[Frank Olson]

It came as a
fabulous surprise that I'm in remission -- that the tumors that invaded
my lungs, pleura and lymph nodes have suddenly disappeared.

There were a lot of people praying for you, Robert. I'm not "surprised"
at all.

As for the rest... what the heck does all this have to do with "using
perimeter fence protection"???

 

[JoeRaisin]

Yep. I get almost as much of a laugh at some of the crazies on my side
of the aisle as those on the other.


No, but it doesn't surprise me. The thing is these people have a
legitimate gripe. They have paid the bulk of US taxes for years while
the wealthy get loopholes and tax shelters. Even though Barak Obama is
finally doing something good for them they've learned not to trust
*anyone* in government. Eight years of Bush is enough to do that even to
Pollyana.

Actually the primary impetus of the T.E.A. Parties was how much money
the federal government is spending. Anyone who believes the lucky 95%
from this round of tax increases will continue to be left alone has a
surprise in store.

Hmm. Where's the lie in that? She was speaking about the standard
Republican response to anyone who challenged Bush's moronic
administration. Now that we finally have adult supervision in
Washington, you don't see anyone playing the "patriot" card against
those who disagree. Rather, we just ignore them while pretending to
want their opini... er, never mind. :^)

I didn't say that the quote was a lie, just that our secretary of state
IS a documented liar.

Npt really. The fact is there is a lot more racism on the right than on
the left. Racism is not exclusively a right-wing phenomenon but it
certainly does tend to lean right.

Actually it fits perfectly. Holy crap - When McCain said "that one"
during a debate it was construed by Obama supporters as racist.

Would you consider someone who, with no actual knowledge of current
affairs, voted for B.O. solely because of the color of his skin to be a
racist?

Consider it a hypothetical question if you don't believe it happened.

Um, they're not my cronies. I don't even know most of them personally.
Also, conversely, when Governor F-Word was indicted, I figured the guy
was probably dirty. The more I read about him, the more crooked he
appears to be.

I don't know who Governor F-word is.

Yep, and I commended you for it.


Well, that's common ground between us at least.


Hawaii? Kenya? The U.S. Senate?

Kenya? so you don't believe he's eligible to be president?

Like I said, he's a politician, so...

Not just a politician - a Chicago politician.

Nah. Idealogues have no room in their minds for doubt or independant
thought -- just rigid adherence to whatever their leaders tell them.
You've seen enough of my comments here over the years to know I'm no
idealogue.

I assume you mean "independent" thought and that you aren't an
"ideologue" - ;^)

Whose right-wing mind do you think I'm reading? I only noted the fact
that the schmuck deliberately delayed the appointment of a war hero to
the VA without cause. You suggested he might have done so to "get even"
(words to that effect) with Democrats. Further, by saying, "an
oversight I trust," I was giving you the benefit of the doubt for not
replying.


No, not if it would be impossible to look into said facts. In the case
in point, however, the salient points are that he help up a vital
nomination of a war hero, delaying her ability to do anything to help
veterans (you know, those "troops" Republican politicians are always
pretending to give a s*** about).


He isn't really unidentified. When I first mentioned it I didn't
remember his name. He's Richard Burr, a Republican senator from North
Carolina. He has been repeatedly asked why the delay but refused to
give an answer.

Not entirely true...

BTW, the wounded veteran whose appointment he delayed
is Tammy Duckworth. She lost both legs in a helicopter crash, fighting
Bush's war.


Hope the above helps.

Okay, rather than some shady "no comment" as to why the appointment was
held up, this is what I found out in less than five minutes.

"Burr, the ranking Republican on the Senate Veterans Affairs
Committee, held up Duckworth's nomination last week because he had
questions about a confidential financial questionnaire that she had
filled out...

....Burr said he'd asked for a delay in the Senate confirmation vote
because of "discrepancies" and "inconsistencies" in what he said were
three different versions of her financial disclosure statement that she
had submitted to the Senate committee."

As soon as the questions were answered he stopped holding up the
appointment. The actual delay was getting those answers.

And the last thing Burr has said about her:

"At the end of the day," Burr said, "I don't think there is a financial
question about Tammy Duckworth. I think she is extremely sloppy, but
that is not a disqualification."

Sounds a lot less nefarious than it seems without that information.

Should sacrifice on the field of battle be a rubber stamp to public
office? I knew lots of spectacular warriors in my twenty years who I
wouldn't elect as dog catcher.

I can't say if Burr is a racist or not. I can only say that he's done
something awful to a wounded veteran and, in the process, to all
veterans. At the very least, that makes him disgusting -- certainly no
patriot.

So a Senator who takes the vetting of a political appointee seriously is
disgusting? Where was your disgust when the democrats were holding up
Bush's appointments for far less cause?

Darn it. I snipped so much that I no longer recall which bill this
was. Do you have the bill number? I'd like to read it if you know
either the identifyuing number or who the sponsor(s) was(were).

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h45/show


Will "they" be coming in black helicopters?

Not sure. What color are the DHS helicopters. Knowing the federal
government they will probably be coming in the large SUV's the rest of
us aren't supposed to be driving.

http://www.haciendapub.com/iol2.html

Yep. Jim says they're already using them in NY.


Uh, no. I don't think it's intrusive. Did Jim say it was optional but
those who elected to participate in the program got a discount?

Yes it's optional - for now.

How about we do both?

Because I don't want anyone having the ability to control the
temperature in my house. Should I be fined or taxed heavily because I
want the winter temp in my house to be 70 degrees rather than 65? I
already pay more for the gas I use to heat my home, why should I be
penalized because i like it warm.

Won't be an issue in my golden years when we winter in Manila...

Hmm. I read the wiki article and it looks like the proposed law
(assuming whoever submitted the wiki article was accurate) simply makes
it easier for workers to obtain collective bargaining rights. It
doesn't *preclude* a secret ballot. The current law says that (now this
is my take on it, not a direct quote) after enough employees sign an
open (i.e., not secret) card, they can then have a secret ballot to
establish a union. The proposed change would say that once enough
employees signed such a card they could gain collective bargaining
rights *even without* that second step. IOW, the forst step has always
been an open petition. Only the second phase was secret. The law would
allow, under two specific circumstances, for the first step to be
sufficient to get the employees what they want. However, it does *not*
do away with secret ballots on the whole. Unless I misread the article
or unless the author misread the proposed bill, this is actually a plus
for workers.

Because open acts like petition signing can be affected by bribery or
coercion. Secret ballots are not. Whatever the process for bringing a
vote - the vote itself SHOULD be held and should be a secret ballot.

L all you want.


I son't pay nearly as much attention to these things as you might
suppose. I like watching left-leaning commentators like Rachel and
Kieth and comics like Maher, but I don't recall any of them using this
term. I did a search on it just now and apparently it's been used in a
YouTube sketch. There are also references to Bush WaffenSS in a few
newsgroup posts. I read a few newsgroups routinely and a few more only
periodically.


Joe Lieberman? He's not really a Democrat or a Republican. He's just
very pro-Bush war.

Bet the right could make the same claim about the republicans you
support. That was kind of my point...

In some ways, yes, it is. Neither war was winnable. Both were
micromanaged by incompetent White House administrations. Neither had a
clear goal nor an exit strategy. Both resulted in thousands of injured
(and largely abandoned) veterans. There's much more but I get tired of
typing.

What about jackass mayors who refused to use available means to evacuate
his population because he was sitting high and dry and waiting for the
feds to come in. Now there is a useless P.O.S.

Uhm, which words? You wrote a lot.

I never claimed that we "picked on" privates - I said that the acts of
such were always blamed on Bush.

Just as every republican is a right wing extremist....

Ah, but they're not. Let me give you an example of a truly patriotic
Republican I know. There are plenty of others, but this guy is a good
friend. We were talking about Obama right after the election. "Gary" is
a self-professed redneck, a card carrying Republican, a lifelong member
of the NRA and a fan of Kenny Chesney. I asked him what he thought
about Obama. Up until the election he invariably stated how opposed to
BO he was. But that day something changed. He said, "Well, now he's my
president. I didn't vote for him, but I'd take a bullet for him." I
guess that's the difference between a patriot and a [fill in the party
of your choice] member.

A patriotic stance - One sorely lacking on the left's part during the
last eight years - except for patriot like Tammy Duckworth.

His comment was sort of humbling to me. I must confess that I don't
think I'd have been able to say the same about Bush.

Of course not. No ideologue could.

As you know, I'm very fond of that particular clause. :^)

I know you're being tongue-in-cheek here due to your business, but abuse
of the interstate commerce clause to circumvent the tenth amendment is
no laughing matter.

Oh, yes. I believe that people *should* cling to their faith. IMO,
that's not a sign of bitterness but of hope for a better tomorrow. It
certainly applies to my life. Even when I was told that my cancer was
incurable and that I had a short time left to live, I tried to hold on
to faith in God. I can't say I never doubted I'd be healed. In fact, I
got to the point of accepting my own imminent death. It came as a
fabulous surprise that I'm in remission -- that the tumors that invaded
my lungs, pleura and lymph nodes have suddenly disappeared.

And I was happy to hear of the remission. I hope all the follow-ups
remain clear.

 

[Jim]

Well, yeah. �I can't imagine they'd do anything at all unless it would help
their bottom line. �But if by so doing they can also prevent major hassles for
their customers, I'm all for it.


Yep. �For example, in a few years you'll be retired, living on Social Security
down here in Sarasota and... �:^)

I thought I was going to retire but I'm still having fun ......
so ...... we'll see. I'll probably have to fall off a ladder or
somthing first.

I don't think Florida is the place for me. Too many old people there.

 

[JoeRaisin]

The resentment for government spending isn't a matter of principle.
It's a pragmatic issue. They don't want to pay taxes. I don't blame
them. I don't like paying taxes either. OTOH, I don't want bridges to
collapse while I'm driving over them.

Paying taxes isn't so much the issue for me - though I would prefer a
flat tax.

What grinds my gears is seeing the money I'm paying get flushed down the
toilet. Like watching the geniuses around here paving all the
crosswalks in brick - then having to rip it up every two years so it can
be leveled. Apparently it's too low rent to use stained & stamped
concrete that would look the same, last longer and is cheaper to repair.

Or teh money being pissed away on this stimulus plan. Instead of
"spending" a trillion dollars they didn't have, it would have made a
much bigger and timely impact if they had just not collected it.

ISTR you brought this up in response to my request for you to cite a
lie. You did say that he lies. I didn't say that he doesn't; just
asked for proof. So fat, none has been offered but I'm willing to
listen if you can cite a lie Olbermann has told.

Somebody's a bit confused. You never asked me to cite any lie, our
secretary of state is a woman and I don't believe I've ever talked about
Olbermann.

I don't recall Obama saying the expression was racist. I thought it was
disrespectful but there was no racial overtone that I could see. Obama
even joked about "that one" during his comedy routine at the Al Smith
dinner. McCain also made light of himself (funnier than Obama's
routine). Frankly, I think McCain is a decent person who wanted to do
good things for America. I just believe that Obama has better ideas
about what will work.

Well, that's what our political system is supposed to be all about. But
this last election cycle we saw folks voting for candidates with
absolutely no idea what the person stood for.

I guess you could call it that. I'm sure there were plenty of folks who
did that but it's clear from the results that an awful lot of people who
voted for Obama were not black. He seems to appeal to everyday
Americans better than anyone since John F Kennedy.


I don't doubt it happened, but the reality is that race apparently
played a much lesser role in this election than anyone expected.


That's Rachel Maddow's nickname for B-Rod due to his use of the F word
in virtually every sentence.


He's more elligible than McCain. If you want to get technical about it,
McCain was born in Panama during a time when children born there were
not automatically US citizens. They were elligible for naturalization
but McCain never went through that either. So technically, he's a
Panamanian citizen. Nevertheless, given his heroic military service to
the United States and his many years of service in Washington, most
people (including me) think he's American enough to serve. But he lost
the election, fair and square, so that case is moot.

The BS from a few right-wing jackasses about Obama is just that -- horse
crap. Obama was born on US soil and is therefor a US citizen. Right now
he's our president. That's "our" as in yours and mine. The country is
in a major crisis and he's trying to bring about change that will help
us recover. The Republican party is offering no alternate plan -- just
more of the same Bush garbage that got us into the mess we're in. If
Obama fails, we all fail.

Take a breath... You were the one who suggested he was from Kenya - I
was just snarking off...

Having lived in Chicago and Washington, D.C., I can tell you that
Chicago politicians have nothing on the federal government when it comes
to corruption.


Yes, that's it. I often get that word wrong. :^)


Care to elaborate?

Didn't you read the article?

That's what he said, but he refused to say what those questions were.
He finally gave in but has never indicated there was anything in the
questionaire that he actually objected to.

Uhm... it was a "confidential" questionnaire so to reveal the details of
what he had a problem with would have been a bit out of line.

In fact the next paragraph went into about as much detail as one would
expect from a "confidential" document.

That was *his* side of the story. The reality is there was not a single
shred of evidence of wrong-doing on Tammy's part -- just a mean-spirited
senator holding up the works to spite the Democratic party and, in the
process, delaying her from doing things to help the same "troops" that
Republican politicians claim they support.

Well now, without revealing confidential information there is really no
way for you to know that.

Except there was no information or indication of any reason to delay the
appointment. Burr *said* that was his reason but never cited a specific
problem in her financial reports.

Then again, if he had spelled out what he had a problem with he would
have been crucified for revealing Ms. Duckworth's confidential information.

I don't know. Ask Senator McCain.

I didn't know you cared so much what Senator McCain thought.

I met a dog catcher several years ago who I would have gladly sent in as
a replacement for Cheney. At least he knew the difference between a
feral dog and an innocent puppy. Also, TTBOMK, he never shot a friend
in the face.

Yep, there comes a time in a man's life when he should stop driving and
handling weapons.

Imagine how much fun he is gonna be when he's the mean old man in the
neighborhood yelling at kids to get off his mine field - er - lawn...

You're assuming he took anything seriously. There has been a concerted
effort among Republican senators to stimy as many Obama appointments as
possible. This was just one more of the same.

Sounds like payback from the right. Same games the left played with
Bush's appointees. Like I said, two sides of the same coin.

Which ones? Let's see. We objected to the appointment of the cleaning
lady to Chief Justice.

Yes you did - among others.

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h45/show

Thanks. I'll look it over

[ pause ]

OK, I read the bill. It's an attempt at "limited" gun regulation. The
intent is to require registration and proof of lawful right to possess
certain types of guns which are predominantly designed to kill people.
While I might like to see such weapons disappear from the planet, I
don't believe that a registration law will do any good. Criminals will
ignore the law as they do other laws anyway. It would create lots of
paperwork and headaches for lawful gun owners though. So we agree, it's
a bad idea (though I do think the author had good intentions).

At any rate, did this ever make it out of committee?

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. It just amazes me that
a person sworn to uphold the Constitution of the Unites States would
even propose such a thing.

Now that I've read the bill, I can say no. It will not make it easier
for "them" to come get your guns, with or without black helicopters.

Always easier when you already know how the weapons are stored.

I prefer large motorcycles. :^)


They probably won't make it mandatory until after a few more disasters
caused by wasteful usage.

A few more nuclear reactors would help to prevent such disasters without
the nefarious potential.

I know what you mean. My wife, being from a tropical country, likes it
really hot. Anything under 85 F and she's freezing. I want the A/C on
if the temperature exceeds 75F. We compromise. I let her set the
thermostat and I go around without a shirt on. :^)


Is there some proposal to fine or tax you more for exceeding 65F?
Anyway, if you were really smart you'd move to Sarasota where it's
almost always hot.


Manilla? Try Ilha Boipeba instead. It's paradise. Here's a picture I
took last time I was there.
http://photos.bassburglaralarms.com/Salvador_2/DSC_7371.jpg

But we already own a house outside of Manila and the wife has all those
relative thingies whose company she seems to enjoy.

BTW, here's a picture of Leuck's mode of transport.
http://photos.bassburglaralarms.com/Salvador_2/DSC_7081.JPG


But petition signing is already the first step in unionizing. The act
only seeks to make it easier to go union.


It never has been yet. I'm not saying it shouldn't be -- only that it
isn't and never was. This act seeks to make things easier for workers.

It eliminates the secret ballot. Bad... very bad...

Bet the right could make the same claim about the republicans you
support. That was kind of my point...

Charley Crist? He's *very* Republican.

What about jackass mayors who refused to use available means to
evacuate his population because he was sitting high and dry and
waiting for the feds to come in. Now there is a useless P.O.S.

They should have tossed him into the water ... along with Bush and Brown.

Uhm... read the words I wrote - it might help you understand what
I'm saying.

Uhm, which words? You wrote a lot.

Just as every republican is a right wing extremist....

Ah, but they're not. Let me give you an example of a truly patriotic
Republican I know. There are plenty of others, but this guy is a
good friend. We were talking about Obama right after the election.
"Gary" is a self-professed redneck, a card carrying Republican, a
lifelong member of the NRA and a fan of Kenny Chesney. I asked him
what he thought about Obama. Up until the election he invariably
stated how opposed to BO he was. But that day something changed. He
said, "Well, now he's my president. I didn't vote for him, but I'd
take a bullet for him." I guess that's the difference between a
patriot and a [fill in the party of your choice] member.

A patriotic stance - One sorely lacking on the left's part during the
last eight years - except for patriot like Tammy Duckworth.

It seems to be lacking on the right as well.

Like I said - two sides of the same coin.

 

[Jim]

Let's hope not.


Watch it there, buster. �Them's fightin' words. �:^)

I say that because .... a number of years ago, we were down in Florida
visiting relatives and my wife and I wanted to go to (I think) Silver
Springs. We pull into the parking lot and see the signs "handicap
parking area ahead" ..... So we start to drive around the parking lot
looking for a regular parking spot and before you know it we're about
a 15/20 minute walk away from the entrance. Walking up to the entrance
I see that there's what looked like about a hundred or two handicap
parking places .......... and most of them occupied ............. and
THAT's when I decided Florida wasn't for me. (At least not before I
become handicapped, anyway.)

As I said .... too many old people down there.

 

[Frank Olson]

I say that because .... a number of years ago, we were down in Florida
visiting relatives and my wife and I wanted to go to (I think) Silver
Springs. We pull into the parking lot and see the signs "handicap
parking area ahead" ..... So we start to drive around the parking lot
looking for a regular parking spot and before you know it we're about
a 15/20 minute walk away from the entrance. Walking up to the entrance
I see that there's what looked like about a hundred or two handicap
parking places .......... and most of them occupied ............. and
THAT's when I decided Florida wasn't for me. (At least not before I
become handicapped, anyway.)

As I said .... too many old people down there.

They've got "handicapped" parking, "new mother" parking, "parents"
parking, "police" parking, "taxi" parking, "tourbus" parking... I'm
still driving around looking for a slot that says: "big SUV gas guzzler
and I don't give a shit for tree-huggin', carbon saving, vegans" parking...

 

[Roger W]

They've got "handicapped" parking, "new mother" parking, "parents"
parking, "police" parking, "taxi" parking, "tourbus" parking...  I'm
still driving around looking for a slot that says: "big SUV gas guzzler
and I don't give a shit for tree-huggin', carbon saving, vegans" parking....- Hide quoted text -

We have a supermarket that has a sign that says: " Reserved for
vehicles with children parking" So I thinking to myself, who lets
their children park their cars?

RW

 

[JoeRaisin]

Me, too. The idiot Bush spent almost everything on his stupid war, then
gave the rest away to his corporate sponsors. Thank God, now that we
have adult supervision of the economy we can start to work our way out
of the hole Bush dug.

I always wondered what the definition of "adult supervision" was and now
I know. It's taking a bad situation and making it worse. Thanks for
clearing that up.

How dare they try to create jobs for Americans. The very nerve!

Except it only creates temporary jobs.

Not really. We tried that for the past eight years and it ruined the
economy.

No, we didn't try it - read it again. What I suggested has never been
tried. Probably because it would work...

Using B.O.'s logic, the answer to money shortfalls in my home would not
be to tighten up the budget but to get a bunch of new credit cards and
max them out.

How does that make sense?

What is his tax policy answer? To reduce the withholding tables but not
the tax tables. If this scheme stands, a whole lot of folks are going
to be very surprised come next tax day when their refund is reduced or
they end up having to pay.

Sorry. To many threads. Not enough brain cells left.


Yep, just like they did in 2000 and 2004.

I must have missed the polls and interviews those years. You know, the
ones where they found bush supporters, fed them all of Gore's/Kerry's
positions and had the interviewee slavishly gushing about what great
positions their candidate held.

I was being facetious. You didn't notice?



He refused even to discuss it with others on the same panel, others who
also read the questionaire.

Right. He said that there were three versions of a financial statement
that didn't add up. Methinks thou art reaching...

He wouldn't speak to other committe members about his so-called
concerns. I think it's time to realize he just did it to spite Obama.


I like McCain very much. He's a good man. He's just not presidential
material (IMO).


Cheney should never have been licensed to speak. The man's a thug.


Heh, heh, heh... :^)


So you agree that Burr was being spiteful -- not responsible. I knew we
would find more common ground here.

On this one appointment it sounds as though there was a legitimate
reason. I'm sure they will play those games though.

Just as the dems did over the last eight years - as you just agreed
happened.

I just wish they had used a little courage regarding the appointments of
a tax cheat to head the IRS and a documented liar as Secretary of State.

Some folks believe that "gub control" will work. If I thought it would,
I'd b all for it. Sadly, it probably never will work in this country.
I'd just like to see a requirement that guns be locked up when the owner
isn't in direct control of them. That might save a few hundred
children's lives each year. Other than that, gun control is just
wishful thinking.

Locking up a weapon is just common sense. Though too often, common
sense doesn't come until after something bad happens.

There is a couple in my grief support group who lost a 4 year old child
when he got his hands on his father's police service weapon. It was
routinely stored on top of a bookcase that the dad had to stand on
tippy-toes to reach. They had assumed the child couldn't get to it but,
unfortunately, he climbed like a monkey.

These days, in my house, I lock up guns and all my big knives as well.

We disagree about the nefarious part, but I agree we need more nuclear
reactors. I also disagree with Obama's ideas about disarmament. Other
than that, I think he's pretty great. Today he earned more respect from
me by acceding to demands for proper investigation and prosecution of
Bush officials for torturing POW's. Bravo!

Only if they also hold responsible all members of congress who were
aware of the "illegal" actions and at best did nothing or, in the worst
cases, gave a stamp of approval.

The only thing that bothers me about this is his partial release of the
memos. Whenever someone claims "transparency" but then releases only
partial information it makes me wonder what they are not saying and why.

Gotcha. Well, I'm heading down to Brazil next month but only for a
couple of weeks. Maybe later this year I'll go back for more time if
finances permit.


No, it does not. The secret ballot is currently a second phase --
*after* an open petition. The proposed act says that in certain
circumstances the open petition (which is already required) is enough.
This would make it eqsier to unionize. The act specifically addresses
workplaces where the company is likely to interfere with the process --
IOW, places where a union is most urgently needed.

A simple petition should never be enough.

A secret ballot eliminates the potential for intimidation, coercion or
bribery - from either side of the issue. The petitions do not.

Once we begin elimination of the secret ballot here, where will it end?

 

[JoeRaisin]

Glad to help. We gave the Republicans a chance at running things and
the results have been disastrous. I don't know if Obama's plan will
work or not, but I sure hope it does. Either way, we know for a fact
that Bush's methods failed miserably on every front.

Of course they did. Both major parties looted the treasury.

It cracks me up to hear B.O. anguishing over the deficit he inherited
when the first thing he did was triple it.

Compared to the previous administration's methods which destroyed 5
million jobs, I'd say the plan is a plus.

When the jobs start. Haven't heard of any yet.

You would think that with all the money supposedly being spent on
infrastructure projects Caterpillar wouldn't still be laying off.

You remember Caterpillar, that was the place Obama lied about what the
CEO told him.

OK, I'll grant you that.


There's a huge difference between microeconomics (that which affects a
single home or a single small business) and macroeconomics (that which
pertains to the overall economy. While it may seem logical to believe
that what applies to the one should also apply to the other, that's
usually not the case. If you have only a little savings and you lose
your job, you'd be crazy to spend using credit cards. But if the whole
economy is down, the only way to bring it back is to create low and
middle income jobs, even if that means operating in the red for a time.
If *everyone* refuses to spend, there will be no jobs for anyone. When
we gave huge tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans, they didn't trickle
it down to the middle class. They hid it away in offshore accounts,
spent some on mega-mansions, etc. When we create jobs for lower income
families, they take the moneyt and spend it. That gives stores and
restaurants more business. That sells stuff like cars and houses. And
that, in turn, creates more jobs. The cycle goes on.

Which is why I think that by simply not collecting the taxes (and not
screwing folks on the other end like the current withholding scheme) in
the first place is the way to go.

It puts a couple hundred dollars directly into the pockets of the
low/middle income folks right now. Money they, as you pointed out,
would spend in stores, restaurants, and other places which would
stimulate the economy immediately - saving and creating jobs.

They way they are doing it, well, let's just say that it would be great
if it does work the way he says it will. I will be more than happy to
admit I was wrong - but I don't have a lot of confidence in the theory.

My accountant says that my taxes will actually go down under Obama's
plan. The again, I don't net $250,000. If you're over that, expect to
pay a few percent more than last year.

Except they are going to let the bush tax cuts expire which will raise
taxes on the middle class.

Having received some of the auto-calls from both the Bush and McCain
campaigns, I can tell you the methods *they* used were disgusting.

Non-sequitur. Disgusting and typical of both major parties, it doesn't
address the fact that many Obama voters hadn't a clue as to his positions.

Burr is the one who was playing games. Unfortunately, the ones who paid
for it were American veterans (you know, the "troops").

Refusal to admit facts doesn't mean they don't exist.

Besides if I have my facts straight, The United States Senate confirmed
Duckworth as Assistant Secretary of Public and Intergovernmental Affairs
for the United States Department of Veterans Affairs on April 22, 2009.

See, once the questions were answered he stopped holding it up. I'm not
saying you won't find such shenanigans on the part of republicans, just
that this one doesn't sound like one.

We couldn't find anyone interested in the State job who wasn't a
documented liar. What we did get is someone who has good working
relationships and strong friendships with more heads of state than I
could even name. That's a far sight better than any of the clowns Bush
hired.

How about someone with a shred of credibiilty that we didn't have to be
ashamed of.

Yep. Using the CDC's website, I found that on average, more than 12
children are killed every day by guns. This, and not the left nor the
"One World Government", is the reason gun control efforts keep coming to
the fore.


How sad. The reality is that kids will always find a way to get at
something they're not supposed to touch. The only safe gun is one they
can't reach. A secure gun cabinet and/or good trigger locks would save
a lot of lives.


I suspect most of the rest will be forthcoming. Once you open the flood
gates it's really hard to close them again.

I won't hold my breath. I understand that some of the still classified
memos may contain information that won't support the current actions.

On the other hand it, if the statute is applied fairly, it could be fun
watching Pelosi try to defend her support of water-boarding.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/08/AR2007120801664.html

http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2009/04/23/pelosi-was-cool-with-waterboarding/

To create a union? Sorry, but I disagree. If more than half the
workers want a union, let them have one.

I agree, but the only truly fair way to find out if half the workers
really want one is to hold a secret ballot.

Historically, this has not been the case.

That makes no sense. Upon what history do you base this?

Again, the proposed statute does not eliminate secret ballots. Either
you misunderstand the wording of the act or you're intentionally being
obtuse (sound familiar?)

No, but perhaps you are (either condition). If the statute is passed
then unions can be imposed *WITHOUT* a secret ballot.