Third Party & Independents Archives

Stimulus Check: 17 Year Olds Don't Qualify

Congress decided 17 year old junior and senior high school students don’t qualify as children or dependents. At least as far as the stimulus rebate checks are concerned. They decided there would be no stimulus refund for children who achieved the age of 17 prior to Dec. 31, 2007. My daughter born Dec. 23, 1990, and a junior in high school (also a result of her birthday causing a delay in her Kindergarten enrollment by one semester), does not qualify for the $300 rebate.

What is interesting is not that this writer failed to receive $300 that all other parents of 16 year olds and under as of Dec. 31, 2007, received. What is of public interest is this politics on the margin process. Politics on the Margin is a phrase I use to define when politicians want to pander or waste with tax payer dollars while not really pandering to everyone of equal class or status, only those that could make a difference at election time.

By all legal definitions, a 17 year old high school student living at home as a dependent of their parents is a child dependent for tax purposes, for custodial legal purposes, for local school parental liability purposes, and on and on. But, this Congress wanted to cut the cost of the Stimulus package and decided and agreed that cutting $300 from parents of children turning 17 prior to Dec. 31, 2007, would be unfair to such a small number of parents that there would be no political cost to be paid for such a move come November.

It was simpler this way. No pro-rating the $300 for when the child turned 18 in 2008 which, in no way negates that child's dependent status, especially in this economic environment. The number or parents feeling cheated would be a real minority, not to be concerned about as such a small minority complaining would sound like a choir of sour grapes. Politics on the Margin.

Politics on the Margin is what keeps earmarks digging our national hole debt ever deeper. Nearly every politician is guilty but, their share of the total waste, fraud, and abuse is so small, as to marginalize the criticism by a challenger at the next election.

Politics on the Margin is what has kept the Iraq war and occupation going, as President Bush played the Senate 1 vote margin in favor of Democrats to the hilt, knowing full well, they had not the power to override his veto on the issue.

Politics on the Margin accounts in varying degrees for failing schools and educational standards in America, for the ever widening wealth gap, for the fact that virtually all Senators in the U.S. Senate are millionaires and millionaires are so well protected by laws, while the plight of the poor and middle class worsens gradually, by marginal degrees, to small to revolt over or about.

Politics on the margin accounts for the greatest and most rapid doubling of the national debt ever witnessed in American history in 8 years. Achieved by false promises to cut the deficit in half (who will remember), and a bit of pork here, a bit of fraud there, and a tremendous amount of waste spread out across vast agencies of government and politicians as to make an attack on any one seem petty.

Politics on the margin cheated my daughter of the $299.63 pro-rata stimulus tax refund she was due as her pro-rated share for her time as a 17 year old dependent of tax payers in the year 2008. But, who cares? No American who got their expected share is going to care that my daughter didn't have the extra for tutoring, or after school extra-curricular expenses in Band and ROTC. To actually care, voters would have to consider voting out their representative in the next election by voting for a challenger instead. And that is just unAmerican, and the bane of all Americans and their futures going forward.

To demand excellence and that which is hard over that which is easy, of our politicians would require a thinking voter capable of weighing the consequences for themselves and country of perpetually reelecting more than 90% of incumbents back to office regardless of how bad things become in America, or how dire the nation's future. And all the past election data indicate such thinking voters are just another marginalized minority. Fodder for Politics on the Margin.

Posted by David R. Remer at May 2, 2008 05:10 PM
Comment #251952


i don’t understand not counting a 17yr old for tax rebate purposes, doesn’t seem fair to me when you can claim them as a dependant. while i’m always happy to get some of my tax money back, i doubt the stimulus from these rebates will amount to much more than a fart in a windstorm. suspending the gas tax wont’t do anything either, at least IMO. just dog and pony shows if you know what i mean.

Posted by: dbs at May 2, 2008 06:26 PM
Comment #251956

So what? Do you really need a pittance loan from the government to remain alive?

For crying out loud, Mr. Remer. You, of all people, are whining about a free loan from the government being denied your offspring?
Give me a break!

Posted by: Weary Willie at May 2, 2008 06:59 PM
Comment #251967


You are correct David. That is wrong. But then you really did not expect the government to get this thing exactly right did you? You can bet that if this were not an election year this loan against our future taxes would not have even been considered. I bet most people are quietly taking their portion while shaking their heads at the absurdity of the situation. This is no more than another band aid in a long list of our legislators abilities to lend us our tax dollars to temporarily stimulate a failing economic condition. What better way to mask their failures and redirect voter angst in a precarious election year.

I am taking my portion and paying down what little debt I have. I refuse to jump on the band wagon of denial in order to forestall the inevitable.

Posted by: RickIL at May 2, 2008 09:54 PM
Comment #251972


“You can bet that if this were not an election year this loan against our future taxes would not have even been considered.”

while i agree this will most likely do little or nothing for the economy, it is only a loan if you have paid no taxes, otherwise it’s a rebate, agree with it or not.

Posted by: dbs at May 2, 2008 10:52 PM
Comment #251983

dbs, the important thing to take note of is the economic conditions on April 30, the day before anyone got their rebates. Because the economic indicators were improving modestly, loss of 20,000 jobs, which was dramatically lower than the 80,000 expected, and Merger & Acquisitions were picking up, and the Fed ended its stimulus bias for an inflation fighting bias.

I don’t want my idiot representatives saying the tax rebates were responsible for this turnaround, unless the turnaround occurs AFTER the rebates are spent.

I agree with you, these political panderings will solve nothing longer term. What do you think of Clinton and McCain saying they would cut the gasoline tax this summer? They would have to be president to push that, and neither of them has a snowball’s chance in hell of that before 2009, if then. Talk about your pandering, this is entirely idle and empty pandering, and as Obama says, would solve nothing about our energy crisis.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 3, 2008 12:22 AM
Comment #251994

The whole give away is a bipartisan stupid idea. Calling it a rebate is just dishonest. Many of the people getting money didn’t pay that much in taxes and the people who actually pay the most taxes are not eligible to get anything at all.

It is a type of income redistribution. Sorry that the politicians in their wisdom left out one group of non-taxpayers to get a tax rebate.

If they really wanted to rebate taxes, they could have just allowed a tax credit on the 2007 taxes. The mailing of the checks is just pure pander.

Posted by: Jack at May 3, 2008 08:52 AM
Comment #251997

while i agree this will most likely do little or nothing for the economy, it is only a loan if you have paid no taxes, otherwise it’s a rebate, agree with it or not.

It is revenue. Revenue which otherwise could have been better spent to pay down our nations debt. We do not have a surplus in this country. The result of giving back money our country does not have means that they are in essence borrowing money that could have been used to address our deficit. It is money which will have to be repayed sooner or later in order to attain a surplus. I see nothing fiscally responsible with the process.

Posted by: RickIL at May 3, 2008 11:35 AM
Comment #251999

I doubt that this stimulus package is gonna do much for the economy. In fact about all it’s doing is putting the country deeper in debt. I’d just as soon they didn’t pass it. But sense they did I reckon they shouldve given anyone with a 17 year old the full $300.
By passing the stimulus package the current bunch of politicians up there in DC has used your money to buy your vote for another term in office. And the sad thing is, it’s working with most folks.

Posted by: Ron Brown at May 3, 2008 12:28 PM
Comment #252002
David R. Remer wrote: To demand excellence and that which is hard over that which is easy, of our politicians would require a thinking voter capable of weighing the consequences for themselves and country of perpetually reelecting more than 90% of incumbents back to office regardless of how bad things become in America, or how dire the nation’s future.
The voters much-needed motivation to simply stop repeatedly rewarding irresponsible incumbent politicians with 93%-to-99% re-election rates is in the pipeline.

The key to part of the solution to the problem is education.
The voters mostly have themselves to thank for those “consequences”.
Perhaps enough voters will stop doing such a stupid thing, and stop repeatedly rewarding bad politicians with re-election when enough of the voters are jobless, homeless, and hungry?
However, that decision will probably have to be driven by pain.
Pain and misery is a good motivator, and a good educator too.

So, why do voters do such a stupid thing (i.e. whine and complain about bad politicians, and give Congress dismally low 11% approval ratings, but then repeatedly reward too many bad incumbent politicians with 93%-to-99% re-electio rates)?

There are several reaons:

  • (01) First of all, there are the root causes (basic human traits):
    • (a) apathy, complacency, sense of futility, negligence, ignorance, and laziness;

    • (b) greed, selfishness, gluttony, lust for power and control, envy, pride, and exploitation of others and things (e.g. lawlessness, wealth, usury, wars, taxation, etc.);

    • (c) irrational fear, fear mongering, anger, intolerance, hatred, prejudice of others and things (e.g. religion, race, gender, color, ethnicity, etc.);

    • (d) delusion (deception and self deception), misplaced loyalties, partisan-warfare, misplaced compassion, misplaced priorities;

  • (02) Too many voters blindly pull the party-lever, without even knowing the candidates on the ballot, much less the candidates’ voting records.

  • (03) Too many voters don’t even know who their own Congress persons are, much less their Congress persons’ voting records.

  • (04) Too many voters refuse to consider challengers which are usually in the OTHER political party, which results in high re-election rates for incumbent politicians.

  • (05) Too many voters simply vote for the candidate that spends the most money, resulting in 90% of elections that are won by the candidate that spends the most money.

  • (06) Too many voters don’t even know who their own Congress persons are, much less their Congress persons’ voting records.

  • (07) Too many voters are one-issue voters, and are easily bribed with their own tax dollars, and fooled by the myth that we can all live at the expense of everyone else. Too many voters want the government to take care of them from cradle to grave. Little do they know, the more they ask government to do, the more bloated, inefficient, corrupt, and wasteful it becomes.

  • (08) Too many voters prefer to wallow in the hatred, blame-game, and circular partisan-warfare, because it is easier to blame the OTHER party than admit THEIR party ain’t much (if at all) better.

  • (09) Too few (if any) voters can name 10, 20, 50, 100, 200, or even 268 (half of 535) in Congress that are responsible and accountable, but too many voters still continue to repeatedly reward THEIR irresponsible and corrupt incumbent politicians with 93%-to-99% re-election rates, rather than ever consider a challenger (since the challenger is usually in the OTHER party), thus making most incumbent politicians’ cu$hy and coveted incumbencies more secure. What do they say about doing the same thing over and over, and expecting a different result?

  • (10) Too few voters understand, nor want to understand how too many corrupt and irresponsible incumbent politicians capitalize on the voters’ laziness, blind partisanship, blind loyalty, delusions, apathy, complacency, hatreds, and ignorance. Too many voters are too easily fooled. So they are used and exploited.

  • (11) Too few voters appreciate the importance of Education, Transparency, and Accountability. May 1st was “Law Day”, yet what did we see? We say millions of illegal aliens protesting and demanding rights. Lawlesssness and crime are on the rise. There are many constitutional violations. Yet, while most Americans want secure borders and reject another amnesty like the one in 1986, which more than quadrupled the problem, most incumbent politicians still flagrantly refuse to enforce existing laws and continue to push for antoher anmensty. These politicians are despicably pitting American citizens and illegal aliens against each other for profits and votes, but too many voters still reward those incumbent politicians with 93%-to-99% re-election rates.

  • (12) And in this upcoming 04-Nov-2008 election, too many voters will focus only on the office of President and Vice President, continue to repeatedly reward irresponsible incumbent politicians in Congress with 93%-to-99% re-election rates, and sabotage the next President again by saddling the next president with the same dysfunctional, irresponsible, corrupt, FOR-SALE, Do-Nothing Congress. And the nation’s pressing problems will continue to grow in number and severity, threatening the future and security of the nation, as the U.S. decays into total fiscal and moral bankruptcy. The only consolation is that we are drawing closer to the pain and misery needed to finally provide the voters their much-needed education.

  • (13) 40%-to-50% of voters don’t even bother to vote all.

  • (14) Too few voters understand that the voters are culpable too, and we have the government we elect, and deserve.

  • (15) Too few voters understand that Congress’ refusal to stop these 10 abuses is no coincidence. Those abuses did not all come about by mere coincidence, and decades of those abuses has resulted in these 17+ economic conditions which have never been worse ever and/or since the 1930s and 1940s. The voters mostly have themselves to thank for it. Ignorance is not an excuse. it is merely an invitation for more abuse.

  • (16) Too few voters understand how their own negligence, and irresponsible voting habits will lead to painful consequences for most Americans … that is, until it is probably too late to mitigat the damages. Thus, too many voters must repeatedly learn the hard way. Too many voters fail to learn from history. The only consolation is that things may finally get better when things get too painful.

At any rate, this economic stimulus package won’t help much (if any), and may make things worse.

Those 10 abuses and the 17+ worsening economic conditions (see (15) above) will still exist.

Throwing money at this problem is like trying to put out a fire by throwing gasoline on it.
One has to seriously wonder about a monetary system that throws more and more money at ever increasing debt and economic problems?
What does this monetary system remind you of?
What are they nevously trying to avoid?
What we have is monetary system that is a dishonest, usurious, predatory, upside-down pyramid-scheme, and all pyramid-schemes eventually collapse.?
Nation-wide debt as a percentage of GDP has almost quadrupled (from 100% to 381%) in the last 30 years!
Can anyone seriously say it isn’t a pyramid-scheme?

After all, why is it that no one can answer this one simple question:

  • ? Where will the money come from to pay the interest on the current $53.2 Trillion in total nation-wide debt (3.81 times the $13.86 Trillion GDP ! ), much less the money to pay the principal (LOAN = PRINCIPAL + INTEREST), when that money does not yet exist?

The U.S. Dollar has already been falling drastically against all major currencies since 1999.
A 1950 U.S. Dollar is worth less than 10 cents.
M3 Money Supply has already increased from $135 Billion in year 1950 to $10.15 Trillion in year 2005 (an increase by a factor of 75.2 !).
The only way to reduce the massive debt will be massive creation of new money out of thin air (which has already been underway for many years).
That is the only way left to prevent the collapse of the pyramid-scheme.
We can not grow GDP enough, increase efficiency enougn, or immigrate enough to stay ahead of the debt monster.
It is catching up to us, and there will be painful consequences.
Especially since the federal government also borrowed and spent $12.8 Trillion from Social Security, leaving it pay-as-you-go, with a 77 Million baby boomer bubble approaching.
Our education is on the way.
Get ready for inflation. A lot of it.

Posted by: d.a.n at May 3, 2008 12:55 PM
Comment #252009

David R.: In our political system, there is no political ploy that works as well as pandering. Fear is number two and hope is tied for third with reform.

“and the people who actually pay the most taxes are not eligible to get anything at all.”

Jack: If they had to choose one or the other, which do you think those who actually pay the most taxes would choose, the rebate or the Bush tax cuts?

Posted by: jlw at May 3, 2008 02:23 PM
Comment #252013


“I see nothing fiscally responsible with the process.”

while i agree with this statement, the fact you call this a loan though means IMHO that you think this money belongs to the gov’t. it actually belongs to the taxpayers who supplied it, therefore it is actually a rebate unless you paid no taxes to begin with, then it is a gift.

Posted by: dbs at May 3, 2008 04:16 PM
Comment #252017

dbs, its a loan, because you will repay it by April 15 of next year. As long as the fed. gov’t. has a debt and deficits, any rebates are merely loans to be recollected later, to pay off the debt and hopefully zero out the deficits.

Certainly a rational way of viewing it, if not purely accurate in political parlance. And its not even an interest free loan, as the taxpayers are accruing interest debt on the national debt, deepened by the stimulus rebate.

Obama is right, we should not be fooled by these tricks on the books which do absolutely NOTHING to shore up the long term prosperity of Americans and working class taxpayers.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 3, 2008 05:39 PM
Comment #252020


“dbs, its a loan, because you will repay it by April 15 of next year.”

only if they raise my tax rate otherwise they won’t recover it. they in essence lowered my tax liability by giving my money back. not only that, but as jack said by writing checks all they did is increase the overall cost when they could’ve just given it to me as an extra deduction.

Posted by: dbs at May 3, 2008 06:55 PM
Comment #252023

dbs said: “only if they raise my tax rate otherwise they won’t recover it.”

Not really. They won’t be cutting your taxes because of it, and according to Republicans, not cutting taxes is a tax increase. Haven’t you heard?

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 3, 2008 07:47 PM
Comment #252079

after all my deductions and whatnot my taxes owed this year came to $744.00 USD. I split my rebate with my now estranged wife and after counting children etc. I personally get a rebate of $750.00 USD so i net $6.00 USD so how is this a “stimulus”?

Posted by: napajohn at May 4, 2008 11:43 AM
Comment #252088

napajohn said: after all my deductions and whatnot my taxes owed this year came to $744.00 USD. I split my rebate with my now estranged wife and after counting children etc. I personally get a rebate of $750.00 USD so i net $6.00 USD so how is this a “stimulus”?

That’s a very good question. I’ve noticed the same thing. Only I’m doing a little better than you. I’m netting $37.48. Now that’s real stimulating.
And these clowns want me to vote for them again in November. LOL!

Posted by: Ron Brown at May 4, 2008 12:21 PM
Comment #252094

ron brown

“That’s a very good question. I’ve noticed the same thing. Only I’m doing a little better than you. I’m netting $37.48. Now that’s real stimulating.
And these clowns want me to vote for them again in November. LOL!”


“after all my deductions and whatnot my taxes owed this year came to $744.00 USD. I split my rebate with my now estranged wife and after counting children etc. I personally get a rebate of $750.00 USD so i net $6.00 USD so how is this a “stimulus”?”

you braggards, even if i get the max rebate, i’m still paying a sh#@ load. i’m getting stimulated, but not in a good way, and i’m no rich guy. funny how gov’t stimulation can leave your rear so sore. not even a kiss !

Posted by: dbs at May 4, 2008 02:37 PM
Comment #252113

Know the feeling all to well. I get it every 3 months when I send the taxes for my projected earnings in for the business.
Maybe ya need to get yourself a tax accountant. A good one can find deductions that you’d never knew existed. And a shady one can make them up for ya.

Posted by: Ron Brown at May 4, 2008 06:59 PM
Comment #252162

I totally agree with your comment. I too have a son that turned 17 on Dec 2, 1990. He is a JR in High School. On time to graduate with his graduating class. I guess he doesn’t exist as far as the government is concerned. I think that this needs to be ammended and the money given to us. They are not adults. Also even if they work part time they still don’t get it if you claim them as an exemption…We are screwed with totally on our taxes…We don’t the $1000. off our taxable amount either…

Posted by: kim at May 5, 2008 10:53 AM
Comment #252438

I have two dependants that I claimed since one is 17 and the other is in College neither gets the rebate

Posted by: Bill at May 8, 2008 10:42 AM
Comment #252440

kim, hopefully, you will consider voting out your incumbent representatives this November. When enough Americans get in the habit of tossing their representatives when the government they get is not the government they want, the replacement politicians just might get the message: If they want to be reelected, government has to be run far better than it has been.

That is the philosophy behind Vote Out Incumbents Democracy, an all volunteer political action organization spreading the word that if its going to change, it is us voters who will have to change it. Politicians are never going to change doing things the easy way for themselves as long as more than 90% of them seeking reelection are reelected, election after election.

Posted by: David R. Remer at May 8, 2008 10:47 AM
Comment #252732

You are missing even a bigger group of taxpayers who were disenfranchised from the stimulus package. What about the 17 - 24 year olds who work and go to college? Whether their parents claimed them or not, if they could be claimed as a dependent on their parents’ return they get nothing, nor do their parents. This group works, often pay their own expenses while going to college and pay taxes. My 22 year old duaghter, graduated from college last year, got married, got a job and paid taxes, BUT because she can be claimed as a dependent by her parents she got nothing. Now explain the reasoning there. Do you suppose they think she won’t vote? She definitely will now.

Posted by: Denise at May 13, 2008 09:18 AM
Comment #253517

We too did not receive the $300 for our 17 year old. Its already bad enough that we weren’t able to take the child credit of $1000 as of last year.Why is it as though they dont exist? He has had a job since he was 14 and is paying taxes so why shouldn’t he qualify?I guess If he doesn’t exist in the goverments eyes, why has it cost me so much this year for fees,school costs,housing,{he still eats daily}.We just paid like $45 for his cap and gown to graduate!! what if I was in the “small minority ” that didn’t pay taxes,anyone think they would let me get away with it!!!

Posted by: Dave S at May 23, 2008 03:56 PM
Comment #253592

I’m 17 years old, I go and work every week so I can put gas in my car, pay my insurance, and pay for textbooks and fees for the college courses I took as a senior. I made close to 9 grand last year between working during the summer and the school year. I was looking forward getting $300 through my parents by being claimed as a dependent. That $300 dollars would have gone a quite ways in paying for $4 a gallon gas for my car that I bought and paid for.

I’m a few months shy of 18, but when I do turn 18 I’m becoming a registered voter and I’m going to remember getting scammed out of $300 by Congress.

I’m also annoyed that I go and work every week and I’m not getting a stimulus check. While there are people who don’t work at all who are getting a stimulus check. How about excluding them from getting a stimulus check, instead of me a 17 year old who works everyday.

Posted by: Jacob R at May 24, 2008 06:35 PM
Comment #254618

Im 23 im a full time college student and full time worker. I was also claimed as a dependent my parents did not receive any money for claiming me nor did I receive a stimulus check. I work very hard hard and it was a huge let down to find out I would not be receiving a check. It almost makes you not want to bother even having a job since apparently I don’t even exist.

Posted by: Katie at June 5, 2008 05:28 PM
Comment #255289

Can someone help!!! I filed my Taxes this year throug a link in on the IRS homepage. I went through a place called CitizenTax. I am not “computer smart” so to speack … to make a very long story short, I made a mistake, checking the wrong box and filed ZERO on exemptions. Now not only was I out money on my normal return because of my error, now they are saying I cant even get a Stimulus check because of that … Is that true? Is there really no way they cant check my SSN to see no one has claimed me? I would take any help here .. I could really use the cash! John Cates

Posted by: John Cates at June 12, 2008 07:55 AM
Comment #255487

It’s very confusing to me. We didn’t get $300 for my 17 year old daughter and SHE didn’t get it either even though she made more than the required $3000 in wages for the year, because she we declared her on our taxes…

Very strange.

I’m hoping that someone can do something about it. My daughter sure could use that $300 right now…

Posted by: Mom at June 13, 2008 07:35 PM
Comment #255488

Mom, regretfully, there isn’t anything that can be done about it except to complain to your representatives. But, since there are so few of us who were gipped by this legislation, our minority voice has and will continue to fall on deaf ears.

This is one of the reasons I recommend folks vote for a challenger instead of their incumbents up for reelection. These old farts have forgotten what $300 means to a working family with a 17 year old, and don’t deserve to be reelected.

Posted by: David R. Remer at June 13, 2008 07:50 PM
Comment #255734

Sorry David, don’t expect it to get any better as your child gets older. In order to receive any form of financial aid (including student loans) you will need to claim your child as a dependent student until the age of 25 whether they have a job or not. Therefore, these students were also ineligible to receive the stimulus package. My 19 year old daughter has paid for not only her own education but all living expenses. She works 30 hours a week and attends college full-time. She also pays taxes. However, in order for her to be considered as independent, she must be either 25, married, or have a child. Seems if your a responsible student you cannot be considered independent. Not only can she not receive a stimulus package for her own efforts, she is not a qualifying dependent. She will however be required to repay the government later on for the payments we and others receive today.

Posted by: cindy at June 16, 2008 11:47 AM
Comment #255859

I think you’re right, David. They have forgotten what $300 can mean to a family.

I found this on the IRS website after I checked my daughter’s SS number…

“You did not qualify for the Stimulus payment because you were claimed as a dependent by another taxpayer.
Helpful Information:
The 2008 tax instructions will include a worksheet to help those who did not qualify for a payment or those who received a reduced amount determine if they can obtain a benefit when they file their 2008 tax returns next year.”

I wonder what that REALLY means…

Posted by: Mom at June 17, 2008 07:13 PM
Comment #256104

This cut matters to a lot of single women who happen to have a 17 year old. Not all single women hit the food stamp line. Hey why not cut off people over 60 there life is about done. Bet that got a lot of you well now you know how those of us with 17 year olds feel.

Posted by: allie cruz at June 20, 2008 03:53 AM
Comment #256697

Both my sons ages 21 and 19, are in college,and did not get stimulus checks because they were told we claimed them on our taxes. And we were not allowed to get the tax credit for them because of their ages. They both have part time jobs and have filed tax returns and yet they still were unable to receive this. Nice catch 22 situation. And they young men were tax payers.

Posted by: Robin at June 24, 2008 11:58 PM
Comment #264119

I guess our children 17-20 somethings don’t count for much….There was the ‘X’ generation and now this is the “invisible” generation! It makes it hard to raise up government conscious citizens…when they don’t count. How can we train them to respect our country and the benefits of our great land when those in Washington act as if they don’t exist!!

I have a VERY ROTC & community active 17yr old son…what message does this send him?

This sends a VERY poor message to our youth, the leaders of tomorrow!

Posted by: Mom of a VERY patriotic 17yr old at September 24, 2008 12:57 PM
Post a comment