Why Does United States Excel At Presidents Cups But Struggle At Ryder Cups?

Reality check: The United States has added two times more debt than wealth in the past two years

The Americans will be looking to topple the Europeans on their home turf for the first time since 1993 . If the legendary Watson was paying any attention this weekend, he would have witnessed a United States team that was focused, confident and above all else loose at Muirfield. Pairings such as Woods and Matt Kuchar, Phil Mickelson and Keegan Bradley, and even Steve Stricker and rookie Jordan Spiethweren’tjust effective, they were engaged and having fun. As a result, even when the Americans fell behind, as they did early in the final foursomes session on Saturday, the Yanks managed to stay relaxed and eventually rallied. “When you’re prepared, you’re more confident. When you have a strategy, you’re more comfortable.”–U.S. Captain Fred Couples Golf Digest (@GolfDigestMag) October 7, 2013 Ironically, thats the exact winning formula the Europeans have utilized during their run of dominance in the more intense and prestigious Ryder Cup. By contrast, the Americans play the event as if in a vice grip of pressure and angst. Top golfers like Tiger and Phil play like the world is on their shoulders and other veterans and less experienced golfers often appear in over their heads to put it kindly. That was certainly the case at Medinah last year as the Americans blew a four-point lead at the start of the singles competition and appeared to be playing golf in quick sand as the Europeans rallied to retain the cup by a single point. For his part, Woods failed to win a single match in that competition, finishing 0-3-1 . In the past three Presidents Cups, however, Tiger has claimed the clinching point each time and is a combined 11-4-0 in those matches. Tiger Woods’ last 3 #PresCup Singles: ’13: def. Sterne, clinched Cup ’11: def.

We are a stones throw away from $17 trillion in national debt, with absolutely zero plans to even just stop aggressively adding to that number, let alone come anywhere close to simply breaking even. So many liberals are so blithely convinced that we face no impending debt crisis and that the simple legislative act of once again raising the debt ceiling has no substantive reason to devolve into such a circus but heres a handy little chart to consider, first posted by the Weekly Standard from the Senate Budget Committee : When the Treasury department started using so-called extraordinary measures to avoid a breach of the debt ceiling in May, 2011, the debt limit stood at $14,294 billion. Today it stands at $16,699 billion, which was reached when Treasury started using extraordinary measures in May of this year. Thats a $2,405 billion increase in 2 years. Meanwhile, the economy, as measured by GDP only increased by $1,199 billion between the second quarter of 2011 and the second quarter of this year. Read: The amount of debt we incurred over the past two years was double the amount of wealth we added to our GDP; or, the rate at which our debt is growing is two times the rate at which our economy is growing and Democrats only proffered solutions to this entirely unsustainable scenario are 1) increasing government spending and 2) raising taxes. Awesome . Yet, entertaining as all this political drama may seem, the theater itself is indeed burning. For the fiscal position of the federal government is in fact much worse today than is commonly realized. As anyone can see who reads the most recent long-term budget outlookpublished last month by the Congressional Budget Office, and almost entirely ignored by the mediathe question is not if the United States will default but when and on which of its rapidly spiraling liabilities. True, the federal deficit has fallen to about 4% of GDP this year from its 10% peak in 2009. The bad news is that, even as discretionary expenditure has been slashed, spending on entitlements has continued to riseand will rise inexorably in the coming years, driving the deficit back up above 6% by 2038. At some point, investors would begin to doubt the governments willingness or ability to pay U.S.

The United States is still getting rid of its chemical weapons

Former inspector: Timeline not practical Syria said to be ‘cooperative’ Weapons inspectors face difficult task Tooele was chosen because military leaders figured Japanese warplanes could hit the West Coast but not fly over the mountains to Utah without refueling, said Richard Trujillo, who spent 40 years working at the facility. “There was mustard gas originally … a lot of smoke-type bombs, smoke pods,” Trujillo recalled. Then, in the 1950s, a lot of nerve gas was transported to the facility, he said. Eventually, the United States signed the international chemical treaty in the 1990s and got serious about getting rid of the chemicals in a way that would not harm the environment or the people working at the plant or living in the area. While the process was slow and expensive, Trujillo said there was not a single casualty despite the volatility of some of the chemicals. “You know the whole task is nothing short of miraculous in my mind,” Trujillo said. “And I was part of it.” Today there are no weapons at the Tooele facility. The process of safely getting rid of these chemicals and munitions took 16 years, and was finally completed last year. Workers there will soon begin the process of dismantling the plants needed to do the job. Yet, there are still more than 3,000 tons of chemical weapons left in the United States, stored at two remaining facilities at Pueblo, Colorado, and Bluegrass, Kentucky. The majority is in Pueblo, where officials plan to start in 2015 destroying 2,600 tons of mustard blister chemicals stored in projectiles in liquid form. The process is expected to take four years. At the Bluegrass plant outside Lexington, Kentucky, there are 523 tons of mustard agent, VX and sarin nerve agents.