Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Tight budget may force Pentagon to cut forces: general
Reuters ^ | 9 Feb 13 | David Alexander

Posted on 02/09/2013 4:46:32 PM PST by SkyPilot

The Pentagon will have to cut the size of U.S. military forces for the second time in as many years if across-the-board spending reductions of $470 billion over 10 years take effect March 1, the top U.S. military officer said on Saturday.

General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said about a third of the cuts would have to come from forces, with the remaining two-thirds taken from spending on modernization, compensation and readiness.

He noted that the Army had begun to shrink last year toward 490,000 from a high of 570,000, a result of efforts to trim $487 billion over 10 years as required by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

The Budget Control Act also envisioned the additional across-the-board cuts under a process known as sequestration. If those cuts go into effect, "the Army will have to come down again," Dempsey said.

Speaking to reporters traveling with him to Afghanistan, Dempsey said two recent high-profile examples of belt-tightening were attempts by the Pentagon to adapt to the current challenging budget climate and had nothing to do with sequestration.

The Pentagon said last week it would seek a smaller-than-expected pay increase of 1 percent for military personnel in the 2014 fiscal year budget. Pay increases have generally been pegged to an employment cost index and had been expected to rise 1.7 percent.

"That action is being taken to help us absorb the $487 billion in the Budget Control Act. It has nothing to do with sequestration," Dempsey said.

A defense official said the lower pay increase would save the department about $470 million during the 2014 fiscal year. The savings would amount to $3 billion over five years because future increases would be based on the lower 2014 raise.

(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: budget; cuts; military; sequestration
Dempsey said the decision this week to delay deployment of the USS Harry Truman aircraft carrier strike group to the Middle East was to adjust to funding for the 2013 fiscal year.

We can't fund carrier strike groups, but Republicans and Democrats in Congress fully funded (for another year) extending unemployment benefits (yet again) to the tune of Billions of Dollars.

Entitlements are exempt from sequestration, and are 62% of the budget, yet we rape the military, and even the Republicans are cheering this time.

The DoD is under a triple curse: the previous Obama cuts of $487 Billion, the Continuting Resolution, and now the looming $600+ Billion in Sequestration cuts.

"What we've got to make clear to the Congress next week (is) that it's not just about sequestration. We're trying to absorb the $487 billion Budget Control Act, we're trying to absorb the challenges that were imposed on us by the continuing resolution and we're anticipating absorbing sequestration," Dempsey said.

Good thing everybody who wants one is getting "their" check though.


1 posted on 02/09/2013 4:46:40 PM PST by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

Obama targets military it is all BS.


2 posted on 02/09/2013 4:49:15 PM PST by boomop1 (term limits will only save this country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

Sort of hard to believe we can afford to give a bunch of F-16s to a country controlled by terrorists.


3 posted on 02/09/2013 4:49:25 PM PST by yarddog (One shot one miss.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

Not to worry. The Gays and the Women will be safe from these cuts.


4 posted on 02/09/2013 4:55:19 PM PST by rbg81
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

Pharaoh Obumer must trying to get that Army down to what was authorized in the 1930’s; 127,000.


5 posted on 02/09/2013 4:57:39 PM PST by SandRat (Duty - Honor - Country! What else needs said?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot
We can't fund carrier strike groups, but Republicans and Democrats in Congress fully funded (for another year) extending unemployment benefits (yet again) to the tune of Billions of Dollars.

When threatened with budget cuts, the heads of an organization present the more drastic alternatives to cutting actual waste.

Every organization wastes money. When I was in the corporate world I saw tremendous waste. When I was in the military I saw even more. The individual men and women in the military deserve our greatest respect. But as an organization, the military is another government agency subject to the same tendencies to bloated bureaucracy and fiscal negligence as any other.

6 posted on 02/09/2013 5:00:00 PM PST by TexasKamaAina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

I can name a few generals we can get rid of.


7 posted on 02/09/2013 5:01:21 PM PST by rfreedom4u (I have a copy of the Constitution! And I'm not afraid to use it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

Congress is too stupid to figure out how to write their own budget for five years, but smart enough to tell the Military what their budget will be.

Amazing...


8 posted on 02/09/2013 5:04:15 PM PST by American in Israel (A wise man's heart directs him to the right, but the foolish mans heart directs him toward the left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot
For the amount of debt/liabilities the US has/skin in the global game, they better fund a powerful military, if default happens, its every nation for themselves. Interesting times, yet we gut the military in favor for an entitlement class, lol.
9 posted on 02/09/2013 5:05:28 PM PST by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rollo tomasi

Interesting times, yet we gut the military in favor for an entitlement class, lol.


There’s a few reasons for that:
1. The Military (still) leans right
2. There are a lot more Welfare state clients than Military—its just a bigger voting block
3. The Left will always believe the Military is bad. Until they start rounding up and executing conservatives, that is.


10 posted on 02/09/2013 5:08:27 PM PST by rbg81
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: TexasKamaAina
Yet the military are the only "bloated" bureaucracy on the chopping block that produces results, you know your priorities, so does the GOP leadership, lol.
11 posted on 02/09/2013 5:09:34 PM PST by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: rollo tomasi

Obama called for these cuts. He is going to win wars with his drones.


12 posted on 02/09/2013 5:09:53 PM PST by abclily
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: rbg81

Yes we all know that, apparently the GOP leadership does not give a hoot which is really interesting.


13 posted on 02/09/2013 5:11:28 PM PST by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: boomop1; SkyPilot

With all the recent ammo sales, and other diverse goings on, I think it is a good possibility that this administration has/is creating a black citizen suppression army. The standing army will not fight citizens within the country’s boundaries.

That will be Obama’s top priority if he has his way. Our regular army serves no purpose to Obama.


14 posted on 02/09/2013 5:12:44 PM PST by ImJustAnotherOkie (zerogottago)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: abclily
GOP in 2011/12 were in favor of this “Super committee” or military cuts ruse, yet you blame Obama 100% for this, hmmm.
15 posted on 02/09/2013 5:15:25 PM PST by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: rollo tomasi

Obama’s sequester bluff has backfired on him.


16 posted on 02/09/2013 5:20:33 PM PST by abclily
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

Obama is going to cut the military budget no matter what sequestration does. It’s better to let sequestration go on and thus give the Republicans more leverage, than give in now, and have the military cut anyway.


17 posted on 02/09/2013 5:21:31 PM PST by norwaypinesavage (Galileo: In science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of one individual)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot
this all phony

sequester only cuts the increases - what is being spent today is not affected.

this, IMO, all aimed at manipulating the American mind and put pressure on our weak kneed politicians.

18 posted on 02/09/2013 5:26:57 PM PST by elpadre (AfganistaMr Obama said the goal was to "disrupt, dismantle and defeat al-hereQaeda" and its allies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: norwaypinesavage
No, contrary to FR unpopular belief, Obama cares about some mythological legacy and the 2014 Congressional elections. If the O has another negative quarter brought on by military cuts, that means (Technically) a recession. In 2011, the Boehner had the Dems by the balls and somehow let them off the hook (Some freepers said he was playing an awesome game of chess). Romney lost, so went Boehner’s chess game.
19 posted on 02/09/2013 5:27:27 PM PST by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

Look at the medals that Dempsey is wearing. The guy has been driving a desk and anal smooching his whole career. That’s why he is in the top job to help ruin the military.


20 posted on 02/09/2013 5:30:36 PM PST by RetiredTexasVet (The Progressive mind...an arid ethical and moral wasteland!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot
we rape the military

The budget is being cut about 10%.

21 posted on 02/09/2013 5:32:37 PM PST by palmer (Obama = Carter + affirmative action)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elpadre
Umm the cuts are real effective if you can actual see what has already been internally lacerated, so you have no idea wtf are you talking about; readiness/viable projects have been compromised yet you clap with insolent approval.
22 posted on 02/09/2013 5:34:48 PM PST by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: palmer

...and missions are being expanded thus draining resources that hamper future readiness/tech/foundation. Wrong area to cut with all the wet work/COIN being asked to be perform.


23 posted on 02/09/2013 5:37:25 PM PST by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: rollo tomasi

Let’s see. . .Decrease in military spending . . .increase in illegal immigration benefits Goodbye America as we “knew” it


24 posted on 02/09/2013 5:41:22 PM PST by Maudeen (Proverbs 3:5-6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

If they still have mandatory muslim sensitivity training after these cuts take effect, then it wasn’t enough.


25 posted on 02/09/2013 5:43:18 PM PST by SpaceBar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Freepers, your Contributions make every difference!
Please keep ‘em coming! Thank you all very much!

26 posted on 02/09/2013 5:53:43 PM PST by RedMDer (Support Free Republic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

Well how about we pull our forces out of Germany,Japan, Britain,etc. and keep that money spent where we need it. The socialists in those countries lambast us and our soldiers and demand we leave until they realize how many billions of dollars we spend propping up their economies. I say let them spend their own damn money defending themselves and we can use some of the money basing those men here and prop up our own economy.


27 posted on 02/09/2013 6:24:36 PM PST by Mastador1 (I'll take a bad dog over a good politician any day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rbg81

“The Gays and the Women will be safe from these cuts.”

I thought women worked cheaper anyway? Seems we could make cuts in their salaries as liberals claim they don’t get paid what men get paid anyway.


28 posted on 02/09/2013 6:25:20 PM PST by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: elpadre
this all phony sequester only cuts the increases - what is being spent today is not affected.

Did you even read the article? Have you done any news research on this?

Not only is the military dealing with a ~$45 Billion per year cut that started in 2011, they are dealing with decreased funding due to the Continuing Resolution. Sequestration is the final knife.

Because the military cannot touch military pay during the first year, all of the cuts this year have to come from Operations and Maintenance, the life blood of operations.

I hope America enjoys their entitlement checks, while men and women who have served this nation through hardship, loneliness, deployments, and sacrifice are under-minded.

29 posted on 02/09/2013 6:29:32 PM PST by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Mastador1
Well how about we pull our forces out of Germany,Japan, Britain,etc. and keep that money spent where we need it.

I hear that repeated over, and over, and over, and over, and over again on Free Republic.

It is another sign of colossal ignorance about how the military operates.

The US has a global mission because we have a global interest. Our political and economic power is directly tied to our military.

When the US responds and operates overseas, that requires overseas bases. Period.

In Europe, Rota NAS Spain, Sigonella NAS Italy, RAF Mildenhall England, and Ramstein Air Base Germany are major logistical and operation hubs. They are also on the now small short list of the military's few overseas enroute bases that are left. The US used to have access to scores of air, land, and naval bases all over the globe. Now, there a just a few. When the next crisis happens in the Middle East (and it will), or there is another terrorist attack on US soil (and there will be), or innocents are being slaughtered as in Rwanda or Bosnia, our politicos demand the of US military: "Do something now!"

You don't get the job done without overseas bases.

30 posted on 02/09/2013 6:37:43 PM PST by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Maudeen
Let’s see. . .Decrease in military spending . . .increase in illegal immigration benefits Goodbye America as we “knew” it

Pretty much. It sure looks that way as of right now.

I like your tag line.

31 posted on 02/09/2013 6:40:14 PM PST by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

I hear ya, it’s just the anger boiling over from every time the Dems get in office and immediately do their best to slice up our military. But hey Obama says we don’t need the military so much, he can just use drones.


32 posted on 02/09/2013 6:46:38 PM PST by Mastador1 (I'll take a bad dog over a good politician any day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: rollo tomasi
GOP in 2011/12 were in favor of this “Super committee” or military cuts ruse, yet you blame Obama 100% for this, hmmm.

Congress hates it when people call it that, they preferred the "Joint Resolution Committee." I am not joking. I had a Congressman correct me.

I cannot, for the life of me, understand what the heck Boehner, Ryan, and Cantor were thinking when they not only agreed to this garbage, but that they agreed to let the military be punished with 50% of the cuts. Did they really (really?) believe that a committee with a bunch of Democrats on it (that the party got to pick) would enact reasonable Entitlement reform?

Maybe it would have succeeded if Max Baucus was promised a fifth and a hooker, Patty Murry was given a brain transplant, John Kerry was told there was a rich widow included in the deal, and James Clyburn was promised another cash kickback. Barring that, it was a disaster. The Democrats literally walked out, but not before telling the Republicans that they would cut Entitlements over their dead bodies.

So now, the military gets punished.

33 posted on 02/09/2013 6:49:30 PM PST by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: TexasKamaAina

How about cutting out a few generals? The military has become a slush fund for defense contractors and generals and other high ranking officers who become lobbyists and TV talking heads. They never met a new, expensive weapons system, plane, or ship that they didn’t love!

The military has become so politicized that I wonder how it operates at all. Billions wasted and still the troops are underpaid and don’t have the equipment they need.


34 posted on 02/09/2013 6:53:38 PM PST by Pining_4_TX (All those who were appointed to eternal life believed. Acts 13:48)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ImJustAnotherOkie

“I think it is a good possibility that this administration has/is creating a black citizen suppression army.”

If you’re inferring that black ghetto kids with no training, no high school diplomas and no idea how to aim a glock are about to march across America and subdue 70 million armed Americans, you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about.

Logistically, they first need to break out of their black ghettos and cross through the Mexican barrios that surround them. That in itself will cost the blacks a million casualties.


35 posted on 02/09/2013 8:02:08 PM PST by sergeantdave (The FBI has declared war on the Marine Corps)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: TexasKamaAina

love your name...must have been in Hawaii once...LOL. As to your post - NAIL ON THE HEAD!!


36 posted on 02/09/2013 8:06:14 PM PST by q_an_a (the more laws the less justice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

Who cares if the bloated military budget is cut? My city and state were invaded by a bunch of illegal aliens and the Defense Department did NOTHING! I know Freepers want a massive military budget....but, the invasion was and is from Mexico... Now the threat and rot is from within... Cutting a TINY amount from the military budge is hardly going to affect our national defense. Nobody did anything while we were invaded during the 80’s, 90’s and 2000’s...so let’s all quit whining about these “cuts”!


37 posted on 02/09/2013 8:27:01 PM PST by There You Go Again
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: There You Go Again
The ineptitude and treason of Bath House Barry's embrace of illegal immigration does not justify fiscal war against a Constitutional enterprise (as Defense is). The US military answers any call its poltical leadership gives it.

I can kick my diabetic, old dog this morning because I am upset with illegal immigration. It would have the same effect (and be just as moral) as punishing our men and women in uniform because local law enforcement, ICE, and the Border Patrol are not empowered or are not acting within the law.

38 posted on 02/10/2013 3:10:56 AM PST by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: palmer
For the life of me, I don't understand why people comment on threads without even bothering to click the links and read the articles.

If you did read the article, you obviously are unable to grasp the facts.

The Sequestration cuts are the final blow. The 10% is the amount of the cut required by the Budget Control Act of 2011, and Obama exempted military pay for the first year (he said this during the campaign last year to deflect criticism). Therefore, ALL of the cuts have to be taken out of the DoD's Operations and Maintenance lines. That cut will be ~25% or even more (no one know yet how bad). And ALL of that has to be cut between March and September.

Compounding the crisis for the DoD, Obama began cutting the military much earlier. There were almost half a billion dollars in cuts (spread out over ten years) that he pushed for and implemented. Secretary Gates started them. Thousand of jobs were lost. Modernization was canceled. This all began 2 years ago.

Making this even worse for the military is the fact that the Senate and Obama never passed a budget (the House did, but that became moot). The military has been operating under a Continuing Resolution for almost 2 years now, with funding frozen at previous levels and with no ability to even forecast new budgets for itself.

And now comes the knife across the throat to our readiness and capability: Sequestration.

Here is just one article that lays out some additional facts for you (if you take time to read it this time):

Sequestration threatens the country's ability to allow those in uniform to do their jobs. To understand what it means in real terms, look at the Air Force. Over the past decade, the service has been hit with numerous cuts and now the 2013 budget risks pushing airmen over the brink. There comes a point when people simply cannot do more with less. Unless Congress passes a sustainable and viable alternative to the Budget Control Act, challenges arising in the Air Force will be mirrored throughout the Army, Navy and Marine Corps -- curtailing the number of key policy options upon which our nation's leaders depend.

Read this is well - it demonstrates the myopia of your statement:

Army: 78% Of Combat Brigades Will Skip Training Due To Sequester, CR

This nation will pay a price for this epic fiscal malpractice vis-à-vis our military. Perhaps that will be part of God's judgment of our nation, because I see that coming.

39 posted on 02/10/2013 3:31:18 AM PST by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot
Sorry to say, you are the one with myopia. I know enough about the defense industry to know there needs to be cuts. I have read many papers with both sides of the argument about the systems that are not needed. I would cut what my employer does because it is generally not practical. I would slash staff at large providers I have worked with, tons of useless middle level staff. I have worked with smaller providers, some are not too bad but none were vital. Johns Hopkins / APL is a joke. Mitre is a joke as well. I have not worked for any of these players but evaluated them objectively.

For training I have heard enough about it that I know it has too much talking and not enough doing. As for deployment, it is obvious to everyone that we need to cut in Europe. On the intel side, we need to end cold war intelligence. It was why we failed on 9/11 but it was not even effective against cold war enemies. Too much early generation (symmetric) warfare thinking. Too many GIGO computer systems that literally don't work.

Here's a CATO proposal: http://www.comw.org/pda/fulltext/120515DefSense.pdf and some rebuttal: http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2012/12/rebuttal-of-catospdas-defense-sense-defense-cuts-proposals/ I had a really good paper on a fundamental restructuring of dod and intelligence, but I can't find it ATTM. It is strategic thinking that will sustain America's strength with our (still) very large budget, not doing the same things and trying to trim those.

40 posted on 02/10/2013 5:38:51 AM PST by palmer (Obama = Carter + affirmative action)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: sergeantdave

Black meaning ‘off the books’.


41 posted on 02/10/2013 7:00:13 AM PST by ImJustAnotherOkie (zerogottago)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: sergeantdave
If you’re inferring that black ghetto kids with no training, no high school diplomas and no idea how to aim a glock are about to march across America and subdue 70 million armed Americans, you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about.

They will have training and logistical support.

Socialist governments have a long history of sponsoring violent (but pro-government) civilian militia organizations in order to suppress domestic opposition.

Watch for "community outreach" and "neighborhood watch" programs which provide training to disadvantaged minority youth groups. When they start displaying visible security forces, you will know that the next episode of the game is ready to start.

Of course "Brown shirt" forces have limited capabilties and are notoriously unreliable. In later phases of power consoliation the "Brown shirts" generally must be liquidated. But for intimidating unarmed civilians, they are pretty effective.

Moreover the regular police forces will initially be directed to ignore pro-government militias or even to protect them from resistance and retaliation. It is that direction which will cause the government security forces to self-destruct.

The fact that a militia program ulitmately cannot work doesn't mean "they" won't try it. The elites firmly believe that they can have anything they want if they push hard enough.

42 posted on 02/10/2013 9:06:50 AM PST by flamberge (What next?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: flamberge

“Socialist governments have a long history of sponsoring violent (but pro-government) civilian militia organizations in order to suppress domestic opposition.”

Comparing American socialists with German fascists is futile. An active and organized group needs to believe in something other than jumbo bags of potato chips, Nike shoes and crack.

You can’t organize an armed group based on shopping for stuff. A flash mob is the antithesis of a trained military platoon.


43 posted on 02/10/2013 12:20:24 PM PST by sergeantdave (The FBI has declared war on the Marine Corps)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: sergeantdave
You can’t organize an armed group based on shopping for stuff.

We have seen dozens of examples in the last two years where this has been done.

Flash mobs can be organized quickly in an angry population and it only requires one or two participants to carry firearms. This emboldens the rest of the mob.

To be sure, this is not a trained military platoon. It cannot stand up to organized resistance. It does not need to do so to be effective. The goal is terrorizing unarmed neighbors into submission.

A small cadre of minimally trained young men with light arms - or even clubs- can do that.

A more apt comparison is with South American facists in Argentina, Venezuela, and Bolivia. This is exactly how they work today.

We have had over 40 years of grievance-mongering politicians telling various minority groups that all their troubles have been caused by "the man". That gives violent young men something to believe in other than "jumbo bags of potato chips, Nike shoes, and crack".

It is enough to make a start and we have elites who are willing to try it. (Remember the NBPP in Philidelphia?) The fact that it cannot work in the long run is unlikely to prevent an attempt in the short run.

44 posted on 02/11/2013 8:29:20 AM PST by flamberge (What next?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson