Where to begin? This is the stuff books are made of. No way can I do anything but scratch the surface in this writing. It’s that massive.

Whether it is corruption, fraud, lawlessness, abuse, lack of ethics, or just plain old dirty politics, our federal administrative government is completely out of control. It appears to me, the foul play by the president and his agencies since his 2009 inauguration is worse than ever before in this country’s history.

Let’s call it moral bankruptcy. It starts at the top with our president Barack Obama but, unfortunately, permeates far too many in this administration on the way down throughout a multitude of government agencies.

Some would say “Les, you are making a mountain out of a mole hill.” Through my research for weeks the scandalous mountains are like Mount Whitney, the highest summit in the U.S. Notice I said mountains plural, not singular!

Unless one lives in a cave, we all know Obama and his administration have engaged in one scandal after another. There’s the gun running Fast and Furious, eavesdropping on reporters that don’t see things Obama’s way, the Stimulus cronyism that led to numerous bankruptcies at taxpayer expense, VA letting veterans die, letting four great Americans die in Benghazi, IRS targeting conservative voters, open borders, releasing criminals, releasing five terrorists for a deserter behind the back of Congress, etc. And, let’s not forget all the Obamacare scandals of unconstitutionally re-writing the law some 40 times without Congress’ input.

Add to all those scandals, there is agency after agency in our government as morally bankrupt as you can get. Far too many in Washington, on the public dole as employees, are liberal partisan activists and not public servants owing allegiance to all Americans. Many have actively, illegally, and even immorally gone after people who are exercising their constitutional right to be critical of our government, especially if it is Obama.

What is happening in this country regarding tax monies for abortions was a “wake up call” for me to get off my duff and get out this letter. Didn’t Obama promise pro lifers taxpayer money would not be used to kill babies? Guess what? The Obamacare insurance carriers cover abortions but hide it by not itemizing medical procedures. How’s that for moral bankruptcy?

Welfare recipients can not use their food stamp debit cards at liquor stores, but they can use them at marijuana shops. The fraud and corruption in our welfare programs has skyrocketed under Obama with his push to get as many on the programs as possible, knowing it is a sure vote during elections for his side. Unfortunately, some of those welfare checks go to people who have died or never existed in the first place. People get government disability checks that are not in the least bit disabled.

There are 109 million people on 80 different welfare programs amounting to three quarters of a trillion dollars annually. The sprawling incompetent bureaucracy administering these programs is in over its head and isn’t it immoral to dang carrots by agencies so people have no incentive to work? The liberal partisan administrative agencies know that the more on the dole the more votes their party will get.

In the Veterans Administration people lied as they manipulated data about veterans getting medical treatment while veterans died for not getting urgent treatment. Many of the workers were cooking the books to get bonuses. Have any been held accountable and did they get their bonuses?

Actually, in the many scandals all over the place very few have been held accountable. What about the many in EPA found surfing for porn most of the day and the outrageous expenditures of many agencies on conferences, perks, etc.?

One of the biggest scoundrels in our government today is the Environmental Protection Agency, with more workers than they know what to do with thus the porn surfing. Green energy (global warming) agendas that Obama can’t get through Congress are unconstitutionally carried out by EPA. Just since 2009, EPA under Obama, has issued thousands of new regulations with words more than 30 times the Bible.

Seems that the moral bankruptcy has even reached down into our Department of Defense as they confiscate Bibles from Christian soldiers and cater to Islamists by not calling them terrorists in order to appease our president.

A good case could be made that Attorney General Eric Holder’s Department of Justice is the most corrupt DOJ agency in the history of this country. Being held in contempt by Congress hasn’t deterred Holder one iota as he administers injustice rather than justice, and never holds himself or Obama accountable for anything.

As mentioned above, the moral bankruptcy is so very pervasive I can only give readers a “smidgeon” of the big picture in this writing. Ironically, Obama said there wasn’t a smidgeon of corruption in the IRS. Turns out the IRS agency scandal is moral bankruptcy in the first order with lies, cover ups, stonewalling, and destroying hard drives as it carries out Obama’s agendas of destroying conservatives.

Is there any wonder by readers that I feel compelled to write this?

Les Knoll lives in Victoria and Gilbert, Ariz.

The Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) was released earlier this month. According to the summary in University World News, United States universities took “…16 places in the top 20, 52 in the top 100 and 146 in the top 500.”

Eight of the top 10 were U.S. universities: Harvard, Stanford, MIT, Berkeley, Princeton, Caltech, Columbia and Chicago (by order). The United Kingdom took the other two slots with Cambridge at 5 and Oxford at 9.

The ARWU was established over a decade ago by the Center for World-Class Universities at Shanghai Jiao Tong University in 2003. They rank over 1,250 universities worldwide and also break down rankings by five broad subject fields. U.S. universities dominate them all—for now. The ARWU uses a variety of measures such as the number of professors with publications in high ranking journals. The system is considered “objective” but places heavy emphasis on research.

There are other ranking agencies, including the Times Higher Education World University Rankings that attempt to classify the best 200 higher education institutions in the world. The THE uses 13 performance indicators “covering the full range of university activities–research, knowledge transfer, international outlook and the teaching environment.” Similar to the movie Casablanca, they end up “rounding up the usual suspects”: Harvard, etc.

The Office of Economic Cooperation and Development in Europe conducted a study of how universities worldwide used these rankings and found:

• 58% of respondents were not happy with their current ranking.
• 70% want to be in the top 10 % nationally.
• 71% want to be in the top 25% internationally.
• 56% have a formal internal mechanism for reviewing their rank order.

Everyone from national leaders to local governors to university presidents want their universities to be in the top ranks and feel inadequate if they aren’t. They direct huge resources toward developing a national and international reputation. But that diverts resources from serving their local region’s needs and teaching their students.

Meanwhile, one country stopped to ask if these rankings are really useful. The Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research commissioned a report that the University World News summarized with the headline: “Official study slams university rankings as ‘useless’.” The Norwegian study “…concluded that even the top rankings are so based on subjective weightings of factors and on dubious data that they are useless as a basis for information if the goal is to improve higher education.”

Last year, the European Union launched yet another university ranking system: U-Multirank.
UWN reported that “Some 500 universities worldwide are expected to sign up to U-Multirank.”

U-Multirank rates universities in five areas: research reputation, quality of teaching and learning, international orientation, success in knowledge transfer (partnerships and start-ups), and contribution to regional growth.

And BBC News just reported a study that analyzed top ranked universities and found “money is the key to being a top university.” With over $700,000 in grants per year per professor, a university can buy into the higher ranks.

Students—and in particular foreign students—often ask me if such-and-such university is “highly-ranked.” (Indeed, in China, universities are ranked Level One, Two or Three.) I ask my students what are they studying? I tell them that it is the department or school that matters, not the university. If you want to be an excellent elementary teacher, don’t go to Harvard. Several Kansas schools have undergraduate programs in that area that are much better. Many Research I universities have some terrible undergraduate programs. Undergraduates will rarely if ever see that $700,000-grant professor.

Norway knows that quality education for undergraduate students has little to do with university rankings. So should we.

One in four. What would you do if I told you since this time last year one in four women experienced domestic violence? Ignore it? Be outraged? Offer help?

I have had the privilege of serving on the boards of domestic violence/sexual assault organizations in our state over the last several years. I’m not a victim. Fortunately, I was raised in a great family. I never thought about domestic violence or sexual assault as a problem until about 20 years ago a staff member told me about a young boy, living in a nice rural Kansas community, who drew her a picture so that she would remember what he looked like after his father killed him. Even though that story struck a nerve, I stayed silent, reluctant to get involved. Years later, I finally decided I had a voice and I wanted to do something to end this violence.

Too often we ignore that bruise on someone’s face or that timid, almost scared, posture of a co-worker, relative or friend. After all it’s not happening to us and it may mean having an uncomfortable conversation about personal issues. We convince ourselves it will go away or that it’s not as bad as we might imagine. Domestic violence and sexual assault are never all right. It’s a person breaking someone’s nose, burning them with cigarettes, raping or threatening them with greater violence. It’s ugly and it has to stop now.

What an education I have received from dedicated people in our state who are focused on eliminating this oftentimes silent scourge! They are the ones who make sure emergency shelters are open so that at 2 a.m. a victim has somewhere to go. Or they provide training for medical personnel when responding to a rape victim. Currently, I am president of the board for the Kansas Coalition Against Sexual and Domestic Violence, which is an organization supporting 29 individual programs across our state that provide support, shelter and a voice for those abused and assaulted. From Garden City to Kansas City, Pittsburg to Hays, these programs are literally a lifeline for victims.

Domestic violence and sexual assault have been with us long before the current issues in the NFL. It has been an issue for far too long. What can you do? First, learn about your local program by going to the KCSDV website (www.kcsdv.org) to find out where the closest program is and how you can support them and the coalition. Then add your voice to a growing number of Kansans saying, “Not in my home, not in my business, not in my city, not in my state, NOT EVER will I accept violence.” The coalition and the local programs need your voice added to theirs, whether volunteering time, donating a few dollars or just speaking to colleagues that this violence must stop now!

Mark Twain said, “The two most important days of your life are when you were born and when you find out why.” I suggest the “why” is to raise your voice for those who can’t… the abused, the raped and those who have died. I urge you to join me and many others across Kansas to speak up and say “Not now! Not ever!”

Mark Schreiber is president of the board of directors at the Kansas Coalition Against Sexual and Domestic Violence.

Dear Dave,
Do you recommend that people continue tithing and giving while getting out of debt?
Sarah

Dear Sarah,
If you’re tithing, that would refer to you being a Christian or of the Jewish faith. To the best of my knowledge, those are the only two religions where tithing is taught as a part of the faith. The word literally means “a tenth,” as in a tenth of your income.

If you are an evangelical Christian, what does Scripture say? It says to take the tithe off the top before you do anything else. You keep doing it always, not from a legalistic perspective, but because it’s part of God’s instructions on the best way to live. It gives you a baseline for giving and generosity.

Then, get yourself and your household cleaned up and in good financial shape before engaging in other acts of giving, which are called offerings. This is the normal process that Scripture outlines. But remember, God is crazy about you and loves you very much.

When you give, it’s the act of being unselfish and putting others first.
—Dave

Dave Ramsey is America’s trusted voice on money and business. He has authored five New York Times best-selling books: Financial Peace, More Than Enough, The Total Money Makeover, EntreLeadership and Smart Money Smart Kids. The Dave Ramsey Show is heard by more than 8 million listeners each week on more than 500 radio stations. Follow Dave on Twitter at @DaveRamsey and on the web at daveramsey.com.

There’s a subtle but starting-to-get identifiable undertone to this year’s elections that we really haven’t seen in decades in Kansas politics this year.

It’s creating a new voting bloc, not just Republicans, not just Democrats, not just unaffiliated voters, or even Libertarians who remain split on whether your meat should be inspected.

It’s a fast-growing “I’m voting against” block that the U.S. Senate race, the governor’s race and the Secretary of State race appear to be generating toward the top of the ballot.

Those are the races, or office-holders, which are getting all the press, and for good reason, we think, whether they generated the attention or whether they are the object of the controversy.

The Senate race, once a four-candidate contest has, by Kansas Supreme Court order to Secretary of State Kris Kobach to pull the name of Democrat Chad Taylor  off the ballot, become a three-man race between three-termer U.S. Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., independent Greg Orman of Olathe and Libertarian Randall Batson, Wichita.

Kobach’s unsuccessful battle to keep Taylor on the ballot has colored that race, made Roberts more vulnerable and splashed back for some voters onto Kobach himself. Most grown-ups have laughed off the Kobach/Kansas Republican Party lamentations that Democrats need their own candidate to prevent those Taylor voters from being disenfranchised…even if they do have proof of citizenship.

But the effort to keep Taylor on the ballot made Roberts seem so vulnerable that…he’s suddenly more vulnerable than you’d expect a three-term member of the Senate to be, and independent Orman is the leading benefactor of the “I’m voting against” block.

In the governor’s race between incumbent Republican Sam Brownback and Democrat Kansas House Minority Leader Paul Davis, the race is a little tougher, the “I’m voting against” cadre split between those who support more school funding, more social programs for the poor and such, and those who are voting against anyone who wants to take or delay their income tax exemptions.

Since everyone’s taxes went down some—ranging from money to pay for school and food to enough to create choice between those granite countertops or moving up to a Buick—the voting-against crowd is split in this race.

And, the race for Secretary of State—an office where most Kansans who aren’t notaries don’t interact with much—gets split into the “I’m voting against” whoever made this Senate ballot a national, even international controversy (that’d be Republican Kobach) and Democrat Jean Schodorf, who so far is just taking pot shots at Kobach and wants more folks to be able to vote without proving citizenship—just certifying it. And, so far, Kobach hasn’t demanded voters reveal their weight…

Incumbent Republican Derek Schmidt has been careful to keep his fingerprints off the Senate race scrap; Republican State Treasurer Ron Estes, who most Kansans wouldn’t recognize if he was sitting next to them at the bar, has gone nearly underground in his campaign. But for Democratic AG challenger A. J. Kotich and Democrat treasurer hopeful Carmen Alldritt, the “I’m voting against” clan might be working for them, obliquely.

Remember mom telling you to stay away from the kid down the block…and his friends? That could happen again. “I’m voting against” could creep around until it alters some down-ballot races by political party.

Does that mean that some down-ballot candidates, who a month ago were happy to be in the same photo as a candidate higher up on the ballot, will have second thought about putting it on Facebook? Will that association work for or against a candidate who is running for the Kansas House, or maybe AG or Treasurer? And does any of this apply to the Insurance Commissioner’s race?

We’ll have to get back to you on that …

Syndicated by Hawver News Co. of Topeka, Martin Hawver is publisher of Hawver’s Capitol Report. To learn more about this nonpartisan statewide political news service, visit www.hawvernews.com.

Imagine this scene: The doorbell rings at 3 a.m. to wake you from a deep sleep. You peek out to see a fireman in full gear standing at your front door. He tells you that your neighbor’s house is on fire and you must leave your home immediately.

Would you be prepared for a situation like this? If you had to evacuate your home in the middle of the night, what would you take with you? Would you have the important information needed to recover if your home was destroyed?

This happened to me a few years ago when I lived in Garden City. We had time to put on shoes and grab my husband’s wallet and my purse as we were ushered out the door. But that was all we had. Thankfully, our home was not damaged, but afterward we reflected on how unprepared we were for that evacuation. Since then, we’ve taken steps to be better prepared for disaster.

September has been designated as Disaster Preparedness Month. This month, several Ellis County residents are participating in the Prepare Kansas online challenge from K-State Research and Extension.

We’re completing weekly tasks to prepare our families and property in case of disaster. But even if you are not participating in an official preparedness program, you can — and should — take action to become better prepared for emergencies.

Here are some steps to help protect your family’s financial situation now and be able to recover and rebuild after a disaster:

1. Rent a safe deposit box. Keep originals of important legal documents, deeds, titles, birth and marriage certificates, passports, property appraisals and other irreplaceable papers in it.

2. Take inventory. You’ll need good records of your belongings after a disaster, both for insurance claims and to prove losses on your tax return. To get started, photograph or videotape every wall of every room of your home. Don’t forget the basement, attic, garage, outbuildings, etc. (It takes less time than you think — I photographed my entire house and garage in about an hour and a half.) Open doors and drawers to photograph the contents of dressers, cabinets and closets. List large appliances and electronics with model or serial numbers, appraisals, receipts or other records to prove the value of these items. Update your home inventory annually and store the images on a flash drive in a safe deposit box or other safe location away from your home.

3. Make a grab-and-go kit. Assemble a set of your important papers in something you can quickly grab and take to the basement in case of a storm or take with you if you have to leave your home. Use a durable, sealed waterproof box, bag or briefcase. Put in copies of important papers that can help your family manage without access to your home for a long period of time. (Note: keep this information carefully secured and protected against unauthorized access.)

Things to include in your grab-and-go kit might include:
• Identification and other key documents that may be needed to prove identity and restore records, including copies of your driver’s license, social security cards, citizenship or naturalization papers or passports.
• Copies of important legal papers such as birth certificates, deeds, mortgage documents, powers of attorney, wills and other papers which might be required after a disaster.
• Copies of medical prescriptions, including eyeglasses and contacts.
• Copies of children’s immunization records.
• Copies of insurance cards and policies, including phone number of insurance agents.
• Copies of the front and back of all credit, debit and ATM cards.
• Account information and phone numbers for all financial accounts.
• List of important telephone numbers (family members, medical providers, attorney, religious adviser, etc.)
• List of monthly bills, contact information and when they are due.
• A copy of your home inventory– written and/or photos.
• Safe deposit box key, box location and names of authorized signers.
• List of electronic access user ID’s and passwords.
• Pocket notebook and pen or pencil.

I hope a fireman never knocks on your door in the middle of the night. But my experience emphasizes the importance of being prepared. Taking time now to make sure your financial documents are up-to-date, accessible and ready to grab and go can save a lot of time and frustration in the event of a fire, storm, flood or other emergency.

For more information, see the K-State Research and Extension publication “Get Financially Prepared: Take Steps Ahead of Disaster,” MF3055. Use the search function at www.ksre.ksu.edu or contact the Ellis County Extension, 601 Main, at (785) 628-9430.

Linda K. Beech is Ellis County Extension Agent for Family and Consumer Sciences.

Who woulda thunk it? In deep-red Kansas, we’ve got three red-hot statewide races, featuring three nationally prominent Republicans — Sam Brownback, Pat Roberts and Kris Kobach.

This oddity has sent reporters scurrying here from New York, D.C., L.A. and even London. No question, it’s bigger than the world’s largest ball of twine.

Overall, the national reporting hasn’t been that bad, but there is a kind of sameness: How did such competition break out in Kansas, of all places, home to GOP dominance over 50 years of presidential elections and 80 years of U.S. Senate contests?

Not all, but many of these reporters want to craft a national story about Kansas in 2014, with implications for the entire country. Maybe there are some, but, 45 days from the election, these races are mostly about holding office-holders accountable.

Arguably, these three Kansas incumbents have over-reached, and elections are society’s most powerful way of rendering verdicts on public officials. But their performances are not all of a piece; indeed, Kansas voters must contend with three distinct red-state records.

First, and most obviously, Gov. Sam Brownback has established clear baselines for judging his performance on economic growth, job creation, educational achievements, and levels of poverty, among other issues. By and large, the judgments here have been harsh, even as he and his allies argue that his self-proclaimed Kansas economic “experiment” is succeeding. Plunging tax revenues and a series of bond downgrades do not inspire confidence, nor do most objective analyses of the Kansas economy.

It may not be fair to hold a governor responsible for the state’s economy, given the great impact of national conditions, but more than any chief executive in memory, Sam Brownback has asked to be judged on his economic record.

Lesson: Be careful what you wish for.

Judging Senator Pat Roberts’ accountability is far different. Senators do compile long voting histories, of course, but these records are far less concrete than those of governors. A senator can end up on many sides of the same policy, as Senator Roberts has on two critical issues for Kansans: funding for the recent farm bill and for the National Bio-and Agro-Defense Facilit. Moreover, senators can vote for policies they know will never pass or introduce legislation that will be dead on arrival, claiming credit for their actions all the while.

So, in the end, the senator’s record does not define his accountability. Rather, it’s Roberts himself, who – fairly or not – is increasingly seen as detached and out of touch. The genuinely funny Pat Roberts of the 1980s and 1990s, with his biting, contextual humor, has been replaced by a grumpy old man. The former Roberts could have dispatched a Greg Orman with a few strokes of his stiletto wit. The current version grumbles and keeps yelling “Harry Reid.”

With recent polling demonstrating real strength for Orman, Pat Roberts must successfully woo the Tea Party right that he so vigorously disparaged a few weeks ago. This is no mean feat.

Finally, there’s the fascinating case of Kris Kobach, who must be kicking himself for not opposing the unexpectedly weak Roberts in the GOP senate primary.

With his crusade against non-existent voter fraud inside the state and his anti-immigrant crusade outside it, Kobach has come to resemble the anti-abortion zealot Phill Kline, ousted in 2006 after a single term as attorney general. Kobach’s intense politicization of an essentially non-political office prompted more than a third of GOP primary voters to reject his bid for re-nomination. And virtually none of those will support him in November.

There is no single “Kansas” story this fall. Rather, voters in this certifiably red state will decide whether these three Republican incumbents have over-reached to the point that they should be defeated.

Maybe, after all, there is a trend. It’s called democracy.

Burdett Loomis is a political science professor at the University of Kansas.

Time to take social media out of the freedom of expression “toy box.”

Serious issues and serious work now abound in this relatively young method by which we not only exchange information, but also to rally to causes and hold public officials accountable.

Just a few years ago, scarcely a few percent of Americans turned to Twitter, Facebook and the like for real news and issues. The medium was dismissed as the stuff of gossip, personal notes and largely meaningless personal snapshots.

And ok, fascination with the “selfie” persists today.

But from controversy in Ferguson, Mo., to tragedies in the Middle East to the flap over hacked nude photos of celebrities to serious debate over domestic abuse and pro athletes, social media is driving public discussion and debate that is the essence of First Amendment freedoms.

The passion of public protest (in other words, the freedoms of assembly and petition), was extended and multiplied in Ferguson, Mo., where street demonstrations over the shooting death of Michael Brown instantly reached a world audience — and may well have been eclipsed in impact by virtual protests.

A photo posted on Aug. 13 of more than 200 Howard University students with their hands and arms in the air, accompanied by the Twitter hashtag “#dontshoot,” became an iconic expression online, and prompted hundreds of posts of similar poses — and thousands of comments.

Even as what many saw as a stereotypical and negative photo of Brown was released by authorities — showing his hands making what some claimed was a gang sign — thousands posted online photos at “#iftheygunnedmedown,” showing two images of the same person side-by-side, one playing to a violent image but the other showing innocent scenes, often with family members and young children.

The ISIS thugs chose to use social media to post horrific videos of their brutal slayings of two U.S. journalists and a British aid worker, and they reportedly also make sophisticated use of the online medium to recruit others to their ranks. In effect, these terrorists used “freedom of speech” for vile purposes.

Even what is not on social media gets attention: Using their own free expression rights to determine what content will appear in their sites, social media operations made decisions to remove and prevent reposting of the ISIS murder videos, and took quick action to prevent the spread of purloined nude photos of several celebrities.

All just new aspects of an age-old question for editors and broadcasters: What to do with graphic, disturbing and or vulgar images that are in the news?

The question of “what to show” has dogged editors and others since Civil War photographer Mathew Brady’s photographs of battlefield corpses at Antietam were displayed in New York in 1862. A newspaper photographer smuggled an “ankle camera” into the 1928 execution of Ruth Snyder in Sing Sing’s electric chair — the first known photo of death by electrocution — and kicked off a debate that remains active today over such photos.

The Ferguson protest may well find a historical niche as the moment when virtual protest took the foreground over actual demonstrations, and when the response from online communities proved to have wider impact than what came from those on the scene. And not only did the Howard and “don’t shoot” prove more effective, they have been immediate, reached audiences around the world, and didn’t allow those bent on violence — as one peaceful demonstrator on the streets of Ferguson said — to “hijack our voices.”

In 2007, an internet milestone was reached at Virginia Tech University, where a gunman shot and killed 32 people. In the hours after that tragedy, major news outlets set up so-called Twitter and Facebook desks, and solicited cell phone photos and video from non-journalists — believed to be the first time this was done on a major story by so many news organizations. In that instance, it was freedom of the press that found a new, technological expression.

Taking to the public square or streets to protest carries its own special impact, with a history that dates back to the colonial era. And face-to-face debate still counts, even in presidential elections.

But in a world now so tightly interconnected through social media, free speech, protest and petition may well have the most impact when done online — and even at 140 characters at a time.

Gene Policinski is chief operating officer of the Washington-based Newseum Institute and senior vice president of the Institute’s First Amendment Center. [email protected]

Dear Dave,
I’m 38, single and I have three kids. I make $65,000 a year and have $34,000 in debt. I’m about to get remarried, and my new husband will make about $100,000 a year. Should I take the $34,000 and put it on my mortgage to consolidate it?
Leslie

Dear Leslie,
Please don’t consolidate this debt. If you guys are about to get married you need to learn, as a couple, to make debt a thing of the past and live on a written, monthly budget. Think about it. Once you’re married, your family will have a great income. You could really push and attack that debt, and have it paid off in no time.

As a new couple, you need to learn to set goals and work on things as a team. Budgeting is a great exercise for any marriage, but it’s an especially good thing for newly married couples to learn to do. A budget isn’t just controlling your money. It’s two people sitting down together and sharing their hopes and dreams for the future. Not just that, it’s the process of making an actual, workable, written plan that will help make these dreams become reality.

Don’t do a debt consolidation, Leslie. Debt consolidation is nothing more than a “con,” because you think you’ve done something about the debt problem. But the truth is the debt is still there, as are the habits that caused it. All you did was move it around.
You can’t borrow your way out of debt, just like you can’t get out of a hole by digging out the bottom!
—Dave

Dave Ramsey is America’s trusted voice on money and business. He has authored five New York Times best-selling books: Financial Peace, More Than Enough, The Total Money Makeover, EntreLeadership and Smart Money Smart Kids. The Dave Ramsey Show is heard by more than 8 million listeners each week on more than 500 radio stations. Follow Dave on Twitter at @DaveRamsey and on the web at daveramsey.com.