First, I have to make a correction, the bill to outlaw partial birth abortion has been approved and is now awaiting the approval of the President.

Today Sam, my co-worker, and I went down to Chino to a seminar on pump motors. After about fifteen minutes of technical difficulties between the computer and the projector, the guy presenting, John, finally started. Amazingly, it was the same presentation we already sat through a few days ago. There happened to be four people there in the room and I think Sam and I both felt sorry for him, so we stuck around. One guy ended up leaving. We sat there until some people started coming in saying that his time was up and that they needed the room for their meeting. Sam and I stayed till he was done, while people started congregating by the door talking and creating an awkward pressure to hurry it up for John. I felt bad for him. After the presentation was done and we walked out I joked that he probably thought we were groupies following him from presentation to presentation. Truth is, we thought it was going to be different. Oh well. Funny stuff.

Let's quickly talk on Iraq. The latest controversy deals with the billions needed to continue rebuilding in Iraq.

The argument follows like this: Sure, Iraq is going to require a very substantial amount of funds, but why just give it to them? We need to give it to them in the form of loans. And the other side: Iraq is in great need of funds for rebuilding and since it's a new country, why give them anything other than a clean slate. Besides, what kind of an example would we be if we do as we plan to do and wipe all debts to other countries that were pre-existent, but then instate our own obligation that Iraq pay us back.

Doesn't that seem hypocritical to give money with strings attached, but refuse to acknowledge the prior debts and obligations that existed before the war? I think that a new country, especially Iraq, needs a clean slate to start with. They will absolutely prove to be a good investment. Their oil sales will most likely favor us, which will bring our gas prices down, thereby helping the everyday man and woman with their travel expesnses, which puts more money in their pockets in turn helping the overall economy, and stimulating a larger tax influx. Ultimately, instating loans would strain their economic stability. They're like a small child, just learning to walk, why would we want to place a billion pound weight on their shoulders? Let us do what needs to be done without so many obstacles. The argument for loans seems to have some basis, but it's just a new way to bring criticism on the president yet again. If we do make it loans, other countries will have a field day with Bush, as will the Democrats that pushed for the loan path in the first place. They'll simply lay blame on Bush, back away, and allow the biased media to report what they will. The country of Iraq is progressing speedily and putting such a damper on them from the very out set is simply counter productive, especially when we can spare the money. It wouldn't hurt us, you have my word.


Both sides