WASHINGTON – Greece is a financial basket case, begging for international help. Is America heading down that same road?

With signs pointing to a weaker recovery than after other post-World War II recessions, U.S. consumer spending is likely to remain unimpressive and the jobless rate high for some time. Sinai said that suggests there won't be enough growth to push down federal deficits by much. "It's a political keg of dynamite," he said.

Greece's national debt now equals more than 100 percent of its gross domestic product, the broadest measure of economic activity. U.S. debt — now $12.5 trillion — is fast closing in on the same dubious milestone.

Nearly all of Greek's debt is held by foreign governments and investors. In the United States, roughly half is owned by global investors, with China holding the largest stake.

By contrast, Japan's debt is proportionately even bigger — about twice its GDP — but the impact is cushioned by the fact that most is held by Japanese households.

"The more open you are to the rest of the world, the more likely you're going to have a problem if you start running large deficits and large debt loads," said Mark Zandi, founder of Moody's Economy.com, and a frequent adviser to lawmakers of both parties.

Zandi does not see any major fallout from the Greek fiscal crisis in the United States for now, other than a possible temporary hit on potential European export markets.

However, he said, "global investors at some point are going to start demanding a higher interest rate. And that's our moment of truth. If we don't address it by cutting spending and raising taxes, some combination of the two, then we're going to have a problem."

Polls show growing public anger over deficits and government spending. The issue is a potent one for the upcoming midterm elections, and a particular liability for majority-party Democrats.

Calls have sounded from both sides of the political aisle for deficit reduction. And Obama last month set up a bipartisan deficit commission to find ways to get the country's budget deficit, now adding more than $1 trillion a year to the national debt, under control.

But the panel is a weak substitute for what Obama really wanted — a commission created by Congress that could force lawmakers to vote on remedies to reduce the debt.

___

EDITOR'S NOTE — Tom Raum covers economics and politics for The Associated Press.

If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects something it cannot be.    Thomas Jefferson

This Page is dedicated to you, the reader.  Our mission is to bring clear and concise information about relevant topics which may have gone totally unnoticed by the "Lame-Stream" media.  We seek to find the truth about current issues and their back stories, as well as analysis of what these issue mean to you and me;  how policies and issues can and/or will affect our lives.

We are also dedicated to Education.  The teaching of foundational truths affecting America.  We contend that because the once great American education system has been corrupted by political ambitions, generation upon generation of Americans are leaving schools with no concept of American Exceptionalisum!  It is our hope and desire to educate our fellow American's on "Who we are and How we (a conglomeration of divers peoples) became the Greatest Nation the World has ever seen"!

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS: 

QUESTION: Why is your web page called the 2d~Amendment News?  Are you all a bunch of gun crazed, right wing nuts?

ANSWER: We contend that the U.S. Constitution is under one of the most intensive assaults it has seen since the advent of the "Progressive Movement" began back in the early 1900's.  We have decided to us the 2d Amendment title because this Constitutional Amendment represents one of the basic freedoms outlined in our constitution and typifies  the constant assault and warring down of our American rights we have experienced.  This amendment, more than any other, has been vilified and eroded and is a clear example of how and what the modern progressives will do to the U.S. Constitution if it does not line up to THEIR BELIEF SYSTEM!

QUESTION: What kind of journalist are you? 

Notice that we have no one with a formal journalist background!  We contend that this is one of our strengths as a reporting and opinion column.   We firmly believe that we can do a far greater job of finding and reporting the truth of any issue, partly because we have no formal experience or bias laden training in the field of journalism.

QUESTION: Are you Republicans or Democrats/Right Wingers or Liberals?

ANSWER:  As the Web Master & Chief Editor, I can only speak for myself on this question.  I honestly do not know what party affiliation the Staff Contributing Editors have.  I do not know, with certainty, how they have voted in the past and it is none of my business.  We do not collaborate on or edit the content of each others work.  You will see articles on this page which are from the heart and backed up by fact.  Were ever possible we will link you directly to the video or article where you will see facts delivered in the subjects own words. 

We have taken a staff affirmation:  to "Find and tell the truth, the whole truth, regardless of which side it leans on, so help us God!"

Now the direct, non-politician answer to you question is; I am a long time registered Democrat.  I have voted for both Republicans and Democrats, depending on the candidates view, principles, and record.  My first presidential vote was for Ronald Reagan.  I consider myself a fiscal and social conservative.  One of my foundational beliefs is that "many years of liberal/progressive policies have eroded our foundational/core principles, resulting in a population no longer based upon "Personal Responsibility".

By JONATHAN PETRE
Last updated at 5:12 PM on 14th February 2010

§  Data for vital 'hockey stick graph' has gone missing

§  There has been no global warming since 1995

§  Warming periods have happened before - but NOT due to man-made changes

Data: Professor Phil Jones admitted his record keeping is 'not as good as it should be'

The academic at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ affair, whose raw data is crucial to the theory of climate change, has admitted that he has trouble ‘keeping track’ of the information.

Colleagues say that the reason Professor Phil Jones has refused Freedom of Information requests is that he may have actually lost the relevant papers. 

Professor Jones told the BBC yesterday there was truth in the observations of colleagues that he lacked organisational skills, that his office was swamped with piles of paper and that his record keeping is ‘not as good as it should be’.

The data is crucial to the famous ‘hockey stick graph’ used by climate change advocates to support the theory. 

Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.

And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.

The admissions will be seized on by sceptics as fresh evidence that there are serious flaws at the heart of the science of climate change and the orthodoxy that recent rises in temperature are largely man-made.

Professor Jones has been in the spotlight since he stepped down as director of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit after the leaking of emails that sceptics claim show scientists were manipulating data.

The raw data, collected from hundreds of weather stations around the world and analysed by his unit, has been used for years to bolster efforts by the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to press governments to cut carbon dioxide emissions.

Following the leak of the emails, Professor Jones has been accused of ‘scientific fraud’ for allegedly deliberately suppressing information and refusing to share vital data with critics.

Discussing the interview, the BBC’s environmental analyst Roger Harrabin said he had spoken to colleagues of Professor Jones who had told him that his strengths included integrity and doggedness but not record-keeping and office tidying.

Mr Harrabin, who conducted the interview for the BBC’s website, said the professor had been collating tens of thousands of pieces of data from around the world to produce a coherent record of temperature change.

That material has been used to produce the ‘hockey stick graph’ which is relatively flat for centuries before rising steeply in recent decades.

According to Mr Harrabin, colleagues of Professor Jones said ‘his office is piled high with paper, fragments from over the years, tens of thousands of pieces of paper, and they suspect what happened was he took in the raw data to a central database and then let the pieces of paper go because he never realised that 20 years later he would be held to account over them’.

Asked by Mr Harrabin about these issues, Professor Jones admitted the lack of organisation in the system had contributed to his reluctance to share data with critics, which he regretted.

But he denied he had cheated over the data or unfairly influenced the scientific process, and said he still believed recent temperature rises were predominantly man-made.

Asked about whether he lost track of data, Professor Jones said: ‘There is some truth in that. We do have a trail of where the weather stations have come from but it’s probably not as good as it should be.

‘There’s a continual updating of the dataset. Keeping track of everything is difficult. Some countries will do lots of checking on their data then issue improved data, so it can be very difficult. We have improved but we have to improve more.’

He also agreed that there had been two periods which experienced similar warming, from 1910 to 1940 and from 1975 to 1998, but said these could be explained by natural phenomena whereas more recent warming could not. 

He further admitted that in the last 15 years there had been no ‘statistically significant’ warming, although he argued this was a blip rather than the long-term trend.

And he said that the debate over whether the world could have been even warmer than now during the medieval period, when there is evidence of high temperatures in northern countries, was far from settled.

Sceptics believe there is strong evidence that the world was warmer between about 800 and 1300 AD than now because of evidence of high temperatures in northern countries.

But climate change advocates have dismissed this as false or only applying to the northern part of the world.

Professor Jones departed from this consensus when he said: ‘There is much debate over whether the Medieval Warm Period was global in extent or not. The MWP is most clearly expressed in parts of North America, the North Atlantic and Europe and parts of Asia.

‘For it to be global in extent, the MWP would need to be seen clearly in more records from the tropical regions and the Southern hemisphere. There are very few palaeoclimatic records for these latter two regions.

‘Of course, if the MWP was shown to be global in extent and as warm or warmer than today, then obviously the late 20th Century warmth would not be unprecedented. On the other hand, if the MWP was global, but was less warm than today, then the current warmth would be unprecedented.’

Sceptics said this was the first time a senior scientist working with the IPCC had admitted to the possibility that the Medieval Warming Period could have been global, and therefore the world could have been hotter then than now.

Professor Jones criticised those who complained he had not shared his data with them, saying they could always collate their own from publicly available material in the US. And he said the climate had not cooled ‘until recently – and then barely at all. The trend is a warming trend’.

Mr Harrabin told Radio 4’s Today programme that, despite the controversies, there still appeared to be no fundamental flaws in the majority scientific view that climate change was largely man-made.

But Dr Benny Pieser, director of the sceptical Global Warming Policy Foundation, said Professor Jones’s ‘excuses’ for his failure to share data were hollow as he had shared it with colleagues and ‘mates’

He said that until all the data was released, sceptics could not test it to see if it supported the conclusions claimed by climate change advocates.

He added that the professor’s concessions over medieval warming were ‘significant’ because they were his first public admission that the science was not settled.

These photos are from Senator Jim Inhofe's Photos from Facebook (Inhofe Family Pokes Fun at Al Gore, Global Warming During DC Feb Blizzard)

WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS?