CHAIRMAN REP. OBEY & SEN. LIEBERMAN.

The uproar going on in Washington D.C. today is about money; 1. Money to fund new health care programs being included in the Health Care overhaul plan now before Congress, if there happens to be a single bill that will warrant the support of lawmakers; one that they can have it passed into law. 2. The troop increase in Afghanistan that will perhaps spell the defeat of the Taliban and end the insurgency there. 3. The overall deficit in the nation's budget that requires a strong and stable economy to have it firmly tackled, with the view of completely bridging, paying, if not wiping, it off, to the point of having the national debt that seems to be having an increment that is running into billions of dollars each and every minute, if not every second, being reversed.

The most recent arguments are the ones by the House Appropriations Chairman David Obey, who has told ABC News that, "There ain't going to be no money for nothing if we pour it all into Afghanistan."; and the insistence of Senator Joseph Lieberman of not voting for any health care reform that will include a "public option" or government run health insurance plan, because like all such government initiatives, it will go bankrupt and thus, to fall back on taxpayers to pay for it.

Rep. David Obey (D. Wis.) explains that the request of 40,000 troops by Gen. Stanley McChrystal will bring the cost of the war "up to approximately $90 billion a year, or $900 billion over 10 years -- virtually the same as the cost of the Democratic health care plan". He therefore wants to impose a "war tax", because without it the Afghan war will derail the health care plan that President Obama has.

He then goes into the history archives and refers to President Lyndon Johnson's "the Great Society" program being wiped out by the Vietnam War; the Korean War wiping out Harry Truman's "Square Deal" and World War 1 ending the progressive movement before the 1920s, and saying, "In each case, the cost of those wars shut off our ability to pay for anything else."

Both arguments are well versed; but are they sustainable, when 40 million Americans do not have health care insurance coverage; and an insurgency that threatens America's friends, India and Pakistan, to booth, in the part of world that seems volatile, and rife with Islamist extremism, which is being "a clear and present danger" to world peace, and therefore, to the national security of the United States?

Can such issues be ignored; with health care being in disarray in America, in response to Sen. Lieberman; and amid the conflicts and problems in all parts of the world, particularly in the Middle East and in Africa; and of nuclear proliferation being something even the United Nations Organization has no definite solution for?; in attempting to find an answer for Rep. David Obey.

Solutions are what they are in Congress to find; and the soldiers are in the fields to defend and protect the American way of life, and if they (soldiers) are making sacrifices with their lives, why cannot the rest of us make sacrifices with our money and pay taxes that will help them to do so? On one hand, "Obey, a Democrat....made it clear that he is opposed to sending any more U.S. troops to Afghanistan and says if Obama decides to do that, he'll demand a new tax -- what he calls a "war tax" -- to pay for it." (ABC News).

Well, on the other hand, there are those who think that wherever there is a threat to the national security of the United States, it must be faced, diplomatically or otherwise; and if Afghanistan is such a place, then everybody must be ready to pay a "war tax".

On health care reform, if nothing is done, the status quo will remain. The Insurance companies will still make their profits, while millions of people suffer needlessly.

Over to you, Sen. Lieberman and Rep. Obey.