YOUR GOVERNMENT AT WORK

[Soldier4Christ]

Dear Heavenly Father, we pray that the people of this nation wake up, realize what they've done, ask You for forgiveness, and pray that You give us strength, conviction, courage, and guidance to start making things RIGHT WITH YOU! LORD, help us all in the precious name of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour Forever! Amen.

Amen.

[Soldier4Christ]

CO2 - THE BREATH OF LIFE

By Phil Brennan

In his celebrated novel "1984" George Orwell wrote about Emmanuel Goldstein - a despicable - and fictional - enemy of the people created by the state to justify the perpetual war against an imaginary enemy being waged as a device to justify it's draconian dictatorship.

There's a new Emmanuel Goldstein in the process of being created by Congressional Democrats to frighten Americans into accepting a measure that would impose crippling economic costs on the American people - it's called CO2  and unlike Goldstein it's real and omnipresent.

We are told that this invisible gas is a dangerous pollutant and greenhouse gas largely responsible for alleged global warming. Moreover, it is wreaking its havoc on the planet because evil humanity is producing dangerous amounts of CO2 and lofting it into the atmosphere and creating a threat to the future of the planet.

We are warned that unless it is controlled by governmental fiat we're all doomed to be parboiled sometime in the future.

Now pending in the House of Representatives is a bill - the 648-page American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 co-authored by Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Cal)and Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass), and better known as the Cap and Trade bill.  If enacted it would impose crippling restrictions and substantial costs on the American people.

It is estimated to increase the typical family's energy costs by a minimum of $3,100 a year and over a span of 20 years result in  $7 trillion  in reduced economic output and vast unemployment according to the Orange County Register.

Even the Environmental Protection Agency has warned that U.S. regulation of so-called greenhouse gases such as Carbon Dioxide "is likely top have serious economic consequences."

All of this economic disruption in an effort to reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere and thus halt global warming.

So just what is this atmospheric pollutant we call carbon dioxide? Is it a deadly greenhouse gas much of which we'd be well rid of?

Hardly.

Without it we'd all be dead. Plant life would vanish, and with it all of humanity.

Simply put, plants inhale CO2, convert it into sugars that enable them to grow and thrive, and exhale oxygen - the stuff that keeps us alive. According to Dr. Tim Ball, a renowned environmental consultant and retired professor of climatology at the University of Winnipeg, plants require CO2 to exist as we require oxygen to exist. As the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere  increases the plants grow more vigorously. Current levels of atmospheric CO2 is 385 ppm but research shows that plants grow most vigorously at 1000 to 1200 ppm which is why commercial greenhouse pump that much into their atmospheres.

Some pollutant!

Dr. Ball warns that if we reduce CO2 levels down to about 250 ppm from the current level of 385 ppm the plants start to die and 150 ppm they are all dead - and so are we.

Says Dr. Ball, "One could cynically argue that this is the goal of extreme environmentalists and the streak of anti-humanism that pervades their thinking."

Aside from the fact that instead of being a pollutant, CO2 is vital to our very existence, what is happening now is  disproving the false allegation that rising levels of CO2 increase global temperatures. Those levels have been shooting up over the past decade yet temperature levels have been falling for the past ten years. Some climatologists are now warning that the world may well be heading into an elongated period of cooling or even the advent of a new little ice age, or even a big one.

Those are the facts, but facts don't seem to matter to the global warming alarmists now pushing the ruinous Cap and Trade legislation. They remain bound and determined to grind down the economy in pursuit of a will of the wisp agenda that demonizes a substance vital to our very existence and imposes crippling economic damage to the average American family's budget.

Be warned: the House of Representatives is about to pass the ruinous cap and trade bill and impose a new tax on us. Don't say I didn't tell you.

_______________

My mother was one of many that used to joke that the government would one day find a way to tax the air we breath. It does look like that is what is happening.

[nChrist]

The current administration defies all common sense and reality and does these things in CORRUPTION - MONEY MAKING - EXTORTION - GRAND THEFT - CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY - VIOLATION OF COUNTLESS LAWS - AND VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION!

[Soldier4Christ]

Late Thursday, the House Energy and Commerce Committee
passed the 900+ page Cap and Trade Carbon Tax bill by
a vote of  33-25.

Standby ... gas prices that are already on the rise will be jumping higher as this tax is implemented.

Lamb will be getting banned because sheep belch.

The price of tomatoes will be going so high it will put catsup and spaghetti sauce out of reach of the average consumer. Most tomatoes are greenhouse grown and greenhouses are one of the largest producers of CO2.

With all the hot air being spewed on Capitol Hill I wonder what the CO2 levels are there.

[nChrist]

Late Thursday, the House Energy and Commerce Committee
passed the 900+ page Cap and Trade Carbon Tax bill by
a vote of  33-25.

Standby ... gas prices that are already on the rise will be jumping higher as this tax is implemented.

Lamb will be getting banned because sheep belch.

The price of tomatoes will be going so high it will put catsup and spaghetti sauce out of reach of the average consumer. Most tomatoes are greenhouse grown and greenhouses are one of the largest producers of CO2.

With all the hot air being spewed on Capitol Hill I wonder what the CO2 levels are there.

A COMPANY OF FOOLS, CRIMINALS, AND TRAITORS ARE LOOSE IN WASHINGTON, D.C.! THIS MIGHT BE AN UNDERSTATEMENT!

[Soldier4Christ]

A COMPANY OF FOOLS, CRIMINALS, AND TRAITORS ARE LOOSE IN WASHINGTON, D.C.! THIS MIGHT BE AN UNDERSTATEMENT!

Just a little bit.

[HisDaughter]

ON CAPITOL HILL
Barney Frank pushes to legalize marijuana
'Criminalizing choices … is not appropriate in a free society'

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: June 18, 2009
2:52 pm Eastern

© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., wants to legalize marijuana and has introduced legislation that would accomplish his goals.

"Criminalizing choices that adults make because we think they are unwise ones, when the choices involved have no negative effect on the rights of others, is not appropriate in a free society," he said in his new announcement about his plans for two bills.

One proposal would remove federal penalties for using marijuana and the second would let people in states where "medical marijuana" is allowed use it freely.

The cosponsors on the bills include Reps. Ron Paul, R-Texas and Maurice Hinchey, D-N.Y.

"To those who say that the government should not be encouraging the smoking of marijuana, my response is that I completely agree," Frank's statement said. "But it is a great mistake to divide all human activity into two categories: those that are criminally prohibited, and those that are encouraged."

He called it "poor law enforcement" the maintain laws that establish as a crime "something which in fact society does not seriously wish to prosecute."

Such legal cases, he said, are "a waste of scarce resources better used for serious crimes."

Especially important is the use of marijuana for medical purposes, he explained.

"When doctors recommend the use of marijuana for their patients and states are willing to permit it, I think it's wrong for the federal government to subject either the doctors or the patients to criminal prosecution. More broadly speaking, the norm in America is for the states to decide whether particular behaviors should be made criminal. To make the smoking of marijuana, whether for medical purposes or not, one of those extremely rare instances of federal crime – literally, to make a 'federal case' out of it – is wholly disproportionate to the activity involved," he said.

According to the Marijuana Policy Project, the proposal "represents a major step toward sanity in federal marijuana policy."

Spokesman Aaron Houston said, "Our decades-long war on marijuana has given us the worst of all possible worlds – a drug that's widely used and universally available but produced and sold entirely by unregulated criminals who obey no rules and pay no taxes."

According to a recent report in Jerome Corsi's Red Alert, President Obama appeared to have no coherent foreign policy toward Mexico, "unless the administration plans to legalize drugs to end bloodshed across the border and accept millions of Mexican refugees."

When Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently traveled to Mexico, she blamed the United States for the drug war, claiming the nation's demand for drugs and its supply of weapons are essential elements supporting drug lords.

"Those policy pronouncements sounded dangerously as if the Obama administration is setting the stage for legalizing drugs, starting with marijuana, and attacking the Second Amendment," Corsi wrote.

And a recent report in Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin said Mexico's drug cartels may be finding success in their campaigns of drug dealing and violence in the United States because of the disorganization of U.S. law enforcement agencies whose agents are supposed to be protecting the border against smuggling and unauthorized entry.

That comes from the U.S. Government Accountability Office, or GAO, which confirms that "operational inefficiencies," long-standing disputes among enforcement agencies and the resulting lack of coordination are among some of the deficiencies contributing to the situation.

[Soldier4Christ]

Barney Frank pushes to legalize marijuana

He just wants to legalize his own activities.

[HisDaughter]

NSA has ability to collect, read domestic e-mails of Americans on widespread basis    

nytimes.com/

The National Security Agency is facing renewed scrutiny over the extent of its domestic surveillance program, with critics in Congress saying its recent intercepts of the private telephone calls and e-mail messages of Americans are broader than previously acknowledged, current and former officials said.

The agency’s monitoring of domestic e-mail messages, in particular, has posed longstanding legal and logistical difficulties, the officials said.

Since April, when it was disclosed that the intercepts of some private communications of Americans went beyond legal limits in late 2008 and early 2009, several Congressional committees have been investigating. Those inquiries have led to concerns in Congress about the agency’s ability to collect and read domestic e-mail messages of Americans on a widespread basis, officials said. Supporting that conclusion is the account of a former N.S.A. analyst who, in a series of interviews, described being trained in 2005 for a program in which the agency routinely examined large volumes of Americans’ e-mail messages without court warrants. Two intelligence officials confirmed that the program was still in operation.

Both the former analyst’s account and the rising concern among some members of Congress about the N.S.A.’s recent operation are raising fresh questions about the spy agency.

Representative Rush Holt, Democrat of New Jersey and chairman of the House Select Intelligence Oversight Panel, has been investigating the incidents and said he had become increasingly troubled by the agency’s handling of domestic communications.

In an interview, Mr. Holt disputed assertions by Justice Department and national security officials that the overcollection was inadvertent.

“Some actions are so flagrant that they can’t be accidental,” Mr. Holt said.

Other Congressional officials raised similar concerns but would not agree to be quoted for the record.

Mr. Holt added that few lawmakers could challenge the agency’s statements because so few understood the technical complexities of its surveillance operations. “The people making the policy,” he said, “don’t understand the technicalities.”

The inquiries and analyst’s account underscore how e-mail messages, more so than telephone calls, have proved to be a particularly vexing problem for the agency because of technological difficulties in distinguishing between e-mail messages by foreigners and by Americans. A new law enacted by Congress last year gave the N.S.A. greater legal leeway to collect the private communications of Americans so long as it was done only as the incidental byproduct of investigating individuals “reasonably believed” to be overseas.

But after closed-door hearings by three Congressional panels, some lawmakers are asking what the tolerable limits are for such incidental collection and whether the privacy of Americans is being adequately protected.

“For the Hill, the issue is a sense of scale, about how much domestic e-mail collection is acceptable,” a former intelligence official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because N.S.A. operations are classified. “It’s a question of how many mistakes they can allow.”

While the extent of Congressional concerns about the N.S.A. has not been shared publicly, such concerns are among national security issues that the Obama administration has inherited from the Bush administration, including the use of brutal interrogation tactics, the fate of the prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and whether to block the release of photographs and documents that show abuse of detainees.

In each case, the administration has had to navigate the politics of continuing an aggressive intelligence operation while placating supporters who want an end to what they see as flagrant abuses of the Bush era.

The N.S.A. declined to comment for this article. Wendy Morigi, a spokeswoman for Dennis C. Blair, the national intelligence director, said that because of the complex nature of surveillance and the need to adhere to the rules of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the secret panel that oversees surveillance operation, and “other relevant laws and procedures, technical or inadvertent errors can occur.”

“When such errors are identified,” Ms. Morigi said, “they are reported to the appropriate officials, and corrective measures are taken.”

In April, the Obama administration said it had taken comprehensive steps to bring the security agency into compliance with the law after a periodic review turned up problems with "overcollection" of domestic communications. The Justice Department also said it had installed new safeguards.

Under the surveillance program, before the N.S.A. can target and monitor the e-mail messages or telephone calls of Americans suspected of having links to international terrorism, it must get permission from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. Supporters of the agency say that in using computers to sweep up millions of electronic messages, it is unavoidable that some innocent discussions of Americans will be examined. Intelligence operators are supposed to filter those out, but critics say the agency is not rigorous enough in doing so.

The N.S.A. is believed to have gone beyond legal boundaries designed to protect Americans in about 8 to 10 separate court orders issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, according to three intelligence officials who spoke anonymously because disclosing such information is illegal. Because each court order could single out hundreds or even thousands of phone numbers or e-mail addresses, the number of individual communications that were improperly collected could number in the millions, officials said. (It is not clear what portion of total court orders or communications that would represent.)

"Say you get an order to monitor a block of 1,000 e-mail addresses at a big corporation, and instead of just monitoring those, the N.S.A. also monitors another block of 1,000 e-mail addresses at that corporation," one senior intelligence official said. "That is the kind of problem they had."

Overcollection on that scale could lead to a significant number of privacy invasions of American citizens, officials acknowledge, setting off the concerns among lawmakers and on the secret FISA court.

"The court was not happy" when it learned of the overcollection, said an administration official involved in the matter.

Defenders of the agency say it faces daunting obstacles in trying to avoid the improper gathering or reading of Americans' e-mail as part of counterterrorism efforts aimed at foreigners.

Several former intelligence officials said that e-mail traffic from all over the world often flows through Internet service providers based in the United States. And when the N.S.A. monitors a foreign e-mail address, it has no idea when the person using that address will send messages to someone inside the United States, the officials said.

The difficulty of distinguishing between e-mail messages involving foreigners from those involving Americans was "one of the main things that drove" the Bush administration to push for a more flexible law in 2008, said Kenneth L. Wainstein, the homeland security adviser under President George W. Bush. That measure, which also resolved the long controversy over N.S.A.'s program of wiretapping without warrants by offering immunity to telecommunications companies, tacitly acknowledged that some amount of Americans' e-mail would inevitably be captured by the N.S.A.

But even before that, the agency appears to have tolerated significant collection and examination of domestic e-mail messages without warrants, according to the former analyst, who spoke only on condition of anonymity.

He said he and other analysts were trained to use a secret database, code-named Pinwale, in 2005 that archived foreign and domestic e-mail messages. He said Pinwale allowed N.S.A. analysts to read large volumes of e-mail messages to and from Americans as long as they fell within certain limits - no more than 30 percent of any database search, he recalled being told - and Americans were not explicitly singled out in the searches.

The former analyst added that his instructors had warned against committing any abuses, telling his class that another analyst had been investigated because he had improperly accessed the personal e-mail of former President Bill Clinton.

Other intelligence officials confirmed the existence of the Pinwale e-mail database, but declined to provide further details.

The recent concerns about N.S.A.'s domestic e-mail collection follow years of unresolved legal and operational concerns within the government over the issue. Current and former officials now say that the tracing of vast amounts of American e-mail traffic was at the heart of a crisis in 2004 at the hospital bedside of John Ashcroft, then the attorney general, as top Justice Department aides staged a near revolt over what they viewed as possibly illegal aspects of the N.S.A.'s surveillance operations.

James Comey, then the deputy attorney general, and his aides were concerned about the collection of "meta-data" of American e-mail messages, which show broad patterns of e-mail traffic by identifying who is e-mailing whom, current and former officials say. Lawyers at the Justice Department believed that the tracing of e-mail messages appeared to violate federal law.

"The controversy was mostly about that issue," said a former administration official involved in the dispute.

[Soldier4Christ]

IRS tells pro-lifers to give up 1st Amendment
Requires affirmation they will not 'protest'

The Internal Revenue Service has told members of the Coalition for Life of Iowa they would have to give up their 1st Amendment rights in order to be recognized as a non-profit organization, according to a complaint being pursued by members of the Thomas More Society.

The organization incorporated in 2004 as a not-for-profit under Iowa law and has been operating strictly within the guidelines for groups set up for religious, educational and charitable purposes, a letter sent to the IRS last week said.

"As detailed in its … narrative, the Coalition for Life carries out its tax-exempt work by sponsoring educational forums and coordinating with other like-minded groups to educate the public and otherwise promote sanctity of life principles," the letter continues.

"The Coalition is aware that from time to time, individuals who may or may not be involved with the Coalition gather for prayer outside of a Planned Parenthood facility. These gatherings are consistently small (ten or fewer people), peaceful, not in any way disrupting, and consist solely of silent and spoken prayers," the lawyer wrote.

However, an IRS agent then contacted the Coalition, through its president Susan Martinek, demanding to know whether the group "engaged in any 'picketing' or 'protest' activities at Planned Parenthood. … You then asked Ms. Martinek to have all Coalition Board members sign a statement that the Coalition will not 'picket' or 'protest' outside of Planned Parenthood or similar organizations and will not 'organize' others to do so," the law firm's letter said.

Concerned over the sudden restrictions on free speech, freedom of association and freedom of religion rights, the Coalition contact legal counsel, and attorney Sally Wagenmaker said she contacted the IRS about the issue.

"You expressed the legally erroneous view that the Coalition is not allowed per se to engage in 'advocacy' as a section 501(c)(3) organization," the attorney said.

"The IRS' requests come perilously close to violating the First Amendment constitutional rights of the Coalition's supporters, and they are not otherwise germane to the Coalition for Life's pending ... application. As you acknowledged verbally to me over the telephone, the Coalition's application is now ripe for approval. The IRS's delay and questioning … constitutes unnecessary and prejudicial interference with the Coalition's legal right to a tax-exempt determination."

"This is the way government oppression creeps into a society," said Judie Brown, president of American Life League. "It starts when the government targets, and attempts to intimidate and silence the grassroots dissenters who will not dance to the tune of the Obama administration’s radically pro-abortion policies."

"This is not only political intimidation by the Internal Revenue Service but it is a blatant violation of First Amendment rights," Brown said. "Neither the Coalition for Life of Iowa nor any other educational and advocacy organization should be subjected to such discriminatory scrutiny. This is a clear case of government repression."

[HisDaughter]

IRS tells pro-lifers to give up 1st Amendment
Requires affirmation they will not 'protest'

The Internal Revenue Service has told members of the Coalition for Life of Iowa they would have to give up their 1st Amendment rights in order to be recognized as a non-profit organization, according to a complaint being pursued by members of the Thomas More Society.

The organization incorporated in 2004 as a not-for-profit under Iowa law and has been operating strictly within the guidelines for groups set up for religious, educational and charitable purposes, a letter sent to the IRS last week said.

"As detailed in its … narrative, the Coalition for Life carries out its tax-exempt work by sponsoring educational forums and coordinating with other like-minded groups to educate the public and otherwise promote sanctity of life principles," the letter continues.

"The Coalition is aware that from time to time, individuals who may or may not be involved with the Coalition gather for prayer outside of a Planned Parenthood facility. These gatherings are consistently small (ten or fewer people), peaceful, not in any way disrupting, and consist solely of silent and spoken prayers," the lawyer wrote.

However, an IRS agent then contacted the Coalition, through its president Susan Martinek, demanding to know whether the group "engaged in any 'picketing' or 'protest' activities at Planned Parenthood. … You then asked Ms. Martinek to have all Coalition Board members sign a statement that the Coalition will not 'picket' or 'protest' outside of Planned Parenthood or similar organizations and will not 'organize' others to do so," the law firm's letter said.

Concerned over the sudden restrictions on free speech, freedom of association and freedom of religion rights, the Coalition contact legal counsel, and attorney Sally Wagenmaker said she contacted the IRS about the issue.

"You expressed the legally erroneous view that the Coalition is not allowed per se to engage in 'advocacy' as a section 501(c)(3) organization," the attorney said.

"The IRS' requests come perilously close to violating the First Amendment constitutional rights of the Coalition's supporters, and they are not otherwise germane to the Coalition for Life's pending ... application. As you acknowledged verbally to me over the telephone, the Coalition's application is now ripe for approval. The IRS's delay and questioning … constitutes unnecessary and prejudicial interference with the Coalition's legal right to a tax-exempt determination."

"This is the way government oppression creeps into a society," said Judie Brown, president of American Life League. "It starts when the government targets, and attempts to intimidate and silence the grassroots dissenters who will not dance to the tune of the Obama administration’s radically pro-abortion policies."

"This is not only political intimidation by the Internal Revenue Service but it is a blatant violation of First Amendment rights," Brown said. "Neither the Coalition for Life of Iowa nor any other educational and advocacy organization should be subjected to such discriminatory scrutiny. This is a clear case of government repression."

  I want to tear my hair out at what is going on around here!

[Soldier4Christ]

  I want to tear my hair out at what is going on around here!

I would rather take action against against them. It might not be less painful but it would be more satisfying.

[nChrist]

Action will be taken against the IRS and any other entity that tries to remove RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS GUARANTEED BY THE RULE OF LAW AND THE CONSTITUTION. If we have a constant struggle ahead, SO BE IT! Our so-called government IS and WILL BE held ACCOUNTABLE under the RULE OF LAW AND THE CONSTITUTION! Our representatives need to carefully consider the criminal and civil consequences of ILLEGAL AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL ACTS!

[HisDaughter]

It is absolutely amazing how many directions this is all coming from.  It makes me dizzy and boggles my mind that so many are turned and trying to turn the nation away from our roots and our very own constitution and think that they can get away with it and are getting away with it because of who is in office and I'm not just talking about the great "Pretender" in the White House.

[HisDaughter]

Rising debt may be next crisis     

apnews


The Founding Fathers left one legacy not celebrated on Independence Day but which affects us all. It's the national debt.

The country first got into debt to help pay for the Revolutionary War. Growing ever since, the debt stands today at a staggering $11.4 trillion - equivalent to about $37,000 for each and every American. And it's expanding by over $1 trillion a year.

The mountain of debt easily could become the next full-fledged economic crisis without firm action from Washington, economists of all stripes warn.

"Unless we demonstrate a strong commitment to fiscal sustainability in the longer term, we will have neither financial stability nor healthy economic growth," Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke recently told Congress.

Higher taxes, or reduced federal benefits and services - or a combination of both - may be the inevitable consequences.

The debt is complicating efforts by President Barack Obama and Congress to cope with the worst recession in decades as stimulus and bailout spending combine with lower tax revenues to widen the gap.

Interest payments on the debt alone cost $452 billion last year - the largest federal spending category after Medicare-Medicaid, Social Security and defense. It's quickly crowding out all other government spending. And the Treasury is finding it harder to find new lenders.

The United States went into the red the first time in 1790 when it assumed $75 million in the war debts of the Continental Congress.

Alexander Hamilton, the first treasury secretary, said, "A national debt, if not excessive, will be to us a national blessing."

Some blessing.

Since then, the nation has only been free of debt once, in 1834-1835.

The national debt has expanded during times of war and usually contracted in times of peace, while staying on a generally upward trajectory. Over the past several decades, it has climbed sharply - except for a respite from 1998 to 2000, when there were annual budget surpluses, reflecting in large part what turned out to be an overheated economy.

The debt soared with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and economic stimulus spending under President George W. Bush and now Obama.

The odometer-style "debt clock" near Times Square - put in place in 1989 when the debt was a mere $2.7 trillion - ran out of numbers and had to be shut down when the debt surged past $10 trillion in 2008.

The clock has since been refurbished so higher numbers fit. There are several debt clocks on Web sites maintained by public interest groups that let you watch hundreds, thousands, millions zip by in a matter of seconds.

The debt gap is "something that keeps me awake at night," Obama says.

He pledged to cut the budget "deficit" roughly in half by the end of his first term. But "deficit" just means the difference between government receipts and spending in a single budget year.

This year's deficit is now estimated at about $1.85 trillion.

Deficits don't reflect holdover indebtedness from previous years. Some spending items - such as emergency appropriations bills and receipts in the Social Security program - aren't included, either, although they are part of the national debt.

The national debt is a broader, and more telling, way to look at the government's balance sheets than glancing at deficits.

According to the Treasury Department, which updates the number "to the penny" every few days, the national debt was $11,518,472,742,288 on Wednesday.

The overall debt is now slightly over 80 percent of the annual output of the entire U.S. economy, as measured by the gross domestic product.

By historical standards, it's not proportionately as high as during World War II, when it briefly rose to 120 percent of GDP. But it's still a huge liability.

Also, the United States is not the only nation struggling under a huge national debt. Among major countries, Japan, Italy, India, France, Germany and Canada have comparable debts as percentages of their GDPs.

Where does the government borrow all this money from?

The debt is largely financed by the sale of Treasury bonds and bills. Even today, amid global economic turmoil, those still are seen as one of the world's safest investments.

That's one of the rare upsides of U.S. government borrowing.

Treasury securities are suitable for individual investors and popular with other countries, especially China, Japan and the Persian Gulf oil exporters, the three top foreign holders of U.S. debt.

But as the U.S. spends trillions to stabilize the recession-wracked economy, helping to force down the value of the dollar, the securities become less attractive as investments. Some major foreign lenders are already paring back on their purchases of U.S. bonds and other securities.

And if major holders of U.S. debt were to flee, it would send shock waves through the global economy - and sharply force up U.S. interest rates.

As time goes by, demographics suggest things will get worse before they get better, even after the recession ends, as more baby boomers retire and begin collecting Social Security and Medicare benefits.

While the president remains personally popular, polls show there is rising public concern over his handling of the economy and the government's mushrooming debt - and what it might mean for future generations.

If things can't be turned around, including establishing a more efficient health care system, "We are on an utterly unsustainable fiscal course," said the White House budget director, Peter Orszag.

Some budget-restraint activists claim even the debt understates the nation's true liabilities.

The Peter G. Peterson Foundation, established by a former commerce secretary and investment banker, argues that the $11.4 trillion debt figures does not take into account roughly $45 trillion in unlisted liabilities and unfunded retirement and health care commitments.

That would put the nation's full obligations at $56 trillion, or roughly $184,000 per American, according to this calculation.