defense. What would be the impact?

To me it looks like US is subsidizing Europe's socialism!

Comment by ashish at July 18, 2005 02:57 PM | Permalink

Tino, Thanks for the post. ashish, Europe defend itself?
Mandy, good stuff. Critical, let me guess.....you went to public school, your parents and teachers were all democrats.....cloise?